Unsay title ani???? Ang makabalo tagaan singko, Summaries of Law

Download Unsay title ani???? Ang makabalo tagaan singko and more Summaries Law in PDF only on Docsity! East Tennessee State University Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University Electronic Theses and Dissertations Student Works 12-2002 The Effects of Character Education on Student Behavior. William G. Thompson East Tennessee State University Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.etsu.edu/etd Part of the Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Commons Recommended Citation Thompson, William G., "The Effects of Character Education on Student Behavior." (2002). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 706. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/706 This Dissertation - unrestricted is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Works at Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. For more information, please contact digilib@etsu.edu. The Effects of Character Education on Student Behavior A dissertation presented to the faculty of the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis East Tennessee State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor in Education by William G. Thompson December 2002 Dr. Ron Lindahl, Chair Dr. Nancy Dishner Dr. Elizabeth Ralston Dr. Russell West Keywords: Character Education, Values Education, Student Behavior 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank my family for their patience and encouragement during this study. Their support kept me going. I want to express my appreciation to my advisor and chairperson, Dr. Ron Lindahl, who guided me through the process in a professional manner and encouraged me each step of the way. Dr. Lindahl was my teacher, mentor, and friend. I wish to acknowledge Dr. Nancy Dishner, Dr. Elizabeth Ralston, and Dr. Russell West for their work on my committee. Each provided valuable comments and suggestions throughout the course of this study. I wish to acknowledge my external auditor, Mr.Bill Gentry, Esquire, and my peer debriefer, Becky Harwell, who served as a critical component of this research and a source of constant encouragement. 5 CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................. 2 DEDICATION.................................................................................................................. 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS................................................................................................. 4 Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 8 Background of the Problem ................................................................................... 8 Statement of the Problem....................................................................................... 9 Significance of the Study ....................................................................................... 9 Design of the Study ............................................................................................... 13 Limitations ............................................................................................................ 14 Overview of the Study ........................................................................................... 14 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE.................................................................................... 15 The History of Character Education....................................................................... 15 The Impetus for Modern Day Character Education ................................................ 19 Arguments for Character Education....................................................................... 21 Arguments against Character Education................................................................. 23 Current Character Education Programs.................................................................. 27 Effectiveness of Current Programs......................................................................... 30 3. METHODS .............................................................................................................. 35 Research Design .................................................................................................... 35 Participants............................................................................................................ 36 6 Chapter Page Successive Phases of the Inquiry ............................................................................ 37 Instrumentation...................................................................................................... 37 Data Collection and Recording Modes................................................................... 38 Data Analysis Procedures ...................................................................................... 38 Logistical Issues .................................................................................................... 39 Ensuring the Trustworthiness of the Data............................................................... 39 4. PRESENTATION OF THE DATA........................................................................... 41 A Culture of Character .......................................................................................... 42 Case Studies .......................................................................................................... 44 Case 1: Elise ................................................................................................... 44 Case 2: Cory................................................................................................... 47 Case 3: Sonny................................................................................................. 49 Case 4: Donny ................................................................................................ 51 Case 5: Ira ...................................................................................................... 54 Case 6: Kandy................................................................................................. 56 Case 7: PJ ....................................................................................................... 59 Case 8: Macky ................................................................................................ 62 Case 9: Sammy ............................................................................................... 64 Case 10: Danny Joe.......................................................................................... 68 Summary ............................................................................................................... 70 5. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA..................................................................................... 71 Teaching Character and Discipline ......................................................................... 71 Changes in Behavior .............................................................................................. 72 Influences on Behavioral Changes.......................................................................... 72 9 and discipline. According to Field (1996), in the 1960s and 1970s character education changed dramatically when value clarification, moral dilemma discussions, and decision-making processes replaced the traditional emphasis on learning right from wrong and acting right. These programs failed to distinguish between the personal preferences of students and true moral values. Today, with the increased problems that society faces, more traditional character education is becoming commonplace in public schools (Lickona, 1995). Statement of the Problem The purpose of this multiple-case study was to determine how character education affects students' behavior. Many principals spend a significant amount of time dealing with inappropriate student behavior. Character education programs are proactive approaches to improve discipline in the schools, but do they make a difference? If character education reduces disciplinary problems, instills compassion and caring, promotes citizenship, and develops a moral conscience in students, it would be a worthwhile endeavor in terms of time and money spent. If character education does not affect the manner in which students behave, then resources can and should be reallocated to other programs. This multiple-case study was conducted at a rural elementary school in East Tennessee and included (a) interviews with teachers responsible for character education instruction, (b) interviews with students, (c) interviews of the parents of students, and (d) a review of disciplinary records. Significance of the Study Character education is not new; it is as old as education itself. Lickona (1992) pointed out that “Wise societies since the time of Plato have made moral education a deliberate aim of school” (p. 6). In America, from colonial times throughout the early part of the 20th century, character education was central to education in general. Likewise, character education was at the heart of teacher preparation programs. The “normal schools” of the 19th century were designed 10 to train a new breed of teachers for the increasing number of public schools with the “development of public virtue” a central theme (Glenn, 1987). However, by the middle of the 1960s, many people considered that public schools in the United States no longer shared common values to teach America’s children. In 1966, with the publication of Lawrence Kohlberg’s theory of moral reasoning, American schools embarked on a journey through values clarification and moral dilemma discussions (Leming, 1993). From the mid 1960s throughout the 1970s, values clarification and moral dilemma discussion dominated education in the United States. In values clarification, the teacher served as a facilitator in helping each student clarify his or her own values by following a prescribed seven-step valuing process. The teacher never attempted to influence the student and withheld his or her personal opinions. Whatever values the student arrived at were to be respected by the teacher. Similarly, Kohlberg’s moral dilemma discussion provided for the teacher to facilitate students' reasoning, assisted students in resolving moral conflicts, and ensured that the discussions took place in a value free environment. The goal was to move the student to the next stage in moral reasoning. In both programs, the objective was cognitive development of moral reasoning; both emphasized that teachers were nonjudgmental and were not to moralize (Leming, 1993). Neither program appeared to deal with behavior. In fact, according to Leming, the research base for the moral and values education curriculums of this period offered little assistance in planning for character education where changes in student behavior were a central objective. This occurred during a period when the traditional family unit was disappearing from American society. Ironically, the social problems faced by public education during this time, such as violence, racism, teen pregnancy, low self-esteem, and drug and alcohol abuse, were the very problems that character education addressed (Character Education Partnership, 2002). According to the Center for the 4th and 5th R's (1999), there is a plague of youth violence in the United States today marked by a near total lack of conscience or remorse. Between 1965 and 1990, there was a 300% increase in the arrest rate for all juvenile violent crimes in this 11 country. Included among the reasons for the increase in youth violence were the rise in the single parent family, the increase in fatherless families, poor parenting in general, the physical and sexual abuse of children, the use of drugs, the desire for money and material things, the desire for power and respect that entices a child to carry a weapon and use it, a decline in respect for life, and explicit violence and sex in the media. The 1992 report of the National Research Council stated that the United States was the most violent of all industrialized nations (Lickona, 1993). More recently, the Columbine tragedy in Colorado underscored the violent behavior of many of today’s youth. According to Schaeffer (1999), the easy availability of guns and the pervasiveness of violence in television, movies, and music play a role. Additionally, out-of- control youth, drug abuse, and other societal ills have played a role. However, the common thread seen in the recent school shootings is that the young people involved seemed disconnected and alienated; most had no meaningful relationships with their parents or other adults, and many were exposed to negative influences such as gangs and violence on television, video games, and the Internet. In today’s society, many homes are headed by working parents who are exhausted when they come home, and the children are left with abundant time for exposure to such negative influences (Schaeffer, 1999). Today, there is renewed consensus concerning core values that transcends cultural, political, and religious boundaries. These core values comprise the basis of modern character education. Respect, compassion, responsibility, honesty, integrity, and fairness are the building blocks of character education programs that are emerging across the nation. This new character education movement is based on the belief that the violent, dishonest, irresponsible, and destructive behavior of today’s youth is the result of the absence of good character. However, not everyone is convinced that character education is the answer to the societal ills of today’s youth. According to Black (1996), “Kids seldom practice what their schools’ character education programs preach” (p. 29). She cited research that shows little positive correlation between what students learn about good character in school and the extent to which they 14 responses together, and coding the responses. The data were analyzed and the researcher attempted to identify constructs, themes, and patterns through reflective analysis. Limitations Students and parents selected to participate in the study were chosen based on teachers’ perceptions of positive and negative behavioral changes over time and on the willingness of those students and parents identified to participate in the study. This purposeful selection process greatly limited the range and variety of cases examined in the study. The researcher was also the principal of the school where the character education program was introduced; therefore, the biases and preconceptions of the researcher must be taken into consideration. No other limitations were identified. Overview of the Study Chapter 1 has included an introduction, statement of the problem, purpose of the study (which also included background information and the significance of the study), and limitations of the study. Chapter 2 describes a review of relevant literature including reviews of educational journals, periodicals, and books related to character education and recent research on character education. Chapter 3 describes the methodology used in conducting the study and Chapter 4 is a presentation of the data collected. Finally, Chapter 5 analyzes the data and Chapter 6 contains conclusions, recommendations for practice, and recommendations for further research. 