Moral judgement among university students in Ica: A view from the perspective of Lawrence Kohlberg

Introduction

When discussing moral judgement, it is essential to talk about “ethics”. This term refers to the fact that a person's behavior within society is regulated by rules. From childhood, human beings are immersed in socializing agents such as the family, the school, the environment, among others (Mendizabal et al., 2021). Thus, from an early age, children learn that there are both good and bad behaviors. All these opinions forged based on the different experiences and external agents about the moral problems they experience, and the arguments used in favor of these judgements constitute the development of the cognitive behavior of moral judgement (Noguera, 2018).

As they pass through stages such as adolescence, youth and adulthood, individuals form their own identity, and become consciously aware of assuming and respecting norms and values. Lawrence Kohlberg (1973) points out that the person will learn and move up in the process of moral judgement in accordance with cognitive development. That is, as the person passes through various stages, he or she will find himself or herself at a different moral level, which will modify his or her reasoning (Mendizabal et al., 2021).

Kohlberg (1969) considers that the functioning of moral judgement is organized in cognitive structures from which all types of moral reasoning derive, which is based on universal and abstract principles, therefore, moral judgement is an evaluation and justification of prescriptive values versus what is good and bad (Goenaga, Lopera & Villada, 2021).

Kohlberg organized the theory of moral development on the basis of three levels, pre-conventional, conventional and post-conventional. These are characterized by moral problems which, in turn, are divided into two stages representing the individual's criteria for behavior (Cruz Puerto, 2020). The first level, the preconventional level, indicates that people are not guided by society's norms but only by concrete consequences; at the conventional level, the person adheres to society's norms and strives to avoid being punished; finally, at the postconventional level, the person reasons based on ethical principles beyond society's norms (Sandoval, Villega & Vega, 2019).

At the beginning of university life, cognitive development is reinforced by teachers, who must contribute to the development of students' moral judgement as part of a comprehensive education (Mendizabal et al., 2021). Although programs already include ethics and moral issues in their curricula to guide them during their professional practice, the results are mostly imperceptible. Therefore, it is important that based on a diagnosis of the student's reasoning and moral development, the current educational purposes are evaluated and improved (Contreras et al., 2020).

Moral development has been considered an essential objective in education systems, as it is a progressive and gradual process that requires a combination of academic training, practical skills, and moral competences to be developed (Ranjbar et al., 2017). This is vital as previous studies show that there is an “ethical erosion” in higher education (Reyes et al., 2021), therefore, educational commitment must be addressed in the long term, where a theme of values, democracy, commitment, and justice is instilled as an aspect of lifelong learning (Sandoval, Villega & Vega, 2019).

We must remember that educational institutions are an important partner in the moral development of individuals and society, facilitating change not only at the personal level, but also contributing to the community and society. Citizens must be educated in democratic values, where they exercise their rights in a responsible manner and fulfil their obligations in solidarity (Pedraza & Pérez, 2019).

In view of this scenario, it was proposed as a general objective to identify and describe the stages of moral judgment among university students in the tenth semester in the district of Ica, in 2022 in a way that allows to demonstrate and respond to the problem that mobilized the study, that is, how are the levels of moral judgment in university students in the tenth semester in Ica in 2022?

For which the following specific objectives were set out: to identify moral judgement at the preconventional level, the conventional level, and the post-conventional level in university students in the tenth semester in Ica, in 2022.

Methods

Results

Demographic data showed that 54.14% of the university students analyzed were male and 45.86% were female. Regarding age, it was found that the vast majority of students were between the ages of 21 years (52.23%), followed by students aged 22 years (35.03%), also 23 years (10.83%) and finally 1.91% were 24 years or older (see Table 4).

The preconventional level of the study sample was analyzed, where a development of instrumental relativism moral judgement of 12.75% is evident in the university students in their tenth semester of the administrative sciences (see Table 5). This result is exclusive of the evaluation of developmental stage II, because the test does not evaluate stage I.

