ä¸‹è¼‰å ¨æ›¸ - The Chinese University of Hong Kong

Susan Gano-Phillips, Affective Learning in General Education 33
that the goal was not to teach “what” to think about ethical issues, but rather
“how” to approach the process of thinking about ethical issues and, most
importantly, “that” it is a worthwhile endeavor to think deeply about the ethical
issues that we routinely confront. The student affective learning outcome that
we agreed upon after much debate and discussion was that the “Students
will be able to examine relationships between codes of ethics and individual
ethical behavior,” and was written at the second level, “Responding,” in the
taxonomy of Krathwohl et al. (1964).
Teaching and Learning Activities (TLAs)
We agreed upon a theory of ethical development (Rest, Bebeau, &
Volker’s four-stage model, 1986) as the organizing framework for the course.
To give the students opportunities to consider individual ethical behavior in
light of the theory, we decided to host a series of public symposia (for faculty,
students, staff, and our local community) on the topic of ethics in everyday
life (supported by a small grant). Each symposium featured a keynote speaker
as well as panelists who spoke on the following subjects: the Ethical Food
Movement, Ethical Dilemmas in Business Practice, Poverty and the Ethics of
Social Service Delivery, and Ethical Challenges of 21 st Century Healthcare.
Each symposium was preceded by a luncheon to encourage discussion among
the diverse participants.
The students were expected to consider and apply a particular stage of the
ethical development theory to their analyses of the symposia events. Further,
they were asked to take increasingly active roles at each symposium across
the semester. By the final symposium, during the luncheon that preceded
the symposium the students were facilitating small group discussions on