The Eleven Principles of Effective Character Education

Character education, by that name and at times by other names, has a long history in the United States. The first author has assembled a library of books on character development and character education in the United States prior to World War II, and it includes nearly 75 volumes dating back to the 1830s, and that is far from complete. Nevertheless, character education has not been a steady focus of scholarly and practical interest, and in fact WWII represented a diminishment of interest that did not resurface significantly for about half a century (cf., McClellan, 1999).The year 1992 was a watershed year for character education in the United States, which at that point was one of very few places in the world using that specific term. Two relatively independent but seminal events marked a reinvigoration of character education in the United States. A meeting was convened in Racine, Wisconsin at the Wingspread Center to discuss a renewed focus on character education. A separate meeting with a similar focus was convened in Aspen Colorado by the Josephson Institute of Ethics, founded and directed by Michael Josephson. Together these two events signaled the beginning of a renaissance for character education, a term that had been used in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, but had been relatively uncommon in the middle third of the 20th century. A few noted scholars, such as Kevin Ryan, Tom Lickona, Jack Benninga, and Ed Wynne, had continued to work under the rubric of “character” during this period. Ryan was the founding director of Boston University’s Center for the Advancement of Ethics and Character (CAEC). In 1996, the CAEC published its Character Education Manifesto (Ryan et al, 1996) and eventually played a central role in applying the 11 principles to school evaluation and recognition.The 1992 Aspen conference, and its resulting Aspen Declaration, spawned Character Counts! The Racine conference spawned the Character Education Partnership (CEP) which was formally established in 1993 and rebranded in 2014 as Character.org. We will use Character.org throughout the rest of this article since that is the current name of usage although legally it remains the Character Education Partnership, with the understanding that the organization was called the Character Education Partnership when most of what we describe here actually transpired.Character.org’s first goal was to support the growth of character education in the United States through a “bringing together” of diverse interested parties, hence the use of the term “partnership” in its name. The idea was to be a convening or “big-tent” or “umbrella” organization; in essence, an organization of organizations. Individual memberships were also encouraged. Character.org intended to treat character education as an inclusive, nonpartisan and ecumenical movement where all with legitimate interest and/or expertise were welcome. Hence the initial board of directors was quite diverse in its members’ perspectives on character education.A year later, in 1994, Amitai Etzioni, a Character.org board member and founder of the centrist public policy group known as the Communitarian Network, furthered this big-tent approach by persuading the Clinton administration to sponsor a series of annual nonpartisan White House conferences on “Character-Building for a Democratic and Civil Society” that brought together a wide variety of stakeholders sharing an interest in fostering character development. In the summer of 1995, the U.S. Department of Education added momentum by announcing it would begin awarding grants to the states to promote character education aimed at teaching “the many common values our children should learn.” This funding initiative, eventually called “Partnerships in Character Education,” brought visibility and prominence to character education. It continued throughout the Clinton administration and was adopted and expanded during the subsequent Bush administration.Success in bringing these diverse groups together—including the federal government—in the common cause of addressing how to foster the character needed for a morally good life and a good society was no small achievement. For several decades, “values education” had been a hot potato that created division rather than consensus. For many schools, the question “Whose values should we teach?” had created educational paralysis and avoidance of coming to grips with this challenge. Other schools dealt with the “whose values?” dilemma by opting for the philosophically problematic value-neutral approach known as “values clarification,” letting students clarify their own values. The emergence of organizations like Character.org and Character Counts!, character education centers like Boston University’s, the White House conferences, and the Department of Education’s grants for character education, taken together, marked a cultural shift. Character education was becoming a national movement; schools were returning to what has been called their oldest mission: educating for virtue and moral development as well as literacy and numeracy.Despite this new consensus, however, challenges remained. As always, the devil was in the details. Character.org saw its role as advocating for character education but also giving schools good guidance. But how to do that? Then, as now, Character.org’s Board of Directors, by design, included persons of diverse backgrounds and philosophical perspectives. As a result of that diversity, there were debates, for example, about