We analyzed the conventional level where we find a development of moral judgement of interpersonal concordance of 23.10% and social order and authority of 35.76% in the university students in their tenth semester of the administrative sciences corresponding to development stage III and IV respectively (see Table 6).

The post-conventional level was analyzed, showing a development of moral judgement of social contract of 11.95% and universal ethical principles of 3.80% in the university students in their tenth semester of the administrative sciences corresponding to developmental stage V and VI respectively, determining and reaching a post-conventional level of 15.75% among the study sample (see Table 7).

Table 8 shows the A and M scores, which show the reliability of the data, and whether respondents have lied or had a bias when giving an answer. The scores should be less than 14%. If this is achieved, it means that the responses are truthful and do not need to be invalidated.

In reference to Figure 1, it is evident that the responses both A (6.90%) and M (5.70%) are less than 14%, so it takes as reliable all the responses collected by the students of the study site. Taking this into account, it is determined that the most predominant moral judgement among the students is the conventional one; being part of this the interpersonal agreement (23.10%) and social order and authority (35.76%): stage III and IV, indicating that the judgement goes with having good behaviors and behaving according to how others expect them to behave, also that they are governed by the regulations and laws determined and that they do not intend to infringe them intentionally, unless they are forced to break some law. Secondly, there is the post-conventional stage; being part of this the social contract (11.95%) and universal ethical principles (3.80%). This group has a judgement empathy, knowing and being aware that all people have different points of view, values, ways of life and so on. They are always being respectful of this, but not preventing that if they see or are in a situation in which they see that the basic and universal principles of a person are being affected; they will put these principles above anything else. And finally, there is the preconventional stage, being part of this the punishment-obedience (0.0%) and instrumental relativism (12.75%), this type of stage would indicate that people act only out of interest and when they know that they will get something beneficial for themselves and for the rest of the people involved, being fairness and justice their predominant ones.

Figure 1. Moral judgement stage profile among the sample: General.

Discussion and conclusion

The moral judgment of tenth semester university students in the district of Ica was identified. The results showed a development of moral judgment in the “Self-interest” stage with 12.75%; an analysis of the “Obedience and punishment” stage was not made, since this is only analyzed in minors. In view of this, it was possible to identify that 12.75% of the total sample were in the preconventional stage, this being the level with the lowest frequency among the study sample. This result differs from that found by Juarez and Tananta (2020) because they found that most of the university students in their sample were at the preconventional level of moral judgment (58.75%), so it was determined that the determining moral judgment among the students was preconventional. It should be noted that at this level the moral sense and judgment is assumed in such a way that the norms are accepted and if they favor one’s own interests. This is due to the fact that the individual proposes to do what satisfies his interests, considering it fair that others also pursue theirs.

Secondly, it was identified that 23.10% of the development of moral judgment of university students are in the stage “Interpersonal agreement and conformity” and 35.76% were in “social order and authority”. These results indicated that 58.86% of the total sample were in the conventional stage, this being the level with the highest frequency among the study sample. The result is similar to what was found by Oporto (2018) who found that 66% of university students in the fourth year of the education and psychology career at a university in Arequipa-Peru showed to be in the conventional moral development level. At this level, the person identifies with the group and they try to live up to their family’s expectations. It is perceived as good and bad, according to how society represents it. At this level, the majority of young people and adolescents (of both sexes) are at this level, where they recognize social rules and the interests of others, in that sense the morality of the individual is linked to the personal and social relationships they have established but also emphasizes especially the rules of authority, considers it essential to maintain social order and is justified by an obligation of conscience that requires people to fulfill the obligations they have to society so it would be important to be considered as a “good person”, loyal, respectable, cooperative and pleasant.

