The Perception Of Teachers’ About Developing Moral Character Through The Curriculum And The Schools’ Culture

Clifford Agyei; Benjamin Aidoo; Philip Siaw Kissi; Samuel Boakye

The Perception Of Teachers’ About Developing Moral Character Through The Curriculum And The Schools’ Culture

Author :

Year-Number: 2017-Volume 9, Issue 1

Language : null

Konu : null

Number of pages:

Mendeley

EndNote

Alıntı Yap

English Turkish

Abstract

This article considers the perception and teachers’ idea relating to developing the character of students through the curriculum in the context of the South African schooling system. Literature covering value education, moral education, and what other researchers perceived as good values that are necessary for a country with a diverse population such as South Africa has been outlined. A total of 64 survey respondents and individual volunteer interviews with ten teachers were recruited for the study. Findings from the study indicate that majority of the survey respondent identified the need and opportunity for moral education to be integrated within each the subjects. The current study also identified an inadequate prior knowledge in the minds of participants. The need to provide workshops for teachers on how to integrate the moral education within the curriculum is identified

Keywords

Abstract

Keywords

Kaynakça

Over the years the number of researches in the field of character education has increased with many targeting on the best possible ways to integrate the teaching of character through the curriculum. The area of moral character development has gained a lot of attention probably due to the high volume of the family break, teen pregnancy, increase in drug use, and gang violence. Character development is shared responsibility where we all have a role to play for the younger generation (Evans, 2006). Character Definition

One problem faced by scholar and researchers in the field of character education is how character conceptualized in a variety of ways (Seider, 2015). Some scholars conceived character as possession or improvement of the particular qualities such as patience, humility or respectfulness whiles others define character as a set of behavior found in a particular type of prosocial behavior, which may include sharing or helping (Seider, 2015). Developmental psychologist and character educator, Berkowitz (2011), in APA Educational Psychology Handbook, also defines character as “ A set of psychological characteristics that motivate and enable individuals to function as competent moral agents” cited by (Seider, 2015, p. 21). The two folds definition by Berkowitz draws attention to the fact that individuals are not just motivated to do what is expected of them but needs to develop skills to enable them to do the right thing. The psychological characteristics aspect of the definition also explains that schools or other institution can choose to strengthen a particular character type and develop it (Seider, 2015). Berkowitz (2011), explained the moral identity of one’s character as consisting of three parts as cognitive, affective and behavioral. In connection with this, Seider (2015) stated, “Effective character education needs to influence not only students’ heads (the cognitive) but also their hearts (affective) and hands (behavioral) (p. 22). Lawrence Kohlberg asserted that our ability to deepening one’s moral identity leads to increase in moral capacity, which enables individual to reason as perfect moral agents. Research on the stages of Moral Development

The moral formation of children is one of the significant goals of socialization (Lapsley & Narvaez, 2006). It is, therefore, relevant for character education teacher to study the formation of child’s character (moral) due to its implication on the society. Crain (1985) recognized and recounts Kohlberg’s six stages of moral development. These stages of moral development give an idea that morality starts from early stages of our lives and therefore important to develop it in schools so children will become moral agents. The outlined of Kohlberg’s theory of moral development include; (a) Stage 1: Obedience and punishment orientation. Children's feels that there are set of rules set by authorities, which need to be obeyed without questioning and failure to do so would attractive punishment; (b) Stage 2: Individualism and exchange. Children feel that no there is no one correct viewpoint but each person is free to follow their own interest; (c) Stage 3: Good interpersonal relationships; which Kohlberg and Hersh (1977) "good boy - nice girl" orientation (p.55). The stage consists of children mainly in their teens, they uphold good behavior and think been nice to people in the community as well as the family is what is approved, hence act accordingly. (d) Stage 4: Law and order or maintaining the social order. Children lay much emphasis on law and order, showing respect for authority and acting as an agent to maintain social order. (e) Stage 5: Social contract and Individual rights. Individuals perceived one’s action as right when it measures up to what the whole society considers acceptable. People normally focus on democratic and dialogue as the main tool for reaching consensus. (f) Stage 6: Universal Principles. Individuals focus on how to respect the human dignity, been fair to each person while carrying out daily responsibility. These are generally universal principle of justice. Through independent thinking, Kohlberg contends that children move through these stages of moral development. This growth in moral stages reinforces the main aim of the education as being development in both intellect and moral (Kohlberg and Hersh, 1977).

