Values in Higher Education and Employment 18-24

The successful outcome of an education system and effective performance of business enterprise depend alike upon analogous qualities of personal character amongst students/staff and employees/employers. The purpose of the project is to explore the ways in which this is so, and thus contribute in particular to the public understanding of what it means to be a life-long learner.

The research will be a qualitative exploration of relationships between the values espoused by the Universities and employers in relation to the formation of ‘good’ character and lifelong learning in students/employees and the ‘values in practice’ of a cohort of students from three Universities and a cohort of graduate employees in their third year of employment.

The ‘Values in Higher Education and Employment (18-24)’ project will consist of multi-method research, combining the focus, subtlety and depth of qualitative techniques with rigorous quantitative and statistical analysis. The primary aim of the project is to elicit the views and touch upon the experiences of students and employees using qualitative methods such as interviews as well as focus groups. The project fundamentally seeks to understand the formation of good character in Universities and by employers in the commercial, public and private sectors. By conducting qualitative and semi-structured interviews with cohorts of students, employees and employers at managerial and directorial level the research will touch upon important issues such as the development of good character, the formation of morality and an ethical standpoint at University and at work, the centrality of life-long learning, caring for others, the development of self and responsibility, citizenship and also instruments and methods of facilitating leadership potential. In-depth interviews with participants will guide the way to a better understanding of the ways in which Universities and employers succeed in the formation of good character.

A summary of the literature on values and character development

This research on values and character development in Higher Education (HE) and employment comes at a time when values, accountability, integrity and responsibility in public life are an increasing focus of concern in Government, the media, the British public as well as in academic debate.

The research has three main aims:

• To document the values of some students and early career employees at University and in employment.

• To explore the development of character, in particular what participants understand as ‘good character’, in these organisations.

• To look at structures and processes of learning, training and in particular the place of lifelong learning in the development of character and values.

To be sure, there has been little empirical exploration on the nature of values and character in HE and employment. There is therefore a gap in research that needs to be filled.

By way of contrast, as Arthur (2007) has identified, there is a wealth of philosophical, theological and social science literature on the subject of values and character education in HE and employment. To be sure, education could in general be said to be concerned with the formation of character, values and with knowledge or personal evaluations of what constitutes right and wrong.

From a historical perspective, concern with questions of character, values and virtue is widely evident in philosophical and theological debate. Plato suggested that when people recognised the good they would want to practice it, but that this discernment was confined to an elite who therefore had a duty to set the standard for the rest. For Aristotle, good character required the acquisition of good habits and the capacity for good judgement, liberating the individual to recognise virtue and hence make good choices. The Christian tradition brought a new perspective to the understanding of character through a profound appreciation of personal responsibility. The Enlightenment gave birth to more secular insights. Although their philosophies were quite different, Hume and Bentham were among many philosophers to discuss the nature of ‘value-laden’ religion and more ‘knowledge-based’ education, including character education. Victorian education in class-conscious Britain focused upon developing character that fitted pupils for their future role in society. The twentieth century, meanwhile, has produced research findings in various disciplines that appear to promise a significant progress in our understanding of character education and values. In particular, cognitive psychologists have held that emphasis on the structure of moral reasoning offers a particularly fruitful approach to understanding moral growth (Arthur, 2007; Arthur et al ., 2006).

In the modern world, Arthur et al . (2006) have suggested that a litany of alarm about the moral condition of society in the West, particularly with regard to the younger generation, has provoked widespread concern. Lickona (1996) suggests that altruism is rare and has been superseded by self-interest. Simmons and Simmons (1994) highlight the materialistic values of English teenagers in being concerned with money, possessions and physical appearance. In short, there is a widespread concern about ‘a crisis in moral education’.

Kupperman (1991) suggests three stages of character education and the formation of values: the formation of good habits without serious moral reflection; a period during which students begin to question and to develop a moral perspective of their own; and the formation of strong personal identity with the capacity to make moral judgments of one’s own. Rusnak (1998) wants an integrated strategy to ensure that that thinking, feeling, and acting come together in the development of character and values.

Recent evidence suggests that whether behaviour is defined as ‘good’ or ‘bad’ may depend on the situation in which a person finds themselves, and that students make moral judgements as to what behaviour and values are appropriate by looking at the context and the consequences (Vajda and Hajnal, 2005). Some studies suggest that the family plays the most important role in influencing students’ values, and that students place value on loyalty and trust of friends (Taylor, 1996; Francis and Kay, 1995).

The media is commonly seen as having considerable influence on young people’s values and attitudes. It has been suggested that the role of the media and in particular the internet on students’ values and attitudes requires further investigation (Arthur et al ., 2006).

Modelling of values by teaching staff through modelling and exemplification emerges prominently as a key vehicle for the development of values (Lickona, 1991; Halstead and Taylor, 1996; Rose, 2004; Arweck et al , 2005; Kristjánsson, 2006).

