Thursday, March 7, 2019

Explain and Evaluate Two Approaches to Explaining Moral Development Essay

Moral evolution is what we consider to be right, wrong, good or bad. It is infracted from infancy through to adulthood and is the principles we use to determine what is right or wrong, fair or unfair. Each individual has their own pick uping of what theology is, save mostly this is determined largely by the culture or society we racy in and the rules that we conform to within this society.In psychology there atomic number 18 many theories around the beliefs of example phylogeny, and how worship is developed from peasanthood to adulthood. The flat coat for the different theories is due to the methods, ways of hire adopted by the psychologists to field of operation human behaviour. These theories allow us to comp ar and gives us the opportunity to attain into consideration all views and ideas and non to settle for just single aim or approach around this subject.(http//www.sid.ir/en/VEWSSID/J_pdf/97420082403.pdf)The aim of this assignment is reflexion at the two d ifferent approaches to virtuous teaching, firstly the cognitive comment to righteous cultivation by Jean Pi suppuratet. Then moving on to the brotherly cultivation possibility, and Banduras contri besidesion to how ethical motive develops. Criticisms of these theories will be discussed and evaluations establish on the two studies will be make.Piaget was the first psychologist to orbit cognitive reading in children. His work dates back to 1932 and his findings stated that righteousity develops through childhood and adolescence. He believed that children pass through different levels of honorableity according to their cognitive development. Piaget conducted a number of experiments and from these tests concluded that children up to the age of three or four could not make moral justicements as they were not capable to understand rules at this age. He stated, if the children were unable to understand the rules and that they were breaking therefore they were unable to make mo ral impressions. He believed that once children could understand the rules, and that they were breaking them then this was the age that moral development began. From his search, this started at the age of about eight years old. forest B, (2004 pg.72)Piaget believed that moral development in children of this age takes place in two microscope exemplifys. Stage one- heterononmous morality described as morality imposed from outside. This is when children see the rules as been made by parents, teachers or God and that they are un kindable. Morality at this stage is ground on moral punishment, you do something wrong and you will be punished. This stage is described by Piaget as the pre-operational stage of development where the child is only able to make his judgement based on the implication of the action.The present moment stage- Autonomous morality described as morality which is based on the childs own rules is apparent when the child is able to decentre and distinguish the inte nt behind the action along with the consequence of the action. It is the stage at which children are able to understand that rules are flexible to change and according to the situation. Woods B, (2004 pg.72)From Piagets experiments he was able to conclude that morality is based on the amount of cognitive development, how intelligent one is. The strengths of Piagets opening are that whilst conducting his experiments he did focus on children alone as examineers. He contributed hugely to our understanding of education and believed that this was the key to saving our society.Piagets moral surmisal was described by his experiment with children that involved rules whilst playing a game of marbles. Children under the age of five showed they had no rules, children aged in the midst of ages 5-10 saw the rules as fixed and children 10 and higher up realised the rules and as well adopted them by mutual consent.Moral dilemmas were besides presented to children by Piaget to develop his th eory further. He gave children a pair of stories where there first child deliberately caused a small amount of damage due to his actions. The second child caused much more(prenominal) damage but his actions were a military issue of an accident. Piaget asked the children to describe which character deserved to be punished in his taste to understand childrens reasoning in their answers. His conclusion from his experiment was that young children focused more on consequences, whilst the older ones took into consideration intent.From Piagets theory we earn a greater understanding on the influence of amiable processes on behaviour, we oblige greater understanding on perception and thinking. along with the above, Piagets theory has had practical benefits such learning skills to improve memory and up problem solving skills.Dwyer D & Charles C (2006 pg318) both(prenominal) of the above experiments have been criticised. Other theorists have claimed that games of marbles do not represen t a childs entire perception of morality. Piagets use of moral dilemmas has as well as been criticised. It has been claimed that younger children only focused on consequences because the story was narrated, however the results may not have been the same if the stories were watched on video. Younger children may have been better able to consider intentions if they were. Other theorists conducting similar research found that, although younger children had some designion of intent, they still preferred to judge