Character Education for the 21st Century - Center for Curriculum ...

58 downloads 283 Views 4MB Size Report
Character matters: How to help our children develop good judgment, integrity, and other ... of associated traits and con
Character Education for the 21st Century: What Should Students Learn?

February 2015



Prepared by: Maya Bialik Michael Bogan Charles Fadel Michaela Horvathova With many thanks to: The Department of Education of Alberta, The Department of Education of New South Wales, Scott Cody, Jennifer Groff, Jordan Magid, Peter Nilsson, and Bernie Trilling for their contributions.

With sincere thanks for the generous support to the:

Center for Curriculum Redesign Boston, Massachusetts www.curriculumredesign.org February 2015 Copyright © 2015 Center for Curriculum Redesign. All Rights Reserved.

Table of Contents

......................................................... ii Why Learn Character Qualities ........................................................................ 1 How Would Character Qualities Be Learned ......................................................... 3 Character Qualities Framework ....................................................................... 4 Mindfulness .......................................................................................... 7 Curiosity ............................................................................................. 10 Courage .............................................................................................. 13 Resilience ............................................................................................ 16 Ethics ................................................................................................. 19 Leadership .......................................................................................... 22 Conclusion ............................................................................................... 25 Appendix 1: Evolution of the CCR Character Framework ............................................ 27 Appendix 2: Crosswalk Comparison of the CCR Framework to other Character Frameworks ... 29 Center For Curriculum Redesign Overview

i

About the Center For Curriculum Redesign In   the   21st   century,   humanity   is   facing   severe   dif6iculties   at   the   societal,   economic,   and   personal   levels.   Societally,  we  are  struggling  with  greed  manifested  in  6inancial  instability,  climate  change,  and  personal   privacy  invasions,  and  with  intolerance  manifested  in  religious  fundamentalism,  racial  crises,  and  political   absolutism.   Economically,   globalization   and   innovation   are   rapidly   changing   our   paradigms   of   business.   On   a   personal   level   we   are   struggling   with   6inding   ful6illing   employment   opportunities   and   achieving   happiness.   Technology’s   exponential   growth   is   rapidly   compounding   the   problems   via   automation   and   offshoring,   which   are   producing   social   disruptions.   Educational   progress   is   falling   behind   the   curve   of   technological  progress,  as  it  did  during  the  Industrial  Revolution,  resulting  in  social  pain.     The   Center   for   Curriculum   Redesign   addresses   the   fundamental   question   of   "WHAT   should   students   learn   for   the   21st   century?"   and   openly   propagates   its   recommendations   and   frameworks   on   a   worldwide   basis.   The   CCR   brings   together   non-­‐governmental   organizations,   jurisdictions,   academic   institutions,  corporations,  and  non-­‐pro6it  organizations  including  foundations.    

Knowledge, Skills, Character, and Metacognition CCR   seeks   a   holistic   approach   to   deeply   redesigning   the   curriculum,   by   offering   a   complete   framework   across  the  four  dimensions  of  an  education:  knowledge,  skills,  character,  and  metacognition.  Knowledge   must  strike  a  better  balance  between  traditional  and  modern  subjects,  as  well  as  interdisciplinarity.  Skills   relate   to   the   use   of   knowledge,   and   engage   in   a   feedback   loop   with   knowledge.   Character   qualities   describe   how   one   engages   with,   and   behaves   in,   the   world.   Metacognition   fosters   the   process   of   self-­‐ re6lection  and  learning  how  to  learn,  as  well  as  the  building  of  the  other  three  dimensions.

To learn more about the work and focus of the Center for Curriculum Redesign, please visit our website at www.curriculumredesign.org/about/background


ii

Why Learn Character Qualities?   Since   ancient   times,   the   goal   of   education   has   been   to   cultivate   confident   and   compassionate   students   who   become  successful  learners,  contribute  to  their  communities,  and  serve  society  as  ethical  citizens.  Character   education  is  about  the  acquisition  and  strengthening  of  virtues  (qualities),  values  (ideals  and  concepts),  and   the  capacity  to  make  wise  choices  for  a  well-­‐rounded  life  and  a  thriving  society.   Facing  the  challenges  of  the  21st  century  requires  a  deliberate  effort  to  cultivate  in  students  personal  growth   and   the   ability   to   fulfill   social   and   community   responsibilities   as   global   citizens.   The   Millennium   Project   tracks  30  variables  globally  to  discern  the  State  of  the  World1  and  identifies  “where  we  are  winning,  losing,   and   unclear/little   change.”   Worrisomely,   areas   where   humanity   is   losing   (see   below)   are   largely   ethical   (environmental  issues,  corruption,  terrorism,  income  inequality)2.    

Ecological Footprint / Biocapacity ratio [*10] Economic income inequality (share of top 10%) Terrorism incidents [1/100] Levels of corruption (0=highly corrupt; 6=very clean) O2 emissions from fossil fuel and cement production (billion tonnes) (GtCO2) Forest area (% of land area) Renewable internal freshwater resources per capita (thousand cubic meters)

Figure 1. Millennium Project analysis of areas where we are losing.

At  the  same  time,  advances  in  science  and  technology  are  a  double-­‐edged  sword.  Although  they  provide  more   opportunities  for  global  collaboration  and  progress,  they  also  create  new  ethical  challenges  such  as  the  use  of   nuclear   energy,   pesticides,   genetic   modification   and   more   broadly   a   paradigm   of   material   progress.3   On   a   practical   level,   their   exponential   growth   is   also   rapidly   compounding   problems   via   automation   and   offshoring,  which  are  producing  social  disruptions.    

1

Glenn, J. Gordon, T. J., & Florescu, E. (2007). State of the Future. The Millennium Project.

2

See https://themp.org

3

Eckersley, R. (2001). Postmodern science: The decline or liberation of science? In, Science Communication in Theory and Practice. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 83-94.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

1  

It  is  through  a  sense  of  personal  and  ethical  responsibility  that  students,  the  citizens  of  the  future,  will  be  able   to   make   knowledgeable   and   wise   decisions   that   address   the   challenges   above.   These   are   the   broad   aims   of   character  education:   •

to  build  a  foundation  for  lifelong  learning;  



to  support  successful  relationships  at  home,  in  the  community,  and  in  the  workplace;  and  



to   develop   the   personal   values   and   virtues   for   sustainable   participation   in   a   globalized   world.    

Our  human  interdependency  is  both  our  strength  and  weakness.  In  the  words  of  Nobel  Prize  winner  Christian   de  Duve:  “We  have  evolved  traits  [such  as  group  selfishness]  that  will  lead  to  humanity's  extinction  –  so  we   must   learn   how   to   overcome   them.”4   Indeed   our   collective   well-­‐being   comes   through   our   individual   awareness.     Research   has   shown   that   students’   capacities   beyond   academic   learning   of   knowledge   and   skills   are   important  predictors  of  achievement,5  and  that  it  proves  useful  once  in  the  workforce.  While  knowledge  and   skills  may  or  may  not  be  used  in  future  jobs,  character  qualities  will  invariably  be   applicable  to  a  wide  range   of  professions.    

4

De Duve, C. & Patterson, N. (2010). Genetics of original sin: the impact of natural selection on the future of humanity. Yale University Press.

5

For a review, see Farrington, Camille A., et al. (2012). Teaching Adolescents to Become Learners: The Role of Noncognitive Factors in Shaping School Performance—A Critical Literature Review. Consortium on Chicago School Research.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

2  

How Would Character Qualities Be Learned? In  brief,  it  is  not  the  intent  of  this  paper  to  address  the  “How”  of  teaching  character  qualities,  but  rather  the   “What”  of  what  those  qualities  ought  to  be.  Here  we  provide  a  brief  discussion  of  how  they  might  be  learned   just  to  provide  a  concrete  example  for  both  in  the  classroom  but  also,  critically,  outside  the  classroom  and   even   outside   the   school,   which   will   challenge   traditional   education   systems   to   cater   to   such   needs   via   activities  such  as  scouting,  adventures  such  as  Outward  Bound,  etc.   In  school,  “practices”  will  include  a  wide  range  of  pedagogical  activities  beyond  didactic  instruction,  such  as   play,  inquiry,  debate,  design,  performance,  sports,  and  contemplative   practices.   Each   pedagogical   activity   has   unique  challenges  and  benefits.     Practices  may  feature  characteristics  such  as:   •

Growth  mindset6  



Stages  of  moral  development7  



Systems-­‐awareness  



“Co-­‐opetition”:  Competition  (in  sports,  music,  robotics,  etc.)  and  Collaboration  (team-­‐structured)  



Fail-­‐safely  experimentation,  with  endeavors  that  stretch  the  student  



Processes,  not  just  flat  Knowledge  



Systematically  metacognitive  (reflection  on  processes)  



Longitudinal/multi-­‐year  span  (of  projects,  and  Self  [career  planning,  metacognitive…])  



Senior  citizens  involvement  for  mixed  aged  dynamics  (wisdom,  sensitivity,  etc.)  



Global  cause  involvement  



Internships/job  training  



Embedding  technology  deeply  and  wisely  

6

Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House LLC.

