27 Answers | Add Yours
I don't think they should be. I do not think that the government should choose what morals my kids will be exposed to. That is up to me. Imagine, for example, if the government wanted to teach my daughters that it is moral for them to submit to their future husbands because that's the way God wants things. I would not want my kids being told that. I think that parents are the only ones who should be chosing the moral messages their kids are getting when they are very young. Later, when they're in high school, let them hear whatever because they'll be old enough to decide for themselves. But when they're at a more impressionable age, I want to be the only one picking what morals they are taught by authority figures.
I agree with #25 in that the emphasis is on values in the education system. However, by interacting with young people in a community environment for five days a week, 7 hours a day, there is bound to be some morals 'teaching' (and hopefully learning). Thinking back to the old adage, 'it takes a village to raise a child', surely we should give young people information on our moral beliefs - as parents and teachers - in order to help them develop their own? if morals were only taught in schools, I would be of the belief that corporal punishment is acceptable, as it was in my own school. If morals are only taught in the home, many of my present students would never learn that domestic violence does not have to be a way of life.
Young people need a range of viewpoints from which to steer their own path.
This has been an age-old debate. I remember in the past that moral "education" was included (in some way) in the classroom. Then there came a time when parents didn't want teachers instructing their children on values or morals. We have come full circle in that many parents want (and some even expect) this to be a part of what youngsters take with them from school.
There are several difficulties here: we are not parents at school, but teachers. Next, how is my value system valid in the life of someone else's child? At the same time, while I try to point value-conscious decisions out in the classroom, it is easier for me in that I teach English/Literature. We often discuss good vs evil in literature. I try to get students to be kind and respectful in class. My biggest concern, however, is why this is not being taught at home. One might ask, how can we teach anymore than we do, with the limited time we have—which with testing and special programs—is already not enough?
This is a tough call.
Whether we like it or not, schools will always be involved with teaching moral behavior. An important part of the educational process is the learning of how to become a functioning member of the larger society that exists outside of the family unit.
Some students come from families that are very involved outside of themselves and that do a great deal of providing experiences and direction in how to relate to others in moral and respectful ways. Other students, for any number of reasons, do not come to us with those kinds of awarenesses - or with attitudes already in place that scream "I am entitled! You will cater to my needs! I don't have to do it if I don't want to and you can't make me!"
We don't always call it teaching morals, but we do it many times every day.
In an ideal world, parents would teach morals to their children. However, we do not live in a perfect world. It's not, necessarily, the parents fault. I feel that, for the most part, parents do the best they can. We live in a world where there are a lot of single parent homes. Some parents are working 2 or 3 jobs to keep food on the table and a roof over their heads. That sometimes makes them absentee parents.
So, that leaves children without role models at home. They go off to school with out knowing what is polite or respectful. They say the first thing that comes to their mind, without thinking about how it might hurt others. They use violence because they do not know how to deal with the emotions they are feeling.
What are we as educators supposed to do? Should we sit by and watch them scream at each other? Are we going to let them bully us and others? NO. We are supposed to be preparing them for the future. Our students cannot go into a job and scream at or hit their employer, they won't have a job for long. And I refuse to let a child or teenager talk to me like have a power over me. In a perfect world I would not have to teach them these things. They would come to school knowing how to talk to adults, understanding respect. But they don't. This isn't a perfect world.
In the world today the school district has to teach morals. Many of our students are not learning them at home. I agree that it can be a tricky situation addressing morals, as some may not have the same view of what is and is not moral. However, the school has to address the issues of what is right and wrong in the real world.
Schools already teach and uphold many moral principles. I give explicit instruction about what constitutes plagiarism and how theft of an idea is as bad as theft of a physical item. I expect honesty when it comes to student work! We have a tight no-bullying policy -- we are teaching moral behavior as it pertains to how the students and teachers treat one another. Whenever there are expectations for behavior, there is a moral lesson to be taught and learned.
True it is the responsibility of the parent to teach matters of a moral nature to children, however, many parents are not doing this. Many parents excuse and even encourage their children to make choices that are contrary to what most of society considers "moral." Why parents choose this has varying reasons. Perhaps it's easier to be a child's friend than a good parent. Perhaps, it's apathy on the parent's part. Perhaps these parents were raised without being taught moral principles. Regardless of the reason, more and more students are in the need of moral guidance from sources outside the family home.
Those who insist that morals should only be taught at home apparently have not seen some of the homes many kids come from. In many instances they have no guidance at home and zero social skills. A major part of a student's education today is the "unwritten curriculum" of how to cope in society. If schools only teach academic subjects, then the student has only been partially educated. It is necessary to train him/her to be a responsible law abiding citizen. I think it is not only proper but absolutely necessary that students be taught proper behavior and a clear distinction between that which is acceptable and unacceptable behavior. It is a dangerous assumption to assume they will learn it at home.
A large role of schools in our society is socialization of commonly held beliefs and values, of how to conduct oneself in our society. But more importantly, I believe that schools should be instrumental in teaching students how to search for their own values and beliefs, to find their own truths, as opposed to superimposing those of society as a whole on minds that are still developing.
Actually, morals are already taught in schools. Walk into many elementary schools and you will see the "Character Counts" program in action. Children are taught the 6 pillars of character (trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, fairness, caring, and citizenship). I see no problem at all with this. In fact, if these basic morals/values are taught young, I can tell you from experience that we see fewer problems with morals/disrespect in the high school. Students will often live up to whatever is expected of them, so if it is expected that they behave under the Character Counts guidelines, they very often will.
Also, I have seen so many parents in recent years that have abdicated their role as morals teachers to their children because they are too busy to take the time to do it. I am not espousing that any one religion be taught to children in public schools, but I think as educators that we have a responsibility to teach our kids about the basics of character for their good, and the good of the future of the country since today's students will be tomorrow's leaders.
If we were all perfect, schools would not have the responsibility of teaching this to their students. I think the schools should continue to do so, basic things such as obedience, respect, ect.
the new generation is continuously bombarded with the information which they are unable to sort out wrong and right , good and bad , moral or immoral if ther be no one to tell them they will be an easy prey to the evil which have taken the guise of good. there are so many things which parents don't know about their kids only teachers know them. As the teachers are their role models so they can easily influence as my personal experience goes. many of the students turn up to me for the very personal problem which they could not share with their parents because of fear , respect or afraid of being snubbed. teacher should not be a robot just to teach the text book he should be a person who ought to care about the moral grooming of his/her students.
Its not moral that we are teaching in school, it's NORMS and VALUES. Moral is somehow a vague term, and it is subjective. One thing could be moral for me but immoral for you.
This world is following cultural patterns that dictates how the members of the society should behave, those patterns include NORMS and VALUES.
At the end of the day, it is still the individual person who decides if what he did throughout the day is moral or immoral. But anybody could rigt away judge if someone violates a particular expectation set by society.
I believe that they should, in fact, not be. You see, teachers are people. People are different. Therefore, teachers are different from one another. You could go to one grade and the teacher could be instructing you in a way that is offensive or opposing to another. For example, one teacher could say that Catholics are the best, and Protestants are paganistic heathens who defile the name of Jesus Christ as well as the Catholic Church and the entire Christian faith. And another could say that Protestants teach a more traditional way, similar to how Jesus taught his disciples. She could say that Catholics are traditionalistic and corrupt. Basically, no, because morals are basically opinions and ethical codes. In different places they are different. In order to remain open and tolerant, we must retain our differences in morals as well as religions, languages, etc.
We’ve answered 334,160 questions. We can answer yours, too.Ask a question