Sei sulla pagina 1di 127

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS

This PDF is available at http://www.nap.edu/24684 SHARE


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a


Workshop

DETAILS

126 pages | 6 x 9 | PAPERBACK


ISBN 978-0-309-45557-2 | DOI: 10.17226/24684

CONTRIBUTORS

GET THIS BOOK Alexandra Beatty, Rapporteur; Board on Testing and Assessment;
Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education; National
Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
FIND RELATED TITLES


Visit the National Academies Press at NAP.edu and login or register to get:

Access to free PDF downloads of thousands of scientic reports


10% off the price of print titles
Email or social media notications of new titles related to your interests
Special offers and discounts

Distribution, posting, or copying of this PDF is strictly prohibited without written permission of the National Academies Press.
(Request Permission) Unless otherwise indicated, all materials in this PDF are copyrighted by the National Academy of Sciences.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Alexandra Beatty, Rapporteur

Board on Testing and Assessment

Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001

This activity was supported by Grant No. 7717 from the S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Founda-
tion. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this
publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that
provided support for the project.

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-45557-2


International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-45557-X
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/24684

Additional copies of this publication are available for sale from the National
Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800)
624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu/.

Copyright 2017 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America

Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.


(2017). Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop.
Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi: 10.17226/24684

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Con-


gress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution
to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are
elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia
McNutt is president.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the c harter
of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to
advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary con-
tributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president.

The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was


established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to
advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their
peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau
is president.

The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences,


Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and
advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems
and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage
education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and
increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.

Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and


Medicine at www.national-academies.org.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Reports document the evidence-based consensus of an authoring committee of


experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations
based on information gathered by the committee and committee deliberations.
Reports are peer reviewed and are approved by the National Academies of
Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

Proceedings chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, sym-


posium, or other convening event. The statements and opinions contained in
proceedings are those of the participants and have not been endorsed by other
participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies of Sciences,
Engineering, and Medicine.

For information about other products and activities of the National Academies,
please visit nationalacademies.org/whatwedo.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

COMMITTEE ON DEFINING AND MEASURING CHARACTER


AND CHARACTER EDUCATION: A WORKSHOP

DEBORAH VANDELL (Chair), School of Education, University of


California, Irvine
CATHERINE BRADSHAW, Curry School of Education, University of
Virginia
LUCY FRIEDMAN, The After-School Corporation, New York
ELLEN GANNET, National Institute on Out-of-School Time, Wellesley
College
STEPHANIE JONES, Harvard Graduate School of Education, Harvard
University
RICHARD M. LERNER, Institute for Applied Research in Youth
Development, Tufts University
VELMA McBRIDE MURRY, Peabody College of Education and Human
Development, Vanderbilt University
JENNIFER BROWN URBAN, College of Education and Human
Services, Montclair State University

ALEXANDRA BEATTY, Study Director


PATRICIA MORISON, Acting Board Director, Board on Testing and
Assessment
KELLY ARRINGTON, Senior Program Assistant

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

BOARD ON TESTING AND ASSESSMENT

DAVID J. FRANCIS (Chair), Texas Institute for Measurement, Evaluation,


and Statistics, University of Houston
MARK DYNARSKI, Pemberton Research, LLC, East Windsor, New Jersey
JOAN HERMAN, National Center for Research on Evaluation,
Standards, and Student Testing, University of California, Los Angeles
SHARON LEWIS, Council of Great City Schools, Washington, DC
BRIAN STECHER, Pardee RAND Graduate School, RAND
Corporation, Santa Monica, California
JOHN ROBERT WARREN, Department of Sociology, University of
Minnesota, Minneapolis

PATRICIA MORISON, Acting Director

vi

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Acknowledgments

T
his Proceedings of a Workshop has been reviewed in draft form
by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical
expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide
candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its
published Proceedings of a Workshop as sound as possible and to ensure
that the Proceedings of a Workshop meets institutional standards for clarity,
objectivity, and responsiveness to the charge. The review comments and
draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the process.
We thank the following individuals for their review of this Proceed-
ings of a Workshop: Catherine Bradshaw, Research and Faculty Develop-
ment, Curry School of Education, University of Virginia; Ellen S. Gannett,
National Institute on Out-of-School Time, Wellesley Centers for Women,
Wellesley College; and Patrick H. Tolan, Youth-Nex, Center to Promote
Effective Youth Development, Curry School of Education, University of
Virginia.
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive
comments and suggestions, they did not see the final draft of the Proceed-
ings of a Workshop before its release. The review of this Proceedings of a
Workshop was overseen by Christopher Cross, Cross & Joftus, Danville,
California.
He was responsible for making certain that an independent examina-
tion of this Proceedings of a Workshop was carried out in accordance
with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully
considered. Responsibility for the final content of this Proceedings of a
Workshop rests entirely with the rapporteur and the institution.

vii

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Contents

1 Introduction 1

2 What Is Character?: Moving Beyond Definitional Differences 5


Character as a Multifaceted Developmental System, 5
Perspectives on Psychology, Context, and Culture, 13
Discussion, 25

3 Views of What Works in Developing Character 27


Themes from Research, 27
Perspectives on Key Ingredients, 30

4 Investing in Implementation and Evaluation 39


Essentials of Program Implementation, 39
Advancing Evaluation, 43
Perspectives from Practice, 46
Discussion, 48

5 Developing a High-Quality Staff 51


The Out-of-School-Time Workforce, 51
Culture, Context, and Supportive Relationships, 55
Discussion, 60

6 Measuring Character 63
Methodological Issues, 63
Perspectives on Measurement Challenges, 71

ix

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

x CONTENTS

7 Workshop Themes 77
Participant Perspectives on Key Questions, 77
Closing Thoughts, 79

References 81

Appendixes

A Workshop Agenda 85
B Participant List 91
C Biographical Sketches of Committee Members and Presenters 95
D Worksheet for Breakout Sessions 107

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Introduction

T
he development of character is a valued objective for many kinds of
educational programs that take place both in and outside of school.
Educators, parents, and others create and support structured pro-
grams and lessons that engage students in academics, sports, service, and
other activities with the aim of developing or strengthening positive behav-
iors, attitudes, values, and attributes. Programs that pursue this kind of
learning may describe what they do as character education; positive youth
development; or the development of social and emotional learning, inter
personal and intrapersonal competencies, or noncognitive skills. These terms
are not interchangeable, but there is overlap among them: They encompass
a range of skills and attributes that students need to flourish in school, the
workplace, and their personal lives, such as the capacity to manage their
emotions, set and achieve positive goals, feel and show empathy, maintain
positive relationships, and make sound decisions. This loosely defined set of
skills and attributes is referred to in this document as character.
Educators and administrators who develop and run programs that seek
to develop character recognize that the established approaches for doing so
have much in common, and they are eager to learn about promising prac-
tices used in other settings, evidence of effectiveness, and ways to measure
the effectiveness of their own approaches. The available research has been
sparse and often focused only on one kind of character or development, but
recent work has helped to identify commonalities in the literature that can
advance understanding of how character might be defined and developed
and how outcomes might be measured.
With the support of the S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation, the National

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

2 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

BOX 1-1
Committee Statement of Task

The committee will plan a two-day workshop to review the literature on


character education, help define character education, identify promising practices
from the research on character education, and explore the challenges of and
opportunities for measuring character and the efficacy of character education
programs. The workshop will emphasize character education programs outside
the regular school day, and will include a focus on enhancing adults capacity to
develop young peoples character.

cademies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held a workshop in July


A
2016 to review research and practice relevant to the development of charac-
ter, with a particular focus on ideas that can support the adults who develop
and run out-of-school programs. The Committee on Defining and Measuring
Character and Character Education was appointed to plan the workshop.
The charge to the committeewhose members have expertise in research and
practice in character education, including research and program development
directly related to character education, program evaluation and measure-
ment, and cognitive and developmental psychologyis shown in Box 1-1.
The committee recognized that there are many definitions of character
and many ways of describing the objectives for programs that aim to help
young people develop positive attributes. The committee members noted
that while good character is in one sense easy to recognizein people who
are responsible, honorable, and emotionally healthy, for examplethe
words used to describe it may seem to imply stances on complex questions.
For example, some people who study these issues use the tools of biology
and psychology to understand individual differences, whereas others focus
on questions of culture, gender, and power relationships to explore the roles
young people are asked to emulate.
A thorough exploration of these complex issues was beyond the scope
of the workshop. The committee focused on obtaining an overview of the
available academic research and structuring discussions with p resenters
who reflected a variety of expertise and perspectives. The committee mem-
bers had the goal of meeting the needs of practitioners, particularly those
involved in out-of-school programs, and of encouraging researchers and
practitioners to learn from one another.1 The committee designed the work-
shop to explore four themes:
1Because the workshop focused on out-of-school programs, the emphasis fell more on older

children and adolescents than very young children.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

INTRODUCTION 3

BOX 1-2

Papers Commissioned for the Workshop

Marvin W. Berkowitz, Melinda C. Bier, and Brian McCauley, Effective Features


and Practices that Support Character Development

Noel A. Card, Methodological Issues in Measuring the Development of Character

Nancy Deutsch, Construct(ion) and Context: A Response to Methodological Is-


sues in Studying Character

Joseph Durlak, What You HAVE to Know AboutProgram Implementation

Clark McKown, Promises and Perils of Assessing Character and Social and
Emotional Learning

Deborah A. Moroney, The Readiness of the Out-of-School-Time Workforce to


Intentionally Support Participants Social and Emotional Development: A Review
of the Literature and Future Directions

Larry Nucci, Character: A Multi-faceted Developmental System

William M. Trochim and Jennifer Brown Urban, Advancing Evaluation of Character


Building Programs

NOTE: The papers are available at http://sites.nationalacademies.org/DBASSE/


BOTA/DBASSE_171735 [November 2016].

defining and understanding character,


identifying what works in developing character,
implementing development strategies and evaluating outcomes, and
measuring character.

The committee commissioned eight papers (see Box 1-2) and planned
sessions that allowed participants ample time to engage with the authors
and one another, and to consider ways the material presented could apply
in their own work.2 Structured breakout sessions allowed participants to

2The workshop agenda, a list of participants, and brief biographical sketches for the com-

mittee members and presenters can be found in Appendixes A, B, and C. The commissioned
papers and an archived video of all sessions can be found at the project website, http://sites.
nationalacademies.org/DBASSE/BOTA/DBASSE_171735 [September 2016].

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

4 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

reflect in detail on the ideas presented. (Appendix D is a worksheet used


in these sessions.)
This proceedings document, prepared by the workshop rapporteur, sum-
marizes the presentations and discussions that took place. The planning com-
mittees role was limited to planning and convening the workshop. The views
contained in this document are those of individual workshop participants
and do not necessarily represent the views of all workshop participants, the
planning committee, or the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering,
and Medicine.
This document follows the structure of the workshop. Chapter 2 is an
overview of research on the nature of character and a discussion of themes
that transcend its varied definitions. Chapter 3 summarizes a range of ideas
on what practices and approaches are most effective in developing char-
acter, and Chapter 4 focuses on the importance of implementing program
goals effectively and evaluating the results. Chapter 5 delves deeper into
one key aspect of effective program implementation, a high-quality staff.
Chapter 6 is an exploration of the technical challenges of measuring char-
acter. Chapter 7 summarizes individual participants perspectives on the
primary workshop themes.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

What Is Character? Moving


Beyond Definitional Differences

A
lthough there are many definitions of character, adults can best help
young people develop it if they have a clear idea of what it is and
what it is not, moderator Richard Lerner commented in introducing
a discussion of the nature of character. While character is a word with
wide application in everyday language, he emphasized, efforts to develop it
in young people are focused on something that is not a trait but a devel
opmental phenomenon. A persons character is not fixed by genes,
he added, but is one outcome of his or her context and experiences. The
session began with a synthesis of scholarship on moral reasoning and char-
acter presented by Larry Nucci of the University of California, B erkeley,
who also proposed a model for understanding the nature of character.
Follow-up discussion was anchored by reflections from Robert McGrath of
Fairleigh Dickinson University, Kristina Schmid Callina of Tufts University,
and Carola Surez-Orozco of the University of California, Los Angeles.

CHARACTER AS A MULTIFACETED DEVELOPMENTAL SYSTEM


Even skeptics of the idea of character have a sense of what Martin
uther King, Jr., meant when he spoke of looking forward to the day when
L
his children would not be judged by the color of their skin but by the con-
tent of their character,1 Nucci observed. Though King identified character

1Quoted from his speech delivered August 28, 1963; available at https://kinginstitute.

stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/i-have-dream-address-delivered-march-washington-jobs-
and-freedom [November, 2016].

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

6 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

as the central consideration in evaluating an individual, Nucci added, social


scientists and educators do not have a shared definition of it, and indeed
some have questioned whether the idea of character has value as a subject
of research. Nucci provided a review of past critiques and analysis of the
idea of character and proposed his own framework for thinking about char-
acter, which synthesizes elements from this diverse literature. In his view,
character is best understood as a multifaceted developmental system rather
than a set of traits a person might have. He suggested an approach for both
studying and assessing character that draws on multiple analytical methods.

Critiques of Traditional Views of Character


Traditional understandings of character have often consisted of a set of
qualitiessuch as honesty, fairness, and compassionthat are defined in
a particular cultural context as worth developing in young people, Nucci
noted. Lists of traditional virtues are often linked to religious or philosophi-
cal traditions but generally lack coherence as definitions, and primarily
reflect social mores rather than any rigorous conceptual framework, Nucci
explained. Psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg belittled this approach to de-
fining character as no more than identifying a bag of virtues, he added
(Kohlberg and Mayer, 1972). Moreover, there are many candidates for a
list of key virtues, and formal lists developed by educators and others may
have very little overlap (Lapsely, 1996).
Nucci observed that current lines of research could be described as of-
fering an updated bag of virtues, as the list of recent character-related studies
in Table 2-1 suggests. In the same vein, Nucci added, the John T empleton
Foundation, a leading funder of character-related work, looks for projects
that promote a set of qualities that include awe, creativity, curiosity, dili-
gence, entrepreneurialism, forgiveness, future-mindedness, generosity, grati-
tude, honesty, humility, joy, love, purpose, reliability, and thrift.2
Another critique of defining character in terms of virtues is that indi-
viduals tend not to demonstrate them consistently, Nucci continued, which
undermines the idea that these virtues can be enduring elements of an
individuals character. Studies conducted as early as the 1920s, he noted,
demonstrated that people may behave honestly in some contexts and dis-
honestly in others (Hartshorne and May, 1928).
Kohlberg (1984) proposed a model for understanding character that
would be more coherent than the bag of virtues. He argued that, regardless
of cultural context, individuals move through stages in their capacity for
moral judgment toward an ideal state in which they base their decisions on

2See https://www.templeton.org/what-we-fund/core-funding-areas/character-virtue-development

[November 2016].

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

WHAT IS CHARACTER? 7

TABLE 2-1 Elements of Character Targeted by Recent Research


Character Element Recent Research
Gratitude Emmons, 2009; Tudge, Frietas, and OBrien, 2015
Hope Snyder, 2002
Grit Duckworth, 2016
Compassionate love Fehr, Sprecher, and Underwood, 2009
Empathy Gordon, 2005
Mindfulness Roeser et al., 2014
Awe Keltner and Haidt, 2003
Purpose Damon, 2009
Happiness Seligman, 2004

SOURCE: Nucci (2016).

principles of justice and fairness. This idea has also been criticized, Nucci
noted, but the idea that human beings share a concern for justice and the
welfare of others is still widely accepted. Nucci agreed that the concern is
universal and commented that any meaningful notion of character has to
place morality at the center. Many of the character attributes that have
been highlighted in recent research, he explained, such as grit or social
and emotional intelligence, might be deployed for either positive or nega-
tive goals: These traits contributed to the practical success of the Nazis or
members of ISIS, for example. Such traits may be important in the pursuit
of personal and social benefits, such as success in school or career, but do
not in themselves lead to moral or immoral actions. Performance itself, he
added, is not a sufficient indicator of a persons character.
Some researchers who study moral education have moved away from the
term character, Nucci explained, and use the terms moral self or moral
identity instead. These terms refer not to a set of traits, he explained, but
a system that is a component of an individuals overall sense of self. This
overall sense of self includes the individuals sense of agency, unique personal
identity, gender and ethnic identity, and sense of him or herself as a produc-
tive member of family and society. The character system that operates within
that larger system, he explained, consists of the interactions among elements
of the self, such as self-regulation or executive control.
Many scholars of moral education have studied well-known individuals
who seem to exemplify moral behavior, on the theory that morality is more
central to their sense of self than it is for others. It turns out, however, that
a close examination of such individuals lives shows that these individuals
are not very different from other people, Nucci explained. The behavior

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

8 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

of Thomas Jefferson, who, despite being the author of the Declaration of


Independence, fathered several children with his slave Sally Hemings and
never granted her freedom, illustrates this point. With the exception of the
1 to 3 percent of the population who are psychopaths, Nucci said, all
people care about morality, and also care about how they view themselves
as moral people. Differences in how central morality is to an individuals
self-identity have not been found to be helpful in explaining differences in
behavior, he added.
The idea that people behave morally because it is important to them to
be able to view themselves as moral beings, Nucci explained, reduces
morality to self-interest and does not account for peoples judgment about
what is a moral choice in a given situation. Other factors play an important
part in peoples judgments, he explained, such as their readings of social
situations and their capacity to regulate their emotions and social behavior.
Indeed, he added, individuals who view their morality as central to their
self-identity may veer into moral zealotry.

Character as a Dynamic System


The most useful focus for character development, in Nuccis view, is
moral agency, the capacity to base ones actions on goals and beliefs about
morality. The development of moral agency begins in childhood, he ex-
plained, as children make sense of the consequences of their own and oth-
ers actions, and can be disrupted by trauma or violence. Moral agency is
not a fixed attribute, Nucci explained, but an element in a complex system
of the self that continuously interacts with the other elements, as illustrated
in Figure 2-1. Thus character, he noted, is not a finished productit is
continuously evolving.
More specifically, Nucci went on, character consists in interactions
between an individual and the context: each influences the other. Individu-
als do not have virtues that exist independent of their choices and actions
within particular contexts, and they demonstrate character by behaving
coherently across varied situations, rather than consistently displaying a
particular trait or set of traits.

Components of the Character System


Based on this understanding, Nucci identified four components (shown
in Figure 2-1) of the character system, which in turn is part of the larger
self-system:

moral cognition,
emotional development or moral mental health,

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

WHAT IS CHARACTER? 9

Self System

AGENCY: Character System


C
MORAL AGENCY
CY
Y
Moral Co
Cognition-Reason (moral, conventional,
IDENTITY: domains)
personal do
MORAL IDENTITY
NTITY
Gender Moral Mental Health (empathy, emotion
recognition)
Ethnicity
Pe
Performance (executive function, self
ACADEMIC
C regulation, grit)
reg

Moral Critical Social Engagement


(responsive engagement, moral purpose)

FIGURE 2-1 The self system.


SOURCE: Nucci (2016).

performance, and
moral (critical) social engagement.

The first three components, he noted, correspond to components identi-


fied by others (Sokol, Hammond, and Berkowitz, 2010), but he added the
fourth in order to include the ways an individual interacts with his or her
social context.

Component 1: Moral Cognition


The essence of character is the willful decision to act morally, Nucci
observed. Some moral decisions may require little deliberation while o thers
require careful weighing of competing considerations, but they are not
accidental or instinctive. Researchers have distinguished moral judgments,
which concern issues such as the welfare of others, fairness, or rights, from
two other factors that affect decision making: social conventions (norms
established by consensus or authority in in a particular social system) and
factors related to personal choice and privacy.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

10 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

Nucci illustrated the distinction between acting according to moral


judgment and acting according to convention using an interview with a
4-year-old girl conducted as part of his research; the transcripts are shown
in Boxes 2-1 and 2-2. The girl can clearly distinguish between a convention
and a moral judgment, he noted.
Nucci and his colleagues have also examined the role of organized
religion in moral judgments by interviewing young people and adults from

BOX 2-1
Childs Reasoning about a Moral Issue

Did you see what happened? Yes. They were playing and John hit him too hard.

Is that something you are supposed to do or not supposed to do? Not so hard to hurt.

Is there a rule about that? Yes.

What is the rule? Youre not to hit hard.

What if there were no rule about hitting hard, would it be all right to do then? No.

Why not? Because he could get hurt and start to cry.

SOURCE: Nucci (2016).

BOX 2-2
Childs Reasoning about a Conventional Issue

Did you see what just happened? Yes. They were noisy.

Is that something you are supposed to do or not supposed to do? Not do.

Is there a rule about that? Yes. We have to be quiet.

What if there were no rule, would it be all right to do then? Yes.

Why? Because there is no rule.

SOURCE: Nucci (2016).

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

WHAT IS CHARACTER? 11

different faith traditions about their views of moral issues. For example,
they asked children from an Amish community in Indiana whether it would
be wrong or right to remove a rule prohibiting particular actions. Nearly
all the children interviewed reported that it would be wrong to remove
rules against actions with a clear moral component, such as stealing or
hitting, but significantly fewer reported that it would be wrong to change
rules regarding nonmoral issues, such as worshipping on a particular day
of the week.
When asked for their reasons, the children were most likely to cite
Gods law, Nucci explained, as the reason it would be wrong to change
rules about moral issues, but they also cited other reasons, such as the
welfare of others and fairness. The children were also asked to consider
whether their answers would be different if God had not given a rule
for either the moral or nonmoral issues. Virtually none of the children
responded that the nonmoral rules should be changed, but significant pro-
portions still argued that it would be wrong to change moral rules, such as
those against stealing or hitting, even if God had not said anything about
these actions. In those cases, the childrens judgments were focused on the
impacts of the actions on other people.
Judgments about right and wrong, Nucci concluded, reflect an indi-
viduals capacity to negotiate three domains: the moral, the conventional,
and the personal. Each domain puts varying demands on an individual
over time, just as an individuals priorities shift over time. An individuals
priorities are also affected by the facts and information he or she has and
the assumptions he or she makes about that information. For example, a
person who assumes a human egg is a person may accordingly view abor-
tion as an immoral act of murder, while a person who does not view the egg
as a person will disagree. Science, religious belief, and cultural traditions
all contribute to such assumptions, Nucci added, and thus critical thinking
also plays a part in morality.
Individuals develop in each of the attributes that contribute to moral
judgment, Nucci went on, but there are no defined stages of development in
peoples capacity to coordinate competing considerations in complex social
situations. Nor is there an end point, he addeda stage at which people
have the wisdom to apply moral principles in all contexts, regardless of
competing nonmoral considerations. In other words, Nucci noted, moral
judgments are inexorably bound up in context, and this makes the assess-
ment of moral growth and the identification of character more challenging.