7

Kohlberg, L., Levine, C. & Hewer, A. (1983). Moral stages: A Current Formulation and a Response to Critics: Contributions to Human Development. S Karger Publications.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

3  

Character Qualities Framework   “There  is  every  reason  to  place  renewed  emphasis  on  the  moral  and  cultural  dimensions   of  education…  this  process  must  begin  with  self-­‐understanding  through…  knowledge,   meditation  and  the  practice  of  self-­‐criticism.”   ~ Report from the International Commission on Education in the 21st Century UNESCO 19968 First,   a   definition:   “Character”   encompasses   all   of   “Agency,”   “Attitudes,”   “Behaviors,”   “Dispositions,”   “Mindsets,”   “Personality,”   “Temperament,”   “Values”   aka   “Social   &   Emotional   Skills”9   (OECD).   “Character,”   although  sometimes  charged  with  negative  connotation,  is  a  concise  term  that  is  recognizable  by  all  cultures.     Character  qualities  are  defined  as  distinct  from  Skills,  which  represent  the  ability  to  effectively  use  what  one   knows.  Higher-­‐order  skills  (such  as  the  “4  C’s”  of  Creativity,  Critical  thinking,  Communication,  Collaboration   –   also  known  as  “21st  Century  Skills”10)  are  essential  for  acquisition  and  application  of  Knowledge  as  well  as  for   work  performance.11     "Why   “Qualities”?  Because   “Traits”   are  incorrectly  assumed  by   many  as   fixed   and   immutable".   Herein,   the  

accent  is  placed  on  brain  plasticity,  implying  that  aspects  of  Character  can  be  learned  to  a  certain  extent.12 Why   a   framework?   Simply   because   it   is   human   nature   to   focus   on   what   gets   clearly   identified,   and   even   further,   measured.   It   makes   crisper   the   “design   goals”   of   Character   education.   As   to   what   would   make   a   good   framework,  it  would  need  to  be:  

1. Complete  →  no  major  elements  missing   2. Compact  →  actionable  and  deployable   3. Uncorrelated  →  no  duplication  and  confusion   4. At  the  Appropriate  layer  of  abstraction  →  for  robustness  and  clarity  –  sensical   5. Globally  relevant  →  for  broad  acceptability     As  a  framework  responding  to  all  of  the  aforementioned  criteria  was  not  located,  the  Center  for  Curriculum   Redesign   (CCR)   synthesized   and   then   refined   a   composite   of   many   frameworks   from   around   the   world,   including:  

8

For more information see: www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/leading-the-international-agenda/rethinking-education/visions-of-learning

9

And not the incorrect and incomplete terminology: “non-cognitive skills” or “soft skills”. See: http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/educationandsocialprogress.htm

10

Trilling, B. & Fadel, C. (2009) 21st century skills. Wiley.

11

The Conference Board “Are they really ready to work?”; AMA “Critical skills survey”; PIAAC program (OECD).

12

Lickona, T. (2004). Character matters: How to help our children develop good judgment, integrity, and other essential virtues. Simon and Schuster.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

4  

•    CAEC •    Character  Counts!  Coalition •    CharacterEd.Net •    Character  Education  Partnership •    China  MoE •    Facing  History  and  Ourselves •    KIPP  Schools •    P21.org

•    Royal  Society  for  the  Arts •    Singapore  MoE •    South  Korea  MoE •    CASEL •    Sweden  MoE •    Thailand  MoE •    Young  Foundation  

CCR’s  Character  Framework  also  incorporated  the  education  philosophy  of  thought  leaders  such  as  Howard   Gardner13,  Robert  Sternberg14,  and  Edgar  Morin15,  whose  concepts  are  presented  below:   Gardner: ● Disciplined   ● Synthesizing   ● Creating   ● Respectful   ● Ethical  

Sternberg: ● Practical   ● Analytical   ● Creative   ● Wise  

Morin: ● Pertinence  in  knowledge   ● Confronting  uncertainties   ● Detecting  errors   ● Understanding  each  other   ● Teaching  the  human  condition   ● Ethics  for  Humanity  

  It   was   then   iteratively   refined   with   input   from   more   than   five   hundred   teachers   from   around   the   world,   in   late  2014.  For  a  sample  of  previous  drafts  of  the  framework  that  led  up  to  the  current  one  and  a  comparison   of  our  framework  with  others,  see  Appendices  1  and  2  respectively.   The  table  below  identifies  the  six  essential  qualities  that  emerged  from  the  Center’s  research,  as  well  as  a  host   of   associated   traits   and   concepts.16   It   is   important   to   keep   in   mind   that   the   list   of   associated   qualities   and   concepts   is   not   exhaustive,   and   very   often   cross-­‐defined,   which   makes   this   field   ripe   for   never-­‐ending   academic  debates.  

13

Gardner, H. (2009). Five minds for the future. Harvard Business Review Press.

14

Sternberg, R. (2003). Wisdom, intelligence, and creativity synthesized. Cambridge University Press.

15

Morin, E. (1999). Seven complex lessons in education for the future. UNESCO.

16

Along the way, it was found that the distinction of Moral vs. Performance is difficult and partially duplicative. The Distinction between Interand Intra-personal is also unnecessary for the same reasons.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

5  

Top Qualities

Associated Qualities and Concepts (non-exhaustive)

Mindfulness

Wisdom,  self-­‐awareness,  self-­‐management  self-­‐actualization,  observation,   reflection,    consciousness,  compassion,  gratitude,  empathy,  caring,  growth,  vision,  insight,   equanimity,  happiness,  presence,  authenticity,    listening,    sharing,  interconnectedness,   interdependence,  oneness,    acceptance,  beauty,  sensibility,  patience,    tranquility,  balance,   spirituality,  existentiality,    social  awareness,  cross-­‐cultural  awareness,  etc.  

Curiosity

Open-­‐mindedness,  exploration,  passion,  self-­‐direction,  motivation,  initiative,  innovation,   enthusiasm,  wonder,  appreciation,  spontaneity  etc.

Courage

Bravery,  determination,  fortitude,  confidence,  risk  taking,  persistence,  toughness,  zest,  optimism,   inspiration,  energy,  vigor,  zeal,  cheerfulness,  humor  etc.

Resilience

Perseverance,  grit,  tenacity,  resourcefulness,  spunk,  self-­‐discipline,  effort,  diligence,   commitment,  self-­‐control,  self-­‐esteem,  confidence,  stability,  adaptability,  dealing  with  ambiguity,   flexibility,  feedback,  etc.

Ethics

Benevolence,  humaneness,  integrity,  respect,  justice,  equity,  fairness,  kindness,  altruism,   inclusiveness,  tolerance,  acceptance,  loyalty,  honesty,  truthfulness,  authenticity,  genuineness,   trustworthiness,  decency,  consideration,  forgiveness,  virtue,  love,  helpfulness,    generosity,   charity,  devotion,  belonging,  civic-­‐mindedness,  citizenship,  equality,  etc.

Leadership

Responsibility,  abnegation,  accountability,  dependability,  reliability,  conscientiousness,   selflessness,  humbleness,  modesty,  relationship  skills,  self-­‐reflection,  inspiration,  organization,   delegation,  mentorship,  commitment,  heroism,  charisma,followership,  engagement,  leading  by   example,  goal-­‐orientation,  focus,  results  orientation,  precision,  execution,  efficiency,  negotiation,   consistency,  socialization,    social  intelligence,  diversity,  decorum,  etc.  

In   the   following   sections,   we   will   describe   each   one   of   the   six   Character   Qualities,   and   briefly   summarize   how   they  can  be  learned  and  –  whenever  possible  –  measured.  The  subject  of  character  assessment  is  a  large  and   important   undertaking.   The   cursory   coverage   of   these   ideas   in   this   document   aims   to   simply   give   some   examples   of   possible   methods   of   assessment,   not   prescribe   any   particular   assessments   or   exhaustively   describe  all  possibilities.  

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

6  

A. Mindfulness Self-awareness, self-esteem, self-actualization, growth, vision, insight, observation, consciousness, compassion, listening, presence, sharing, interconnectedness, empathy, sensibility, patience, acceptance, appreciation, tranquility, balance, spirituality, existentiality, oneness, beauty, gratitude, interdependency, happiness, etc.

  “If  every  8  year  old  in  the  world  is  taught  meditation,  we  will  eliminate  violence  from   the  world  within  one  generation.”     — Dalai Lama

  a. What it is

The  practice  of  mindfulness  comes  from  Eastern  spiritual  philosophy,  first  translated  from  Sanskrit  to  English   by   British   scholars   in   1784,   and   later   influencing   a   range   of   western   thinkers;   Zen   Buddhism   in   particular   experienced  a  boom  of  recognition  in  America  after  World  War  II  both  in  the  intellectual  and  public  spheres.17   In  addition  to  fulfilling  a  spiritual  role,  mindfulness  has  been  used  successfully  for  clinical  purposes  (treating   stress,   chronic   pain,   anxiety,   depression,   borderline   personality   disorder,   eating   disorders,   and   addiction),   and  has  recently  been  introduced  as  a  practice  that  enhances  everyday  life.18     Mindfulness   can   be   defined   as   “the   awareness   that   emerges   through   paying   attention   on   purpose,   in   the   present   moment,   and   non-­‐judgmentally   to   the   unfolding   of   experiences   moment   by   moment.”19   Although   it   is   common  to  practice  mindfulness  through  meditation,  the  two  should  not  be  confused,  as  mindfulness  can  be   practiced  through  any  daily  experience  such  as  eating,  walking,  driving,  etc.   Ellen   Langer   famously   argues   that   the   traditional   view   of   “no   pain,   no   gain”   education   in   which   learning   occurs  with  repetitive  study  and  unwavering  focus  is  designed  for  a  perfectly  static  environment  and  for  the   constantly   changing   environment   we   live   in,   mindfulness   education   is   far   more   effective.20   Research   suggests   that   mindfulness   training   can   enhance   attention   and   focus,   and   improve   memory,   self-­‐acceptance,   self-­‐ management   skills,   and   self-­‐understanding,21   although   the   size   of   the   effect   is   debated.   It   has   also   been   associated  with  higher  positive  affect,  vitality,  life  satisfaction,  self-­‐esteem,  optimism,  and  self-­‐actualization,”   as   well   as   with   “higher   autonomy,   competence,   and   relatedness.”22   It   has   also   been   proposed   as   a   mechanism   to   address   oppression23   and   combat   global   and   environmental   crisis   and   the   apparent   inability   to   respond   to  

17

McCown, D., Reibel, D., & Micozzi, S. (2010). Teaching Mindfulness: A Practical Guide for Clinicians and Educators. New York. Springer.

18

Hooker, K. & Fodor, I. (2008). Teaching mindfulness to children. Gestalt Review, 12(1), 75-91.

19

Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness. New York: Delacorte.

20

Langer, E. (1993). A mindful education. Educational Psychologist 28(1) 43-50.

21

Hooker, K. & Fodor, I. (2008). Teaching mindfulness to children. Gestalt Review, 12(1), 75-91.

22

Brown, K. & Ryan, R. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 822-848.

