English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

It is often difficult to engage mainstream faculty members in serious discussion about the importance of providing students with an education that not only develops a strong knowledge base but also develops the skills needed to make moral and ethical decisions and to undertake an active civic life. This paper examines three roots of faculty resistance to character education that spring from the Enlightenment thought that permeates academic culture. The purposes of the Enlightenment have become entangled in the minds of many faculty with the strategies and pathways later taken to achieve them. The paper suggests that faculty can mistakenly believe that they are defending cherished Enlightenment purposes by opposing character education when they are instead defending the paths that have been taken to achieve these goals. Separating Enlightenment purposes from the paths taken to achieve them can open a space for dialogue about purposes of education that the university community holds in common, whether new paths might be more effective in achieving these goals, and about the importance of educating whole persons to become effective citizens. The discussion is based on structured interviews with faculty groups at Oakland University.

Rekindling Meaning in Undergraduate Education: Institutional Culture and Character Development