14 Jan
Can we teach character in 45 minutes monthly?
Posted in General, Organization, Students, Teacher Frustration on 14.01.10
For decades Georgia has required public schools to teach character traits. Each month spotlights a trait: respect, responsibility, citizenship, compassion, resilience, diversity, commitment, and integrity.
Who can argue with such a plan?
Teaching and emphasizing strength of character is a noble goal, and literature is the perfect platform for discussions about valuable character traits. Any English teacher discussing Atticus Finch of To Kill a Mockingbird certainly touches on each of the character traits Georgia emphasizes.
History teachers discussing the founding of America, the Great Depression, the Civil Rights Movement, and other important historical events also teach and emphasize character.
Is it possible to teach science without emphasizing respect, resilience, responsibility?
Is it possible to teach foreign language, or physical education, or mathematics or any other school subject without addressing character traits that we want students to develop?
As with so many things in education, we often let other interests sidetrack our goals, and too often our decisions are not based on what is best for students. Instead of allowing teachers to emphasize character traits naturally as they teach their subjects, my school, along with a few others in my district, changed the process a few years ago.
For 45 minutes one day each month, high school students attend a Character Education lesson. They return to their homerooms and are instructed in the “Word of the Month.” Imagine pulling sixteen year olds into a classroom and saying, “Today we are going to learn about responsibility,” or “This month’s word is ‘compassion.’ Now, who can define ‘compassion’?”
Students complain that the program is silly.
Teacher complain that the program is unproductive.
In fact, students and teachers have complained and suggested improvements FOR YEARS!
No assessment of the program has ever been conducted, and most teachers simply go through the motions of teaching a character education lesson each month, believing this is the way it is going to be regardless of what they think.
On Tuesday we taught RESILIENCE, a fitting word for teachers and students who gather each month and go through the motions of learning character in such an unnatural setting.
Like too many things in education, this unproductive and inane activity doesn’t have to be this way. Teachers could indeed restructure the program and make it meaningful for students, but things won’t change because we have “taught” character this way for over 15 years. It’s the only method that most teachers, students, and administrators know.
Unfortunately, we all know the mantra: “This is the way we have always done it.” Sometimes routine appears more important than success.
Maybe one month we can add a new character word: effectiveness!
Copyright secured by Digiprove © 2010 Edie Parrott
2 comments on this topic
15. January - 9:18 pm
Thank you!
16. January - 10:17 pm
I teach character ed freshmen. and I can tell you why it doesn’t work. Warning: long rant ahead.
You are getting up in front of kids who don’t know you that well(since ur only in homeroom on tuesdays) even though you may have been with them for 2, 3, 4 years. Half of them don’t care. Most of them just want donuts(which i never bring for my kids. they can suck it up). And most of them are still thinking about what happened last period and the homework they need to finish for the next one. Or they’re texting. Most of them seem like they are listening but are really tuning you out and thinking about family problems. They are angry at mom and dad or a sibling. Someone just broke up with someone and since they’re in high school they think they were in love so they’re heartbroken. And its a wonderful process that repeats itself til they’re adults and instead of practicing commitment they were practicing divorce. Which most of their parents are, if they were married in the first place.
These kids don’t need some disconnected character ed mentor whom they’ve never met(or don’t know that well). They need someone to talk to. A friend who will listen with compassion to whats on their mind and whats on their heart. And honestly, character ed mentors can’t do that for a classroom full of students. At least I can’t. But thats what they need. They won’t listen to someone who hasn’t gained their respect. Once they have a role model they respect, they might start to actually “learn” something about character. By example mind you, not by presentation.
Ask any high schooler to go online and read the CE lessons on the KMHS website. Half of them are silly. some are, I would dare say, STUPID. They want us to play “Love Can Build a Bridge” by The Judds to teach them compassion? Yeah. That will get their attention. You are basically sending a message to them that they are immature and can’t understand how to function socially.
I have an idea. Let’s bring the gospel in and teach these kids that they’re sinners and that God has provided a way out in his grace and mercy. That the creator of the universe loves them even when they’re mom or dad or friends don’t. That they’re not alone. Why don’t we give them hope. And reality. Instead of trying to teach them foundationless morals. These CE lessons don’t make references to the Bible. Why? Trying not to offend anyone? I’ll bring the Bible in and pop it open in front of my class and read to them. It’s a lot better than some “it takes a village to raise a child” african proverb. And it doesn’t take a village to raise a child. It takes two committed, responsible, loving parents. Remember Adam and Eve? Not much of a village there. Remember Noah and his sons? Not exactly what you would call “the village people.” It only takes a village to raise a child if they parents aren’t doing their job. And I don’t believe it should be the responsibility of teachers to do what parents should be doing at home.
This may not all apply to middle school and elementary school students. But it definitely does for high schoolers.
ok. off my soapbox.
16. January - 10:25 pm
Brian, I agree with some of your statements, particularly the comments about how the lessons are silly for high school students. While I agree that the Gospel would indeed provide great lessons, it would be inappropriate in a public school to pull lessons from the Bible unless we are also going to pull lessons from other religious texts.
While I understand your frustration with Character Education, I am concerned about how angry you seem to be. Why do you teach CE if you don’t agree with the program?
16. January - 10:47 pm
Wow! Good points, Edie! I find, in my 20th year of teaching, that I’m much more appreciative of our former principal’s mantra of “No more TTWWADI: That’s the way we’ve always done it!”. I guess I didn’t realize how resistant to change educators can be! At least he appreciated change! Have a large day!!!
17. January - 1:30 pm
I don’t use the lessons they give us online(unless I omit 90% of it). I make my own lessons. And I don’t always talk about the character word.
I’m not angry that they’re trying to teach good character. I’m angry that that responsibility has been relegated to the public education system where its effectiveness can never surpass that of the environment in which true character is supposed to be fostered. And because they are not giving the kids a foundation on which to base ethics or morals.
Having good character comes from the inherent belief in the value of other lives. The only way other people have significance is if there is a God who created them. If we just evolved, then we’re no better than animals. If the universe began with a bang and not the spoken word of God then the universe is meaningless. And who are we to give our lives meaning in an ultimately meaningless universe? How can you teach kids that we are no better than animals and expect them to behave like they are?