Implementation of moral education by teachers of foreign languages

Teaching a foreign language is often associated with the development of communicative competence, interpersonal and social development, but also with the development of intercultural competence, aesthetic sensitivity, etc., as when learning a second language, the topics of literature, geographical and cultural differences with respect to the language and culture of the countries speaking the language are discussed. FL is the subject which can provide pupils with the greatest scope for developing the various components of education, as is documented by a review of the literature and teaching methods used abroad to teach a FL. A total of 342 teachers from Slovakia participated in the survey, 55 of them FL teachers. In our research, we focused on three areas, namely, 1) finding out the conditions for implementing moral education in primary school, 2) finding out whether foreign language teachers implement the moral component of education depending on their own moral setting, and 3) academic dishonesty in the context of assessing dishonest practices in pupils and academic dishonesty in teachers during their studies. Teachers participated in the research voluntarily and could refuse to complete the last section. 1) The results show that, FL teachers (N = 55) rate the need for moral education as the most important, but they are mostly concerned with intellectual (M = 4.09), physical (M = 3.56) and environmental education (M = 3.47) in the application of the different components of education. For better application of moral education, they would need adequate and quality training (67.3%) and methodological materials (78.2%). 2) it was found that teachers consider themselves as the basis of moral behaviour (M = 4.7) and at the same time, explicit rules set by them are important for them (M=3.75). Teachers do not trust in the moral behaviour of children and society (M = 2.25), which was also reflected in the fact that the treatment of moral topics is mainly done by the method of explanation (85.5%) and the method of example (80%). 3) Teachers rated the factor of gaining one’s own advantage (M = 4.27) significantly more negatively (N2 = 45; Z = -5.225; p = 0.0001) than the factor of cooperating with others (M = 3.24). On the other hand, FL teachers (N3 = 44) reported their academic dishonesty in terms of occurrence most frequently as a form of cooperation (M = 2.68). Relatively, they defined getting unearned benefits with external help (M = 2.16) or in a utilitarian manner (M = 1.72). We discuss ways to help develop moral education and support teachers.