An Attempt to Distinguish Colleges by Their Ability to Build Character

[Drosselmeier]

<p>

And Drossl - it’s funny, when you go to Princeton you don’t even think about the honor code. You just absorb it. If I think about it now, the honor code is implemented in a way consist with culture-building. Cheating is absolutely not tolerated. The honor code is visibly supported throughout the university. That said, I still think the list is a refugee from the College of Bogusology…

Yeah. I gather that this is exactly the case, which is why I think if any school is mentioned in a list of superior character building schools, it ought to be Princeton. It seems to me the notion of honor is built right into the culture of the place so that when a student steps outside of it, they no longer feel “Princetonian” (at least that seems to be the goal, however effective it is). I don’t know anything about this Templeton organization. I do believe that the sort of absorbed, private honor that I see being nurtured at Princeton does not often get honored. So, I figure if someone picks up on this and wants to draw attention to it, power to ‘em.</p>

<p>Rorosen:</p>

<p>Your questions are fascinating. I don’t think I can answer them satisfactorily. But I’ll just say my own belief on the value of honor is that it is not just a meme that has infected us. I think it has a basis that is probably grounded in human biology, based right in the mechanical meaning of being human. Ultimately it is knowledge of the fact that You = Me and that each of our behaviors must reflect this essential truth if it is to conform to what we are. If it does not conform to this truth (i.e. should I push a behavior on you that I would not wish done to me), I act qualitatively unlike what I am.</p>

<p>EK:</p>

<p>My point was that volunteering itself is not proof of a focus on inward character, not to say such a focus does not exist in a volunteer or a volunteer program, but that the amount a person volunteers or the size of a volunteer program is not proof that such focus exists. This is especially true if participants in these programs or the programs themselves are gaining admiration, awards, college admissions, and other valuables for their services (which sometimes causes me to wonder if some volunteers are being as altruistic as they appear). I am thinking that Templeton is more interested in schools that are just as interested in building private character as they are in all this public stuff. If so, then it might help us understand why the foundation might not mention a school with a whole lot of volunteerism. Someone once said that character is doing what you know is right, even when it would be impossible ever to be caught or noticed for it. It could be Templeton is trying to deal with this sort of ethic in the policies of schools in addition to the outward stuff we commonly associate with character.</p>

<p>Now, I am not saying that any school not on the list is objectively void of a concern for private character. I personally don’t know anything about most of these schools where that is concerned. I am saying that it could be the case that Templeton has evaluated the policies of the schools and found some of them focused much more evenly on both private and public character than others. If so, I think it is a worthy effort, even if it merely brings attention to the issue of private character.</p>

[anxiousmom]

<p>I’m so glad Ohio U. (my alma mater) is on there… but haven’t a clue why! I remember that many kids were just there to drink and puke, and I don’t remember a shred of anything vaguely character-building or honory. My DD’s U is not on on the list, although it has a student run honor council (<a href=“http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~honor/)%5B/url%5D”>http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~honor/)</a>, and every test, exam, and paper has a signed handwritten statement by the student attesting to compliance with the honor code, and plenty of volunteering, Leadership programs and internships, emphasis on civic engagement, etc. going on. Maybe nobody in the Rice admin office bothered to fill out or return the questionaire? Ha! ;)</p>

[mini]

<p>My d. didn’t apply to a single school that didn’t have an “honor”, many of these codes a hundred years old or more, so what’s the big deal?</p>

[anon94785555]

<p>UW rules! Washington beat out Wisconsin, 110-106 Peace Corps recruits, ending my UW’s longtime leadership. It helps to be a large school to produce the numbers.</p>

<p>I much prefer the schools where you learn without being molded. Wis has a saying (too lazy to look it up) involving winnowing, learning to separate the wheat from the chaff- a much more worthy goal than one idea of character. (BTW- wheat, in Wis?? They switched to dairying because there was too much competition with wheat many years ago…) Also, someone mentions lengthy questionnaires- there is so much more worthy material needing attention I’m sure many schools didn’t bother with this, I wonder what their response rate was. I also suspect some schools are just too liberal for any committee to be able to agree on any such behavioral issues.</p>