issues such as the role of incentives in character education. Should schools focus exclusively on fostering “intrinsic motivation” (doing the right thing because it’s the right thing to do), or was there also a role for rewards and awards in motivating students to form good habits that eventually do not need external incentives? Directors brought diverse perspectives to this and other issues from different theoretical perspectives (for example behaviorism and constructivism).There was even more debate about mission and strategy; what specific role should Character.org play in advising schools? Should it try to be a clearinghouse for character education materials and somehow rate them? Or should it attempt to formulate standards of excellence for “effective character education”—standards specific enough to provide useful guidance but broad enough to encompass and encourage creativity and diversity in how schools went about implementing the standards? Ultimately, Character.org wisely shied away from being a Good Housekeeping-style organization that would decide who or what would get its “stamp of approval.” Rather they decided to be purveyors of criteria for excellence.The Character.org Board of Directors therefore, in early 1995, less than 2 years after its formation, heeded Tom Lickona’s suggestion for a set of “principles.” Tom Lickona was asked to draft such a set of principles for excellent character education. The Board’s intention was to consider them for formal organizational adoption.Lickona relied on two main sources: (1) research for his 1991 book Educating for Character and (2) a white paper written by Eric Schaps and Catherine Lewis for the Developmental Studies Center (now rebranded as the Center for Collaborative Learning). Lickona drafted the Eleven Principles of Effective Character Education. His draft was reviewed by Schaps and Lewis as well as Character.org leadership including Diane Berreth, then an executive with the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Their edits led to the first version of this document, authored by Lickona, Schaps, and Lewis (Lickona et al., 1995) a document that included a short preamble, an articulation of each of the 11 principles, and two to three paragraphs explicating each. A comparison between the original 1995 principles and those now in use (2018) can be found in Table 1. The initial version was officially adopted by the Character.org Board of Directors in April 1995. Soon thereafter, in 1996, Lickona also published a scholarly article on the 11 principles in the Journal of Moral Education (Lickona, 1996).The 11P, as the Eleven Principles of Effective Character Education later came to be known (and as it was eventually trademarked by Character.org), remained simply 11 big ideas about excellent and comprehensive character education until 1997.The primary focus of this paper is the history of the 11P. However, the 11P were expanded in a variety of ways as well as being integrated with other initiatives developed during the course of nearly the past quarter century. The latest, fully articulated version, 2018, can be found in the next article by Tamra Nast (see Nast, this issue). Hence, in order to fully document and understand the history of the 11P, it is necessary to look at the Schools of Character initiative of Character.org, as well as other central developments and initiatives that are linked to the 11P in varied ways. In 1997 and 1998 there were three significant ways that this happened. These included a professional development video, a recognition program, and an evaluation instrument.In 1997, National Professional Resources created and published a video entitled “Eleven Principles of Effective Character Education” featuring Tom Lickona and Catherine Lewis, two of the authors of the 11P document, explicating each of the 11 principles, and including perspectives from other leaders and champions of character education, such as Sanford McDonnell, a founder and long-time board chair of Character.org. It also highlighted a set of schools that exemplified best practices in character education. This use of exemplary schools was a harbinger of a very important parallel development, namely a school excellence recognition program grounded in the 11P.Kevin Ryan, then CAEC executive director and Character.org board member, argued for a school character education excellence recognition program. He was supported in this proposal by Character.org Board Chair Sandy McDonnell. The reasoning was that a national award recognition and competition of this kind would inspire schools to use the 11P, be an incentive for more schools to get involved in character education, spur schools already involved to strive for greater excellence, and attract media attention to the schools chosen as the top “schools of character” for that year.In 1997, Character.org hired Esther Schaeffer as its second executive director. Schaeffer came from directing a nonprofit that worked to interest the business sector in supporting K-12 education. She leveraged her business connections, and contacted Business Week to encourage them to focus on character education. When Business Week (represented by Charlotte Frank then vice president for research and development at McGraw-Hill Educational and Professional Publishing Group) agreed to publish an article, Character.org secured corporate funding with the help of Sandy McDonnell. The result was a corporate-sponsored special section entitled “Schools of Character: Reclaiming America’s Values for Tomorrow’s Workforce.”Schaeffer agreed with Ryan and