15 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE The review of literature focuses on three main topics. First, the history of character education is reviewed because it provides a background for describing the events, philosophies, and attitudes that led to modern day character education. Second, programs currently in place are reviewed and can be divided into three categories: the Socratic approach, the integrated method, and service learning. Finally, the research on character education, both positive and negative, is presented because it provides a starting point for this study. The History of Character Education Character education in American schools has been around since colonial times. When communities were small, it was relatively easy for parents to control the content of what was taught in school, and what was taught were values based on Christian principles. Because the majority of early settlers were Christians, it was natural that the church would be responsible for the schools. According to Mulkey (1997), school textbooks of 1776 contained 100 % moral and religious content and parents demanded strict adherence to these values by their children. As the new country and the beginning of publicly sponsored education developed, there was a trend toward separation of church and school. The transition from church schools to public schools lasted almost 100 years (Mulkey, 1997). During this time, the McGuffey Reader became a staple textbook for schools across the country. It included stories from the Bible along with larger than life stories of heroes, poems, and universal truths to develop students into good citizens. Never attempting to hide religious overtones, the McGuffey Reader taught values of frugality, cleanliness, honesty, hard work, dedication, patriotism, and obedience (Field, 1996). However, Benjamin Franklin’s Autobiography best exemplifies the virtues that the early schools 16 sought to teach; they included temperance, silence, order, resolution, frugality, industry, sincerity, justice, moderation, cleanliness, tranquility, chastity, and humility (Mathers, 1995). During the late 1800s, the Catholic community sought financial support from the government when they established their own schools, arguing that the public schools based their moral teachings on the Protestant Bible. This gave way to the changes in character education of the early 20th century. The early 1900s brought a renewed interest in character education in the public schools. In 1916, William Hutchins developed the Children’s Morality Code, which emphasized the values of self-control, good health, kindness, truth, sportsmanship, teamwork, self-reliance, duty, reliability, and good workmanship (Mulkey, 1997). This resulted in the formation of “good character clubs” throughout elementary and high schools with the hopes that peer pressure would be strong enough to ensure the practice of these character traits (Field, 1996). According to Leming (1993), schools attempted to integrate these codes into all facets of the school. In 1924, the most comprehensive study of character education began. The Hartshorne and May study assessed the character-related behavior of some 10,000 students primarily in grades 5 through 8 located in 23 communities across the United States. They found no relationship between character education and behavior, specifically as it related to honesty and helping others (Leming). This did not stop educators from continuing their programs of character education. Field noted that many educators were concerned that moral standards continued to be threatened by industrialization, urbanization, immigration, World War I, the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, and the laissez-faire attitudes of the 1920s. In the mid 1930s, John Dewey focused the attention of public schools on the need for moral training and development and encouraged them to provide the environment for the moral development of the students (Mulkey, 1997). During this time, “Citizenship” readers became widely available for students; at the same time, there was a decrease in the number of formal character education programs as stability and hope returned to the country as a result of the 19 centers, youth organizations, and religious groups. The result was the “Aspen Declaration on Character Education,” which established eight principles of character education. In March 1993, the Character Education Partnership was established. This was a national coalition of business leaders, labor leaders, representatives from government, national youth leaders, parents, religious leaders, and representatives of the media. Their goal was to place character education at the top of the national educational agenda (Lickona). National organizations to promote character education are numerous. The Center for the Advancement of Ethics and Character at Boston University, founded by Kevin Ryan, and the Center for the 4th and 5th R's (Respect and Responsibility) founded by Thomas Lickona, are two prominent organizations that promote character education (Black). The Jefferson Center for Character Education (Leming, 1993) and the Josephson Institute of Ethics (Lickona) are also at the forefront in the movement to teach children about character. Finally, a survey by the National School Boards Association in 1996 indicated that 45% of school districts surveyed offered some form of character education and 38% of the remaining districts had plans to do so in the near future (Black). These modern day character education programs emerged as a result of the problems with today’s youth. The Impetus for Modern Day Character Education Violent behavior, lack of respect for others and their property, lack of remorse, dishonesty, and no clear understanding of the difference between right and wrong was becoming commonplace in public schools. Goldberg (2000) reported on the six-year-old boy in the first grade at Buell Elementary School near Flint, Michigan, who took a gun from his pants and shot and killed a little girl in the classroom. A first grade student died supposedly because of a quarrel on the playground the day before. Sam Riddle, the father of a boy who was killed in another school shooting said, “The culture of violence is manifesting itself here with what occurred.” In Jonesboro, Arkansas, in 1998, two middle school boys opened fire on their classmates and killed four girls and a teacher. Two months later, a similar incident occurred in 20 Oregon (Hutcheon, 1999). The following April, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris killed 12 of their fellow students before taking their own lives at Columbine High School. In November 1999, an 11-year-old boy in Pontiac, Michigan, was convicted of murder, as an adult, for gunning down a stranger (Goldberg). In April 2001, a 14-year-old student at the Monroe City Alternative Center in Louisiana fired several shots at students, teachers, and the principal before being overpowered by the police while he was reloading. No motive was given, but the boy had been expelled from the alternative school earlier in the month ("Alternative School Pupil," 2001). Finally, in May 2001, a 15-year-old boy and his 14-year-old friend pleaded guilty to conspiracy, possession of a bomb, and terrorist threats. They had planned to bomb West Chatham Middle School near Savannah, Georgia ("Student Pleads Guilty," 2001). Schaeffer (1999) pointed out that violence in television, movies, and music played a part in the violence in schools as did out of control youth, drug abuse, gangs, video games, the Internet, and other problems in society. However, the commonality of the perpetrators of violence has been their alienation from their parents and society (Schaeffer). Hutcheon (1999) condemned the electronic media for socializing children into violence and a premature, perverted, and abusive sexuality. He also stated that harassing and violent behavior toward girls was being reported as early as the second grade, that boys in sex-education programs frequently named O.J. Simpson and Mike Tyson as their idols, and that the seriousness of violent acts by youths was increasing. Alarming cases of violent acts among teens and preteens appeared to be common. For example, two young boys in Chicago dropped a five-year-old boy from a high-rise window because he would not steal candy for them; a six-year-old girl in California knifed another girl over a Barbie doll; another six-year-old girl in California killed an infant by kicking her in the head because she was in the wrong room at the wrong time; a Texas teenager killed a boy who blew a car horn at him; and a girl in New York murdered another girl during an argument over a boy (Hutcheon). Schaeffer argued that the easy availability of guns and the pervasiveness of violence and sex in television, movies, and music were at least in part 21 responsible for the violent behavior of today’s youth. Hutcheon described in detail the deterioration of society and cited examples from movies, music, and television. He stated that television was the single most influential socializer in modern society, that the programming is increasingly violent and most violent during the times when children were watching, and that the programming specifically for children was filled with horrifying acts of violence. He also cited the titles of popular rap songs such as “Back off Bitch,” “Another Body Murdered,” and “Come Die with Me” as examples of the negative influence music was having on children. Finally, Hutcheon described serial-killer board games, mass murderer collector trading cards, realistic video games of violence, interactive cybersex, and access to everything on the Internet as contributors to the desensitization of society’s children. In view of the problems society faces today, there is a public outcry for a renewal of character education. Arguments for Character Education In the mid 1990s, former Secretary of Education William Bennett's Book of Virtues was on the New York Times bestseller list for almost one year (Lockwood, 1997). All one needed to do was pick up a magazine or newspaper, search the Internet, look at recent book reviews, or listen to the President in his address on education to see that values and character were at the forefront of educational issues. Children faced dilemmas every day on what was right and wrong and the debate continued on whose responsibility it was to teach what is right. The obvious answer was the family; but the family in many respects has disintegrated. According to Whitehead (1993), the majority of children born today will not live continuously with their own mother and father throughout their childhood and many children will experience a family break- up two or more times before they complete school. Lickona (1993) stated that no entity had experienced the impact from the disruption of the family unit more than schools. Children of divorced and single mothers were more likely to be poor, have emotional and behavioral 24 called on boys the majority of the time; and that teachers advocated critical thinking--then labeled those students who thought critically as difficult children. To him, the problem was not with the children, but with the adults with whom the children interacted; that values were not taught, but caught and practiced. Nash (1997) concluded that the current character education programs were inadequate to prepare students to live in a culturally diverse society. Finally, one of the most prominent critics of the character education movement condemned the program as political indoctrination of the conservative right. Kohn (1997) argued that the movement was a collection of didactic teaching, which promised extrinsic rewards and was designed to make students work harder and do what they were told. Drilling students and indoctrination were the norm instead of critical reflection and discussion, which he advocated. He also stated that the practice of extrinsic motivation, which was so common in character education programs, actually eroded intrinsic motivation, which should be the goal of character education. Kohn described five basic questions to consider relative to the character education programs and proposed answers to each. First, he questioned at what level the problems would be addressed. He noted the argument that social problems could be explained by the lack of traditional values, as most of the character education programs proposed, was not valid. He further stated that if people committed crimes primarily because of their lack of character, then political and social problems were irrelevant and would not need to be addressed. Kohn also stated that how a person acted was directly correlated to the environment. Rather than attempt to change the child, one should attempt to change the school and the classroom. Second, Kohn suggested that one ask how the proponents of character education programs view human nature. He argued that the entire concept was based on the idea that children were inherently bad and needed to be changed; that human nature was selfish, cruel, and mean; and that the underlying belief was the religious doctrine of original sin. The third question Kohn proposed dealt with the ultimate goal of character education programs. He noted that the underlying agenda of such programs was the neo-conservative concern for social and economic stability. 