[StickerShock]

<p>

This is especially true if participants in these programs or the programs themselves are gaining admiration, awards, college admissions, and other valuables for their services…

Excellent point, Drosselmeier.</p>

<p>As Catholic school kids, we didn’t study all that much Scripture. But the one piece of Scripture that was drilled into our heads daily, both at home & school, was “Don’t blow your own horn.”</p>

<p>Somehow I doubt this list will make a huge impact on application decisions. Use it if you value Templeton’s mission; ignore it if you don’t. When making weighty decisions, seeking more data points & more opinions is a good thing.</p>

[StickerShock]

<p>

Also, someone mentions lengthy questionnaires- there is so much more worthy material needing attention I’m sure many schools didn’t bother with this, I wonder what their response rate was.

Templeton explains how they handle this:

…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>If you don’t think the results are valid, it certainly can’t be blamed on not evaluating & considering enough schools.</p>

[wecandothis]

<p>one school my d applied to that I thought WOULD be on this list, but is not: Univ of San Diego.
Some of the other ones she applied to that I thought WOULD NOT BE on the list, but are: U Miami and UCLA</p>

<p>Do they know something we don’t know, or is this whole thing pretty arbitrary?</p>

[huskem55]

<p>lots of religious-affiliated schools. guess if you’re not religious, you have no chance in hell (no pun intended)</p>

[wecandothis]

<p>but U San Diego is a religious-affiliated school (Catholic), and not on the list, while other very similar schools are ( U Santa Clara etc)</p>

<p>so there is something suspect here with the lack of consistency</p>

[Xanatos]

<p>I’m honestly a little perplexed at the inclusion of Dartmouth on this particular list.</p>

<p>I was also kinda hoping to see BJU and/or PCC.</p>

[Strykur]

<p>This study is nuts! The University of Miami (Thug U to some) is supposed to build CHARACTER?!</p>

[Hanna]

<p>Not to mention DePauw, which has recently taken a public, and well-substantiated, beating for fostering a culture where looks and social status are enormously important…</p>

<p>But not Haverford, with one of the strictest honor codes in the nation? Very strange list.</p>

[paying3tuitions]

<p>right, hanna, no Haverford and no Yeshiva/Stern colleges, either</p>

<p>Those Bogusologists must think Quakers and Jews can’t build cultures of conscience and character, or foster an ethic of “civic duty”…i guess</p>

<p>Ah, well. Just another one of those clubs to which I’d rather not belong.</p>

[coureur]

<p>This list of schools can’t correct, because at least four of the schools are traditional football powerhouses –> winners. And “building character” has long been the exclusive domain of <em>losing</em> football coaches. (“Well, we didn’t win a lot of games, but we sure were building a lot of character in these fine young men.”)</p>

<p>And “character” is a pretty abstract concept anyway (which is why no one can challenge the losing coaches’ assertions), so how does one accurately measure an abstraction?</p>

[Cstixj]

<p>Character.org</p>

<p>The Templeton organization seems to have teamed up with the United Auto Workers Union and General Motors to recognize schools that develop character at the secondary school level as well. At a time when single parent households are at an all time high and crime has become rampant at the secondary school level, I think this is an excellent program. AND I do like the thought of character development carrying on through the college level as well. </p>

<p><a href=“http://www.character.org/site/c.gwKUJhNYJrF/b.993295/k.180D/National_Schools_of_Character_Awards_Program.htm[/url]”>http://www.character.org/site/c.gwKUJhNYJrF/b.993295/k.180D/National_Schools_of_Character_Awards_Program.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[StickerShock]

<p>

Those Bogusologists must think Quakers and Jews can’t build cultures of conscience and character, or foster an ethic of “civic duty”…i guess

You make this assumption because two schools you admire were left off the list? That’s quite a leap.</p>

<p>How many Quaker colleges are there in the entire US? Not many. Even if you count ones like Bryn Mawr that may have been founded by the Quakers, but are non-denominational.</p>

[interesteddad]

<p>You guys should spend a little more time browsing around the Templeton site.</p>

<p>They actually have a list of some 350 colleges – chosen because they excel in one of several different areas. Community service learning, etc. etc.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.collegeandcharacter.org/guide/collegealpha.html[/url]”>http://www.collegeandcharacter.org/guide/collegealpha.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>I can’t tell for sure, but I think the “honor roll” may be the 100 schools added to the lists this year.</p>

[curmudgeon]

<p>

Purpose </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. To date, more than 350 colleges and universities have been named to one or more Honor Rolls.

