Enhancing Education: Exploring the Effectiveness of Character Education Programs

In recent years, the education sector has faced challenges such as decreasing teacher retention rates and increasing student behavioral concerns. Character education programs have emerged as a potential solution to address these issues. This article explores the effectiveness of character education programs, examining their impact on both students and teachers.

The Core of Character Education

According to education author Thomas Lackona, the purpose of education is to “help people become smart, and to help them become good.” Character education is the process by which humans learn to interact with society, usually through the teaching of core virtues such as courage, justice, and wisdom. Feelings, thoughts, and actions all work together to form character. Character education can be a stand-alone curriculum, or it can be part of a larger school initiative, such as Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS). Character Education is a Tier 1 Support, meaning it should be offered to all students, not just the ones who show a lack of character.

Character is the set of traits that integrate moral knowledge, emotion, and action, enabling individuals to act as moral agents. Good character can be defined as the ability to know the good, will the good, and act the good (Yildirim and Gürpinar, 2023). In a similar source, character is defined as complex set of psychological traits that enable an individual to act as a moral actor (Berkowitz and Bier, 2004).

A Historical Perspective

Character education has always been important, but its relevance has varied over time. In the eighteenth century, our new nation’s leaders understood that democracy required virtuous citizens who could exercise their rights responsibly. As the majority of our nation’s populace was Protestant Christians, the Bible was the primary source of character education. As more immigrants arrived from predominantly Catholic countries, controversy arose over the correct source material for teaching good character. As Americans began to question traditional power structures in the 1960s, character education declined in American schools. This is in part due to the rise of moral relativism, a more pluralistic society, and the misconception that teaching character means teaching religion. In the 1980s, character education made a resurgence, thanks to the “war on drugs” and the desire to reduce violence. Since then, we have come full circle to educating the whole child. Today’s character education curriculum emphasizes Social-Emotional Learning (SEL).

The Link Between Character Education and Teacher Satisfaction

A study based on the responses of 159 school teachers found a positive correlation between teachers who self-reported that Character Education programs are effective. These teachers also reported a higher level of satisfaction with their teaching career. This suggests that when teachers believe in the value and impact of character education, their own professional fulfillment increases.

Meta-Analysis of Character Education Programs

Character education has become a widely implemented strategy to promote youth development across schools. The definition of character has been controversial, but generally alludes to a complex multidimensional psychological construct encompassing moral, intellectual, self-regulatory, and civic functioning. Character education programs are heterogenous with some focusing on pedagogy and others focusing on peer relationships or mentoring. Programs designed to foster moral reasoning, emotional regulation, civic engagement, and prosocial behavior have gained support, but their actual effectiveness remains contested. Brown and colleagues (2023) undertook a comprehensive meta-analysis, synthesizing 214 studies (N = 307,512) to evaluate the effectiveness of character education programs and examine factors that moderate outcomes.

The authors employed a rigorous multi-phase literature search, identifying studies published up to 2017 across multiple academic databases. Eligible studies featured K-12 populations, included a control condition, and allowed for computation of effect sizes. Each study was rated on eight dimensions of methodological quality, and standardized effect sizes were calculated (Hedges’ g). Moderator analyses examined several variables including program specifics, program targets, program components, and types of outcomes.

The meta-analysis found a small but significant positive effect of character education (mean g = 0.24). Shorter programs, especially single-session and those under a month, showed larger effects. Mentoring programs outperformed those without mentoring, with formal mentoring yielding a mean g = 0.39 versus 0.21 for non-mentored programs. However, only a minority of studies used appropriate statistical corrections for clustering, and high-quality studies showed smaller effects (g = 0.17).

Authors underscore the modest but generally positive outcomes of character education. While the average effects are small, they are meaningful when applied across large populations. Importantly, the presence of negative outcomes in some longer programs highlights the need for careful implementation. Methodological concerns, including lack of replication and inadequate analysis of clustered data, limit confidence in many findings.

The Role of Mentoring in Character Education

Mentoring emerges as a promising factor in character education. Programs that incorporate structured, intentional mentoring, rather than relying solely on curriculum or teacher-led instruction, yield stronger outcomes. For practitioners, the findings advocate for brief, high-impact mentoring models that are replicable and scalable.

Read also: Simple Dota 2 Heroes to Master

Character Education Through Play

Behavior regulation constitutes the majority of character education. Behavior regulation is one of the types of self-regulation. In order for the learning process to take place successfully in children who have just started school, it is very important to have behavior regulation skills in terms of both academic and social performance. In schools, children need to be able to control their behavior in order to direct their attention to certain tasks. The beginning of school is a critical period for the formation of self-regulation skills. A 6 year-old child with well-developed self-regulation skills exhibits behaviors such as waiting for his/her turn, sharing course materials, controlling impulsive behaviors, communicating appropriately, following the routines of school life, and following classroom rules (Blair, 2002; Meyers and Berk, 2014). Children with high self-regulation skills can control their thoughts, emotions and behaviors.

