Why Should Ethicists Care about Pre-School Classes?

by Howard Gardner

An Unexpected Focus

Why should we—researchers studying moral and ethical character in adolescents and young adults—be interested in how young children are treated as early as the pre-school years? To be sure: It’s been well established that the early years of life are critical for the healthy development of the individual. Accordingly, observations and findings about various approaches to early education may well be revealing.

A remarkable set of studies, carried out over the last forty years, has illuminated three distinctive approaches to early childhood education. In the early 1980s, educational anthropologist Joseph Tobin and his colleagues examined preschool education in Japan, China, and the United States. Two decades later, members of the research team returned to the same sites; they documented both continuities and changes in the trio of settings, sometimes with the same teachers. And then, yet again, during the most recent decade, the research team, now led by Tobin’s former student Akiko Hayashi, returned to the sites that had been earlier studied—this time focusing particularly on the way that teachers and teaching had changed over the decades.

The methods employed by the researchers were original and turned out to be surprisingly revealing. In addition to ethnographic observations and semi-structured interviews, the team created short videos of classrooms in-operation in the three societies. Thereafter, they showed these videos to educators across the three cultures and gathered their observations, analyses, and critiques. This multi-faceted approach elicited reflections on pedagogical approaches in the teachers’ own society, as well as observations and critiques by observers drawn from the other two societies.

It hardly needs to be stated: with four books on the shelf, as well as numerous articles, presentations and symposia, one could create a lengthy summary—and still leave out much of importance. For present purposes, I have a single focus: how educators across the three societies handle conflict in the preschool class. The distinctive approaches reveal much about how adults—and particularly educators—conceptualize conflict; and these conceptualizations, in turn, may provide clues to, hints of, the moral and ethical landscape of the respective societies.

An Episode, Response by Teachers, and Diverse Interpretations across the Three Societies

At the Komatsudani preschool on the east side of Kyoto, four old Hiroki is misbehaving. He is hitting other children, hoarding toys, disrupting organized activities—and over the course of the day, his demeanor actually gets worse.

What happens in the Japanese classroom? Ostensibly, very little. The teachers stay largely in the background, wait for Hiroki to calm down, even ignore some attacks that might have mildly injured other children. The day finally ends at 6 PM when Hiroki’s father picks him up.

Watching the video, most Japanese educators find this an acceptable reaction. They believe that no serious injury is likely to occur. The students will learn about how to handle challenging situations as they seek to control or modulate Hiroki themselves—rather than relying on adult interventions; Hiroki will learn that little is to be gained by this anti-social behavior. Instead, he will be motivated to become an accepted member of the cohort… and this feeling of belonging is central to Japanese culture.

Not so for educators in the other societies who view a video of the episode. Most do not approve! They think that the teachers (knowledgeable and responsible authority figures) can and should intervene. The misbehaving child deserves it; he will draw an appropriate lesson from this adult intervention; the children who are being mistreated deserve to be protected and rescued. Indeed, in their passivity, the teachers may well be derelict. Moreover, the other students are absorbing the wrong message: misbehavior is to be tolerated–perhaps event tacitly encouraged–by authority figures.

To be sure: not every observer reflects this attitude. Certainly, some Japanese educators feel that the teachers are not fulfilling their educational roles appropriately; the adults in the room should directly address this anti-social behavior. And observers from the other societies also vary in the extent to which they critique teachers, though few would have permitted such disruptive and possible injurious behavior to proceed unchallenged for so long.

Follow-up

Societies are not static! China has gone through several changes—the mid-1980s and early 2000s were more permissive than earlier or more recent periods. The establishment of academic standards has become widely accepted, though the pendulum continually swings between progressive and conservative orientations. The United States has moved in the direction of greater accountability, including a focus on numeracy, literacy, and pre-literacy skills. Japan has more for-profit schools and has sought to incorporate lessons from other societies, such as the admired pre-schools of Northern Italy.

Still there seem to be some throughlines, some continuities:

In Japan, classes remain large—as many as 30 students for one teacher. (And some see advantages in classrooms of this size—students are more likely to realize that adults are not necessarily available to intervene). Teachers tend to remain in their previous niches or to take on more authority within their designated school. The “Three Rs” are not salient.