Component 2: Emotional Development or Moral Mental Health


Moral mental health, Nucci explained, consists of the capacity for
empathy, the ability to accurately read the emotions of others, and a sense

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

12 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

of moral agency. It is these capacities that allow humans to make judgments


about what might harm othersand these capacities can be undermined by
exposure to a variety of deficiencies or harm in childhood. Educational pro-
grams designed to foster childrens capacity for social and emotional learn-
ing and to regulate their own behavior, Nucci explained, have often been
aimed at overcoming such deficiencies, but these efforts can also optimize
moral mental health in all children. Nucci used the term moral wellness to
convey the idea that maintaining the character system is an ongoing activity
rather than a status or state that can be achieved. Nucci noted that social
and emotional learning fit in this component because they are essential to
moral functioning but do not in themselves lead to moral behaviors.

Component 3: Performance
Character entails not only the capacity to recognize the right thing to
do but also the propensity to act on that judgment, Nucci explained.
Doing the right thing often comes at a cost, he went on, and in some cases
the cost may be so high that it is completely rational to prioritize self-
interest over the morally right thing to do. Nucci cited as an example
cases in which child soldiers are ordered to take immoral actions and face
dire consequences for refusing to obey. Acting on moral judgments is not
simply a matter of willpower or motivation, Nucci argued. Behaving in
a moral fashion even when doing so competes with other goals requires a
capacity for self-regulation and executive function (the processes that allow
people to control their own behavior). Recent work on grit, defined as the
capacity to both feel passion for a long-term goal and persevere in pursuing
it (Duckworth, 2016), suggests that it may be an important element of the
capacity to act morally. For example, grit might help to explain individuals
commitment to addressing injustices despite extreme challenges, but does
not in itself account for the moral thinking that led to that commitment,
he noted.

Component 4: Moral (Critical) Social Engagement


The first three components of character describe the development of an
individual who will operate morally in everyday life, Nucci commented.
They do not, however, account for the reality that a person of character
might function morally but nevertheless tolerate living within a culture or
society that is structurally unequal, or practices, such as slavery, that are
immoral. This is no idle concern, Nucci added. It would be difficult to
support an argument that people who lived during the time slavery was
legal in the United States were less moral than people today, he noted, when
one considers the injustices and inequality that are tolerated today. At the
same time, however, individuals, including children, have across history

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

WHAT IS CHARACTER? 13

and cultural context demonstrated the capacity to critically evaluate moral


situations and to resist and protest unfair social practices.
Nucci proposed as the fourth component of character the capacity to
take a critical moral stance: to recognize both that ones own moral per-
spective may be faulty and that societal norms may be at odds with fairness
and respect for human welfare. Most notions of character, Nucci went on,
have been focused on the development and functioning of the individual,
without explicit regard for the individuals position within the larger social
network. This focus leaves out the impact of sociopolitical factors on the
individuals development, and also the ways in which individuals can bring
about social change. Nucci suggested that the capacity to contribute to
principled moral change in the social system or civic virtue is another
element of character. This fourth component of character, Nucci observed,
may be linked to a sense of purpose, a set of personal goals that give an
individuals life meaning and direction (Damon, 2009), in that such goals
often relate to the pursuit of social justice.
Character is not a collection of virtues or traits, Nucci reminded partici-
pants, but a system that enables the person to engage the social world as a
moral agent. Researchers may study particular components of character, he
added, but reducing character to any one of them would be an error. The core
of it is morality defined in terms of fairness and human welfare. Efforts to
assess character that center on measuring the degree of a particular trait an
individual has, for example, are not useful, he argued. More useful, he sug-
gested, would be to assess the components of the character systemsocial
and emotional learning, moral reasoning, and moral mental healthin much
the same way that a physician would assess the various aspects of a childs
physical growth and development. This might be done using questionnaires,
interviews, and observations, Nucci suggested, but he also noted that further
developments in understanding of moral development and moral function-
ing in a social context would be needed for such approaches to be practical.
Nucci used a quotation from Theodore Roosevelt to emphasize the vital
importance of this work: To educate a man [person] in mind and not in
morals is to educate a menace to society.

PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOLOGY, CONTEXT, AND CULTURE


Three presenters who reflected different academic traditions were asked
to respond to Nuccis paper.

A Positive Psychology Perspective


Robert McGrath said he was particularly struck by one point in Nuccis
argument: that virtue, like the concepts of race and gender, is primarily

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

14 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

TABLE 2-2 Alternative Lists of Key Virtues


Ben G. E.
Plato Aristotle Jainism Catholicism Franklin Moore
Courage Courage Forgiveness Wisdom Temperance Interpersonal
enjoyment
Justice Temperance Humility Fortitude Silence Aesthetic
enjoyment
Prudence Generosity Straightforwardness Temperance Order
Temperance Philanthropy Purity Justice Resolution
Magnanimity Truthfulness Faith Frugality
Honor Self-Restraint Hope Industry
Gentleness Penance Love Sincerity
Friendliness Renunciation Justice
Truthfulness Nonattachment Moderation
Wit Celibacy Cleanliness
Justice Tranquility
Knowledge Chastity
Art Humility
Prudence
Intuition
Wisdom

SOURCE: McGrath (2016).

a social construction.3 He agrees, he commented, with the idea that all


psychosocial concepts are to some extent social constructions. Certainly
there is strong evidence, he added, that categories of race are entirely social
constructions. Regarding both gender and virtue, however, he suggested,
there are more questions. Ideas about gender have changed dramatically in
the past few decades, he observed, noting that the Commission on Human
Rights in New York City, which investigates claims of gender discrimina-
tion, now recognizes more than 30 gender identities. However, in his view,
though the concepts of man and woman reflect shifting cultural ideas
and expectations, they seem also to reflect something inherent and essential.
Similarly, he believes it is important to consider whether virtue is purely a

3Nucci had included this point in an earlier draft of his paper, which McGrath used in plan-

ning his remarks, but did not include it in his presentation.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

WHAT IS CHARACTER? 15

Erik Comte- John William Cawley Dahlsgaard


Erikson Sponville Templeton Bennett et al. et al.
Hope Politeness Creativity Self-discipline Empathy Wisdom and
knowledge
Will Fidelity Curiosity Compassion Order Courage

Purpose Prudence Diligence Responsibility Resourcefulness Humanity


Competence Temperance Entrepreneurialism Friendship Serenity Justice
Fidelity Courage Forgiveness Work Temperance
Love Justice Future-mindedness Courage Transcendence
Care Generosity Generosity Perseverance
Wisdom Compassion Honesty Honesty
Mercy Humility Loyalty
Gratitude Joy Faith
Humility Love
Simplicity Purpose
Tolerance Reliability
Purity Thrift
Gentleness
Good Faith
Humor
Love

construction or whether there is an objective and universal truth that under


lies its structure, even though it is socially malleable.
McGrath showed his own compilation of lists of virtuessee
Table 2-2agreeing with Nucci that such lists have been all over the
place. His lista sampling of virtues identified by philosophers from Plato
and Aristotle to writers who are alive todayis by no means complete, he
added. Philosopher David Hume, for example, listed more than 70 virtues
and said there could be thousands more. Another philosopher, Daniel Rus-
sell, referred to the challenge of identifying key virtues as the enumeration
problem. The fact that people through history have made up their own
long lists, and that many virtuessuch as courtesy or pietyclearly reflect
particular times and places, seem to be evidence for viewing character as a
social construction, McGrath commented.
There are several reasons not to accept that position, in McGraths
view. First, if character is no more than a product of cultural context, then

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

16 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

there is no logical way to critique the bag of virtues constructionthere


would be no conceptual framework to replace it. Second, if ideas of char-
acter and virtue are entirely socially constructed, virtue education would be
no more than a method for convincing people to comply with whichever
social conventions have priority in a particular time and place. Third, a
purely convention-based list of virtues could be expanded indefinitely. If
one purpose of a virtue list is to provide guidance for personal growth, the
longer the list, the less useful it is, McGrath pointed out.
McGrath offered his perspective on the essential nature of character,
which he believes complements Nuccis arguments well. Figure 2-2 shows

FIGURE 2-2 The VIA classification of strengths and virtues.


SOURCE: http://www.viacharacter.org/www/Character-Strengths/VIA-Classification#
{March 2017].

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

WHAT IS CHARACTER? 17

TABLE 2-3 Parallels Among Competencies


Competency Key
Clusters for the Competencies
Character.org 21st Century in Youth
and Thomas J. (National Research (Park et al., In The Wizard
Competency Sergiovanni Council, 2012) 2016) of Oz
Caring Heart Interpersonal Interpersonal Heart
(Tin Woodman)
Inquisitiveness Head Cognitive Intellectual Brain
(Scarecrow)
Self-Control Hand Intrapersonal Intrapersonal Courage
(Cowardly Lion)

SOURCE: McGrath (2016).

the VIA Classification of Strengths and Virtues, developed by the VIA


Institute on Character, a nonprofit organization.4 The model, McGrath
explained, is based on research in positive psychology and is an effort to
develop a comprehensive picture of character.5 The model identifies six
universal virtues, shown in the left-hand column, and 24 strengths that
everyone has in some degree.
McGrath has studied these 24 character strengths with the goal of
understanding the relationship between abstract principles of a well-lived
life and elements of character. He has used factor analysis and other statis-
tical techniques to try to identify a set of key strengths, or constructs. He
acknowledged that the set would not be definitive but hoped to use these
methods to better understand the underlying principles that are essential in
character. Questionnaires about the 24 strengths are available on the VIA
website and have been completed by millions of adults and adolescents
located around the world. He and his colleagues have examined samples of
these responses. Three factorscaring, inquisitiveness, and self-control
emerged as meaningful to people across these samples. While other terms
could have been used for these three values, they correspond closely to
strengths or competencies identified in other contexts, as the examples in
Table 2-3 illustrate.

4The model is based on the book Character Strengths and Virtues (Peterson and Seligman,

2004). See also http://www.viacharacter.org/www/Character-Strengths/VIA-Classification#


[December 2016].
5Positive psychology refers to the study of the strengths and virtues that enable individuals,

communities, and organizations to thrive (see http://www.positivepsychologyinstitute.com.


au/what_is_positive_psychology.html [December 2016]).

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

18 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

McGrath believes there are strong reasons for viewing these three
strengths as essential or universal virtues, but he also acknowledged the
importance of social context, which continually redefines what is meant
by these essential virtues. For example, both the invention of the printing
press and the development of the Internet brought radically new contexts
for human inquisitiveness. McGrath suggested that these three strengths are
necessary elements of character but not sufficient. Virtues and strengths
interact, he said, noting that this idea goes back at least to Aristotle, who
argued that people who have the wisdom to develop one virtue logically
therefore possess other virtues (this is the thesis of reciprocity of virtue).
Character education that focuses on only one virtue or strength, however
important, is insufficient, in his view. In teaching people about virtue, he
concluded, we need to recognize that people have personal, interpersonal,
and cultural values and that together these three contribute to a life well
lived. In his view, effective character development must include teaching
young people to be caring without the expectation of benefit, to be ques-
tioning without a crisis, and to be disciplined without structure.

Studying the Interactions Between Character and Context


Kristina Schmid Callina drew on her experience with research in devel
opmental psychology focused on positive youth development to offer obser-
vations about how character can be developed. Her work has been based in
a relational developmental systems theoretical perspective, she explained.
The premise of this research perspective is that in order to understand any
developmental phenomenon, including character, it is important to recog-
nize the reciprocal influences that individuals and their contexts have on
one another.
The relational developmental systems perspective moves beyond the idea
of nature versus nurture, Schmid Callina explained. Instead of weighing
the respective influences of an individuals inherent nature and the experi-
ences he or she has from birth, researchers posit that development cannot be
reduced to any one causal explanationto particular traits or socialization
experiences. The relational developmental systems perspective provides a
holistic way to understand character development as an element in a com-
plex developmental system like that represented in the bio-ecological model
developed by Urie Bronfenbrenner (1979), shown in Figure 2-3.
What does this mean for the study of character? Character is contextu-
ally defined, Schmid Callina said. It is a function of the continuous mutually
reinforcing relationship between the individual and his or her context. She
agreed with the idea Nucci had expressed in his paper, that a notion of char-
acter as a set of virtues that might exist independent of their enactment in
a particular context [is] meaningless (p. 9). Any assessment of character

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

WHAT IS CHARACTER? 19

FIGURE 2-3 An ecological model of human development developed by Urie


Bronfenbrenner.
SOURCE: Santrock (2007).

must account in some way for the interactions between the person and the
context, she added.
Across time and place, good character reflects the coherence of an indi-
viduals behaviorhow reliably he or she displays the right virtue, in the
right amount, at the right time, in Aristotles words. The attributes needed
might vary according to circumstances, Schmid Callina noted, so what is
critical is coherence, not consistency. Focusing on the idea that character
traits are fixed, or on the importance of single traits, will likely prevent one
from seeing the coherence in an individuals actions.
Schmid Callina described a study of character and leadership develop-
ment among cadets at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, called

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

20 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

Project Arete, to illustrate how ideas about the importance of context and
coherence can be used to evaluate character development. The most com-
mon method of evaluating character development curricula, she noted, has
been to assess particular strengths in young people and then compare their
scores from before and after completing the program. This approach often
fails to integrate the idea of coherence.
Specifically, such evaluations examine average group differences on
particular character attributes, rather than the individuals relationship with
the developmental system, Schmid Callina explained. They do not examine
the individuals developmental pathways or interactions with his or her con-
text, which would provide insight about character development. To explore
character development among West Point cadets, she explained, one might
examine the attributes they bring that make them more likely to develop
as leaders of character, or what about the West Point experience influences
their character development. These are important, she noted, but to focus
just on individual attributes, or on characteristics of the program, as com-
ponents is to overlook their interactions. More useful, she explained, is to
examine which features of the program promote which attributes among
cadets at a particular time and place.
One challenge in examining individual pathways to development, she
explained, is that standard approaches to statistical analysis in the social
sciences tend to focus on differences between people rather than changes
within individuals.6 Integration of multiple methods of qualitative and
quantitative research is needed, Schmid Callina noted, to effectively ana-
lyze changes within individuals and then aggregate such findings to yield
broader conclusions about character development. Person-centered analy-
sis is critical, she argued for evaluating programs such as that at West
Point. There are as many different experiences at West Point as there are
cadets, she added, to highlight the importance of using new approaches to
understand them. This is a lively area of research, she noted in closing, as
many new tools are being developed. Such research is expensive and time
consuming, but in her view very promising.

The Influence of Culture and Context on Character Development


Carola Surez-Orozco brought the perspective of a cultural develop-
mental psychologist to the question of how cultural context influences char-
acter development. She said she was struck by the multitude of definitions
of character, she noted, because defining culture has posed a similar chal-
lenge. In the 1950s, anthropologists Alfred Kroeber and Clyde Kluckoholn

6Schmid Callina recommended The End of Average: How We Succeed in a World That

Values Sameness by Todd Rose (2015) for a detailed discussion of these issues.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

WHAT IS CHARACTER? 21

articulated the problem and identified 152 definitions of the term. They syn-
thesized from these many definitions five essentials: values, beliefs, r ituals,
symbols, and practices. Human values are at the center, Surez-Orozco
explained, as Figure 2-4 illustrates, and each of these elements is expressed
through humans day-to-day practices.
Anthropologists pay close attention to cultural practicesthe routines,
activities, and other things that people doSurez-Orozco commented.
These include

language use;
kinship systems;
religious and ritual practices;
economic models;
power structures and hierarchies;
gender expectations;
cultural socialization (child rearing);
dress; and
food.

FIGURE 2-4 Essential components of culture.


SOURCE: Surez-Orozco (2016).

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

22 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

Anthropologists also focus on cultural models or belief systems people


develop. It is through such models that members of a culture generally
specify the critical knowledge that is essential in their cultural context, she
explained, and individuals who do not acquire this knowledge are ruled
out as competent members of the group. At the heart of cultural models,
as the bullseye in Figure 2-4 illustrates, are values, norms, and ideologies.
Cultures have what anthropologists call distributed knowledge, shared
ideas and information that is developed collectively and helps to define the
group. Distributed knowledge is often aligned with religious belief systems,
Surez-Orozco noted, and is passed down across generations.
Describing a culture is complicated because each has multiple layers,
Surez-Orozco explained, and as anthropologist Clifford Geertz said,
describing a culture requires thick descriptions of symbolic systems and
meanings. However, social scientists too often reduce these complexities
to simplistic categories, describing a society as either collectivist or indi
vidualistic, for example, or speaking in broad terms about nationality (e.g.,
American versus Chinese) or ethnicity (Latino versus black or white). Even
speaking of culture as language, ethnicity, and nationality does not capture
the complexity of culture, she observed. But, as John Berry (1997, p. 27)
wrote, There is no contemporary society in which one culture, one lan-
guage, one religion, one single identity characterizes the whole population.
Surez-Orozco used a simplified version of the Bronfenbrenner model
that Schmid Callina had used to show how the experiences of immigrant
children illustrate the intersection of culture, values, and character: see
Figure 2-5. She noted that the more distal elementsthose farther r emoved
from the individuals daily experienceare often overlooked but are vitally
important to character. For example, economic inequality in the United
States has grown sharply in the last 20 years, as Figure 2-6 illustrates. More
children are living in extreme poverty, she noted, and immigrant children
are among those most affected. Moreover, one-quarter of immigrant chil-
dren are growing up under the shadow of undocumented status, she
added, and 400,000 people are deported every year, increasing numbers of
whom are the parents of children who are U.S. citizens. Xenophobic stereo
types exacerbate the stress that immigrant children face, Surez-Orozco
continued.
Surez-Orozco offered data from research she has done on the civic
participation and social responsibility of young adults of Latino immigrant
origins to illustrate how distal factors may influence the development of
character (Surez-Orozco, Hernandez, and Casanova, 2015). Latino youth
who are in the first or second generation of their families to live in the
United States are the fastest growing group of young adults in the nation,
she pointed out (Rumbaut and Komaie, 2010). The degree to which these
young adults engage civically will influence the way they develop as indi-

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

WHAT IS CHARACTER? 23

FIGURE 2-5 Ecological framework.


SOURCE: Surez-Orozco (2016).

FIGURE 2-6 Income inequality in the United States, 1910 to 2010.


SOURCE: Surez-Orozco (2016).

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

24 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

viduals and also influence U.S. society, she added (Lerner, Dowling, and
Anderson, 2003; Stepick, Stepick, and Labissiere, 2008). Surez-Orozco
and her colleagues explored the degree to which these young people follow
patterns of civic engagement typical in the broader population, and also
sought to understand the values and motivations that drive them to engage
civically.
They recruited a sample of 58 young adults of Dominican, Mexican,
Guatemalan, and Salvadoran origin who are first- or second-generation
immigrants living in cities in the Northeast. The participants were asked to
complete questionnaires and to participate in a Q-sort exercise, in which
they ranked their views and values. Figure 2-7 summarizes the participants
responses to the task of picking four values (from among 20) they saw as
most associated with the United States, their or their parents country of
origin, and themselves.
Independence was given a high priority across all three groups, she
noted, but some other values were specifically associated with only one or
two. For example, pursuit of wealth, freedom, and opportunity were associ-
ated with the people of the United States generally, but not the participants
countries of origin or themselves. The young adults associated religion only
with their countries of origin, and highlighted family obligations, helping
and serving others, and respect, along with independence, as important to
themselves.

FIGURE 2-7 Q-sort task.


SOURCE: Surez-Orozco (2016).

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

WHAT IS CHARACTER? 25

Surez-Orozco and her colleagues also examined the ways in which


the young people choose to be civically engaged. Many are not especially
involved politically, she commented, but many do volunteer, for example,
serving as mentors or translators or taking leadership roles in civic efforts
such as support for the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien
Minors (DREAM) Act.7 The young adults studied also showed a propensity
to select civic-minded professions, Surez-Orozco noted, such as education,
medicine, and the law, and cited the specific goal of giving back to their
communities or those in need. Looking across the study participants, she
added, two-thirds demonstrated active levels of civic engagement, and
their primary reasons were a sense of social responsibility and the desire to
rectify a social injustice.
Culture matters, Surez-Orozco concluded. The values that are at
the core of culture, in her view, are key drivers of character. However,
understanding the complex relationship between culture and character
requires a deep understanding of a particular population developed using
multimethod approaches. Context also matters, she added, and it is espe-
cially important not to neglect the distal influences.

DISCUSSION
Discussion focused on the tension between the degree of emphasis
placed on the individual versus the cultural context that was evident in the
presentations, as one participant put it. The participant pointed out that,
although people are clearly influenced by their cultural environment, there
is a biological substratum and a genetic influence. People do have an un-
changeable core of traits that would persist even if they were transplanted
to an entirely new cultural context, he argued.
Nucci responded by acknowledging that each individual does have a
unique identity that is stable, but that reducing character to a set of immu-
table traits is misguided. Martin Luther King, Jr., he reminded the group,
was both an esteemed moral leader and a philanderer, who presumably
was dishonest to family members and others to hide his infidelity. Thinking
about character in terms of coherenceto attempt to understand how an
individuals internal motivation and reasoning interact with the circum-
stances and external influencesis more useful for making sense of this
type of paradox than looking for consistent traits in the individual, Nucci
suggested. If consistency is the standard, we all fail, he pointed out.
Others turned the discussion to practical implications for character
education. One suggested that focusing on the commitment to be a better

7This legislation was first proposed in the United States Senate in 2001 but has not yet

passed.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

26 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

person is a way around the debate over the respective influences of indi-
vidual attributes and cultural influences. Programs that help young people
develop character could usefully be viewed as opportunities for young
people to practice acting as people of character, making judgments about
what is right and wrong, and making decisions about how to pursue con-
crete goals, this person suggested.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Views of What Works in


Developing Character

T
he discussion turned next to the practical challenges of developing
character in young people. Marvin Berkowitz of the University of
Missouri, St. Louis, drew from research on school-based character
education to identify evidence regarding current strategies and principles
to guide educators and program developers. Reed Larson of the University
of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Camille Farrington of the University of
Chicago, and Karen Pittman of the Forum for Youth Investment provided
additional perspectives.

