by Mark Hyatt, President & CEO, Character Education Partnership
As a parent, former school superintendent and now President of a national, education-based nonprofit, I have long agreed with the profound point made by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who said in 1947, “Intelligence is not enough. Intelligence plus character,that is the goal of true education.”
For much of our history as a nation, schools did focus on both academics and character development. One prepared young people to succeed in the workforce, and the other prepared them to be more honest, ethical, engaged citizens. Over time, however, we drifted away from the character mission of schools to focus exclusively on academics.
It is my hope that Paul Tough’s new book, “How Children Succeed,” will get character development on the national radar scope again and, more importantly, back into schools where it belongs. In his book, Tough does a good job looking at the current approach to parenting and education, as well as the types of character traits he believes are necessary for young people to succeed in school and beyond. His research suggests that one especially important virtue, grit, should become the cornerstone of education reform.
Regarding parenting, Tough says moms and dads are worried too much about their children’s self esteem—and, ironically, it is hurting, rather than helping them. Basically, many parents insulate their kids from adversity or failure, thinking it would wound them in some way. In reality though, he says the opposite is true—that improvement and growth don’t come from happy talk and slogans about how anything is possible. Instead, real growth comes by helping kids to learn from failures, mistakes or when they come up short.
As for education, Paul Tough says we’re missing the target there in several ways, too. One, for example, is our over-reliance on SAT and ACT scores to predict success in college. The idea behind using them is to make up for GPAs, which many consider arbitrary. How, for example, could a college admissions officer compare a 3.0 GPA from a high school student in a wealthy suburb of Washington, DC, with a 3.0 GPA from a student in rural America or small town USA?
The logic behind using the SAT/ACT as a common denominator sounds quite reasonable. As such, the scores for many years have carried great weight when selecting young people for college admission. However, Tough claims that a student’s GPA, regardless of where it was earned, is actually a better predictor of success in college. The reason, he says, is that GPA reflects more than just cognitive skill. It reflects other qualities important for college-level work (and life), such as determination or “grit” (a great word, by the way, but one we hardly ever use).
Again, from the prism of parent, veteran school administrator, and nonprofit leader, I agree with Paul Tough’s findings and recommendations. There is indeed a better way to prepare young people for success in school and in life. We should heed his advice and allow kids to experience and learn from failures and mistakes. We should also look beyond cognitive skills when judging a young person’s potential. Finally, we should bring back character development in our schools.
The organization I lead, Character Education Partnership (CEP), has studied schools for nearly 15 years. Along the way, we have discovered 11 Principles of Effective Education. We have seen over and over how following these 11 guidelines in a comprehensive or holistic way, and intentionally focusing on developing good character in students, can positively transform schools. Schools become safe, caring, supportive environments where students are allowed to flourish academically and in other ways. It also helps prepare those same young people to become more responsible, compassionate, accepting, engaged citizens for our communities, nation and world.
Sounds nice, I know. But what about those pesky metrics? Well, we’ve also found from our experience that key metrics also move in the right direction at schools where they do the character building right. Take just one example from the 44 schools we identified and recognized in 2011 as National Schools of Character: Lindbergh High School in St. Louis, Missouri. Since the school implemented character education in 1999, student achievement on Missouri’s tests improved from 24 to 84 percent proficient/advanced in math and from 10 to 66 percent in communication arts. Today the school is recognized as one of Missouri’s Top Ten Highest Performing Schools.
Data points from all 44 schools show similar gains: 87% of students reported they felt safe or that bullying was rare; 89% of the schools reporting said they experienced declines in disciplinary referrals or had rates that were extremely low; 100% of the schools reporting experienced an increase in state reading and math scores; and 78% of the schools made Annual Yearly Progress (AYP), well above the national average.
Based on what we have seen consistently for many years of studying and evaluating schools, I believe Paul Tough is also right when suggesting that paying more attention to key character traits can even become a cornerstone of effective school reform across The United States. You see, this is not an either-or proposition. Good character education is simply good education. Intelligence plus character–that is the goal of true education.