In China, the acquisition of study and work habits should start early. Individual differences in achievement are to be expected and should be acknowledged; but so is membership in the group, ranging from the class, to the school, to the wider Chinese society.

In the United States, schools are expected to engender independence, autonomy, and individuality. This characterization obtains for teachers as well—many continue to pursue their own education, typically at their own expense, and often will end up in different schools, in different roles, or even in a different occupation.

Stepping Back

What are we to make of all this? On the one hand, I’ve described but a single line of research—a few schools, for very young children. In most societies around the globe, including the three observed by the Tobin team, youngsters will have many additional years of schooling as well as decades of work and family life ahead of them. All of these experiences are likely to have an impact. Moreover, I’ve focused on only one classroom interaction—and others (for example, how teachers deal with events and encounters that occur in the school playground or in the neighborhood)—will doubtless have impact as well.

On the other hand, as scholars of education (as well as psychology and neuroscience), we have now accrued massive evidence of the importance of the early years of life. The brain develops (or fails to develop) in crucial ways. Social and emotional models are being observed, absorbed, emulated, (or, on occasion, rejected); and so have skills and attitudes toward work as well as play. To be sure, not everything is determined by the age of five,—nor (to riff off a once well-known book title) has all been learned by kindergarten (!) –but a great deal has been.

The traces laid down in early life can be overthrown if society changes radically; or if the preschools (or, for that matter, education at home) undergo a major reformulation and reconceptualization. But it’s naïve to think that moral and ethical standards can simply be flown in or imposed at the age of 10, 20, or later. A basis—what Germans term “anlage” —has been well established; —and if it remains or is reinforced in the succeeding decades, the results are powerful and enduring traits, behaviors, personalities. These cannot be easily changed! And so, as just one example, believing that one is part of a group, and should not assert one’s individuality too much, is far more characteristic of Japanese than American youth…hence the much-cited Image of Japan as a ‘shame’ rather than a ‘guilt’ culture.

Moreover, these patterns of thought and behavior in turn have an impact on the societies that struggle for dominance in our world. In 1945 the United States presumed as Number One; in 1980 Japan described as Number One (Vogel, 1979) and in our time, China asserting itself as Number One.

In future writings, my colleagues and I will focus on the ways in which schools around the world contribute to the ethical standards and mooring of the broader society.

The Good Starts Project is generously funded by the Saul Zaentz Charitable Foundation.

For comments on earlier drafts, I thank researchers, Joseph Tobin and Akiko Hayashi, and also my colleagues, Lynn Barendsen and Shinri Furuzawa.

REFERENCES

Fulghum, R. (1989). Everything I ever really needed to know I learned in Kindergarten. Ballantine Books.

Hayashi, A. (2022). Teaching expertise in three countries: Japan, China, and the United States. University of Chicago Press.

Tobin, J., & Hayashi, A. (2015). Teaching Embodied: Cultural Practices in Japanese Preschools. University of Chicago Press.

Tobin, J. J., Hsueh, Y., & Karasawa, M. (2009). Preschool in three cultures revisited: China, Japan, and the United States. University Of Chicago Press.

Tobin, J., Wu, D., & Davidson, D. (1989). Preschool in three Cultures: Japan, China, and the United States. Yale University Press.

Does a Research Oath for Doctoral Students Make Sense?

by Howard Gardner

The French Office for Research Integrity recently announced a new policy. Going forward, all students who receive—as well as all who expect to receive—a doctorate in any field will be required to take an ethical oath. The wording: “I pledge to the greatest of my ability, to continue to maintain integrity in my relationship to knowledge, to my methods, and to my results.” On two occasions, these individuals need to affirm that, as holders of a doctoral degree, they will adhere in their work to the highest ethical standards.

The case for such a requirement is straightforward. In recent years, across the broad range of physical, natural, and social sciences, there have been numerous cases in which holders of doctorates have behaved in ways that disgrace their profession and may also damage human beings. Two cases that have recently received publicity:

  1. Widespread claims that amyloid deposits cause dementia—and hence can be addressed by palliative drugs—have been based on faulty or ambiguous evidence.

