<p>An interesting undertaking. The John Templeton Foundation identified “100 institutions (that) exhibit a strong and inspiring campus-wide ethos that articulates the expectations of personal and civic responsibility in all dimensions of college life.” Comments?</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.collegeandcharacter.org/guide/honorroll.html[/url]”>http://www.collegeandcharacter.org/guide/honorroll.html</a></p>
<p>What no distinctively left of center schools? (Actually they let a couple in by accident. Emory, Earlham, and Hendrix. ;)) No Reed, Wesleyan, Antioch, Warren Wilson? I do believe that the list shows a distinct bias towards more conservative schools. The Curmudgeon Foundation has done an admittedly quick but exhaustive study and found this study bogus.</p>
<p>Quick study wins every time.</p>
<p>If their students don’t wreck TV sets (or defecate out windows), they don’t count:</p>
<p><a href=“WRAPS organizes campus-wide food drive, adapts to COVID restrictions – The Williams Record”>WRAPS organizes campus-wide food drive, adapts to COVID restrictions – The Williams Record;
<p>Thank goodness at least one HYPS made the honor roll, so we don’t have to choose between character and prestige :p.</p>
<p>Half of HYPS made the honor roll. Of course, given this particular honor roll, I’m not certain whether it’s good or bad.</p>
<p>Templeton is very religious and conservative.</p>
<p>Princeton and Yale build character and Harvard and Stanford don’t? Huh? And I’m the registered Princeton fan on the parent board…</p>
<p>Oh well. Whatever. Not that the idea isn’t an interesting one. What sort of traits can a university president build into the culture/promote in the culture/remove from the culture that help his/her insitution to “build character”.</p>
<p>Oh dear. Then we have to define character. And discuss can it be built and is it built through support or many many beatings:).</p>
<p>I guess another question is, can/should this be added as a criteria in the US News Ranking?</p>
<p>PS. Curmodgeon, Like most major northeastern universities, Princeton and Yale are distinctively left of center.</p>
<p>maybe character is what you build once you’ve run out of parts,…</p>
<p>I know, I know!</p>
<p>Let’s make a list based on arbitrary value “X.” </p>
<p>No, we’re not going to tell you exactly what “X” is. That would be too easy! We’re also not going to tell how exactly we came to ranking the list, because we don’t believe in trifles like transparency.</p>
<p>In fact, we’re going to let you have fun by deducing “X” by slogging through our list and trying to figure out what all the schools have in common. We’ll throw in a few prestigious names just to throw you for a loop, make it a little more exciting.</p>
<p>So what it comes down to: we have a list of highly Christian, conservative schools, plus a few secular-but-not-“offensively”-secular well-known powerhouses, just so they can’t accuse us of being biased.</p>
<p>Mm. Delicious.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My S is currently taking a class with one of the members of the Board of Advisors. Since Harvard has been left out of the list of colleges that build character (despite the participation of former and current Harvard faculty) I’ll have to ask my S why his prof is busy teaching whatever he is teaching instead of building character. Sheesh…</p>
<p>“The Curmudgeon Foundation has done an admittedly quick but exhaustive study and found this study bogus.”</p>
<p>does the foundation offer any scholarship in the field of bogusology?</p>
<p>Isn’t this study akin to the peer review component of the US News Rankings, with the difference being that it is an internal review rather than an external one. For that matter doesn’t that make this more effective. I see this as much more than individual teachers trying to build character, but whether the attempt to build character is inherent in the system. More than anything, in my view, that is what is lacking in higher education today!</p>
<p>"Identification Process </p>
<p>The John Templeton Foundation sent a nomination packet to the president, public information officer, and vice president for academic affairs and vice president for student life at all four-year accredited colleges and universities in the United States. Institutions were invited to nominate character-development programs that deserved special recognition. Each college and university was also encouraged to nominate its president for distinguished leadership in the field of character development, as well as to nominate itself for the Templeton Honor Roll designation. In addition, the nomination packet was sent to a wide range of higher-education associations and centers that promote character development as an important aspect of the undergraduate experience. </p>
