Reflections on the responsibility of higher education institutions

Although, in order to respect individual autonomy, many universities have focused more on training for competition, presentation, and economics, neglecting ethical and democratic citizenship, which are ultimately more important. After all, intellectual prowess is no guarantee of the common good.

This is not a religious issue, nor is it about indoctrination. The university works with mature adults whom it must educate, in their character and social development, by fostering rational, reflective, and self-directed habits, rather than being something to be imitated.

These reflections summarize part of the detailed analysis that has been published by Jubilee Center for Character and Virtues from the University of Birmingham and the Oxford Character Project from the University of Oxford, entitled “Character Education in Universities. A Framework for Flourishing“, prepared in consultation with senior university leaders and academic specialists in higher education from universities in the UK, USA, Asia and Europe.

Beyond its length, due to the importance of the reflections in the text, and the advocacy it makes for values and character development, and the implicit questioning of the obsession of some educational systems and universities to measure only work and related skills, the Observatory presents the translation of the document, carried out by Translated by Nueva Revista, of UNIR, Spain.

Introduction

When we talk about the value of higher education, income potential and economic contribution are only partial considerations. The value of a university education is evident in the lives of graduates; flowering staff [flowering, [here and throughout the rest of the document, in the sense of "life achieved", "life worth living"] and its contribution to the good of society as a whole. This can be observed not only in what students do, but in who they become.

In recent years, many universities have expressed their commitment to a more engaged vision of higher education. Terms such as “full potential,” “flourish,” “thrive,” and “well-being,” applied to both students and university communities, are prominently featured in institutional mission and purpose statements. Increasingly, universities are discussing the development of “graduate capabilities” and “21st-century skills”—qualities essential for navigating the Fourth Industrial Revolution and contributing to a rapidly changing society.

To fulfill this ambition, the transmission of specific knowledge and skills is important. However, An exclusive focus on knowledge and skills (often highlighted for their career and for their economic value) is not enough to achieve the goals that universities are setting for themselves in terms of the value that graduates and students seek. A third, vital dimension is encapsulated by the interrelated concepts of “character” and “flourishing.” However, despite efforts to give pride of place to this holistic emphasis, for many, this vocabulary within higher education is not easy to grasp. Greater clarity is needed in a language that is still imprecise and underdeveloped.

The specific objective of this infrastructure is to help these institutions articulate and organize their mission to to promote the flourishing and development of the character of their students. We recognize that universities “They shape life” and also the fact that many already mention some specific character qualities they wish to develop in their students under the rubric of “graduate results”. This framework does not seek to introduce a foreign concept or a radically new agenda. Its purpose is to facilitate a conceptual taxonomy that contextualizes and situates the cultivation of character and student prosperity as central to contemporary higher education.

Graduation speeches, university websites, and mission statements clearly show that these institutions, in all their diversity, want to guide their students toward fulfilling lives as citizens, professionals, and human beings; lives that contribute significantly to the common good and provide a sense of purpose and real meaning.

Universities recognize that the education they provide has an effect on their students in ways that transcend numbers and statistics. Their concern is to educate autonomous, resilient individuals with a clear and ethical mindset, and to this end, they present them with new possibilities and ways of living. What universities lack, and what this infrastructure aims to provide, is a philosophically rigorous framework that can be put into practice.

Character and flowering

The idea of student training at universities is commonly expressed in terms of improving "21st-century skills" or "graduate capabilities," which are necessary if the student wants to succeed in the modern world, particularly in the workplace. The connection between graduate attributes and professional success is fundamental, but on its own it is insufficient.

One term that is gaining prominence in some declarations of intent documents is that of eudaimonic well-being, defined as human flourishing. However, while the concept of prosperity holds promise for those efforts to move beyond strictly instrumentalist ideas of excellence or success, it can also be employed in a banal and unremarkable way. In the philosophical tradition stemming from Aristotle, Flourishing is a central term; it refers to a full human life in all its dimensions: social, moral, emotional, and intellectual. It is not simply related to the subjective aspect of human fulfillment, but to the actual understanding of life's main goals. (Kristjánsson, 2020).

Flourishing involves several socioeconomic factors that are circumstantial, but it also fundamentally depends on the readjustment of human excellence through character strengths or virtue: stable predispositions that combine perception, knowledge, emotion, motivation, and the ability to react in an exemplary way to respond to different situations in different spheres of human life.

