Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Understanding Character Education PDF
Understanding Character Education PDF
W
66
IE
EV
COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
W
This is to certify that the dissertation by
Wanda Robinson-Lee
IE
has been found to be complete and satisfactory in all respects,
EV
and that any and all revisions required by
the review committee have been made.
Review Committee
PR
Walden University
2008
ABSTRACT
by
Wanda Robinson-Lee
W
BA, Elementary Education (K-6), North Carolina Central University
M Ed, Mentally Handicapped (K-12), North Carolina Central University
IE
EV
PR
Walden University
February 2008
ABSTRACT
The lack of research about effective character education programs and caring community
programs. The theoretical framework was based on the belief that all stakeholders must
support an effective character education program. This evaluative case study explored the
efficacy of one character education program in a middle school in eastern North Carolina
from the perspective of 20 adult participants. Data were collected through face-to-face
W
interviews, the distribution of a 43-item survey to 27 participants of administrators,
teachers, and parents, and the analyses of archival documents to determine if the school
IE
was a caring community and if the goals of the character education program were met.
Data were managed with the ATLAS.ti software, and analyzed using Miles and
EV
which were then used to determine the efficacy of the program. The major finding was
that this program was not completely effective in meeting its goals. There is a need to
create a more caring community, and integrate character education throughout the
curriculum. Administrators, educators, and parents want to provide students with tools to
help improve society. This study explicates how administrators, educators, parents, and
community members need to work together to insure that character education programs
are successful. The findings in this study could assist schools in the implementation of
by
Wanda Robinson-Lee
W
M Ed, Mentally Handicapped (K-12), North Carolina Central University
IE
EV
Doctor of Philosophy
Educational Leadership K-12
Walden University
February 2008
UMI Number: 3304039
W
IE
EV
PR
This dissertation is dedicated to my father, Charlie Lee Robinson, and to the fond
and loving memories of my mother, Lillie Vernice Prince Robinson, who provided me
with strict, invaluable lessons that inspired and directed me throughout my life’s journey.
W
IE
EV
PR
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
“For his anger endureth but a moment: in his favour is life: Weeping may endure
Many tears have been shed as I passed on this road that sometimes seemed so
dark and dreary, but there was always hope that there would be a brighter day. As I
traveled on this Walden journey, I faced many obstacles. My home was totally destroyed
by fire, with family pictures, special mementos, and all the KAMS and textbooks gone. I
was devastated, but faith in God and encouragement from Dr. Simon, friends, and family
W
members strengthened me to really believe that “all things work together for the good of
IE
those that love the Lord.” Two months later, I received another setback when my mother
passed away from colon cancer. This was a very trying time, but I trusted and believed
EV
that God never makes a mistake and that my mother was in a much better place. God is
so awesome, and I give him all the praise, honor, and glory for all that He has done. He
has strategically placed people in my path to assist, encourage, pray for, and support me
PR
Larron, LaDonte’, and Laurence Lee, for their love, support, and all the special prayers.
My children are super “special angels” because they encouraged me with the Word of
God when I didn’t have confidence in myself. I am very much indebted to Dr. Marilyn
Simon, my mentor, who was always there providing me with support to get things done.
When I was unsure of my direction, she was my guiding light; thank you, Dr. Simon.
ii
A special thanks to my dissertation committee, Dr. Marilyn Simon, chair, and Dr.
Elaine Spaulding and Dr. Linda Crawford, for showing me that each individual is
important in his or her own way while working together as a team so that goals may be
family, and especially the Women of Faith for their prayers and words of support. I offer
a special thank you to my brothers and their wives, my sisters and confidantes Debra and
Shirley, for understanding and being there for me. I would also like to remember my
prayer partners and Women of God Joceilyn Wallace, Sharon Williams, and Jewel
W
Williams. Numerous people aided me on this journey. I may not name each and every
IE
one, but I would be remiss to fail to mention Dr. Kyla Kurrian, Dr. Paul Mehas, Dr. Craig
McPhadden, Mr. Donald Bryant, and Mr. Moses Mitchener for providing skill and
EV
knowledge toward the collection or analysis of the data in this study.
