Perspective Chapter: University Entrants’ Moral Ethics at Crossroads – Students’ Behavioral Management Perspective amid Globalization

Abstract

Students move from one stage to another in moral ethics development through experiential, academic, and planned ethics learning. Nevertheless, as they move to public HLIs, it becomes inevitable to face a dilemma for moral choice because universities operate and function under value-free education policy regardless of the discipline of study. Through the ethnographic review of the literature, the authors have discussed the implications of “moral ethics” on students’ behavior management; the relevance of students’ ethical standards to public university cultures on first-time entrance; students’ response to new public university cultures on retention overtime through “academic freedom;” African students’ appraisal of their initial “moral values” on first-time entrance in public universities; future possibilities to learning with new cultures geared by “globalization” in the African context; and observations for implementations of ethics education and training. Authors recommended that moral and civic education should be included in higher learning curricula and that the faculty be aware that facilitating an environment for students’ development in ethical decisions is part and parcel of teaching and learning. Therefore, professors need to think about how to accommodate a diversity of students’ ethical perspectives to guide the first entrant into university culture.

1. Introduction

First-time entrance into a public university, particularly in the African context, is here-marked by a change in experiential learning of the university students. People grow in particular moral traditions guided by specific moral principles, beliefs, and values [1]. Such traditions take care of such society members to a given stage of development, which if fully development is realized in higher learning institutions (HLIs). As students enter universities for the first time, they experience an abrupt change in their ways of communication. Bazerman on ethics notices the need to learn new forms of communication for the purpose of suiting the cultures of speaking to lecturers and peers, and communicating with oneself [2]. Secular education in African public universities is run under value-free HLIs, whereby students may exercise traditions, moral values, and ethical practices of their choices. However, the conflicting traditions, moral values, and ethical standards have been linked to affect students’ academic success, life adaptations, and individual worldview. They particularly shape behaviors by affecting learning realized through globalization. Despite the fact that there are heterogeneous curriculum class settings, and trainings are run under common ground of value-free policy in HLIs. Disciplines, such as philosophy, sociology, anthropology, humanities, natural science, engineering, law, and education, therefore, have realized a change of mindsets of the graduates on training. Contrarily to training, learning has been confronted by founded systems of morals and ethics of the students on first-time entry, which university faculties need to handle and nurture. University settings have a role to play in mitigating malfunction in student behavior and facilitating functional individuals, both in academic settings and society at large.

This chapter presents an empirical analysis of the situation of first-time entrant students in a public university campus, their exposure, and response to new university culture, which might contradict their initial moral values and ethical standards. The contradicting values with their local traditions and religious moral foundations guided to theorize on ease of learning and short-term and long-term future impacts on their behaviors mediated through university training in the era of globalization. The chapter, therefore, contains analyses on the relevance of students’ moral ethics to the public universities’ cultures; students’ responses to new cultures in public universities on retention overtime; appraisals of initial moral values and ethics; and future possibilities of ethical standards geared by globalization through university education.

2. Methodology

This literature research used an ethnographic review of scholarly articles published on the themes under study. Documents were retrieved from Google Scholar.¹ The Boolean logic was used to retrieve the documents using phrases containing the keywords, which guided the study. With regard to the keywords, the researchers analyzed six key issues, including (a) implications of “moral ethics” on students’ behavior management; (b) relevance of students’ “ethical standards” to public university cultures on first-time entrance; (c) students’ response to new public university cultures on retention overtime through “academic freedom”; (d) African students’ appraisal of their initial “moral values” on first time entrance in public universities; (e) future possibilities to learning with new cultures geared by “globalization” in African context; and (f) observations for implementations of ethics education and training. Document navigation was assisted by Zotero² software over a period of 2 months, and thematic coding was assisted by MAXQDA 2022³ software. Some documents were used in more than one theme. The themes analyzed were interpreted and discussed. Some recommendations emerged from the discussion.

3. Results and discussion

Document search using Google Scholar provided documents for this analysis. The phrases were constructed based on the research questions and keywords and treated according to the Boolean logic generated number of documents as summarized in Table 1.

Search Engine	Theme	Searched/ logic	Results	Discarded	Used
Google Scholar	Implications of “moral ethics” on students’ behavior management.	Implications “moral ethics” students’ behavior management pdf journal.	118,000	112,000	09
	African students’ appraisal of their initial “moral values” on first-time entrance in public universities.	African students’ appraisal of their initial “moral values” first-time entrance public universities pdf journal.	237,000	228,000	07
	Relevance of students’ “ethical standards” to public university cultures on first-time entrance.	Relevance students’ “ethical standards” public university cultures first-time entrance pdf journal.	234,000	130	04
	Students’ response to new public university cultures on retention overtime through “academic freedom.”	Students’ response new public university cultures retention overtime through “academic freedom” pdf journal.	214,000	208,000	08
	Future possibilities to learning with new cultures geared by “globalization” in African context.	Future possibilities learning new cultures geared “globalization” in African context pdf journal.	231,000	221,000	09
	Observations for implementations of “ethics” education and training.	Observations implementations “ethics” education training pdf journal.	68,700	68,695	05

Table 1.

Number of documents retrieved and used for the review under the Boolean logic.

