volume2-issue4

[ w w w . m o j - e s . n e t ]

2014

Malaysian Online Journal of Educational

Science Volume 2, Issue 4

October 2014

Editor-in-Chief

Professor Dr. Saedah Siraj

Editor

Dr. Zaharah Hussin Dr. Onur BULAN

Associate Editors

Professor Dr. Omar Abdull Kareem

Associate Prof. Dr. Ibrahem Narongsakhet

Associate Prof. Dr. Mohd Yahya Mohamed Ariffin,

Associate Prof. Dr. Norani Mohd Salleh

Associate Prof. Dr. Wan Hasmah Wan Mamat

ISSN: 2289-3024

Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Science Volume 2, Issue 4

www.moj-es.net

,

Copyright 2013 - MALAYSIAN ONLINE JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL SCIENCE All rights reserved. No part of MOJESs articles may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means,

electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.

Contact Address:


MOJES, Editor in Chief

University of Malaya, Malaysia Published in Malaysia


www.moj-es.net

Message from the editor-in-chief

Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences (MOJES) strives to provide a national and international academic forum to meet the professional interests of individuals in various educational disciplines. It is a professional refereed journal in the interdisciplinary fields sponsored by the Faculty of Education, University of Malaya. This journal serves as a platform for presenting and discussing a wide range of topics in Educational Sciences. It is committed to providing access to quality researches ranging from original research, theoretical articles and concept papers in educational sciences.

In order to produce a high quality journal, extensive effort has been put into selecting valuable researches that contributed to the journal. I would like to take this opportunity to express my appreciation to the editorial board, reviewers and researchers for their valuable contributions to make this journal a reality.


October 2014

Editor in chief

Message from the editor

Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences (MOJES) seeks to serve as an academic platform to researchers from the vast domains of Educational Sciences. The journal is published electronically four times a year.

This journal welcomes original and qualified researches on all aspects of Educational Sciences. Topics may include, but not limited to: pedagogy and educational sciences, adult education, education and curriculum, educational psychology, special education, sociology of education, Social Science Education, Art Education, Language Education, educational management, teacher education, distance education, interdisciplinary approaches, and scientific events.

Being the editor of this journal, it is a great pleasure to see the success of the journal. On behalf of the editorial team of Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Science (MOJES), we would like to thank to all the authors and editors for their contribution to the development of this journal.

Dr. Zaharah Hussin & Dr. Onur BULAN

October 2014

Editor


www.moj-es.net

Editor-in-Chief

Professor Dr. Saedah Siraj, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Editors

Dr. Zaharah Hussin, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Onur BULAN, Sakarya University, Turkey

Associate Editors

Professor Dr. Omar Abdull Kareem, Sultan Idris University of Education, Malaysia

Associate Prof. Dr. Ibrahem Narongsakhet, Prince of Songkla University, Thailand

Associate Prof. Dr. Mohd Yahya Mohamed Ariffin, Islamic Science University of Malaysia

Associate Prof. Dr. Norani Mohd Salleh, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Associate Prof. Dr. Wan Hasmah Wan Mamat, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Advisory Board

Emeritus Professor Dr. Tian Po Oei, University of Queensland, Australia

Professor Dr. Fatimah Hashim, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Professor Dr. Jinwoong Song, Seoul National University, Korea

Professor Dr. H. Mohammad Ali, M.Pd, M.A., Indonesian University of Education, Indonesia

Professor Dr. Moses Samuel, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Professor Dr. Nik Azis Nik Pa, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Professor Dr. Richard Kiely, the University College of St. Mark and St. John, United Kingdom

Professor Dr. Sufean Hussin, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Zawawi Bin Ismail, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Editorial Board

Emeritus Professor Dr. Rahim Md. Sail, University Putra of Malaysia, Malaysia

Professor Dr. Abdul Rashid Mohamed, University of Science, Malaysia

Professor Dr. Ananda Kumar Palaniappan, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Professor Dr. Bakhtiar Shabani Varaki, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran.

Professor Dr. H. Iskandar Wiryokusumo M.Sc, PGRI ADI Buana University, Surabaya, Indonesia

Professor Dr. Ramlee B. Mustapha, Sultan Idris University of Education, Malaysia

Professor Dr. Tamby Subahan Bin Mohd. Meerah, National University of Malaysia, Malaysia

Associate Professor Datin Dr. Sharifah Norul Akmar Syed Zamri, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Associate Professor Dato Dr. Ab Halim Bin Tamuri, National University of Malaysia, Malaysia

Associate Professor Dr. Abdul Jalil Bin Othman, University of Malaya, Malaysia


www.moj-es.net

Associate Professor Dr. Ajmain Bin Safar, University of Technology, Malaysia

Associate Professor Dr. Habib Bin Mat Som, Sultan Idris Education University, Malaysia

Associate Professor Dr. Hj. Izaham Shah Bin Ismail, Mara University of Technology, Malaysia

Associate Professor Dr. Jas Laile Suzana Binti Jaafar, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Associate Professor Dr. Juliana Othman, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Associate Professor Dr. Loh Sau Cheong, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Associate Professor Dr. Mariani Binti Md Nor, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Associate Professor Dr. Mohamad Bin Bilal Ali, University of Technology, Malaysia

Associate Professor Dr. Norazah Mohd Nordin, National University of Malaysia, Malaysia

Associate Professor Dr.Rohaida Mohd Saat, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Associate Professor Dr. Syed Farid Alatas, National University of Singapore, Singapore

Dato Dr. Hussein Hj Ahmad, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Datuk Dr. Abdul Rahman Idris, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Datin Dr. Rahimah Binti Hj Ahmad, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Abu Talib Bin Putih, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Abd Razak Bin Zakaria, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Adelina Binti Asmawi, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Ahmad Zabidi Abdul Razak, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Chew Fong Peng, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Diana Lea Baranovich, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Fatanah Binti Mohamed, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Ghazali Bin Darusalam, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Haslee Sharil Lim Bin Abdullah, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Husaina Banu Binti Kenayathulla, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Kazi Enamul Hoque, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Latifah Binti Ismail, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Lau Poh Li, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Leong Kwan Eu, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Madhyazhagan Ganesan, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Megat Ahmad Kamaluddin Megat Daud, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Melati Binti Sumari, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Mohammed Sani Bin Ibrahim, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Mohd Rashid Mohd Saad, University of Malaya, Malaysia


www.moj-es.net

Dr. Muhammad Azhar Bin Zailaini, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Muhammad Faizal Bin A. Ghani, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Nabeel Abdallah Adedalaziz, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Norlidah Binti Alias, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Pradip Kumar Mishra, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Rafidah Binti Aga Mohd Jaladin, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Rahmad Sukor Bin Ab Samad, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Renuka V. Sathasivam, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Rose Amnah Bt Abd Rauf, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Selva Ranee Subramaniam, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Sit Shabeshan Rengasamy, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Shahrir Bin Jamaluddin, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Suzieleez Syrene Abdul Rahim, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Syed Kamaruzaman Syed Ali, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Vishalache Balakrishnan, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Wail Muin (Al-Haj Said) Ismail, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Wong Seet Leng, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Zahari Bin Ishak, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Zahra Naimie, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Dr. Zanaton Ikhsan, National University of Malaysia, Malaysia

Cik Umi Kalsum Binti Mohd Salleh, University of Malaya, Malaysia

En. Mohd Faisal Bin Mohamed, University of Malaya, Malaysia

En. Norjoharuddeen Mohd Nor, University of Malaya, Malaysia

En. Rahimi Md Saad, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Pn. Alina A. Ranee, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Pn. Azni Yati Kamaruddin, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Pn. Fatiha Senom, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Pn. Fonny Dameaty Hutagalung, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Pn. Foziah Binti Mahmood, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Pn. Hamidah Binti Sulaiman, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Pn. Huzaina Binti Abdul Halim, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Pn. Ida Hartina Ahmed Tharbe, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Pn. Norini Abas, University of Malaya, Malaysia


www.moj-es.net

Pn. Roselina Johari Binti Md Khir, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Pn. Shanina Sharatol Ahmad Shah, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Pn. Zuwati Binti Hashim, University of Malaya, Malaysia


www.moj-es.net

Table of Contents

DOMAIN APPROACH: AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH IN MORAL EDUCATION 1