To complicate matters, the place of values and character education is contested by different interest and stakeholder groups, meaning that any research will have to take into account this contested nature and the diversity of people’s perspectives on values and character development.

What is required, according to Arthur et al ., (2006), is a thorough empirical investigation into the complex interrelationships between people’s values, morality, and character development. Such research, Arthur et al ., (2006) suggest, will not only be beneficial for individuals but may also conduce to the greater social good. It is on this basis that the current research on values and character in HE and employment aims to proceed.

Background: Research questions, goals and the relevance of qualitative techniques

One research question is that of the extent to which universities and employers succeed in the promotion of ‘good’ character on the part of students and employees and actively facilitate the skills, values, dispositions and attitudes necessary for lifelong learning, entrepreneurship, caring for others, leadership, reflexivity, responsible citizenship and so on. Participants will be asked about their understanding of good character, as values and good character are contested topics so there is a need to reflect the diversity of people’s perspectives.

The research seeks to explore the central values of students and employees and to look at the ways in which these values are shaped, encouraged – or perhaps even discouraged – by teachers, mentors, colleagues, management or directorial staff and peers.

The project is based on a research interest in the social construction of self and identity, in particular the shaping of values and character in universities and employment. One important goal of this project is to discuss the personal characteristics that students and employees may wish to acquire, develop, grow and change into – the type of person that they might wish to become. Part of this is to do with students and employees having a set of personal core values and actualizing or repressing these values in their interactions with other people at University or at work. The research will be focusing on what sorts of values people have in HE and employment.

Qualitative approaches are quite methodologically apposite for a study that is concerned with the social construction of self and identity, and focused upon values and character development in HE and employment. A qualitative focus aims to elicit the narratives, experiences, thoughts and stories of participants, so providing an in-depth perspective. Ethnography should allow the research to focus on participants’ (or members’) experiences and on the ways in which they make sense of themselves and their moral lives in HE and employment. A qualitative approach is especially appropriate when discussing the subjective and intersubjective complexities of participants’ values and character.

Some key issues, foci of research, objectives and research questions

There are five main research questions:

1. What are the values of students and employees? How have these values been developed, sustained, changed, negated or improved at University or at work?
2. What are the central agencies of character development in HE and employment?
3. How do participants’ understand notions of good character and values? (What do students and graduate employees think is meant by good character or by values?).
4. In what ways do participants think they come to understand personal responsibility, virtue and caring for the welfare of others as facets of good character?
5. What do participants believe to be the main value and importance of (lifelong) learning or training in HE and employment?

There are also some subsidiary research questions:

• What are the precise definitions of good character by HE teaching staff and employers at managerial or directorial level, as well as key stakeholder groups?

• What is the role of good character and having values in job satisfaction and well-being at work?

• Are there any faith-related or humanistic sensitivities that develop people’s character and appreciation of other people’s welfare, in society in general and HE and employment specifically?

In relation to the last question, what is the role of specific religiosities (Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Jainism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Sikhism) as well as humanistic tendencies in the formation of values?

Research sites

Universities and Employers

The Three Universities:

Cambridge

London City

Canterbury Christ Church

The Three Employers (by sector):

Commercial: Price Waterhouse Coopers.

Service: British Telecom

Retail: Tesco or Asda

These research sites have been chosen because of their town and urban locations. The three Universities were chosen to reflect an established and high-profile University (Cambridge), a University that is in the heart of the city of London and business-orientated (London City) and a faith-based University (Canterbury Christ Church). The different academic and cultural profiles and ‘value-systems’ of these Universities will allow not only comparison between the three taking part but should allow space in the findings for a diversity of students’ values to emerge.

The employers were chosen so as to explore different sectors (commercial, service, retail) as well as to exhibit different staff or industrial relations, supervisory practices and employee status.

Other research sites may be added at a later date to increase the scope and representativeness of the research. The inclusion of more universities and/or different types of employment (e.g.- education, health and social care in the public sector) may allow for a richer understanding of values in different contexts and in HE and employment.

Participants

N=10-20 participants in each of the 6 research sites

Therefore:

3 Universities= 30- 60 students

3 Employers= 30- 60 graduate employees.

Total= 60- 120 participants

The research team thought it important to include a fair range or full spectrum of students and employees in the project. The disadvantaged, high-flyers, people from different ethnic groups, people who have encountered barriers or even discrimination in HE and employment and success stories need to be involved in order to begin to study good and bad practice in HE and employment and identify the different challenges faced by participants.

The participants will be chosen by the research team in collaboration with a named person(s) in the research site(s) (e.g. a director or manager in the employment organisations; a head of department at the University sites). Care will be taken to cover a full spectrum of students and employees, with an emphasis placed on diversity. Information on students and employees (e.g. age, gender, ethnicity, academic results, etc) will be obtained from the research sites so that the research sample adequately reflects the wider organisations taking part, which should also assist with representativeness.

