EDUC 504: RESPONSE TO LITERACY LESSON VIDEO
Piaget
Piaget is most well known for his theory on the stages of cognitive development,
however he also developed a theory on moral development which coincides with his cognitive
theory. Similar to his cognitive theory, in Piaget’s moral development theory, children progress
from one stage to another as they age. Younger children according to Piaget are in a stage of
heteronomous morality, whereas older children are in a stage of autonomous morality.
In Piaget’s theory, which he developed by questioning children of different ages about
fictional stories of misdeeds/misbehavior, younger children are characterized by a moral
understanding that is based on inflexible rules. These rules are imposed by others, usually adults
or other authority figures. These rules, furthermore, are immovable, fixed, and egocentric (others
must see it the same way as I do). Lastly, in this stage children believe that bad deeds should and
always are punished (Slavin & Schunck, 2021). Even circumstances that arise coincidentally
after a misdeed are seen as punishments for bad behavior. This is Piaget’s explanation for
children who will blame themselves for actions that have nothing to do with them. For example,
a mischievous child has parents who divorce, and the father moves away. The child concludes
that the father moving away is a punishment because the child was “bad”. However, the parents’
action had nothing to do with the child’s behavior. The child’s conclusion is simply because
he/she is in the heteronomous stage of moral development.
Following the heteronomous stage is the autonomous morality stage, which begins
around age 10-12 which coincides with abstract thinking of Piaget’s formal operational stage of
cognitive development. At the autonomous morality stage, children are able to see multiple
perspectives of what is right instead of egocentric views. In this stage, rules are no longer fixed
and immovable. Children are able to consider the affect of a situation on a rule and discern that
Page 1 of 8
EDUC 504: RESPONSE TO LITERACY LESSON VIDEO
in certain circumstances it may be okay to break the rules. Intentions become important and
actions need not always be punished (Slavin & Schunck, 2021).
Kohlberg
Kohlberg also had stages in his theory of moral development. However, Kohlberg had 6
stages which were grouped into three levels. The levels are pre-conventional, conventional and
postconventional. The levels are determined by the means by which an individual judges or
determines what is right. The first two levels, preconventional and conventional, have external
means to determine what is right. In the preconventional level the external factors are
punishment or gratification. If an action results in punishment, or lack thereof, or needs being
gratified, or lack thereof, those results determine the morality of the actions. In the conventional
level, the externals are others’ approval or expectations. If actions meet others’ approval or
expectations, then that viewpoint determines the morality of the actions. The postconventional
level has internal judgements of actions. If actions adhere to one’s rights or one’s personal
ethical standards, that determines the morality of actions (Slavin & Schunck, 2021).
Within the preconventional level are two stages, (1) punishment and obedience
orientation and (2) instrumental relativist orientation. The first stage is focused on external
punishment, obedience to external authorities. The second stage is focused on the satisfaction of
needs, i.e. rule following meets one’s needs or others’ needs. In general children move beyond
this stage by age nine. The conventional level encompasses the (3) good boy-good girl
orientation, and the (4) law and order orientation. The first of these is focused on the external
approval of others, whereas the later is focus on one’s alignment with the expectations of others.
The last two stages, which are within the conventional level, finally move on to internal focuses
Page 2 of 8
EDUC 504: RESPONSE TO LITERACY LESSON VIDEO
the first of which is (5) social contract orientation which focuses on one’s rights and (6) universal
ethical principle orientation which focuses on one’s ethical perspective (Slavin & Schunck,
2021).
Turiel
Turiel did not agree with the linear, sequential approach to the stage theories of Piaget
and Kohlberg. Instead, Turiel posited that three domains, social, moral, and psychological,
progress in parallel, simultaneous manner. The moral domain according to Turiel is focused on
the welfare and well-being of others. This domain takes into consideration the morality of
actions based on if those actions do not cause harm to others and treats others fairly. The social
domain is based upon social norms and societal expectations. This considers actions based upon
rules and social conventions of politeness and decorum. Lastly, the psychological domain is
focused upon one’s thoughts about oneself and others as well as the choices that one makes. As a
child progresses in this domain, they are able to consider the thoughts and perspectives of others
(Ryan, 2011).
It is important to note that Turiel is the only theorist that differentiates between morality
and social convention. In his theory, there are actions that are only considered “right” not
because there is a moral component to them (they do not cause harm nor injustice), they are
simply agreed upon and polite social conventions. For example, saying thank you or not saying
thank you has nothing to do with harm or fairness, which are the core of Turiel’s moral
decisions. Rather, saying thank you is just an agreed upon social practice.
Page 3 of 8
EDUC 504: RESPONSE TO LITERACY LESSON VIDEO
Bandura
Bandura theorized that all behaviors are learned through a social context. Modelling is
imitated when children have motivation to imitate that behavior. Motivation comes from past
reinforcement, promised reinforcement or vicarious reinforcement. Children will imitate pro-
social behaviors if those behaviors are reinforced through praise, seeing others get rewarded,
promise of praise or reward etc. Children will also imitate aggressive behaviors if observation of
those behaviors shows that force brings reward.
