Citation
The relationship of formal religious education to the moral judgment development of college students

Material Information

Title:
The relationship of formal religious education to the moral judgment development of college students
Creator:
Friend, Gary Gene
Copyright Date:
1991
Language:
English

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright Gary Gene. Friend. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Resource Identifier:
25151719 ( OCLC )
AJA2107 ( LTUF )
0026404991 ( ALEPH )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
THE RELATIONSHIP OF FORMAL RELIGIOUS EDUCATION
TO THE MORAL JUDGMENT DEVELOPMENT OF COLLEGE STUDENTS
By
GARY GENE FRIEND

A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

1991




Copyright 1991 by
Gary Gene Friend




This dissertation is dedicated to Weston Webster and Virginia Eloise Friend, who loved me, nurtured me, and taught me the ethical and religious values which have been the mainstay of my life; and to my wife, Jacquelyn, and my children, Gary, Matthew, and Jennifer, who have been the proving ground for those teachings. Without the love, instruction, and example of two genuinely loving Christian parents, the richness of my life would be far less than what it is. Without the love and patience of my wife and children, my ethical and religious values would not have been tempered, purified, and refined; and the depth of my character would be far less than what it is.




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank my wife, Jacquelyn, who has
supported me during all of my programs of study in numerous colleges and universities throughout the United States. Without her love, friendship, and assistance I would not have endured.
I also would like to thank my supervisory
committee, James Wattenbarger, Joan Curcio, James Hensel, and M. David Miller, whose assistance in shaping and honing the concept of this investigation was invaluable to me. In addition, I would like to thank Patricia Ashton for the advice she provided concerning the literature review.
Finally, I would like to thank the presidents,
faculty, and students of the participating institutions. Without their full cooperation, this study would not have been possible.

iii




TABLE OF CONTENTS
page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii
LIST OF TABLES vi
ABSTRACT viii
CHAPTERS
1 INTRODUCTION 1
Background 1
Need for the Study 4
Assumptions 8
Statement of Purpose . . . . . . 9
Research Questions and Hypotheses . . 10 Delimitations 13
Limitations 14
Definitions 15
Organization of the Research Report . . 16
2 LITERATURE REVIEW . . . . . . . 18
Introduction 18
Theoretical Foundations . . . . . 19 Related Moral Development Research . . 26
3 METHODOLOGY 37
Introduction 37
Design 37
Sample 38
Instrumentation 41
Data Collection 44

iv




CHAPTERS

Data Analysis .

4 DATA ANALYSIS .
Introduction .
Respondent Characteristics . . . .
Phase 1 Analysis .
Phase 2 Analysis .
Phase 3 Analysis .
Summary of Findings . . . . .
5 CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS.

Introduction .
Conclusions and Implications . Suggested Future Studies . . Recommendations .

. 111
. . .112
. 133 136

APPENDICES

A PARTICIPATION SOLICITATION LETTER B SURVEY COVER LETTER . . . C RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE . . D DEFINING ISSUES TEST . . . E DISTRIBUTION LETTER . . . F FIRST FOLLOW-UP LETTER . . G SECOND FOLLOW-UP LETTER . . .

REFERENCES .

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH . . .

v

46

52

52
54 57
64 75
102
111

. . . 139
. . . 141
. . . 143
. . . 146
. . . 162
. . . 164
. . . 166

. . . . . . . 168

177

page




LIST OF TABLES

Table page
4-1 Student Demographics 55
4-2 Student Educational Background . . . 56 4-3 Parent Educational and Student Denominational Background .. 58 4-4 Student Religious Ideology and Moral Values Background 59
4-5 Results for Hypothesis 1 Philosophy Courses 61
4-6 Results for Hypothesis 1 Theology Courses 62 4-7 Results for Hypothesis 1 Ethics Courses . 63 4-8 Results for Hypothesis 2 School Type . 66 4-9 Results for Hypothesis 2 Supplement
Liberal Arts Colleges 68
4-10 Results for Hypothesis 2 Supplement
Divinity Schools 69
4-11 Results for Hypothesis 3 Liberal Arts
College Affiliation 71
4-12 Results for Hypothesis 3 Divinity School
Affiliation 73
4-13 Results for Hypothesis 4 Age 77

vi




Table page
4-14 Results for Hypothesis 4 Grade Point Average 78
4-15 Results for Hypothesis 4 Parents' Annual
Income 79
4-16 Results for Hypothesis 4 Familiarity
with Kohlberg 80
4-17 Results for Hypothesis 4 Religious
Conversion 81
4-18 Results for Hypothesis 4 Gender . . . 82 4-19 Results for Hypothesis 4 Year of Study . 83 4-20 Results for Hypothesis 5 Mother's
Education Level 86
4-21 Results for Hypothesis 5 Father's
Education Level 87
4-22 Results for Hypothesis 5 Religious
Ideology 88
4-23 Results for Hypothesis 6 Church/
Synagogue Attendance 92
4-24 Results for Hypothesis 7 Source of Basic
Moral Values 94
4-25 Results for Hypothesis 7 Ethnic Group . 95 4-26 Results for Hypothesis 7 Highest Degree
Held 96
4-27 Results for Hypothesis 8 Denominational
Membership 100

vii




Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
THE RELATIONSHIP OF FORMAL RELIGIOUS EDUCATION
TO THE MORAL JUDGMENT DEVELOPMENT OF COLLEGE STUDENTS By
GARY GENE FRIEND
MAY 1991
Chairman: James L. Wattenbarger Major Department: Educational Leadership
The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a significant relationship between formal religious education and the moral judgment development of college students, and, after controlling for formal religious education, to see if there is also a significant relationship between the educational environment or certain selected student characteristics and the moral judgment development of those students. Formal religious education was defined as the study of Judeo-Christian philosophy, theology, or ethics at a fully accredited college or divinity school. Educational environment was defined as

viii




the type of school attended and the Judeo-Christian denominational affiliation of the school.
A correlational design was used, and data were
gathered through two instruments: a one-page demographics, educational background, religious ideology, and moral values background questionnaire designed by the researcher; and the Defining Issues Test (DIT) designed by James Rest. DIT P scores were used as the measure of moral development. The final data base contained 226 randomly selected college and divinity school students, enrolled at 12 fully accredited, randomly selected institutions from 11 states located throughout the United States.
The number of ethics courses completed was related significantly to the moral judgment development of liberal arts college students; however, this relationship was not significant for divinity school students. Judeo-Christian philosophy or theology courses completed were not related significantly to student moral development.
After controlling for ethics courses completed, the type of school attended, the affiliation of some institutions, and 8 of 15 selected student characteristics ix




were related significantly to the moral judgment development of students. Divinity school students had significantly higher levels of moral development than liberal arts college students. Students attending Roman Catholic and Southern Baptist institutions had significantly lower levels of moral development than students attending nonaffiliated institutions. Conversely, the moral development of students attending Jewish and United Methodist institutions did not differ significantly from the moral development of students attending nonaffiliated institutions. The eight significantly related student characteristics were gender, ethnic group, highest degree held, year of study, mother's education level, father's education level, religious ideology regarding moral decisions, and individual denominational membership.

x




CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Background
Although the early founders of American colleges
were concerned about the moral development of students, the required courses in moral philosophy that directly addressed that concern disappeared from college curricula in the early twentieth century (Rudolph, 1962, 1977). There has been a recent resurgence of support for reintroducing ethics courses into American college curricula, in nearly all academic disciplines (Baca & Stein, 1983). This renewed support has been strengthened by the perception of a pervasive deterioration of ethical values and standards in all areas of American life. This perception of widespread moral deterioration has been reinforced by recent scandals in athletics, business, education, government, medicine, and religion. These scandals also have raised profound questions concerning the basic ethical fabric of modern

1




2

American society (Barrett, 1987; Bowen, 1987; Koepp, 1987; Shapiro, 1987; Stengel, 1987).
Is there a universal ethical standard for human behavior? From the earliest time there has been sharp disagreement on the answer to this question. Plato (c.350/1937) postulated that there was a transcendent universal standard of justice, and that it was from this standard that human applications were derived. George E. Moore (1903) postulated that there was no universal standard, that moral laws were simply statements that certain types of actions would have good effects, that the end always would justify the means, and that no action that was not justified by its results could be right.
This disagreement over the existence of a universal ethical standard has not been settled. Nevertheless, each person ultimately develops a standard for individual ethical conduct. To believe there is no universal standard means individual ethical conduct adheres to an individually determined standard of ethics; on the other hand, to believe there is a universal standard still means the application of that standard is individually determined, and once again




3

individual ethical conduct adheres to an individually determined standard of ethics. Either way there is an ethical standard that is followed. If that standard is adhered to by most human beings in a society, it becomes, at the very least, a universal standard for that society.
For the Judeo-Christian society, the universal
standard is behavior rooted in the golden rule. The ethical norms for most Judeo-Christian denominations are prescribed by two basic biblical principles. These principles are: (a) "Hear, 0 Israel, the Lord Our God is One Lord, and you shall Love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength" (Snaith, 1978, p.287); and (b) "You shall love your neighbor as yourself" (Snaith, 1978, p. 187). These principles set the standard for Judeo-Christian living and are interpreted into an individual concept of morality and justice using examples such as Moses and Jesus Christ as the hermeneutic for that interpretation, and the golden rule as the instruction for application. In the final analysis, however, the moral belief of individuals can be determined only by their feelings concerning how they ought to treat others, and how




4

others ought to treat them, not by what they do, because belief does not always result in practice (Aland, Black, Martini, Metzger & Wikgren, 1975; Rest, 1986b).
Need for the Study
Can moral judgment be developed? There has been a voluminous amount of research done in the field of moral development. Some of the most notable research has been done by Lawrence Kohlberg at Harvard University and by James Rest at the University of Minnesota Center for the Study of Ethical Development. Both Kohlberg and Rest concluded from their research that moral judgment can be developed, and that this development continues well into adulthood (Colby et al., 1983; Rest, 1979, 1986b). In addition, Rest (1986b) concluded that people can show dramatic changes in moral development in their twenties, and that college education is powerfully associated with the development of moral judgment. Rest (1986a, 1986b) also concluded that differences between males and females with regard to moral development are trivial, and that individual religious ideology, characterized on a conservative to liberal




5
dimension, does account for significant variance in measurements of moral judgment development.
If moral judgment can be developed, how can a
society properly influence individual moral belief in a way that will result in adherence to a socially acceptable ethical standard, and that eventually will result in socially acceptable individual behavior? It has been in the area of the development of moral belief that some individuals have indicated that formal religious education has a definite role to play. Conversely, there are others who have indicated that formal religious education has no definite role to play in that area. This continuing controversy can be seen in the literature of James Michael Lee and Lawrence Kohlberg. Lee (1980) indicated that because virtually every Christian denomination affirms that morality is an integral part of its doctrine and practice, moral development is also a vital part of the religious education activities that each supports. He pointed out that "Kohlberg operationally defines religion as religious affiliation. Thus his data do not show that morality is autonomous from religion, but rather from religious




6

affiliation" (p. 333). Lee concluded that formal religious education has a unique role to play in moral development. In contrast, Kohlberg (1981) stated that "formal religious education has no specifically important or unique role to play in moral development" (p 304).
Moreover, Rest (1986b) indicated that, although there have been numerous studies that contribute to the conclusion that higher education has a positive effect on the moral judgment development of college students, there has been very little research that has investigated the relationship of formal religious education to the moral judgment development of college students. As a result of that lack of research, he felt little was known concerning the effects of religious education on moral judgment development at the college level. He pointed out that most researchers who had investigated the relationship of religious education to moral judgment development drew their samples from high school students and noncollege affiliated adults. He also said there had been no research done at the college level that investigated the relationship of formal religious education to moral judgment development, and also




7

examined the relationship of educational environment and selected student characteristics to moral judgment development. Consequently, he concluded that our knowledge of whether formal religious education influences moral judgment development will remain limited until studies are conducted that do incorporate all of those variables.
The controversy, as seen in the literature of Lee (1980) and Kohlberg (1967, 1981), over whether formal religious education has a uniquely significant role to play in moral development, has not been adequately clarified by definitive research. Furthermore, Rest (1986b) indicated that the literature relating religious measures to moral judgment development shows an inconsistent relationship between P scores on the Defining Issues Test (DIT) and religious education. More research is needed in order to address this controversy and definitively determine if there is a significant relationship between formal religious education and moral judgment development. If it can be determined that formal religious education does have a significant role to play in moral judgment development, then the question of how much and what type of formal religious




8

education is most effective in developing moral judgment can be addressed.
The controversy over the significance of the role of formal religious education in moral development and the lack of research concerning the relationship of formal religious education to moral judgment development were the primary reasons this study was needed. These two reasons also provided the main impetus for this investigation.
Assumptions
It was assumed, for the purposes of this study,
that there is a universal ethical standard that sets forth the proper way for human beings to relate to one another with regard to such things as truth and justice (Kohlberg, 1981; Nisan & Kohlberg, 1982, Piaget, 1932/1965; Plato c.350/1937; Rest, 1986b). Second, it was assumed that each individual is capable of formulating and living ethical values that are oriented toward increasingly higher stages of moral development, as defined by Kohlberq, and that the movement to those higher stages continues throughout life (Colby, Kohlberg, Gibbs & Lieberman, 1983; Piaget,




9

1932/1965; Rest, Davison & Robbins, 1978; Rest, 1979, 1986b). Third, it was assumed that individuals in their college years are highly receptive to moral judgment development (Biggs & Barnett, 1981; Colby et al., 1983; Rest, 1986a, 1986b). Finally, it was assumed that moral judgment development can be measured in a manner that is quantifiable (Davison & Robbins, 1978; Kohlberg, 1981, 1983, 1984; Rest 1979, 1986a, 1986b).
Statement of Purpose
The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a significant relationship between formal religious education and the moral judgment development of college students, and, after controlling for formal religious education, to see if there is also a significant relationship between the educational environment or certain selected student characteristics and the moral judgment development of those students. In order to accomplish this purpose the researcher examined specific formal religious education courses, different types of higher education institutions with varied religious affiliations, and a




10

number of selected student characteristics across a wide range of educational environments.
Research Questions and Hypotheses
The study was divided into three phases, and
hypotheses were developed to assist in determining the answers to the research questions examined in each of those phases. The following research questions were posed for this study:
1. Primary research question: Is there a significant relationship between formal religious education and the moral judgment development of college students, based on the number and type of formal religious education courses completed?
2. Secondary research question: After controlling for any significantly related formal religious education courses, is there a significant relationship between the educational environment and the moral judgment development of college students?
3. Tertiary research question: After controlling for any significantly related formal religious education




11

courses, is there a significant relationship between certain selected student characteristics and the moral judgment development of college students?
During Phase 1 of the investigation, Hypothesis 1 was tested to determine the answer to the primary research question. During Phase 2 of the investigation, Hypotheses 2 and 3 were tested to determine the answer to the secondary research question. During Phase 3 of the investigation, Hypotheses 4 through 8 were tested to determine the answer to the tertiary research question. The following is a listing of the hypotheses used in this study:
1. Hypothesis 1: There is no difference, based on the number and type of formal religious education courses completed, in the DIT P scores of college students.
2. Hypothesis 2: After controlling for ethics
courses completed, there is no difference, based on school type, in the DIT P scores of college students.
3. Hypothesis 3: After controlling for ethics
courses completed, there is no difference, based on school affiliation, in the DIT P scores of college students attending the same type of school.




12

4. Hypothesis 4: After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on age, gender, year of study, grade point average, parents' annual income, familiarity with Kohlberg's moral development theory, or individual religious conversion experience, in the DIT P scores of college students.
5. Hypothesis 5: After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on mother's education level, father's education level, or student's religious ideology regarding moral decisions, in the DIT P scores of college students.
6. Hypothesis 6: After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on church/synagogue attendance, in the DIT P scores of college students.
7. Hypothesis 7: After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on ethnic group, highest degree held, or source of basic moral values, in the DIT P scores of college students.
8. Hypothesis 8: After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on individual




13

denominational membership, in the DIT P scores of college students.
Delimitations
Two widely accepted measures of moral judgment
development are the Moral Maturity Scale (MMS) developed by Kohlberg from his Moral Judgment Interview, and the P Score Index developed by Rest from his Defining Issues Test (DIT) (Rest, 1986b). The DIT P Score was the only measure of moral judgment development used for this study. The Defining Issues Test was selected for use in this study because it is the most widely used measure of moral judgment, it is the best documented in terms of reliability and validity, it can be administered by mail, and it is an objective test that is simple to score (Rest, 1986a).
The colleges and divinity schools used in this study, except for the nonaffiliated ones, were selected because of their connection with the four largest Judeo-Christian denominations in the United States. The nonaffiliated institutions were included mainly for educational environment comparison purposes.

I




14

This study was restricted to an evaluation of the moral judgment development of college and divinity school students who were receiving formal religious education that teaches primarily the Judeo-Christian ethic. However, the intent was to examine the full spectrum of that teaching in a number of varied educational environments at higher education institutions located throughout the United States.
Limitations
This study included an examination of only
Judeo-Christian formal religious education. Although this decision was made by design, it does limit the generalization of the results to other religious and ethical systems.
The denominationally affiliated colleges and
divinity schools that were used in this study represented only the four largest Judeo-Christian denominations in the United States. Although this decision also was made by design, it does limit the generalization of the results to other denominations.




15

Definitions
College Students are individuals who are attending a fully accredited college or divinity school located in the United States.
DIT P Scores are a percentile index of the relative importance individuals attach to the principled morality, or Kohlberg's Stage 5 and Stage 6, items on the Defining Issues Test (DIT).
Educational Environment includes the type of school attended and the Judeo-Christian denominational affiliation of the school.
Ethics are moral principles concerning the concept of justice in human relationships.
Formal Religious Education is the study of JudeoChristian philosophy, theology, or ethics at a fully accredited college or divinity school.
School Affiliation identifies the Judeo-Christian denominational association or nonassociation of the institution.
School Type identifies whether an institution is a college or a divinity school.




16

Organization of the Research Report
Chapter 1 is an introduction to the study. The
introduction includes discussions of the study background, the need for the study, the study assumptions, the purpose of the study, the research questions posed for the study, the hypotheses used in the study, the study delimitations, the study limitations, and the unique definitions for certain terms used in the study. Chapter 2 is a review of the literature pertinent to the study. The literature review is divided into two sections. These sections include discussions of the theoretical foundations for the study and the related moral development research. Chapter 3 is a description of the methodology used for the conduct of the study. This includes discussions of the study design, the study sample, the instrumentation, the data collection, and the linear regression equations used for the testing of hypotheses during the data analysis. Chapter 4 is a discussion of the respondent characteristics and the results of the study from the testing of hypotheses during each phase of the study, including a summary of the findings




17
by hypothesis. Chapter 5 is a discussion of the study findings to include conclusions, implications, suggested future studies, and recommendations based on those findings.




CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a significant relationship between formal religious education and the moral judgment development of college students, and, after controlling for formal religious education, to see if there is also a significant relationship between the educational environment or certain selected student characteristics and the moral judgment development of those students. Formal religious education was defined as the study of Judeo-Christian philosophy, theology, or ethics at a fully accredited college or divinity school. Educational environment was defined as the type of school attended and the Judeo-Christian denominational affiliation of the school. The discussion in this chapter was divided into two sections, each section reviewed an area of literature pertinent to the examination

18




19

of the relationship between formal religious education and moral judgment development. The two areas were Theoretical Foundations and Related Moral Development Research.
Theoretical Foundations
The initial theoretical foundation for the
investigation of moral stages of development in human beings was laid by Jean Piaget (1932/1965), in a work titled The Moral Judgment of the Child. On the basis of his work with 5-year-old to 13-year-old children, Piaget theorized three overlapping periods in the development of the sense of justice in the moral development of the child: a period based on unilateral respect for the rules of adult authority, a period of progressive egalitarianism based on mutual respect among social peers, and a period of equity based on a flexible golden rule and consideration of the needs of individuals in particular situations.
Building on the work of Piaget, in a trilogy of books, titled The Philosophy of Moral Development: Moral Stages and the Idea of Justice, Vol I (1981), Moral Stages: A Current Formulation and a Response to Critics (1983), and




20

The Psychology of Moral Development: The Nature and Validity of Moral Stages, Vol II (1984), Lawrence Kohlberg set forth the philosophical and theoretical foundation for his six moral stages. Kohlberg (1981) discussed the following three levels and six stages of moral reasoning:
1. The Preconventional Level. He indicated this level contained Stage 1 reasoning, or the stage of punishment and obedience; and Stage 2 reasoning, or the stage of individual instrumental purpose and exchange.
2. The Conventional Level. He indicated this level contained Stage 3 reasoning, or the stage of mutual interpersonal expectations, relationships, and conformity; and Stage 4 reasoning, or the stage of social system and conscience maintenance.
3. The Principled Level. He indicated this level
contained Stage 5 reasoning, or the stage of prior rights and social contract or utility; and Stage 6 reasoning, or the stage of universal ethical principles focused on justice and respect for all.
Kohlberg (1981) also discussed the successive
concepts of justice for each of his six stages of moral




21

development. At Stage 1 justice was conceived as an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Correct behavior at this stage of moral development was defined as literal obedience to rules and authority, avoiding punishment, and not doing physical harm. At Stage 2 justice was conceived as you help me and I will help you. Correct behavior at this stage of moral development was defined as serving one's own or other's needs and making fair deals in terms of concrete exchange. At Stage 3 justice was conceived as do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Correct behavior at this stage of moral development was defined as playing a good role, being concerned about the other people and their feelings, keeping loyalty and trust with partners, and being motivated to follow rules and expectations. At Stage 4 justice was conceived as a system of roles and rules that were shared and accepted by the entire community. Correct behavior at this stage of moral development was defined as doing one's duty in society, upholding the social order, and maintaining the welfare of society or the group. At Stage 5 justice was conceived as individual liberty, civil rights, equality of opportunity, and contract united by the respect




22

for the freedom of others. Correct behavior at this stage of moral development was defined as upholding the basic rights, values, and legal contracts of a society, even when they conflict with the concrete rules and laws of the group. At Stage 6 justice was conceived as universal ethical principles that were higher than or prior to law and focused on the rights of humanity, independent of civil society. Correct behavior at this stage of moral development was defined as the assumption of guidance by universal ethical principles that all humanity should follow.
Building on the work of Kohlberg, in two books, titled Development in Judging Moral Issues (1979), and Moral Development: Advances in Research and Theory (1986b), James Rest discussed his Defining Issues Test (DIT) and established the foundation for his Four-Component Model. Rest (1986a) described the DIT as an instrument based on Kohlberg's developmental theory and his six-stage characterization of moral development. He pointed out that the DIT is a recognition test that asks the subjects to classify their own responses, and once those responses are scored the DIT P index provides the location of each subject




23

in terms of a continuous percentage on a developmental continuum.
One controversy surrounding testing instruments like the DIT, that are based on justice oriented Kohlberg type moral dilemmas, is the claim that males and females experience the social world differently and that justice defined measures of moral development are gender biased. Gilligan (1982), one of the most outspoken critics of justice defined measures, postulated that male social development stresses individuality, while female social development stresses connection between individuals. She contended that these two different patterns of social development result in two different moral orientations. She said that these two moral orientations are the predominantly justice based male orientation and the predominantly care based female orientation. She also contended that these orientations result in the downgrading of female moral development when measured on a justice oriented instrument, and cause women to appear morally inferior to men.
On the other hand, Walker (1985) in a review of studies using various versions of Kohlberg's justice




24

oriented test concluded that males do not score higher than females. Walker's report included a study that compared justice orientations and care orientations in both spontaneous moral dilemmas and hypothetical moral dilemmas and found no differences in scores based on gender. Snarey, Reimer, and Kohlberg (1985) reported no differences based on gender with regard to scores on Kohlberg's test. Gibbs and Widamon (1982) found no differences in scores based on gender with regard to the justice oriented Kohlberg test. Nisan and Kohlberg (1982) also reported no differences in scores based on gender with regard to the Kohlberg style test. In addition, Rest (1979) indicated there were only 2 of 22 studies using the justice oriented Defining Issues Test that reported a significant difference in DIT P scores between males and females. Rest (1986b) also reported that the differences between males and females with regard to moral development as measured by the DIT are trivial. Finally, Shaver (1985) in a longitudinal study of college students reported that females had significantly higher DIT P scores than males. The indication is that the justice oriented Kohlberg style tests, including the DIT, do not




25

contain a detectable gender bias that significantly affects female performance.
Rest (1986b) set forth his Four-Component Model that was developed at the University of Minnesota Center for the Study of Ethical Development. He theorized that the following four major kinds of psychological processes were necessary in order for moral behavior to occur:
1. The person must have been able to make some sort of
interpretation of the particular situation in terms of
what actions were possible, who (including himself)
would be affected by each course of action, and how the
interested parties would regard such effects on their
welfare.
2. The person must have been able to make a judgment
about which course of action was morally right (or fair
or just or morally good), thus labeling one possible line of action as what a person ought (morally ought)
to do in that situation.
3. The person must give priority to moral values above
other personal values such that a decision is made to
intend to do what is morally right.




26

4. The person must have sufficient perseverance, ego
strength, and implementation skills to be able to
follow through on his/her intention to behave morally,
to withstand fatigue and flagging will, and to
overcome obstacles. (pp. 3-4)
Rest (1986b) also postulated that there are no moral cognitions without affect, and no moral affects without cognitions, leading him to the conclusion that there is no moral behavior that can be separated from the cognitions and affects that prompt moral behavior. These writings of Piaget, Kohlberg, and Rest provided the theoretical foundations for the moral development research that was conducted in this study.
Related Moral Development Research
Rest (1986b) indicated that it is essential to
cognitive developmental theory to demonstrate that people change over time in the direction postulated by the theory; hence, the demonstration of age trends is the first indication of validity for any measure of moral judgment. Piaget (1932/1965) reported these empirical age trend




27

results in his research. Colby, Kohlberg, Gibbs, and Lieberman (1983) in an extensive report listed age trends as a major empirical finding. Rest (1979) reported age trend data for validating the Defining Issues Test and indicated that longitudinal studies using the DIT showed a substantial upward movement of approximately ten times more than that of downward movement. In fact, he indicated that age/education accounts for 52 percent of the variance in DIT scores. This work by Piaget, Kohlberg, and Rest strongly supports the conclusion that moral judgment development moves into the higher stages on the Kohlberg moral development scale with an increase in age and/or education.
There are a number of additional studies by other
researchers using the DIT that support this upward age trend conclusion with regard to college students. Biggs and Barnett (1981) in a four year study of 82 college students reported upward age trends. Whiteley (1982) in a study of 187 college students also confirmed upward age trends. Mentkowski and Strait (1983) in a four year study of 140 college students concluded that there was evidence of upward age trends. Kitchner, King, Davison, Parker, and Wood




28

(1984) in a two year study of 56 junior high school, junior college, and graduate school students also reported evidence of upward age trend development.
These age trend studies strongly support the
conclusion that individual moral development increases over time, but they do not indicate why this upward age trend change occurs. Several prominent researchers over a number of years have concluded that formal higher education has a significant impact on the moral development of college students. Chickering (1969) reported that developmental changes do occur during the college years and that numerous cross-sectional and longitudinal studies of college students have indicated that changes do occur in individual attitudes, values, and personal integration during the time that students are completing their higher education. Bowen (1977) reported that higher education and the academic environment produce immediate and induced future changes in students emotional and moral development as well as their cognitive learning. Astin (1977) reported that formal higher education has a substantial impact on student attitudes and values. In a secondary analysis of




29

demographic correlates of the DIT, Rest (1979) reported that formal education was the strongest correlate when compared with individual DIT P scores. Rest (1986b) indicated that one of the strongest and most consistent correlates of moral development is years of formal education. A strong correlation of formal education and moral judgment development was also documented by Colby et al. (1983), showing correlations of 0.53 and 0.60.
These studies of the relationship of formal
education to moral judgment development indicate that there is a significant relationship between these two variables. However, this research does not identify what specific aspects of formal education influence this upward movement in moral development. Are there certain formal education courses that have more impact on moral development than other courses? There have been numerous reviews of moral education programs that have indicated that certain types of moral education programs are effective in increasing moral judgment development while others are not. Lockwood (1978) concluded that some moral education programs promote significant increases in moral judgment development as




30

measured by the stages of development on the Kohlberg moral development scale. Lawrence (1980) suggested that there were moral education programs that increase individual moral judgment development as measured on the Kohlberg moral development scale. Leming (1981) also concluded that certain types of moral education programs increase moral judgment development and significantly accelerate movement into the higher levels of moral development on the Kohlberg scale. The consensus of opinion from these studies was that the moral education programs that were effective were those that lasted longer than a few weeks, and involved the participation of the students in controversial moral dilemmas. Finally, in a meta-analysis of 55 studies, where the Defining Issues Test was used as the measure of moral development, Schlaefli, Rest, and Thoma (1985) concluded that the overall effect of moral education programs is statistically significant when they are considered collectively without regard to type of program. This conclusion seems to go beyond the conclusions reached by the other researchers and suggests that moral education is effective in increasing individual moral judgment




31

development, regardless of the length of the program or the method of instruction that is used to teach the program.
With regard to these conclusions this researcher
intended to investigate the relationship of formal religious education to moral judgment development. Does formal religious education have a significant role to play in moral development as indicated by Lee (1980), or does it have no specific role to play as indicated by Kohlberg (1981)? One of the main disagreements between these two researchers with regard to whether religious education influences moral development appears to be the contention over Kohlberg's definition of religion as religious affiliation. There have been some studies by other researchers that have focused on religious affiliation in attempting to determine if religious education has a significant role to play in moral development. Wahrman (1981) reported that there was not a significant relationship between the religious affiliation of 124 college students and their moral judgment development as measured by the DIT. McGeorge (1976) reported that a longitudinal study of 140 New Zealand college students tested in 1973 showed no significant difference between the




32

moral development of religiously affiliated college students and those who were not religiously affiliated. However, when he retested 92 of the college students in 1975 the nonaffiliated students were significantly higher in moral judgment development then those who were religiously affiliated. Schomberg (1978) in a study of 289 university freshman reported a nonsignificant relationship between participation in religious activities and the level of moral judgment development. If religious affiliation is used as the sole measure of the effectiveness of religious education, then Kohlberg (1981) probably was correct in stating that religious education has no unique role to play in moral development. However, this researcher agrees with Lee that religion and religious education are comprised of more that mere religious affiliation.
Although the overall relationship of formal
education to moral judgment development has been examined in numerous studies, there has been a distinct lack of research that has isolated the relationship of formal religious education to moral judgment development. Consequently, there was little information available to assist this




33

researcher in developing the parameters for this study. Of the researchers that had examined the relationship of formal religious education to the moral judgment development of college students, none had isolated specific religious education courses. Moreover, some of the researchers who had correlated religious education and moral judgment development had not examined religious education at the college level. Nevertheless, each of these studies provided information that was useful during the conceptualization portion of this research.
In a study of the relationship of religious
education, religious commitment, and religious conversion to the moral judgment development of college students, Wolf (1980) found that college students with extensive exposure to religious education received at home, in family life, at church, and at religious schools below the college level, had significantly lower DIT P scores than students with low exposure to the same type religious education. He also reported a nonsignificant relationship between religious conversion and moral judgment development. However, he did not examine religious education at the college level.




