| . |
. |
. |
|
A
Cognitive Developmental Approach to Conversation
|
|
|
Teachers are usually aware of the problem ELT
students face in conversation classes in putting to use the basic language rules they have
learned. Even advanced students seem to have difficulty in spoken interaction; i.e.
conversation. Students who have mastered function, form, and vocabulary can often read and
write better than they can speak in a foreign language.
|
|
|
One of the most important problems for students
who have mastered the basics of grammar seems to stem from the content chosen for
conversation classes. Topics such as pollution or the dangers of smoking are not
interesting to students. They usually only lead to activities such as gathering data and
then presenting them in the classroom. These activities often lack the features of a real
life communicative situation.
|
|
|
Free and spontaneous speech activities require
ways of stimulating students to converse in a psychologically authentic atmosphere, rather
than through ready-made formulas. Students must feel the need to communicate and express
ideas and feelings, a process which calls for engaging and thought- provoking material,
suitable to the cognitive developmental level of the learners.
|
|
|
Integrating Kohlberg's theory and educational
strategies and hypothetical moral dilemmas offer opportunities for authentic material,
material which can be used with both children and adults. These dilemmas are open-ended
hypothetical problems which present a conflict between the rights, responsibilities, and
claims of hypothetical characters. These characters are faced with a situation that the
students are asked to resolve. These dilemmas often involve life and death situations that
we have all engaged in imaginatively at some time in our lives. As they possess drama and
emotional appeal, they meet the criteria for absorbing, thought-provoking content.
|
|
|
Kohlberg (1963) has developed a system for
categorizing the moral reasoning of individuals into three levels: pre-conventional,
conventional , and post-conventional . As people mature, they move through
these stages covering a range of moral development in an invariant sequence. The first
level portrays children's highly concrete moral reasoning in finding a solution to a
problem. The second level emerges during preadolescence and becomes quite dominant during
adolescence. The solutions at this stage usually include abstract issues (ex: what society
should expect from its members) and requires reasoning based on beginning formal
operations. The third level emerges during adolescence or early adulthood and
characterizes the reasoning of only a small number of adults who are able to think in
abstract categories and use reasoning based on advanced formal operations. The solutions
to the dilemmas develop around the principle of justice; i.e., what would be the fairest
solution for all the characters in the dilemma.
|
|
|
Kohlbergian dilemmas can be used with first year
English language students. Each dilemma usually takes two class hours. Before presenting
the dilemma I arrange the chairs in a circular shape with the teacher in the middle. This
arrangement gives each one in the group a chance to communicate face to face and to use
both nonverbal and verbal contact. It also contributes to the friendly atmosphere
necessary for interaction.
|
|
|
I usually present the dilemma such as the
following Heinz quandary by reading it twice at normal speed.
|
|
|
In Europe, a woman is near death from a special
kind of cancer. There is one drug that the doctors think might save her. It is a form of
radium that a druggist in the same town has recently discovered. The drug is expensive to
make, but the druggist is charging ten times what the drug cost him to make. He paid $200
for the radium and is charging $2000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's
husband, Heinz, goes to everyone he knows to borrow the money, but he can get together
only about $1000, which is half of what it costs. He tells the druggist that his wife is
dying and asks him to sell the drug cheaper or let him pay later. The druggist says,
"No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it." Heinz is
desperate and considers breaking into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife.
|
|
|
(Colby, 1979: Form A)
After the reading, the first step involves identifying and clarifying the dilemma. To
do this the students must clarify their own notions of justice. This discussion almost
always turns into a warmup exercise. The teacher can use the warmingup activity as an
opportunity to create a positive and accepting classroom atmosphere. This is the time
students have a chance to communicate their thoughts in a classroom where they will be
listened to without fear of criticism. This also might be the first opportunity for many
students to think about issues which they have heard but not really thought about.
|
|
|
The second step involves reading the first part
of the first question to the students. "Should Heinz steal the drug?" The
students are asked to form three groups according to their answers: Those who think Heinz
should steal the drug, those who think he should not, and those who cannot decide.
