Handbook of Moral Behavior and Development

Volume 3: Application

William M. Kurtines, Jacob Gewirtz, Jacob L. Lamb, William M. Kurtines, Jacob Gewirtz, Jacob L. Lamb

• Publisher: Psychology Press
• Year: 2013
• Topic: Psychology
• eBook ISBN:
  9781134992881
• Subtopic: Developmental Psychology
• Index: Psychology

The publication of this unique three-volume set represents the culmination of years of work by a large number of scholars, researchers, and professionals in the field of moral development. The literature on moral behavior and development has grown to the point where it is no longer possible to capture the "state of the art" in a single volume. This comprehensive multi-volume Handbook marks an important transition because it provides evidence that the field has emerged as an area of scholarly activity in its own right. Spanning many professional domains, there is a striking variety of issues and topics surveyed: anthropology, biology, economics, education, philosophy, psychology, psychiatry, sociology, social work, and more.

By bringing together work on diverse topics, the editors have fostered a mutually-beneficial exchange not only between alternative approaches and perspectives, but also between "applied" and "pure" research interests.

The Theory volume presents current and ongoing theoretical advances focusing on new developments or substantive refinements and revisions to existing theoretical frameworks. The Research volume summarizes and interprets the findings of specific, theory-driven, research programs; reviews research in areas that have generated substantial empirical findings; describes recent developments in research methodology/techniques; and reports research on new and emerging issues. The Application volume describes a diverse array of intervention projects — educational, clinical, organizational, and the like. Each chapter includes a summary report of results and findings, conceptual developments, and emerging issues or topics. Since the contributors to this publication are active theorists, researchers, and practitioners, it may serve to define directions that will shape the emerging literature in the field.

1The Child Development Project: A Comprehensive Program for the Development of Prosocial Character

Victor Battistich

Marilyn Watson

Daniel Solomon

Eric Schaps

Judith Solomon

ABSTRACT

The Child Development Project is a comprehensive longitudinal intervention project designed to enhance the social and moral development of children through systematic changes in the classroom, school, and home environments. The intervention program consists of five theoretically consistent and reinforcing classroom components, which are supported by consistent school-wide and home activities. The components are: Cooperative Learning, Developmental Discipline, Helping Activities, Highlighting Prosocial Values, and Promoting Social Understanding. In this chapter, we describe the background of the project and the theoretical and empirical support for each of the program components, focusing on the manner in which aspects of both traditional, adult-oriented socialization theories and more recent peer-oriented approaches to sociomoral development derived from cognitive-developmental theory are combined to promote the internalization of prosocial values. We then describe the degree to which we have achieved implementation of the classroom program at three elementary schools during the first five years of the project, present an overview of our findings to date concerning the effects of the program on children’s social attitudes, values, skills, and behavior, and discuss the implications of our program for character education in elementary schools.

INTRODUCTION

In the fall of 1982, we began working intensively with teachers and parents at three suburban elementary schools in northern California in an attempt to enhance the social and moral development of children through systematic changes in the classroom, school, and home environments. Our specific aim was to encourage the development of prosocial characteristics in children, generally defined as attitudes, motives, and behaviors that reflect consideration of others’ needs and feelings, concern for others’ welfare, and a willingness to balance one’s own legitimate needs and desires with those of others in situations where they conflict. This ambitious intervention program, known as the Child Development Project (CDP), is currently in its seventh year. Although the project will continue for several more years, we have already achieved considerable success in changing classroom and school practices at the three program schools, and have observed a number of positive program effects on children. We will describe the project in some detail, concentrating on the background and theoretical rationale for the program, but including brief descriptions of the training procedures we have used and the degree of implementation we have attained in program classrooms, relative to the “natural” occurrence of such activities in a group of comparison classrooms.¹ We will also present an overview of our major findings to date concerning the program’s effects on children’s social attitudes, skills, and behavior.

ELEMENTARY-SCHOOL CHARACTER EDUCATION

It is obvious that school has profound effects on children’s social development. In addition to being a social institution with a primary role in the acculturation of children, the school may be viewed as a microcosm of the larger society in which children develop basic understandings of the self, the social world and their place in it (Minuchin & Shapiro, 1983). Over the years, many school programs aimed at enhancing children’s social development have been implemented, ranging from the progressive education (Dewey, 1899, 1916) and related open education movements (Engstrom, 1970), to the plethora of “affective” education programs in the 1960s (Allender, 1982), to recent programs designed to enhance moral reasoning (Blatt & Kohlberg, 1975; Power, 1979; Rest, 1983). Yet, the preponderance of research on schools has been concerned with general cognitive development and academic achievement (see Wittrock, 1986). Except for research on the effects of moral dilemma discussion on moral reasoning (Blatt & Kohlberg, 1975; Lawrence, 1980; Lockwood, 1978; Rest, 1979), and on the effects of cooperative learning on social attitudes and behaviors (Johnson, Johnson, & Maruyama, 1983; Sharan, 1980; Slavin, 1983), programs aimed at promoting .moting social development have been inadequately researched, and we know relatively little about the comparative effects of various teacher behaviors, classroom practices, and school organizations on children’s social and moral development (Anderson & Prawat, 1986; Bar–Tal, 1978; Minuchin & Shapiro, 1983).