34

In a longitudinal study of students from a state university, a Bible college, and a Christian liberal arts college Shaver (1984) reported that individual DIT P scores increased significantly over the four year period of higher education. Although Shaver did compare the DIT P scores of students from the three different educational environments, as well as a number of selected student characteristics, he did not examine any specific formal religious education courses.
In a longitudinal study of students from a liberal arts college Shaver (1985) reported a significant increase in the DIT P scores of students over the educational period of four years. In addition, he reported that females had significantly higher DIT P scores than males. However, he again did not include an examination of any specific formal religious education courses.
In another longitudinal study of students attending a Christian liberal arts college and a Bible college, that was designed to expand on his 1984 study, Shaver (1987) reported that the DIT P scores of students attending the Christian liberal arts college were significantly higher




35

than the DIT P scores of students attending the Bible college. Although he again compared the DIT P scores of the students from the two different educational environments, he, for a third time, did not examine any specific formal religious education courses. Moreover, he did not examine any selected student characteristics in this study.
None of these researchers definitively addressed the relationship of formal religious education to moral judgment development, by examining specific formal religious education courses, by comparing the religious affiliation of institutions, or by comparing the characteristics of students from a wide range of diverse educational environments. Furthermore, Wolf (1980) limited his study to only one nonaffiliated state university, and considered only religious education received below the college level. Although two of the studies by Shaver (1984, 1987) included a comparison of educational environments with regard to differences in student DIT P scores, none of the three included an examination of specific formal religious education courses or the religious affiliation of the institutions. Moreover, none of these studies included




36
any thorough examination, across educational environments, of the relationship of individual student characteristics to moral judgment development after controlling for formal religious education.




CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a significant relationship between formal religious education and the moral judgment development of college students, and, after controlling for formal religious education, to see if there is also a significant relationship between the educational environment or certain selected student characteristics and the moral judgment development of those students. This chapter contains a description of the study design, the study sample, the survey instruments used, the data collection procedures, and the statistical analyses employed in evaluating the data.
Design
The research design used in this investigation was a correlational design. The definition of formal religious

37




38

education, the random selection of the educational environments, and the selection of the variables to be evaluated were all under the direct control of the researcher. The random selection of the students, and the content of the specific religious education courses were both controlled by the individual institutions.
The study focused on the relationship of formal religious education to the moral judgment development of college students. A standardized moral judgment development test, the Defining Issues Test (DIT) designed by James Rest, was used to gather moral development information; and a one-page questionnaire, designed by the researcher, was used to gather demographic, educational background, religious ideology, and moral values background information.
Sample
The colleges and divinity schools used in this study were selected through a two step selection process. First, the four largest Judeo-Christian denominations in the United States were selected from Statistical Abstracts of the United States (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1989). This




39

provided five selection categories comprised of all nonaffiliated institutions, and all institutions affiliated with those four denominations: Roman Catholic, Jewish, Southern Baptist and Methodist. Second, 60 fully accredited institutions were selected from The Greenwood Encyclopedia of American Institutions (Ohles & Ohles, 1986a & 1986b) using those five categories. A total of 48 institutions were selected randomly from affiliated colleges and divinity schools, 12 from each of the four denominations previously mentioned. The remaining 12 institutions were selected randomly from nonaffiliated colleges and divinity schools. A participation solicitation letter was sent to the president of each of those 60 institutions. A copy of the participation solicitation letter is included in Appendix A.
The presidents of 12 of the 60 institutions agreed
to participate in the study. The participating institutions were located in Alabama, California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Of the 12 institutions, 9 were affiliated and 3 were nonaffiliated. Moreover, 5 of the 12 were colleges and 7 were divinity schools. Of the 5 colleges,




40

1 was Jewish, 1 was Roman Catholic, 1 was Southern Baptist, and 2 were Colleges of Arts and Sciences from nonaffiliated state universities. Of the 7 divinity schools, 4 were Roman Catholic, 1 was Jewish, 1 was United Methodist, and 1 was interdenominational nonsectarian. The nonaffiliated colleges and nonsectarian divinity school were included mainly for educational environment comparison purposes.
The contact person for each institution, depending on the size of the student population, was instructed to select 50 or 100 students using a simple random sampling technique. Institutions with a population of less than 400 were asked to select only 50 students. Thirty percent of the selected students returned their survey packets, and the answers and scores of 226 respondents were included in the final data base used in the data analysis. The validity of the study sample was strengthened by the fact that the respondents were from 12 different institutions located throughout the United States, and the fact that each returned DIT was required to pass four separate internal checks on respondent reliability before being used in the data analysis. Furthermore, the DIT P score mean for the




41

respondents used in the study was 44.58, which was virtually identical to the DIT P score mean of 44.02 for the same mix, undergraduates and graduates, reported by James Rest (1986a) in his standardization sample.
Instrumentation
The six-story version of the Defining Issues Test
(DIT) was used to measure the moral judgment development of individual respondents. The DIT was developed by James Rest, Director of the Center for the Study of Ethical Development at the University of Minnesota. The DIT P score was the index used from the Defining Issues Test for comparison of student moral judgment development. Rest (1986b) indicated that the DIT P score index provided the relative importance that an individual attached to the principled morality, or Kohlberg Stage 5 and Stage 6, items on the DIT; and that it was calculated by summing the number of times the Kohlberg Stage 5 and Stage 6 items were chosen as the first, second, third, or fourth important consideration, weighting those ranks by 4, 3, 2, and 1, respectively.




42

Davison and Robbins (1978), in a review of several studies, concluded that the test/retest reliability for DIT P scores is generally in the high .70s or .80s. They also concluded that the Cronbach's Alpha index of internal consistency for DIT P scores is generally in the high .70s. Rest (1986a) indicated that correlations of the DIT P score with other measures of moral reasoning, such as various versions of Kohlberg's Interview test and the Comprehension of Moral Concepts test, average about .50, with some correlations as high as .60 and .70. In addition, Rest (1986a) also indicated that the DIT P score index has shown the most consistent reliability and validity trends of any index based on the DIT.
The DIT was used in this study because, as Rest (1986a) indicated, it is the most widely used measure of moral judgment; it is the best documented in terms of reliability and validity; it can be mailed to subjects for self-administration and then returned to the researcher for computerized scoring; and it is simpler to score than the Kohlberg interview, which uses a more subjective scoring system and has to be personally administered to each




43

subject. According to Rest (1986b), the DIT uses Kohlberg type moral dilemmas, with multiple choice answers; it is based on the six theoretical stages of moral reasoning developed by Kohlberg; and it follows the premise that individuals at different stages of moral development interpret moral dilemmas differently, define critical issues of dilemmas differently, and have different ideas about what is right and fair in a given situation. The DIT was developed in a three-story version and a six-story version. The six-story version was selected for use in this study because, according to Rest (1986a), it is a more reliable measurement of moral judgment than the three-story version. A copy of the Defining Issues Test is included in Appendix D.
The one-page questionnaire that accompanied the DIT was designed by this researcher. The questionnaire solicited information concerning 15 selected items of demographic, educational background, religious ideology, and moral values background information. The responses were evaluated with regard to their relationship to DIT P scores, using the linear regression designs described in the Data




44

Analysis Section of this chapter. A copy of the research questionnaire is included in Appendix C.
Data Collection
For reasons of confidentiality, institutions would not supply names and addresses of students. The presidents of the 12 institutions that participated in the study agreed to have a representative of their school randomly select students, distribute research packets, and then collect the completed packets and return them, in bulk, to this researcher.
A cover letter that explained the research project and gave instructions for completion was attached to each questionnaire and DIT, both of which had been numbered for control purposes. A return envelope was provided with each packet, in order that respondents could seal the completed questionnaire and DIT inside, then date and sign the envelope for control purposes before returning it to the school representative. A copy of the survey cover letter that was attached to each research packet is included in Appendix B.




45

Groups of 50 or 100 of these packets then were
transmitted to the participating institutions, depending on the size of their student population. Institutions with student populations of less than 400 received 50 packets each, institutions with student populations of 400 or more received 100 packets each. A cover letter explaining the distribution and collection of the research questionnaires was sent to each institution with the research packets. A copy of the distribution letter is included in Appendix E.
A follow-up letter was sent to each school
representative at the end of four weeks, requesting the return of all completed research packets. A second follow-up letter was sent at the end of six weeks to those representatives who had not responded to the first follow-up letter. Finally, a follow-up telephone call was made at the end of eight weeks to those representatives who had not responded to the second follow-up letter. A copy of the first follow-up letter is included in Appendix F, and a copy of the second follow-up letter is included in Appendix G.




46

Institution presidents were given the option of
receiving a summary of the completed research project for their institutional use. Respondents were informed that the results of the study would be made available to them, upon request, through the president of their institution.
Data Analysis
The raw data from each questionnaire and DIT were coded for computer analysis. The DIT raw data were first processed using a computer program designed by the researchers at the University of Minnesota, and adapted by this researcher for use on an IBM computer. As recommended by Rest (1986a), protocols were discarded for those students whose DIT responses failed any of four internal checks on subject reliability. Protocols were discarded for any respondent who had an M score of 8.0 or higher, indicating the score was more than two standard deviations above the average M score; any respondent who had more than eight inconsistencies on any single story; any respondent who had more than two stories with any inconsistencies; and any respondent who had more than one story that had more than




47

nine items rated the same. The final output of the computer program provided DIT P scores for use with the questionnaire data in all subsequent regression analyses. Regression analyses were performed on all variables using a general purpose regression procedure. These regression analyses were completed in three phases using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS Institute, 1985).
Phase 1 evaluated the relationship of formal
religious education to moral judgment development. This was accomplished by examining the relationship of student DIT P scores to the number of Judeo-Christian philosophy, theology, or ethics courses completed. Phase 2 evaluated the relationship of educational environment to moral judgment development, after controlling for significantly related formal religious education courses. This was accomplished by examining the relationship of student DIT P scores to the type of school attended and the affiliation of like types of schools. Phase 3 evaluated the relationship of certain selected student characteristics to moral judgment development, after controlling for significantly related formal religious education courses. This was




48

accomplished by examining the relationship of student DIT P scores to age, gender, ethnic group, highest degree held, year of study, grade point average, parents' annual income, mother's education level, father's education level, familiarity with Kohlberg's moral development theory, individual religious conversion experience, church/synagogue attendance, religious ideology regarding moral decisions, source of basic moral values, and individual denominational membership.
Since ethics courses were the only type of formal religious education courses that showed a significant relationship to the moral judgment development of college students during the Phase 1 analysis, they were the only courses controlled for in Phase 2 and Phase 3 of this study. All hypotheses were tested at the alpha level of .05. All categorical variables were dummy coded with 1 and 0. In all linear regression equations the categories represented by X components were the ones that were coded 1. The category not represented by an X component was the one coded 0, that was used for comparison with the other X components. The following linear regression equations were used for




49

hypothesis evaluation in the phases indicated:
1. Phase 1, Hypothesis 1: Y=Bo+BiXi+E, where Y was DIT P scores, and X1 was the number of Judeo-Christian philosophy, theology, or ethics courses completed.
2. Phase 2, Hypothesis 2: Y=Bo+BiXi+B2X2+E, where Y was DIT P scores, X1 was the number of ethics courses completed, and X2 was divinity schools. Supplemental Analysis: Y=Bo+BiXi+E, where Y was DIT P scores for either college or divinity school students, and Xi was the number of ethics courses completed.
3. Phase 2, Hypothesis 3: Y=Bo+BiXl+B2X2+B3X3+B4X4+E, where Y was DIT P scores for either college or divinity school students, Xi was the number of ethics courses completed, X2 was Roman Catholic affiliation, X3 was Jewish affiliation, and X4 was Southern Baptist affiliation for colleges or United Methodist affiliation for divinity schools.
4. Phase 3, Hypothesis 4: Y=BO+BlXl+B2X2+E, where Y was DIT P scores; Xi was the number of ethics courses completed; and X2 was age, male gender, year of study, grade point average, parents' annual income, individuals who were




50

familiar with Kohlberg's moral development theory, or individuals who had experienced religious conversion.
5. Phase 3 Hypothesis 5: Y=Bo+BIXl+B2X2+B3X3+E, where Y was DIT P scores; Xi was the number of ethics courses completed; X2 was mothers who were college graduates, fathers who were college graduates, or individuals who believed they should follow established religious rules and biblical commandments in making all moral decisions; and X3 was mothers with postbaccalaureate degrees, fathers with postbaccalaureate degrees, or individuals who believed they should follow the leadership of the Spirit of God in making all moral decisions.
6. Phase 3, Hypothesis 6: Y=Bo+BlXl+B2X2+B3X3+B4X4+E, where Y was DIT P scores, Xi was the number of ethics courses completed, X2 was individuals who went to church/ synagogue regularly seeking values or direction for their life, X3 was individuals who went to church/synagogue regularly out of duty or habit, and X4 was individuals who did not go to church/synagogue regularly.
7. Phase 3, Hypothesis 7: Y=BO+BlXl+B2X2+B3X3+B4X4+ BsXs+E, where Y was DIT P scores; Xi was the number of




51

ethics courses completed; X2 was Asian-Americans, individuals who had completed an Associate degree, or individuals who felt their basic moral values had come mainly from friends; X3 was Black-Americans, individuals who had completed a Baccalaureate degree, or individuals who felt their basic moral values had come mainly from teachers; X4 was Hispanic-Americans, individuals who had completed a Master degree, or individuals who felt their basic moral values had come mainly from ministers; and X5 was Native Americans, individuals who had completed a Doctorate degree, or individuals who felt their basic moral values had come mainly from sources other than those specified.
8. Phase 3, Hypothesis 8: Y=Bo+BlXI+B2X2+B3X3+B4X4+
BsX5+B6X6+B7X7+B8XS+B9Xg+BloXio+E, where Y was DIT P scores, Xi was the number of ethics courses completed, X2 was Roman Catholic, X3 was Southern Baptist, X4 was United Methodist, X5 was Episcopalian, X6 was Presbyterian, X7 was American/Independent Baptist, Xe was United Church of Christ/Christian Church/Fundamentalist/Reformed, X9 was Unitarian/Quaker/Mennonite, and Xio was no denominational membership.




CHAPTER 4
DATA ANALYSIS
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a significant relationship between formal religious education and the moral judgment development of college students, and, after controlling for formal religious education, to see if there is also a significant relationship between the educational environment or certain selected student characteristics and the moral judgment development of those students. Formal religious education was defined as the study of Judeo-Christian philosophy, theology, or ethics at a fully accredited college or divinity school. The educational environment was defined as the type of institution attended and the Judeo-Christian denominational affiliation of the institution. The selected student characteristics included age, gender, ethnic group, highest degree held, year of study, grade point average,

52




53

parents' annual income, mother's education level, father's education level, familiarity with Kohlberg's moral development theory, individual religious conversion experience, church/synagogue attendance, religious ideology regarding moral decisions, source of basic moral values, and individual denominational membership.
The remainder of this chapter contains a discussion of the characteristics of the 226 respondents used in the study, and a discussion of the data produced by the linear regression analysis of each hypothesis. The respondents were students who were attending colleges and divinity schools in 11 different states located throughout the United States. General purpose linear regression models were used to compare DIT P scores with the coded data from the respondent questionnaires. All hypotheses were tested at the confidence level of .05, using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS). All categorical variables were dummy coded with 1 and 0. In all linear regression equation models the categories represented by X components were the ones that were coded 1. The category not represented by an X component was the category coded 0, that was used for




54

comparison with the other X components in the regression equation model.
Respondent Characteristics
Over 51% of the study respondents were students from liberal arts colleges. over 56% indicated they were under 25 years of age. Over 66% reported they were male. Over 91% said they were white. Over 35% indicated parental income of $20,000 to $50,000. A complete list of these student demographics is included in Table 4-1.
Over 22% of the study respondents indicated they
were in their senior year of study. Over 37% reported they had a grade point average between 3.0 and 3.4. Over 54% said they had not completed a baccalaureate degree. Over 55% indicated they had completed one or more Judeo-Christian philosophy courses. over 77% reported they had completed one or more theology courses. Over 57% said they had completed one or more ethics courses. A complete list of these student educational background characteristics is included in Table 4-2.




55

Table 4-1 Student Demographics

Characteristics

Students by School Type
Divinity School Students Liberal Arts College Students
Student Age
17-24
25-29 30-39
40-49 50 +
No Response
Gender
Male Female
Ethnic Group
Asian-American Black Hispanic Native American White No Response

Parents' Annual Income
< 20,000
20 50,000 51 75,000 76 100,000 101 200,000 > 200,000 No Response

Nuimber Perce~nt

110 116
127 32 32 16 10
9
150 76
6 3 7 3
206
1

48.7 51.3
56.2
14.2 14.2 7.1
4.4 3.9
66.4 33.6
2.7 1.3 3.1 1.3 91.2
.4
4.4 35.4 12.4 11.5
4.0 .9
31.4

10 80 28 26
9
2
71

Characteristics Number Percent




56

Table 4-2
Student Educational Background
Characteristic Number Percent
Year of Study
Freshman 27 11.9 Sophomore 15 6.6 Junior 30 13.3 Senior 51 22.6 Postbaccalaureate Yr 1 36 15.9 Postbaccalaureate Yr 2 32 14.2 Postbaccalaureate Yr 3 22 9.7 Postbaccalaureate Yr 4+ 13 5.8
Grade Point Average
2.0 2.4 9 4.0 2.5 2.9 27 12.0 3.0 3.4 75 33.2 3.5 3.9 84 37.1 4.0 3 1.3 No Response 28 12.4
Degrees Held
None 96 42.5 Associate 27 12.0 Baccalaureate 71 31.4 Master 31 13.7 PhD/EdD 1 .4
Formal Religious Education
Completed Judeo-Christian Philosophy Courses 125 55.3 No Judeo-Christian Philosophy Courses 101 44.7 Completed Theology Courses 175 77.4 No Theology Courses 51 22.6 Completed Ethics Courses 130 57.5 No Ethics Courses 96 42.5




57

Over 58% of the study respondents indicated their
mother was not a college graduate. Over 57% reported their father was a college graduate. Over 55% said they were members of the Roman Catholic denomination. A complete list of these parent educational and student denominational background characteristics is included in Table 4-3.
Over 39% of the respondents indicated they believed they should follow the leadership of the Spirit of God in making all moral decisions. Over 91% reported that their basic moral values came mainly from their family. Over 67% of the respondents said they were not familiar with the moral development theory of Lawrence Kohlberg. Over 51% indicated they had not experienced religious conversion. Over 72% reported they attended church or synagogue regularly seeking values or direction for their life. A complete list of these student religious ideology and moral values background characteristics is included in Table 4-4.
Phase 1 Analysis
During the Phase 1 analysis the relationship of the number of completed Judeo-Christian philosophy courses,




58

Table 4-3
Parent Educational and Student Denominational Background
Characteristic Number Percent
Mother's education level
No High School Diploma 16 7.1 High School Graduate 116 51.3 College Graduate 66 29.2 Postbaccalaureate Degree 28 12.4
Father's education level
No High School Diploma 16 7.1 High School Graduate 79 35.0 College Graduate 76 33.6 Postbaccalaureate Degree 55 24.3
Denominational membership
Roman Catholic 126 55.8 Jewish 11 5.0 Southern Baptist 26 11.5 United Methodist 19 8.4 Episcopalian 13 5.8 Presbyterian 9 4.0 Independent Baptist 4 1.8 American Baptist 3 1.3 United Church of Christ 4 1.8 Reformed 1 .4 Christian Church 1 .4 Fundamentalist 1 .4 Quaker 1 .4 Mennonite 1 .4 Unitarian 1 .4 None 5 2.2




59

Table 4-4
Student Religious Ideology and Moral Values Background
Characteristic Number Percent
Religious ideology regarding moral decisions
Follow Religious Rules & Biblical Commands 66 29.2 Follow Own Moral Reasoning 68 30.1 Follow Leadership of Spirit of God 89 39.4 No Response 3 1.3
Source of basic moral values
Family 206 91.2 Friends 3 1.3 Teachers 5 2.2 Ministers 4 1.8 Others 8 3.5
Familiarity with Kohlberg
Yes 73 32.3 No 152 67.3 No Response 1 .4
Experienced religious conversion
Yes 107 47.4 No 116 51.3 No Response 3 1.3
Pattern of church/synagogue attendance
Attend Regularly Seeking Values 163 72.1 Attend Regularly Out of Duty/Habit 16 7.1 Do Not Attend Regularly 35 15.5 Do Not Attend At All 9 4.0 No Response 3 1.3




60

theology courses, or ethics courses to DIT P scores was tested. Hypothesis 1 postulated that there would be no difference, based on the number and type of formal religious education courses completed, in the DIT P scores of college students. This null hypothesis was tested with a general purpose regression model using Y=Bo+BiXi+E as the linear regression equation. The significance level for the F-test was established at .05.
The SAS regression model procedure was executed using DIT P scores as the value of Y, and the number of Judeo-Christian philosophy, theology, or ethics courses completed as the value of Xi. The results of those linear regression analyses are included in Tables 4-5 through 4-7.
Only one independent variable, ethics courses
completed, had a significant relationship to the dependent variable DIT P scores. The computer model indicated that students averaged 1.75 points higher on their DIT P scores for each ethics course completed. The probability of values greater than :T: for this independent variable was .007. The other two independent variables, Judeo-Christian philosophy courses completed and theology courses completed,




61

Table 4-5
Results for Hypothesis 1 -- Philosophy Courses

Dependent Variable = DIT P Score
Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 1 97.825 97.825 0.487 0.4861 Error 224 45027.269 201.015 C Total 225 45125.094
DEP MEAN 44.581 ROOT MSE 14.178 R-Square 0.0022 C.V. 31.803 ADJ R-SQ -0.0023
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >|T
Intercept 1 44.899 1.047 42.864 0.0001 Philosophy 1 -0.173 0.248 -0.698 0.4861 Courses




62

Table 4-6
Results for Hypothesis 1 -- Theology Courses

Dependent Variable = DIT P Score

Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 1 126.974 126.974 0.632 0.4274 Error 224 44998.120 200.884 C Total 225 45125.094
DEP MEAN 44.581 ROOT MSE 14.173 R-Square 0.0028 C.V. 31.793 ADJ R-SQ -0.0016
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >|T:
Intercept 1 44.153 1.085 40.679 0.0001
Theology 1 0.142 0.179 0.795 0.4274 Courses




63

Table 4-7
Results for Hypothesis 1 -- Ethics Courses

Dependent Variable = DIT P Score

Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 1 1445.355 1445.355 7.412 0.0070 Error 224 43679.739 194.999 C Total 225 45125.094
DEP MEAN 44.581 ROOT MSE 13.964 R-Square 0.0320 C.V. 31.324 ADJ R-SQ 0.0277
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >|T
Intercept 1 42.742 1.148 37.222 0.0001
Ethics 1 1.753 0.644 2.723 0.0070 Courses




64

did not have a significant relationship to DIT P scores. Because there was a significant relationship between student DIT P scores and the number of ethics courses completed, Hypothesis 1 was rejected. The reader will note that due to the confounding effect of number of ethics courses completed and school type, that was identified during the Hypothesis 2 analysis, the results of the Hypothesis 2 supplemental analysis must be considered when drawing conclusions or implications from the Hypothesis 1 finding.
Phase 2 Analysis
During the Phase 2 analysis the relationship of school type and school affiliation to DIT P scores was tested, after controlling for significantly related formal religious education courses. Hypothesis 2 postulated that, after controlling for ethics courses completed, there would be no difference, based on school type, in the DIT P scores of college students. This null hypothesis was tested with a general purpose regression model using Y=Bo+BIXl+B2X2+E as the linear regression equation. The significance level for the F-test was established at .05.