There are different factors that are effective in the acquisition of self-regulation skills on behaviors. Play is one of the most important factors that provide self-regulation skills (Bodrova et al., 2013; Savina, 2014; Whitebread et al., 2009). In play, the child exhibits behaviors such as voluntarily participating in the rules, determining his/her own limitations without being under pressure, designing the rules of the game with his/her friends, agreeing on the roles in the game and fulfilling his/her duties. Thus, they gain self-regulation skills (Savina, 2014). Elias and Berk (2002) stated that children tend to behave in accordance with social norms in play. According to Erikson, when children play, they create their own social space where they follow the rules of behavior of the group they cooperate with. In this social space, which is intertwined with real life, children learn both to behave in accordance with social rules and to transfer these accepted behaviors to their real lives (Meyers and Berk, 2014). In play, children set limits on their own behaviors, which is very important in terms of distinguishing between desired behaviors and undesired behaviors through their own experiences. Because in real life, children unconsciously obey the rules that adults tell them without understanding the reasons. Prohibitions and rules imposed from outside are abstract concepts that are difficult for children to understand. Children can only concretize the rules they encounter in play and learn from them.

Furthermore, research shows that play behavior varies by developmental stage. While younger children often engage in parallel or imaginative play, children in the early elementary years (ages 6-7) increasingly prefer structured, rule-governed games that promote cooperation and social negotiation (Wood, 2013; London Fleer, 2017; Dogan, 2021). These types of games are particularly effective in character education, as they allow children to experience fairness, empathy, and emotional control in contextually meaningful ways (Whitebread et al., 2017).

Designing Effective Character Education Programs

Good character does not happen automatically; it is developed over time through teaching, example, learning and practice. Especially for today's children, character education is of vital importance (Pala, 2011). Character education can be defined as a conscious and pre-planned effort by schools and governments to instill in students basic moral values such as care, honesty, justice, responsibility and respect (Singh, 2019). This education involves the entire school community, including the school culture and curriculum, and is important for the acquisition of important qualities such as justice, care and compassion. It also contributes to the success of democratic societies by promoting values such as civic virtue, respect for the law, and a sense of common good (Singh, 2019). The most general meaning of character education is growing as a human being (McGrath, 2018). Although there are different approaches to how character education programs should be designed, the most important accepted idea is that this education should be provided within the school and curriculum (Berkowitz and Bier, 2004; Lapsley and Narvaez, 2006; Pala, 2011; Singh, 2019). Character education needs to be high-quality and comprehensive, but it is often difficult to find schools that meet all of these standards (Berkowitz, 2002). When the literature is examined, it is understood that there are many programs based on character education, but there is no character education that emphasizes play (Ekşi, 2003; Gökçek, 2007; Turan, 2014; Yilmaz, 2021).

Play plays a critical role in personality development. Because it encourages human relations, supports creativity, increases the joy of living and supports learning. For children, gaining direct experiences enables them to build knowledge, develop abstract thinking and generalize to new situations. Play is also an effective tool for teachers to introduce new ideas and concepts to children (Burriss and Tsao, 2002). With these aspects, it is understood that play is one of the most important elements that support character development (Deger, 2024). Especially competition-style games teach values such as playing according to the rules, appreciating the winner, reacting to defeat in moderation, and experiencing joy in a controlled manner (Yaliz, 2011). Therefore, integrating character education with play-based methods not only meets children's developmental needs but also increases the effectiveness and sustainability of value acquisition (Lickona, 1996; Berkowitz and Bier, 2005). For this reason, it can be predicted that providing character education on the basis of games will lead to positive results in gaining desired behaviors.

Implementing Character Education Programs: Practical Steps

Start by establishing expectations for your program. Chances are good that you have a teacher or group of teachers that is passionate about character education. Study after study shows that students learn and behave better for people with whom they have a positive relationship. Incorporate direct instruction in character education EVERY DAY. By all means possible, institute a homeroom or advisory period that meets daily. The daily interaction also establishes relationship building that is so important for building character. Weekly video announcements centering around character education allow you as the building leader to set the tone for the rest of the building. In general, every student should be participating in the same character education program at the same time. This allows you to establish consistent language surrounding character, which makes communication easier among the building population. Even if you pick a great character education program, sometimes you will have to veer off-plan a little.

A Case Study: Play-Based Character Education Program

This study was planned according to the exploratory sequential design, one of the mixed method designs. In the first stage of the mixed method, qualitative data were collected and the study group and game-based character education program were formed. In the second stage of the research, a randomized model with pretest-posttest control group was used. In this model, there are two groups formed by random assignment. One of the groups is the experimental group and the other is the control group.

The research was conducted in the most crowded school with a socio-economically diverse student population in Düzce Province. In order to determine the study group, opinions were collected from first grade teachers about the undesirable behaviors they observed in students. The collected qualitative data were coded by the researchers and presented in Table 1. Within the framework of the themes and sub-themes, the scope framework of the game-based character education to be implemented was determined. In the quantitative part of the study, criterion sampling method, one of the purposive sampling methods, was used to determine the experimental and control groups. The criterion for inclusion in this study was getting high scores from the behavior assessment scale. First grade teachers were asked to fill out the behavior assessment scale for a total of 180 children. Accordingly, 40 children with the highest scores on the scale were determined as the study group.

