|
Character Education
Effectiveness
Findings
The WWC review of interventions for character education addresses student outcomes in three domains: behavior; knowledge, attitudes, and values; and academic achievement.
Behavior. The San Ramon Study examined four types of student behavior in the classroom and found statistically significant positive effects on two of them (spontaneous prosocial behavior and supportive, friendly and helpful behavior).7 The WWC confirmed the statistical significance of both findings.8 The Six-District Study examined students' altruistic behavior and 19 different indicators of problem behavior and victimization. The study reported statistically significant effects for two outcomes (use of alcohol and use of marijuana). However, none of these outcomes were statistically significant as calculated by the WWC. Additionally, the average effect size across all findings in the behavior domain was not large enough to be considered substantively important by WWC standards (that is, at least 0.25). So, the Six-District Study showed indeterminate effects on behavior.
Knowledge, attitudes, and values. The San Ramon Study examined values, attitudes, and relevant social skills and sense of school as a community of elementary school students. The study reported statistically significant positive effects on several outcomes, including social problem-solving skills and conflict resolution skills, democratic values, consideration of others' needs, and sense of community.9 However, none of these outcomes were statistically significant as calculated by the WWC. The average effect size across all findings in this domain was neither statistically significant nor large enough to be considered substantively important by WWC criteria (that is, at least 0.25). The Six-District Study examined core values, attitudes, and related social-emotional skills of elementary school students and reported statistically significant positive effects on several outcomes, including concern for others, democratic values, conflict resolution skills, outgroup discrepancy score (deviation from friend), liking for school, enjoyment of class, task orientation, and sense of community.10 However, none of these outcomes were statistically significant as calculated by the WWC.8 The average effect size across all findings in this domain was neither statistically significant nor large enough to be considered substantively important by WWC criteria (that is, at least 0.25). So, both studies showed indeterminate effects on knowledge, attitudes, and values.
Academic achievement. The San Ramon Study examined elementary school students' academic performance and reported one statistically significant positive effect on a holistic measure of reading comprehension. However, this effect was not statistically significant as calculated by the WWC.8 In addition, the average effect size across all findings in the academic achievement domain was neither statistically significant nor large enough to be considered substantively important by WWC criteria (that is, at least 0.25). The Six District Study examined elementary school students' academic motivation and performance. It reported statistically significant positive effects on intrinsic academic motivation and achievement in multiple state standardized tests. However, these effects were not statistically significant as calculated by the WWC.9 In addition, the average effect size across all findings in the academic achievement domain was neither statistically significant nor large enough to be considered substantively important by WWC criteria (that is, at least 0.25). So, both studies showed indeterminate effects.
Rating of effectiveness
The WWC rates the effects of an intervention in a given outcome domain as: positive, potentially positive, mixed, no discernible effects, potentially negative, or negative. The rating of effectiveness takes into account four factors: the quality of the research design, the statistical significance of the findings (as calculated by the WWC8), the size of the difference between participants in the intervention condition and the comparison condition, and the consistency in findings across studies (see the WWC Intervention Rating Scheme).
9 These analyses were reported by Battistich et al. (1989), Benninga et al. (1991), Solomon et al. (1996), and in information provided to the WWC by the first study author.
10 These analyses were reported by Battistich et al. (2000), Solomon et al. (2000), and in information provided to the WWC by the first study author.