Week2_Discussion
.docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Walden University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
3050
Subject
History
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
2
Uploaded by PickleFarms
12/4/2023
Week 2: Discussion Post: Educ-3050
You may not be aware of every single one but, on a daily basis, you make decisions based on your own moral compass. Not
everyone views right and wrong the same way but, rather, we decide internally what we feel is appropriate. Pretend you found
a dirt-covered wallet at a nearby park that contained $100. The driver's license is local but it expired over 5 years ago.
Obviously, this wallet has been missing for a long time. Do you return the wallet because it is the "right" thing to do, or do you
keep the money because the person has probably forgotten all about this wallet? I think many of us would agree returning the
wallet is the right thing to do, however not everyone would make this choice. What if you went to return the wallet and found
that the owner is now deceased? Do you leave the money with a family member, or do you feel it would be appropriate to keep
the money since the owner is no longer alive? If there had been $1,000 in the wallet, would this change your decision? In this
Discussion, you consider a moral dilemma more serious than just an old wallet. One would hope the majority of the population
would try to do the right thing, but our decisions become clouded when the stakes are high.
Review the Learning Resources for this week.
Review the stages of Kohlberg's developmental theory in the course text and in the McLeod article on Kohlberg.
Review the Kohlberg video and the course text. Consider this prompt and the questions. Share the scenario with
someone and ask them the questions. Reflect on their response and the discussion that may have come after the initial
response.
o
Heinz's wife is dying from a particular type of cancer. Doctors say a new drug might save her. The drug was
discovered by a local chemist. Heinz and his wife try desperately to buy some but the chemist is charging 10
times the money it costs to make the drug, and this is much more than Heinz and his wife can afford.
o
Heinz only raises half the money, even after help from family and friends. He explains to the chemist that his
wife is dying and asks if he can have the drug cheaper or pay the rest of the money later.
o
The chemist refuses, saying that he discovered the drug and is going to make money from it. The husband is
desperate to save his wife, so later that night he breaks into the chemist's laboratory and steals the drug.
Should Heinz have stolen the drug?
Would it change anything if Heinz did not love his wife?
What if the person dying was a stranger, would it make any difference?
Should the police arrest the chemist for murder if the woman dies?
Read the limitations of the study in the Kohlberg article (McLeod, 2013a) and the research information in Chapter 1 of
the course text to help us understand learning and teaching by allowing us to explain and predict our students'
behavior and how our actions will influence learning. How can Kohlberg's theory help you predict behavior and
actions?
Post
your reflections after sharing the scenario with someone else. Consider how their response fits in with Kohlberg's stages of
moral development. This study was originally conducted on 10- to 6-year-old boys.
Main Discussion Post:
After sharing the scenario with another adult, their responses were what I would have thought they were. The most common
response to the questions, were it’s against the law, illegal, and it’s not right.
Should Heinz have stolen the drug?
Adult
- Heinz should not have stolen the drug no matter how much he loved his wife.
My response
-Heinz should not have stolen the drugs, but should have tried to make another deal with the chemist.
Would it have changed anything if Heinz did not love his wife?
Adult
- maybe, then he wouldn’t care if his wife was dying.
My response-
Love makes you do crazy/stupid things. If Heinz didn’t love his wife, then he might not steal the drug, to help
save her.
What if the person dying was a stranger, would it make a difference?
Adult
- it would not make a difference, it is still illegal to steal.
My response-
Does not matter if it was a stranger stealing is still illegal, but I do understand where he is coming from.
Should the police arrest the chemist for murder if the woman dies?
Adult
- No, because no one was making Heinz steal the drugs and give them to his wife. It is not the chemist fault if she dies.
My response-
The chemist should not be arrested because it is not his fault, he did not make the guy take the drug and make
the wife take it. The chemist had no control over what Heinz did with it after he left. The drug could have needed to be
refrigerated and it wasn’t after it left the chemist lab.
It doesn't matter if you're trying to be the modern day Robin Hood or not: stealing is wrong and it has serious repercussions.
Whether it's a punishment or even death, there are consequences for your actions that can't be avoided. Not only is stealing
illegal, but it's also morally wrong. It can have a negative impact on both the victim and the perpetrator. The victim may suffer
financial loss, emotional distress, and a loss of trust in others, while the thief may experience guilt, shame, and legal
repercussions that can negatively affect their future opportunities. It's essential to find alternative ways to address any financial
or material needs, such as seeking help from a charity or government program. Remember that honesty and integrity are
important values that will lead to a more fulfilling and positive life.
Read
a selection of your colleagues' posts.
Respond
to at least two classmates' posts.
Consider the following:
Compare and contrast your colleagues' reflections with your own analysis of the scenario.
Ask probing questions based on the limitations of the study.
Discuss the limitations of predicting student behavior in a classroom.
In addition, be sure to answer colleagues who initiate a response to your post, as per course requirements on the Discussion
Rubric.
Response to Alicia Davis:
Alicia,
Thank you for the comment. Your question: Would you still feel the same if you were in this situation in real life and had to
make a quick decision? Yes and no. Yes, because it is illegal. No, because it would mean saving someone I loved, no matter if I
was around to see them survive. I would rather my loved one survive and see the world than die and not be around to see
anything. I understand where Heinz came from, which has pros and cons. Every situation has its ups and downs, no matter how
much you think about a situation before moving.
Melissa
Response to Brooke Bloms:
Brooke,
Great post; keep up the great work! Your individual made a great point that no matter if the medication worked or not, it was
not a guarantee. Heinz should steal the drug, but he shouldn’t as well because, like your individual stated, “it is not a guarantee
to work.” How would Heinz know if it was going to work or not? Why steal a medication that is not going to work or, even
worse, speed up the process of the cancer and make the wife have less time?
You are teaching 2
nd
grade, and you have a student who has diabetes (Patty). Susie, Patty’s best friend, notices that Patty is
getting sleepy, which indicates that her blood sugar is dropping. Susie tries to get your attention to inform you, but you are out
of the room, dealing with a behavioral issue with two students. Susie knows that you keep chocolate on your desk, so she goes
through your desk and grabs the chocolate for Patty. She runs to Patty and makes her eat it fast; before too long, Patty is feeling
better, but….. How would you react to that scenario?
The chocolate had coconut oil, and Patty is allergic; she starts to break out in hives, and you call 911 and her mother. Would
Susie be punished or praised? How would you handle this situation? Is it punishable or excusable? I would love to hear anyone
and everyone’s thoughts on this.
Melissa
Response to Emily Church:
Emily,
Great post; keep up the great work! The adult that you shared the scenario with has a good point. Human life is more valuable
than any property or money. I agree that the law exists for the greater good, MOST of the time. Sometimes, the law thinks they
cannot do any harm and can do as they please because they are the law, which is never good for anyone, not even the law.
Let’s do a scenario for the classroom. You are teaching 2
nd
grade, and you have a student who has diabetes (Patty). Susie, Patty’s
best friend, notices that Patty is getting sleepy, indicating her blood sugar is dropping. Susie tries to get your attention to inform
you, but you are out of the room, dealing with a behavioral issue with two students. Susie knows that you keep chocolate on
your desk, so she goes through your desk and grabs the chocolate for Patty. She runs to Patty and makes her eat it fast; before
too long, Patty is feeling better, but….. How would you react to that scenario?
The chocolate had coconut oil, and Patty is allergic; she starts to break out in hives, and you call 911 and her mother. Would
Susie be punished or praised? How would you handle this situation? Is it punishable or excusable? I would love to hear anyone
and everyone’s thoughts on this.
Melissa
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help