Howard Gardner on best approaches for teaching ethics

by Howard Gardner

Howard Gardner responds to a question posed from Korea, from someone interested in best approaches for teaching ethics:

Thank you for your inquiry. You raise the question of the advantages of teaching ethics as a ‘stand alone’ course, as is done in Korea. My own view is that no one is born moral or immoral, ethical or unethical. Our upbringing and our surrounding culture determine how we behave toward others—those whom we know (what I call neighborly morality); toward those with whom we have a work relationship (what I call the ethics of roles). Across cultures and history, morals and ethics have been taught or conveyed in multiple ways: through religion, through stories, through history, through the media, through formal education, and, most importantly, through the individuals with whom one spends time, particularly when we are young. Traditionally parents, grandparents, older siblings, and other relatives have had the most influence; we see how they behave, for what they are praised and rewarded, for what they are shunned and punished, and we decide how we should behave ourselves. In recent times, and particularly in the United States, the examples of peers are very important. When formal schooling began, it often featured a very strong moral and ethical curriculum. Indeed, except for acquiring literacy, learning how to behave toward others—and how not to behave toward others—was the chief curriculum of traditional schooling. And so the ethical curricula featured in Korea, in China, in Scandinavia, and indeed in most countries is probably the norm. And yet, the existence of moral /ethical education scarcely guarantees the emergence of moral/ethical human beings. To take just one recent example: in China, during Mao Zedong’s era, there was plenty of moral education in school. Yet in the Cultural Revolution, young people were extremely destructive, often participating with enthusiasm as their own parents or teachers were ridiculed, punished, even murdered. In my view, the important consideration is not whether there are formal classes in school. Rather, there are two crucial considerations: l) How do the influential persons in the young person’s life behave toward other human beings? 2) Are the messages in the society consistent or inconsistent with one another? When the influential persons behave morally and ethically, and their behaviors are similar to one another, then young people are likely to emerge as moral and ethical human beings. This happens whether or not there is formal schooling. If, on the other hand, the role models are immoral and/or unethical, or the messages across the society (including school) are inconsistent with one another, then it is unlikely that young people will merit the labels ‘moral’ or ‘ethical.’

Twitter Trouble

by Diana Lockwood

I learned firsthand all about the “digital perils” associated with Twitter.  An administrator pulled me aside to explain that a student’s mother was challenging my ability to teach her child because of a tweet I posted encouraging students to not be lazy and attend tutorial to raise their grade.  There was no room for discussion because the student had already been reassigned to another classroom.

Getting called into the office for tweeting and learning what the word “tweet” meant happened in the same year.  I used to think it was a birdcall, but now I know it is a noun and a verb and a way to cause harm or good.  High schools are focused on immediate visible danger like fists, knives, and guns; however, cyber conflicts also spill over into reality.  A tweet about the location of a fight will cause students to skip class to watch and cheer as two kids beat the living daylights out of each other.  Situations where the Internet is used to cause harm, intentional or accidental, are preventable.

Twitter is also a place where communities can work together to spread positive news.  Working as a classroom teacher, I frequently tweet updates about homework, school-related sporting events and tutorial sessions.  I am always looking for new ways to be a 21st century teacher who communicates with parents and students using a variety of modalities. Being a member of the Twitter community alerts me when a student is sick, running late for school, in a bad mood, or worse.

At the Educating for Today and Tomorrow conference, I attended The GoodPlay Project: Exploring Digital Ethics workshop. Here, we explored “digital promises” and “digital perils.”   I’ve found that Twitter engages my students, because they love to see their work.  It offers instant publication and gratification. I tweet because the majority of my students have internet capable phones.  They may not bring paper or pencil to class, but they always have their cell phones.  Through Twitter, I tell my students to share their journal entries, or send positive messages.  For example, “So proud of all the football players! You guys played really well!”  Or, I message reminders, “Quiz tomorrow on class this week.  Be sure to study!” However, messages may also be easily misconstrued – emotions and tone are often difficult to interpret through digital media.  Also, online information should be monitored by parents and teachers through active participation in online social media.