23

Orr, D. (2014). The uses of mindfulness in anti-oppressive pedagogies: philosophy and praxis. Canadian Journal of Education. 27(4), 77-497.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

7  

it   due   to   a   lack   of   translating   knowledge   into   action   and   value   the   world   intrinsically.24   Even   brief   mindfulness   meditation   trainings   have   shown   reduced   fatigue   and   anxiety,   and   improved   visuo-­‐spatial   processing,  working  memory,  and  executive  functioning.25  

b. How it can be taught It   is   very   important   that   the   person   who   is   teaching   mindfulness   also   practices   it   in   his   or   her   own   life,   otherwise   the   authenticity   and   effectiveness   is   likely   to   be   lost.26   It   is   important   to   explicitly   discuss   the   exercises   with   children   in   order   to   address   misconceptions   such   as   meditation   is   only   for   experts,   that   it   means   going   into   a   trance,   or   that   it   is   used   for   relaxation.27   Some   children   may   experience   anxiety   from   practicing  mindfulness,  and  teachers  should  be  careful  to  gently  encourage  these  students  only  in  the  ways   that  are  appropriate  for  them.   Many   successful   mindfulness   curricula   for   children   begin   with   exercises   emphasizing   awareness   of   the   environment,  such  as  writing  in  a  journal  about  their  daily  routine  in  increasing  detail,  or  drawing  a  picture  of   an  object  with  increasing  levels  of  detail.  Slightly  more  advanced  exercises  focus  on  awareness  of  the  body’s   movement,28  or  on  the  senses.  Consider  for  example  the  following  script.29   Bring  your  attention  to  the  raisin,  observing  it  carefully  as  if  you  had  never  seen  one  before.   Pick  up  one  raisin  and  feel  its  texture  between  your  fingers  and  notice  its  colors.  Be  aware  of   any   thoughts   you   might   be   having   about   the   raisin.   Note   any   thoughts   or   feelings   of   liking   or   disliking  raisins  if  they  come  up  while  you  are  looking  at  it.  Then  lift  the  raisin  to  your  nose   and  smell  it  for  a  while  and  finally,  with  awareness,  bring  it  to  your  lips,  being  aware  of  the   arm  moving  the  hand  to  position  it  correctly  and  of  your  mouth  salivating  as  the  mind  and   body   anticipate   eating.   Take   the   raisin   into   your   mouth   and   chew   it   slowly,   experiencing   the   actual  taste  of  the  raisin.  Hold  it  in  your  mouth.  When  you  feel  ready  to  swallow,  watch  the   impulse  to  swallow  as  it  comes  up,  so  that  even  that  is  experienced  consciously.  When  you   are   ready,   pick   up   the   second   raisin   and   repeat   this   process,   with   a   new   raisin,   as   if   it   is   now   the  first  raisin  you  have  ever  seen.

  Some   classic   exercises   such   as   meditation   on   the   breath   may   not   need   to   be   adjusted   very   much   at   all.   Counting  breath  in  various  ways  is  a  helpful  exercise  for  focusing  awareness,  and  it  is  important  to  remind   children  that  it  is  normal  for  the  mind  to  wander,  and  when  they  notice  this  they  should  simply  bring  it  back   to   focus   on   the   breath,   without   judgment.   A   particularly   useful   exercise   emphasizing   not   engaging   with   thoughts   involves   imagining   thoughts   as   bubbles   rising   up   or   clouds   drifting   across   the   sky.30   Explicitly   connecting  such  exercises  to  their  daily  life  (particularly  when  they  feel  anxious,  overwhelmed  or  angry)  can   be   especially   effective   if   it   is   reinforced   by   other   adults   in   the   children’s   lives.   Mindfulness   exercises   may   also   be   coupled   with   breathing   techniques   that   physiologically   prepare   the   body,   such   as   in   the   Youth   24

Bai, H. (2001). Beyond Educated Mind: Towards a Pedagogy of Mindfulness. In, Unfolding Bodymind: Exploring Possibilities Through Education, eds. B. Hockings, J. Haskell, & W. Linds (Brandon, VT: The Foundation for Educational Renewal), 86 - 99.

25

Zeidan, F. et al. (2010). Mindfulness meditation improves cognition: evidence of brief mental training. In, Consciousness and Cognition.

26

Kabat-Zinn, J. (2003) Mindfulness-based interventions in context: Past, present, and future. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10(2), 144156.

27

Gunaratana, V. (1991). Mindfulness in Plain English. Boston: Wisdom Publications.

28

Fontana, D. & Slack, I. (1997). Teaching Meditation to Children: A Practical Guide to the Use and Benefits of Meditation Techniques. Boston: Element.

29

Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness. New York: Delacorte.

30

LeShan, L. (1974). How To Meditate: A Guide to Self-Discovery. New York: Bantam Books.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

8  

Empowerment  Seminar.31  This  grounded  approach  may  be  especially  useful  for  children,  or  people  suffering   through  hardships  like  PTSD.32   At   the   beginning   of   the   day,   during   key   transitions,   or   before   important   events   may   be   the   best   times   to   engage  children  in  mindfulness  exercises  so  that  they  may  approach  their  activities  centered  and  focused.  

c. How it can be assessed Self-­‐report  questionnaires,  especially  those  that  take  into  account  multiple  facets  of  mindfulness,  have  been   found   to   be   valid   measures   in   psychometric   research.33   This   is   philosophically   aligned   with   the   practice   of   mindfulness  as  it  encourages  people  to  reflect  on  themselves  and  their  experiences.    

31

Ghahremani, Dara G., et al. (2013). Effects of the Youth Empowerment Seminar on impulsive behavior in adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 53(1), 139-141.

32

Seppälä, Emma M., et al. (2014). "Breathing‐Based Meditation Decreases Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Symptoms in US Military Veterans: A Randomized Controlled Longitudinal Study." Journal of Traumatic Stress, 27(4), 397-405.

33

Baer, R. et al. (2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13(27) 27-45.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

9  

B. Curiosity

Open-mindedness, exploration, passion, self-direction, motivation, initiative, innovation, enthusiasm, spontaneity, etc.

  “I  have  no  special  talents.  I  am  only  passionately  curious.”     — Albert Einstein

  a. What it is

Early  discussions  of  curiosity  as  a  character  quality  date  back  to  Cicero,  who  described  it  as  “an  innate  love  of   learning  and  of  knowledge,  without  the  lure  of  any  profit”34;  and  Aristotle,  who  saw  it  as  an  intrinsic  desire   for  information,35  a  view  that  is  still  widely  recognized  as  important.  Modern  psychology  research  has  taken   several   different   approaches   to   studying   curiosity:   examining   its   source,   situational   determinants,   correlates,   and  relationship  to  motivation.     Research  suggests  that  curiosity  is  both  a  trait  (general  capacity)  and  a  state  (sensitive  to  context).  It  is  also   both   an   internal   (homeostatic)   drive   as   well   as   a   response   to   external   cues   (stimulus   evoked)36.   Curiosity   can   be   conceived   of   as   a   drive   (comparable   to   thirst   or   hunger)   due   to   organisms   trying   to   minimize   the   unpleasantness   of   uncertainty.   Behavioral   studies   of   organisms   ranging   from   cockroaches   to   monkeys   to   humans  have  found  that  when  deprived  of  sensory  input  they  will  seek  out  information,  and  that  the  “thirst   for  knowledge”  can  be  satisfied  with  information  just  as  physiological  thirst  can  be  satisfied  with  water.   It   has   also   been   described   as   a   response   to   violated   expectations   (or   perceptual   and   conceptual   conflict37),   following   an   inverted   U-­‐shaped   curve   where   the   greatest   amount   of   curiosity   is   elicited   by   an   optimal   degree   of  violated  expectations;38  when  we  know  enough  to  be  interested,  but  we  are  still  to  some  degree  uncertain   of  how  best  to  make  sense  of  the  idea.  The  optimal  arousal  model  was  arrived  at  separately  by  three  different   researchers   in   different   fields:   Hebb   (who   studied   neuroscience),   Piaget   (who   studied   developmental   psychology),   and   Hunt   (who   studied   motivation).   Curiosity   has   also   been   placed   in   a   larger   model   of   motivation,  stemming  from  the  drive  to  resolve  uncertainty39.   This  model  is  both  intuitive  and  supported  by  research:  we  naturally  try  to  understand  the  world  around  us,   and   this   manifests   as   curiosity.   As   one   would   expect,   it   is   highly   specific   to   the   interplay   of   person’s   strengths  

34

Cicero. (1914). De finibus bonorum et malorum (H. Rackham, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Press.

35

Aristotle. (1933). Metaphysics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

36

Lowenstein, G. (1994). The Psychology of Curiosity: A Review and Reinterpretation. Psychological Bulletin, 116(1), 75-98.

37

Berlyne, D. (1960). Conflict, arousal and curiosity. New York: McGraw-Hill.

38

Lowenstein, G. (1994). The Psychology of Curiosity: A Review and Reinterpretation. Psychological Bulletin, 116(1), 75-98.

39

Kagan, J. (1972). Motives and development. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 22(1), 51.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

10  

and  the  difficulty  of  the  task.40  This  is  related  to  ideas  such  as  cognitive  dissonance,  ambiguity  aversion,  and   gestalt  psychology.  The  Information-­‐Gap  theory,41  building  on  these  findings,  models,  connections,  and  at  that   time   unexplained   observations,   treats   curiosity   as   the   feeling   resulting   from   paying   attention   to   a   gap   in   knowledge   between   what   one   knows   and   what   one   wants   to   know.   The   Interest/Deprivation   theory   combines  the  ideas  from  curiosity  models  with  the  neuroscience  of  desire  and  reward,  and  claims  that  both   induction   of   a   positive   sensation   of   interest   and   reduction   of   a   negative   sensation   of   uncertainty   are   involved   in  curiosity.42   A  recent  fMRI  study43  successfully  found  that  the  greater  the  curiosity,  the  more  resources  (time  or  tokens)   participants  were  willing  to  spend  on  receiving  the  answer,  and  (in  line  with  mounting  evidence)  the  more   likely   they   were   to   remember   the   information   later.   Additionally,   higher   curiosity   correlated   with   higher   activation  of  areas  of  the  brain  associated  with  anticipated  reward,  prediction  error,  and  memory.  

b. How it can be taught One   thing   that   is   clear   from   research   into   curiosity   is   that   simply   “giving”   students   information   is   not   as   effective   as   first   piquing   their   curiosity.   This   can   be   done   in   a   variety   of   ways   that   challenge   their   existing   mental   models   and   orient   them   toward   a   gap   in   their   knowledge   such   as   presenting   a   contradiction,44   or   through  inquiry-­‐based  learning  and  problem-­‐based  learning.45  An  operationalized  notion  of  the  information   gap  has  been  developed  to  estimate  the  information  gap  in  students’  knowledge:  the  lower  bound  is  students’   confidence   in   their   knowledge   of   the   information,   and   the   higher   bound   is   how   important   learning   about   a   topic  is  to  the  students.46   However,  while  many  relevant  factors  are  in  the  teachers’  control,  it  is  important  to  keep  in  mind  that  since   curiosity   is   closely   related   to   students’   intrinsic   drive   to   make   sense   of   the   world   around   them,   students’   autonomy  must  be  closely  considered.  An  environment  that  is  too  controlled  by  the  teacher  leaving  no  space   for   the   agency   of   the   student   is   not   going   to   be   effective   in   encouraging   curiosity.47   Research   suggests   that   monitoring   children’s   play   and   offering   them   rewards   decreases   their   interest   in   the   activity   even   two   weeks   later.48   In   further   support   of   this,   studies   have   found   that   the   most   important   aspect   underlying   students’   curiosity   is   their   perceived   value   of   the   information.49   If   they   are   learning   because   they   must   do   so   for   the   class,   this   undermines   the   students’   intrinsic   curiosity   for   the   knowledge,   which   must   stem   from   their   understanding   of   its   importance.   In   addition   to   autonomy,   personalization   and   contextualization   have   also  

40

Miyake, N., & Norman, D. (1979). To ask a question, one must know enough to know what is not known. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18(3), 357-364.