While certain facets of an individual's personality are not easy to change once adulthood is reached, some of the fundamental traits of character: moral, civic, intellectual and performative (Jubilee Center, 2017) remain educable throughout the university stage and beyond. By placing a stronger focus on the education of these virtues and how they contribute to the flourishing of the student, universities can gain academic credibility and practical traction in their increasingly clear goal of reaching this potential.

Moreover, this approach is not limited to the development of individual virtues, but also clarifies how the flourishing of students can contribute to building a healthy, just, and prosperous society.

Higher education today

The concepts of character and flourishing are certainly not new to university education. The emphasis on the moral and intellectual development of students in virtues such as critical thinking, honesty, charity, work, service, wisdom, and justice, among others, is enshrined in university mottos. In fact, the orientation of higher education toward human flourishing has been fundamental to universities since the founding of the earliest medieval institutions.

In the 20th century, these issues were overshadowed by economic considerations and a focus on expanding university offerings, but they have not disappeared. They resurface in the social debate about the value of higher education and are given particular emphasis in situations that require existential reflection, such as graduation ceremonies.

What is character?

To speak of an individual's character is to refer to who they are. Character traits are consistent across different situations and spheres of life, but they are not immutable. Character can be cultivated and it can be corrupted. It is multidimensional, combining thought, emotion, motivation, and action. Arthur (2019: 10-11) identifies some key points:

• It changes over timeIt is malleable, not fixed.
• It is visible in the behavior: implies an observable action.
• It's social: it is formed within specific cultural contexts.
• It implies choice and autonomy: it is rational and free, not blindly conformist.
• It involves principles and convictions: it is closely related to questions about purpose and meaning.

Today's universities face significant challenges in justifying the value they provide to both students and the societies that fund them. One assumption shared by all is that the purpose of the university must be integrated with the good of its local, national, and global communities. The key question is: how do we create a culture of higher education where value outweighs price, moving beyond the notion that students pay for degrees simply to secure a better-paying job? How can we create university communities that inspire students to develop character, thrive, and promote the good of society?

While a renewed emphasis on the role of universities in the civic sphere is important, At present there is a notable character gap in the way this mission of renewal and appreciation is being carried out: more in terms of competition, presentation and economics (global and local) than in terms of principles of ethical and democratic citizenship.

Regarding active forms of civic democracy in relation to the civic mission of universities, such references generally end up becoming narratives along the lines of “a positive contribution to communities,” “student volunteering,” and “students as citizens.” The idea that universities provide a reflective democratic space through which virtues can be expressed and shaped is seriously underestimated. Moreover, while the general study of liberal arts programs has been associated with the development of educated, autonomous, and liberal citizens, There is a growing recognition that, without attention to moral relationships, intellectual prowess is no guarantee of a commitment to the common good.

The context regarding the contribution of universities to the public good is being questioned. A concerted effort is needed to examine, mobilize, and celebrate the role of these institutions in character education. If universities in the UK are truly at a crossroads in gaining and maintaining public trust (Hudson and Mansfield, 2020), an explicit shift towards character, including a clearer vision of what it means for universities to promote personal and social flourishing, can provide the necessary redirection towards the common good.

Character education in higher education. Fundamental principles

• Character development is fundamental to the research, education, and civic purpose of universities.
• Good higher education involves good character education. Equip students for work and life.
• Character contributes to human and social flourishing, not just to the student's individual interests.
• Character education equips the student with the intellectual, civic, and moral virtues to make wise decisions and live well within the framework of a democratic society.
• Students should be free to critically decide how to develop their character and put those virtues into practice.
• Character can be observed (through example) and taught in universities, but it should be desired and sought by the student.
• Universities have a responsibility to prepare students for their professional lives. This also requires the acquisition of intellectual, moral, and civic virtues.
• The goal of many universities is to educate responsible citizens and leaders who will contribute positively to the challenges of a rapidly changing world. Character education is essential to this.
• Character education is culturally sensitive. It is not the property of a single philosophical tradition. It is emphasized by many cultures and can draw on resources from diverse traditions.
• Focusing on character and values helps to instill in students a sense of belonging to an institution.
• Students should be aware of what they can do with what they learn: an empowerment that comes from having successfully applied their knowledge to real and important problems in the world.
• A university culture that allows positive relationships, civic participation, and self-determination facilitates the acquisition of good character.