Chander Vengadasalam, Wan Hasmah Wan Mamat, Fauziah Mail , Munimah Sudramanian

EFFECT OF SCHOOL SYSTEM AND GENDER ON MORAL VALUES AND FORGIVENESS IN PAKISTANI SCHOOL CHILDREN

13

Anam Javed, Rukhsana Kausar, Nashi Khan

25 EXPLICIT FORM FOCUS INSTRUCTION: THE EFFECTS ON IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE OF

ESL LEARNERS

Mandana Rohollahzadeh Ebadi, Mohd Rashid Mohd Saad , Nabil Abedalaziz

TEACHERS APPROACHES IN TEACHING LITERATURE: OBSERVATIONS OF ESL CLASSROOM 35

Siti Salina Mustakim, Ramlee Mustapha, Othman Lebar

THE EVALUATION OF STUDENTS WRITTEN REFLECTION ON THE LEARNING OF GENERAL CHEMISTRY LAB EXPERIMENT

45

Ng Sook Han, Ho Ket Li, Lee Choy Sin, Keng Pei Sin


www.moj-es.net

Domain Approach: An Alternative Approach in Moral Education

Chander Vengadasalam [1], Wan Hasmah Wan Mamat [2], Fauziah Mail [3], Munimah Sudramanian [4]

[1] [email protected] Faculty of Education, University of Malaya

[2] [email protected] Assoc. Professor Dr. Faculty of Education, University of Malaya

[3] [email protected] Faculty of Education, University of Malaya

[4] [email protected] Faculty of Education, University of Malaya ABSTRACT

This paper discusses the use of the domain approach in moral education in an upper secondary school in Malaysia. Moral Education needs a creative and an innovative approach. Therefore, a few forms of approaches are used in the teaching-learning of Moral Education. This research describes the use of domain approach which comprises the moral domain and social convention domain. Both these domains are used through various suitable activities based on the curriculum content. The Domain Theory is used to determine the moral domain of thinking and the level of social convention domain of the students.

Keywords: Domain Theory, Moral Domain, Social Convention Domain, Curriculum Content

INTRODUCTION

Vision 2020 became one of the main agendas of education in Malaysia, generally and expressively for Moral education. As a national political plan undertaken by Malaysian Government, Vision 2020 attempts Malaysia to have a strong society morally, spiritually and ethically. According to the plan Malaysians will live together in a democratic society that is liberal and progressively tolerant, and be a developed country within the year 2020. Among the nine major challenges stated the fourth one emphasizes on building the moral and ethical values of the people of the country. It undertakes the challenge to generate a fully moral and ethical society (Mahathir, 1991). In order to succeed in the challenge of generating, a fully moral and ethical society, teaching Morality and Ethics needs to be experimented by applying various theoretical approaches.

Moral development process and formation of an individuals personality are related to education approach for moral education which depends on learning theories. Through this approach, we could observe the methods of learning theories that have been used in learning and teaching instruction. By mastering this approach, a teacher may develop suitable techniques in teaching. While choosing a suitable technique, the teacher needs to consider the moral maturity level of a student, value suitability, situation and also the moral issues to be focused in a particular lesson (Wainryb, 2006).

The approaches used in the teaching method of moral education emphasize the dominant values; caring and appreciation. These major values should be given serious attention so that the community shall build up strong personality values. These values are appreciation of knowledge, occupation, friendship, love and caring, aesthetic and etiquette, and also consolidation of moral values (Jarret, 1991). Fraenkel (1977) stated some moral education approaches used in various moral education programs. Among them are value inculcation, moral cognitive development (Kohlberg, 1972), value clarification (Raths, Harmin, & Simon,

1


www.moj-es.net

1966), value analysis (Coombs, 1977), rational development, considerate, social action (Higgins, 1991), Farmington Trust project (Wilson, Williams, & Sugarman, 1967) and humanity curriculum project (McPhail, 1980). These approaches have been applied in preparing lessons and learning moral education in many countries. Noddings(1995) approach based on skill and affection and Nuccis (2001) Domain Approach are among some of the approaches in practice and relied upon most now days. The current research is particularly interested in the Domain Approach of Nucci (2001).

Domain Approach

Domain approach in moral education facilitates students to understand the social world by investigating critical social issues in the social convention domain and moral domain. As these domains are different, students necessarily should develop both of the domains so that they could develop themselves as constructive citizens with high moral values generally and individuals specifically. The Domain Approach exactly focuses on developing reflexive behavior assessment in relationship with the moral and social convention domains (Nucci, 2001).

Studies and theories have proved that Moral education displays a significant difference in terms of moral development concept and social convention (Nucci, 2008). These past researches not only show the conceptual difference between moral domain and social convention, it also underlines the interaction of individual environment. From the pedagogical viewpoint it is also found that the interaction of individual environment affects the moral interaction which is correlated with the domain aspect provided in the lesson. These findings can be used for student development based on moral education (Kohlberg & Mayer, 1972). The findings call attention to the level of students moral development, and suggest using the reflective approach in education such as discussion (Berkowitz & Gibbs, 1983) usually in accordance with the Moral education development approach to produce a domain appropriate lesson (Nucci, 1982).

Moral Domain and Social Convention Domain are also introduced in the Malaysian KBSR / KBSM Moral education syllabus. For example, values related to honesty, justice and freedom of expression are included in the Moral Domain. While values related to prudishness, maintaining the family tradition and mutual cooperation among each other are categorized as values into the social convention domain. Hence, this approach may be experimented for its suitability in our schools as it encourages academic usage of contents of values in discussion. Furthermore, the students can be trained by this approach in order for them to understand and cultivate responsibility in managing their life with righteousness in the social world that they inherit, through achieving the KBSR / KBSM Moral education objectives (Chang, 2000).

Research Objectives

This research is aimed at studying the application of Domain Approach in the Moral education subject in an upper secondary school in Malaysia which is locally known as Form Four. The following are the specific research objectives:

1. To identify the thinking level of students in terms of moral domain.

2. To identify the thinking level of students in terms of social convention domain.

3. To understand acceptance of the students on domain approach.

4. To understand problems faced by students during implementation of the Domain Approach.

Research Questions

In order to attain the research objectives the following research questions are to be answered:

1. How is the thinking level of the students in terms of moral domain?

2. What is the thinking level of the students in terms of social convention domain?

3. How is the acceptance of the students on domain approach?

4. What are the problems faced by students while engaged in learning through Domain Approach?

2


www.moj-es.net

Conceptual Framework

Domain theory becomes a reference when discussing the education approach applied in Moral education. Domain theory is one of the moral education theories often used by researchers (Laupa & Turiel, 1995; Nucci, 2001; Smetana, 2006; Turiel, 2006). Domain theory is used to identify the understanding or thinking levels of the learners and also to forecast someones way of conceiving an incident or event (Gabennesh, 1990b; Gravestone, 1987; Nucci, 2001; Turiel, 2006).

This theory became famous because, according to Turiel (2002, 2006) and Nucci (2001, 2006), various programs, desk research in education have become issues of discussion in order to deepen understanding on matters in moral education. This study, however, does not focus on Moral education in general but is limited to the teaching approach of Moral education.

Turiel (1998) and Nucci (2001) in their studies describe Domain approach in moral education as being segmented into two components namely moral domain and social convention domain. Modules in moral education, according to Domain Theory provide the opportunity to expand learners moral domain and social convention domain. Table of contents taught through domain theory will increase moral knowledge and indirectly motivate social reasoning in a person.

Nucci (2001) modified and expanded the study by Turiel (1976); he strongly believed that the domain approach can forecast the understanding, thinking and reasoning level of the students. Smetana (2006) claimed that variations exist in understanding of moral domain and social convention produced through domain theory, by considering someone's way in constructing holistic understanding about value, social regulation, norms and integrating all these together through moral selection. This approach attempts at encouraging people to develop a higher level in moral thinking and social regulation.

This domain theory contrasts with other theories. This theory is segmented into two domains namely moral action domain and social action domain. According to Nucci (2001) students give different opinions with one another. These different opinions and ideas of the students are in terms of moral action domain and social action domain. The current research investigates moral thought development by using the domain approach.

