Newsletter Spring 2009 - Earli

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3SIG13Spring 2009newsSustainable Development,Moral and DemocraticEducation (page 9)Contributors in this issue:Iris AlkaherKlaus BeckHorst BiedermannDaan BrugmanOlga FotakopoulouLena FritzénAngela GastagerMichaela GummerumYaniv HanochKarin HeinrichsMonika KellerPeter G. KirchschlaegerCees KlaassenMary KoutseliniBrigitte LatzkoDiomidis MarkoulisNava MaslovatyDavid MelnikGerhard MinnameierFritz OserJean-Luc PatryDimitris PnevmatikosKimberley Schonert-ReichlJaap SchuitemaAnna M. TapolaWiel VeugelersAlfred WeinbergerSIG 13 Contact InformationJoint Coordinator: Cees Klaassen, The Netherlands (C.Klaassen@pwo.ru.nl)Joint Coordinator: Jean-Luc Patry, Austria (Jean-Luc.Patry@sbg.ac.at)Newsletter Editor: Anna M. Tapola, Sweden (Anna.Tapola@hik.se)1

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3Table of ContentThe Notice BoardSIG 13 Mission StatementThree Questions to Dimitris PnevmatikosThree Questions to Brigitte LatzkoSocio-Environmental Projects to Promote Environmental Involvement in a Multicultural SocietyThe Maslovaty Award – Call for NominationsThe Maslovaty Award: Code of Procedure467891415EARLI 2009 CONFERENCESIG 13 at the EARLI 2009 confenceUps and Downs in the Review ProcessThe SIG 13 Future & Vision SessionInvited symposium: The Relationship Between Teaching Subject Matter and Values Education• The Relationship Between Teaching Subject Matter and Values Education• Discussing Moral Values in History Class• Biology, Democracy, and Morality – An Integrative Approach in Teacher Education• Beyond Language, Mathematics, and Science – The Example of the Inclusionof Human Rights Education into the Teaching of Language, Mathematics and Scienceas a Key Success Factor for Human Rights Education1821262728313235Future & Vision Session: New Trends in Morality, Learning and Moral EducationSymposium: Two Heads on One Body: On the Difficult Relationship betweenthe Political and the Moral• An Integrative Approach to Moral and Civic Education• Morality and Civics: Two Powerful Domains Each Having its Own Basic Core Structure• Points of Convergence between Socio-Moral Reasoning and the Conceptionof Key Political Ideas• Teachers between the Moral and the PoliticalCall for Contributions – DEADLINESSymposium: Moral Motivation in Real Situations – On the Way to a Concept ina Post-Kohlbergian Era?• First and Second Order Happy Victimisers and the Quest for Moral Motivation• Immoral Motivation• Preschool Children’s Moral Emotions and Prosocial Behavior• Motivated to be moral? – An Action-Based View on Moral MotivationGuidelines for Authors374041444749515253565961643

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3The Notice BoardThis is where you can find information about upcoming events, interesting articles,conferences, work shops, new books, job announcements, other opportunities, etc.ARTICLESCourt, D. (2008). Qualitative Research as Cultural and Religious Mirror: What Do ResearchersReally Learn? Religious Education, 103, 410-426.Cowie, H., Hutson, N., Oztug, O., & Myers, C. (2008). The Impact of Peer Support Schemeson Pupils’ Perceptions of Bullying, Aggression and Safety at School. Emotionaland Behavioural, 13, 63-71.Cowie, H., Hutson, N., & Jennifer, D. (2008). Taking Stock of Violence in U.K. Schools:Risk, Regulation, and Responsibility. Education & Urban Society, 40, 494-505.Cowie, H. & Oztug, O. (2008). Pupils’ Perceptions of Safety at School. Pastoral Care inEducation, 26, 59-67.Gerouki, M. (2008). ”Innovations” on Hold: Sex Education in the Greek Primary School.Health Education, 109, 49-65.Gerouki, M. (2008). Pushed to the Margins - Sex and Relationships in Greek PrimaryTextbooks. Sex Education, 8, 329-343.Gross, Z. (2008). Relocation in Rural and Urban Settings: A Case Study of UprootedSchools From the Gaza Strip. Education & Urban Society, 40, 269-296.Husu, J., Toom, A., & Patrikainen S. (2008). Guided Reflection as a Means to Demonstrateand Develop Student Teachers’ Reflective Competencies. Reflective Practice,9, 37-51.Johnson, L., Møller, J., Jacobson, S., & Wong, K. C. (2008). Cross-national Comparisons inthe International Successful School Principalship Project (ISSPP): The USA, Norwayand China. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 52, 407-422.Kopp, V., Stark, R., & Fischer, M. R. (2008). Fostering Diagnostic Knowledge throughComputer-Supported, Case-Based Worked Examples: Effects of Erroneous Examplesand Feedback. Medical Education, 42, 823-829.Leenders, H., Veugelers, W., & de Kat, E. (2008). Teachers’ Views on Citizenship Educationin Secondary Education in The Netherlands. Cambridge Journal of Education,38, 155-170.Mortari, L. (2008). The Ethic of Delicacy in Phenomenological Research. InternationalJournal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being, 3, 3-17.Oser, F., Althof, W., & Higgins-D’Alessandro, A. (2008). The Just Community Approachto Moral Education: System Change or Individual Change? Journal of Moral Education,37, 395-415.Oviedo L., Alles G. D., Atkinson A. P., Wheeler M,. Atran S., Norenzayan, A., et al.(2008). Is a Complete Biocognitive Account of Religion Feasible? Zygon, 43, 103-126.Schuitema, J., ten Dam, G., & Veugelers, W. (2008). Teaching Strategies for Moral Eduction:A Review. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40, 69-90.4

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3FORTHCOMING MEETINGSAME 2009 (Association for Moral Education)The annual conference will be 2–4 July at Utrecht University in the Netherlands.Deadline for proposals: 31 January, 2009More information about the conference at the website: www.fss.uu.nl/ame2009/#EARLI 2009The biannual conference will be in Amsterdam. 25–29 August.More information: www.earli2009.org/JURE 2009 (Junior Researchers of EARLI)The JURE pre-conference will be in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 23–25 August.More information at the website (www.earli2009.org/nqcontent.cfm?a_id=1).ECER 2009 (European Conference on Educational Research)The annual main conference will be at the University of Vienna, Austria, 28–30September. Furthermore, a pre-conference for the postgraduate network of EERA(European Educational Research Assosiation) will mbe organised at the same venue,25–26 September. More information can be found at the website (www.eera-ecer.eu/ecer/ecer-2009-vienna)AERA 2010 (American Educational Research Association)The annual meeting will be 30 April – 4 May in Denver, Colorado, USA.Please consult the website for more information (www.aera.net).AERA 2011 (American Educational Research Association)The annual meeting will be 8–12 April in New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.Please go to www.aera.net for more information later on.EARLI 2011 biannual conference will take place in Exeter, United Kingdom, during thelast week of August. Check the EARLI website for more information later on.AERA 2012 (American Educational Research Association) 2012.The annual meeting will be 13–17 April in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.BOOKSFasko, D., & Willis, W. (Eds.) (2008). Contemporary philosophical and psychological perspectiveson moral development and education. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Gerouki, M. (2008). Sex Education Primary School Programs. Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag.5

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3SIG 13 Mission StatementWhat is the purpose of SIG 13?What are we aiming for?What are we doing?According to the EARLI website, up topresent, the organisation includes 21 SpecialInterest Groups – SIG 13 being one ofthem. Each SIG also have access to separatewebsites, and that is where you can readthe various SIGs mission statements. In themission statements they state what they dowithin the specific SIG; this is where youfind the answers to the why, how, who,when, and what questions. Consequently,by reading the statement you will get somebrief ideas what it is all about, which inturn, may attract people to join the groupin question.So far, 13 of 21 SIGs provide mission statementsat their websites. Eight of them do notyet offer any descriptions of what they do,or their roles in the research community, andso forth. SIG 13 being one of the latter ‘anonymous’groups. The question is, do we need amission statement? This is an issue that we cantackle at the upcoming EARLI conference. However,not all SIG 13 members will participatein the meeting in Amsterdam. That is why it iscrucial to initiate a wide discussion on the matterin the newsletter, and thereby give all membersequal opportunities to take part in thepreparations of a possible mission statement indue time to the next SIG 13 business meeting.Or in other words, this is a call for your contributionto the text that in the end will constituteSIG 13 mission statement.In order to encourage readers to participatein this process, I have picked somekey words from the answers to the ’ThreeQuestions’ that is published in every issueof the newsletter. Hitherto, six responds tothe ’Three Questions’ have been published,and more answers, by other members, willbe launched in coming issues. Maybe thosekey words can be inspiring, when we preparefor a forthcoming mission statement?You are cordially invited to send all yoursuggestions concerning a feasible futuremission statement directly to one of the SIG13 joint coordinators – Jean-Luc Patry (jeanluc.patry@sbg.ac.at).Jean-Luc will makenecessary preparations – perhaps with supportfrom a drafting committee. The outcomesfrom all those preparations will bepresented at the next business meeting.Anna M. TapolaSome Key Words…across Europe and beyond……basic and applied research……better world……better understanding of human…condition……brainstorming……communicate with colleagues……community of friends……conduct conferences……cooperation on educational…topics……the core of human existence……debates and dialogues……democratic citizenship……democratic values……discuss controversial issues……the essence of education……ethics……exchange of ideas……facts and values……forum for exchange ……fosters intellectual discussions……global warming……heterogeneous forum……ideas about moral and…democratic education……increasingly diversified…Western society……innovative ideas……innovative practice……integrate……interact……interdisciplinary research……international cooperation……moral……moral and democratic…education……moral argumentation……moral competence……moral values……more controversy……moving beyond……new pathways……nuclear war……participate……people are our…strongest reason……platform……pluralistic society……promote intensive networks……publish books……research network……research reports……responsibility……responsible judgments……right and wrong……solid scientific research……terrorism……unity is strength……values in environments…6

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3Three Questions toDimitris Pnevmatikos• Why is moral and democratic• education important?”Moral and democratic education is importantnot because it can provide studentswith a number of ecumenical “truth” values,but mainly because it can give them thechance and the time to reflect on such valuesand to participate in procedures such as discussions,the development of argumentationsand, based on majoritarian agreement,decisions about moral issues. Individualscould be guided towards valid moral principles,being aware that this procedure hasdifferent degrees of certainty and is neverabsolutely reliable. In this sense, the possibilityto revise the decision would always remainopen. Citizens with experience of thiskind of education could be more likely toabide by decisions of the group. Thus, moraland democratic education benefits both theindividual and society.”• Why are you engaged in SIG 13?”Understanding the way people think,judge, and solve moral dilemmas and problemsis at the core of my research interests.Although my research interests could beclassified as basic research in the domain,there is always the need to communicatewith colleagues working on education. SIG13 is a group that brings togetherscholars from both basicand applied research onmoral behavior. That is why Istrongly supported the foundationof this SIG. Thus, myengagement in SIG 13 meetsmy need to communicateand to cooperate with otherpeople working in the fieldof moral and democraticeducation.”• How do you want the SIG 13• community to develop?”SIG 13 should be a forum for the exchangeof ideas about moral and democratic education.I feel the need to learn more aboutthe ideas and the research questions of theother members of the group. So the organisedsymposia within our EARLI frameworkand the SIG’s newsletter represent a greatstart. However, this should be only the beginning.Another objective should be to establisha research network for the study ofmoral and democratic education across Europeand beyond. Edited books and specialissues in journals could host our researchwork, and if our publishing work expands,why not found a new Journal on Moral andDemocratic Education.”PROFESSIONALFILEWho: Dimitris PnevmatikosE-mail: dpnevmat@uowm.grTitle/profession: Assistant Professor onDevelopmental PsychologyInstitution: University of Western Macedonia,Faculty of EducationCountry: GreecePresent research interest: I am currentlyworking on children’s understanding ofabstract entities such as consciousness, humanmind and soul, deity, death and justicefrom the developmental perspective.PERSONALFILEHidden talents: Music (I play a number ofinstruments!).Listen to: Different kinds of music thatcould have a melody, all day. From traditional,classic and opera to jazz, rock andwhatever you could imagine! Each kind ofmusic has its time.My (no longer) secret bolthole:Chalkidiki, Greece.Favourite (non-scientific) book: Aristotle’sPoetics, Politics and Nicomachean Ethics.7

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3Three Questions toBrigitte Latzko• Why is moral and democratic• education important?”Moral and democratic education is, wasand will be the essence of education generally.Education is moral itself. Fosteringsocio-moral competencies in our studentswould be of major benefit for preservingdemocratic values in an increasingly diversifiedWestern society.”• Why are you engaged in SIG 13?”Educational efforts are strongly linkedwith the understanding of the developmentalprecursors of a morally responsibleyounger generation. Therefore it is very importantto have a platform like SIG 13 whereinnovative ideas and findings are discussed.SIG 13 provides a great deal of informationthat can be used to promote children’s andadolescents’ morality through educationalefforts that integrate different developmentaland educational models. Particularly inGermany moral and democratic educationin schools is not very attractive among thescientific community, that’s why I am lookingfor new pathways how to raise educators’awareness of their responsibility formoral and democratic education.”• How do you want the SIG 13• community to develop?”It would be wonderful to establish someinterdisciplinary research cooperation oneducational topics.”PROFESSIONALFILEWho: Brigitte LatzkoE-mail:latzko@uni-leipzig.deHomepage: www.unileipzig.de/~erzwiss/homepages/latzkoTitle/profession: PhDInstitution: Departmentof Education,Educational Psychology,University ofLeipzigCountry: GermanyPresent researchinterest: autonomyand authority in termsof moral development;teacher training.PERSONALFILEHidden talents:24-hours-hooveringListen to:Bach; therefore I amliving in LeipzigMy (no longer)secret bolthole:Café Grundmann;chocolate cake,sherry and a cup ofstrong coffeeFavourite(non-scientific)book: Strangerson a Train. PatriciaHighsmith8

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3NEW THESISSocio-Environmental Projects toPromote Environmental Involvementin a Multicultural SocietySummary of Iris Alkaher’s thesisThe study focused on environmental educationin a multicultural society. Therefore,it integrated scientific and socio-culturalaspects in science education. The maintheoretical framework of the study is basedon the education for sustainability (EfS)approach to environmental education. Environmentaleducation is an educationalprocess that takes place in school and outof-school.It aims at raising the knowledgeabout the biophysical and socio-cultural dimensionsof the environment; developingcare and values with regard to the environmentand the human society; and improvingskills that could lead people to act in apro-environmental behavior and make proenvironmentaldecisions. The field of environmentaleducation includes a variety ofapproaches, views, assumptions and waysto implement the objectives detailed above.From the moral and democratic educationperspective, this study serves as opportunityto explore how exposing younglearners to the complexity of human-nature-societyrelations develops their problemsolving skills and decision-making skillswhile/with considering both nature andhuman needs and increases their willingnessto be involved/participate in citizenryactivism in the future. In addition, thisstudy led to a better understanding of howdiverse multicultural youth perceive/addressenvironmental values and respect differentenvironmental values of other ethnicgroups (who are neighbor communities).Title of the thesis:Proyektim Svivatiyim-Hevratiyim Le-idud Meo-ravutHevratit Be-hevra Rav-Tarbutit(English title: Socio-Environmental Projectsto Promote Environmental Involvement in aMulticultural society)Author:Iris AlkaherEmail address:irisal@vt.eduPhD studies affiliation:Department of Education in Technology andScience, Technion, Haifa, ISRAELCurrent affiliation:Virginia Polytechnic and State UniversityBlacksburg, USADissertation date:July 2008Thesis available at:Technion libraries (Thesis in Hebrew, abstractin English)Advisor: Tali Tal, Associate Professor,Department of Education in Technology andScience, Technion, Haifa, ISRAEL9

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3NEW THESISA group of young Israelis that took part of the socio-environmental project. During thisday they where tidying up the surrounding at Zalmon Creek.The socio-environmental projects thatwere investigated in the study are employingenvironmental education based on theEfS approach. According to EfS, the goal ofenvironmental education is to develop responsibleglobal citizenship by reinforcingthe motivation of communities to adopt asustainable lifestyle in turn, raising knowledgeand skills that enable people to actand make decisions as members of a communityand society. This approach emphasizesthe interactions between society,economy and environment and focuses onhuman development, human rights, andsocial justice. EfS became one of the leadingcurrents in the field of environmental education,considering the approach’s emphasisof integration of social and economicalaspects and the concern for next generations.EfS is an appropriate framework for moraland democratic education as well. EfSapproach encourages meaningful socio-environmentaldiscourse among the learnersand meaningful discussions of worldwideenvironmental problems that are caused bycompeting interests of human beings. EfSbased learning emphasizes the importanceof considering the rights of different cultural,ethnic and socio-economic communitiesin order to solve environmental problemsthat would lead to/contribute to achievementof a sustainable society.The Israeli Ministry of Education declared,in 2004, that Israel is committed to advanceEfS in the formal educational system.However, there are difficulties implementingEfS in Israeli schools. In recent years,few leading environmental organizationsin Israel, external to the school system, aretrying to engage students, teachers, parentsand the community in environmental educationalpractice. In order to promote andempower environmental leadership of dif-10

