Re: Assignment #4 -- Life-span Human Development

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: [1], 2 ]

Subject: Re: Assignment #4

Author:
Jennifer Williams

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 09:38:51 07/01/10 Thu
In reply to: Dr. Magun-Jackson 's message, "Assignment #4" on 20:31:48 06/28/10 Mon

>Assignment 4 (Kohlberg vs Erikson): June 31
>This posting has several parts:
> 1) What do you like and dislike about Kohlberg's
>theory of moral development?

I like Kohlberg's theory of moral deveopment because it is so closely tied to cognitive development. This rings true with me for some reason. Maybe i've just encountered too many immature people with questionable morals, haha. I do agree that you have to be mature in order to make sound moral decisions. I also find it interesting that he places so much emphasis on justice and what is right and wrong, but then points out the gray area that often exists in situations like the Heinz dilemma. I also really enjoy the way in which Kohlberg did his research. I appreciate the fact that he asked his subjects to answer the dilemmas that he gave them out loud so that he could follow their path of reasoning.
The one thing i don't like about Kohlberg's theory is that it is a bit rigid. I don't like that it doesn't really allow an individual to go back and forth between the stages and work on issues that they might be having. Another problem that I have with Kohlberg's theory is that it is very culturally specific. It seems to address one set of values and does not account for different dilemmas and values that may be held elsewhere in the world.

What is it in this
>theory that speaks to you personally?

The aspect of Kohlberg's theory that speaks to me personally is that one must mature in order to reach a higher moral developmental stage. This is something that I feel I must keep in mind in the classroom. I think that all teachers get to a point where they expect more of their students than they are really able to give and I believe that this theory may help me with that.

In which stage
>of moral development would you place yourself? Why?
I would place myself in the postconventional stage. In most aspects of my life I am very serious about following the rules and I have a very clear concept of right and wrong. However, I generally make more serious moral decisions based on what I feel is right as opposed to always following the rules to a tee.
>
2) What do you like and dislike about Erikson's
>theory of self development? What is it in this theory
>that speaks to you personally? In which crisis to you
>find yourself? Why?
The thing I like most about Erikson's theory is that you are able to go back and fix 'negative outcomes' from previous crises. I am very much in favor of looking into yourself and finding out why you act the way that you do, so any theory that allows you to do this and work on your problem areas, is my favorite. I also like the fact that Erikson's theory covers all ages. I find his integrity vs. despair crisis very interesting. I really enjoy Erikson's theory so I don't really have any critiques of it. I would say that his theory factors into both my job and my life. I have always been very proactive about any issues that I have noticed in myself and have done my best to deconstruct and fix them. I think this is very Eriksonian in nature. I believe that I am currently somewhere inbetween crisis 6 and 7. I have recently gotten married. I believe that I have conquered intimacy and am now in my nesting phase. I hope to start a family soon which suggests that I am moving towards generativity.

> 3) Of the two theories, which is most relevant to
>your career/ major/life? Why? How would you use
>these theories?

I think that both theories apply to my career and life but I prefer to approach my life and my job in an Eriksonian way. I like to look at a problem or behavior and study it until I get to the root of it and then go about trying to fix it. I am sure some people would say that Erikson's theory is a bit too positive or idealist, but people say the same thing about me. I like to look at things as fixable, no matter how desperate the situation seems, instead of writing someone off as not mature enough to handle a situation and giving up because they are stuck in the phase they are currently in. My exposure to Kohlberg's theory, though, will hopefully give me more patience with my kids and let them get to a point where they will make the right decisions on their own.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject	Author	Date
Re: Assignment #4	Cassandra Dowell (Busy)	12:34:03 07/01/10 Thu