3.1 Implications of moral ethics on students’ behavior management

Moral ethics is an important issue that has driven the public concern of religious, educational, social organizations, and enterprises, and offices on the question of the standards of humanity, human interactions, and work performance. The ideals of ethical and moral man have brought many debates into the academic disciplines, public offices, and society, in general. However, the essential thinking, in a nutshell, is that every human being must demonstrate moral ethics complying with the expectations of the respective place, organization, community, profession, or society at large. This ethical position poses the moral spheres as the focal point of the debate with questions about the moral itself, right, good, and duty [3]. The existence of the questions on what should apply as the universal ethical and moral principles, and given premises signifies a crucial case for discussion. According to Jacoby, such a debate has suited the analytical qualities around social and individual perspectives, moral principles, ethical reasoning, moral content and form, and moral action [3].

Ethics has a wide definition. Pinchera [4] and Rich [5], in their writing, referred to ethics as a set of principles accepted by a culture in terms of morals referring to specific beliefs and behaviors and how to manage them through practicing ethics. Morality is basically determined individually as it applies to oneself as being right or wrong through a systematic ethical analysis, then interpreted, judged, and applied to others. However, Pinchera reminds us that the individual is a subjective level of moral implications, which considers cultural values and norms, personal interpretation and logic, and an emotional state at the time of incidence [4]. When students make first-time moral encounters, they may establish logic based on the individualized reason of the recurring circumstances [5]. Contrarily, ethics can be based merely on personal opinions. There is always no clarity in ethical directives, which may make people, particularly students, to disagree about what is right and wrong. People consider something ethical only if it is of good value in their lives. Junaid and colleagues analyzed how ethical were the standards of engineering accredited programs and suggested more studies to come up with a global working definition, which encompasses a global definition, broader ethics, and its application [6]. They took the sample from the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Ireland, and France. They identified concepts, keywords, and terminologies from the textbooks used to teach ethics as they refer to ethics. They found out that researchers have used words, such as values, professionalism, chatters, standard codes, limits, normative, moral choice in dilemma, right decision, ethical deliberations, whistleblowing, policies, multiethnic considerations, trustfulness, trustworthiness, reliability, and social equity, at the global level. Junaid et al. became aware that some of the concepts, such as responsibility, may be too general to comprehend and may need interpretation [6]. Junaid et al.’s study focused on using verbs as a concept of ethics by concentrating on what one does rather than on what one is; because their field of study was ethics in engineering programs [6].

Students in public universities in SSA, for instance, may individually seek to accomplish their own potential by considering, recognizing, and contributing to the ethical fulfillment of others as an integral part of their own ethical fulfillment [3]. Attaining goals directed to processes in establishing such potentials is accompanied by a sense of the need for social cohesion demanding immersion into common values and practices as social beings. An individual being is encompassed by systems of moral ethics under a multicultural mix of ethical enrolled students, who must be directed to abide by bylaws and work together in value-free HLIs. In this context, a morally educated person is processed to be the output of the expectations of the university curriculum. Moral development; therefore, becomes a self-guided process in which students have to learn direction or strengthen the previously founded behaviors. One should come to learn that students may do what people perceive as right or wrong with regard to the social focus of origination of the founded behavior, which might be difficult to apply in future. Under such circumstances, exposure to a new culture if not well defined according to the mix of cultural differences, individuals may dictate the student to a different character, seemingly good or bad, depending on the cohort and collegial caliber. Though Jacoby presents the implications of the individual character’s particularity as contrasted to the general culture as explained by Arthur, who provides the reasons, restraints, and incentives for conducting life, there remains the question of merging the particularity with the general exhibitions without affecting the morals of one’s founded exhibitions [3]. Even though the aim of this paper is not to deal with one particular aspect of ethics in academia, in the current aspect some scholars have discussed specific areas of ethics in academics and revealed the reality of the need for the continuation of diversified studies in global ethics. For instance, Kim and Uysal found that the issues of plagiarism of text among international students were influenced by their ethical judgment and cultural backgrounds [7]. In a similar case, Wilson et al. concluded the discussion on the issue of equity in social welfare policy from the lesson during the Covid-19 pandemic that it was crucial for course instructors to revisit the concept of culture and multiculturalism for ethics in education [8].

Nevertheless, for the students traveling across provinces within countries, there are phenomena affecting their thinking to micro-changes in character, particularly of the youth cohort. On the micro-ethics level, Spiel et al. [9] defined ethics as moral philosophy, concerned with the study of what constitutes a good life and, consequently, how we should live. Allied ethics look into how we can think ethically about specific issues as students move in pursuit of education across the nations, for example, as they encounter changes that demonstrate the power of learning and living new ways. Similarly, the gears of globalization with learned students have imposed many challenges to the maintenance of the traditional values and beliefs in African universities, where Western and European cultures can be learned and practiced well in almost all spheres of life because of increased inventions of information channels, such as internet, radio, social media, and mobile phone [10]. Implicitly, globalization has been noted as the agent of macro-changes in African cultures and mediated through such as media and higher education. The question of what is the right character to practice in a mix of cultural standards have been reserved in scholarly works. Jacoby argues on the objective and subjective aspects of culture [3]. According to that analysis, aspects of culture may impose students into “cultural syndromes”⁴ of complexity, individualism, collectivism, and tightness. It becomes entirely difficult for the post-HLIs candidate to demonstrate characters that can be accepted as universal logic. Cross contended that the roles, norms, and values do not determine social actions but the reciprocal relations which students may negotiate and construct to live social reality which must conceal individual identities such that they can no longer be defined by such social systems of norms [11]. There are peculiarities manifesting through levels of conscience for humanism and formal ethical protocols among native cultures, which candidates in HLIs cannot exhibit in preciseness or may show total change. Consequently, they may be perceived as lacking fundamental human values, such as respect, self-discipline, and humanity, in particular, circumstances for self and others [12].

