I heard the end of a report on network TV -- the report was on the results of a test on "character" among school children in Fairfax County, Virginia. The controversy that made the story news was that the results were reported by race. Black and Hispanic children (and special ed children) scored lower than did White and Asian children.
As a researcher I was curious about what questions were asked of the kids, how "character" was measured, was the test anonymous so that children would tell the truth, was this done on a sample of students or the whole population; the sorts of questions researchers think about when assessing the validity of a study.
What I found was disturbing beyond belief -- not about the children but about the school system that produced this report.
What I discovered was that there was no test. This was how the eminently well-off and highly educated Fairfax County school system staff measured "sound moral character and ethical judgment":
The findings on third-grade morality reflected the number of elementary students who received "good" or "outstanding" marks on report cards in such areas as "accepts responsibility," "listens to and follows directions," "respects personal and school property," "complies with established rules" and "follows through on assignments." Such categories, which draw mainly on teacher observations, are common.
For older children (which showed very little racial difference in the results),
the report's findings on moral character were based on the number of state-reported disciplinary infractions,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
So Fairfax County has defined moral character for us. Moral character, apparently, means that the child does not disturb the teacher in anyway. A child who stands up for another child being victimized by a teacher is obviously of low moral character. A child who turns in his/her homework is of good moral character. A child who never breaks the rules, even when the rules dictate doing something wrong, is of good moral character. I hate Nazi arguments, but I have to say, I think by these measures, Nazi guards in concentration camps would come out with a rating of "good moral standards." Martin Luther King, on the other hand, would probably score pretty low.
The school system's response to criticism of this report is "that their initial findings are not conclusive." I would say the findings are absolutely conclusive. I conclude that the people in the school system who devised this as a test of "sound moral character" not only lack moral character but also lack intelligence, judgment and an understanding of what the words "moral" and "character" mean. And they obviously lack the ability to use a dictionary:
character: qualities of honesty, courage, or the like; integrity.
moral: of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong; ethical.
moral: founded on the fundamental principles of right conduct rather than on legalities, enactment, or custom.
-- dictionary.com
And I have to wonder why people in school system measuring moral character from teacher reports on behavior never consider the possibility that racial bias might affect teachers' judgment.