Earticle

The argument on the related departments of Moral-Ethics Education can be classified into two categories depending on whether they are good curriculum and teacher development model. So the purpose of this article is to make a good curriculum and teacher development model for the good Moral-Ethics Education. And differences among related departments are also discussed. From the department of philosophy's standpoint, teaching ethical knowledge has been emphasized in Moral-Ethics Education curriculum. But teaching ethical․propositional knowledge cannot be the whole of Moral-Ethics Education. There are other aspects of education such as formation of character. Deparment of ethics education's approach deal with the problem of how to consider these aspects of education on curriculum. This approach may lessen the problem of exclusive emphasis on intelletual education. If we really want to practice good moral education in school, it is indispensable to put the viewpoint of intergrated character education into the Moral- Ethics Education curriculum. Also it is necessary for us to pursue the good moral․ethics teacher. The good teacher has a strong power developing character of children. This teacher has not only ethical knowledge but also various teaching methods and assessment techniques. If we really consider the teacher's capacity and role in Moral-Ethics Education, we need a good teacher developmet model for the special Moral-Ethics Education. To achieve this purpose, The department of philosophy's standpoint is not enough to make a teacher development model for the intergrative character. Fially, it is very important for us to make a good curriculum and teacher development model that can be learned by student. So the arguments suggested in this study can be suggested as follows. The department of philosophy does not have curriculum and teacher development model which have more appropriate content and effective teaching -learing activities.

Moral education is concerned with growing moral persons through developing their morality Moral action takes the moral point of view. The teacher needs a vision of moral man, some sense of the person as moral actor or agent. So the moral agent is neither raw intellect nor disembodied reasoning but has feelings and emotions and passions that play a great part in the moral life. But this affective component is one that many of us ignore or, at least, underestimate through moral philosophy and moral education. Especially Kolberg's model assumes that the moral life is primary the result of the development of specific, often abstract moral principals that are capable of being expressed in verbal form. The model derives from Piaget's idea of stages of mental development, and the particular principal of justice incorporated in the system is that of the philosopher Rawls, Kant, and Platon. In short, this model presents moral development as a process of abstract cognitive development, as a growth in rational competence expressed in increasing sophisticated principles of moral reasoning. However ethics of justice is subject to many drawbacks. An ethics of care may be argued in terms of alternative -ethics to overcome the limitation of ethics justice. However An ethics of justice and An ethics care should be integrate. For bridge justice between care, presents an approach to morality that stems from Carol Gilligan‘s work distinguishing a moral orientation of care from a morality of justice. In the chapter Ⅱ illustrates each orientation, and integrates care with justice. Gilligan's research on relational caring, and its applications to schooling promises crucial addition to moral discussion here, increasing interpersonal focus. The Ⅲ. integrates care with justice In final Ⅳ. suggest a valuable education program that employes elements from both the character education and developmental perspectives. Teaching methods is also understood intergratidly. Teaching methods should not be focused upon superficial ethical knowledge but be focused upon ethical issues and problems in our society. Teachers should deal with the affective, behavior domains such as moral values, attitudes and dispositions as well as the cognitive domains such as moral knowledge and judgement. Evaluation of ‘Moral Education’ should include moral knowledge, moral reasoning, moral values & attitudes, moral dispositions, and moral behavior. Various assessment techniques, such as personal observation, interviews, students essays, the student's portfolio, and performance tests should be utilized to measure the extent of student progress. And in other to facilitate students moral actions, evaluation of ‘Moral Education’ should be enlarged to service projects and social participation activities.