A Study on the Effectiveness of

Learning English Literature through

Collaborative Reasoning on the
Moral Reasoning Development of
Upper Secondary School Students in
Sabak Bernam, Selangor.
Nur Liyana Johari
GS47295
 Problem
• Moral Reasoning

p.s: we have 2 “problem” slides, go to slide 14

Problem maybe can go after all definition of terms sekali jalan (Tiqah)
 Moral Reasoning
Moral
Reasoning

Judgement: Determine Reasons for

Right vs. Wrong action action
 How is it measured? (maybe)
• A trolley is running out of control down a track.
• In its path are five people who have been tied to the
track by a mad philosopher.
• Fortunately, you flip a switch, which will lead the
trolley down a different track to safety.
• Unfortunately, there is a single person tied to the track.
• Should you flip the switch or do nothing?

No heading for this slide

Note: maybe can summarize / simplify the
story, so Lee just read the full version verbally?
Moral Reasoning - How is it measured?
My suggestion for slide 6 & 8 (Tyq)
A trolley is You can flip a
Should you flip
running out of switch, to change
the switch or do
control. track.
nothing?
(5 people) (1 person)

Answers are measured using

Kohlberg's Three Levels
and Six stages
of Moral
Reasoning
 Tiqah: Tried to simplify the
table, original is on the right >
Cont. (Lee please comment)

Kohlberg's Three Levels and Six stages of Moral Reasoning

Lev. Stages Age Range Examples
Stage 1: Avoidance • Preschool - elementary I would cheat if I knew I
conventional

of punishment • Some junior high wouldn't get caught.

Pre-

Stage 2: Exchange • Few high school students Ill let you copy mine if you
of favours do my homework.
Stage 3: Good • Few older elementary I'm not going to tell
Child children because I want her to like
Conventional

• Some junior high me.

Stage 4: Law and • Many high school You can't do that because
Order students the teacher said no.
• (S4) Doesn’t typically
appear until high school
Stage 5: Social • Rarely seen before college In this case, the rule may be
conventional

contract • (S6) Extremely rare wrong.

Post-

Stage 6: Universal You shouldn't lie because it

ethical principle violates the Golden Rule.
Tiqah: Ps: sorry cant fit the in the prev slide
 Method of collecting data? (maybe)
• Intervention
– Collaborative Reasoning

• Discussion / forum to listen to one another think

out loud as one learn to engage in reasoned
argumentation.
• Personal Experience and evidence from the
stories are used to support reason / conclusion /
decision and consider others' points of view.
 Medium
• Literature
• An embedded subject in English subject.
• Literary texts.
 Operational definition
• Effectiveness:
– Is there any increase in the students' level of moral
reasoning?

• Literature:
– Embedded English subject in school: Literary texts;
poems, novels, short stories and dramas
that contain dilemmas and moral values

• Development:
– Increase in the level of moral reasoning
 What?
• Malaysia ranks #1 in the South East Asia for
highest crime rate.
• #15 in the world (2016, Crime and Safety
Report by OSAC)

Tiqah: IDK what’s d heading but maybe can

show like the guest presenter? The map of the
world (#15) and circle SEA (#1) then Malaysia,
show the newspaper cuttings.. maybe (The Star, 2016)
 Background of Study
Malaysian National Education Philosophy

“Education in Malaysia is an on-going effort towards further developing the

potential of individuals in a holistic and integrated manner, so as to produce
individuals who are intellectually, spiritually, emotionally and physically
balanced and harmonious based on a firm belief in and devotion to God. Such
an effort is designed to produce Malaysian citizens who are knowledgeable
and competent, who possess high moral standards and who are responsible
and capable of achieving a high level of personal well-being as well as being
able to contribute to the betterment of the family, society and the nation at
large”
• Islamic Studies
• Moral Studies
• Literature (Bahasa & English)
• History
• Civic and Citizenship Education
 The Problem
• Not the subject/content but
delivery/execution
• Literature lessons
– spoon feeding & memorizing
• P.s: maybe can give title to these 3 points
– Student engagement
– Critical thinking
– Understanding
• The gap
 Research Objectives
1. To study the effectiveness of using
Collaborative Reasoning in the teaching of
English Literature on Upper Secondary school
students' moral reasoning.
2. To investigate the level of Upper Secondary
school students' moral reasoning.
 Research Questions
1. How does using Collaborative Reasoning in
the teaching of English Literature assist in the
development of Upper Secondary school
students' moral reasoning?
2. To investigate the level of Upper Secondary
school students' moral reasoning?

Notes based on guest speaker’s slides from last week

Dr wants le RQ super specific + arranged chronologically. The last one should be the most
important finding.
 Significance of Study
Teachers & Students

Show That Literature

could increase moral
reasoning with the
right approach
offers a lot and is fun

Not to underestimate the power of literature.

Notes based on guest speaker’s slides from last week (Origial diagram on right)
Sig. practical contribution of the study (not just prove a point)
- Add to body of knowledge (refer back to gap)
- Provide guideline to future use (maybe classroom instruction - Problem where lit. is spoon fed, inhibit
critical thinking etc.)
- Baseline study for future research (maybe open door to more research done in other subjects that can
dev. Moral reasoning.. Just a suggestion)
Tiqah: Maybe can focus more on moral reasoning than literature.
 Variables
• Independent variable:
– Teaching English using Collaborative Reasoning

• Dependent variable:
– Students' level of moral reasoning
 Why?
• Literature Subject in Malaysia Education
System
• Models and Approaches to Teaching Literature
• Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development
• Collaborative Reasoning
 The Gap
• Research / Studies that relate Literature with
Moral Reasoning is scarce.

Notes based on guest speaker’s slides from last week

This goes under prob statement
 How?
• Quasi-experimental study: Pre-test & Post-test
nonequivalent group design
 Who?
• Purposive sampling:
– English proficiency: Low intermediate /
intermediate
– Rural area
– Randomly pick 2 out of 7 classes
– Randomly pick 1 as controlled/treatment
– Randomly assign groups of 5-6 members
 Procedure
• Pre: Give story (Kohlberg's dilemmas)
– Go trhough story
– Understand dilemma
– Go trhough questions
– Write answers individually
– (essay/short answers)
• Intervention: (Once a wekk for 4 weeks)
– Get in groups
– Give story (Kohlberg's dilemmas) Two periods of class
– Go through story
– Understand dilemma
– Go through questions
– Collaborative Reasoning: discuss to answer/come up with decision
• Post:
– Give story (Kohlberg's dilemmas)
– Go through story
– Understand dilemma
– Go through questions
– Write answers individually
– (essay / short answers)

Tiqah: Babe, u need to summarize this T_T

 Instrumentation
Joe is a fourteen-year-old boy who wanted to go to camp very much. His father
promised him he could go if he saved up the money for it himself. So Joe worked hard
at his paper route and saved up the forty dollars it cost to go to camp, and a little
more besides. But just before camp was going to start, his father changed his mind.
Some of his friends decided to go on a special fishing trip, and Joe's father was short
of the money it would cost. So he told Joe to give him the money he had saved from
the paper route. Joe didn't want to give up going to camp, so he thinks of refusing to
give his father the money.

1. Should Joe refuse to give his father the money? Why or why not?
2. Does the father have the right to tell Joe to give him the money? Why or why
not?
3. Does giving the money have anything to do with being a good son? Why or why
not?
4. Is the fact that Joe earned the money himself important in this situation? Why or
why not?

Kohlberg's Three Levels and Six Stages of Moral Reasoning

Example
END