Pacheca, Jaryl BTLED HE 1A

EDCALP

Level I.
Preconventional Level
Preconventional morality is the first stage of moral development, and lasts until approximately age 9. At the
preconventional level children don’t have a personal code of morality, and instead moral decisions are shaped
by the standards of adults and the consequences of following or breaking their rules. At this level, the child is
responsive to cultural rules and labels of good and bad, right or wrong, but he interprets the labels in terms of
either the physical or hedonistic consequences of action (punishment, reward, exchange of favors) or the
physical power of those who enunciate the rules and labels. Rules imposed by authority figures are conformed
to in order to avoid punishment or receive rewards. This perspective involves the idea that what is right is what
one can get away with or what is personally satisfying.

For example, if an action leads to punishment is must be bad, and if it leads to a reward is must be good.
Authority is outside the individual and children often make moral decisions based on the physical consequences
of actions.
Stage 1: Obedience and Punishment Orientation The first stage highlights the self-interest of children in their
decision making as they seek to avoid punishment at all costs. In relation to our example above, the man should
not steal the medication from the pharmacy as he may go to jail if he is caught. Similar to the first stage in
Piaget’s theory, Kohlberg reflects on the moral thought of children. At a young age, they believe that rules are
meant to be followed and those in charge will undoubtedly follow through with punishment. A child’s
reasoning to the above example may include “it’s bad to steal,” or “it’s against the law,” without assessing the
perspective of the man whose wife is sick. This stage is labeled preconventional due to the limited association
that children have with the outlined principles. They view the ethics taught as something that society
implements, not as something they internalize themselves. The physical consequences of action determine its
goodness or badness regardless of the human meaning or value of these consequences. Avoidance of
punishment and unquestioning deference to power are values in their own right, not in terms of respect for an
underlying moral order supported by punishment and authority
Stage 2: Individualism and Exchange This stage observes how children begin to adopt the views taught, but
also recognize that there is more than one point of view for each matter. Each person is different and will,
therefore, have a unique outlook according to their interests. In terms of our example above, they may reason
that “he may think that it is right to take the drug, but the pharmacist would not.” The second stage relies
heavily on the exchange of favors and can be summarized with the common marketing saying “what’s it in for
me?” Children at this stage are not motivated by friendship or respect but by the personal advantages involved.
For example, if a parent asks their child to complete a chore around the house, the child may ask what the
benefit would be to them. Parents often recognize the “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours” mindset at
this stage and offer a reward, such as an allowance.

Level II.
Conventional Level
The conventional level is the second stage and occurs during adolescence and adulthood. During this stage
individuals begin to develop personal moral codes by internalizing the rules of adult role models. There is no
questioning of these norms and rules during this stage, they are adopted and not critiqued. the second stage of
moral development, and is characterized by an acceptance of social rules concerning right and wrong. At the
conventional level (most adolescents and adults), we begin to internalize the moral standards of valued adult
role models. At this level, the individual perceives the maintenance of the expectations of his family, group, or
nation as valuable in its own right, regardless of immediate and obvious consequences. The attitude is not only
one of conformity to personal expectations and social order, but of loyalty to it, of actively maintaining,
supporting, and justifying the order and identifying with the persons or group involved in it. The level consists
of the following two stages:

Stage 3: Social Approval Good behavior is what pleases or helps others and is approved by them. There is
much conformity to stereotypical images of what is majority or "natural" behavior. Behavior is frequently
judged by intention -- "he means well" becomes important for the first time. One earns approval by being
"nice". The child/individual is good in order to be seen as being a good person by others. Therefore, answers
relate to the approval of others. This stage recognizes the desire to be accepted into societal groups as well as
how each person is affected by the outcome. In terms of our example above, the man should take the medicine
from the pharmacy in order to be a good partner to his wife. Children in the third stage are typically pre-teens or
early teenagers and have now adopted the societal norms as their own. While they believe that people should
behave appropriately in their communities, they recognize that there is no simple solution to moral dilemmas. In
Kohlberg’s study per the example above, they accepted that he should steal the medicine and “he was a good
man for wanting to save her.” They also reasoned that “his intentions were good, that of saving the life of
someone he loves.”

