One of the potential criticisms of advocating that professors approach their classes from a strong ethical foundation is that someone could assume that teaching from an ethical foundation leads to proselytizing. However, there are significance differences between adopting a moral compass based on an ethical foundation, teaching about an ethical foundation, and proselytizing the tenets of an ethical foundation.

Having a moral compass assists us in making appropriate classroom decisions based on positive values that promote student success. For an example, an administrator once recommended that I be less flexible in my classroom. My class would be improved, the administrator essentially argued, if I did not make accommodations to students who needed extra time to do successful projects. The administrator also recommended that I should provide fewer choices for students to complete their coursework. These suggestions went so far against my ethical foundation that my moral compass directed me to not follow misguided advice that would hurt students.

Because my ethical foundation is so student centered, I find that by listening to students that my teaching strategies improve. One simple example involved reporting on the participation points which students earn by successfully completing worksheets, homework, and other documents that go into the student’s class binder; a binder I grade at the end of each semester. Participation points are listed in the daily class notes I e-mail to students and, at the end of each semester, I provided students with a sheet listing all of the documents for which points were earned and how those documents should be organized in the student’s binder.

At the end of one semester, a student commented that it would have been easier if I distributed the participation points list more often throughout the semester. Other students agreed. Based on the ethical foundation in which my pedagogy is rooted, it was easy for me to make the decision to begin distributing participation points sheets more frequently. It is a little extra work for me, but, as a Christian colleague might consider in making a similar decision from their ethical foundation, “Whatever you do for even the least of my brothers or sisters, that you do until me.”

Although my ethical foundation is rooted in the Buddha Dhamma, my pedagogical decisions do not promote Buddhism. They are the types of decisions that have compassion toward other sentient beings as the basis for my decision making; a type of compassion that is found in a variety of religious, secular, and personal ethical codes.

But what is the difference between rooting our pedagogy in an ethical foundation and crossing the line into proselytizing? As a lay Buddhist, one of the five basic precepts I follow on a daily basis is “Suramerayamajja pamadatthana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami;” that “I undertake the precept to refrain from intoxicating drinks and drugs which lead to carelessness.” I have been a teetotaler for many more years than most of my students have been alive and think that alcohol and other non-medical drug use is harmful to individuals because it takes us away from mindfulness.

Even though I find my student’s alcohol and drug use to be problematic on a theological basis, my job is not to try to convince my students not to drink. As a professor, I can be concerned if a drunk student is disrupting class or I might refer a student who is exhibiting signs of addiction to counseling, but it is not my place to preach to students about their personal choices concerning alcohol use.

When instructing about Buddhism, it is perfectly acceptable for me to teach students about the five precepts and to explain the theological justification for refraining from intoxicating drinks. But teaching about Buddhism is not the same as trying to convince students to be Buddhists. In the same way, I can teach students about cannibalism without advocating that they eat each other.

There is a difference between being a teetotaler and a prohibitionist. The teetotaler chooses not to drink. The prohibitionist preaches that you should not drink either. By having an ethical foundation from which to guide our pedagogy, we are teetotalers; not prohibitionists.

–Steven L. Berg, PhD