PBIS and Character Education: An Evolution towards Best Practice

From Merle Schwartz, CEP director of education and research

Before I came to CEP in August of 2002, I was a school psychologist in Maine, a learning & behavior specialist, and wrote the first graduate course at that time on PBIS for the University of Southern Maine. Before that, I was a special education teacher for many years. I mention this because, at that time, I had the connection on how PBIS could been done well—and how character education was a foundational missing piece in most schools. Understanding character education allowed me to evolve beyond PBIS.

Although the intent of PBIS (remember it is part of IDEA), was to be proactive and prosocial, it  seems to have morphed back into standard behavior modification techniques. When I work with educators on this topic, and the need for the school to move beyond common “rule” to basic core ethical values, they quickly realize that PBIS does not help develop integrity. In many cases, when the reinforcers stop, the prosocial behavior stops as well.

For schools and states struggling for best practice implementation of PBIS, I try to help educators see PBIS and character education not as an “either-or,” but rather, view character education and core values as setting the foundation that then shapes PBIS so that students “do the right thing for the right reason.” 

What follows is the original piece I wrote about PBIS that may be found in CEP’s wonderful Eleven Principles Sourcebook, guidebook 7 on intrinsic motivation:

In 1997, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) was amended to include positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) as the recommended method for dealing with challenging behavior in children with disabilities. PBIS is an approach that assists students in learning prosocial behavior through, modeling, shaping, cueing, and dialoguing in an environment that is respectful of individual student needs. The PBIS process provides a better understanding of why challenging behavior occurs, i.e., what function the behavior serves, when it happens, what influences it, and what maintains it. In contrast, behavior management systems seek to control student behavior through external inducements that do not teach deficit skills nor develop greater self-awareness in students. 

PBIS and character education are natural partners for improving the educational experience of children with significant behavioral and learning challenges.
Both honor the students’ learning needs by developing student autonomy, a sense of belonging, and competence. Throughout the PBIS process, teachers utilize the strategies of reflection, problem solving, restitution, and social skill training, as appropriate and based on the cognitive ability of the student.

In PBIS, extrinsic rewards and consequences are at times necessary to reduce the problem behavior while the student is learning the replacement social skills. For example, a teacher might help a student track their success in keeping their relationships with others nonagressive by having the student record a tally for each designated period of time they are prosocial in meeting their needs. A certain number of tallies may be traded for special time playing a game with a classmate. While the child is “earning” special time, they are also learning prosocial behavior. From a character education perspective, individual plans should be monitored closely so that as students begin to gain control of their emotions and find more appropriate means for communication, reinforcement moves away from extrinsic rewards and towards social rewards, ultimately emphasizing students’ intrinsic satisfaction in being a good citizen of the school and classroom. This is a much easier process in schools that fosters character development within a caring atmosphere.

Unethical, Illegal, or Just Dumb?

By Joe Mazzola, CEP Executive Director 

I’ve been following the trial of former Congressman William Jefferson in the Washington Post.  (You probably remember the case. He was found with $90,000 stashed in his freezer.  The money, marked by the FBI, was allegedly to be used to bribe the VP of another country. Jefferson was charged with 16 counts of bribery, racketeering and money laundering. ) Two recent articles really got me riled up. They summarize closing arguments by the defense counsel.

Basically, the attorney said his client was “stupid” and “exercised awful judgment,” but he was not a criminal. The lawyer made a distinction between ethics and the law, saying “prosecutors tried to turn what amounted to ethics violations into crimes. They’re trying to bend the law, stretch the facts to turn what is not a crime into a crime.”

Regarding the Congressman’s use of public office to further business deals for himself and family (One allegation is that $400,000 in bribe money went to companies he set up in different family members’ names), the lawyer came back to this point. Yes, he admitted, the Congressman did rely on help from his staff with business matters, and yes, he and his aides did take certain “liberties.” However, the lawyer then added “What is ethical is not the issue in this case.”

Finally, the defense counsel attempted to muddy the waters more by acting as though every politician in Washington was on trial. He said, “The point here is what members of Congress are expected to do in their jobs. If seeking political help was a crime, you could lock up half of Washington, DC.” He likened some of what his client did as “something to be expected of members of Congress,” nothing more than the “customary use of the office.”