<p>Each program, institution, and president nominated was promptly mailed an extensive application form that required the contact person to respond in writing to a list of questions that addressed specific selection criteria. </p>
<p>At the same time that the Foundation was receiving nominations and applications, we recognized that some exemplary programs would not receive or return a nomination form to us. Therefore, the Foundation asked the Institute on College Student Values at Florida State University, under the direction of Dr. Jon Dalton, to conduct an exhaustive and comprehensive proactive search to identify additional exemplary programs, presidents, and institutions. Between the nomination process and this proactive search, the researchers at the Institute on College Student Values reviewed more than 2,500 programs and 1,000 institutions. </p>
<p>Selection Process </p>
<p>In collaboration with members of the project’s Advisory Board, the Institute on College Student Values developed a set of rigorous selection criteria for each of the 10 Exemplary Program categories, the Presidential Leadership recognition, and the Templeton Honor Roll designation. The Institute’s research team read, reviewed, and rated each application. Although Florida State University is very committed to character development and has received national recognition for its programs, the University was excluded from consideration in any category to avoid any perception of conflict of interest. "</p>
<p>More:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.collegeandcharacter.org/guide/process.html[/url]”>http://www.collegeandcharacter.org/guide/process.html</a></p>
<p>Sorry. Systems don’t teach. Teachers teach.</p>
<p>That’s apart from defining what values are and what character means. This particular prof is a scientist. I, and am sure others, would think he was out of bounds if he were to discuss issues that have nothing to do with the topic he is supposed to be teaching.</p>
<p>Now I suspect that the reason that he and other scientists are on the Board of Trustees and Advisors has nothing to do with “values” or “character” but with the Templeton Foundation’s interest in reconciling science and religion. And with that, I have no quarrel. Although I am not religious, I think it is a worthwhile mission and I know plenty of scientists who are deeply religious. But that is very different from profs straying from their topics to teach “values” and mold "character, however defined.</p>
<p>Well, my son’s school made the list so I thought this was great, but my daughters is not and it’s whole mission seems to be character building so something’s not right. Oh, and Penn State made it??</p>
<p>If you google this organization you’ll find plenty of references to the need for spirituality in the classroom, spirituality in science, spirituality in auto mechanics. It should be effective in finding schools for students who want more spirituality in their marketing classes. LOL. Wait spirituality and free enterprise. I’m sure there are some schools on that list that have no trouble combining those two. ;)</p>
<p>Could we sic David Horowitz on those teachers who pretend to teach science or whatever but are actually teaching whatever they consider “values?”</p>
<p>And to think I was pretty confident that I’d taught my kids to know right from wrong before I let them loose onto unsuspecting college profs…</p>
<p>Mini - where was the part about defecating out windows?</p>
<p>Before getting to far out of bounds in terms of discussing individual professors and how they may or may not be teaching character or adequately representing the school’s mission in their classroom, let’s understand CLEARLY the mission of the Templeton Fiundation: </p>
<p>“In 1989, the John Templeton Foundation established the Honor Roll for Character-Building Colleges to recognize biennially those institutions that emphasize character development as an integral aspect of the undergraduate experience.”</p>
<p>Seems to me there are many ways to “emphasize character development as an integral aspect of the undergraduate experience” without asking science teachers to set time aside to teach values during their class. Let’s use some common sense.<br>
(Sir) John Templeton is respected around the world. The fact that he devotes time and interest to such a noble cause is a great thing. In a day and age of political hackery, the fact that the foundation kept the school of a board member off the list is refreshing.</p>
<p>It does not matter whether the prof is teaching Japanese language or Quantum mechanics. The profs should not be teaching values or mold character.<br>
Now if the Board member feels strongly about the Templeton mission, either he should be trying to carry it out in class or he should resign from the Templeton Board. Or he should resign from the school.
My common sense tells me that it’s my job to teach my kids my values and mold their characters. It’s not something that I wish delegated to others.</p>