The elementary school is a particularly important setting for the study of socialization processes, since here the young child simultaneously encounters two socializing agents: adults and peers.² Clearly, both adults and peers influence socialization, but theorists disagree on their relative importance for social and moral development. In fact, the adult and peer socialization systems are often regarded as having quite different, even opposing influences on the child (e.g., Devereaux, 1970; Piaget, 1932; Youniss, 1980). These differences in theoretical perspective are based to some degree on differing assumptions about human nature, and are reflected in different approaches to social and moral education.

One view, represented by Durkheim (1925), considers morality to reside in society, and sees socialization processes as necessary to constrain the child’s natural egoism. In order to maintain cooperative and cohesive social organizations, the child must be coerced into sacrificing self-interest and controlling egoistic desires (Durkheim, 1893). Sociomoral development from this perspective is a unilateral process in which adults initially shape the behavior of children to conform with societal norms and values through the application of reward and punishment (cf. Bandura, this volume). Later, this extrinsic control over behavior becomes replaced by internal feelings of right and wrong through processes of identification (Freud, 1921) or affective conditioning (Aronfreed, 1968; Mowrer, 1960).

This view of sociomoral development is reflected in traditional approaches to character education (Garbarino & Bronfenbrenner, 1976; Rushton, 1980; Super-ka, Ahrens, Hedstrom, Ford, & Johnson, 1976). The teacher is the source of all authority in the classroom, including moral authority, and character education is a process of didactic instruction and moral inculcation. The purpose of this moral training is to instill in the child respect for social authority, acceptance of discipline, and a willingness to sacrifice for the welfare of society. Although opposition to the teaching of values during the early 1960s led to a great reduction in this type of direct moral training in American schools, both the emphasis on the teacher as sole authority in the classroom and the reliance on rewards and punishments to control student behavior are still prevalent in American educational practice (e.g., Canter, 1976; Jones, 1979; Sarason & Sarason, 1974; White & Smith, 1972).

In contrast to this traditional adult-oriented view of socialization, cognitive-developmental theory emphasizes the child’s active role in the construction of morality. According to this view, the motivation to behave morally derives ultimately from social understanding—from observing and comprehending the mutual benefits of establishing fair terms for social cooperation (Dewey, 1959; Piaget, 1932). People may be egoistic, but they realize that they gain personal advantages from entering into harmonious social relationships. Consequently, coercion is not necessary to ensure social cohesion and cooperation. In fact, didactic instruction and the use of power by adults are considered to be poor socialization practices, yielding at best a morality of conformity and constraint (Piaget, 1932). Rather, what is important for socialization is the provision of opportunities for children to understand the reasons for social norms and to attend to the functions and purposes of social organizations. Interaction with peers is considered to be quite important in this regard (Piaget, 1932; Youniss, 1980). More specifically, however, it is the opportunity to develop understanding of others’ perspectives by discussing various points of view and participating in group decision making that is seen as crucial to sociomoral development (Kohlberg, 1969, 1976; Rest, 1983; Selman, 1980).

Most recent approaches to character education are based on this view of sociomoral development. This includes not only student discussion of moral dilemmas based on Kohlberg’s work (Hersch, Paolitto, & Reimer, 1979; Turiel, 1972), but also other approaches to values analysis and clarification (e.g., Beck, McCoy, & Bradley–Cameron, 1980; Kirschenbaum, 1975; Simon, Howe, & Kirschenbaum, 1978; Superka et al., 1976). The teacher’s role is not to espouse particular values, but rather to help students become aware of their own values and the values of others by analyzing their beliefs and behavior, discussing social and moral dilemmas, and trying to resolve different points of view according to moral principles. The aim of such activities is to encourage the development of mature social understanding and the application of logic and reason to social and moral issues, leading to autonomous choice and commitment to personal values, rather than acceptance of and conformity with externally imposed principles of conduct.

Each of these viewpoints provides important insights into processes of social and moral development, but by itself is only a partial account of the socialization of children (cf. Gibbs & Schnell, 1985). Clearly, as cognitive-developmental theory suggests, opportunities to collaborate with others in the pursuit of common goals and to negotiate disagreements and participate in group decision making are important for social and moral development. However, the relative similarity in status and power among peers does not necessarily mean that reasoning and negotiation will be used to settle disagreements, or that conflicts between peers will lead to mutual accommodation rather than domination. One has only to observe children interacting at a park or playground to become aware of many instances of insensitive and cruel behavior toward peers, and of frequent, often intense rivalry between different cliques. Young children in particular have a quite limited, predominantly egocentric understanding of the social world and, left on their own, their behavior often may result in nonreciprocal, exploitive interactions with others (cf. Lickona, this volume). Such interactions obviously do not constitute the kinds of social experiences identified by cognitive-developmental theory as important for sociomoral development.