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3NEW THESISIris Alkaher’s thesis concerns EfS (Education for Sustainability), which is related toenvironmental science, economics, and social science, as well as moral and democraticeducation. Water supply, and especially lack of clean fresh water, are important politicalissues in Israel. This photo shows a group of culturally mixed Israeli students who aremeasuring the quality of the water in the polluted Zippori creek. This was one of the activitiesthat were included in the socio-environmental project.ferent communities in Israel, these organizationswork at present with diverse communities.The study explored and characterizedtwo socio-environmental projects, bothwere initiated, planned and directed bytwo leading environmental organizations inIsrael: the governmental organizationINPA (Israel Nature Parks Authority),and the non- governmental organizationSPNI (Society for the Protection of Naturein Israel). Both projects were based on collaborationbetween schools, local municipalities,environmental organizations, businessesand local communities. Despitethe importance of having interrelationsbetween different ethnic communities inthe fragile Israeli socio-political situation,multicultural socio-environmental projectsare rarely investigated. Moreover, there areno previous studies that describe the uniquecollaboration in environmental educationbetween schools and informal environmentalorganizations in Israel. These aspects ofthe study are innovative.The study followed-up two socioenvironmentalprojects that broughttogether Arab and Jewish students intojoint meetings. The projects focused onbroad learning about local socio-environmentalconflicts and on different solutions.The complex relationship between manand nature is expressed through theseconflicts. In addition to EfS, the rationalebehind the projects is based on three additionalviews: out-of-school learning thatemphasizes physical-experiential, affective,and social aspects of learning process;11

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3NEW THESISplace-based education that is expressed bymultidimensional learning within a placeand direct experience in place both raisingsense of place; and multicultural educationthat emphasizes equal learning opportunitiesfor students from diverse ethnic andcultural backgrounds.The research aimed at characterizingthe Arab-Jewish socio-environmental projectsin Israel; describing the multiculturalinteractions between the adults and thestudents that participated in the projects;and identifying the participants’ socioenvironmentalviews, attitudes and behaviorintentions in the context of the projects.The research participants included275 eighth grade students from two Arabschoolsand two Jewish-schools, four principalsof these schools, seven teachers andfive environmental organizations’ facilitators.The research, which was post-positivisticand interpretative, employed the followinginstruments: Likert-type and open-endedquestionnaires that were administered tothe students in the beginning and at theend of each project and provided informationabout the students’ environmental perceptions,knowledge, attitudes and behaviorintentions; focused observations of theA Few Questions to Iris Alkaher• What kind of work or other position do you have now?Currently, I am a science education research associate (post-doctoral fellow) in the Departmentof Biochemistry at Virginia Polytechnic and State University (Virginia Tech), Blacksburg,USA. I conduct research that aims at exploring/investigating the impacts, benefitsand challenges of engaging undergraduate students in classroom-based research/inquiry inbiology.• What are your future research plans?I see myself in the future as a STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics)educator in the Israeli academia. As a STEM researcher, I would like to contribute to thedevelopment of STEM curriculum that integrates/incorporates moral, sociocultural and citizenshipaspects/dimensions. In addition, I would like to deepen, expand/ develop scienceteacher training programs that increase the teaching skills and abilities of STEM teachers toteach in multicultural learning environments.• What are your best advises to PhD candidates?Conducting doctoral research is like beginning a four-year journey towards a destinationthat is unknown at the beginning, but incredible when you reach it at the end. In thisjourney you should expect all types of weather and challenges as well as a range of difficultyregarding the hiking trails you will follow. A doctoral research in the field of educationrequires you to define long-term expectations, motivations, rational and goals. It requiresyou to broaden your perspective and think both creatively and critically of the potentialcontributions of your research to the knowledge body as well as to the communities oflearners, teachers and educators. I believe that selecting a topic that makes you eager tolearn and investigate in this field is the first important decision for a successful and productiveresearch study. While conducting your first steps as a PhD researcher I do encourageyou to ask your self – what exactly do I look for? What is new, innovative, interesting andworthwhile to explore in my topic? How could I contribute to undeveloped areas? How willmy new data lead to a better understanding in this field? Why is my research so important?Who could use my discoveries and how? Keep asking yourself the same questions everytime you meet a crossroad in your research journey. And at the end, after you have probablyfound the answers for a few of your questions, write your dissertation, and present yourresults, you will realize that you still have more questions than answers, and more challengesto deal with; then you would understand that the journey of the scientific research is anever ending story.12

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3NEW THESISstudents’ and staffs’ meetings that providedinformation on the ways the projects were enacted;personal interviews with the adult participantsat the beginning and at the end ofeach project, that provided information aboutthe participants’ socio-environmental viewsand attitudes in the context of the projects; focusgroups with the students at the beginningand at the end of each project for identifyingtheir environmental perceptions, knowledge,attitudes and behavior intentions. The datawas analyzed mainly according to qualitativeapproaches. The Likert-type questionnairewas statistically analyzed.The research findings reflect the greatpotential of projects that implement EfS onlearners’ environmental knowledge, awarenessand behavior. In addition, the findingsindicate the unique potential of the projectsin bridging between environmental educationin formal and informal settings, andconnecting between culturally diverse studentsthat usually do not meet nor discusssocio-environmental issues. The study exposesthe challenges of educators who wishto promote environmental education in amulticultural society.The projects contributed to the students’development of environmental literacy byencouraging them to think critically aboutcomplex environmental conflicts and aboutways to resolve these conflicts. This is byproviding opportunities to ask questions,take a stand and make decisions. In theaspects of moral and democratic education,which aims at developing “life skills”that would help young people to becomeproductive individuals and contributingmembers to their communities, this findingis promising. Moreover, the projectsintegrated real-world problems into theschools and created an authentic learningenvironment. Exposing the students to localenvironmental issues that are relatedto their surrounding and question the relationshipsin the students’ own environmentcould serve as a good example for EfS andplace-based educational programs.All the participants perceived the projectsas a means to advance environmental andsocio-cultural goals. This view expressesthe wide understanding of the interactionsbetween man and environment accordingto the sustainability approach and fits therationale of the projects.Moreover, the findings pointed out culturaldifferences between the Arab andJewish students regarding their environmentalviews. I claim that these differencesexpress different needs of each community.Therefore, a central challenge, for environmentaleducators, is to know how to chooseeducational programs with goals and strategiesthat would fit the different needs andworld-views of diverse cultural communitiesand suit a multicultural and bilingualsociety. The findings indicated that theserequirements were partially achieved. Thecontent and teaching strategies partiallyaddressed the Arab as well as the Jewishlearners. The projects enabled varied multiculturalinteractions, although these interactionswere limited in the contexts oflanguage and culture barriers.Another challenge for environmentaleducators is to develop a responsible environmentalbehavior. The projects havecontributed to this goal by raising students’knowledge about and awareness tothe local environment. Nevertheless, thestudents’ behavior intentions (and their actualbehavior) have not been significantlyimproved. It is suggested that integratingmore continuous hands-on activities andactual work would improve their intentionsand maybe their actual behavior.This study highlights the need to furtherunderstand socio-cultural aspects in learningscience in general and in environmentaleducation in particular. It suggestsintroducing multicultural issues in teachereducation in Israel. This could better fit thediverse society of the country and betterserve our students.13

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3The Maslovaty Award – Call for NominationsDear Friends,Nava Maslovaty, long-standing member and Coordinator of SIG 13 Moral & DemocraticEducation (2003-2007), has founded the “Maslovaty Foundation” that issues an award,once every two years at the bi-annual conference, for the best work by an MDE memberto encourage expert and young scientists to participate actively in the activities of theinterest group, to publish excellent works in scientific journals, and to cooperate withscientists from various countries. The Guidelines of the Foundation are given below. Twoawards will be given at the Amsterdam EARLI conference, and we would like to encourageyou to submit your work according to the following principles:1. Award for published papers: The award will be given to the best publication(monograph, chapter in a book or paper in a recognized journal) within the last twoyears (2007 and 2008) (co-) authored by a SIG 13 member and dealing with moraland/or democratic education. Publications in English or with an English abstractare eligible. SIG 13 members are cordially invited to submit papers that satisfy theseconditions (whether your own paper or the paper of another SIG 13 member) accordingto the rules until June 1st, 2009, as .,pdf file and including the exact bibliographicinformation and the ISBN or ISSN number to the Jury members, i.e. to the jointSIG 13 coordinators and to the Maslovaty Foundation by its representatives NavaMaslovaty and David Melnik (the email addresses will be given below).2. Award for young researchers: The award will be given to the best presentationat the 13th Biennal Conference EARLI 2009 in Amsterdam by a young researcherwho presents a paper for the first or second time at an EARLI conference. Presentersare cordially invited to submit their paper, and supervisors of young researcherspresenting in Amsterdam are invited to encourage young researchers to do so or tosubmit the paper themselves. The paper must be submitted in full length by July1st, 2009 as .pdf-file to the Jury members, i.e. to the joint SIG 13 coordinators and tothe Maslovaty Foundation representatives Nava Maslovaty and David Melnik (theemail addresses will be given below).The Jury thanks Nava for her gentle gift and looks forward to receiving many proposals,and we encourage all Members of SIG 13 to participate in this award.With best regards,Cees Klaassen (C. Klaassen@pwo.ru.nl)Jean-Luc Patry (jean-luc.patry@sbg.ac.at)Maslovaty FoundationBy its representatives Nava Maslovaty and David Melnik (maslon@bezeqint.net)For more information, please see Code of Procedure, page 15-17.14

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3The Maslovaty Foundation for the Advancementof Education on Morals and SocietyCODE OF PROCEDURETITLE IObjectives of the Award”The Maslovaty Foundation for the Advancement of Education on Morals and Society”(hereinafter: ”The Maslovaty Foundation”), in collaboration with and participation ofSIG 13 “Moral and Democratic Education” of EARLI (hereinafter: ”SIG 13”), grants anaward for the purpose of encouraging expert and young scientists to actively participatein the activities of the special interest group.TITLE IIThe Maslovaty AwardChapter IDescription of the AwardSec. 1. Categories. Two awards will be given -A. Award for young researchersB. Award for published papersSec. 2. Frequency. The awards will be given every two years at the bi-annual conferenceof EARLI and the interest group at the Business Meeting of the SIG 13.Sec. 3. Award Components. The awards will total €2000 (€1000 for each category). Eachaward will carry an inscribed certificate and a prize of €1000.Sec. 4 Publication. The SIG 13 will publish information on the Maslovaty Award onits website, in newsletters and any other printed publications, in order to publicize theaward to potential candidates. The publication will include all necessary details requiredfor candidates as specified in this code of procedure.Sec. 5. Mentions and Commemoration. The Foundation’s conditions for granting theawards are:i. To mention that the Maslovaty Foundation is the grantor, both wheni. presenting the award as well as in case the awarded paper is published.i. The text of the mention will be in the language in which the articlei. appears in the publication, with wording to be determined by thei. Maslovaty Foundation.ii. To issue a certificate indicating that the award was given with thei. participation of the Maslovaty Foundation.iii. The SIG 13 coordinators and/or the recipients of the award will appraisei. the Foundation of the publication and will see to sending two copies ofi. it to the Foundation.15

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3iv. The SIG 13 coordinators will see to advertising the Maslovatyi. Foundation and the winners of the award on the EARLI website and i.i. through other appropriate means.Sec. 6. Amendment. The Maslovaty Foundation is entitled, at its sole discretion, to modifyall or part of this code of procedure, to revoke the award, and to raise or reduce theamount of the award.Chapter IIThe Award for Young ResearchersSec. 7. Eligibility. The award for young researchers is open to a paper (co-) authoredand presented by a researcher at an EARLI session organized by the SIG 13 if –i. The nominated author is scheduled to present the paper him- ori. herself at the conference.ii. The young researcher presents a paper at a SIG 13 session in EARLIi. for the first or second time.Sec. 8. Nomination. There can be self-nomination of an EARLI SIG 13 member or nominationby the supervisor, provided he or she is a member of SIG 13. If the supervisornominating the paper is member of the Jury, Sec. 20 herein will apply.Sec 9. Submission date. The full paper must be submitted by July 1st before the EARLIConference at which the paper will be presented.Sec. 10. Method of submission. The paper must be submitted as a pdf-file or as a scannedversion of the paper. The paper must be sent no later than the submission date to thethree members of the jury via their published e-mail addresses.Chapter IIIThe Award for Published PapersSec. 11. Eligibility.i. Only papers (co-)authored by SIG 13 members are eligibleii. Only one paper per SIG 13 member can be submitted.iii. Any papers published in the last two calendar years before the yeari. of the EARLI conference are eligible (e.g., for the 2009 conference,i. papers published in 2007 and 2008 are eligible).iv. Only papers published as a monograph, a chapter in a book or in ai. refereed journal are eligible. The publication must have an ISBNi. number.v. The paper must be written according to APA rules.vi. The paper must be written in English or at least have an Englishi. abstract.Sec. 12. Nomination. The nomination can be by:i. The (co-)author or any other SIG 13 member.ii. A jury member. In this case, section 20 herein will apply.Please note thatthe deadline is postponeduntil the 1 June 2009. For moreinformation, see Call forNominations, page 14.Sec. 13. Submission date. The paper must be submitted by May 1st of the year of theEARLI conference in which the award is given.Sec. 14. Method of submission. The paper must be submitted as a pdf-file or as a scan16

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3ned version of the paper. The paper must be sent no later than the submission date to thethree members of the jury via their published e-mail addresses.TITLE IIIJudgmentChapter IJurySec. 15. Membership. The jury will consist of three members: the two SIG 13 coordinatorsand a person nominated by the Maslovaty Foundation.Sec. 16. Decision. Decisions of the jury will be unanimous.Sec. 17. Objections. The jury’s decision will be deemed final. No objection to any awardwill be considered.Chapter IIReviewingSec. 18. External reviewer. The jury can request an external reviewer. Reviewers may,but do not need to, be members of SIG 13.Sec. 19. Paper not in English. If the paper is not in English, the jury must have threeexternal reviewers fluent in the language of the paper.Sec. 20. Conflict of interest. The jury must have an external reviewer if the (co-) authoror the nominator is a member of the jury. In this case, the reviewer is chosen by the twoother jury members. The external reviewer may, but does not need to, be a member ofEARLI.Chapter IIIEvaluation of AwardeesSec. 21. Decision deadline. Decisions will be made by the jury no later than 14 daysbefore the date of the conference.Sec. 22. Lack of suitable candidates. The jury may decide not to grant an award at aparticular conference, due to lack of suitable candidates.Sec. 23. Method of selection. The decision by the jury will have two stages: a) The in/out stage; b) The best of the best three papers.Sec. 24. Criteria for selection. The criteria for selection will be determined by the juryand will be published.Cees KlaassenJean- Luc PatryMaslovaty Foundation Coordinators of SIG 1317