Grouping helps students feel comfortable since it is easier to develop a sense of trust
and cooperation in small groups. There can be more than one group within each group
according to the number of students in the classroom. Next, dictate the remaining
questions of the dilemma.
|
|
|
- Should Heinz steal the drug? Why or why not?
- If Heinz doesn't love his wife, should he steal the drug for her? Why or why not?
- Suppose the person dying is not his wife but a stranger. Should Heinz steal the drug for
a stranger? Why or why not?
- Suppose it is a pet animal he loves. Should Heinz steal to save the pet animal? Why or
why not?
- Why should people do everything they can to save another's life?
- It is against the law for Heinz to steal? Does that make it morally wrong? Why or why
not?
- Why should people generally do everything they can to avoid breaking the law? How does
this relate to Heinz's case? (Colby, 1979: Form A)
|
|
|
Each group discusses and writes down the reasons
in answer to the questions of the dilemma. During this discussion the groups often revert
to the native language; however, this usually indicates that the students are enjoying the
task and that they are bringing in their own knowledge and experience, thus personalizing
the task. They are then asked to formulate and write down their reasons in English. The
teacher is there to facilitate.
|
|
|
Kohlberg's research in psychology has shown that
our conception of justice-what is right-changes and develops over time as we interact with
our environment. Students at the pre- conventional level approach a moral problem from the
concrete interests of the individuals involved in a situation. Their concerns will be
whether Heinz will be punished for stealing and whether he will be able to live without
his wife.
|
|
|
Students at the conventional level approach a
moral problem as a member of society and take into account what the group or society
expects an individual to do within its moral norms. The students' considerations at this
level will focus on 1) whether a loving husband would do whatever he could to save his
wife, 2) whether he could get help from the authorities and what would happen to society
if all its members broke the laws. The concern is to protect society as well as one's own
interests.
|
|
|
At the post-conventional level a moral problem
is considered from an above society perspective. The person at this level sees beyond the
current laws and norms of society and thinks about the principles upon which a just
society can be based. In relation to Heinz's dilemma, the person at the post-conventional
level will consider whether the attempts to save a life would be interpreted as breaking
the law. Another consideration would be to decide what kind of system could both prevent
the loss of innocent life and protect the druggist's right to property.
|
|
|
The classroom presentation of the dilemma and
the students' recording of their answers usually takes one class hour. The next class hour
is dedicated to the discussion of the questions, one by one, by the whole class. During
the discussion I try to ensure equal participation among group members and to help
students acquire the confidence to develop, express, and value their own responses.
Students experience the delight of encountering their own thoughts expressed by their
friends and also find the same situations viewed in a totally new unexpected light or
perspective due to their being at different stages of moral development.
|
|
|
During this process I try to encourage students
to find each other's perspective along with the perspectives of the people in the dilemma
since role-taking is a prerequisite to the development of moral thinking. I also ask
abstract philosophical questions such as, "Why are laws made? On what basis should
one decide whether a law is just or unjust? If one decides to break a law intentionally,
does a person have a responsibility to accept the consequences?" These questions
invite students to explore the reasons behind their views and to interact with their
classmates in a way that challenges their reasoning.
|
|
|
The use of Kohlbergian dilemmas leads to
interactional encounters, which is the center of conversation, and stimulates the
negotiation between participants, fostering development of student skills in the areas of
reasoning, communicating, listening and questioning. Students try to overcome the
linguistic obstacles enthusiastically because fluent language use turns into a means, not
an end, and the conversation lesson becomes a living experience of communication rather
than another boring class hour.
|
|
|
Meral
€ileli is an associate professor at The Middle East Technical University
Faculty of Education, Dept. of Foreign Language Education, in Ankara. |
|
|
Return
|
|
|
- Colby et al. 1979. Standard form scoring manual. U.S.A.: Harvard University.
- Hersh, P. R. 1979. Promoting moral growth. New York, London: Longman.
- Kohlberg, I. 1963. The development of children's orientations toward a moral order. l:
Sequence in the development of human thought. Vita Humana, 6, pp. 11-33(a).
- Rivers, M. W. 1983. Speaking in many tongues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
|
|
|
. |
. |