41

Lowenstein, G. (1994). The Psychology of Curiosity: A Review and Reinterpretation. Psychological Bulletin, 116(1), 75-98.

42

Litman, J. (2005). Curiosity and the pleasures of learning: Wanting and liking new information. Cognition and Emotion,19(6), 793-814.

43

Kang, M., Hsu, M., Krajbich, I., Loewenstein, G., McClure, S., Wang, J., & Camerer, C. (2009). The wick in the candle of learning epistemic curiosity activates reward circuitry and enhances memory. Psychological Science, 20(8), 963-973.

44

Vidler, D. (1974). The use of contradiction to stimulate curiosity. Educational Technology, 14(10), 41-43.

45

Pluck, G. & Johnson, H. (2011). Stimulating curiosity to enhance learning. Educational Science and Psychology, 2(19) 24-31.

46

Gentry, J., Burns, A., Dickinson, J., Putrevu, S., Chu, S., Hongyan, Y., Williams, L., Bare, T., & Gentry, R. (2002). Managing the curiosity gap does matter: What do we need to do about it? Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, 26, 67-73.

47

Niemec, C. & Ryan, R. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and Research in Education. 7(2), 133-144.

48

Lepper, M., Greene, D., Carskaddon, G., & Gronner, P. (1972). Turning Play into Work : Effects of Adult Surveillance and Extrinsic Rewards on Children’s Intrinsic Motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(3), 479–486.

49

Rossing, B. & Long, H. (1981). Contributions of curiosity and relevance to adult learning motivation. Adult Education Quarterly, 32, 25-36.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

11  

been   found   to   increase   students’   intrinsic   motivation.50   Finally,   teacher   involvement   has   been   found   to   be   particularly   important   to   motivation,   and   students   who   are   initially   are   more   motivated   receive   greater   attention  from  their  teachers,  thus  enhancing  their  involvement  further.51  

c. How it can be assessed Measurement   of   trait   curiosity   directly   is   very   difficult,   since   any   test   must   be   biased   toward   some   particular   subjects  and  not  information  in  general  and  since  most  studies  found  it  to  be  highly  correlated  with  IQ  and   creativity.  The  measurement  of  trait  curiosity  is  less  relevant  to  education,  however,  than  the  measurement  of   state   curiosity.   In   other   words,   measuring   how   generally   curious   any   individual   is   may   be   less   informative   than   measuring   how   successful   a   given   activity   or   curriculum   is   at   inducing   curiosity.   Accordingly,   questionnaires  have  been  developed  to  address  state  curiosity  and  have  been  found  to  be  valid  and  reliable   for   use   as   research   instruments.52   In   a   related   vein,   questionnaires   that   measure   motivation   (extrinsic,   intrinsic,   and   amotivation)   have   been   developed   and   tested   cross   culturally.53   Behavioral   measures   such   as   how  much  effort/resources/time  individuals  use  to  obtain  a  new  piece  of  information  as  well  as  exploratory   behaviors  have  been  used  to  measure  curiosity  as  well.   Interestingly,   this   translates   directly   to   students’   “engagement”   with   class   material.   To   what   degree   do   the   students   seem   intrinsically   motivated?   How   far   do   they   push   themselves?   The   questions   involved   in   measuring  curiosity  are  the  same  ones  involved  in  describing  how  driven  students  are  about  their  learning.  

50

Cordova, D. & Lepper, M. (1996) Intrinsic Motivation and the Process of Learning: Beneficial Effects of Contextualization, Personalization, and Choice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(4), 715-730.

51

Skinner, E. & Belmont, M. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571.

52

Naylor, F. (1981). A state-trait curiosity inventory. Australian Psychologist, 16(2), 172–183.

53

Vallerand, R., Pelletier, L., Blais, M., Briere, N., Senecal, C., & Vallieres, E. (1992). The Academic Motivation Scale: A measure of intrinsic, extrinsic, and motivation in education. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 52(4), 1003-1017.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

12  

C. Courage

Bravery, determination, fortitude, confidence, risk taking, persistence, toughness, zest, optimism, inspiration, energy, vigor, zeal, cheerfulness, humor, stability, etc.

  “Nothing  in  the  world  is  worth  having  or  worth  doing  unless  it  means  effort,  pain,   difficulty…  I  have  never  in  my  life  envied  a  human  being  who  led  an  easy  life.  I  have   envied  a  great  many  people  who  led  difficult  lives  and  led  them  well.”     — Theodore Roosevelt

  a. What it is

Courage  can  be  thought  of  as  an  ability  to  act  despite  fear  or  uncertainty,  in  risky  situations  or  when  we  are   feeling   vulnerable.54   While   courage   must   not   be   taken   to   the   extreme   since   some   errors   can   clearly   have   devastating  consequences,  it  is  still  true  that  courage  is  necessary  for  all  individuals  both  in  their  professional   and  personal  lives.  A  commonly  cited  professional  example  is  entrepreneurship.  While  studies  have  not  found   entrepreneurs   to   be   more   risk-­‐taking   on   self-­‐rated   measures,   "multivariate   tests   revealed   that   entrepreneurs   categorized   equivocal   business   scenarios   significantly   more   positively   than   did   other   subjects,   and   univariate   tests   demonstrated   that   these   perceptual   differences   were   consistent   and   significant   (i.e.   entrepreneurs   perceived   more   strengths   versus   weaknesses,   opportunities   versus   threats,   and   potential   for   performance   improvement  versus  deterioration)."55  In  fact,  one  paper  describes  organizational  failures  as  consequences  of   “failures   of   courage,”   since   none   of   the   people   responsible   were   able   to   act   to   prevent   it.56   It   is   well   established  that  risk  taking  is  higher  in  adolescents  than  in  children  or  adults,57  and  higher  in  males  than  in   females.58  It  is  also  clear  that  this  capacity  is  not  fixed.   Courage  can  be  considered  a  subjective  experience,  where  an  individual  overcomes  fear  and  chooses  to  take   action  in  the  face  of  uncertainty.  In  the  courageous  mindset  there  are  three  intrapersonal  positive  traits  that   one  must  develop  in  order  to  “loosen  the  hold  that  a  negative  emotion  has  gained  on  that  person's  mind  and   body   by   dismantling   or   undoing   preparation   for   specific   action,”59   and   contribute   to   one’s   courageous   mindset.   These   traits   include   openness   to   experience,   conscientiousness,   and   self-­‐evaluation   traits   such   as  

54

Brown, B. (2012). Daring greatly: How the courage to be vulnerable transforms the way we live, love, parent, and lead. Penguin.

55

Palich, L. & Bagby, R. (1995). Using cognitive theory to explain entrepreneurial risk-taking: Challenging conventional wisdom. Journal of Business Venturing, 10(6), 425–438.

56

Rate, C. & Sternberg, R. (2007). When good people do nothing: a failure of courage. In, Research Companion to the Dysfunctional Workplace, 321. Northampton, MA,: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

57

Steinberg, L. (2007). Risk Taking in Adolescence: New Perspectives From Brain and Behavioral Science. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(2), 55–59.

58

Byrnes, J., Miller, D., & Schafer, W. (1999). Gender Differences in Risk Taking : A Meta-Analysis, 125(3), 367–383.

59

Fredrickson, B. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56, 218–226.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

13  

self-­‐efficacy.60  Simultaneously,  one  must  withhold  pro-­‐social  values  and  experience  affirmative  social  forces   in   order   to   minimize   one’s   level   of   fear   and   act   courageously   “to   be   liked   (normative   influence)   or   to   be   right   (informational  influence).”6    

b. How it can be taught In School Courage  is  needed  in  the  classroom  for  both  teachers  and  students  to  overcome  fears,  challenge  one  another’s   biases,   and   learn   new   concepts   and   skills.   Significant   risk   taking   –   and   consequent   failing   –   is   shown   to   increases   students’   competencies,   imaginations,   confidence,   and   resourcefulness.61  In   order   to   encourage   risk   taking,  and  therefore  develop  courage,  a  teacher  can  use  four  tactics:  (1)  serve  as  role  models  of  risk  takers   themselves,   (2)   celebrate   mistakes   as   opportunities   to   learn,   (3)   structure   grading   policies   that   forgive   mistakes   and   encourage   revision,   and   (4)   discuss   narratives   about   mistakes   that   resulted   in   successful   outcomes.62   Outside of School Specific   types   of   courage,   such   as   physical,   expressive,   and   moral   courage,   can   be   taught   through   informal   learning   frameworks   that   include   structured   time   for   relationship   building,   physical   challenges   and   skill   acquisition.63   These   qualities   of   an   informal   learning   experience,   blended   with   a   supportive   social   environment  that  includes  culturally  competent  role  models,  can  foster  courage  by  ensuring  that  learners  are   “seen,   heard   and   valued.”   Such   programs   increase   self-­‐efficacy,   and   encourage   learners   to   make   healthy   choices  despite  possible  social  scrutiny  or  intrapersonal  fearful  emotions.64  

c. How it can be assessed Risk  taking  tendencies  of  entrepreneurs  were  not  accurately  captured  by  self-­‐report  methods,  however  they   were  reflected  in  their  responses  to  case  studies65  and  situational  judgment  tasks66  providing  a  glimpse  into  a   potential  method  for  assessment.  There  are,  however,  ways  to  measure  moral  courage,  which  is  a  construct   relevant   to   organizational   psychology,   particularly   useful   for   hiring   processes.   These   measurements   assess   levels   of   altruism   and   the   propensity   to   take   risks,   in   order   to   determine   ethical   orientations   among   employees  towards  morally  courageous  action.67  It  is  important  to  distinguish  morally  courageous  acts  from   foolhardiness   or   thrill-­‐seeking,   which   describe   risk   taking   as   mere   adrenaline   boosts   that   puts   oneself   or   others  in  danger  with  general  disregard.68  

60

Hannah, S., Sweeney, P., & Lester, P. (2007). Toward a courageous mindset: The subjective act and experience of courage. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 2(2), 129-135.

