CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction Moral Education Has

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction Moral education has always been a perennial aim of education. The function of schools, it was believed, was not only to make people smart but also to make them good. However, with industrialization, the moral aim of education receded to the background as the demands of capitalist markets centered mainly around the provision of skilled manpower, culturally ready to integrate into labour markets. The return of moral education to the limelight is attributable to the fact that modern societies increasingly have to deal with disturbing trends both within schools, and in the wider society. Mounting discipline problems culminating in violent outbursts, alarming rates of teenage pregnancy and drug abuse are phenomena often explained by the breakdown of the family or are generally situated in the aftermath of industrialization. Many have also located the dysfunction of the school as one contributing to the degeneration of social mores. Prime among these dysfunctions is the fact that our schools are not adequately providing for one important aspect of child and adolescent development, that is, moral education. Those who believe that we need to provide for some form of moral education in our curriculum are not a homogeneous group. Amongst them we find, at one extreme, the traditionalist who argues that we should return to the good old ways of teaching values through religious literature or some other relevant material of universal significance. At the other extreme, some argue that, rather than teach values, adults have to model 1 desirable behaviour and the school’s hidden curriculum must be used to help children become morally autonomous adults. In Mauritius, moral education has, so far, been the concern of confessional schools (those with religious denominations). However, it is undeniable that the interethnic conflicts of February 1999 (Matadeen Report:1999) acted as a catalyst in propelling character education into the limelight by emphasising the need of some form of moral education, an indispensable ingredient, for peaceful cohabitation in a multicultural society. Our renewed interest in character education forms part of a wider educational and political agenda aimed, not only, at revamping our system of education but also at giving a new impulse to a quasi non-existent social policy. The goodwill of the government, no doubt fuelled by the political urgency of a dormant social crisis, has manifested itself through the inclusion of Living Values Programmes in the school curriculum and in many of the teacher training programmes at the Mauritius Institute of Education. Implicit in these policies is the assumption that all the stakeholders within the school are ready and willing to assume the roles that others are carving out for them. Despite the general agreement that schools are responsible to a certain extent for character education, there seems to be a general vagueness as to what this responsibility consists of and how schools can conceive and implement such a programme formally and informally in a multicultural context. No study has so far been undertaken to investigate the perceptions of stakeholders about moral education in Mauritian secondary schools. The aim of this present study is to fill this gap by describing and developing an understanding of the perceptions of some stakeholders in secondary education about moral education in the context of Mauritius. 2 This study will provide the groundwork which may assist policy decision makers to take into account the needs and expectations of different stakeholders in relation to moral education in our schools. 1.2 OVERVIEW OF OUR GLOBAL CONTEMPORARY CONTEXT While most social theorists (Burbules and Torres 2000:5) agree that we are living in an age of rapid scientific and technological change, they also do not deny that such changes have varying impacts on different social groups within the same society and across different societies. The existing literature about post industrial and post modern societies (Beck 1995: 127- 136) and its effects on social groups and families is growing rapidly in view of the all pervasive effects of globalisation. At the economic level, changing trade patterns and world order have compelled all societies to readjust structurally. The free flow of capital and its rising value as compared to labour has meant increasing inequity across most societies with resultant outbreaks in violence and conflicts. Changes in patterns of production, distribution and consumption worldwide together with the possibilities offered by information and communication technology have meant the adoption of radically new work culture that has impacted on the family. Changing relations of production have produced in time changing philosophies and outlooks which have permeated all spheres of life - both public and private. In the public sphere, discourse came to be centered on the concept of individual merit and rights with the attendant connotations of individual freedom, which is at the basis of most democratic societies. From the agrarian societies maintained by the collectivity, the building block of post-industrial societies is the person and not the community. Such a transformation meant a radically different political agenda, more 3 sympathetic to the capitalist set up. While the neomarxists have highlighted the sinister agenda of industrialized countries in affirming the supremacy of the capitalist economic system as the only viable economic system and legitimizing the cultural dominance of the West, one cannot ignore the benefits conferred by industrialization in terms of health improvements and better life expectancy. However, as Mac Laren (1995:3) argues the benefits of progress are confined to a few and the cost of such progress is borne by too many. Economic compulsions represent the driving force of modern societies, to which everything else becomes subservient. Mac Laren (1995:1) opens the discussion in his book “Critical Pedagogy and Predatory Culture” with this description of postmodern societies: The prevailing referents around which the notion of public citizenry is currently constructed have been steered in the ominous direction of the social logic of production and consumption. Maintaining high rates of economic growth is the priority of all industrialized countries - a priority which looks formidable since Pareto efficiency has already been reached making it difficult to push productivity beyond the present levels. As a result people generally have to work harder to keep up with the demands of the workplace. Increasing dissatisfaction with the present economic set up, disillusionment caused by the crumbling of the welfare state, the disintegration of the family and mounting social unrest in many parts of the world, disruptions in climatic conditions and a general deterioration of the environment, have caused many people to question this very model of development and 4 governance. The democratic ideal, with its emphasis on individual- “centredness”, is frequently scrutinized critically and reformulated to suit the changes and requirements of contemporary societies. There tends to be general agreement among economists themselves, that, together with economic indicators, we need to consider those related to the well being of people and the quality of life. Many political leaders have crafted their campaign around this growing disillusionment and are using slogans that use catch words like family values and democratic values. The dismal picture projected by the postmodern societies is one where people and their governments are trying to wrestle with often mutually exclusive ends. The conflicts arise at three different levels: (i) the need to reconcile dwindling resources with rising expectations (ii) the need to have a common vision while maintaining one’s distinct identity (iii) the need to consider individual needs in the face of societal requirements. While many would tend to view these problems as one of resource management, my contention is the core of those conflicts is essentially a moral and philosophical issue related to what we think is right for society and should be done and what kind of life one should lead. But modern societies do not have the moral resources to recognize and analyse the ethical implications of those decisions. The usual approach to tackling such a variety of social problems arising out of one or more of the conflicts mentioned above, has been piecemeal and has remained within predefined economic parameters. Economic solutions are brought to bear on problems which are non economic in 5 nature. Indeed economic problems related to the use and distribution of scarce resources stem essentially from a general philosophical and moral position. Decisions are made on the basis of what people value individually and not on what the society desires. This situation has produced highly undesirable outcomes at the level of the family, community and society at large. Critics (MacLaren 1995:1-87) have identified many reasons for the failure of modern society to respond to the aspirations of people. Chief among these is the growing insensitivity of people towards the needs of others (Noddings 1995: 365), an outcome of our rapidly dehumanizing society. The issue now, however, is to identify the ways in which perspective and outlook can be influenced to embrace a more inclusive interpretation of caring, that, is caring for others. 1.3 CHANGING PERCEPTIONS OF THE ROLE OF EDUCATION AND SCHOOLS Education

Load more