Fethullah Gulen and the Gulen Movement

Abstract

Character education has been woven into the fabric of the curriculum of Gulen- inspired schools worldwide. Through character education programs, students develop performance habits and intellectual qualities that enable them to perform at their highest potential not only while in school, but also in their personal and professional lives. This paper seeks to understand why character education has been among the common characteristics of these schools.

Character Education in Gulen Inspired Schools Worldwide

Throughout the history, in all countries around the world, education has had two ultimate goals- to help children gain literacy and to help them become better human beings.

Continuous coverage from the media reporting increased violence, crimes, teen pregnancy, and other disruptive behaviors in schools has created awareness among many educators and psychologists that there is a moral crisis in our education system. Though many of these social issues do not stem from the lack of moral values, and most may have multifaceted origins, there is a growing tendency among educators to link the solutions to these issues and related social problems to the lack of teaching of formal character education in our public schools.

Moral education, or more generally “character education” has been receiving serious attention, publicity, and media coverage and is increasingly becoming a popular topic in the fields of education and educational psychology. The motivation behind these growing interests is twofold. First, as recent research has consistently shown, there is a positive correlation between good character education programs and academic achievement. Secondly, it is simple common-sense that moral education plays a major role in creating a safe school environment which is one of the most important components of effective schooling.

Former secretary of education Rod Paige expressed his frustration clearly when he said, “Sadly, we live in a culture without role models, where millions of students are taught the wrong values or no values at all. This culture of callousness has led to a staggering achievement gap, poor health status, crime, violence, teenage pregnancy and tobacco and alcohol abuse..Good character is a product of good judgments made every day.” (Benninga, 2006, p.2).

What is a Character Education?

In its simplest definition, morality simply refers to a set of social norms and conventions of being “right” or “wrong” in our daily discourse (Nucci, 1997). Character education is a broader term describing the education of children in a manner where the learning process will help them develop as moral, compliant, socially-acceptable and well-mannered human beings. The Character Education Partnership (CEP) defines formal character education as “a national movement creating schools that foster ethical, responsible, and caring young people by modeling and teaching good character through emphasis on universal values that we all share.”(Character Education Partnership, n.d.). Similar to CEP definition, understanding the pluralistic nature of our classroom, Gulen-inspired schools more commonly define character education as "developing universal human values such as honesty and integrity. As a perfect and timely response to Rod Paige’s call above, for instance, Pinnacle Academy in Virginia writes, “ Respectful of others and themselves and act as role models for their families and communities” as one of their core expectations from their graduates (http://pinnacleacademyva.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=62&Itemid=82)

There are other operational definitions of character education in terms of “relationship” and self-oriented virtues.” (Jacques et al, 2006). Considering the fact that human beings are social creatures and can only survive in a society through daily interactions, such relational virtues as respect, fairness, civility, and tolerance play an important role in helping shape a person's behavior as an acceptable individual in the society. Also, undoubtedly, nurturing such self-oriented values such as fortitude, self-discipline, effort, and perseverance in schools will help academic resilience and promote achievements. Character education is a nationwide proactive initiative striving to help schools to promote intentional teaching and role modeling, and infuse their students' universal moral and ethical values along with academic and personal performance values. In brief, character education simply means “value formation”. Considering such unacceptable actions, as killing, hurting, hitting, and stealing that may impact the social, emotional and materialistic welfare of others, in the framework of universal values accepted by all cultures and societies, several contemporary theorist tend to define morality in the axis of “justice and welfare” (Nucci, 1997). Therefore, the debates around social right and wrong and its psychological characterization provide an empirical starting point for defining moral education (Nucci, 1989).

Gulen’s Philosophy of Gradualism in Child Education

In his book, “Cekirdekten Cinara (From Seed to Plane-Tree), Fethullah Gulen emphasizes the importance of introducing age-appropriate materials in schooling to maximize learning and behavioral change. According to Gulen, there is a “gradualism” in God’s creation, so the nature of a human being develops both biologically and intellectually by gradually travelling through different stages of life, each with its own requirements for optimal growth. Human beings cannot be programmed to act in certain ways, but can be educated gradually and incrementally to become better a human being. Likewise, the leaders in these private schools inspired by Gulen's philosophy understand that helping children to develop a good character is not a quick fix. Rather it is a product of a continuous process of intentional teaching, being a role model, learning and practices in everyday discourse.

