CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

A Comparative Case Study of Character Education Based on Two School Models

Julie Bursch, Catherine Dance, and Kasey Topousis
University of Colorado at Denver

Intelligence plus character that is the goal of true education.

Martin Luther King Jr.

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

ABSTRACT
This research project aims to study how character education is implemented and
perceived at two different schools. Our aim is to gather information on how character education
is perceived by students and families in these two school communities. Researchers gathered
information for this project by distributing perception surveys in order to inform how character
education aligns with families and students ideas and values. We have studied how students and
families feel invested and/or represented by the character education system at these two schools
by looking specifically at three research questions:

How do the two schools differ and align in their approach to character education?

Do families feel invested and/or represented in the character education system of the school?

Do students feel invested and/or represented in the character education system of the school?

Using comparative data analysis, this study found that while both parents and students felt
strongly that character education should be taught in schools, and that character education would
positively impact academic success, students felt that the current character education programs
did not fully represent what is important to them and their families.

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

INTRODUCTION
School Overviews
STRIVE-Montbello is a middle school located in Far Northeast Denver, in the Montbello
neighborhood. STRIVE is a charter network that was founded in 2006 with one middle school.
Since 2006, the network has grown and currently includes six middle schools and two high
schools, and has further plans to expand. This is the second year that STRIVE has had a
Montbello campus, and the school currently includes around 220 - 6th and 7th graders. STRIVEs
mission is to provide a college preparatory education to students in low-income communities.
Montbello has undergone some major demographic shifts over the past decade, changing from a
predominantly Black community to a more mixed community of Latino and Black families. This
shift can even be seen in the demographics of the 6th and 7th grade students at STRIVEMontbello, where the 7th grade has a mixed demographic, and the 6th grade has a predominantly
Latino population.
Denver Center for International Studies at Fairmont, commonly referred to as DCIS, is an
innovative public school that opened in August 2013 in Southwest Denver. DCIS offers an
international curriculum to students in ECE through 5th grade. The mission of DCIS is to help
students grow as independent thinkers eager to lead their world and their community. Students at
DCIS come from a variety of backgrounds, with 85% of students who qualify for the Free and
Reduced lunch program. In the transition between the former Fairmont Elementary School and
the opening of DCIS, there has been a huge demographic shift in the student population. For
example, the amount of Latino students decreased from 88% in the 2012-2013 school year to
78% of the student population this year.

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

Character Education
Character education is a critical topic built into the curriculum of both school models. At
STRIVE-Montbello, character education classes are taught every second or third Friday. Topics
are determined by the grade level team, and the teacher of each lesson rotates between the grade
level team. Example topics covered so far this year include: Respect, Organization, Conflict
Resolution, Code Switching and Suicide Awareness. DCIS at Fairmont has a school wide
character education program focused on four character core values. The four core values,
determined through a staff voting and elimination process, are: Respect, Perseverance, Joy, and
Integrity. In addition, teachers implement individualized character education lessons into their
own classrooms.
The researchers, and current teachers in these two school models, recognize that they
have biases due to the identities that they carry. All three researchers identify with many of the
dominant groups (white, able-bodied, heterosexual, middle/upper class), and acknowledge that
this is not the case for the majority of their students. Therefore, as character education programs
are being encouraged and implemented in both school models, mostly by the teachers, it is
important to understand the impact these programs are having on students, and ensure that these
programs align with the ideas and values represented within the school community.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Defining Character Education
James Leming explains that the character education movement lacks either a single theoretical
perspective or a common core of practice. The movement is eclectic both in terms of its
psychological premises and its pedagogical practices, (Nickell, 2001). Educators argue whether

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

character development should be a common core of practice or something unique and

responsive to the guidance of the individual community (Nickell, 2001). Hayes et al. believes
that a one-size fits all approach to education does not meet the many diverse needs of schools
and communities, and can potentially exacerbate problems as the stakeholders do not feel
ownership of the program, (2006). Even more problematic, there is not a standard definition
that is decided upon for what constitutes character education.
What Works in Character Education defines character education as any school-based K12 initiatives either intended to promote the development of some aspect of student character or
for which some aspect of student character was measured as a relevant outcome variable,
(Berkowitz & Bier, 2006). Perhaps more straightforward, Howard, Berkowitz, and Schaeffer
define character education as the process of defining what is the ethically correct action and
having the integrity, or character, to do the right thing is an ongoing element of the human
experience, (2004). Furthermore, researchers Joao Lopes, Celia Oliveira, Lauren Reed, and
Robert A. Gable define the use of character education as ...to describe numerous aspects of the
teaching and learning process to individual student development, (Lopes et al, 2013). They
believe that in order for character education be effective and fully functional, there needs be a
consistency in communication, behavior, values and social norms taught throughout the school.
Every teacher, administrator, and student in the school needs be informed and reflective about
the current character education system.