61

Haworth. J. & Conrad. C. (1997). Emblems of quality in higher education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

62

Loui, M. (2006). Courage in the Classroom. College Teaching, 54(2), 221-221.

63

Whittington, A. & Mack, E. (2010). Inspiring courage in girls: An evaluation of practices and outcomes. Journal of Experiential Education, 33(2), 166-180.

64

ibid.

65

Palich, L. E., & Bagby, R. (1995). Using cognitive theory to explain entrepreneurial risk-taking: Challenging conventional wisdom. Journal of Business Venturing, 10(6), 425–438.

66

ibid.

67

Chapa, O., Gonzalez, R., & Stringer, D. (2012). The path of measuring moral courage in the workplace. Proceedings of 2012 Annual Meeting of the Academy of International Business – US Northeast Chapter: Business Without Borders, 1-9.

68

Konter, E. & Ng, J. (2012). Development of sport courage scale. Journal of Human Kinetics, 33, 163-172.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

14  

Other  fields,  such  as  sports  psychology,  have  also  developed  courage  measurements.  Konter  and  Ng  identified   a  five-­‐factor  measurement  scale  that  assesses  courage  in  sport,  which  evaluates:  (1)  Determination  to  push   towards  a  goal  despite  boundaries,  (2)  Mastery  as  a  source  of  self-­‐confidence,  (3)  Assertiveness  to  expend  a   high   amount   of   energy,   (4)   Venturesome   as   a   way   to   cope   with   fear,   and   (5)   Sacrifice   Behavior   related   to   altruistic  risk-­‐taking.69   Despite   holistic   attempts   to   categorize   courage   within   four   specific   “types,”   such   as   work/employment,   patriotic/religion-­‐based   belief   systems,   specific   social/moral   situations,   and   independent   or   family   based   courage,  recent  research  suggests  that  far  more  types  of  courage  are  yet  to  be  understand  and  the  construct   of  courage  may  need  to  be  classified  more  frequently  as  complex  and  situation-­‐based  conceptualizations.70  

69

ibid.

70

Woodard, C. & Pury, C. (2007). The construct of courage: Categorization and measurement. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 59(2), 135.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

15  

D. Resilience

Perseverance, resourcefulness, tenacity, grit, spunk, charisma, confidence, adaptability, dealing with ambiguity, flexibility, self-discipline, commitment, self-control, feedback, effort, diligence, etc.

  “The  greatest  glory  in  living  lies  not  in  never  falling,  but  in  rising  every  time  we  fall.”     — Nelson Mandela

  a. What it is

In   its   most   basic   form,   resilience   can   be   thought   of   as   an   ability   or   set   of   qualities   that   allow   one   to   overcome   obstacles.   Resilience   is   the   essence   of   the   rags-­‐to-­‐riches   stories   that   have   permeated   cultures   for   centuries.   It   encompasses   the   ability   of   certain   people   to   succeed   where   others   in   their   circumstances   would   not.   In   a   2000   paper   about   the   history   and   continuing   discussion   on   resilience,   it   is   defined   as,   “a   dynamic   process   encompassing   positive   adaptation   within   the   context   of   significant   adversity.”71   The   designation   “dynamic   process”   highlights   the   fact   that   resilience   is   a   word   used   for   a   multitude   of   factors   which   all   influence   whether  or  not  someone  will  succeed  in  the  face  of  adversity.  One  of  the  contributing  elements  of  resilience  is   the   notion   of   “grit.”   In   her   seminal   study   regarding   grit,   which   is   defined   therein   as,   “perseverance   and   passion  for  long-­‐term  goals,”  Angela  Duckworth  and  her  colleagues  found  that,  “grit  accounted  for  an  average   of  4%  of  the  variance  in  success  outcomes.”72     The   three   main   factors   that   have   been   identified   in   schools,   communities   and   social   support   systems   as   positively  influencing  resilience  in  youth  are:  caring  relationships,  communication  of  high  expectations,  and   opportunities  for  meaningful  involvement  and  participation.73  74  75   As   resilience   is   primarily   concerned   with   overcoming   adverse   conditions   when   others   might   not,   much   of   the   early  research  on  resilience  focuses  on  sample  groups  from  “high-­‐risk”  communities  and  school  systems.  This   research   did   much   to   identify   resilience   as   a   key   factor   in   whether   or   not   a   student  was   likely   to   succeed   in   a   high-­‐risk   setting.76   The   identification   of   resilience   as   a   positive   quality   led   many   to   question   the   validity   of   certain  “at-­‐risk”  models  for  reform.77  78  Now  researchers  are  looking  at  ways  to  encourage  the  positive  factors  

71

Luthar, S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). ‘The Construct of Resilience: A Critical Evaluation and Guidelines for Future Work’. Child Development 71, 543–562.

72

Duckworth, A., Peterson, C., Mathews, M. & Kelly, D. (2007). ‘Grit: Perseverance and Passion for Long-Term Goals.’ Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 92(6), 1087-1101.

73

Pianta, R. & Walsh, D. (1996). High-risk Children in the Schools: Creating Sustaining Relationships. New York: Routledge.

74

Benard, B. (1991). Fostering Resiliency in Kids: Protective Factors in the Family, School, and Community. San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development.

75

Rees, P. & Bailey, K. (2003). ‘Positive Exceptions: Learning from Students who “Beat the Odds.”’ Educational and Child Psychology, 20(4), 41-59.

76

ibid.

77

Garmezy, N. & Rutter, M. (1983). Stress, Coping and Development in Children. New York: McGraw-Hill.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

16  

that  have  been  identified  in  fostering  resilience  instead  of  focusing  exclusively  on  mitigating  risk  factors.  This   has  led  the  way  for  research  on  resilience  as  it  relates  to  all  students,  not  just  those  identified  as  “high-­‐risk.”79  

b. How it can be taught In School As  discussed  above,  resilience  has  been  linked  to  three  key  factors:  caring  relationships,  a  communication  of   high  expectations,  and  opportunities  for  meaningful  involvement  and  participation.  It  has  been  suggested  that   the  greatest  opportunity  for  the  reinforcement  of  these  key  principles  is  on  the  classroom  level  as  opposed  to   on  a  school  level.80  Children  spend  the  most  time  in  the  classroom  and  therefore  are  more  likely  to  develop   meaningful   relationships,   and   more   likely   to   have   opportunities   for   participation.   It   has   been   shown   that   when   children   feel   supported   in   the   classroom,   there   is   a   greater   likelihood   that   they   will   engage   with   the   material   being   taught   and   with   their   peers.81  82   With   a   view   to   the   classroom   as   the   most   appropriate   level   to   affect   resilience,   research   suggests   seven   traits   to   be   encouraged   in   the   classroom   environment   in   order   to   promote   resilience:   care   and   connection,   pro-­‐sociality   and   support,   engagement,   inclusivity,   collaboration,   empowerment,   and   a   focus   on   learning.83   According   to   this   research,   by   focusing   on   making   the   classroom   an   environment  which  places  the  highest  priority  on  these  values,  we  will  be  fostering  resilience  in  all  students,   not   only   those   identified   as   being   “at-­‐risk.”   While   work   is   ongoing   regarding   how   to   best   encourage   these   identified   qualities,   there   is   promising   research   supporting   the   implementation   of   a   “caring   community”   model,  first  suggested  by  John  Dewey  almost  a  hundred  years  ago.84  85   As  mentioned  above,  work  on  teaching  resilience  has  moved  away  from  only  targeting  “at-­‐risk”  students.  This   is   due   to   an   important   study,   which   indicates   that   by   trying   to   intervene   in   situations   where   a   student   is   identified  as  “at-­‐risk,”  through  measures  such  as  pullout  programs,  there  is  the  possibility  of  causing  isolation   and   alienation   from   the   classroom   community.86   Therefore,   by   trying   to   intervene,   we   might   actually   be   inhibiting   resilience.   By   teaching   resilience   to   all   students,   we   not   only   protect   those   students   identified   as   “at-­‐risk”   but   also   equip   each   and   every   student   with   the   tools   needed   to   deal   with   the   difficulties   they   will   inevitably  need  to  overcome  in  their  lives.     Outside of School Outside   of   the   school   and   classroom   environment,   family   life   and   community   involvement   have   been   identified   as   two   other   environmental   factors   that   affect   a   child’s   resilience.   While   more   research   needs   to   be   done  into  how  all  three  of  these  factors  interact,  it  has  been  demonstrated  that  the  more  of  these  protective   78

Werner, E. (1990). Protective Factors and Individual Resilience. In S.J.S. Meisels (ed.), Handbook of Early Childhood Intervention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

79

Cefai, C. (2008). Promoting Resilience in the Classroom: A Guide to Developing Pupils’ Emotional and Cognitive Skills. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

80

Brown, S., Riddell, S., & Duffield, J. (1996). Responding to pressures: a study of four secondary schools, in: P. Woods (Ed.) Contemporary Issues in Teaching and Learning. London, Routledge.

81

Slavin, R. (1991). Student Team Learning: A Practical Guide to Cooperative Learning, 3rd ed. Washington DC: National Education Association.

82

Fraser B. (1994). Research on classroom and school climate. Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning. New York: Macmillan Publishing

83

Cefai, C. (2008). Promoting Resilience in the Classroom: A Guide to Developing Pupils’ Emotional and Cognitive Skills. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

84

Battistisch V., Solomon D., Watson M. & Schaps M. (1997). Caring School Communities. Educational Psychologist, 32(3), 137- 151.