We are born helpless as well as ignorant of the laws of life and must cry out to get the help we need. After a year or so, we can stand on our feet and walk a little. When we are about 15 we are expected to have understood the difference between good and evil, the beneficial and the harmful. However, it will take us our whole lives to acquire intellectual and spiritual perfection. Our principle duty in life is to acquire perfection and purity in our thinking, conceptions and belief. By fulfilling our duty of servanthood to the Creator, Nourisher and Protector, and by penetrating the mystery of creation through our potentials and faculties, we seek to attain to the rank of true humanity, and become worthy of a blissful, eternal life in another, exalted world (http://www.fethullahgulen.org/conference-papers/contributions-of-the-gulen-movement/2522-the-educational-philosophy-of-fethullah-gulen-and-its-application-in-south-africa.html)

Home Visits to Foster Character Formation

The fundamental guiding principle of the leaders of these Gulen-inspired schools is that the raw materials as well as the final product of the education process is a human being. As Rick Weissbourd said, “The moral development of a student does not depend primarily on explicit character education efforts but on the maturity and ethical capacities of adults with whom they interact” (2006, pp. 6-11). Gulen-inspired schools such as the one we mentioned above in Virginia, organize periodic family visits to ensure that the “parent-teacher relationship is improved” by exchanging feedback about “student’s academic and social growth and performance” for better schooling.

Students, parents, teachers and staff are part of a school culture that fosters strong communication between school and families. Everyone is asked to uphold a commitment to the school and to each other to put in the time and effort required to achieve success. The schools host community breakfasts and student-centered exhibits to create a sense of community and build community support. Families and educators share responsibility for student learning and they rely on each other to contribute to the learning process.

Therefore, children as they interact with their parents, relatives, adults in their neighborhood, school administrators, teachers, and older friends whether consciously or unconsciously they shape their own character formation. Thus, for a permanent positive change, in addition to the formal education in schools, parents must also be vigilant about whom their children are coming into close contact with on a daily basis, and as the main role models, they must be careful as to how they talk, act, and express their expectation in their social life.

Character Formation and Discipline

Discipline and dedication of the school staff have been among the main reasons behind the pervasive success stories of all Gulen-inspired schools. Growing discipline problems and the lack of respect students have towards their teachers are widely known by virtually everybody. School violence, bullying, substance abuse, and other illicit problems are not new. Such discipline problems are real threats, and should be addressed professionally with clear objectives. Psychologist and educators are still debating how to better plan, implement and evaluate a traditional character education, and specifically, are trying to address the question of how to best contribute to educational practice and societal changes that will address the problems mentioned above (Nucci, 1997).

Therefore, the purpose of schooling in Gulen-inspired schools requires that schools seek to improve both academic and character formation of children. As Ryan and Bohlin (1999, pp. 93-94) write:

Where does character education fit into the curriculum? The simple answer is this:
everywhere. Since education seeks to help students develop as persons, character
development is part and parcel of the whole enterprise. Teaching, as Alan Tom reminds
us, is a moral act. We believe that learning is a moral act as well . . . Character education, then, with its twin goals of intellectual and moral development, should be implicit in all of the school’s undertakings.

In the Gulen-inspired schools, character education is more than just a stand-alone program, instead, it is integrated into the fabric of school-wide curriculum.

Due to growing concerns about the increasing discipline problems in public schools, policy-makers and administrators not only in Gulen-inspired schools but also across the country started to mandate the inclusion of character education in the fabric of the standard curricula of their school systems. Schools that are committed to moral education have enjoyed the outcomes of their efforts in creating safe, warm and predictable yet purposeful engaging atmosphere conducive to maximum learning. Nothing makes administrators and parents more happy than seeing their children enjoying school time with enthusiastic teachers proud of teaching civilized children.

