Ethics Instruction in U.S. Military Classrooms: Methods and Principles

Introduction

Today, the United States is prosecuting two ground wars in the Middle East, with the prospect of additional conflicts looming elsewhere on the horizon. The war on terrorism has forced the U.S. armed forces into encounters where the enemy is virtually indistinguishable from civilians, and the rules of engagement are drastically different from those that characterized many previous military engagements. In this environment, the need for ethics instruction has assumed new relevance and importance, as soldiers on the ground in Afghanistan and Iraq are constantly confronted with unfamiliar and potentially deadly situations that are beyond their control.

All professions can be said to have a need for ethical standards that serve as a guide to their members, helping them recognize appropriate actions from inappropriate ones, and this is certainly the case in the U.S. Army today. To this end, this paper provides an overview of the problem to be considered, a discussion of ethics instruction in general and classroom ethics instruction in the U.S. Army in particular, followed by a summary of the research and important findings in the conclusion.

Background and Overview

According to Bruhn, Zajac, Al-Kazemi, and Prescott (2002), "The issues surrounding professionalism and a code of ethics are part of a broader concept of what constitutes good citizenship. Good citizenship is a product of organizational culture and its psychological structure and members' interpretations of them" (p. 461). "Good citizenship, therefore, means more than going to work every day and fulfilling one's contractual obligations. Indeed, it means exhibiting characteristics of 'the good soldier syndrome' and is characterized by these attributes: altruism, helping, conscientiousness, prosocial behavior, neighborliness, sportsmanship, and civic virtue" (Bruhn et al., p. 462).

These are clearly desirable attributes, but Davis (1999) emphasizes that such ethical instruction must be conducted in a formal classroom setting or learned "on the job" because they are industry-specific. It should be noted, however, that some observers question whether teaching ethics is even possible, maintaining that it is too late to begin ethics education at the university or college level because most students arrive at higher education institutions already possessing a firm set of values that are not likely to change. Some critics suggest that ethics courses cannot be effective because values are formed early in life and "honesty" is not a course that can be taught (Sims, 2002). Likewise, Jensen (1997) reports that, "Scholars, teachers, parents, and the general citizenry are increasingly pondering whether ethics can or should be taught in schools" (p. 13).

Ethical instruction today, however, comprises much more than fundamental concepts of "honesty." As Davis advises:

"Because they are special standards, professional ethics are more than mere ordinary morality or common sense. Like other special standards (for example, law), they cannot be learned in most families, religious institutions, or primary or secondary schools. Generally, they must be taught as part of a formal professional education or learned in some less formal way (for example, by copying what others do in a workplace)." (Davis, pp. 111–112)

Although there are some distinct benefits to be gained from "learning by doing" in many aspects of a profession, Davis maintains that ethics instruction in particular is best accomplished in a formal classroom setting for the following reasons:

First, treating ethics as extracurricular suggests that problems of professional ethics are rare, not built into the day-to-day work of a profession. Second, extracurricular approaches treat professional ethics as voluntary — something good to know, but not something necessary for minimal competence in the profession.

Ethics instruction is therefore considered a necessary component for "minimal competence in a profession," and these issues are discussed further below.

Ethics Instruction

While some studies indicate that ethics is difficult or even impossible to teach, other recent research has determined that ethics courses can have a significant effect on ethical sensitivity and reasoning skills (Sims, 2002). While the "golden rule" may apply in a universal fashion, ethics instruction is typically more finely tuned to a specific culture or professional setting. Davis (1999) points out that, "Professional ethics are special (morally permissible) standards of conduct governing members of a particular profession because they are members of that profession" (p. 111).

One of the biggest problems facing ethics instructors, however, is the highly subjective nature of the concepts involved. Not only do these perceptions differ from society to society, they frequently differ from individual to individual in ways that affect an instructor's ability to deliver quality educational services. In her essay "Teaching Ethics Isn't Enough," Kienzler (2004) advises, "Human nature seems to give us a tendency to see the ethics problems in our students' choices, but we sometimes overlook the ethics problems in our own choices. When we think about ethics, we generally mean teaching ethics to students, not examining our own ethics" (p. 291). In this regard, Kienzler suggests that a certain "lead by example" quality is necessary for effective ethical instruction: "Many of us now teach ethics, but we also need to think about our own ethics. I think we do not ordinarily do this" (Kienzler, p. 292). Furthermore, the traditional concepts of the role of ethical educators in the United States are fundamentally different from those in many other countries today (Gutek, 1993).

While it is therefore difficult to conceptualize ethical instruction in completely universal terms, there are some general guidelines available to help people distinguish between ethical and non-ethical behaviors. Ashmore and Starr (1994) emphasize that, "Thinking men and women create a preexisting moral duty. That is, all those men and women who have agreed to respect a specific set of human rights have created for themselves, in the future, a pre-existing moral duty to respect those rights for all persons" (p. 164). This does not mean that such mutual respect and moral duties include acknowledging what is not there. As Cahn (1986) emphasizes, "Surely respect for our fellow human beings does not require resorting to the obvious fiction that everyone is excellent at everything" (p. 26). It does mean, however, that such moral duties are a concomitant of a given profession — and these considerations extend to the armed forces as well.

References

Ashmore, R. B. & Starr, W. C. (1994). Teaching ethics: An interdisciplinary approach. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press.

Bruhn, J. G., Zajac, G., Al-Kazemi, A. A., & Prescott, L. D., Jr. (2002). Moral positions and academic conduct: Parameters of tolerance for ethics failure. Journal of Higher Education, 73(4), 461.

Cahn, S. M. (1986). Saints and scamps: Ethics in academia. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield.

Davis, M. (1999). Ethics and the university. London: Routledge.

Gutek, G. (1993). American education in a global society. New York: Longman.

Harvey, F. J. (2005, December 27). Memorandum for principal officials of Headquarters, Department of the Army, MACOM Commanders. Washington, D.C.: Author.

Jensen, J. V. (1997). Ethical issues in the communication process. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Kienzler, D. S. (2004). Teaching ethics isn't enough: The challenge of being ethical teachers. The Journal of Business Communication, 41(3), 292.

Rosenthal, J. H. (2002, July–August). A new ethical front. Foreign Policy, 86–87.

Sims, R. R. (2002). Teaching business ethics for effective learning. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

Toner, J. H. (2003, Summer). Military or ethics. Air & Space Power Journal, 37.

Wakin, M. M. (1986). War, morality and the military profession. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Wyatt, T. C. & Gal, R. (1990). Legitimacy and commitment in the military. New York: Greenwood Press.