Should liberal arts colleges attend to the moral development of students in addition to their intellectual development? And if so, what is the best way to do this?
For example, the St. Lawrence University "Aims and Objectives" includes the aim of helping students to develop "a personal ethic of considered values" (2005-2006 Catalog, p. 6).
Since it is usually philosophy departments that offer courses in ethics, is it up to philosophy departments to handle this responsibility? Or should this particular goal be addressed across disciplines?
Saturday, October 08, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Good question. I wonder if morals and ethics can really be learned in the classroom, or through discussion. They seem deeper, somehow--that they must be acquired through trial and error, through meaningful personal reflection and assesment at points of crisis. I, anyway, have never simply decided through discussion to have a better ethic of x or take on a character trait of y. These have always been more personal and interior.
Then again, I do think that students should be engaged with thinking and learning that causes personal reflection, in an indirect way. The BEST reflection doesn't happen, for me, when the instructor assigns it, but when the implications of whatever I'm learning begin to seep into me, and I have to deal with them down in the crannies of my worldview and self-perception.
I think a class can teach ABOUT ethics and morals, but I'm not sure it can instill them.
I like Tyler's comment. There is similar topic of debate in the Environmental Studies department: should ENVS students be graded just on their class work, or should they also be graded on how much they actually do to further the protection of the environment? It may seem that it is only fair to grade classwork; economics students are not graded on how economically-rational they are in their private lives. But the whole problem of the environment is that most of us can easily KNOW what the problems are, but few find the "right kind" of knowledge (knowledge that summons emotion as an alley in understanding) that causes change? Shouldn't THAT be the kind of understanding that we are trying to impart to students? Isn't that the kind of understanding that deserves good grades?
Post a Comment