65

The SAS regression model procedure was executed using DIT P scores as the value of Y, ethics courses completed as the value of Xi, and divinity schools as the value of X2. The results of that linear regression analysis are included in Table 4-8.
There was a significant difference, based on school type, between the DIT P scores of students attending divinity schools and the DIT P scores of students attending liberal arts colleges. The computer model indicated that divinity school students averaged 5.5 points higher on their DIT P scores than students attending liberal arts colleges. The probability of values greater than |T! for this independent variable was .0038. Because there was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students attending divinity schools and the DIT P scores of students attending liberal arts colleges, Hypothesis 2 was rejected.
Due to the confounding effect of number of ethics courses completed and school type, that was identified during the data analysis of Hypothesis 2, a supplemental analysis was performed to examine the relationship of DIT P scores to ethics courses completed by students from each




66

Table 4-8
Results for Hypothesis 2 -- School Type

Dependent Variable = DIT P Score

Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 2 3055.964 1527.982 8.100 0.0004 Error 223 42069.130 188.651 C Total 225 45125.094
DEP MEAN 44.581 ROOT MSE 13.735 R-Square 0.0677 C.V. 30.809 ADJ R-SQ 0.0594
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >'T!
Intercept 1 40.584 1.350 30.069 0.0001 Ethics 1 1.238 0.657 1.884 0.0608 Divinity 1 5.543 1.897 2.922 0.0038 Schools




67

type of school. This analysis was accomplished using the general purpose regression model Y=Bo+BiXi+E as the linear regression equation. The significance level for the F-test was established at .05.
The SAS regression model procedure was executed using DIT P scores of liberal arts college students or divinity school students as the value of Y, and number of ethics courses completed as the value of X1. The results of those linear regression analyses are included in Tables 4-9 and 4-10.
There was a significant relationship between the
number of ethics courses completed and the DIT P scores of students attending colleges of liberal arts and sciences. The computer model indicated that liberal arts college students averaged 2.93 points higher on their DIT P scores for each ethics course completed. The probability of values greater than T for this independent variable was .0185.
On the other hand, the relationship between the
number of ethics courses completed and the DIT P scores of students attending divinity schools was not significant. A full discussion of the confounding effect of number of




68

Table 4-9
Results for Hypothesis 2 Supplement -- Liberal Arts Colleges

Dependent Variable = DIT P Scores

Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 1 902.965 902.965 5.709 0.0185 Error 114 18032.054 158.176 C Total 115 18935.019
DEP MEAN 41.416 ROOT MSE 12.577 R-Square 0.0477 C.V. 30.367 ADJ R-SQ 0.0393
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >|T
Intercept 1 39.450 1.429 27.613 0.0001 Ethics 1 2.925 1.224 2.389 0.0185




69

Table 4-10
Results for Hypothesis 2 Supplement -- Divinity Schools

Dependent Variable = DIT P Score

Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 1 162.741 162.741 0.743 0.3905 Error 108 23641.236 218.900 C Total 109 23803.977
DEP MEAN 47.917 ROOT MSE 14.795 R-Square 0.0068 C.V. 30.877 ADJ R-SQ -0.0024
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >|T|
Intercept 1 46.904 1.836 25.546 0.0001 Ethics 1 0.701 0.813 0.862 0.3905




70

ethics courses completed and school type is provided in Chapter 5.
Hypothesis 3 postulated that, after controlling for ethics courses completed, there would be no difference, based on school affiliation, in the DIT P scores of college students attending the same type of school. This null hypothesis was tested with a general purpose regression model using Y=Bo+BlXI+B2X2+B3X3+B4X4+E as the linear regression equation. The significance level for the F-test was established at .05.
The SAS regression model procedure was executed using DIT P scores as the value of Y, ethics courses completed as the value of Xi, Roman Catholic college as the value of X2 Jewish college as the value of X3, and Southern Baptist college as the value of X4. The results of that linear regression analysis are included in Table 4-11.
There was not a significant difference, based on school affiliation, between the DIT P scores of students attending the Jewish affiliated college and the DIT P scores of students attending the nonaffiliated colleges. However, there was a significant difference, based on




71

Table 4-11
Results for Hypothesis 3 -- Liberal Arts College Affiliation

Dependent Variable = DIT P Score

Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 4 2495.250 623.813 4.212 0.0033 Error 111 16439.769 148.106 C Total 115 18935.019
DEP MEAN 41.416 ROOT MSE 12.170 R-Square 0.1318 C.V. 29.384 ADJ R-SQ 0.1005
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >|T|
Intercept 1 47.705 3.052 15.629 0.0001 Ethics 1 2.101 1.323 1.588 0.1150 Rom Catholic 1 -8.591 3.294 -2.608 0.0104 Jewish 1 4.091 9.880 0.414 0.6796 So Baptist 1 -11.217 3.819 -2.937 0.0040




72

school affiliation, between the DIT P scores of students attending the Roman Catholic affiliated college or the Southern Baptist affiliated college, and the DIT P scores of students attending the nonaffiliated colleges. The computer model indicated that students attending the Roman Catholic affiliated college averaged 8.59 points lower on their DIT P scores than students attending the nonaffiliated colleges. The probability of values greater than :T| for this independent variable was .0104. The computer model also indicated that students attending the Southern Baptist affiliated college averaged 11.22 points lower on their DIT P scores than students attending the nonaffiliated colleges. The probability of values greater than :T| for this independent variable was .004.
The SAS regression model procedure then was executed using DIT P scores as the value of Y, ethics courses completed as the value of X1, Roman Catholic divinity school as the value of X2 Jewish divinity school as the value of X3, and United Methodist divinity school as the value of X4. The results of that linear regression analysis are included in Table 4-12.




73

Table 4-12
Results for Hypothesis 3 -- Divinity School Affiliation
Dependent Variable = DIT P Score
Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 4 2547.921 636.981 3.147 0.0174 Error 105 21256.057 202.439 C Total 109 23803.977
DEP MEAN 47.917 ROOT MSE 14.228 R-Square 0.1070 C.V. 29.693 ADJ R-SQ 0.0730
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >|T|
Intercept 1 52.542 3.225 16.290 0.0001 Ethics 1 0.326 0.802 0.406 0.6854 Rom Catholic 1 -8.770 3.472 -2.526 0.0130 Jewish 1 4.531 5.188 0.873 0.3844 U Methodist 1 -6.139 4.512 -1.360 0.1766




74

There was not a significant difference, based on school affiliation, between the DIT P scores of students attending the Jewish divinity school or the United Methodist divinity school, and the DIT P scores of students attending the nonsectarian divinity school. Conversely, there was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students attending the Roman Catholic divinity schools, and the DIT P scores of students attending the nonsectarian divinity school. The computer model indicated that students attending Roman Catholic divinity schools averaged 8.77 points lower on their DIT P scores than students attending the nonsectarian divinity school. The probability of values greater than :T! for this independent variable was .013. Because there was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students attending the nonaffiliated colleges and the DIT P scores of students attending the Roman Catholic college or the Southern Baptist college, and there was also a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students attending the nonsectarian divinity school and the DIT P scores of students attending the Roman Catholic divinity schools, Hypothesis 3 was rejected.




75

Phase 3 Analysis
During the Phase 3 analysis the relationship of respondent's age, gender, ethnic group, highest degree held, year of study, grade point average, parents' annual income, mother's education level, father's education level, familiarity with Kohlberg's moral development theory, individual religious conversion experience, church/synagogue attendance, religious ideology regarding moral decisions, source of basic moral values, and individual denominational membership to DIT P scores was tested, after controlling for formal religious education courses that had shown a significant relationship to DIT P scores in the Phase 1 analysis. The reader will recall that ethics courses were the only courses in that category.
Hypothesis 4 postulated that, after controlling for ethics courses completed, there would be no difference, based on age, gender, year of study, grade point average, parents' annual income, familiarity with Kohlberg's moral development theory, or individual religious conversion experience, in the DIT P scores of college students. This




76

null hypothesis was tested with a general purpose regression model using Y=Bo+BlXl+B2X2+E as the linear regression equation. The significance level for the F-test was established at .05.
The SAS regression model procedure was executed using DIT P scores as the value of Y; ethics courses completed as the value of Xi; and age, male gender, year of study, grade point average, parents' annual income, individuals who were familiar with Kohlberg's moral development theory, or individuals who had experienced religious conversion as the value of X2. There was not a significant difference in the DIT P scores of college students based on age, grade point average, parents' annual income, familiarity with Kohlberg's moral development theory, or individual religious conversion experience. The results of those linear regression analyses are included in Tables 4-13 through 4-17.
On the other hand, there was a significant
difference in the DIT P scores of college students based on gender and year of study. The results of those linear regression analyses are included in Tables 4-18 and 4-19.




77

Table 4-13
Results for Hypothesis 4 -- Ace

Dependent Variable = DIT P Score
Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 2 2143.876 1071.938 5.451 0.0049 Error 214 42082.373 196.647 C Total 216 44226.249
DEP MEAN 44.588 ROOT MSE 14.023 R-Square 0.0485 C.V. 31.450 ADJ R-SQ 0.0396
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >|T|
Intercept 1 37.580 2.840 13.233 0.0001 Ethics 1 1.647 0.729 2.259 0.0249 Age 1 0.200 0.101 1.971 0.0501




78

Table 4-14
Results for Hypothesis 4 -- Grade Point Average

Dependent Variable = DIT P Score

Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 2 2489.637 1244.818 6.843 0.0013 Error 195 35474.294 181.919 C Total 197 37963.931
DEP MEAN 44.239 ROOT MSE 13.488 R-Square 0.0656 C.V. 30.488 ADJ R-SQ 0.0560
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=O >|T|
Intercept 1 28.487 7.218 3.947 0.0001 Ethics 1 2.077 0.671 3.093 0.0023 GPA 1 4.127 2.176 1.897 0.0593




79

Table 4-15
Results for Hypothesis 4 -- Parents' Annual Income
Dependent Variable = DIT P Score
Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 2 635.736 317.868 1.718 0.1829 Error 152 28119.978 185.000 C Total 154 28755.714
DEP MEAN 44.141 ROOT MSE 13.601 R-Square 0.0221 C.V. 30.814 ADJ R-SQ 0.0092
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=O >:T:
Intercept 1 41.087 2.049 20.052 0.0001 Ethics 1 1.014 0.748 1.356 0.1772 Parents' 1 0.034 0.025 1.349 0.1794 Annual
Income




80

Table 4-16
Results for Hypothesis 4 -- Familiarity with Kohlberg

Dependent Variable = DIT P Score

Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 2 1693.286 846.643 4.342 0.0141 Error 222 43284.274 194.974 C Total 224 44977.560
DEP MEAN 44.527 ROOT MSE 13.963 R-Square 0.0376 C.V. 31.359 ADJ R-SQ 0.0290
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >|T|
Intercept 1 42.103 1.256 33.516 0.0001 Ethics 1 1.554 0.661 2.352 0.0196 Kohlberg 1 2.468 2.039 1.210 0.2275 Theory




81

Table 4-17
Results for Hypothesis 4 -- Religious Conversion

Dependent Variable = DIT P Score
Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 2 1954.912 977.456 5.036 0.0073 Error 220 42703.616 194.107 C Total 222 44658.528
DEP MEAN 44.418 ROOT MSE 13.932 R-Square 0.0438 C.V. 31.366 ADJ R-SQ 0.0351
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >|T|
Intercept 1 43.738 1.438 30.413 0.0001 Ethics 1 1.874 0.645 2.905 0.0040 Conversion 1 -2.715 1.871 -1.451 0.1482




82

Table 4-18
Results for HvDothesis 4 -- Gender

Dependent Variable = DIT P Score

Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 2 4293.455 2146.727 11.724 0.0001 Error 223 40831.640 183.102 C Total 225 45125.094
DEP MEAN 44.581 ROOT MSE 13.532 R-Square 0.0951 C.V. 30.353 ADJ R-SQ 0.0870
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >|T'
Intercept 1 47.577 1.656 28.738 0.0001 Ethics 1 1.908 0.625 3.052 0.0025 Male Gender 1 -7.529 1.909 -3.944 0.0001




83

Table 4-19
Results for Hypothesis 4 -- Year of Study

Dependent Variable = DIT P Score
Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 2 5642.231 2821.116 15.934 0.0001 Error 223 39482.863 177.053 C Total 225 45125.094
DEP MEAN 44.581 ROOT MSE 13.306 R-Square 0.1250 C.V. 29.847 ADJ R-SQ 0.1172
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >IT|
Intercept 1 33.732 2.150 15.690 0.0001 Ethics 1 0.412 0.672 0.612 0.5409 Yr of Study 1 2.405 0.494 4.869 0.0001




84

When the linear regression procedure was run using
male gender as the value of X2, the computer model indicated that males averaged 7.53 points lower on their DIT P scores than females. The probability of values greater than T! for this independent variable was .0001. When the linear regression procedure was run using year of study as the value of X2, the computer model indicated that students averaged 2.41 points higher on their DIT P scores for each completed year of study. The probability of values greater than :T| for this independent variable was .0001. Because there was a significant difference in student DIT P scores based on gender and year of study, Hypothesis 4 was rejected.
Hypothesis 5 postulated that, after controlling for ethics courses completed, there would be no difference, based on mother's education level, father's education level, or religious ideology regarding moral decisions, in the DIT P scores of college students. This null hypothesis was tested with a general purpose regression model using Y=Bo+ BlXl+B2X2+B3X3+E as the linear regression equation. The significance level for the F-test was established at .05.




85

The SAS regression model procedure was executed using DIT P scores as the value of Y; ethics courses completed as the value of Xi; mothers with baccalaureate degrees, fathers with baccalaureate degrees, or students who believed they should follow established religious rules and biblical commandments in making all moral decisions as the value of X2 ; and mothers with postbaccalaureate degrees, fathers with postbaccalaureate degrees, or students who believed they should follow the leadership of the Spirit of God in making all moral decisions as the value of X3. The results of those linear regression analyses are included in Tables 4-20 through 4-22.
When the linear regression procedure was run using mothers with baccalaureate degrees as the value of X2 and mothers with postbaccalaureate degrees as the value of X3; there was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students whose mothers had completed a baccalaureate degree, and the DIT P scores of students whose mothers had not completed a college degree. The computer model indicated that students whose mothers had completed a baccalaureate degree averaged 4.19 points higher on




86

Table 4-20
Results for Hypothesis 5 -- Mother's Education Level

Dependent Variable = DIT P Score

Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 3 2415.338 805.113 4.185 0.0066 Error 222 42709.756 192.386 C Total 225 45125.094
DEP MEAN 45.581 ROOT MSE 13.870 R-Square 0.0535 C.V. 31.113 ADJ R-SQ 0.0407
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >|T|
Intercept 1 40.923 1.403 29.160 0.0001 Ethics 1 1.819 0.647 2.812 0.0054 Mom Bac 1 4.193 2.103 1.994 0.0474 Mom Postbac 1 4.242 2.895 1.465 0.1443




87

Table 4-21
Results for Hypothesis 5 -- Father's Education Level

Dependent Variable = DIT P Score

Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 3 3239.856 1079.952 5.724 0.0009 Error 222 41885.238 188.672 C Total 225 45125.094
DEP MEAN 44.581 ROOT MSE 13.736 R-Square 0.0718 C.V. 30.811 ADJ R-SQ 0.0593
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >|T|
Intercept 1 40.931 1.599 25.590 0.0001 Ethics 1 1.774 0.636 2.790 0.0057 Dad Bac 1 0.438 2.123 0.206 0.8367 Dad Postbac 1 6.747 2.329 2.896 0.0042




88

Table 4-22
Results for Hypothesis 5 -- Religious Ideology

Dependent Variable = DIT P Score

Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F
Squares Square
Model 3 2316.995 772.332 4.019 0.0082 Error 219 42084.384 192.166 C Total 222 44401.379
DEP MEAN 44.425 ROOT MSE 13.862 R-Square 0.0522 C.V. 31.204 ADJ R-SQ 0.0392
Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >IT|
Intercept 1 44.967 1.872 24.025 0.0001 Ethics 1 1.686 0.674 2.501 0.0131 Follow Rules 1 -5.406 2.399 -2.254 0.0252 Follow Spirit 1 -1.593 2.249 -0.708 0.4796




89

their DIT P scores than students whose mothers had not completed a college degree. The probability of values greater than !Tj for this independent variable was .0474. When the linear regression procedure was run using fathers with baccalaureate degrees as the value of X2 and fathers with postbaccalaureate degrees as the value of X3; there was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students whose fathers had completed a postbaccalaureate degree, and the DIT P scores of students whose fathers had not completed a college degree. The computer model indicated that students whose fathers had completed a postbaccalaureate degree averaged 6.75 points higher on their DIT P scores than students whose fathers had not completed a college degree. The probability of values greater than |T| for this independent variable was .0042. When the linear regression procedure was run, using the religious ideology of following established religious rules and biblical commandments regarding moral decisions as the value of X2, and the religious ideology of following the leadership of the Spirit of God regarding moral decisions as the value of X3, there was a significant difference between




Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID ENERANOHL_AGI3H7 INGEST_TIME 2017-07-11T21:14:01Z PACKAGE UF00101000_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
fcla fda yes
!-- The relationship of formal religious education to the moral judgment development college students ( Book ) --
METS:mets OBJID UF00101000_00001
xmlns:METS http:www.loc.govMETS
xmlns:xlink http:www.w3.org1999xlink
xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance
xmlns:daitss http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss
xmlns:mods http:www.loc.govmodsv3
xmlns:sobekcm http:digital.uflib.ufl.edumetadatasobekcm
xmlns:lom http:digital.uflib.ufl.edumetadatasobekcm_lom
xsi:schemaLocation
http:www.loc.govstandardsmetsmets.xsd
http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitss.xsd
http:www.loc.govmodsv3mods-3-4.xsd
http:digital.uflib.ufl.edumetadatasobekcmsobekcm.xsd
METS:metsHdr CREATEDATE 2017-12-05T10:03:26Z ID LASTMODDATE 2017-12-04T16:01:15Z RECORDSTATUS COMPLETE
METS:agent ROLE CREATOR TYPE ORGANIZATION
METS:name UF,University of Florida
OTHERTYPE SOFTWARE OTHER
Go UFDC FDA Preparation Tool
INDIVIDUAL
UFAD\renner
METS:note Online edit by Kaitlyn Tingum ( 3/26/2015 )
METS:dmdSec DMD1
METS:mdWrap MDTYPE MODS MIMETYPE textxml LABEL Metadata
METS:xmlData
mods:mods
mods:accessCondition Copyright Gary Gene. Friend. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
mods:identifier type OCLC 25151719
LTUF AJA2107
ALEPH 0026404991
mods:language
mods:languageTerm text English
code authority iso639-2b eng
mods:location
mods:physicalLocation University of Florida
UF
mods:url access object in context http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00101000/00001
mods:name
mods:namePart Friend, Gary Gene
mods:originInfo
mods:copyrightDate 1991
mods:recordInfo
mods:recordIdentifier source sobekcm UF00101000_00001
mods:recordOrigin MARC Importer GUI:4.8.01:UFAD\neldas
mods:recordContentSource University of Florida
mods:titleInfo
mods:title The relationship of formal religious education to the moral judgment development of college students
mods:typeOfResource text
DMD2
OTHERMDTYPE SOBEKCM SobekCM Custom
sobekcm:procParam
sobekcm:Aggregation ALL
UFIRG
UFIR
UFETD
IUF
sobekcm:MainThumbnail RELATIONSHIPOFFO00FRIE_0000thm.jpg
sobekcm:Wordmark UFIR
sobekcm:bibDesc
sobekcm:BibID UF00101000
sobekcm:VID 00001
sobekcm:Source
sobekcm:statement UF University of Florida
sobekcm:SortDate 726832
METS:amdSec
METS:digiprovMD DIGIPROV1
DAITSS Archiving Information
daitss:daitss
daitss:AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT PROJECT UFDC
METS:techMD TECH1
File Technical Details
sobekcm:FileInfo
sobekcm:File fileid JP21 width 2394 height 3272
JPEG1 630 861
JPEG2 863
JP22 2393 3277
JPEG3 864
JP23 2392 3279
JPEG4
JP24 2391
JPEG5
JP25 2390 3278
JPEG6
JP26 2389 3276
JPEG7
JP27 2388 3275
JPEG8 866
JP28 2385
JPEG9
JP29
JPEG10
JP210 2382
JPEG11 867
JP211
JPEG12 868
JP212 2380
JPEG13
JP213
JPEG14
JP214
JPEG15 869
JP215 2377
JPEG16
JP216 2378
JPEG17
JP217
JPEG18
JP218 2376
JPEG19
JP219 2375
JPEG20
JP220 2373
JPEG21 870
JP221 2372
JPEG22
JP222
JPEG23
JP223
JPEG24
JP224 2371
JPEG25
JP225 2370 3274
JPEG26 871
JP226 2369
JPEG27
JP227 2367
JPEG28
JP228 3273
JPEG29
JP229
JPEG30 872
JP230
JPEG31 873
JP231
JPEG32
JP232 3281
JPEG33
JP233 2366
JPEG34
JP234
JPEG35
JP235
JPEG36
JP236
JPEG37
JP237 2365
JPEG38 874
JP238 2364
JPEG39
JP239
JPEG40
JP240
JPEG41
JP241
JPEG42
JP242
JPEG43
JP243
JPEG44
JP244
JPEG45 875
JP245 2362 3280
JPEG46
JP246
JPEG47
JP247
JPEG48
JP248
JPEG49
JP249 2363
JPEG50
JP250
JPEG51
JP251
JPEG52
JP252
JPEG53
JP253
JPEG54
JP254
JPEG55
JP255
JPEG56
JP256 2360
JPEG57
JP257 2361
JPEG58
JP258
JPEG59
JP259
JPEG60
JP260
JPEG61 876
JP261
JPEG62
JP262
JPEG63
JP263
JPEG64
JP264
JPEG65
JP265
JPEG66
JP266
JPEG67
JP267
JPEG68
JP268
JPEG69
JP269
JPEG70
JP270
JPEG71
JP271 3282
JPEG72
JP272
JPEG73
JP273
JPEG74
JP274
JPEG75
JP275
JPEG76
JP276
JPEG77
JP277
JPEG78
JP278
JPEG79
JP279
JPEG80
JP280
JPEG81
JP281
JPEG82
JP282
JPEG83
JP283
JPEG84
JP284
JPEG85
JP285
JPEG86
JP286
JPEG87
JP287
JPEG88
JP288
JPEG89
JP289
JPEG90
JP290
JPEG91
JP291
JPEG92
JP292
JPEG93
JP293
JPEG94
JP294
JPEG95
JP295 3283
JPEG96
JP296
JPEG97
JP297
JPEG98
JP298
JPEG99
JP299
JPEG100
JP2100
JPEG101
JP2101
JPEG102
JP2102
JPEG103
JP2103
JPEG104
JP2104
JPEG105
JP2105
JPEG106
JP2106
JPEG107
JP2107
JPEG108
JP2108
JPEG109
JP2109
JPEG110
JP2110
JPEG111
JP2111
JPEG112
JP2112
JPEG113
JP2113
JPEG114
JP2114
JPEG115
JP2115
JPEG116
JP2116
JPEG117
JP2117
JPEG118
JP2118
JPEG119
JP2119
JPEG120
JP2120
JPEG121
JP2121
JPEG122
JP2122
JPEG123
JP2123 3284
JPEG124
JP2124
JPEG125
JP2125 3285
JPEG126
JP2126
JPEG127
JP2127
JPEG128
JP2128
JPEG129
JP2129
JPEG130
JP2130
JPEG131
JP2131 2368
JPEG132
JP2132
JPEG133
JP2133
JPEG134
JP2134
JPEG135
JP2135
JPEG136
JP2136
JPEG137
JP2137
JPEG138
JP2138
JPEG139
JP2139
JPEG140
JP2140
JPEG141
JP2141
JPEG142
JP2142
JPEG143
JP2143
JPEG144
JP2144
JPEG145
JP2145
JPEG146
JP2146
JPEG147
JP2147
JPEG148
JP2148
JPEG149
JP2149
JPEG150
JP2150
JPEG151
JP2151
JPEG152
JP2152
JPEG153
JP2153
JPEG154
JP2154 2374
JPEG155
JP2155
JPEG156
JP2156
JPEG157
JP2157
JPEG158
JP2158
JPEG159
JP2159
JPEG160
JP2160
JPEG161
JP2161
JPEG162
JP2162
JPEG163
JP2163 2379
JPEG164
JP2164
JPEG165
JP2165
JPEG166
JP2166
JPEG167
JP2167 2381
JPEG168
JP2168
JPEG169
JP2169
JPEG170 865
JP2170 2383
JPEG171
JP2171 2384
JPEG172
JP2172
JPEG173
JP2173
JPEG174
JP2174 2386
JPEG175
JP2175 2387
JPEG176
JP2176
JPEG177
JP2177
JPEG178
JP2178
JPEG179
JP2179
JPEG180
JP2180
JPEG181
JP2181
JPEG182
JP2182
JPEG183
JP2183
JPEG184 862
JP2184
JPEG185
JP2185 2395
JPEG186
JP2186 2396
JPEG187
JP2187
JPEG188 860
JP2188 2398
JPEG189
JP2189 2399
JPEG190 859
JP2190
JPEG191
JP2191
JP2192
JPEG192
METS:fileSec
METS:fileGrp USE archive
METS:file GROUPID G1 TIF1 imagetiff CHECKSUM 8417c57496f63760c33ce1bfdadd228d CHECKSUMTYPE MD5 SIZE 23518964
METS:FLocat LOCTYPE OTHERLOCTYPE SYSTEM xlink:href relationshipoffo00frie_0000.tif
G2 TIF2 34281c51364ab6e380280a4e3ada30ad 23544260
relationshipoffo00frie_0001.tif
G3 TIF3 73e41ddf4c700473d25a277c1e6eea43 23550920
relationshipoffo00frie_0002.tif
G4 TIF4 a1293794d17595436fb6f7d0da66b88f 23541212
relationshipoffo00frie_0003.tif
G5 TIF5 54eb31b7bd7bebe7735c6de8e2c02e76 23524168
relationshipoffo00frie_0004.tif
G6 TIF6 0c1e80668788fd92c3f43e656ea92043 23500240
relationshipoffo00frie_0005.tif
G7 TIF7 bfc0a421a9d4075246dac8280ee30200 23483612
relationshipoffo00frie_0006.tif
G8 TIF8 949d89918ed119c2133453a6bf0788f2 23483280
relationshipoffo00frie_0007.tif
G9 TIF9 ebc6ba08f07b153ddabad649349c91f3 23468548
relationshipoffo00frie_0008.tif
G10 TIF10 4b025de27d5bd9a5774ce617273e353c 23425300
relationshipoffo00frie_0009.tif
G11 TIF11 639c5004f6ff8db84182d61237a88474 23438584
relationshipoffo00frie_0010.tif
G12 TIF12 e381590ba5818f51f8dd82acbc716195 23426292
relationshipoffo00frie_0011.tif
G13 TIF13 5858cc988c1eed678300e23c00294d3b 23420128
relationshipoffo00frie_0012.tif
G14 TIF14 4b7379365171294201934309c83d162a 23420076
relationshipoffo00frie_0013.tif
G15 TIF15 4622843a4010676a6b7c5cb0df922b08 23397552
relationshipoffo00frie_0014.tif
G16 TIF16 f7a48a6c464c403d793d88fc108ea16e 23400556
relationshipoffo00frie_0015.tif
G17 TIF17 71bb262cc398ceb81c4655e5ef0b492b 23407768
relationshipoffo00frie_0016.tif
G18 TIF18 1051bfb5bd0f857f94d31de6625e2c56 23373676
relationshipoffo00frie_0017.tif
G19 TIF19 a97ceb0aa6ea3381e8ad0dbd4b6f5afd 23363424
relationshipoffo00frie_0018.tif
G20 TIF20 805b3d6703312497d31d9b80f0e20a94 23336896
relationshipoffo00frie_0019.tif
G21 TIF21 f346bf5890cc57c685c1466b5c9387f0 23333780
relationshipoffo00frie_0020.tif
G22 TIF22 e04ed99e2e17040d960f89bf15f0364c 23327340
relationshipoffo00frie_0021.tif
G23 TIF23 aca7117408771b570a6a77612115e256 23341496
relationshipoffo00frie_0022.tif
G24 TIF24 a36ffc1d602ae6fb21b03649e2c1b189 23317012
relationshipoffo00frie_0023.tif
G25 TIF25 e9798098cf5d34c6af50721f8c2187ac 23300048
relationshipoffo00frie_0024.tif
G26 TIF26 6196603c7514245b2e1c28405f1ee0fe 23289996
relationshipoffo00frie_0025.tif
G27 TIF27 c26c8772955079210d19830443d6e210 23270952
relationshipoffo00frie_0026.tif
G28 TIF28 8d6dab5cf8d8ce0a988cf3cda40f0654 23260776
relationshipoffo00frie_0027.tif
G29 TIF29 edc6c9a9ddf45e324a3390cb99adc4f3 23289792
relationshipoffo00frie_0028.tif
G30 TIF30 ed933c18ea1af69d00fb881ac0dd7beb 23278248
relationshipoffo00frie_0029.tif
G31 TIF31 3dd30379b805bef24f1a3ff81ebda552 23306596
relationshipoffo00frie_0030.tif
G32 TIF32 98cfc99da58c05db15a4e78c5f1b5b42 23321336
relationshipoffo00frie_0031.tif
G33 TIF33 c2e8dc6d7ad446ab5b01a1d9f911703e 23268516
relationshipoffo00frie_0032.tif
G34 TIF34 e51f937b06e667c8a095338618e3b469 23261340
relationshipoffo00frie_0033.tif
G35 TIF35 b1d2dd31a5b97ed3105d6203ec703e0c 23275936
relationshipoffo00frie_0034.tif
G36 TIF36 0aef7b867d02e062cd44de4437cd3ae7 23275296
relationshipoffo00frie_0035.tif
G37 TIF37 11dd92483cad05b9e7b9d83a57248a88 23272752
relationshipoffo00frie_0036.tif
G38 TIF38 9e4277cc98821169f58d774934d77fee 23277736
relationshipoffo00frie_0037.tif
G39 TIF39 ae4567ef9acf0ff0beeeb4116785b003 23270168
relationshipoffo00frie_0038.tif
G40 TIF40 bf52fc08b6d7ce6dd3988caeb1b19aff 23265956
relationshipoffo00frie_0039.tif
G41 TIF41 f5c4ec65ddc552901f432f05463615b3 23280160
relationshipoffo00frie_0040.tif
G42 TIF42 13348f5fbace9fff5bf3c253fc87d41d 23270360
relationshipoffo00frie_0041.tif
G43 TIF43 b00c86c584af68e29a013eef4213d7d7 23270540
relationshipoffo00frie_0042.tif
G44 TIF44 b539b88d536d546e593397075db2ddf4 23301332
relationshipoffo00frie_0043.tif
G45 TIF45 a20b2f24bcfc10c750fb5c509d20e61c 23264652
relationshipoffo00frie_0044.tif
G46 TIF46 b9c9d0482d53e58ecdc2491def0c5b52 23256304
relationshipoffo00frie_0045.tif
G47 TIF47 b377dc7e31b68ee14faa74f35afdc5b2 23274176
relationshipoffo00frie_0046.tif
G48 TIF48 044a09a5fd06bffab2dc1e2bb5d50873 23249296
relationshipoffo00frie_0047.tif
G49 TIF49 b4e1e35a613248dfe9b5e3b7b485003b 23253108
relationshipoffo00frie_0048.tif
G50 TIF50 1607ea85ece4b6c24b7e010f5465c4d2 23260448
relationshipoffo00frie_0049.tif
G51 TIF51 c5664003c62c4607581f2c0edb56a98e 23236508
relationshipoffo00frie_0050.tif
G52 TIF52 9430c549a0187ab2984a646f941fd936 23236208
relationshipoffo00frie_0051.tif
G53 TIF53 ad9f6c0ebbd87ef8987609645bbce845 23250912
relationshipoffo00frie_0052.tif
G54 TIF54 f3b8857d765bc65a8898b8a43ee90be9 23236400
relationshipoffo00frie_0053.tif
G55 TIF55 709172685e1f5a6474f54d8c70af493b 23238884
relationshipoffo00frie_0054.tif
G56 TIF56 db4bdc29f8fc196bdd748db474fffca6 23209352
relationshipoffo00frie_0055.tif
G57 TIF57 7ab2ed1c733ec773a0c91939c0d19492 23219300
relationshipoffo00frie_0056.tif
G58 TIF58 4a7dbdaa2cb72a111e32bb7946e9c2b5 23222620
relationshipoffo00frie_0057.tif
G59 TIF59 4eecc8052bae168a07e59dd0a699efc3 23239324
relationshipoffo00frie_0058.tif
G60 TIF60 a0c7b045e592b058fa978b2987c3fee1 23253300
relationshipoffo00frie_0059.tif
G61 TIF61 b83832009c7163d670285016d613c0ff 23252344
relationshipoffo00frie_0060.tif
G62 TIF62 2c21e6f620ca0ab7f550b66b0046f165 23271852
relationshipoffo00frie_0061.tif
G63 TIF63 858580b8ee95d50da76b4026c0590ea5 23252540
relationshipoffo00frie_0062.tif
G64 TIF64 4c4ebbede5be231d5a60d12a2c229588 23250600
relationshipoffo00frie_0063.tif
G65 TIF65 ef29a83a98bb12defa5bc725c027a5d2 23271460
relationshipoffo00frie_0064.tif
G66 TIF66 595a55e7cff650bac5f15ef368d69961 23255808
relationshipoffo00frie_0065.tif
G67 TIF67 c90670b7cbb6db7c79897771f0cef98f 23256164
relationshipoffo00frie_0066.tif
G68 TIF68 1507f3253fa95f735426c5c4460c50f7 23264608
relationshipoffo00frie_0067.tif
G69 TIF69 08ee1a4148d7db5fd3d988dca04a2aaf 23266112
relationshipoffo00frie_0068.tif
G70 TIF70 60ee75734114f028747801368040b0ce 23249508
relationshipoffo00frie_0069.tif
G71 TIF71 0bc999b6dcb930550b7a2f563913a289 23269232
relationshipoffo00frie_0070.tif
G72 TIF72 1ccefd6ac116de5e4e7b551ffb1f461c 23263532
relationshipoffo00frie_0071.tif
G73 TIF73 b884cf3113a1de5e5fc915a8a0e3a720 23276052
relationshipoffo00frie_0072.tif
G74 TIF74 36a2a94f6b4ae1207ee3fa78f1923ecb 23266396
relationshipoffo00frie_0073.tif
G75 TIF75 4a988fbe44c9437fd8e16f051152699a 23250564
relationshipoffo00frie_0074.tif
G76 TIF76 a110a358999d910790165e08503f4e76 23284640
relationshipoffo00frie_0075.tif
G77 TIF77 835b09ee1689a3a849192f57089b788c 23280684
relationshipoffo00frie_0076.tif
G78 TIF78 1848b9c6c81322f691f0f48fdb95d4b0 23267568
relationshipoffo00frie_0077.tif
G79 TIF79 d91892c8f9ea3beff9b2e551881030c9 23270560
relationshipoffo00frie_0078.tif
G80 TIF80 7cf446336bb835baae6350c9605eab41 23270464
relationshipoffo00frie_0079.tif
G81 TIF81 de8d3e6ae852834123202fc0182d202a 23277140
relationshipoffo00frie_0080.tif
G82 TIF82 b89f523171c6a32d7bdf950bfbb07faf 23256960
relationshipoffo00frie_0081.tif
G83 TIF83 d0d660761c6b827c0765b0ea948e9e2c 23284572
relationshipoffo00frie_0082.tif
G84 TIF84 8bf050d8dbcc14d0d19e57b91f89576d 23252616
relationshipoffo00frie_0083.tif
G85 TIF85 ba810b9f85158b040c567db3d70d6cfc 23243612
relationshipoffo00frie_0084.tif
G86 TIF86 dd8ffaeb74c943404c719a2a617e4ebd 23246248
relationshipoffo00frie_0085.tif
G87 TIF87 abd4250a4d0ad2f09656dce285dff3ae 23249268
relationshipoffo00frie_0086.tif
G88 TIF88 5ca595f3a636fa0f0bb650057cdbf8a0 23228012
relationshipoffo00frie_0087.tif
G89 TIF89 9c7d451eb4086635938875852c8c2b6b 23252132
relationshipoffo00frie_0088.tif
G90 TIF90 fb3f9298172bc232ab17475c78dcc0d8 23278968
relationshipoffo00frie_0089.tif
G91 TIF91 ab1b0050f4613bd0fb30e1647dda38d1 23297500
relationshipoffo00frie_0090.tif
G92 TIF92 0a645d580f9e0fb191a03d7891917a9e 23273592
relationshipoffo00frie_0091.tif
G93 TIF93 8cdbfb19c56ddc35acb92d8b4d12a6ec 23269100
relationshipoffo00frie_0092.tif
G94 TIF94 c4a7a82a9dabf6ae26937c97f847da20 23287832
relationshipoffo00frie_0093.tif
G95 TIF95 a99197ec6e12b70dcbc66c0efeded0aa 23305956
relationshipoffo00frie_0094.tif
G96 TIF96 8fcf3f1ec070829e7ea4ae812e801ab8 23291816
relationshipoffo00frie_0095.tif
G97 TIF97 69d0b98ea77ab6749790591c9e3eb107 23280828
relationshipoffo00frie_0096.tif
G98 TIF98 1d3fcf0bb4174a131f2da1eaace86827 23297872
relationshipoffo00frie_0097.tif
G99 TIF99 7a7062d4debe3156355281476254db40 23266652
relationshipoffo00frie_0098.tif
G100 TIF100 62d7ad504c6d6f09c901d5079d8d3720 23299048
relationshipoffo00frie_0099.tif
G101 TIF101 0972ff0ae9a409fbc4df317b450b7b92 23284656
relationshipoffo00frie_0100.tif
G102 TIF102 c063eb8e73af367273dc619e20661f29 23277720
relationshipoffo00frie_0101.tif
G103 TIF103 0aa58f51cf622c3c281d1eafd7b22f07 23300660
relationshipoffo00frie_0102.tif
G104 TIF104 cc3510e8407f45f03d6c39d9457e5af5 23311332
relationshipoffo00frie_0103.tif
G105 TIF105 f4aca04ddf00626207593b2790621775 23293700
relationshipoffo00frie_0104.tif
G106 TIF106 2f40f9e4382a27c5233d81a86f46ef14 23308044
relationshipoffo00frie_0105.tif
G107 TIF107 12f8f4fd55e87e6f096739af207a2c31 23281168
relationshipoffo00frie_0106.tif
G108 TIF108 518987d26541cd25bd5428956f47cc4f 23302024
relationshipoffo00frie_0107.tif
G109 TIF109 af302a6ee034690c61310d7991130e6b 23311696
relationshipoffo00frie_0108.tif
G110 TIF110 41f87e326a2f37f2982597639284040b 23277356
relationshipoffo00frie_0109.tif
G111 TIF111 b70eaf39be22c257d22876cf3c6b58fb 23304240
relationshipoffo00frie_0110.tif
G112 TIF112 8efbef5e8250b1be8285af848b4de71a 23294412
relationshipoffo00frie_0111.tif
G113 TIF113 728d49d592c00259ca6c9e8b6df04887 23280044
relationshipoffo00frie_0112.tif
G114 TIF114 07cace1a3ea0ed463d4f3ce6d8bd03d0 23287224
relationshipoffo00frie_0113.tif
G115 TIF115 03c8681cb7169baa05f29b610c53fe2d 23284748
relationshipoffo00frie_0114.tif
G116 TIF116 15c08d57070a97533059bb59def3eb67 23283052
relationshipoffo00frie_0115.tif
G117 TIF117