In Howard Gardner’s Truth, Beauty, and Goodness: Educating for the Virtues in the Age of Truthiness and Twitter, he refers to the Internet as the “Wild, Wild West” and speaks about the “compromised work” and ethics often seen among American youth.  Twitter can contribute to the demoralization of our youth, if we do not work together to set and monitor parameters. The Internet is a gateway for “digital perils” where tweets are posted with little forethought, but we have to remain mindful of the potential Twitter has to elevate learning.  I speak to my students in a language with which they are already familiar – “tweeting” – and use their knowledge to scaffold and build upon their current understandings.

Gardner discusses how youth “know the right thing to do,” but ask, “why should I be more ethical than my peers seem to be?”  Could we as teachers expect students to act ethically if schools focused on the “digital promises?”  Educators are trying to teach as best they can in a time of limited resources.  Many of my colleagues are too afraid to use the new technology, because textbooks and worksheets seem safer than the Internet.

I believe that we need to work together to educate our youth and ourselves to make safe decisions online.  The recommended guidelines I propose for online usage in schools begin with teachers:  Teachers should discuss the purpose of the Internet for classroom use, set parameters for word choice and stick to posting positive news.  Students must agree to act ethically online and receive teacher approval before posting a school related message.  Parents need to help students understand the concept of thinking ethically, monitor their children’s social networking, and contact the teacher if an inappropriate event occurs.

We have to start teaching in the 21st century and use the resources at our fingertips.  As adults we must cooperate and keep the doors open for discussion – both in person and on the internet.  Most importantly, we have to work together to keep our children safe in cyberspace as well as in reality.

Howard Gardner Visits Bloomsburg

by Joan Miller

I first learned about the GoodWork Project five years ago. Since then I have collaborated with researchers in the nursing profession to learn about the meaning of good work among nurses in local, regional, and international settings. I have integrated the theory of good work in courses across disciplines at Bloomsburg University, Bloomsburg, PA.

Recently, Dr. Howard Gardner delivered the Provost Lecture at Bloomsburg University to an audience of over 1500 faculty and students. Dr. Gardner provided an overview of the theory of multiple intelligences. He transitioned seamlessly into the theory of good work. Following the lecture students approached Dr. Gardner to ask questions about both theories. Students grasped the theory of multiple intelligences and the need for both individualized and pluralized teaching. They understand that individuals have intelligences that cannot be measured solely by psychometric tests. However, they struggled with the notion of what it takes to become the kind of people we want to be and to build the society in which we want to live.

At breakfast the following morning, conversation with students turned to a discussion of what it means to falsify a resume. One student stated she would want to present herself just as she is, with enthusiasm for her profession and no falsification. She wants to be accepted for the person she is. Another student stated she would not be able to ‘put her head on the pillow’ at the end of the day if she falsified a resume. However, she is concerned about how hard it is to adhere to high ideals when others in the work place do not. She stated, “At the end of the day, a young person can return home and even there witness compromised work and values. What is a young person to do?” This student seemed desperate for a role model.

How are we preparing the next generation? Have we abandoned the role of the trusted role model? Have we failed as educators or is there hope for a better future among those committed to preparing the next generation of professionals to assume roles as responsible citizens? What does it take?

Howard Gardner’s Provost Lecture

Educating for Today and Tomorrow

by Lynn Barendsen

Last week, along with several colleagues from Project Zero, I participated in a conference in Washington DC. Our hosts were CASIE (Center for the Advancement and Study of International Education) and WIS (the Washington International School). Project Zero’s first “off site” conference! Very exciting for all of us, and a great opportunity to learn from passionate, creative teachers and researchers. I thought I’d share a sampling of thoughts that are still lingering with me:

Our first day was spent at the National Gallery of Art – a treat! Considering the idea of the museum, Shari Tishman asked us to consider the various “frames” we bring to our experiences. She referred to studies which demonstrate that most of us place a great deal of trust in our museums. Thinking through my goodwork “frame,” I wondered: what are the responsibilities that go along with this trust?