3


www.moj-es.net

Domain Approach

Planning

Action Plan

Data Collection

Reflection

Moral Thinking Development

Social Convention Domain Moral Domain

Framework Of Concept Study

Diagram 1: Framework of Concept Study Based On Domain Theory

This is a qualitative action research. The Action Research concept was pioneered by Dewey in the United States in the 1920s. After the Second World War, a social psychologist, Lewin (1946), started using this action research approach as an effort in resolving local community problems. Two important features of action research are: making decisions collectively and giving attention to enhancing work quality (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1988). The main purpose of this method is to bring theory into practical development. The original idea to practice this method started at the time of Aristotle and continues to be effective till today. It enables individuals or groups of individuals to play an active role in improving their environmental circumstance (Clark, 1972). Action research has been carried out on individuals or group of individuals in some organization that is facing a problem or handling an issue that needs to be resolved. In action research, the researcher uses methods such as story- telling, elaboration, observation in data collecting and to understand what and how some event occurs followed by taking action or planning a specific plan to resolve the problems faced. Following Bradbury & Reason (2001), the current research is qualitative, participatory, cyclic and reflective. McNiff (2002) stated that action research is an approach to improve the quality of education through changes by encouraging teachers to be aware of their own practice by becoming critics on practices and set up for transformation. This requires

4


www.moj-es.net

involvement of the other teachers collectively. In the context of this study, Kemmis and McTaggarts (1988) module was used to reflect on teaching and learning activities. Since this study involved teaching and learning practices, action research has been sensitively attuned to the world of practice and the concerns of practitioners and capable of building systematic understandings about practice through the critical reflection of practitioners (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1988). As the program objective is to understand the students moral thought development through usage of domain approach, so by itself the researcher implemented the lesson in the classroom in order to get reflective feedback from various perspectives by using the Kemmis and McTaggart Module (1988). This pictures action research to be a systematic inquiry that is collective, collaborative, self- reflective, critical and undertaken by the participants of the inquiry (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1988). In this study the researcher participated as a teacher looking back into the practice and positions to development of teaching and learning theory in the future.

Kemmis & McTaggarts Action Research Model (1988)

Step 1 Planning

Action Plan

Step 2

Step 3 Data Collection

Step 4 Reflection Data analysia

Step 5 Replanning

Step 6 Action Plan (such as step 2)

Step 7 Data Collection (such as step 3)

Step 8 Reflection Data analysis (such as step 4)

Diagram 2 : Kemmis & McTaggarts Action Research Model

FINDING

Students thinking level in terms of Moral Action domain The findings of the study consist of elements such as by focusing on three themes. The first theme is

justice, second is altruism and the third one is autonomy. The current study systematically followed the steps of Kemmis and McTaggarts (1988) model of action research. The steps were planning, action plan, data collection, reflection, re-planning and discussion on moral domain action. The findings of the study are thematically categorized into three: Justice, Altruism and Autonomy.

5


www.moj-es.net

Justice

Justice is an important standard in moral assessment and it is related to the principle that allows procedures to distribute profit between individuals and society. Certainly the value of justice also ensures individuals do not to show favoritism and nor greed of personal interest. On the other hand, it also means fair, square, balanced and equal in all terms. This meaning could be explicable with more detail through study findings as follows:

Study participants opined that the value of fairness and impartiality are important things in a morally decisive situation. In the teaching and learning process on fair justice and balanced aspects, it becomes focal in emphasis before focusing on other aspects and this is known as moral component treatment.

In detail study participants gave opinion on the importance of fair and balanced aspects in a particular situation. An excerpt from one of the interviews of the participants follows:

Although Raju is a prefect, arriving late to school is still invariable as a delinquency and he should stand in front of the assembly site as other students who do it. Discipline teacher should not forgive Raju. If the teacher forgives, other students also should be forgiven. The rule is a rule and it should be stands sic, all must be entertained fair and equally (Yalu).

The above mentioned interview transcript showed that study participant gives priority to fairness in justice claimed that in all affairs or state, fair value should be given priority. If it is not maintained, justice will not be practiced in all matters in the future. Another participant of the study gives opinion by saying as follows:

If the school gives flexibility to the prefects who did disciplinary offence, this will affect other students. It will encourage students doing wrong and breaking school rules with slovenly. Students also will not respect the prefects in school because they are also breaking the school rules by doing disciplinary offence (Mugilan).

This interview shows the participants demand the practice of justice to be executed for all in a proper manner. The learners also expect fairness of treatment to be equally accorded to all, be it prefect or general student. This study participant also feels and hopes that school captains should help teachers in maintaining school disciplinary problems and not perform any anti-disciplinary activities. Regarding fulfilling the study agreement, the study participant gives opinion in the interview transcript as follows:

As a father, he should hold in his words, he could not cheat the children. Pity to the children, they are been cheated. If cant do, dont promise. Pity those because they certainly wait for the school holiday to go for a picnic, furthermore they already told their friends in school (Mong).

According to this participant, maintaining agreement or keeping what is promised are principles that should be adopted by every human being to avoid any disappointment or cheated feeling from anyone. This point of view has been supported by a participant in the same group who stated:

People will respect us if we always fulfill promises that we make. But people will be angry and will not respect us if we not fulfill our promises that we do frequently. A father should become an example to the children, otherwise the same matter will happen to him in the future (Darshen).

This view of the study participant clearly explains that this study participant has powerful hold in words or promise and always paid tribute and gives respect to elder generation, and he hopes the elder generation should become an example to the young generation. This will help in bringing up a righteous community in society. Result of the written documents exactly shows us that a few study participants think an individual should not be biased in implementing a given task. This mindset is also supported by another participant in the following interview:

Teacher Lim should be taking the same action to Ravi although Ravi is the teachers friends child and stays in the same housing area. Chin will feel not fair in this situation because he was sent to the discipline teacher even though both of them were doing the same offence (Kavina).

6


www.moj-es.net

Altruism

Based on the result of written documents, it was found that study participants are compassionate seeing people in difficulty. God created humans to live peacefully in a conciliatory situation. But, because of human greed disasters and catastrophes befall the human self. The matter was realized by this study participant. However the study participant should give information on moral action and moral principle that should be consolidated to proffer and submit facts or explanations.

Moral action taken by the study participant is in accordance with moral principle namely humane or merciful. Moral actions without intentions based on welfare, humane, mercy, sympathy, and empathy are not acceptable. At the same time a few study participants give the same views on altruism principle namely humane feeling will lose sense in hatred and greed.

I am willing to suffer in hunger in order to help those in famine (Thurga).

In this modern world of materialistic gain, the words of this participant stood apart with humane urge of feeling the difficulty and sufferings of the needy and poor people.

Result of observation made through this field record shows that many study participants made judgments by involving others. Considerations such as this were carried out based on welfare of others. Vested self-interests are not prioritized; instead, others needs are more important and given preference. In order to consider someones case, the participants engage in a discussion to decide mutually in order to give comfortable protection of the person involved in the crisis. The participants also become caring and sympathetic in this practice of thinking about others welfare.

Autonomy

To observe the autonomy principle, the retrieval interview shows that study participants are sensitive on righteousness issues. The autonomy principle explains the free consideration concept. Consideration and behavior made by result of coercion from outside actually could not be categorized as moral. Here is an example of transcript to express the learners sense of autonomy:

Corruption is the main enemy of a country so it should be controlled immediately. There are a few government officers willing to be implicated in corruption when conducting design task given to them.

Teacher : Is there wrong if giving bribe to police officer to avoid getting summons?

Mei : Yes, wrong.

Teacher : Why wrong, otherwise we will get summons?

Swetha : Teacher, police must to take care.

Teacher : Take care what?

Swetha : Take care of us so that we are not doing evil.

Teacher : If the police not take care, are you going to do evil?

Kavin : Not like that teacher. Our law says that we cant give bribe. Just now only we read that corruption is the main enemy of the country.

The group discussion indicates that the participants think and share ideas on appropriation. Moreover, they also try to provide credible reasons with the help of the small dictation article. This matter could be proved from one of the participants clarifications:

7


www.moj-es.net

Police must catch the people who give bribe. Corruption is the main enemy of the country. If all people could give bribe to the police, for what purpose they getting their salary? Police should play a major role in order to look after the country, not to get link or build a network with the bad people who make offence to the country. Police must conduct their duty according to the instructions given by their main leaders. Our country will be safe and peaceful with the assistance of police force that functioned as clean, efficient and trustworthy (Joseph).