@interesteddad

I can’t tell for sure, but I think the “honor roll” may be the 100 schools added to the lists this year.

Nope. It doesn’t look like it.</p>

[emeraldkity4]

<p>reviews of Colleges that encourage Character Development- by John Templeton Foundation</p>

<p>from Library Journal

Assembled by the John Templeton Foundation for students, parents, and educators, this work “profiles over 500 college and university programs that inspire students to lead ethical and civic-minded lives.” The book is divided into three major parts: exemplary programs, presidential leadership, and a list of 100 profiles of Templeton Honor Roll colleges and universities. Unfortunately, this is not the comprehensive guide it claims to be; it is in fact subjective and biased. Most selection criteria given are not measurable or justified, and there is no mention of how data was collected and tabulated. (In some cases, a college president is honored but the college itself is not.) It should be pointed out that the mission of every college and university is not only to educate students but also to encourage character development; singling out a group of colleges and universities that place emphasis on character development is thus impossible. Finally, the arrangement of this book makes it difficult to use, and no index is provided. Most college-bound students and their parents will find this book of limited reference value.ASamuel T. Huang, Northern Illinois Univ. Libs., DeKalb

</p>

<p>From Booklist

As character education becomes more popular, coverage of colleges that encourage character development seems most fitting. This publication describes 405 college programs in 10 categories. The guide is geared to parents, educators, potential students, counselors, and college communities.
Established in 1987, the John Templeton Foundation works with educators, theologians, scientists, and others to support academic programs that foster character development. For this book, the foundation invited all four-year universities and colleges in the U.S., as well as a number of higher-education associations, to nominate character-development programs that deserved special recognition. The project’s advisory board collaborated with the Institute on College Student Values at Florida State University to identify additional programs, develop a set of criteria, and rate each nomination. More than 2,500 programs from 1,000 institutions were reviewed. Most schools selected are private, and at least one-third have religious connections.</p>

<p>Programs are listed under 10 categories, including “Student Leadership Programs,” “Spiritual Growth Programs,” “Civic Education Programs,” and “Character and Sexuality Programs.” A half page is given to each school to provide address and contact information, a small photo or school quote, and a summary of relevant programs. In some cases, several efforts are listed; in other cases, different aspects of a single program are noted. About a quarter of the schools appear under more than one category, among them Calvin College, Dartmouth, the U.S. Air Force Academy, Wheaton College, and Yale.</p>

<p>Each college and university that was sent a nomination packet was also encouraged to nominate its president for leadership in the field of character development and to nominate itself for “The Templeton Honor Roll.” These nominations were subject to the same review and rating process as the college programs. Fifty higher-education presidents are given one-page profiles. In the Honor Roll, 100 institutions are cited as “character-building” colleges that “articulate the expectations of personal and civic responsibility in all dimensions of college life.” Each of these schools is allocated one page for a description of their programs and philosophy; coverage in the category listings is cross-referenced in this section.</p>

<p>Additional features include a list of advisory board members, a glossary, and a directory of 70 higher-education organizations that encourage character development. At the end of the volume, programs are indexed alphabetically, by state, and by category.</p>

<p>There appears to be a conservative, Christian emphasis here, but with that limitation in mind, the reader may find this work valuable in college selection. It should be used in conjunction with other guides, because it does not provide information on accreditation, degrees offered, cost, and so on.

</p>

[Cstixj]

<p>Emerald, could you please provide links for us all. Thank you.</p>

<p>I have an inkling that there is a very real correlation between schools that spend time building character and schools with the happiest students. Would anyone agree?</p>