研究生: |
曾麟喬 Tseng, Ling-chaio |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
Neo-Kohlbergian取向之發展及其道德教育蘊義 |
指導教授: |
李琪明
Lee, Chi-Ming |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
公民教育與活動領導學系 Department of Civic Education and Leadership |
論文出版年: | 2009 |
畢業學年度: | 97 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 231 |
中文關鍵詞: | Kohlberg 、Neo-Kohlbergian取向 、界定議題測驗 、道德基模 、四成分模式 、專業倫理教育 、道德教育 |
英文關鍵詞: | Kohlberg, Neo-Kohlbergian approach, Defining Issues Test (DIT), moral schema, Four-Component Model (FCM), professional ethical education, moral education |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:257 下載:24 |
分享至: |
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
「Neo-Kohlbergian取向」承襲自美國學者L. Kohlberg道德認知發展理論,延續其強調認知、自我建構、發展、時期轉換與巨觀道德的的精神,但改變研究方法,以及調整部分心理學與哲學的假定。筆者基於對該取向理論發展的關切以及近年對道德教育的重視,於本文採取理論分析法,針對四個研究目的加以探究:1.瞭解該取向興起背景及其與Kohlberg理論的異同;2.探討該取向理論重點與相關研究;3.評述該取向的限制與待思考課題;4.反思該取向對我國道德教育的運用與啟發,並提出後續研究建議。
本文歸納Neo-Kohlbergian取向三個理論重點,分別是:1.建構量化的界定議題測驗(DIT),取代Kohlberg的晤談法以測量道德判斷發展,並納入默會理解概念且獲致後成規期道德思考的實徵支持;2.以軟屬性的道德基模描述道德判斷發展,取代Kohlberg的階段觀,強調個人道德認知發展為三種道德基模(個人興趣基模、維持規範基模、後成規期基模)思維的漸序分配轉換,且道德基模會處於鞏固與變遷不斷交錯的型態;3.以四成分模式(FCM)解釋道德心理運作歷程,並從專業倫理教育角度切入進行相關研究。然而,DIT量化設計在理論詮釋上有其侷限,道德基模論述仍有不明確之處,FCM雖具有啟發性但各成分實徵研究有落差,整體而言理論間定位與關係有待釐清。
Neo-Kohlbergian取向對於道德教育的啟示亦可從三方面討論:其一,DIT研究成果顯示青少年時期道德發展的重要性,其辨認道德發展程度與相關因素,且映證道德兩難討論是道德教學與研究的實用性策略。其二,該取向對於道德基模的論述,深入探討個人認知發展的樣貌,有助益於對道德思維的瞭解;其三,FCM的研究彰顯道德心理各成分的重要性,提醒道德/專業倫理教育實施與評量必須兼顧道德心理不同成分,以及可運用真實情境研究與深入中介概念的探討。
最後本論文提出該取向後續研究與對我國道德教育運用之若干建議,可繼續辨明與釐清理論的論述與研究外,針對DIT進行跨文化比較與進行基礎道德發展研究,並運用多元方法研究道德。此外可藉力於該取向發展特定專業之道德判斷測驗,並提醒教育教育人員在道德教學與課程須配合學生心理發展,以及結合FCM研究,注重道德心理各面向的培養與提升。
The neo-Kohlbergian approach has its roots in L. Kohlberg’s theories, extended the emphasis on cognition, self construction, development, the shift from conventional to post-conventional thinking, and macro-morality. The approach also shifted away from Kohlberg’s original methodology and his hypotheses on psychology and philosophy. Due to the author’s special interest in understanding the development of the approach and concerns for Taiwan’s moral education in recent years, the goals of this study were as follows: 1) to trace the history and compare the approach with Kohlberg’s theory; 2) to analyze the approach’s key theories and related researches; 3) to give comments on its limitations and unanswered questions; 4) to reflect and provide further research suggestions on the approach and its uses and inspirations for Taiwan’s moral education.