The observation shows that the students are able to apply logic in their reasoning. This moral consideration is more essential in order uplift the learners thinking capacity. The issues and situations mentioned in this research could easily guide the students in order to understand the matter immediately. Even though consideration and behavior of an individual are based on the result of interaction with the superior in power. For example, a police officer takes action on an individual due to bribe issue and due to the instruction given by the superior officer. The action taken by force or order would not bring any positive effects for a long term period. Individuals must have the assurance to realize that all the actions are carried out voluntarily and independently. This matter could be identified through the collection of research findings in the following transcription observation:

Jaya : Yallini should inform the complex manager about Mala who steal the clothes.This is because Mala should not

steal the clothes.

Shan:Why he wants to trouble his friend, furthermore the manager threatened Yallini. It is considered as a bad habit also because Yallini did not make any offence. If want to ask, he must ask in a proper manner.

Jaya : Ok let do not talk about the manager, tell whether Malas behavior is right or wrong.

Shan : Simply wrong but Yallinis feeling also should be taken into mind.

Jaya : But the problem is Mala, not Yallini. If the shop is ours how our action could be. We must think.

Shan : Ok in that case, I agree with you.

Through the transcript record, we found that Jaya state should while Shan state should not to inform the complex manager about the theft. Although the positions taken by Jaya and Shan differ, praise should be accorded to both study participants because they made decisions independently. But more importantly here, pressure is given to Yallini in the situation where Yallini becomes an important factor in this case. However, after a brief discussion conducted in the group and when the issue of righteousness was taken into consideration, Shan agreed with Jaya. This discussion proves that group discussion in obtaining perfect answer is truly needed (Muthu).

For Shanti moral action or moral treatment became the fundamental point in all human action. Without moral action humans do not become perfect. Learning is not just for theory only in fact should be adopted in life. Shanti also emphasized righteousness in written documents such as follows:

Zaki should not behave such like that, he should respect the ceremony that actually held for celebrating his great success returned back to his own country after complete his tertiary education in overseas. He should respect and return back the merit given by his family members that willing to support him financially while he is [pursuing] his studies in overseas. Giving respect to the elder generation is a good element that should be adopted by our society. (Shanti).

According to Shanti, righteousness is the main idea under the principle of altruism. A matter can be taken into consideration under the righteousness policy. If carried out, such appearance so common, good things will turn out and be acquired at the end of every action. Devi, another participant, stated: I should accept promotion while working in the future just like an ordinary man even though Im a woman.

The stance taken by Shanti shows that righteousness in action should be maintained regardless of gender. At the same time, all of us deserve to get privileges in case we have qualification and ability which

8


www.moj-es.net

could bring common good for all. Muni, the other participant, wrote as follows:

Prefect who is on duty always stomp the school toilet door because of not satisfied with behavior of students who always defile the toilet. The behavior of the prefect who is on duty is correct, because the prefect carry out his/her duty that is given to him/her and comply with the school rules (Muni).

Based on the written documents, Muni has understood the question suggested in the post-test, while study participant could do moral considerations before giving facts or reasons. Aspect of moral consideration has transpired by Muni and at the same time she started to employ moral reasoning in this situation. She also justified the prefects action as being due to order or assignment given by the discipline teacher. Therefore it also can be considered that treatment and the way an individual judges results from the pressure exerted by superiors.

DISCUSSION

The findings revealed that the students were interested in learning moral education using the domain approach which involves the moral domain and social convention domain (Nucci, 2001). Applying the Domain approach in teaching morality in the classroom is not very easy. There may be some challenges to overcome in the teaching and learning process.

To teachers, the toughest challenge was making clear the difference between the moral and social convention domain. Some of the participants mixed up the domains when discussing the issues given to them. However, finally most of the students managed to understand the difference and increased their moral knowledge.

Domain approach in moral education gives teachers a way or option to associate moral content more creatively. This approach can forecast the understanding, thinking and reasoning level of the students in some situation (Nucci, 2001; Turiel, 1976).

Nucci (2001) affirmed that students thinking level in moral domain will be increased by using the domain approach. In this study, Yalu opined that fair value and impartiality are important in moral situations. This shows that the thinking level of this student improved from earlier.

Domain Approach empowers students to engage themselves in discussions on moral issues. They can give ideas and opinion about justice, altruism and autonomy. As discussed earlier, Kavina thinks an individual should not be biased in implementing the task given. Giving opinion using the domain approach can also be used to solve real situation or problems faced in everyday life. At the same time students could think and share ideas on appropriation and gave logical reasons which related to trust.

CONCLUSION

In the world of globalization, it is important to use various types of approaches in teaching moral education. Domain approach in moral education gives opportunity for students to understand the social world by investigating critical social issues in the social convention domain and moral domain.

REFERENCES

Adeyemi, M. B. (1992). The relative effectiveness of the reflective and the lecture approach methods on the achievement of high school social studies students. Educational Studies, 18(1), 49-56.

Berkowitz, M., & Gibbs, J. (1983). Measuring the developmental features of moral discussion. Merrill Palmer Quarterly, 24, 399-410.

Blasi, A. (2004). Moral development, self, and identity. D. K. Lapsley & D. Narvaez (Eds.) (pp. 335347). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

9


www.moj-es.net

Bottery, M. (1990). The morality of the school: The theory and practice of values in education. London, UK: Cassell.

Chang Lee Hoon. (2000). Perkembangan domain Moral dalam pengajaran dan pembelajaran Sains Sosial: Teori dan amalan. [Moral domain development in teaching and learning of Social Sciences: Theory and practice]. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: University of Malaya Press.

Chang, L. H. (1998).Moral reasoning of Malaysian students: A study on choices of action, values, and orientations of 16- year-old students. Macquarie University.

Clark, P. A. (1972).Action Research & Organizational Change. Harper & Row Publishers.London.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (Eds.). (1993). Inside/outside: Teacher research and knowledge. Teachers College Press.

Dewey, J. (1963). Experience and education. New York, NY: Macmillan.

Dunn, R. (1992). Strategies for teaching word recognition to disabled readers. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 8(2), 157-177.

Durkheim, E. (1961). Moral Education: A study in the theory and application of the sociology of education.New York, NY: The Free Pres.

Fraenkel, J. R. (1977). How to teach about values: An analytic approach. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Gilligan, C. (1979). Womans place in man's life cycle. Harvard Educational Review, 49(4), 431-446.

Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Hargreaves, D. (1984). The challenge for the comprehensive schools, culture, curriculum, and the community. In J.

Arthur, J. Davidson, & W. Stow (2000). Social Literacy, Citizenship Education & the National Curriculum. London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer.

Jarrett, J. L. (1991). The teaching of values: Caring and appreciation. London, UK: Routledge.

Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia. (1979). Laporan Jawatankuasa Kabinet tentang polisi Pendidikan. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia. (2000). Sukatan Pelajaran Pendidikan Moral KBSM (Semakan),Pusat Perkembangan Kurikulum.

Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner. Victoria, Australia: Deakin University Press.

Kohlberg, L., & Mayer, R. (1972). Development as the aim of education. Harvard Educational Review, 42(4), 449- 496.

10


www.moj-es.net

Laupa, M. (1991). Children's reasoning about three authority attributes: Adult status, knowledge, and social position. Developmental Psychology, 27(2), 321.e

Laupa, M., & Turiel, E. (1995). Social domain theory. In W.M. Kurtines & J.L. Gewirtz (Eds). Moral Development: An introduction, 455-474. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of social issues, 2(4), 34-46.

Mahathir Mohamad. (1991). Malaysia: The Way Forward. Retrieved from http://www.pmo.gov.my/?menu=page&page=1904

McNiff, J. (1988). Action research: Principles and practice. London, UK: Routledge.

McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2002). Action research in organizations. Routledge.

Myers, M. D., & Avison, D. (1997). Qualitative research in information systems.Management Information Systems Quarterly, 21, 241-242.

Narvaez, D., Bock, T., Endicott, L., & Lies, J. (2004). Minnesotas Community voices and character education project. Journal of Research in Character Education, 2(2), pp. 89112. Retrieved from http://www3.nd.edu/~dnarvaez/documents/Narvaezetal04JRCE.pdf

Nisan, M. (1987). Moral norms and social conventions: A cross-cultural comparison. Developmental Psychology, 23, 719-25.

Noddings, N. (1997). Character education and community. In A. Molnar (Ed.), The construction of childrens character (pp. 1-14). Chicago, IL: The National Society for the Study of Education.

Nucci, L. (1982). Conceptual development in the moral and conventional domains: Implications for values education. Review of Educational Research, 49, 93-122.

