Why Teaching Kids Basic Ethics Isn’t Enough: How to Help Them Solve Real Ethical Problems
Last October, I was supervising fifth grade recess on a day so hot the asphalt stuck to the soles of my sneakers, when a group of kids clustered around me, arguing. Javi, cross-armed and red in the face, tugged me over to where Lila stood clutching her crinkled lunch box. “Ms. Henderson, tell her it’s wrong not to share,” he said. “Mia forgot her lunch, and Lila has three extra chocolate chip cookies. Everyone knows you share when someone’s hungry.”
Lila mumbled that the extra cookies were for her little sister, who goes to aftercare and can’t have any of the served snacks because of a peanut allergy, and her family can’t afford to buy separate snacks that week. I’d been teaching basic ethics to this class all semester: we’d made posters that say “Share With Others,” “Don’t Call Names,” “Tell The Truth” that hung by the classroom door. My first instinct was to smooth it over: “Javi, Lila packed those for her sister, that’s her right. Let’s ask someone else for snack.” Javi stomped off muttering that it was unfair, Lila stayed hunched over her lunch box for the rest of recess, and I walked back inside thinking that something was off.
I started counting how many times this sort of moment happens every week. Last month, a kid found an iPhone in the bathroom and didn’t turn it in. When I asked him why, he said the last time he turned in a found wallet, the owner accused him of stealing the twenty dollars that was in it. Basic rule says return found property, but that rule doesn’t account for the last time you got burned for following it. A few weeks before that, a group of girls excluded a new student from their birthday party, and when I called them out on it, they said she’d been spreading rumors about their friend for a month. Excluding people is wrong, but standing up for your friend feels right. We teach kids a list of basic ethical rules, but we never teach them what to do when two right things clash, or when the rule doesn’t fit the messy reality of being a person.
After that recess incident, I started changing how I handle these moments. I don’t jump to the rule book anymore. I carve out 10 minutes once a week to walk through whatever small ethical conflicts popped up that week, and when something blows up during the day, I pause instead of solving it right away. The first thing I do is ask everyone involved to name what they care about, not what the other person did wrong. In the cookie incident, I pulled Javi and Lila aside after recess and did just that. Javi didn’t just say Lila was wrong; he said Mia had shared her last snack with him the week before when he forgot his, so he owed her, and it felt wrong to let her go hungry. Lila said she’d promised her sister those cookies, and if she gave them away, her sister would have nothing to eat after school, and that felt wrong to her. Suddenly, it wasn’t a good person vs. bad person situation—it was two people both trying to do the right thing.
The second thing I do is not give them the answer. I ask them to come up with at least two possible solutions that work for both people. That day, Javi suggested he give Mia half his granola bar, so Lila could keep all her cookies. Lila suggested she give one cookie to Mia and keep two for her sister. They picked the first option, and both walked away fine, no one feeling cheated or wronged. That’s way better than me imposing a solution that left one of them upset.
This works at home too; my sister, who has a 10-year-old, tried it after I told her about it. Her son wanted to quit the soccer team he’d committed to halfway through the season, and her first instinct was to fall back on the default rule: “you made a promise, you have to stick it out.” But when she asked what he cared about, he said the coach yells at new players so much he has stomach aches every morning before practice. She named what she cared about: she didn’t want him to think it’s okay to quit every time something is hard, and the team would be short a player if he left. They brainstormed three solutions together: he stays through the current round of games, helps the coach find a replacement sub, then quits; he talks to the coach about how he feels and stays if things change; he quits right away and the coach can deal with it. They picked the first option, and no one ended up resenting anyone.
The steps are so simple, you don’t need any special training or fancy materials. When a conflict comes up, pause before you reach for the rule. Ask everyone to say what they need, not just who is wrong. Ask for two or three solutions instead of giving one. If the first solution doesn’t work, try another. It doesn’t take much extra time, once you get used to it.
I still mess up sometimes. Two weeks ago, I caught a kid copying homework, and I almost wrote him up for cheating before I remembered to pause. He told me he’s been staying with his grandma who works two night shifts, so she can’t help him with homework, and he was scared he’d fail the unit and get held back. We didn’t get a perfect solution—he still had to redo the homework after class—but we set up a weekly after-school help slot, and he didn’t get a failing mark that would have gone on his record.
I can’t say this is going to turn every kid into a model citizen, or that every conflict gets solved neatly. Some days we run out of time, some days no solution makes everyone happy. But what I’ve seen over the last few months is that my students don’t immediately jump to calling someone bad when they break a basic rule anymore. They don’t freeze when there’s no clear right answer. They start talking, and trying, and that’s more than most of us got when we were kids learning ethics. It’s messy, but it’s real, and that’s what matters.
Please indicate: Thinking In Educating » Why Teaching Kids Basic Ethics Isn’t Enough: How to Help Them Solve Real Ethical Problems