Ethical Decision-Making Among Undergraduates at a Jesuit
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING AMONG UNDERGRADUATES AT A JESUIT UNIVERSITY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF FIRST YEAR STUDENTS AND GRADUATING SENIORS Molly Shannon Dugan Bachelor of Arts in History and Theology, University of San Francisco, 2006 Master of Education in Student Development Administration, Seattle University, 2008 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty under the supervision of Gail F. Latta, Ph.D. in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education in Leadership Studies Xavier University Cincinnati, OH October 2018 ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING AT A JESUIT UNIVERSITY Molly Dugan, 2018 ii ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING AT A JESUIT UNIVERSITY ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING AMONG UNDERGRADUATES AT A JESUIT UNIVERSITY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF FIRST YEAR STUDENTS AND GRADUATING SENIORS Molly Shannon Dugan Dissertation Advisor: Gail F. Latta, Ph.D. Abstract The purpose of this study was to explore the influence of institutional mission on the ways in which undergraduate college students make ethical decisions by comparing decisions made by unmatriculated first year students and graduating seniors. Analysis focused on whether unmatriculated first year students and graduating seniors employed different ethical decision-making philosophies, and whether the Jesuit identity of the study institution was reflected in the ethical decision-making of these students. The study sought to identify the approach to ethical decision-making employed by students at a Jesuit institution of higher education, determine whether first year and senior students differed in their approach, and explore the extent to which Jesuit identity was reflected in their rationales. The study used a framework of six ethical principles: utilitarianism, categorical imperative, justice as fairness, pragmatism, altruism, and virtue ethics; and six Jesuit values: reflection, discernment, solidarity and kinship, service rooted in justice and love, Cura Personalis, and Magis. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected to adress the four research questions guiding the study. Qualitative data was analyzed through theoretical coding and quantitative data was analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA. Results from both analyses were first interpreted separately, then compared to better understand the influence of institutional mission on ethical decision-making. These iii ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING AT A JESUIT UNIVERSITY analyses revealed that there was some variation in how ethical principles and Jesuit values were applied by both study populations, but not much systematic differentiation between first year students and seniors in their ethical decision making, or in the Jesuit values reflected in their decisions. Limitations and opportunities for further research aimed at clarifying the results of this exploratory study, as well as implications for student affairs professionals in the higher education community are discussed. Overall, the evidence of minimal distinctions between first year and senior level students’ ethical decision making and application of Jesuit values resulting from this study suggest there is a need to better understand the factors that contribute to the ethical and values-based development of college students. Replicating this study with a larger sample could help determine whether in fact there is room for growth in providing such developmental opportunities to undergraduates throughout their academic tenure. iv ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING AT A JESUIT UNIVERSITY Acknowledgements The completion of this dissertation marks the end of an educational journey supported by so many, to whom I owe a debt of gratitude. To start, my advisor, Dr. Gail Latta. I distinctly remember the first time we met in your office in Hailstones, discussing the Leadership Studies program, me unsure of what I was doing or where I was going with my career, and you ending the conversation by declaring I had found my next steps. Fast forward almost four years from that very first conversation and I am forever grateful for your endless support, mentorship, and insight, not to mention the seemingly endless editing, hours of data analysis, and willingness to answer questions or discuss the process every step of the way. I am thankful for the support of my committee, Professor Paul Fiorelli, and Dr. Dave Johnson. Paul, thank you for sparking my interest in ethics. Dave, thank you for your unending support, personally, professionally, and academically. I also must thank my classmates in the Leadership Studies program. This journey wouldn’t have been the same without all of you. It’s been quite the ride! To everyone who has been on the “Project Dr. Molly” cheerleading