不同专业选择学生的道德推理

Mirjana Đokić, Snažana Stojiljković
{"title":"不同专业选择学生的道德推理","authors":"Mirjana Đokić, Snažana Stojiljković","doi":"10.22190/FUTLTE1901019D","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The goal of this research was to investigate the differences in moral reasoning among students of social, biomedical and technical sciences. The sample included 300 students of both genders (154 male and 146 female students). In order to investigate students’ moral reasoning, we used a modified version of the DIT developed by Rest. Kohlberg’s theory of moral development, which claims that there are six stages of moral development which are grouped into three levels of morality, was used as the theoretical foundation for the test. The results of the study show that there is a statistically significant difference at the postconventional level of moral judgment depending on the group of sciences: the level of postconventional moral reasoning is higher among the students of social and biomedical sciences than among the students of technical sciences. When it comes to the conventional level of moral reasoning, which is the modal level for the adult population, differences have not been observed. With regards to the individual stages of moral development, the results show that there are statistically significant differences in moral reasoning at stage 3, stage 4, stage 5A, stage 5B and stage 6. Stage 3 is more prominent among students of social and technical sciences than in students of biomedical sciences. Stage 4 and Stage 5A are higher in students of biomedical and social sciences than in technical science students. Stage 5B and stage 6 are more prevalent in biomedical sciences students than in students of the other two groups of sciences. Findings are discussed from the point of view of cognitive approach to morality and the contribution of educational and social factors to the moral development process of a person. ","PeriodicalId":240124,"journal":{"name":"Facta Universitatis, Series: Teaching, Learning and Teacher Education","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"MORAL REASONING OF STUDENTS OF DIFFERENT PROFESSIONAL CHOICES\",\"authors\":\"Mirjana Đokić, Snažana Stojiljković\",\"doi\":\"10.22190/FUTLTE1901019D\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The goal of this research was to investigate the differences in moral reasoning among students of social, biomedical and technical sciences. The sample included 300 students of both genders (154 male and 146 female students). In order to investigate students’ moral reasoning, we used a modified version of the DIT developed by Rest. Kohlberg’s theory of moral development, which claims that there are six stages of moral development which are grouped into three levels of morality, was used as the theoretical foundation for the test. The results of the study show that there is a statistically significant difference at the postconventional level of moral judgment depending on the group of sciences: the level of postconventional moral reasoning is higher among the students of social and biomedical sciences than among the students of technical sciences. When it comes to the conventional level of moral reasoning, which is the modal level for the adult population, differences have not been observed. With regards to the individual stages of moral development, the results show that there are statistically significant differences in moral reasoning at stage 3, stage 4, stage 5A, stage 5B and stage 6. Stage 3 is more prominent among students of social and technical sciences than in students of biomedical sciences. Stage 4 and Stage 5A are higher in students of biomedical and social sciences than in technical science students. Stage 5B and stage 6 are more prevalent in biomedical sciences students than in students of the other two groups of sciences. Findings are discussed from the point of view of cognitive approach to morality and the contribution of educational and social factors to the moral development process of a person. \",\"PeriodicalId\":240124,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Facta Universitatis, Series: Teaching, Learning and Teacher Education\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Facta Universitatis, Series: Teaching, Learning and Teacher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22190/FUTLTE1901019D\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Facta Universitatis, Series: Teaching, Learning and Teacher Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22190/FUTLTE1901019D","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是调查社会科学、生物医学和技术科学学生在道德推理方面的差异。样本包括300名男女学生(154名男生和146名女生)。为了调查学生的道德推理,我们使用了Rest开发的DIT的修改版本。Kohlberg的道德发展理论,声称道德发展有六个阶段,分为三个层次的道德,被用作测试的理论基础。研究结果表明,不同学科的学生在后传统道德判断水平上存在显著差异:社会科学和生物医学专业的学生在后传统道德推理水平高于技术科学专业的学生。当涉及到传统的道德推理水平,也就是成年人的模态水平时,没有观察到差异。就个体道德发展阶段而言,结果显示,在第3阶段、第4阶段、第5A阶段、第5B阶段和第6阶段,道德推理存在显著的统计学差异。第三阶段在社会科学和技术科学的学生中比在生物医学科学的学生中更为突出。第4阶段和第5A阶段在生物医学和社会科学专业的学生中高于技术科学专业的学生。阶段5B和阶段6在生物医学科学的学生中比在其他两组科学的学生中更普遍。从道德的认知途径以及教育和社会因素对一个人的道德发展过程的贡献的角度讨论了研究结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
MORAL REASONING OF STUDENTS OF DIFFERENT PROFESSIONAL CHOICES
The goal of this research was to investigate the differences in moral reasoning among students of social, biomedical and technical sciences. The sample included 300 students of both genders (154 male and 146 female students). In order to investigate students’ moral reasoning, we used a modified version of the DIT developed by Rest. Kohlberg’s theory of moral development, which claims that there are six stages of moral development which are grouped into three levels of morality, was used as the theoretical foundation for the test. The results of the study show that there is a statistically significant difference at the postconventional level of moral judgment depending on the group of sciences: the level of postconventional moral reasoning is higher among the students of social and biomedical sciences than among the students of technical sciences. When it comes to the conventional level of moral reasoning, which is the modal level for the adult population, differences have not been observed. With regards to the individual stages of moral development, the results show that there are statistically significant differences in moral reasoning at stage 3, stage 4, stage 5A, stage 5B and stage 6. Stage 3 is more prominent among students of social and technical sciences than in students of biomedical sciences. Stage 4 and Stage 5A are higher in students of biomedical and social sciences than in technical science students. Stage 5B and stage 6 are more prevalent in biomedical sciences students than in students of the other two groups of sciences. Findings are discussed from the point of view of cognitive approach to morality and the contribution of educational and social factors to the moral development process of a person. 
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信