McDonnell that a school recognition initiative would be desirable for Character.org. Once the Business Week partnership had begun, she discovered that they had a history of award programs for schools. So Schaeffer and Character.org arranged a follow-up collaboration. This then led, in 1998, to Character.org and Business Week plus another of The McGraw-Hill Companies, the Educational and Professional Publishing Group, to create and publish a document with the same name as the 1997 special section of Business Week (Schools of Character: Reclaiming America’s Values for Tomorrow’s Workforce).Schaeffer enlisted the support of Boston University’s CAEC to help design and manage this school-recognition focus of the 1998 publication. The additional support of the John Templeton Foundation made this partnership possible. This free-standing document highlighted 10 schools from 10 states for excellence in character education (and eight more “honorable mention” schools). This document was in fact part of an annual series entitled “The Annual Business Week Awards for Instructional Innovation” (the 1998 character education document was the ninth edition in this series).This partnership was deemed so successful, and not surprisingly aligned so closely with Schaeffer’s vision for this relatively young organization, that Character.org decided to formalize what became known as the National Schools of Character program. At this point there was no clear intention for this program to continue for a long time. Additionally, the issue of how long the imprimatur of being a National School of Character would last was not addressed. In it was to be a and Character.org annual central here is that the 11P were used for the first as standards of excellence in schools. At this was an of the 11P with Boston University’s Center for the Advancement of Ethics and under the leadership of Kevin Ryan, became another Character.org to provide support in the design and administration of the for National Schools of was enlisted by the CAEC to this new initiative, in with Esther to the document, about and organizations with character education to schools they were schools and Schaeffer and and their used the 11P to the and that to about which were then schools were and eight more were for and CAEC the for the 1998 Schaeffer developed with in the and their organizations Tom Lickona and his Center for the and at the of at Kevin Ryan and the CAEC at Boston and Eric Schaps and the Developmental Studies with as Sandy McDonnell and the John Templeton and with other and organizations that supported character education and the Character.org mission as A of this was a long and partnership between Character.org and the John Templeton Foundation as the John Templeton Foundation in this to support the 11P and its school We will to school recognition third of the initiatives on the 11P by were used by Character.org and the CAEC to the schools, no formal to character education this Tom Lickona and his at the Center for the and developed the “Eleven Principles and it was at that 1998 Institute in Character Education. The included under each of the 11 principles in order to each one for Schaeffer and with how and to the 11P to schools for recognition for excellence in character education they the need for such a set of The and of the of Lickona’s “Eleven Principles as the for the later development by the CAEC and Character.org of a set of Character Education Partnership, in Character.org expanded the 11P a more and set of standards for character education CAEC a second from Character.org to the on this Kevin Ryan from the CAEC in 1998 and as executive director. She enlisted a at the to work with her in the initiative to a more evaluation The CAEC and Character.org convened an which included Tom Lickona, and This group the as Lickona had in the Eleven Principles as for each Lickona’s Eleven Principles each was on a from or to The were then to create a for each for this the version of the standards that we had no We it was in and that it was the first These standards were then used for for recognition.The recognition program became known as National Schools of Character but also included National of the 11P did not the or of character education the school the In the early was found to be a and Schaeffer on the of all to 11P and standards continued to be published although they were was and although most of the were not We were to of the 11P published in 1995, 1996, and and of the standards published in and in under the leadership of the two were entitled 11 Principles of Effective Character for School Education Partnership, was added as an focus at this This document was in and then in It is clear these were part of a their to the and work of Character.org, as well as to Character.org’s to with the National Schools of Character recognition program, and with support from the John Templeton the 11P were used as the criteria for evaluation of for National Schools of Character were used in but ways. schools used the 11P as they in a part of the the at Character.org the 11P criteria to the in order to the set to the most Character.org with from the CAEC (and later other external and Character.org each of the schools using the 11P as a for their a of reviewed the school and the using the 11P as Once the standards were they became the rubric for of and is important to that the and the past two In the first year of this the that was with the 10 or 11 schools to be as National Schools of Character was of Tom Lickona, Diane Berreth, Eric Schaps, and Ed In that 11 schools and one were