OK, So what I’m getting so far out of Schrader’s Kohlberg article is:

Three trains of thought on moral development

  • Romantic–Rousseau, Freud, Neill, etc. kid has natural good particularly (and bad) that should be allowed to come out unsuppressed or distorted;
  • Cultural Transmission–kid should be taught societal values in a pretty authoritarian manner; and
  • Progressive (what Deb called Social Constructivist in class), in which kid learns to make their own moral judgments

To understand development of Progressive train of thought, she uses Kohlberg’s 6 stages of moral development as framework. Three parts of moral reasoning–judgment about what’s right, reason for doing right and justification of importance of reasons (not sure exactly what difference is between reason and justification). Judgment means moral judgment based on social reasoning and “prescriptive or normative judgment about people’s rights, obligations and responsibilities ” NOT Piagetian cognitive development and reasoning.

According to Kohlberg, person will pass through all stages given opportunities for social interaction and “requisite cognitive development.” Kohlberg’s student Blatt proved that people would move to the next stage of moral development if given opportunities to talk to peers at that next stage (Vygotsky and scaffolding and social constructivist theories of learning) and asked to talk about their reasoning. In effective dilemma discussions, people talk about why they think a course of action is morally right and are encouraged to focus primarily on their reasoning (so, metacognition and process-focus rather than outcome-focus). more to come. . .