Links Between Character, School Connectedness, Conduct, and Grades

In this Teachers College Record article, Scott Seider, Sarah Novick, and Jessica Gomez (Boston University) and Jennifer Gilbert (Vanderbilt University) report on their study of two kinds of character in students: (a) performance character (e.g., persistence, self-discipline, and grit), and (b) moral character manifested in interpersonal relationships (e.g., empathy and integrity). The researchers wanted to know which kind of character was most predictive of students’ academic achievement and conduct. Their study was conducted in three “no excuses” inner-city charter middle schools in a major northeastern city. 

Seider, Novick, Gomez, and Gilbert found a strong correlation between performance character and students’ academic achievement. Was this character trait malleable – subject to school interventions? Although the evidence was correlational, one data point suggested that improvements in performance character led to improved academic achievement: students in one of the schools received support from their advisory teachers on developing a study schedule to prepare for mid-year exams and their grades went up. This suggests, say the authors, that “when educators actively seek out and implement the classroom supports that strengthen their students’ ability to persevere on academic tasks,” better achievement is the result. 

As for moral character, Seider et al. found a negative correlation with academic achievement – that is, students who expressed the strongest commitment to integrity in their academic work got the lowest grades, on average, and those who were willing to compromise ethical standards by engaging in cheating and plagiarism got the highest grades. What’s going on here? The researchers speculate that this troubling effect may be an unintended side effect of the three schools’ (largely laudable) emphasis on grades, academic achievement, and college readiness. This included one school’s public celebration and special T-shirts for students who did well on interim assessments. “Put another way,” say Seider and colleagues, “students are more likely to compromise their integrity in school communities that place an intensive emphasis on performance.” 

In their study, the researchers noticed three other strong correlations. First, students who received the greatest number of disciplinary demerits had, on average, the lowest grade-point averages. “[O]ne explanation that has been offered for this relationship is that students who engage in relatively few disruptive or anti-social behaviors allow their teachers greater opportunities to engage them in effective teaching and learning,” say the authors. “A second possibility is that educators tend to reward students who exhibit good behavior with higher academic grades.” 

Another correlation was that students who expressed the strongest commitment to approaching their academic work with integrity received, on average, the fewest demerits. Seider et al. speculate that this happened because teachers emphasized mastery (versus competitive) goals with these students. “In other words, students are more committed to achieving with integrity when they perceive the goal of their learning to be mastering academic content rather than earning high academic marks,” they say. “One potential explanation, then, for the relationship between academic integrity and student conduct is that strengthening students’ investment in mastering academic content simultaneously increases their commitment to achieving with integrity and decreases their motivation to engage in behaviors that will disrupt the teaching and learning process.” 

A third correlation was between students’ feelings of “school connectedness” and academic achievement – a strong correlation that was independent of performance and ethical character. Exploring the question of causation, Seider et al. note that all three schools held weekly community meetings and advisory groups designed to build a strong bond with students. Perhaps the relationship is bi-directional, they speculate: “Namely, students who feel a strong personal connection to their teachers and classmates are likely to put greater effort into their school work, and, in so doing, to earn higher academic grades. Likewise, students who earn high academic grades are likely to experience a greater sense of connection to their school community as a result of this form of positive reinforcement from their teachers.” Interestingly, one of the schools presents an outstanding student with its DuBois Award at each week’s assembly, highlighting the ways a student can draw on his or her learning to change the world. This may heighten students’ investment in learning rather than (as may occur in one of the other school’s competitive awards) doing better than other students. 

In conclusion, Seider, Novick, Gomez, and Gilbert suggest that schools should emphasize moral character as well as performance grades in their classrooms: grit, self-control, optimism, and zest – and also integrity and empathy. 

“The Role of Moral and Performance Character Strengths in Predicting Achievement and Conduct Among Urban Middle-School Students” by Scott Seider, Sarah Novick, Jessica Gomez, and Jennifer Gilbert in Teachers College Record, August 2013 (Vol. 115, #8, p. 1-34), http://bit.ly/17uZa2i; Seider can be reached at seider@bu.edu. 

From the Marshall Memo #500