The study group was divided equally into two groups (experimental-control) using the random assignment method in accordance with the pretest-posttest control group model. In the study, which initially started as 20 experimental and 20 control groups, children who did not participate in the implementation process were excluded from the study.

The Behavior Assessment Scale for Children (BASC) used in the study is based on self-regulation theory and aims to assess the child's behavior (Chuang et al., 2016). Teachers are aware of children's development and behavior due to their profession (Sişman et al., 2021). Therefore, it was deemed appropriate for teachers to fill out the Behavior Assessment Scale for Children. The Behavior Assessment Scale for Children was developed by Chuang et al. (2016) to make a general assessment of children's behaviors. The Turkish validity and reliability of the scale was conducted by Sişman et al. The scale consists of 17 items and a three-factor structure (cognitive, emotional, and behavioral factors) that is easy to understand and apply. The scale is a 3-point Likert scale and is scored between 0 and 2; 0 points = no match, 1 point = moderate match and 2 points = relatively strong match. A higher score indicates lower performance. The CVI score of the original scale was 0.98. The result of confirmatory factor analysis shows that GFI = 0.90, RMSR = 0.03, RMSA= 0.06 and CFI = 0.94. Cronbach's alpha coefficients of the subscales were reported to range between 0.78 and 0.82 (Chuang et al., 2016). For the Turkish version of the scale, Cronbach's alpha coefficient was found to be 0.73 in the forms filled out by teachers (Sişman et al., 2021).

In the qualitative data collection phase of the study, semi-structured interview technique was used to record individual interviews with teachers in the institutions where they work. The play-based character education program prepared by the researchers was implemented for a total of 12 weeks. The interventions were conducted for a total of 36 sessions of at least 60 min and 3 days a week. While preparing the content of the game-based character education program, a lesson model based on young age groups was created. The lesson started with order exercises, which are the basis of physical education, and continued with games and ended with order exercises again and a motivational speech by the researcher. The reason for game-based character education is to concretize the concept of character education, which is abstract for children in the 6-7 age group, who are first grade students, through games. This study chose a structured and goal-oriented play-based learning approach. This approach aims to help ensure the permanence of behavior change. Considering that this age group learns best through in-game activities, character education content was combined with game content and children were given hands-on activities. The reason for starting the lessons with organization exercises is that these exercises help children learn how to take commands, follow instructions and act in harmony as a group.

While creating game-based character education programs, six main themes were formed by processing the qualitative data obtained from the preliminary interviews with teachers and the main themes were explained with items within themselves. A game-based character education program was developed for the explained items and training was carried out within the framework of the developed program. The six main themes are: congratulations and appreciation, dress, and appearance, compliance with in-game rules (awareness of following the rules), communication, awareness of duty and responsibility, and awareness of environmental cleanliness.

In the selection of games, first of all, games that were suitable for the age group of the children and that they could enjoy were prioritized. Among these, preference was given to games that included content supporting the development of core character education components such as honesty, respect, responsibility, fairness, helpfulness, and cooperation, and that were believed-based on teacher opinions-to contribute to the development of positive behaviors.

During the implementation phase, the role of the implementing teachers was not limited to introducing and supervising the games; rather, they actively engaged in motivating students, providing positive reinforcement, and guiding behavioral reflection. Teachers used encouraging language such as “Great teamwork!”, “That was a very fair decision”, or “I appreciate how you helped your friend” to reinforce desirable behaviors in the moment. When students demonstrated actions aligned with character values, teachers made those behaviors visible and meaningful through immediate verbal feedback and praise. Moreover, in situations where negative behaviors emerged, teachers facilitated reflective conversations by asking guiding questions like “What could we do differently next time?” or “How did that make your friend feel?” to promote empathy and self-awareness.

The suitability of the use of parametric tests in analyzing the data obtained within the scope of the research was examined. Independent Samples t-test, one of the parametric tests, is used to test whether there is a significant difference between the averages of two independent groups. The assumptions for this test are that the total mean scores are at least in the interval scale suitable for comparison, the variable data show normal distribution characteristics in both groups, the two groups are independent from each other, and the variances of the groups are expected to be equal (Can, 2019; Büyüköztürk, 2014; Field, 2009). Among these assumptions; when the assumption that the distribution of the variable data in both groups shows normal distribution characteristics is met, the condition of having at least 10 samples (n1 ≥ 10 and n2 ≥ 10) in each group, the number of samples requir…

Examining Life Skills and Civic Efficacy

Studies that examine character development programs are scarce. This study examines the effect of a week-long character education program in a range of life skills and civic efficacy. Thirty adolescents participated in the training. A no-control, quasi-experimental design incorporated baseline measures and a six-month follow-up. A Life Effectiveness Questionnaire and Civic Efficacy Survey were administered and open-ended questions further explored how participants incorporated program outcomes into their daily lives. The t-test comparison of baseline and pretest measures yielded no significant differences, but t-test comparison of pre-post- test analysis elicited statistically significant positive results.

tags: #character #education #programs #effectiveness