This study focused on three aspects. The first was the construction of the Defining Issues Test (DIT) as a substitute for Kohlberg’s interview method to measure moral judgment development, which fitted with current views in cognitive science and obtained empirical support that substantiated post-conventional thinking. The second was the discussion of three moral schemas as a description for development, which replaced Kohlberg’s view of developmental stages. They conceptualized development as shifting distributions from primitive to advanced thinking, and assumed that moral schemas alternated between consolidated and transitional types. The third is the use of the Four-Component Model (FCM) in explaining morality as a multiplicity of processes and goes into further research from a professional ethical education point of view. However, DIT and moral schemas are limited in interpreting moral development. FCM, although inspirational, but is restricted by the lack of equilibrium of its components’ researches. Overall, the relation between DIT and FCM awaits clarification.
In addition, this study discussed the inspirations of moral education of the neo-Kohlbergian approach. First, DIT revealed significance of moral development during adolescence. It recognized the degrees and factors of moral development. It also showed effectiveness of dilemma discussion in terms of moral education and researches. Second, moral schemas explored the pattern of individual cognitive development. It made a thorough inquiry on moral thinking. Third, the FCM research exhibited the importance of four components in the aspect of moral education and evaluation. It also demonstrated that researches implemented from real life situation and studies about intermediate concepts had real potentials.
Finally, this study provided suggestions about directions for future researches and applications on Taiwan’s moral education. Apart its clarification of the relations between DIT and FCM, it recommended focus on DIT for cross-culture study, and studies on morality using multiple strategies. Moreover, the approach can assist the development of moral judgment assessments for specific profession, and remind educators that moral education needs to complement students’ psychological development and the growth of their multifaceted moral psyche characterized by FCM researches.
中文部分
王晃三(1996)。專業倫理融入式教學問答集。通識教育季刊,3(2),頁157-162。
石元康(1989)。洛爾斯。台北市:東大。
伍振鷟(1999)。道德問題與教育。載於伍振鷟主編,教育哲學(頁283-302)。台北市:五南。
朱建民(1996)。專業倫理教育的理論與實踐。通識教育季刊,3(2),頁33-56。
余安邦(1996)。文化心理學的歷史發展與研究進路:兼論其與心態史學的關係,載於楊國樞主編,文化心理學的探索,頁2-60。
呂維理(譯)(2004)。J. Rest, S. J. Thoma, Y. L. Moon, & I. Getz(1986)著。不同文化、性別與宗教。載於張鳳燕(編譯),道德發展:研究與理論之進展(Moral development : advances in research and theory)(頁117-176)。台北市:心理。
李琪明(2007a)。品德教育面臨轉型的解構與重建。教師研習資訊,24(1)。頁33-41。
李琪明(2007b)。德育理念與實踐。載於李琪明、林煥祥、洪瑞兒、洪振方、程瑞福、徐元民、鄧毓浩、蔡居澤、陳瓊花,德智體群美五育—理念與實踐(頁10-53)。台北市:教育部。
沈六(1977)。青少年道德認知發展階段及其在德育上的應用,中等教育,16(3)。頁31-35。
林文瑛(譯)(1993)。L. Kuhmerker(1991)著。柯爾堡及圈內的朋友們。載於俞筱鈞等(譯),道德發展:柯爾堡的薪傳(The Kohlberg legacy for the helping professions)(頁307-316)。台北市:洪葉文化。