  2. Widespread claims that the blood thinner Xarelto can help to heal cardiac damage—it can actually have deleterious effects—have also been withdrawn because of data manipulation.

Moving beyond the medical sector, in my own field of psychology, the haphazard collection, misinterpretation, and fudging of data have been widespread. In response, all sorts of new requirements and checkpoints have been introduced—to what avail, remains to be seen. In light of such accumulating evidence of malfeasance, an oath is, so to speak, a no-brainer.

But it is almost as easy to make the case against such oaths. Numerous fields—ranging from those dating back to the time of Hippocrates to those new areas of work whose claim to be a profession are debatable—have ethical principles and/or oaths. These are easily accessible and sometimes administered solemnly. And yet, rarely does one hear of severe consequences for those who clearly have violated these precepts. Indeed (and this is not meant as a judgment), practitioners nowadays are far more likely to be penalized or chastised if they misbehave toward a colleague or make injudicious remarks than if they fail to honor the core strictures of their profession. And those whose malpractice has been confirmed at one institution all too often find a comparable position at other (though perhaps less prestigious) institutions.

As one who has held a doctorate for over a half century, I have a clear perspective on this matter. Far more important than any kind of oath, whenever and however administered, are the practices and norms that students witness in the course of their training. This immersion begins early in education (dating back well before matriculation at college or university) and reaches its apogee in the years of doctoral training. Particularly crucial are the standards, models, words, deeds of teachers, especially doctoral advisers; the values and ambitions of peers—other doctoral students in the cohort; and the atmosphere among young and senior professionals who work alongside the candidate in the lab, at the library, in class, or in the lunchroom.

Of course, there will always be exceptions. There will be graduates who, despite the positive models readily visible in their training, proceed to violate their professional oaths and norms. (I can think of colleagues who, lamentably, failed to learn from estimable role models). There will also be graduates who, despite a flawed adviser, lab atmosphere, and/or peer group, hold the highest standards for themselves and others. Bravo for them!

But we cannot and should not wait for outliers (or, if you prefer, out-liars!) We cannot count on physicians healing themselves or researchers reading and re-reading the oath that they have sworn to uphold. Instead, as teachers and mentors, we need to apply a critical lens to our own practices and models; and, if they are flawed in any way, we must strive to correct them. If future doctorates encounter positive models, we can rest assured that most of them will follow in the footsteps of their mentors. And then, should such an oath be required, it will serve—not as a prayer but as a celebration.

 

For helpful suggestions, I thank Courtney Bither and Ellen Winner

Top 5 Articles - Back To School

For many of us—including those in the US—a new school year has officially launched. While we hope that this is really the year that we “return to normal,” there are still some lingering effects from the last two years of pandemic that must be recognized and addressed. That said, the promise of a new start lends the opportunity for new tactics and strategies in the classroom. 

Take a look below to find some of the latest articles that our team has been reading and sharing as we kick off the new academic year. 

  1. In this article, John Spencer argues that teachers need to be given the space to take creative risks with their teaching. Freedom gives teachers professional agency, which helps to bolster engagement in their craft. It also allows teachers to serve as role models for their students who are asked on a daily basis to take risks in their own learning. Spencer goes on to suggest 10 creative risks for teachers to try out this year. We hope this inspires some educators to test drive something new.

  2. While schools are back in person, the effects of the pandemic and remote learning are still being felt. For some students, this can show itself through burn out. We’ve talked a lot over the last year about worker burnout, but how can teachers and schools turn their attention to this issue within their students? Miriam Plotinsky of Edutopia describes the problem space and offers some strategies for mitigating the effects of student burnout in her article here

  3. In response to the rising number of students experiencing mental health issues, many teachers have added a mental health check-in with students to their daily routine. This article from NPR describes this new strategy and how school systems and professional care are working with educators to get resources to those students who need additional support. 

  4. What do you know about Mastery Based Learning (MBL)? The Hechinger Report’s article gets into the nitty gritty of MBL and offers a rebuttal to some of the most common arguments from skeptics. Take a look and see if this might be the approach your students need to improve performance and deepen understanding.