History of Character Education

Since the beginning of public schooling, character education has had a presence in schools as a
component of educating our citizens. Especially as schooling became compulsory in the United
States at the beginning of the 1900s, there was emerging concern that values of the home be

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

reinforced in the classroom and that the children of others--particularly immigrants--learn and
practice them as well, (Howard et al., 2004, p. 190). For this reason in particular, women
traditionally filled the roles of teachers, as they were seen to be good role models with strong
moral guidance.
Between the 1940s and 1960s, many people were opposed to character education in
response to national events occurring. People became concerned that teaching character in
schools was an invasion of students and families privacy. In the 1960s, there was a perceived
erosion of moral authority based on opposition to U.S. policy in the war in Vietnam, support for
the civil rights movement, challenges to traditional sexual norms and values, and a growing
cultural pluralism across generations with an increasing diversity of the population, (Howard et
al., 2004, p. 194). This was also around the same time when the Supreme Court banned teacherled prayers in public classrooms...perceived [by many] as tantamount to banning character
education, (Howard et al., 2004, p. 194).
However, the pendulum swung back in the direction of religious ways in the 1970s and
80s. In reaction to these secular rulings, religious conservatives across the land believed that
America was becoming more secular and the youth of the nation were not being given the
religious-based education they needed to make sense of the world, (Davis, 2006). People started
to take action against the rise of bullying and the tide of moral decay in America, (Nickell,
2001). Even dating back to the 1920s, schools have adopted plans for a character education
curriculum. The Character Education Partnership reports that 18 states currently mandate
character education, an additional 18 states encourage character education, and 7 states support
character education without formal legislation, (Hayes, Lewis, & Robinson, 2011). Despite

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

recognizing the need for character development programs, there are still many questions and
challenges regarding its implementation.

Outcomes of Character Education

As Howard et al. notes, teachers are often much more engaged in the implementation rather than
on the evaluation of character education programs (2004, p. 205). There is no standard criteria
for the plethora of character education programs available, which makes it very difficult to judge
the success of any program. Often unrelated benchmarks, such as test scores and attendance, are
being used to measure the effectiveness of a schools character education program, (Hayes et
al., 2006). Lopez et al. cited a study that found a strong interrelationship between schools who
implement character education and high test scores. They found there were fewer behavior
problems, a higher level of communication within the community, and an increase in academic
success, (Lopez et al, 2013). Yet it remains difficult to design evidence-based outcomes for a
character curriculum, simply due to the fact that its content is highly subjective. Consequently, it
feels impossible to review the effectiveness of individually or school-based and designed
character education programs, (Hayes et al., 2006).
Researchers have looked for evidence in schools to show that when students have the
opportunity to build positive relationships with their peers and teachers, and when they have the
opportunity to express their feelings and thoughts, they will be happier and more successful.
Moreover, citizens are realizing that a society cannot operate unless its citizens follow certain
moral principles, and schools are realized that without character education, which can help
establish a good learning environment, education itself may not be effective, (Davis, 2004). For
example, a 2003 study analyzed more than 600 California schools and found a correlation
between the character education of a school and its academic scores, (Perles, 2013). It is also

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

found that the most successful schools offer a well-rounded education focusing on academics,
social, and emotional competencies. Through character education, schools can hope to prevent
negative behaviors that come out later in life such as bullying, stealing, violence, drug use, and
so on. Helen R. Stiff-Williams found The value of high-quality character education has been
associated with improved school climates, increased academic achievement, and improved
human relations. A majority of states now have either a legislative or state education department
requirement that character education can be included in public school instruction, (StiffWilliams, 2010).

