Schools must combine traditional academic priorities with broader strategies for developing youth in a holistic way, including the use of character education Too many young people -- of all colors, and all walks of life -- are growing up today unable to handle life in hard places, without hope, without adequate attention, and without steady internal compasses to navigate the morally polluted seas they must face on the journey to adulthood.

As a result, we are on the verge of losing two generations of Black children and youth to drugs, violence, too-early parenthood, poor health, and education, unemployment, family disintegration and to the spiritual and physical poverty that both breeds and is bred by them. Millions of Latino, Native American, and other minority children face similar threats. And millions of White children of all classes, like too many minority children, are drowning in the meaninglessness of a culture that rewards greed and guile and tells them that life is about getting rather than giving. (p. 15) -- Marian Wright Edelman in The Measure of Our Success (1992).

This article is based on one central theme -- that "the role of schools in both framing the pathway to adulthood, and guiding and supporting young people in that journey, must extend beyond the narrow focus on academic performance that continues to dominate most discussions of the purposes and goals of schools, and of school restructuring" (Hixson, 1994, p. 1). Accordingly, there is a critical need for new strategies for consolidating the social, personal, and academic agendas of schools into a more coherent and integrated continuum of experiences for students -- experiences that will prepare them to be successful in life, not simply on tests.

More specifically we need to address young people's increasing involvement in a variety of high-risk behaviors (most prominently, involvement in violence and the use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs) and the adoption of self-defeating values and attitudes (a loss of faith in the school and other community institutions as the primary vehicles for ensuring their future well-being).

The typical response has been to approach these issues in a fragmented, isolated, and parallel manner, leading to a proliferation of add-on programs, curricula, projects, and activities that have overwhelmed schools and made the school experience more complex, fragmented, and confusing for staff and students alike.

This article is an argument for a new approach -- indeed a new paradigm -- grounded in a more expansive vision of the roles, purposes, and goals for schooling. It combines traditional academic priorities with broader strategies for holistic youth development into a more comprehensive and systemic framework for school restructuring and staff development. We believe that character education must be a central element of that paradigm.

Over the last generation and particularly since the 1983 publication of A Nation at Risk, those involved in education have been emersed in a surprisingly long-lived national debate over the way we structure and organize schools, and indeed the entire enterprise of education.

Beginning with an almost obsessive focus on the relationship between academic performance (primarily as reflected on standardized tests) and the present and projected needs of the workplace, the debate has increasingly been guided by the growing national concern about the status and problems of America's youth.

As Karen Pittman (1992), Director of the Center for Youth Development and Policy Research, among others, has noted:

This focus on addressing the full range of developmental and academic needs of young people is capturing the attention of increasing numbers of researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and business leaders. Among researchers, there is increasing agreement that confronting the conditions and circumstances that affect students' motivation and their ability to successful engage in the learning process and participate in the broader life of the school and community is as central to effective schooling as reading, math, science, or social studies. For example, in Schools for the 21st Century, Phillip Schlechty (1990) observed: "Those who are serious about school reform must first understand that America's schools are not less effective than they once were." (p. xvii)

"The problem is that schools today are expected to take on tasks that they have never been held responsible for before. And, even more fundamental, the present school structure grew out of a set of assumptions about the purpose of schooling that is inconsistent with emerging social and economic realities." (p. xvii)

"Those who would restructure schools must therefore consider the purposes schools have been designed to serve, as well as the purposes schools could be designed to serve. It is, after all, the past that has given schools their structure -- the way we envision the future will shape the new structures we try to create."(p. xvii)

Throughout North America, many schools have recognized that education must go beyond simply "delivering" instruction and information, no matter how effectively or efficiently they accomplish those goals. Improving instructional and curricular quality alone is insufficient to meet the needs of students who find little value or meaning in their school experiences, or who are so consumed with non-school issues that they are simply unable to take advantage of the opportunities that the school provides.

As Arthur Cervinkes, principal of Mather High School in Chicago noted in a recent interview: "We can't get to the meat of the subject if we don't have their alert attention, the healthy attention of the kids. Sometimes it takes a while to get to the subject while we're ameliorating other concerns."

