Developmental education and teaching processes: An exploration of ethical dilemmas

Developmental education programs are designed to aid underprepared students to undertake college level courses. However, the assistance offered by developmental education programs includes remedial classes and personal development (Carriuolo, 1994; Higbee, 1993). Developmental education is an integral part of higher education, since in a survey of 464 two-year and four-year colleges, about one-tenth of college freshmen lacked proficiency in college level English and over one-fourth were deficient in mathematics skills (Gose, 1998). The academic performance of students in developmental education programs is related to the caring attitude of the instructor, as well as, the type and frequency of student/teacher interaction. (Austin, 1977; Beal & Noel, 1980; Sedlacek, 1987; Tinto, 1993).;The literature recognizes that the ethical issues in higher education has been ignored for a long time (Scriven, 1982; Markie, 1994), and there are very few empirical studies toward higher education ethics (Counelis, 1993). Furthermore, most teachers start their career with little knowledge of the ethical dilemmas that are encountered in the classroom (Nash, 1991).;The purpose of the study was to discover the type and frequency of problems faced by teachers of developmental education classes in the process of teaching that are recognized as ethical dilemmas. In addition, the study investigated the relationship between ethical dilemmas and various demographic data.;A survey instrument was developed that consisted of both closed and open-ended questions. The questionnaires were mailed to 214 instructors of developmental education classes in four southern New Jersey community colleges. There was a 40.2% response rate. The responses to open-ended questions were analyzed and chi-square statistic was performed to determine relationships between demographic data and ethical dilemma categories.;The results indicated that the ethical dilemma categories were: (1) academic fraud, (2) applying established rules, (3) awarding grades for effort, (4) student with disabilities, (5) student discourse. In addition, 26.8% of respondents reported that they have not experienced any dilemma. Furthermore, 67% of participants reported having had no training to recognize or resolve ethical dilemmas. There was a significant relationship between gender and ethical categories. However, the study is limited by the sample size.