25 Fourth, Kohn wanted to know which values should be taught. He agreed that honesty and fairness were reasonable, but found that the emphasis was on conservative values such as diligence, obedience, and patriotism as well as the Protestant work ethic; that is, children should work hard and complete the job even if they do not want to, and that they should never question the value or meaning of what they were doing. He noted that respect, responsibility, and citizenship were suspect because in practice they masked the real goal of uncritical deference to the authority of the school and teachers. Fifth, Kohn deemed it important to question how the values are taught. He argued that the majority of the programs were didactic, largely engaged in exhortation and directed recitation and primarily telling and compelling students to do what was right according to the program. He saw a major contradiction in that teachers who knew these techniques did not work in academic subjects but swallowed the whole concept and practice when it came to character education. This type of indoctrination was compared by Kohn to Nazi Germany in the 1930s. He concluded with the argument that character education was composed of three ideologies: behaviorism, conservatism, and religion. These arguments against character education appeared to be in the minority; with increased support from the public, more and more states are requiring character education in school. From the late 1960s to the early 1980s, society embraced the romantic idea that all values were oppressive; educators went along with it, maintaining almost a neutral official stance on values. However, right or wrong, the escalating moral problems in the United States have brought about a new consensus from private citizens and public organizations, both liberal and conservative, urging schools to teach morals. These people firmly believed that schools could not stand by and do nothing while violent behavior and bad language increased but must do what they can to improve the character of the students and the moral health of the nation (Lickona, 1992). Sichel (1988) reported that all formal education was imbedded with morality and that teachers, along with family, were the primary sources for helping children deal with moral dilemmas. According to Vessels and Boyd (1996), opinion polls in 1993 and 1994 indicated that 26 the majority of Americans believed that communities could agree on a set of values to teach students; furthermore, 90% favored the teaching of values such as honesty, respect, democracy, persistence, fairness, compassion, and civility. In 1994, the United States Congress passed Public Law 103-301, in support of character education. In addition, in 1994, Present Clinton endorsed character education in his state of the union address. In September 1995, The U.S. Department of Education awarded character education grants to California, Iowa, New Mexico, and Utah. Partnerships, coalitions, and corporations emerged as initiators and supporters of character education. There were still those who stated that public schools should not be in the business of teaching character and morals. To silence these critics, Haynes (1994) argued that there was a triad of social virtues emanating from the First Amendment, including freedom of conscience, or rights, the obligation to guard this freedom for oneself and others, or responsibility and the need to maintain a dialogue by considering how and what we discuss or respect. Furthermore, Bitensky (1995) explained that there had been several Supreme Court decisions that supported character education in public schools. In these decisions, character education was not the primary focus, but the decisions disclosed supportive views of many Justices regarding the role of public schools in teaching values. Other decisions that clarified rights of students regarding free speech also established the constitutionality of values education. For example, in Board of Education v. Pico (1982), Justice Brennan stated that schools must be permitted to constitute the curriculum in order to transmit community values and that there was substantial community interest in promoting respect for authority and traditional values including social, moral, and political (Vessels & Boyd, 1996). In Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser (1986) and Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988), the values education as part of the curriculum was upheld against student claims of free speech violations. Finally, in Ambach v. Norwick (1979), the court stated that the responsibility of public schools in preservation of the values of society has long been recognized by court decisions (as cited in Vessels & Boyd). This 29 school, recognized individual students, groups, and entire classes for demonstrating good character. Sometimes this was based on some type of service activity, but it could have been for some type of academic activity as well. Rusnak (1998) emphasized that character education was not a separate subject but a part of every subject. The programs he reviewed all stressed focusing students’ attention on the ethical dimension of stories, leading students to thoughtful consideration of ethical principles, focusing attention on the moral aspects of history, applying the moral of a story to a student’s own life, and building the skills of moral discussion. Rusnak described several different programs across the country, including Project PAVE (Partners Advancing Values in Education) in the Milwaukee public schools, Project Essential in the Kansas City school system, and Project PREP (Personal Responsibility Education Process) in the St. Louis schools. Each of these programs integrated character education into all aspects of the curriculum and school environment and each reported higher student achievement as measured by standardized tests. The third major type of character education programs is based on service learning. Service learning is just that; students undertake some type of service project with the purpose typically to assist others or make the community a better place to live. Woehrle (1993) described the program at Friends Academy, a Quaker school located in Locust Valley, New York. It included three-year-old preschool through grade 12 students. The program was based on Robert L. Selman’s developmental stage theory of social perspective, which was similar to Kohlberg’s stages of moral development. The service activities ranged from feeding birds, to making decorations for nursing homes, to wrapping Christmas presents for the needy, to raising money for “Save the Children,” to cooking and serving meals in a homeless shelter. The purpose of these activities was to develop social responsibility in the students; in other words, the development of good character. Similarly, Howard (1993) described Maryland’s approach to service learning. Maryland was the first state to mandate community service requirements as prerequisites to graduation. The program allowed students in grades 6 through 12 to earn service 30 credits through activities sponsored by religious groups, social groups, community organizations, medical institutions, libraries, or school sponsored clubs and organizations. Teachers prepared the students through class discussions, research projects, and written proposals. The purpose of this service was to develop or reinforce community values such as justice, compassion, and civic responsibility as a part of character education (Howard). Finally, Switala (as cited in Rusnak, 1998) argued that community service was one of three initiatives used in the Bethel Park School District in Pennsylvania to develop character. It involved service projects in both the school and the community and included peer tutoring, assisting in labs, serving as safety officers, assisting in child care, helping the handicapped, fund-raising for charities, cleaning up the environment, and working in nursing homes. The goal was to develop values, social skills, and responsibility as well as citizenship. Although character education programs like these have been implemented throughout the United States, one of the major criticisms has been the lack of research on their effectiveness. Effectiveness of Current Programs During the 1990s, character education programs spread across the United States; much has been written about these programs, both positive and negatively. However, the most common criticism throughout the literature has been the lack of research on the effectiveness of these programs, particularly quantitative research. Some researchers looked at how the programs have affected the students, some looked at how teachers feel about the programs, and some looked at how the students feel about the programs. Williams (1993) conducted a pilot study to determine how students in the classroom learned moral values. She surveyed, observed, and interviewed teachers, students, administrators, and parents in different school settings, both public and private, over the course of one school year. Because respect was identified by the students as the highest priority, the research focused on this one value. The findings indicated that teachers' perceptions of the 31 success of the program were quite different from the perceptions of the students. Whereas all teachers noted that teaching character was part of their responsibility and all considered that they had been successful, the students disagreed. Williams found that respect was best taught through modeling and quality teaching rather than through formal lessons. Students judged some teachers as insincere and inconsistent, as holding double standards and giving preferential treatment. The students indicated that they learned respect by how they were treated by the teacher rather than what the teacher taught about respect. In another study, Mathison (1998) looked at how teachers felt about character education. Her study included 159 teachers from 4 metropolitan areas across the United States and 137 student teachers at San Diego State University. Although there were several other areas of interest in the study, the primary purpose was to assess the attitudes of teachers and student teachers toward character education in the classroom. The study used a Likert-scale survey format consisting of 20 items for teachers and 7 additional items for student teachers. For teachers, additional information was gathered on number of years teaching, grade level and subjects currently assigned, and location. All participants were provided the opportunity to provide their thoughts about character education in public schools. The responses were quantified and converted to percentages for the entire population--the teachers as a group and the student teachers as a group. The study addressed four major questions dealing with general attitudes toward character education, professional responsibilities, preparation to teach such issues, and perceived obstacles. The findings suggested that teachers considered character education as important and necessary, although they differed on exactly what constituted character education and how it should be taught. Some researchers looked at how character education affected a student's attitude and behavior. According to Leming (1993), the most comprehensive research on the effects of character education was conducted by Hartshorne and May from 1928 through 1930. The results showed that there was little, if any, effect on students’ behavior and ended character education 34 six with a student population of 642. The school was located in a small town in Arkansas. Olsen administered a pre- and post-program survey to the 29 classroom teachers at the school. The two-page questionnaire covered five categories of character including respect for authority, respect for others, courtesy, self-respect, and responsibility. The study concluded that student behavior improved after the implementation of the character education program according to teachers’ perceptions. In summary, character education has always been a responsibility of public schools, although schools have not always accepted this responsibility. From teaching stories from the Bible in Colonial America, to the McGuffey reader of the 1800s, to moral reasoning and values clarification of the 1960s and 1970s, to modern day programs, which vary greatly on methods and teaching strategies, character education has changed dramatically over the years. The research conducted during the 1900s has been inconclusive, with some studies suggesting that character education programs change students' behaviors and attitudes and other studies suggesting that character education programs have failed. This inconclusive research confirms the need for further study. 