Teacher training for moral education / education in values is a topic discussed in the scope of Philosophy and of Education Sciences, namely in studies on curriculum and didactics, varying its orientation according to the adopted foundations, both of ethical order and referring to psychological research on moral development. 

Portuguese curriculum provides since 2017 the Citizenship and Development subject as a space for discussion of issues related to the development of personal, social, and civic competencies  According to the National Strategy for Citizenship Education (2017), “Citizenship Education is a mission of the whole school; it is proposed that the implementation of the curricular component of Citizenship and Development follows a framework of Whole-school Approach based.” (p. 6).The change of curriculum requires the need for training to which teachers did not have access. 

This communication intends to present the results of a project in the Portuguese context which aimed to explore the questions, difficulties and needs of training by teachers of Citizenship and Development of children aged between 10 and 12 years old. The training contemplates 25 hours, divided into six modules, where the themes of citizenship and moral development have been worked on, and 25 hours of implementation of the activities with their class.  

The training project was based on Rest's integrative model of moral development (1979; 1984; 1986). While named neo-kohlberguian (Rest et al, 2000), Rest model of moral development is rather different from Kohlberg approach. Faced with the question "What processes or functions must have occurred in order for an individual to perform a moral act?" (Rest, 1986, p. 3), Rest identified four components of moral development (Rest, 1979; 1986), each of which corresponds to a different psychological process, being moral behavior the result of these different processes and not just the logical or affective consequence of a single process, as follows: moral sensitivity, moral judgment, moral motivation and moral action, each of which can be studied separately. By moral sensitivity, it is meant that the person is aware of the moral dimension of the situation and so s/he’s able to interpret the situation in terms of how his/her actions will affect the welfare of others. Moral judgment is the ability to formulate possible moral courses of action and a plan of action that applies a moral standard or ideal in that specific situation. Moral motivation is the capacity to decide for one course of action by evaluating if it serves moral values. Moral action is the ability to accomplish what one has decided to do, by identifying and validly overcoming obstacles and difficulties. (Rest, 1984; 1986) Several studies have been made on moral judgement of college students and professional groups by Rest and his research group, namely using the DIT (Defining Issues Test) (Rest, 1979; 1986). Also based on this model, between 1998 and 2002, the Department of Education of the University of Minnesota (Narvaez et al., 2004) developed the community voices and character education project (CVCE), a moral education project, addressed to children from 10 to 12 years old, in collaboration with middle school teachers. 

Our collaborative project also involves researchers and teachers. It does not have in view the training and evaluation of predefined behaviors, but rather the flexible articulation with other components of the school curriculum and the development of transversal ethical competencies of the children (Narvaez et al., 2004). 

This is an exploratory investigation in order to meet the objectives outlined. The sample consisted of 10 teachers of citizenship and development who will participate in a focus group (Hennink, 2013) dependent on theoretical saturation. The study received a favorable decision from the Ethics Committee of the University of Porto. After authorization from the schools, the informed consent of the teachers was also requested. It will be built a semi-structured interview script for this purpose. Regarding the results of the focus group, they will be analyzed using the NVIVO program and subsequent content analysis. The teachers had a training with 25 hours, divided into six modules, where the themes of citizenship and moral development have been be worked on, and 25 hours of implementation of the activities with the class. The training explores citizenship and moral development, moral sensitivity, moral judgment, moral motivation, and moral action. In the last module, each teacher present a portfolio with the results of the activities done with his/her students. The evaluation of the training includes four components: presence in the training sessions under b-learning; participation in training sessions on a b-learning basis; portfolio with registration and documentation of the formative process and implementation of activities; and presentation and discussion of the portfolio.

The training program will allow for a balance between theory and practice; teacher empowerment, thereby promoting the increase of moral development skills by children and a better articulation between the school community and the wider community. At the end of the Training, teachers were able to: 1) Organize and implement with its students of 5th and 6th year a Citizenship and Development program based on ethical competence; 2) Organize a set of activities aimed at the development of competencies by students of sensitivity, judgment, motivation and moral action; 3) Organize a portfolio that documents the formative process - in a concerted action between critical reflections on theoretical contents with records of activities, implementation and evaluation with its students.

Buxarrais, R.M. (1997). La formación del profesorado en educación en valores. Bilbao (Espanya). ISBN: 8433012614. Esteban, F. (ed.) (2016). La formación del carácter de los maestros. Ediciones de la Universidad de Barcelona. Working Group on Citizenship Education (2017). National strategy for citizenship education. https://cidadania.dge.mec.pt/sites/default/files/pdfs/national-strategy-citizenship-education.pdf Hennink, M. M. (2013). Focus group discussions. Oxford University Press. Kohlberg, L. (1976). Moral stages and moralization: The cognitive developmental approach. In Lickona, T. (ed.), Moral Development and Behavior (pp. 31-53). Holt, Rienhart, and Winston. Martínez, M. (2016) La función del profesorado universitario en la formación del caràcter y la construcción de la personalidad moral de los docentes. In Carrillo, I. (Coord). Democracia y educación en la formación docente. Servei de publicacions de la Universitat de Vic – UCC. 237-241. Narvaez, D., Bock, T., Endicott, L., & Lies, J. (2004). Minnesota’s community voices and character education project. Journal of Research and Education, 2(2), 89-112. Puig, J.M. (2016). Aprendizaje-servicio y educación en valores. Convives (16), 12-19. ISSN: 2254-7436 Puig, J.M. (2017). Aprender participando en prácticas morales. Propuestas, pautas y ejemplos para la enseñanza de valores en la escuela. Religion y Escuela (307). 22-25. ISSN: 0212-3509 Rest, J. (1979). Development in judging moral issues. Minneapolis. MN: University of Minnesota. Rest. J. (1984). The major components of morality. In W. Kurtines, and J. Gewirtz (eds.), Morality, Moral Development and Moral Behavior (pp. 24–38). New York: Wiley. Rest, J. (1986). Moral Development: Advances in Research and Theory. NY: Praeger Press. Rest, J. et al (2000). A Neo-Kohlbergian Approach to Morality Research. Journal of Moral Education, 29 (4), 381-395. Rest, J., Narvaez, D., Thoma, S. J., Bebeau, M. J. (1999b). DIT2: Devising and testing a new instrument of moral judgment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 644-659.