Scribd
Upload
126 views12 pages

Piaget's: Theory of Moral Development Shazia Siddique

Piaget's theory of moral development proposes that children progress through distinct stages of moral reasoning ability from ages 0-10 years old. In the earliest stage, children view rules as rigid and focus only on consequences of actions. Later, around age 10, children develop an understanding of intentions and recognize rules can vary by context. Piaget used clinical interviews and stories to study children's moral judgments, though his methods lacked standardization and generalizability. While influential, Piaget's theory underestimated children's understanding and has been criticized for not clearly distinguishing moral versus conventional reasoning.

Uploaded by

sea
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
126 views12 pages

Piaget's: Theory of Moral Development Shazia Siddique

Piaget's theory of moral development proposes that children progress through distinct stages of moral reasoning ability from ages 0-10 years old. In the earliest stage, children view rules as rigid and focus only on consequences of actions. Later, around age 10, children develop an understanding of intentions and recognize rules can vary by context. Piaget used clinical interviews and stories to study children's moral judgments, though his methods lacked standardization and generalizability. While influential, Piaget's theory underestimated children's understanding and has been criticized for not clearly distinguishing moral versus conventional reasoning.

Uploaded by

sea
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 12

Piaget’s Theory of Moral

Development
Shazia Siddique
Moral Development

Moral development
is the gradual
development of an
individuals concept of
right or wrong –
conscious, religious
values, social attitudes
and certain behavior.
 Moral development as cognitive
development (stages)
 Piaget (1932)
 Kohlberg (1963)
 Implications for educators and researchers
Moral reasoning develops through childhood due to
disequilibrium and decreasing egocentrism.

Stage 1.
Pre-moral: 0 – 5 years. Little understanding of rules as children can‟t
carry out complex mental operations. Behaviour is regulated from outside
the child (Sensorimotor & Pre-operational)

Stage 2.
Heteronomous/Moral realism: 5–9 years. Rules are rigid and given by
adults/God. Rules tell you what is right or wrong.Consequences dictate
the severity of a behaviour, not the intentions (Pre-operational &
Concrete Operational)
Stage 3.

Autonomous morality/Moral relativism: 10 years upwards.


Emphasises co-operation. Rules are changeable under certain
circumstances and with mutual consent.(Concrete and Formal
Operational)
 Story 1: A little boy called goes in, the door knocks
John is in his room. He is against the tray, “bang” to
called to dinner. He goes the 15 cups and they all get
into the dining room. But broken!
behind the door there was a  Story 2: One day
chair, and on the chair when Henry‟s mother was
there was a tray with 15 out, he tried to get some
cups on it. John couldn't jam out of the cupboard.
have known that there was He climbed up on a chair
all this behind the door. He and stretched out his arm.
But the jam
was too high up and he to get it, he knocked over a
couldn't reach it and have cup. The cup fell down
any. But while he was trying and broke.
Q: Who would a 7 year old say is naughtier – why?
 Younger children focused on the
consequences of behaviour –the boy who
accidently broke 15 cups was naughtier than
the boy who broke one cup while doing
something he shouldn‟t. They based their
judgements on the amount of damage (Moral
Realism)
 Children aged 10 and above saw the motivation
or intent behind the act as important in
determining naughtier – so the child who broke
a cup whilst trying to steal was naughtier as his
motives were bad (Moral Relativism)
Critiques of Piaget’s theory
Rules of marbles more complex than other games.
Gendered – “girls‟ games too simplistic”.
Game rules are conventional rules, not moral ones
(cf. Turiel, 1983).
CRITICAL EVALUATION

 Piaget’s theory of children’s moral development can be seen as an


application of his ideas on cognitive development generally.

 As such his theory here has both the strengths and weaknesses of his overall
theory.

 1. Reliability. Piaget uses qualitative methods (observation and clinical


interviews).

 His research is based on very small samples.

 His methods are not standardised and therefore not replicable.

 It is impossible to say from his research how generalizable the results are.
 His is exploratory research, which is useful for generating new ideas

rather than for the rigorous testing of hypotheses.

 2. Validity. Is Piaget testing what he thinks he is testing?

 This isn’t clear.

 For example in his story of the broken cups Piaget claims to find a

difference in children’s views of what is right or fair.

 However it may be that the answer the children give is based on their

view of what would actually happen in such circumstances not what

they think should happen.


CRITICAL EVALUATION

 3. Underestimating children’s rate of development. Shift from “moral realism” to


“moral relativism” occurs around the age of 9 to 10 and that children younger
than this do not take motives into account

 Other research suggests that children develop an understanding of the


significance of subjective facts at a much earlier age.

 Nelson (1980) found that even 3-year olds could distinguish intentions from
consequences if the story was made simple enough.

 4. What do children’s replies to a story actually mean?  This again isn’t


necessarily clear.

 Do they understand the story?

 Are they able to remember it correctly?


 Do they give the answer that they think will please the experimenter?

 Is their reply governed by the substantive aspects of the story (what actually
happens) or by the moral principle embedded in it?

 5. Does Piaget tell us what we want to know?

 Piaget’s research is about children’s moral reasoning.

 Many psychologists argue that what is far more important is not what children
think about moral issues but how they actually behave.

 And we should not forget that there is no one to one relationship between
attitudes and behavior.
 Can teachers make use of these theories to
improve classroom relationships and
behaviour?

You might also like