3.2 Relevance of students’ ethical standards to public university cultures on first-time entrance

The HLIs stipulate their cultures in chapters in which students become followers. Such cultures are formalized to assist the university to achieve the goals of education which their attainment processes bring together students and resources to learning activities. Students may enter the HLIs without questioning their ethical and moral foundations, and with little experience of other contravening ethical and moral backgrounds. This reality was revealed and described by Colby’s writing on “whose values anyway” [13], explaining the experiences of students at Messiah College⁵. Accordingly, Christian students were exposed to a secular education system similar to public institutions operating in value-free academic freedom with regard to their previously founded dos and do nots. The Christian faith was thus imposed to relative standards on the basis of various denominations, among others Roman Catholic, Protestants, Lutheran, Anglican, Pentecostal, and Charismatic grounds operating in a circular education system. This, in particular, formed a true representation of the context facing first entrants in HLIs, whose ethical standards may not necessarily comply with new experiences. Each student’s worldview; however, brings a student into HLIs with internalized values that affect how a student confronts value-free academic freedom in HLIs. A student’s worldview facilitates the education goals attainment process for the controls and choices that a student makes in ethical dilemmas. As Hirsto analyzed the aspects of student’s worldview among Finish university students, worldview is normally integrated with a student’s background regarding the history of that society, political, social, economic factors, human relations, and student’s religious affiliations or beliefs [14]. Moreover, in confronting an ethical dilemma, worldview is important for preserving students’ well-being because it strongly affects students’ choices, goals, and their certainty in careers [14]. This lesson from a finish education system, where theology is considered as one of the core courses, revealed how students with religious background were more certain in ethics and life goals. Where the faculty created a tolerant environment for minority groups, students did not experience microaggressions except female students, who were disturbed by the class discussion on women ordination. In the era of globalization, students tend to learn a lot of things through different media, including broadcasting channels and internet, which sharpen their individualized values and beliefs. Early formal training adds to the compounded effects on moral development with firmly held theoretical bases they have acquired since high school education, such as Darwinism (evolution of man), Weberian (political), Marxism (economic), and Michael’s social dominations doctrines, against the originally founded ethical bases [15].

It is logical to think, for example, the training given prior to university education that associates man with other animals must have an effect on the moral implications of man on viewing man as opposed to other objects and animals. The use of scientific logic as opposed to supernaturalism in solving problems emerged in the post-modernism period between seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, which was characterized by the prevalence of science, regarded as the age of reason because science represented something absolute, certain, and genuine. The scientific culture evolved prioritizing research of concrete things and strictly organized, and well-managed methods of enquiry to gain people’s trust and put forth objectively driven values and rationalism as absolute values [16]. It is through such practices that collection of evidence could found doctrines on the fit and non-fit animals, including members of the human species, thinking of competitiveness to resources, and survival of the fittest. Weighing through the contravening implications of natural indifference, and fit and non-fit theories would lead to the assumptions on negative influences of formal education, particularly in HLIs on the development of moral ethics traditionally founded in the SSA cultures. It is however not clear as to how the doctrines on competition for survival and the concept of the unfit may leave a gap in training leading to the public resources grabbed by the trusted elites from the HLIs processes, bearing in mind that uneducated ones rarely access national treasuries management and related bursary channels. The existence of misconducts, such as corruption cases and other malpractices, in the hands of post-HLI candidates, as described in one of the subsequent subsections; however, it implies that the conscience for humanism and formal protocols are less products of the exhibited and nurtured outcome of the value-free education in HLIs. The problem of the elite syndrome motivated Julius Nyerere, the first president of Tanzania, to urge African leaders to rethink the aims of education in the postcolonial era. Nyerere argued that national education after independence remained under the colonial influence, in regard to the kind of graduates it produced [17]. That education did not transmit values. Instead, it inculcated in the elite’s mind obsession and passion for individual material wealth and domination of the weak, the elite being the stronger, particularly in the economic aspects as criteria for social merit and worth. Graduates tended to lack humility and a sense of appreciation for what normal citizens had sacrificed for them to get educated. Therefore, public universities need to figure out how to socialize first entrants into the university toward ethical preparedness before they graduate.