Our second day began with a plenary in which David Perkins talked about the Languages of War and Peace. Guiding us through how meaning is made, using phrases such as “regrettable necessity” or “zealous allegiance,” David enriched our understanding of what global competence means in the 21st century. As global citizens, whether or not we may agree with the actions of our nation’s leaders, we are all complicit in the societies to which we belong. A question Wendy and I have been thinking about for years, but one that seems to be getting increasingly complex: what does it mean to be a responsible global citizen?

Howard Gardner spoke about Five Minds for the Future on the final day of the conference. I always learn something when I listen to Howard, and this day was no exception. But what I found most moving was his response to a question posed by a participant. Attending the conference as a parent, not an educator, a woman asked how she might encourage new ideas in her school system. She is apparently up against a difficult school board, undoubtedly facing budget cuts, and feeling quite powerless. He offered encouragement, pointed to some examples of incredible “boutique” approaches (e.g. Reggio Emilia), and then pointed to what is really most important in our education system. We should not be focusing solely on test scores, or even on intelligence or knowledge. Education should be about teaching young people to be the kinds of human beings we want them to be.

Just a few of many ideas I’ll continue to mull over as Thanksgiving approaches.

Professional Ethics and Social Media-Medicine and Religion

by Margot Locker

Last week we posted the first in our two part series on Project Zero’s Carrie James’ experience at SMU’s “Conference of the Professions.”  After John Browning spoke about ethics and the law, Dr. Dan McCoy, a dermatologist, spoke about ethical dilemmas and challenges surfacing in medicine related to the internet.

He began by explaining how the internet allows patients to research their ailments and creates communities around shared experiences with medical conditions.  While these forums can be positive places for patients to relate, provide advice, and share stories, they can also be a source of misinformation for many. Dr. McCoy further detailed that there is concern across the field because it is difficult to police these spaces.

He also cited the tensions in online doctor-patient relationships, as they lack the trust and authenticity which are often products of face to face interactions. A solid relationship between doctor and patient is key to good medicine. While “telemedicine” should not necessarily cease to exist, the interactions online should be handled with care.

At the closing of his talk, Dr. McCoy cited a case in his life where a young nurse posted a photo of medical nature online that was deemed inappropriate and was consequently fired.  She was later reinstated as the picture was not identified or tagged. Cases like these raise the questions of doctor patient confidentiality and the caution medical professionals need to take in their online and social media activity.

After hearing Dr. McCoy speak, several conference participants offered their experiences with ethical uses of the internet in medicine. One participant wondered if it is ethical to find information out about a patient online in order to better treat them (such as a picture of a patient smoking). Another participant in the conference noted that psychiatric residents are more commonly “googling” patients in order to gather more information about their histories, which in turn changes the nature of their clinical encounter and how they may treat the patient. Should this practice be banned? Is it helpful or harmful in deciding on a course of treatment?

After Dr. McCoy finished speaking, the last member of the panel, Pastor Dusty Craig, shared his thoughts on the place of the internet in religion. He feels that social media allows people to get to know their spiritual leader in a different environment.  These media also provide forums for members of religious communities to share their perspectives on their faith and, in so doing, helps push against the notion that the leader is the only person who can speak about the meaning of the faith He pointed out that the mission of the church is to spread the word and get the message to the “un-churched, de-churched, and anti-church population,” and social media is an ideal means to do this.  Pastor Craig ended by acknowledging that with all the benefits of the internet, policies are still necessary to regulate use within the church. His church, for instance, has rules on what staff can post online, especially as they “friend” and reach out virtually to many people in order to get them interested in the church.

Offering these diverse perspectives about the internet in their places of work, this panel revealed many common challenges facing the professions when it comes to internet usage and social media. Many questions come to mind in thinking about these issues: What privacy issues do we face in light of the internet? How is the relationship between doctor/patient, lawyer/client, and pastor/ practioner altered due to online activity? How can social media be ethically managed? How are professions adapting professional codes, or creating new ones, to address new issues raised in new media environments?