林文瑛(譯)(2004)。S. J. Thoma, J. Rest, & R. Barnett(1986)著。道德判斷、行為、決策與態度。載於張鳳燕(編譯),道德發展:研究與理論之進展(Moral development : advances in research and theory)(頁177-226)。台北市:心理。
林宜瀅(2003)。國中道德氣氛與學生道德發展之相關研究。國立台灣師範大學公民教育與活動領導學系碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
林素梅(2006)。天主教輔仁大學推動品德教育之研究。國立台灣師範大學公民教育與活動領導學系碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
南一書局高中公民與社會編撰委員會(2006)。普通高級中學公民與社會第一冊。台南:南一書局。
柯秀燕(2003)。高職畢業生就業情形與就業競爭力初探。技術及職業教育,78,頁31-34。重視職業道德、人文素養與工作態度的教養
胡肇勳、程景琳(2007)。國小低年級孩童與父母在不同領域衝突的反應方式之研究。教育心理學報,38(4),頁481-499。
俞筱鈞(譯)(1993a)。L. Kohlberg(1986)著。我個人尋求普遍性道德之回溯。載於俞筱鈞等(譯),道德發展:柯爾堡的薪傳(The Kohlberg legacy for the helping professions)(頁3-15)。台北市:洪葉文化。
俞筱鈞(譯)(1993b)。U. Gielen (1991)著。道德推理研究。載於俞筱鈞等(譯),道德發展:柯爾堡的薪傳(The Kohlberg legacy for the helping professions)(頁49-78)。台北市:洪葉文化。
孫效智(2001)。生命教育的倫理學基礎。教育資料集刊,26,頁27-57。
翁萃芳(2002)。多管點閒事vs.旁觀者效應。2008/4/30,取自自由電子新聞網http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2002/new/jul/8/today-o1.htm
翁開誠(譯)(2004)。J. Rest, D. Deemer, R. Barnett, J, Spickelmier, & J. Volker (1986)著。生活經驗與發展的途徑。載於張鳳燕(編譯),道德發展:研究與理論之進展(Moral development : advances in research and theory)(頁37-78)。台北市:心理。
翁懿涵(2002)。皮亞傑發生認識論及對臺灣教育蘊義之省思。國立臺灣師範大學教育學系碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
張春興(1996)。教育心理學。台北市:東華。
張鳳燕(1995)。教師道德推理測驗之發展。教育與心理研究,18,頁103-138。
張鳳燕(編譯)(2004)。J. Rest (1986)著。道德發展:研究與理論之進展(Moral development : advances in research and theory)。台北市:心理。
教育部品德教育促進方案(2006)。
梁福鎮(2000)。詮釋學方法及其在教育研究上的應用。載於中正大學教育研究所主編,質的研究方法(頁221-238)。高雄市:麗文。
許澤民(譯)(2004)。M. Polanyi(1958)著。個人知識:邁向後批判哲學(Personal knowledge: Toward a post-critical philosophy)。台北市:商周出版。
郭為藩(1993)。序。載於俞筱鈞等(譯),道德發展:柯爾堡的薪傳(The Kohlberg legacy for the helping professions)(頁3-15)。台北市:洪葉文化。
郭靜晃(譯)(1993)。U. Gielen & 雷霆(1991)著。道德推理的測量。載於俞筱鈞等(譯),道德發展:柯爾堡的薪傳(The Kohlberg legacy for the helping professions)(頁79-117)。台北市:洪葉文化。
陳李綢、郭妙雪(1998)。教育心理學。台北市:五南。
陳英豪(1976)。發展觀的道德論與教育。教育文粹,5。頁8-10
陳蕙苓(1998)。如何落實高級職校職業道德教育。人文及社會學科教學通訊,9(2),頁65-74。
單文經(1982)。道德教育初探。高雄市:復文。
單文經(譯)(1979)。F. Edwin(1979) 著。認知活動發展理論述要。今日教育,36。頁52-56。
單文經(譯)(1986)。L. Kohlberg(1981)著。道德發展的哲學(Essay on moral development, Vol. 1: The philosophy of moral development)。台北市:黎明。
單文經(譯)(2004)。J. Rest, & S. J. Thoma (1986)著。教育課程與介入處理。載於張鳳燕(編譯),道德發展:研究與理論之進展(Moral development : advances in research and theory)(頁79-116)。台北市:心理。
彭淮棟譯(1985)。M. Polanyi著。博藍尼講演集:人之研究‧科學、信仰與社會‧默會致知(The study of man. Science, faith and society. The tacit dimension)。台北市:聯經。
黃光國(1996)。專業倫理教育的基本理念。通識教育季刊,3(2),頁19-32。
黃坤錦(1999)。知識結構與教育。載於伍振鷟主編,教育哲學(頁221-258)。台北市:五南。
黃湘武(1985)。國中生質量守恆、重量守恆、外體積觀念與比例推理能力的抽樣調查研究,中等教育,36(1), 頁44-65。
黃藿(2004)。教育專業倫理與道德教育。載於黃藿(主編),教育專業倫理(1)(頁1-43)。台北市:五南。
楊大春(1996)。後結構主義。台北市:揚智文化。
楊淑玲(2003)。會計實務與學習行為道德態度之探討。淡江大學會計學系,研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北縣。
楊深坑(1986)。教育科學性之詮釋學分析。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所集刊,28,頁33-73。
葉光輝(譯)(1993)。U. Gielen (1991)著。柯爾堡的道德發展理論。載於俞筱鈞等(譯),道德發展:柯爾堡的薪傳(The Kohlberg legacy for the helping professions)(頁17-48)。台北市:洪葉文化。
劉美慧(1993)。高職學生認知型態與職業道德判斷之研究。公民訓育學報,頁443-482。