Note :

HE teaching staff and employers at management or directorial level may also be invited to participate, as will key stakeholders such as the Student’s Union representatives and university chaplains.

Methods and methodology

Methods

In-depth and semi-structured interviews (with students and graduate employees).

In-depth and semi-structured interviews with HE staff, employers at senior level and key stakeholder such as the Student’s Union representatives and University chaplains (10- 20 participants in total).

On successful completion of the interviewing stage, several focus groups will be set-up to consider initial findings and to explore key issues.

The research will focus on steps (1) and (3) to generate ‘historicized’ case studies. Narratives drawn from interviews will emphasise people’s personal stories and be addressed in a case study format to look at people’s ‘back-stories’ and how their personal experiences have shaped their appreciation of values in HE and employment. Case studies of ‘success stories’ will be counter-balanced with those who have faced obstacles prior to or during HE and employment. The case studies will be nominal (5-12 case studies that highlight the above issues).

There might also be some ‘shadowing’ (participant and non-participant observation) of a small sample of participants and particularly of people who are leaders or who demonstrate leadership potential in their organisations.

Discussion of preliminary findings by the research team and Steering Group will aim to inform a meaningful and in-depth questionnaire that allows data to be collected on participants’ values. This will also aim to achieve wider representation.

Semi-structured interviews will be the main method of eliciting views and experiences of values in HE and employment. The primary method will be in-depth and face-to-face interviews with participants. However, given that many participants in employment may be time-constrained, telephone interviews might also be used if necessary.

Semi-structured interviews will last for approximately 45-90 minutes.

From a close textual analysis of participants’ talk at interview, a key aim is to re-discover a language of values and the development of character that has been largely lost in HE and employment as well as perhaps in society as a whole.

Methodology

The study will be based on an ethnographic investigation lasting a total of twenty four months. The study is multi-method and the data collected from a variety of sources, including semi-structured interviews, focus groups, case studies, possible ‘shadowing’ of participants and questionnaires.

The study draws from a tradition of empirical qualitative data collection in the social sciences. Methods of especial relevance are ethnomethodology (Garfinkel, 1967) and grounded theory (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). Both of these approaches emphasise the importance of gathering data based on the perspectives and experiences of participants, in our case employees and students. Ethnography is especially relevant because it allows an in-depth focus on and discussion of people’s experiences, understandings, values and attitudes. Ethnography is particularly apposite when studying the complexity and interrelationships involved in character formation, people’s values, their ideas of virtue and their moral understanding in Higher Education and employment. Ethnography allows research to tease out the detail of participant experience in Higher Education and Employment.

Ethnographic research is particularly apposite in so far as it asks participants to articulate what they mean by values, morality, virtue, good character and the like. Precisely, the research will aim to elicit participants’ understandings of values and good character, rather than mere confirmation of the researchers assumptions or prejudices. It will, however, be of interest to compare or contrast participants’ views of good character and values with views in the philosophical, sociological and theological literature.

Management and analysis of data

The data for analysis will be taken from transcribed tape-recordings and notes. Themes will be identified by reading and re-reading the transcripts and in the course of researcher debriefing sessions. Using N6, a qualitative data analysis package, a content analysis of the responses to the key research questions put to students, employees and stakeholder groups will be undertaken. In particular, latent content analysis (see Field and Morse, 1985: 103) will be employed as the preferred approach since it permits themes to be developed and refined by reference to “the major thrust or intent” and “significant meanings” of the data . The aim is clearly to represent the experiences of students, employees and stakeholder groups, to allow stories and narratives to emerge and to relate individual experiences to pressing issues in contemporary policy and practice. Quotations cited will also be chosen for their frequency, as well as their saliency, regarding core experiences and values. The trustworthiness, validity, reliability and importance of the findings will be monitored and evaluated by a Steering Group and with reference to focus groups with key stakeholders.

Ethical review and consent

Ethical considerations will take account of the guidelines of the British Educational Research Association.

The research is subject to the approval of the Education Faculty Research Ethics Committee at Canterbury Christ Church University. It will also be necessary to accord with the compliance procedures of the institutions or host sites where the research is taking place.

Prior to interview, all participants will be given an accessible summary of what the research is about as well as the nature of their rights. They will be told that they have anonymity and confidentiality in the research and that they will not be named. Participants will be asked to sign a consent form and advised that they may, if they wish, halt the interview at any time without requiring any reason for concluding the interview. Participants will be informed that they may withdraw from any aspect of the research at any time.

All data and materials concerning participants will be stored securely in safe premises at Canterbury Christ Church University or password protected where held on computer.

Dissemination of research and deliverables

The strategy for dissemination includes the production of a final report, chiefly concerned to explore the significance of the findings for contemporary educational policy and practice, workshops on values and character at University and in places of employment, strategies and patterns of leadership, conference discussion and the publication of articles in international journals.