While my research on Moral Complexity emerged as potential innovation for game development, its byproduct is its use for didactic purposes. Understanding Moral Complexity in games and their relation to players’ Moral Competence helps make educational use of this very relation. The idea is to use dilemmas from games (the overall Moral Complexity of the game is not so important compared to the distinct Moral Complexity of the specific game scene evoking a moral dilemma) as a medium to foster Moral Competence through discussion.
A certified method doing this already but without games is the Konstanz Method of Dilemma Discussion (KMDD) by Georg Lind. Lind based this method on Blatt’s and Kohlberg’s idea to promote moral (judgment) competence in schools (Lind 2019: 96). This method would moderate streamlined discussions with school classes on various dilemmas. However, Kohlberg dropped the method as he believed that moral education is futile as our moral thinking progresses naturally with age.
Lind profoundly disagreed with that perception and developed his own method based on Kohlberg’s work.
“I developed the KMDD to promote the moral competence of people that is to help them to be as good as they themselves want to be. In other words, it should help to promote the ability to solve problems and conflicts based on universal moral principles through thought and discussion, rather than by force, fraud, and the exercise of power.” (Lind 2019: 98)
By providing well planned workshop-like sessions (with focus on pupils: age 10-18), the central goal of KMDD is to foster and advance moral competence in…
- making one sensitive toward moral feelings and allowing one to articulate these.
- considering situations more objectively
- ordering individual opposing moral principles according to the situation
- finding compromises to resolve conflicts between one’s moral principles
- strengthening confidence to communicate own moral resolutions against opposing ones
- increasing efficiency in making moral decisions under pressure
- tolerating and valuing different perspectives and thoughts on moral conflicts
(Lind 2019: 98-99)
However, to enable these learning effects, the KMDD must follow certain principles, which can be summarised as (1) an optimal learning climate, which consist of a framework consisting of rules that are respected by all participants (Lind 2019: 99); (2) triggering discussion through semi-real dilemma stories to enable sufficient engagement without exceeding a degree of emotionality (Lind 2019: 99); (3) Alternating phases of support and challenge through minimal intervention as moderator to keep level of attention of participants (Lind 2019: 99); (4) Self-moderation of the discussion as it is crucial to let the participants remain autonomous in how they contribute to the discussion (Lind 2019: 100); and (5) Factual orientation versus personal orientation to forward objective moral reasoning (as much as possible).
These principles function as a framework for 90 minutes sessions with school classes or adult groups of at least 15 participants. A story is presented, followed by a brief period of individual reflection. Further, a concise first discussion is opened to assess the detection of the dilemma by the participants. Then the participants are asked to join in little groups (2-3 persons) to prepare for a plenary discussion. The beginning and end of the session are framed by pre and post-assessments of Moral Competence scores of the participants. (Lind 2019: 102)
Sessions should be held twice a year. However, the success of the KMDD depends on the didactic qualities of the teacher. Official KMDD training is needed to be certified.
Lind justifies the need for this method in schools to increase the ability to deliberate peaceful solutions to moral conflicts, paving the way for a better co-existence. While the method demands serious funding to educate teachers and conduct the session, he is adamant that this investment will be even profitable as it will decrease “costs caused by violence, fraud, corruption and the exercise of power” (Lind 2019: 110).
I argue, however, why not supplement the written semi-fictional dilemmas with scenes from videogames? Would it not be even more effective if the subject of a KMDD session would be a dilemma that students have experienced virtually? I think it makes much sense to adapt and modify Lind’s KMDD to suit future classrooms in terms of digitisation. Games such as Papers Please, This War of Mine or We. The Revolution seems perfect to engage high school students while strengthening their moral competence at the same time. I will explore these possibilities in my next post.
References:
Lind, G. (2019). How to teach moral competence. Berlin: Logos Verlag.