85

Sergiovanni, T. (1994). Building School Communities. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

86

Pianta, R. & Walsh, D. (1998). Applying the Construct of Resilience in Schools: Cautions from a Developmental Systems Perspective. School Psychology Review, 27(3), 407-417.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

17  

factors  a  child  has  access  to,  the  more  likely  they  are  to  succeed  when  faced  with  challenges  in  one  of  these   spheres.  87  

c. How it can be assessed While   most   of   the   current   research   identifies   resilience   from   a   retrospective   analysis,   i.e.   by   looking   at   subjects  who  have  faced  adversity  and  overcome  it,  there  is  work  being  done  to  formulate  ways  to  identify   resilience   at   earlier   stages.   Some   researchers   have   questioned   the   ability   to   effectively   identify   resilience   due   to   certain   methodological   problems,   such   as   a   lack   of   a   consensus   on   what   resilience   is,   and   conclude   that   more   research   must   be   done   before   we   can   effectively   assess   resilience.   88   However,   there   is   evidence   that   teachers  are  already  effective  in  identifying  resilient  students  in  their  classes89  and  there  is  an  ongoing  effort   to   develop   more   structured   assessment   methods.   One   such   effort   focuses   on   six   separate   domains   to   be   assessed   for   each   child:   security,   education,   friendships,   talents   and   interests,   positive   values   and   social   competencies.90   While   efforts   such   as   these   provide   a   good   base   for   continued   assessment   methods,   the   ongoing  nature  of  research  into  resilience  will  continue  to  improve  and  inform  the  way  in  which  we  identify   resilience.  

87

Dent, R. & Cameron, R. (2003). ‘Developing Resilience in Children who are in Public Care: The Educational Psychology Perspective.’ Educational Psychology in Practice 17(1), 3-19.

88

Kinard, E. (1998). ‘Methodological Issues in Assessing Resilience in Maltreated Children.” Child Abuse and Neglect 22, 7, 669-680.

89

Read, L. (1999). ‘Teachers’ Perceptions of Effective Instructional Strategies for Resilient and Non-resilient Students.’ Teaching and Change, 7(1), 33-52.

90

Daniel, B. & Wassell, S. (2002). Assessing and Promoting Resilience in Vulnerable Children. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

18  

E. Ethics Humaneness, kindness, respect, justice, equity, fairness, compassion, tolerance, inclusiveness, integrity, loyalty, honesty, truthfulness, trustworthiness, decency, authenticity, genuineness, consideration, forgiveness, virtue, love, care, helpfulness, generosity, charity, devotion, belonging, etc.

  “To  educate  a  person  in  mind  and  not  in  morals  is  to  educate  a  menace  to  society.”     — Theodore Roosevelt

  a. What it is Ethics  as  a  teachable  character  quality  is  informed  in  a  large  part  by   the   literature   on   moral   development,   pioneered   by   Jean   Piaget   and   John  Dewey,  and  expanded  by  Lawrence  Kohlberg  and  Carol  Gilligan.   The   main   idea   is   that   children   naturally   progress   through   stages   of   moral  reasoning,  from  pre-­‐conventional  (obedience  and  punishment,   self-­‐interest   orientations)   through   conventional   (interpersonal   accord   and   conformity,   authority   and   social-­‐order   maintaining   orientation)   to   post-­‐conventional   (social   contract   orientation,   universal  ethical  principles).91    

John   Dewey   proposed   that,   “education   is   the   work   of   supplying   the   conditions  which  will  enable  the  psychological  functions  to  mature  in   the   freest   and   fullest   manner.”92   Among   these   conditions   are   intellectual   development   and   the   concurrent   social   and   educational   climates,   environments   that   provide   opportunities   for   group   participation,   shared   decision-­‐making,  and  the  assumption  of  responsibility  for  the  consequences  of  actions.93   However,   knowledge   of   ethics   does   not   necessarily   lead   to   ethical   action.   Once   a   moral   reasoning   level   has   been   achieved   it   is   never   lost,   however,   moral   behavior   is   highly   context   specific.   As   such   it   can   involve   contextual   factors   like   motivation   and   emotion,   or   other   necessary   qualities   like   courage.   A   study   linking   moral   reasoning   stages   and   “strength   of   will”   with   prevalence   of   cheating   behavior   found   that   15%   of   students  who  were  at  a  post-­‐conventional  stage  cheated  (compared  to  55%  of  conventional  subjects  and  70%   of   pre-­‐conventional   subjects).   Notably,   within   the   conventional   stage   only   26%   of   what   the   study   called   “strong-­‐willed”   participants   cheated,   compared   to   74%   of   those   determined   by   the   study   to   be   “weak-­‐ willed.”94  For  this  reason,  it  is  useful  to  think  of  ethics  as  a  character  quality  rather  than  a  pool  of  knowledge.  

91

Kohlberg, L. (1981). The philosophy of moral development: Moral stages and the idea of justice (essays on moral development, volume 1). San Francisco: Harper & Row.

92

John Dewey, as cited in Kohlberg, L. & Hersh, R. (1977). Moral development: A review of the theory. Theory into practice, 16(2), 53-59.

93

Kohlberg L. (1976). Moral stages, moralization: the cognitive developmental approach. In, Moral development and behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart, Winston, 54.

94

Krebs, R. & Kohlberg, L. (1973). Moral judgment and ego controls as determinants of resistance to cheating. Moral Education Research Foundation.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

19  

b. How it can be taught In School Ethics   is   often   taught   through   a   particular   lens   of   one’s   specialization   in   post-­‐secondary   education   such   as   business95,  medicine96,  law97,  or  public  administration98.  But  there  are  also  ways  to  teach  and  practice  ethics   across   the   curriculum,99   and   adolescence   in   particular   has   been   identified   as   an   important   time   of   transformation   in   this   regard.100   Research   shows   that   behaviorist   “drill”   methods   are   only   effective   on   a   superficial  level,  and  that  methods  engaging  students’  autonomy  are  much  more  deeply  effective.101     One   way   to   grant   students   autonomy   with   ethical   decisions   is   through   democratic   schools,   in   which   students   are  responsible  for  collectively  making  decisions  that  affect  the  entire  community.  This  responsibility  engages   them  in  an  age-­‐appropriate  yet  important  roles  requiring  ethical  conduct.  In  his  theory  of  the  just  community   high   school,   Kohlberg   claims   that   in   order   for   the   democracy   to   be   successful,   it   must   1)   be   embraced   as   a   “central  commitment  of  a  school  rather  than  a  humanitarian  frill,”  2)  that  the  content  of  discussions  should  be   framed   in   terms   of   morality   and   fairness,   and   3)   that   small   group   discussions   preceding   the   large   democratic   community   meetings   would   help   facilitate   and   preserve   students’   higher-­‐stage   thinking   in   the   face   of   mob   mentality.   There   are   also   ways   to   integrate   ethics   into   the   curriculum   without   restructuring   the   school.   Just   as   post   secondary  ethical  education  often  takes  place  with  small  groups  working  through  a  series  of  case  studies  of   ethical  dilemmas,  Philosophy  for  Children  programs  use  children’s  stories  to  teach  children  to  think  through   ethical   questions.102   According   to   Kohlberg,   for   discussions   to   be   effective,   the   necessary   conditions   are   1)   exposure   to   the   next   level   of   reasoning   and   2)   confrontation   with   challenges   to   the   learner’s   current   moral   structure.103   Classroom   studies   have   shown   successful   moral   development   when   the   teacher   carefully   supported   and   clarified   students’   arguments,   and   continuously   pushed   the   students   to   think   one   step   beyond   their  current  understanding104.   These   programs   have   a   wide   range   of   different   curricula   for   different   age   groups.   Ethics   can   also   be   taught   as   a   separate   subject   for   older   students,   such   as   in   the   International   Baccalaureate   curriculum105   and   in   New   South  Wales  public  primary  schools106.  

95

Oddo, A. (1997). A framework for teaching business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(3), 293-297.

96

Pellegrino, E. (1989). Teaching medical ethics: some persistent questions and some responses. Academic Medicine, 64(12), 701-3.

97

Pearce, R. (1998). Teaching ethics seriously: Legal ethics as the most important subject in law school. Loyola University Chicago Law Journal, 29, 719.

98

Hejka-ekins, A. (2014). Teaching Ethics in Public Administration, American Society for Public Administration 48(5), 885–891.

99

Society for Ethics Across the Curriculum: http://www.rit.edu/cla/ethics/seac/Teaching%20Ethics.html - Retrieved on October 10, 2014.

100 Kohlberg, L. & Gilligan, C. (1971). The adolescent as a philosopher: The discovery of the self in a post-conventional world. Daedalus, 10511086. 101 Schaps, E., Schaeffer, E., & McDonnel, S. (2001). What’s right and wrong in character education today. Education Week. 102 Lipman, M. (1976). Philosophy for children. Metaphilosophy, 7(1), 17-33. 103 Kohlberg L. (1976). Moral stages, moralization: the cognitive developmental approach. In: Lickona T ed. Moral development and behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart, Winston, 54. 104 Blatt, M. & Kohlberg, L. (1975). The effects of classroom moral discussion upon children's level of moral judgment. Journal of Moral Education, 4(2), 129-161. 105 Dunn, Michael. “Ethics”. (10th May 2013). http://www.theoryofknowledge.net/areas-of-knowledge/ethics/ Last accessed: 10/9/2014 106 See: www.primaryethics.com.au/index.html

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

20  

Outside of School As   Kohlberg107   points   out,   the   moral   atmosphere   of   the   home,   the   school,   and   the   larger   environment   are   extremely  important  contributors  to  moral  development.  In  particular,  two  dimensions  are  crucial:  the  role-­‐ taking   and   empathy   opportunities   that   the   environment   provides   for   the   learner,   and   the   level   of   justice   in   the   institution.   As   an   example,   Kohlberg   compares   various   prisons;   those   in   the   pre-­‐conventional   stage   of   development   rely   on   obedience   to   arbitrary   command   by   power   and   punishment   for   disobedience,   while   those  in  the  conventional  stage  implement  a  system  of  points  are  reward  for  conformity.  This  further  speaks   to   the   importance   of   autonomy   in   education,   not   just   in   the   curriculum   but   in   every   aspect   of   the   educational   experience.  

c. How it can be assessed Moral   judgment   research   claims   that   a   person’s   judgments   reflect   an   underlying   organization   of   thinking   and   that  these  organizations  develop  through  a  series  of  transformations.108  Therefore  by  categorizing  students’   reasoning  to  various  ethical  questions,  one  can  place  an  individual  on  a  point  within  the  larger  framework  of   moral  reasoning  development.  It’s  also  possible  to  flip  this  exercise,  with  students  attempting  to  comprehend   explanations  of  others’  moral  reasoning,  as  it  has  been  shown  that  they  are  able  to  correctly  understand  those   below   and   at   their   own   level   (some   can   even   correctly   understand   one   level   above   their   own),   but   not   higher   level  arguments.109,110    

107 Kohlberg L. (1976). Moral stages, moralization: the cognitive developmental approach. In: Lickona T ed. Moral development and behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart, Winston, 54. 108 Rest, J. (1979). Development in judging moral issues. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. 109 Rest, J., Turiel, E., & Kohlberg, L. (1969). Relations between level of moral judgment and preference and comprehension of the moral judgment of others. Journal of Personality, 37(2), 225-252. 110 This type of assessment, placing learners along a developmental trajectory, is being developed further by Zak Stein and Theo Dawson at Lectica and as the company expands, will surely be able to cover concepts such as Ethics.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

21  

F. Leadership Responsibility, heroism, abnegation, accountability, selflessness, humbleness, inspiration, integrity, organization, delegation, teamwork, mentorship, commitment, engagement, leading by example, goal-orientation, consistency, self-reflection, social awareness, cross-cultural awareness, dependability, reliability, conscientiousness, efficiency, productivity, results orientation, focus, precision, project management, execution, socialization, negotiation, diversity, decorum, etc.