THEMES FROM RESEARCH


Developmental psychology research, Berkowitz noted, suggests that
accepted ideas about effective parenting map directly onto ideas about
educating for characterand that every teacher is in a sense a surrogate
parent. Yet, he suggested, few parents use the sorts of character develop-
ment strategies, such as reading or posting inspirational quotations, hang-
ing posters bearing a single word such as respect, or handing out reward
tickets to children caught doing something praiseworthy, that are often
found in schools and other settings. If these practices are so effective, he
wondered, why dont educators use them with their own children?
Another way to think about what might be effective in developing
character in young people, Berkowitz added, is to consider how ones own
positive character traits actually developed. In contrast to Nuccis view, he
suggested that individuals do have traits such as honesty or being caring
that they display consistently, though not perfectly. Most often, he said,

27

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

28 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

people asked about how their traits developed report that they worked to
emulate a parent or other role model, or had determined that they would
not have negative traits they saw in their own parents, such as racism or
dishonesty. He has never encountered a person who reported that his or
her character came from a curriculum or a set of lessons, he commented.
Berkowitz defined character as the complex constellation of psycho-
logical characteristics that motivate and enable individuals to function as
competent moral agents, noting that his definition is essentially the same
as the one Nucci had used. Character education, in turn, he defines as a
way of being through which adult educators and role models foster the
development of character. People are complex organisms, he noted, and
the idea that they can be taught to have character does not fit with the
models of human psychological and moral functioning that developmental
psychologists and other researchers use. The goal of character development
programs should not be to teach, but to promote healthy adult cultures and
actively foster young peoples development, he said.
Berkowitz and his colleagues identified character development strategies
for which there is evidence of effectiveness (Berkowitz at al., 2016). They
reviewed research from the past 16 years that has been collected through
the What Works in Character Education Project,1 meta-analyses and other
recent syntheses of the research, and literature on parenting with respect to
character. The researchers looked for reviews of scientific studies focused on
the outcomes of character education, defined in terms of moral reasoning,
positive psychology, and other frameworksthey did not include effects on
academic achievement or other outcomes. They did not analyze implementa-
tion strategies, but focused on program design and pedagogical approaches
that make a difference.2
Berkowitz developed a structure for thinking about best practices for
character education, which he calls PRIME, for prioritizing character edu-
cation, relationships, intrinsic motivation, modeling, and empowerment.
He used PRIME to organize the primary points he drew from the literature
review conducted for the workshop.

PrioritizationCharacter education will not work, in Berkowitzs view, if it


is not an authentic priority in the school or setting. He and his colleagues
found that several practices were consistently found in programs and set-

1See http://character.org/key-topics/what-is-character-education/what-works [December

2016]. Berkowitz noted that he and his colleagues are developing the Character Education
Research Clearinghouse (CERCh) to make their findings more widely available. See Berkowitz
et al. (2016) for a detailed discussion of the sources for this work.
2Most of the work they reviewed addressed character education in school settings, but

Berkowitz noted the relevance of this work to out-of-school settings, which have received
significantly less research attention.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

VIEWS OF WHAT WORKS IN DEVELOPING CHARACTER 29

tings that do make character a genuine priority. One is rhetorical emphasis:


The adults talk regularly about shared goals and values. Another is alloca-
tion of resources, such as investment in professional development. School
and classroom climate, particularly a sense that teachers are trusted, is a
key element. Treating character education as a school-wide valuerather
than confining it to particular lessons or making it the responsibility of a
particular teacheris another way schools and programs demonstrate com-
mitment, as is effective leadership from the principal, he noted.

RelationshipsHealthy relationships within and beyond the school are also


characteristic of settings where character education is effective, B erkowitz
said. Positive relationships flourish when they are strategically promoted,
he added. In the classroom, this means teachers use interactive pedagogical
strategies such as cooperative learning, for example, and teach interpersonal
skills. School settings in which relationships among all staff members, fami-
lies, and community members are respectful and engaged foster character
learning. Schools can promote such relationships through structured activi-
ties that invite people who do not normally go into classrooms to interact
with students, for example.

Intrinsic MotivationChildren can be partners in the journey of their own


character development, Berkowitz commented, and he said he does not
favor behavior-modification strategies for fostering certain behaviors. We
want kids to internalize values and virtues, he suggested, and that is best
done using strategies that engage students own motivations. One effective
practice is to focus on students self-growth, guiding them in setting goals,
offering focused training, and allowing them opportunities to review their
actions and behavior and initiate changes, he said. Opportunities to serve
others also give students the chance to engage in morally positive actions
and reflect on what they learn.

ModelingThe adults and older students in exemplary character education


settings model core values or virtues and social and emotional competen-
cies, Berkowitz noted, and this has a powerful influence on young people.
What you do has more impact than what you say, he added.

EmpowermentSchools tend to be very hierarchical, Berkowitz noted.


Shared leadership and classrooms run according to democratic principles
foster the kind of character program leaders hope their students will develop.

Another set of practices that Berkowitz and his colleagues identified


in the literature did not fit neatly into the PRIME model, he noted. He
listed these practices in the category of developmental pedagogy, meaning

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

30 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

approaches that are intentionally designed to foster the development of


character and social and emotional competence. One method for doing
this, he explained, is to directly teach about character, such as by teaching
social and emotional competencies or integrating character concepts into
a broader curriculum. Another is to set high expectations for growth that
are clearly articulated for students but also scaffolded so that incremental
progress is recognized. Giving students opportunities to practice the compe-
tencies they are learning, for example through role-playing, is also critical,
he added.
More scientific research on effective practices is needed, Berkowitz
noted, including research that isolates specific practices or compares sets of
practices, as well analyses that shed light on effectiveness. Nevertheless, he
believes the available literature clearly demonstrates that we have to teach
it and practice it, in order to foster character development in young people.

PERSPECTIVES ON KEY INGREDIENTS


Reed Larson, Camille Farrington, and Karen Pittman each offered
additional thoughts about the features and practices that are critical for
programs that aim to foster character development.

Supporting Adolescents
Larson focused on the question of how institutions and caring adults
can best support adolescents grappling with the complex contexts in which
they live. Aristotle, he pointed out, argued that neither rote repetition nor
teaching would prepare a young person to confront a difficult situation,
arguing that, We become just by the practice of just actions, self-controlled
by exercising self-control, and courageous by performing acts of courage.
Confronting a genuinely confusing unstructured situation that poses a
moral challenge, Larson added, can be a profound learning experience.
Larson suggested that after-school programs, especially those for adoles-
cents, provide real-world situations, opportunities, and dilemmas through
which young people can practice in the way Aristotle suggested. He referred
to this type of learning as cycles of practice in context. He noted that his
ideas about after-school character education aligned well with Berkowitzs
findings from in-school character education.
Larson has conducted research with 250 youths from different ethnic
groups, using multiple interviews to analyze their accounts of their social
and emotional learning and character development. This work has identi-
fied some active ingredients that are especially important to programs for
older youth: the opportunity to grapple with challenges, including moral
challenges, investment in meaningful goals, and constructive peer processes.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

VIEWS OF WHAT WORKS IN DEVELOPING CHARACTER 31

The opportunity to grapple with real-world challenges, in a support-


ive, prosocial environment with the oversight of trusted program leaders
is invaluable for young people, in Larsons view. There are two ways that
programs often provide such opportunities, he explained. One is to engage
young people in service projects, political actions, art or video productions,
or other long-term, goal-oriented activities that tap into their interests.
Another is for a young person to take on a substantive role, for example as
a group leader, blogger, board member, dance captain, or camera person.
These kinds of roles come with obligations, he observed, and much research
in developmental psychology supports the idea that struggling with and
fulfilling meaningful obligations can have positive effects for young people.
To illustrate the potential effects of this kind of experience, Larson
quoted a girl who cared for a baby pig, preparing to enter it in an agricul-
tural fair. The pig became very sick and its care became very challenging,
but the girl explained, Its just me. Im the one that has to push myself to
do these things no matter how badly I dont want to step in that pigpen,
I gotta do it, gotta do it. Larson also described the successful efforts of
a group of young people in an action program who challenged discipline
policies in their school that they believed were unfair. To be effective, they
had to figure out how to communicate effectively with teachers, adminis-
trators, fellow students, and the Board of Education, but they eventually
succeeded. Interviewed three years later, the students described that struggle
as foundational to their later lives, Larson said.
Challenges such as these, Larson emphasized, provide opportunities for
young people to practice skills, work out moral positions, and see through
trial and error what works. Programs that facilitate this kind of learning,
he added, dont just cultivate a climate, but create a culture of action
that motivates young people and helps them learn. The programs give the
young people agency and create an atmosphere of trust, but also provide
tools and models that support them in their efforts to overcome challenges
in their work.
Voluntary after-school activities are particularly good opportunities for
young people to invest their time and energy in goals that are meaningful
to them, the second key ingredient discussed by Larson. These are activities
that young people are interested in, feel they are good at, and enjoy. They are
also activities young people perceive as useful as they pursue life and career
goals, and often they are also opportunities for altruism. When students
believe that what they are doing may actually make a difference to others,
they often have additional motivation to persevere through challenges.
Peers may have negative or positive influences, Larson noted, and after-
school programs can foster constructive peer processes, the third ingredient
in effective after-school programs. Indeed, peers are a critical secret sauce
of after-school programs, he suggested. Adults can foster constructive peer

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

32 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

interactions in a few ways. One is to cultivate a safe space, by modeling


and encouraging constructive dialogue that incudes reflective discussion,
problem solving, and empathy.
Another is to support young peoples individual and collective invest-
ment in their work. The roles young people play in the program are impor-
tant to the development of constructive peer relationships, he noted: they
confer both responsibilities and rights and give young people opportunities
for agency, the power to pursue an objective. Often, as a program begins,
young people take on roles with a lot of enthusiasm and then find the roles
more demanding than they expected. They experience self-doubt and emo-
tional strain, and their commitment may waver. At this stage, the adults
can help young people persevere with encouragement and guidance. Young
people also recognize that they owe it to their peers to persevere, not out
of guilt but because they have a shared investment in the outcome. Young
people who are part of groups that go through these stages successfully,
without giving up, can build character strengths that transfer to other set-
tings, such as home and school, Larson noted.
Figure 3-1 illustrates how these elements fit together and reinforce one
another in an after-school setting. After-school projects can be structures
in which young people develop character voluntarily, Larson concluded.
Given the opportunity, young people want and choose to take on challeng-
ing projects and roles in the service of something they care about, he added.
Adults play a key role in helping to shape the experience of practicing
being an upstanding member of their group, as Aristotle suggested, Larson
noted. He emphasized the value of staff expertise in helping young people
experience a sense of agency.

Foundations for Young Adult Success


Camille Farrington offered her perspectives on how young people
develop successfully, based on work she has done with colleagues (Nagaoka

FIGURE 3-1 Challenge model of character learning for older youth.


SOURCE: Larson (2016).

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

VIEWS OF WHAT WORKS IN DEVELOPING CHARACTER 33

et al., 2015). As both Nucci and Berkowitz had made clear, she noted,
character development entails a lot of different things happening simulta-
neously. She endorsed the framing Berkowitz et al. offered in their paper
(2016, p. 19), that Ultimately the goal of character education is for chil-
dren and adolescents to become good people, to develop into and act as
agents for good in the world. Hence this is about being people of character
even more than it is about acting good.
Random assignment is not a promising strategy for studying a con-
struct this complicated, or the practices that might promote it, Farrington
noted. It is difficult to isolate specific strategies in order to study their
effects, and much existing research has focused on outcomes other than
character itself. Moreover, she noted, researchers are often compelled
to use short-term behaviors as proxies for the state of being a person of
character, or being on the way to becoming one. Parents and educators
use many strategies and practices in the hope that, over many years, their
efforts will pay off as the child or student becomes an adult of character,
but theres no way to be certain at the time that these methods will bear
fruit, she observed.
Farrington and her colleagues conducted a study of what matters in the
development of successful young people, and how and when they develop
the attributes that are important to success. Their research included a re-
view of relevant literature and extensive interviews with experts from fields
including neuroscience, developmental psychology, social psychology, edu-
cation, workforce development, and sociology. They took a broad view of
what success means: a balance of positive work, family, civic engagement,
and other elements, as shown in Figure 3-2. Figure 3-3 illustrates their view
of the foundation that allows young people to develop successfully. The
outer rings show the three essential elements young people need to develop
by the time they reach adulthood: a sense of agency, an integrated identity,
and a set of competencies. (Farrington noted that these elements continue
to develop throughout adulthood as well.) The inner ring shows specific
components that are the foundation for developing the three e ssential ele-
ments. These elements all contribute to a persons functioning as an indi-
vidual (sense of self) and to his or her functioning in the context of family,
community, and the broader world, she added.
Farrington and her colleagues used a developmental approach to ex-
plore when and how these elements develop. A common research approach,
she noted, is to examine the inputsconditions and practicesthat might
help to develop character. She and her colleagues hoped to learn about the
mechanisms through which these practices result in the development of
character, she explained, so they shifted the focus from what adults do to
what young people do, the kinds of experiences they have and how they
make meaning of those experiences.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

34 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

Young Adulthood
(Postsecondary, Ages 19-22)

INT
WORK
EG FAMILY
DSETS
R
MIN
Y

AT
NC

E DI
AGE

KN S K I L L S E
OW L E D G

DENT I TY
VA L U E S
HEALTH FRIENDS
&

SE N
LF
EDUCATION - R E G U L ATI O
C CIVIC
OM ES ENGAGEMENT

YO PETENCI
S S
UN CE
G ADU T SUC
L
FIGURE 3-2 Model of young adult success.
SOURCE: Nagaoka et al. (2015, p. 4).

The developmental experiences that emerged from their review include


both actions and reflections, Farrington explained, as illustrated in Fig-
ure 3-4. The five actions on the left side of the figuresuch as encountering
new modes of behavior, being able to explore in a safe space, and practicing
and developing skillsare the opportunities through which young people
develop character strengths. Versions of these kinds of experiences are
important for children at all stages from early childhood through young
adulthood, and are also key for adult learning, Farrington noted. Reflect-
ing on and making meaning of these experiences is just as important, she
went on, agreeing with Larsen on this point. Without the opportunity to
internalize, or integrate, experiences, as Larsen had noted, the experience
can just fly away, as if it had never happened, Farrington explained. The
five actions shown on the right side of the figure are key ways individuals
actively reflect on their experiences. These include describing what one
observes, evaluating and making judgments about ones own and others

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

VIEWS OF WHAT WORKS IN DEVELOPING CHARACTER 35

FIGURE 3-3 Foundations for young adult success.


SOURCE: Nagaoka et al. (2015, p. 20).

behavior, making connections both with other people and among ideas and
experiences, envisioning the future, and integrating experiences into ones
sense of self.
The role of adults, Farrington concluded, is to provide these oppor-
tunities for action and reflection for young people at every stage of their
development. We are very good at helping kids encounter facts and infor-
mation, and practice skills, she observed, but we tend to skip over most
of the others, though they are very important for learning and character
development.

Youth Development as a Shared Goal


The focus on practices that can help children and adolescents flourish
is very timely from a policy perspective, noted Karen Pittman, because
it is happening not just in school-based and after-school contexts but

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

36 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

FIGURE 3-4 Developmental experiences that lead to positive development.


SOURCE: Nagaoka et al. (2015, p. 16).

in other systems. There has been a surge of interest in evidence-based


policy, she noted, and it is important for the practice and research com-
munities to act quickly to broaden the definition of what evidence is
and generate new methodologies. Pittman agreed with Farrington and
others who have argued that randomized controlled trials are not a useful
research approach for character development. It is important to identify
other research designs, she explained, in order to accurately identify what
is working. Pittman noted that her organization, the Forum for Youth
Investment, has been involved in two recent projects that look across
sectors such as child welfare, juvenile justice, and civic education and
prevention (see Box 3-1).
Pittman also endorsed the idea of moving away from the bag of
virtues approach to character, in which a program is designed to develop
a particular trait or strength. As many of the presenters had made clear,
what is critical is to understand how all these skill sets and strengths come
together so that a young person grows up with a strong sense of agency
and identity, and how program practices create the contexts that contribute
to that. Our job is not just to model moral behavior, she commented,
but also to nurture it. The way to do that is to create an environment
that is safe in which young people can be challenged and rewarded for
their efforts. That only happens in environments in which young people
are engaged, she argued: That is the secret sauce.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

VIEWS OF WHAT WORKS IN DEVELOPING CHARACTER 37

BOX 3-1
Projects Conducted by the Forum for Youth Investment

Karen Pittman highlighted two projects in which the Forum for Youth Invest-
ment has been involved. Ready by Design is a synthesis of research on young
peoples development. The report identifies critical elementswhich could be
described as components of character, social and emotional skills, noncognitive
competencies, or by other termsthat young people need to thrive.a
The second project, Preparing Youth to Thrive, was a collaboration among
eight exemplary youth organizations working with disadvantaged youth. The part-
ners were asked to think about how to harness what they do, Pittman explained.
They identified, practices they use to help vulnerable adolescents strengthen their
social and emotional skills, and identify ways to formalize these approaches so
they can be used in other settings on a large scale. The results are presented in
a series of reports.b

aSee
http://sparkaction.org/sites/sparkaction.org/files/readybydesign.pdf [December 2016].
bSeehttps://www.selpractices.org/resource/preparing-youth-to-thrive-methodology-and-
findings-from-the-sel-challenge [December 2016].

More quantitative research is available in some of the other fields con-


cerned with child and adolescent welfare, Pittman noted, such as juvenile
justice. Studies, some of which used a randomized control model, have
yielded findings. For example, she noted, scaring kids doesnt work, so
you can throw out all the programs that are based on that. This body of
work has begun to identify program components and practices that are
effective, she added (see Box 3-1). It has been complicated to isolate prac-
tices or strategies she noted, because most programs use multiple ones. The
programs covered in the What Works Clearinghouse,3 she noted, use an
average of eight strategies each and often have their own names for them.
The focus of recent juvenile justice research, she explained, has been to use
meta-analysis and other techniques to cull out the essential components
of the strategies and approaches that are effective. These components, or
principles, she added, have been the basis for standard protocols that can
be used in program evaluation.
We can talk about what works, Pittman continued, but in her view
it is more useful to look for what makes it better. Improvement comes,
she suggested, when there is a complete cycle, or feedback loop. Evidence
is used to identify practices with the potential to be effective, these prac-
tices are implemented in a program or classroom, and the youth workers

3See http://character.org/key-topics/what-is-character-education/what-works [December 2016].

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

38 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

or teachers who are implementing the practice with young people are ob-
served (in a nonthreatening manner) and given feedback about their work.
When this happens, she explained, the educators and program leaders can
deconstruct the practice and use it to sustain improvement.
Pittman also endorsed the importance of developmental pedagogy, as
Berkowitz had discussed. She suggested that the key question is whether any
given program is aligned with the ideas about how young people develop
over time that were articulated across the presentations. The out-of-school
literature, she observed, echoes much of what Berkowitz had reported from
the in-school literature, and in her view the time is right to merge these.
No matter what system you are working in, she commented, it will be
important to build a culture that supports youth development, and to make
sure all staff understand how to implement the practices aimed at doing this
and integrate them with other goals of the program.
Pittman closed with the analogy of school as a big jar filled with t ennis
balls representing the primary teaching objectives it is responsible for, such
as algebra, language arts, and social studies. The jar is full: there no room
for another tennis ball so adding a requirement for social and emotional
learning, or character education, will seem impossible. Instead of viewing
those goals as another tennis ball, Pittman suggested, educators should view
them as marbles or sand that can be poured into the jar and can fit around
the tennis balls. You may not immediately change what happens within the
tennis balls, she commented, but you begin the process of engaging all
the adults in the school in helping young people develop character.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Investing in Implementation
and Evaluation

T
he discussions of what works in developing character pointed to
questions about how specific practices and strategies can be effec-
tive. The importance of both implementing programs faithfully and
evaluating their effectiveness has been documented in many fields,1 and the
workshop turned next to ideas from both research and practice on these
key elements of character education. Researchers Joseph Durlak of Loyola
University and William Trochim of Cornell University discussed implemen-
tation and evaluation, respectively. Mike Surbaugh of the Boy Scouts of
America and Donald Floyd of the National 4-H Council (retired) provided
input and perspectives from the practitioner perspective.

ESSENTIALS OF PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION


Durlak focused on the opportunities and challenges in program imple-
mentation he has identified in research focused on out-of-school settings, and
he began with the simple message that unless you attend carefully to effec-
tive program implementation, you will probably be wasting valuable time,
effort, and resources on new programs that are unlikely to be successful.
Durlak defined implementation as the ways a program is put into
practice and delivered to participants, and he noted that a strong litera-

1See, e.g., Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://www.cdc.gov/

violenceprevention/pdf/chapter1-a.pdf [December 2016]; http://www.rti4success.org/related-


rti-topics/implementation-evaluation [December 2016]; http://www.nccmt.ca/resources/
search/71 [December 2016].