There was also evidence of a development of moral judgment of the social contract of 11.95% and of universal ethical principles of 3.80%. These results indicated that a total of 15.75% of university students were in the post-conventional stage of development, this being the second most prevalent among the study sample. These results are supported by Bedoya et al. (2021) whose study found that the postconventional index was the second predetermining moral development among tenth cycle students of a university in the city of Manizales with a marguen of 29%, the first being the conventional level (50%). At this level the meaning of ethics for the human being is defined in terms of more abstract principles and values. The person who reaches this level defines and considers that some norms are unjust and could be changed or repealed. This indicates that there are students who have reached the highest stage, who no longer think only of themselves and of society, but who carry out an analysis where they can demonstrate that there are supreme values and rights that every society must guarantee, as well as universal moral principles that are different from the laws themselves.

We must remember that stage IV is characterized by the fact that the values of law and life are in conflict and people have problems when choosing between these two, in some cases this leads to see this stage (post-conventional) as inadequate to resolve situations in a society whose legal system denies basic human rights; where our behavior does not necessarily follow the dictates of our moral judgments, situations faced by students who have passed to this level of moral judgment.

The determining moral judgment identified among the tenth semester university students of the district of Ica was the conventional moral judgment with a total of 58.86% of the entire sample, followed by the post-conventional level (15.75%) and finally the preconventional (12.75%). This general analysis is supported by both Jaime (2019) where conventional moral reasoning also prevailed, with 68.8%. Also in Barreto (2018) who evidenced that university students in his sample were mostly at the conventional developmental level (51%). Oporto (2018) substantiates that university students being at this stage is normal, since “at this level most adolescents and young adults are found, so that social norms and the expectations of others, especially authority, are appreciated, and the subject identifies with the social role he or she occupies” (p. 22).

In all the cases reviewed, it is common for the populations and samples studied to be situated at the conventional level. This means that nowadays young people have become aware of abiding by the common rules of coexistence as well as recognizing that all individuals have interests that may not necessarily be the same. It follows that fairness is relative, as it is linked to personal interests, and that an exchange with others is necessary to ensure that one's own interests are satisfied.

It is important that, in the creation of scenarios for moral development, the educational and teacher's responsibility involves creating a type of conflict that facilitates the development of models of thinking in their students, because, as Kohlberg indicates, models of thinking are not taught, whereas, on the contrary, moral reasoning is self-generated in the environmental exchange and changes progressively.

The main limitation is the collection of data in a single period and not longitudinally to be able to observe how the stages change according to the knowledge and maturity of each person. Therefore, it is suggested that when replicating the studies, they can be carried out under the type of research mentioned above and thus observe the evolution of moral judgement.

This empirical work was intended to discover, describe and understand the level of moral development that, following Lawrence Kohlberg’s contributions, characterises a group of students. The results of this research provide evidence of which of the stages is the most developed by students who are about to finish their careers and go out into the workplace, which requires workers who perform through correct behaviour and currently these often feel shame, guilt or, on the contrary, feel organisational pride. In this way, it will allow universities to improve their educational models that favour student moral development as a way to improve academic and work performance, which requires changes in the current forms of interaction between teachers, students and study centre.

As a final conclusion, it was identified that the stages of moral judgement among the study sample indicate that interpersonal agreement (23.10%); and social order and authority (35.76%) are the most developed, instrumental relativism (12.75%) is the least developed and social contract (11.95%) and universal ethical principles (3.80%) are the stages that tend to develop in the future among university students in the tenth semester in the district of Ica.

Regarding the specific objectives, it was possible to identify that the preconventional level was 12.75%, the conventional level was 58.86% and finally the post-conventional level was 15.75% among university students.

Although the transition through each of the stages proposed by Kolhberg evolves over the years, one of the keys provided by Kolhberg’s theory to reach the last stage is the need to dialogue or contact with people or reflections in stages higher than ours to discover how they reason in situations of ethical conflict, It is therefore important that after the stages are located, the educational sector can carry out activities that reinforce the development of moral judgement and continue in ascending progression, but also that it transmits the capacity to live in accordance with this judgement, as many times there are not intellectual errors but moral weakness, due to a lack of strength to do good. This is because our moral action often shows incoherence with respect to our way of thinking, which forces us to re-evaluate the values we hold.