PAGE 1

THE RELATIONSHIP OF FORMAL RELIGIOUS EDUCATION TO THE MORAL JUDGMENT DEVELOPMENT OF COLLEGE STUDENTS By GARY GENE FRIEND A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1991

PAGE 2

Copyright 1991 by Gary Gene Friend

PAGE 3

This dissertation is dedicated to Weston Webster and Virginia Eloise Friend, who loved me, nurtured me, and taught me the ethical and religious values which have been the mainstay of my life; and to my wife, Jacquelyn, and my children, Gary, Matthew, and Jennifer, who have been the proving ground for those teachings. Without the love, instruction, and example of two genuinely loving Christian parents, the richness of my life would be far less than what it is. Without the love and patience of my wife and children, my ethical and religious values would not have been tempered, purified, and refined; and the depth of my character would be far less than what it is.

PAGE 4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my wife, Jacquelyn, who has supported me during all of my programs of study in numerous colleges and universities throughout the United States. Without her love, friendship, and assistance I would not have endured. I also would like to thank my supervisory committee, James Wattenbarger Joan Curcio, James Hensel and M. David Miller, whose assistance in shaping and honing the concept of this investigation was invaluable to me. In addition, I would like to thank Patricia Ashton for the advice she provided concerning the literature review. Finally, I would like to thank the presidents, faculty, and students of the participating institutions. Without their full cooperation, this study would not have been possible.

PAGE 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii LIST OF TABLES vi ABSTRACT viii CHAPTERS 1 INTRODUCTION 1 Background 1 Need for the Study 4 Assumptions 8 Statement of Purpose 9 Research Questions and Hypotheses 10 Delimitations 13 Limitations 14 Definitions 15 Organization of the Research Report .... 16 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 18 Introduction 18 Theoretical Foundations 19 Related Moral Development Research 26 3 METHODOLOGY 37 Introduction 37 Design 37 Sample 38 Instrumentation 41 Data Collection 44 IV

PAGE 6

CHAPTERS page Data Analysis 46 4 DATA ANALYSIS 52 Introduction 52 Respondent Characteristics 54 Phase 1 Analysis 57 Phase 2 Analysis 64 Phase 3 Analysis 75 Summary of Findings 102 5 CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS. Ill Introduction Ill Conclusions and Implications 112 Suggested Future Studies 133 Recommendations 136 APPENDICES A PARTICIPATION SOLICITATION LETTER 139 B SURVEY COVER LETTER 141 C RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE 143 D DEFINING ISSUES TEST 146 E DISTRIBUTION LETTER 162 F FIRST FOLLOW-UP LETTER 164 G SECOND FOLLOW-UP LETTER 166 REFERENCES 168 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 177

PAGE 7

LIST OF TABLES Table page 4-1 Student Demographics 55 4-2 Student Educational Background 56 4-3 Parent Educational and Student Denominational Background 58 4-4 Student Religious Ideology and Moral Values Background 59 4-5 Results for Hypothesis 1 Philosophy Courses 61 4-6 Results for Hypothesis 1 Theology Courses 62 4-7 Results for Hypothesis 1 Ethics Courses 63 4-8 Results for Hypothesis 2 School Type ... 66 4-9 Results for Hypothesis 2 Supplement Liberal Arts Colleges 68 4-10 Results for Hypothesis 2 Supplement Divinity Schools 69 4-11 Results for Hypothesis 3 Liberal Arts College Affiliation 71 4-12 Results for Hypothesis 3 Divinity School Affiliation 73 4-13 Results for Hypothesis 4 Age 77 vi

PAGE 8

Table page 4-14 Results for Hypothesis 4 Grade Point Average 78 4-15 Results for Hypothesis 4 Parents' Annual Income 7 9 4-16 Results for Hypothesis 4 Familiarity with Kohlberg 80 4-17 Results for Hypothesis 4 Religious Conversion 81 4-18 Results for Hypothesis 4 Gender 82 4-19 Results for Hypothesis 4 Year of Study 83 4-20 Results for Hypothesis 5 Mother's Education Level 86 4-21 Results for Hypothesis 5 Father's Education Level 87 4-22 Results for Hypothesis 5 Religious Ideology 88 4-23 Results for Hypothesis 6 Church/ Synagogue Attendance 92 4-24 Results for Hypothesis 7 Source of Basic Moral Values 94 4-25 Results for Hypothesis 7 Ethnic Group ... 95 4-26 Results for Hypothesis 7 Highest Degree Held 96 4-27 Results for Hypothesis 8 Denominational Membership 100 VII

PAGE 9

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy THE RELATIONSHIP OF FORMAL RELIGIOUS EDUCATION TO THE MORAL JUDGMENT DEVELOPMENT OF COLLEGE STUDENTS By GARY GENE FRIEND MAY 1991 Chairman: James L. Wattenbarger Major Department: Educational Leadership The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a significant relationship between formal religious education and the moral judgment development of college students, and, after controlling for formal reliqious education, to see if there is also a significant relationship between the educational environment or certain selected student characteristics and the moral judgment development of those students. Formal religious education was defined as the study of Judeo-Christian philosophy, theology, or ethics at a fully accredited college or divinity school. Educational environment was defined as viii

PAGE 10

the type of school attended and the Judeo-Christian denominational affiliation of the school. A correlational design was used, and data were gathered through two instruments: a one-page demographics, educational background, religious ideology, and moral values background questionnaire designed by the researcher; and the Defining Issues Test (DIT) designed by James Rest. DIT P scores were used as the measure of moral development. The final data base contained 226 randomly selected college and divinity school students, enrolled at 12 fully accredited, randomly selected institutions from 11 states located throughout the United States. The number of ethics courses completed was related significantly to the moral judgment development of liberal arts college students; however, this relationship was not significant for divinity school students. Judeo-Christian philosophy or theology courses completed were not related significantly to student moral development. After controlling for ethics courses completed, the type of school attended, the affiliation of some institutions, and 8 of 15 selected student characteristics

PAGE 11

were related significantly to the moral judgment development of students. Divinity school students had significantly higher levels of moral development than liberal arts college students. Students attending Roman Catholic and Southern Baptist institutions had significantly lower levels of moral development than students attending nonaffiliated institutions. Conversely, the moral development of students attending Jewish and United Methodist institutions did not differ significantly from the moral development of students attending nonaffiliated institutions. The eight significantly related student characteristics were gender, ethnic group, highest degree held, year of study, mother's education level, father's education level, religious ideology regarding moral decisions, and individual denominational membership.

PAGE 12

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Background Although the early founders of American colleges were concerned about the moral development of students, the required courses in moral philosophy that directly addressed that concern disappeared from college curricula in the early twentieth century (Rudolph, 1962, 1977). There has been a recent resurgence of support for reintroducing ethics courses into American college curricula, in nearly all academic disciplines (Baca & Stein, 1983). This renewed support has been strengthened by the perception of a pervasive deterioration of ethical values and standards in all areas of American life. This perception of widespread moral deterioration has been reinforced by recent scandals in athletics, business, education, government, medicine, and religion. These scandals also have raised profound questions concerning the basic ethical fabric of modern

PAGE 13

American society (Barrett, 1987; Bowen, 1987; Koepp 1987; Shapiro, 1987; Stengel, 1987). Is there a universal ethical standard for human behavior? From the earliest time there has been sharp disagreement on the answer to this question. Plato (c. 350/1937) postulated that there was a transcendent universal standard of justice, and that it was from this standard that human applications were derived. George E. Moore (1903) postulated that there was no universal standard, that moral laws were simply statements that certain types of actions would have good effects, that the end always would justify the means, and that no action that was not justified by its results could be right. This disagreement over the existence of a universal ethical standard has not been settled. Nevertheless, each person ultimately develops a standard for individual ethical conduct. To believe there is no universal standard means individual ethical conduct adheres to an individually determined standard of ethics; on the other hand, to believe there is a universal standard still means the application of that standard is individually determined, and once again

PAGE 14

individual ethical conduct adheres to an individually determined standard of ethics. Either way there is an ethical standard that is followed. If that standard is adhered to by most human beings in a society, it becomes, at the very least, a universal standard for that society. For the Judeo-Christian society, the universal standard is behavior rooted in the golden rule. The ethical norms for most Judeo-Christian denominations are prescribed by two basic biblical principles. These principles are: (a) "Hear, Israel, the Lord Our God is One Lord, and you shall Love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength" (Snaith, 1978, p. 287); and (b) "You shall love your neighbor as yourself" (Snaith, 1978, p. 187). These principles set the standard for Judeo-Christian living and are interpreted into an individual concept of morality and justice using examples such as Moses and Jesus Christ as the hermeneutic for that interpretation, and the golden rule as the instruction for application. In the final analysis, however, the moral belief of individuals can be determined only by their feelings concerning how they ought to treat others, and how

PAGE 15

others ought to treat them, not by what they do, because belief does not always result in practice (Aland, Black, Martini, Metzger & Wikgren, 1975; Rest, 1986b). Need for the Study Can moral judgment be developed? There has been a voluminous amount of research done in the field of moral development. Some of the most notable research has been done by Lawrence Kohlberg at Harvard University and by James Rest at the University of Minnesota Center for the Study of Ethical Development. Both Kohlberg and Rest concluded from their research that moral judgment can be developed, and that this development continues well into adulthood (Colby et al., 1983; Rest, 1979, 1986b). In addition. Rest (1986b) concluded that people can show dramatic changes in moral development in their twenties, and that college education is powerfully associated with the development of moral judgment. Rest (1986a, 1986b) also concluded that differences between males and females with regard to moral development are trivial, and that individual religious ideology, characterized on a conservative to liberal

PAGE 16

dimension, does account for significant variance in measurements of moral judgment development. If moral judgment can be developed, how can a society properly influence individual moral belief in a way that will result in adherence to a socially acceptable ethical standard, and that eventually will result in socially acceptable individual behavior? It has been in the area of the development of moral belief that some individuals have indicated that formal religious education has a definite role to play. Conversely, there are others who have indicated that formal religious education has no definite role to play in that area. This continuing controversy can be seen in the literature of James Michael Lee and Lawrence Kohlberg. Lee (1980) indicated that because virtually every Christian denomination affirms that morality is an integral part of its doctrine and practice, moral development is also a vital part of the religious education activities that each supports. He pointed out that "Kohlberg operationally defines religion as religious affiliation. Thus his data do not show that morality is autonomous from religion, but rather from religious

PAGE 17

affiliation" (p. 333). Lee concluded that formal religious education has a unique role to play in moral development. In contrast, Kohlberg (1981) stated that "formal religious education has no specifically important or unique role to play in moral development" (p 304). Moreover, Rest (1986b) indicated that, although there have been numerous studies that contribute to the conclusion that higher education has a positive effect on the moral judgment development of college students, there has been very little research that has investigated the relationship of formal religious education to the moral judgment development of college students. As a result of that lack of research, he felt little was known concerning the effects of religious education on moral judgment development at the college level. He pointed out that most researchers who had investigated the relationship of religious education to moral judgment development drew their samples from high school students and noncollege affiliated adults. He also said there had been no research done at the college level that investigated the relationship of formal religious education to moral judgment development, and also

PAGE 18

examined the relationship of educational environment and selected student characteristics to moral judgment development. Consequently, he concluded that our knowledge of whether formal religious education influences moral judgment development will remain limited until studies are conducted that do incorporate all of those variables. The controversy, as seen in the literature of Lee (1980) and Kohlberg (1967, 1981), over whether formal religious education has a uniquely significant role to play in moral development, has not been adequately clarified by definitive research. Furthermore, Rest (1986b) indicated that the literature relating religious measures to moral judgment development shows an inconsistent relationship between P scores on the Defining Issues Test (DIT) and religious education. More research is needed in order to address this controversy and definitively determine if there is a significant relationship between formal religious education and moral judgment development. If it can be determined that formal religious education does have a significant role to play in moral judgment development, then the question of how much and what type of formal religious

PAGE 19

education is most effective in developing moral judgment can be addressed. The controversy over the significance of the role of formal religious education in moral development and the lack of research concerning the relationship of formal religious education to moral judgment development were the primary reasons this study was needed. These two reasons also provided the main impetus for this investigation. Assumptions It was assumed, for the purposes of this study, that there is a universal ethical standard that sets forth the proper way for human beings to relate to one another with regard to such things as truth and justice (Kohlberg, 1981; Nisan & Kohlberg, 1982, Piaget 1932/1965; Plato c. 350/1937; Rest, 1986b). Second, it was assumed that each individual is capable of formulating and living ethical values that are oriented toward increasingly higher stages of moral development, as defined by Kohlberg, and that the movement to those higher stages continues throughout life (Colby, Kohlberg, Gibbs & Lieberman, 1983; Piaget,

PAGE 20

1932/1965; Rest, Davison & Robbins, 1978; Rest, 1979, 1986b). Third, it was assumed that individuals in their college years are highly receptive to moral judgment development (Biggs & Barnett, 1981; Colby et al 1983; Rest, 1986a, 1986b). Finally, it was assumed that moral judgment development can be measured in a manner that is quantifiable (Davison & Robbins, 1978; Kohlberg, 1981, 1983 1984; Rest 1979, 1986a, 1986b). Statement of Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a significant relationship between formal religious education and the moral judgment development of college students, and, after controlling for formal religious education, to see if there is also a significant relationship between the educational environment or certain selected student characteristics and the moral judgment development of those students. In order to accomplish this purpose the researcher examined specific formal religious education courses, different types of higher education institutions with varied religious affiliations, and a

PAGE 21

10 number of selected student characteristics across a wide range of educational environments. Research Questions and Hypotheses The study was divided into three phases, and hypotheses were developed to assist in determining the answers to the research questions examined in each of those phases. The following research questions were posed for this study: 1. Primary research question : Is there a significant relationship between formal religious education and the moral judgment development of college students, based on the number and type of formal religious education courses completed? 2. Secondary research question : After controlling for any significantly related formal religious education courses, is there a significant relationship between the educational environment and the moral judgment development of college students? 3. Tertiary research question : After controlling for any significantly related formal religious education

PAGE 22

11 courses, is there a significant relationship between certain selected student characteristics and the moral judgment development of college students? During Phase 1 of the investigation, Hypothesis 1 was tested to determine the answer to the primary research guestion. During Phase 2 of the investigation. Hypotheses 2 and 3 were tested to determine the answer to the secondary research guestion. During Phase 3 of the investigation, Hypotheses 4 through 8 were tested to determine the answer to the tertiary research guestion. The following is a listing of the hypotheses used in this study: 1. Hypothesis 1 : There is no difference, based on the number and type of formal religious education courses completed, in the DIT P scores of college students. 2. Hypothesis 2 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on school type, in the DIT P scores of college students. 3. Hypothesis 3 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on school affiliation, in the DIT P scores of college students attending the same type of school

PAGE 23

12 4. Hypothesis 4 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on age, gender, year of study, grade point average, parents' annual income, familiarity with Kohlberg's moral development theory, or individual religious conversion experience, in the DIT P scores of college students. 5. Hypothesis 5 ; After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on mother's education level, father's education level, or student's religious ideology regarding moral decisions, in the DIT P scores of college students. 6. Hypothesis 6 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on church/synagogue attendance, in the DIT P scores of college students 7. Hypothesis 7 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on ethnic group, highest degree held, or source of basic moral values, in the DIT P scores of college students. 8. Hypothesis 8 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on individual

PAGE 24

13 denominational membership, in the DIT P scores of college students Delimitations Two widely accepted measures of moral judgment development are the Moral Maturity Scale (MMS) developed by Kohlberg from his Moral Judgment Interview, and the P Score Index developed by Rest from his Defining Issues Test (DIT) (Rest, 1986b). The DIT P Score was the only measure of moral judgment development used for this study. The Defining Issues Test was selected for use in this study because it is the most widely used measure of moral judgment, it is the best documented in terms of reliability and validity, it can be administered by mail, and it is an objective test that is simple to score (Rest, 1986a). The colleges and divinity schools used in this study, except for the nonaffiliated ones, were selected because of their connection with the four largest Judeo-Christian denominations in the United States. The nonaffiliated institutions were included mainly for educational environment comparison purposes.

PAGE 25

14 This study was restricted to an evaluation of the moral judgment development of college and divinity school students who were receiving formal religious education that teaches primarily the Judeo-Christian ethic. However, the intent was to examine the full spectrum of that teaching in a number of varied educational environments at higher education institutions located throughout the United States. Limitations This study included an examination of only Judeo-Christian. formal religious education. Although this decision was made by design, it does limit the generalization of the results to other religious and ethical systems. The denominationally affiliated colleges and divinity schools that were used in this study represented only the four largest Judeo-Christian denominations in the United States. Although this decision also was made by design, it does limit the generalization of the results to other denominations.

PAGE 26

15 Definitions College Students are individuals who are attending a fully accredited college or divinity school located in the United States. PIT P Scores are a percentile index of the relative importance individuals attach to the principled morality, or Kohlberg's Stage 5 and Stage 6, items on the Defining Issues Test (DIT). Educational Environment includes the type of school attended and the Judeo-Christian denominational affiliation of the school Ethics are moral principles concerning the concept of justice in human relationships. Formal Religious Education is the study of JudeoChristian philosophy, theology, or ethics at a fully accredited college or divinity school. School Affiliation identifies the Judeo-Christian denominational association or nonassociation of the institution. School Type identifies whether an institution is a college or a divinity school.