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCESIG 13 at the EARLI 2009 confenceThe major part of this issue is allocated forpresentations of all SIG 13 related symposia,including all papers, which are acceptedfor presentations at the conference. Youwill find an overview in table 1.There will be one invited symposium,and two regular symposia that are directlylinked to SIG 13 at the EARLI conference. Inaddition, there will be a new special formatcalled Future & Vision session (see page 26and 37-39). All these forthcoming events,and all the papers that are included in theSIG 13 symposia, are presented below. Thepurpose of doing this is to provide informationthat may help you to navigate throughthe huge conference in Amsterdam.Table 1Symposia Related to SIG 13 at EARLI 2009 ConferenceTYPESYMPOSIUM TITLEPAPER TITLEAUTHOR (email address)InvitedSymposiumThe RelationshipBetween TeachingSubject Matter andValues EducationTeamwork in an Innovative LearningEnvironment at School:High Achievers vs. Low AchieversAngela Gastager (angela.gastager@sbg.ac.at), Alfred Weinberger (alfred_weinberger@gmx.at)& Jean-Luc Patry (jean-luc.patry@sbg.ac.at)Discussing Moral Valuesin History ClassJaap Schuitema (j.a.schuitema@uva.nl), WielVeugelers (w.m.m.h.veugelers@uva.nl), GertRijlaarsdam (g.c.w.rijlaarsdam@uva.nl) &Geert ten Dam (g.t.m.tendam@uva.nl)Biology, Democracy, and Morality –An Integrative Approachin Teacher EducationAnna M. Tapola (Anna.Tapola@hik.se)& Lena Fritzen (Lena.Fritzen@vxu.se)Beyond Language, Mathematics,and Science – the Example ofthe Inclusion of Human RightsEducation into the Teachingof Language, Mathematics andScience as a Key Success Factorfor Human Rights EducationPeter G. Kirchschlaeger(peter.kirchschlaeger@phz.ch)Future& VisionSessionNew Trends in Morality,Learning and MoralEducationNo papersCees Klaassen (C.Klaassen@pwo.ru.nl) &Jean-Luc Patry (jean-luc.patry@sbg.ac.at)RegularSymposiumTwo Heads on OneBody: On the DifficultRelationship betweenthe Political and theMoralAn Integrative Approach to Moraland Civic EducationMorality and Civics: Two PowerfulDomains Each Having its Own BasicCore StructureMary Koutselini (edmaryk@ucy.ac.cy)Fritz Oser (fritz.oser@unifr.ch) & HorstBiedermann (horst.biedermann@unifr.ch)Points of Convergence betweenSocio-Moral Reasoning and theConception of Key Political IdeasTeachers between the Moraland the PoliticalOlga Fotakopoulou (ofotakop@psy.auth.gr)& Diomidis Markoulis (markouli@psy.auth.gr)Wiel Veugelers (w.m.m.h.veugelers@uva.nl)RegularSymposiumMoral Motivation inReal Situations – Onthe Way to a Conceptin a Post-KohlbergianEra?First and Second Order HappyVictimisers and the Questfor Moral MotivationImmoral MotivationPreschool Children’s Moral Emotionsand Prosocial BehaviorGerhard Minnameier(minnameier@lbw.rwth-aachen.de)Daan Brugman (D.Brugman@uu.nl)Michaela Gummerum (Michaela.gummerum@plymouth.ac.uk),Yaniv Hanoch (yaniv.hanoch@plymouth.ac.uk),Monika Keller (keller@mpib-berlin.mpg.de) & Kimberley Schonert-Reichl (Kimberly.schonert-reichl@ubc.ca)18Motivated to be moral? – An Action-Based View on Moral MotivationKarin Heinrichs (heinrichs@bwl.lmu.de)

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEIn order to give you a detailed and broadpicture, we wanted to publish as many extendedsummaries as possible. However,since the authors wrote the extended summariesexclusively for review purposes, wehave asked for special permissions to publishthese texts in the newsletter as well.This means that you will find most, but notall, extended summaries in this issue. Incase the first author has not provided suchan explicit permission, you will only haveaccess to the abstract in the newsletter.Jean-Luc Party has organized and willchair the invited symposium, entitled TheRelationship Between Teaching SubjectMatter and Values Education (Table 1).Four papers will be presented, and DimitrisPnevmatikos will be discussant. The contributionswithin the invited symposium focusthe relationship between teaching varioustypes of subject matter and aspects ofmoral and democratic education. Please goto page 27 to 37 for more information.Fritz Oser and Wiel Veugelers organisedone of the regular SIG 13 symposia. Thetitle of the symposium is Two Heads onOne Body: On the Difficult Relationshipbetween the Political and the Moral (Table1), and it will be chaired by Horst Biedermann.The relationship between moral judgementsand political thinking constitutesthe centre of attention in this symposium.In the abstract it is claimed that teacherscan realize moral education without politicalcontent. It is also argued that – sometimes– it is possible to have political educationwithout moral issues. The symposiumincludes four contributions, which will bediscussed by Klaus Beck. Further informationis given at page 40 to 51.The other regular SIG 13 symposium isentitled Moral Motivation in Real Situations– On the Way to a Concept in a Post-Kohlbergian Era? (Table 1). The symposiumis organised by Karin Heinrichs and GerhardMinnameier. Karin Heinrichs will also serveas chair, and Fritz Oser will be discussant.Moral motivation and moral behaviour appearto stand in centre of this symposium.The four contributions also relate to the traditionsof Kohlberg and Rest. You will findmore information at page 52 to 63.At the previous biannual EARLI conferencein Budapest (2007), SIG 13 organizedthree symposia – one invited symposiumand two regular symposia. At the businessmeeting in Budapest we agreed upon theambition to try to organize an additionalsymposium at the conference in Amsterdam(see the minutes from the business meetingthat was published in SIG 13 Newsletter issue1). We were obviously not successful infulfilling such ambitions. However, we tried,but the rest of the submitted symposiaproposals were rejected by the conference.According to the information to the SIG coordinatorsfrom the conference organizer,40% of the submitted SIG 13 symposia wereaccepted for presentation. This percentageprobably equals the two regular symposia,since the invited symposium never wassubject to the regular review process. Consequently,it appears as if 60%, or three proposedSIG 13 symposia, were rejected in thereview process (see also Ups and Downs inthe Review Process in this issue).There will of course also be a large portionof individual presentations at the conference.According to information given bythe conference organizer, 1,057 individualpresentations are accepted. A minor portionof these is related to SIG 13. In Table 2(see page 20) you will find title and presenteron all accepted SIG 13 linked individualpresentations. So far, we have identified 24individual contributions written by SIG 13members, or in other ways related to moraland democratic education. The intention isto present further information on these contributionsin the next special conference issueof the newsletter, which is planned to belaunched prior to the conference in August.The newsletter’s editor will soon contactthe presenters of accepted individual contributions.Anna M. Tapola19

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCETable 2 Accepted Individual Presentations Related to SIG 13TITLE OF THE CONTRIBUTIONPRESENTERThe Effects of Study Circle on Taiwan Junior High School Students’ Civic ParticipationShu-Hua HuBridging School and Town in Education for Citizenship: a dialogic and argumentativeapproach in community of philosophical inquiryDiego Di MasiMorality and Gentleness in Competition: Do they belong to two different worlds?Dimitris PnevmatikosDifferent Approaches to Teaching Controversial Issues and Students’ conflict stylesHermann Josef AbsWhat can Biology Teachers Learn about Teaching Controversial Genetic Issues from theGenomics Context?Paul van der ZandeA State-Independent Education for Citizenship? Assessing Students in Swedish Comprehensiveand Steiner Waldorf Schools on Questions of Civic and Moral DevelopmentBo DahlinMono-Cultural Children Literature: the Case of Socialization in Israeli Jewish Ultra-OrthodoxLeah BaratzValues Education in the Israeli Schools: A Pilot StudyYaacov KatzSpecific Aspects of Civic Competence: The Views and Beliefs of Students in Different Formsof Hungarian Vocational Education on Societal and Economic ParticipationLaszlo KinyoDeveloping Teacher Ethos for Culturally Responsive TeachingJoan WhippTeachers’ Personal Theories: a case study with Greek in-service and postgraduate studentteachersVassiliki Papadopoulou… because sharing is caring... Teachers’ Understanding of Education as the Conceptof Their EthosBrigitte LatzkoTeacher Educators’ Views on Human DignityAnna TapolaAssessing Environmental Awareness with the WALK: Validation of a new type of instrumentJean-Luc PatryPre-schools as Communities of Learning: planning and evaluating with young childrenMaria Assunção FolqueEnhancing Student Teachers’ Reflective Skills and Thoughtful ActionJukka HusuBoys and Reading: An Unfortunate Relationship?Wassilis KassisWhen Teaching Becomes a Conversation: a ’self-co-study’ on a co-teaching experience in IsraelRuth MansurSupporting Diagnostic Competence in Medicine by Case-Based Learning with ErroneousExamples and Elaborated Feedback: Two Empirical StudiesRobin Stark“What is childhood all about?”: Preservice Teachers’ Constructions of ChildhoodSofia AvgitidouPhenomenological Reflectivity with TeachersLuigina MortariThe Relationship between Organizational Social Capital and Job Satisfaction,Innovative Capacity, and Absenteeism in Dutch Primary SchoolsNienke MoolenaarTeachers and Principals (Dis)agree: Differences in Perceptions of Transformational Leadershipin Relation to Organizational FunctioningEffective civic education in Europe. Testing an educational effectiveness model for explainingstudents’ achievement in civic and citizenship educationNienke MoolenaarMaria Magdalena Isac20

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEUps and Downsin the Review ProcessAt the International Programme Committeemeeting in the end of February, a decisionas to which proposals will be acceptedfor the conference was finally made. Accordingto the conference website, the acceptancerate was 81% (after correction forformat changes). The acceptance rates relatedto the various conference formats wereas follows: round tables 95%, posters 83%;panel discussions 81%; symposia 66%; individualpapers 56%; workshops 40%; ITdemonstrations 25%.The deadline for proposals was 31 October2008. After this date a large amount ofreviewers have been busy scrutinizing allthe submissions. This means, depending onthe type of research report and format, eachproposal has been reviewed at least twice.Some proposals have been scrutinized athird time. In addition, some proposals underwentthe review process several times.For example, if the paper in question originallywas included in a symposium, andthe symposium as a whole was rejected inthe review process, then the paper was reviewedas an individual paper as well.The outcomes from the review processwere distributed to the first authors, symposiumorganizers, and others, in the end ofFebruary or beginning of March. However,it appears as if, due to technical errors, someaddressees received feedback informationthat were difficult to read and thereforedifficult to comprehend. If you are amongthose addressees, you will find some clarificationsat the conference website (www.earli2009.org/nqcontent.cfm?a_id=458).According to the conference organizers,all symposia were accepted when the generalsymposium score was 70 or above.However, the general symposium scorewas not enough. In addition, if the symposiumas a whole was to be accepted, all papersthat were included in the symposiummust score 60 or more. In case the symposiumas a whole was rejected, the involvedpapers were reviewed a second time as individualcontributions.To be accepted, individual papers neededto score 65 or more, and posters needed toscore 60 or more. In case proposed papersor posters scored less, the contributionswere reviewed as round tables. Round tablesession contributions were accepted ifthey scored 55 or more. All in all, the reviewprocess resulted in more than 1,000accepted individual presentations and almost170 accepted symposia.• What do you think about the reviewprocess as a whole? The question is posedto the SIG 13 joint coordinator Jean-LucPatry, who answers:“EARLI as well as the reviewers putmuch effort into the selection process,which is quite positive since this contributesto enhancing the quality of the contributionsat the conference. One can imaginethe work that all the reviewers had to dogiven the huge amount of proposals whichall have to be reviewed by several peers. Itmust also be noted that the reviewers hadtwo texts of each presentation, a summaryof maximally 300 words and an extendedsummary of maximally 1000 words. This ismore than is available in many other contexts.Nevertheless, it is not possible to sayeverything that one would like to say evenin 1000 words, and this is particularly problematicif one does not know on what issuesthe reviewers will focus. Some may criticizethe methods part for being too short(and reject a paper on this reason), whileothers say this part is too long, and spaceshould better be invested in the discussionand conclusion. When writing the summaries,one has to imagine the reviewers’ priorities.This is easier in mainstream topics21

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEwith particular traditions, it is much harderif innovative research is to be presented.So I guess that the current review processfurthers conservative research and inhibitsinnovations.”So far I have reported some of the generaloutcomes from the review process. However,when breaking down the results fromthis process, and with special focus on theoutcomes directly related to SIG 13, the situationbecomes different. The acceptancerate for SIG 13 related contributions was noteven close to the average, which was 81%.SIG 13 was actually the least successful SIGin the entire review process. Only 40% 1 ofthe proposed SIG 13 symposia were acceptedby the conference, and more than 40% 1of the proposed SIG 13 related papers wererejected. In comparison with other SIGs,these outcomes place SIG 13 at the final position(Figure 1 2 ). Furthermore, SIG 13 wasleft far behind by the other SIGs. There is anevident gap between SIG 13 and the SIG atthe position directly above (Figure 1 2 ).• How do you comment these outcomes?Jean-Luc answers:“This is certainly a disappointing result.We can speculate about its reasons. Let meaddress two hypotheses:1) The topics addressed by the SIGrelatedproposals are not of high interestin the EARLI community: Moral anddemocratic education are marginal in learningand instruction research, and one canspeculate that papers dealing with such is-Figure 1Accepted Papers and Symposia per SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGTotal – All SIGsAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGSIG 13 Moral & Democcratic EducationPercentage accepted symposia50%Percentage accepted papers100%22

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEsues are rejected more easily than those onmainstream topics. I do not want to insinuatethat the reviewers consciously rejectnon-mainstream papers. We do not knowhow the reviewers were chosen, and it isappropriate not to know them, so there isno way to judge this hypothesis.2) The papers that were submitted wereof lower quality than those related to otherSIGs. This is possible. However, it is impossibleto test this hypothesis, too, sincewe have no access to other submissions,whether accepted or rejected, nor to thereviewers’ comments. Nevertheless, onecan assume that most reviewers focus onmethodical issues, which means that themethods used in SIG 13 proposals are injeopardy. Let us assume this is the case.There might be good reasons for that (andI discuss this issue more in detail in theintroduction to our ’future and vision’presentation in Amsterdam, see page 26).In any case the outcomes of the reviewprocedures should be a challenge for us toprovide papers with better quality particularlywith respect to methodical issues.We will have to discuss how this can beperformed within the SIG, and the speculationsabove may help us to do so.”However, even if SIG 13 gained the lessgratifying placement in Figure 1, our communityhad a fairly high ratio between submittedsymposia and papers (Figure 2 2 ).This means that we submitted a large portionof symposia in comparison with proposedSIG 13 related papers. In the conferenceorganizer’s information to the SIG coordinators,it is suggested that the ratio betweenFigure 2Ratio between Submitted Symposia and Papers per SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGSIG 13 Moral & Democratic EducationAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIG0.15Ratio: number of symposia per number of papers0.3023

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEsubmitted symposia and papers can bean indicator related to the structure of theSIG. For example, it is suggested that highpercentage symposia can indicate a moreorganized SIG. Or, perhaps a large degreeof symposia is an outcome of old and longstandingSIGs?• What do you think about SIG 13 and theratio between submitted symposia andpapers? Jean-Luc again:“We have discussed the symposia inthe Florina conference, and in addition tothose decided there one more symposiumwas submitted. Maybe this is an indicatorof organization. But maybe the ratio is alsoan indicator of the issues suggested in hypothesis1 above: that few people outsideour SIG would submit proposals to topicsrelated with moral and democratic education.Many SIG members are already includedin symposia proposals and hence donot need to submit individual papers.”Despite the lack of exact figures 1, 2 , itappears as if less than ten SIG 13 symposiawere submitted to the conference (Figure3). The corresponding number of submittedSIG 13 related papers was higher, butless than 30 (Figure 3). Even these resultsrender SIG 13 a position among the fiveleast active SIGs. However, such a resultcan be rather misleading since a SIG’s activityprobably is dependent on the numberof researchers that have joined the specificSIG. Unfortunately, it seems as if the conferenceorganizer did not have access to suchinformation, and therefore, they whereunable to present the SIG’s activity relatedFigure 3Number of Submitted Papers and Symposia per SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGSIG 13 Moral & Democratic EducationAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGAnother SIGNumber of submitted symposia100Number of submitted papers20024

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEto the number of members.• How do you assess the SIG 13 activity?Does it need to be improved? And if so,how do we do it? The questions go to Jean-Luc:“It would certainly have been appropriateto put the figures you mention in relationto the number of members of the SIG. Theactivity of a SIG is always the activity of itsmembers. Whether the activities need to beimproved depends on the judgment and theparticipation of the members. The SIG 13has a Newsletter (that you are reading rightnow), it has had a successful conference lastyear in Florina (Greece) and is planning anotherone for next year, it has an award for thebest paper and so on. I think we are quite active,but it is always possible to improve. Weare happy for any suggestion and feedback.”• Finally, if we look forward, how do youthink we ought to overcome the difficultiesthat evidently affected some of thesubmitted SIG 13 contributions?“As said above in my opinion we mustput much emphasis on the quality of theproposals particularly with respect tomethods. As a SIG, we must not seek tohave an impact on the research that is donein our domain; this is in the responsibilityof the individual researcher and, in the caseof junior researchers, of his or her supervisor.However we should provide a platformfor giving and receiving feedback relatedto issues of quality, we should be willingto deal adequately with such feedback, andmaybe we should focus at least part of theJean-Luc Patry, joint coordinator of SIG13, gives some possible explanations tothe outcomes of the review process.discussions in the future SIG 13 conferenceson methodical questions.“Anna M. Tapola1Due to lack of exact figures, this is anapproximation.2Figure 1, 2 and 3 that are presented inthis article are revised versions of figuresprovided by the conference organizer.However, so far, no exact numbers havebeen reported by the organizer, andtherefore, Figure 1, 2 and 3 should onlybe accepted as descriptions of tendencies.Do you miss any previousissue of SIG 13 Newsletter?Please download the newsletter at the website:www.earli.org/special_interest_groups/moral_education25

