Pendidikan Karakter dan Kedalaman Moral Perspektif Lichona dan Kohlberg

Authors

  • Ulfa Nur Azizah Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Tarbiyah Muhammadiyah Kediri

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.57060/jers.v4i02.129

Keywords:

Morality, Character Education, Moral Theories

Abstract

This study aims to delve into the depth of moral concepts from the perspectives of Lichona and Kohlberg and their application in character education. Through a literature review and comparative analysis, this research compares and explores the moral theories developed by Lichona and Kohlberg, particularly in the context of character development and moral education in schools. Using a qualitative approach, the study identifies the key principles of both theories and considers how these principles can be integrated into effective character education curricula and practices. The findings indicate that, despite some differences in their theoretical aspects, both thinkers contribute significantly to the understanding and teaching of morality in education. The study suggests that a combined approach, drawing on the strengths of both theories, can provide a richer and more comprehensive framework fo rcharacter educationin schools.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Belgasem-Hussain, A., & Hussaien, Y. (2020). Earnings management as an ethical issue in view of Kohlberg’s theory of moral reasoning. Journal of Financial Crime, 30(2), 522-535. https://doi.org/10.1108/jfc-11-2019-0138

Dakin, E. (2014). Protection as care: moral reasoning and moral orientation among ethnically and socioeconomically diverse older women. Journal of Aging Studies, 28, 44-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2013.12.001

Dellaportas, S. (2006). Making a difference with a discrete course on accounting ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 65(4), 391-404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-0020-7

Hafizi, Z. (2023). The importance of moral education in the formation of children's character. Ijgie (International Journal of Graduate of Islamic Education), 4(2), 345-350. https://doi.org/10.37567/ijgie.v4i2.2527

Jørgensen, G. (2006). Kohlberg and Gilligan: duet or duel?. Journal of Moral Education, 35(2), 179-196. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240600681710

Krebs, D., & Denton, K. (2005). Toward a more pragmatic approach to morality: a critical evaluation of Kohlberg's model. Psychological Review, 112(3), 629-649. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.112.3.629

Kuswandi, I. (2020). Tahapan pengembangan moral: perspektif barat dan islam (telaah terhadap gagasan Thomas Lickona, Lawrence Kohlberg dan Al-Qur’an). Ar-Risalah Media Keislaman Pendidikan Dan Hukum Islam, 18(1), 158. https://doi.org/10.29062/arrisalah.v18i1.329

Lourenço, O. (2019). A plea for the study of the relation between the aretaic morality and the deontic and responsibility moralities. Psychologica, 62(2), 117-142. https://doi.org/10.14195/1647-8606_62-2_7

Molina, A. (2015). Public administration, market values, & the public interest: a Kohlbergian perspective. Public Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 426-452. https://doi.org/10.1177/073491491503900303

Moroney, S. (2006). Higher stages? some cautions for Christian integration with Kohlberg's theory. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 34(4), 361-371. https://doi.org/10.1177/009164710603400406

Nemcov, L. (2018). Teaching business ethics. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483381503.n1161

Setyabudi, M. (2020). Konsep dan matra konsepsi toleransi dalam pemikiran Rainer Forst. Jurnal Filsafat Indonesia, 3(3), 81-94. https://doi.org/10.23887/jfi.v3i3.24895

Downloads

Published

2024-08-10

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Pendidikan Karakter dan Kedalaman Moral Perspektif Lichona dan Kohlberg. (2024). Journal of Education and Religious Studies, 4(02), 60-68. https://doi.org/10.57060/jers.v4i02.129

Similar Articles

1-10 of 35

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.