劉淑慧、劉安真、吳珍梅(2000)。大學生道德判斷評量表之編製。測驗年刊,46(1),頁89-118。
劉靖國(2002)。國民教育階段學童之儒家道德判斷與現代道德判斷之研究。台南師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台南縣。
蔡甫昌、李明濱(2003)。生命倫理。載於醫藥基因生物技術教學資源中心主編,後基因體時代之生物技術,教育部顧問室「生物技術科技教育教育改進計畫」。
龍應台(2006)。請用文明來說服我。台北市:時報。
簡成熙(1997a)。關懷倫理與教育:Gilligan與Noddings思想初探。載於簡成熙(主編),哲學和教育—二十世紀末的教育哲學(頁197-232)。高雄市:復文。
簡成熙(1997b)。教育理論、研究與實踐的關係—教育分析哲學式的省察,載於簡成熙(主編),哲學和教育—二十世紀末的教育哲學(頁289-303)。高雄市:復文。
簡成熙(2004)。教育專業倫理信條能提升教育專業地位嗎。載於黃藿(主編),教育專業倫理(1)(頁97-133)。台北市:五南。
簡穗(2002)。會計人員道德判斷及發展之探討與經理人道德推理對決策影響之研究。淡江大學會計學系,研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北縣。
魏建忠(2004)。高爾拔(Lawrence Kohlberg)的道德教育理論之道德哲學面向研究。國立中央大學哲學研究所碩士論文,未出版,桃園縣。
蘇永明(1997)。郭耳堡的道德認知發展論評析,載於簡成熙(主編),哲學和教育—二十世紀末的教育哲學(頁175-196)。高雄市:高雄復文。
蘇建文(譯)(1993)L. Kuhmerker (1991)著。柯爾堡對教育的貢獻。載於俞筱鈞等(譯),道德發展:柯爾堡的薪傳(The Kohlberg legacy for the helping professions)(頁121-130)。台北市:洪葉文化。
英文部分
Bebeau, M. J. (1994). Influencing the moral dimensions of dental practice. In J. Rest & D. Narvaez (Eds.), Moral development in the professions: Psychology and applied ethics (pp. 121-146). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bebeau, M. J. (2002). The defining issue test and the Four Component Test Model: contributions to professional education. Journal of Moral Education, 31(3), 371-395.
Bebeau, M. J., & Thoma, S. J. (1999). “Intermediate concepts” and the connection to moral education. Educational Psychology Review, 11(4), 343-360.
Center for the Study of Ethical Development. (2006a). New index (N2). Retrieved March 10, 2008, from http://www.centerforthestudyofethicaldevelopment.net/index.html
Center for the Study of Ethical Development. (2006b). DIT2. Retrieved March 10, 2008, from http://www.centerforthestudyofethicaldevelopment.net/index.html
Crowson, H. M., DeBacker, T. K., & Thoma, S. J. (2007). Are DIT scores empirically distinct from measures of political identification and intellectual ability? A test using post-9/11 data. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 25, 197–211.
Derryberry, W. P., Jones, K. L., Grieve, F. G. & Barger, B. (2007). Assessing the relationship among Defining Issues Test scores and crystallised and fluid intellectual indices. Journal of Moral Education, 36(4), 475-496.
Derryberry, W. P. & Thoma, S. J. (2005). Moral judgment, self-understanding, and moral actions: The role of Multiple constructs. Journal of Developmental Psychology, 51, 67-92.
Kohlberg, L. (1986). A current state on some theoretical issues. In S. Modgil & C. Modgil (Eds). Lawrence Kohlberg: consensus and controversy (pp. 485-546). Philadelphia: Falmer.。
Lickona, T. (Ed.). (1976). Moral development and behavior: theory, research, and social issues. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Lind, G. (2008). Scoring and interpreting the Moral Judgment Test. Retrieved 2008/10/25, from http://www.uni-konstanz.de/ag-moral/mut/mjt-intro.htm
Narvaez, D. (1998). The influence of moral schemas on the reconstruction of moral narratives in eighth graders and college students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 13-24.
