Moral Development According to Pascarella and Terenzini

For class this week, the class was instructed to read chapter in Ernest Pascarella and Patrick Terenzini’s book How College Affects Students: A Third Decade of Research. This chapter focuses on moral development of students and uses Kholberg as the framework by which they base their chapter. Because this book compares what was found by the authors in the 1990’s to what is commonly thought now about student development, there is an interesting view into how development theory has changed in certain areas and how it has not in others.

As stated above, this chapter discusses how college effects the development of students morally and the authors do a good job of using a lot of evidence to back up the claims they make. In the beginning of the chapter, the author talks about the change in moral development during college. The authors say that evidence shows them that students do show a statistically significant improvement in their moral development when they are in college but the authors also try to provide reasons as to why this may be so. It is interesting to parallel this concept to my own student development because I do think I developed morally when I was in college and I am fairly certain it would not happened if I was not in college. Because I was raised in a very conservative household, there was a lot that I was not exposed to but because I went to college I was able to experience other things that challenged my moral fibers. I feel that I have become a more moral person and do not think I would have been able to make that transition had I not been in college.

            The authors also make an interesting point when it comes to peer-to-peer influence on moral matters in college. The example of cheating and academic dishonesty are used in the book. Evidence suggests that students will cheat or be academically dishonest if they see other students around doing the same and on the other hand, if students feel that their friends would look down on them for being academically dishonest, they will refrain. These findings seem to be influenced by the institution and whether or not they had an honor code that was enforced by the students themselves. This is interesting because at the University of West Florida (UWF), we have an honor code that includes the student body as an active member in not accepting academic dishonesty. The honor code which was instated a few years back allows students to have an active stake in holding each other accountable but using inclusive language. “As Argonauts we act with integrity. We do not lie, cheat, steal ortolerate those who do.” This statement does not just represent the administration but also the students. UWF also has an academic dishonesty committee that evaluates and sanctions students who are thought to have been academically dishonest. This committee is not only faculty and staff but students as well because as discussed in the book, academic dishonesty should be a peer-to-peer discussion.

            Another interesting point presented by the authors is that students are not shaped by a single event in their college experience but a series of events that shifts their way of thinking. Academically, this may be true and for most students this is probably the case but I wonder how that translates outside of the classroom. Speaking from personal experience, one major event changed the way I saw the world and what my morals were, it was not so much the small experiences that did it. I would be interested to see what would constitute a large ‘event’ that could happen academically that would change a student’s moral development. Would be it a change in major? It seems like a ‘no-brainr’ that the small experiences/ events would be more impactful.