Character education in universities

Each university has a specific history, ethic, and institutional profile, and all contribute to their societies in unique ways. This is naturally reflected in the virtues it showcases in its mission statement. However, While the specific emphasis of an institution is important, character development is fundamental to that university's research, education, and civic mission. For research to be conducted effectively, intellectual virtues such as critical thinking, impartiality, and academic honesty are essential. These inquisitive virtues are fundamental to the exploration of knowledge and understanding, which are the hallmarks of higher education.

Throughout their time at university, students are introduced to an intellectual culture that shapes them to critically and fairly evaluate different types of arguments and certainties. They are expected to interact respectfully and consciously with those with whom they disagree and to develop the creativity, critical thinking, and sound judgment necessary to formulate hypotheses, evaluate evidence, construct arguments, and, through complex debates and analyses, arrive at appropriate conclusions.

Today's universities link intellectual ambition to a civic mission: to educate a new generation of responsible citizens and leaders who contribute to the societies around them (Brooks et al., 2019). In addition to intellectual virtues, cultivating civic virtues, such as service and civic-mindedness, should be part of this external dimension of higher education. This also applies to the specific social impact universities aim to achieve in a particular sector.

In this way, certain specific virtues of a profession can be more clearly defined. Compassion is important for future healthcare professionals, just as creativity and perseverance are necessary for aspiring businesspeople or entrepreneurs. The moment when universities focus on sustainable development as part of their institutional mission will require staff and students who demonstrate responsibility and a commitment to social justice.

Of course, the intellectual and civic aspects of character cannot be separated from considerations of what constitutes a good life or a prosperous society. They are linked to moral virtues such as justice, courage, kindness, honesty, humility, and compassion. While the idea that modern universities intentionally cultivate moral character in their diverse student body is not without controversy, in reality, all institutions have a formative effect on the individuals within them.

In addition to the categories of intellectual, civic, and moral virtues, there are behavioral skills and psychological capacities such as fortitude, perseverance, collaboration, and self-confidence that are essential for putting virtues into practice. These performance strengths act as muscles, allowing students to develop personally across a wide range of fields. They also support mental well-being.

In some documents concerning the policies of a particular institution, “character development” has become synonymous with cultivating performance strength, while this framework warns us against the instrumentalization of character, an inseparable part of this equation. We must emphasize that just as character can be impoverished by overestimating these strengths, it can also be damaged by underestimating them. Simply subscribing to a moral virtue is not enough if you lack, for example, the confidence to demonstrate it and the strength to recover from potential failures in order to achieve the virtue's motivational goals.

A fundamental character virtue in the university setting is functional wisdom (phronesisThis is a meta-virtue that links intellectual, civic, moral, and performative virtues. It is the general quality of knowing what we should and should not want when the demands of two or more virtues clash, and of integrating these demands into an appropriate procedure. For example, the virtues linked to the business or entrepreneurial world may seem to conflict with the virtues of service and care. Functional wisdom is the ability to reason well in relation to what is right and to integrate emotional, motivational, situational, and competitive pressures into a correct procedure.

Living with functional wisdom involves reflection, sound judgment, and the energetic implementation of decisions. The ability to learn from experience—from mistakes and failures, but also from triumphs—is fundamental. This kind of wisdom requires the absence of prejudice and the recognition of the plurality of things and situations that must be experienced. It also entails the active and attentive search for what is right, and this is cultivated through experience and reflection. It takes its own form in advanced education when students take ownership of their identity and purpose in the world.

Virtues can be classified into specific categories (but which are intertwined with other aspects of higher education):

• Intellectual virtues. They are related to the pursuit of truth, knowledge, and understanding, which are fundamental to the kind of high-level research that characterizes university teaching and research. This includes critical thinking, intellectual humility, an open mind, and healthy curiosity.
• Civic virtues. They are related to the commitment of institutions and students in their local, national, and global contexts. They include service, civics, hospitality, citizenship, and charity.
• Moral virtues. These virtues are related to students' need for a clear ethical awareness in their work and university life, as well as a sense of purpose that extends beyond their own interests, instead aligning their ambitions with a commitment to the common good. Moral virtues are important in connection with issues such as integrity in research and respectful interaction with others. They are also essential for the flourishing of the campus and community life. These virtues include justice, courage and fortitude, honesty, humility, and compassion.
• Performance strengths. They are related to character traits that have instrumental value in enabling intellectual, moral, and civic virtues. These include fortitude, determination, motivation, and teamwork.
• Functional wisdom. It is an intellectual meta-virtue that guides the other virtues. Its cultivation encompasses various virtues, navigating between excess and deficiency of character, and governs the development of virtue in practical action. Based on character traits cultivated through habit in previous years, functional wisdom critically re-evaluates these traits and allows them to be shared within a person's capacity for reasoning. One of its main functions is to assess the weight of relevant values, procedures, and emotions in order to choose the most conducive path for personal and social flourishing.