In the same way, utilizing man as the instrument of achieving political objectives has always downgraded civilians in most SSA countries where postsecondary education may leave a vacuum contributing to firm ground for such practices. In fact, political, economic, and social dominations imposed by the educated elites are subjects to test against the ethical procedures in most SSA countries, where HLIs products are claimed to have acquired hybrids of morals to favor unethical living, including the escalating problem of grand corruption. What cure does the HLIs in SSA countries have to offer in training? As argued previously on cultural syndromes, it would be challenging to offer singly a cure on a case that contravenes with people in a mix of cultures. In the case of relationship and courtship matters in one nomadic culture in SSA countries, for example, seducing a girl to an agreement would seem to be a weak husband, as man must show virility power to acquire wives. Subjecting this behavior to legal ethics derived from standardized thinking based on human rights would mean that the respective student has to learn issues that must be advocated to the domicile communities. However, someone must think about how powerfully held is something taught and practiced from childhood, especially talking about matters related to owning wealth, dominating socially, financially, and politically from which the rules to achieve may be relatively derived. The convergence of the arguments would be on the need that students must be taught good moral and ethical conduct at all levels, including HLIs.

3.3 Response to new public university cultures on students’ retention through academic freedom

Continuing students in HLIs represent group of students affirming the characters and behaviors named in a given university. They form a part of the university culture, which can be demonstrated in various arenas of universitas magistrorum et schorarium⁶. It is ideal to think that a student has responded and complied with what has been resolved as the right course of action concerning the behaviors and characterization. Students pass through conflicting processes to reach a consensus about what is right and wrong. For example, in religious HLIs the faculty mentoring the “students to explore the relationship between reason and faith try to shake the students up, encourage them to think for themselves, and push them out of their comfort zone” [13]. In the same way, instructors and mentors in psychology and philosophy, in particular, become the real agents of change in the emotional intelligence of the students in public HLIs in which the moderation is depending on individual virtues and social circumstances the students are playing around with. Such changes however are marked by controversial thinking and actions relative to initial beliefs and values. The quality of the change is influenced by the type and nature of the society in question, in this case, multiple interacting cultural grounds to hybridize. Giannou explains such changes in ancient Greece that justice, courage, moderation, and wisdom were the central aspects of a virtuous person, according to Socrates and Plato, and Aristotle held that a lack of virtues was a lack of happiness—the absolute evil [16]. This would mean that the students should focus on the course of action, which must cause or multiply the effect of happiness.

According to Aristotle, there is nothing good in its own right but everything is good in relation to something else such that wisdom and knowledge of something could be used both for good and bad purposes—the ends could justify the means. Implicitly, someone could regard the usefulness of a particular logic and action of the cultural syndrome based on the effect—whether it would result in happiness or guilty. The emphasis can be made that virtues could be reached only if students choose the right means, and if the choice of means is within their power [16]. One should have the right desire to do the right thing and in the right degree and should act promptly in that way. There are different perspectives concerning the powerful will of man to do the right thing. In Christian philosophy, for example, one ethical influence is that human willpower exceeds human logic.

Another influence is that the human mind is incapable of solving its own big problems of human ethical life but rather, God’s authority is needed to guide humans to resolve such problems [16]. This is contravened by scientific logic and thinking by scientists, such as Einstein, on the other hand, posing that the human brain is so great that it can conquer even elements of nature. However, we hereby put forth that humans have a perfect will and ability to do good deeds, and the capacity to choose to do good or to be good. Though being good or bad seems to be rhetorical, it can be comprehended by a rational being in a given context. Informed students can develop a sense of moral obligations to do the right things, do things right, and be good. Imanuel Kant established a dual principle, the categorical imperative, which can explain indicators of ethical human activity; that always act so as to treat humanity whether in your own person or in that of others as an end and not as a means and act only on that maxim that you can make a universal law [16]. With the explanatory framework of the implications, Kant emphasized the autonomy and freedom to choose and act in a manner that can apply good to everybody. It is with such theoretical arguments that students should develop a positive will to treat humanity, and act in ways that can apply in almost all situations universally. However, it seems that the reality of the conflicting values and beliefs in multicultural contexts is being ignored in this case. Can universities establish common standards upon which all cultures can comply and students depend on? The whole situation would be resolved legally to set the conditions of legal justice and injustices, which may not necessarily reflect the requirements of social justice for all students. The general situation would be the creation of the HLIs’ environment with students challenged with the question of how to adjust to suit the education systems in such institutions.

In fact, Girmay has identified primary barriers to students’ adjustments in HLIs to include cultural, social, and academic exposures [18]. Cultural exposure imposes barriers to students based on religion, orientation, and collective cultural issues. Within HLIs, students engage in networks of social interactions with diverse groups, including culturally similar and different peers, students’ organizations, and associations. With social barriers, students may face problems of isolation, microaggressions, misperceptions, and prejudice [14, 18]. Some behavioral demonstrations and characterizations exposing students to stigma and neglect may lead the victims to withdrawal consequences from social engagements, a situation related to failure to adapt to the cultural ingredients of mixed sociocultural groups. The question of “whose values anyway” is the best to adapt and adopt remains paramount [13], which the legal prohibitions have inclined on resolving for a long time. Students become witnesses of acceptance and rejection of values and standards derived from interactions across cultures. The academic barriers include rigor, language, and structure used in academic communication [18]. Like the case that has been presented in universities in Russia, foreign students are influenced by subjective and objective factors to adapt to HLIs, in a process of mastering new cultural contexts and values of the new sociocultural environment [19].