team…thank you thank you thank you. You will never know how much your continuous support and encouragement has meant to me over the past several years. Whether it was a simple “you can do it” text message, a glass of wine, a bowl of ice cream, a surprise box in the mail (thanks, Amy!), going for a walk or run, or a high five or hug in the hallway, you are the ones who pushed me through! In particular, I must thank Laura Adkins, Amy Reed, Amy Gamble, Rhonda Mingo, Missy Burgess, Abby King-Kaiser, Kelly Carr, the CMT Girls Gang, the Prosecco Girls, the Saturday breakfast crew, Church-ish, and, last, but not v ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING AT A JESUIT UNIVERSITY least, Mary Ballou, who will always be my Xavier person. To my colleagues in Student Involvement and Student Affairs at Xavier, thank you for your flexibility, understanding, and support throughout this journey. Particularly, to Dr. Leah Busam, a huge thank you for allowing me the space to complete this program and this dissertation. Your constant support throughout this process has been appreciated beyond words. To the students I have the privilege of working with every day, past and present…thank you for reminding me why I do this work. You inspire me always, even on the most frustrating of days. Finally, to my family…your faith in me and my abilities has pushed me through. Aurora and Dakota, you motivate me to be better and do better and being your Aunt is my favorite job! Mom and Dad, thanks for the laughs, the words of encouragement, the advice, and letting me call and scream once in a while. Onward and upward! vi ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING AT A JESUIT UNIVERSITY Table of Contents Chapter 1. Overview of the Study A. Research Topic and Background……………………………………………...1 B. Statement of the Problem……………………………………………………...3 C. Purpose of the Study…………………………………………………………..4 D. Conceptual Framework………………………………………………………..4 1. Framework for Ethical Decision-making……………………………...5 2. Framework for Jesuit Values………………………………………….7 E. Research Questions……………………………………………………………9 F. Methodology…………………………………………………………………..9 G. Definition of Terminology…………………………………………………...15 H. Assumptions…………………………………………………………………18 I. Limitations…………………………………………………………………...19 J. Delimitations…………………………………………………………………19 K. Significance of the Study…………………………………………………….20 L. Organization of the Study……………………………………………………22 Chapter 2. Literature Review A. Ethical Decision-Making…………………………………………………….23 1. An Overview and Definitions of Ethical Decision-Making…………23 2. Ethical Decision-Making Models……………………………………25 a. Four-Component Model……………………………………...26 b. Issue Contingent Model……………………………………...27 c. Person-Situation Interactionist Model……………………….29 3. Influencing Factors in Ethical Decision-Making…………………….30 a. Gender………………………………………………………..31 b. Age…………………………………………………………...32 c. Academic Major……………………………………………...33 d. Religion………………………………………………………34 e. College Ethics Courses………………………………………35 4. Use of Ethical Ideologies in Ethical Decision-Making Literature…...37 B. Ethical Perspectives as a Conceptual Framework…………………………...40 1. Utilitarianism: The Greatest Good for the Greatest Number………...40 2. Kant’s Categorical Imperative: Do What’s Right No Matter the Cost……………………………………………………….42 3. John Rawls’ Justice as Fairness: Equal Rights and Opportunities for All…....................................................................................................45 4. Pragmatism: A Focus on the Process of Moral Inquiry……………………..................................................................47 5. Altruism: Doing What Benefits Others………………………………48 6. Virtue Ethics: Goodness Through Actions…………………………..49 C. Jesuit Identity of Jesuit Colleges and Universities…………………………..49 1. Mission and Values at the Study Institution…………………………55 D. Impact of Student Involvement on College Students………………………..61 E. College’s Impact on Ethical Development…………………………………..64 vii ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING AT A JESUIT UNIVERSITY Chapter 3. Methodology A. Introduction…………………………………………………………………..70 B. Research Questions…………………………………………………………..70 C. Research Design……………………………………………………………...70 D. Instrumentation and Data Collection………………………………………...75 E. Population……………………………………………………………………78 F. Informed Consent…………………………………………………………….82 G. Data Analysis………………………………………………………………...84 Chapter 4. Data Analysis A. Introduction…………………………………………………………………..86 B. Research Questions…………………………………………………………..86 C. Characteristics of the Sample………………………………………………...87 1. Individual Participant Demographic Characteristics………………...88 D. Qualitative Analysis……………….………………………………………....91 1. Framework for Coding Ethical Perspectives………………………...92 2. Framework for Coding Jesuit Values………………………………..94 3. Coding Procedure…………………………………………………….96 i. Comparison of Internal and External Coding of Qualitative Data…………………………………………………………..98 1. Comparison of Internal and External