Male early childhood teachers negotiate classroom dilemma: class, family, community and culture in models for moral reasoning

摘要

The discourse on moral reasoning has, in recent decades, diverged in various trajectories. Innovations have been predominantly instigated by feminist theorists alleging that universalistic moral theories, like Kohlberg's, necessarily entail, and thus ultimately contribute to, essentialist notions of gender. What might be broadly characterized as 'social constructionist' models for the development of gender identity present possible inroads for addressing this quandary. To be specific, transposing the operant principles in social constructionist models for the development of gender identity to moral theory suggests possibilities for social constructionist models for the development of moral reasoning. The findings of a recent study of the moral reasoning behaviors of male early childhood teachers in New York City fuels arguments against universalistic, gender-essentialist models for moral reasoning and simultaneously supports arguments in favor of a social constructionist model for both gender and moral reasoning. This study additionally identifies several factors which have been historically neglected by models for moral reasoning, namely, individual socioeconomic background, family history, community and culture.