in terms of consequences because they found this easier. Piagets theory has as well as been criticised to be culture specific. It has been said that it is based on moral universals. It has been claimed that the moral development of children in non western cultures may differ from that of the children Piaget investigated. (http//everything2.com/title/Piaget%2527s+theory+of+moral+development)Critics of Piagets theory have also stated that his research was not very scientific, that his findings were biased as he worked alone. Researchers conducting scientific experiments need to have two or more observers Piaget observed and noted his findings alone. He was criticised for do generalisations with his findings by universe culture specific and not taking into compute background, tradition and upbringing of each child. An example of this is using clinical interviews to study the thinking of children. His sample size was criticised for being too small and did not give much consideration to affectionate understanding. Due to all the criticisms above regarding Piagets work we can evaluate his theory as weak therefrom leading to errors in his conclusions.Haralambos M & Rice D. (pg 522).Social learning theory approach to moral development is based on the idea that moral development happens as a result of observing and imitation. Albert Bandura 1977 studied this concept and came up with findings that concluded that children learn through recognition, reward a nd punishment. Social learning theorist, focus particularly on observational learning, imitation, recognition and reward.Woods B, (2004 pg. 126)Bandura conducted a number of experiments observing childrens behaviour towards an inflatable doll also called a Bobo doll. The children were separated into groups and the first watched an adult behaving aggressively towards this blown up inflatable doll. This was the aggressive model conditioning. The second group of children, the adult contend with the other toys and was the non aggressive model condition. Along with a control group, which include children from the group who had witnessed an adult being violent and aggressive towards the Bobo doll.This group was then left in a room with a number of toys but not allowed to play with them in an attempt to build up the childrens frustration. The children were later left in a room and results were noted. The children who witnessed the adult being aggressive towards the Bobo doll imitated this behaviour and those from the non aggressive model displayed lower levels of infringement and violence, hence showing that children learn through imitation. (http//psychology.about.com/od/classicpsychologystudies/a/bobo-doll-experiment.htm)Bandura also believed that children learn from their social environment, this he believed provides models of behaviour and expectations of appropriate behaviour. He believed that children learn through observation, imitation and reinforcement which are all closely linked.Woods B, (2004 pg. 126)Along with Piagets theory, Banduras theory also has its criticisms. Banduras social learning theory takes into consideration cognitive learning but concentrates more upon the idea that morality is developed through positive reinforcement, imitation and the social environment. Woods B, (2004 pg. 71)When evaluating Banduras, experiment in attempt to understanding moral development, it is chief(prenominal) to point out that the experiments were conducted in a laboratory and hence the results may not be true in the real world. Critics have also pointed out that there may be selection bias as the children in the experiment were all from the same socio economic background, making the results handicap and not true to society.The long term effect of this experiment is not known as the results were noted immediately, and the reality is very different to an experiment. level(p) though the children displayed violent behaviour towards the doll this does not prove that they would be violent towards another person. The children could also have demonstrated this behaviour to please the adult, again making the findings of this experiment inaccurate. (http//psychology.about.com/od/classicpsychologystudies/a/bobo-doll-experiment.htm)The aim of this hear was to explain and evaluate Piaget and Banduras theory. Both the theorists have contributed to understanding of moral development in todays society and both evenly face criticisms to their work. T he main aspects that have been pointed out and open to attack are that both Bandura and Piaget have given little consideration to feelings, culture and unearthly beliefs.There sample was small not allowing general conclusions and findings to be wide acceptable. There experiments have been attacked for not being scientific. They failed to recognise that moral development has different content and meaning in different cultures and moral judgement is hugely influenced by societys common law and traditions. Parents eccentric and child nourishment are vital in how children and adolescents develop morally. Both Piaget and Bandura failed to take these important points into consideration when conducting their research.Piaget has studied cognitive development and his contributions are invaluable in the development of today education and the human development theory. Bandura looked more at social learning model one is amongst one of the most influential psychologists of our time. (http//www .sid.ir/en/VEWSSID/J_pdf/97420082403.pdf)

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.