Even with the ever growing concern that our classrooms are now occupied by screen Agers (Rushkoff & Rushkoff, 2006), whose hitherto, used to learn lifestyle, values, and point of view through adult filtering (Jolls, 2008), many still believe these digital learners cannot successfully be equipped with moral character education without the teacher’s purposefully exhibiting examples of what learners are taught.

Bennete (1993) believes there is nothing more influential and more detrimental in a child’s life than the moral power of quiet example. This has necessitated the need for the character educator’s role to shift from delivering a curriculum content to becoming a moral model, who will demonstrate a high level of respect and responsibility inside and outside the classroom for children to emulate (Lickona, 1991). Firmly supporting the above belief, Heafford (1967), who argues that students should be given concrete examples through the exemplary behaviors of teachers because it is only through example and practice that the language of morality could be taught and not by word of mouth, preaching, or lecture. With this, attempts by teachers to inculcate moral character into students should be complemented by they also becoming symbols of the very qualities and virtues they expect their learners to acquire.

Pritchards (1988), even puts it more succinctly by explaining that school goes beyond the content of its curriculum and in delivering moral education, hidden or implicit curriculum which includes how teachers and students act toward one another may have a great effect on the development of character in the school. The above discussions have been summed, Falkenberg (2007), who believed that teaching is a moral project, which is inherently moral, has a moral purpose and emphasizes moral responsibility. Consequently, the educator’s role in character education cannot be complete without the demonstration of the very morals being taught by the educator

Research has shown that most teachers have mixed feelings when it comes to implementation of character education (moral) programs in schools’ curricula. In a research by Tuff (2009) in Alberta, Canada, it is reported that most teachers believe that character development programs should not be added to the curricula as it provides teachers with additional responsibility. Other teachers contended that any character development program should first be approved to enable all staff to participate in it (Tuff, 2009). A similar research by Gleeson and O’Flaherty (2016), in Australia and Ireland, revealed that most teachers in Australia perceived themselves as nurturers who are interested not only in making students’ smart but focus on the moral development of students as well. On the other hand, the majority of Irish teachers were less positive about their responsibility to provide moral education and training for students. Wood and Roach (1999), research on school administrators’ idea about character education also revealed that 99% of them agreed that character through the curriculum is necessary but emphasized that most teachers lack formal training. Recommendation such as; proper training of teachers to integrate character through the curriculum, organizing workshops to broaden and increase knowledge of teachers, parents and administrators, and effective practices that are supported by enough scientific research. A study on high school students to ascertain their perspective on character education also revealed that most students see character education as an important factor in their lives but most argued that it's too late for its implementation at high school level. They, therefore, recommended an early start at an elementary level (Romanowski, 2003). These findings revealed that various stakeholders of education perceived some responsible role by acting as moral agents to help in the development of students’ character.