PAGE 27

16 Organization of the Research Report Chapter 1 is an introduction to the study. The introduction includes discussions of the study background, the need for the study, the study assumptions, the purpose of the study, the research questions posed for the study, the hypotheses used in the study, the study delimitations, the study limitations, and the unique definitions for certain terms used in the study. Chapter 2 is a review of the literature pertinent to the study. The literature review is divided into two sections. These sections include discussions of the theoretical foundations for the study and the related moral development research. Chapter 3 is a description of the methodology used for the conduct of the study. This includes discussions of the study design, the study sample, the instrumentation, the data collection, and the linear regression equations used for the testing of hypotheses during the data analysis. Chapter 4 is a discussion of the respondent characteristics and the results of the study from the testing of hypotheses during each phase of the study, including a summary of the findings

PAGE 28

17 by hypothesis. Chapter 5 is a discussion of the study findings to include conclusions, implications, suggested future studies, and recommendations based on those findings

PAGE 29

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a significant relationship between formal religious education and the moral judgment development of college students, and, after controlling for formal religious education, to see if there is also a significant relationship between the educational environment or certain selected student characteristics and the moral judgment development of those students. Formal religious education was defined as the study of Judeo-Christian philosophy, theology, or ethics at a fully accredited college or divinity school Educational environment was defined as the type of school attended and the Judeo-Christian denominational affiliation of the school. The discussion in this chapter was divided into two sections, each section reviewed an area of literature pertinent to the examination 18

PAGE 30

19 of the relationship between formal religious education and moral judgment development. The two areas were Theoretical Foundations and Related Moral Development Research. Theoretical Foundations The initial theoretical foundation for the investigation of moral stages of development in human beings was laid by Jean Piaget (1932/1965), in a work titled The Moral Judgment of the Child On the basis of his work with 5-year-old to 13-year-old children, Piaget theorized three overlapping periods in the development of the sense of justice in the moral development of the child: a period based on unilateral respect for the rules of adult authority, a period of progressive egalitarianism based on mutual respect among social peers, and a period of equity based on a flexible golden rule and consideration of the needs of individuals in particular situations. Building on the work of Piaget, in a trilogy of books, titled The Philosophy of Moral Development: Moral Stages and the Idea of Justice, Vol I (1981), Moral Stages: A Current Formulation and a Response to Critics (1983), and

PAGE 31

20 The Psychology of Moral Development: The Nature and Validity of Moral Stages, Vol II (1984), Lawrence Kohlberg set forth the philosophical and theoretical foundation for his six moral stages. Kohlberg (1981) discussed the following three levels and six stages of moral reasoning: 1. The Preconventional Level He indicated this level contained Stage 1 reasoning, or the stage of punishment and obedience; and Stage 2 reasoning, or the stage of individual instrumental purpose and exchange. 2. The Conventional Level He indicated this level contained Stage 3 reasoning, or the stage of mutual interpersonal expectations, relationships, and conformity; and Stage 4 reasoning, or the stage of social system and conscience maintenance. 3. The Principled Level He indicated this level contained Stage 5 reasoning, or the stage of prior rights and social contract or utility; and Stage 6 reasoning, or the stage of universal ethical principles focused on justice and respect for all. Kohlberg (1981) also discussed the successive concepts of justice for each of his six stages of moral

PAGE 32

21 development. At Stage 1 justice was conceived as an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Correct behavior at this stage of moral development was defined as literal obedience to rules and authority, avoiding punishment, and not doing physical harm. At Stage 2 justice was conceived as you help me and I will help you. Correct behavior at this stage of moral development was defined as serving one's own or other's needs and making fair deals in terms of concrete exchange. At Stage 3 justice was conceived as do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Correct behavior at this stage of moral development was defined as playing a good role, being concerned about the other people and their feelings, keeping loyalty and trust with partners, and being motivated to follow rules and expectations. At Stage 4 justice was conceived as a system of roles and rules that were shared and accepted by the entire community. Correct behavior at this stage of moral development was defined as doing one's duty in society, upholding the social order, and maintaining the welfare of society or the group. At Stage 5 justice was conceived as individual liberty, civil rights, equality of opportunity, and contract united by the respect

PAGE 33

22 for the freedom of others. Correct behavior at this stage of moral development was defined as upholding the basic rights, values, and legal contracts of a society, even when they conflict with the concrete rules and laws of the group. At Stage 6 justice was conceived as universal ethical principles that were higher than or prior to law and focused on the rights of humanity, independent of civil society. Correct behavior at this stage of moral development was defined as the assumption of guidance by universal ethical principles that all humanity should follow. Building on the work of Kohlberg, in two books, titled Development in Judging Moral Issues (1979), and Moral Development: Advances in Research and Theory (1986b), James Rest discussed his Defining Issues Test (DIT) and established the foundation for his Four-Component Model. Rest (1986a) described the DIT as an instrument based on Kohlberg's developmental theory and his six-stage characterization of moral development. He pointed out that the DIT is a recognition test that asks the subjects to classify their own responses, and once those responses are scored the DIT P index provides the location of each subject

PAGE 34

23 in terms of a continuous percentage on a developmental continuum. One controversy surrounding testing instruments like the DIT, that are based on justice oriented Kohlberg type moral dilemmas, is the claim that males and females experience the social world differently and that justice defined measures of moral development are gender biased. Gilligan (1982), one of the most outspoken critics of justice defined measures, postulated that male social development stresses individuality, while female social development stresses connection between individuals. She contended that these two different patterns of social development result in two different moral orientations. She said that these two moral orientations are the predominantly justice based male orientation and the predominantly care based female orientation. She also contended that these orientations result in the downgrading of female moral development when measured on a justice oriented instrument, and cause women to appear morally inferior to men. On the other hand, Walker (1985) in a review of studies using various versions of Kohlberg's justice

PAGE 35

24 oriented test concluded that males do not score higher than females. Walker's report included a study that compared justice orientations and care orientations in both spontaneous moral dilemmas and hypothetical moral dilemmas and found no differences in scores based on gender. Snarey, Reimer, and Kohlberg (1985) reported no differences based on gender with regard to scores on Kohlberg' s test. Gibbs and Widamon (1982) found no differences in scores based on gender with regard to the justice oriented Kohlberg test. Nisan and Kohlberg (1982) also reported no differences in scores based on gender with regard to the Kohlberg style test. In addition, Rest (1979) indicated there were only 2 of 22 studies using the justice oriented Defining Issues Test that reported a significant difference in DIT P scores between males and females. Rest (1986b) also reported that the differences between males and females with regard to moral development as measured by the DIT are trivial. Finally, Shaver (1985) in a longitudinal study of college students reported that females had significantly higher DIT P scores than males. The indication is that the justice oriented Kohlberg style tests, including the DIT, do not

PAGE 36

25 contain a detectable gender bias that significantly affects female performance. Rest (1986b) set forth his Four-Component Model that was developed at the University of Minnesota Center for the Study of Ethical Development. He theorized that the following four major kinds of psychological processes were necessary in order for moral behavior to occur: 1. The person must have been able to make some sort of interpretation of the particular situation in terms of what actions were possible, who (including himself) would be affected by each course of action, and how the interested parties would regard such effects on their welfare. 2. The person must have been able to make a judgment about which course of action was morally right (or fair or just or morally good), thus labeling one possible line of action as what a person ought (morally ought) to do in that situation. 3. The person must give priority to moral values above other personal values such that a decision is made to intend to do what is morally right.

PAGE 37

26 4. The person must have sufficient perseverance, ego strength, and implementation skills to be able to follow through on his/her intention to behave morally, to withstand fatigue and flagging will, and to overcome obstacles, (pp. 3-4) Rest (1986b) also postulated that there are no moral cognitions without affect, and no moral affects without cognitions, leading him to the conclusion that there is no moral behavior that can be separated from the cognitions and affects that prompt moral behavior. These writings of Piaget, Kohlberg, and Rest provided the theoretical foundations for the moral development research that was conducted in this study. Related Moral Development Research Rest (1986b) indicated that it is essential to cognitive developmental theory to demonstrate that people change over time in the direction postulated by the theory; hence, the demonstration of age trends is the first indication of validity for any measure of moral judgment. Piaget (1932/1965) reported these empirical age trend

PAGE 38

27 results in his research. Colby, Kohlberg, Gibbs, and Lieberman (1983) in an extensive report listed age trends as a major empirical finding. Rest (1979) reported age trend data for validating the Defining Issues Test and indicated that longitudinal studies using the DIT showed a substantial upward movement of approximately ten times more than that of downward movement. In fact, he indicated that age/education accounts for 52 percent of the variance in DIT scores. This work by Piaget, Kohlberg, and Rest strongly supports the conclusion that moral judgment development moves into the higher stages on the Kohlberg moral development scale with an increase in age and/or education. There are a number of additional studies by other researchers using the DIT that support this upward age trend conclusion with regard to college students. Biggs and Barnett (1981) in a four year study of 82 college students reported upward age trends. Whiteley (1982) in a study of 187 college students also confirmed upward age trends. Mentkowski and Strait (1983) in a four year study of 140 college students concluded that there was evidence of upward age trends. Kitchner, King, Davison, Parker, and Wood

PAGE 39

28 (1984) in a two year study of 56 junior high school, junior college, and graduate school students also reported evidence of upward age trend development. These age trend studies strongly support the conclusion that individual moral development increases over time, but they do not indicate why this upward age trend change occurs. Several prominent researchers over a number of years have concluded that formal higher education has a significant impact on the moral development of college students. Chickering (1969) reported that developmental changes do occur during the college years and that numerous cross-sectional and longitudinal studies of college students have indicated that changes do occur in individual attitudes, values, and personal integration during the time that students are completing their higher education. Bowen (1977) reported that higher education and the academic environment produce immediate and induced future changes in students emotional and moral development as well as their cognitive learning. Astin (1977) reported that formal higher education has a substantial impact on student attitudes and values. In a secondary analysis of

PAGE 40

29 demographic correlates of the DIT, Rest (1979) reported that formal education was the strongest correlate when compared with individual DIT P scores. Rest (1986b) indicated that one of the strongest and most consistent correlates of moral development is years of formal education. A strong correlation of formal education and moral judgment development was also documented by Colby et al (1983), showing correlations of 0.53 and 0.60. These studies of the relationship of formal education to moral judgment development indicate that there is a significant relationship between these two variables. However, this research does not identify what specific aspects of formal education influence this upward movement in moral development. Are there certain formal education courses that have more impact on moral development than other courses? There have been numerous reviews of moral education programs that have indicated that certain types of moral education programs are effective in increasing moral judgment development while others are not. Lockwood (1978) concluded that some moral education programs promote significant increases in moral judgment development as

PAGE 41

30 measured by the stages of development on the Kohlberg moral development scale. Lawrence (1980) suggested that there were moral education programs that increase individual moral judgment development as measured on the Kohlberg moral development scale. Leming (1981) also concluded that certain types of moral education programs increase moral judgment development and significantly accelerate movement into the higher levels of moral development on the Kohlberg scale. The consensus of opinion from these studies was that the moral education programs that were effective were those that lasted longer than a few weeks, and involved the participation of the students in controversial moral dilemmas. Finally, in a meta-analysis of 55 studies, where the Defining Issues Test was used as the measure of moral development, Schlaefli, Rest, and Thoma (1985) concluded that the overall effect of moral education programs is statistically significant when they are considered collectively without regard to type of program. This conclusion seems to go beyond the conclusions reached by the other researchers and suggests that moral education is effective in increasing individual moral judgment

PAGE 42

31 development, regardless of the length of the program or the method of instruction that is used to teach the program. With regard to these conclusions this researcher intended to investigate the relationship of formal religious education to moral judgment development. Does formal religious education have a significant role to play in moral development as indicated by Lee (1980), or does it have no specific role to play as indicated by Kohlberg (1981)? One of the main disagreements between these two researchers with regard to whether religious education influences moral development appears to be the contention over Kohlberg's definition of religion as religious affiliation. There have been some studies by other researchers that have focused on religious affiliation in attempting to determine if religious education has a significant role to play in moral development. Wahrman (1981) reported that there was not a significant relationship between the religious affiliation of 124 college students and their moral judgment development as measured by the DIT. McGeorge (1976) reported that a longitudinal study of 140 New Zealand college students tested in 1973 showed no significant difference between the

PAGE 43

32 moral development of religiously affiliated college students and those who were not religiously affiliated. However, when he retested 92 of the college students in 1975 the nonaffiliated students were significantly higher in moral judgment development then those who were religiously affiliated. Schomberg (1978) in a study of 289 university freshman reported a nonsignificant relationship between participation in religious activities and the level of moral judgment development. If religious affiliation is used as the sole measure of the effectiveness of religious education, then Kohlberg (1981) probably was correct in stating that religious education has no unique role to play in moral development. However, this researcher agrees with Lee that religion and religious education are comprised of more that mere religious affiliation. Although the overall relationship of formal education to moral judgment development has been examined in numerous studies, there has been a distinct lack of research that has isolated the relationship of formal religious education to moral judgment development. Consequently, there was little information available to assist this

PAGE 44

33 researcher in developing the parameters for this study. Of the researchers that had examined the relationship of formal religious education to the moral judgment development of college students, none had isolated specific religious education courses. Moreover, some of the researchers who had correlated religious education and moral judgment development had not examined religious education at the college level. Nevertheless, each of these studies provided information that was useful during the conceptualization portion of this research. In a study of the relationship of religious education, religious commitment, and religious conversion to the moral judgment development of college students. Wolf (1980) found that college students with extensive exposure to religious education received at home, in family life, at church, and at religious schools below the college level, had significantly lower DIT P scores than students with low exposure to the same type religious education. He also reported a nonsignificant relationship between religious conversion and moral judgment development. However, he did not examine religious education at the college level.

PAGE 45

34 In a longitudinal study of students from a state university, a Bible college, and a Christian liberal arts college Shaver (1984) reported that individual DIT P scores increased significantly over the four year period of higher education. Although Shaver did compare the DIT P scores of students from the three different educational environments, as well as a number of selected student characteristics, he did not examine any specific formal religious education courses. In a longitudinal study of students from a liberal arts college Shaver (1985) reported a significant increase in the DIT P scores of students over the educational period of four years. In addition, he reported that females had significantly higher DIT P scores than males. However, he again did not include an examination of any specific formal religious education courses. In another longitudinal study of students attending a Christian liberal arts college and a Bible college, that was designed to expand on his 1984 study, Shaver (1987) reported that the DIT P scores of students attending the Christian liberal arts college were significantly higher

PAGE 46

35 than the DIT P scores of students attending the Bible college. Although he again compared the DIT P scores of the students from the two different educational environments, he, for a third time, did not examine any specific formal religious education courses. Moreover, he did not examine any selected student characteristics in this study. None of these researchers definitively addressed the relationship of formal religious education to moral judgment development, by examining specific formal religious education courses, by comparing the religious affiliation of institutions, or by comparing the characteristics of students from a wide range of diverse educational environments. Furthermore, Wolf (1980) limited his study to only one nonaffiliated state university, and considered only religious education received below the college level. Although two of the studies by Shaver (1984, 1987) included a comparison of educational environments with regard to differences in student DIT P scores, none of the three included an examination of specific formal religious education courses or the religious affiliation of the institutions. Moreover, none of these studies included

PAGE 47

36 any thorough examination, across educational environments, of the relationship of individual student characteristics to moral judgment development after controlling for formal religious education.

PAGE 48

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY Introduction The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a significant relationship between formal religious education and the moral judgment development of college students, and, after controlling for formal religious education, to see if there is also a significant relationship between the educational environment or certain selected student characteristics and the moral judgment development of those students. This chapter contains a description of the study design, the study sample, the survey instruments used, the data collection procedures, and the statistical analyses employed in evaluating the data. Design The research design used in this investigation was a correlational design. The definition of formal religious 37

PAGE 49

38 education, the random selection of the educational environments, and the selection of the variables to be evaluated were all under the direct control of the researcher. The random selection of the students, and the content of the specific religious education courses were both controlled by the individual institutions. The study focused on the relationship of formal religious education to the moral judgment development of college students. A standardized moral judgment development test, the Defining Issues Test (DIT) designed by James Rest, was used to gather moral development information; and a one-page questionnaire, designed by the researcher, was used to gather demographic, educational background, religious ideology, and moral values background information. Sample The colleges and divinity schools used in this study were selected through a two step selection process. First, the four largest Judeo-Christian denominations in the United States were selected from Statistical Abstracts of the United States (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1989). This

PAGE 50

39 provided five selection categories comprised of all nonaffiliated institutions, and all institutions affiliated with those four denominations: Roman Catholic, Jewish, Southern Baptist and Methodist. Second, 60 fully accredited institutions were selected from The Greenwood Encyclopedia of American Institutions (Ohles & Ohles, 1986a & 1986b) using those five categories. A total of 48 institutions were selected randomly from affiliated colleges and divinity schools, 12 from each of the four denominations previously mentioned. The remaining 12 institutions were selected randomly from nonaffiliated colleges and divinity schools. A participation solicitation letter was sent to the president of each of those 60 institutions. A copy of the participation solicitation letter is included in Appendix A. The presidents of 12 of the 60 institutions agreed to participate in the study. The participating institutions were located in Alabama, California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Of the 12 institutions, 9 were affiliated and 3 were nonaffiliated. Moreover, 5 of the 12 were colleges and 7 were divinity schools. Of the 5 colleges,

PAGE 51

40 1 was Jewish, 1 was Roman Catholic, 1 was Southern Baptist, and 2 were Colleges of Arts and Sciences from nonaffiliated state universities. Of the 7 divinity schools, 4 were Roman Catholic, 1 was Jewish, 1 was United Methodist, and 1 was interdenominational nonsectarian The nonaffiliated colleges and nonsectarian divinity school were included mainly for educational environment comparison purposes. The contact person for each institution, depending on the size of the student population, was instructed to select 50 or 100 students using a simple random sampling technique. Institutions with a population of less than 400 were asked to select only 50 students. Thirty percent of the selected students returned their survey packets, and the answers and scores of 226 respondents were included in the final data base used in the data analysis. The validity of the study sample was strengthened by the fact that the respondents were from 12 different institutions located throughout the United States, and the fact that each returned DIT was required to pass four separate internal checks on respondent reliability before being used in the data analysis. Furthermore, the DIT P score mean for the

PAGE 52

41 respondents used in the study was 44.58, which was virtually identical to the DIT P score mean of 44.02 for the same mix, undergraduates and graduates, reported by James Rest (1986a) in his standardization sample. Instrumentation The six-story version of the Defining Issues Test (DIT) was used to measure the moral judgment development of individual respondents. The DIT was developed by James Rest, Director of the Center for the Study of Ethical Development at the University of Minnesota. The DIT P score was the index used from the Defining Issues Test for comparison of student moral judgment development. Rest (1986b) indicated that the DIT P score index provided the relative importance that an individual attached to the principled morality, or Kohlberg Stage 5 and Stage 6, items on the DIT; and that it was calculated by summing the number of times the Kohlberg Stage 5 and Stage 6 items were chosen as the first, second, third, or fourth important consideration, weighting those ranks by 4 3, 2, and 1, respectivel y

PAGE 53

42 Davison and Robbins (1978), in a review of several studies, concluded that the test/retest reliability for DIT P scores is generally in the high .70s or .80s. They also concluded that the Cronbach's Alpha index of internal consistency for DIT P scores is generally in the high .70s. Rest (1986a) indicated that correlations of the DIT P score with other measures of moral reasoning, such as various versions of Kohlberg's Interview test and the Comprehension of Moral Concepts test, average about .50, with some correlations as high as .60 and .70. In addition. Rest (1986a) also indicated that the DIT P score index has shown the most consistent reliability and validity trends of any index based on the DIT. The DIT was used in this study because, as Rest (1986a) indicated, it is the most widely used measure of moral judgment; it is the best documented in terms of reliability and validity; it can be mailed to subjects for self -administration and then returned to the researcher for computerized scoring; and it is simpler to score than the Kohlberg interview, which uses a more subjective scoring system and has to be personally administered to each

PAGE 54

43 subject. According to Rest (1986b), the DIT uses Kohlberg type moral dilemmas, with multiple choice answers; it is based on the six theoretical stages of moral reasoning developed by Kohlberg; and it follows the premise that individuals at different stages of moral development interpret moral dilemmas differently, define critical issues of dilemmas differently, and have different ideas about what is right and fair in a given situation. The DIT was developed in a three-story version and a six-story version. The six-story version was selected for use in this study because, according to Rest (1986a), it is a more reliable measurement of moral judgment than the three-story version. A copy of the Defining Issues Test is included in Appendix D. The one-page questionnaire that accompanied the DIT was designed by this researcher. The questionnaire solicited information concerning 15 selected items of demographic, educational background, religious ideology, and moral values background information. The responses were evaluated with regard to their relationship to DIT P scores, using the linear regression designs described in the Data

PAGE 55

44 Analysis Section of this chapter. A copy of the research questionnaire is included in Appendix C. Data Collection For reasons of confidentiality, institutions would not supply names and addresses of students. The presidents of the 12 institutions that participated in the study agreed to have a representative of their school randomly select students, distribute research packets, and then collect the completed packets and return them, in bulk, to this researcher. A cover letter that explained the research project and gave instructions for completion was attached to each questionnaire and DIT, both of which had been numbered for control purposes. A return envelope was provided with each packet, in order that respondents could seal the completed questionnaire and DIT inside, then date and sign the envelope for control purposes before returning it to the school representative. A copy of the survey cover letter that was attached to each research packet is included in Appendix B.

PAGE 56

45 Groups of 50 or 100 of these packets then were transmitted to the participating institutions, depending on the size of their student population. Institutions with student populations of less than 400 received 50 packets each, institutions with student populations of 400 or more received 100 packets each. A cover letter explaining the distribution and collection of the research questionnaires was sent to each institution with the research packets. A copy of the distribution letter is included in Appendix E. A follow-up letter was sent to each school representative at the end of four weeks, requesting the return of all completed research packets. A second follow-up letter was sent at the end of six weeks to those representatives who had not responded to the first follow-up letter. Finally, a follow-up telephone call was made at the end of eight weeks to those representatives who had not responded to the second follow-up letter. A copy of the first follow-up letter is included in Appendix F, and a copy of the second follow-up letter is included in Appendix G.

PAGE 57

46 Institution presidents were given the option of receiving a summary of the completed research project for their institutional use. Respondents were informed that the results of the study would be made available to them, upon request, through the president of their institution. Data Analysis The raw data from each questionnaire and DIT were coded for computer analysis. The DIT raw data were first processed using a computer program designed by the researchers at the University of Minnesota, and adapted by this researcher for use on an IBM computer. As recommended by Rest (1986a), protocols were discarded for those students whose DIT responses failed any of four internal checks on subject reliability. Protocols were discarded for any respondent who had an M score of 8.0 or higher, indicating the score was more than two standard deviations above the average M score; any respondent who had more than eight inconsistencies on any single story; any respondent who had more than two stories with any inconsistencies; and any respondent who had more than one story that had more than

PAGE 58

47 nine items rated the same. The final output of the computer program provided DIT P scores for use with the questionnaire data in all subsequent regression analyses. Regression analyses were performed on all variables using a general purpose regression procedure. These regression analyses were completed in three phases using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS Institute, 1985). Phase 1 evaluated the relationship of formal religious education to moral judgment development. This was accomplished by examining the relationship of student DIT P scores to the number of Judeo-Christian philosophy, theology, or ethics courses completed. Phase 2 evaluated the relationship of educational environment to moral judgment development, after controlling for significantly related formal religious education courses. This was accomplished by examining the relationship of student DIT P scores to the type of school attended and the affiliation of like types of schools. Phase 3 evaluated the relationship of certain selected student characteristics to moral judgment development, after controlling for significantly related formal religious education courses. This was

PAGE 59

48 accomplished by examining the relationship of student DIT P scores to age, gender, ethnic group, highest degree held, year of study, grade point average, parents' annual income, mother's education level, father's education level, familiarity with Kohlberg's moral development theory, individual religious conversion experience, church/synagogue attendance, religious ideology regarding moral decisions, source of basic moral values, and individual denominational membership. Since ethics courses were the only type of formal religious education courses that showed a significant relationship to the moral judgment development of college students during the Phase 1 analysis, they were the only courses controlled for in Phase 2 and Phase 3 of this study. All hypotheses were tested at the alpha level of .05. All categorical variables were dummy coded with 1 and 0. In all linear regression equations the categories represented by X components were the ones that were coded 1. The category not represented by an X component was the one coded 0, that was used for comparison with the other X components. The following linear regression equations were used for

PAGE 60

49 hypothesis evaluation in the phases indicated: 1. Phase 1, Hypothesis 1 ; Y=Bo+BiXi+E, where Y was DIT P scores, and Xx was the number of Judeo-Christian philosophy, theology, or ethics courses completed. 2. Phase 2, Hypothesis 2 : Y=Bo +Bi Xi +B2 X2 +E, where Y was DIT P scores, Xi was the number of ethics courses completed, and X2 was divinity schools. Supplemental Analysis : Y=Bo +B1X1 +E, where Y was DIT P scores for either college or divinity school students, and Xi was the number of ethics courses completed. 3. Phase 2, Hypothesis 3 : Y=Bo +Bi Xi +B2X2 +B3X3 +B4X4 +E, where Y was DIT P scores for either college or divinity school students, Xi was the number of ethics courses completed, X2 was Roman Catholic affiliation, X3 was Jewish affiliation, and X4 was Southern Baptist affiliation for colleges or United Methodist affiliation for divinity schools 4. Phase 3, Hypothesis 4 : Y=B0+Bi Xi +B2 X 2 +E where Y was DIT P scores; Xi was the number of ethics courses completed; and X2 was age, male gender, year of study, grade point average, parents' annual income, individuals who were

PAGE 61

50 familiar with Kohlberg's moral development theory, or individuals who had experienced religious conversion. 5. Phase 3 Hypothesis 5 : Y=B +Bi Xi +B2 X 2 +B3 X3 +E where Y was DIT P scores; Xi was the number of ethics courses completed; X2 was mothers who were college graduates, fathers who were college graduates, or individuals who believed they should follow established religious rules and biblical commandments in making all moral decisions; and X3 was mothers with postbaccalaureate degrees, fathers with postbaccalaureate degrees, or individuals who believed they should follow the leadership of the Spirit of God in making all moral decisions. 6. Phase 3, Hypothesis 6 : Y = Bo +Bi Xi +B2 X2 +B3X3 +B4X4 +E, where Y was DIT P scores, Xi was the number of ethics courses completed, X2 was individuals who went to church/ synagogue regularly seeking values or direction for their life, X3 was individuals who went to church/synagogue regularly out of duty or habit, and X4 was individuals who did not go to church/synagogue regularly. 7. Phase 3, Hypothesis 7 : Y=Bo +Bi Xi +B2 X2 +B3X3 +B4 X4 + B5X5+E, where Y was DIT P scores; Xi was the number of

PAGE 62

51 ethics courses completed; X2 was Asian-Americans, individuals who had completed an Associate degree, or individuals who felt their basic moral values had come mainly from friends; X3 was Black-Americans, individuals who had completed a Baccalaureate degree, or individuals who felt their basic moral values had come mainly from teachers; X was Hispanic-Americans, individuals who had completed a Master degree, or individuals who felt their basic moral values had come mainly from ministers; and X5 was Native Americans, individuals who had completed a Doctorate degree, or individuals who felt their basic moral values had come mainly from sources other than those specified. 8. Phase 3, Hypothesis 8 : Y=Bo +Bi Xi +B2 X2 +B3 X3 + B4 X4 + B5X5+B6X6+B7X7+B8X8+B9X9+B10X10 +E, where Y was DIT P scores, Xi was the number of ethics courses completed, X2 was Roman Catholic, X3 was Southern Baptist, X4 was United Methodist, X5 was Episcopalian, X$ was Presbyterian, X7 was American/ Independent Baptist, Xs was United Church of Christ/Christian Church/Fundamentalist/Reformed, X9 was Unitarian/Quaker/Mennonite, and Xi was no denominational membership.

PAGE 63

CHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS Introduction The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a significant relationship between formal religious education and the moral judgment development of college students, and, after controlling for formal religious education, to see if there is also a significant relationship between the educational environment or certain selected student characteristics and the moral judgment development of those students. Formal religious education was defined as the study of Judeo-Christian philosophy, theology, or ethics at a fully accredited college or divinity school The educational environment was defined as the type of institution attended and the Judeo-Christian denominational affiliation of the institution. The selected student characteristics included age, gender, ethnic group, highest degree held, year of study, grade point average, 52

PAGE 64

53 parents' annual income, mother's education level, father's education level, familiarity with Kohlberg's moral development theory, individual religious conversion experience, church/synagogue attendance, religious ideology regarding moral decisions, source of basic moral values, and individual denominational membership. The remainder of this chapter contains a discussion of the characteristics of the 226 respondents used in the study, and a discussion of the data produced by the linear regression analysis of each hypothesis. The respondents were students who were attending colleges and divinity schools in 11 different states located throughout the United States. General purpose linear regression models were used to compare DIT P scores with the coded data from the respondent questionnaires. All hypotheses were tested at the confidence level of .05, using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS). All categorical variables were dummy coded with 1 and 0. In all linear regression equation models the categories represented by X components were the ones that were coded 1. The category not represented by an X component was the category coded that was used for

PAGE 65

54 comparison with the other X components in the regression equation model Respondent Characteristics Over 51% of the study respondents were students from liberal arts colleges. Over 56% indicated they were under 25 years of age. Over 66% reported they were male. Over 91% said they were white. Over 35% indicated parental income of $20,000 to $50,000. A complete list of these student demographics is included in Table 4-1. Over 22% of the study respondents indicated they were in their senior year of study. Over 37% reported they had a grade point average between 3.0 and 3.4. Over 54% said they had not completed a baccalaureate degree. Over 55% indicated they had completed one or more Judeo-Christian philosophy courses. Over 77% reported they had completed one or more theology courses. Over 57% said they had completed one or more ethics courses. A complete list of these student educational background characteristics is included in Table 4-2.