Nucci, L. (2001). Education in the moral domain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nucci, L. P., Krettenauer, T., & Narvaez, D. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of moral and character education. London, UK: Routledge.

Nucci, L., & Weber, E. (2013). The domain approach to values education: From theory to practice. Handbook of moral behavior and development, 3, 251-266.

Piaget, J. (1932). The moral judgement of the child. London, UK: Kegan Paul.

Power, F. C., Higgins, A., & Kohlberg, L. (1991). Lawrence Kohlberg's approach to moral education. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (Eds.). (2001). Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice. Sage.

11


www.moj-es.net

Roslina Tan Abdullah. (1997). Childrens observational learning of sports skill: A developmental perspective. Journal Pendidikan (UKM).

Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-23.

Smetana, J. G. (2006). Social-cognitive domain theory: Consistencies and variations in childrens moral and social judgments. Handbook of moral development, 119-153.

Teh Yik Koon (1998). Pengenalan. Dalam Pengenalan kepada Sains Sosial. Sekolah Pembangunan Sosial Universiti Utara Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: Utusan Publications & Distributors.

Turiel, E. (1976). A comparative analysis of moral knowledge and moral judgment in males and Turiel, E. (2002). The culture of morality: Social development, context, and conflict. Cambridge University Press.

Turiel, E. (1998). The development of morality. Handbook of child psychology.

Turiel, E. (2006). Thought, emotions, and social interactional processes in moral development. Handbook of moral development, 7-35.

Turiel, E., Killen, M., & Helwig, C. C. (1987). Morality: Its structure, functions, and vagaries. The emergence of

morality in young children, 155-243.

Wainryb, C. (2006). Moral development in culture: Diversity, tolerance, and justice. Handbook of moral development (pp. 211-240).

Wan Hasmah Wan Mamat. (2000). Values education in Malaysia schools: Facing the challenges of government policy in Vision 2020. Unpublished Ed.D thesis, Monash University, Australia.

Wan Hasmah Wan Mamat. (2002). Pembelajaran interaktif dalam Pendidikan Moral: Cabaran bagi guru. [Interactive learning in Moral Education: Challenges for teachers] Paper presented at the Seminar Pendidikan Moral: Trend dan Hala Tuju on 22-23 July 2002 at Faculty of Education, University of Malaya.

Wilson, J., Williams, N., & Sugarman, B. (1967). Introduction to moral education. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.

Wrucle, A. C. (1997). An investigation into development of oral English in concept formation through the use of group games in the bilingual IESL. Texas Womans University.

Wynne, E., & Ryan, K. (1993). Reclaiming our schools: A handbook on teaching character, academics, and discipline. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

12


Effect of School System And Gender on Moral Values and Forgiveness in Pakistani School Children

Anam Javed [1], Rukhsana Kausar [2], Nashi Khan [3]

[1] [email protected] Institute of Applied Psychology University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan

[2] Institute of Applied Psychology University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan

[3] Institute of Applied Psychology University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan

ABSTRACT

The present research was conducted to compare children studying in private and public schools in Pakistan on forgiveness and moral values. It was hypothesized that the type of school and gender of the child are likely to affect forgiveness and moral values in children. A sample of 100 children with equal number of girls and boys was recruited from private and public schools of Lahore, Pakistan. Tendency to Forgive scale (Brown, 2003), Attitude towards Forgiveness (Berry et al., 2001) and the Moral Development Measure (Ziv, 1976) were used for assessment. Analysis revealed that type of school and gender only showed main effects on moral values and forgiveness. Children from private school and girls had higher tendency to forgive, had better attitude towards forgiveness and high morality as compared to public school children. Findings have important implications for public sector school systems with regard to their role in moral development of children in Pakistan.

Keywords: Forgiveness, Moral Values, Private and Public Schools, Gender, Children.

INTRODUCTION

Decline of morality in society is one of the most important issues faced by the world today. Moral values are the code of conduct and standards of life set by a particular society and by the international community in general. Moral values help one make choices between good and evil and they monitor an individuals choices and behaviors. An individuals morals may be regulated by the society and government, ones religion, or self. The values driven by the society or government are relative and can change with the change in government or society. Most individuals develop their moral code primarily at home, through the influence of their families and parents who are the first socializing agents to inculcate these values in a child. Standards of behavior and moral values may change over time; from generation to generation; across cultures and locations (Smith, 2006).

Moral development involves childrens learning to differentiate between right and wrong; to use this information to make right conclusion while facing complex choices; and having the freedom and strength to act in line with the right choice (i.e., to do the right thing) regardless of whether it may be the suitable thing to do. Morality and moral development are influenced by a number of features such as childrens understanding of peers, family members and adults, as well as their growing emotional, physical and cognitive needs and social skills (Kohlberg, 1969).

Kant proposed the value theory which provides postulates regarding understanding of the process and extent to which an individual values things i.e. a person, an idea, an object (cited from Kemerling, 2001). Kohlberg (1969) suggested six stages of moral development of children in order to explain how they develop a sense good and bad, right and wrong and justice. The first stage is obedience and punishment in which

www.moj-es.net 13


certain rules and regulations are set, should be strictly followed to avoid punishment. Individualism and exchange is the second stage in which a childs point of view becomes important and the child judges actions on the basis of how certain set standards serve individual needs. In third stage, living up to social expectations and roles is focused. In the fourth stage, the maintaining social order stage, while making judgments, society as a whole is considered. In the social contract and individual rights stage, one begins to consider the diversity of values, opinions, and beliefs which others hold. In the final stage of moral reasoning, universal ethical principles and abstract reasoning predominate; people follow internalized principles of justice, despite conflict with existing laws and rules.

According to Jean Piaget, a child passes through different stages of moral development. The pre-moral judgment is the first stage in which children do not understand the concept of rules and have any idea of internal or external morality. The second stage is called moral realism and children in this stage begin to understand the concept of rules, but they are seen as external and unchallengeable. The third and final stage is called moral relativity in which children recognize that rules are not fixed, and can be changed with mutual consent. In this stage, children start to develop their own internal morality that may be discrepant to external rules (Cited from Failure, 2002).

Pakistan is a Muslim country and Islam as a religion emphasizes on moral values in the Muslim society. Islam holds moral values of utmost importance to endorse and control deeds of an individual, a society, and mankind (Yahya H., 2005). It aims to incorporate human characteristics, deeds and activities that endeavor to practice followers of the Almighty Allah (the Lord), and for whom Islam describes and clarifies the path of goodness (Alqaseem, 2012). Allah (almighty) says It is not righteousness that you turn your faces to the East or the West, but truly righteous is he who believes in Allah and the Last Day and the angels and the Book and the Prophets, and spends his money out of love for Him, on the kindred and the orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and those who ask for charity and for ransoming the captives; and observes prayer and pays the Zakat (charity); and those who fulfill their promise when they have made one, and are patient in poverty and afflictions and the steadfast in the time of war; it is these who have proved truthful and it is those who are truly God-Fearing (Al-Baqara: 177, Al-Quran). In another verse, Allah says And seek, in that which Allah has given thee, the Home of the Hereafter; and neglect not thy lot in this world; and do good to others as Allah has done good to thee; And seek not to create mischief in the land. Verily, Allah loves not those who create mischief (Al-Qasas: 77, Al-Quran). Teachings of the Prophet Muhammad also carry a strong message of moral values as one occasion He said whenever a calamity befalls on a center of population, take it for granted that immorality is rampant in that place (Mohammed, 1999).

Forgiveness is one of the main components of morality and for a healthier and happier society people are in need of receiving forgiveness from God and each other and also forgiving others. Forgiving someone is an ongoing process and it develops over time. The process of forgiveness begins to develop at a very younger age i.e. when the child starts to make distinction between good and bad, at that time their mental approach toward forgiveness and moral values is in the developing process. Experience of interpersonal forgiveness is multi-dimensional, including one clearly moral dimension and several dimensions that involve morality exercised in context (e.g., in relationships; Gassin, 1997). At an early age, parents are the first socializing agents who teach their children moral values and the concept of forgiveness (MacLachlan, 2008).