As Lickona (this volume) points out, young children often require adult guidance and support to help them experience positive and productive peer relationships. Parents, teachers, and other adults responsible for socialization directly help children develop appropriate interpersonal behaviors by communicating social and moral values and enforcing societal norms, and also indirectly control peer socialization experiences by determining the conditions under which children interact (Radke–Yarrow, Zahn–Waxler, & Chapman, 1983). Such guidance is not only in the service of social control, but has an important informational function as well: It helps children to understand the reasons for social regulation and the values underlying cooperative relationships, and provides appropriate standards by which they can judge the acceptability of their own and others’ behavior (cf. Bandura, this volume).

While it is important to recognize that adult communication and enforcement of social norms and values are necessary for positive sociomoral development, it is seriously misleading to view adult socialization solely or even primarily as a unilateral process of didactic instruction and commands for blind obedience accompanied by the administration of rewards and punishments. Adults do engage in didactic instruction, and do exercise control through the use of rewards and punishments, but they also reason with children and explain why particular behaviors are socially unacceptable, encourage children to express themselves and exercise autonomy, recognize children’s rights as well as their own, and engage in reciprocal, cooperative interactions with children (Baumrind, 1967, 1971; Maccoby & Martin, 1983; Radke–Yarrow et al., 1983). In short, interactions between adults and children may contain many of the features identified by cognitive-developmental theorists as playing an important role in social and moral development.

It is equally misleading to view children as having only egoistic motives that must be restrained and redirected into socially constructive behaviors. While it is true that children often engage in negative interpersonal behaviors when their personal interests conflict, it is also true that children as young as 2 years old engage in a variety of prosocial actions, including displays of empathy and sympathy over another person’s distress, comforting behaviors, and spontaneous helping and sharing (e.g., Hoffman, this volume; Lewin, 1942; Piaget, 1932; Radke–Yarrow & Zahn–Waxler, 1984; Rheingold & Hay, 1978; Sullivan, 1940; Zahn–Waxler & Radke–Yarrow, 1982). Since such behaviors emerge at an early age and are directed toward unfamiliar children and adults as well as parents and siblings, it is reasonable to assume that young children have both prosocial and egoistic motives. Imitation of the behavior of caregivers and differential reinforcement by parents are undoubtedly involved in the acquisition and maintenance of prosocial behaviors (Grusec, 1982; Hay & Rheingold, 1979), but prosocial actions may be intrinsically rewarding as well (Hay & Rheingold, 1979; Radke–Yarrow et al., 1983). Both sociobiological (e.g., Trivers, 1971) and psychological theorists (e.g., Angyal, 1952; Bakan, 1966; Freud, 1930; Hoffman, 1981, this volume) have hypothesized that there are inherent prosocial or “communalistic” tendencies as well as self-centered, individualistic tendencies in human nature. Whether such tendencies are seen as innate or acquired, it should be recognized that young children are intrinsically motivated to be concerned about others as well as themselves.

Finally, it is important to recognize that the child is actively striving to understand and accommodate to the social environment. To depict the child as simply a passive recipient of socialization influences is overly simplistic. The child’s cognitive structures and causal schemas at least partly determine the effects of socialization attempts, whether they originate from adults or peers, and the child’s responses to adult and peer behaviors influence successive socialization processes (cf. Hoffman, 1983; Maccoby & Martin, 1983; Radke–Yarrow et al., 1983; Rest, 1983). Effective socialization practices, including character education techniques, must be sensitive to the child’s level of cognitive understanding and social skill, and must be modified appropriately as the child matures. Sociomoral development is thus more accurately described as a transactive process in which the child both responds to environmental influences and, in turn, actively influences the environment through these responses. The important question for socialization, then, is not whether adult inculcation of moral values or the understanding of and commitment to principles of justice arising from reciprocal peer relationships play a more important role in development, but rather how these two systems of socialization interact, and which combinations of adult and peer influences are optimal for positive social development.

THE PROJECT’S INTERVENTION PROGRAM

The impetus for the Child Development Project arose from concerns expressed in the late...

Table of contents

• Front Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Contents
• Preface to Handbook
• Editorial Advisory Board
• Preface to Volume 3
• Contributors’ Biographies
• 1. The Child Development Project: A Comprehensive Program for the Development of Prosocial Character
• 2. Sociomoral Development and Drug and Alcohol Abuse
• 3. Literature and Morality: An Experimental Curriculum
• 4. Moral Psychology and Public Policy
• 5. Sociomoral Developmental Delay and Cognitive Distortion: Implications for the Treatment of Antisocial Youth
• 6. The Just Community Approach to Moral Education: Evolution of the Idea and Recent Findings
• 7. Moral Development in the Elementary School Classroom
• 8. Moral Education and Critical Social Theory: From the “First World” to the “Third World”
• 9. How People “Treat” Each Other: Pair Therapy as a Context for the Development of Interpersonal Ethics
• 10. The Moral Balance Model: Theory and Research Extending Our Understanding of Moral Choice and Deviation
• 11. The Domain Approach to Values Education: From Theory to Practice
• 12. The Role of Planning in Moral Development
• 13. Moral Education from the Perspective of Psychosocial Theory
• 14. Democratic Schools and the Problem of Moral Authority
• Author Index
• Subject Index