39

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

40 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

ture on it has developed over the last 20 years, which he reviewed for the
workshop (Durlak, 2016). One point this research has made obvious, in his
view, is that the program you think you are doing almost never turns out
to be the program that actually occurs. His emphasis on the importance
of implementation applies not just to programs, but also to practices or
strategies, as they are carried out in the real world, he added, and is based
on a consistent research finding.
A key reason why programs and practices often look so different from
their designs, in Durlaks view, is the wide chasm between the worlds of
research and practice. Despite good intentions on both sides, he noted, very
few of the many programs and strategies researchers evaluate and find to
be effective are adopted in the world of practice. The results researchers
quantify, he added, rarely translate into comparable degrees of effective-
ness when the ideas are put into practice. There has been little incentive
for researchers to offer practitioners concrete assistance in implementing
their programs, he added, but a focus on implementation can be a bridge
between research and practice. Often, he added, when researchers and
practitioners collaborate in focusing on effective implementation, programs
turn out to be even more effective than researchers had been able to show
on their own.

Components of Effective Implementation


There are four components of effective program implementation for
which the evidence is particularly strong, Durlak explained:

Fidelity: the degree to which the major components of the program


have been faithfully delivered
Dosage: how much of the program is delivered
Quality of delivery: how well or competently the program is
conducted
Adaptation: any changes made to the original program

The research also shows that when attention to the quality of imple-
mentation increases, outcomes improve, Durlak noted. Conversely, poor
implementation can render a program ineffective, he added.
For example, Durlak observed, a meta-analysis of reviews of school-
based programs designed to improve social and emotional learning (target
ing, for example, conduct problems, emotional distress, and antisocial
behavior) showed that results were significantly larger for settings in which
the program was implemented effectively than in settings where it was not
(Durlak et al., 2011). Many of the effect sizes were double or more than
double for the effectively implemented programs, he noted.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

INVESTING IN IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION 41

More than 20 factors have been identified as important in implementa-


tion, Durlak noted. They reflect not only the influence of the organization
and its staff, but also that of others involved, at the community, provider,
program, and organization levels. At the community level, funding, as well
as political and administrative pressures or mandates, can have an effect.
The degree to which providers perceive that they need a program, their
degree of commitment, and the benefits they expect from it all play a role.
Also important is the degree to which the program is compatible with the
setting and the population it is intended to serve. Similarly, the climate
within the organization in which the program is to be implemented, its
readiness to take the program on, and the degree to which its leaders and
staff share the programs vision are also influential.
Durlak highlighted three of the specific factors that have been shown
to be important to effective implementation: professional development, the
possibilities for adapting the program or system, and effective leadership at
the host organization. Of these, the one he views as most important, indeed
absolutely essential, is high-quality professional development, including
both training and ongoing support. If it is not possible to include this ele-
ment, he said, the program should not be implemented.
Knowing that no program is ever implemented exactly as designed, he
went on, it is also important to be deliberate about the ways in which those
implementing a program will deviate from the design and why. Perhaps
the population the organization serves has different experiences, needs, or
interests, for example. Adaptations can make programs more effective, he
noted, but it should be clear who has the authority to make decisions about
adaptation and how they will be documented. This is one reason why ongo-
ing support is so important, he added: leaders and staff should have a struc-
ture for reviewing possible adaptations and the intended and u nintended
results they may have. It is also important to note, he added, that adopting
any new program will alter the host organization in some way. Guidance
and consultation in securing finding, planning for implementation, secur-
ing and training staff, and other challenges help leaders implement the
program effectively. Strong leaders can also help to motivate staff, delegate
authority, and negotiate challenges that arise, he added.

Barriers and Supports


Research has also pointed both to barriers to effective implementation
and to circumstances or features that foster it. Barriers include competing
priorities, both for young peoples time and for the time and resources
adults have for addressing their needs. Another is insufficient infrastruc-
ture or resources, which might include staff, physical space, and funding.
Available leaders or staff might lack sufficient knowledge or skills to imple-

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

42 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

ment the program, may have negative attitudes about the program, or may
simply be resistant to change. If these barriers are present and cannot be
overcome, Durlak suggested, the program is not going to work.
However, there are elements that can help organizers facilitate im-
plementation and overcome barriers, Durlak continued. First is effective
leadership and clear allocation of responsibility and lines of accountability.
Another is flexibility within an organization, so leaders can, for example,
reallocate resources or seek external ones in response to unanticipated
needs. Coordination across all the entities involved, including local or state
agencies or other governmental bodies, is also valuable, Durlak pointed
out. Character education programs are usually components of policies
intended to affect more than a single program, so the way the policy is
implemented is just as important as the implementation of a particular
program or practice.
The staff who are implementing a program or practice will need ongo-
ing feedback, Durlak noted, so they can adapt and improve as they proceed.
The feedback should be offered in a collaborative way, together with sup-
port for assessing the feedback and figuring out how to respond. Programs
can use systems for tracking data and efficiently sharing feedback to make
this part of the process more systematic, he added. Ongoing research can
then build on the feedback by systematically examining what can be learned
from the implementation experience in a particular context.
We dont have a nationwide structure for implementation, Durlak
pointed out, even though it is important in virtually every sector in which
evidence-based interventions are used. The bridge between research and
practice Durlak called for requires an implementation system that includes:

good policies, regulations, and mandates;


sufficient funding;
personnel to train and consult with implementing staff; and
adequate time for assessment, reflection, and making needed
improvements.

A few groups have taken on this challenge, Durlak noted, including


the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL);
Communities That Care; and the Getting to Outcomes program at RAND
Corporation.2 This is not a comprehensive list, he noted, and many pro-
grams do not have access to the kinds of guidance such organizations offer.
Effective implementation requires collaboration, Durlak concluded.
Policy makers and funders, program developers and researchers, leaders

2See http://www.casel.org [December 2016]; http://www.communitiesthatcare.net [December

2016]; and http://www.rand.org/health/projects/getting-to-outcomes.html [December 2016].

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

INVESTING IN IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION 43

and staff at local organizations, trainers and consultants, and the young
people who are to receive the services and their families all have a profound
interest in the outcome and also have ideas to contribute. Sadly, he noted,
these five groups rarely collaborate, and it is primarily individual founda-
tions that make such collaboration possible in the United States when it
does occur. Other countries, he pointed out, have institutionalized systems
for implementation and evaluation. Effective implementation cannot be
rushed, he observed. Some programs are quite complicated and require
significant change in an organization and time to develop. It is only worth
pursuing programs, in Durlaks view, if the resources to support effective
implementation are available.

ADVANCING EVALUATION
Many character education programs have never been formally evalu-
ated, William Trochim pointed out, and we still dont know if and how
they work. Despite the existence of resources such as the What Works
Clearinghouse (see Chapter 3), there is very little formal evidence for pro-
gram designers and practitioners to use, he noted. The reason in his view
is that we dont have the time and resources to invest in evaluation. It is
often one of the lowest priorities within organizations, and few have staff
with the expertise to conduct sound evaluations, he said.
He collaborated with workshop steering committee member Jennifer
Brown Urban to apply findings from recent scholarship linking evaluation
in other fields to the character education context (Trochim and Urban,
2016). Their objective was to offer a new way of thinking about evaluation,
which Trochim described as an evolutionary systems approach.

An Evolutionary Approach
Trochim began with the connection to the theory of evolution, based
on the idea that programs are like organisms. Like a potato, he suggested,
a program is one in a population of varieties within the same species. The
theories that guide the programstated or assumed expectations about
what the program will do and howare the essential instructions for
the program, akin to the genetic code that instructs an organism how
to d evelop. The inevitable variations in the way the program is imple-
mented each have consequences. In subsequent generations of the program,
Trochim said, natural selection determines which of these variations con-
tinue and which are discarded.
Trochim did not intend this model only as a metaphor, he noted: he
argued that programs evolve by the same rules that govern the biological
process of natural selection. To elaborate, he noted that the potato was not

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

44 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

native to Europe but when a single variety was introduced it soon became
a dietary staple, particularly in Ireland. A blight infected this variety during
the 1840s, and because Ireland relied so heavily on it there was widespread
famine. Trochim suggested that there is a parallel danger for character edu-
cation in saying we know what worksjust do that.
Natural selection in the context of programs or interventions, he con-
tinued, is a process of blind variation and selective retention. Blind varia-
tion, he explained, does not mean that those who implement programs are
acting without reason, but rather that they make choices without having
information to indicate whether they will work or not. At the same time,
he added, people in these situations do draw on experience and knowledge
in making their decisions, even if it does not come from formal evaluations.
Thus they selectively retain particular approaches based on many factors,
including personal, social, and sociopolitical influences.
Charles Darwins purpose in exploring the way organisms develop,
Trochim continued, actually grew out of an interest in artificial selection,
the breeding of plants and animals to produce new ones that have desired
traits. Trying to develop character using various interventions, he suggested,
is another form of artificial selection. We are breeding ideas and trying to
see which ones will survive, he said.
Evaluation plays a critical role in this endeavor, in Trochims view,
because it is the basis for judging whether or not an intervention worked
and should be selected. It also plays a role in the development of variations
to be tested, he explained: We want a system that generates varieties [of
ideas] and also allows us to judge and select them. Every program has a
life cycleit progresses through phases or stagesand over time programs
and theories evolve. Eventually, if one looks at character development pro-
grams across time, it is possible to trace the family tree of the programs
and the theories that guide them.
Programs evolve in the way organisms do in part because their develop-
ment can be compared to human development, Trochim pointed out. Thus,
another key to the approach to evaluation that he and Urban advocate is
relational developmental systems theory, which, as Schmid Callina had
explained, focuses on the reciprocal influences that individuals and their
contexts have on one another (see Chapter 2). Just as individuals have
the potential to adapt across the life span, Trochim explained, programs
develop and are adapted in the context in which they are implemented.
Trochim observed that Darwin never used the phrase survival of the fit-
test; his argument was that it is the species that are best able to respond
to changes in their environments that survive, not the strongest or most
intelligent.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

INVESTING IN IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION 45

Systems Thinking
Thinking about evaluation has increasingly come to include a focus on
the idea of systems, the interaction of many parts, Trochim explained. The
interactions between the individual organism (or program) and its envi
ronment occur in the context of nested systems, and effective evaluation
requires understanding of how the relevant systems interact. This is a rela-
tively new application of an ancient idea, Trochim noted. Many philoso-
phers and scholars have developed systems-based theories, or ideas about
the way systems observed in nature or society are organized and structured.
Trochim highlighted elements that are particularly relevant to evalua-
tion. One is that a program is a whole that is greater than the sum of its
multiple parts. These parts contribute to both static processes, those that
tend to operate in linear, predictable ways, and dynamic ones, which are
not predictable. Like an individual, he added, a program functions within
a hierarchical nest of contexts, from the personal, local, and regional,
through the national and global. Each stakeholder reflects these contexts
in a different way and will have a different perspective on the program, its
goals, and its boundaries. For example, practitioners may focus on engaging
individual young people, while a funder may focus on broad societal goals.

Applying These Ideas to Character Development Evaluation


Building evaluation into the culture of all the relevant systems is the
key to making it effective, Trochim explained, and he reviewed ideas that
apply at the organization and program levels.
Organizations need to adopt evaluative thinking, Trochim observed,
which has been defined as critical thinking applied in the context of evalu-
ation, motivated by an attitude of inquisitiveness and a belief in the value
of evidence, that involves identifying assumptions, posing thoughtful ques-
tions, pursuing deeper understanding through reflection and perspective
taking, and informing decisions in preparation for action (Buckley et al.,
2015, p. 378).
In practice, he explained, this means having an evaluation policy: a
rule, regulation, principle, or norm that the group or organization uses to
guide decisions and actions. In practice, he noted, all organizations and
groups already have evaluation norms that guide them, but they may be
unwritten and informal. The idea, he added, is that as evaluative thinking
takes hold, the people in the organization gradually come to incorporate
these ideas into their work without necessarily thinking consciously about
evaluation. People generally welcome the opportunity and tools to think
through what they are doing, he noted. There are numerous methods

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

46 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

organizations can use to build their evaluation capacity (described more


fully in Trochim and Urban, 2016).
Trochim, Urban, and their colleagues have developed the Systems Eval-
uation Protocol (SEP),3 a set of workbooks and other resources available
on the Internet that programs and organizations can use to apply systems-
based evaluation principles in a way that is tailored to their own needs. The
SEP provides a step-by-step guide, Trochim explained, for introducing the
ideas that are key to the systems approach at the program level. The SEP
engages users in an extensive planning process, he noted, which is the foun-
dation for an effective evaluation system. A key element of this process, for
example, is a stakeholder analysis that identifies the key goals and interests
that need to be considered in implementing the program. Another step is the
development of a logic model that allows staff to visualize the roles of each
program component and their causal links to the activities they do each day.
Trochim closed with a reminder that applying the evolutionary, ecologi-
cal, and developmental systems approach to evaluation means focusing on
the interactions between a program and the systems in which it is nested.
Doing this requires people to expand their views of what evaluation encom-
passes and to keep the priority on the goals of the program.

PERSPECTIVES FROM PRACTICE


Mike Surbaugh and Donald Floyd offered two perspectives based on
their experiences as leaders of national youth organizations.
Surbaugh noted how frequently he and representatives of other orga-
nizations like the Boy Scouts have the experience of talking with adults
eager to discuss the profound impact their childhood experience with the
organization had on their lives. We dont know specifically what it is in
our program that leads to character development, he observed, but its
of paramount importance to find out. From reflecting on his own experi-
ence as a Boy Scout, he has realized that he did not recognize at the time
the long-term benefits the experiences might bring. He noted his apprecia-
tion for the guidance the workshop papers offer for organizations trying
to b
etter understand how they can help young people develop character
Character is not proprietary, he pointed out, and ideas about how to
develop it should be completely open-source. He said he does not think
about the mission of the Boy Scouts as being in competition with another
organization, such as the National 4-H, or feel the need to demonstrate
that the Boy Scouts program does a better job at developing character.
It would be a waste of time, in his view, for each organization to focus on
identifying its own set of priority traits or competencies, or debating the

3See https://core.human.cornell.edu/research/systems/protocol [February 2017].

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

INVESTING IN IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION 47

right terminology to use in discussing these objectives. We all know it


when we see it, he noted.
However, he added, most youth-serving organizations have not been
formally evaluated, and we have little idea how they work. The Boy
Scouts have participated in several studies, he noted, and other large legacy
organizations have had the scale and resources to collaborate with re-
searchers to examine questions about their programs and strategies. But
the large numbers of small youth-serving organizations, including sports
teams, religious youth groups, and school programs, lack resources and
tools for evaluation.
What also concerns Surbaugh is that many young people are not having
the opportunity to participate in any program or activity that can develop
character. Many more kinds of activities are available to families today, he
noted, not all of which have benefits for character on their own. Parents
do not necessarily have information about the distinctions among available
options for their children and have many criteria for choosing. He sug-
gested that parents may focus on the activities their children say they prefer
without looking at the long-term picture of how they will be spending their
time. For example, many young children enjoy organized sports, which are
time consuming and may crowd out other activities, but tend to drop out
by middle school. At this stage it can be late to engage the child in a posi-
tive youth-development activity that fosters core values, Surbaugh noted.
His hope is that structures that promote character development can be
inserted in a range of activities, so that organizations of many kinds can
make a difference in young peoples lives.
Floyd, who recently retired from the National 4-H Council, explained
that 4-H is a community-owned, nonhierarchical institution focused on
positive youth development. In its 115 years, 4-H has emphasized the
importance to young people of developing a long-term relationship with
a caring adult and having the opportunity to practice real-life skills and
leadership in an environment in which it is safe to experiment and fail.
Based on his experience leading the 4-H, he offered three ideas about why
investing in implementation and evaluationspecifically allowing sufficient
funding and other resources to do these things wellis so difficult for or-
ganizations of this kind.
First, governing boards, CEOs, and executive teams are completely ill-
equipped for in-depth conversations about research and evaluation, Floyd
suggested. There are nearly 250,000 youth-serving organizations in the
United States, and their leaders are likely focusing primarily on marketing,
fund-raising, taxes, personnel problems, and the like, rather than evalua-
tion, he noted. People in these positions need simple ways to think about
research and evaluation, in Floyds view, and few of these are available.
Floyd also noted that few governing boards offer seats to representatives

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

48 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

of the populations served by the organization. Involving young people in


theses roles, he said, changes the conversation, refocusing the boards
attention on the organizations mission.
A second challenge Floyd noted is that leaders are trained to be
competitive. Collaboration is seldom included in performance goals for
people in these roles, Floyd pointed out, and he endorsed Surbaughs point
that there is no proprietary 4-H or Boy Scouts version of good character.
Organizations are not well prepared to collaborate, and the reality is that
they do have to compete for funding, he added.
Collaboration is not impossible, however. Floyd described Imagine
Science, a collaboration among national youth organizations to address
the needs of young people who have lacked access to such organizations,
with a focus on STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics)
education.4 The first thing that the collaborators had to do, Floyd observed,
was to assert their authority in their organizations to break some rules.
The group identified some principles, he continued, but many were hard
to implement. For example, the leaders wanted transparency to be part of
the project but they found that they had to give their local affiliates formal
permission to collaborate and share resources with other organizations.
Finally, Floyd noted that the rich workshop discussion presented a com-
plicated array of ideas, and he worried about overcomplicating the task for
leaders and practitioners. 4-H, which began as the idea of a young teacher
who had neither a plan nor any resources, has grown to serve young people
in 100,000 clubs in the United States and many more across 50 countries,
he pointed out. The reason the 4-H idea has spread so far and remained so
consistent, he suggested, is that it is simple and time-tested.

DISCUSSION
In discussion participants focused on questions about how youth orga-
nizations can respond in a practical way to new ideas. Several participants
commented on the difficulties of collaborating across organizations. There
has certainly been change, one noted, in that 25 years ago it would have
been astonishing to see a program such as Imagine Science that involved
true collaboration across major organizations. Allowing independent
researchers the access they need to conduct studies of their work was also
rare for such organizations, but it is difficult to see how widespread these
sorts of changes are, this person added.
Another noted that funders may hold the key. They encourage their
grantees to collaborate and to evaluate their work, this person noted, but
they seldom offer funding for these purposes. They are in a unique position

4See http://imaginesci.org [December 2016].

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

INVESTING IN IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION 49

to promote collaboration and the sharing of both tested experience and in-
novative ideas. For example, a funder could work with the grantees under
a particular funding portfolio to identify commonalities and facilitate the
sharing of ideas. The large national organizations can also play a leader-
ship role, as the discussions of 4-H and the Boy Scouts illustrated, noted
another. The true competitors for youth organizations are not other youth
organizations, another person commented, but video games, smart phones,
and the many other kinds of activities that occupy young peoples time. Its
the kids who are not involved in any organized youth activity we need to
reach, he added.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Developing a High-Quality Staff

S
taff and leaders are at the heart of every youth program. Recruit-
ing and retaining experienced, qualified individuals and giving them
the support and training they need is a primary challenge for every
organization. Deborah Moroney of the American Institutes for Research
explored research on the characteristics of the workforce that serves in
out-of-school youth programs and offered ideas for building their capacity
to support positive development. Noelle Hurd of the University of Virginia,
Rob Jagers of the University of Michigan, and Mary Keller of the Military
Child Education Coalition offered their perspectives on the role of culture
and context in the development of supportive relationships between young
people and program staff.

THE OUT-OF-SCHOOL TIME WORKFORCE


Deborah Moroney said she has experienced many of the roles associ-
ated with youth organizations, starting as a participant in an after-school
program, becoming a junior counselor at age 14, and eventually working
her way to program director. Throughout that tenure, she commented,
she did not have access to the kinds of information and guidance that are
available to practitioners now. But even now, she observed, it is not easy for
practitioners to identify the information that will be useful to them in the
ever-increasing volume of literature and resources. She drew on available
research to identify some key points related to the characteristics and role
of the youth program workforce (Moroney, 2016).

51

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

52 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

Programs and Their Objectives


One challenge, Moroney noted, is to sort through the concepts of char-
acter and development that researchers have described, which are complex,
as Larry Nucci of the University of California, Berkeley, demonstrated
(see Chapter 2). Despite differences among the three basic conceptual
categoriescharacter development, positive youth development, and social
and emotional learningthey all derive from a common theoretical frame-
work in the fields of psychology and human development, in Moroneys
view. For the purpose of supporting out-of-school program staff, the key
is that each can be applied in settings that offer young people experiences
intentionally designed to support their social and emotional development.
Research on out-of-school youth development programs indicates that
high-quality ones share several attributes, Moroney continued, regardless
of the conceptual underpinnings of their missions. These programs offer
young people

a safe and supportive environment in which to share experiences


that are relevant and engaging;
the opportunity to experience a sense of belonging, positive rela-
tionships, and shared norms; and
the opportunity to build both practical and other skills, explore
interests, learn, and reflect.

Programs that have these three attributes, Moroney explained, provide


conditions in which young people can develop in positive ways. Never
theless, the question of whether positive youth development is the same
thing as social and emotional learning or character development is an
important one, Moroney noted, and her answer is yes and no. Studies
demonstrate that high-quality youth programs can support positive devel-
opment, but in her view those that aim specifically to develop character or
social and emotional learning goals must take additional intentional steps.
Such steps fit well into the missions of high-quality out-of-school programs,
she explained, but the character-related learning goals must be explicit parts
of the missionand staff must be well prepared to pursue them.

The Out-of-School Program Workforce


The workforce that programs rely on to create high-quality settings
and experiences is segmented, Moroney explained. This population works
in camps, scouting, other national organizations, child care programs, and
many other kinds of settings, so it has been a challenge for researchers
to define and collect data about this workforce. Existing data indicate

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

DEVELOPING A HIGH-QUALITY STAFF 53

that there are approximately 1 million adults employed in out-of-school


programs, and most are either young adults just entering the workforce
or older adults changing careers after decades of work. In either case,
Moroney noted, they are relatively new to the youth program workforce
and relatively inexperienced. About half of these individuals have a 2- or
4-year degree in a related field, such as education or social work. The vast
majority, she noted, are part-time workers and their pay is modest; staff
turnover in the field is very high. Were asking a lot of people in a career
trajectory that is not well supported, she added.

