Running head: INDOCTRINATION AND THE TEACHING OF VALUES 1

Indoctrination and the Teaching of Values

Shelly Treleaven

ECC 513: Ethics and Law for School-based Practice

M. Ed. in Leadership

City University of Seattle in Canada

INDOCTRINATION AND THE TEACHING OF VALUES ​ 2

Introduction

What and how to teach has been a question for many years, and concerns around the

teaching of values and morals to our youth has more recently been cause for significant debate.

The Department of Education Ministerial Order (2013) has indicated that our students are to be

taught to be “ethical citizens.’ The question of who determines what is ethical and valued is of

great concern to many parents and teachers. Personal values and perspectives can influence a

teacher on how they instruct while parents want the familial values to be supported. These

concerns can create distrust in curriculum and the methods employed for instruction.

Autonomy

Autonomy is the ability to think and reason independently of others. People who are

autonomous are not controlled by others and are able to explain and reason for themselves.

Children develop autonomy gradually over the course of their development. Merry (2005) stated

that autonomy “implies the capacity to appreciate the reasons upon which one chooses to act.”

The fact that young students may not be able to think critically or independently gives rise to

concern over whether they are being indoctrinated or taught.

Indoctrination

What then is indoctrination? Davies (2008) indicated that the etymological meaning of

indoctrination simply means instruction, however DiPaolo and Simpson (2015) explain that

“indoctrination unnecessarily bypasses or inhibits the development of a person’s capacity for

rational thought.” They go on to clarify that difference between educational approaches that

cultivate a student’s ability to think critically and encourage respect and thoughtful consideration
INDOCTRINATION AND THE TEACHING OF VALUES ​ 3

of ideals and those that denounce or undermine perspectives and expound only a rigid or

single-minded attitudes are where quality teaching and indoctrination differ.

Values Instruction

As part of the Alberta Program of Studies (2002) teachers are required, among numerous

other outcomes, to instruct students at a grade seven level to “examine the influences on personal

decision making for responsible sexual behaviour” (w-7.13). Even though parents are given the

opportunity to remove their child from this type of instruction, the perspective of the teacher

instructing this class has a great deal of influence on those students in this class. It is however, a

teacher’s obligation to instruct the prescribed curriculum therefore it is imperative that while

they will hold their own personal views on content that they provide instruction with the ethical

intent with which our government indicates. Methods of instruction are seldom implicitly

directed however the use of shame or guilt in moral and value education ought to avoided as it is

morally objectionable. If the teacher morally or ethically disagrees with the content of the

curriculum they are still held accountable for appropriate instruction of the materials or ideology.

Discussion

Throughout history the education system has been leveraged to indoctrinate youth. Some

historical examples include the First Nations that were separated from their families with the

intent to ‘school’ them in the Catholic European customs, German schools at the time of Hitler

with the imposing of Nazi ideology, in addition to religious separate schools. Indoctrination can

be especially dangerous and coercive due to the authority and trust that teachers and parents are

afforded (Merry, 2005). Moral education and the instilling of values are considered to be of

great importance and necessary, but attention ought to be focused on the intention of the
INDOCTRINATION AND THE TEACHING OF VALUES ​ 4

instruction. If the intent is to offer information, share perspective, support cultural norms, and

offer alternative ideology in an informative manner and allows for divergent thinking where one

is not punished for holding an alternate perspective, then this approach would not be considered

to be indoctrination. Moral or value instruction does not need to conflict with the individual’s

autonomy provided that there is a focus on critical thinking and opportunity for reflection.

Ethical Implications

Ethical decisions are made using a number of strategies and adhering to only one style is

not necessary. Feng (2012) studied a number of models for ethical decision-making and

determined that of his four part model which included moral intensity, moral recognition, moral

judgement and moral intention, the most important element for educational leaders to focus on

was moral intensity. Jones (1991) shared a model that indicated that “moral intensity is

comprised of six factors, which are as follows:

1. Magnitude of consequences - defined as the sum of harms or benefits to victims

or beneficiaries.
2. Social consensus - defined as the degree of social agreement that a proposed act is
evil or good.
3. Probability of effect - a joint function of the probability that the act in question
will actually take place and the act in question will actually cause the harm or
benefit predicted.
4. Temporal immediacy - the length of time between the present and the onset of
consequences.
5. Proximity - the feeling of nearness (social, cultural, psychological, or physical)
that the moral agent has for victims or beneficiaries of the act in question.
6. Concentration of effect - an inverse function of the number of people affected by
an act of given magnitude.” (pg. 374-378)

These six components when combined have the effect of indicating the size of the concern.

Jones implied that when these factors were taken into account that leaders responded in a more

ethical manner.
INDOCTRINATION AND THE TEACHING OF VALUES ​ 5

Conclusion

Ethics in a school setting are often prescribed by the government and the responsibility of

the teacher is to follow the curriculum. That said, the teaching values and morals in a school

setting can be tricky. Teachers must always be aware and cognizant that the manner with which

they teach is as important as the content they are delivering. Raising awareness of social

privilege, cultural differences and inequalities as well as encouraging healthy and responsible

behaviour are all a part of our moral curriculum. The intention of educators ought to be to build

upon common social values and characteristics. Any instruction leveraging guilty or shame

would not be supported and all methods of instruction ought to be varied, allowing for

autonomous thought and reflection where students are expected to think critically about the

instruction that they are receiving.

INDOCTRINATION AND THE TEACHING OF VALUES ​ 6

References

Alberta Education. (2013). Department of Education: Ministerial Order # 001/2013. Government

of Alberta. Retrieved from

http://www.education.alberta.ca/department/policy/standards/goals.aspx

Craft, J. L. (2013). A review of the empirical ethical decision-making literature:

2004–2011.​Journal of Business Ethics, 117​(2), 221-259. doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1518-9

Davies, L. (2011). Teaching without indoctrination: Implications for values education.

Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 51(​ 3), 602-606. Retrieved from

http://proxy.cityu.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.proxy.cityu.edu/docview/92

0756337?accountid=1230

Dipaolo, J., & Simpson, R. M. (2016). Indoctrination anxiety and the etiology of belief.

Synthese, 193(​ 10), 3079-3098.

doi:​http://dx.doi.org.proxy.cityu.edu/10.1007/s11229-015-0919-6

Feng, F. I. (2013). Moral intensity and school principals' ethical decision-making: An empirical

study.​ The Asia - Pacific Education Researcher, 22​(4), 531-540.

doi:​http://dx.doi.org.proxy.cityu.edu/10.1007/s40299-012-0051-z

Jones, T. (1991). Ethical Decision Making by Individuals in Organizations: An Issue-Contingent

Model. ​The Academy of Management Review,​ ​16​(2), 366-395. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/258867
INDOCTRINATION AND THE TEACHING OF VALUES ​ 7

Merry, M. S. (2005). Indoctrination, moral instruction, and nonrational beliefs: A place for

autonomy?: Indoctrination, moral instruction, and nonrational beliefs.​ Educational

Theory, 55​(4), 399-420. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.2005.00002.x-i1