Research Methods Design The research design employed a mixed method approach involving administering a survey to ten public senior high school teachers in the 5 districts of KwaZulu-Natal and interview with ten volunteers respondents. The study was conducted in mixed-gender educational schools. All the schools are community day government schools with majority of students’ population consist of black South Africans. The community members are regarded as the major stakeholders in these schools. Due to resources such time and funds, only 5 districts in KwaZulu-Natal were recruited for this study hence convenience sampling procedure was used in selecting the participating schools. The survey would assist curriculum designers and administrators comprehend how teachers think and feel about the implementation of moral character while interview would bring out what teachers perceived as the barriers or resistance to the implementation in the school. This allows for a thick description, which goes beyond statistics and measurement (Gleeson & O’Flaherty, 2016; Duma & Anderson, 2014). The questionnaire consisted of three sections. Section I dealt with demographic information, section II with teachers’ prior knowledge or training in moral education and section III covered specifically on what teachers perceived as their responsibility or the role of schools in the moral character development of students. The demographic information included aspects such as gender, age, subjects taught, and years of teaching of the teacher. Teachers’ knowledge on character education in terms of training when at teacher training colleges, the number of workshops received on character education when started working covered section II. Section III introduced teachers’ to three Likert-type response questions, which assessed teachers’ knowledge perception of the school and teachers’ responsibility in the moral character development of students. The semi-structured interviews conducted with volunteer teachers to explore and enhance main survey findings. The questionnaire and the interview questions were adapted from Tuff (2009) with reliability and the validity scale reported as 72% and 90%. Ethical approval was sought and granted by relevant district education offices where the research took place, which is in compliance with ethical committees for the protection of human subjects for research. Data Collection The survey questionnaire and the interview were sent to the teachers in their respective schools by one of the researchers. Initially, letters were sent to all the principals of the ten secondary schools to seek for permission to carry out the research and to explain how allowing teachers to participate will help the study. Individual teachers were also given letters explaining the purpose of the research study and how their voluntary participation would interest the study. Teachers were advised that participation is voluntary and their response would be treated confidential and anonymous. Both the questionnaire and the interview were filled under the supervision of the researcher who went to the various schools. Each interview lasts approximately 25 minutes and was recorded using a digital recorder, with the consent of the interviewee. Much attention was paid to what teachers perceived as their role as well as the school in shaping the character of students. Participants A total of 64 classroom teachers of whom 56% were females and 44% males responded to the survey. The larger proportion of female teachers respondent is an indicative of the relatively higher number of female teachers in the various schools use to compare to male teachers. Survey respondents were effectively spread across the age range with up to 90% below the age of 45. More than half of the respondents have been teaching for than 10years. Respondents teach a wide variety of subject’s disciplines with languages and science being particularly represented. The volunteer interviewees (n=10, 6 Females and 4 male teachers) varied in subject discipline, experienced, and age. Data Analysis The analysis was designed to effectively assist in answering the research questions, which this study attempts to find answers to. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the quantitative data. Themes that emerge from the interview (qualitative data) were analyzed using the theme coding approach (McMillan, 2016). Transcripts were studied in full by one of the authors in order to identify themes while assigning a code to the repeated concepts. An inductive approach to data analysis (Veitch, Arundell, Hume & Ball, 2013) and thematic analysis were used to ascertain themes. Allowing another author to review each interview transcript, which allows for the coding to be compared, further maximized the validity and the interpretation of the data. Result and Findings Result Table 1. Survey of teachers’ perception and prior knowledge about developing

training, and confidence to teach or integrate moral character in their daily plan. Berkowitz (2011) reported a

functioning moral character program (Berkowitz, 2011; Berkowitz & Bier, 2005).

There were some respondents in both survey and interview with a mixed view that character development should be a sole responsibility of the parents. This resonates with the research by Freeks (2015) on the influence of role-playing on the character development of South Africa student. In concluded, Freeks (2015) reported that majority of the respondent agreed that parents have a major role in the character development of children. Even with this, Lickona (1991) claimed that teachers still have a major role to play in the moral orientation of children. Throughout the South Africa and the World education system at large, teachers serve as ethical mentors and the instrument for moral character development. Those respondents who view moral development, as a sole responsibility of the parents may be to blame in part due to a lack confidence and skills on the side of the teacher to effectively integrate moral education within the subject. With this Berkowitz (2011) explicitly stated that schools that wish to provide moral character development should first aim at professional development. Conclusion As Heenan (2009) wrote that education had two primary aims; firstly to help students master literacy and numerals, and secondly to build quality character. Teachers should, therefore, note that value addition and development are indispensable to every educational system. It is, therefore, important for the South African Department Education and other education systems around the world to consider these two aims in order to achieve a holistic education. As a recommendation Freeks (2015), indicated that character development and character building programs that have scientific bases should be introduced into the various school programs to stop the decline in values. Integrating moral character within the curriculum has the potential to increase students’ academic performance, respect for human dignity, and sense of responsibility. Moving away from the common ideology of virtues and focus much on moral virtue as a way to knowledge will be an ideal (Narvaez, 2013). Based on the study findings, it is important for the district and provincial education department to educate teachers on strategies needed before integrating moral character in the various schools around South Africa. This will help bridge the gap in the knowledge of most teachers concerning moral education. Moreover, because the community members are seen as the major stakeholders in most South African highschools, parents should be educated to team up with the teachers to implement character-building program that are capable of developing students’ character. Character training and character development should be incorporated into the curriculum of teacher training institutions across South Africans to make teachers aware of their basic responsibility of been a character mentor in their schools and community at large.