Forgiveness has a number of advantages (i.e. reduced negative affect; improved psychological well-being and physical health), and it encourages trust and resolution in relationships (Burnette, Taylor, Worthington & Forsyth, 2006; Worthington, 2005). Forgiveness is considered to replace negative feelings with positive ones. It changes the will of the heart from bitterness and anger to compassion and affection, bad thoughts to good thoughts. Forgiveness is reported to diminish negative feelings such as hatred, anger desire for revenge and instead develops the feelings of affection, love and compassion (Burnette, Taylor, Worthington & Forsyth, 2006; Finkel, Rusbult, Kumashiro, & Hannon, 2002; Worthington, 2005).

From the psychological point of view, interpersonal forgiveness involves the cognitive, emotional and behavioral components and how s/he feels about the offender, behaves and thinks about him/her. Forgiveness is releasing the negative feelings concerning the pain inflicted by the offender, and avoiding the negative feelings such as anger and hatred (DiBlasio, 1992; DiBlasio & Benda, 1991; Wilson, 1994). Forgiveness diminishes feelings of anger and hatred and through forgiving others the cycle of violence can

www.moj-es.net 14


break as it could heal the hurt that has been caused to the injured or hurt person. Forgiving others and seeking forgiveness is associated with happiness. Moreover, forgiving improves ones interpersonal relationships by bringing good reputation, credibility and enhancing mutual regard (Lickerman, 2010).

From the religious perspective, forgiveness can only be understood within the context of forgiveness by God and with reference to sin and evil. Theologically, forgiveness promotes spiritual healing of an individual (Soares-Prabhu, 1986; Sobrino, 1986; Von Balthasar & Urs, 1984; Wahking, 1992; Walters, 1984; Zackrison, 1992). In Christianity, the concept of forgiveness is as important as in Islam. As it is said in the Bible, God promises to torture us if we fail to forgive others (Matthew 18:21-35), our sin of un-forgiveness gives the Devil a foothold which he will use to cause emotional pain and/or physical distress (Ephesians 4: 26-27).

Forgiveness holds significance as one of the core human values in Islam. It is important to believe in the forgiveness of Allah (almighty) and the prophet Muhammad teaches to forgive and forget and considers it necessary to base human relations on forgiveness. We cannot expect mercy from Allah unless we also have a warmth heart to forgive a wrongdoer. Islam teaches to forgive each other, even ones enemies. Allah says in the Quran Hold to forgiveness, command what is right, and turn away from the ignorant (Quran, 7:199). In another verse Allah commands: They should rather pardon and overlook. Would you not love Allah to forgive you? Allah is Ever-Forgiving, the Most Merciful (Quran, 24:22). Allah has advised the faithful that forgiveness is more proper: The repayment of a bad action is one equivalent to it. But if someone pardons and puts things right, his reward is with Allah (Quran, 42:40)... But if you pardon and exonerate and forgive, Allah is Ever-Forgiving, Most Merciful. (Quran, 64: 14). Forgiveness has been considered as a superior moral trait as revealed in the Quran: But if someone is steadfast and forgives, that is the most resolute course to follow. (Quran, 42:43) For that reason, believers are forgiving, compassionate and tolerant people who, as revealed in the Quran, control their rage and pardon other people (Quran, 3:134).

Schools are considered as a major institution where childrens behaviors are shaped. Education plays an essential role in national development and is a means of national advancement and a step forward for progress. In Pakistan, the educational system has been mainly divided into two: public schools, the ones managed and financed by the Government and private schools managed and financed by individuals or groups. Within and between major two systems (public & private) there is huge diversity within and between the system pertaining to the: curriculum; fee structure; management & administration; resources; qualification and expertise of the teachers. The majority of public schools are in deplorable condition and in the recent past, the business sector has enabled private education to flourish in Pakistan (Dar, 2012). Private schools have better resources and better qualified teachers as compared to public schools (Javed, 2009).

The school has been known as a medium of direct instruction and a social institution which is surrounded with norms, customs and ways of thinking and the teacher is a conveyer (Oladipo, 2009), Teachers have very important roles to play in the moral development of the child. Teachers teach children to respect the right of others; they also promote the acceptance of responsibility for ones actions. Teachers are responsible for teaching the importance of honesty, dedication and right behavior. Children often idealize their teachers, and try to follow their behaviors. The inclusion of moral lesson in the curriculum and ensuring its full accomplishment/delivery is another way in which teachers contribute in moral development of the child. Teachers are directly involved in teaching behaviors that are right and correct and teaching students to avoid those which are wrong (Oladipo, 2009).

In Pakistan, most of the people from lower socio economic status get their children educated in government / public school because these are affordable but those from middle and high class prefer to send their children to private schools. Despite having gradual moral deterioration over time, and significance of moral values and forgiveness for a healthy society, there is no research in Pakistan which has compared children studying in public and private schools on moral values. The present study aimed at examining whether children studying in two types of schools differ in forgiveness and moral values and whether two sets of schools differ in inculcating moral values and sense of forgiveness among their students.

Singh (2011) studied moral judgment of school children belonging to different socio-economic status and school backgrounds and found that students of lower socioeconomic status had better moral judgment than those from higher socio economic status. Guttmann (1984) compared sixth-grade pupils from secular

www.moj-es.net 15


public schools and religious public schools on cognitive morality and actual moral behavior. The pupils from religious public schools demonstrated a higher level of moral reasoning than those from secular public schools. Blogger (2010) examined differences between private and public school children on morality and concluded that in Government-run schools, classes were overcrowded and teachers could not give individual attention to students and thereby could not teach morality to students.

Respect, forgiveness and goodwill are the most frequently practiced moral values in daily life of children and researchers have demonstrated gender differences in moral values and forgiveness (Exline, 2005). Hoffman (2007) investigated gender differences in moral standards and found women being more sympathetic toward others. Moral transgression was more likely to be associated with guilt in females and fear in males. Lavoie (2007) demonstrated that subsequent to punishment on divergence, girls showed less resistance to divergence as compared to boys. Similarly, Goss (2006) asserted that following transgression females are more forgiving than males. Cheng and Yim (2007) argued that moral values increase with age as in their study older adults were more forgiving than younger adults.

Ahmed, Shaukat, and Abiodullah (2009) examined the role of different school systems (public, private & Madrassah) in Pakistan in the development of moral values and pro-social behavior in students (i.e., honesty, tolerance, violence, respect for others and patriotism). They found that children studying in the Madrassah school system showed higher level of honesty, more respect for others and patriotism as compared to students of private and public schools. However, children from the Madrassah school system were more violent than children from private and public schools. Private school students showed high level of tolerance as compared to those from public sector schools.

It was hypothesized that: type of school and gender are likely to have main effects on moral values and forgiveness in children; type of school and gender are likely to have interactive effect on moral values and forgiveness in children.

METHOD

Sample

The sample consisted of 100 children with equal number from private and public sector schools and with equal number of girls and boys. The sample was recruited from two private and two public sector schools in Lahore, Pakistan. Data were gathered from single sex schools and two types of schools were selected from the same locality. Children ranged in ages between 9-12 years with the mean age of 11 years (SD =1.15) and they were studying in classes 4 7. The majority of the children were living in a nuclear family system (60%).

Table 1 Demographic Characteristics of the Sample (N=100)

Variables Private Schools children M (SD) f (%) Public Schools children M (SD) f (%)

Age in years 10.56 (1.15) 10.56 (1.15) Fathers education 15.18 (2.29) 7.50 (5.80) Mothers education 14.54 (1.81) 7.28 (5.32) Total monthly income ( in PK RS)

61120 (1425.46) 7862 (7028.83)

Family system Nuclear 31 (62%) 29 (58%) Joint 19 (38 %) 21 (42%)

Assessment Measures

Assessment was carried out using the Demographic Information form, Tendency to Forgive (TTF), Attitude towards Forgiveness (ATF), The Moral Development Measure.

Tendency to Forgive Scale. This scale was developed by Brown in 2003. The scale contains 4 items and on each item the participants report how they usually respond when someone offends them. Each item is

www.moj-es.net 16


rated on a 7-point rating scale ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). Two items (2 & 3) are reverse scored and sum of score is calculated to compute total forgiveness score. For the present study, the scale was translated into the Pakistani national language Urdu, after seeking permission from the author of the scale. Cronbachs alpha of the scale for the present study was .72.

Attitude towards Forgiveness Scale. The Attitude towards Forgiveness scale was developed by Berry et al. (2001). The scale contains 6 items measuring participants general attitudes toward forgiveness. Participants indicate their level of agreement on a scale ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). Three items (6, 8, and 9) are reverse scored and scores on all items are added to get the total score. Cronbachs alpha of the scale for the present study was .64.