Politics of Character Education

To some scholars and researchers, character education is seen as an opportunity to prepare young
people for the future and envision a more democratic society. Brian H. Smith states, Politics is
an important driver of character education because government funding powerfully shapes what
schools do, (Smith, 2013). During the Clinton administration, the U.S. Department of Education
began funding character education programs with competitive grants. For the fiscal year 2003,
the U.S. Department of Education spent $24 million to support character education (Howard et
al., 2004, p. 203).
Guang-Lea Lee and M. Lee Manning believe that the world is decreasing in value, and
people are succumbing to negative interactions with one another. For example, Stiff-Williams
reports The American Academy of Pediatrics findings that the United States has the highest
youth homicide and suicide rates of the twenty-six wealthiest nations in the world (Borba
2001), (Stiff-Williams, 2010). The most powerful way to combat this statistic is to enstill values
in children at a young age. It is the teachers responsibility to prepare children for society by
passing on the values that are the foundation of our society, (Lee et al., 2013). In order to

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

rebuild the foundation of our society, character education must begin at a very young age so that
it will be engrained in childrens beliefs, actions, and thoughts. Through this reconstruction of
society, Lee et al. hope that Children possessing good character will have a profound effect on
the society in which they live and help ensure that todays generation will become leaders who
can contribute to a more respectful and caring world community, (Lee et al., 2013). Though
there is much disagreement surrounding character education, one of the points on which all
approaches to character education in the United States agree is that there is a relationship
between character education and preparing a student to become a democratic citizen, (Howard
et al., 2004, p. 196).

METHODS
Research Questions

How do the two schools differ and align in their approach to character education?

Do families feel invested and/or represented in the character education system of the
school?

Do students feel invested and/or represented in the character education of the school?

Participants
The participants in this study are from two different schools. The first group of participants is
first and third grade students and parents/guardians at DCIS at Fairmont, located in the Baker
Neighborhood of Denver. The second group of participants in the study is seventh grade students
and parents/guardians at STRIVE-Montbello Middle School, located in Far Northeast Denver.

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

10

Perception Survey
The perception survey was given to twenty, first grade students, and thirty, third grade students
at DCIS at Fairmount, and 102, seventh graders at STRIVE-Montbello. All student participants
are current students of the researchers. Each student also received a survey to give to their
parents. Student surveys were all given in English. Parent/Guardian surveys were given in
English and Spanish. The majority of survey questions were posed to both students and
parents/guardians. Demographic questions had open answer choices for self-identification, and
included:: Gender, Ethnicity, Primary Language, Religious Affiliation. Informational questions
regarding the topic of character education included:
Do you feel the values at STRIVE/DCIS are building your (students) character?
Do the values represent what is important to you and your family?
Who do you feel should decide the values taught in school?
Do you believe teaching values in school will positively impact your (students) academic
success?
Do you think values should be taught in schools?
If we could only teach you three values at school, which three are the most important to
you?
Would you like to have more of a voice in the values we teach at STRIVE/DCIS?

In addition to the aforementioned questions, on the student survey it also asked if students
feel the character education values that we have taught them this year have helped them grow as
an individual, and on the parent/guardian survey it asked parents the length of time they had been
part of the community. Both the student and parent/guardian surveys are included as appendices.

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

11

Data Collection
This study follows a mixed research method model, indicating that both qualitative and
quantitative data were used to inform the research. The mixed research method allows
researchers to gather information across various indicators to better inform how students and
families in these two schools perceive character education.
In addressing the first research question, qualitative data was collected through informal
discussions between the three researchers regarding the two schools in question. To answer the
second and third research questions, qualitative data was gathered through perception surveys
given during the week of April 7, 2014.

DATA ANALYSIS/RESULTS
Data Analysis
Similarity and difference data (research question #1) between the DCIS at Fairmont and
STRIVE-Montbello character education programs was collected between February 22, 2014 and
April 18, 2014. All data is qualitative and will be addressed in the discussion section.
Quantitative data gathered from the perception survey is addressed here. Demographic
data is reported in Table 1 and Table 2.Table 1 includes demographic data of the student
participants in this analysis for each school. Table 2 includes demographic data of the
parent/guardian participants in this analysis for each school.