35 CHAPTER 3 METHODS The purpose of this multiple-case study was to determine how character education affects students' behavior. This chapter describes how the research was conducted, the participants, the instrumentation used, how the data were collected and recorded, how the data were analyzed, logistical issues, and how trustworthiness of the data was assured. Research Design This was a multiple-case study of how character education affects students' behavior. Case study research, according to Yin (1994), is characterized by three conditions: the type of research questions posed, the extent of control and access to behavioral events, and the degree of focus on contemporary as opposed to historical events. Yin argued that “how” and “why” questions are explanatory in nature and typically lead to the use of case studies, histories, and experiments. This study dealt with “how” character education affected students' behavior and therefore meets the first condition. The second condition described by Yin is the extent of control over and access to behavioral events. Experimental research typically exerts a great deal of control and manipulation of behavior, whereas there is little control of behavior in both historical and case study research. There was no control or manipulation of behavior in this study; therefore, it met the second condition described by Yin. This researcher described how students behave and how they perceived the influence of the character education program on that behavior, how teachers perceived student behavior and the influence of the character education program, and how parents perceived student behavior and the influence of the character education program. The third condition described by Yin is the degree of focus on contemporary events as opposed to historical events. What was studied was a contemporary event. The 36 researcher studied student behavior at school where the character education program was in its fourth year of operation. It, therefore, met the third condition described by Yin. Case study research is similar to historical research except that it can include direct observations and systematic interviews that are usually not available in historical research. This research included both. In summary, this research attempted to describe how character education affected students' behavior; there was no attempt to control or manipulate behavior during the study; and the focus was on contemporary rather than historical events. Gall, Borg, and Gall (1996) stated that case study research has four main characteristics. The first characteristic is the study of phenomena, or programs, by focusing on specific instances or cases; this study focused on the effect of the character education program by focusing on specific students, teachers, and parents. The second characteristic is in-depth study of the case or cases; similarly, this study focused on the behavior of 10 students and the perceptions of these students, their teachers, and their parents. The third characteristic is the study of the phenomenon in its natural context; this study was conducted at the school where the students were enrolled. Finally, the fourth characteristic is the representation of the emic perspective; accordingly, this study focused on the perceptions of the students, the teachers, and the parents. Participants The participants of this study were selected from an intact group, which included all students in grades three and four (approximately 250) at this school and the parents of these students. All teachers at the school in grades three and four, as well as the school counselor, the librarian, and the physical education teacher (approximately 15) were asked to identify a student or students to include in the study. The school was located in a rural area in East Tennessee in a county school system where the economy is based heavily on tourism. Approximately 54% of the students were on the Free and Reduced Lunch Program, approximately 24% received special education services, and the school had been identified as a Federal Chapter I school. The school 39 Logistical Issues The researcher was the principal of the school where the study occurred and was, therefore, familiar with the building, campus, faculty, students, and many parents. Permission to conduct the research was granted by the school superintendent (see Appendix F). Individuals interviewed were employees of the school, students of the school, and parents of the students; most were readily available and willing to participate. Permission forms were sent to the parents of students who were to be interviewed (see Appendix D) as well as an Informed Consent Form (see Appendix E) that was signed by both parent and student. The telephone numbers and addresses of parents to be interviewed were readily available to the researcher. Teachers selected for interviews were invited to participate with the understanding that their participation was voluntary. Teachers selected were also requested to sign an Informed Consent Form (see Appendix E). The only logistical problems were arranging interview times for the parents because of work schedules and the transient nature of the students. Ensuring the Trustworthiness of the Data Trustworthiness of the data was established based on Guba’s techniques to establish trustworthiness (Guba & Lincoln, 1985). Creditability was established based on prolonged engagement, triangulation, and member checking. The study covered a period of one school year. Ten cases were included in the study, which involved interviewing the student, the teacher, and the parent or parents and reviewing the disciplinary records of each of the students for the past three years. The data collected were triangulated based on the interviews of the students, teachers, and parents and then a comparison was made with the disciplinary records and the data collected through interviews. Each individual interviewed was given the opportunity to review the interview for accuracy, correct interpretation, and the patterns identified. Transferability of the information was established through a thick description of the school, its climate, and the participants. Dependability and confirmability were established 40 through an audit of the data by an individual completely independent of the school to assure accuracy and completeness (Guba & Lincoln, 1985). The auditor's report is presented in Appendix G. The researcher was the principal in the school; had 16 years experience in the field of public education, 10 as an administrator; and was instrumental in initiating the character education program in the school. Additionally, the researcher was a participant observer during the course of the study, all of which must be taken into consideration in reviewing this study. 41 CHAPTER 4 PRESENTATION OF THE DATA The purpose of this multiple-case study was to determine how character education affects the behavior of students. The researcher attempted to determine the perceptions of teachers, students, and their parents regarding the effects of the character education program. This study used the general interview guide approach, as described by Gall et al. (1996) to determine perceptions of program effects. Fifteen teachers were given the opportunity to participate in the study, including all teachers in grades three and four, along with the guidance counselor, librarian, and physical education teacher. Of these, 11 agreed to be interviewed but only 8 were recorded in this study. One of the 11 stated she had not done a good job of teaching character and could not name a student in whom she had seen a change in behavior. The second one identified a student, but the student’s mother did not want him to participate. The third teacher identified one student, but he moved to another school before the interview could take place. The 8 teachers recorded in this study identified 10 students whose behavior had changed significantly during the year. As stated in Chapter 3, the students and their parents were selected through extreme or deviant case sampling techniques. These students were identified by the teachers through the interview process as being special--by having shown changes in their behavior during the year. Accessibility of the participants varied. Teachers and students were generally easily accessible and willing to grant interviews. It was more difficult to schedule interview time with parents because of conflicts with their work schedules and the transient nature of the school population. Some were reluctant because the Informed Consent form stated that their child’s feelings might be hurt during the interview process. By far, the students were the most difficult to interview; I would sometimes get shrugs from them indicating they did not know the answer. 44 during the year. The school’s chorus is composed of third and fourth grade students who perform character-related songs, some written by their director, along with patriotic songs at special programs throughout the school year. As one visitor commented, “You can feel the caring and love as soon as you walk in the building.” Although the culture of the school had changed since the establishment of the character education program, there were still students with behavioral problems. However, the nature of these problems had changed from violent and disrespectful behavior to scuffles on the playground and writing on the bathroom walls. Additionally, the total number of disciplinary referrals to the office declined over the three-year period after the introduction of the character education program, dropping from 274 during the 1999-2000 school year to 235 during the 2001-2002 school year while during the same period, the school population increased. Along with the increase in school population, the transient rate of the students remained approximately 30%. These transient students may not have had any exposure to character education programs prior to enrollment at this school. Case Studies Each case presented includes comments by the teacher or teachers, responses from the students, responses from one or both of their parents, and a summary of disciplinary records for each student. Pseudonyms were used to protect the identity of the students. Case 1: Elise Elise was a 10-year-old female who had just completed the fourth grade and had attended this school since kindergarten. She had two older brothers who also attended this school. She had always been a very shy and withdrawn student and had struggled academically since first grade. 45 Elise’s teacher, Mrs. W, had been teaching for 11 years at this school. When asked how she taught character in her classroom, she stated “I integrate it into the subject being taught. I bring out the pillars of character based on the situation or story. For example, we talked about President Clinton’s lack of integrity and President Bush admitting to driving while intoxicated.” When asked how character education is incorporated into her discipline program, she stated “Any discipline problem is related to Character Counts; we talk about being examples for the younger kids in the halls, cafeteria, etc. We also talk about the ‘Golden Rule’ when they tease, taunt, or gossip.” Mrs. W indicated that Elise had changed more than any other student in her class; she stated: At the beginning of the year, Elise would not complete her work, would not ask questions, and was not very responsible when it came to keeping up with either her assignments or her personal things. Now, Elise is more responsible, she keeps up with assignments in class as well as homework, she does all her work and turns it in, and, if she has questions, she asks me. She is more confident, has better self-esteem, and seems happier. When asked to what she attributed the changes she saw in Elise, Mrs. W responded, “We have promoted responsibility and respect from day one. I think some of it has to do with Elise maturing, but I think the majority of it comes from the daily reminders about character.” When Elise was informed of what the teacher had said and asked why her behavior had changed, she responded: Kind of like Character Counts. I usually listen to it. Other kids, like, have stuff to play with; and they are beside me with, like, necklaces and stuff, and I did not have any necklaces on. I just listen to it. It wasn’t that boring, but it was OK, I was listening. It, like, taught me responsibility, trustworthiness . . . that’s how I got the trustworthiness award. When asked what trustworthy meant, she responded, “Yeah, I forgot; oh, it means trust people. I get my homework done here and I have more time to play on the computer at home. I just like Mrs. W; she’s one of my favorite teachers. She’s really nice.” 46 When asked who influenced her behavior most, Elise asked “Teacher?” When told it could be a teacher or anyone else, she responded: Mrs. L and Mrs. W. Mrs. L taught me a lot and Mrs. W did too. I got in trouble; and that’s a lot how I learned, ’cause I got in trouble, and I didn’t want to get in trouble. I wanted to try to be my best, so I tried not to be in trouble anymore. Mrs. L taught us all kinds of stuff; and I thought fourth grade teachers were real strict, but Mrs. W was good. How she is nice to us and how she treats us. It’s like letting your teacher down when you’re bad. When asked if she knew what the Character Counts program was about, she responded: Yes, it is what my momma said we were going to talk about. Mrs. L was the teacher who did the character counts songs and stuff. I think I just felt touched in the fourth grade. I don't know what...it was Mrs. W. When asked if it affected how she behaved, she said “Yes, I used to fight with my brothers for no reason; now I only fight with them when they fight with me. It taught me respect and responsibility; now when I get stuff out, I put it back up.” Elise’s mother was interviewed. When asked if she had observed any changes in Elise’s behavior this year, either at home or at school, and if she could give me specific examples, she responded: Yes, she has matured a lot. When she accomplishes something on her own, she will say that that is ‘responsibility’; and, where she has done better in her studies this year…and little things like getting herself up in the mornings and doing her homework. It really started around the first of the third grade. When Elise’s mother was asked what led to the changes the last two years, she responded: Well, she had a really good teacher this year; Mrs. W was really good with her, and she had a good teacher the year before; and the year we spent at Sylvan [Leaning Center], she just really matured a lot. We attend church