Theoretical Aspects of Character Development

Over the past century, several psychologist and theorists (Piaget, Vygotsky, Kohlberg, Bloom) proposed models and taxonomies to explain moral and cognitive aspects of  human development. Among the first theorist who worked on the moral and cognitive development of human was Jean Piaget. Piaget proposed that “all development emerges from action; that is to say, individuals construct and reconstruct their knowledge of the world as a result of interactions with the environment.” (Nucci, 1997). Piaget’s postulates were based on his observations of children playing and limited empirical studies based on his findings. He believed that children first develop cognitive ability and that cognitive abilities then determine the children’s logical reasoning abilities. Accordingly, he concluded that moral development occurs in predictable discrete stages starting form egocentric moral reasoning behavior at early childhood to  justice- based cooperative moral reasoning adolescence(Slavin, 2006, p.51) .  After his lengthy observation of children’s moral reasoning during their play, he formulated his famous four cognitive development stages to describe, not only the cognitive development of children, but also to help understand their moral development.  The driving force behind Piaget’s inference was that younger children were more strict in their perception of right and wrong than older children or adults. Benjamin Bloom , Piaget’s contemporary, also worked on cognitive domain or mental reasoning, and concluded a similar developmental framework, but his included six levels of intellectual behavior development stages (Vogler, 2009, p.110). Although, both theories and their development structure  may seem  similar when considering the gradual development of human  behavior,  they differ greatly in terms of how they define cognitive and moral development and predict the future  intellectual and moral development of children.  The technological advances in neuroscience offers research-based explanation about the ability to develop logical reasoning and psychological maturity, and  at a certain point it could be interpreted  as supporting Paget’s  cognitive stages. In fact, researchers have shown that individuals at around age sixteen have (late adolescence) almost completed the development of their logical reasoning ability, while psychological maturity development continues as late as 25 years of age (Steinberg, 2009, p.40)

The practical implication of Piaget’s findings to the education system was that his work suggested the use of cooperative learning strategies by which teachers nurture mutual decision making habits and problem solving ability, and emphasize fairness while creating environment for personal discovery rather than direct coaching students with moral values (Nucci, 1997).

A few years after Piaget, Lawrence Kohlberg also developed a stage theory of moral reasoning . Theoretically Kohlberg did not propose something completely new. Instead,  his work  of six developmental stages was a modification of Piaget’s development stages. Like Piaget, he also proposed that children develop moral reasoning ability through  their practices and personal experiences which comprise comprehension of moral  values such as fairness, justice, and human welfare. (Nucci, 1997) 

Unlike Piaget, who observing playing children,  Kohlberg used moral dilemmas  to understand the ability of moral reasoning of children at different ages. He then concluded that moral dilemmas can actually help kinds advance their moral reasoning ability, but only one stage at a time. (Slavin, 2006, p.55).  As a result, Kohlberg also disputed the effectiveness of traditional character education which involves direct teaching of moral norms, and instead he proposed that these “bag of values” be integrated into the fabric of the standard school curriculum.  His  inferences also coincided with our understand of today’s pluralistic society that there are no single set of moral values that can be imposed on young children. Instead there are moral dilemmas that collectively agreed upon such as social conventions to regulate social relations and interactions.  For instance, he pointed that individuals can make different decisions, yet they may hold the same core moral values.

Despite the evidentiary differences in their opinions, one of the common themes that these psychologist and theorist agree upon is the emphasis on “universal values” appealing to all religions, cultures and values of pluralist society in a democratic setting, as it has also  been long advocated by Fethullah Gulen (http://www.fethullahgulen.org/)

How a Good Character Education Program is Implemented

The goal of a good character education program is to help schools create a safe, caring, and inclusive learning environment for all students where they can develop socially, emotionally, ethically, and academically. A character education program seeks to create such an environment by promoting core ethical values such as respect, responsibility, perseverance, honesty, fortitude, fairness, and compassion.  To be effective, character education must be implemented through a holistic approach, known as whole school reform, which integrates character development into every aspect of school life. While character education fosters qualities that help students be law-abiding citizens accepted by the society, it also lays the foundation for success in their future careers by teaching them self-discipline and compassion for others. A distinct feature of the holistic model is its emphasis on “building a caring community” (Character Education Partnership, n.d.) among students by fostering cooperation and collaboration over competition, by stressing discipline and classroom management based on problem-solving techniques rather than on rewards and punishments, and by favoring a democratic student-centered teaching approach over the old teacher-centered classroom model.

