A reader posted a comment, link, suggesting that I inform myself about what it is I'm trying to defend. Actually, based upon my background and experience I consider myself pretty well informed on this issue. Nevertheless, I followed their link to the Wikipedia, link, just to make sure.
There are some problems, they aren't new. One issue is over what to teach; what is ethical, what is moral?
There is no consensus on which terms to use, or even how many pillars or principles to address and that is problematic.
According to the Wikipedia, salvation comes from Aristotle;
The key to finding this balance is to enjoy and recognize the value of developing one’s rational powers, and then using this recognition to determine which actions are appropriate in which circumstances.Developing rational powers and using them to determine what is ethical or moral under the circumstances, requires a certain amount of learning and thinking about ethics and morals.
At the very least, character education requires a common vocabulary and mutually understood tenets. It requires teaching, learning and practicing. None of which will happen if we give up entirely on efforts to provide character education in public schools.
- The formation of character in young people is educationally a different task from and a prior task to, the discussion of the great, difficult ethical controversies of the day. - William J. Bennett, author and former U.S. Secretary of Education (b. 1943)
- If we want our children to possess the traits of character we most admire, we need to teach them what those traits are and why they deserve both admiration and allegiance. Children must learn to identify the forms and content of those traits.- William J. Bennett
- To educate a person in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society. - Theodore Roosevelt, American adventurer and president (1858-1919)
4 comments:
"At the very least, character education requires a common vocabulary and mutually understood tenets. It requires teaching, learning and practicing. None of which will happen if we give up entirely on efforts to provide character education in public schools."
There you go. Apparently, you didn't really read the Wikipedia article because the central issue is that there is no "common vocabulary and mutually understood tenets," either in theory or practice. And there never will be - that's what religions are for: controlling people with conflicting moral certitudes.
Perhaps you need to read the Wikipedia article. While there isn't agreement in on "specific" terms and priorities, the article never suggested that there aren't enough basic concepts and terms that discussions can be had on character and courage and honor in general.
It is possible to understand a tenet without agreeing with it. It is possible to talk about a term without agreeing that it is properly defined.
It never ceases to amaze me; the energy people like you spend poo pooing character education and always with no better option - always the critics never the creators.
If your plan is to do nothing about decaying behavior, then any plan is a better plan, even an imperfect plan.
I wrote the Wikipedia article. Actually, it did suggest exactly that. You are arguing your position based on wishful thinking and speculation, which leads one to wonder if you have a vested interest here.
If not, and you are just poorly informed, your next stop should be to read the references - nearly half of which back up the validity of my point about little if any common understanding between contending CE programs. In fact, you would think there would be more overlap. Nope.
As to your imperfect plan, filling a need that can't be shown to exist is fruitless, therefore pointless.
Sorry
Dear "anonymous"
Sure you did.
Any suggestion that that there are no commonalities at all between programs is flat out wrong. Else, point to a bonafide character education program that doesn't include truth telling and actual accountability to whatever standards they identify.
Interestingly, truth telling and accountability are abhorrent to most powerful people. It's hard to find people who are willing to model honest accountability to meaningful standards of conduct.
Perhaps you can point to a program that failed, in which the senior most role models were honestly accountable to the standards they were modeling.
You have no idea what my position(s) are based on. In fact, they are based on more than a quarter of century of experience in public school classrooms.
I confess to a "vested interest" in the world our children will inherent. Beyond that I have no vested interest. The same cannot be said for you I'm afraid. Honestly, when I was reading the article, I had the distinct impression whomever wrote it was more interested in building resistance to character education than in illuminating it.
The most disturbing thing I read, your contention that character education meets a nonexistent need. Your premise I guess, that children have a natural tendency to hold themselves honestly accountable to meaningful standards conduct, and therefore can be left to their own devices.
Perhaps you need to get out a little more.
Sorry
Post a Comment