  “To  lead  people,  walk  beside  them  ...  As  for  the  best  leaders,  the  people  do  not  notice   their  existence.  The  next  best,  the  people  honor  and  praise.  The  next,  the  people   fear;  and  the  next,  the  people  hate  ...  When  the  best  leader's  work  is  done  the  people   say,  'We  did  it  ourselves!”     — Lao-Tsu

 a. What it is While   the   need   for   organizations   to   have   effective   leaders   is   undisputed,   the   notion   of   what   is   involved   in   leadership   and   how   it   can   be   taught   is   currently   in   the   process   of   shifting.   The   traditional   views   can   be   described   as   falling   into   a   “systems   control”   framework,   with   leaders   conceived   of   as   extraordinary,   charismatic,  almost  superhero  individuals  who  work  in  an  isolated  way  to  inspire  followers  to  act  in  the  good   of   a   unitary   and   fixed   organization.   This   is   in   line   with   a   general   mechanistic   view   of   organizations   with   subordinates  viewed  as  followers  and  leaders  viewed  as  experts  who  attempt  to  maximize  their  control  and   motivate  subordinates  to  act  in  certain  ways  toward  the  organization’s  goals.111   However,   this   view   suggests   that   leadership   is   reserved   for   special   individuals   (out   of   the   reach   of   the   majority   of   people)   and   to   a   great   extent   innate   and   unteachable.   It   is   also   at   odds   with   studies   that   have   discussed  the  importance  of  “quiet  leadership,”112  and  that  successful  leaders  often  do  not  fit  the  traditional   description;   rather   they   can   be   “shy,   unpretentious,   awkward   and   modest   but   at   the   same   time   [have]   an   enormous  amount  of  ambition  not  for  themselves  but  the  organization.”113   The   emerging   process-­‐relational   framework   of   leadership   by   contrast   emphasizes   that   organizations   are   social  constructs  composed  of  “ongoing  patterns  of  meaning  making  and  activity  brought  about  as  …  people   [are]  in  relationships  with  each  other  and  to  their  cultures.”114  In  this  view,  leadership  is  not  about  any  one   individual,  but  a  set  of  processes,  practices  and  interactions,115  and  complete  control  is  neither  possible  nor   desirable.  Leaders,  just  like  everyone  else,  must  constantly  make  sense  of  crosscutting  and  often  conflicting  

111 Hay, A., & Hodgkinson, M. (2006). Rethinking leadership: a way forward for teaching leadership? Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 27(2), 144–158. 112 Badaracco, J. (2001). We don’t need another hero. Harvard Business Review, 79(8), 121-6. 113 Collins, J. (2001). Level 5 leadership: the triumph of humility and fierce resolve. Harvard Business Review, 79(1), 67-76. 114 Watson, T. (2005) as cited in Hay, A., & Hodgkinson, M. (2006). Rethinking leadership: a way forward for teaching leadership? Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 27(2), 144–158. 115 Crevani, L., Lindgren, M., & Packendorff, J. (2010). Leadership, not leaders: On the study of leadership as practices and interactions. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 26(1), 77–86.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

22  

goals   and   information,   and   the   skills   they   need   (such   as   negotiation   and   asking   questions)   are   both   more   teachable  and  more  practical.116  This  framework  also  allows  for  a  greater  degree  of  flexibility  and  uncertainty,   with  group  processes  seen  as  more  important  than  individual  visions.   This   framework   is   also   in   line   with   current   complex   systems   science   models   of   best   practices   for   management,   in   which   the   individual   leader   facilitates   group   processes   and   relationships   rather   than   imposing  his  or  her  vision  top-­‐down  and  thus  limiting  the  organization’s  potential  to  that  of  one  individual.117   This  change  in  conceptions  of  leadership  to  as  relational,  collectivist,  and  non-­‐authoritarian  so  as  to  include   higher  complexity  decision  making  and  greater  flexibility  is  a  natural  response  to  the  need  to  cope  with  the   increasing  complexity  and  uncertainty  of  our  world.   A   widely   accepted   model   of   teaching   leadership   defines   leadership   as   a   “relational   and   ethical   process   of   people   together   attempting   to   accomplish   positive   change.”118   This   relational   model   of   leadership   includes   dimensions  of  being  inclusive,  empowering,  purposeful,  ethical,  and  process  oriented.  

b. How it can be taught In School While  most  leadership  literature  has  been  focused  on  adults,119  there  are  certainly  skills  and  guidelines  that   can   be   applied   and   adapted   for   use   with   children.   The   skills   identified   as   necessary   for   a   leader   within   a   process-­‐relational   framework   of   an   uncertain   and   complex   world   include   those   that   are   interpersonal   (negotiation,   networking,   conflict   resolution,   communication),   as   well   as   those   that   are   intrapersonal   (openness,  learning,  and  self-­‐awareness).120  Leadership  should  not  be  reserved  for  those  students  identified   as   gifted,   but   rather   should   be   part   of   all   students’   education   since   true   leadership   grows   out   of   group   processes.121  As  such,  providing  examples  of  successful  leaders  is  unhelpful  whereas  a  focus  on  the  process  of   leadership   and   using   experiences   of   leadership   along   with   discussions   around   these   experiences   will   allow   students  to  make  sense  of  how  groups  function  and  build  up  the  relevant  capacities  in  themselves.   The   method   of   instruction   should   also   be   in   line   with   the   process-­‐relational   philosophy,   with   teachers   and   students   co-­‐constructing   understanding   rather   than   the   teacher   transmitting   knowledge   to   students   in   a   top-­‐ down   one-­‐directional   manner.   This   modeling   of   appropriate   leader   behavior   is   most   effective   if   also   discussed  explicitly  with  students.  A  study  of  high  quality  leadership  programs  identified  16  characteristics   clustered   into   three   groups   in   successful   programs:   participants   are   engaged   in   building   and   sustaining   a  

116 Hay, A. & Hodgkinson, M. (2006). Rethinking leadership: a way forward for teaching leadership? Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 27(2), 144–158. 117 Bar-Yam, Y. (2002). Complexity rising: From human beings to human civilization, a complexity profile. In, Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems. EOLSS UNESCO Publishers, Oxford, UK. 118 Komives, S., Lucas, N., & McMahon, T. (2006). Exploring leadership: For college students who want to make a difference (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 119 Oakland, T., Falkenberg, B., & Oakland, C. (1996). Assessment of leadership in children, youth, and adults. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 138-146. 120 Hay, A., & Hodgkinson, M. (2006). Rethinking leadership: a way forward for teaching leadership? Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 27(2), 144–158. 121 Yukl, G. (2010). An Evaluative Essay on Current Conceptions of Effective Leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8(1), 33–48.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

23  

learning  community,  student-­‐centered  experiential  learning  experiences,  and  research-­‐grounded  continuous   program  development.122   Outside of School There   are   also   opportunities   outside   of   school   for   students   to   take   positions   of   leadership   within   the   community.   Students   should   be   encouraged   to   take   leadership   roles   and   be   metacognitive   about   their   experiences  working  with  groups.  Subjects  such  as  music  may  be  particularly  useful  in  this  sense  (discussed   below).     Additionally,   teachers   should   be   careful   of   the   messages   they   are   sending   to   students   implicitly   about   responsibility  and  autonomy;  a  study  comparing  1st  grade  classrooms  in  traditional  schools  and  progressive   schools   found   that   despite   some   expected   differences,   in   both   settings   responsibility   was   usually   conveyed   in   a   negative   light   (when   students   failed   to   do   something)   and   focus   in   all   classrooms   was   on   procedural   knowledge,  followed  by  conceptual  understanding,  and  only  then  character  qualities.123  

c.  How  it  can  be  assessed The   majority   of   leadership   assessment   tools   are   intensive,   targeted   toward   adults   (usually   in   managerial   positions),  and  fall  into  the  systems  control  framework.  There  are  now  efforts  at  developing  assessments  that   are   process-­‐relational   in   nature,   minimally   intensive,   and   targeted   toward   students   (although   a   literature   review  did  not  find  a  suitable  assessment  that  achieved  all  of  these  things  at  once).     The   Leadership   Dimension   Questionnaire   (LDQ)124   is   built   on   the   idea   that   effective   leadership   is   “being   yourself,  with  skill”125  and  assesses  15  dimensions   (intellectual,  managerial,  and  socio-­‐emotional)  of  adults  in   management  positions,  matching  them  to  three  different  styles  of  leadership  (engaging  leadership,  involving   leadership,   and   goal   leadership).   It   was   found   to   be   both   valid   and   reliable,   but   further   studies   would   need   to   test  its  success  with  student  populations.   A   tool   used   to   assess   teamwork   in   high   school   students   (a   related   concept   to   the   post-­‐heroic   notion   of   leadership)  successfully  triangulated  results  from  self-­‐report,  teacher  evaluation,  and  situational  judgment.126   Each  method  has  its  advantages  and  disadvantages:  self-­‐report  is  the  most  subjectively  true  to  the  students’   experiences   but   may   produce   response   distortion   and   may   be   confounded   by   students’   language   comprehension  abilities,  situational  judgment  tests  have  high  ecological  validity  but  are  difficult  to  score,  and   teacher   ratings   are   slightly   more   objective   and   bypass   the   issue   of   students’   language   difficulties   but   are   subject   to   halo   effects.   Combining   them,   therefore,   conveys   the   most   accurate   depiction,   but   is   a   highly   involved  process.  An  interesting  finding  from  this  study  is  that  of  all  subjects  analyzed,  music  was  the  most   correlated  with  teamwork  scores.  This  makes  conceptual  sense,  since  grades  in  music  depend  on  the  groups   ability   to   work   together   to   choose,   learn,   refine,   and   perform   musical   pieces,   and   points   to   a   potential   direction  for  inserting  modules  on  leadership  and  teamwork  into  existing  curriculum  by  calling  attention  to  it   existing  role.  