Finally, special thanks are extended to the research participants; you were greatly
coworkers, friends, and fellow doctoral colleagues, who supported my endeavors with
their labor of love. May God continue to bless each of you for your love and kindness
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
W
Definition of Terms........................................................................................................... 20
Limitations ........................................................................................................................ 22
Delimitations ..................................................................................................................... 23
Assumptions...................................................................................................................... 23
IE
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................. 24
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 24
EV
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................... 26
Research Overview ........................................................................................................... 26
Documentation .................................................................................................................. 28
History and Background of Character Education ............................................................. 29
Controversy of Character Education ................................................................................. 35
PR
W
Pilot Study Administrator Participant 2 ...................................................................... 89
Pilot Study Parent Participant 3 .................................................................................. 90
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 91
IE
Pilot Study Findings.......................................................................................................... 92
Case Study Participants..................................................................................................... 94
Efficacy of Character Education ....................................................................................... 96
Case Study Administrator Participants ........................................................................... 103
EV
Character Education and Student Discipline .................................................................. 103
Case Study Parent Participants ....................................................................................... 106
Parental Awareness of Character Education ................................................................... 106
Major Themes Supportive of Findings ........................................................................... 110
Curriculum Subthemes Supportive of Findings.............................................................. 113
PR
W
Perceptions of Support and Care by and for Faculty and Staff....................................... 132
Adult Stakeholder Respondents to Question 26 ....................................................... 132
Adult Stakeholder Respondents to Question 29 ....................................................... 133
IE
Adult Stakeholder Respondents to Question 31 ....................................................... 134
Adult Stakeholder Respondents to Question 32 ....................................................... 134
Adult Stakeholder Respondents to Question 34 ....................................................... 135
Adult Stakeholder Respondents to Question 35 ....................................................... 135
EV
Adult Stakeholder Respondents to Question 36 ....................................................... 135
Adult Stakeholder Respondents to Question 38 ....................................................... 136
Adult Stakeholder Respondents to Question 39 ....................................................... 136
Adult Stakeholder Respondents to Question 40 ....................................................... 137
Perceptions of Support and Care by and for Parents ...................................................... 137
PR
W
APPENDIX C: NOTIFICATION TO DR. LICKONA TO USE SURVEY .................. 185
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 6. Central Themes or Primary Codes for Adult Stakeholders .............................. 110
W
Table 8. Likert-Type Scale Values and Responses for Questions 1, 4, 7, 9, 12, 15, 17, 20,
IE
and 23 ...................................................................................................................... 120
Table 9. Likert-Type Scale Values and Responses to Questions 2, 3, 5, 10, 13, 16, 18, 21,
EV
and 24 ...................................................................................................................... 124
Table 10. Likert-Type Scale Values and Responses to Questions 6, 8, 11, 14, 19, 22, and
25............................................................................................................................. 129
PR
Table 11. Likert-Type Scale Values and Responses to Questions 26, 29, 31, 32, 34-36,
Table 12. Likert-Type Scale Values and Responses to Questions 27, 28, 30, 33, 37, 41,
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Likert-type scale value for the question “In this school, parents treat other
W
IE
EV
PR
ix
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION TO STUDY
Lickona (1991) suggested schools should take a primary role in teaching children
principles such as honesty, respect, and integrity while other researchers such as Hulbert
who are not necessarily comfortable with teachers taking over their role in developing
W
their child’s moral fiber.
IE
Spock (1960) addressed the need to prepare children for adulthood and noted that
teachers, as experts in education, have the skills and abilities to offer children a moral as
EV
well as an academic education. In contrast, Covey (1997) noted parents were their child’s
first mentor, providing children with opportunities for appropriate challenges and
opportunities to make choices, and they should not abdicate this role to teachers. Before
PR
education to help cure moral problems of society including street crime, violence in
schools, drug use, teen pregnancy, and the decline in good manners (Davis, 2003).
character education and civic education plan to change school culture through community
Instruction (NCDPI), the North Carolina Center for the Prevention of School Violence
completed a 5-year grant project to develop and gather resources to assist schools in a
2
system-wide approach to implement character education (p. 91). The partnership was
Wake County. School boards and superintendents developed a policy for using the
NCCEP model. The central office appointed a lead person to coordinate, monitor, and
the schools; and present a guide on possible ways to implement the NCCEP model. The
central office also requested the principals determine how the model could be
implemented at each school. The principals appointed a person in the school to review
W
the assessments; identify the strengths, best practices, and weaknesses of the current
IE
program; and then resubmit to the designees. Reports were revised and goals were set to
implement the character education accountability requirements. However, there has yet to
EV
be an assessment of the success of individual schools in implementing character
The NCDPI (2001) and the NCCEP model focused on student achievement and
PR
three components of character education: (a) community and parental involvement, (b)
school climate in reference to character education, and (c) the integration of character in
the curriculum to develop model programs that strengthen and promote character in
partners. This is in accord with the Student Citizen Act (2001), which recommended
eight character traits for character education instruction: courage, good judgment,
(2002) identified the following components from Lickona, Schaps, and Lewis’s (1994)
Eleven Principles of Effective Character Education as a format for the NCDPI (2001)
NCCEP model to help principals plan and evaluate character education programs:
3
1. Character education promotes core ethical values as the basis of good
character.
2. Character must be defined to include thinking and behavior.
3. Effective character education requires an intentional, proactive, and
comprehensive approach that promotes core values in all stages of life.