However, the degrees with which students from historically disadvantaged social groups interact with their counterparts go on insufficiency below expectations as they exhibit less affiliation to the university cultures [11]. Despite their globalization desire to access better education, there are factors that alienate international students. Such students may be under social, cultural, and economic dominations imposing on them a situation of reduced efficacy to engagements which the emancipation processes may take long to post-training period in their future [20]. To resolve such challenges, deliberate initiatives are to be instituted in HLIs to recognize the need to develop such disadvantaged groups holistically in inclusive interactive approaches. The recommendation to mitigate such barriers is to have effective intercultural adaptation and management beyond interpersonal communications, where a college as an organism is vigorously working together to realize the process of an intercultural management system [20]. Cross also identified a triangular system linking lecturers, students, and institutions in resolving the relative values and ethical standards in conflicts in order to nurture the students’ potentials [11]. Accordingly, the actor, in this case, the student, should be brought into the system and the system unto the actor according to a process of interiorization of norms and values by the individuals. This thinking recognizes students as the central agents of change, and the HLIs as a source of capacity to offer adequate remedies to the students. In fact, students prefer guidance through adjustment difficulties and social counseling to wage positive improvements and achieve total change [21]. Nonetheless, one would comment that the mechanisms through which the students respond to the experiential changes in cultures in the HLIs vary depending on the nature of students and the institutional capacity.

3.4 African students’ appraisal of their initial moral values on first-time entrance in public universities

The HLIs are populated with students from various cultural origins. Higher education, therefore, enrolls larger segments of populations with complex interactions of ethical and moral values. In literature, demographic diversity is considered prestige and strength of any university according to Ford and Patterson [22]. Yet, universities have not taken considerable time to resolve the encounters first entrants face that impact their values. In fact, Ford and Patterson on ethnographic diversity found that universities with the lowest rates of ethno-racial diversity were more likely to engage in practices that enhance the appearance of diversity than universities with the highest levels of student diversity. In this regard, an individual student is confronted by a situation of how to moderate and stabilize with appropriate disposition on the change, while retaining viable core principles of the previously founded ethical and moral standards. It is logical to think that while students should adapt to positive changes, they should retain the socially and culturally viable attributes with regard to the future requirements of the qualities of graduates suited to formal work. Without being naïve, one should recognize that while holding the formal values and beliefs as the secular curriculum ingredients, some local values, beliefs, and attributes that most of the university elites would call the indigenous identities would be essentially beneficial in holding and maintaining public office ethics deemed good. As the enrolled candidates include a mix of full-time students and others who work part-time, as well as other cohorts and calibers, such as married, parents, who seek sexual relationships, business people, priests and members of different religious affiliations, and politicians [13], moral ethics can be standardized on codes and bylaws, and the formulation should consider the cultural ingredients of the concerned students.

The student governing bodies in universities are primarily concerned with keeping students in compliance with the HLIs’ goals of learning. As highlighted in preceding sections, public universities operate in value-free education settings, where the faculty could not impose a particular culture on a student, but rather a student should develop the full identity and capacity to choose to do what is right. In practice, cultural interactions which Colby warns the curriculum design should take note of; face conflicts of compliance with the question of what is right way to do and wrong [13].

This question, what is right and what is wrong is still the widest ethical debate, which writers consider an ethical dilemma. An ethical dilemma is contrasted with an ethical issue and problem by Giannou for the sake of the current discussion [16]. Accordingly, an ethical issue would be a situational controversy on what individuals can do with regard to legal or technical perspectives, and what ought to be done from an ethical perspective. This is a total conflict between the legalities, bylaws, and technicalities with what can be ethically and socially justified by the HLIs’ members. The difference with ethical problems confines to the practices, where someone knows what they ought to do but their moral decisions become difficult to apply. Ethical dilemmas in HLIs occur where choices between two equally unwelcome alternatives relating to students’ welfare make encounters, which may involve conflicts of moral principles the choice of which must affect one part between the alternatives to some degree.

Implicitly, students may be confronted by ethical dilemmas, where the choices of the right course of action are to be executed amidst the moral and ethical beliefs at crossroads. In a real sense, they should first undergo standardization of expectations of their ethical conduct, which can principally be subjective or relative. Ethical subjectivism manifests with individual students creating their own morality firmly holding that there are no objective moral truths, that is, appraising only individual opinions [5]. This perspective would have resulted in conflicting moral practices, particularly with students of strongly held religious and denominational affiliations in HLIs. The conflicts of interest at individual and community levels would base on the issue of whether the change influenced someone, or should they influence the change. The consequential experiences can be waived by reliance on guidelines and bylaws. However, the institutional guidelines and bylaws help to resolve such problems partly. It is regarded that moral evaluation should be rooted in experience, beliefs, and behaviors portraying a stipulated institutional culture with regard to the fact that what is wrong in one individual culture may be right in another, in the so-called cultural relativism [5]. The question of how should such guidelines include the individual cultural ingredients satisfactorily into their framework remains unresolved. However, the basic plan of such guidelines and bylaws should focus on the goals of the education curriculum and the national philosophy of education. Some scholars such as Colby have thought about the possibility of the HLIs affecting the moral understanding and behaviors of the students [13]. Accordingly, they may affect students’ moral appraisals by empowering them to face highly challenging moral dilemmas, intellectually serious way of moral issues that arise in academic disciplines, participate in service to the community, and reflect on what is learned in the process, adhere to high ethical standards regarding academic integrity, and other issues of honesty and mutual respect.