"While the subject is the important thing everybody measures our success by, we must have healthy human beings to work with and to run this country later -- and if we don't get that, then who cares about the subject."

Similarly, at the policymaking level, Education Secretary Riley, in his State of Education address (2/14/94) noted:

". . . the issue is not the latest ranking of schools or students. The issue is not "good," "bad" or "rank" -- but whether we are changing fast enough to save and educate [emphasis added] this generation of young people . . . whether education has kept up with the fundamental and far-reaching changes in the economic and social structure of this nation."

"For it goes without saying that there is a great disconnection. If I am troubled by anything, it is this -- we seem, as a nation, to be drifting toward a new concept of childhood which says that a child can be brought into this world and allowed to fend for himself or herself. (There is) a disconnection so pervasive between adult America and the children of America that we are all losing touch with one another.

"This is why we must come to the realization that we must find new ways to give parents and families the support they need to help their children grow . . . ." [emphasis added]

From the business world, Louis Gerstner (1994), president and CEO of IBM noted in his recent book, Reinventing Education:

"Character formation has been a major responsibility of schools. Education never existed in a vacuum. It has a purpose: Make the world a better place by making students better people. At no time in our history has this been more important." (p. 223)

"While schools cannot solve the problems of race and social class, they are the public sector's first line of defense in dealing with the questions of social justice and humane values." (p. 223)

Accordingly, the issue is not that schools are being asked to take on more of society's problems which extend beyond the academic domain. Instead, schools must recognize that they cannot accomplish the academic aspect of their mission if they do not attend to the needs of the whole child, and that the pursuit of a narrow academic mission alone is simply no longer sufficient. As Douglas Heath (1994) notes in Schools of Hope:

"Today's youth are somewhat like us adults. But it is not good enough for their future. Given the complexity of the world they are inheriting, they must be more mentally mature. And given their world's increasing personal and global political and economic interdependencies, they will have to develop not just more mature minds, but also more mature characters." (p. 25)

We offer a series questions to stimulate new thinking about how character education intersects and anchors broader school development restructuring process and for looking at the implications for staff development.

• Why do we teach? What is the role and purpose of schools and schooling in the context of 1996 America?
• Who do we teach? What do we know about the characteristics and realities of today's students and how do we design schools that are aligned, rather than in conflict with them?
• What do we teach? In order to be successful in life, what do students need to know, be able to do, and be like?
• How do we teach? In what ways can we organize students' educational environments and experiences (both in and out of schools) such that they facilitate meaningful and engaged learning and authentic success?
• Who teaches? How can we ensure that all staff are fully competent and disposed to engaging the students they have and the communities in which their schools are located in the whole spectrum of activities that define a truly 21st century education. While there has been much attention to whether or not students are "ready to learn," there must be an equivalent interest in ensuring that teachers are ready to teach the students they have.
• Where do we teach? What is nature of the organizational structures, climate or culture, and relationships that need to exist within the school/district, and between the school and its locale, as well as the broader community.

Collectively, these questions provide a framework for discussions that can help schools and communities reflect about the intersection of the social and personal development agendas of schooling and the mission, goals, and fundamental purposes of education.

Character education is more than rote responses to a rubric of external rules. It is comprehensive and holistic, involving ethical considerations that guide one's ability to distinguish right from wrong. It is education that creates meaning for productive living. This practice of discipline becomes an opportunity to foster and internalize moral reasoning, develop voluntary compliance with rules, and develop respect for others. It encourages the use of intellectual and moral resources as a means for confronting social issues (Lickona, 1993).

Character education engages learners in life-oriented experiences that enhance personal development, resiliency, responsible decision making, self-discipline, and positive goal-oriented behavior. It involves practical teaching and inclusive learning that enables students to understand, appreciate, and adapt core ethical values into their daily lives. The values of honesty, truthfulness, caring, civic virtue and citizenship, rights and responsibility, respect for self and others, trustworthiness, and perseverance are the guiding principles in the framework of educating for character.

