We will fail, first, because we will not engage their attention or enthusiasm and, secondly, because we will be going against a fundamental educational principle, namely, that one must start from where people are. Dewey, of course, told us this long ago, and Piaget and Kohlberg in the field of moral education have continued to make the point. Where, specifically, are young adolescents? Most people are in a state of rough balance between concern for themselves and concern for others, especially their family and friends which is precisely where most adults are.
Helping them satisfy their concerns is not giving in to a lesser morality, but helping them achieve legitimate life goals which, of course, are partly self-interested. The position I would recommend we adults adopt is that adolescents are our moral equals. Insofar as their morality differs from that of adults it is not due to a lesser capacity but to differences in the life circumstances in which they find themselves and to which their morality is more or less appropriately adapted.
Stages of morality may be traced but they are stages of change associated with changing life circumstances, not stages of improvement. One can, of course, always live better as an adolescent. Moral development in the sense of improvement is possible at a particular age. However, it is equally necessary for both adolescents and adults. Adolescents do not stand in greater need of moral improvement.
If one grants that adults are not, on average, more moral than adolescents, what place is there for moral education conducted by adult teachers? Normally in education we assume that teachers have greater knowledge and skill than their students, which is why they are teachers. What is the situation in the case of moral education? To begin with, as we have noted, there is always the possibility of moral development in the sense of improvement at a given age.
Adolescents, like adults, can become more altruistic, sensitive, thoughtful and wise, and more skillful in giving expression to their morality. Accordingly, the need for moral education certainly exists. In society as it is presently structured, adults are cast in the role of teachers.
They have the authority and the professional training and status. In most cases, young adolescents who attempted to take on such a role would be rejected, by peers and adults alike, as precocious and presumptuous; and besides they would not be paid for their activities or even given time to perform them.
Adults, then, must engage in formal moral education if it is to take place to a significant degree under present social, political, and economic conditions. They may be better at morals than most adolescents and fellow adults, and have a great deal to teach. Besides moral development at a given age, adolescents must eventually go on to a morality appropriate to adulthood. If they are to live well as adults, and fulfill the responsibilities assigned to them, they must take on the way of life of an adult and the corresponding moral behavior.
Now, adults are in a good position to initiate adolescents into the responsibilities and way of life of adulthood, since we are there already. In this area we often have greater knowledge and skill than students. While there is room for moral education by adults, however, we must tread carefully. In many areas, especially those having to do with moral development at an age level, we may have less knowledge and skill than our students, even though custom and politics assign us the role of teacher.
Even where we do feel we know more, either because ethics is our teaching field or because we know about the adult way of life, we should adopt an interactive teaching mode since adolescents already have many insights into the adult world and its problems. We must resist the temptation to push students into the adult mode of conduct just because it suits our interests: Our concern should rather be for the whole, including ourselves.
We must as far as possible allow students to enter adulthood in their own way, so that their needs for identity and relative independence are met. We must keep constantly in mind that initiation of young people into an adult mode of life is only one part of the story. The adult way of life must itself be under constant scrutiny to see if it can be improved.
In a great many ways adults and adolescents should be exploring precisely the same societal issues. The significance of the adult-adolescent distinction should not be exaggerated. We must search for them together. Adolescents could live fuller, more interesting lives and adults could have better relationships with adolescents and also benefit from their aid in societal projects.
It is important, however, that we not jeopardize their well-being by pushing too quickly or in the wrong directions. We could destroy a way of life—adolescence, which for all its problems is at least a way of life—before we have established a satisfactory new way of life—adulthood-at-an-earlier-age.
A key principle here, once again, is that teachers and students must work together to ensure that both the speed and the direction of change are appropriate. The time has come to spell it out more systematically.
Morality is based largely in human needs, of oneself and others. It is grounded in goods such as friendship, fellowship, self-respect, health, happiness, fulfillment, a sense of meaning in life. Following Aristotle, there is a strong emphasis here on human nature and basic human desires and tendencies.
They should be seen and taught as components within a total value system, the ultimate purpose of which is to enable humans, individually and as groups, to achieve human goods. This in no way diminishes the importance of moral and social values but shows that they, like all other values, must be weighed against one another rather than be seen as absolutes.
Members of subgroups such as adolescents have a right to pursue their distinctive interests rather than subordinate them completely to general societal values. Morality in both its foundations and its daily implementation involves feelings, desires, and life forces such as those we have noted in adolescents. It is not purely mental. The mind does not simply control feelings in morality; rather the two are constantly interacting or working together to give direction to life and moral motivation.
They should be basically in control of their own lives, but it is rare that they will be able to think or act completely by themselves, nor is it clear why that would be a laudable moral ideal. This follows from the rootedness of morality in human nature and human life.
One could develop a broad definition of religion according to which it would be necessary to be religious in order to be moral. For a great many people, however, their religion is in fact the mediator in part at least of their morality, and if they lost the one the other would suffer, temporarily and perhaps permanently.