Responding to objections

Of course, there are legitimate complications and concerns that make the idea of character education as a university goal a more complex expectation compared to primary or secondary education. Students are already adults and have been shaped and educated in their earlier stages of life. Universities are diverse environments with students from all over the world, coming from backgrounds and traditions (philosophical and religious) where questions of values and virtues are deeply ingrained. The dominant philosophy in advanced education prioritizes personal autonomy and shows a widespread nervousness about the danger of indoctrination.

These are important issues to consider, above all, avoiding indoctrination and respecting student autonomy. However, this framework is not isolated in a theoretical bubble when it comes to character formation in universities. First, there are certain disciplines within universities where concerns about character are, so to speak, woven into their very fabric: disciplines focused on developing (ethical and effective) professionals in areas such as teaching, medicine, nursing, law, social work, and business.Jubilee Center, 2016).

Secondly, while it should be acknowledged that some university students are involved in areas of study in which the development of personal character does not have the same intrinsic concern, All university courses, regardless of whether they are in the arts, humanities, social sciences or sciences (technology, engineering, mathematics…), have an effect on the character of those who participate in them.l (Kiss and Euben, 2010).

The question is what character traits university education cultivates and whether this formative aspect is intentional. Furthermore, all university disciplines have associated ethical and character expectations, especially those related to ethical research and standards of good academic practice.

Character and practical wisdom can be:

• Discovered: The university community, students and staff provide the example, cultural and encouraging influence for a particular, positive character that motivates and promotes the development of personality.
• Taught: The university provides the campus-wide educational experience, equipping students with the language, wisdom, understanding, skills, and abilities that enable character development.
• Wanted: The university provides opportunities that help students to freely seek, desire, and pursue character development.

Third, the tools of character education must be appropriate to the context. While directed habit and imitation may be appropriate in the early stages of education, the focus at the university level should be on the character the student acquires through critical thinking and reflection. The teacher's role should be to guide and help them reflect on their own about who they are and who they want to become.

It is this personal reflection on character, its autonomous development, and its integration with reason and identity that fosters flourishing as an adult. In other words, what is known as “character education” at the university level is clearly distinct from character development in the early stages of the education system.

How to cultivate character in higher education?

If character development in universities is inevitable, even desirable, it would be far more beneficial (in keeping with the research nature of the university) for that development to be open and international. This applies both to the specific character virtues that the institution promotes and to the methods for cultivating them. A key question is how character can be legitimately cultivated in a modern, pluralistic university. Since there is no single model of what a university is, there is no standard guide to follow. However, there is a long history of philosophical research and much recent work in the field of psychology and education from which we can obtain this information.

Aristotle postulated that virtues are cultivated through relationships and in a dynamic way; through the imitation of people we consider exemplary and through repetitive practice. “We become builders when we build, and we become harpists by playing the harp. In the same way, we become just people through just actions.” (Aristotle, 1999, 1103a34-1103b2). This idea of habit formation is supported by recent studies in social and cognitive psychology and serves as the foundation for character education. Character traits are not inherent in an individual.

They are cultivated actively and continuously through practice. However, while habit is fundamental, The emphasis in higher education, where students are mature adults, should be directed towards creating rational, reflective, and self-directed habits, rather than something to be imitated.. The cultivation of practical wisdom through reflection on personal experience arises naturally in university settings. Students may not have the life experience necessary to acquire this kind of wisdom at this stage, but they can certainly learn to appreciate its value and develop life practices that lead them to it.

A synthesis of research conducted in education, philosophy, and psychology (Lamb et al., 2021) has identified seven character development methods that can be applied in university contexts: habit through practice, reflecting on personal experience, engagement with virtuous examples, dialogue that increases virtue literacy, conversations about situational variables, moral reminders that highlight norms, and friendships of mutual responsibility.

If we are to help students cultivate desirable character qualities and practical wisdom, then universities must consider how they can pursue character education in a purposeful, planned, conscious, and reflective manner. This means they must consider how character is discovered, taught, and sought.

