This quantitative descriptive study identified the differences in the moral reasoning development levels between undergraduate teacher education students enrolled in methods courses and graduate teacher education students enrolled in an alternative certification education program using the Defining Issues Test-2 instrument. Based on Kohlberg’s (1978) theory of moral development, this study addressed four null and four alternative hypotheses. The hypotheses aimed to identify whether differences existed in the development of moral reasoning, moral reasoning development levels, moral reasoning dilemma decisions, and moral reasoning development scores based on gender, parental status, church attendance, age group, program type, desired teaching level, and perception of the adequacy of training among undergraduate and graduate teacher education students. Results revealed that moral reasoning development scores, moral dilemma decisions, and moral development scores based on gender, parental status, church attendance, age group, program type, or perceptions of the adequacy of training between the two student groups were not statistically significantly different. A statistical significant difference existed in the moral reasoning development levels and desired teaching levels (grades 1 through 6 or grades 7 through 12). Undergraduate students were significantly more likely to be at the lowest level of moral reasoning development level (personal interest) than graduate students. Because of the small sample size, a post hoc power analysis was conducted after the results were analyzed. The lack of significant findings were due to an insufficient statistical power and type two error. Recommendations and model components essential for training within the university setting are addressed.
|School:||University of Phoenix|
|School Location:||United States -- Arizona|
|Source:||DAI-A 78/08(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Ethics, Teacher education|
|Keywords:||Moral development, Professional development, Sexual misconduct|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be