Ironically, there is another case taking place, where I heard more about the distinction between what is ethical versus legal. The case involves the former Mayor of DC, Marion Barry, who is now a city councilman. He put his girlfriend on the payroll and doesn’t think it’s a problem. He was quoted in the paper saying basically “if it’s not illegal, then it’s okay.”

Personally, I believe all of this business about making a distinction between what’s unethical versus what’s illegal is flat wrong. In my view, all elected officials hold positions of great trust. They should all be people of good character and simply do the right thing for the right reasons.

Unfortunately, what is described above is the exact opposite, and, regrettably, far too common in today’s society.  However, it does make a good case for why we need intentional character education in our schools.  All of us need to encourage young people to do the right thing for the right reasons…and model it in our own lives.  The more young people see adults quibbling between what is ethical and legal, the more they are apt to take the same approach regarding their own misbehaviors.

Remember, as President Abraham Lincoln said “The philosophy in the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next.”  Wouldn’t it be nice if “customary use of the office” meant maintaining the very highest ethical standards? 

Thanks for encouraging young people to do the right thing!

Ignite ‘The Passion for What is Right’ in Teens

Pam Bylsma, assistant principal at Hinsdale Central High School (IL) offers her insight into developing intrinsic motivation in teens.

Over the course of eight years, Hinsdale Central High School has evolved into a culture where students exhibit ethical and performance values, earning us recognition as a National School of Character.  How did we develop our students’ intrinsic motivation to do the right thing?  How can you work with your teenagers so that they genuinely strive to be their ethical best?

When sharing our story with high school educators, we tell them that it takes time for a new program to build momentum, but in four short years, your entire building will turn over.  So start by finding a group of courageous students and passionate staff.  Collaborate with the students on how to package the message for your student body.  Avoid replicating someone else’s program in your school.  Instead, build it to reflect the school you are and the school you aspire to be.  Empower all of your stakeholders to make a difference.  See leadership potential in everyone.

Back when we started our initiative, we experienced some resistance from students, who were fearful that we were going to preach to them like children.  They dreaded some “cheesy,” moral-for-the-month, condescending homeroom program.  Instead, approach it as we did, and respect the dignity of your teenage students by inviting them to the table to reflect honestly about their world, their lives, and their school.  Through focus groups and surveys, bravely ask tough questions, hold your breath, and hear the truth.  Your students will expose problems that the adults in your building haven’t seen or don’t understand. When you do this authentically, your teens will find their voice and, ultimately, their power.

After you ask students what type of world they want to exist in, reassure them that they have the power to craft any reality they want, and you will help them do it.  Their intrinsic motivation will flourish if you take a bold step and commit wholeheartedly to the concept of shared leadership.  In other words, allow your students to generate solutions to the issues that distress them.  Our tendency as educators is to swoop in and fix the problems for them, which only undermines the development of their intrinsic motivation.  The key is to engage the students in the task of re-culturing their school. Emboldened by their aspirations and the trust of adults, teenagers become empowered to solve their challenges. Their peers, inspired by their positive example, will join the movement, adding more innovative ideas and energy. The cumulative impact will result in students of good character becoming the norm and not the exception.

When working to build students’ self-motivation, it is critically important to know what not to do.  Avoid implying that character education is being instituted at your school in order to “fix the kids.”  Students will recoil against a message of this type.  You don’t want to communicate to your students that character education is something that you are doing to them.  Rather, your goal should be for students to see adults working along side of them, building our character day to day, seeking to adhere to the same values that we want them to aspire to.  We all build our character everyday by the choices we make; therefore, people need continual opportunities to make better moral choices, to try again, to improve.  Teenagers are more likely to be motivated toward positive change if someone believes in their capacity to do so.  Youth need support through intentional coaching, modeling, and goal setting.  By putting your school’s core ethical values into each teen’s consciousness, students are more likely to develop the intrinsic motivation to strive to be their best ethical selves.

In conclusion, being committed to the concept of shared leadership takes courage on your part.  You need to be willing, as we were, to step back and trust students to take on bold responsibilities. Our students never cease to amaze us.  They dream big and then they work hard to make those dreams come true.  Their ability to envision a better world is inspirational; their energy electrifying.  Transformational is the word that comes to mind.

Character Integration – authentic or artificial?