Teaching strategies in a values-enhanced school culture integrate the cognitive, affective, and ethical aspects of learning throughout the school curriculum. Character education is the fulcrum that supports and connects intellectual and social development to purposeful learning and living. It is the vehicle that translates ethical principles and reasoning into thoughtful decision making and responsible action. Sustained approaches to character education enable students to develop an inner compass of morals. Students are taught pro-social behavior. They learn to expand their options and respond to life situations from an intellectual and moral dimension, understanding right from wrong. They develop a respect for the power of choice as it relates to the benefits and consequences of behavior.

There are some very basic steps that staff developers can take when implementing a character education program.

• Conduct focus groups with community people and parents to determine if people feel there is a need for such a program. Discuss issues such as safety, or the lack of it, in the community; the amount of violence, drug and gang problems; and youth problems.
• Meet with local law enforcement agencies, especially officers of the juvenile courts, and ask for statistics and other information concerning the number of young people with whom they come in contact.
• Ask teachers to think about the most serious barriers they encounter on a daily basis that inhibit them from teaching and students from learning.
• Provide opportunities for educators and businesses to share their vision of excellence for students.
• Create an ethical dialogue that focuses on practical strategies for school improvement.
• Provide information regarding foundations and businesses which offer financial support and other resources to implement a character education program.
• Share information and strategies for the creation of a partnership among schools in the district which are involved in character education programs.
• Create partnerships and mentorship programs with community organizations, businesses, and parent groups.
• Explore ways that schools can link character education with the concept of service learning.
• Provide all stakeholders with research-based information and best instructional practices. Help educators become "high performing engineers"




Conclusion

Students, teachers, parents, communities, schools, universities, businesses, cultural institutions, organization, systems and establishments throughout our nation benefit from the collaborative efforts of teaching character building to our youth. Our professional and personal responsibility to character building is our choice and our challenge. Character education provides a way of opening the eyes of educators to the complexities of social and ethical issues. The real litmus test of our ethical strength as a nation will be the example we set for our students. It will be through our pride and commitment to moral excellence that students will understand who we are and what we want them to become.

The shape of our future, both public and private, will reflect our collective will as educators, parents, and community partners to respond to the call for authentic leadership and ethical responsibility. What we cultivate in the lives of our children today will not go unnoticed. For what we do will determine what we will become as a nation tomorrow.

References

Edelman, M.W. (1992). The measure of our success: A letter to my children and yours. Boston, MA: Beacon Press

Gerstner, L.V. (1994). Reinventing education: Entrepreneurship in America's public schools. New York: Penguin Books.

Heath, D.H. (1994). Schools of hope: Developing mind and character in today's youth." San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Hixson, J. (1994). Integrating prevention and restructuring: Exploring the expanding agenda for change. Unpublished working paper prepared for the Frameworks for Prevention project of the Midwest Regional Center for Drug-Free Schools and Communities.

Lickona, T. (1993). The return of character education. Educational Learning, 51(3), 6-11.

National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1993) A national at risk. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Pittman, K.J., & Cahill, M. (1992). Pushing the boundaries of education: The implications of a youth development approach to educational policies, structures, and collaborations. A commissioned paper prepared for the Council of Chief State School Officers. Washington, DC: Center for Youth Development and Policy Research.

Riley, R. (1994). The state of American education. Remarks prepared for the U.S. Secretary of Education's annual State of Education address, delivered at Georgetown University, February 15, 1994.

Schlechty, P.C. (1990). Schools for the 21st century: Leadership imperatives for educational reform. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

About the Authors

Judson Hixson is a senior associate, Midwest Regional Center for Drug Prevention. North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. 1900 Spring Road, Suite 300, Oak Brook, IL 60521-1480, (800)356-2735, ext. 1026. Cheryl Gholar is an educator at the University of Illinois, Cooperative Extension Service, 6438 Joliet Road, Countryside, IL 60525, (708) 352-0109. Ernestine Riggs is a NDN Reading Project Director, North Central Regional Educational Laboratory, 1900 Spring Road, Suite 300, Oak Brook, IL 60521-1480, (800)356-2735, ext. 1085.