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEThe SIG 13 Future & Vision SessionOne of the news at the upcoming conferencein Amsterdam is the Future & Vision session.The conference organizer has offered eachSIG to arrange this special format, and allFuture & Vision sessions are scheduledto Saturday’s lunchtime (29 August). Thepurpose of this text is to explain a bit aboutthe background, our preparations andintentions (see also our extended summaryat page 37). We also hope this informationwill encourage you to join us at SIG 13Future & Vision session.The main presentation addresses thequestion of moral education in today’sschool. Although it is recognized asimportant, it is not practiced, and a seriesof potential reasons are given for that.However, to each of these reasons counterargumentsare presented, and issues forfurther research are presented.We think that reflections on topics ofthis kind are particularly relevant in thepresent time. The main goal of moraleducation is not to enhance knowledgein the moral domain; instead, it focuseson attitudes, belief systems, judgmentsand argumentations. However, due to thepolitical impact of the international andnational large-scale studies like TIMSS,PISA etc., the educational systems haveconcentrated their interest on content issueslike mathematics, science, literacy. Thesame holds, it seems, also to the researchcommunity: Apparently it is easier toget grant proposals, papers published inreviewed journals, and papers acceptedin conferences if the mainstream trend toconcentrate on cognitive learning, learningof knowledge and content, is followed. Therejection rates of submitted papers andsymposia of SIG 13 themes for the EARLI2009 conference in Amsterdam – which isthe highest of all SIGs (please see page 21) –can be an indicator of the problem.Of course the quality of the papers mayhave been lower than in other SIGs, wecannot judge this. But it seems easier toreject a paper on moral education than oncognitive learning. Possibly it is also easierto do research that, according to the classicalcriteria of validity, is regarded as “good”. Itis difficult to do moral education researchin a laboratory, with tight control andrandom assignment. Easy-to-do assessmentinstruments are not available for manyresearch questions in our domain, and theimpact of interventions cannot be assumedto follow immediately after teaching.We need to address such questions, andthe presentation is an attempt to do so withthe aim to sketch issues of the future ofthe field. The trend is, it seems, not quitefavorable and we need to do somethingabout it. Some relevant concepts will besuggested, but we invite all members ofSIG 13 to suggest concrete actions that canbe done. You can do that either by sendingemails with the proposition to one or both ofthe coordinators (this proposition will thenbe included in the symposium) or at least byparticipating in the session and contributingyour suggestion there - we hope for anintense and sustainable discussion.You are cordially invited to come toour Future & Vision session. Please makenecessary preparations and bring all yourgood ideas to the meeting. This will bean excellent opportunity to discuss newinitiatives, international collaborationswithin SIG 13, and other brave ideas. Youare most welcome!Cees KlaassenJoint coordinatorJean-Luc PatryJoint coordinator26

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCETitle of InvitedSymposium:Organizers:Chair:Discussant:Included papers:The Relationship Between Teaching Subject Matter andValues EducationJean-Luc PatryUniversity of Salzburg, AustriaJean-Luc PatryDimitris PnevmatikosUniversity of Western Macedonia, Greece,The Relationship Between Teaching Subject Matterand Values Education(Angela Gastager, Alfred Weinberger & Jean-Luc Patry)Discussing Moral Values in History Class(Jaap Schuitema & Wiel Veugelers)Biology, Democracy, and Morality – An IntegrativeApproach in Teacher Education(Anna M. Tapola & Lena Fritzén)Beyond Language, Mathematics, and Science – theExample of the Inclusion of Human Rights Education intothe Teaching of Language, Mathematics and Science asa Key Success Factor for Human Rights Education(Peter G. Kirchschlaeger)ABSTRACTTeachers often argue that they cannot do moral and democratic education, among othersbecause of lack of time given the pressure by the content they have to teach and by thecurriculum. However, moral education is not necessarily a competitor for subject matterteaching, but rather both can be combined or at least put in relation to each other. Thecontributions within this symposium will analyze the relationship between teaching subjectmatter like history, language, mathematics, and science and doing moral and valueseducation. It is shown, among others, that moral educa tion does not inhibit content knowledgeacquisition, but rather that it can foster it if used appropriately.27

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCETitle of Symposium:Title of Paper:Authors:Affiliations:The Relationship Between Teaching Subject Matter andValues EducationTeamwork in an Innovative Learning Environment atSchool: High Achievers vs. Low AchieversAngela Gastager*Alfred Weinberger**& Jean-Luc Patry** University of Salzburg, Austria** College of Education of the Diocese in LinzABSTRACTThe efficiency of the teaching and learning processes within an implemented teamworkenvironment combined with the didactical model VaKE (Values and Knowledge Education)is investigated. VaKE is a constructivist approach that combines values educationwith knowledge acquisition using cooperative learning environments. The learning processstarts with a dilemma consisting of a values problem (moral dilemma) and a specificcontent problem. The problem mostly provokes irritation so that the students are motivatedand interested in solving the problem. The problem solving steps follow a specific constructivistlearning algorithm including a so-called viability check. Different possibilitiesand information for central problem solving are discussed, and the students test the developedsolutions stepwise in the viability check. They exchange their acquired knowledge(content viability check) and discuss their moral arguments (moral viability check).The assumption is that the introduction of specific teamwork in a VaKE-learningenvironment has a stronger impact on the students’ attitudes and experiences than a learningenvironment without teamwork. It is also supposed that lower ability students learnmore successfully. The following hypotheses are tested: (1) The students’ attitudes aboutclimate, emotions, socio-moral atmosphere, working and group process, reliability, goalsand success in teamwork, and total judgement increase in both groups. (2) Experimentalgroup students become more positive in respect to group integration, loyalty, confrontationwith difficulties, and socio-moral atmosphere, compared with control group. (3) Studentsof the experimental group gain more knowledge, particularly knowledge that ismore applicable, than control group students. (4) Transfer effects occur. Instruments arequestionnaires (for testing hypothesis 1), the lesson-interruption-method (hypothesis 2),and informal performance tests for school and content analyses of students’ essays (hypotheses3 and 4). A cross-over-design with a sample of 70 students on the 5th grade level isused. Results will be presented and critically discussed.EXTENDED SUMMARYThe study was performed within the Scientific Project TeamWork (SPTW) in learning(e.g. Gastager 2008; Gastager & Patry 2005). The efficiency of the teaching and learningprocess within an implemented teamwork environment combined with the didactical28

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEmodel VaKE (Values and Knowledge Education) is investigated in a cooperative learningenvironment. VaKE is a constructivist teaching-learning model that combines valueseducation with knowledge acquisition according to the theory of Piaget (e.g. 1972). It isalso strongly influenced by v. Glasersfeld’s framework (e.g., 1997). The starting point forthe constructivist learning process is a dilemma which consists in both a values problem(moral dilemma) and a specific content problem. The problem usually provokes anirritation so that the students are motivated and interested in solving the problem; forthis a cooperative learning setting is provided. The process regarding different problemsolving steps follows the principles of a constructivist learning algorithm and includesthe so-called viability checks (Patry 2007). Different possibilities and information to solvethe problem are discussed, and the students test the developed solutions stepwise andexchange the knowledge they have acquired.Previous research showed that in VaKE learning environments that are low in structureprovided by the teacher students of higher ability tend to be successful in acquiring newknowledge elements but low abilities students seem to be inhibited in learning (Weinberger2006). Other studies (Huber A. 2007; Williams 2007) showed that students withlow abilities benefit particularly from teamwork if they are interacting with high abilitystudents (Slavin 1983). Furthermore teamwork fosters interpersonal relationships and theacceptance of differences in knowledge acquisition (Huber 2003; Johnson & Johnson 1990)and hence supports a positive socio-moral atmosphere between the students.VaKE is characterized by a strong cooperative learning environment including stepswith collective learning of the whole class (e.g. dilemma discussion) and group work (e.g.collecting further information). One can distinguish group work and team work; while ingroup work situations the group members learn independently with individual goals, inteamwork the members work together and with other teams of the class towards personal,team, and class goals. In teamwork they understand that these goals are accomplishedbest by mutual support. Furthermore teamwork members have different skills and knowledge,and each member can contribute to the teams’ success, resulting in regular viabilitychecks.The assumption is that the introduction of specific teamwork in a VaKE learning environmentchanges the attitudes and the experiences of all students in comparison witha learning environment without teamwork (see Gastager & Weinberger in press). It isalso supposed that lower ability students learn more successfully. The following hypothesesare tested: (1) The students’ attitudes about classroom climate, emotions, sociomoralatmosphere, working and group processes, reliability, goals and success in teamworkand total judgement increase in both the experimental (teamwork is implemented)and the control group (where teamwork is not implemented). (2) Experimental groupstudents become more positive with respect to group integration, loyalty, confrontationwith difficulties and the socio-moral atmosphere. (3) Low ability students of the experimentalgroup benefit more from teamwork than high ability students. (4) The studentsof the experimental group gain more knowledge that is applicable, than students of thecontrol group. (5) Transfer effects occur. Instruments in the study are questionnaires (fortesting hypothesis 1), the lesson interruption method (hypothesis 2) and informal performancetests and content analyses of students’ essays (hypotheses 3 and 4). The investigateddimensions are tested in a cross-over-design with a sample of 70 fifth-grade students.Results will be presented and critically discussed.29

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEReferencesGastager, A. 2008. Teamwork von Studierenden: zur Wirksamkeit einer kooperativenLernumgebung im Studium. In: F. Eder, & G. Hörl (Hg.), Gerechtigkeit undEffizienz im Bildungswesen. Unterricht, Schulentwicklung und LehrerInnenbildungals professionelle Handlungsfelder. Wien: LIT, 113 – 129.Gastager, A., & Weinberger, A. in press. Zur Wirksamkeit von Teamwork in einerinnovativen Lernumgebung im Schulunterricht. About the effectiveness ofTeamwork in an innovative learning environment at school. To be published inZeitschrift für Empirische Pädagogik.Gastager, A. & Patry, J.-L. 2005. Ist der „Teamwork-Fragebogen“ valide? DieStrukturlege-Matrizen-Analyse-Technik als Vermittlerin zwischen Idiographieund Nomothetik. In Salzburger Beiträge zur Erziehungswissenschaft, 1/2, 45 - 58.Glasersfeld, E. von 1997. Radikaler Konstruktivismus. Ideen, Ergebnisse, Probleme.Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.Huber, A.A. 2007. Wechselseitiges Lehren und Lernen (WELL) als spezielle FormKooperativen Lernens. Berlin: Logos.Huber, G.L. 2003. Processes of decision-making in small learning groups. Learning andInstruction, 13, 255–269.Slavin, R. 1983. When does cooperative learning increase student achievement?Psychological Bulletin, 94(3), 429-445.Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. 1990. Social Skills for Successful Group Work,Educational Leadership , 47/4, 29-33.Patry, J.-L. 2007: Konstruktivistisches E-Teaching als Ermöglichung vonViabilitäts-ChecksEin Anwendungsbeispiel. Salzburger Beiträge zur Erziehungswissenschaft, 11, 15-31.http://www.uni-salzburg.at/pls/portal/docs/1/553921.PDF (October 28, 2008).Piaget, J. 1972. The principles of genetic epistemology. London: Routledge & Kegan.Weinberger, A. 2006. Kombination von Werterziehung und Wissenserwerb. Hamburg:Verlag Dr. Kovac.Williams, R. B. 2007. Cooperative Learning: A Standard for High Achievement.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.30

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCETitle of Symposium:Title of Paper:Authors:Affiliation:The Relationship Between Teaching Subject Matterand Values EducationDiscussing Moral Values in History ClassJaap Schuitema & Wiel VeugelersUniversity of Amsterdam, NetherlandsABSTRACTHistory is one of the disciplines where there has been a lively debate on whether andhow history education can contribute to citizenship education. On the one hand, historyis considered to be a subject with opportunities for citizenship education. On the otherhand, history as a continuation of citizenship education could potentially harm theobjectives of history education, such as historical reasoning. We will present a study inwhich the effectiveness was investigated of two curriculum units for citizenship educationin secondary history classes. Stimulating dialogue in the classroom was a centralelement in both units. Students reflected on moral values and multiple perspectives representedin the subject matter and discussed what moral values they themselves consideredto be important. The two curriculum units differed in the balance between groupwork and whole class teaching. The effectiveness of both curriculum units was comparedwith regular history classes using a quasi- experimental design. 482 students participatedin the study. We investigated the effects on students’ ability to take moral values andmultiple perspectives into account when justifying their opinion on a moral issue as wellas their ability to reasoning historically. The results of the study indicate that a dialogicapproach to citizenship education as an integral part of history classes helps studentsto form a more profound opinion about moral issues in the subject matter. The resultsfurther show that group work is a more effective method to enhance students’ abilitiesto justify an opinion than whole class teaching. Moreover, our findings suggest that citizenshipeducation in the history class does not have to be detrimental to the objectivesparticular to history teaching. Involving the opinions of students on moral issues in thesubject matter can therefore make a valuable contribution to history education.31

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCETitle of Symposium:Title of Paper:Authors:Affiliations:The Relationship Between Teaching Subject Matterand Values EducationBiology, Democracy, and Morality – An IntegrativeApproach in Teacher EducationAnna M. Tapola* & Lena Fritzén*** University of Kalmar, Sweden** Vaxjo University, SwedenABSTRACTCan an integrative approach to teaching and learning promote broader social and societalaspects in biology education? At the same time; can an integrative approach facilitatemoral and democratic education in teacher training by utilising biology subject matter?These are the key questions addressed in this paper. Integrative approach in this contextmeans that biology subject matter instruction is fertilized with more traditional approachon learning basic skills within teacher education. In this way integrative approach means anew whole, where moral and democratic aspects are highlighted. The question is whethertraditional subject matter – in this case genetic diversity and gene technology – have legitimacyas levers in discussions on moral and democratic issues.Our interpretation of integrative approach in education is also related to the schoolsdouble assignment – to teach subject matter and the assignment to foster. The integrativeapproach is also an attempt to bridge the gap between different notions concerningthe continental concept Didaktik. However, the integrative approach also has bearing onBildung, contemporary socio-scientific issues, and how to obtain sustainable developmentin society. These concepts will be further clarified and contextualised in the paper.In order to be able to assess and scrutinise the integrative approach, we will includean analysis of a training sequence from Swedish teacher education. The data consist ofevaluations (questionnaires) from a compulsory exercise (n=73). The questionnaires haveundergone bivariate analysis, and Spearman’s rho is used as statistical instrument for determiningrank correlation and statistical significance.The findings show a strong significant support for the training sequence. However, theresults are further problematised in the paper. This leads to a suggested model of theintegrative approach – The Trialectic Bowl. The model includes the three key factors: emancipatoryknowledge interest, the double assignment, and Bildung.EXTENDED SUMMARYThe AimThis study aims to discuss whether biological subject matter contains an inherent democraticpotential, and to sort out whether an integrative approach can facilitate its utilization.Another issue is whether life scientific subject matter has legitimacy within teachereducation, for example as a sort of lever in moral and democratic education.32

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEThe ProblemEver since the 1980s there has been an unfortunate and pronounced separation betweensubject-related instruction and more traditional outlooks on learning and instruction thatare common in general pedagogy in Sweden and elsewhere. When Marton (1986a, 1986b)re-invented Didaktik in Sweden, he also contributed a division between referring to generallearning and instruction in pedagogy, and its counterpart linked to subject matterinstruction. This demarcation has strongly dominated some research areas, which is unfortunatebecause of its biased consequences.This has led to radical consequences for research on moral and democratic education, aswell as science education research and other scholarly areas. In those cases where an ambitionhas existed to integrate theoretical development within a specific subject, it has almostexclusively involved different aspects of learning, and then mostly the individual pupil’slearning of various central concepts within the subject (see for example Vosniadou, 1994).In our understanding, this implies that constructivist influences have been pronounced,and still are significant. As such, there is an underlying critique in our position. However,this should not be understood our singling out constructivists and their research duringthe past 20 years. Quite the opposite. These research outcomes have in many cases beenmost important. However, if the research community wishes to strive for further problematisationof the subject’s potential in a wider societal sense, paying particular attention tomore comprehensive questions about morality and fundamental democratic values, thanthe body of scholarly works need to be complemented with alternative ontologies andepistemological approaches. This paper is an attempt to remedy the lack of alternativestrategies.Theoretical and Educational SignificanceIntegrative approach has profound support from Swedish regulatory documents. Otherdemocracies probably have similar official documents and laws. The integrative approachis also significantly related to the school’s double assignment: to communicate knowledgeabout subject matter and to contribute to the democratic upbringing of the learners. Thedouble assignment is frequently referred to in Swedish teacher education and teacherpractices. Other countries probably have significant expressions with similar meaning.For example, the Dutch equivalent could be said to be what Veugelers and Vedder (2003)call ‘the pedagogical mission of the schools’ or ‘the pedagogical mission of education’. Aparallel discussion can be found in Oser’s review (1994). However, he prefers to discussthe issues in terms of ’effectiveness’ and ’professional responsibility’.Various integrative teaching methods, strategies, and instructions have also been underscientific scrutiny for decades (see for example Atkinson & Crowe, 2006; Gadotti &McLaren, 1996; Patry, Weyringer & Weinberger, 2007). Our version of integrative approachis grounded in critical theory and dialectics. In this text, the term integrative is used to describean approach that is – in a traditional sense – neither pure subject-related instruction,nor general learning and instruction, nor pure pedagogy. The idea is to discuss whetheran integrative approach can – in a dialectical view – create a new whole where the school’sdouble assignment can counteract the established division referred to above.Research designA quantitative research design was applied in this study. In order to be able to assess33