It is ideal to state that students in HLIs are exposed to moral processes, which demand them to accommodate by classifying, merging, and disorienting moral and ethical issues. Such processes should consider students’ social, religious, and personal perspectives, mediating the achievements of educational goals stipulated in the university guidelines, curriculum, and backed up by students’ bylaws. To bring about such achievements, the campus-created cultures may need to provide active roles to the faculty to exercise observer and critical position on students’ behaviors [13]. Such roles focused on cultivating self-determination within and outside university campuses, and should empower students’ personal development on one hand and dual relationships on the other hand. With self-determination, students should respect and promote others’ rights to make their own choices and decisions, irrespective of their values provided this does not threaten the rights and legitimate interests of others [16]. This stance puts exceptions on self-determination and the freedom of one’s choice when another’s right to well-being is at stake. Implicitly, the subjective moral experiences of individual students should not victimize the rights of others complying with the guidelines and bylaws. In fact, Giannou presents dual relationships that it should offer protection against the damage done within the social systems, particularly on personal and social life of others, promoting dependence, reversing roles, mutual acquaintances, and joint affiliations and memberships [16]. It seems to be a logical presentation as students immerse in populations that they have to adapt, associate with, and accredit the values and beliefs at individual and group levels.

Appraising individual morals amid ethical dilemmas would therefore require attention to accommodate others from multiple perspectives. Though the compliance may not be ethically conclusive, it would at least set conditions for coordinated work to achieve the goals of education. Some ethical questions, such as questions on racial and gender equality [11], and sexual discrimination and prohibitions rooted in cultural beliefs and cemented by laws [23] among others, would be resolved with regard to the rationalized values. The problem with globalization is the channeling of influential cultural perspectives, which must be applied by others in response to the demands of human rights activists, legal workers, and advocates of equity and inclusion against public sentiments withholding what is right in traditional opinions. The HLIs are agents of cultural change, especially in the developing world where economic development needs to influence cultural change in the direction determined by foreign interventions. Some changes seem to be viable and inevitable, such as actions to equate and equalize gender roles and economic freedom, but those that seem threatening to indigenous cultures, such as sexual orientations and racial prioritization, have received opposition and prohibitions in SSA countries. Cross presents that some HLIs have run under the existence of unethical conduct, while pretending to neutralize and fight them, while Msuya warns that the female gender is highly affected negatively in such circumstances [11, 23].

It is, therefore, imperative to conclude on the notion by Rich that individuals may allow their emotions to overtake good reasoning, with social initiatives destructing good foundations for ethical decisions through social emancipations praxis [5]. While some cultural values to be held by students may be good to keep life in order, real emancipations may sway away from valued ethical principles in cultural heritage to hybridize them based on new thinking. In that case, there would be both positive and negative consequences. The positive consequences would be justifiably noted on the relieved sides of the ethical dilemmas. However, it has been noted that hybridizing cultures may impose seriously negative consequences on the means of association among groups in HLIs, and conspicuous distinctions from the general public. It is sound to argue that moral and ethical assessments and choices of practices should make a balance of emotion and reason [5]. Every movement to effect cultural change should base on the genuine cause of reason acceptable for ethics and morality among persons, and basically with the universal golden rule profound in the world religions: Doing unto others that which you think is good if done to you [12]. This thinking calls for the evaluation of daily life practices for improvements that must stress on human dignity; the core principles of good living, which maintain viable human species in safe and secure perpetuation.

3.5 Future possibilities through learning with new values and standards geared by globalization in African context

The most important component of the curriculum of instruction and philosophy of education statements should be the direction of the nation to be cultivated by education itself. As a learning social caste, the students in HLIs can form a component of the wider social system imposing steep change on the national culture development realized through educational institutions. Though this needs its own space in education discussion and research, learning from universities, such as the Porland State University, good faculty interventional programs are inevitable to protect national identity through regular talks to ensure all voices are heard in discussions of moral, political, and policy issues, aiming at maintaining what can be valued and keeping the wrong away [13]. As argued previously by Colby that students’ choices might be inconclusive and unripe, and there should be ethical guidelines to provide the directions, which must be protected for the right future [13]. As rational beings, students have the ability to create universal laws and follow them [16]. It implies that any gap left would result in the course of actions that might distort the meaning of the valued education and its products—in the case of confusion on what social educational outcome should the processes provide.

Vividly, scholarly works by Mohlake on unattended social responsibility [12], Kumasey and Laba on ethical malpractices [24, 25], and Cross on cultural mutations [11] are true indications of the failures of education systems in SSA countries to provide quality products on moral and ethical perspectives. Mohlake notices faulty training in education systems, which has produced graduates lacking core values enshrined in our valuable cultures. Researchers have exposed issues, such as reported rampant cheating in exams, where students’ motive is not to master their course and get skills for future work but to get certificates [26, 27]. This is a warning that the education systems in SSA countries need to curb the implications rooted in academic malpractices for curricula contents in HLIs. Should HLIs standardize students’ moral and ethical principles to suit the requirements for future African livelihood or live the issue hanging. The authors of this chapter propose that more discussion is needed on this matter. Nevertheless, the first entrants are the best to start with because are still malleable. An observation from Jansen was presented by Mohlake to be noted that:

…we are breeding a new generation of youthful South Africans who are learning early to be angry, deadly angry, without adult intervention and without political or pedagogical correction…we fail to …educate youth minds broadly in ethics, values, reasoning, appreciation, problem-solving, argumentation and logic [12]

This presentation on South Africa captures several cases happening as failure of the education systems to prepare the students for moral and ethical qualities required to compete in the labor markets and societies, in general. It is a true indication that HLIs lack the completeness of expected ingredients to be imparted to graduates morally, ethically, and academically. It could be the case that much emphasis is made on academic content than social interaction competencies bestowed in cultural endowments to humanity. Non-stressed moral and ethical guidance might impose the wrong formulation of universal laws and logic, as the case may be in this regard. Similarly, Kumasey’s work on ethics and values in Ghana notices frequent occurrences of unethical behaviors, such as fraud and abuse of resources, moonlighting, falsifying records, waste and misuse of official time, apathy, sexual harassment, payroll irregularities (ghost names in payrolls), and cash and procurement irregularities as the pitfalls of trained workers in public offices [24]. The demonstration of such cases puts in question the position of installments of the moral and ethical principles and guidelines through education channels strengthened by the HLIs. A simple logic would be held that traditional moral and ethical values would be sufficient to empower working free from such incidences but are not being emphasized, and academic training demonstrates good quality performance.

The presentation by Laba shows that identified malpractices in past and present in the HLIs, particularly in the admission of students, plagiarism, and dishonesty in writing exams go beyond the academic life to graduates’ malfunctions in future society [25]. One would suppose that the doctor is too sick to treat the patients. Implicitly, the machineries are not well set to impose required ethical principles and moral guidelines on students. Laba further cautions that the present state of higher education in Africa, and the shift in fiscal priorities in the context of the government having the monopoly on higher education is disastrous [25]. Many countries in SSA have the government either owning or dictating the operations in HLIs. With exceptions of the religiously founded government regimes, the governance of the institutions would be justified through legal justices that do not necessarily satisfy the social expectations of cultural prioritization on one hand. On the other hand, secular education in public HLIs operating under value-free processes may impose students to serious inadequacy of moral and ethical development. With globalization forces operating in ethical processes, hybrid institutional cultures may lead to lethal cultural mutations [11]. This is particularly important to observe when the processes of the whole institutional culture are affected by the changes in the student’s body or organs. It is worth to note that non-managed moral and ethical development of youth students in HLIs may lead to future evolution of hybrid moral values and ethical standards, which the desirability may not be guaranteed. One would therefore speculate on the possibility of future extinction of initial moral and ethical principles, the fact which was however not the focus of the current discussion.

Notwithstanding, based on the utilitarian approach moral actions are determined as good or bad by learning from the consequences [16]. What is it that is good or bad consequences? According to classical utilitarians, the ultimate good is something that most people will desire that which gives happiness or pleasure. This would imply that the nations would move in blind ethical directions left in hands of the students in HLIs driven by globalization forces. In that case; therefore, a call for moral and civic responsibility inclusion into the higher education curriculum statement has been made [3, 13]. The assumption is that when the development of the student’s moral and civic responsibility is the goal of the institution, then the idea of value-free education is a dead end in itself. This means there should be efforts to refocus students’ achievement goals to morality, character, patriotism, and social justice across ideological lines and open communication. Students should clearly stipulate what they should live with protection from indoctrination in future life. Such curricular inclusion should emphasize on critical thinking and open-mindedness with an interest to pursue ideas, and backing up their claims while expecting others to do the same. Of course, being knowledgeable and having a perfect will to do the right things and do things right should enable them to think independently, hold their positions, and ensure commitments to moral and ethical principles.

It could be argued based on the observations that moral education was highly required in university training. There should be a given set of morals and civic engagements, which students should learn in order to comply with a society in which they are going to live and work. It is critical to state that individualized moral standards are subject to changes with time and space over the preexisting ethos. For example, Colby presents that a woman who self-described as racist into her thirties, became a leader in the black civil rights movement in her late thirties and early forties through a series of transformative experiences over several years and that an immoral financially successful businessman became a tireless advocate for poor in his middle age, in Roanoke Valley of Virginia [13]. The thinking that moral education should be imparted in higher learning curriculum is of utmost importance though highly challenged by the contexts in which should be, given the varied opinions and cultures of the institution members [13]. It implies that the existence of different culturally derived HLIs’ members does not disapprove the formulation of moral education training in HLIs. Well-researched moral standards can be imparted and practiced by the institutional members and can be taken by the students, which should suit and positively improve livelihood in their domiciles. In particular, the moral standards for respect, roles, and duty are important ingredients of students’ preparedness to take charge of responsibilities in family, community, and society. As much as ethics and norms would depend on what someone has to offer, this contention would be right if learning new things would be related to learning new ethics and morals, which is the absolute confusing reality in HLIs. On the other hand, open admissions would not restrict institutions to bring in singly culturally confined students. This would imply that; technical interventions were required to create training in the curriculum of HLIs, which would standardize the morals, which students have to rely on for their livelihood.