regularly, and it has always been a part of Elise’s life. When Elise’s mother was asked if Elise ever talked about the Character Counts program, her mother responded: Oh yes, she talks about it a lot. She did get, what was that she got on graduation day? She got a certificate for trustworthiness, and she was so tickled about that; but Elise is real compassionate and worries about other people anyway. You know certain kids in the class that don’t have anything, she worries about them a lot; and, she makes a response about other kids who aren’t trustworthy in the class and makes comments about that a lot. 49 When Cory’s mother was asked if he had ever discussed the Character Counts program, she stated: He would never really discuss what was going on at school. He did talk about doing yard work at school and collecting cans, but when I would try to talk to him about respect and responsibility, the boys [he and his brother] would mock me. When she was asked if the program affected how her child behaved, she stated: It gets through to them with the hands-on experiences, and it affected him last year [when he was in Mrs. M’s class], but he has changed [since going to the middle school]. His attitude at home and toward school has changed [for the worse], and he has been in trouble [at school]. I have started working again, and that might affect his behavior. In reviewing Cory’s discipline record during the 1999-2000 school year, he was referred to the office eight times, suspended from the bus once and from school twice. During the following year--the year in which he was in Mrs. M’s class, he was referred to the office three times, none of which resulted in suspension. During the 2001 to 2002 school year, he was referred to the office at the middle school (grades 5 through 8) for disciplinary reasons nine times for fighting/horseplay, inappropriate remarks, and vulgar language. He was suspended from the bus once, received in-school suspension six times, and was suspended from school once. Case 3: Sonny Sonny, Cory’s brother, was nine years old and in the third grade. He had attended this school since kindergarten. His teacher, Mr. Y, was in his second year of teaching, his first at this school. When asked how he teaches character in his classroom, Mr. Y stated, “I approach character in the classroom through daily classroom rules. These rules encourage responsibility, citizenship, fairness, respect, and caring by interweaving these guidelines into journal writings.” When asked how character education is incorporated into his disciplinary program, Mr. Y responded, “Character education is incorporated through positive decision making on the part of the students.” In describing changes in behavior that he has observed, he stated, “I feel that character in the classroom has encouraged a few overactive students to make good decisions.” 50 He identified Sonny as one of his students whose behavior has changed significantly in a positive manner. I have observed Sonny informally throughout the year. I have seen him open the door for visitors, walk away from a fight when provoked by another student and report the incident to his teacher, and treat others with respect (i.e. saying “sir” and “ma'am,” saying “thank you,” and going out of his way to help a teacher and student). When I informed him that I had seen a big improvement in his behavior over the last two years, especially this year, and asked him if he could tell me why, he shrugged his shoulders. When asked if his behavior at home had improved as well, he shook his head yes and said “uh-huh.” When asked why, he responded, “I don’t know right now.” When asked who had had the most influence on him in improving his behavior, he responded “my Dad and my Mom.” When asked how, he responded, “They ground me and take away my play station.” When asked if he knew what the Character Counts program was, he responded “no." When asked if he had ever heard of it, he responded “yes." When asked if he knew the different pillars, he responded, “The pillars are like states and stuff.” When I explained to him that it was like “respect and responsibility,” he responded “careness, respect, responsibility, kindness.” When asked if the program affected him at all, he responded “a little bit.” When asked if it had made him more responsible or made him a better citizen, he responded “a little bit.” When Sonny’s mother was interviewed, she was asked if she had observed any changes in Sonny’s behavior at home or at school. She responded “Oh yes, some of it has sunk in with Sonny. He is much more respectful and more courteous to adults.” When asked what she thought led to these changes, she responded “The influence of his teacher here at school. He still has good days and bad days, but the good days are by far more frequent now.” When asked if her son had ever discussed the Character Counts program, she stated, “He talks about what he is doing at school all the time; he is more open than his brother. He has talked specifically about respect and responsibility and how important they are.” 51 Sonny’s referrals to the office have dropped significantly over the last two years. During the school year 1999 to 2000, when he was in the first grade, he was referred to the office for disciplinary problems 10 times. These incidents were serious enough to result in bus suspension, corporal punishment, and suspension from school requiring a hearing before the superintendent. During the 2000 to 2001 school year, Sonny was referred to the office only twice, neither requiring serious disciplinary action. During the 2001 to 2002 school year, Sonny has not been referred to the office for disciplinary reasons. Case 4: Donny Donny was a nine-year-old male starting the fourth grade. He had a younger brother and they both lived with their mother. He had been a student at this school since first grade. His third grade teacher, Mrs. F, was asked to describe how she taught character in her classroom. She responded: At the beginning of the six-weeks, my class divides itself into three communities. Each community elects a mayor and a vice-mayor who take many responsibilities toward class management and discipline. The communities are in constant competition to be the best at everything from keeping a clean community to reading the most books. Each student becomes accountable to the community for many things during the school day, including maintaining acceptable character. For each pillar of character, Mrs. F stated: I find a story to read to the class that illustrates the trait. It may be a story that we are reading in class anyway, or it may be some other appropriate title, or it could be a movie. I use a character in the story to start the discussion about the new pillar of character. After the discussion, each student writes a couple of paragraphs about the characterization depicted in the story and illustrates it. During the second or third week of the emphasis, each student draws a pillar in his or her Character Counts Journal, colors it appropriately, draws something to illustrate that pillar of character, and writes about it. One lesson is usually based on a skit from Frank Schaeffer’s Skits for Character Counts. Students read the skit, then perform it for the class. During another lesson, students work in small groups to write their own skits and act them out. Occasionally, we sing songs about character. I have written a couple of songs that tell what character is, name the pillars, and cites times when character counts at our school. 54 When asked if it was something the teacher did, she responded, “Especially with the, they had their own little communities like. I think she really did good with that, ’cause I think a lot of them could have got really scared, but I think she did really well with it.” When Donny’s mother was asked if she thought what the teacher was doing in class affected Donny, she responded: Oh yeah, I’m sure it did. I don’t have any doubt about that. Just like the situation we talked about before with the little boy, I think Donny would have been terrified, because he, I mean we, have guns at home, but they are all the time locked up. And I tell him if he sees someone with it you, don’t stand around, you run; and if they’re shooting, you hit the floor. I think she did really well because he wasn’t scared at all. When she was asked how the program affected how Donny behaved, she responded: He’s more happy, just at ease, it helps him more than any of them because Donny’s grandfather is on a heart transplant list…and I think if it wasn’t for him loving this school and everything about it he wouldn’t be as good as he was. Most of Donny’s disciplinary problems were minor and handled by the classroom teachers. During the 2000 to 2001 school year, he had no referrals to the office for disciplinary reasons. During the 2001 to 2002 school year, he was referred to the office once, in September, for fighting. Both boys claimed the other one was at fault. He has had no other referrals. Case 5: Ira Ira was a nine-year-old male going into the fourth grade. He was an only child living with both biological parents. He had attended this school since kindergarten. His third grade teacher, Mrs. S, had been teaching for three years, all at this school. When Mrs. S was asked how she taught character in her classroom, she stated, “I tie in the Character Counts program with our reading stories. For example, we discuss how a character in the story exhibited trustworthiness, responsibility, and so forth.” When she was asked to describe how character education is incorporated into her disciplinary program, she responded, “When we have a major blow up in class, I show how it ties in with Character Counts. I ask the students if it shows caring, or respect, or good citizenship when they act that way.” 55 Mrs. S was asked to describe any changes in behavior that she had observed for individual students, her class as a whole, and the school as a whole. She stated: When a student commits an act, they apologize for being disrespectful; they acknowledge that when you steal you are not being trustworthy; and things like that. I see it all the time. The program works more with kids whose parents reinforce or teach the same concepts at home. When asked which students she had observed the most significant changes, she stated: Ira’s behavior has improved. He doesn’t interrupt as much, he stays in his seat, he participates in class, he completes his work now, and he is much more respectful. He went on medication for hyperactivity midway through the year but even after medication, rewards work really well with him. When I told him what his teacher had said, and asked Ira why he had changed so much during the year, he responded: Because I didn’t feel good sitting back there in the corner without anybody to talk to when I’m done; so, like, during snack time, I was talking to everyone because that was the only chance I got, except outside. But sometimes we didn’t get to go outside. When asked what else changed him he responded: I think the most thing that changed me is my medicine; and if I work with it, it will change me; and that’s why the doctor put me on it, to see if I could work with it; and it has changed a lot of me. When asked who had had the most influence on him, he responded, “Can it be a different classmate?” When told it could be a classmate, teacher, parent, or anyone, he responded: I’d have to say that would be Mrs. S, because whenever I first came to school last year, I wanted Mrs. S, and then I had Mrs. B, and then I got really mad ’cause I didn’t get Mrs. C, because you moved Steven, and you said you’d move me to a different classroom, and I’m really glad I got Mrs. S. When asked if Mrs. S did anything special, he responded, “Um yeah, she did something special; whenever, I mean one time I was back there being quiet and I earned three dollars that one day and, uh, I got moved up to the front.” When Ira was asked if he knew what the Character Counts program was, he responded: Yeah, caring is like caring about someone. Fairness is like when you lose you don’t have to be mad, you just have to be fair. Trustworthy means you need to tell the truth every time. Responsibility means you need to take responsibility of other people’s stuff and if 56 it breaks don’t say someone else did it. Respect [he was prompted on respect] means respect other kid’s stuff. When asked if he participated in the “math-a-thon” he responded “yes” and when asked what that was for, he responded, “It was to help people at St. Jude’s hospital.” When asked if the program affected how he felt or thought or how he acted, he responded “Yes, that’s one thing that changed me because every time I did something wrong I felt bad. So I started telling the truth, respecting other kid’s stuff, and I was helping people and a lot of stuff.” Ira’s father indicated that he had observed changes in Ira’s behavior during the year both at home and at school. He stated “Ira was always on the edge of exploding. Now, he is a lot more content, he is able to control his emotions a lot better.” When asked what he thought led to these changes, he responded “the medication.” When asked if his child ever discussed the Character Counts program, he stated, “Yes, Ira keeps us informed on what he is studying at school. He talks about the Character Counts program a lot and how it relates to his behavior and the behavior of the other students.” When asked if the program affected his child's behavior, and if so, how, Ira’s father stated, “It brings attention to the child’s behavior. It keeps it in his mind, fresh. It’s a reminder to him that we should show respect and responsibility.” Ira’s discipline record over a three-year period showed that during the 1999 to 2000 school year, Ira had one incident when he was referred to the office. During the 2000 to 2001 school year, he was referred to the office five times, but the last entry was in mid-December (about the same time he went on medication). During the 2001 to 2002 school year, he was not referred to the office for disciplinary reasons. Case 6: Kandy Kandy was a nine-year-old female. She lived with both biological parents and had one younger sister who had not yet started school. She had been at this school since kindergarten and had a history of behavior problems. Her teacher, Mrs. F, had been teaching for 36 years, 6 of which have been at this school. 