PDC Thursday
Roundtables—February 7, 2013:
Topic: Teaching
Character Beyond the Classroom – Residential Life Curriculums
Attendees:
Teddy Wenner, Dave
Facciani, Hans Doerr, Mike Eckert, Tiffany Zimmerman, Ryan Pagotto, Rachel
Stone, Carolyn Conforti-Browse, Jason Beck
Reading:
Selections from PDC Blog
Posts
Thoughts: Teaching character and
values at Blair is something we all feel strongly about, yet how do we
communicate these values to our students?
And what is the role that residential life plays in educating the whole
student?
Particular questions and
issues that were raised:
- A formal Residential life curriculum comes with both pros and cons. At Blair, we have relied on Prefect modeling in the dorms, organic conversations about values at the dorm level, in classes, and with advisors, etc. A one-size fits all curriculum would likely saddle larger dorms with a very different burden than smaller dorms and raise questions about buy-in.
- Organic approaches to character and values work at Blair, but how can we be more intentional about our residential life focus? Public speaking has become a part of the regular conversation on campus and as a result it seems to have improved across campus. Would consistency in conversations about character and values have a similar effect?
- Tiffany reminded us of the Search Institute’s 40 Assets of Developmental Assets (see link below) and Hans brought of Tough’s commentary on the Kipp/Riverdale 7 Character Essentials – both could provide models for a shared curriculum and focus at Blair.
- Community-wide Essential Questions (as used by Francis Parker and others) could be an effective way to guide the conversation and a school-wide curriculum on character and values. Could align with chapel, vespers, dorm, prefects, advisors, even Skeptics and coursework… A shared reading?
- Would a Character Curriculum “Independent Study” that students could elect to participate in be a nice way to elevate the conversation? Or should the program be more advisor-centric?
- What do we want our graduate to value when they cross the stage? Is there faculty agreement on what values these are? Should there be?
- Housemasters could be empowered to develop their own curriculums and use prefect and student involvement in that process.
- Could we align a residential life conversation/curriculum with the CHAT program? Is it time to consider a new approach to CHAT given the current challenges? A look at Loomis’s Center for the Common Good classes or a new model of larger presentations then follow-up in dorms for CHAT?
- It was suggested that Prefect Program could be more engaged in these conversations on a formal basis. Could we put more structure in place for them on this issue of character conversations with the kids in the dorm?
- Should we re-consider the role of the Dorm Staff and our expectations of them beyond the absolute basic nature of dorm duty?
- Would the use of “badges” for character be a way to engage the kids and provide structure?
Action items:
- Continue the conversation about more formal structure for residential and community conversations about character and values.
- Look at revising CHAT and consider aligning it with a community-wide Essential Question and other programs.
- Develop a shared vocabulary of character values and/or graduate outcomes that all faculty agree on.
- Survey community about their perception of what comprises character.
- Consider more synchronicity between prefects, class councils, weekend activities, housemasters, vespers, chapel, CHAT, and the advisor program.
- Look at intentional ways to focus this conversation in the community.
Looking
Ahead: Thursday, February 14th at 7:00 PM
in the Wean Dining Hall.
Topic: Foundational Questions: What We Live and Believe
Topic: Foundational Questions: What We Live and Believe
Thursday, February 21st at 7:00 PM in the Wean Dining Hall.
Topic: Advanced Placement Courses: Academic handcuffs or a valuable curriculum?
Topic: Advanced Placement Courses: Academic handcuffs or a valuable curriculum?
Thanks Jason - covers everything we discussed and lots of areas to continue discussing.
ReplyDeleteVery interesting and important dialogue that I look forward to contributing to. An approach I'm exploring and would enjoy hearing commentary about is the application of the Good Work Project http://www.thegoodproject.org/. Curious to know everyone's thoughts on it. Keep up the great conversations and look forward to seeing you soon. - Chris Fortunato
ReplyDeleteJust some feedback. The religion dept mission statement is all about character and values education. Likewise the HRC should be in your list of groups like dorm staffs, prefect, CHAT, Chapels and Vespers. We require students already to take at least one semester where character education is addressed. However, I agree that that alone would not be enough so I applaud this conversation and agree with the questions at the end of the blog piece. Keep me posted as things develop as I am a member of a national network of character educators called, The Center for Spiritual and Ethical Education. Through this group there has been a lot of work done with independent schools to implement campus wide strategies for ethical ed. and character building so we can add this group to the list of resources.
ReplyDeleteI really like Tiffany's poster on character ed and the values we would want to promote. I can't imagine any of us objecting to any of the goals on that poster.
Cindy Crowner
Unfortunately, the fact is that there is no evidence that character education programs are needed or effective.
ReplyDeleteWhat if you knew there was a conclusive study about it which proves that it does absolutely nothing except waste time and money? Yes, research when you plan to experiment on students is prudent.
October 2010, a federal study*, the largest and most thorough ever conducted, found that school-wide Character Education programs produce exactly ZERO improvements in student behavior or academic performance.
It's no surprise. Besides the fact that there is no theoretical basis for character education, just take a look at the lists of values and goals of the dozens of competing CE offerings. The lack of agreement between the lists is one of the most damning aspects of character education! It also becomes obvious that the majority of the values follow a monolithic conservative agenda, concerned with conformity, submitting to authority, not making a fuss...
One thing all these programs do agree on is what values are NOT included on their lists of core values. Not found, even though they are fundamental to the history and success of our nation are such noted values as independence, calculated risk, ingenuity, curiosity, critical thinking, skepticism, and even moderation. "Take chances, make mistakes, get messy!" the famous saying by Ms. Frizzle on the much celebrated TV show, The Magic School Bus, embodies values that would be antithetical to those found in today’s character education.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_education#Issues_and_controversies
*"Efficacy of Schoolwide Programs to Promote Social and Character Development and Reduce Problem Behavior in Elementary School Children" The Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. October 2010.