| This study is a critical analysis of the character education movement in the United States. It examines the ideologies that shape the movement and reveals its political nature. Literature review and document analysis are used to answer the research questions. Both historical texts and contemporary literature are examined to trace the development of character education and its surrounding socio-cultural discourses. Theoretical works by both advocates for character education, such as James Terry White, Harry McKown, William Bennett, and Thomas Lickona, and critics of character education, such as John Dewey, Hartshorne and May, Alfie Kohn, and Nel Noddings, are discussed.;Major conclusions of the study reveal that character education represents a long-standing tradition of using schools as agents of social stability, political stasis, and cultural preservation. Especially when the society entered a transition period and the ruling class faced challenges, character education was called upon to solve social problems and socialize children to the established political, economic, and social orders.;Far from being innovative, character education today maintains the tradition of virtue ethic. While claiming to teach universal virtues and engage in community-based decision-making, character educators largely ignore issues of gender, race, class, and culture and deceptively present character education as politically neutral. In the name of absolute moral principles, character educators define virtues based on particular ideologies and provide relative recommendations to students. Character education essentially promotes predominantly conservative ideologies such as absolutism, authoritarianism, and religious dogmatism.;Given its serious weaknesses, character education does not represent an encouraging direction for school reform. Character education promotes the overall school reform movement that continues to be content-oriented, standards-based, and test driven. The overall reform agenda does not challenge the fundamental school structure and culture as the source of problems, therefore, it cannot bring significant and positive changes to American education. Similarly, character education that promotes the cultural politics of conservative power elites only reinforces the status quo and steers the general school reform in the wrong direction. As transformative school reform is needed, alternative moral education is required. |