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEand scrutinise the integrative approach, we include an analysis of a training sequencefrom Swedish teacher education. The data consisted of preservice teachers’ evaluations(questionnaires) from a compulsory exercise (n=73). The randomised sample has undergonebivariate analysis, and Spearman’s rho was used as statistical instrument for determiningrank correlation and statistical significance. Controls were used extensively in orderto secure sufficient reliability.FindingsThe findings show a strong significant support for the training sequence. Based on the resultswe have reason to conclude that the preservice teachers have a pronounced integrativeattitude toward the double assignment that the exercise was based on. For example,the students reported seeing clear relationships between genetics, gene technology, anddemocracy. The preservice teachers also reported having developed their knowledge ofbiology, as well as having practiced democracy and discussed intricate societal issues,when they carried out the exercise. This suggests that the exercise is likely to be successfulin the task of simultaneously communicating subject matter and contributing to thelearners’ moral and democratic upbringing. However, the results also suggest that withinthe subject of biology there is a democratic potential that can serve as a lever in moraland democratic education. Thus, certain aspects of life-scientific subject matter can havea legitimate part to play in teacher education. However, the results are further problematisedin the paper. This leads to a suggested model of the integrative approach – TheTrialectic Bowl. The model includes the three key factors: emancipatory knowledge interest,the double assignment, and Bildung. We will further clarify how the model functionsat the conference.ReferencesAtkinson, J & Crowe, M. (Eds) (2006). Interdisciplinary Research: Diverse Approaches inScience, Technology, Health and Society. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Gadotti, M. & McLaren, P. (1996). Pedagogy of Praxis. A Dialectical Philosophy of Education.New York: State University of New York Press.Marton, F. (1986a). Fackdidaktik Vol. 1. Principiella överväganden. Yrkesförberedande ämnen.Lund: Studentlitteratur.Marton, F. (1986b). Fackdidaktik. Vol. 3, Matematik, naturorienterande ämnen. Lund:Studentlitteratur.Oser, F. K. (1994). Moral perspectives on teaching. Review of Research in Education, 20, 57-127.Patry, J-L, Weyringer, S. & Weinberger, A. (2007). Combining Values and KnowledgeEducation. In D. N. Aspin & J. D. Chapman (Eds). Values Education and LifelongLearning. Springer.Veugelers, W. & Vedder, P. (2003). Values in Teaching. Teachers and Teaching, 9, 377–389.Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change.Learning and Instruction, 4, 45-69.34

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCETitle of Symposium:Title of Paper:Author:Affiliation:The Relationship Between Teaching Subject Matterand Values EducationBeyond Language, Mathematics, and Science – theExample of the Inclusion of Human Rights Education intothe Teaching of Language, Mathematics and Science asa Key Success Factor for Human Rights EducationPeter G. KirchschlaegerTeacher Training University of Central Switzerland,SwitzerlandABSTRACTMoral education faces often the difficulty of finding its place within teaching programs.This is due to lack of time and to the strong competition between different disciplines. Moraleducation is more successful when it is able to identify the opportunities of content-basedlinks between the teaching subject matter and moral and democratic issues. The exampleof the inclusion of human rights education into the teaching of language, mathematics,and science can show firstly what these kinds of links can look like and what their limitsare. Secondly, these examples give an understanding of the reciprocal benefits for thesubject matter and for human rights education. They demonstrate an example of moraland democratic education within the teaching of language, mathematics, and science thatgoes beyond teaching mere subject matter. Thirdly, the discussion of this way of teachingsubject matter beyond mere language, mathematics, and science leads to the discoverythat the inclusion of human rights education in subject matter teaching corresponds moreauthentically to its own idea and goals.EXTENDED SUMMARYMoral education often faces the difficulty of finding its place within teaching programsand curricula. This is due to lack of time and the strong competition between differentdisciplines. Moral education is more successful when it is able to identify the opportunitiesof content-based links between the teaching of specific subject matter and moral anddemocratic issues.The example of the inclusion of human rights education into the teaching of language,mathematics, and science can show firstly what these kinds of links can look like andwhat their limits are. Human rights education can be seen as the teaching about (furtheringknowledge), with (enabling critical reflection), and for (corresponding action) humanrights. E. g. within the context of the teaching of language, human rights education canbe introduced by examples such as the right to freedom of opinion and expression. Theinclusion of human rights education into the teaching of mathematics can begin with theconnection between ”civil mathematics” and its support for the realization of the ideaof the Enlightenment to release people of their inability to speak for themselves and theelement of ”empowerment” in human rights education. The Kantian philosophy with itssingle human right (the right to freedom) is one of the fundaments of the idea of human35

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCErights. Human rights education is a part of education guaranteed by the right to education(see article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: “Education shall be directedto the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect forhuman rights and fundamental freedoms.”). Through human rights education studentsare empowered to claim their own rights, to respect the rights of the others and to claimin solidarity the rights of others. Human rights education can contribute to the teachingof science by reflecting on the goals and limits of science, discussing the right to freedomof opinion and expression as constituent for scientific discourse, and discovering therelevance of scientific progress for the furthering of the implementation of human rights.Secondly, these examples give an understanding of the reciprocal benefits for differentsubject matter and for human rights education. They are an example of moral and democraticeducation within the teaching of language, mathematics, and science that goesbeyond teaching mere subject matter. In this way, moral and democratic education willnot be misunderstood as an isolated subject which can be taught, learned, and tested andwhich will then be followed by another subject. Instead, it will be recognized as an aspectwhich accompanies the process of learning beyond the boundaries of individual subjects.It will play the role of a leitmotif for teaching of subject matter. Human rights educationleads to positive results when students learn about human rights in a learning environmentthat models human rights.Thirdly, the discussion of this way of teaching subject matter beyond mere language,mathematics, and science leads to the discovery that the inclusion of human rights educationin subject matter teaching corresponds more authentically to its own idea and goals.In this case, human rights education has its starting point in the content of the teaching oflanguage, mathematics, or science. Therefore it takes very seriously one of the principlesof human rights education, namely, to start in the concrete context of its addressees andfrom the perspective of their real-life experience. It begins in the middle of the context ofthe students, in their context of learning language, mathematics, or science. Human rightseducation will thus find a way, thanks to these content-based links between subject matterand moral and democratic issues, to introduce not only the knowledge about humanrights, but also attitudes, values, and responsibility alongside learning different subjectmatters.36

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCETitle of the Future& Vision Session:Authors:Affiliations:New Trends in Morality, Learning and Moral EducationCees Klaassen* & Jean-Luc Patry*** Radboud University Nijmegen, Netherlands** University of Salzburg, AustriaABSTRACTIn the first Future & Vision symposium of SIG 13 a discussion will be held about theimportance of morality in education, the relation between moral values and authenticlearning and the importance of moral education. In this conference for practical reasonswe concentrate ourselves on the moral domain and in the next conference we will dealwith the other related domain of this SIG, the domain of democratic education.After the presentation of the above mentioned paper a panel-discussion will be heldand an open discussion with the members of this session about the new pathways inour research field. Aim of this discussion is to explore the different ways teachers copewith moral values in educational practice. Special attention will be paid to the differentmotives and reflections teachers bring forward for their daily actions in this respect. In thepaper the question is discussed why it is necessary and fruitful for educational practice toresearch the moral values that are embedded in the educational goals, the pedagogical orreligious mission of the school, the learning process, the subject content, the interactionsand the school as a communityThe paper ends with a series of questions that are important as topics for future research.EXTENDED SUMMARYIn the present paper we aim at a discussion of morality in education and at the importanceof moral education. This is one of the two domains of the SIG 13. The other half, democraticeducation, is closely related with it, but will be dealt with in the next EARLI convention.Although morality and moral education are topics whose importance is acknowledgedamong all people involved in education, relatively little is being done in this regard inpractical teaching. For this there may be several reasons:• Teachers claim that they have not enough time to deal with these issues because they• have to satisfy the curriculum, which is increasing in size and depth of the subject• matter to be taught.• They claim that they do not want to interfere with the parents values systems that might• be different from their own and in any case differ from family to family under• postmodern influences so that it is impossible to satisfy the needs of all parents and their• children simultaneously.• They often also claim that everyone should have his or her own values and that it is not• justified to try to change these values (relativistic position).• Further, they say that they think it very difficult to teach about values and do not have37

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCE• an appropriate training in dealing with values issues.• Some teachers say that they cannot bring forward the courage to go into value• communication with students.• According to most of the teachers there are too many students in their classes so that• they cannot provide the individual attention that would be necessary for moral education.• And finally they say that there are separate lessons for moral education anyway, such as• religious, political and ethical subject matters, that take care of this issue so that they do• not need to do it in addition to this.To this one can oppose the following:• Any teaching and education has to do with values: Education is defined as an attempt to• achieve goals, and the definition of goals necessarily depends on values. One can argue• (rightly) that the goals are defined by curriculum; nevertheless a teacher will have• additional goals (e.g., with respect to social behavior) and will have his or her own• interpretation of the curriculum with respect to values issues. This may also be• influenced by the goals and mission of the school as an organization, particularly if the• school is devoted to a specific set of values (e.g. schools with a religious domination, or• schools devoted to a particular worldview or schools that are following a special• ‘pedagogic-didactical’ program, such as Montessori,etc.• This is closely linked with the fact that any subject matter is values laden. It is• impossible to teach a topic without communicating, openly or tacitly, certain values• about the subject matter. This holds for literary and history issues, as well as for science• and mathematics. Without being aware of it, the teacher can and will communicate• attitudes (which are values statements with respect to a particular object) about the• content of his or her teaching to his or her students.• For the optimization of learning processes it is important to offer the subject matter to• the student in the form of authentic contexts. Authentic learning tries to take into• account the real life situations of the students, their learning processes outside of the• schoolyard and the many external learning sources which ask for a transfer of school• knowledge and real-life experiences. These learning arrangements are characterized• by various social and cultural influences and bearers of several, often competing,• values. Students have to learn to discover these values embedded in the learning• process as well as in the subject content.• Education is interaction, and any social interaction has necessarily a values component:• We influence each other, and this influence requires responsibility in ‘the communities• of practice’ (Wenger) in which we participate. This is the issue of ethos. This includes,• but is not restricted to, issues of interaction among the students (e.g., intervening in• cases of mobbing among students, etc.)38

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCE• Education is always an activity within the school as a community and organization as• well as the society at large, which requires taking into account also the values that are• relevant on these levels.The relationship between teaching subject matters and doing moral and values educationis a constant problem. We propose that the SIG 13 should be devoted to providingscientific foundations for a sound teaching that takes into account both the content issuesand the values issues. This refers also to other educational domains, like families, educationalinstitutions, etc. This means that the SIG 13 understands itself as an institution thatconstantly reminds the education community of the values issues in education.In particular, we propose that the following questions be important for the future asresearch topics:• The interplay between subject matters and values in teaching;• Ethical issues in social interaction in educational settings (ethos);• The interplay of knowledge, values and experiences in authentic learning processes.• Basic research on the development of morality and on possibilities to improve it• (e.g., accelerate a positive development);• Analysis of values issues in any field of education both descriptively (what values are• effective in the educational settings, such as what goals do educators have?) and• prescriptively (how are these values justified?);• Reflection about meta-theoretical issues involving values, such as how to justify values• in education etc.These issues, particularly the latter ones, go beyond the restrictive field of moral educationbut it seems to us that they cannot be omitted if one wants to account for the fullscope of morality in education – and this is, in our opinion, one sense of SIG 13.39

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCETitle of Symposium:Organizers:Two Heads on One Body: On the Difficult Relationshipbetween the Political and the MoralFritz OserUniversity of Fribourg, SwitzerlandWiel VeugelersUniversity for Humanistics Utrecht, Netherlands,Chair:Discussant:Included papers:Horst BiedermannStanford University, USA,Klaus BeckUniversity of Mainz, GermanyAn Integrative Approach to Moral and Civic Education(Mary Koutselini)Morality and Civics: Two Powerful Domains Each Having itsOwn Basic Core Structure(Fritz Oser & Horst Biedermann)Points of Convergence between Socio-Moral Reasoning andthe Conception of Key Political Ideas(Olga Fotakopoulou & Diomidis Markoulis)Teachers between the Moral and the Political(Wiel Veugelers)ABSTRACTThis symposium focuses on the relationship between two extremely interconnected “motherstructures”, namely political thinking (and participation) on one hand and moral judgment(feelings and action) on the other. Of course both of them are to be developed in children,adolescents and young adults. But especially in education teachers can realize moraleducation without political content, and, in extremis, also political education without moralissues. Both fields have basic structures, morality as an expression of justice, care and truthfulness,politics as handling of power, creating laws and guarantying a basic liberty.The symposium elucidates new research on this topic, looking on one hand how we canfind out what connects the two fields in some forms of integrating them (Cyprus, Netherlands),but also what separates them (Greece and Switzerland). We can as a third possibilityfirst realize the one, then the other separately and finally bring the three together etc.Most important is that education is obliged to foster both in a mandatory way, for a newgeneration in Europe. Democratic education is as necessary as social behavior; and moralsensitizing processes are based on models how we can bring the two fields together. Atypical form is the political scandal; but such events are mostly not very fertile for a necessaryrespect on a positive democratic attitude. But everybody accepts: Society is one bodyand steering forces are two heads: The political and the moral.The presentations cover important relevant dimensions of this hiatus: data based developmentalaspects and the question if already children can be political and not only moral,empirical teaching aspects and the question, if we have effective correlates between politicalbeliefs and moral sensitivity and psychological/philosophical aspects that constitutesof analysis trying to answer the basic integrating force of (or apathy against) both.40

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCETitle of Symposium:Title of Paper:Author:Affiliation:Two Heads on One Body: On the Difficult Relationshipbetween the Political and the MoralAn Integrative Approach to Moral and Civic EducationMary KoutseliniUniversity of Cyprus, CyprusABSTRACTThis paper provides data from the IEA 1999 Civic Study and aims at promoting theparadigms´ discourse on how students develop their moral and civic education. Accordingto primary and secondary analysis of the IEA data, two of the most important groupsof variables defining Civic Education and development are those of Democratic valuesand Social participation, features that occur in the core of Moral Education, indicatingthat Moral education and Civic education have common principles and practices. Moraldevelopment does not entirely correspond to Civic education, but we can argue that theyhave common features, those referring to values and participation: the better the democraticvalues the more the participation of students in social actions. The term ‘values’ isused to refer to the principles and fundamental convictions which act as general guides tobehaviour, the standards by which particular actions are judged to be good and desirable(Halstead & Taylor, 2000). Thus, a first conclusion is that citizenship education as actionis strongly connected with values, which are cultivated in the home and societal politicalenvironment.The two main paradigms on Civic Education and Moral Education discourse that meansthe Positivistic/empirical paradigm and the Social critical one constitute the frameworkwithin which the IEA study results are discussed and the main questions of the Symposiumare answered.EXTENDED SUMMARYIntroductionDo Moral education and Civic education have common principles and practices? Is theMoral development part of the Civic education? Does the question “What citizen do we wantto develop” correspond to the question “What values and attitudes does a person acquire”?The answers to these questions depend on the epistemological and research traditionon which we base our discourse. Obviously there are two different and in some points oppositeparadigms that express different beliefs, values and assumptions: the positivistic/empirical paradigm and the social critical one.MethodologyThe paper provides data from the IEA 1999 research study on Civic Education and aimsat promoting the paradigms´ discourse on how students develop their moral and civiceducation.The IEA Civic Education Study (Torney-Purta et al., 2001) examined two differentaspects of political achievement: Civic knowledge and attitudes towards various aspects41