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

12

Table 1. Student Demographics

Demographics

STRIVE Montbello

DCIS 1st Graders

DCIS 3rd Graders

Gender
Female
Male

52
50

10
9

15
14

Ethnicity
African American
Black
Hispanic
Latino/a
Mexican
Mixed
White

11
13
5
6
44
12
5

0
7
7
0
0
4
7

4
7
7
2
2
5
7

Other
No Response

1
5

1
0

0
2

Primary Language
English
Spanish
Both

64
2
10

19
0
0

22
6
0

No Response

26

STRIVE Montbello

DCIS 1st Graders

DCIS 3rd Graders

Gender
Female
Male

30
3

21
4

17
2

Ethnicity
African American
Black
Hispanic
Latino/a
Mexican
Mixed
White

2
4
15
1
3
1
2

0
0
6
0
0
4
10

1
0
9
0
0
1
6

Table 2. Parent/Guardian Demographics

Demographics

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

13

Other
No Response

1
4

1
0

1
2

Primary Language
English
Spanish
Both

11
13
1

24
1
0

17
2
0

No Response

In Table 2, it is important to recognize that there were significantly more females that
completed the perception survey than males.
Comparative analysis was used to identify and discuss variances between: student
responses and parent/guardian responses, responses based on gender, and responses based on
ethnicity. In comparing these variances, data is no longer separated by individual schools.

Quantitative Results
Tables 3 - 10 include comparative statistics for the questions posed on the perception survey.
Although student and parent/guardian data is similar in many ways, such as the majority belief
that character education should be taught in schools, they also differ in numerous ways.
In Table 3, it is very apparent that overall, many more students and parents/guardians
know the character education values taught at the two schools being discussed, than those who
did not. More students (82.5%) knew the values than parents/guardians (71.4%). This data makes
sense, as students are surrounded by the values for a minimum of eight hours per day.

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

14

Table 3. Knowledge of STRIVE/DCIS values

Response
Knew ALL values
Knew SOME values
Knew NO values

Students (150 total)

Parents (77 total)

82.5 %
12.8 %
0.05 %

71.4 %
24.3 %
14.3 %

Tables 4 and 5 show that both students and parents/guardians strongly believe that
teaching character education in schools helps to build students character, and will positively
impact students academic success. A much greater percent of parents/guardians said this was
always true than students, a difference of 32.9% for building character, and 29.5% for academic
success.
Table 4. Building character
Response
Score
1 (Never)
2 (Sometimes)
3 (Neutral)
4 (Mostly)
5 (Always)

Students (150 total)

Parents (77 total)

7.4 %
12.1 %
25.6 %
32.2 %
22.8 %

0.0 %
8.6 %
5.8 %
30.0 %
55.7 %

Students (150 total)

Parents (77 total)

2.7 %
5.4 %
14.8 %
30.2 %
46.3 %

0.0 %
2.9 %
1.4 %
17.1 %
75.8 %

Table 5. Academic success

Response
Score
1 (Never)
2 (Sometimes)
3 (Neutral)
4 (Mostly)
5 (Always)

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

15

Table 6. Representative of individual and family values

Response

Students (150 total)

Parents (77 total)

7.4 %
14.8 %
20.1.9 %
26.2 %
30.1 %

0.0 %
2.9 %
7.1 %
27.1 %
62.9 %

Score
1 (Never)
2 (Sometimes)
3 (Neutral)
4 (Mostly)
5 (Always)

Directly addressing the second and third research questions, Table 6 presents data
regarding the degree to which students and parents/guardians feel the current STRIVE/DCIS
character education values represent the individual and family values. While overall, students
and parents/guardians felt the values were more representative of individual values and family
values than not, once again, parents/guardians said they strongly agree to a much higher degree
than students did.
Table 7 shows the data addressing whether students and parents/guardians feel that
character education should be taught in schools. 68.6 % of parents/guardians felt that character
education should always be taught in school. Not a single parent/guardian said that they did not
believe that character education should be taught in schools, and only six out of seventy
parents/guardians that returned the survey said character education should sometimes be taught
in school, or felt neutral about the question.

Table 7. Character education in schools

Response
Score
1 (Never)
2 (Sometimes)
3 (Neutral)
4 (Mostly)
5 (Always)

Students (150 total)

Parents (77 total)

3.4 %
9.4 %
15.4 %
24.2 %
47.0 %

0.0 %
1.4 %
7.1 %
20.0 %
68.6 %

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

16

In the student survey, students were asked if they felt they were growing as individuals
due to the character education they were currently receiving. Table 8 displays the data linked to
that question. Overall, 71.1% of students felt they were experiencing individual growth to some
degree. This data almost matches perfectly to the 71.2 % of students that agreed that character
education should be taught in school. Fewer students felt that they were not growing than
students who said character education should not be taught in school.
Table 8. Individual growth of students due to character education
Response
Score
1 (Never)
2 (Sometimes)
3 (Neutral)
4 (Mostly)
5 (Always)