Narvaez, D.(2006). Integrative ethical education. In M. Killen & J. Smetana (Eds.) Handbook of Moral Development (pp703-732). N.J.:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Narvaez, D. & Bock, T. (2002). Moral schemas and tacit judgment or how the Defining Issues Test is supported by cognitive science. Journal of Moral Education, 31(3), 297-314.
Nucci, L. (2002). Goethe’s Faust revisited: Lessons from DIT research. Journal of Moral Education, 31(3), 314-325.
Power, C. (2002). Building democratic community. In W. Damon(Ed.), Bringing in a new era in character education(pp. 129-148). California: Hoover Institution Press.
Puka, B. (2002). The DIT and the “dark side” of development. Journal of Moral Education, 31(3), 339-351.
Rest, J. (1973). Patterns of preference and comprehension in moral judgment. Journal of personality, 41, pp86-109.
Rest, J. (1976). New approaches in the assessment of moral judgment. In T. Lickona(Ed.), Moral development and behavior: theory, research, and social issues. NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Rest, J.(1983). Morality. In P. H. Mussen (Series Ed.)& J. Flavell & E. Markman (Vol. Eds), Handbook of Child psychology: Vol 3. Cognitive Development (3th ed. pp. 556-629). New York: Wiley.
Rest, J. (1994). Background: Theory and Research. In J. Rest & D. Narvaez (Eds.), Moral development in the professions: Psychology and applied ethics (pp. 1-26). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rest, J. & Narvaez, D. (1994). Summary: What’s possible? In J. Rest & D. Narvaez (Eds.), Moral development in the professions: Psychology and applied ethics (pp. 213-224). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rest, J., Cooper, D., Coder, R., Masanz, J., & Anderson, D. (1974). Judging the important issues in moral dilemmas. Developmental Psychology, 10(4), 491-501.
Rest, J., Narvaez, D., Bebeau, M. J., & Thoma, S. J. (1999a). Postconventional moral thinking: a neo-Kohlbergian approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Rest, J., Narvaez, D., Bebeau, M. J., & Thoma, S. J. (1999b). A neo-Kohlbergian approach: The DIT and schema theory. Educational Psychology Review, 11(4), 291-324.
Rest, J., Narvaez, D., Thoma, S. J. & Bebeau, M. (2000). A neo-kohlbergian approach to morality research. Journal of Moral Education, 29(4), 381-395.
Rest, J., Thoma, S. J., & Bebeau, M. J. (1999). DIT2: devising and testing a revised instrument of moral judgment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91 (4), 644-659.
Rest, J., Thoma, S. J., & Edwards, L. (1997). Designing and validating a measure of moral judgment: Stage preference and stage consistency approaches. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89 (1), 5-28.
Rest, J., Thoma, S. J., Narvaez, D., & Bebeau, M. J. (1997). Alchemy and beyond: Indexing the Defining Issues Test. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89 (3), 498-507.
Rogers, G. (2002). Rethinking moral growth in college and beyond. Journal of Moral Education, 31(3), 325-337.
Thoma, S. J. (1994). Moral judgment and moral action. In J. Rest & D. Narvaez (Eds.), Moral development in the professions: Psychology and applied ethics (pp. 199-211). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Thoma, S. J. (2002). An overview of the Minnesota approach to research in moral development. Journal of Moral Education, 31(3), 225-245.
Thoma, S. J. (2006). Research on the Defining Issues Test. In M. Killen & J. Smetana (Eds.), Handbook of moral development (pp. 67-91). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Thoma, S. J., Barnett, R. Rest, J. & Narvaez, D. (1999). What dose the DIT measure? British Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 103-111.
Thoma, S. J., Narvaez, D., Rest, J., & Derryberry, P. (1999). Does moral judgment development reduce to political attitudes or verbal ability? Educational Psychology Review, 11(4), 325-342.
Thoma, S. J. & Rest, J. (1999). The relationship between decision-making and patterns of consolidation and transition in moral judgment development. Developmental Psychology, 35, 323-333.
Walker, L. J. (2002). The model and the measure: an appraisal of the Minnesota approach to moral development. Journal of Moral Education, 31(3), 353-367.
Westbrook , T. (1994). Tracking the moral development of journalists: A look at them and their work. In J. Rest & D. Narvaez (Eds.), Moral development in the professions: Psychology and applied ethics (pp. 189-197). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
You, D. (2007). Interrelationships and gender differences among components of morality for dental students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.