59 Sometimes she does. She has talked to me about it a couple of times and a couple of times she’s come home upset because, like when they did cotton candy for the Character Counts kids and she was upset because she didn’t get any; and she said, “I can’t ever get any because I can’t get the Character Counts stuff right.” She was really excited about all the privileges she would get. Ms. F worked with her really well, giving her umpteen chances to be able to do things, making sure she had some type of job; and that’s one of the Character Counts things, but Ms. F always made sure she had some job to do. When asked if they thought how the teacher handled her and the Character Counts program affected Kandy, they both responded, “Sure it did.” Her father stated, “She tried very hard for Ms. F, but Ms. F would just have to remind her, and she would straighten out.” Kandy’s mother responded: Ms. F would ask them if they were misbehaving and tell them it was ‘on their honor’; and when I was in there volunteering, nine times out of ten, those that were misbehaving would tell her truthfully that they were. It is good that she made them individually responsible rather than the class as a whole. It makes them responsible for their own actions. During the 1998 to 1999 school year, when Kandy was in the first grade, she was referred to the office twice. Once was for biting another child on the bus. The other was for stealing from the teacher. During the 1999-2000 school year, when Kandy was in the second grade, she was referred to the office nine times, ranging from not following the rules, to being disrespectful, to cutting another child’s hair. During the 2000 to 2001 school year, Kandy was referred to the office four times; however, the last referral was on October 2, barely into the second six-weeks of school. Case 7: PJ PJ was a 10-year-old male in the fourth grade. He had attended this school since kindergarten and began experiencing academic and behavioral problems in the second grade. Because of the academic problems, he was retained in the second grade. He had three older sisters; who were good students academically; one was in the gifted program. The guidance counselor identified PJ while he was in the third grade. When asked how his behavior had changed at the end of the third grade, the guidance counselor stated: 60 Although he still gets in trouble frequently, the intensive character environment in his classroom has had a positive impact on his behavior. He does behave better than previously. He also seems to understand that he is making the choices that result in his punishment. Continuing in this manner, I hope he will improve enough that the misbehavior/attention getting comments will be less and less frequent. The incentives provided by his classroom teacher have given PJ a goal to work toward that is contingent upon behavior showing good character. He has chosen to work toward these goals. When asked how his behavior had changed during the fourth grade, his teacher, Mrs. M, responded: I have known PJ for the past four years. During this time, I watched him struggle to succeed in school not only academically, but also with his behavior. I was very apprehensive about having him in my class this year, partly because of his reputation and having had his three older sisters. Now, as this year is closing, I feel honored to have had the opportunity to watch PJ have success and show his true character. When his fourth grade teacher was asked what she thought contributed to the changes, Mrs. M stated: I believe many factors have contributed to PJ’s great year. He has been shown by the faculty and staff what is expected of him, and he has responded positively; he has also matured socially and academically. Testing has shown he has a learning disability and he now knows there is a reason he struggles. He has been given responsibilities throughout the school such as washing tables in the cafeteria, tutoring and reading to kindergarten students, collecting cans, watering plants, and helping out when needed. He knows he has to be trustworthy and responsible when given these tasks. He also knows what he does helps the school, which shows citizenship and caring. When PJ was informed of the comments made by his teachers and asked why his behavior had improved so much during the year, he responded, “I had to. All my sisters had Mrs. M, and I’m the last one, and I just wanted to be good.” When asked if his behavior had improved at home, he responded, “yes.” When asked why, he responded, “A couple of things, actually, [oldest sister] is threatening to move out.” When asked who had had the most influence on him, he responded, “Friend-wise, family-wise, teacher-wise?” When told it could be any of these, he responded, “Mrs. M, [friend's name], and [oldest sister].” When asked what they had done to influence him, he responded, “[Oldest sister] has helped me do my homework and everything else, [friend's name] is just my friend, and Mrs. M has been really nice to me.” When asked if he knew what the Character Counts program was, he responded, “no.” When told it was 61 the program where we talk about respect, responsibility, and caring, he began shaking his head affirmatively; when asked if he now understood what the program was, he responded, “yes.” When I informed him of some of the service projects his teacher and her class had done through the year, he named other projects they had done, both this year and last year. When asked if the program had changed him at all, he responded “kind of.” When asked how, he responded, “I don’t know.” When asked if she had observed any changes in PJ’s behavior during the school year, his mother responded: I have seen a tremendous change in behavior at home. He is more considerate of others, more open to discuss problems, and doesn’t lose his temper as much. He controls it better. He also realizes that we don’t have control over all events. When PJ’s mother was asked what she thought had led to these changes, she stated: I think the school family has had a big influence on him, along with maturing some. His teacher, the way she treats him, has had a big effect. She and I talked before school started and she was reluctant to have him because of his reputation of threats to himself and his sulking; but, she has done a wonderful job with him and he has had his best school year ever. When asked if he ever discussed the Character Counts program, PJ’s mother responded: He talks about the program and brings cards and other information home. We discuss the pillars at home. He talks about what they discuss in class, and we discuss different ways of showing or demonstrating the six pillars of character. Manners is a big thing for me, being polite and respectful. When asked if she thought the program had affected how PJ behaved, she stated: PJ would not have done as well in a more rigid system. He has been affected by how he has been treated at this school; that is, he has been treated with respect, caring, and trusting. He has been thinking, reasoning, and applying the character concepts that have been presented to him here at school. The 1998 to 1999 disciplinary records were not available. During the 1999 to 2000 school year [repeating the second grade], PJ was referred to the office for threatening another student and refusing to apologize [he told a girl he would put a bullet through her head]. He was also referred to the office for opening an umbrella up and hitting another girl in the mouth. During this time, he was a bitter, angry child and threatened to hurt himself many times. During 64 When Macky’s grandmother was asked if she had observed any changes in his behavior during the school year, she responded: During this school year, Macky has changed dramatically. Before, the other children didn’t understand him and his teacher didn’t understand him either. He’s always behaved well at home; school was the only place where he had problems. He would throw fits on the teachers and sull up and sulk. When asked what she thought led to these changes, she stated: This year, his teacher understood Macky better; she showed him respect, and she got Macky’s respect in return. When she saw Macky was getting upset over something, she would give him space and time to himself. She wouldn’t force the issue on him. She let him cool off. Then, she talked to him like she would an adult. This made Macky realize that she accepted him as he was. Macky is different from the other kids; in ways, he is much more mature. But the other kids always made fun of him and teased him. Mrs. C did not let this happen in her class. When Macky’s grandmother was asked if he ever discussed the Character Counts program, she responded: Macky talked about the Character Counts program a lot. He would tell me what was going on at school with the program, and he would bring information home from his teacher describing what they were doing at school. Macky loved his teacher. When she was asked if the program affected how Macky behaved, she stated: I think the teacher probably affected how Macky behaves as much as the program has. Macky knows about trust and respect and the other parts of the character program, but it was how the teacher implemented the program, how she treated the kids, that changed Macky. There are no records of Macky's being referred to the office for disciplinary reasons while he was at the elementary school. However, since going to the fifth grade at the middle school, he was suspended for threatening other students. Case 9: Sammy Sammy was a nine-year-old boy in the fourth grade. He lived with his mother and older brother in a small house in a quiet neighborhood. He had a long history of behavior problems. His third grade teacher identified him as showing the most improvement in his behavior during the 2000 to 2001 school year. 65 When his teacher, Ms. B, was asked to describe how she taught character in the classroom, she responded, “I constantly incorporate character education throughout the curriculum. We discuss character in everything we do, whether it is reading, spelling, or language arts.” When asked to describe how it is incorporated into her classroom disciplinary program, she stated: I use rewards and awards on a daily and monthly basis. We discuss appropriate and inappropriate behavior rewarding positive behavior, isolating negative behavior, and withdrawing rewards. Our emphasis is on the class rules and how character plays a part in our actions. When asked to describe the changes she had observed in Sammy, Ms. B responded: Sammy was constantly in trouble throughout the year. He was involved in horseplay, harassing other students, and disrupting the classroom by talking, singing, or arguing. He hit, kicked, and threw things at other students. He refused to do his assigned work in class and at home. He was disrespectful, uncooperative, and rude. He misbehaved daily in the cafeteria. He brought toys and electronic games to school to play with during class, and he rarely came to class prepared. Then, around the beginning of the fourth six weeks, his behavior changed. When asked what she thought caused the changes in his behavior, she stated: He realized that he was missing out on a lot of rewards and privileges due to his behavior. As his behavior improved, I spoke with his mother and told her I was considering giving him the ‘Most Improved’ student award at the end of the year. Well, he was like a different kid. He stopped harassing the other students, began completing his assignments, and his grades improved dramatically. I informed Sammy that Mrs. B had stated that his behavior had improved dramatically during the last part of the year, that he controls himself, that he tries to do all his work, and that he tried to please her. When Sammy was asked why, what changed him, he responded, “Because my mom told me I was going to get the ‘Most Improved’ award if I would be good the rest of the year, and I wanted to do that.” When asked if he had responsibilities at home, such as making his bed, taking out the trash, washing dishes, feeding pets, or cleaning his room, he responded, “no,” to each question. When asked if there were other students in his class who acted responsibly, he mentioned one boy and stated, “He always acts that way.” He also mentioned several girls and stated, “They always act that way too.” He mentioned another girl and stated, 66 “She started off being mean to some of the kids at the beginning of the year. Then, uh, we told her to stop being mean to us and she started being nice.” When asked who had the most influence on his changing his behavior, he responded, “I have no idea.” When asked if it was his teacher, he responded, “un-un.” When asked if it was his mom, he responded, “She told me [that he might get an award].” When asked if he knew what the Character Counts program was, he responded, “uh-huh.” When asked to explain it, he responded, “I don’t know much about it.” When asked why we did the program he responded, “To be trustworthy and to treat other people the way you want to be treated.” When asked if any aspect of the program affected him, Sammy responded, “Uh-huh, I helped clean up around the school.” When asked if he participated in the math-a-thon, he indicated that he did; when asked if he knew what it was for he responded, “yeah, for children’s hospital.” When asked what next year was going to be like, Sammy responded, “like this year.” When asked which part of this year, he responded, “the last part.” When Sammy’s mother was asked if she had observed any changes in his behavior during the school year, she responded: Yes, both at home and at school. He is more mature, more responsible, and I get fewer phone calls from the principal. I can trust him now, where I couldn’t before. He will do what I say. He cleans his room, and he has done much better in school. I really think he could do better in his schoolwork, but he wants to be the first one finished all the time. When asked what she thought led to the changes in his behavior, she stated: The main reason he changed was his teacher called me and promised the ‘Most Improved Student’ award if he maintained good behavior the remainder of the year. After that, he just kept improving his behavior. This year, he wanted Ms. W for fourth grade. He has loved her since kindergarten. Since he has been in her room, his behavior has continued to improve. He is also very excited about perfect attendance. When asked if he had ever discussed the Character Counts program, she responded: He talks about specific things his class does at school but doesn’t relate it to the character program. For example, when his class collected things for needy families at Christmas, he was excited about it but did not relate that to Character Counts. 