4. The school must be a caring community.
5. To develop character, students need opportunities for moral action.
6. Character education includes a meaningful and challenging curriculum
that respects and helps all learners succeed.
7. Character education should strive to develop student intrinsic
motivation.
8. The school staff becomes a moral and learning community and shares
responsibility of character education.
9. Character education requires moral leadership from staff and student
leaders.
W
10. The school must recruit parents and community members for the
character-building effort.
11. Evaluations of character education should assess the functioning of the
IE
school educators and the extent that students manifest good character.
(Positive Action, 2005, pp. 1-4)
by the Center for the 4th and 5th Rs, helped schools assess themselves as caring
were asked how the character education program was affecting student behaviors. Several
schools attempted to meet this challenge, but a formal evaluation on what worked and
drug use, teen pregnancy, and a decline in good manners. In addition, there has been an
increase in sexual and physical abuse of children, excessive desire for money and
material possessions, an increase in juveniles carrying and using weapons, and the failure
in respect for life with explicit sex and violence. Online bullying is also a growing
4
problem threatening the social lives of children in the United States, with about one in
four students believed to have been bullied online (Giannetti & Sagarese, 2004). To deal
with these social problems, there has been a re-evaluation of the school’s role in teaching
values. The Student Citizen Act of 2001 encouraged schools in the United States to
implement character education and civic plans to change school culture. North Carolina
Carolina Character Education Partnership (NCCEP) and the Center for the Prevention of
W
citizenship at all levels of education. There is thus a need for an increased understanding
IE
about character education programs in schools. However, there has been no formal
assessment of the efficacy of these programs. The problem addressed in this evaluative
EV
case study was the need to understand the effectiveness of the character education
program.
intensively the many phenomena that make up the activities of the unit under study with
the hope of being of value to the wider population” (p. 366). The evaluative case study
included administrators, teachers, and parents who volunteered to participate in the study.
the researcher collects both quantitative and qualitative data, compares results, and uses
the findings to determine if they validated each other. Fraenkel (1994) used a modified
5
triangulation design to study four high school social studies teachers identified as
outstanding by their peers. In painting a picture of the daily classroom routine, Fraenkel
used qualitative techniques such as class observations, daily logs, and interviews with
teachers and students (p. 444). In addition quantitative instruments such as performance
checklists, rating scales, and discussion flowcharts were used. The interviews,
observations, and quantitative measures collected were used in the triangulation method.
the qualitative technique for this evaluative case study to develop an understanding of the
W
participants’ perspectives of the effectiveness of the character education program in the
IE
middle school. In addition, the survey instrument (SCCP-II) was the quantitative tool that
provided all teachers, administrators, and parents at the case study school an opportunity
EV
to share feedback of the school as a caring community in relation to character education.
teacher lesson plans used to evaluate the character education program. Interviewees
PR
determined the most appropriate times for the individual interviews that took place.
(p. 101). In addition to the interviews and surveys, relevant documents in relation to the
character education and other archival records explored the effectiveness of the character
education program in the school. This evaluative case study profoundly explored and
analyzed the effectiveness of the character education program in the middle school from
The research questions that this evaluative case study attempted to answer were as
follows:
Carolina middle school perceive the effectiveness of the character education program
middle school in eastern North Carolina are in need of improvement based on the opinion
W
of the administrators, teachers, and parents?
IE
Research Question 3: To what extent is the middle school a caring community?
Purpose Statement
EV
The purpose of this evaluative case study was to explore the effectiveness of a
character education program in a middle school in North Carolina and determine if the
the effectiveness of a character education program that had been operational for 1 year.
Rather than isolating the variables, Yin (2003) suggested multiple sources of evidence
provide quality and more convincing and accurate information than do single sources of
evidence (p. 98). Data were obtained from a collection of qualitative and quantitative
of archival documents, and surveys. The data were compared and the results of the
findings were used to validate each other in relation to the character education program
from the perspectives of all participants and their use of character education.
7
Background of the Problem
Edgington (2002) posited character education is the fastest growing school reform
movement in the United States. The trend, although controversial, had been to rely on
public schools to educate for character. Williams (2000) purported the dual focus of
of the acts of violence that plagued schools, churches, and community centers had given
more weight to the use of character education (p. 3). In a survey of 280 preservice and
W
classroom teachers, Edgington found 75% of teachers believed character education
IE
should be taught, although 65% were unsure of how to put character education into
practice.
EV
Berkowitz and Bier (2005) identified the importance of public schools and
Berkowitz and Bier studied 33 character education programs across the United States that
PR
participation. The study supported the need for schools and parents to positively
contribute to developing moral integrity in children. Parents were trained, along with staff
members with character education activities and strategies relating to topics of child
rearing, bullying, positive discipline, and risky behavior for parental involvement. The
offered a successful annual read-aloud night for families, giving students an opportunity