so set of 11 schools and three were as The was to in This continued until with in the of schools and with on the and external had many with of schools and that did not the It was that the use of a for them to 10 each was and not aligned with character education several years of and board it was decided to from the to a At that point it was decided rather than the 10 top schools, a on the would be the for recognition as a National School of In the of to and then to in were in in in in in a new initiative to schools in in and in a significant was added in when for the first recognition was a had long been a for beginning in the early as one of then Esther Schaeffer’s This of recognition for schools is parallel to the national recognition program which has a that the national recognition program. Character.org decided to with varied to excellence at the that would the national recognition program. The of states in Schools of Character has and is in in half of the states in the United States in other to specific character education practices that exemplified each of the principles in a in Character.org had to the fact that many schools that had not to all 11 of the principles in an exemplary did very in these schools and their practices were included in the annual National Schools of This program, called to be very and has growth the In there were already such that had more than and expanded to 11 from an that has continued was to the original that made as a School of Character a This was problematic in two ways. the of schools, and in in school leadership and it was to that a by virtue of the of a National School of would its focus on character education or its of excellence in character education. a as a National School of Character such schools with no for or even in character education. Hence, Character.org a new policy and for It was decided that as a National School or of Character would be for years and they so schools for different standards and a different were for this It is also that at about the same Character.org its from the of competition to the of the became known as one of the the 11P another when one of the of program used in more than the Character.org She the development of an written on the 11P. The idea was to provide a more and more set of about each of the principles, to schools in their to understand and their of She as author and by 11 on each of the principles was authored by and by or in with other of these were by such as Tom Lickona and The included of the principles, from best and to other practical The Eleven Principles was published in In Character.org on the 11P to the Character.org and were the early with eventually the role of and professional development although many eventually also this and Tamra with the and the was the of the was the to but it also the of it included the book for each of the The is a with a video and It is to be where one can of the books for focus on a at a time. However, this led to a of the book and hence less Character.org did attempt to create a less version of the those in Education published a short but with as called Effective Character A for The was to so that they had an understanding of character education practices their The book was from the Eleven Principles eight authors to the goal was to the on It became clear to Character.org, however, that an version would need a for the that Character.org created the Character an The Character includes an course about the 11P that can to through a of and as well as in an where can be are and are and in the past there has been interest Character.org to of the 11P school as a for the development of character in many of most and the This was a of interest by and involved in the use of the 11P, and the Schools of Character program. As and character growth in and National Schools of and as the schools involved and in these by the and other stakeholders to and the 11P in their and organizations. In Character.org had long with the idea of to more and other in their to foster their character development. Sandy McDonnell, the founding Chair of the Board of Directors, was a for in a character education organization that McDonnell founded Character.org, has long had the mission of and expanded interest from the and the Character.org organizational has in led to the of of Character (see this issue). Character.org’s current executive with this worked in the of education, and the corporate The Character.org Board of Directors had and has who this interest in of character education in and has to additional to schools, that would and other organizations to form of In 2018, the expanded vision was articulated as and and The mission is to and to help and groups their character This mission is being aligned with the new and to be a that will continue and for to in and until and our a in as that is for it is also for organizations like Character.org and for like the Eleven Principles of Effective Character Education. principles were first articulated years when a character education was becoming a national but very needed that was grounded in and best The 11P to provide been times to growth in our understanding of what character is and how to foster its development. the help of many the principles a set of that a evaluation (the a national recognition program (Schools of a comprehensive and professional development including a comprehensive of the 11P the Journal of Character the (2018) a Character He that we that question a that character there are such to the 11P to the and will continue to do to Diane Berreth, and for and