Influencing Social and Emotional Learning


Moroney found three themes in the research about how youth workers
contribute to the social and emotional development of program partici-
pants. First, effective youth workers play a key role in recruiting young
people to participate in the first place and encouraging them to continue.
This means that staff turnover likely hurts youth recruitment and atten-
dance, she noted. Second, staff with higher levels of preparation tend to
be more engaged in the programs themselves and to be more successful at
engaging young people. The same is true of staff who receive moreand
more effectiveprofessional development. Few programs, however, offer
specific supports designed to assist youth work professionals in their career
pathways. In Moroneys view, much more could be done, drawing on ex-
amples from early childhood and other contexts, to support, develop, and
retain engaged and effective workers in the out-of-school arena.
Third, the relationships that develop between program staff and young
people are key to the development of character and social and emotional
learning, Moroney said. Strong relationships not only help young people
develop, she explained, but also engage the adults and help motivate them
to stay with a program. There is a strong body of research on how these
relationships form and how programs can foster them, she noted.
Looking beyond the staff members themselves, the research also sug-
gests some specific factors that help programs marshal an effective staff
to develop social and emotional learning in young people. In addition to
hiring and supporting a qualified and well-prepared staff, programs need
to support the staff in developing strong relationships with young people,
and design ways for each young person to practice and build skills and to
take on leadership roles in activities that engage them. If these things are in
place, Moroney continued, young people will have the experiences that
really are the catalyst for developing social and emotional competencies.
Seeing young people make this sort of progress, she added, is a prime reason
highly qualified workers stay in the field.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

54 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

Challenges
This is a lot to do for a workforce that is not compensated well and
does not have a traditional educational pathway, and in which there is
high turnover, Moroney pointed out. Yet youth workers want very much
to contribute to young peoples social and emotional development, she
said. Surveys have shown that youth workers are hesitant about how well
prepared they are to do this work and are eager for more training and
guidance in this area.
Moroney acknowledged that the complexity of the overlapping frame-
works for thinking about this kind of development can be daunting for
program staff and leaders. She said she hopes program leaders and staff
will recognize that whatever conceptual focus is adoptedsuch as char-
acter education or social and emotional learningthe mission of positive
development is one that has always been part of the reason out-of-school
youth programs exist. Many youth workers eyes glaze over when they
hear about another new thing, Moroney commented, and we need to
make sure this is not another new thing. New ideas about how to sup-
port young peoples positive development should contribute to the way
staff think about all the activities and strategies they already pursue, not
replace them.
Moroney sought the views of research and practice leaders in the field
on how youth workers can best be supported in pursuing the mission of
promoting positive development. They agreed on the importance of several
points, particularly organizational support for professional development.
She noted the importance of learning from other fields about this area. For
example, research on workers and the workplace across many fields and
careers has increasingly focused on the importance of social and emotional
and other noncognitive skills. This research has suggested that supporting
all adults in their career and developmental pathways benefits both workers
and employers, Moroney noted.
The leaders she consulted did not agree on how to address the com-
plexity of and overlap among concepts of character or positive develop-
ment. Practice leaders argued for identifying a simple framework that
could be widely applied, incorporating common elements from existing
ones. Researchers, Moroney noted, did not. She suggested that from a
common-sense perspective, a common framework and vocabulary would be
especially helpful in an environment where there is significant job mobility.
It is not uncommon for youth workers to work at more than one organiza-
tion at the same time, for example, and it would be much easier for those
workers, as well as those who change jobs frequently, to become familiar
with a single framework and develop expertise with it over time, than to
shift gears with every move.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

DEVELOPING A HIGH-QUALITY STAFF 55

Moroney closed with ideas about next steps for research. The indi-
viduals she consulted particularly emphasized the value of implementation
studies, data on the characteristics of the youth workforce, and the impacts
the practices designed to foster positive development have in young peoples
later lives.

CULTURE, CONTEXT, AND SUPPORTIVE RELATIONSHIPS


The three discussants offered their perspectives on how culture and
context influence the relationships youth program staff develop with young
people, the goals adults have for this work, and how programs can use these
insights to strengthen their work.

Developing Supportive AdultYouth Relationships


Adolescents are becoming independent, learning to differentiate them-
selves from their parents, and exploring adult models they might emulate,
noted Noelle Hurd. She added that this is a time of life when nonparental
adults can play an especially important role in young peoples social and
emotional learning. An adult who has experience in an area in which the
young person is interested can be a role model, a mentor, or a coach. With
training in the development of social and emotional skills, however, that
adult can offer even more, she suggested. An experienced adult can guide
a young person through developmental steps he or she is ready to make
and reinforce the social and emotional learning opportunities that occur
naturally in the activity they share. These are the kinds of benefits youth
programs that aim to build character hope to offer young people, but doing
so requires the right staff, Hurd noted.
Another benefit young people gain from experiencing this kind of re-
lationship, Hurd pointed out, is the experience of trusting adults outside
their families. Being able to find the right person to turn to when they need
guidance and cultivate this kind of relationship will help them negotiate
challenges as they grow up and also as adults. Youth are more likely to
cultivate these relationships in settings where there are a number of adults
who are skilled at connecting with youth, she added. When youth have the
chance to select the adults they feel most comfortable with, the relationship
is likely to be stronger.
These relationships are fostered when there are structured activities that
allow young people to engage with adults in an informal way and build
closeness and trust, Hurd continued. It is also critical that the environment
feel safe to young people, so that they can be open about areas where they
feel uncertain or vulnerable, and open to learning new things. Demon-
strating respect for young peoples voices is one way adults create a safe

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

56 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

environment, she added. Adults in these settings are uniquely positioned to


help young people forge connections between their home and school lives
and the communities in which they live.
Hurd agreed with Moroney that the workforce that is expected to de-
velop these relationships faces challenges, including high turnover, limited
hours, low pay and status, and limited opportunities for advancement. She
suggested several pathways forward.
Some are ways to make the career path for out-of-school workers more
appealing. Several universities now offer degrees in youth work, she noted,
including the University of Virginia; they provide not only preparation but
also status for youth workers. Student loan forgiveness policies could help
such programs recruit top-notch young people, she added. Many youth
workers cobble together more than one position in order to earn an ade
quate living, in part because few out-of-school jobs are full-time. It would
be possible, Hurd suggested, to structure employment opportunities that
straddle school and after-school time, providing workers with greater
consistency and predictability.
Examples from K-12 education, as well as other fields, could broaden
thinking about professional development for youth workers, Hurd added.
Online resources and organized professional networks are among the avenues
that are not widely pursued in the out-of-school context. Peer mentoring
and evaluation and feedback strategies, such as supportive observation, are
others. Concrete opportunities for advancement, such as trainings that offer
continuing education credits, are also strategies that could help programs
recruit and retain high-quality staff, in her view.
Hurd closed with some observations about the role of social justice in the
work that adults do in out-of-school programs, and the need for training to
prepare them to both model and teach. Empowerment for young people and
respect for their voices are important elements of programs that aim to foster
social and emotional development, but they can be new for w orkers who
were raised with different norms. Being attuned to and responsive to young
people and the social context in which they are growing up is also essential
for youth workers, she added. The concept of critical consciousness, she con-
tinued, is an educational tool through which educators engage young people
in thinking critically about social and historical influences that shape their
own circumstances, such as long-standing social and economic inequities and
oppression of minority populations. The opportunity to work in partnership
with trusted adults in advocacy or activism for a cause in which they have a
shared commitment can be an invaluable learning experience, Hurd pointed
out. Training can build youth workers understanding of these ideas and
capacity to integrate them into their daily encounters with young people.
This kind of thinking is especially important for adults working with
young people who experience disadvantage and racism directly, Hurd ex-

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

DEVELOPING A HIGH-QUALITY STAFF 57

plained. Training and ongoing support are key to helping youth workers
examine their own potential biases and adopt cultural humilityan open-
ness to and curiosity about other cultural backgrounds and experiences
Hurd commented, particularly when the adults and young people are
bridging differences in race, ethnicity, gender, or socioeconomic experience.
Youth development programs aim to build on young peoples strengths,
Hurd noted, and this is also particularly important for programs that serve
marginalized youths. Young people in challenged communities can derive
long-term benefits when a trusted adult helps them to identify strengths in
their own character, as well as assets in their homes and schools.

Reflections on Culture and Context


Rob Jagers offered his ideas about how to frame challenging and com-
plex questions of culture and context. The United States is experiencing
rapid demographic shifts, he observed, and social, political, and economic
inequities are a part of the national fabric of life. In particular, disparities
in access to health care, the quality of physical environments, and wealth
have profound impacts on peoples lives. These inequities are based on dif-
ferences of race, class, gender, and religion, and we wrestle as a country,
he noted, with both identifying the causes and identifying ways to correct
them. Programs around the world that are led by young people are address-
ing these inequities, Jagers continued, and their idealism and accomplish-
ments are examples for youth programs in the United States. Young peoples
eagerness to take on these challenges can inspire adults, he added.
Jagers described the assumptions that guide his own work in this area.
He is interested in helping to develop the next generation of informed
and engaged global citizens, he explained, and he believes in participatory
democracy. He said he believes that issues of race, culture, and class are
often conflated and that they should be disentangled. Because inequities,
discrimination, and oppression are woven into society, he commented that
sociopolitical development is needed to bring about meaningful change.
Schools and extended learning settings are opportunities for this kind of
learning, he suggested.
Jagers proposed some ways that social and emotional learning ap-
proaches can be connected to social justice goals. For example, he explained,
young people sometimes react to their oppressed and marginalized status
with frustration and resentment, engaging in risky behaviors such as unsafe
sex or violence.1 Some strategies for risk prevention and reduction of risk

1He defined oppression as asymmetrical power relations that are reflected in deprivation,

discrimination, exclusion, and exploitation, and explained that it can be internalized by op-
pressed groups, who act in ways that run counter to their own best interests as a result.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

58 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

behaviors, based in research on social and emotional learning, may have


what he described as a reactionary or self-defeating character if they focus
on tamping down the behaviors, but lack any critique of the oppressive
system that fosters them and are not anchored in ideas of social justice.2
Strategies that focus on building resilience or social and emotional
competencies without addressing system-level social justice concerns might
be described as conformist, he continued, if their aim is to promote justice
within the existing social order, not to alter its unjust attributes.
By contrast, an approach in which adults support young people in
working to promote a more just and equitable world by facilitating their
resistance to inequities and injustice would be transformational, in his
view. He suggested that this is common in the context of youth organizing,
and is in line with the approaches Hurd had discussed.
A focus on the goals of programs designed to build character naturally
leads to questions about cultural context, Jagers continued. Social scientists
view culture as primarily subjective, he pointed out. He defined culture as
the themes and orientations that shape collective norms, beliefs, values, and
behaviors, and noted that these themes influence individuals and their rela-
tionships, as well as societal institutions. Thus, he explained, culture shapes
peoples sense of personhood, their cognitive, affective, and behavioral
style. It also shapes gender roles, familial roles, relationships among social
groups, and peoples interactions with the natural world. Culture is not
staticit evolves over timebut it is transmitted across generations, and
is particularly expressed through the functioning of institutions, including
schools, churches, and out-of-school programs.
Jagers pointed to stances from which U.S. culture has been critiqued,
noting that they can be the basis for infusing ideas about how to make the
world more equitable and just into a character education or youth devel-
opment program. Theories about the underpinnings of global capitalism,
rational choice theory, and neoliberalism all include this kind of cultural
critique, he noted. An Afrocultural orientation, he added, would focus on
the importance of spirituality, communal thinking, and the interdependence
of healthy societies.
Many programs have developed strategies for building the cultural
awareness of adults and youth, Jagers noted. He agreed with Hurd that
critical consciousness and social and political development are tools for
engaging young people in understanding the nature of oppression and
privilege and recognizing the roles they themselves can play in challenging
these sources of inequity and injustice. By engaging this way, out-of-school
settings can be empowering settings, he added.

2Jagers noted that social justice has many meanings and that he was focused primarily in this

context on distributive social justice, intended to reduce inequity and deprivation.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

DEVELOPING A HIGH-QUALITY STAFF 59

More specifically, he added, the ways adults interact with young people
could be understood as a continuum. At one end is a relationship in which
the adult is in complete control of the situation and treats the young person
as a vessel into which knowledge and wisdom are poured. In the middle
would be a situation in which the adult and the youth share control, and
young people have an active role and voice in what happens. At the other
end would be a relationship in which youth are autonomous and have total
control of the situation.
In his own work with young people, Jagers noted, he is guided by
the idea that young people need to experience autonomy. Out-of-school
programs are ideal settings for them to identify and analyze challenges for
themselves, and to plan and implement their responses, with the thought-
ful guidance of trained adults. He encouraged participants to explore the
Wolverine Pathways program at the University of Michigan, which exempli-
fies this approach.3 This program is designed to boost the academic, social,
and cultural preparation of low-income Michigan high school students to
increase their chances to enroll at the University of Michigan and complete
a degree there. The program focuses on helping young people take on the
role of change agents, to improve the well-being of their communities.

Military Children
Mary Keller used the example of military children to focus on the chal-
lenges that face highly mobile children and the ways youth programs can
support them. There are currently approximately 2 million children whose
parents are serving in some way in the armed forces, she noted. These chil-
dren move an average of once every 2 to 3 years because of their military
parents responsibilities, Keller noted, and this means they change schools
often. Only approximately 8 percent are enrolled in Department of Defense
schools, she added, yet all of these children need consistent and reliable
programming.
Frequent moves affect childrens academic trajectories, Keller com-
mented, and also their social and emotional learning. Many of these chil-
dren are also exposed to significant stress and trauma. For example, there
is a population of nearly 2 million children whose parents are veterans of
conflict that took place after September 11, 2001. Children and families
often continue to have stresses related to a parents military service even
after the parent leaves the military, she added, noting that female veterans
with children are a growing segment of the homeless population in the
United States. Positive youth development is very important for these over-
lapping populations of children, Keller emphasized.

3See https://wolverinepathways.umich.edu [December 2016].

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

60 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

Youth-serving programs seek to mitigate the risks that children and


young people face and also to marshal the protective factors that work
in their favor, so it is vital that the program leaders and staff understand
the population with whom they are working, Keller pointed out. It is also
very important that they not have a deficit modela primary focus on the
risks and challenges children facein thinking about how to serve a group
of children or youth, she added. The resilience military children tend to
develop is widely recognized, she added. What is most important to chil-
dren, she suggested, is that adults really listen to what they have to say.
Professional development, in Kellers view, is perhaps the most im-
portant ingredient in youth development programs. It is far too easy, she
added, to put extensive resources into professional development that is
ultimately not effective in helping teachers and youth workers in changing
the way they work with young people. Often what is needed, she added, is
a convoy of support that guides and helps teachers and youth workers
in implementing new ideas and understanding how they can be integrated
with what they are already doing.
The same principle applies for military children and others who move
frequently, Keller continued. The mission of the Military Child Coalition is
to help make sure military children have inclusive, high-quality educational
opportunities, and a part of the work is to find ways to build elements of
consistency into childrens lives, even as they move. The needs of military
children are becoming more widely recognized, Keller noted. These children
have recently been officially designated as a population subgroup about
whom data will be collected by the U.S. Department of Education, for
example, although Keller worries that the limitations of statistical methods
will telescope the complex social and emotional needs of this population
into broad, uninformative categories. She closed with the hope that pro-
gramming and other supports for military children will continue to reflect
the complex understanding of social and emotional learning and character
development discussed at the workshop.

DISCUSSION
Many comments addressed the differences between and overlap among
the ways researchers have framed the objectives of building character or
helping young people develop in a positive way. A focus on the differences
is a giant risk to the entire endeavor we all care so much about, one
participant said. In his view it is critical that practitioners and researchers
build on what we know rather than swapping out one trend for another.
Several people expressed agreement. One suggested that supporting young
peoples growth is a consistent theme across all of the frameworks. Another
commented that the DNA [of the frameworks] is the sameno one wants

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

DEVELOPING A HIGH-QUALITY STAFF 61

to miss the opportunity to develop young peoples assets. Whatever we


call it, out-of-school programs are good at it, noted another.
A number of ways of skirting the differences were offered, including

using discipline-based project learning, where the focus is on other


goals but ways of building young peoples strengths are woven in.
This might be done by inserting intentional practices designed
to teach about character into activities that engage young people
for other reasons;
focusing on ways program staff can demonstrate and integrate the
skills and practices they hope young people will develop; and
recruiting near-peer mentors, junior staff, or volunteers just
slightly older than youth in a program who can connect with them
on a more equal footing, and train them to bring thinking about
character strengths into their work.

The last point on that issue was that research-practice partnerships are of
real value in addressing this challenge. They help researchers understand
how their ideas function in practice and they also empower practitioners
to think more broadly about what they are doing.
Other comments focused on the risk that youth programs designed
to build character strengths may reinforce social conformity. We pat
ourselves on the back for our commitment to democracy and equal op-
portunity even though both are very imperfect in the United States, one
person commented. He welcomed the reminder to question assumptions
and implicit biases. No youth program should encourage young people
to take their assumed place, e.g., a low-skill job, this person noted. Youth
programs should be places where adults help young people demand a re-
shaping of society, in this persons view.
Another participant noted that programs that work with underserved
young people too often have a deficit/problem model and focus on what
it will take to help them succeed. Following up, another person pointed to
the importance of recognizing the role of power and privilege in relation-
ships between youth and adults. In that vein, another noted that though
these subjects can sometimes be uncomfortable, youth program activities
naturally present countless teachable moments in which well-prepared
adults can bring these broader issues in from the margins.
Thoughtful training and support for youth workers are critical to help
them create a safe space for courageous conversation, another person
noted. This kind of training is needed at every level, this person added, and
should be treated as a basic, on par with the criminal background check.
Making sure that program leaders and staff have this support should be a
priority for those at the policy and funder levels who hope to have broader

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

62 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

impacts on equity. Another participant followed up on this point by not-


ing the power funders have in determining what is best practice and what
ideas will be supported. Funders have a very significant influence on the
out-of-school sphere, this person observed, and that power is a serious
responsibility.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Measuring Character

R
esearchers, programs, organizations, and funders all want trust
worthy evidence that young people who are exposed to some form
of character education grow or develop as a result of that experi-
ence. As the rich debate about how to define the nature of character and
goals for character education suggests, however, measuring outcomes in this
area is challenging. Noel Card of the University of Connecticut reviewed
methodological challenges in the measurement of character and proposed
suggestions for addressing them. Discussants Clark McKown of Rush Uni-
versity Medical Center and Nancy Deutsch of the University of Virginia
offered two additional perspectives.

METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES
The divide between research and practice is only part of the challenge
for improving practice in the development of character and social and emo-
tional learning, explained Card. There is also a gulf between methodology
and research and practice, he suggested, and he began with a practical,
hands-on overview of how key psychometric principles apply to the study
of character development.

Psychometric Fundamentals
Reliability, validity, and equivalence are three fundamental principles
of measurement, Card noted, and each presents challenges for the mea-

63

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

64 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

surement of knowledge, attributes, or skills that can be difficult to define


precisely, such as character.

Reliability
Reliability is a measure of how repeatable a measure is, or the ex-
tent to which scores are consistent when a test of a particular construct is
given multiple times, Card explained. There are several ways to think about
reliability, and most common is the idea of internal consistency reliability.
Typically, test developers want to measure a construct in more than one
way, using multiple items or tasks. For example, he commented, a survey
or interview might include multiple questions about an aspect of character
to get at it in different ways. Measures of internal consistency indicate
how repeatable these different questions arethe degree to which they
are measuring the same thing, based on how similar the scores are across
the group of questions. Psychometricians tend to turn up their noses at
this type of reliability, Card explained, because it is based on assumptions
about how parallel the questions truly are.
Another measure, testretest reliability, is an indication of how repeat-
able the test is across multiple measurement occasions. In this case, the
assumption is that the construct itself is stable over a particular time spanso
if the time span between testing and retesting is too long it would be possible
that any change is accounted for not by the way the measure functions but
by actual developments in the person being tested.
A third type of reliability is inter-informant reliability, a measure of how
repeatable test results are across multiple individuals who report on the
character construct being assessed. In this case, Card explained, the under-
lying assumption is that the character construct being measured is the same
in different contexts in which the reporters observe it. For example, both a
classroom teacher and an after-school counselor might be asked to evaluate
a childs character based on observation. If the character construct is stable
across the classroom and after-school setting, then any differences in the
observations would contribute to a lower inter-informant reliability score.
It is worth noting, Card observed, that we dont really know how
stable elements of character may be over time or across different settings.
Nevertheless, internal consistency is important. It is also easier to collect
evidence about multiple questions within a single test than to collect evi-
dence over time or across settings, so this measure is commonly used in
the context of character education. It is important not to overemphasize
the value of reliability measures, Card pointed out. All of the measures are
estimates from a sample, so they are measures of how a particular testing
instrument performs in a particular context at a particular time.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

MEASURING CHARACTER 65

Validity
Validity and equivalence are at least as important as reliability, Card
continued. Validity is the extent to which a measurement actually assesses
what it is intended to assess. Suppose one wanted to measure how fre-
quently young people were displaying a particular prosocial behavior, and
differences among them, Card suggested. The challenge is to find a way
to measure the behavior accurately without inadvertently measuring other
things that are not relevant. One could use a scale that measures a very spe-
cific behavior, such as a questionnaire item asking how often young people
offer to help the teacher, but that might not provide enough information,
he pointed out. On the other hand, if the construct is not carefully defined
the results might reflect the respondents understanding that the behavior
is socially desirable, rather than how well they display it.
The key to validity, Card emphasized, is to have a very clear definition
of the character or development being studied, but the field has not settled
that problem. We have to work toward this, he suggested, but it is still
possible to measure character without either assuming that it is immutable
or reducing the complexity of human behavior, psychology, and cognition
to a simple variable. What measurement experts can do instead is to define
a domain they can measure that represents the traits, skills, or behaviors
being studied, as shown in Figure 6-1.
The circumference of the circle represents the boundaries of an opera-
tional definition of the construct to be measured, such as a set of behav-
iors that are characteristic of the prosocial attitude being tested: the dots
represent items or questions that sample elements of this domain, perhaps
particular behaviors. The dots that lie outside the circle assess behaviors or
attitudes that are outside of the defined domain, such as a belief that the
teacher favors particular behaviors.
At the center of the circle is the bullseye, Card explainedthe heart
of the construct. Theoretically there could be an infinite number of dots
inside the circle, questions that accurately measure some aspect of the
domain. The job of the test developer is to identify a practical number of
them that, together, provide an accurate composite picture of the domain
being tested. The arrows across the bottom circle represent the way a
carefully chosen set of items will triangulate around the bullseye, Card
explained.
The distribution of the dots in Figure 6-1 represents a situation in
which there is relatively low internal consistency reliability. If the researcher
removes the items that contribute most to this low internal consistency,
Card explained, the result might be a set of items that yield highly consis-
tent results but lie at the edge of the circlenot centered around the bulls-
eye. In other words, efforts to improve reliability might produce a highly

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

66 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

FIGURE 6-1 Framework for representing measurement domain.