Falkenberg, T. (2007). On the grounding of teacher education in the human condition. The Journal of

Educational Thought (JET) / Revue De La Pensée Éducative, 41(3), 245-262. Freeks, F. E. (2015). The influence of role-players on the character-development and character-building of

doi:10.15700/saje.v35n3a1086 Gleeson, J., & O'Flaherty, J. (2016). The teacher as moral educator: comparative study of secondary teachers

doi:10.1016/j.tate.2015.12.002 Heafford, M. R. (1967). Pestalozzi: His thought and its relevance today. Education paperbacks. The Library of

Educational Thought. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd. Heenan J .(2009). Making sense of values. Retrieved from http://www.teachingvalues.com/valuesense.html. Jolls, T. (2008). The impact of technology on character education. Retrieved from

0Education.pdf Kasa, B., & Ersöz, Y. (2016). Pros and Cons: Compulsory 12-year education reform In Turkey. South African

Journal of Education, 36(2), 1. Retrieved from http://www.sajournalofeducation.co.za/index.php/saje Kohlberg, L., & Hersh, R. H. (1977). Moral development: A review of the theory. Theory into practice, 16(2),

53-59. doi:10.1080/00405847709542675 Lapsley D.K & Narvaez, D. (2006). Character education. In K. A. Renninger & I.E. Sigel (Eds), W Damon &

Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Lickona, T. (1991) Educating for character: How our schools can teach respect and responsibility. New York, NY:

Bantam Books. Lickona, T. (1997). The teacher's role in character education. The Journal of Education, 179(2), 63-80. Retrieved

from http://www.jstor.org/stable/42741723 McCabe, D. L., Treviño, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2001). Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of

research. Ethics &Behavior, 11(3), 219-232, doi:10.1207/S15327019EB1103_2 McCormack, O., & O'Flaherty, J. (2010). An examination of pre-service teachers' attitudes towards the

1332-1339, doi:10.1016/j.tate.2010.02.0 08 McMillan, J. H. (2016). Fundamentals of educational research. Boston, MA: Pearson Education. Narvaez, D. (2013). The future of research in moral development and education. Journal of Moral Education,

42(1), 1-11, doi:10.1080/03057240.2012.757102 Pritchard, I. (1988). Character Education: Research Prospects and Problems. American Journal of

Education, 96(4), 469-495. Romanowski, M. H. (2003). Through the eyes of students: High school students' perspectives on character

Stedje, L. B. (2010). Nuts and bolts of character education. Literature Review. Oklahoma: Character First.

Retrieved from http://strata.vaesite.com/__data/uploads/files/CharacterEducationReport.pdf The South African National Policy on Religion and Education .(2003). Department of Education, Retrieved

0on %20Religion%20in%20Education%20(GG25459,%20Notice%201307)%20Amended.pdf Tuff, L. (2009). Teacher perception of character education Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Lethbridge, Alta.:

University of Lethbridge, Faculty of Education. Van Veen, K., Sleegers, P., Bergen, T., & Klaassen, C. (2001). Professional orientations of secondary school

doi:10.1016/S0742051X(00)00050-0 Veitch, J., Arundell, L., Hume, C., & Ball, K. (2013). Children’s perceptions of the factors helping them to

be‘resilient’to sedentary lifestyles. Health Education Research, 28(4), 692-703. Wood, R. W & Roach, L . (1999). Administrators’ perceptions of character. Education, 120(2), 213-220.

Last issue
Previous issues
Article Statistics