69 Mostly I looked up to my parents, my dad and my mom. I looked up to them because I knew they were the ones who, on through the years, were raising me to be like the person who cares for others and respects their teachers. I just looked up to them a lot. When asked if he knew what the Character Counts program was, he responded, “yes.” When I began naming the pillars, he reminded me of the ones I had omitted. When asked if the program affected how he behaved, he responded, “yes.” When asked how, he responded, “It made me be a better person.” When asked for examples, he responded: When the Character Counts program started, I got into a little trouble, but not as much as I used to, because I took anger management for a couple of years [the anger management class was taught by the guidance counselor in conjunction with the Character Counts program]. The teacher taught us how to control our anger and we studied the six pillars. I learned that you shouldn’t ever judge people by their clothes, or how their hair looked, or the way they think. You should judge them by what kind of person they are. When Danny Joe’s mother was asked if she had observed changes in his behavior, she stated, “Yes, he is rowdier and loses his temper quickly.” When asked what she thought led to the changes, she responded: I don’t know. I consider myself a good mother. Nobody’s perfect. He has an awful temper, but there is something deeper bothering him. There is something there that is bothering him, and we are in the process of getting him counseling. When she was asked if Danny Joe ever discussed the Character Counts program, she stated: He has, some; he talked about the food drives and planting trees and flowers. He is not a mean kid; he just has a temper. He has a good heart, but has a temper. Sometimes he would remind me that he had to wear old clothes to school because they were planting flowers that day. When she was asked if the program affected how her child behaves, she responded: It has had a positive effect; it reinforces what is taught at home. I think he had a wonderful relationship with his fourth grade teacher last year. She really tried. She cares about him, and he knew it. He has told me that he would go back to Mrs. C’s class if he could. During the 1998 to 1999 school year, when Danny Joe was in the second grade, he was referred to the office eight times for fighting, horseplay, making vulgar gestures and comments, being disrespectful, and refusing to follow commands by the teacher. The next year, Danny Joe was referred to the office three times. During his fourth grade year, Danny Joe was referred to 70 the office twice in September, right after school started, for fighting and horseplay. He was not referred to the office again until May, just before the school year was over. It was at this time that Danny Joe indicated that a cousin had sexually molested him periodically since before kindergarten and that it had recently resumed. During the 2001 to 2002 school year, while Danny Joe was in the fifth grade, he was referred to the office at the middle school four times during the year for pushing and making threats, possession of a cap pistol, being disrespectful to the teacher, and inappropriate language. Summary In summary, this chapter presented case studies of 10 students whom teachers identified as exhibiting changes in their behavior during the school year. Each study included an interview with the teacher, the student, and one or both of the student’s parents, along with a summary of disciplinary records from this school as well as the middle school when applicable. Chapter 5 includes analysis of the data. 71 CHAPTER 5 ANALYSIS OF THE DATA The data collected were analyzed on a continuing basis throughout the study. The researcher was searching for patterns, themes, and constructs related to how character was taught, how the character program was incorporated into the disciplinary plan, the nature and degree of changes in behavior, and the basis for behavioral changes (or what participants perceived may have caused the changes, if any, in behavior). Observations of students' behavior by the researcher confirmed what had been reported by the parent, students, and teachers and in no case substantially differed from those reports; therefore, little emphasis was given in the reporting of results to these informal observations. Teaching Character and Discipline All of the teachers integrate the character education program into the curriculum and some teach it separately, as well. From selected readings to journal writing, to art, to the regular reading program, to everyday discussions of current events and what is happening in the classroom or school, the teachers weave the pillars of character into their lessons on a daily basis. Although their disciplinary programs were different, there was a common pattern of basing the programs on the pillars of character. All of the teachers indicated that when a child broke one of the class rules, the pillar of character associated with the infraction was then discussed. Whether the infraction was coming to class unprepared, stealing from another child, not telling the truth, bullying other children, or disrupting the class, the teachers consistently brought character into the discussion of the student’s misbehavior. 74 an effect on the behavior of their son or daughter. Three of the parents also stated that their child had “matured” during the year, and they felt that was a contributing factor as well. When asked specifically if the program had affected their child’s behavior, all of the parents responded that it had. Even the parent whose son was experiencing negative changes in his behavior stated the program had a positive effect on him. When the students were asked why they had changed during the year, four of them gave credit to the character education program or some aspect of it. Two of these students specifically stated that the Character Counts program affected their behavior, one stated he “didn’t like missing the privileges” provided by the program, and the other stated he behaved himself in hopes of receiving one of the “awards” given at the end of the year. Four of the students also gave credit to the teacher for affecting their behavior. Whether it was not wanting to disappoint the teacher or how the teacher “treated” them, the responses indicated that the teacher was the “reason” the behavior had changed. One other student indicated he “didn’t know” why his behavior had changed; the other student indicated he “didn’t want to get in trouble” as being the reason. Disciplinary Referrals to the Office A review of the office records on discipline was made on each student. There was evidence of improvement in the behavior of 7 of the 10 students studied. Some showed not only a drop in the number of referrals but also the reasons for referral were less serious. Three of the students had no referrals to the office for disciplinary reasons during the time they attended this school. Two students went from double-digit referrals to no referrals at all during the most recent school year. Three other students’ behaviors improved by the end of the first six weeks of the most recent school year, as evidenced by no referrals after that time (except for one who had referrals in September and no more until the end of the school year). Finally, two students improved their behavior at this school (as shown by the nature and number of referrals to the 75 office), but began having serious disciplinary problems again after they moved to the middle school. The third student, who is now at the middle school, had no office referrals at this school but was suspended from the middle school for threatening a student. Summary The character education program appeared to be well integrated into the curriculum at this school and was the basis for classroom management and rules. Responsibility and respect were the two most prevalent changes in behavior identified by the teachers, a claim supported by the parent interviews. Another change identified was that some of the students had improved their attitude toward school or were “happier.” Although this is not specifically a behavior, it does contribute to how a child behaves and is worth noting. Of the 10 students in the study, 5 stated the teacher was an influencing factor in how they behaved. When asked specifically why they changed their behavior, four gave credit to the teacher and four gave credit to some aspect of the character education program. In contrast, the teachers unanimously credited the character education program, to some degree, in affecting how the students behaved, whereas the parents all mentioned the teacher as being one of the primary factors. Finally, the disciplinary records indicated improved behavior for 7 of the 10 students in the study. The other three had no record of referral for disciplinary reasons. However, the records indicate that referrals to the office increased once the student left this school. Conclusions and recommendations for practice and further research are described in Chapter 6. 76 CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PRACTICE, AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH This chapter describes conclusions from the study, recommendations for practice, and recommendations for further research. The findings of this study were compared to similar studies described in Chapter 2. Conclusions Previous research about the effects of character education programs does not yield clear conclusions. In this study, based on teacher comments, parent interviews, and disciplinary records, it appears that following the implementation of a character development program in this elementary school, student behavior improved. Because all the parents and almost half of the students credited the teacher as a primary factor for the changes in behavior, and all the teachers credited the character education program as a primary factor, one could logically conclude that the character education program contributed to the improved behavior. This was further supported by the perceptions of the parents (50% gave some credit to the character education program) and the students (40% credited the character education program) that the character education program contributed to the changes in student behavior. The disciplinary records might be interpreted as supporting this conclusion. Seven of the 10 students included in the study had been referred to the office for disciplinary reasons over the last three years. All seven showed a decrease in the number of referrals during the study, along with a decrease in the seriousness of the referrals. These findings are similar to those reported by Leming (1993) in a longitudinal study of the Weber County Character Education Project. This study described a reduction in disciplinary problems in schools where character education programs were in effect 79 In summary, it appears that the character education program may have had a positive effect on the behavior of the students in the study based on the perceptions of the teachers, parents, and students. The disciplinary records of the students included in the study support this conclusion. However, other factors may have affected student behavior as much as, or even more, than the character education program. Recommendations for Practice Based on the results of this study, it is recommended that the character education program continue as an integral part of the curriculum of the school. All of the teachers interviewed incorporated the character education program throughout the curriculum including art, music, and classroom disciplinary programs. The results of the study indicated improvement in the behavior of some students and it appears that the character education program may have been a primary factor in this improvement. Rusnak (1998) emphasized that character education was not a separate subject but an integral part of every subject. Students’ attention should be focused on the ethical dimensions of stories, the moral aspects of history, and applying the moral of a story to the student’s own life. All of the programs reviewed by Rusnak integrated character education into all aspects of the curriculum and school environment. Olsen (1995) also concluded that student behavior improved after the implementation of a character education program. It is also recommended that the school continue to expand the hands-on activities of the students in performing service projects. This will provide students the opportunity to be truly involved and develop a sense of ownership of the program. This is based in part on the findings of this study and in part on the literature review. The program began at this school as a separate subject, with commercially developed lesson plans and student activities. As the program evolved, it became more “service” oriented, getting the students involved in activities that helped their school, their community, and beyond (such as the flood victims