122 Eich, D. (2008). A Grounded Theory of High-Quality Leadership Programs: Perspectives From Student Leadership Development Programs in Higher Education. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 15(2), 176–187. 123 Blumenfeld, P., Hamilton, V., Wessels, K., & Falkner, D. (2014). Teaching Responsibility First Graders. Theory Into Practice, 18(3), 174–180. 124 Dulewicz, V., & Higgs, M. (2005). Assessing leadership styles and organisational context. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20(2), 105–123. 125 Goffee, R. & Jones, G. (2000), “Why should anyone be led by you?” Harvard Business Review, September-October, 63-70. 126 Wang, L., MacCann, C., Zhuang, X., Liu, O., & Roberts, R. (2009). Assessing Teamwork and Collaboration in High School Students: A Multimethod Approach. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 24(2), 108.

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

24  

Conclusion The Aspiration: A Wiser Society for a Sustainable Humanity Supporting   education   to   meet   the   needs   of   today’s   world   is   a   global   goal.   Most   of   the   education   transformation   efforts   worldwide   are   laudably   focused   on   the   “How”   of   education.   But   very   little   is   being   done   about   the   “What”.   Education   needs   innovative   global   curricular   goals   adapted   to   the   needs   of   the   21st   century  student  and  society.   A   “21st   century   education”   is   both   broad   in   a   relevant   way,   as   well   as   deep   in   judiciously   chosen   areas,   where   the   three   dimensions   of   Skills,   Character   and   Metacognition   are   taught   through   the   lens   of   traditional   and   modern  knowledge,  with  interdisciplinary  lenses.     The  CCR’s  Geneva  Declaration  has  stated:   “We  call  for  Character  Education  of  the  entire  population  as  a  critical  right  and  necessity,  requiring:   •

A  new  vision  of  Character  Education  that  identifies  and  anticipates  needs,  and  reinforces  the  role  of   both  performance  and  moral  qualities,  at  both  the  intrapersonal  and  interpersonal  levels,  in  society,   economies,  and  individuals;  



 Improvement   in   teachers   professional   development   through   rethinking   what   and   how   to   teach   Character   in   order   to   support   development   of   the   students,   inside   and   outside   the   classroom   and   school;  



 More   inclusive   assessments,   at   the   global,   academic   entrance,   local   (jurisdiction-­‐specific)   and   classroom  (formative  and  summative)  levels,  and  providing  data  and  information  that  can  be  used  to   help  improve  character  education  at  all  levels;  



 Mobilization  of  public  awareness  through  the  media,  and  involvement  of  private  and  public  sectors,   governmental  bodies,  students,  international  organizations,  foundations  and  others  in  strengthening   partnerships  and  networks  for  character  education,  and  in  improving  character  education  globally.  



 

Humanity  has  a  very  large  stake  in  making  these  goals  happen,  and  very  soon.  To  wax  philosophical  about  the   ultimate  goal  of  an  Education,  CCR  does,  like  many  from  Socrates  to  Confucius,  view  wisdom  as  the  ultimate   goal  of  an  education.  These  eminent  thinkers  remind  us  that  what  is  legal  is  not  necessarily  just  and  what  is   ethical   is   not   necessarily   wise.   To   quote   E.O.   Wilson:   “We   are   drowning   in   information,   while   starving   for   wisdom.”  

The  Center  for  Curriculum  Redesign  invites  you  to  jointly  explore  the  seminal  question,    

“What  should  students  learn  for  the  21st  century?”

         

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

25  

           

Please continue the conversation and join our mailing list at, www.curriculumredesign.org/subscribe

With  sincere  gratitude  to  all  external  sources;  their  contribution  is  used  for  nonprofit  education  work  under   the  “Fair  Use”  doctrine  of  copyright  laws.        

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

26  

Appendix 1 Evolution of the CCR Character Framework

a. Draft Framework – 2011

b. Draft Framework – 2012 Performance  “character”:  one’s  mastery  and  thrust  for  excellence  in  life,  school,  and  the  workplace:

 

 

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

27  

Moral  “character”  (relational  and  ethical):  wisdom,  and  how  one  treats  oneself  and  others,  in   interpersonal,  social  and  occupational  matters:  

 

  c. Draft Framework – 2013

Type

Purpose

MORAL

Trait

Leading  to and  to  associated  Traits  and  Concepts

Self-­‐awareness Empathy Managing  Self

Courage

Ethics

Cooperation Working  with  others

Mindfulness,balance,  self-­‐actualization,  self-­‐esteem,   vision,  care,  kindness,  compassion,  consideration Zest Determination,  fortitude,  grit,  confidence,  persistance risk  taking,  toughness,  e nthusiasim,  e nergy,  zeal optimism,  cheerfulness Generosity,  humaneness,  i nclusiveness,  tolerance,     Integrity,   loyalty,  honesty,  truthfulness,  forgiveness,  justice,   fairness,  respect equity Socialization listening,  speaking,  sharing,  social  awareness,  e xecution cross-­‐cultural  awareness,  e fficiency,  conscientiousness,

PERFORMANCE

Achieving  Goal

Leadership

Productivity

Engagement,  humbleness,  commitment,  mentorship,   consistency,  l eading  by  e xample,  reliability,  focus

Curiosity

Initiative

Open-­‐mindedness,  e nthusiasm,  e xploration,  i nnovation, passion,  self-­‐direction,  motivation,  

Resilience

Adaptability

Flexibility,  dealing  with  ambiguity,  diligence,  discipline, perserverence,  patience,  grit,  confidence,  tenacity

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

28  

Appendix 2 Crosswalk Comparison of the CCR Framework with Other Character Frameworks

Mindfulness

Curiosity

Courage

Resilience

Ethics

Leadership

Character Counts! Coalition127

Caring  

 

 

 

Respect,   Responsibility   Trustworthiness,   Fairness,   Citizenship  

CharacterEd.Net

Caring  

 

Courage  

Perseverance,   Self-­‐Discipline  

Fairness,   Responsibility     Honesty  Respect,   Integrity,   Citizenship   (Patriotism)  

Character Education Partnership128

Caring  

 

 

Self-­‐Discipline  

Respect,   Fairness,   Citizenship  

Responsibility  

Facing History and Ourselves129

Caring  

 

 

Resiliency  

Fairness,  Justice,   Respect,   Citizenship  

Responsibility  

KIPP Schools

Gratitude  

Curiosity  

Zest,   Optimism  

Grit,  Self-­‐ Control  

 

Social   intelligence  

P21.org

Flexibility  and   Adaptability,   Social  and  Cross-­‐ cultural  skills  

Initiative   and  Self-­‐ Direction  

 

 

(Productivity   and)   Accountability,  

Social  and   Cross  Cultural-­‐ Skills,   Leadership  and   Responsibility  

Center for the Advancement of Ethics and Character130

Wisdom  

 

Courage  

Diligence,  Self-­‐ Discipline  

Honesty,  Justice,   Kindness  

Responsibility  

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning131

Self-­‐Awareness,   Self-­‐Management,   Social  Awareness,    

 

 

 

 

Relationship   skills,   Responsible   Decision   Making  

The Jubilee Center for

Compassion,   Gratitude  

 

Courage  

Self-­‐Discipline  

Justice,  Honesty,    

Modesty     (and  Humility)  

127

Josephson Institute, The Six Pillars of Character. Retrieved from http://charactercounts.org/sixpillars.html

128

Retrieved from http://www.character.org/

129

Facing History and Ourselves National Evaluation Study: Outcomes and Implications. (2010). Retrieved from http://www.facinghistory.org

130

Retrieved from http://www.bu.edu/education/caec/files/FAQ.htm

131

Retrieved from: http://www.casel.org/social-and-emotional-learning/core-competencies/

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

29  

Character and Virtues132 Young Foundation

 

 

 

Grit  

 

 

China MoE133

Patience  

 

 

 

Justice,  Respect,   Equality,   Citizenship  

Responsibility  

Singapore Character and Moral Education (CME)134

Caring  

 

 

Resiliency  

Respect,   Integrity,   Citizenship  

Responsibility  

South Korea Moral Education135

Kindness  

 

 

 

Honesty,   Respect,   Citizenship  

Responsibility  

Swedish National Agency for Education136

 

 

 

Diligence,   Perseverance,   Self-­‐Discipline  

 

 

Thailand Philosophy of Sufficiency Economy137

Patience  

 

 

Diligence,   Perseverance  

Honesty,   Integrity  

 

132

Retrieved from: http://jubileecentre.ac.uk/userfiles/jubileecentre/pdf/other-centre-papers/Framework.pdf

133

Xiaoman, Z. (2006). Moral Education and Values Education in Curriculum Reform in China. Frontiers of Education in China, 1(2), 191-200.

134

Teo, W. (2010). The Effectiveness in Measuring Character Development Outcomes in Singapore Schools Through the Character Development Award. Retrieved from http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/704/

135

Song, S. (2005, Sep 13). Moral Education in Korean Primary and Secondary Schools. Introductory material prepared for the Malaysian Ministry of Education delegation. Retrieved from http://english.mest.go.kr

136

Bergmark, U. (2008). ‘I want people to believe in me, listen when I say something and remember me’ – how students wish to be treated. Pastoral Care in Education, 26(4), 267-279.

137

Tabucanon, M. (2010, Oct 6). Sufficiency Economy Philosophy: A Model for Sustainable Development. Presentation at the 3rd ASEAN-PlusThree Leadership Programme on Sustainable Production and Consumption. Retrieved from http://www.emb.gov.ph/

   

Character  Education  for  the  21st  Century   © CCR – www.curriculumredesign.org  

30  

Center for Curriculum Redesign Boston, Massachusetts www.curriculumredesign.org

Maya Bialik Michael Bogan Charles Fadel Michaela Horvathova

With the generous support of:

Copyright © 2015 Center for Curriculum Redesign. All Rights Reserved.