SOURCE: Card (2016).

reliable measure of the wrong thing, Card emphasized, and this danger is
another reason it is so important to have a clear definition of the construct.

Equivalence
The third key psychometric idea is equivalence, Card went on, an in-
dicator that the measurement performs in the same way across groups or
time. This idea is useful in assessing test fairness, or differential item func-
tioning, because it is the basis for determining whether a test item performs
differently across groups, such as males and females or ethnic groups. That
is, an item performs differentially if it yields different results for individuals
who in reality have comparable knowledge or skills only because something
about the way it is designed favors one individual over the other. Items that
are equivalent across time allow researchers to accurately assess changes
that result from an intervention, for example. There are three levels of
equivalence, Card noted (configural, weak, and strong), but he suggested

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

MEASURING CHARACTER 67

that it is rarely tested in the context of character education. Doing so re-


quires specific analytic tools, such as factor analysis or item response theory,
that are technically challenging.

Implications for Measuring Character


A clear definition of what is to be measured is important for each
of these basic psychometric properties, Card commented. In the arena of
character, he noted, there are multiple definitions of many constructs, and
operational definitions often have fuzzy boundaries. This is not a prob-
lem in itself but it means that measures or scales might more closely match
one definition than another in ways that are difficult to trace. One possible
solution is to identify the items that fit more than one definition, as shown
in Figure 6-2. It might be possible to more closely align existing definitions
so that the overlap would be greater, he suggested. It would not make sense
to artificially force this, he added, but whether it could be done in a reason-
able, defensible way is a matter for the field to consider.
From Cards perspective, one of the defining features of the field of
character development is its diversity. The variation in the nature of pro-
grams that do this work and the contexts in which they serve, as well as

Denition #2

Denition #1

FIGURE 6-2 Overlap of operational definitions.


SOURCE: Card (2016).

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

68 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

the diversity of the adults and young people involved, is striking. Card
suggested that those involved in measurement of character and related
constructs should pay greater attention to the possibility that psychometric
properties may function differently across diverse populations and contexts.
It is important to assess these psychometric properties in every study, he
emphasized, and to pay explicit attention to measuring equivalence.
Moreover, a researcher studying the impact of an intervention needs
to consider the possibility that other developments that occur at the same
time the intervention is implemented may affect the measure. Box 6-1 lists
the kinds of errors that can arise when this is not done effectively. The
bottom line, Card suggested, is that we cannot have confidence that an
intervention was effective without establishing that it affected the aspect of
character itself, rather than the measurement of it.

Two Examples
Card offered two examples to illustrate these ideas, studies of gratitude
and humility that were parts of an ongoing meta-analysis of 11 character
strengths he is conducting with colleagues. They reflect two very differ-
ent situations, he noted. He and his colleagues have found that studies
of gratitude all tend to use one of a very small number of measurement
instruments. One of these is a six-item questionnaire that was developed
through a series of steps. The researchers who developed this test, known
as the GQ-6 (McCollough et al., 2002), first administered a much longer set
of questions to college undergraduates and then used statistical techniques

BOX 6-1
Possible Results of Measurement
Errors in Intervention Studies

Intervention increases prosocial behavior and does not impact measurement.


Intervention leads to higher measured prosocial behavior but no real changes
in the construct (e.g., socially desirable responding).
Intervention leads to higher prosocial behavior and impacts the measurement
so intervention effect is exaggerated.
Intervention leads to higher prosocial behavior and impacts the measurement
so intervention effect is hidden.
Intervention reduces prosocial behavior but heightens reporting, obscuring the
harmful impact of the intervention.

SOURCE: Card (2016).

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

MEASURING CHARACTER 69

to identify the six questions with the highest inter-informant reliability and
construct validity.1 They then administered the six-item test to a broader
sample of adults and found similar evidence of construct validity.
A second method for measuring gratitude is the Gratitude, Resent-
ment, and Appreciation Test (GRAT) (Watkins et al., 2003). In this case
the researchers conducted the psychometric analysis using a 55-item test,
which they also administered to college undergraduates. Using statistical
analysis they identified the three factors that appeared to be most relevant
and used those to winnow the list of test questions. They did not, however,
replicate the analysis that identified the three factors, Card noted, though
they did test the psychometric properties.
There were limitations to both of these studies, Card pointed out: a
possible overemphasis on reliability in the first case, and possible errors
in the identification of the relevant factors in the second. His point was
not to criticize the researchers in either caseindeed, he noted that both
were impressive efforts to translate a theoretical concept into a usable
measure. However, both are treated as seminal studies, he commented, and
researchers who later adopted these measures are unlikely to have assessed
the psychometric decisions for themselves or taken them into account in
using the results they obtained using these instruments.
This is not at all uncommon, Card noted: developing sound measures
takes time because it is challenging. Even where there are a few seminal
papers, he pointed out, we dont just put up the victory flag and say done.
Most instruments need to be modified as theory changes, and to be adapted
for use with particular populations and in particular contexts, he added. In
the case of gratitude, Card noted, there are actually four popular measures
that have been used in a diverse set of studiesfindings that emerge across
a body of work that uses different methods can yield valuable conclusions.
Researchers of humility, however, do not have a small number of widely
used measures to rely on, and many seem to develop their own unique mea-
sure, to be used in that study and never again. One problem with this
situation is that any two studies of humility may actually be measuring very
different things. Conversely, other studies may be measuring constructs that
are not identified as humility, but which match definitions of it that other
people use. Some researchers may develop a measure without adequately
testing its psychometric properties, Card added, which may be one reason
why so many researchers in this area have chosen not to rely on the previ-
ous literature.

1There are several categories of validity; construct validity is the type Card had described,

a measure of the degree to which an assessment measures what it is intended to measure. In


this case, the researchers compared the results to the results of tests of related constructs,
such as religiosity.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

70 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

It is virtually impossible to synthesize results from a body of work


that has this degree of inconsistency in the measures used, Card pointed
out. It is very difficult to say with confidence which programs are effective,
or answer other important questions about humility. The situation with
gratitude research is preferable, he added, but neither is ideal.

Suggestions
Card closed with a few suggestions with respect to planning studies,
reporting results, and accumulating a body of trustworthy research. He
challenged participants to include questions about psychometrics in their
assessments of available research. It is important to explore what sorts of
measures were used to produce compelling results, how they were devel-
oped, and what limitations might need to be taken into account. He em-
phasized that measuring changes in character attributes is not the same as
simply measuring that attribute at a particular time.
Card also noted that We shouldnt assume that the creator of an
instrument has thought about every population and context in which it
might be used. Others who use a measure need not be rigid, he suggested,
but should carefully modify it to better suit different circumstances. Pairing
a quantitative measure with qualitative or mixed-method studiespossibly
working with a multidisciplinary teamis another important strategy for
improving the definition of the construct and the associated measure.
Finally, Card observed that full reporting on psychometric properties
should be a part of any study, so that readers can fully understand what
was done and what possible limitations they should consider. He acknowl-
edged that this is difficult. Some of the analyses are technically demanding,
which means time, expertise, and resources are needed to support that extra
effort. Studies that include detailed psychometric analysis tend to be less
interesting to publishers, he noted, but it is important that this information
be available, perhaps as a component of a larger study.
We need to shift perceptions, Card suggested, so that people in the
field value psychometric analysis and dont just view it as a preliminary
to more interesting results. Meta-analysis of a body of research results is
an important tool for identifying findings that reflect a much larger sample
than any single study could, as well as a more diverse set of study settings
and types of measures. Because studies typically differ in many ways,
Card noted, it is possible to use statistical procedures to identify causes of
some of the differences that emerge from a synthesis of results across a large
body of studies. This sort of information can help the planners of future
studies to make well-supported decisions about the measures they will use.
Card closed with the point that if there were easy solutions we would
have figured this out long ago. He pointed out that his focus was on

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

MEASURING CHARACTER 71

quantitative measurement of individual differences, and that other kinds


of analysis have much to offer as well, including quantitative measures of
growth and change and causation; ways to conceptualize individual differ-
ences in character; and qualitative and mixed-method approaches.

PERSPECTIVES ON MEASUREMENT CHALLENGES

Pathways Forward for Measurement


The scientific study of character depends on good measures, and Clark
McKown highlighted the importance of these issues to both practitioners
and researchers. In his view, the work of these two groups should overlap
in substantive ways. McKown endorsed Cards overview of standards of
evidence that apply not only to the study of character but also across social
science fields, and highlighted a few key points.
First, he noted that Card described constructs in the study of character
as having fuzzy boundaries, meaning that it is difficult to draw precise boun
daries between one construct to be measured and another. McKown sug-
gested that the problem is broader. Constructs throughout the social sciences
share this problem, and it was clearly a theme throughout the workshop, he
observed. There is clearly not yet consensus on what it is we are really after,
he suggested. If any 10 people at the workshop were asked to define character
or social and emotional learning, he added, it is likely that they would offer
10 different definitions. Consensus may not be feasible, he acknowledged, but
we need to get our story straight, because it is essential for measurement.
McKown offered an example of research in an area where the concepts
have been clearly defined to illustrate the potential benefits to the forward
momentum of the study of character that conceptual clarity could bring.
He has worked with colleagues to develop a web-based system for measur-
ing social and emotional skills in elementary age students (McKown et al.,
2016). They are targeting thinking skills, such as the ability to understand
another persons thoughts and feelings and solve social problems, as well
as behavioral skills, such as the ability to join an ongoing group and help
someone in need. They are also measuring mental and behavioral com-
ponents of self-control. McKown and his colleagues made firm decisions
about constructs that would and would not be included in their work,
which, he argued, allowed them to develop a measurement system that
meets the psychometric standards Card described.
The stakes for approaching measurement carefully are high, McKown
continued, because what gets assessed gets addressed. A common lan-
guage and metrics are needed, he added, because where the field cannot
offer trustworthy evidence, all we are doing is vulnerable to the winds of
trend and fad.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

72 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

There is also an urgent need for high-quality assessments that can be


used in practice, McKown observed. He suggested that in addition to the
construct validity Card discussed, these assessments should also have con-
sequential validity. This type of validity is a measure of the consequences,
both intended and unintended, of the way test results are used. (In general,
psychometricians do not assess how valid a test itself is, but how valid
the interpretations that can be based on test results are for the intended
purpose, he noted.)
A real-life example illustrates why this is important, McKown ex-
plained. A collaboration among Californias largest school districts, called
CORE Districts,2 has included measures of noncognitive skills (e.g., self-
efficacy, social awareness, mindsets, and self-management) in their ac-
countability system for schoolsan effort McKown said was bold and
important. However, a public controversy developed over the concern that
using measures that are based on self-reports for this sort of high-stakes
purpose is not good measurement practice. Reasonable people can disagree
about whether the indicators that CORE Districts used provide evidence
that is valid basis for accountability decisions, McKown commented, but
the situation highlights the importance of consequential validity for all
measures of character and social and emotional learning. Consequential
validity is not just a matter of technical properties, he added, but also re-
quires consideration of social values.
McKown emphasized the importance of thinking carefully about the
purposes of any assessment. In the context of character development, he
suggested, the current state of the art supports formative assessments,
those that are used to identify students needs, guide instruction, and give
students feedback about their learning. Existing assessment methods are
generally suited for use in program evaluation as well. Few current mea-
sures, however, have the psychometric properties needed when the results
will be used for high-stakes accountability purposes, in his view. More
development is needed in this area, he suggested, and it is critical to think
about the purpose before, not after, planning an assessment.
McKowns last point was that in the best of all worlds, the method
of assessment will match what is being assessed. Social science researchers
use surveys, observation, teacher ratings, behavior ratings, and direct assess
ments, in which children solve problems that assess social, emotional, or
behavioral traits or skills. No one of these methods can measure each type
of construct well, McKown commented, and each is better suited to measur-
ing some things than others. For example, to assess how well children can
read others facial expressions, it would be better to use direct assessment in
which they look at faces and indicate what they are expressing, than to give

2See http://coredistricts.org [December 2016].

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

MEASURING CHARACTER 73

them a questionnaire in which they rate their ability to do this. Similarly,


asking children about their own behaviors is less useful than asking teachers
and others to report on the behaviors they observe.
McKown concluded with the hope that the field is poised to move for-
ward swiftly and wisely in developing sound measures of character and
social and emotional learning.

Understanding Constructs in Context


Nancy Deutsch framed her comments with the point that measure-
ment should always serve the goal of making our work in out-of-school
time better. From her perspective as a qualitative and mixed-methods
researcher, she noted that two themes struck her repeatedly during the
workshop: the socially constructed nature of social science, and the impor-
tance of context, variability across time, people, and settings. Qualitative
and quantitative researchers, she suggested, both treat these ideas as central
but approach them in different ways. They ask different questions, and their
questions drive their methods.
Quantitative research is well suited for assessing the presence, amount,
and prevalence of constructs related to character, Deutsch observed, and to
testing hypotheses about the factors that influence character. Quantitative
researchers recognize the importance of variability, she went on, but their
methods are not suited to answering questions associated with the vari-
ability of social contexts and its implications for understanding character.
Social science researchers focus much of their energy on defining,
under standing, and measuring constructs and how interventions might
influence them, Deutsch continued, yet they seldom question some of the
assumptions that underlie these descriptions of human behaviors and think-
ing. In particular, researchers rarely acknowledge that all constructs are
social constructions. Ideas about character that underlie the constructs
researchers measure in this field differ across contexts, and this is important
to the study and measurement of character, Deutsch commented,
Psychometric principles such as validity and reliability are formal ac-
knowledgments that measurement tools are subject to error, Deutsch con-
tinued, yet they also reflect an assumption that something called character
exists as a singular, objective fact. The measurement challenge is generally
understood to be one of getting as close as possible to assessing this true
construct, without, in Deutschs view, sufficient regard for the social, his-
torical, and political influences on that construct.
The field of psychopathology provides examples to illustrate the social
influences on construct definition. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders (DSM) defined homosexuality as a sociopathic personal-
ity disorder until 1973, Deutsch pointed out. By 2009 the DSMs authors

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

74 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

officially regarded homosexuality as a normal and positive variation of


human sexuality, she noted, and opposed the use of therapy to convert
an individual to heterosexuality. Definitions and terminology related to
gender and sexuality continue to evolve, she added, reflecting the way
people live.
How a construct is defined determines who is understood to have more
or less of the desired attribute, and therefore which individuals need inter-
vention, Deutsch explained. Another example of this comes from a study of
moral development in the 1950s. Psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg defined
six stages of moral development through which people progress, based on
research with samples of white men. When women began to be included in
follow-up research, however, he and his colleagues found they tended to get
stuck at level 3, a stage that focuses on interpersonal relationships, and
not progress to the stages that had been defined as higher. Psychologist
Carol Gilligan later pointed out that by developing the theory based only
on male samples, Kohlberg and his colleagues had inadvertently missed
important evidence of differences. Gilligan posited that there were essential
differences between men and women; research on moral development has
pursued further lines of inquiry in this area.
Research on differences in the use of school discipline practices across
students in different racial and ethnic groups provides another example of
the importance of context, Deutsch observed. For example, some research
has shown that approaches to social and emotional learning designed
to be neutral may inadvertently reflect misunderstanding of the diverse
ways students from marginalized backgrounds express social and emotional
skills. Redefining the relevant social and emotional constructs in ways
that reflect awareness of conscious and unconscious biases and the role of
power and privilege, Deutsch explained, leads to the use of different mea-
sures and altered ideas about students behavior and need for intervention.
These issues illustrate, in Deutschs view, that researchers and prac-
titioners alike need to be careful about how we define normative con-
structs. When researchers measure constructs based on the experiences of
a narrow subset of people, Deutsch continued, the experiences and expecta-
tions of that subset become definitive.
These examples also illustrate the importance of context in measure-
ment, Deutsch observed. The principle of measurement equivalence that
Card described is based on the assumption that a construct should be the
same across contexts, time, or groups, she noted. If, however, the social eco-
logical theory articulated by Bronfenbrenner, discussed by Schmid C allina
and others (see Chapter 2), is correct, that assumption might be false. The
question, Deutsch explained, is not whether a person may have a core set
of character traits that are consistently displayed, but whether there is an
essential center to the construct itself. In other words, she noted, people

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

MEASURING CHARACTER 75

might define a construct in consistent waysviewing selfishness as putting


self before others, for examplebut identify different sorts of behaviors as
examples of selfishness, depending on their context.
Quantitative measures of constructs such as character are valuable,
Deutsch concluded, but qualitative and mixed-methods approaches are
needed to illuminate meaning as it exists in context. The strengths of
qualitative social science are like those of qualitative analysis in chemistry,
which aims to identify the components of a mixture, she noted. In the
social sciences, qualitative analysis examines the components of a social
setting: the context. Qualitative research can help explain the meaning of
outliers and sources of variation that are apparent in quantitative research.
Qualitative methods make it possible to explore variations that may be
masked by the crisp definitions that are important in quantitative research.
For example, racial and ethnic identifiers are used to study possible differ-
ences across groups, but they may also mask important differences. People
who fall in the categories of black, white, or Latino have origins in many
countries and experiences that are too varied for statistical tools to address.
Qualitative methods have sometimes been viewed as useful primarily
for exploratory work that can support the development of measures, for
example. But in Deutschs view, these methods can also help explain devel-
opmental pathways and individual changes over time, and answer questions
about how and why people behave as they do. Thus, she concluded, we
have many tools in our toolbox for understanding the broad, complex
domain of character.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Workshop Themes

T
he final session was an opportunity for participants and presenters
to sift through the ideas that emerged in the 2 days of discussion.
Participants reported on the discussions they had had in breakout
sessions and their responses to the workshop framing questions (see Chap-
ter 1 and Appendix D). The workshop closed with concluding thoughts
from committee members.

PARTICIPANT PERSPECTIVES ON KEY QUESTIONS


Participants had two opportunities to discuss their responses to the
primary topics raised at the workshop, and to focus on the perspectives of
practitioners. The group representatives reported that individual partici-
pants shared the following ideas:

Defining Character
Character is not a trait and does not break down into easily mea-
surable components. Nevertheless, it is reassuring to learn that
there is constancy in the theoretical background for current ideas
of character and social and emotional learningthat we really are
a field.
Policy makers, researchers, and practitioners all need to act in a
more coordinated way, but the lack of a shared language is an
obstacle. Coordination could help all concerned avoid misunder-
standings and make the available information more effective.

77

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

78 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

An organization needs to define for itself, in a collaborative way,


what character goals it will pursue. Fuzzy-sounding boundaries are
OK, said one participant, because the goal is to identify what an
individual program is best poised to address. The focus should be
on the behavioral level, on what it looks like when young people
have a particular kind of character. Each program should revisit its
definition of character goals every few years to be sure the definition
is aligned with the objectives of primary program stakeholders.
The work of out-of-school youth development programs cannot be
understood in a vacuum, and it is critical to examine issues of race,
income, class, gender, and culture. That reality is complicated by
real-world limitations in funding and other resources.

Evidence of What Works in Developing Character


A few basic structures stood out as especially important: responsive
engagement, reflection and critical thinking, awareness and affir-
mation, and a focus on relationships.
Modeling behaviors is not enoughit is important to get kids
reflecting on what they do, to help them be intentional about it,
according to one participant.
Professional development is critical yet many programs lack the
resources for it. It is often the first thing cut when resources are re-
duced, and the field needs to raise awareness of its vital importance.
Training and feedback for adults is keypeople really do want
to improve, but they need support, said one person. To help en-
gage staff in the culture of evaluation, it is important to be sure
there are ways to provide rapid feedback and flexibility for quick
adjustment.

Implementation and Evaluation


Evaluation is a key way that programs can demonstrate their worthi-
ness to funders and policy makers, yet few have sufficient resources
to do it properly.
The work of these programs is a journey. The role of the organi-
zation is to create an environment in which staff feel comfortable
receiving feedback and are encouraged to reflect on what they are
doing.
Evaluation can be done with a variety of methodsan overreliance
on the goal of randomly controlled trials would be a mistake.
Practitioners are not often asked about the kinds of research they
want and need. They want help getting better at what they know

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

WORKSHOP THEMES 79

they want to do, noted one participant. The relationship between


research and practice is not linear, so both practitioners and
researchers need to be active in trying to translate what the find-
ings mean for practice.
Sometimes it is worth taking a strategic risk on an untested idea,
if the potential reward is high. The key is to treat the effort as a
pilot test and to carefully and honestly evaluate both successes and
failures.

CLOSING THOUGHTS
The workshop ended with closing thoughts from several committee
members.1
Lucy Friedman noted that the workshop discussion did not focus much
on what is known not to work, but that there is evidence on this as
well. Scaring young people and pouring information into them are both
ineffective, for example, she said. This is an exciting time in the field, in
her view. She sees researchers and practitioners coming together to change
the conversation and help gain recognition for the importance of out-of-
school time. Continued developments in research are necessary to this, she
observed.
Jennifer Brown Urban noted that the available workshop time did not
allow William Trochim to describe the practical, how-to elements of
their work, but she encouraged participants to use the paper and project
website as resources.2 She also commented that collaboration is challenging
for organizations, and that the diversity in out-of-school opportunities is
a good thing. We need as a community to provide as many opportunities
as possible so kids can find what meets their needs and interests, she said.
This diversity makes research challenging, but the individuality of programs
is often what makes them work, she observed.
Catherine Bradshaw reinforced the message that measurement tools
beyond surveys are important, and that researchers need to consider what
can be learned from programs with a wide variety of missions and defini-
tions of familiar objectives. If a program does have an impact on character,
she wondered, can it count as character development even if that is not a
part of its philosophy?
Ellen Gannett commented that she as a practitioner feels proud of the
efforts her colleagues have made to join forces with researchers and also
to articulate their own ideas and questions. Building a skilled and stable
workforce has become a high priority in the field, and she said she sees the

1Not all of the committee members were able to be present for this final discussion.
2See https://core.human.cornell.edu/research/systems/protocol [December 2016].