PAGE 66

Table 4-1 Student Demographics 55 Characteristics Number Percent Students by School Type Divinity School Students Liberal Arts College Students Student Age 17-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50 + No Response Gender Male Female Ethnic Group AsianAmerican Black Hispanic Native American White No Response Parents' Annual Income < 20,000 20 50,000 51 75,000 76 100,000 101 200,000 > 200,000 No Response 110

PAGE 67

Table 4-2 Student Educational Background 56 Characteristic Number Percent Year of Study Freshman Sophomore Junior Senior Postbaccalaureate Yr Postbaccalaureate Yr Postbaccalaureate Yr Postbaccalaureate Yr 4+ 27

PAGE 68

57 Over 58% of the study respondents indicated their mother was not a college graduate. Over 57% reported their father was a college graduate. Over 55% said they were members of the Roman Catholic denomination. A complete list of these parent educational and student denominational background characteristics is included in Table 4-3. Over 39% of the respondents indicated they believed they should follow the leadership of the Spirit of God in making all moral decisions. Over 91% reported that their basic moral values came mainly from their family. Over 67% of the respondents said they were not familiar with the moral development theory of Lawrence Kohlberg. Over 51% indicated they had not experienced religious conversion. Over 72% reported they attended church or synagogue regularly seeking values or direction for their life. A complete list of these student religious ideology and moral values background characteristics is included in Table 4-4. Phase 1 Analysis During the Phase 1 analysis the relationship of the number of completed Judeo-Christian philosophy courses.

PAGE 69

58 Table 4-3 Parent Educational and Student Denominational Background Characteristic Number Percent Mother's education level No High School Diploma 16 7.1 High School Graduate 116 51.3 College Graduate 66 29.2 Postbaccalaureate Degree 28 12.4 Father's education level No High School Diploma High School Graduate College Graduate Postbaccalaureate Degree Denominational membership Roman Catholic Jewish Southern Baptist United Methodist Episcopalian Presbyterian Independent Baptist American Baptist United Church of Christ Reformed Christian Church Fundament a list Quaker Mennonite Unitarian None 16

PAGE 70

59 Table 4-4 Student Religious Ideology and Moral Values Background Characteristic Number Percent Religious ideology regarding moral decisions Follow Religious Rules & Biblical Commands Follow Own Moral Reasoning Follow Leadership of Spirit of God No Response 66

PAGE 71

60 theology courses, or ethics courses to DIT P scores was tested. Hypothesis 1 postulated that there would be no difference, based on the number and type of formal religious education courses completed, in the DIT P scores of college students. This null hypothesis was tested with a general purpose regression model using Y=Bo+BiXi+E as the linear regression equation. The significance level for the F-test was established at .05. The SAS regression model procedure was executed using DIT P scores as the value of Y, and the number of Judeo-Christian philosophy, theology, or ethics courses completed as the value of Xi The results of those linear regression analyses are included in Tables 4-5 through 4-7. Only one independent variable, ethics courses completed, had a significant relationship to the dependent variable DIT P scores. The computer model indicated that students averaged 1.75 points higher on their DIT P scores for each ethics course completed. The probability of values greater than !T| for this independent variable was .007. The other two independent variables, Judeo-Christian philosophy courses completed and theology courses completed.

PAGE 72

61 Table 4-5 Results for Hypothesis 1 -Philosophy Courses Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F Squares Square Model 1 97.825 97.825 0.487 0.4861 Error 224 45027.269 201.015 C Total 225 45125.094 DEP MEAN 44.581 ROOT MSE 14.178 R-Square 0.0022 C.V. 31.803 ADJ R-SQ -0.0023 Independent Variable

PAGE 73

62 Table 4-6 Results for Hypothesis 1 -Theology Courses Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F Squares Square Model 1 126.974 126.974 0.632 0.4274 Error 224 44998.120 200.884 C Total 225 45125.094 DEP MEAN 44.581 ROOT MSE 14.173 R-Square 0.0028 C.V. 31.793 ADJ R-SQ -0.0016 Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >!T! Intercept

PAGE 74

Table 4-7 Results for Hypothesis 1 -Ethics Courses Dependent Variable = DIT P Score 63 Source DF Sum of Squares Mean Square F Value Prob > F Model 1 Error 224 C Total 225 1445.355 43679.739 45125.094 1445.355 194.999 7.412 0.0070 DEP MEAN 44.581 ROOT MS E 13.964 R-Square 0.0320 C.V. 31.324 ADJ R-SQ 0.0277 Independent

PAGE 75

64 did not have a significant relationship to DIT P scores. Because there was a significant relationship between student DIT P scores and the number of ethics courses completed. Hypothesis 1 was rejected. The reader will note that due to the confounding effect of number of ethics courses completed and school type, that was identified during the Hypothesis 2 analysis, the results of the Hypothesis 2 supplemental analysis must be considered when drawing conclusions or implications from the Hypothesis 1 finding. Phase 2 Analysis During the Phase 2 analysis the relationship of school type and school affiliation to DIT P scores was tested, after controlling for significantly related formal religious education courses. Hypothesis 2 postulated that, after controlling for ethics courses completed, there would be no difference, based on school type, in the DIT P scores of college students. This null hypothesis was tested with a general purpose regression model using Y=Bo +Bi Xi +B2 X2 +E as the linear regression equation. The significance level for the F-test was established at .05.

PAGE 76

65 The SAS regression model procedure was executed using DIT P scores as the value of Y, ethics courses completed as the value of Xi and divinity schools as the value of X2 The results of that linear regression analysis are included in Table 4-8. There was a significant difference, based on school type, between the DIT P scores of students attending divinity schools and the DIT P scores of students attending liberal arts colleges. The computer model indicated that divinity school students averaged 5.5 points higher on their DIT P scores than students attending liberal arts colleges. The probability of values greater than IT! for this independent variable was .0038. Because there was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students attending divinity schools and the DIT P scores of students attending liberal arts colleges, Hypothesis 2 was rejected. Due to the confounding effect of number of ethics courses completed and school type, that was identified during the data analysis of Hypothesis 2, a supplemental analysis was performed to examine the relationship of DIT P scores to ethics courses completed by students from each

PAGE 77

Table 4-8 Results for Hypothesis 2 -School Type 66 Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Squares Mean Square F Value Prob > F Model 2 Error 223 C Total 225 3055.964 42069.130 45125.094 1527.982 188.651 8.100 0.0004 DEP MEAN 44.581 ROOT MSE 13.735 R-Square 0.0677 C.V. 30.809 ADJ R-SQ 0.0594 Independent

PAGE 78

67 type of school. This analysis was accomplished using the general purpose regression model Y=Bo +Bi Xi +E as the linear regression eguation. The significance level for the F-test was established at .05. The SAS regression model procedure was executed using DIT P scores of liberal arts college students or divinity school students as the value of Y, and number of ethics courses completed as the value of Xi The results of those linear regression analyses are included in Tables 4-9 and 4-10. There was a significant relationship between the number of ethics courses completed and the DIT P scores of students attending colleges of liberal arts and sciences. The computer model indicated that liberal arts college students averaged 2.93 points higher on their DIT P scores for each ethics course completed. The probability of values greater than !Ti for this independent variable was .0185. On the other hand, the relationship between the number of ethics courses completed and the DIT P scores of students attending divinity schools was not significant. A full discussion of the confounding effect of number of

PAGE 79

68 Table 4-9 Results for Hypothesis 2 Supplement -Liberal Arts Colleges Dependent Variable = DIT P Scores Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F Squares Square Model 1 902.965 902.965 5.709 0.0185 Error 114 18032.054 158.176 C Total 115 18935.019 DEP MEAN 41.416 ROOT MSE 12.577 R-Square 0.0477 C.V. 30.367 ADJ R-SQ 0.0393 Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >!Ti Intercept 1 39.450 1.429 27.613 0.0001 Ethics 1 2.925 1.224 2.389 0.0185

PAGE 80

69 Table 4-10 Results for Hypothesis 2 Supplement -Divinity Schools Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F Squares Square Model 1 162.741 162.741 0.743 0.3905 Error 108 23641.236 218.900 C Total 109 23803.977 DEP MEAN 47.917 ROOT MSE 14.795 R-Square 0.0068 C.V. 30.877 ADJ R-SQ -0.0024 Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter = >!Ti Intercept 1 46.904 1.836 25.546 0.0001 Ethics 1 0.701 0.813 0.862 0.3905

PAGE 81

70 ethics courses completed and school type is provided in Chapter 5. Hypothesis 3 postulated that, after controlling for ethics courses completed, there would be no difference, based on school affiliation, in the DIT P scores of college students attending the same type of school. This null hypothesis was tested with a general purpose regression model using Y=Bo +B1X1 +B2 X2 +B3 X3 +B4X4 +E as the linear regression equation. The significance level for the F-test was established at .05. The SAS regression model procedure was executed using DIT P scores as the value of Y, ethics courses completed as the value of Xi Roman Catholic college as the value of X2 Jewish college as the value of X3 and Southern Baptist college as the value of X4 The results of that linear regression analysis are included in Table 4-11. There was not a significant difference, based on school affiliation, between the DIT P scores of students attending the Jewish affiliated college and the DIT P scores of students attending the nonaffiliated colleges. However, there was a significant difference, based on

PAGE 82

71 Table 4-11 Results for Hypothesis 3 -Liberal Arts College Affiliation Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F Squares Square Model 4 2495.250 623.813 4.212 0.0033 Error 111 16439.769 148.106 C Total 115 18935.019 DEP MEAN 41.416 ROOT MSE 12.170 R-Square 0.1318 CV. 29.384 ADJ R-SQ 0.1005 Independent Variable

PAGE 83

72 school affiliation, between the DIT P scores of students attending the Roman Catholic affiliated college or the Southern Baptist affiliated college, and the DIT P scores of students attending the nonaffiliated colleges. The computer model indicated that students attending the Roman Catholic affiliated college averaged 8.59 points lower on their DIT P scores than students attending the nonaffiliated colleges. The probability of values greater than !T! for this independent variable was .0104. The computer model also indicated that students attending the Southern Baptist affiliated college averaged 11.22 points lower on their DIT P scores than students attending the nonaffiliated colleges. The probability of values greater than IT! for this independent variable was .004. The SAS regression model procedure then was executed using DIT P scores as the value of Y, ethics courses completed as the value of Xi Roman Catholic divinity school as the value of X2 Jewish divinity school as the value of X3 and United Methodist divinity school as the value of X4 The results of that linear regression analysis are included in Table 4-12.

PAGE 84

73 Table 4-12 Results for Hypothesis 3 -Divinity School Affiliation Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F Squares Square Model 4 2547.921 636.981 3.147 0.0174 Error 105 21256.057 202.439 C Total 109 23803.977 DEP MEAN 47.917 ROOT MSE 14.228 R-Square 0.1070 CV. 29.693 ADJ R-SQ 0.0730 Independent

PAGE 85

74 There was not a significant difference, based on school affiliation, between the DIT P scores of students attending the Jewish divinity school or the United Methodist divinity school and the DIT P scores of students attending the nonsectarian divinity school. Conversely, there was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students attending the Roman Catholic divinity schools, and the DIT P scores of students attending the nonsectarian divinity school The computer model indicated that students attending Roman Catholic divinity schools averaged 8.77 points lower on their DIT P scores than students attending the nonsectarian divinity school. The probability of values greater than !T! for this independent variable was .013. Because there was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students attending the nonaffiliated colleges and the DIT P scores of students attending the Roman Catholic college or the Southern Baptist college, and there was also a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students attending the nonsectarian divinity school and the DIT P scores of students attending the Roman Catholic divinity schools, Hypothesis 3 was rejected.

PAGE 86

75 Phase 3 Analysis During the Phase 3 analysis the relationship of respondent's age, gender, ethnic group, highest degree held, year of study, grade point average, parents' annual income, mother's education level, father's education level, familiarity with Kohlberg's moral development theory, individual religious conversion experience, church/synagogue attendance, religious ideology regarding moral decisions, source of basic moral values, and individual denominational membership to DIT P scores was tested, after controlling for formal religious education courses that had shown a significant relationship to DIT P scores in the Phase 1 analysis. The reader will recall that ethics courses were the only courses in that category. Hypothesis 4 postulated that, after controlling for ethics courses completed, there would be no difference, based on age, gender, year of study, grade point average, parents' annual income, familiarity with Kohlberg's moral development theory, or individual religious conversion experience, in the DIT P scores of college students. This

PAGE 87

76 null hypothesis was tested with a general purpose regression model using Y=Bo +B1X1 +B2X2 +E as the linear regression equation. The significance level for the P-test was established at .05. The SAS regression model procedure was executed using DIT P scores as the value of Y; ethics courses completed as the value of Xi ; and age, male gender, year of study, grade point average, parents' annual income, individuals who were familiar with Kohlberg's moral development theory, or individuals who had experienced religious conversion as the value of X2 There was not a significant difference in the DIT P scores of college students based on age, grade point average, parents' annual income, familiarity with Kohlberg's moral development theory, or individual religious conversion experience. The results of those linear regression analyses are included in Tables 4-13 through 4-17. On the other hand, there was a significant difference in the DIT P scores of college students based on gender and year of study. The results of those linear regression analyses are included in Tables 4-18 and 4-19.

PAGE 88

77 Table 4-13 Results for Hypothesis 4 -Age Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F Squares Square Model 2 2143.876 1071.938 5.451 0.0049 Error 214 42082.373 196.647 C Total 216 44226.249 DEP MEAN 44.588 ROOT MSE 14.023 R-Square 0.0485 C.V. 31.450 ADJ R-SQ 0.0396 Independent

PAGE 89

78 Table 4-14 Results for Hypothesis 4 -Grade Point Average Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source

PAGE 90

79 Table 4-15 Results for Hypothesis 4 -Parents' Annual Income Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source

PAGE 91

80 Table 4-16 Results for Hypothesis 4 -Familiarity with Kohlberg Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F Squares Square Model 2 1693.286 846.643 4.342 0.0141 Error 222 43284.274 194.974 C Total 224 44977.560 DEP MEAN 44.527 ROOT MSE 13.963 R-Square 0.0376 C.V. 31.359 ADJ R-SQ 0.0290 Independent Variable

PAGE 92

81 Table 4-17 Results for Hypothesis 4 -Religious Conversion Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Squares Mean Square F Value Prob > F Model 2 1954.912 977.456 Error 220 42703.616 194.107 C Total 222 44658.528 5.036 0.0073 DEP MEAN 44.418 ROOT MSE 13.932 R-Square 0.0438 C.V. 31.366 ADJ R-SQ 0.0351 Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >!T! Intercept

PAGE 93

82 Table 4-18 Results for Hypothesis 4 -Gender Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source

PAGE 94

83 Table 4-19 Results for Hypothesis 4 -Year of Study Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F Squares Square Model 2 5642.231 2821.116 15.934 0.0001 Error 223 39482.863 177.053 C Total 225 45125.094 DEP MEAN 44.581 ROOT MSE 13.306 R-Square 0.1250 CV. 29.847 ADJ R-SQ 0.1172 Independent

PAGE 95

84 When the linear regression procedure was run using male gender as the value of X2 the computer model indicated that males averaged 7.53 points lower on their DIT P scores than females. The probability of values greater than T for this independent variable was .0001. When the linear regression procedure was run using year of study as the value of X2 the computer model indicated that students averaged 2.41 points higher on their DIT P scores for each completed year of study. The probability of values greater than !T! for this independent variable was .0001. Because there was a significant difference in student DIT P scores based on gender and year of study, Hypothesis 4 was rejected. Hypothesis 5 postulated that, after controlling for ethics courses completed, there would be no difference, based on mother's education level, father's education level, or religious ideology regarding moral decisions, in the DIT P scores of college students. This null hypothesis was tested with a general purpose regression model using Y=Bo+ B1X1 +B2X2 +B3X3 +E as the linear regression equation. The significance level for the F-test was established at .05.

PAGE 96

85 The SAS regression model procedure was executed using DIT P scores as the value of Y; ethics courses completed as the value of Xi ; mothers with baccalaureate degrees, fathers with baccalaureate degrees, or students who believed they should follow established religious rules and biblical commandments in making all moral decisions as the value of X2 ; and mothers with postbaccalaureate degrees, fathers with postbaccalaureate degrees, or students who believed they should follow the leadership of the Spirit of God in making all moral decisions as the value of X3 The results of those linear regression analyses are included in Tables 4-20 through 4-22. When the linear regression procedure was run using mothers with baccalaureate degrees as the value of X2 and mothers with postbaccalaureate degrees as the value of X3 ; there was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students whose mothers had completed a baccalaureate degree, and the DIT P scores of students whose mothers had not completed a college degree. The computer model indicated that students whose mothers had completed a baccalaureate degree averaged 4.19 points higher on

PAGE 97

86 Table 4-20 Results for Hypothesis 5 -Mother's Education Level Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F Squares Square Model 3 2415.338 805.113 4.185 0.0066 Error 222 42709.756 192.386 C Total 225 45125.094 DEP MEAN 45.581 ROOT MSE 13.870 R-Square 0.0535 C.V. 31.113 ADJ R-SQ 0.0407 Independent Variable

PAGE 98

87 Table 4-21 Results for Hypothesis 5 — Father's Education Level Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F Squares Square Model 3 3239.856 1079.952 5.724 0.0009 Error 222 41885.238 188.672 C Total 225 45125.094 DEP MEAN 44.581 ROOT MSE 13.736 R-Square 0.0718 CV. 30.811 ADJ R-SQ 0.0593 Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >!TI Intercept

PAGE 99

88 Table 4-22 Results for Hypothesis 5 -Religious Ideology Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Squares Mean Square F Value Prob > F Model 3 Error 219 C Total 222 2316.995 42084.384 44401.379 772.332 192.166 4.019 0.0082 DEP MEAN 44.425 ROOT MSE 13.862 R-Square 0.0522 C.V. 31.204 ADJ R-SQ 0.0392 Independent

PAGE 100

89 their DIT P scores than students whose mothers had not completed a college degree. The probability of values greater than IT! for this independent variable was .0474. When the linear regression procedure was run using fathers with baccalaureate degrees as the value of X2 and fathers with postbaccalaureate degrees as the value of X3 ; there was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students whose fathers had completed a postbaccalaureate degree, and the DIT P scores of students whose fathers had not completed a college degree. The computer model indicated that students whose fathers had completed a postbaccalaureate degree averaged 6.75 points higher on their DIT P scores than students whose fathers had not completed a college degree. The probability of values greater than !T! for this independent variable was .0042. When the linear regression procedure was run, using the religious ideology of following established religious rules and biblical commandments regarding moral decisions as the value of X2 and the religious ideology of following the leadership of the Spirit of God regarding moral decisions as the value of X3 there was a significant difference between

PAGE 101

90 the DIT P scores of students whose ideology was to follow established religious rules and biblical commandments regarding moral decisions, and the DIT P scores of students whose ideology was to follow their own moral reasoning regarding moral decisions. The computer model indicated that students whose ideology was to follow established religious rules and biblical commandments averaged 5.41 points lower on their DIT P scores than students whose ideology was to follow their own moral reasoning. The probability of values greater than IT! for this independent variable was .0252. Because there was a significant difference in student DIT P scores based on mother's and father's education level, and religious ideology regarding moral decisions, Hypothesis 5 was rejected. Hypothesis 6 postulated that, after controlling for ethics courses completed, there would be no difference, based on church/synagogue attendance, in the DIT P scores of college students. This null hypothesis was tested with a general purpose regression model using Y = Bo+BiXi + B2X2 +B3X3 +B4X4 +E as the linear regression equation. The significance level for the F-test was established at .05.

PAGE 102

91 The SAS regression model procedure was executed using DIT P scores as the value of Y, ethics courses completed as the value of Xi regular church/synagogue attendance seeking values or direction for life as the value of X2 regular church/synagogue attendance out of duty or habit as the value of X3 and nonregular church/synagogue attendance as the value of X4 The results of that linear regression analysis are included in Table 4-23. There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who attended church/synagogue regularly or nonregularly and the DIT P scores of students who never attended. Because there was not a significant difference in the DIT P scores of college students based on their pattern of church/synagogue attendance, Hypothesis 6 was not rejected. Hypothesis 7 postulated that, after controlling for ethics courses completed, there would be no difference, based on ethnic group, highest degree held, or basic source of moral values, in the DIT P scores of college students. This null hypothesis was tested with a general purpose regression model using Y=Bo +Bi Xi +B2 X2 +B3 X3 +B4 X4 +B5 X5 +E as

PAGE 103

92 Table 4-23 Results for Hypothesis 6 -Church/Synagogue Attendance Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F Squares Sguare Model 4 1330.526 332.632 1.688 0.1537 Error 218 42952.318 197.029 C Total 222 44282.844 DEP MEAN 44.368 ROOT MSE 14.037 R-Square 0.0300 C.V. 31.637 ADJ R-SQ 0.0122 Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >!T! Intercept

PAGE 104

93 the linear regression equation. The significance level for the F-test was established at .05. The SAS regression model procedure was executed using DIT P scores as the value of Y; ethics courses completed as the value of Xi ; basic moral values from friends, Asian-American, or Associate Degree as the value of X2 ; basic moral values from teachers, Black-American, or Baccalaureate Degree as the value of X3 ; basic moral values from ministers, Hispanic-American, or Master Degree as the value of X4 ; and basic moral values from other specified sources. Native American, or Doctorate Degree as the value of X5 The results of those linear regression analyses are included in Tables 4-24 through 4-26. When the linear regression procedure was run using basic moral values from friends as the value of X2 basic moral values from teachers as the value of X3 basic moral values from ministers as the value of X4 and basic moral values from other specified sources as the value of X5 there was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of those students and the DIT P scores of students who indicated their family was the basic source of their

PAGE 105

94 Table 4-24 Results for Hypothesis 7 -Source of Basic Moral Values Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F Squares Square Model 5 1790.776 358.155 1.818 0.1103 Error 220 43334.319 196.974 C Total 225 45125.094 DEP MEAN 44.581 ROOT MSE 14.035 R-Square 0.0397 CV. 31.482 ADJ R-SQ 0.0179 Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >!TI Intercept

PAGE 106

95 Table 4-25 Results for Hypothesis 7 -Ethnic Group Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F Squares Square Model 5 3482.101 696.420 3.671 0.0033 Error 219 41550.799 189.730 C Total 224 45032.900 DEP MEAN 44.623 ROOT MSE 13.774 R-Square 0.0773 CV. 30.868 ADJ R-SQ 0.0563 Independent

PAGE 107

96 Table 4-26 Results for Hypothesis 7 -Highest Degree Held Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F Squares Square Model 5 5986.363 1197.273 6.730 0.0001 Error 220 39138.731 177.903 C Total 225 45125.094 DEP MEAN 44.581 ROOT MSE 13.338 R-Square 0.1327 CV. 29.919 ADJ R-SQ 0.1129 Independent Parameter Stand T For HO: Prob Variable DF Estimate Error Parameter=0 >!Tl Intercept

PAGE 108

97 moral values. When the linear regression procedure was run using Asian-American as the value of X2 Black-American as the value of X3 Hispanic-American as the value of X4 and Native American as the value of X5 there was a significant difference in some DIT P scores. There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of Black, Hispanic, or Native American students and the DIT P scores of White students. Conversely, there was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of Asian-American students and the DIT P scores of White-American students. The computer model indicated that Asian-American students averaged 14.88 points lower on their DIT P scores than White students. The probability of values greater than !T| for this independent variable was 0.0098. When the linear regression procedure was run using Associate Degree as the value of X2 Baccalaureate Degree as the value of X3 Master Degree as the value of X4 and Doctorate Degree as the value of X5 ; there was a significant difference in some DIT P scores. There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who held associate degrees or doctorate degrees and the DIT P scores of students who did

PAGE 109

98 not hold a college degree. On the other hand, there was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who held baccalaureate degrees or master degrees and the DIT P scores of students who did not hold a college degree. The computer model indicated that students who had completed baccalaureate degrees averaged 8.25 points higher on their DIT P scores than students who had not completed a college degree. The probability of values greater than !T| for this independent variable was 0.0002. The computer model also indicated that students who had completed master degrees averaged 12.80 points higher on their DIT P scores than students who had not completed a college degree. The probability of values greater than IT! for this independent variable was 0.0001. Because there was a significant difference in student DIT P scores based on ethnic group and highest degree held, Hypothesis 7 was rejected. Hypothesis 8 postulated that, after controlling for ethics courses completed, there would be no difference, based on individual denominational membership, in the DIT P scores of college students. This null hypothesis was tested with a general purpose regression model using

PAGE 110

99 Y = Bo+BiXi+B2X2 +B3X3+B4X4+B5X5+B6X6+B7X7 +B8X8+B9X9+B10X10 +E as the linear regression equation. The significance level for the F-test was established at .05. The SAS regression model procedure was executed using DIT P scores as the value of Y, ethics courses completed as the value of Xi Roman Catholic as the value of X2 Southern Baptist as the value of X3 United Methodist as the value of X4 Episcopalian as the value of X5 Presbyterian as the value of Xs American/ Independent Baptist as the value of X7 United Church of Christ/ Christian Church/Fundamentalist Church/Reformed Church as the value of Xs Unitarian/Quaker/Mennonite as the value of X9 and no denominational membership as the value of X10 The results of that linear regression analysis are included in Table 4-27. There was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students in some denominational classifications and the DIT P scores of students who were Jewish. The computer model indicated that Roman Catholic students averaged 15.23 points lower on their DIT P scores than Jewish students. The probability of values greater than

PAGE 111

100 Table 4-27 Results for Hypothesis 8 -Denominational Membership Dependent Variable = DIT P Score Source DF Sum of Mean F Value Prob > F Squares Square Model 10 7128.223 712.822 4.033 0.0001 Error 215 37996.871 176.730 C Total 225 45125.094 DEP MEAN 44.581 ROOT MSE 13.294 R-Square 0.1580 C.V. 29.820 ADJ R-SQ 0.1188 Independent

PAGE 112

101 IT! for this independent variable was .0004 The computer model indicated that Southern Baptist students averaged 21.48 points lower on their DIT P scores than Jewish students. The probability of values greater than !T| for this independent variable was .0001. The computer model indicated that United Methodist students averaged 10.16 points lower on their DIT P scores than Jewish students. The probability of values greater than IT! for this independent variable was .0491. The computer model indicated that American/ Independent Baptists averaged 18.95 points lower on their DIT P scores than Jewish students. The probability of values greater than IT! for this independent variable was .0038. The computer model also indicated that students who did not belong to any denomination averaged 15.59 points lower on their DIT P scores than Jewish students. The probability of values greater than IT! for this independent variable was .0312. Because there was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who were in the aforementioned denominational classifications and the DIT P scores of students who were Jewish, Hypothesis 8 was rejected.

