Our Centers for Ethics:
South Dakota Survey Results, 1998-2000
The survey asked teachers about student behavior, their own training in CHARACTER COUNTS! and their frequency of program use. It found that teachers believed student behavior had improved in every area except adherence to school rules among grades 7-12. In addition, instructors who used it more often reported better results. The effect of teachers' training on their assessments was ambivalent.
Student Behavior
The questions on student behavior began with the phrase, “Compared to before we started using Character Counts!, my students ...” They therefore assess student change over the entire course of the program. For every statement, teacher agreement suggested that CHARACTER COUNTS! had improved behavior in the area.
1. Students’ behavior toward each other.
Teachers of grades 1-6 felt students:
Agree Unsure Disagree
Fight less often
1998 28% 50% 15%
1999 36% 40% 19%
2000 41% 48% 11%
Help each other more often
1998 57% 28% 8%
1999 58% 23% 8%
2000 63% 29% 8%
(Note that most of the improvement here occurred in the first year.)
Call each other names less
1998 37% 38% 17%
1999 43% 33% 18%
2000 50% 39% 11%
Teachers of grades 7-12 felt that students:
Agree Unsure Disagree
Fight less often
1998 18% 60% 16%
1999 13% 74% 13%
2000 30% 63% 7%
Treat each other better
1998 40% 34% 22%
1999 39% 48% 13%
2000 52% 41% 7%
Help each other more often
1998 34% 46% 14%
1999 38% 57% 5%
2000 51% 44% 5%
The latter three questions show the value of a multi-year program, and a multi-year study. Grades 7-12 showed little or no improvement from the first year to the second, but marked gains from the first to the third.
2. Students’ behavior toward authority.
Teachers of grades 1-6 felt students:
Agree Unsure Disagree
Are less disruptive in class
1998 31.5% 40% 21%
1999 40% 35% 21%
2000 37% 45% 18%
Are less destructive of property
1998 32% 46.5% 12.5%
1999 40% 45% 11%
2000 54% 39% 7%
Treat me with more respect
1998 41% 38% 13%
1999 46% 33% 17%
2000 51% 38% 11%
Teachers of grades 7-12 felt students:
Agree Unsure Disagree
Are less disruptive in class
1998 26% 44% 24%
1999 40% 35% 21%
2000 37% 45% 18%
Have more respect for property
1998 28% 45% 23%
1999 27% 52% 22%
2000 35% 53% 12%
Treat me with more respect
1998 28% 46% 20%
1999 37% 48% 15%
2000 44% 45% 11%
3. Students’ adherence to school rules.
Teachers of grades 1-6 felt students:
Agree Unsure Disagree
Play by the rules more often
1998 43% 37% 12%
1999 46% 36% 12%
2000 56% 35% 9%
Have better recess behavior
1998 37% 36% 17%
1999 39% 30% 26%
2000 44% 45% 11%
Have better lunch manners
1998 13% 65% 14%
1999 22% 60% 17%
2000 26% 61% 13%
Get homework done more often
1998 15% 50% 22%
1999 24% 53% 19%
2000 28% 58% 14%
Cheat less
1998 26% 53% 11%
1999 29% 54% 15%
2000 35% 56% 9%
For 1998, the statements received mixed support, and “disagrees” outnumbered “agrees” in the third and fourth questions, “have better lunch manners” and “get homework done more often.” But time wrought improvements. By 1999 the “agrees” exceeded "disagrees" in every category, and by 2000 they had grown further. In that year, in the third and fourth questions, the “agrees” were twice the “disagrees.”
Teachers of grades 7-12 felt students:
Agree Unsure Disagree
Are less likely to get detention
1998 12% 60% 23%
1999 18% 67% 15%
2000 23% 66% 11%
Get their homework done more often
1998 14% 50% 31%
1999 13% 61% 27%
2000 14% 64% 22%
Skip classes less often
1998 18% 57% 22%
1999 17% 65% 18%
2000 19% 69% 12%
Are late for classes less often
1998 24% 48% 27%
1999 20% 57% 24%
2000 22% 60% 18%
Are less likely to cheat
1998 14% 53% 32%
1999 10% 61% 29%
2000 15% 66% 19%
In 1998, teachers felt CHARACTER COUNTS! had little effect on adherence to school rules among grade 7-12 students. In every case, the “disagrees” outnumbered the “agrees.” But by 2000, “agrees” outnumbered “disagrees” in response to the first, third, and fourth questions. And with the fifth, the gap had narrowed from 14-32 to 15-19. Only the second remained highly weighted to "disagree." Throughout, however, the improvement almost always comes through a decline in “disagrees” and a corresponding rise in “not sure” — and not from an increase in “agrees.” The exception is the first, “less likely to get detention,” where the “agrees” jump from 12 to 23 percent.
Impact of Frequency of Exposure
For the figures below, “times” are times per month. Significance levels apply only to the 2000 figures.