Based on the results of extensive research and on consultation with leading character education experts, the Character Education Partnership (CEP) prepared Eleven Principles of Effective Character Education to provide guidance on the elements that should be included in an effective, comprehensive character education program. The Eleven Principles, which compliment the core values that Gulen has been emphasizing in child education for the past thirth years, are to: 1. promote core ethical and performance values; 2. teach students to understand, care about, and act upon these core values; 3. encompass all aspects of school culture; 4. foster a caring school community; 5. provide opportunities for moral action; 6. support academic achievement; 7. develop intrinsic motivation; 8. include whole-staff involvement; 9. require positive leadership of staff and students; 10. involve parents and community members; and 11. assess results and strive to improve.

In addition to the above principles responding the growing needs of our ever-shrinking world, Gulen rightfully adds “dialogue” as another attribute that must be gained at early stages of schooling. Williams says, “These schools have been producing generations open for dialogue, …we have a lot to take from the education perspective of Gulen” (http://tr.fgulen.com/content/view/9351/12/ )

Results of Good Implementation of Character Education in the USA

According to reports released by the CEP, schools that integrated character education into the fabric of their curricula and cultures, for example, CEP’s National Schools of Character, experienced improvement in academic achievement, behavior, school culture, peer interaction, and parental involvement. The CEP reports show remarkable change among students exposed to character education including an increase in pro-social behaviors such as cooperation, respect, and compassion and a decrease in negative behaviors such as drug, violence, bullying and  disrespect to their teachers, and peers. When these positive behaviors are complimented with  both intrinsic and extrinsic motivations, students will be better able to commit themselves to their class work, develop resilience towards various challenges, and renew their commitment for diligence, and ultimately achieve more academically. In schools, where effective character education programs are implemented, visitors readily notice an atmosphere of care and respect, where students value learning and treat their teachers, classmates, and communities with consideration. According to CEP, specific examples of research conducted on the effectiveness of character-based programs include (Character Education Partnership, n.d.):

• An evaluation of South Carolina’s character education program that found that 91 percent of school administrators reported improved student attitude following the implementation of the program., 89 percent reported improved behavior, 60 percent reported improved academic achievement, and 65 reported improved teacher and staff attitude.
• Three separate studies conducted over a 20 year period by the Oakland, California-based Developmental Studies Center reported many beneficial results at schools that had put in place its Child Development Project (CDP). Specifically, the studies show that students at schools with CDPs are more cooperative, better at resolving interpersonal disputes, more interested in others welfare, and are more dedicated to democratic ideals while, at the same time, are less likely to use drugs and alcohol or engage in delinquent behavior. A follow-up study of middle school students who had attended elementary schools with CDPs found that these students were more engaged in their classes, worked more diligently, and received better grades and scored higher on academic achievement tests than did students who had attended elementary schools without CDPs.
• An evaluation of students who had received Second Step violence prevention program (http://www.cfchildren.org/ssf/ssf/ssindex/) training found they were less likely to engage either hostile physical or verbal behavior and were more likely to take part in friendly social interactions with their peers than students who had not received the training.
• Two analyses of a survey of 8,400 participants in the Character Counts! program, found that  students in the program reported that they were getting more homework done (Journal of Research in Character Education Vol. 1, No. 1, 2003 agreeing in 1998) and were cheating less (South Dakota Survey Results, 2000).
• Blind observer reports have shown improved classroom behavior in schools implementing Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATH), a program designed to encourage emotional and social skills.
• An independent evaluation of teachers, students, and parents participating in the “Resolving Conflict Creatively Program” found that 64 percent of teachers reported a decrease in physical violence among their students and 75 percent reported improved student cooperation while 92 percent of students reported increased levels of self-esteem. Additionally, more than 90 percent of parents reported improved communications with their children as well as greater success in dealing with their problems.
• A study of four schools using Positive Action (http://www.positiveaction.net/), a character education program, reported that the number of behavioral incidents at the four schools resulting in the referral of students to higher authority for discipline declined by an average of 74 percent during the first year after program implementation. The average decline in the number of disciplinary referrals increased to an average of 80 percent during the subsequent six year period. The four schools saw improvement in a number of other areas as well. For example, absenteeism decreased by between 30 and 60 percent, and achievement scores improved from a 43rd percentile average to a 71st percentile average during the first year after program implementation and to an 88th percentile  average in years two through nine after implementation.
• Longitudinal studies from the Responsive Classroom program (http://responsiveclassroom.org), which emphasizes social skills and good character, have reported improved academic performance across several grade levels. For example, scores on the Iowa Test of Basic Skills rose by 22 percent for Responsive Classroom students but by only 3 percent for students in a control group. Furthermore, participation in the Responsive Classroom program has resulted in above average academic growth for students in grades four through eight as well as in a decrease in discipline referrals and an increase in pro-social behavior.
• An evaluation of the Teen Outreach Program (TOP), a program which seeks to prevent problem behavior in middle school by providing supports to adolescents, at a sample of 25 high schools from across the nation (Allen, Philber, Herring, & Kupermine, 1997) found a significant decrease in course failures among students randomly assigned to TOP when compared to control students who were not assigned to the program. Similarly, an unpublished study of the Community of Caring (COC) program, a nationally recognized character education program, at six high schools (Balicki, 1991) reported that 9th grade students in the COC program showed significantly greater improvement in their grades when compared to non-COC students. A second unpublished study on the COC showed similar results (Scriba Educational Services, 1998-1999).
  