Where should character education be placed in universities?

Character development can be focused on specific contexts within higher education. If virtues are important for learning a particular discipline, they can be emphasized within specific programs of study. General education or extracurricular programs can help students reflect on their life purpose and develop the character necessary for responsible citizenship and leadership. However, the formative nature of universities as institutions implies that character education cannot be limited solely to these contexts. For universities to take their role in character development seriously, a broader consideration of university life is necessary.

• Culture: What are the university's values? How are they reflected in practice? Do institutional practices, incentives, and societal expectations support or discourage character development?
• Teaching: What place does consideration of an ethical framework and concepts of character and personal development have in teaching (formal or informal)? How do university professors embody the research virtues that their discipline demands and promotes? What role would consideration of character play in transforming teaching from transactional to transformational?
• Commitment on-line: learning on-line Blended learning offers the potential to make higher education more flexible and expand its reach. At its best, it allows for a greater degree of personal interaction between faculty and students, but it can also lead to teaching and learning becoming more functional and less formative. What role does character education play in the university's plans to expand its offerings in this area? on-line?
• Investigation: What kind of research is being conducted at universities related to character development? Are aspects related to the visibility of character valued? What virtues are necessary for good researchers in different fields? How are these virtues cultivated in the curriculum on research ethics?
• Extracurricular activities: What role do extracurricular activities such as sports, music, theater, or student society leadership play in character development? Is the formative role of these activities valued and supported appropriately?
• Student support: How can student support services be proactive in promoting positive character development? What character qualities are necessary to successfully navigate the pressures of university life? How are personal virtues used as a resource to protect students' mental health?
• Professional services: Are students aware of the importance of character in professional practice? How do advisors address questions about vocation and service? How are students encouraged and supported to identify and cultivate the character necessary for good practice in their future careers? How can alumni help others understand the importance of character and wisdom in the workplace?
• Admissions: Is the university transparent about the character traits it seeks to cultivate alongside other graduate skills? How are character traits relevant to an applicant's potential in their field of study considered in the admissions process?

Putting the framework into practice

This framework is not intended to provide a single guide for character education in universities. These proposals are meant to help university leaders and staff (in partnership with students) advance character education within their own contexts. University leaders should consider:

• Establish a group of workers and students to consider the nature and place that character education has in your institution.
• Make your vision of character education explicit to everyone: workers, students, potential new hires, and the general public.
• To detail and make publicly visible those virtues that are considered fundamental to the life of the university.
• Make sure your vision focuses not only on enhancing your students' knowledge of the subject or developing their skills for their future career, but also on character development.
• Establish groups distributed throughout the institution to ensure that their vision for character education is visible and implemented.
• Offer your staff professional development, particularly in those roles that assist the student and offer advice on how to support character development.
• Introduce programs on leadership development in students in a widespread manner, as well as strategies and skills.

The staff at universities should consider:

• How to ensure a legitimate focus in your teachings to cultivate intellectual virtues and wisdom.
• Detail the virtues that are fundamental in their disciplines and the different programs associated with their study.
• To help students make a clear connection between ethical practice in the professional field and the theory and practice of character development, as well as the importance of applicable wisdom.
• To highlight the qualities of personal tutoring, mentoring, and spiritual care for their students, ensuring that they focus on developing the qualities associated with individual flourishing.
• Encourage new students to reflect on what they hope to gain from their university education so they can clarify their purpose in life.
• To provide students with real opportunities to "test" their character through teaching and learning, as well as extracurricular activities (volunteering).
• Evaluate students based on their character and wisdom, as well as their activity.
• To help students make the connection between their own character development and how it responds to local, national, and global challenges.

Conclusion

The value of higher education is observable in the lives of students, not only in what they do or their future jobs, but in how they contribute to society and who they become. The nervousness associated with character education potentially violating respect for autonomy is understandable, but the fact that universities are abandoning character education in these terms demonstrates a lack of foresight.. Universities shape the character of students whether they are aware of it or not.

The right question is what character qualities are being formed through higher education and to what extent purposefully. This framework has presented a purposeful and encouraging approach to character education in universities. It respects student autonomy and diversity and aims to contribute to solving fundamental problems in higher education. If universities are truly committed to helping their students and, consequently, to fostering a flourishing society, character education cannot be overlooked.

Article taken from the page: www.universidad.edu.co

More institutional news from the News Agency