Students (149 total)

4.0 %
3.4 %
22.1 %
31.5 %
39.6 %

When asked to pick three character education values to teach in school, students and
parents/guardians agreed on 66.7% of the values. Students and parents/guardians believe that
respect and honesty are two of the three values that are most important to teach in character
education. Students believed that self-control and trust were the most important values after
respect and honesty. Parents/guardians identified responsibility as the third most important value
to teach in character education programs.
Of the 34 character education values offered as choices, there were only five values that
not a single participant chose. Those values were: diligence, resilience, humility, virtue and
generosity.

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

17

Table 9. Character education values to teach

Response
Values
Citizenship
Compassion
Compromise
Courage
Creativity
Diligence
Empathy
Enthusiasm
Forgiveness
Generosity
Gratitude
Grit
Honesty
Humility
Independence
Integrity
Intelligence
Joy
Kindness
Leadership
Loyalty
Obedience
Other
Passion
Perseverance
Resilience
Respect
Responsibility
Self-Control
Teamwork
Tolerance
Trust
Virtue
Wisdom

Students

Parents

1.0 %
0.2 %
0.2 %
1.0 %
5.1 %
0.4 %
1.1 %
0.4 %
2.5 %
0.4 %
0.4 %
1.0 %
7.8 %
0.0 %
2.7 %
1.8 %
3.4 %
4.5 %
2.9 %
6.7 %
5.4 %
1.1 %
0.7 %
1.1 %
2.2 %
0.0 %
11.0 %
5.4 %
7.4 %
6.7 %
1.6 %
7.4 %
3.8 %
1.3 %

1.9 %
1.0 %
0.5 %
1.4 %
1.0 %
0.0 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.0 %
0.5 %
1.0 %
10.5 %
0.5 %
3.8 %
7.1 %
4.3 %
1.9 %
5.7 %
8.6 %
1.4 %
1.0 %
0.0 %
1.0 %
7.1 %
0.0 %
21.0 %
10.5 %
3.3 %
6.7 %
1.0 %
1.9 %
0.0 %
0.5 %

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

18

Table 10. Student and parent voice in character education

Response

Students (150 total)

Parents (77 total)

No
Yes

16.1 %
84.6 %

18.3 %
76.0 %

No Response

0.0 %

5.7 %

The final table, Table 10, shows the results to the final question on both the student and
parent/guardian question on the perception survey. The question asked if either party would like
more of a voice in determining what is taught during character education at STRIVE and DCIS.
Both parties said that they would like to have more of a voice in character education. What was
significant about the parent/guardian parties that said no is that while there were many fewer
white families that completed the survey, a large majority of them chose No when asked if
they wanted more of a voice.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION
In terms of character education, all of the questions should be the subject of moral discourse
between and among people with open and critical minds, (Howard et al., 2004, p. 201). This
study aimed to compare two different school approaches towards character education and
discover what impact, if any, those efforts had on students and their families. Considering both
schools make space in their instructional time to teach students about character, the researchers
wanted to know if students and their families felt represented and/or invested in the values the
teachers and schools are hoping to instill in their students. After analyzing two schools in
different communities, with varying age groups and ethnicities, the researchers were able to find
consistencies and dissimilarities between community perceptions of character education. In

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

19

general the researchers found that parents overwhelmingly supported the idea of character
education in schools, and believes that such practices lead to building character and improved
academics. This is significant because people have not always historically shown support for
teaching character in our schools.
The findings of the study were at times surprising, and at other times predictable. When
the researchers asked students and parents what their three most important values were, the
answers spanned nearly the entire provided list. Though there were a few that were favored more
so than others, such as respect and honesty, these preferences only lead by a small margin. This
echoes the common perception that character education is subjective, and thus difficult to assess
or evaluate. Furthermore, parents and students provided a combination of all answers for who
should be the ones to decide the values taught in character education; data does not show that
community members believe one specific party should have the responsibility of designing the
character education curriculum. The idea of teachers, parents, students, school administration,
and the school district all coming together to decide upon the essential character values lends
itself as an opportunity for further research.
A significant finding that the researchers analyzed was the amount of white parents who
said No when asked if they want more of a voice in the values we teach at STRIVE and DCIS.
For example, out of the 19 third grade parents at DCIS who completed the survey, 6 of them
identified as white families. Five out of the six families marked No they do not want a voice in
deciding which values are taught, while all non-white parents (Hispanic, Black, and Mixed)
voted Yes, they do want more of a voice. There could be many reasons why families who are
not a part of the dominant white culture feel like they want to have a voice in the values being
taught. White families may trust that the school has chosen values that represent their culture