3.6 Observations for implementations of ethics education and training

Implementation of moral and civic education in HLIs is challenged in public HLIs with the emphasis on value-free education curriculum. In fact, moral and civic education in HLIs is challenged on two major issues. First, it is thought that college time is too late to offer moral and civic education [13]. Such thinking is based on the argument that college students are more likely to be regarded as adults given the current times of globalization forces. However, Colby considers it wrong to think that offering moral and civic education to students in HLIs is too late [13]. Of course, one should agree that there have been noted changes in the perception of adulthood attainment in the post-early to mid-twentieth century. For example, Colby notices that higher learning institutions in the United States operated in loco parentis, at least until the early 1970s [13]. The faculty assumed the roles of the parents to help students manage time, and observe the rules on behavioral issues—to ensure that students observed behaviors and comply with social and moral norms. Presently, students have demanded to be treated with adulthood identities due to changes in global forces geared by politics and legalities through globalization—which the assumption is not correct with regard to Colby [13]. Consequently, the rules for freedom of choice in the case of children, youth, and adults have exacerbated the problem of mismanagement of ethics and morals demonstrated by the youth in value-free HLIs. This situation is a product of global movement assisted by globalization forces, and the education curriculum itself. For instance, universal codes on human rights, freedom of expression, and decision-making have left parents detached from their students in HLIs regardless of the student’s age. Most of the universities, therefore, including some in SSA countries have instituted the offices of the Dean of Students to do the counseling roles—providing the student’s with arrays of options to choose on the case of decision-making. The modern university education; however, put forward the facilitation of autonomy in college students rather than imposing moral choice on an individual [28, 29]. According to the sustainable development goals (SDGs) [30], tertiary colleges and universities are in-charge, move beyond the long history, and assume the role of creating knowledge or carrying out research and engagement in the development [28], which can only flourish in free and autonomous learning environment. However, it has been reserved on the basis of the distinction of counseling from real guidance that the former takes away the parenting roles on the basis of professionally supporting the students to choose what is right from wrong. Students in this case reserve the right to choose the course of actions they presume to be right, in order to provide pleasurable circumstances.

Accordingly, for the ages 18 to 22, which most of the undergraduate students may possess and which all of the major developmental theorists refer to represent the transition to adulthood, encompass the range associated with great moral and ideological exploration, ferment, and consolidation, as could be expressed that:

At this time in their lives, young people are questioning their epistemological, moral, political, and religious assumptions, making critical career and other life choices, and rethinking their sense of who they are, which is important to them. There could hardly be a time riper for moral growth [13].

The assertion above is of utmost importance for considering the freedom of the youth to choose the moral standards to live. It seems that there is a high possibility of such students being confronted by challenges to take the right path, hardly exercising the expectations of societies in their future. The reason here is that they have to learn new things, which might not be related to what they have to live. Choosing from an array of alternatives is highly challenging even for early and middle adults. This has led to the conclusion based on the most sophisticated level of moral thinking by Kohlberg, that post-conventional moral judgment does not occur until early adulthood and continues to increase at least until the end of formal education, and beyond for those participating in activities that challenge their moral thinking [13]. As a mechanism to establish a common national culture, the moral and civic education should be instilled even at the lower grades of learning. Some countries, such as Japan, had implemented such education and abolished it in lower grades of elementary schools with a belief that children could not comprehend it and could not exhibit exceptional commitments characterizing their lives until adulthood, but the lethal aftermath forced reestablishment of the training to the children at the same level of schooling [3, 13]. Teaching children about what to live should be held as effectively as it is for guiding college students as youths. This is because both levels complement each other in imparting values and right moral choices.

Second, the value-free education practice holds on assumption that moral and civic education in HLIs is an intellectually weak undertaking [13]. Implicitly, such an assumption can be interpreted that moral and civic education programs undermine the intellectual rigor of the academic experience, which scholars represented by Colby proposes that it is not the case [13].

4. Conclusions

Academic primary goals in students’ learning demonstrate better achievements when teaching incorporates moral and civic ingredients. Unfortunately, the case on the contextual nature of pedagogies in HLIs would be that some faculties may not be prepared to promote moral and civic development. It seems that the requirements for the new pedagogies, including training materials, to resolve ethical dilemmas might be challenging the faculties in HLIs, who wish to implement the programs for the first time. The question of what others are doing on the basis of global accreditation may sterilize what someone has to decide on inclusion due to the lack of global standardized ethical guidelines. However, moral and civic development centered on hands-on training, and integration of the service experiences with the academic material are critical to students’ learning outcomes demonstrated through desired standard moral and ethical dispositions. One can hold that moral and civic training is necessary in HLIs for providing students with informed beliefs, values, and choices on encounters with ethical dilemmas in learning and teaching process. The quest of who to set ethics training standards at global or regional level seems to need more discussion and research to attain a certain level of objectivity and inclusiveness.

5. Recommendations

1. Moral and civic education should be included in higher learning curricula. Such training should not be restricted to HLIs as teaching children what to live is more effective than teaching adults, so spiral learning on moral and civic education through the education system would be more beneficial.

2. The faculty need to be aware of facilitating an environment for students’ development in ethical decisions as part and parcel of teaching and learning. Professors need to think about how to accommodate and tolerate the diversity of students’ worldviews, and ethical decisions while students encounter value-free HLIs environment, which has influence from global perspectives. The faculty need to set a common ground for students to make the right ethical choices with informed perspectives without any kind of pressure or undue influence.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Acronyms and abbreviations

HLI

means higher learning institutions

SSA

means Sub-Saharan Africa