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEof democracy. Both aspects were tested with multiple-choice items. Three main domains ofresearch questions were chosen for the test and survey. Domain I was Democracy, domainII was National Identity, Regional and International Relationships, and domain III wasSocial Cohesion and Diversity. The Civic Education Study was carried out in two phases.In the first phase, researchers conducted national case studies examining the traditions,goals and conditions of civic education (Torney-Purta et al., 1999). In the second phase,samples of the grades attended by the majority of 14-year-olds, their civic educationteachers, and the principals of their schools were surveyed on civics. Over 93 thousandsstudents from 28 countries around the world participated in this study (Torney-Purta, etal., 2001).Examples of the variables defining Social participation and democratic values in the IEAstudy are the following:Good citizen is the one who:s1 participates in activities to benefit people in their community (society)s2 takes part in activities promoting human rightss3 takes part in activities to protect the environments4 helps voluntarily poor or elderly people in the communitys5 collects money for a social causes6 collects signatures for a petitions7 participates in a non-violent (peaceful) protest march or rallyDemocratic valuesd1 When everyone has the right to express their opinions freelyd2 When people demand their political and social rightd3 When citizens have the right to elect political leaders freelyThe results of a comparative study of 4 countries participating in the 1999 IEA study(Denmark (580), Finland (815), Norway (799), and Sweden (643)) are also presented(Papanastasiou & Koutselini, 2004), emphasizing the effects of democratic values onsocial actions. This secondary analysis of the data were analyzed using structural equationmodeling methodology (Heck, Larsen , & Marcoulides, 1990), which indicated that democraticvalues influence social participation of student in social actions.The paradigms´ discourseThe two main paradigms on Civic Education and Moral Education discourse that meansthe Positivistic/empirical paradigm and the Social critical one constitute the frameworkwithin which the IEA study results are discussed and the main questions of the Symposiumare answered.Results and DiscussionThe answers on the questions we put at the beginning of this paper are partly positive.Moral education and Civic education have common principles and practices. Moral developmentdoes not entirely correspond to Civic education, but we can argue that they havecommon features, those referring to values and participation.The results of the IEA study and the secondary analysis of the data of four countries42

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCE(Papanastasiou & Koutselini, 2004) indicated that the better the democratic values themore the participation of students in social actions. The term ‘values’ is used to refer to theprinciples and fundamental convictions which act as general guides to behaviour, the standardsby which particular actions are judged to be good and desirable (Halstead, & Taylor,2000). Thus, a first conclusion is that citizenship education as action is strongly connectedwith values, which are cultivated in the home and societal political environment.Heater (1990) defines five key aspects of the debate about citizenship education: identity,civil citizenship; political citizenship; social citizenship; and civic virtue. Ian Davieset al. (1999, 3) argue that “it is in the area of civic virtue that debates raise most explicitlyissues about community service and other forms of contributing actively to an immediateimprovement of social conditions”. According to Mellor and Kennedy (2003) and Hahn(1998) there is not a clear distinction between ‘democratic values’ and ‘attitudes to participationin social action’ since it might be argued that participation in social action is itself ademocratic value. Thus, social participation presupposes valuing democracy, concern forthe welfare of others, and it expresses a moral and ethical behavior.Nevertheless the results of this study indicate that a differentiated approach to citizenshipeducation is needed, because there exists also a different understanding and promotingof citizenship in different countries, as well as between people in the same country.Home political environment depends on cultures and subcultures of different groupswithin the same society and between societies. These differences of heterogeneous groupsand societies must be recognized. As Young argues (1997, 264) “Group representation bestinstitutionalizes fairness under circumstances of social oppression”.ConclusionThe above discussion leads us to the conclusion that an integrative approach to moraland civic education is worth achieving, since social participation and action presupposemoral values that are better developed in a society and not in isolation by the individual.Citizenship is also considered as a set of provisions to counter-act the negative consequencesof class or social inequality (Turner, 1993), argument that has been supported by thesocial critical paradigm.The linear internalization of values and disabling attitudes, practices, representationsand narratives can be realized only when persons do not question the systemic inherentlyordered reality. In that sense, citizenship has a subjective component: Willingness to actand real action.. As Heywood (1994: 156) put it: «Members of groups that feel alienatedfrom their state, perhaps because of social disadvantage or social discrimination, cannotproperly be thought of as ‘full citizens’».43

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCETitle of Symposium:Title of Paper:Authors:Affiliations:Two Heads on One Body: On the Difficult Relationshipbetween the Political and the MoralMorality and Civics: Two Powerful Domains Each Havingits Own Basic Core StructureFritz Oser* & Horst Biedermann*** University of Fribourg, Switzerland** Stanford University, USA,ABSTRACTAlthough the relationship between the quality of the moral judgement and their citizenshipcompetencies are not yet clearly resolved a lot of people belief that participation isthe common hinge between these two realms. Contrary to this we argue if humans usefor political issues political thinking then the outcome of a decision must be different asif they only argue morally. Therefore in this paper we hypothesize that morality and thecontent of citizenship are completely different domains and that the stimulation of a higherform of moral judgment does not change any competence profile of political thinking. Inaddition to the discussion on a conceptual basis we present empirical findings based on adouble empirical approach: (a) findings based on a quantitative study (IEA-CivEd Studyin Switzerland; n: 1270; age: 17-18) reveal no meaningful relationship between moraljudgment and political thinking respectively aspects of political identity; and (b) findingsbased on a qualitative study (Switzerland; n: 40; age: 9-21) reveal that decisions in terms ofa war-story turn out highly different depending on the criterion posed political or morally.These results do not militate against the school obligation of moral education with theobjective of development civic competencies on a democratic understanding. Rather theypoint the fact out, that if we only stimulate one of these two domains, the other one is notpositively or negatively influenced. Thus, political and civic education has to be aware ofhow and when the two domains can be brought intentionally together and how and whenthey have to be separated.EXTENDED SUMMARYTheoretical background and aimsThe gap between political and moral concepts and judgment structures continuous beingof real interest for philosophical and psychological reason. Although the relationshipbetween the quality of the moral judgement and their citizenship competencies are notyet clearly resolved educational scientists often belief that participation is the commonhinge between these two realms. Contrary to this we argue if humans use for politicalissues political thinking then the outcome of a decision must be different as if they onlyargue morally. Therefore in this paper we claim that the political judgment is a cognitivepsychological mother structure, similar to the one of morality but substantially ortho-44

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEgonal of it with its own ontogenetic path and its own hierarchy of thinking and valuepatterns. We assume that morality deals with balancing out questions of justice, care andtruthfulness whereas politics is concerned with the setting of laws, the use of power andthe warranty of freedom in respect of conditions for economics, for welfare, for health,for education and other public areas. On the basis of this assumptions we hypothesizethat morality and the content of citizenship are completely different domains and that thestimulation of a higher form of moral judgment does not change any competence profileof political thinking (e.g. knowledge, attitude, concept, action disposition, sensitivity). Inother words we propose, that (1) the political judgement has its own fundamental cognitivestructure that implies its own categories of thinking; (2) that children and adolescentsare confronted with two different core-structures of thinking, namely with politics on theone hand and morality on the other hand; and 3) that we have to separate political andmoral judgements theoretically and empirically.In keeping with the theoretical tenets the purpose of this study is to examine whethermoral judgment and political thinking are based on identical or different cognitivepsychological structures.MethodologyThe study is based on a double empirical approach: (a) based on a quantitative studywe examine whether moral judgment is correlated with political thinking (respectivelywith aspects of political identity as attitudes, concepts, knowledge, confidence, interest,contentedness etc.); and (b) on the basis of a qualitative study we analyze whether peoplewho frame a dilemma either morally or politically reach similar or different decisions.The data basis for (a) the quantitative part of the study is the standardised IEA CivicEducation II survey, in which 1270 16- to 18-years old students in Switzerland were testedwith regard to their political understanding, and questioned in relation to their politicalconceptions and attitudes (Amadeo et al. 2002; Oser & Biedermann 2003). In Switzerland,on the one hand a questionnaire on everyday experience of political participation (Biedermann2006) and on the other hand two of six stories from the DIT (Defining Issues Test)from Rest (1975) were attached to this international survey as national options.The data basis for (b) the qualitative study is the survey Development of PoliticalUnderstanding (Oser et al., 2005). In this study 40 9- to 21-years old persons in Switzerland(as mainstream, some individual people range from 22 to 60 years) have been interviewedabout their feelings, thinking, decisions and reasons referring to six stories written in theshape of dilemmas (war-story, ostracism, mayor-dilemma, island-story, private propertyand welfare and conflict of territory), each of it referring to some important politicaldimensions. In this paper we only refer to the war-story, which confronted the participantswith a serious conflict between two countries.Results and conclusionAs aforementioned the aim of the quantitative study was to examine whether moraljudgment is correlated with political thinking respectively aspects of political identity.Our main finding reveals no meaningful relationship. Consideration this finding ourhypothesis, that the moral judgment and political judgment have their own cognitivestructures and therefore their own categories of thinking, takes corroboration.With the qualitative study our efforts were to analyze what decisions are reached from45

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEpeople who frame a dilemma either morally or politically. The findings reveal that thedecisions from our participants turn out highly different in terms of the posed criterion.If they frame the war-story moral, most of them tend to decide to justify and wage a war.If the war-story is framed politically, both wage a war and avoidance of a war is decidedby the subjects. If the frame is politically and morally balanced, the participants decideto avoid a war and to enter into negotiations. Considering these findings our hypothesis,that the moral judgment and political judgment have their own cognitive structures andtherefore their own categories of thinking, takes corroboration again.These results do not conflict with the school obligation of moral education with theobjective of development civic competencies on a democratic understanding. Rather theypoint the fact out, that if we only stimulate one of these two domains, the other one isnot positively or negatively influenced; thus it must be separately stimulated with differentcontent and different behaviour goals. Concerning this matter we present differentmodels of the relationship between morality and civic contents.ReferencesAmadeo, J.-A., Torney-Purta, J., Lehmann, R., Husfeldt, V. & Nikolova, R. (2002). CivicKnowledge and Engagement: An IEA Study of Upper Secondary Students in SixteenCountries. Amsterdam: The International Association for the Evaluation ofEducational Achievement.Biedermann, H. (2006). Junge Menschen an der Schwelle politischer Mündigkeit. Partizipation:Patentrezept politischer Identitätsfindung? Münster: Waxmann.Oser, F. & Biedermann, H. (2003). Jugend ohne Politik: Ergebnisse der IEA Studie zupolitischem Wissen, Demokratieverständnis und gesellschaftlichem Engagement vonJugendlichen in der Schweiz im Vergleich mit 27 anderen Ländern. Zürich: Rüegger.Oser, F., Steinmann, S., Maiello, C., Quesel, C. & Villiger, C. (2005). Zur Entwicklung derpolitischen Kognition. Schlussbericht zum Nationalfondsprojekt. Universität Fribourg.Rest, J. R. (1975). Longitudinal study of the Defining Issues Test of moral judgment: Astrategy for analyzing developmental change. Dev. Psychol. 11, 73-748.46

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCETitle of Symposium:Title of Paper:Authors:Affiliation:Two Heads on One Body: On the Difficult Relationshipbetween the Political and the MoralPoints of Convergence between Socio-Moral Reasoningand the Conception of Key Political IdeasOlga FotakopoulouDiomidis MarkoulisAristotle University of Thessaloniki, GreeceABSTRACTThe relation between moral reasoning development and political beliefs has been a majorresearch topic in recent years. A repeated finding of relevant studies is that conventionalsocio-moral reasoning, as it is explicated in Kohlberg’s theory, is connected to conservativepolitical ideology, while postconventional reasoning is associated with more liberalpolitical orientations.The present study extends this vein of research by explicitly examining the developmentof political thinking among adolescents between twelve and eighteen years of age(assigned in two groups of 12-15 and 15-18 years), in relation to the subject’s socio- moralreasoning stage.The findings of the study do not support a linear relationship between the developmentin the two domains. At a more general level, preconventional reasoners tended to adoptan individualistic or authoritarian point of view towards the political or social phenomenawhereas conventional reasoners tended to adopt more communitarian or progressivepolitical ideas. The findings are discussed within the framework of structural theories ofsocio-moral and political reasoning development.EXTENDED SUMMARY1. AimsThe aim of this paper is to present portion of the findings of a research project regardingthe development of political thinking in Greek students. The paper represents an attemptto answer questions concerning the potential influence of socio-moral reasoning on thedevelopmental pattern of adolescents’ reasoning regarding key political concepts andsocial phenomena.2. MethodA. SampleA group of 312 students (144 male and 168 female), ranging in age from 12 to 18, participatedin the study. All participants were selected from public schools in Thessaloniki –atown of about 1.500.000 inhabitants – and the rural area. A repeated finding of relevantstudies is that conventional socio-moral reasoning, as it is explicated in Kohlberg’s theory,is connected to conservative political ideology, while postconventional reasoning is associatedwith more liberal political orientations.The present study extends this vein of research by explicitly examining the develop-47

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEment of political thinking among adolescents between twelve and eighteen years of age.The findings of the study do not support a linear relationship between the development inthe two domains. At a more general level, preconventional reasoners tended to adopt anindividualistic or authoritarian point of view towards the political or social phenomenawhereas conventional reasoners tended to adopt more communitarian or progressivepolitical ideas. The findings are discussed within the framework of structural theories ofsocio-moral and political reasoning development.B. InstrumentsParticipants were presented with three political dilemmas adapted to their age and wereasked several questions on a large number of hypothetical issues. Students – as mentioned- of the two age groups (12-15 and 15-18 years old) expressed their views on the threestories entitled: “The Mayor’s Dilemma”, “Territorial Conflict” and “The history of twocountries” (Oser, in preparation). The stories and the accompanying questions servedas cognitive stimulants for the adolescents’ political reasoning processes. The Mayor’sdilemma f.i. deals with a strike of state employed workers. They strike because theirsalaries were not paid by the city council. But according to the law the state employees areforbidden to strike. What shall the mayor do? The question is also whether a responsiblepolitician let them do against the law or give the order to the police to stop the strike. Theother dilemmas deal with other political issues.Concerning adolescents’ moral judgment development, it was assessed through FormIII of Kohlberg’s Moral Judgment Interview (Heinz’s dilemma); a written version of thequestionnaire was used.C. ProcedureParticipants of both grade levels were divided into two groups: the one where the politicaldilemmas were given in the framework of focus groups, and the other, where thepolitical stories were given in a written form in their classrooms. The Heinz’ dilemma wasadministered through a written interview to all the participants. Respondents were askedto provide reasons or justifications why a chosen course of action should be followed andwhy chosen values or norms should be upheld.3. Results & DiscussionIn the first section, we report the results that emerged from the qualitative analysesemployed for the identification of the different levels of understanding of politicalconcepts displayed by the participants. In the second section, we present the results ofthe exploration of the relationship between subject’s socio-moral reasoning and politicalreasoning development.Points of convergence between socio-moral and political reasoning were found concerningthe conception of state interference and political freedom, law, government andthe settlement of immigrants.Preconventional reasoners tended to adopt an individualistic or authoritarian point ofview towards the state, political freedom, the law, the government and the rights of immigrantswhereas conventional reasoners tended to adopt more communitarian or progressivepolitical ideas towards the above political conceptions. The findings are discussed withinthe framework of structural theories of socio-moral and political reasoning development.48

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCETitle of Symposium:Title of Paper:Author:Affiliation:Two Heads on One Body: On the Difficult Relationshipbetween the Political and the MoralTeachers between the Moral and the PoliticalWiel VeugelersUniversity for Humanistics Utrecht, NetherlandsABSTRACTNowadays in practice, educational politics and research is connection is made betweenthe moral and political. Citizenship education is extended beyond the level of thepolitical and includes the social and the interpersonal level (Oser & Veugelers, 2008).Socio- political development is combined with moral and personal identity development.In several studies we research the relationship between the moral and political. In threestudies among teachers and students in secondary education we found that teachers aremore reluctant in paying attention to the political then students want to be case (Leenders,Veugelers, De Kat, 2008a; 2008b; 2008c). In a fourth study we explore the relationshipbetween the moral and the political further in the literature and by interviews withteachers. In particular we focused on the concept of cosmopolitical citizenship. This studyshowed that teachers are aware of the political, but in their pedagogical goals they focuson the moral. In educational practice they however can avoid the political.EXTENDED SUMMARYTheoretical conceptsThe current debate on young people’s social development is imbued with the conceptof ‘citizenship’. Citizenship education may focus on transferring knowledge on democracy,its institutions and the structure of society (Cleaver, Ireland, Kerr & Lopes, 2005).Equally, the approach could be more on promoting particular social norms, or on anactive construction of moral signification (Haste, 2004). We endorse the latter approach, inwhich both the individual’s social performance and participation in society are of interest(Veugelers, 2003). Among the moral values to be developed are ‘justice’, ‘respect’, ‘autonomy’,and ‘social and moral commitment’. Citizenship is not restricted to the politicalaspect, but also relates to society as a whole, to the everyday relations between people andindividuals’ identity development (Banks, 2004). Citizenship education may also becomemore reflective, and therefore susceptible to change, by improving moral reasoning andaction (Veugelers, Derriks, De Kat, & Leenders, 2006). This paper focuses on the relationshipbetween the moral and the political.First study: National survey among teachers in secondary educationThe first study was a survey with a-select sample of Dutch schools. In each of the 150schools we selected 4 teachers. There was a response of 43% (Leenders, Veugelers, DeKat, 2008a). We focus here on the scales relates to the socio and political domain. The49

