Given the current educational trends, clearly aimed at performance, educators should try to highlight the importance of other more necessary dimensions in a society which is increasingly in need of values. The study of these values can be approached from different perspectives, but it is in the education field where  we must ensure the holistic development of our students, the  focus of first importance should be carried out firstly in the moral development and in  the cognitive one in a second instance.

            According to Palomo González (1989), the root of moral judgment is the "role-taking" or ability to see things from the perspective of another person. This is  considered by Kolhberb (1982), along with the cognitive development, as a necessary condition for moral development and as an intermediary between cognitive abilities and the level reached in this moral development.

            In a recent research on moral development, Bartels and Pizarro (2011) have found that the utilitarian responses to various moral dilemmas correlate with high scores on tests that measure psychopathy, Machiavellianism and meaninglessness life. As far as these authors are concerned, it can be considered that those who score low on moral development, have a set of prototypical unethical psychological characteristics.

            Moreover, there are numerous investigations devoted to the study of the relationship between moral development and variables such as  empathy (Hoffman, 2000, 2001), religion (Glicksman, 1998; Kunzman, 2003; Ebstyne King, & Furrow, 2004; Day, 2010 ), personality (Cawley, 1998; Lapsley& Hill, 2009; Walker, LJ, &Hennig, 1997), gender (Lifton, 1985), bias (Barrett, 1996; Passini, 2013), values (Ariail, 2005; Salas-Diaz, 2009).

            In order to discern whether the moral dilemmas were still useful to develop a  moral reasoning, Linde Navas (2009) conducted a field study to examine the validity of such moral dilemmas. In this study, it can be found important issues which are worth to keep in mind when designing a questionnaire to measure the moral development.

Objectives

            Our research is aimed at studying the validity and utility of using moral dilemmas to cause cognitive dissonance and evaluate the moral development among students of educational qualifications.

So the goal is twofold, on the one hand, to investigate if the recommendations of Linde Navas (2009) on the use of moral dilemmas, based on real and recent events, arouse interest, as well as to make sure that they are presented as an useful tool in the university classroom. On the other hand, to check if the answer to these dilemmas anticipate high scores on variables related to moral development, civic education and inclusive education.

Ariail, D. L. (2005). Personal values, moral development, and their relationship: A study of Certified Public Accountants. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/ Barrett, K. A. (1996). An examination of the relationship between moral development and modern prejudice. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/ Bartels, D. M., & Pizarro D. A. (2011). The mismeasure of morals: Antisocial personality traits predict utilitarian responses to moral dilemmas. Cognition(xxx), 2-8. Campbell, D. T.,& Fiske, D. W. (1959).Convergent and discriminant validation by multitrait-multimethod matrix.Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81-105. Cawley, M. J. I. (1998). The Virtues Scale: A psychological examination of the structure of virtue and the relationships between virtue, personality, moral development, and epistemological style. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/ Day, J. M. (2010). Conscience: Does religion matter? Empirical studies of religious elements in pro-social behaviour, prejudice, empathy development, and moral decision-making. The development and structure of conscience. (pp. 49-68): Psychology Press, New York, NY. Ebstyne King, P., & Furrow, J. L. (2004). Religion as a Resource for Positive Youth Development: Religion, Social Capital, and Moral Outcomes. Developmental Psychology, 40(5), 703-713. Glicksman, S. I. (1998). The role of religion in the domain theory of moral development. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/ Hoffman, M. L. (2000). Empathy and moral development: Implications for caring and justice: Cambridge University Press, New York, NY. Hoffman, M. L. (2001). Toward a comprehensive empathy-based theory of prosocial moral development Constructive & destructive behavior: Implications for family, school, & society. (pp. 61-86): American Psychological Association, Washington, DC. Kunzman, R. (2003). Religion, Ethics and the Implications for Moral Education: A critique of Nucci's Morality and Religious Rules. Journal of Moral Education, 32(3), 251-261. Lapsley, D. K., & Hill, P. L. (2009). The development of the moral personality Personality, identity, and character: Explorations in moral psychology. (pp. 185-213): Cambridge University Press, New York, NY. Lifton, P. D. (1985). Individual differences in moral development: The relation of sex, gender, and personality to morality. Journal of Personality, 53(2), 306-334. Linde Navas, A. (2009). ¿Tienen vigencia los dilemas clásicos de Kohlberg en Educación Moral?. Un estudio de campo. Campo Abierto, 28(2), 137-149. Palomo González, A. M. (1989). Laurence Kohlberg: teoría y práctica del desarrollo moral en la escuela. RevistaInteruniversitaria de FormacióndelProfesorado, 4, 79-90. Passini, S. (2013). What do I think of others in relation to myself? Moral identity and moral inclusion in explaining prejudice. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 23(3), 261-269. Salas-Díaz, D. (2009). Review of Educacion, valores y desarrollo moral.