2003American Journal of EducationRequires access

What’s Wrong with Character Education?

Michael Davis

Open publisher page 89 citations

Abstract

We can distinguish three sorts of “character education”: (1) simple moral education (essentially, Kohlbergian moral education in the classroom), (2) just‐community education (a Deweyesque practice emphasizing democratic decision making outside the classroom), and (3) simple character education (attempting to build character both in and outside of class one trait at a time by emphasizing good behavior). Simple moral education may have a modest effect on character; just‐community education probably has no greater effect, even though it has considerably higher risks and other costs. But simple moral education suffers from three disadvantages that should lead us to reject it: the disadvantages are empirical (absence of evidence that it does what it claims), conceptual (a conflict between what good character is and the way that simple character education proposes to teach it), and moral (its failure to do the right things for the right reasons).

About this research paper

What this paper is about

We can distinguish three sorts of “character education”: (1) simple moral education (essentially, Kohlbergian moral education in the classroom), (2) just‐community education (a Deweyesque practice emphasizing democratic decision making outside the classroom), and (3) simple character education (attempting to build character both in and outside of class one trait at a time by emphasizing good behavior). Simple moral education may have a modest effect on character; just‐community education probably has no greater effect, even though it has considerably higher risks and other costs. But simple moral education suffers from three disadvantages that should lead us to reject it: the disadvantages are empirical (absence of evidence that it does what it claims), conceptual (a conflict between what good character is and the way that simple character education proposes to teach it), and moral (its failure to do the right things for the right reasons).

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 89 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

We can distinguish three sorts of “character education”: (1) simple moral education (essentially, Kohlbergian moral education in the classroom), (2) just‐community education (a Deweyesque practice emphasizing democratic decision making outside the classroom), and (3) simple character education (attempting to build character both in and outside of class one trait at a time by emphasizing good behavior). Simple moral education may have a modest effect on character; just‐community education probably has no greater effect, even though it has considerably higher risks and other costs. But simple moral education suffers from three disadvantages that should lead us to reject it: the disadvantages are empirical (absence of evidence that it does what it claims), conceptual (a conflict between what good character is and the way that simple character education proposes to teach it), and moral (its failure to do the right things for the right reasons).

Key concepts: Character education, Character (mathematics), Moral character, Simple (philosophy), Moral education, Good moral character, Democracy, Psychology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
What’s Wrong with Character Education? — Research Paper | ScholarLens