Stage 4: Law and Orders In this stage, laws and social order reign supreme. Rules and regulations are to be
followed and obeyed. In the above example, the man should not steal the medicine because it is against the law.
The individual is oriented toward authority, fixed rules, and the maintenance of the social order. Right behavior
consists in doing one's duty, showing respect for authority, and maintaining the given social order for its own
sake. And The child/individual becomes aware of the wider rules of society, so judgments concern obeying the
rules in order to uphold the law and to avoid guilt.

Level III.
Postconventional Level
the third stage of moral development, and is characterized by an individuals’ understanding of universal ethical
principles. These are abstract and ill-defined, but might include: the preservation of life at all costs, and the
importance of human dignity.
Individual judgment is based on self-chosen principles, and moral reasoning is based on individual rights and
justice. According to Kohlberg this level of moral reasoning is as far as most people get.
Only 10-15% are capable of the kind of abstract thinking necessary for stage 5 or 6 (post-conventional
morality). That is to say, most people take their moral views from those around them and only a minority think
through ethical principles for themselves. The individual makes a clear effort to define moral values and
principles that have validity and application apart from the authority of the groups of persons holding them and
apart from the individual's own identification with the group. The level has the two following stages:

Stage 5: Social Contract This stage acknowledges the introduction of abstract reasoning as people attempt to
explain specific behaviors. In our example above, the man should steal the medication for his wife because she
is deathly ill and the laws do not take the circumstances into account. In the fifth stage, members begin to
consider “What makes for a good society?” They are able to step back and assess each situation as a whole,
reflecting on what is good and just. Reflecting on the morals and ethics of their current community allows them
to address inconsistencies in their values and attempt to fix what they do not agree with. A society that runs
smoothly does not necessarily uphold their desired principles. This is one step ahead of stage four, where the
main goal is to keep a society functioning at all costs. Right action tends to be defined in terms of general
individual rights and standards that have been critically examined and agreed upon by the whole society. There
is a clear awareness of the relativism of personal values and opinions and a corresponding emphasis upon
procedural rules for reaching consensus. Aside from what is constitutionally and democratically agreed upon,
right action is a matter of personal values and opinions. The result is an emphasis upon the "legal point of
view", but with an additional emphasis upon the possibility of changing the law in terms of rational
considerations of social utility (rather than freezing it in terms of stage 4 "law and order"). Outside the legal
realm, free agreement, and contract, is the binding element of obligation. The "official" morality of the
American government and Constitution is at this stage.

Stage 6: Universal Ethical Principles The final stage of Kohlberg’s theory states that moral reasoning is based
on personal values. In the above example, it is okay for the man to take the medication without paying as
objects or property are not as valuable as his wife’s life. Stage six was developed when Kohlberg discovered
that elected processes do not always result in fair outcomes. Individuals at the fifth stage of moral reasoning
recognized the importance of protecting human rights while also resolving challenges in a democratic way.
Unfortunately, some majority votes resulted in regulations that actually hurt a minority group, leading to
questions of an even higher level of reasoning. Right is defined by the decision of conscience in accord with
self-chosen ethical principles that appeal to logical comprehensiveness, universality, and consistency. These
principles are abstract and ethical (the Golden Rule, the categorical imperative); they are not concrete moral
rules like the Ten Commandments. At heart, these are universal principles of justice, of the reciprocity, and
equality of the human rights, and of respect for the dignity of human beings as individual persons. Kohlberg's
conception of justice follows that of the philosophers Kant and Rawls, as well as great moral leaders such as
Gandhi and Martin Luther King. According to these people, the principles of justice require us to treat the
claims of all parties in an impartial manner, respecting the basic dignity, of all people as individuals. The
principles of justice are therefore universal; they apply to all. Thus, for example, we would not vote for a law
that aids some people but hurts others. The principles of justice guide us toward decisions based on an equal
respect for all.