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCE‘social attitude in the global society’ scale consists of social issues such as the naturalenvironment, global life, and politics. This scale comprises 9 items and measures whetherteachers pay attention to developing skills and attitudes for different domains in globalsociety. We also developed a more politically-oriented scale comprising 4 items on politicaland democratic involvement. This ‘social change’ scale measures the teachers’ focuson attitudes such as involvement with social change, the creation of equal opportunities,equal voice in decision making, and co-operating in changing unequal power structures.Our study shows that teachers’ opinions on the importance of values as educationalgoals differ. The social domain is very important in citizenship education. Teachers paymost attention to the development of ‘social competence’ and quite a lot to curriculumoriented‘social and global issues’. Teachers only work a little on more political ‘socialchange’.Second study in three pre-university (VWO) schoolsThis survey investigates the objectives, practical application and learning outcomes ofmoral education at three pre-university (VWO) schools with differing views on citizenship.392 students, 56 teachers participated in the research. Students are more sociallyaware and politically engaged than teachers.The survey shows that both teachers and students state that they want more attentionto be given to aspects of moral education than actually happens in practice in the class.Teachers and students attach importance to pedagogical and sociopolitical objectives.However, the reported learning outcomes are invariably much lower than envisaged. Itis most surprising that students stress different aspects of the content than teachers: theirinterest is both more social, socially involved and politically engaged.Third study in three pre-vocational schoolsThis survey investigates the objectives, practical application and learning outcomes ofmoral education and citizenship education at three pre-vocational schools (15-year oldstudents in the lower tracks of secondary education). 248 students, 60 teachers. Schoolsdiffer in how sharply they focus on social and political aspects, and in how reflective theirapproaches are. The schools involved in this survey differed considerably: a mainly whiterural school, a multiethnic, medium-sized school in a medium-sized town, and a large,minority ethnic school in a major city. The more multiethnic schools are, the more teachersand students tend to be aware of the importance of these aspects. As student interviewsconfirm, the diversity already exists within the school, and the students encounter thedialogue outside the school.The students at the minority ethnic school in the major city were the most familiar withthe diversity theme. However, they do point out that their teachers tend to be reluctant toraise strongly value-laden themes. All students agree that they learn to get on with eachother in a broad sense in the playground – not in the class. Students themselves point tothe desirability of political opinion forming.Fourth study: relating the social, moral and the political in global citizenshipThe results in the first three studies about the relation of the moral, social and politicalshow that teachers are quite reluctant in the political domain more then they are in thesocial and political. We decided to do more research into teachers’ ideas and practices. We50

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEhad interviews with curriculum experts and teachers. The focus was on global citizenship.We started with a more theoretical research on concepts used. Mouffe (2005) is criticisingmoral education for neglecting political power relations, for example in the use of theconcept justice (Rawls) and cosmopolitism (Nussbaum, 1996). We made a distinction inthree types of global citizenship:• An open global citizenship (knowledge of other cultures and open attitude)• A moral global citizenship (to appreciate diversity, stimulate possibilities• and taking responsibilities)• A social political citizenship (working on more equality in social and political• power relations)This study showed that teachers are aware of the embeddings of global citizenship insocial and political power relations and know that you always take a political stance.Teachers don’t want to pay too much attention to political relations because the age ofstudents and because working with politics in schools is controversial. Teachers try tostimulate an open and critical attitude in students and to raise their moral awareness, inparticular about the connectness of people and to appreciate diversity. In the paper wewill discuss what these results mean for pedagogical theory and educational practice.Call for ContributionsSIG 13 Newsletter Issue # 4This is the EARLI 2009 Special Issue that will be publishedprior to the conference.Deadline I: 12 June 2009This deadline concerns all texts related to acceptedindividual presentations that is linked to SIG 13.Deadline II: 24 July 2009This deadline concerns all other kinds of contributions.SIG 13 Newsletter Issue # 5This issue will be launched during the autumn 2009.Deadline: 1 November 200951

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCETitle of Symposium:Organizers:Moral Motivation in Real Situations – On the Way toa Concept in a Post-Kohlbergian Era?Karin Heinrichs,Institute for Human Resource Education LMU Munich,GermanyGerhard Minnameier,Institute of Education, RWTH Aachen University,GermanyChair:Discussant:Included papers:Karin HeinrichsFritz Oser,Institute of pedagogical psychology, FribourgSwitzerlandFirst and Second Order Happy Victimisers and the Questfor Moral Motivation(Gerhard Minnameier)Immoral Motivation(Daan Brugman)Preschool Children’s Moral Emotions and ProsocialBehavior(Michaela Gummerum, Yaniv Hanoch, Monika Keller& Kimberley Schonert-Reichl)Motivated to be moral? – An Action-Based View on MoralMotivation(Karin Heinrichs)ABSTRACTMoral motivation has been an very important and lively discussed concept to bridge thegap between moral judgment and moral behavior in the tradition of Kohlberg`s moralcognitiveapproach (for example in Rest`s four component-model). In order to focus notonly on hypothetical dilemmata but on morally relevant situation in everyday life as well asin the light of the elaborated discussion about moral emotions, intuitions and reflection, theidea of moral motivation is prepared to be rediscovered. The symposium should providedifferent perspectives on moral motivation and its impact on moral behaviour. Theoreticalconcepts and analysis are explained as well as results on empirical studies concerning themotivational drivers of prosocial and antisocial behaviour in different types of morallyrelevant situations.52

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCETitle of Symposium:Title of Paper:Author:Affiliation:Moral Motivation in Real Situations – On the Way toa Concept in a Post-Kohlbergian Era?First and Second Order Happy Victimisers and the Questfor Moral MotivationGerhard MinnameierInstitute of Education, RWTH Aachen University, GermanyABSTRACTThe Happy Victimiser (HV) phenomenon is known and discussed as a kind of moralaberration typical of, roughly, 5 to 8 year-olds. It is conceived as a specific way of moralfunctioning characterised by the fact that the respective persons – in this case children –know moral rules and violate them deliberately. What’s more, they are also thought toaccept those rules, at least in principle, and so not only to fail to meet these standards, butto do that happily, feeling good about acting against them. This phenomenon is explainedby a lack of moral motivation, and it is argued that the development of moral motivationleads to the disappearance of the HV phenomenon at the end of middle childhood.This view is challenged in three ways. First, whereas the HV phenomenon is conceivedas a temporary imbalance between two strands of development, moral-cognitive andmoral-motivational, there appears to be a similar form of moral functioning in adolescenceand early adulthood. The HV therefore does not seem to be overcome by stronger moralmotivation but to recur on a higher level, for whatever reason this may be. In part one, thecharacteristics of this “second order” HV will be carved out on the basis of data from researchwith group discussions (see also Takezawa et al. 2006, Gummerum et al. (in press))and data from a survey among teacher students. In part two both first and second ordersHVs are accommodated as specific moral points of view in the sense of a fully-fledgedstages of moral reasoning within a neo-Kohlbergian framework. In part three the conceptof moral motivation is briefly discussed (for systematic treatment see Minnameier (forthcoming))and rejected as theoretically and explanatorily void.EXTENDED SUMMARYThe Happy Victimiser (HV) phenomenon is known and discussed as a kind of moralaberration typical of, roughly, 5 to 8 year-olds. It is conceived as a specific way of moralfunctioning characterised by the fact that the respective persons – in this case children –know moral rules and violate them deliberately. What’s more, they are also thought toaccept those rules, at least in principle, and so not only to fail to meet these standards, butto do that happily, feeling good about acting against them.The matter is further complicated by the way, the HV phenomenon is measured. Usuallysubjects are presented picture stories in which the protagonist violates known and commonlyaccepted moral rules (e.g. steals sweets from one of her or his mate’s pockets whenunobserved). Then subjects are asked how the protagonist feels. HVs say that the protagonistfeels good, i.e. attribute positive emotions to the protagonist.53

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEApart from the question of what is actually expressed when subjects say that the protagonistfeels good, it is puzzling that the HV phenomenon seems to be rather common.It does not seem to be a default of moral functioning that is occasionally observed, butrather a normal phase that children go through in their regular development. This raisesthe question whether “happy victimising” could not be understood as a normal form ofmoral reasoning and feeling at a certain stage of moral development. Indeed, the authorof the present paper has suggested to reconstruct the HV as a specific – and in somesense equilibrated – stage of moral thinking (Minnameier, forthcoming). Moreover, theHV phenomenon seems to reappear in a different but similar form in later years, particularlyin adolescence and young adulthood, which is not in line with the received viewthat the HV phenomenon marks a specific and short-living developmental dysfunctionthat is straightened out in the course of regular personality integration.The present paper challenges this received view in various, but interrelated aspects.First of all it is argued that the HV phenomenon is not restricted to middle childhood and– where it appears – overcome once and for all, but has at least one counterpart in lateryears. In the first step, therefore the notion and the features of a second order HV will becarved out from data from different research (recorded discussions among adolescents insecondary school education [see also Takezawa et al. 2006, Gummerum et al. (in press)]and data from a survey among teacher students).Secondly, this “resurgence” of the HV is clearly incompatible with the standard explanationthat (first order) HVs have acquired suitable moral knowledge but lack so-calledmoral motivation (see e.g. Nunner-Winkler, 2007). This would mean that moral motivation,which is thought to be acquired by all by late childhood, would or could be lostagain later on – a quite implausible assumption or at least one which is not sanctionedby any theoretical account, as far as I can see. Conversely, the HV seems much betteraccommodated as a specific moral point of view in the sense of a fully-fledged stage ofmoral reasoning. This will be explicated for both first and second order HVs within a neo-Kohlbergian framework.Thirdly, the very notion of moral motivation and its purported relation to moral reasoningwill be challenged and refuted. Moral motivation in the sense understood by Rest (1984)Kohlberg and Candee (1984)) and in the context of the HV phenomenon is understood asthe inclination to decide for the moral alternative and against other non-moral motives.However, such a decision appears to be a question of moral reasoning itself, and thereforeit is hard to see, how moral motivation can be conceived of as a psychological entitydistinct and separate from moral reasoning as such.Apart from this difficulty inherent in the notion of moral motivation, there is also theproblem that the purported lack of moral motivation implies that people quite delibera-telydo what they themselves think is wrong from their moral point of view. Hencethey are supposed to be in an unequilibrated cognitive state, since there seems to be agap between their moral reasoning and their action which they themselves ought to feel.Hence, the HV should be unhappy, not happy. This practical inconsistency and theoreticaltension is discussed in the context of the philosophical discussion about moral internalismand moral externalism. For internalists, moral motivation belongs to and is inherent inmoral principles. Such a position will be proposed and defended. As a result it is arguedthat the notion is theoretically void and practically useless since it is, e.g., not necessary toaccount for the HV phenomenon.54

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEReferencesTakezawa, M., Gummerum, M., & Keller, M. (2006): A stage for the rational tail of theemotional dog: Roles of moral reasoning in group decision making. Journal ofEconomic Psychology, 27, pp. 117-139.Gummerum, M., Keller, M. Takezawa, M. & Mata, J. (in press): To give or not to give:Children’s and adolescents’ sharing and moral negotiations in economic decisionsituations. Child development.Minnameier, G. (forthcoming). The Problem of Moral Motivation and the HappyVictimizer Phenomenon: Killing two birds with one stone. (To appear in a specialissue of the Journal of New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development.)Rest, J. R. (1984). The major components of morality. In W. M. Kurtinez & J. L. Gewirtz(Eds.), Morality, moral behavior, and moral development (pp. 24-38). New York: Wiley.Kohlberg, L., & Candee, D. (1984). The relationship of moral judgment to moral action.In W. M. Kurtines & G. L. Gewirtz (Eds.), Morality, moral behavior, and moraldevelopment (pp. 52-73). New York: Wiley.Nunner-Winkler, G. (2007). Development of moral motivation from childhood to earlyadulthood. Journal of Moral Education, 36, pp. 399-414.55

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCETitle of Symposium:Title of Paper:Author:Affiliation:Moral Motivation in Real Situations – On the Way toa Concept in a Post-Kohlbergian Era?Immoral MotivationDaan BrugmanDepartment of Developmental Psychology, UtrechtNetherlandsABSTRACTTheories on moral cognition have proposed several processes to bridge the gap betweenmoral judgment and moral behaviour. These theories suggest that moral judgment is prosocial,but that it may be hard to behave accordingly due to situational and/or personalcharacteristics. Personal characteristics that empirically have been found to mediate ormoderate the relationship between moral judgment and antisocial behaviour includeself-serving cognitive distortions and moral self esteem. Self-centeredness is viewed asa primary cognitive distortion that functions as the motivational source for antisocialbehaviour. Blaming others, minimizing/mislabeling and assuming the worst are secondarycognitive distortions that neutralize feelings of guilt and blame to protect self-esteem.In this contribution we will analyze the relationship between moral judgment and antisocialbehaviour in several samples of delinquent and non-delinquent adolescents, takinginto account both self-centeredness, secondary self-serving cognitive distortions andmoral self esteem.EXTENDED SUMMARYIntroductionAccording to social-cognitive theories, people act upon their interpretation of socialevents. Antisocial behaviour is based on deficiencies in interpreting these events, i.e.cognitive distortions. Several theories on cognitive distortions have been put forward andseveral classifications of cognitive distortions have been proposed. Cognitive distortionsare ‘inaccurate or biased ways of attending to or conferring meaning upon experiences’(Barriga et al., 2001, p. 1). Barriga et al. (2001) focus on those self-serving cognitive distortionsthat, at a high level of prevalence, facilitate aggression and other types of antisocialbehaviour.Barriga et al. (2001) distinguish between primary and secondary self-serving cognitivedistortions. Primary distortions are self-centred attitudes and beliefs (egocentric bias):one’s own views, expectations, needs, rights, immediate feelings, and desires are consideredso important that the legitimate views, expectations, etc. of others (or even one’s ownlong-term best interests) are not taken fully into account or are completely disregarded.Secondary cognitive distortions are pre- or post-transgression rationalizations that serveto neutralize conscience, potential empathy and guilt, and thereby prevent damage tothe self-image when an individual engages in antisocial behaviour. The secondary distor-56

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEtions consist of ‘blaming others’, ‘minimizing/mislabelling’, and ‘assuming the worst’.‘Blaming others’ means misattributing blame to outside sources, especially another personor group, or to a momentary aberration, or misattributing blame for one’s victimizationor other misfortune to innocent others. ‘Minimizing/ mislabelling’ is regardingantisocial behaviour as causing no real harm or as being acceptable or even admirable;alternatively, belittling or dehumanizing labels are used in referring to others. ‘Assumingthe worst’ means gratuitously attributing hostile intentions to others, seeing worst-casesscenarios as inevitable in a range of social situations, or assuming that improvement is impossiblein one’s own or others’ behaviour (Barriga et al., 2001, p. 4). The “How I Think”Questionnaire is a practical, apparently reliable and valid paper-and-pencil instrument tomeasure these four cognitive distortions (Barriga et al., 2001).Cognitive distortions mediate the relationship between moral judgment and antisocialbehaviour (Brugman, 2008). In contrast to moral judgment, the gender difference inantisocial behaviour can be explained by differences in self-serving cognitive distortions(Barriga et al., 2001; Brugman, 2008). However, the complex structure of cognitivedistortions has not been taking into account in this model nor the complex structureof antisocial behaviour. It is important to look more specifically at types of distortionsand types of antisocial behaviours. Some authors have claimed that some distortionscan be behaviour-specific or even victim-specific (Leenders & Brugman, 2005). For theeffectiveness of the treatment of antisocial behaviour is knowledge about the specificityof self-serving cognitive distortions of utmost importance. For example, the EQUIP forEducators program was constructed to reduce antisocial behaviour among adolescents byreducing their self-serving cognitive distortions (DiBiase et al., 2001). But reducing thesegeneral cognitive distortions might be less effective than reducing the types of cognitivedistortions related to types of antisocial behaviour. In this contribution we will investigatethe mediating role of cognitive distortions between moral judgment and antisocialbehaviour at a more specific level using the different types of cognitive distortions and thedifferent types of antisocial behaviour.SamplesIn our research participated 4 samples. Two samples of young adolescents (1,2); one sampleof juvenile delinquents (3); and one sample of young adults (4). These were applicants forthe police academy and the measures were used as a pilot for integrity test. In total wehave 611 subjects, 362 males and 249 females. Mean age of males was 18.0 years and offemales 16.5 years. The youngest participant was 12 years of age the oldest 47. An overwhelmingmajority of the participants (about 90 %) has a Dutch ethnic background.MeasuresThe following measures were used in this research:• How I Think (HIT) Questionnaire (Barriga et al., 2001; Nas et al., 2008) to measure• Self-Serving Cognitive Distortions (SSCD)• Moral Self Esteem. An adapted version of the Moral Self relevance scale• (Barriga et al., 2001);• Sociomoral Reflection Measure – Objective Short Form (Basinger et al., 2007): Moral• Judgment (SRMS);. This is a new written measure without moral dilemmas,• to investigate moral reasoning.57