Bandura theorized that experimentation with imitating behaviors is what causes a child to
develop a moral framework. It is important to note that in Bandura’s Social Learning theory
actions are not morally determined to be right or wrong based on some sense of good/bad, harm,
fairness like in Turiel’s theory. But rather, actions are determined to be right or wrong based
upon if they are reinforced or punished, whether through direct or vicarious means. For example,
for a child who observes violent behavior in adults in his/her life, violence may be internalized as
normal or “right” (Ryan, 2011).
Similarities between Kohlberg and Turiel
Although Turiel did not agree with Kohlberg’s theory and sought to address what he saw
as deficiencies within that theory, there are similarities between Turiel’s theory and part of
Kohlberg’s theory. Particularly, Turiel theorized about the interplay between the moral and
social domains (as well as psychological). Kohlberg’s conventional stage also focuses on social
influences on moral determinations. In Turiel’s theory he discusses the social domain that
importance of politeness or a child performing actions simply because an adult has told the child
Page 4 of 8
EDUC 504: RESPONSE TO LITERACY LESSON VIDEO
that it is the polite thing to do. This coincides with Kohlberg’s fourth stage, Law and Order
Orientation.
Secondly, a desire for social approval characterizes the social domain of Turiel and the
Good Boy- Good Girl Orientation, which is stage three of Kohlberg. The difference is that
Kohlberg posits that moral dilemmas are resolved through this need for social approval. Turiel
removes this from the moral realm and places it in the social domain only. However, in some
sense this is semantics since both are driven by the same influence which is social conventions
and other’s perceptions of one’s adherence to those conventions.
Differences between Piaget and Bandura
The most drastic difference in theories is seen between Piaget and Bandura because
Piaget focuses on the thinking or cognition behind moral decisions. Bandura is focused primarily
on behaviors, not thinking. Bandura is a behavioralist which means he is focused on what is
measurable, observable, and objective. Actions can be seen. Antecedents and reinforcements can
be seen and measured. Cognition cannot. That is one critic of Bandura’s theory– that it does not
take into account cognitive predispositions.
Secondly, Piaget’s theory discussed how children’s moral reasoning changes over time as
they age. Bandura does not discuss change over time as one ages. Rather, the social context not
one’s age is the determining factor in one’s change of behavior or lack thereof.
The Alignment of Turiel’s Theory with the Bible
A major component of Turiel’s theory is the concept of justice. He posited that moral
decisions are made based on one’s determination of the fairness or justice of an action. This is in
Page 5 of 8
EDUC 504: RESPONSE TO LITERACY LESSON VIDEO
alignment with Scripture because a major tenet of the Christian faith is to live justly with others.
The Word of God says “He has told you, O man, what is good; andFwhat does theFLORDFrequire
of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and toFwalk humbly with your God? (English
Standard Version, 2001, Micah 6:8) (emphasis is mine). Turiel also discussed how social
experiences c(social domain) an have an effect on moral development (moral domain).
Particularly in the moral domain’s focus on justice, according to Turiel experiences of injustice
can also affect one’s moral determinations. “Another source of concepts of justice and their
application in social situations is experiences of injustices, especially institutionalized forms of
injustice and inequalities. By institutionalized injustices, we mean forms of injustice and
inequalities embedded in systems of social organization and cultural practices.” (Turiel et al,
2018, p. 128) Although perhaps not until later in life, Turiel states that many individuals
recognize systemic injustices and develop a personal moral framework that rejects those
injustices.
These thoughts of Turiel again align with Scripture which encourages us to resist
injustice, particularly social or systemic injustices to classes of less fortunate, poor or needy
people. Jeremiah 22:3 says “Thus says theFLord: Do justice and righteousness, and deliver from
the hand of the oppressor him who has been robbed. And do no wrong or violence to the resident
alien, the fatherless, and the widow, nor shed innocent blood in this place” (English Standard
Version. 2001).
Page 6 of 8
EDUC 504: RESPONSE TO LITERACY LESSON VIDEO
References
English Standard Version Bible. (2001). ESV Online. https://esv.literalword.com/
Ryan, K. (2011) A Child’s Mind: How Kids Learn Right & Wrong. Learning Seed, LS-1346-11-
DVD,https://d3crmev290s45i.cloudfront.net/preview/1004151xxx/
1004151359/1004151359_1780209_preview-000020x000050.mp4
Slavin, R. E., & Schunk, D.H. (2021).FLearning Theories.(3rd ed.). Pearson. ISBN:
9780136956334.
Turiel, E., Dahl, A. & Besirevic,FZ. 'Thought, Emotions, and Sentiments in the Development of
Justice',Fin Mark LeBar (ed.),FJustice, The VirtuesF(New York,F2018;Fonline edn,FOxford
Academic, 23 Aug.
2018),Fhttps://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190631741.003.0006,Faccessed 8 Mar. 2024.
Page 7 of 8
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