Which is best? Or does it matter? In our preK-3 character building, the character lessons serve as something tangible for our young students to connect with and hold on to as they learn all about the pillars of character. Because of their developmental age, trustworthiness, for example, is kind of an abstract concept, but when we pitch a quarter – which represents a lie – in to a bucket of water and then give the students an “honest abe” penny to pitch in to show that it’s impossible to cover up a lie, now we’ve done some science with the water displacement and given students a concrete visual of the ripple effects that lying and then trying to cover it up can have.

When teachers seize teachable moments in their classrooms to build character, they’re doing much of the same but seemingly a bit more authentically since the integration isn’t in the shape of a formal lesson. Morning Meetings or Sensitivity Circles help to accomplish the same integration goal by creating a safe place to share and modeling listening and empathy to connect a classroom community.

This year our high school PALs formed Integrity Teams and taught character lessons; there was a great deal of engagement in the lessons delivered by their teenage role models! But were those lessons more powerful than when those same teens modeled good character by performing their traditional German Dances for us or leading us in a Red Ribbon pep rally? It probably depends upon the learner. 

Just as there are many different learning styles, so we have many, many ways to integrate character into our curriculum, all equally ‘value-able’ methods if they can empower our students with character strength.

What is the impact of awards programs on students?

Lara Maupin, Associate Director of the National Schools of Character, reflects on her son’s feelings about end-of year awards. We welcome your comments on the value of awards and how best to foster intrinsic motivation. Click on the comment button below to responds.

It is that awards assembly time of year again, and many schools with an interest in character education, such as the public elementary school my own children attend, are giving out awards to students for exemplifying core values such as honesty, respect, and responsibility. In my work at CEP, I have encountered many such programs that I would consider effective and thoughtfully implemented.

My 10-year-old son received such awards for most of his years in elementary school but did not last year or again this year. Spurred by recent debate over the possible unintended negative consequences of such awards on young children, I asked my son how he felt about not receiving an award for honesty or one of the other values again this year.

He said, “It makes me feel like my teachers don’t notice the good things I do. They focus on the bad.”

That really made me think. Not because I worry about my son’s self esteem or because I think every kid should get a trophy for just showing up. Because I don’t. My son plays baseball and is an actor: he’s resilient. But I also know he struggles each and every day to do his best and be a good kid, and if these awards make him think his teachers don’t see this in him, I have to question their value.

So I ask, what is the impact of such awards or other “caught being good” programs on students, some of whom may be struggling with issues that make just keeping it all together at school an accomplishment? What are the best ways to foster intrinsic motivation and commitment to core values in students? For those who value and implement such recognition programs, how do you reflect on these issues and ensure that your programs do not unintentionally cause harm?

More on Integrating Character Education

Dr. Peter R. Greer, former headmaster of Montclair Kimberly Academy (NJ) and member of CEP’s Blue Ribbon Panel, adds to the dialogue on integrating character education into the curriculum. He is the author of “Character Education on the Cheap”  [  http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2007/11/14/12greer.h27.html.]

I agree with Dr. Berkowitz and Mrs. Stoodley (and they with Aristotle) that merely having intellectual discussions (theoretical wisdom; the head) about the virtues/character/values is merely “half a loaf,” BUT IT IS HALF THE LOAF!  The other half loaf is practicing good habits (practical wisdom; the hand).  Constant activities (the hand) without the theoretical background (the head) do not make for student retention, the formation of good habits, etc.  

How can you have a social climate of respect if you have not discussed/reflected on what the virtue of respect is and then attempted to form good habits regarding that virtue — stumbling at times, but working toward the “aim” of respecting others and yourself?  What is conflict resolution without an understanding and practicing of the virtues of courage, self-control, justice, wisdom, and respect and responsibility?  How serious are classroom discussions and school projects when students study one virtue/value a month — never suspecting that in a single situation, one might be forced to see injustice and practice courage and responsibility to the best of one’s abilities and with the right intent?

Character education comes from teacher exemplars; character education comes from discussions/reflections within academic areas; character education comes from activities — the wisdom from doing those activities.  I think I understand Dr. Berkowitz’ idea when he says that “…it is more about the pedagogy than the content.”  But, how can you not teach the content of the virtues/values — at the same time you are empowering students to choose a service learning project; at the same time you are using cooperative learning (not merely a technique, but an opportunity to understand better the fundamental trait of “taking others seriously as persons — and yourself seriously”; at the same time you are connecting (relevance) with the students?

The content of the virtues/values (I like virtues and I like what Kevin Ryan says about the difference) is more than a booster shot or turbo-charge, the content is half the loaf.  You wouldn’t know that reading the school applications.  The loaf is 1/2 SEL and 1/2 strategies and activities.