PAGE 113

102 Summary of Findings All possible comparisons of independent variables were not exhausted in the linear regression analyses performed during the course of this investigation, nor were there any analyses of possible interactions between or among independent variables. The selected comparisons were those that this researcher believed were the most important within the scope of this study. The following is a summary by hypothesis of the study findings based on those selected comparisons : 1. Hypothesis 1 : There is no difference, based on the number and type of formal religious education courses completed, in the DIT P scores of college students. Finding: There was not a significant relationship between Judeo-Christian philosophy courses completed or theology courses completed and student DIT P scores. There was a significant relationship between ethics courses completed and student DIT P scores. The computer model indicated that students had significantly higher DIT P scores for each ethics course completed. For that reason. Hypothesis 1

PAGE 114

103 was rejected. However, any conclusion or implication drawn from the finding of Hypotheses 1 must include consideration of the results of the Hypothesis 2 supplemental analysis of the confounding effect of number of ethics courses completed and school type. A discussion of this confounding effect is contained in Chapter 5. 2. Hypothesis 2 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on school type, in the DIT P scores of college students. Finding: There was a significant difference, based on school type, in the DIT P scores of college students. The computer model indicated that the DIT P scores of students attending divinity schools were significantly higher than the DIT P scores of students attending liberal arts colleges. For that reason. Hypothesis 2 was rejected. However, any conclusion or implication drawn from the finding of Hypotheses 2 must include consideration of the results of the Hypothesis 2 supplemental analysis of the confounding effect of number of ethics courses completed and school type. The reader is referred to Chapter 5 for a discussion of this confounding effect

PAGE 115

104 3. Hypothesis 3 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on school affiliation, in the DIT P scores of college students attending the same type of school. Finding: There was not a significant difference, based on school affiliation, between the DIT P scores of students attending the Jewish affiliated college and the DIT P scores of students attending the nonaffiliated colleges. There was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students attending the Roman Catholic affiliated college or the Southern Baptist affiliated college, and the DIT P scores of students attending the nonaffiliated colleges. There was not a significant difference, based on school affiliation, between the DIT P scores of students attending the Jewish divinity school or the United Methodist divinity school and the DIT P scores of students attending the nonsectarian divinity school. There was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students attending the Roman Catholic divinity schools and the DIT P scores of students attending the nonsectarian divinity school The computer model indicated that students attending the Roman Catholic college

PAGE 116

105 or the Southern Baptist college had significantly lower DIT P scores than students attending the nonaffiliated colleges. The computer model also indicated that students attending the Roman Catholic divinity schools had significantly lower DIT P scores than students attending the nonsectarian divinity school. For those reasons, Hypothesis 3 was rejected. 4. Hypothesis 4 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on age, gender, year of study, grade point average, parents' annual income, familiarity with Kohlberg's moral development theory, or individual religious conversion experience, in the DIT P scores of college students. Finding: There was not a significant difference in the DIT P scores of college students based on age, grade point average, parents' annual income, familiarity with Kohlberg's moral development theory, or individual religious conversion experience. There was a significant difference in the DIT P scores of college students based on gender and year of study. The computer model indicated that males had significantly lower DIT P scores than females. The computer model also

PAGE 117

106 indicated that for each completed year of study students had significantly higher DIT P scores. For those reasons. Hypothesis 4 was rejected. 5. Hypothesis 5 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on mother's education level, father's education level, or student's religious ideology regarding moral decisions, in the DIT P scores of college students. Finding: There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students whose mothers had completed a postbaccalaureate degree, and the DIT P scores of students whose mothers had not completed a college degree. There was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students whose mothers had completed a baccalaureate degree, and the DIT P scores of students whose mothers had not completed a college degree. There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students whose fathers had completed a baccalaureate degree, and the DIT P scores of students whose fathers had not completed a college degree. There was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students whose fathers had completed a postbaccalaureate

PAGE 118

107 degree, and the DIT P scores of students whose fathers had not completed a college degree. There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who believed they should follow the leadership of the Spirit of God in making all moral decisions, and the DIT P scores of students who believed they should follow their own moral reasoning in making all moral decisions. There was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who believed they should follow established religious rules and biblical commandments in making all moral decisions, and the DIT P scores of students who believed they should follow their own moral reasoning in making all moral decisions. The computer model indicated that students whose mothers had completed a baccalaureate degree had significantly higher DIT P scores than students whose mothers had not completed a college degree. The computer model indicated that students whose fathers had completed a postbaccalaureate degree had significantly higher DIT P scores than students whose fathers had not completed a college degree. The computer model also indicated that students who believed they should follow established religious rules and biblical commandments

PAGE 119

108 in making all moral decisions had significantly lower DIT P scores than students who believed they should follow their own moral reasoning in making all moral decisions. For those reasons. Hypothesis 5 was rejected. 6. Hypothesis 6 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on church/synagogue attendance, in the DIT P scores of college students. Finding: There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who attended church/synagogue regularly or nonregularl y and the DIT P scores of students who never attended church/synagogue. For that reason, Hypothesis 6 was not rejected. 7. Hypothesis 7 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on ethnic group, highest degree held, or source of basic moral values, in the DIT P scores of college students. Finding: There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who indicated that friends, teachers, ministers, or another specified source was the main source of their basic moral values, and the DIT P scores of students who indicated that their family was the main source of their basic moral

PAGE 120

109 values. There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of Black, Hispanic, and Native American students and the DIT P scores of White students. There was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of AsianAmerican students and the DIT P scores of White students. There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who had completed an associate degree or a doctorate degree, and the DIT P scores of students who had not completed a college degree. There was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who had completed a baccalaureate degree or a master degree, and the DIT P scores of students who had not completed a college degree. The computer model indicated that the DIT P scores of Asian-American students were significantly lower than the DIT P scores of White students. The computer model also indicated that the DIT P scores of students who had completed a baccalaureate degree or a master degree were significantly higher than the DIT P scores of students who had not completed a college degree. For those reasons. Hypothesis 7 was rejected.

PAGE 121

110 8. Hypothesis 8 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on individual denominational membership, in the DIT P scores of college students. Finding: There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who were Episcopalians, Presbyterians, members of the United Church of Christ/ Christian/Fundamentalist/Reformed denominations, or members of the Unitarian/Quaker/Mennonite denominations, and the DIT P scores of students who were Jewish. There was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who were Roman Catholics, Southern Baptists, United Methodists, American/ Independent Baptists, or members of no denomination, and the DIT P scores of students who were Jewish. The computer model indicated that the DIT P scores of students who were Roman Catholics, Southern Baptists, United Methodists, American/ Independent Baptists, or members of no denomination were significantly lower than the DIT P scores of students who were Jewish. For that reason, Hypothesis 8 was rejected.

PAGE 122

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a significant relationship between formal religious education and the moral judgment development of college students, and, after controlling for formal religious education, to see if there is also a significant relationship between the educational environment or certain selected student characteristics and the moral judgment development of those students. Formal religious education was defined as the study of Judeo-Christian philosophy, theology, or ethics at a fully accredited college or divinity school Educational environment was defined as the type of school attended, and the Judeo-Christian denominational affiliation of the school. To accomplish the purpose of this study the following research questions were posed: 111

PAGE 123

112 !• Primary research question : Is there a significant relationship between formal religious education and the moral judgment development of college students, based on the number and type of formal religious education courses completed? 2Secondary resea rch question : After controlling for any significantly related formal religious education courses, is there a significant relationship between the educational environment and the moral judgment development of college students? 3 Tertiary resear ch question : After controlling for any significantly related formal religious education courses, is there a significant relationship between certain selected student characteristics and the moral judgment development of college students? Conclusions and Implications Of the eight student characteristics that were related significantly to moral development, gender, ethnic group, mother's education level, and father's education level are variables not under the direct control of the

PAGE 124

113 student. Highest degree held, year of study, religious ideology regarding moral decisions, and denominational membership are variables under the student's direct control. Moreover, this direct control includes selection of the type of school, the affiliation of the school, and the number of ethics courses completed; variables that also are related significantly to student moral development. The general conclusion is that the majority of significantly related independent variables are variables that can be directly controlled by the student. The general implication is that students have substantial direct control over their own moral development. Of course with a correlational design and survey data, it cannot be determined for certain whether the significant relationships are due to increases in student moral development prompted by individual independent variables, or to pre-existent higher levels of student moral development. The following is a discussion of the specific conclusions and implications drawn from the data analysis findings of the eight study hypotheses formulated to answer the three research questions:

PAGE 125

114 1Hypothesis 1 : There is no difference, based on the number and type of formal religious education courses completed, in the DIT P scores of college students. Finding: There was not a significant relationship between Judeo-Christian philosophy courses completed or theology courses completed and student DIT P scores. There was a significant relationship between ethics courses completed and student DIT P scores. The computer model indicated that students had significantly higher DIT P scores for each ethics course completed. For that reason. Hypothesis 1 was rejected. The conclusion is that the completion of certain types of formal religious education courses significantly increases the moral judgment development of college students. The more ethics courses completed, the higher the individual level of moral development. The reader will recall that there was a confounding effect of number of ethics courses completed and school type, that was identified during the Hypothesis 2 data analysis. Because of this confounding effect, a supplemental analysis was performed in Phase 2 of the study, during the Hypothesis 2

PAGE 126

115 analysis. This supplemental analysis indicated that there was a significant relationship between the number of ethics courses completed and the moral judgment development of students attending colleges of liberal arts and sciences. However, the supplemental analysis also indicated that the relationship between number of ethics courses completed and the moral judgment development of students attending divinity schools was not significant. The implication is that undergraduate college students who complete college ethics courses will increase significantly in their level of moral development, making more moral judgments at the Stage 5 and Stage 6 levels on the Kohlberg moral development scale for each ethics course completed. Students probably reach a point of diminishing return, where additional ethics courses do not provide any additionally significant increase in moral development; however, that point was not determined by this study. The confounding effect that was present in this study also suggests that the effect of number of ethics courses completed is not present for divinity school students. The findings for Hypothesis 1, Hypothesis 2, and the

PAGE 127

116 Hypothesis 2 supplemental analysis, suggest that students who choose to attend divinity schools are in higher levels of moral development prior to their attendance at those schools. These findings also suggest that divinity school students complete more ethics courses than liberal arts college students, although they could complete some or all of those courses at the undergraduate level prior to their attendance at the divinity school. Of the liberal arts college students used in this study 51.7% had completed no ethics courses, while only 32.7% of the divinity school students had completed no ethics courses. Of the divinity school students used in this study 30.0% had completed 1 ethics course, and 37.9% of liberal arts college students had completed 1 ethics course. Only 10.4% of liberal arts college students had completed more than 1 ethics course, while 37.3% of divinity school students had completed more than 1 ethics course. Only 6.0% of liberal arts college students had completed 2 ethics courses, while 23.6% of divinity school students had completed 2 ethics courses. Only 4.4% of liberal arts college students had completed 3 to 6 ethics courses, while 11.7% of divinity school students

PAGE 128

117 had completed 3 to 6 ethics courses. No liberal arts college student had completed more than 6 ethics courses, while 1.0% of divinity school students had completed 8 ethics courses and 1.0% of divinity school students had completed 10 ethics courses. 2. Hypothesis 2 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on school type, in the DIT P scores of college students. Finding: There was a significant difference, based on school type, in the DIT P scores of college students. The computer model indicated that the DIT P scores of students attending divinity schools were significantly higher than the DIT P scores of students attending liberal arts colleges. For that reason, Hypothesis 2 was rejected. The conclusion is that, even after controlling for the number of ethics courses completed, divinity school students have significantly higher levels of moral development than liberal arts college students. The discussion of the conclusion and implication for Hypothesis 1 must be considered in conjunction with this conclusion before drawing any implication for this hypothesis.

PAGE 129

118 The implication is that type of school attended may significantly affect individual moral development, with divinity school students developing more rapidly and making more moral judgments at the Stage 5 and Stage 6 levels on the Kohlberg moral development scale than liberal arts college students. However, there also is the possibility that individuals who choose to attend divinity schools are more prone to be in significantly higher levels of moral development prior to making that choice. As discussed previously in the Hypothesis 1 implication, the confounding effect between the number of ethics courses completed and school type, suggests the additional possibility that college students who choose to attend divinity schools also complete more ethics courses than other college students. The finding that divinity school students had significantly higher DIT P scores than liberal arts college students was not unexpected, due to the fact that education has one of the most consistent relations to the DIT (Rest, 1986a), and the fact that nearly all of the divinity school students had completed baccalaureate degrees prior to their divinity school attendance.

PAGE 130

119 3. Hypothesis 3 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on school affiliation, in the DIT P scores of college students attending the same type of school. Finding: There was not a significant difference, based on school affiliation, between the DIT P scores of students attending the Jewish affiliated college and the DIT P scores of students attending the nonaffiliated colleges. There was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students attending the Roman Catholic affiliated college or the Southern Baptist affiliated college, and the DIT P scores of students attending the nonaffiliated colleges. There was not a significant difference, based on school affiliation, between the DIT P scores of students attending the Jewish divinity school or the United Methodist divinity school and the DIT P scores of students attending the nonsectarian divinity school. There was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students attending the Roman Catholic divinity schools and the DIT P scores of students attending the nonsectarian divinity school The computer model indicated that students attending the Roman Catholic college

PAGE 131

120 or the Southern Baptist college had significantly lower DIT P scores than students attending the nonaffiliated colleges. The computer model also indicated that students attending the Roman Catholic divinity schools had significantly lower DIT P scores than students attending the nonsectarian divinity school. For those reasons, Hypothesis 3 was rejected. The conclusion is that, even after controlling for the number of ethics courses completed, students attending Roman Catholic colleges and Southern Baptist colleges have significantly lower levels of moral development than students attending Jewish and religiously nonaffiliated colleges. In addition, even after controlling for the number of ethics courses completed, students attending Roman Catholic divinity schools have significantly lower levels of moral development than students attending nonsectarian divinity schools. The implication is that school affiliation may significantly affect individual moral development, with students who are attending nonaffiliated colleges and nonsectarian divinity schools developing more rapidly and

PAGE 132

121 making more decisions at the Kohlberg Stage 5 and Stage 6 levels of moral development than students who are attending Roman Catholic colleges. Southern Baptist colleges, and Roman Catholic divinity schools. However, there also is the possibility that individuals who are at the lower stages of development on Kohlberg's moral development scale are more prone to select Roman Catholic colleges, Southern Baptist colleges, and Roman Catholic divinity schools; whereas, those who are at the higher stages of development are more prone to select nonaffiliated colleges and nonsectarian divinity schools. This selection may be due, at least in part, to individual denominational membership, which also was significantly related to individual moral development. Denominational membership will be discussed later. 4. Hypothesis 4 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on age, gender, year of study, grade point average, parents' annual income, familiarity with Kohlberg's moral development theory, or individual religious conversion experience, in the DIT P scores of college students. Finding: There was not a significant difference in the DIT P scores of college

PAGE 133

122 students based on age, grade point average, parents' annual income, familiarity with Kohlberg's moral development theory, or individual religious conversion experience. There was a significant difference in the DIT P scores of college students based on gender and year of study. The computer model indicated that males had significantly lower DIT P scores than females. The computer model also indicated that for each completed year of study students had significantly higher DIT P scores. For those reasons, Hypothesis 4 was rejected. The conclusion is that, even after controlling for the number of ethics courses completed, female college students have significantly higher levels of moral development than male college students. Furthermore, even after controlling for the number of ethics courses completed, college students have significantly higher levels of moral development for each additional year of college education completed. The implication is that gender may significantly ^/ affect the moral development of students, with females developing more rapidly and making significantly more moral

PAGE 134

123 judgments at Kohlberg's Stage 5 and Stage 6 levels than males; and that each year of college education significantly increases the moral development of students, and the number of moral judgments they make at Kohlberg's Stage 5 and Stage 6 levels. However, as Rest (1986a) suggested, there also is the possibility that significant differences in male/female DIT P scores are due to intelligence quotients, education, or socio-economic status. The gender differences were unexpected because Rest (1979) listed only 2 of 22 studies that reported significant male/female differences. Rest (1986b) said gender differences with regard to moral development are trivial, and Gilligan (1982) said that Kohlberg style justice oriented moral judgment scoring systems downgrade women and make women's moral development appear inferior to men's. With regard to year of study, the finding was not unexpected, because Rest (1986a) indicated that education has one of the most consistent relations to the DIT, and just receiving more education of any kind at the college level significantly increases DIT P scores. 5. Hypothesis 5 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on mother's

PAGE 135

124 education level, father's education level, or student's religious ideology regarding moral decisions, in the DIT P scores of college students. Finding: There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students whose mothers had completed a postbaccalaureate degree, and the DIT P scores of students whose mothers had not completed a college degree. There was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students whose mothers had completed a baccalaureate degree, and the DIT P scores of students whose mothers had not completed a college degree. There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students whose fathers had completed a baccalaureate degree, and the DIT P scores of students whose fathers had not completed a college degree. There was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students whose fathers had completed a postbaccalaureate degree, and the DIT P scores of students whose fathers had not completed a college degree. There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who believed they should follow the leadership of the Spirit of God in making all moral decisions, and the DIT P scores of students who

PAGE 136

125 believed they should follow their own moral reasoning in making all moral decisions. There was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who believed they should follow established religious rules and biblical commandments in making all moral decisions, and the DIT P scores of students who believed they should follow their own moral reasoning in making all moral decisions. The computer model indicated that students whose mothers had completed a baccalaureate degree had significantly higher DIT P scores than students whose mothers had not completed a college degree. The computer model indicated that students whose fathers had completed a postbaccalaureate degree had significantly higher DIT P scores than students whose fathers had not completed a college degree. The computer model also indicated that students who believed they should follow established religious rules and biblical commandments in making all moral decisions had significantly lower DIT P scores than students who believed they should follow their own moral reasoning in making all moral decisions. For those reasons. Hypothesis 5 was rejected.

PAGE 137

126 The conclusion is that, even after controlling for the number of ethics courses completed, students whose mothers have completed a baccalaureate degree have significantly higher levels of moral development than students whose mothers do not have a college degree. In addition, even after controlling for the number of ethics courses completed, students whose fathers have completed a postbaccalaureate degree have significantly higher levels of moral development than students whose fathers do not have a college degree. Moreover, even after controlling for the number of ethics courses completed, students who believe they should follow established religious rules and biblical commandments in making all moral decisions have significantly lower levels of moral development than students who believe they should follow their own moral reasoning in making all moral decisions. The implication is that mothers with baccalaureate degrees and fathers with postbaccalaureate degrees help to increase their children's level of moral development, in some way contributing significantly to their children's movement into the Kohlberg Stage 5 and Stage 6 levels of

PAGE 138

127 moral development; and that religious ideology significantly affects individual moral development, with students who hold the ideology of following their own moral reasoning developing more rapidly and making more moral decisions at the Kohlberg Stage 5 and Stage 6 levels than students who hold the ideology of following established religious rules and biblical commandments. With regard to mother's and father's education level, it is reasonable to expect that if college education increases moral development, college educated parents will teach higher moral values to their children and assist in moving them into a higher level of moral development than that of their peers whose parents are not college educated. It also is reasonable to expect that those students who feel they should follow established religious rules and biblical commandments in making all moral decisions would not choose Kohlberg Stage 5 and Stage 6 responses, since the lower stage answers would fit their religious ideology more closely with regard to moral decisions. In addition, as Rest (1986b) indicated, their religious ideology also would tend to retard their movement into Kohlberg's higher stages of moral development.

PAGE 139

128 6. Hypothesis 6 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on church/synagogue attendance, in the DIT P scores of college students. Finding: There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who attended church/synagogue regularly or nonregul arl y and the DIT P scores of students who never attended church/synagogue. For that reason, Hypothesis 6 was not rejected. The conclusion is that, even after controlling for the number of ethics courses completed, church/synagogue attendance does not have a significant relationship to the moral development of college students. Moreover, nonattendance at church/synagogue does not have a significant relationship to the moral development of college students The implication is that church/synagogue attendance or nonattendance does not significantly affect the moral development of college students, and the number of moral judgments they make at the Stage 5 and Stage 6 levels on the Kohlberg scale. This suggests that either ethics are not being taught effectively at churches and synagogues, or

PAGE 140

129 students attending churches and synagogues are not learning anything that would cause their moral development to be different from students who are not attending. 7. Hypothesis 7 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on ethnic group, highest degree held, or source of basic moral values, in the DIT P scores of college students. Finding: There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who indicated that friends, teachers, ministers, or another specified source was the main source of their basic moral values, and the DIT P scores of students who indicated their family was the main source of their basic moral values. There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of Black, Hispanic, and Native American students and the DIT P scores of White students. There was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of Asian-American students and the DIT P scores of White students. There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who had completed an associate degree or a doctorate degree, and the DIT P scores of students who had not completed a college degree. There was a significant

PAGE 141

130 difference between the DIT P scores of students who had completed a baccalaureate degree or a master degree, and the DIT P scores of students who had not completed a college degree. The computer model indicated that the DIT P scores of Asian-American students were significantly lower than the DIT P scores of White students. The computer model also indicated that the DIT P scores of students who had completed a baccalaureate degree or a master degree were significantly higher than the DIT P scores of students who had not completed a college degree. For those reasons, Hypothesis 7 was rejected. The conclusion is that, even after controlling for the number of ethics courses completed, Asian-American students have significantly lower levels of moral development than White students. Even after controlling for the number of ethics courses completed, individuals who have completed baccalaureate degrees and master degrees have significantly higher levels of moral development than those who have not completed a college degree. The implication is that the Asian-American culture significantly affects individual moral development, and/or

PAGE 142

131 follows a different moral standard than the White-American culture, with Asian-American students making less moral judgments at the Stage 5 and Stage 6 levels on Kohlberg's moral development scale than White students. Moreover, the amount of higher education completed, from the bachelor's level through the master's level, significantly affects individual moral development, increasing the number of moral judgments made at the Stage 5 and Stage 6 levels on Kohlberg's moral development scale; whereas, education below or above those levels does not significantly affect moral judgment development. The nonsignif icance at the doctorate level could be due to the fact that there was only one respondent in that category, though it does merit further investigation. 8. Hypothesis 8 : After controlling for ethics courses completed, there is no difference, based on individual denominational membership, in the DIT P scores of college students. Finding: There was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who were Episcopalians, Presbyterians, members of the United Church of Christ/ Christian/Fundamentalist/Reformed denominations, or members

PAGE 143

132 of the Unitarian/Quaker/Mennonite denominations, and the DIT P scores of students who were Jewish. There was a significant difference between the DIT P scores of students who were Roman Catholics, Southern Baptists, United Methodists, American/ Independent Baptists, or members of no denomination, and the DIT P scores of students who were Jewish. The computer model indicated that the DIT P scores of students who were Roman Catholics, Southern Baptists, United Methodists, American/ Independent Baptists, or members of no denomination were significantly lower than the DIT P scores of students who were Jewish. For that reason. Hypothesis 8 was rejected. The conclusion is that, even after controlling for the number of ethics courses completed, Roman Catholics, Southern Baptists, United Methodists, American/ Independent Baptists, and individuals claiming no denominational membership have significantly lower levels of moral development than Jewish individuals. The implication is that denominational membership significantly affects individual moral development, with Jewish students developing more rapidly and making more

PAGE 144

133 moral judgments at the Kohlberg Stage 5 and Stage 6 levels of moral development than Roman Catholic, Southern Baptist, United Methodist, or American/ Independent Baptist students. This significant difference in moral development could be due to the more conservative teachings of particular Christian denominations, or the multifarious nature of the Jewish religion, or a combination of both. Suggested Future Studies In order to reinforce the findings of this study and seek answers to the questions raised by those findings, the following studies are suggested for future investigation: Formal religious education replication study This researcher is not aware of any other study that has examined the relationship of DIT P scores to such a wide array of ethics courses, taught in so many diverse higher education environments. Therefore, another study seeking to replicate the findings of this study is essential to the reinforcement of this researcher's conclusions and recommendations. Behavioral change study Although, theoretically, changes in individual moral beliefs also result in changes

PAGE 145

134 in individual ethical behavior; realistically, that is not always what occurs. The question that remains unanswered by this study is whether this increase in individual moral judgment development, which is significantly related to ethics courses completed at the college level, also results in significant changes in individual ethical behavior, once the ethics courses are completed. As indicated by Rest (1986b) the development of an acceptable means of measuring ethical behavioral changes will be a very difficult task. However, it should not be an impossible one. This is certainly an area that needs to be investigated by future studies Gender differences study A study to determine the reason why the DIT P scores of females were significantly higher than those of males, even after controlling for the number of ethics courses completed, is another area for future exploration. Rest (1986a) suggested that when gender differences do occur the influence of IQ, education, or SES should be checked. Are the DIT P score differences in this study, as Rest suggests, due to intelligence quotients, education, or socio-economic status? Are the differences

PAGE 146

135 just peculiar to this particular study, do they mean females learn more rapidly than males, or do they mean females change their opinions more rapidly then males? These are questions that merit exploration in future research studies, especially when considering the claims made by Gilligan (1982), and the fact that significant male/female differences were present in a study reported by Shaver (1985) and two earlier studies reported by Rest (1979). Ethnic differences study A study to determine the reason why Asian-American students had significantly lower DIT P scores than White-American students is another area for future investigation. Is this phenomenon caused by the Asian-American culture, the structure of the DIT, the ability of the individual student, or some other variable? Parent education effect study A study to determine the reason why students whose mothers had a baccalaureate degree, or whose fathers had a postbaccalaureate degree, had significantly higher DIT P scores than students whose parents did not have a college degree is another area for future exploration. The study should also examine the

PAGE 147

136 reason why students whose fathers had a baccalaureate degree, or whose mothers had a postbaccalaureate degree, did not have significantly higher DIT P scores than students whose parents did not have a college degree. Is this difference affected by the major field of study for the parent's degree, the demands of the parent's career, the ethical example of the parent, or some other variable? Degree completion effect study Finally, a study to determine the reason why there was not a significant difference between the DIT P scores of college students who had completed associate degrees or doctorate degrees, and the DIT P scores of students who had not completed any college degree is another area for future investigation. Did the lack of significant difference occur because of some individual student characteristic, because of the particular institution attended by the student, or because of some other variable? Recommendations This study indicates that the early founders of American colleges were correct in including moral philosophy

PAGE 148

137 courses as a required part of college curricula. Moreover, this study also strongly supports the contention by Bok (1988) that all colleges ought to include more ethics courses as part of the core curriculum in each discipline, and practical discussions of ethical issues in the other classes taught in each particular discipline. According to Bok, college presidents, deans, and faculty need to fulfill their responsibility, to both students and higher education, by ensuring that more ethics courses and more ethical discussions are incorporated into college curricula. In consideration of the reasoned argument of Bok (1988), and because of the findings of this study, the following recommendations are made: 1. Each institution of higher education should include a general ethics course as part of the required core curriculum in each major discipline. 2. Each department, at each institution of higher education, should include at least one applied ethics course as a required part of the curriculum in that major field, and specifically designed to explore ethical issues in that major

PAGE 149

138 3. Discussions of ethical issues should be incorporated into as many nonethics courses as practical within all major fields of study, at each institution of higher education. 4. All students should take full responsibility for those independent variables that were identified as significantly related to their moral development and under their direct control. It is reasonable to expect that the increase in individual moral development related to the study of ethics at the college level would have direct relevance to each major career field, in a number of areas. Moreover, it also is reasonable to expect that the implementation of these four recommendations would be beneficial to both college students and society at large, during the students' college years and upon their entry into the career work force following graduation. Therefore, the presidents, faculty, and students of all institutions of higher education should duly consider the content of this study, and begin now to hear the voices of prominent higher education leaders like Derek Bok.