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

80 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

effects of that and of the many contributions from research. The out-of-
school workforce, she suggested, stands shoulder to shoulder with other
professionals, and is on its way to further growth
Richard Lerner thanked the participants for their contributions to
a rich discussion of the many dimensions of the challenge. The work-
shop enhanced his understanding of the complex issues and particularly
reinforced the importance of making cultural diversity and social justice a
predominant focus in both research and practice, he noted. The primary
goal for character education under any name is to make the world b etter
for young people, he said, and the passion for doing better work on
behalf of young people through research and practice is a noble purpose.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

References

Berkowitz, M., Bier, M., and McCauley, B. (2016). Effective Features and Practices that Sup-
port Character Development. Paper prepared for the Workshop on Approaches to the
Development of Character, July 26, The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering,
and Medicine, Washington, DC. Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/
dbassesite/documents/webpage/dbasse_173494.pdf [December 2016].
Berry, J.W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology, 46(1),
5-34.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and
Design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Buckley, J., Archibald, T., Hargraves, M., and Trochim, W.M. (2015). Defining and teaching
evaluative thinking: Insights from research on critical thinking. American Journal of
Evaluation, 36(3), 375-388.
Card, N.A. (2016). Methodological Issues in Measuring the Development of Character. P aper
prepared for the Workshop on Approaches to the Development of Character, July 26,
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Washington, DC.
Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/documents/webpage/
dbasse_173818.pdf [December 2016].
Damon, W. (2009). The Path to Purpose: How Young People Find Their Calling in Life. New
York: Simon and Schuster.
Duckworth, A. (2016). Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance. New York: Simon and
Schuster.
Durlak, J. (2016). What You HAVE to Know aboutProgram Implementation. Paper prepared
for the Workshop on Approaches to the Development of Character, July 26, The National
Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Washington, DC. Available: http://
sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/documents/webpage/dbasse_173421.pdf
[December 2016].
Durlak, J.A., Weissberg, R.P., Dymnicki, A.B., Taylor, R.D., and Schellinger, K.B. (2011). The
impact of enhancing students social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-
based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405-432.

81

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

82 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

Emmons, R.A. (2009). Greatest of the virtues? Gratitude and the grateful personality. In D.
Narvaez and D. Lapsley (Eds.), Personality, Identity, and Character: Explorations in
Moral Psychology (pp. 256-270). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Fehr, B., Sprecher, S., and Underwood, L.G. (Eds.). (2009). The Science of Compassionate
Love: Theory, Research, and Applications. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Gordon, M. (2005). Roots of Empathy: Changing the World Child by Child. Toronto: Thomas
Allen Publishers.
Hartshorne, H., and May, M.A. (1928). Studies in Deceit. New York: Macmillan.
Keltner, D., and Haidt, J. (2003). Approaching awe, a moral, spiritual, and aesthetic emotion.
Cognition & Emotion, 17(2), 297-314.
Kohlberg, L. (1984). Essays on Moral Development. Vol 2: The Psychology of Moral Develop-
ment. San Francisco: Harper and Row.
Kohlberg, L., and Mayer, R. (1972). Development as the aim of education. Harvard Educa-
tional Review, 42(4), 449-496.
Lapsley, D. (1996). Moral Psychology. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Larson, R. (2016). Learning Character. PowerPoint prepared for the Workshop on Approaches
to the Development of Character, July 26, The National Academies of Sciences, Engi-
neering, and Medicine, Washington, DC. Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/
groups/dbassesite/documents/webpage/dbasse_173631.pdf [December 2016].
Lerner, R.M., Dowling, E.M., and Anderson, P.M. (2003). Positive youth development:
Thriving as the basis of personhood and civil society. Applied Developmental Science,
7(3), 172-180.
McCullough, M.E., Emmons, R.A., and Tsang, J.-A. (2002). The grateful disposition: A
conceptual and empirical topography. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82,
112-127.
McGrath, R.E. (2016). Essential Virtues. PowerPoint prepared for the Workshop on Ap-
proaches to the Development of Character, July 26, The National Academies of Sciences,
Engineering, and Medicine, Washington, DC. Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.
org/cs/groups/dbassesite/documents/webpage/dbasse_173629.pdf [December 2016].
McKown, C., Russo-Ponsaran, N.M., Allen, A.A., Johnson, J., and Russo, J. (2016). Web-
based direct assessment of childrens social-emotional comprehension. Journal of Psycho-
educational Assessment, 34, 322-338. DOI: 10.1177/0734282915604564.
Moroney, D. (2016). The Readiness of the Out-of-School Time Workforce to Intentionally
Support Participants Social and Emotional Development: A Review of the Literature and
Future Directions. Paper prepared for the Workshop on Approaches to the Development
of Character, July 26, The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medi-
cine, Washington, DC. Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/
documents/webpage/dbasse_173641.pdf [December 2016].
Nagaoka, J., Farrington, C.A., Ehrlich, S.B., and Heath, R.D. (2015). Foundations for
Young Adult Success: A Developmental Framework. Chicago, IL: The University
of Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research. Available: https://consortium.
uchicago.edu/publications/foundations-young-adult-success-developmental-framework
[December 2016].
Nucci, L. (2016). Character: A Multi-faceted Developmental System. Paper prepared for
the Workshop on Approaches to the Development of Character, July 26, The National
Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Washington, DC. Available: http://
sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/documents/webpage/dbasse_173496.pdf
[December 2016].
Peterson, C., and Seligman, M.E.P. (2004). Character Strengths and Virtues: A Handbook
and Classification. New York: Oxford University Press and Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

REFERENCES 83

Roeser, R., Vago, D., Pinela, C., Morris, L., Taylor, C., and Harrison, J. (2014). Contemplative
education: Cultivating ethical development through mindfulness training. In L. Nucci, D.
Narvaez, and T. Krettenauer (Eds.), Handbook of Moral and Character Education (2nd
ed.) (pp. 234-247). New York: Routledge.
Rose, T. (2015). The End of Average: How We Succeed in a World That Values Sameness.
New York: HarperCollins.
Rumbaut, R.G., and Komaie, G. (2010). Immigration and adult transitions. Future Child,
20(1), 43-66.
Santrock, J.W. (2007). Child Development. Eleventh edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Com-
panies, Inc.
Seligman, M.E. (2004). Authentic Happiness: Using the New Positive Psychology to Realize
Your Potential for Lasting Fulfillment. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Snyder, C.R. (2002). Hope theory: Rainbows in the mind. Psychological Inquiry, 13(4),
249-275.
Sokol, B.W., Hammond, S.I., and Berkowitz, M.W. (2010). The developmental contours of char-
acter. In T. Lovat, R. Toomey, and N. Clement (Eds.), International Research Handbook on
Values Education and Student Wellbeing (pp. 579-603). Dordrecht, N etherlands: Springer.
Stepick, A., Stepick, C.D., and Labissiere, Y. (2008). South Floridas immigrant youth and
civic engagement: Major engagementminor differences. Applied Development Science,
12(2), 57-65.
Surez-Orozco, C. (2016). The Role of Culture and Context on Character Development.
PowerPoint prepared for the Workshop on Approaches to the Development of Character,
July 26, The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Washing-
ton, DC. Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/documents/
webpage/dbasse_173633.pdf [December 2016].
Surez-Orozco, C., Hernandez, M.G., and Casanova, S. (2015). Its sort of my calling: The
civic participation and social responsibility immigrant origin emerging adults. Research
in Human Development, 12(1), 84-99.
Trochim, W.M., and Urban, J.B. (2016). Advancing Evaluation of Character Building
Programs. Paper prepared for the Workshop on Approaches to the Development of
Character, July 26, The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine,
Washington, DC. Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/
documents/webpage/dbasse_173497.pdf [December 2016].
Tudge, J., Frietas, L.B., and O-Brien, L.T. (2015). The virtue of gratitude: A developmental
and cultural approach. Human Development, 58, 281-300.
Watkins, P.C., Woodward, K., Stone, T., and Kolts, R.L. (2003). Gratitude and happiness:
Development of a measure of gratitude, and relationships with subjective well-being.
Social Behavior and Personality, 31, 431-452.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Appendix A

Workshop Agenda

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine


Workshop on Approaches to the Development of Character

July 26 and 27, 2016


National Academy of Sciences Building, Lecture Room
2101 Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, DC, 20418
Agenda

TUESDAY, JULY 26
8:309:00 Introductory Remarks and Setting the Stage

Welcome and introductions from the National


AcademiesAlix Beatty
Welcome, introductions, and goals for the workshop
Deborah Vandell, planning committee chair
Welcome from workshop sponsor S.D. Bechtel, Jr.
FoundationSusan Harvey, Education Director
Setting the stageStephanie Jones
Ways to use the workshopJennifer Brown Urban

85

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

86 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

SESSION 1: WHAT IS CHARACTER?:


MOVING BEYOND DEFINITIONAL DIFFERENCES
Moderators: Richard Lerner, Stephanie Jones

9:009:45 Paper 1: What Is Character? Overview of the Research


Larry Nucci, University of California, Berkeley

9:4510:30 Reflections and Open Discussion

Perspectives from research on personalityRobert McGrath,


Fairleigh Dickinson
Influences on the development of characterKristina
Schmid Callina, Tufts University
Importance of culture and contextCarola Surez-Orozco,
University of California, Los Angeles

10:3010:45 Break

SESSION II: WHAT WORKS IN DEVELOPING CHARACTER?


Moderators: Lucy Friedman, Catherine Bradshaw

10:4511:30 Paper 2: Effective Features and Practices that Support


Character Development
Marvin Berkowitz, University of Missouri, St. Louis

11:3012:10 Reflections and Open Discussion

Reed Larson, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign


Camille Farrington, University of Chicago
Karen Pittman, Forum for Youth Investment

12:1012:15 Introduction of First Breakout Activity


Jennifer Brown Urban

12:151:15 Lunch

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

APPENDIX A 87

1:152:15 Breakout Group Activity

Self-assessment of program objectives and activities, review


of research findings.

[Break on the way back to full session]

SESSION III: INVESTING IN IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION


Moderators: Catherine Bradshaw, Ellen Gannett

2:153:15 Paper 3: What You HAVE to Know about Program


Implementation
Joseph Durlak, Loyola, Chicago

Reflections and Open Discussion


Mike Surbaugh, Boy Scouts of America
Donald Floyd, National 4-H Council (retired)

3:154:15 Paper 4: Advancing Evaluation of Character Building Programs

William Trochim, Cornell University, and Jennifer Urban

Reflections and Open Discussion


Mike Surbaugh, Boy Scouts of America
Donald Floyd, National 4-H Council (retired)

4:154:30 Reflections on the Day

Moderator: Deborah Vandell

Committee comments and open discussion

4:35 Reception for Workshop Participants

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

88 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

WEDNESDAY, JULY 27
8:459:00 Goals for the Day

Deborah Vandell

SESSION III (CONTINUED):


INVESTING IN IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION
(CONTINUED)
Moderators: Jennifer Brown Urban, Ellen Gannett

9:009:45 Paper 5: Considerations in Developing a High-Quality Staff


Deborah Moroney, American Institute for Research

10:1510:55 Reflections and Open Discussion

Developing supportive relationshipsNoelle Hurd,


University of Virginia
Critical role of culture and contextRob Jagers,
University of Michigan
Experience with a highly mobile populationMary Keller,
Military Child Education Coalition

10:5511:00 Introduction of Second Breakout Activity


Jennifer Brown Urban

11:0011:15 Break

11:1512:00 Breakout Group Activity

Ideas for strengthening implementation of practices,


strategies, evaluation

12:151:00 Lunch

SESSION IV: MEASURING CHARACTER


Moderator: Stephanie Jones, Richard Lerner

1:001:45 Paper 6Methodological Issues


Noel Card, University of Connecticut

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

APPENDIX A 89

1:452:30 Reflections and Open Discussion

Clark McKown, Rush University Medical Center


Nancy Deutsch, University of Virginia

2:302:45 Break

2:454:00 Panel Discussion of Themes from the Workshop and


Self-Study Discussions

Moderators: Lucy Friedman, Richard Lerner

Representatives from the groups report on their discussions


and findings and offer their conclusions from the workshop
with respect to:

What is character?
What works in developing character?
Investing in implementation and evaluation

Open Discussion

4:004:30 Closing Thoughts


Moderator: Deborah Vandell
Committee members, open discussion

4:30 Adjourn

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Appendix B

Participant List

Katie Jaxheimer Agarwal, S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation


Doug Anderson, Camp Fire
Diego Arancibia, ASAPconnect
Marcia Argyris, S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation
Sara Bartolino, Transforming Education
Julie Bennett, ASAPconnect
Marvin Berkowitz, University of MissouriSt. Louis
Beth Birnstihl, National 4-H Council
Richard Bollinger, John Templeton Foundation
Katie Brackenridge, Partnership for Children & Youth
Catherine Bradshaw, University of Virginia
Shirley Brandman, National Commission on Social, Emotional and
Academic Development
Amy Branner, Coaching Corps
Jennifer Brown Lerner, American Youth Policy Forum
Jennifer Brown Urban, Montclair State University
Katie Buckley, Transforming Education
Kristina Schmid Callina, Tufts University
Noel Card, University of Connecticut
Janet Carter, Coaching Corps
Marc Chun, The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
Jennette Claassen, Playworks
Sarah Clement, John Templeton Foundation
Stacey Daraio, Temescal Associates
Jillian Darwish, Mayerson Academy

91

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

92 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

Jeff Davis, California AfterSchool Network


Bryan DeCoster, COL U.S. Army, Center for the Army Profession and Ethic
Nancy Deutsch, University of Virginia
Jeff Dill, Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture, University of Virginia
Joe Durlak, Loyola University
Andrea Ettekal, Tufts University
Camille Farrington, Urban Education Institute
Donald Floyd, 4-H
Steve Fowler, FowlerHoffman LLC
Elizabeth Fowlkes, Boys & Girls Clubs of America
Lucy Friedman, The After-School Corporation
Michael Funk, California Department of Education
Ellen Gannett, Wellesley College
Dan Gilbert, Afterschool Alliance
Rebecca Goldberg, S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation
Glenn Goldman, COL U.S. Army, Center for the Army Profession and Ethic
Jodi Grant, Afterschool Alliance
Maria Guzman, YMCA of the USA
Kate Hagner, Student Conservation Association (SCA)
Heidi Ham, National AfterSchool Association
Susan Harvey, S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation
Alex Hooker, S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation
Heather Hough, Policy Analysis for California Education
Noelle Hurd, University of Virginia
Robert Jagers, University of Michigan
Penny Jeffers, Outward Bound
Arron Jiron, S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation
Jacqueline Jodl, National Commission on Social, Emotional and Academic
Development
Sara Johnson, Tufts University
Stephanie Jones, Harvard University
Mary M. Keller, Military Child Education Coalition
Kelsey Kennedy, U.S. Government Accountability Office
Ashleigh King, S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation
David La Piana, S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation
Reed Larson, University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign
Richard Lerner, Tufts University
Alexis Llamas, S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation
Mark Logemann, Boy Scouts of America
Hana Ma, S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation
James Martinson, Camp Fire
Gina McGovern, University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign
Robert McGrath, Fairleigh Dickenson University

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

APPENDIX B 93

Clark McKown, Rush University Medical Center


Melissa Menzer, National Endowment for the Arts
Amanda Miller, S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation
Jessica Mitchell, Big Brothers Big Sisters of America
Deb Moroney, American Institute for Research
Bela Mot, YMCA of the USA
Trent Nichols, Boy Scouts of America
Larry Nucci, University of California, Berkeley
Ruth Obel-Jorgensen, California School-Age Consortium
Kathleen OConnor, NatureBridge
Arthur Pearson, Thompson Island Outward Bound Education Center
Jennifer Peck, Partnership for Children & Youth
Karen Pittman, Forum for Youth Investment
Courtney Pollack, Positive Coaching Alliance
Michael Randel, Randel Consulting Associates
Cristin Rollins, Girls Inc.
Jonathon Rondeau, Family League of Baltimore
Aleah Rosario, California School-Age Consortium
Kimon Sargeant, John Templeton Foundation
Penn Sheppard, Girls Inc.
Steve Smith, Student Conservation Association
Michelle Steagall, CORE Districts
Stephen Streufert, NatureBridge
Carola Surez-Orozco, University of California, Los Angeles
Mike Surbaugh, Boy Scouts of America
Tina Syer, Positive Coaching Alliance
Jeremy Taylor, Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning
Jim Thompson, Positive Coaching Alliance
Cathy Tisdale, Camp Fire National Headquarters
Anh Ton, S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation
William Trochim, Cornell University
Deborah Vandell, University of California, Irvine
Jill Walahoski, National 4-H Council
Dan Warren, Boy Scouts of America
Kimberly Webster, Playworks
Roger Weissberg, Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional
Learning (CASEL)
Heather Williams, After School Division, California Department of
Education
Jessica Zhang, S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Appendix C

Biographical Sketches of
Committee Members and Presenters

Marvin Berkowitz (Presenter) is the inaugural Sanford N. McDonnell


endowed professor of character education and co-director of the Center for
Character and Citizenship at the University of MissouriSt. Louis, and the
University of Missouri Presidents Thomas Jefferson Professor. He previously
served as the inaugural Ambassador H.H. Coors professor of character devel
opment at the U.S. Air Force Academy and professor of psychology and
director of the Center for Ethics Studies at Marquette University. He was
also founder and associate director of the Center for Addiction and Behav-
ioral Health Research in Milwaukee. Since 1999 he has directed the Leader
ship Academy in Character Education in St. Louis. He was an inaugural
recipient of the Bill Porzukowiak Character Award, received the Sanford N.
McDonnell Lifetime Achievement Award from the Character Education Part-
nership, the first Exemplary Partner Award from the Charmmd Foundation,
and the Good Works Award from the Association for Moral Education. He
also received the Kuhmerker Career Award from the Association for Moral
Education. He earned his B.A. in psychology from the State University of
New York at Buffalo and his Ph.D. in life-span developmental psychology at
Wayne State University.

Catherine Bradshaw (Committee Member) is a professor and the associate


dean for research and faculty development at the Curry School of Education
at the University of Virginia. Prior to her current appointment, she was an
associate professor and the associate chair of the Department of Mental
Health at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Her
primary research interests focus on the development of aggressive b ehavior

95

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

96 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

and school-based prevention. She collaborates on research projects examin


ing bullying and school climate; the development of aggressive and problem
behaviors; effects of exposure to violence, peer victimization, and environ-
mental stress on children; and the design, evaluation, and implementation
of evidence-based prevention programs in schools. She works with the
Maryland State Department of Education and several school districts, and
she collaborates on many federally funded research grants. She is an asso
ciate editor for the Journal of Research on Adolescence and the editor of
Prevention Science. She is a coeditor of the Handbook of School Mental
Health. She holds a doctorate in developmental psychology from Cornell
University and a masters of education in counseling and guidance from
the University of Georgia.

Kristina Schmid Callina (Presenter) is a research assistant professor at the


Institute for Applied Research in Youth Development in the Eliot-Pearson
Department of Child Study and Human Development at Tufts University.
Her research interests focus on the ways in which young people construct
positive pathways to adulthood. In her dissertation, she examined the role
of hope in positive developmental outcomes, especially youth engagement
in community contributions. She has worked extensively on the 4-H Study
of Positive Youth Development (PYD), a 10-year, longitudinal study of in-
ternal strengths and ecological assets that promote PYD. More recently, she
has broadened the scope of her work by using a strengths-based perspec-
tive to better understand the positive development of military-connected
adolescents and young adults. In collaboration with the Simon Center for
the Professional Military Ethic and the Department of Behavioral Sciences
in Leadership at the U.S. Military Academy, she is investigating the devel-
opment of character and leadership among cadets at West Point (a project
funded by the Templeton Religion Trust). In addition, she collaborates with
the Military Child Education Coalition.

Noel Card (Presenter) is professor of human development and family s tudies


at the University of Connecticut and has previously held positions in hu-
man development and in educational statistics. His substantive research
investigates social development, with specific foci in peer relations, aggres-
sive behavior, and character strengths. His quantitative research interests
include meta-analysis, longitudinal data, and dyadic data. He is editor of
the Journal of Research on Adolescence, is an outgoing associate editor
at Developmental Psychology, and is conference co-organizer of the three
meetings (2012, 2014, and 2016) of Developmental Methods. His most re-
cent work includes meta-analyses of the psychometric properties of various
measures of character strengths, supported by the John Templeton Founda-
tion. He received his Ph.D. in clinical psychology from St. Johns University

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

APPENDIX C 97

and completed a postdoctoral fellowship in quantitative psychology at the


University of Kansas.

Nancy Deutsch (Presenter) is associate professor of educational leadership


and foundations at the University of Virginias (UVAs) Curry School of
Education. She is affiliated with the Research, Statistics & E
valuation pro-
gram, as well as Currys interdisciplinary doctoral program in applied devel
opmental science and Youth-NEX, the UVA Center to Promote E ffective
Youth Development. Her research focuses on out-of-school settings for ado-
lescents. She co-authored two chapters in the book A Place to Call Home:
Community-Based After-School Programs for Urban Youth. Her book
Pride in the Projects: Teens Building Identities in Urban Contexts reports
on a 4-year study of teens at an inner-city youth organization. A second
book, Youth Organizations and Positive Youth Development: Case Studies
of Success and Failure, co-authored with Bart Hirsch and David D uBois,
won an SRCD Social Policy Book award. She is currently working on a
longitudinal study of youthadult relationships funded by the W illiam T.
Grant Foundation, a longitudinal follow-up of the Young Women L eaders
Program, and an evaluation of the WINGS after-school program. She re-
ceived her B.A. from Vassar College and completed her Ph.D. in human
development and social policy at Northwestern University.