Moral issues are deeply embedded in the hard realities of life, and no matter how much we clarify our values, we can still be wrong, objectively. For example, we may firmly believe that it is always wrong to tell lies, but one day come across a case where, given all the facts, we are forced to admit that telling the truth would be wrong, since it would clearly do more harm than good.
This does not mean that the same things are right or wrong for everyone: Relevant differences abound in circumstances and temperament. But for a given person or group in given circumstances one can in principle objectively determine which actions would be better and worse morally. Moral questions are enormously complex, but nevertheless soluble in many cases.
Morality has often been seen and taught as a matter of following a few simple rules, the main obstacles lying not in finding out what is right but in bringing oneself to do what one knows to be right.
In the present context, we only have room to highlight a few elements in moral education, ones which follow from preceding discussion and are especially relevant in the junior high school. The following are some key principles and strategies. Teachers including administrators and students are growing together; they are engaged in joint inquiry.
On many matters students know as much as teachers and on some they may know more e. But it is given as grist for the mill, not as the last word. Teachers should embody in their behavior and the way they run the school their view of how one should live.
This view, however, is constantly developing. We do not yet know fully what that is. Furthermore, it is a view that the students are helping to develop. School behavior and organization should, for teachers and students together, be an ongoing experiment. It is unlikely that we will be able to make the school a great deal better than other societal institutions, since it is inextricably bound up with the rest of society.
But we can discuss why the school is the way it is, in terms of embedded injustice, the bureaucratization of society, cultural inertia, parental, teacher, and student convenience, institutional imperatives, sexual discrimination, age discrimination. What do these incidents reveal? They reveal that our greed has reached gigantic proportions. The attitude of government employees has become so indifferent to public that they are not prepared to help.
These unscrupulous workers do not work even for 50 per cent of the total hours of their duty. This is nothing but stealth of time. As students they were taught to solve various types of sums or write answers to different types of questions. They were not taught how to serve the nation.
They were not made aware of the happiness that one derives by working honestly and sincerely. The atmosphere in our schools, colleges and other institutions of education is full of competition. The students are taught to excel one another. Their competition, more often than not, becomes so intense that it leads to rivalries, jealousy and hatred among class-fellows.
While it cannot be denied that competition is necessary to achieve higher goals but is totally undesirable if it breeds ill feelings. Our ancient universities of Nalanda and Patliputra created scholars of great repute like Kautilya in Economics and Susruta in Medicine, but they never used competition among the students to move ahead. Actually, these students were taught by the gurus the feelings of mutual help, of being complementary to one another.
There was a spirit of sacrifice for the sake of justice and fair play. That is why our ancient societies were happy and prosperous. The teachers and other educationists who are concerned with the orientation of syllabi for schools and colleges are of the opinion that the characteristics of honesty, fair play, goodness and helpfulness which are the ingredients of morality cannot be taught as subjects in any educational institution. They are something which a child inherits from the parents and learns from his family, particularly mother and father.
India being a secular country, cannot take up religious education in schools and colleges. They argue that, to the extent the moral education can be given in educational institutions, it is given through discipline and punishments for breaking the code of conduct. Any student who steals abuses or hurts others is punished. This is nothing else but imparting of moral education.
What these teachers and educationists tend to ignore is that these actions teach only discipline in actions. Evils as they say have large fangs, desires are boundless. The students need to be told the ultimate consequences of acquiring wealth through illegal means when they grow up and take up some job. For this, moral education needs to be taken up as a subject. Our life on earth is for a limited period of time.
The purpose of human life is not to indulge in luxuries and enjoy the material comforts. They give temporary happiness. The real purpose of life is to develop our spirit in a pure and chaste manner whereby we attain salvation.
This is the spiritual lesson which every religion teaches. This is a part of moral education which each faith teaches us. This should be a part of our education.
Essay on “The Importance of Moral Education” Complete Essay for Class 10, Class 12 and Graduation and other classes. The Importance of Moral Education There is a special need today for evolving a new system of education in India which must be in tune with our major values of national tradition and integration.
Moral education means an ethical education to follow the good and right principles of life. It consists of some basic principles, like truthfulness, honesty, charity, hospitality, tolerance, love, kindness and sympathy. Short Speech on Importance of Moral Education. Category: Short Essay on Importance of School Education ; Importance of.
Importance of Moral Education: Essay, Article, Short Note Introduction (Essay on Moral Education) Morality is one of the fundamental aspects of human life and society/5(). Before , education was the exclusive responsibility of the states. In the Constitutional Amendment of , education was included in the Concurrent list. Since then, the central government continues to play a leading role in the evolution and monitoring of educational policies and programmes.
Words Short Essay on Moral Education. The first point of importance to notice with regard to moral instruction is that, in the words of the proverb, example is better than precept. Words Essay on Importance of Moral Education ; Words Short Essay on Moral Courage ; Essay on Education. The importance of moral education is particularly clear at the junior high level (grades , average age years). Fortunately, it is also a stage when most educators and parents are willing to concede time for moral education activities: The “basics” have been taught in some measure, and the pre-college pressure has not yet begun.