in North Carolina, the police and firefighters in New York City, and the children of Afghanistan). The disciplinary 80 records of the students included in this study steadily improved as the program became more service oriented. Service learning is also a major element of the Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development’s character education initiative (Howard, 1993). According to Kuykendall (1992), service learning is a means to motivate those students who are not motivated because it promotes nonacademic skills. Finally, Howard (1993) stated that service learning involves students in activities that result in real assistance to others, promotes personal growth, and reinforces accepted community values. Whether the students recognize the character education program as a program in itself is immaterial. It is, however, important to develop long-lasting character traits that will result in a responsible and productive adult. Recommendations for Further Research Although one could logically conclude from the results of this study that character education may have had a positive effect on the behavior of the students included in this study, it is not conclusive and there are still questions that need to be answered. In the absence of a character education program, what types of teacher behavior most affect the behavior of students? Further research should be conducted comparing schools where character education programs are not present to schools where character education is an integral part of the curriculum. In addition, studies should examine the extent to which the age and maturity level of the students affects behavior, with, and without a character education program in place. Another recommendation would be to conduct case studies of those students whose behavior did not change when exposed to a character education program. The study should focus on the influence of the teacher, the home situation, the manner in which the program was implemented, and the student. Further research should also examine the influence of extrinsic rewards on behavioral changes. Finally, further research should consider the role parents play and the effects their actions have on the behavior of students both with and without a character education program in place. 81 It should be noted that the cases selected by the teachers were generally positive changes in behavior and that the researcher, as principal, observed other, less positive changes in some students who were not investigated in this study. Therefore, further research should examine the types and percentages of students who change behavior as a consequence of character education programs or effective teachers and the types and percentages of students who do not. 84 Olsen, J. (1995). Teacher perceptions of student behavior after implementation of a kindergarten through sixth-grade character education program. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Arkansas. Primm, C. (1998). Effects of character education on character-related behaviors of elementary students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Truman State University, Missouri. Raths, L., Harmin, M., & Simon, S. (1966). Values and teaching. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill. Rich, J. (1991). The conflict in moral education: Teaching principles or virtue. The Clearing House, 64, 293-296. Rusnak, T. (Ed.). (1998). An integrated approach to character education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Ryan, K. (1993). Mining the values in the curriculum. Educational Leadership, 51, 16-18. Ryan, K., & Bohlin, K. (1999). Values, views, or virtues? Education Week on the Web, 18, pp. 49, 72. Editorial Projects in Education on the World Wide Web. Retrieved July 27, 2002 from http://www.edweek.org Schaeffer, E. (1998). Character education in the curriculum and beyond. The Education Digest, 63, 15-17. Schaeffer, E. (1999). It’s time for schools to implement character education. NASSP Bulletin, 83, 1-7. Sichel, B. (1988). Moral education: Character, community, and ideals. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Student pleads guilty in school bomb plot. (2001, May 12). The Mountain Press, p. A9. Tattner, N. (1998). An investigation of improved student behavior through character education with a focus on respect and self-control. Unpublished doctoral Dissertation, University of Central Florida. Tomaselli, J., & Golden, J. (1996). Character development in education: The ABCD’s of valuing. NASSP Bulletin, 80, 66-73. Vessels, G., & Boyd, S. (1996). Public and constitutional support for character education. NASSP Bulletin, 83, 55-60. Whitehead, B. (1993). Dan Quayle was right. The Atlantic, 271, 47-84. Williams, M. (1993). Actions speak louder than words: What students think. Educational Leadership, 51, 22-23. 85 Woehrle, T. (1993). Growing up responsible. Educational Leadership, 51, 40-41. Wynne, E. (1988). Balancing character development and academics in elementary school. Phi Delta Kappan, 69, 424-426. Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 86 APPENDICES APPENDIX A Interview Guide for Teachers Teacher’s name: Years teaching: Years teaching at this school: Grade: 1. During this school year, for which student(s) have you observed the most significant changes in behavior (positive or negative)? 2. Describe the changes you have observed in this child (or children). 3. To what do you attribute these changes? 4. Describe how you teach character in your classroom (i.e. your approach, amount of time, materials used, incorporation into the curriculum, reinforcement of the concepts, etc.). 5. Is character education incorporated into your disciplinary program? Describe how it is incorporated. 89 APPENDIX D Parent Permission for Students Dear Parents: As a part of my doctoral dissertation, and in an effort to improve what we are doing at school, I am conducting research to determine how the character education program affects student behavior. As a part of this research, I will be interviewing students and parents. I am requesting permission from you to interview your child. His or her name will not appear in the dissertation in any way. He or she will only be identified as male or female and third or fourth grade. For me to interview your child, East Tennessee State University requires you to complete and sign the attached “Informed Consent Form.” This form is required for all research conducted through the university. It can be an intimidating form because it is the same form used for many medical studies. Please be assured that I truly care about your child and my questions will not hurt him or her in any way. Attached is a copy of those questions for you to review. As I mentioned earlier, I would also like to interview you as a part of the research. You would not be identified in the dissertation in any way except as the parent of a third or fourth grade child. If you will allow me to interview you and your child, please complete and sign the attached form and return to me. Sincerely, Bill Thompson, Principal 90 APPENDIX E INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD East Tennessee State University Veterans Affairs Medical Center Informed Consent for a Research Project PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Bill Thompson, Principal TITLE OF PROJECT: The Effects of Character Education on Student Behavior This Informed Consent will explain about being a research subject in an experiment. It is important that you read this material carefully and then decide if you wish to be a volunteer. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to determine how the character education program affects the behavior of the students. It will involve observations of students, interviews with teachers and students, and interviews with parents. The results will be used to determine the effectiveness of the character education program and make possible modifications to the program. DURATION: Each interview should be completed in one hour or less. PROCEDURES: The study will include observing how students behave, interviewing teachers concerning their impressions of how the character education program has affected the behavior of the students, and interviewing students concerning their impressions of how the character education program has affected their behavior and the behavior of their classmates. It will also involve interviewing parents concerning their impressions of how the character education program has affected the behavior of their child or children. These interviews may be audiorecorded. POSSIBLE RISKS/DISCOMFORTS: The possible risks and/or discomforts of your involvement include: no known risks, side effects or inconveniences are expected. However, it is possible that some students’ feelings may be hurt as a result of discussing poor behavior with that student and/or his or her parent. You may choose not to answer any question(s) that make you feel uncomfortable. POSSIBLE BENEFITS and/or COMPENSATION: The potential benefits as a result of this study include a safer school and improvement in student behavior. A broader potential benefit of this study includes the knowledge base created concerning character education programs. There are no other direct benefits to the individual subjects and there will be no compensation paid to any subjects. April 22, 2002 Subject’s initials_____ 91 Page 2 of 3 PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Bill Thompson, Principal TITLE OF PROJECT: The Effects of Character Education on Student Behavior CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS: If you have any questions, problems or research-related medical problems at any time, you may call Bill Thompson at xxx-xxxx or Debra Cline at xxx- xxxx. You may call the Chairman of the Institutional Review Board at xxx/xxx-xxxx for any questions you may have about your rights as a research subject. CONFIDENTIALITY: Every attempt will be made to see that the study results are kept confidential. A copy of the records from this study will be stored in the office at Northview Elementary School for at least 10 years after the end of this research. The results of this study may be published and/or presented at meetings without naming you as a subject. Although your rights and privacy will be maintained, the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, the East Tennessee State University/V.A. Medical Center Institutional Review Board, the Food and Drug Administration, and the ETSU Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis have access to the study records. The records will be kept completely confidential according to current legal requirements. They will not be revealed unless required by law, or as noted above. COMPENSATION FOR MEDICAL TREATMENT: East Tennessee State University (ETSU) will pay the cost of emergency first aid for any injury which may happen as a result of your being in this study. They will not pay for any other medical treatment. Claims against ETSU or any of its agents or employees may be submitted to the Tennessee Claims Commission. These claims will be settled to the extent allowable as provided under TCA Section 9-8-307. For more information about claims call the Chairman of the Institutional Review Board of ETSU at xxx/xxx-xxxx. VOLUNTARY PARTICIPATION: The nature, demands, risks, and benefits of the project have been explained to me as well as are known and available. I understand what my participation and/or the participation of my child involves. Furthermore, I understand that I am free to ask questions and withdraw from the project at any time, without penalty. I have read, or have had read to me, and fully understand the consent form. I sign it freely and voluntarily. A signed copy has been given to me. Your study record will be maintained in strictest confidence according to current legal requirements and will not be revealed unless required by law or as noted above. April 22, 2002 Subject’s initials_____ 94 APPENDIX G Auditor's Letter of Attestation I attest to having conducted an audit in order to establish the dependability and confirmability of the qualitative study conducted by William G. Thompson that describes the effects of character education on student behavior. I examined an audit trail consisting of raw data (audiotapes, interview transcriptions, field notes, collected documents) and records containing pattern coding, “notes on notes,” interpretations and analyses, reflective journal entries, and the dissertation. _______________________________________________ (Auditor) _______________________________ (Date) 95 VITA WILLIAM G. THOMPSON Personal Data: Date of Birth: February 18, 1951 Place of Birth: Monterey, Tennessee Marital Status: Married Education: Tennessee Technological University, Cookeville, TN, 1972 B.S, Secondary Education East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, Tennessee, 1990 M.S., Elementary Educational Administration Lincoln Memorial University, Harrogate, Tennessee, 1995 Ed.S., Educational Administration East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, Tennessee, 2002 Ed.D., Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis Professional Experience: Classroom Teacher, Overton County Schools, TN Wilson Elementary, 1972-1973 Classroom Teacher, Sevier County Schools, TN Pigeon Forge Middle School, 1986-1991 Assistant Principal, Sevier County Schools, Kodak, TN Northview Elementary School, 1991-1993 Principal, Sevier County Schools, Kodak, TN Northview Elementary School, 1993--Present Other Related Experience: Investigator, U. S. Civil Service Commission, Knoxville, TN 1973-1974 Personnel Specialist, U. S. Civil Service Commission, Orlando, FL 1974-1976 96 Other Related Experience: Personnel Advisor, U. S. Office of Personnel Management, Huntsville, AL 1976-1979 Personnel Specialist, U. S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, TN 1979-1981 Classification Specialist, U. S. Department of the Army, Huntsville, AL 1981-1983 Owner/Operator Blue Circle Drive-In Restaurant Livingston, TN 1983-1986