Joseph Durlak (Presenter) is emeritus professor of clinical psychology at


Loyola University, Chicago. He remains active in writing, editing, consult-
ing, and reviewing. His primary interests are in prevention and mental
health promotion programs for children and adolescents, implementation
of evidence-based interventions, meta-analysis, community psychology, and
social and emotional learning programs. He has published major reviews
on prevention programs for youth, after-school programs, program imple-
mentation, and school-based social and emotional learning programs. He
is the senior co-editor of the Handbook of Social and Emotional Learning.
His most recent project involves collaboration with Mark Lipsey and others
at Vanderbilt University to develop a new set of effect-size benchmarks for
universal prevention programs for school-aged youth.

Camille Farrington (Presenter) is a senior research associate at the Univer-


sity of Chicago Consortium on School Research (UChicago Consortium).
Her work focuses on policy and practice in urban high school reform,
particularly classroom instruction and assessment, academic rigor, and
academic failure. She is the lead author of Teaching Adolescents to Become
Learners: The Role of Noncognitive Factors in Shaping School Perfor-
mance. Her primary concern is improving the long-term educational and
life outcomes of youth from marginalized communities. Reflective of this

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

98 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

interest, her book Failing at School: Lessons for Redesigning Urban High
Schools documents how high schools systematically construct widespread
student failure for the most socially vulnerable students, and offers practi-
cal recommendations. She draws on 15 years experience as a public high
school teacher and National Board Certified Teacher Mentor. She received
a B.A. from the University of California, Santa Cruz, teacher certification
from Mills College, and a Ph.D. in policy studies in urban education from
the University of Illinois at Chicago.

Donald Floyd (Presenter) recently retired from his role as CEO and presi-
dent of the National 4-H Council. He has been involved with the leader-
ship of youth-serving, nonprofit organizations for more than 35 years. For
17 years, he held local- and national-level positions, including national
executive vice president of Junior Achievement. He recently completed
a term as chair of the National Collaboration for Youth and is currently
a trustee with the Americas Promise Alliance. He served as a trustee of
Albright College and was secretary of the board, member of the executive
committee, and vice chair of its governance committee. He is former chair
of the International Leaders Committee of the Institute for Applied Re-
search in Youth Development, Tufts University. He was one of six inaugural
recipients of the International Fellows in Applied Developmental Science.
He has traveled to 35 countries to establish youth programs and has lived
in Japan and Ghana. He served in the U.S. Air Force from 1966 to 1970,
and is a graduate of Albright College.

Lucy Friedman (Committee Member) is founding president of The After-


School Corporation (TASC) (now known as ExpandedED Schools), a not-
for-profit organization established in 1998 to enhance the quality and
availability of after-school programs in New York and beyond. Prior to
joining TASC, she was the founder and executive director of Victim Ser-
vices (now known as Safe Horizon) for 20 years. She led a study group
for Mayor David Dinkins, which recommended the creation in schools of
Beacon programs that operate after school and on weekends. She serves on
several boards, including the Afterschool Alliance, Leadership Enterprise
for a Diverse America, and Bryn Mawr College. She is cochair of the New
York State Afterschool Network, chair of the executive committee of the
Coalition for Science After School, and cochair of the Study Group on
Supplementary Education. She holds a Ph.D. in social psychology from
Columbia University and was a Peace Corps volunteer in the Dominican
Republic.

Ellen Gannett (Committee Member) is director of the National Institute


on Out-of-School Time (NIOST) at the Wellesley Centers for Women at

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

APPENDIX C 99

Wellesley College. Her work ranges from system building for afterschool
and youth development to professional development and creating evalu-
ation systems. She currently serves as one of the technical assistance pro-
viders for the Wallace Foundations Next Generation Afterschool System
Building Initiative. She is the principal investigator for the Robert Bowne
Foundation Afterschool Matters Initiative and is project director for the
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education techni-
cal assistance and training initiative for 21st Century Community Learning
Center grant recipients. She also serves as senior project advisor on NIOSTs
Afterschool Program Assessment System. She is a founding member of the
Health Out-of-School Time Coalition and was a national board member of
the American Camp Association and is a past co-chair of the Next Genera-
tion Youth Work Coalition. She received her B.S. from the University of
Massachusetts Amherst, and her M.Ed. from the Lesley College Graduate
School of Education.

Noelle Hurd (Presenter) is assistant professor with the Department of


Psychology at the University of Virginia (UVA). She runs the Promoting
Healthy Adolescent Development Lab at UVA. Her overarching research
interest is the promotion of healthy adolescent development among margin-
alized youth. Her work has focused on identifying opportunities to build on
pre-existing strengths in youths lives, such as supportive intergenerational
relationships. Using a resilience framework, she has assessed the poten-
tial of nonparental adults to serve as resources to marginalized youth. In
addition to exploring the role of supportive relationships in contributing
to youth development, she also researched the role of broader contextual
factors (e.g., neighborhood characteristics) in shaping youth outcomes.
Currently, she is investigating the role of contextual factors in promoting
or deterring the formation of intergenerational relationships and shaping
the nature of interactions between marginalized youth and the adults in
their communities. She is also further examining the mechanisms that drive
the promotive effects of natural mentoring relationships and developing an
intervention focused on enhancing positive intergenerational relationships
between adolescents and the nonparental adults in their everyday lives.

Robert Jagers (Presenter) is associate professor with the School of Educa-


tion at the University of Michigan. He is a developmental psychologist
who investigates the complex connections among culture, race, and class
and their impact on the social-emotional development of urban youth.
He studies how culture influences, and is influenced by, African American
youth and their functioning in the different contexts in which they must
negotiate. His work is used in the design of interventions to limit risky
behaviors and support positive youth development. He is a graduate of

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

100 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

The P
ennsylvania State University and received his Ph.D. from Howard
University.

Stephanie Jones (Committee Member) is the Marie and Max Kargman asso-
ciate professor in human development and urban education at the Harvard
Graduate School of Education. Her research focuses on the longitudinal
effects of poverty and exposure to violence on social, emotional, and behav-
ioral development from early childhood through adolescence. Much of her
recent work has focused on exploring noncognitive factors across the devel
opmental spectrum, with an emphasis on conducting rigorous scientific
research while also creating translational and applied products for the early
and middle childhood practitioner and policy communities. Jones serves on
numerous national advisory boards and expert consultant groups related to
social-emotional development and child and family anti-poverty policies.
She has experience conducting large-scale literature reviews; creating multi
disciplinary, integrative conceptual frameworks; and translating research
into accessible content. She received the Grawemeyer Award in Education
for her work with Zigler and Walter Gilliam on A Vision for Universal
Preschool Education, and the Joseph E. Zins Early-Career Distinguished
Contribution Award for Action Research in Social and Emotional Learn-
ing, from the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning.
She holds a doctorate in developmental psychology from Yale University.

Mary Keller (Presenter) serves as the president and CEO of the M ilitary
Child Education Coalition. She has been the organizations executive leader
since 1998 and was one of its founders. She served as a teacher and admin
istrator in several Texas school districts for more than 21 years. She served
for 8 years as assistant superintendent and area superintendent for educa-
tion services for the Killeen Independent School District, which serves more
than 20,000 military connected children and the nations largest military
installation, Fort Hood. She holds professional certifications in teaching
elementary education, as well as history, supervision, mid-management,
and superintendency. She also holds a mediation certification from the
Texas Bar Association. She graduated from Wayland Baptist University
with a bachelors degree in elementary education and a masters degree in
education with a specialization in curriculum and instruction. She earned
her doctorate in educational administration with a special emphasis in
supervision from Texas Tech University.

Reed Larson (Presenter) is a professor in the Department of Human and


Community Development, as well as in the Departments of Psychology;
Educational Psychology; Kinesiology and Community Health; and Recre-
ation, Sport, and Tourism at the University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

APPENDIX C 101

He has served as president of the Society for Research on Adolescence; held


the Pampered Chef Endowed Chair at the University of Illinois; and is editor-
in-chief of New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development (with
Lene Jensen). He co-developed the Experience Sampling Method, and pub-
lished numerous articles on adolescents reports on their emotions and the
dynamics of their experiences in different domains in their daily lives. He
is author of Divergent Realities: The Emotional Lives of Mothers, Fathers,
and Adolescents (with Maryse Richards) and Being Adolescent: Conflict and
Growth in the Teenage Years (with Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi). His current
primary area of interest is adolescents experiences of positive development
in community-based programs, extracurricular activities, sports, and other
structured, voluntary activities. He is using qualitative and mixed methods
research to capture the cognitive and motivational processes of development
that occur in these contexts. His research also examines the expertise that
effective program leaders and coaches exercise in facilitating youths active
learning processes.

Richard M. Lerner (Committee Member) is the Bergstrom chair in applied


developmental science and the director of the Institute for Applied Research
in Youth Development at Tufts University. He was the founding editor of
the Journal of Research on Adolescence and of Applied Developmental
Science, which he continues to edit. He was a fellow at the Center for
Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences and is a fellow of the Ameri-
can Association for the Advancement of Science, American Psychological
Association, and Association for Psychological Science. He is known for
his theory of relations between life-span human development and social
change, and for his research about the relations between adolescents and
their peers, families, schools, and communities. He attended New York
City public schools through his Ph.D., completing his doctorate at the City
University of New York in developmental psychology.

Robert McGrath (Presenter) is a professor of psychology at Fairleigh


Dickinson University. He is also a senior scientist for the VIA Institute
on Character; program evaluator for Thriving Learning Community, a
character development program implemented in all middle schools in
the Cincinnati Public School system; and director of integrated care for the
Underserved of Northeastern New Jersey. He also maintains an active
research program and consulting practice in methodology, measurement,
positive psychology, and professional issues. In the past 5 years he has
authored two books, Quantitative Models in Psychology and Creating and
Verifying Data Sets with Excel, and co-edited a third, Pharmacotherapy for
Psychologists: Prescribing and Collaborative Roles. He is a contributor to
the multivolume reference The Handbook of Research Methods in Psychol-

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

102 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

ogy, and has authored more than 200 refereed publications and presenta-
tions. He has received multiple awards for his work, including the Farleigh
Dickinsons Distinguished Faculty Award for Research and Scholarship and
the Society for Personality Assessments Martin Mayman Award for distin-
guished contribution to the literature in personality assessment.

Clark McKown (Presenter) is associate professor of behavioral sciences


at Rush University Medical Center and the executive director of the Rush
NeuroBehavioral Center. McKown was principal investigator on an Insti-
tute for Education Services Goal 5 grant to develop SELweb, a web-based
assessment system designed to measure social-emotional comprehension
and social acceptance in grades K to 3. He is also co-investigator on an
ongoing Goal 5 grant to validate the Virtual Environment for Social Infor-
mation Processing and principal investigator on a Goal 5 grant to develop
a developmentally appropriate version of SELweb for grades 4 through 6.
Findings from his research have been published in Psychological Assess-
ment, Journal of School Psychology, Child Development, and other outlets.
He received his B.A. in psychology from Yale and his Ph.D. in psychology
from the University of California, Berkeley.

Deborah Moroney (Presenter) is a principal researcher at American Insti


tutes for Research and director of the social and emotional learning,
school climate, and out-of-school time practice area. Her research and
practice experience is in social and emotional learning and youth develop-
ment in after-school and expanded learning settings. She is the architect of
a collaborative method for the design of dual purpose (improvement and
demonstration) evaluation frameworks for national multisite programs.
Additionally, she has led several statewide and districtwide after-school
needs assessments and evaluations. Presently, she serves as the princi-
pal investigator of the implementation and outcome study for Schools
Out New York City and she is a member of the Afterschool Technical
Assistance Collaborative for the C.S. Mott Foundation. She is the project
director for a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation initiative to collabora-
tively define a transformative research agenda for a culture of health in
schools. She co-authored the fourth edition of an after-school resource,
Beyond the Bell: A Toolkit for Creating Effective Afterschool and Ex-
panded Learning Programs, and authored other numerous publications
on social and emotional development and assessment. She holds an M.Ed.
and a Ph.D. in special education from the University of Illinois at Chicago.

Velma McBride Murry (Committee Member) is the Lois Autrey Betts chair
in education and human development and professor of human and organi
zational development in Peabody College at Vanderbilt University. Her

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

APPENDIX C 103

work has focused on the significance of context in studies of African


American families and youth, particularly the impact of racism on family
functioning. This research has elucidated the dynamics of this contextual
stressor in the everyday life of African Americans and the ways in which
family members buffer each other from the impact of the external stressors.
Prior to joining the Vanderbilt faculty in 2008, she was professor of child
and family development and co-director of the Center of Family Research
in the Institute for Behavioral Research at the University of Georgia. She
received a Ph.D. in human development and family studies from the Uni-
versity of Missouri, Columbia.

Larry Nucci (Presenter) is an adjunct professor in the Graduate School of


Education at the University of California, Berkeley, and professor emeritus
of educational psychology at the University of Illinois at Chicago. He has
published extensively on childrens moral and social development and edu-
cation, including the Handbook of Moral and Character Education (edited
with Darcia Narvaez and Tobias Krettenauer) and Nice is Not Enough:
Facilitating Moral Development and Education in the Moral Domain. He
is a pioneer in social cognitive domain theory. An aspect of his work on
social development has focused on childrens judgments about issues related
to matters of privacy and discretion. This research has been carried out in
a number of cross-cultural contexts, including in Asia and Latin America.
He is editor-in-chief of Human Development and a member of the editorial
boards of Cognitive Development, Parenting Science and Practice, and the
Journal for Research in Character Education.

Karen Pittman (Presenter) is co-founder, president, and CEO of the Forum


for Youth Investment. A sociologist and recognized leader in youth develop-
ment, she started her career at the Urban Institute. She then became a vice
president at the Academy for Educational Development, where she founded
and directed the Center for Youth Development and Policy Research and
its spin-off, the National Training Institute for Community Youth Work.
In 1995 she joined the Clinton administration as director of the Presidents
Crime Prevention Council and then moved to the executive team of the
International Youth Foundation. She worked with ret. Gen. Colin Powell
to create Americas Promise, after which she and Merita Irby launched the
Forum. She has written three books and many articles on youth issues,
including as a regular columnist in Youth Today. She has served on numer-
ous boards and panels. She has been honored with the National Commis-
sion for African American Education Augustus F. Hawkins Service Award,
the American Youth Policy Forum Decade of Service Award for Sustained
Visionary Leadership in Advancing Youth Policy, and the Healthy Teen
Network Spirit of Service Award.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

104 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

Carola Surez-Orozco (Presenter) is a professor of human development


and psychology at the University of California, Los Angeles. Her areas
of research include educational trajectories of immigrant-origin youth,
immigrant family separations, the role of mentors in facilitating youth
development, the effects of unauthorized status on developing youth, gen-
dered experiences, and civic engagement, among others. Her most recent
book, Transitions: The Development of the Children of Immigrants, won
the Society for Research on Adolescence Social Policy Award. She has
beenawarded an American Psychological Association Presidential Cita-
tion for her contributions to the understanding of cultural psychology of
immigration and has served as the chair of the American Psychological
Association Presidential Task Force on Immigration. She is the editor of
the Journal of Adolescent Research and serves as senior program associate
for the William T. Grant Foundation. She was elected as a member of the
National Academy of Education in 2016.

Mike Surbaugh (Presenter) serves as the chief scout executive/CEO of the


Boy Scouts of America. He grew up in scouting and spent the majority of
his career in six local Boy Scout Councils, serving as CEO in South Dakota,
Wisconsin, and Pittsburgh. He has a strong interest in the development and
delivery of programs to disadvantaged youth, youth with disabilities, and
American Indian youth. During his tenure in Pittsburgh, he worked closely
with researchers from the University of Pittsburgh in studying the core
content of scouting programs and their delivery of character competencies.
While at the national service center, he followed research at Tufts University
in character in Cub Scouting, and has incorporated the lessons learned into
the Boy Scouts of Americas current business plan.

William Trochim (Presenter) is a professor at Cornell University. His re-


search is focused on applied social research methodology, with an emphasis
on program planning and evaluation methods. He has taught evaluation
and research methods at both the undergraduate and graduate levels at
Cornell since 1980 and has mentored more than 50 Ph.D. students in
evaluation. He has written a number of books, including several widely
used introductory research methods texts, and articles that have appeared
in the American Journal of Evaluation and New Directions for Program
Evaluation, among others. He is the developer of the concept-mapping
methodology and software used for conceptualization purposes in hundreds
of contexts and settings. He is the director of evaluation for Weill Cornell
Medicines Clinical and Translational Science Center and participates ac-
tively in the National Institutes of Health Clinical and Translational Science
Awards national evaluation. He helped develop evaluation systems for the
HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials Networks of the Division of AIDS of the National

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

APPENDIX C 105

Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases and is actively engaged in


National Science Foundationsponsored research. He was president of the
American Evaluation Association (AEA) and served several terms on the
AEA board of directors. He received his Ph.D. from Northwestern Univer-
sity in methodology and evaluation research.

Jennifer Brown Urban (Committee Member) is an associate professor in the


Department of Family and Child Studies at Montclair State University. She
was a Society for Research in Child Development/American Association for
the Advancement of Science Executive Branch policy fellow at the National
Institutes of Health Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research. She
currently directs the Developmental Systems Science and Evaluation Re-
search Lab at Montclair State. She is trained as a developmental scientist
with specific expertise in youth development and program evaluation. She
has published on the application of systems science methodologies to de-
velopmental science questions and on the role of program evaluation and
planning in research-practice integration. She is the co-principal investiga-
tor on the National Science Foundationfunded p roject, A Phase II Trial
of the Systems Evaluation Protocol for Assessing and Improving STEM
Education Evaluation. She holds a B.A. in psychology and child develop-
ment from Tufts University, an M.A. in human development from Cornell
University, and a Ph.D. in human development with a minor in program
evaluation and planning from Cornell University.

Deborah Lowe Vandell (Committee Chair) is a professor of education and


founding dean of the School of Education at the University of Califor-
nia, Irvine. Her research focuses on the effects of developmental contexts
(early child care, K-12 schools, after-school programs, families) on chil-
drens social, behavioral, and academic functioning. She has been elected to
the National Academy of Education and to the Governing Council for the
Society for Research in Child Development. She is a fellow of the American
Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association,
and American Psychological Society. She has served on numerous advisory
boards for the National Academy of Sciences, National Institutes of Health,
and U.S. Department of Education. She started her career as an elementary
school teacher while earning her masters degree in education at Harvard
University and later received a Ph.D. in psychology from Boston University.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Appendix D

Worksheet for Breakout Sessions

The two breakout sessions are opportunities for:

1. Practitioners to reflect on how the workshop presentations and


discussions may be relevant to their own work. The focus of the
first breakout session is program objectives and approaches. The
second breakout session focuses on how programs implement and
evaluate the strategies they use.
2. All participantswhether practitioners, researchers, policy
makers, funders, or othersto track what you are learning from
the presentations and discussions about the four primary themes
of the workshop:

What is Character?
What Works in Developing Character?
Investing in Implementation and Evaluation
Measuring Character

Please feel free to use these worksheets for note-taking during the workshop
and as a guide for discussion during the breakout sessions.

We invite each group to identify a spokesperson to reflect on its findings


about the four topics during the panel discussion at the end of the work-
shop. Each group will have 10 minutes.

107

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

108 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

Breakout Session 1Self-Assessment of Program Boundaries


1. What ideas about character discussed this morning could be helpful in
your work?

How does Larry Nuccis presentation about what character is and the dis-
cussion that followed influence your thinking about your programs objec-
tives, or the role of programs like yours in developing specific attributes?

2. What practices and activities are you using?

Think about the full range of activities and practices used in your program
that may play a role in developing character, and how they may do that.
Begin by writing a list of the major activities of your program. Next, make
a list of the key outcomes your program hopes to address. Draw an arrow
connecting each of the activities to specific outcomes. What research can
you associate with those arrows? Which connections are supported by
research? Which are not?
[Use the table on the next page.]

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

APPENDIX D 109

Practices and Activities How They Develop Character

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

110 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

3. How does Marvin Berkowitzs presentation about research on


practices and features and the discussion that followed influence
your thinking about the practices in your program and how pro-
grams like yours may develop character?

4. What ideas about effective features and practices could help you meet
your objectives?

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

APPENDIX D 111

Key Ideas from Workshop Sessions I and II


to Share in Final Panel Discussion

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

112 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

Breakout Session 2Self-Assessment of Investments in


Implementation and Evaluation
1. Are there ways to strengthen the implementation of the practices and
strategies used in your program?

How does Joe Durlaks presentation about effective program implementa-


tion and the discussion that followed influence your thinking about the
operation of your program and programs like yours?

2. How does/has your organization/program approached evaluation?

What evaluation work, if any, is being done currently?

How has evaluation historically been approached?

How have evaluation results (if any) been used?

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

APPENDIX D 113

3. What strategies might you use to strengthen a culture of continuous


improvement and constructive evaluation?

How does Bill Trochim and Jen Urbans presentation about advancing
evaluation of character building programs and the discussion that fol-
lowed influence your thinking about the role of your program and how
programs like yours can engage in evaluation practice and develop a culture
of evaluation?

What is the evaluation capacity of your current staff?

How would evaluation look for your program in an ideal world?

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

114 APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER

4. What strategies might you use to strengthen staff and leadership?

How does Deb Moroneys presentation about developing a high-quality


staff and the discussion that followed influence your thinking about your
program and how programs like yours can recruit and retain top staff?

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

APPENDIX D 115

Key Ideas from Session III to Share in Final Panel Discussion

Notes from Session IV to Use in Final Discussion

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Approaches to the Development of Character: Proceedings of a Workshop

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Potrebbero piacerti anche