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

20

more than non-white families. White families may have felt more represented in school when
they were students, and therefore dont question a schools curriculum or agenda as frequently.
Non-white families may want to remain as involved in important decision-making opportunities
as possible, so that their children are receiving the education that includes their identities. NonWhite families may not feel informed on the current values system, and want to be more a part of
the process to feel validated.
The process in which DCIS at Fairmont decided on the four core values was through an
in-depth voting process that involved all staff members in the school. It was a bottom-up process
that ensured all voices among the staff were heard and appreciated. There were not any family
members who were invited into the process, other than family members who were on the staff.
The first step was coming up with five values that were important to each staff member as
individuals. The next step was fusing those five values from each staff member into a larger list
of values. DCIS then broke into teams of six to discuss to strengths and weaknesses of each
value. After DCIS chose the values they felt would represent their community well and set us up
for a strong foundation, DCIS came back together as a whole group to chose 3 to 5 values to
agree upon. This process was very detailed and thorough, because DCIS was aware of the
impact that a strong set of values can have on a community. There was a common understanding
that these chosen values would lay out the groundwork for our success.
There were a few limitations in the study that may have prevented the researchers from
gaining well-rounded insight into how families and students perceive the values taught at
STRIVE and DCIS. First, not all families were given the survey - only 77 families completed
this survey from both schools. Due to time constraints and convenience, the researchers
distributed the perception survey to families in their classrooms only. Furthermore, the return

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

21

rate of the surveys was low, which left the researchers with a lower number of surveys to analyze
and collect data from than was expected. Even though the families who returned the survey
represented diverse backgrounds, the researchers werent able to hear the voice of all families.
Second, not all students at STRIVE and DCIS were given the survey - only 150 students
completed it, which is a small fraction of the schools student bodies. If the researchers would
have distributed the survey to all students, the data would look slightly different. For example,
the researchers only considered how first and third graders perceived the values taught at DCIS;
if the researchers would have distributed the survey to fifth graders as well, they would have had
more years of experience to speak from. Another limitation identified from the student survey
was that at times, the student responses did not reflect the actions the researchers observe in
class. Though the motive is unknown, this may be a result of students taking the opportunity to
voice their opinions out of resistance, rather than realistic experiences. It could have also been a
lack of understanding the survey structure. Lastly, the researchers did not inquire what other
teachers or staff members believed about character education. The researchers completed the
research from our own perspective, without including other staff members.
One of the more surprising occurrences during the research was that students were more
critical of the character education systems than were parents or families. The students were not
as convinced that character education improved their academic success or helped to build their
character. They were also more hesitant about including character education in schools. This is
an opportunity for further research, and to hear more about why students hold this resistance.
The next step in the research could be to host a forum where students can explain their thoughts
in a deeper way than permitted in a survey format. Out of 150 students, 84.6% claimed they

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

would like to have more of a voice in deciding the values that we teach. A continued research
study would give these students the space to voice their opinions.

22

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

23

REFERENCES
Berkowitz, M. W., & Bier M. C. (2006). What works in character education: A research driven
guide for educators. Washington, DC: Character Education Partnership.
http://www.rucharacter.org/file/practitioners_518.pdf

Davis, D. H. (2004). Character education in Americas public schools. Journal of Church-State

48 (1), 5-14. Retrieved from: http://jcs.oxfordjjournals.org/

Hayes, B. G., Lewis, S. V., & Robinson E. H. (2011). Implementing an authentic character
education curriculum. Association for Childhood Education International 87.4, 227.

Howard, R. W., Berkowitz, M. W., & Schaeffer E. F. (2004). Politics of character education.
Educational Policy 18, 188. DOI: 10.1177/0895904803260031

Lee, G., Manning M. L. (September - October 2013). Character Education Around the World:
Encouraging Positive Character Traits. Childhood Education, 89.5, p283.

