The purpose of this study is to present a critical review of various kinds of integrative approaches to moral education, and then, to explore new possibilities to build bridges across the theoretical chasms between a traditional socialization perspect...
The purpose of this study is to present a critical review of various kinds of integrative approaches to moral education, and then, to explore new possibilities to build bridges across the theoretical chasms between a traditional socialization perspective such as character education and a constructivist perspective in moral education. With relatively more attention to character education, Lickona and Rusnak have sought to create an integrated approach in character education. Focusing on moral psychology, Damon and Blasi tend toward their theories of progressive integration of self and morality in explaining moral conduct. Rest proposes his four component model of morality as an integrated approach to moral education, yet maintains the essential features of an empirically grounded theory of moral judgment development. Additionally, contemporary research has argued that the justice-empathy dichotomy and the justice-caring dichotomy were essentially false and both kinds of theories were compatible with a recognition of justice and empathy/caring as integral aspects of morality.
I think it is more profitable for research to be based on these integrative approaches to moral education, instead of trying to chop up moral education into fractions. However, contemporary versions of these integrative approaches to moral education expose some deficiencies in theoretical and practical perspectives. Thus, to accomplish a comprehensive and integrated approach to moral education, I suggest the potential for an integrative view of character education and constructivist moral education, using a new concept of "constructivist character education" as an integrative, bridging term.