The Moral Development Measure. The Moral Development Measure was developed by Ziv (1976). The scale measures five aspects of morality including resistance to temptation stage of moral judgment, confession after transgression, reaction of fear or guilt, and severity of punishment for transgression. There are two separate scales for boys and girls. The scale was translated into Urdu after seeking permission from the author. The scale showed high reliability as the Cronbachs alpha was .82 for the current study.

Procedure

An authority letter explaining nature and purpose of the study and also requesting permission for data collection was provided to the respective heads of schools. School authorities assigned a teacher to facilitate data collection. The sample subjects meeting inclusion criteria were approached in their classes. Participants were assured of full confidentiality of all the information obtained from them. A written consent was taken from them and they were also required to get a consent form signed by either of their parents. After brief instructions, the participants were provided the demographic information form and other assessment measures to complete. Students completed assessment in the presence of the researcher in group form. It took about 45-50 minutes to complete assessment on a group.

Statistical Analysis and Results

The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) was used to analyze data. To examine the effect of school system and gender on tendency to forgive and attitude toward forgiveness a series of two way Analysis of Variance were performed.

Table 2 Effect of Type of School and Gender on Tendency to Forgive & Attitude towards Forgiveness

Sources SS MS F P Tendency to forgive School 112.36 112.36 5.80 0.02 Gender 376.36 376.36 19.42 0.00 School*Gender 67.24 67.24 3.47 0.07 Attitude towards forgiveness School 207.36 207.36 5.72 0.02 Gender 201.64 201.64 5.56 0.02 School*Gender 4.84 4.84 0.13 0.72

df = 1, 99

It was hypothesized that type of school and gender are likely to have main effects on tendency to forgive and attitude toward forgiveness in children; type of school and gender are likely to have interactive effect on tendency to forgive and attitude toward forgiveness in children. Results demonstrated that school system and gender had significant main effect on tendency to forgive and attitude toward forgiveness among school children. However, no interactive effect of school and gender was found on tendency to forgive and attitude toward forgiveness. Children studying in private school showed significantly higher tendency to forgive and had better attitude towards forgiveness compared to the children studying in public schools (M = 16.40, 14.28 respectively). Moreover, girls showed significantly higher tendency to forgive and had better attitude towards forgiveness compared to boys (M = 17.28, 13.40 respectively).

www.moj-es.net 17


Tendency to forgive

Gender

malefemale

Estima

ted Ma

rginal M

eans

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

11

School

private

public

Figure 1. Effect of type of school and gender on Tendency to Forgive.

Though there is no significant interactive effect of gender and type of school on tendency to forgive but girls from private schools showed more tendency to forgive as girls from public schools and boys from both types of schools.

Attitude towards forgiveness

Gender

malefemale

Estimat

ed Margi

nal Mea

ns

29

28

27

26

25

24

23

22

21

School

private

public

Figure 2. Effect of type of school and gender on Attitude Toward Forgiveness,

Girls from private schools showed better attitude toward forgiveness. No interactive effect of school system and gender was found on attitude toward forgiveness.

To examine the effect of school system and gender on different dimensions of morality, namely reaction of fear or guilt, confession after transgression, severity of punishment and immorality, another set of two way Analysis of Variance was performed (see table 3).

www.moj-es.net 18


Table 3 Effect of School and Gender on Morality, Reaction of Fear or Guilt, Confession After Transgression, Severity of Punishment and Immorality (N=100)

Sources SS MS F p Morality School 5550.25 5550.25 12.52 0.00 Gender 470.89 470.89 1.06 0.30 School*Gender 670.81 670.81 1.51 0.22 Reaction of fear or guilt School 384.16 384.16 8.69 0.00 Gender 129.96 129.96 2.94 0.09 School*Gender 64.00 64.00 1.45 0.23 Confession after transgression School 10.89 10.89 0.993 0.32 Gender 166.41 166.41 15.18 0.00 School*Gender 4.41 4.41 0.402 0.53 Severity of punishment School 231.04 231.04 7.59 0.01 Gender 1.44 1.44 0.05 0.83 School*Gender 14.44 14.44 0.47 0.49 Immorality School 380.25 380.25 18.57 0.00 Gender 4.41 4.41 0.21 0.64 School*gender 65.61 65.61 3.20 0.08

df =1, 98

It was hypothesized that: type of school and gender are likely to have main effects on moral values in children; type of school and gender are likely to have interactive effect on moral values in children.

Results showed that the school system had significant main effect on morality, reaction of fear or guilt, severity of punishment and immorality and gender had significant effect on confession after transgression. School system and gender did not show interactive effect on any dimension of morality. Girls studying in private school scored higher on morality, felt more fear or guilt, and showed tendency to confess after wrongdoing as compared to girls and boys studying in public schools. Girls showed less immorality and were more afraid of severity of punishment compared to boys. Private school children showed more fear of severity of punishment and exhibited less immorality compared to public school children.

Morality

Gender

malefemale

Estimat

ed Margi

nal Mea

ns

60

50

40

30

20

School

private

public

Figure 3. Effect of type of school and gender on Morality.

www.moj-es.net 19


Reaction of fear or guilt

Gender

malefemale

Estimated

Margin

al Mean

s16

15

14

13

12

11

10

9

8

School

private

public

Figure 4. Effect of type of school and Reaction of Fear and Guilt.

Confession after transgession

Gender

malefemale

Estimat

ed Margi

nal Mea

ns

8

7

6

5

4

3

School

private

public

Figure 5. Effect of type of school and gender on Confession after Transgression.

Severity of punishment

Gender

malefemale

Estimat

ed Marg

inal Me

ans

12

11

10

9

8

7

School

private

public

Figure 6. Effect of type of school and gender on Perceived Severity of Punishment.

www.moj-es.net 20


Immorality

Gender

malefemale

Estimat

ed Margi

nal Mea

ns12

11

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

School

private

public

Figure 7. Effect of type of sSchool and gender on Immorality.

To sum up, private school children showed more tendency to forgive and high attitude towards forgiveness and scored higher on morality as compared to public school children. No gender differences were found on different dimensions of morality i.e. reaction of fear or guilt, confession after transgression, severity of punishment; however, girls showed more tendency to forgive and high attitude towards forgiveness as compared to boys.

DISCUSSION

The present research was conducted to compare forgiveness and moral values in children of private and public schools in Pakistan. Children studying in private schools were more forgiving and showed moral values as compared to those from public schools. Consistent with our findings, Blogger (2010) also found that children from private school were more moralistic than those from public schools and concluded that in Government run school, classes were overcrowded and teachers could not give individual attention to students and thereby could not teach morality to the students. Javed (2009) argued that differences in private and public schools are mainly due to difference in resources and that private schools have better resources and better qualified teachers who can impart quality education to students.

Gill and Jaswal (2007) in their study examined the impact of teaching a values program on children. The children who received moral value lessons were better on moral values as compared to the control group across all ages. In our study, the private schools included holding morning assemblies which are meant to deliver moral lessons to their children and this could be an explanation for better moral values among private school children. On the other hand, public schools do not hold morning assemblies and do not have formal ways of inculcating moral values among students.

Another finding from our study was that there were no gender differences on moral values. Findings are consistent with those of Lan, McMahon, Rieger, King, and Gowing (2005) who investigated gender differences in moral reasoning, personal values and value types and found no statistically significant differences in the level of moral reasoning in girls and boys. In our study, girls showed more inclination toward forgiveness. Our findings are consistent with earlier research. Goss (2006) looked at gender differences in forgiveness following transgression and found that female participants were more forgiving than male participants. Exline (2005) also demonstrated gender differences in forgiveness and found girls being more forgiving than male students. Though this was a small scale study, the findings from the present study have important implications for public sector schools. Children from public schools showed poor moral values and were less forgiving as compared to those from private schools. Government Education department and policy makers need to review the curriculum, pedagogy and extracurricular activities in public schools to ensure that in addition to imparting formal education, moral values and civic sense are inculcated in children and that teachers are agents of character building. The younger children learn and acquire habits more quickly and take their teachers as their role models. Schools can be very effective and instrumental in educating

www.moj-es.net 21


children in such a manner that they are forgiving and they grow up as morally sound and responsible citizens. Character building and inculcating moral values in children would not only benefit them to grow as a morally responsible individuals with a positive outlook but also to create a peaceful and forgiving society.