PAGE 150

APPENDIX A PARTICIPATION SOLICITATION LETTER

PAGE 151

President Name of Institution Anywhere, USA Dear Sir: I am conducting a PhD research study in conjunction with Dr James Wattenbarger Director of the University of Florida Institute of Higher Education, to investigate the relationship of formal religious education, as taught in various theology, philosophy, and ethics courses, to the moral judgment development of college students. We have decided to obtain part of the study sample from students attending colleges and seminaries affiliated with major Judeo-Christian denominations in the United States, and part of the sample from students attending colleges and seminaries that are not so affiliated. We have also decided to use the internationally recognized Defining Issues Test, developed by Dr James Rest, Director of the University of Minnesota Center for the Study of Ethical Development, as the measurement instrument for moral judgment development. I am writing to ask if you would be willing to have a member of your staff distribute a packet of research material to each of (INSERT 50 OR 100 DEPENDING ON SIZE OF SCHOOL) students randomly selected from those currently enrolled at your institution. The time required for completion of the packet is thirty to forty-five minutes. Individual names and institutional names will not be identified in the study, and copies of the results of the study will be provided to you upon request. Thank you for your attention and cooperation in the completion of this important research. Questions may be directed to me at (MY TELEPHONE NUMBER). Sincerely Gary G. Friend, Sr 140

PAGE 152

APPENDIX B SURVEY COVER LETTER

PAGE 153

Institute of Higher Education University of Florida Dear Research Participant You have been selected by (NAME OF COLLEGE OR DIVINITY SCHOOL) to participate in an important research study being conducted at the University of Florida Institute of Higher Education. This study is designed to investigate the relationship of formal religious education to the moral judgment development of college and seminary students. Attached is a questionnaire, which I am asking you to complete. This will require approximately thirty to fortyfive minutes of your time; however, your input will provide invaluable information vital to the completion of this research. ALTHOUGH THIS IS NOT A TEST, IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE STUDY FINDINGS THAT THE OPINIONS GIVEN ARE SOLELY YOUR OWN. CONSIDER EACH ITEM CAREFULLY, BUT ALSO PACE YOURSELF SO THAT YOU FINISH IN NO MORE THAN ONE HOUR. PLEASE FOL LOW THE INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE. COMPLETE IT IMMEDIATELY. SEAL IT IN THE ENCLOSED ENVELOPE, SIGN AND DATE THE ENVELOPE WHERE INDICATED, AND IM MEDIATELY RETURN IT TO (Name of Contact Person) INDIVIDUAL NAMES AND NAMES OF INSTITUTIONS WILL NOT BE USED IN REPORTING THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY. Names are used on the questionnaire for control purposes only. The results of the study will be made available to you upon request through the President of your (INSERT THE WORD COLLEGE OR SEMINARY AS APPROPRIATE) when the research is completed. Thank you for your attention and cooperation. Sincerely, Gary G. Friend, Sr 142

PAGE 154

APPENDIX C RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE

PAGE 155

ID NUMBER BACKGROUND PORTION Ql PLEASE GIVE US THE FOLLOWING BACKGROUND INFORMATION: 1. Name: Age: 2. Gender: Male Female 3. Ethnic Group: Asian-American Black Hispanic Native American White 4. Degrees Held: Associate Bachelor Master PhD/EdD 5. Yr of Study: Freshman Junior Grad Stu(Masters) Sophomore Senior Grad Stu( PhD/EdD) 6. GPA: (Using 4 point scale e.g. 3.5, 2.8) 7. Parents' Annual Income: (e.g. $45,000) 8. Parent's Education Level: a. Mother: High Sch Grad Coll Grad Post Grad Degree b. Father: High Sch Grad Coll Grad Post Grad Degree 9. Moral Development Courses Taken (Number of each, e.g. 1,6,2) : Judeo-Christian Philosophy Theology Ethics 10. I am familiar with the moral development theory of Lawrence Kohlberg: Yes No 11. Religious Experience: a. I have experienced religious conversion: Yes No 144

PAGE 156

145 b. I have the following pattern of church/synagogue attendance I go to church/synagogue regularly seeking values or direction for my life. I go to church/synagogue regularly out of duty or habit. I do not go to church/synagogue regularly. I do not go to church/synagogue at all. 12. Religious Ideology: I believe I should follow established religious rules and biblical commandments in making all moral decisions I believe I should follow my own moral reasoning in making all moral decisions. I believe I should follow the leadership of the Spirit of God in making all moral decisions. 13. My basic moral values came mainly from: Family Friends Teachers Ministers Others (Specif y : ) 14. Denominational Membership( Specif y) : (e.g. Southern Baptist, Jewish, Catholic, Methodist, None) NOTE: THIS QUESTIONNAIRE WAS PRODUCED ON ONLY ONE PAGE, NOT TWO AS SHOWN HERE. THE COPY SHOWN IS THE COLLEGE VERSION. THE SEMINARY VERSION WAS THE SAME WITH THE EXCEPTION OF QUESTION FIVE, WHICH READ AS INDICATED BELOW. 5. Yr of Study: Seminary Yrl Seminary Yr3 Grad Stu(Masters) Seminary Yr2 Seminary (DMin) Grad Stu(PhD)

PAGE 157

APPENDIX D DEFINING ISSUES TEST

PAGE 158

ID NUMBER PIT PORTION Q2 OPINIONS ABOUT SOCIAL PROBLEMS This portion of the questionnaire is aimed at understanding how people think about social problems. Different people often have different opinions about questions of right and wrong. There are no "right" answers in the way that there are right answers to math problems. We would like you to tell us what you think about several problem stories. The papers will be fed to a computer to find the average for the whole group, and no one will see your individual answers. *********************************************************** In this questionnaire you will be asked to give your opinions about several stories. Here is a story as an example. Frank Jones has been thinking about buying a car. He is married, has two small children and earns an average income. The car he buys will be his family's only car. It will be used mostly to get to work and drive around town, but sometimes for vacation trips also. In trying to decide what car to buy, Frank Jones realized that there were a lot of questions to consider. Below there is a list of some of these questions. If you were Frank Jones, how important would each of these questions be in deciding what car to buy? Copyright, James Rest, 1979 All Rights Reserved NOTE: THE DIT IS REPRINTED WITH PERMISSION OF THE PUBLISHER. EACH DIT PROBLEM STORY SENT TO STUDENTS WAS PRODUCED ON ONLY ONE PAGE, NOT TWO AS SHOWN HERE. 147

PAGE 159

148 Instructions for Part A: (Sample Question) Q3 On the left hand side check one of the spaces by each statement of a consideration. (For instance, if you think that statement #1 is not important in making a decision about buying a car, check the space on the right.) IMPORTANCE Great Much Some Little No 1. Whether the car dealer was in the same block as where Frank lives. (Note that in the sample, the person taking the questionnaire did not think this was important in making a decision. ) 2. Would a used car be more economical in the long run than a new car. (Note that a check was put in the far left space to indicate the opinion that this is an important issue in making a decision about buying a car.) 3. Whether the color was green, Frank's favorite color. 4. Whether the cubic inch displacement was at least 200. (Note that if you are unsure about what "cubic inch displacement" means, then mark it "no importance.") 5. Would a large, roomy car be better than a compact car. 6. Whether the front connibilies were differential. (Note that if a statement sounds like gibberish or nonsense to you, mark it "no importance.")

PAGE 160

149 Instructions for Part B: (Sample Question) From the list of questions above, select the most important one of the whole group. Put the number of the most important question on the top line below. Do likewise for your 2nd, 3rd and 4th most important choices. (Note that the top choices in this case will come from the statements that were checked on the far left-hand side statements #2 and #5 were thought to be very important. In deciding what is the most important, a person would re-read #2 and #5, and then pick one of them as the most important, then put the other one as "second most important," and so on.) Most important 5 Second most important 2 Third most important 3 Fourth most important 1

PAGE 161

150 HEINZ AND THE DRUG 04 In Europe a woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost to make. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $1,000, which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying, and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said, "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it." So Heinz got desperate and began to think about breaking into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife. Should Heinz steal the drug? (Check one) Should steal it Can't decide _Should not steal it IMPORTANCE : Great Much Some Little No ! 111. Whether a community's laws I ! are qoing to be upheld.

PAGE 162

151 i ! 6. Whether the druggist's ! rights to his invention ! have to be respected.

PAGE 163

152 STUDENT TAKE-OVER 05 At Harvard University a group of students, called the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), believe that the University should not have an army ROTC program. SDS students are against the war in Viet Nam, and the army training program helps send men to fight in Viet Nam. The SDS students demanded that Harvard end the army ROTC training program as a university course. This would mean that Harvard students could not get army training as part of their regular course work and not get credit for it towards their degrees. Agreeing with the SDS students, the Harvard professors voted to end the ROTC program as a university course. But the President of the University stated that he wanted to keep the army program on campus as a course. The SDS students felt that the President was not going to pay attention to the faculty vote or to their demands. So, one day last April, two hundred SDS students walked into the university's administration building, and told everyone else to get out. They said they were doing this to force Harvard to get rid of the army training program as a course. Should the students have taken over the administration building? (Check one) Yes, they should Can't decide No, they shouldn't take it over. take it over. IMPORTANCE : Great Much Some Little No ! 111. Are the students doing this ! to really help other people ! or are they doing it just ! for kicks?

PAGE 164

153 ! 1 4. Would taking over the ! building in the long run ! benefit more people to a ! qreater extent?

PAGE 165

154 ESCAPED PRISONER 06 A man had been sentenced to prison for 10 years. After one year, however, he escaped from prison, moved to a new area of the country, and took on the name of Thompson. For 8 years he worked hard, and gradually he saved enough money to buy his own business. He was fair to his customers, gave his employees top wages, and gave most of his own profits to charity. Then one day, Mrs. Jones, an old neighbor, recognized him as the man who had escaped from prison 8 years before, and whom the police had been looking for. Should Mrs. Jones report Mr. Thompson to the police and have him sent back to prison? (Check one) Should report him Can't decide Should not report him IMPORTANCE : Great Much Some Little No ! 111. Hasn't Mr. Thompson been I ! good enough for such a III! long time to prove he isn't ! II a bad person?

PAGE 166

155 8. Would it be fair to all the prisoners who had to serve out their full sentences if Mr. Thompson was let off? 9. Was Mrs. Jones a good friend of Mr. Thompson? 10. Wouldn't it be a citizen's duty to report an escaped criminal, regardless of the circumstances? 11. How would the will of the people and the public good best be served? 12. Would going to prison do any good for Mr. Thompson or protect anybody? From the list of questions above, select the four most important : Most important. Second most important Third most important. Fourth most important.

PAGE 167

156 THE DOCTOR'S DILEMMA 07 A lady was dying of cancer which could not be cured and she had only about six months to live. She was in terrible pain, but she was so weak that a good dose of pain-killer like morphine would make her die sooner. She was delirious and almost crazy with pain, and in her calm periods, she would ask the doctor to give her enough morphine to kill her. She said she couldn't stand the pain and that she was going to die in a few months anyway. What should the doctor do? (Check one) He should give the Can't decide lady an overdose that will make her die. ^Should not give the overdose. IMPORTANCE : Great Much Some Little No 1. Whether the woman's family is in favor of giving her the overdose or not 2. Is the doctor obligated by the same laws as everybody else if giving her an overdose would be the same as killing her? 3. Whether people would be much better off without society regimenting their lives and even their deaths. 4. Whether the doctor could make it appear like an accident Does the state have the right to force continued existence on those who don't want to live? What is the value of death prior to society's perspective on personal values?

PAGE 168

157 ! 7. Whether the doctor has •II! sympathy for the woman's ! suffering or cares more 111! 1 about what society might ! think.

PAGE 169

158 WEBSTER 08 Mr. Webster was the owner and manager of a gas station, He wanted to hire another mechanic to help him, but good mechanics were hard to find. The only person he found who seemed to be a good mechanic was Mr. Lee, but he was Chinese. While Mr. Webster himself didn't have anything against Orientals, he was afraid to hire Mr. Lee because many of his customers didn't like Orientals. His customers might take their business elsewhere if Mr. Lee was working in the gas station. When Mr. Lee asked Mr. Webster if he could have the job, Mr. Webster said that he had already hired somebody else. But Mr. Webster really had not hired anybody, because he could not find anybody who was a good mechanic besides Mr. Lee. What should Mr. Webster have done? (Check one) Should have hired Can't decide Should not have Mr. Lee hired him IMPORTANCE : Great Much Some Little No 1. Does the owner of a business have the right to make his own business decisions or not? 2. Whether there is a law that forbids racial discrimination in hiring for jobs 3. Whether Mr. Webster is prejudiced against orientals himself or whether he means nothing personal in refusing the job. 4. Whether hiring a good mechanic or paying attention to his customers' wishes would be best for his business

PAGE 170

159 5. What individual differences ought to be relevant in deciding how society's roles are filled? 6. Whether the greedy and competitive capitalistic system ought to be completely abandoned. 7 Do a majority of people in Mr. Webster's society feel like his customers or are a majority against prejudice? 8. Whether hiring capable men like Mr. Lee would use talents that would otherwise be lost to society. 9. Would refusing the job to Mr. Lee be consistent with Mr. Webster's own moral beliefs? 10. Could Mr. Webster be so hard-hearted as to refuse the job, knowing how much it means to Mr. Lee? 11. Whether the Christian commandment to love your fellow man applies in this case. 12. If someone's in need, shouldn't he be helped regardless of what you get back from him? From the list of questions above, select the four most important : Most important. Third most important. Second most important. Fourth most important.

PAGE 171

160 NEWSPAPER 09 Fred, a senior in high school, wanted to publish a mimeographed newspaper for students so that he could express many of his opinions. He wanted to speak out against the war in Viet Nam and to speak out against some of the school's rules, like the rule forbidding boys to wear long hair. When Fred started his newspaper, he asked his principal for permission. The principal said it would be all right if before every publication Fred would turn in all his articles for the principal's approval. Fred agreed and turned in several articles for approval. The principal approved all of them and Fred published two issues of the paper in the next two weeks. But the principal had not expected that Fred's newspaper would receive so much attention. Students were so excited by the paper that they began to organize protests against the hair regulation and other school rules. Angry parents objected to Fred's opinions. They phoned the principal telling him that the newspaper was unpatriotic and should not be published. As a result of the rising excitement, the principal ordered Fred to stop publishing. He gave as a reason that Fred's activities were disruptive to the operation of the school Should the principal stop the newspaper? (Check one) Should stop it Can't decide Should not stop it IMPORTANCE : Great Much Some Little No 1. Is the principal more responsible to students or to parents? 2. Did the principal give his word that the newspaper could be published for a long time, or did he just promise to approve the newspaper one issue at a time? Would the students start protesting even more if the principal stopped the newspaper?

PAGE 172

161 When the welfare of the school is threatened, does the principal have the right to give orders to students? 5. Does the principal have the freedom of speech to say "no" in this case? If the principal stopped the newspaper would he be preventing full discussion of important problems? Whether the principal's order would make Fred lose faith in the principal Whether Fred was really loyal to his school and patriotic to his country. What effect would stopping the paper have on the student's education in critical thinking and judgments? 10 Whether Fred was in any way violating the rights of others in publishing his own opinions 11. Whether the principal should be influenced by some angry parents when it is the principal that knows best what is going on in the school 12. Whether Fred was using the newspaper to stir up hatred and discontent. From the list of guestions above, select the four most important : Most important Second most important. Third most important. Fourth most important.

PAGE 173

APPENDIX E DISTRIBUTION LETTER

PAGE 174

John Doe, Contact Person Name of Institution Anywhere, USA Dear John Doe: In response to President (INSERT NAME) letter, I am providing packets for distribution to (INSERT 50 OR 100) students from your (INSERT COLLEGE OR SEMINARY). Some institutions have chosen to have selected professors distribute the packets to a random selection of students to be filled out immediately, since it only requires thirty to forty-five minutes for completion. Using this method, the professors would collect the completed materials and return them to your office for bulk return to me. This assures an excellent return rate, and is the preferred method. On the other hand, some colleges have chosen to distribute the packets from a contact person to a random selection of students, who then return the completed packets to the same person for bulk return to me. Although this provides less assurance of return, it is also an acceptable method. You may use whichever method best suits your situation. The cover letter on each packet asks each student to complete the questionnaire, place it in the envelope provided, seal it, and return it to your office for bulk return to me in the same box I sent to you. I have provided a postage paid return mailing label for this purpose. I cannot express to you enough appreciation for what you are doing to assist me. If you have any questions feel free to contact me at (MY TELEPHONE NUMBER). Sincerely Gary G. Friend, Sr 163

PAGE 175

APPENDIX F FIRST FOLLOW-UP LETTER

PAGE 176

John Doe, Contact Person Participating College or Divinity School Anywhere, USA Dear John Doe: This letter is a follow-up to the box of research questionnaires I sent you in (MONTH OF DISPATCH). I want to ensure that the questionnaires arrived at your office for distribution, and that the completed questionnaires have not been lost in the mail during their return to me. My experience indicates that individuals who complete the questionnaires will return them within four weeks. If it has been that long since the last packet was handed out, I doubt there will be any more returns, and you may ship me the completed questionnaires that have been returned to you. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerel y Gary G. Friend, Sr 165

PAGE 177

APPENDIX G SECOND FOLLOW-UP LETTER

PAGE 178

John Doe, Contact Person Participating College or Divinity School Anywhere, USA Dear John Doe: This letter is a follow-up to the letter I sent you on (DATE OF FOLLOW-UP LETTER). I want to ensure that you have mailed the completed questionnaires and that they have not been lost in the mail during their return to me. Please feel free to contact me at (MY TELEPHONE NUMBER) if you have any questions regarding the return of the completed questionnaires. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerel y Gary G. Friend, Sr 167

PAGE 179

REFERENCES Aland, K. Black, M. Martini, C. M., Metzger, B. M., & Wikgren, A., eds (1975). The Greek new testament New York: American Bible Society. Astin, A. W. (1978). Four critical years San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Baca, M. & Stein, R. H. (1983). Ethical principles, practices, and problems in higher education Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. Barrett, L. I. (1987, May 25). Ethics: Sounds of the righteous brothers. Time p. 21. Biggs, D., & Barnett, R. (1981). Moral judgment development of college students. Research in Higher Education 14 91-102. Bok, D. (1988, May-June). Ethics, the university, & society. Harvard Magazine pp. 39-50. Bowen, E. (1987, May 25). Ethics: Looking to its roots. Time pp. 26-29. Bowen, H. R. (1980). Investment in learning San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Cahn, S. M. (1986). Saints and scamps: Ethics in academia Totowa: Rowman and Littlefield. Callahan, D., & Bok, S., eds. (1980a). The teaching of ethics in higher education Hastings-on-Hudson : The Hastings Center. 168

PAGE 180

169 Callahan, D., & Bok, S., eds (1980b). Ethics teaching in higher education New York: Plenum Press. Carbone, P. F., ed (1987). Value theory and education Malabar, FL : Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company. Chickering, A. W. (1969). Education and identity San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Colby, A., & Kohlberg, L. (1987). The measurement of moral judgment: Volume I Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Colby, A., & Kohlberg, L. (1987). The measurement of moral judgment: Volume II Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Colby, A., Kohlberg, L Gibbs, J., & Lieberman, M. (1983). A longitudinal study of moral judgment. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 48(1-2 Serial No. 200). Collins, M. J., ed. (1983). Teaching values and ethics in col leges San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Davison, M. L & Robbins S. (1978). The reliability and validity of objective indices of moral development. Applied Psychological Measurement 2.(3), 391-403. Dewey, J. (1959). Moral principle in education New York: Philosophical Library. Feldman, K. A. (1969). Change and stability of religious orientations during college. Review of Religious Education 11(1), 40-60. Fletcher, J. (1966). Situation ethics: The new morality Philadelphia: The Westminster Press. Frankena, W. K. (1970). The concept of morality. In G. Wallace & A. Walker (Eds.), The definition of morality London: Methuen.

PAGE 181

170 Geisler, N. L. (1971). Ethics: Alternatives and issues Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House. Geisler, N. L. (1973). The Christian ethic of love Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House. Gibbs, J. C, & Widaman, K. F., (1982). Social intelligence: Measuring the development of sociomoral reflection Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Hall, R. T., & Davis, J. U. (1975). Moral education in theory and practice Buffalo: Prometheus Books. Harding, C. G., ed (1985). Moral dilemmas Chicago: Precedent Publishing, Inc. Hook, S., Kurtz, P., & M. Todorovich, M., eds (1977). The ethics of teaching and scientific research Buffalo: Pometheus Books. Jersild, P. T., & Johnson, D. A., eds. (1976). Moral issues and Christian response New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Khalili, H., & Hood, H. B. (1983). A longitudinal study of change in conceptual level in college. Journal of College Student Personnel 24 389-395. Kimbrough, R. B. (1985). Ethics: A course of study for educational leaders Arlington: The American Association of School Administrators. Kitchner, K., King, P., Davison, M., Parker, C. & Wood, P. (1984). A longitudinal study of moral and ego development in young adults. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 13 197-211.

PAGE 182

171 Koepp, S. (1987, May 25). Having it all, then throwing it all away. Time pp. 22-23. Kohlberg, L. (1967). Moral and religious education and the public schools: A developmental view. In T. Sizer (Ed.), Religion and public education Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Kohlberg, L. (1981). The philosophy of moral development: Moral stages and the idea of justice, vol I San Francisco: Harper and Row. Kohlberg, L. (1983). Moral stages: A current formulation and a response to critics New York: Karger. Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development: The nature and validity of moral stages, vol II San Francisco: Harper and Row. Lawrence, J. A. (1980). Moral judgment intervention studies using the defining issues test. Journal of Moral Education 9_, 14-29. Lee, J. M. (1980). Christian religious education and moral development. In B. Munsey (Ed.), Moral development, moral education, and Kohlberg. Basic issues in philosophy, psychology, religion, and education Birmingham, AL : Religious Education Press. Leming, J. S. (1981). Curricular effectiveness in moral/ values education: A review of research. Journal of Moral Education 10, 147-164. Lockwood, A. (1978). The effects of values clarification and moral development curricula on school-age subjects: A critical review of recent research. Review of Educational Research 48 325-364. McGeorge, C. (1976). Some correlates of principled moral thinking in young adults. Journal of Moral Education 5_, 265-273.

PAGE 183

172 Menkowski M. & Strait, M. (1983). A longitudinal study of student change in cognitive development and generic abilities in an outcome-centered liberal arts curriculum. Final Report to the National Institute of Education (Report No. 6). Milwaukee, WS : Alverno College, Office of Research and Evaluation. Moore, G. E. (1903). Principia ethica Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Munsey, B., ed (1980). Moral development, moral education, and Kohlberq Birmingham, AL : Religious Education Press. Navia, L. E., & Kelly, E., eds (1980). Ethics and the search for values Buffalo: Prometheus Books. Nisan, M. & Kohlberg, L. (1982). Universality and crosscultural variation in moral development: A longitudinal and cross-sectional study in Turkey. Child Development 53, 865-876. Nucci L. (1981). Conceptions of personal issues: A domain distinct from moral or social concepts. Child Development 52 114-121. Ohles, J. F., & Ohles, S. M. (1986a). The Greenwood encyclopedia of American institutions: Private colleges and universities New York: Greenwood Press. Ohles, J. F. & Ohles, S. M. (1986b). The Greenwood encyclopedia of American institutions: Public colleges and universities New York: Greenwood Press. Payne, S. L., & Charnov, B. H., eds. (1987). Ethical dilemmas for academic professionals Springfield: Charles C Thomas Piaget, J. (1965). The moral judgment of the child (M. Gabain, Trans.). New York: The Free Press. (Original work published 1932)

PAGE 184

173 Plato. (1937). The works of Plato (B. Jowett, Trans.). New York: Tudor Publishing Company. (Original works published c.350) Rest, J. R. (1979). Development in judging moral issues Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Rest, J. R. (1980). Developmental psychology and value education. In B. M. Mapel (Ed.), Kohlberg and moral education: Basic issues in philosophy, psychology, religion, and education Birmingham, AL : Religious Education Press. Rest, J. R. (1986a). PIT manual : Manual for the Defining Issues Test (3rd ed ) Minneapolis: Center for the Study of Ethical Development. Rest, J. R. (1986b). Moral development: advances in research and theory New York: Praeger Publishers. Rest, J. R. Cooper, D., Coder, R., Masanz J., & Anderson, D. (1974). Judging the important issues in moral dilemmas--an objective test of development. Developmental Psychology 10(4), 491-501. Rest, J. R, Davison, M. L., & Robbins S. (1978). Age trends in judging moral issues: A review of crosssectional, longitudinal, and sequential studies of the Defining Issues Test. Child Development 49 263-279. Riahinejad, A. R., & Hood, A. B. (1984). The development of interpersonal relationships in college. Journal of College Student Personnel 25 498-502. Robbins, S. E., Swanson, D. B., & Thoma S. J. (1976). Scoring Program for the PIT [Computer Program]. Minneapolis, MI: Center for the study of Ethical Development Rosen, B., & Caplan, A. L. (1980). Ethics in the undergraduate curriculum Hastings-on-Hudson : The Hastings Center.

PAGE 185

174 Rudolph, F. (1962). The American college and university: A history New York: Vintage Books. Rudolph, F. (1977). Curriculum: a history of the American undergraduate course of study since 1636 San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1977. SAS Institute Inc. (1982). SAS user's guide: Statistics 1982 edition Cary, NC : SAS Institute Inc. SAS Institute Inc. (1983). SAS introductory guide: Revised edition Cary, NC : SAS Institute Inc. SAS Institute Inc. (1985). Statistical Analysis System [Computer program]. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc. Schlaefli, A., Rest, J. R., & Thoma S. J. (1985). Does moral education improve moral judgment? A meta-analysis of intervention studies using the Defining Issues Test. Review of Educational Research 5_5(3), 319-352. Schomberg. S. F. (1978). Moral judgment development and freshmen year experiences (Doctoral dissertation. University of Minnesota, 1978). Dissertation Abstracts International 39 3482A. (University Microfilms No. 7823960) Shapiro, W. (1987, May 25). Ethics: What's wrong. Time pp. 14-17. Shaver, D. G. (1984). A longitudinal investigation of the moral development of selected students at a conservative religious college (Doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, 1984). Dissertation Abstracts International 45 2778A. Shaver, D. G. (1985). A longitudinal study of moral development at a conservative religious liberal arts college. Journal of College Student Personnel 26 400-404.

PAGE 186

175 Shaver, D. G. (1987). Moral development of students attending a Christian, Liberal Arts College and a Bible College. Journal of College Student Personnel 28 211-218. Simmons, P. D. ed. (1980). Issues in Christian ethics Nashville: Broadman Press. Snaith, N. H., ed. (1978). The Hebrew old testament London: The British and Foreign Bible Society. Snarey, J. R., Reimer, J., & Kohlberg, L. (1985). The development of social-moral reasoning among kibbutz adolescents: A longitudinal cross-cultural study. Developmental Psychology 20.(1), 3-17. Stengel, R. (1987, May 25). Morality among the supplysiders. Time pp. 18-20. Strike, K. A., Haller, E. J., & Soltis, J. F. (1988). The Ethics of School Administration New York: Teachers College Press. Strike, K. A., & Soltis, J. F. (1985). The Ethics of Teaching New York: Teachers College Press. Turiel E. (1966). An experimental test of the sequentiality of developmental stages in the child's moral judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1(6), 611-618. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1989). Statistical Abstract of the United States 1989 (109th Edition). Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office. University of Minnesota Center for the Study of Ethical Development. (1986). PIT manual: Manual for the Defining Issues Test Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Wahrman, I. S. (1981). The relationship of dogmatism, religious affiliation and moral judgment development. Journal of Psychology 108 151-154.

PAGE 187

176 Walker, L. J. (1985). Sex differences in the development of moral reasoning: A critical review. Child Development 55 677-691. Whiteley, J. (1982). Character development in college students Schenectady, NY: Character Education Press. Wolf, R. J. (1980). A study of the relationship between religious education, religious experience, maturity and moral development (Doctoral dissertation. New York University, 1979). Dissertation Abstracts International 406219A-6220A.

PAGE 188

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Gary Gene Friend was born in Cumberland, Maryland, the son of Weston Webster and Virginia Eloise Friend of Swanton, Maryland. After graduation from Southern High School in Oakland, Maryland, he completed an Associate in Arts degree at Potomac State College in Keyser, West Virginia, concentrating his study in English and world history. He then completed a Bachelor of Arts degree at the University of West Virginia in Morgantown, West Virginia, concentrating his study in world history and political science Upon graduation from the university, he began his service as a U.S. Army commissioned officer in the 101st Airborne Division. He completed Airborne and Ranger training, married Jacquelyn Dawn Warnick, and later served as an Infantry Platoon Leader and Air Operations Officer with the 25th Infantry Division in Viet Nam. When he returned from the war, he was assigned to the U.S. Army Adjutant General's Office in Washington, D.C. After 177

PAGE 189

178 leaving that office he completed a Master of Business Administration degree at George Washington University, in Washington, D.C. concentrating his study in business management and data processing. Following his graduation from that university, he served as the Director of Customer Support in the Information Systems Office of the U.S. Army Surgeon General's Office in Washington, D.C; as the Deputy Director of the Data Systems Directorate at the National Cancer Center and Fort Detrick in Frederick, Maryland; and as the Director of Management Information Systems at Fitzsimons Medical Center in Denver, Colorado. He resigned from the military to complete a Master of Divinity degree at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky, concentrating his study in counseling psychology, theology, and world religions. He then returned to active duty in the U.S. Army, where he served as the Chief Administrative Officer of a U.S. Army Hospital in Louisville, Kentucky, and as the Executive Officer of a U.S. Army Hospital in Baltimore, Maryland. He retired from the U.S. Army after 20 years of active military service to complete a Doctor of Philosophy degree at the

PAGE 190

179 University of Florida in Gainesville, Florida, concentrating his study in higher education administration, university leadership, and ethics.

PAGE 191

I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. James L. Wattenbargey, Chairman distinguished Service Professor of Educational Leadership I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Jg-L^ ^ (Ia ^L*~(U-, Jpian L. Curcio Assistant Professor of Educational Leadership I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ^ —>/<• r (it/ J James W. Hensel Professor of Educational Leadership I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Michael D. Miller Assistant Professor of Foundations of Education

PAGE 192

This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the College of Education and to the Graduate School and was accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. May, 1991 Dean, College of Education Dean, Graduate School

PAGE 193

I .'UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 3 1 262 08285 356 4