I would like to hear more about why Dr. Berkowitz says that integration into the curriculum in prepared lessons is vastly overrated; what he means by “a novice school” (no in-service? no character curriculum or plan? no attention to the 11 Principles?).

I would suggest that the very fact that schools and other character groups do little to nothing to help teachers feel competent and confident about what the virtues (values) actually mean is a poor foundation for constantly and spontaneously addressing character in academic lessons (unless it is the value /Pillar of the month variety — whereby activities, not serious theoretical knowledge, reflection, and action are the norm).  

I would suggest that integration of character education in the daily curriculum and school life is currently more of a goal than a reality. 

Integrating Character Education Into the Curriculum

Read the recent dialogue between Marvin Berkowitz, Professor of Character Education at University of Missouri-St. Louis and Janice Stoodley, Director of the National Schools of Character. We invite your comments. How do you integrate character education into your curriculum?

Friday, May 15, 2009 4:28 PM
Hi Marvin,
Thanks for the feedback. There was much discussion on the panel [the Blue Ribbon Panel who selects the National Schools of Character]  this year about extrinsic motivation (they were tougher on this than sometimes in the past) and about integration into the curriculum and wanting to see sample lessons.
Janice

Friday, May 15, 2009 5:30 PM
Janice,
Integration into the curriculum in prepared lessons is vastly overrated. (1) For novice schools, it is very hard to do. (2) For mature schools, it is constantly spontaneously addressed in academic lessons.
Marvin

Friday, May 15, 2009 4:48 PM
Marvin,
What about the ones in the middle? Are you saying people shouldn’t look at their curriculums and find ways to integrate? That’s a whole different message from what I hear from other experts. As a former high school English teacher, I think I could point to specific content where I addressed character and moral issues. I agree that it doesn’t have to be a blow by blow description in a book somewhere. Although if teachers saw that the district had done that, they would get a strong message that it is an expectation.
Janice

Friday, May 15, 2009 5:51 PM
Janice,
Not saying it should not be done. Just saying that intellectual discussions of character probably only impact moral reasoning and moral knowledge, but not values, motives, social competencies, etc. So it is a good strategy, but less important than creating a social climate of respect, caring, etc. that is lived out by all community members.
Marvin

Sat May 16, 2009 2:53 AM
I agree, I agree. The social climate is the most important part.
Janice

Janice,
Was thinking about our exchange this AM. One thing most people don’t seem to “get” about character ed and academics is that character ed actually promotes academic achievement. When they do get that, they assume it is because we integrate character ed into the academic content. There are two nuances to this. First, the content does not have to be about character (Ron Berger never thought he was a character educator until Tom Lickona pointed it out). Second, it is more about the pedagogy than the content.

Integration is most effective when we teach academic content (any academic content) through character-building methods; e.g., a pedagogy of empowerment (student-generated service learning projects), a pedagogy of collaboration (cooperative learning was found to promote character development well before character ed got its hands on it…look at how many best practices are about collaborative work), a pedagogy of relevance (content that is connected to the lives of students), etc. This is where the rubber really hits the road.

Now, I think it is still a booster shot (turbo-charging?) if you also mine the character specific content in the academic curriculum at the same time (Ron Berger does many of his projects around service to others, but not all of them).

And finally, peer discussion of ethical issues does promote socio-moral critical thinking capacities.

Well, it is 8 AM on Saturday, so I better go to the gym (soccer senior olympics in a week and I am still rehabbing a muscle tear) and then do chores.
Marvin

Sat May 16, 2009 4:04 PM
Marvin,
Thanks for your very thoughtful analysis. I agree with you 100% re academic achievement. But if we want people who are honest, etc., we have to talk about moral issues at some point. Through the curriculum is a logical place, yes?

Good luck on your senior Olympics competition. I just got back from a 60-mile bike ride and I’m whipped.
Best,
Janice

Sunday, May 17, 2009 10:43 AM
Janice
I disagree (not about being whipped by the bike ride). There is too much research in disparage arenas that suggests that learning ABOUT a content is not a very powerful impact on character related to the content (e.g., preventing unhealthy behaviors, participating in public service or civic arenas, honesty and other character issues). It doesn’t hurt, but the real change in the heart and hand comes from how others treat you, the models others present, the experiences you have related to those contents (e.g., working collaboratively alongside others), and from direct mastery of SEL skills you need to act effectively in those ways (e.g., peer resistance to drug overtures).Learning ABOUT helps in providing accurate information (social norming in drug prevention so kids know how much is actually used) and discussions of it help stimulate critical thinking about those contents (e.g., moral dilemma discussions promote moral reasoning competencies). But in the latter case, it is the wedding of the content with the pedagogy that matters, not just exposure to the content.