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCE• Behavior:• Self-Reported Antisocial Behavior in sample 1,2 (12 items)• Incarcerated juvenile delinquents (sample 3) versus regular youths and adults• (sample 1,2,4)• Integrity interview (sample 4)AnalysesData were analysed using Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) for each of the cognitivedistortions and types of antisocial behaviour of the general model presented below for thefirst set of data of adolescents (N=161, c 2 (1) = 0.35, p=.56, CFI = 1.0, RMSEA = .000).Figure 1:Path analysis model moral cognitions and antisocial behavior (Brugman, 2008).References:Barriga, A. Q., Gibbs, J. C., Potter, G. B., & Liau, A. K. (2001). How I Think (HIT)Questionnaire Manual. Il: Research Press. [Dutch translation: C. N. Nas (2000). HoeIk Denk Vragenlijst.]Brugman, D. (2008). Three Perspectives on the Moral Self: Moral Self Complexity,Moral Self Relevance, and Moral Self Esteem. Paper presented at the SymposiumAdolescents’ moral self understanding: emotional and behavioral implications.ISSBD: Wuerzburg.Brugman, D., Basinger, K.S., & Gibbs, J.C. (2007). Measuring Adolescents’ MoralJudgment: An Evaluation of the Sociomoral Reflection Measure – Short FormObjective (SRM-SFO). Paper presented at the Symposium: Cross-cultural researchon moral reasoning. Chair: Uwe P. Gielen, International Council of Psychologists.San Diego, USA, August 11-14, 2007.DiBiase, A. M., Gibbs, J. C., Potter, G. B., & Spring, B. (2005). EQUIP for Educators.Teaching youth (grades 5-8) to think and act responsibly. [Dutch translation F. van derVelden & D. Brugman, EQUIP voor het onderwijs. Stichting EQUIP]. Champaign,Illinois: Research Press.Dodge, K. A., & Coie, J. D. (1987). Social-information processing factors in reactive andproactive aggression in children’s peer groups. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 53, 1146-58.Leenders, I. & Brugman, D. (2005). The moral/non-moral domain shift in relation todelin-quent behavior in adolescents. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 23,65-79.58

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCETitle of Symposium:Title of Paper:Authors:Affiliations:Moral Motivation in Real Situations – On the Way toa Concept in a Post-Kohlbergian Era?Preschool Children’s Moral Emotionsand Prosocial BehaviorMichaela Gummerum*Yaniv Hanoch*Monika Keller**Kimberley Schonert-Reichl**** School of Psychology, University of Plymouth, UnitedKingdom** Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin,Germany***University of British Columbia, CanadaABSTRACTTwo studies explored the relationship between prosocial behavior in the dictator game andmoral emotions among 2- to 6-year-old preschool children. In study 1, German children’smoral judgment and their emotion attribution to a violator of a moral rule (happy victimizertask) both independently predicted sharing behavior in dictator game, but did not predictteacher ratings of participants’ prosocial behavior. In study 2, Canadian preschool children’sempathy significantly predicted prosocial behavior in dictator game. General emotioncomprehension was not related to prosocial behavior. These results are discussed in relationto psychological and economic theories of moral behavior.EXTENDED SUMMARYIntroductionTwo studies explored the relationship between prosocial behavior in the dictator game,a prosocial sharing situation developed in economics, and moral emotions among 2- to6-year-old preschool children. This strengthens both psychological research on moralbehavior, since the dictator game presents an interesting research avenue for studying prosocialbehavior, and economic research on social preferences, since behavior in economicgames is related to other psychological measures. Furthermore, exploring young children’sunderstanding of moral emotions enables educators to foster preschool children’ssocial-emotional learning. Previous research (e.g. Schonert-Reichl et al., 2002) points to theimportance of young children’s social and emotional development not just for their emotionalwell-being and peer relationships, but also for their later school competence andsuccess.In study 1, German children’s moral judgment and their emotion attribution to a violatorof a moral rule was related to behavior in dictator game and a teacher rating of prosocialbehavior. We expected that children who judged a violation to be wrong and whoattributed negative emotions would behave and be judged as more prosocially.59

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEIn study 2, the relationship between behavior in dictator game and empathy and generalemotion comprehension was assessed in a sample of children who got training in ananti-bullying program and a control sample. We expected that empathy but not generalemotion comprehension would predict sharing in dictator game.MethodIn study 1, 40 two- to six-year-old children participated. Participants judged moral rule violationsand attributed emotions to a violator in two happy-victimizer scenarios. Pro-socialbehavior was measured with teacher ratings (Preschool Social Behavior Questionnaire)and the dictator game, in which children could share ten pieces of candy with anotheranonymous player.In study 2, 49 three- to five-year-old children have participated so far. Empathy andgeneral emotion understanding were assessed through self-report measures in individualinterviews. In dictator game, participants could allocate ten stickers between themselvesand another anonymous child.ResultsStudy 1. In contrast to earlier studies, in which younger children tended to allocateresources more selfishly than older children, the majority of participants in this studyshared the candies fairly in dictator game.Regression analyses indicated that both moral judgment and emotion attributionsignificantly predicted prosocial behavior in dictator game. Children who judged a ruleviolation to be wrong shared more in dictator game. Similarly, participants who attributednegative emotions to violators gave more in dictator game. Neither moral judgment noremotion attribution predicted prosocial behavior as judged by the teachersStudy 2. Analyses indicated that children behaved rather fairly in dictator game, andthere was no age effect. Empathy, but not general emotion understanding significantlypredicted sharing in dictator game.DiscussionResearch in developmental psychology and education has shown that fostering socialemotionaldevelopment in preschool children has positive effects on children’s schoolachievement, peer relationships, and general well-being and resilience (Schonert-Reichlet al., 2002; Wentzel, 1993). In two studies we investigated how preschool children’sunderstanding of moral emotions (moral emotion attributions, moral motivation, andempathy) related to their prosocial behavior in the dictator game, a prosocial sharingsituation developed in economics. Overall, results indicate that empathy and emotionattribution in the happy victimizer task predict prosocial sharing. However, recognitionof emotions is not related to prosocial behavior. These findings indicate that in order toincrease prosocial behavior in children educators should particularly promote children’sunderstanding of emotions in moral contexts.Although sharing in dictator game is related to established psychological measures ofmoral and prosocial development, the correlations with teacher ratings of social behaviorwere low (Study 1). Such low correlations between different measures of prosocialbehavior have been reported in the literature before. The results indicate that the dictatorgame is an experimental assessment for children’s behavior in (prosocial) dilemma situations.It can be used across age groups and lines of inquiries, which maximizes the abilityto draw meaningful comparisons across species, across the lifespan, and across cultures.60

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCETitle of Symposium:Title of Paper:Author:Affiliation:Moral Motivation in Real Situations – On the Way to aConcept in a Post-Kohlbergian Era?Motivated to be moral? – An Action-Based Viewon Moral MotivationKarin HeinrichsInstitute for Human Resource Education LMU Munich,GermanyABSTRACTRest proclaimed “moral motivation” as one out of four components determining moralbehavior. But he had admitted a great need for specifying this component though therewas a variety of approaches studying drivers of moral behavior (Rest 1999, p. 109), becausemost of those approaches were not supported by empirical evidence appropriately.Considering recent moral psychological research a paradigm shift has been is coming uphow to map moral judging and acting (Heinrichs 2005; Krebs & Denton 2005; Lapsley &Narvaez 2005) which promises to enrich the discussion of moral motivation.In line with basic assumptions of the post-Kohlbergian view, the process model of judgingand acting (Heinrichs 2005) is used in the presented paper as a theoretical framework.Recently developed and empirically tested approaches which capture drivers of moralbehavior in varying perspectives are reconstructed and compared. These approaches allprovide empirically tested contributions to specify moral motivation and its relation tomoral behavior. But they are all concentrating on different domains in so far as they focuson various types of initiating morally relevant situations (dictator game, transgression,moral conflicts, moral decision-making in organizations). Additionally they study differenttarget groups (for example children of different ages, students or adults) (Jones 1991;Krettenaer & Eichler 2006; Malti et.al., in press; Oßwald 2008).To reconstruct and compare these approaches in an action-based view will hopefullycontribute to encourage a sophisticated discussion on moral motivation beyond the Kohlberg-tradition.In an educational view it would be important to specify the impact ofpersonal and situational determinants and their relations on moral motivation in welldoneempirical studies in future research in order to identify promising ways to fostermoral motivation in different contexts and ages.EXTENDED SUMMARYAims of the theoretical paper:In order to advance Kohlberg`s and Candee`s model of moral behavior Rest developedthe well-known four-component model of judging and acting in real situations. “Moralmotivation” is there proclaimed to be one of these four components (Rest 1999) anddescribed as a value-based decision to go for that kind of behavior which the individualhas recognized to be moral way of acting. So far the context specific moral judgementcould be considered as a cognitive source for behaving consistently to the moral judgment.But this cognitive perspective on moral motivation is only one possible way of specifying61

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEthis component of moral acting. As Rest himself pointed out this component is the onewhich is worste laborated and not of appropriate empirical evidence (Rest 1999, p. 109).In recent research on moral judging and acting the influence of Kohlberg’s theory hasdecreased. A Post-Kohlbergian era has begun (Lapsley & Narvaez 2005; Krebs & Denton2005; Heinrichs 2005). The up-coming approaches promise to be theoretically (andempirically) progressive compared to Kohlberg’s theory, they agree in the basic assumptionsexplained further on and they could be considered to deliver an auspicious perspectivefor further research on moral judging and acting:• The approaches are focussing on real situations which can be considered as morally• relevant, not limited to hypothetical dilemmas.• Moral sensibility in terms of constituting moral situations which are assumed to• determine the further way of acting.• The process of moral acting referring to real situations normally is determined by• automatic-spontaneous mode of data processing. Reflection has to be activated.• The mode of data processing depends on how the associated mental model of the• situation is fitting to the perceived situation.• Moral judging and acting is determined by the individual’s experience.• The experienced-based knowledge is rooted in evolutionary processes.• Moral judging and acting is not only related to cognitive, but to emotional processes.Proceeding:In the present paper it is expected that an approach to moral motivation based on thesePost-Kohlbergian assumptions could lead to a theoretically progressive conception ofmoral motivation. Therefore the process model of moral acting (Heinrichs 2005) which isin line with the assumptions of other post-Kohlberg approaches (Lapsley & Narvaez 2005;Krebs & Denton 2005) is used as a theoretical framework and as a reference to reconstructthe function of the motivation as one determinant on the way to building an intention inmorally relevant situations as well as to act in a morally appropriate way. According tothis process model of acting, moral motivation could be defined as a state which pointsto an output of internal processes and which could be reconstructed as a state of beingenergized to meet the individually concerned requirements. The situation is consideredas an opportunity to realize the person’s wishes or goals. Some of these goals might beconscious, others remain unconscious; some are or connected to the “moral self”, othershave phylogenetic roots. But all lead to putting the person in a state of arousal towardschanging the morally relevant situation. Motivation is necessary for building an intentionbut not sufficient. Additionally to motivation there is a need for commitment, for volitiontill an intention is formed (Heinrichs 2005). Otherwise motivation is assumed to influencethe process of constituting a situation, of associating a mental modeal of the situation tothe currently perceived one.According to an interactive paradigm which presumes the state of motivation to beinfluenced by personal and situational determinants the following statements shouldexplicate the relation of motivational drivers and types of morally relevant situations inmore details. It is intended to compare selected empirical approaches to moral acting(Malti et.al., in press; Oßwald 2008, Jones 1991). These approaches are rooted indifferentscientific perspectives on moral acting: some of them concentrate on intrapersonal62

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3EARLI 2009 CONFERENCEdeterminants (Malti et.al., in press), the next on the impact of the situation (Jones 1991)and others on the interaction of personal and situational determinants (Oßwald 2008). Thefollowing questions will lead to the comparison of these approaches:• What kind of morally relevant situations do the studies refer to?• Which target group was included in the investigation?• How can “moral motivation” be defined in line with the particular approach?• What kind of drivers does the study focus on?• Does the approach predominantly proclaim intrapersonal or situational variables• having impact on moral motivation?Theoretical and educational significance:Especially in the context of vocational education and training a great need for improvingthe way of judging and acting in business context is obvious. But in investigationsconcerning to moral development are often limited to children or young people. Howmoral judging and acting can be fostered in adulthood is still expected to be a field offuture research. The question how people become and stay motivated to act in a morallyappropriate way is essential to generate helpful treatments to foster moral behavior atwork.References:Heinrichs, K. (2005). Urteilen und Handeln in moralrelevanten Situationen. Ein Prozessmodellund seine moralpsychologische Spezifizierung, Frankfurt/Main u.a.: Peter-Lang-Verlag.Jones, T. (1991). Ethical decision-making by individuals in organizations: an issuecontingentmodel, Academy of Management Review, 16 (2), 366-395Krebs, D. L.& Denton, K. (2005): Toward a More Pragmatic Approach to Morality: ACritical Evaluation of Kohlberg´s Model. Psychological Review, 112 (3), 629-649Krettenauer, T. & Eichler, D. (2006). Adolescents’ self-attributed emotions following amoral transgression: relations with delinquency, confidence in moral judgment,and age. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 24, 489-506Lapsley, D. & Narvaez, D. (2005). Psychological Foundations of Everyday Morality andMoral Expertise. In D.K. Lapsley & Power F. Clark (Eds.). Character Psychology andCharacter Education, Notre Dame: Notre Dame UniversityMalti, T., Gummerum, M., Keller, M., & Buchmann, M. (in press). Children’s sympathyand prosocial behavior: The role of moral motivation. Child DevelopmentOßwald, S. (2008). Determinants of prosocial behaviour: moral prototypes, social norms andprosocial video games, Aachen: Shaker63

Newsletter from EARLI SIG 13 Moral and Democratic Education – Issue # 3Guidelines for AuthorsMembers are encouraged to submit texts and other contributions to the SIG 13 Newsletter.This newsletter is intended to be a service for the members – an opportunity to learn andto gain from other people’s experiences. By submitting contributions to the newsletter,each author is assumed to fully accept the guidelines below. However, these guidelinesare not set in stone: readers are cordially invited to suggest improvements. Please sendany suggested changes for the better to the interim editor (Anna.Tapola@hik.se). After aperiod of ‘trial and error’ the present tentative guidelines will be adjusted, and then set atforthcoming SIG 13 Business meeting.FormatsSIG 13 Newsletter welcomes contributions in varying formats, for example:• Reports can consist of short summaries from meetings or other events of interestto the SIG 13 community.• The Notice Board consists of short announcements where notices will be publishedunder categories (and subheadings) such as Forthcoming meetings (includingconferences, workshops, summer schools etc), Books, Job Announcements, etc.• Articles enable the author to develop and explore a line of argument of interestto the readership.Language and manuscriptMany of us have first languages other than English. Even so, in the newsletter we willstick to English as our good old lingua franca.• Contributions should be submitted electronically to the interim editor(Anna.Tapola@hik.se). Send your contributions as an attachment to an e-mail. Pleaseuse Word-files for text (doc suffix). Photos, tables, illustrations or other figures can besubmitted as jpg, eps, or Photoshop files.• The author’s identity and e-mail address must be provided on the top of the firstmanuscript page. Below that, please add the following sentence:This manuscript does not interfere with any third party’s copyright.• Manuscripts for the Notice Board should be short, and each announcement should notexceed 150 words.• Manuscripts for reports should not exceed 500 words, and should not include anabstract or bibliography.• Manuscripts for articles should not exceed 2 500 words, including references andabstract. Abstracts should not exceed 100 words. Footnotes should be avoided.Please use APA style (fifth edition) for references.Copyright and Legal MattersSIG 13 Newsletter supports the authors’ legal rights to their own works. This meansthe copyright will stay with the author, and it will not be transferred to the SIG 13Newsletter. Consequently, the author has full legal responsibility with regard to texts,figures, photos or other contributions that are published in the newsletter.• The individual authors retain the copyright to their work.• The newsletter will not publish anonymous contributions.• Make sure that your contribution does not contain any copyrighted material thatbelongs to someone else (third party).• Please contact the editor if you are at all uncertain about the copyright of yourcontribution to the SIG 13 Newsletter.64