REFERENCES

Ahmed, N. R., Shaukat, S., & Abiodullah, M. (2009). Role of different educational systems in the development of moral and social traits in Pakistani students. Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 19(1-2), 59-74.

Alqaseem, A. (2012). Concepts of Moral Values in Islam. Retrieved from http://musaad.wordpress.com/islam/concepts/

Berry, J. W., Worthington, E. L., Jr., Parrott, L. I., OConnor, L., & Wade, N. G. (2001). Dispositional forgiveness: development and construct validity of the transgression narrative test of forgiveness (TNTF). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1277-1290.

Blogger, G. (2010). Standard Education in Pakistan. Retrieved from http:/ / www.pakspectator.com/standard-education-in-pakistan/

Brown, P. R. (2003). Measuring individual differences in the tendency to forgive: construct validity and links with depression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(6), 759-771.

Burnette, L. J., Taylor, W. K., Worthington, L. E., & Forsyth, R. D. 2006. Attachment and trait forgivingness: The mediating role of angry rumination. Personality and Individual Dierences, 42, 15851596.

Cheng, S. T., & Yim, Y. K. (2007). Age difference in forgiveness: the rule of future time perspective. Psychology

and aging, 23 (3), 676-680.

Dar, H. (2012). Quality of Education in Pakistan. Retrieved from http://tribune.com.pk/story/398535/private- schools--quality-of-education-in-pakistan

DiBlasio, F. A. (1992). Forgiveness in psychotherapy: Comparison of older and younger therapists. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 11, 181-187.

DiBlasio, F. A., & Benda, B. B. (1991). Practitioners, religion and the use of forgiveness in the clinical setting. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 10, 166-172.

Exline, J. J. (2005). Psychologists Find Gender Difference in Forgiving. Retrieved from http://www.physorg.com/news123779556.html

Failure, H. (2002). Piagets Theory of Moral Development. Retrieved from http://everything2.com/title/Piaget%2527s+theory+of+moral+development

Finkel, E. J., Rusbult, C. E., Kumashiro, M., & Hannon, P. A. (2002). Dealing with betrayal in close relationships: Does commitment promote forgiveness? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 956-974.

www.moj-es.net 22


Gassin, Elizabeth A. (1997). Receiving forgiveness as an exercise in moral education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago. Retrieved from http://0-files.eric.ed.gov.opac.msmc.edu/fulltext/ED408536.pdf

Gill, R., & Jaswal, S. (2007). Impact of parents education and occupation on children for learning values through teaching values programme. Journal of Human Ecology, 21(3), 185-189.

Goss, S. M. (2006). The Influence of Friendship Quality and Commitment on the Empathy-forgiveness Relationship in Children. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/dissertations/AAI3225993/

Guttmann, J. (1984). Cognitive morality and cheating behavior in religious and secular school children. Journal of Educational Research, 77, 243-249.

Hoffman, M. L. (2007). Sex difference in moral internalization and values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(4), 720-729.

Javed, O. (2009). Research Highlight: Private Schools Outperform Public Schools at a Lower Cost. Retrieved from http://www.nextstepforward.net/general-pakistan/research-highlight-privat schools-outperform-public-schools-at-a-lower-cost/

Kemerling, G. (2001). Kant, the moral order. Retrieved from http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/5i.htm

Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In D Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research (pp. 347-480). Skokie: Rand McNally.

Lan, G., McMahon, S., Rieger, F., King, N., & Gowing, M. P. (2005). Differences by gender in the moral reasoning, personal values and value types of Accounting majors: A study. Journal of the Academy of Business and Economics (JABE), 5(1), 120-130.

Lavoie, J. C. (2007). Cognitive determinist of resistance to deviation in seven, nine and eleven years old children in low and high maturity of moral judgment. Developmental Psychology, 10(3), 393-403.

Lickerman, A. (2010). How to forgive others. Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/happiness-in-world/201002/how-forgive-others

MacLachlan, A. (2008). Forgiveness and moral solidarity. Retrieved from http://inter-disciplinary.net/ptb/ persons/ forgiveness/f1/maclachlan%20paper.pdf

Mohammed, K. (1999). Moral values and other topics in Islam. Retrieved from http://aaiil.org/text/books/others/kalamazadmohammed/moralvalues/moralvalues.pdf

Oladipo, E. S. (2009). Moral education of the child: Whose responsibility? Journal Social Science, 20, (2), 149-156. Quran, 7:199; 24:22; 42:40, 43; 64: 14; 3: 134.

Singh, K. P. (2011). A study of moral judgment of school children belonging to different socio-economic status and school backgrounds. International Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 1(6), 1-2.

Smith, M. H. (2006). Ethics and moral values. Retrieved from http://virtualreligion.net/vri/ethics.html

www.moj-es.net 23


Soares-Prabhu, G. (1986, April). As we forgive': Interhuman forgiveness in the teaching of Jesus. Concilium, 184, 57-68.

Sobrino, J. (1986, April). Latin America: Place of sin and forgiveness. Concilium, 184, 45 - 56.

Von Balthasar, H. U. (1984). Jesus and forgiveness. Communio, 11, 322-334.

Wahking, H. (1992). Spiritual growth through forgiveness. Journal of Psychology and Christianity 11, pp. 198-206.

Walters, R. P. (1984). Forgiving: An essential element in effective living. Studies-in-Formative-Spirituality, 5(3), 365-374.

Wilson, H. P. (1994). Defining Forgiveness: Psychological & Theological Perspectives. Retrieved from http://www.forgivenessweb.com/RdgRm/definitionpsychological.htm

Worthington, E. L., Jr. (Ed.). (2005). Handbook of forgiveness. New York, NY: Brunner-Routledge.

Yahya, H. (2005). Forgiveness According to the Morals of Islam and its Benefits on Health. Retrieved from http://harunyahya.com/en/works/3439/forgiveness-according-to-the-morals

Zackrison, E. (1992). A theology of sin, grace and forgiveness. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 11(2), 147-159.

Ziv, A. (1976). Measuring aspects of morality. Journal of Moral Education, 5(2), 189-201.

www.moj-es.net 24


Explicit Form Focus Instruction: The Effects on Implicit and Explicit Knowledge of ESL Learners

Mandana Rohollahzadeh Ebadi [1], Mohd Rashid Mohd Saad [2], Nabil Abedalaziz [3]

[1] [email protected] Department of Language Faculty of Education, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur

[2] [email protected] Department of Language Faculty of Education, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur

[3] [email protected] Department of Educational Psychology and Counseling Faculty of Education, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur

ABSTRACT

The study examines the effect of explicit form focus instruction and specifically metalinguistic information feedback on the development of both implicit and explicit knowledge of adult English as a Second Language (ESL) learners. Ninety-one subjects at the lower intermediate level were carefully selected through placement test at one of the selected education centre in Kuala Lumpur and randomly assigned into experimental and control groups by the researcher. A quantitative study was conducted over approximately four weeks in 16 sessions. Modal (can and have to), past tense with ed, Present perfect (since and for), Comparatives, Unreal conditionals were chosen as the target structures. Target structures were taught based on the lesson plan of the study. Pretest and posttest were given before and after the intervention program. The tests consisted of two tests designed to measure implicit knowledge (i.e., EOIT & TGJT) and two other tests (i.e., UGJT & MKT) to measure explicit knowledge. Results of ANCOVA analysis show gains on both types of knowledge on the posttest. The theoretical implication of the results suggests explicit instruction adequately facilitates development of L2 implicit and explicit knowledge. Pedagogically, these results suggest that explicit instruction on some English language features may benefit L2 learners, especially in facilitating their implicit knowledge.

Keywords: second language acquisition, error correction, implicit feedback, recast, implicit knowledge; explicit knowledge, language awareness

INTRODUCTION

One of the concerns of applied linguists is centered on the most effective form of grammar instruction in the communicative classroom (Sheen, 2002). The issue concerns the extent to which teachers need to direct learners attention to understand grammar in communication classes. Long (1988, 1991) proposed that grammar instruction may be of two types: focus on form and focus on formS. The former refers to drawing students attention to linguistic elements as they arise incidentally in lessons whose overriding focus is on meaning or communication (Long, 1991, p. 45). The latter is equated with the traditional teaching of discrete points of grammar in separate lessons (Sheen, 2002, p. 303).

The role of focus on form

Documents

volume2-issue4