Among teachers of grades 7-12, the match-ups were:
Agree Unsure Disagree
Treat each other better
1998
0-1 time 19% 48% 31%
2-4 times 45% 32% 23%
5+ times 56% 31% 13%
2000
0-1 time 40% 46% 14%
2-4 times 67% 33% 0%
5+ times 60% 40% 0%
Significance: 0.009
Less likely to skip class
1998
0-1 time 4% 57% 39%
2-4 times 15% 65% 20%
5+ times 31% 44% 25%
2000
0-1 time 15% 65% 21%
2-4 times 22% 66% 12%
5+ times 33% 67% 0%
Significance: 0.06
Get their work done more
1998
0-1 time 5% 61% 34%
2-4 times 15% 52% 33%
5+ times 38% 37% 25%
2000
0-1 time 9% 54% 37%
2-4 times 15% 65% 20%
5+ times 24% 66% 10%
Significance: 0.14
Less likely to get suspended
1998
0-1 time 4% 52% 44%
2-4 times 11% 67% 22%
5+ times 25% 62% 13%
2000
no reported data
Treat me with more respect
1998
0-1 time 5% 65% 30%
2-4 times 33% 45% 22%
5+ times 44% 44% 12%
2000
no reported data
Fight less
1998
0-1 time 4% 70% 25%
2-4 times 41% 42% 17%
5+ times 63% 31% 6%
2000
0-1 time 28% 58% 14%
2-4 times 33% 62% 5%
5+ times 33% 63% 3%
Significance: 0.06
Overall, the greater exposure to CHARACTER COUNTS!, the better teachers felt students did. Researchers offered two possible explanations for the finding. Either teachers who used the program more often were more disposed to report that it was working, or greater use of the program actually did work.
Among teachers of grades 1-6, the match-ups were:
Agree Unsure Disagree
Treat me with more respect
1998
0-1 time 30% 54% 16%
2-4 times 48% 39% 13%
5+ times 53% 44% 3%
2000
0-1 time 32% 59% 9%
2-4 times 59% 32% 9%
5+ times 65% 30% 5%
Significance: 0.003
Have better recess behavior
1998
0-1 time 33% 43% 24%
2-4 times 40% 42% 18%
5+ times 47% 41% 12%
2000
0-1 time 26% 68% 6%
2-4 times 51% 38% 12%
5+ times 55% 45% 0%
Significance: 0.0004
Call each other names less
1998
0-1 time 21% 52% 27%
2-4 times 48% 38% 14%
5+ times 56% 25% 19%
2000
0-1 time 32% 56% 12%
2-4 times 58% 35% 8%
5+ times 55% 45% 0%
Significance: 0.003
The 2000 survey also reported strong relationships for “fight less often” (0.004), “are less destructive of property” (0.002), and “are less disruptive in class” (0.007). However, the first-year report does not provide corresponding statistics.
The frequency effect was stronger with elementary school students than with upper-level students, which may indicate that CHARACTER COUNTS! has a greater influence on younger children than on teens.
Impact of Teacher Training
The researchers also asked teachers whether or not they had had training in CHARACTER COUNTS!, and compared the answers to teacher assessments of student behavior. For teachers of grades 7-12, the figures are:
Agree Unsure Disagree
Treat each other better
1998
training 44% 48% 7%
no training 38% 30% 30%
2000
training 61% 31% 8%
no training 48% 45% 6%
Significance: 0.08
Skip class less often
1998
training 20% 72% 8%
no training 12% 52% 36%
2000
“little relation,” no reported data
Get work done more often
1998
training 19% 66% 15%
no training 13% 45% 41%
2000
training 16% 64% 21%
no training 12% 65% 24%
Significance: 0.02
Less likely to get suspended
1998
training 13% 76% 10%
no training 11% 56% 32%
2000
“little relation,” no reported data
Late to class less often
1998
training 15% 72% 13%
no training 21% 41% 38%
2000
no reported data
Fight less often
1998
training 25% 72% 3%
no training 16% 57% 27%
2000
“little relation,” no reported data
In 1998 each relationship was statistically significantly at the .01 level, meaning there was less than a 1 percent likelihood that the association between training and reports occurred by chance. The evaluators suggested two possible explanations for this relationship. Either the trained teachers view the program more favorably and hence are more apt to see it as having an impact, or trained teachers actually deliver the program more effectively.
However, by 2000 a leveling had occurred, and the trained and untrained were reporting similarly. The cause of this consensus is hard to discern.
For teachers of grades 1-6, the figures are:
Agree Unsure Disagree
Call each other names less
1998
training 50% 36% 14%
no training 34% 43% 23%
2000
training 70% 25% 5%
no training 41% 47% 11%
Significance: 0.0002
Help each other more often
1998
training 67% 25% 8%
no training 58% 35% 8%
2000
training 81% 16% 2%
no training 56% 36% 8%
Significance: 0.02
Have better recess behavior
1998
training 43% 41% 16%
no training 34% 43% 23%
2000
training 56% 37% 7%
no training 39% 51% 10%
Significance: 0.0005
Treat me with more respect
1998
training 50% 37% 13%
no training 40% 46% 14%
2000
training 60% 35% 5%
no training 48% 40% 11%
Significance: 0.0009
Elementary school teachers were closer to agreement in 1998, yet by 2000 the gap had widened and trained teachers were perceiving more improvement. Furthermore, in many categories the statistical significance is extremely strong. Levels like 0.0002 virtually rule out chance. Conceivably a smaller sample size enhances the teacher training effect, since over time the number of grade 7-12 teachers has almost doubled, while the grade 1-6 teacher pool has shrunk to less than half. But if sample size matters, it is hard to see how.
Get Involved
Professional development
Print brochures
Spread the word!
About CHARACTER COUNTS!