I know this stuff gets pretty complex and that is why I say character ed IS rocket science and why so many fall so short in effective implementation. They simply don’t know why they are doing what they are doing nor know what really works.
Marvin

Tuesday, May 19, 2009 2:13 PM
Hi Marvin,
I don’t disagree with you at all that learning ABOUT a content doesn’t change behavior. However, learning content from a teacher the student respects, admires, etc. is another story. I’m just arguing that the content needs to be there.
Janice

Tuesday, May 19, 2009 6:47 PM
Glad to stir up a controversy. I would argue that learning physics from a teacher who is respectful, responsible, caring etc. would promote character development whereas learning character from a teacher who is not a role model will not (and in fact will hurt). Sure, both together are ideal, but I think more of the developmental power comes from what others do and not from what they say (and there is data to back me up).
Marvin

Wednesday, May 20, 2009 9:28 AM
No controversy here. I agree with you 100%, but the physics teacher would be even more successful in teaching values if he/she also talked about/taught them. I know you agree.
Janice

2009 National Schools of Character Award Winners Announced

The Character Education Partnership (CEP) has named seven public schools, one charter school, one private school, and one school district as 2009 National Schools of Character. Read the Press Release.

O, Captain, my Captain

“Crisis doesn’t necessarily make character, but it certainly reveals it.” 

–John Maxwell, leadership and management author

 

Recently, we have witnessed and celebrated the heroics of two captains.  The first was Captain “Sully” Sullenberger, who successfully landed his jet on the Hudson River and then made sure that every passenger was safely out of the cabin before stepping to safety himself.   The other was Captain Richard Phillips.  He surrendered himself to pirates off the coast of Africa to protect his crew.  These incidents could have been tragic, but they turned out okay.

Both captains were in positions of leadership.  They were responsible for the lives of others.  And, when tested under the most stressful of circumstances, they demonstrated great character.  They both put others ahead of themselves, risking their own lives in the process.   The two men further demonstrated good character after the fact.  Many of us were struck by their genuine humility and thought it was so nice to see them recognize others involved in their two miracles—the “true heroes,” as they called them.

In an editorial following the rescue, three different leadership scholars commented on the actions of Captain Phillips.  One of them said, “Wow.  What remarkable courage.  Not many people would have done that.”  The other two basically said that he merely did what was expected of any captain. 

I disagree. If Captain Phillips’ behavior was merely the expected, then why don’t we see such behavior more often? 

My hunch is that neither Captain Sully nor Captain Phillips had to even think about what to do at “crunch time.”  Instead, they likely just responded on instinct to do the right thing.  That is true with all people of good character.  As Aristotle observed, we are what we repeatedly do.  Although I don’t know it for a fact, I also have a hunch that both captains were raised to do what was right, and then had it reinforced later in school, for example at the Air Force Academy, in the case of Captain Sully.

Good character is more than talk or a title.  It is doing what is right, especially when the stakes are high. Maxwell said, “Adversity forms a crossroads that makes a person choose one of two paths:  compromise or character.”  These two captains were at a crossroad of adversity.   They were tested but did not compromise.  They chose character and did the right thing.    

Wouldn’t be great if everyone, especially our current “Captains of Industry,” were cut from the same cloth as Captain Sully and Captain Richards and put others ahead of themselves?  How can we ensure that children growing up today will have this strength of character?

Joe Mazzola

Executive Director, CEP

 

2009 Conference – 16th National Forum on Character Education

“Citizens of Character – the Foundation
of Democracy”
October 29-31, 2009
Hilton Alexandria Mark Center
Alexandria, Virginia

This year’s conference will feature many exciting and motivational speakers, for information on the upcoming conference please visit CEP’s official website. Also, be sure to add this blog to your RSS feed and please feel free to contribute your comments on articles found here. We hope to extend CEP’s Forum on Character throughout the year and create a presence for ongoing sharing and collbaoration.

http://www.character.org/cepforum