  5. Larry Cuban recently revisited his popular article on “classroom expectations” here. Cuban discusses not only how a teacher’s expectations of their students ultimately influence classroom outcomes, but also how students’ expectations of their teachers also play into the behaviors and academic achievements of the group.

8 Things We Learned About United World College's Mission-Based Education

by Shelby Clark and Danny Mucinskas

From 2017-2022, our team was involved in an investigation of international mission-driven schools, centered on the United World Colleges movement. A full report of findings was released in June 2022 and is available here.

A synthesis of major findings is presented in the slideshow below, which may be helpful for readers to understand the major takeaways that have come out of this original research.

Find an accessible version of these slides here [link].

For more information about the study overall, including appendices, background information, and the instruments used, please visit edimpactstudy.com [link].

The Good Project Presents at Project Zero Sparks 2022

by Lynn Barendsen and Danny Mucinskas

In late July 2022, we had the pleasure of leading a virtual workshop as part of Project Zero’s one-day online Sparks conference, an opportunity to learn about a variety of PZ ideas for a diverse group of educators. We were pleased that, for our session, we had an audience of almost 40 educators from around the world: participants from the US hailed from states as diverse as Georgia, Nebraska, Ohio, and Texas, while international participants joined from countries such as Brazil, Japan, Switzerland, and Trinidad and Tobago. 

Our session was titled “Good Work: What It Is and How to Teach It,” and we offered an introduction to Good Project ideas, a brief overview of our research, and an introduction to the Good Project Lesson Plans. Although we miss the collegiality of in-person meetings (and look forward to many more in the future!), we welcomed the variety of perspectives and responses that emerged from such a far-reaching, diverse group. 

We began with an activity from the Good Project Lesson Plans, asking participants to think of someone they believed exemplifies “good work.” In small breakout groups, participants described individuals they admired: sometimes they chose family members, friends, and colleagues; sometimes they described individuals they’d never met but nonetheless admired. They then pulled out terms they would use to describe these exemplary workers, including qualities such as “visionary,” “driven,” “optimistic,” “honest,” “trustworthy,” “caring,” and more.

When we returned as a full group, participants shared themes from the descriptions of the individuals they admired and what they learned from these individuals on a shared collaboration board, and we had a brief discussion. For example, one participant commented upon three qualities that their partner exemplified in their work, including approaching collaborators with kindness. Another participant spoke of a celebrity’s work ethic and commitment to excellence. Interestingly, a number of participants described the importance of positivity and bringing “joy” and compassion to work in various ways, using words and phrases such as “sense of humor” and “cultivate calm.” Our team has led this discussion on a number of occasions, and this focus on positivity is not something that has come up frequently in past sessions. We wonder now if perhaps attention to joy feels especially necessary for educators who are experiencing more challenges than ever. 

After a brief introduction to Good Work and the three “Es” that comprise our definition (excellence, ethics and engagement), we asked participants to revisit the qualities that defined their chosen “good workers” and consider whether their descriptions fit neatly under the heading of one or more of these “Es.” Some terms (such as “honesty”) seem to fall squarely into the “ethics” column. Other terms (such as “supportive” or “inclusive” or “kind”) could arguably fit into multiple categories. We explained that these conversations can make for great jumping-off points with students as they consider what’s important to them in their work, and how they might best find mentors to help them further establish their own standards for work. 

We then offered a brief introduction to the Good Project Lesson Plans. Incorporating real-world dilemmas, reflective activities, and guided conversations about ethical challenges, responsibilities, and values, these materials are designed to support students to develop the skills, understandings, and dispositions to effectively navigate their working lives. We are excited to explore the outcomes of our materials more systematically in our recently launched research project of the lesson plans, for which we are recruiting a passionate group of educators around the world. 

Despite calls for the development of “21st century skills” necessary for success in a changing working world—one that includes technological advancements, political turmoil, and evolving work habits—few educational outlets allow students to grapple with this complexity and address their own opinions and beliefs as they relate to present and future work. Inviting this diverse group of educators to reflect on their own beliefs about work gave us the briefest insight into how they approach some of these challenges.