It
is stated that a person’s first moral language addresses where people come
from, their differing moral places of origin, and their set of beliefs attained
from their environment. For instance, if children have grown up in a home where
a strict religious practice is adhered to, they are more likely appealing to
the same principles of moral beliefs such as, thou shall not lie, steal etc.
Many religions appeal to a similar set of universal moral principles, justified
and agreed upon by all. Humans, for the most part, desire what is intrinsically
good; however, you have to experience what is good so that you understand what
it feels like. People do not learn a language of morality unless it is
practiced.
In
this case study, the old code about not telling is well known. This is a method
used by bullies. This is the code that allows evil to develop and flourish.
Schools are no place for such a code. In this instance, the bullies needed to
be confronted. This mean group of girls creating the gossip, were at first,
reluctant to speak about the situation until the implementation of all three
moral languages were exercised in their dialogue sessions.
The
advantage of appealing to belief systems and a schools code of conduct is that
students need to understand that the school expects excellent conduct from
them. Nevertheless, these same students often think that not doing unkind
things is enough for us to be happy with them. It is not. Students need to
understand their individual responsibility for making the school what we all
want it to be, and demonstrate conduct that is morally and universally ‘right’.
Their responsibility requires pro activity—not neutrality. That responsibility
requires acts of kindness as we look out for each other. If we see someone
being excluded, we should act to include them in the group, or start another
group that does include them. If we hear unkind words, we should speak kind
words. If we know of unsavory things on the Internet, educators should make sure
adults know, too.
The
disadvantage of discussing morals and beliefs is the danger one might not be
open to nor understand the reasoning behind a person’s action. This is the
limitation of appealing solely to ones beliefs. We need to look at other moral
languages combined. Once people are invited into the public speaking arena
universal concepts of morality and care can be found.
Public Speech
Public
speech is the most common speech of a morally pluralistic society. The language
of the majority prevails so that discourse can occur despite fundamental
differences in people’s points of view. Opening the lines of communication
through discussion is fundamental so that, in an ideal community, they can
shape and reshape truths because judgments are open to correction.
Within
this case study, instant recognition of degrading gossip is vital. Universally
we know a student should stop the talebearer in mid-sentence. We ought to
challenge our gossips with, “Have you confronted the person with this?” To give
ear to a nasty tale will not only injure our spirit but also encourage
gossipers to continue their destruction. We will either be part of the problem
or part of the solution. Teaching students how to develop a solution-based
thought process is invaluable.
We
know for now, stealing is bad, truth is good, honesty is essential, integrity
is crucial, good manners matter, all people are worthy of respect and rules
should be kept. Whenever we are with children, our influence should be strongly
in that direction. To act or speak in a way that diminishes a child’s respect
for law, for good values, for property, for liberty, and for other people, and
not to act or speak when we witness the child failing to respect these things,
is to deny the child the chance of developing the best possible character.
These aspects are best left with a teacher, counselor or administrator to deal
with. Follow up is critical. In this specific case study, their advisor teacher
should allow the students to discuss problems and confide in her.
The
advantage of including parents in the overall decision-making process shows the
concern to connect the home and school. It demonstrates an awareness and
partnership between all parties involved. The level of the discussion should
appeal to the moral principles I have described in this study: belief systems
and codes of conduct, care, and public speech combined. The disadvantage of
including parents into this realm of problem solving is that the communication
becomes more complex as increasing perspectives and input are discussed.
Care
Care
is another moral language we discuss and share rather than seeing issues from a
more technical perspective. I find I have always referred to the works of Nel
Noddings and the ‘Care’ perspective, as it is closely tied to the way I view
life situations. To share the lingo of ‘care and nurturance,’ Nel Noddings
(1984) describes educators as the ones who “are in charge of children who need
to be treated with kindness and compassion, who need to grow and mature”.
As
a teacher or administrator, there is sometimes the temptation to say ‘Who
cares?’ Care and public speech, as moral languages, are closely related in this
case study. Certainly life is easier when a blind eye is turned, for one does
not have to deal with avoidance, misinformation, downright lies, and angry
parents. To do nothing, however, is to deny the students a most important
aspect of education—the degree of personal responsibility needed to create,
inhabit, and sustain a worthwhile society.
Facebook,
Twitter, T.V., the Internet, Social Media, and lenient schooling have all been
blamed. Certainly, these may have influenced things to go in the wrong
direction. Adult influence of the right sort can, I believe, turn things
around. We adults must realize further that young people are immature—that’s
what being young is, after all. Left to youth, with no advice or guidance, they
will sometimes make incorrect judgments. When the age of majority arrives, they
are free to make their own decisions, their own judgments. Until that day,
responsible adults must teach them many things and insist on some things—yes,
for their own good. Using a caring perspective allows teachers and
administrators to determine a fair, balanced solution to a problem.
In
this case study, we arrived at a solution through the use of face-to-face
dialogue rather than the technological phenomenon, Facebook!
Note:
It is amazing to think that Facebook has been around since 2004, and these
issues educators face are still prominent today. Although Facebook is a
brilliant innovation if used wisely, it can however create social disharmony in
some circumstances (as outlined in this case study). Since my own studies in
University, I realize there are many theoretical perspectives we can use to
help us with the decision-making process in tricky situations. As
Administrators, teachers, parents and community members we cannot sit back as
bystanders. We must be pro active and work jointly so that wrongs can become
right!