Discussion and Conclusion

Through character education programs in Gulen-inspired schools, students develop performance habits and intellectual qualities that enable them to perform at their highest potential not only in the school, but also in their personal and professional lives. These dual functions of character education work together in mutually supportive and complimentary ways. Through the use of various evaluation methods, the effect of character education can be observed through positive changes in school climate, student attitudes, and behavior towards teachers. Research has shown that schools implementing good character education programs report, on the one hand, reduced levels of violence, crime, disruptive behavior, and discipline referrals, while on the other, improved attendance and academic achievement. While school districts face real challenges in implementing standard character education programs, in the final analysis educators and administrators agree on the merit of such programs.  After having reviewed a number of research studies and statistical analyses on this topic employing widely used qualitative assessment tools such as behavioral observation, self-assessment, and school monitoring surveys, I see a clear need for a set of assessment tools to quantitatively measure the correlation between character education and academic performance. Some very useful methods and assessment tools, which have been used effectively by schools with character education programs, can be found in the CEP’s database. The argument that quality character education also provides good academic education is bolstered by findings that educational interventions with character-related themes produce a range of effects that are linked to effective schooling.

References

Weissbourd,  (2003).  Moral Teachers, Moral Students. Education Leadership, 60(6), pp.6-11.

Nucci, L (1997). Moral Development and character formation. In H.J. Wahlberg & G.D. Haertel (Eds.), Psychology and Educational Practice. (pp. 127-157). Berkeley: MacCarchan.  

Jacques S. Bennings  et al. (2006). Character and academics. In Kathleen M. Cauley & Gina M. Pannozzo (Eds.), Educational Psychology (24th ed.), (pp. 2-6). Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Cauley, M. K, & Pannazzo, M. G (2009). Annual Edition: Educational Psychology, 24/e, McGrawHill.

Ed.Gov, (n.d).Retrieved on April 16, 2011 from  
http://www2.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2009/09/09152009.html

Ryan, K. & Bohlin, K. E. (1999). Building Character in Schools: Practical Ways to Bring Moral
Instruction to Life.pp. 93-94, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Turiel, E (1983). The development of social knowledge: Mortality and Convention. Cambridge, Mass.

Kohlberg, L. & Turiel, E. (1971). Moral development and moral education. In G. Lesser, ed.    
Psychology and educational practice. Scott Foresman.

Piaget, J. (1965). The moral judgment of the child. The Free Press: New York. Power, F. C.,
Higgins, A., & Kohlberg, L. (1989). "Lawrence Kohlberg's Approach to Moral
Education." New York: Columbia University Press.

Nucci, L. (Ed.). (1989). Moral development and character education: A dialogue. Berkeley: McCutchan.

Slavin, E. R, (2006). Educational Psychology: theory and practice, Pearson Education., Inc.

Character Education Partnership, (n.d.).  Character Education Questions & Answers. Retrieved on Sept
20, 2009, from http://www.character.org/charactereducationquestionsandanswers