Lopes, J., Oliveira, C., Reed, L., & Gable, R. A. (September - October 2013). Character
Education in Portugal. Childhood Education, 89.5, p286.

Nickell, P., & Field, S. (2001). Elementary character education: local perspectives, echoed
voices. International Journal of Social Education, 16(1), 1-17. Retrieved from
http://tb4cz3en3e.search.serialssolutions.com

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

24

Perles, K. (2013). Character Education: Good Hearts Lead to Good Grades. Education.com.
Retrieved from http://www.education.com/magazine/article/character-educationclassroom-improve-academic/.

Smith, B. H. (November-December 2013). School-based character education in the United

States. Childhood Education, 89.6, p350.

Stiff-Williams, H. R. (2010). Widening the Lens to Teach Character Education Alongside

Standards Curriculum. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues
and Ideas, 83.4, 115-120. Retrieved by http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00098651003653030.

Weissberg, R.P., & Cascarino, J. (2013). Academic learning + social-emotional learning =

national priority. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(2), 8-13.

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

25

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

Character Education Student Survey

Your Name (Optional): ___________________________________
Gender:

_____ Female
_____ Male

Ethnicity: _____________________________________
Primary Language: __________________________
Religious Affiliation: _______________________________
Can you name the STRIVE/DCIS values?
1.

3.

2.

4.

5.

6.

Circle the answer choice that best represents your beliefs:

1 = Never

2 = Sometimes

3= Neutral

4= Mostly

5=Always

Do you feel the values at STRIVE/DCIS are building your character?

1

Do the values represent what is important to you and your family?

1

Who do you feel should decide the values taught in school?

Teachers

Families

Students

School District

School Administration

Other: _________________________________
Do you believe teaching values in school will positively impact your academic success?
1

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

26

Do you think values should be taught in schools?

1

Do you feel the character education values that we have taught you this year have helped you grow
as an individual?
1

If we could ONLY teach you three values at school, which three are the most important to you?
Joy

Respect

Teamwork

Leadership

Tolerance

Creativity

Honesty

Independence

Responsibility

Grit

Compromise

Empathy

Gratitude

Diligence

Generosity

Courage

Wisdom

Compassion

Citizenship

Loyalty

Trust

Enthusiasm

Resilience

Passion

Obedience

Self-Control

Humility

Integrity

Kindness

Forgiveness

Virtue

Perseverance

Intelligence

Other: ______________________________________________
Would you like to have more of a voice in the values we teach at STRIVE/DCIS?
_______Yes

_________No

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

27

APPENDIX B
Dear Families,
I am conducting a research study for my Graduate coursework for the University of Colorado
Denver. The study is focusing on whether families feel represented by the character education
(values) taught in our school. I would greatly appreciate if you took a few minutes to fill out this
survey in order to help me understand how the values at our school impact your family. Please
return this to me by Wednesday, April 16th. Thank you.
Your Name (Optional): ___________________________________
Your Students Name: _______________________________
Gender:

_____ Female
_____ Male

Ethnicity: _____________________________________
Primary Language: __________________________
Religious Affiliation: _______________________________
How many years have you been a part of this community? ______________________________
Can you name the STRIVE/DCIS values?
1.

3.

2.

4.

5.

6.

Please circle the answer choice that best represents your beliefs:
1 = Never

2 = Sometimes

3= Neutral

4= Mostly

5=Always

Do you feel the STRIVE/DCIS values are building your childs character?
1

Do the values represent what is important to you and your family?

1

CHARACTER EDUCATION IN TWO SCHOOLS

28

Who do you feel should decide the values taught in school?

Teachers

Families

Students

School District

School Administration

Other: _________________________________
Do you believe teaching values in school will positively impact your childs academic success?
1

Do you think values should be taught in schools?

1

If we could ONLY teach your student three values at school, which three are the most important to
you?
Joy

Respect

Teamwork

Leadership

Tolerance

Creativity

Honesty

Independence

Responsibility

Grit

Compromise

Empathy

Gratitude

Diligence

Generosity

Courage

Wisdom

Compassion

Citizenship

Loyalty

Trust

Enthusiasm

Resilience

Passion

Obedience

Self-Control

Humility

Integrity

Kindness

Forgiveness

Virtue

Perseverance

Intelligence

Other: ______________________________________________
Would you like to have more of a voice in the values we teach at STRIVE/DCIS?
_______Yes

_________No