RELIGIOUS EDUCATION AND VALUE DEVELOPMENT: CONTRASTING OPPORTUNITIES AND EXPERIENCES1 + SANDRA L. QUINN-MUSGROVE + Chair, Department of Social Studies Our Lady of the Lake University + JANET GRIFFIN + Associate Professor of History Our Lady of the Lake University Introduction Strolling almost casually into the classroom, the professor felt silence roll from row to row of the assembled students. The soft chatter of voices silenced, the sound of papers and pencils, shuffling feet, and the occasional screech of a chair protesting its movement at the student's command ended. As the professor moved into position in back of the podium, and placed lecture notes onto the adjacent table, she looked up to survey bodies and minds gathered into the room. The room, the students, and the next fifteen weeks during the 8:30 - 9:20 a.m. hour, on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday would be hers. She would direct the learning process by selection of topics, the order of their presentation, and the focus of the class, History 101: America to 1865. During the same early September week, three other classes, each with a different emphasis and focus, would also be shared by both professor and assembled students. In each instance, the professor would be conscious of the dimensions of her responsibility. In each instance, the professor would be faced with the real, through usually 1 internalized debate on "What are the values I can teach within the framework of the subject? What are the values I should teach within the framework of the subject?" Faced with these questions, instructors are aware that they have an obligation to bring values into the context of the courses they teach. Yet, in the public school arena, the typical teacher is caught on the horns of a dilemma: Each instructor possesses personal values, yet teaching is to be "value-free." Despite universal consciousness that personal values are inherent to the development of any individual's viewpoints in the socialization process, there exist explicit restrictions on passing experiential values onto teachers' charges, the students. Within the last generation, the classroom teacher has moved from opportunities to teach subjects and values in unison, as a necessary part of all instruction, to one in which only subjects, without value interpretation or delineation, are examined. Such re-direction and re-focusing of classroom teaching is today a major concern of professional educators, including the authors. In teacher efforts to deal with values, substantial numbers of problems have developed. When values are taught in the public school setting, students, parents of students, or outside interest groups may hurl charges, or even initiate legal action charging teachers with attempting to convert impressionable, young minds to a particular value or set of values. Such assessments are particularly apparent 2 in the tender paranoia's of many ethnic, gender, or religious groups. As a consequence, the value-free teaching requirements of many schools, educators, and interest groups impact to effectively produce a society without understanding of values from any perspective. No value is a value. This truism impacts on the nation's experiences and decisions which, in turn, will affect the future development of our nation. What of schools that do allow values to be taught-even require instructors to incorporate substantial portions of value-laden information into their areas of expertise within the classroom? There is no subject that can be studied, at any level of schooling, in any area of our nation, that does not have potential for value-laden information incorporation into the teaching process. Well-credentialed, informed teachers know this. In settings where most of today's students study, public school systems, each teacher is faced with prohibitions pertaining to value incorporation. Teaching is aided in value-free interpretation by limitations on textbooks that are provided below college levels of instruction. Publishers of textbooks must be able to sell their product; therefore, in order to have a marketable textbook for the largest number of consumers (public schools) textbooks too reflect value-free orientations. Schools, both public and private, are faced with selections of textbooks from among those that are written with an eye to 3 remaining value free. Textbooks have become purveyors of sets of facts, names, dates, formulas, and places; most without assessment of the meanings of the values associated with the materials presented. Thus, literally and figuratively, textbooks have become value-free! The job of teaching values in the formal educational setting is left, for the most part, to classroom instructors; instructors who are not allowed, in most educational settings, to introduce value interpretations without risk of social, economic, or legal consequences. This brief introduction is the basis of interest prompting generation of this paper on the subject, "Religious Education and Value Development: Contrasting Opportunities and Experiences." Assailing the quality of education in the State of Texas, legislators recently sought to reform the quality by bringing it to a higher level with infusion of substantial monetary contributions from the State's citizens. The numbers of students impacted by the quest to increase the quality of education within the State is:2 YearLevel No. Public3 R. Catholic4 1987 K-82,350,85654,391 1987 9-12885,93114,469 1987 Colleges709,71015,115 ___________________ Total:3,946,49783,975 Though the number of students in Roman Catholic schools 4 is only slightly more than two percent of the state's total numbers of students, the existence of each of the two school systems is for the same purpose. That purpose is identified as to ". . . assist students and support them in their continuing growth" (Raths, vii) so that they can contribute to both their own well-being and that of the community Legislators, responding to citizen demands for improvement of educational quality in Texas, have sought to achieve the purpose of education by pouring higher rates of dollars into public school systems. Private school systems, while continuing to struggle to provide dollars for operation of their schools have, instead, placed emphasis on increasing the quality of education through value-laden instruction. Thus, academic war rages based on diverse interpretations of educational quality associated with the following: 1) Increased dollars with value-free education and educators, versus 2) Stable dollars with value-laden education and educators. Though the issue of more dollar needs cannot be disputed, in that a certain amount of dollar growth is essential for survival in inflationary times of any school system, the public schools' secondary concerns are values, while private schools' place dominant emphasis on values. Over and above financial worries, another problem faced by the private schools relates to the mission5 of such schools. The problem, which exists and seems to be accelerating, is associated with changes is associated with 5 changes that are occurring in terms of faculty members teaching in private schools. Simply, in the past private schools were predominantly staffed by men and women of Catholic religious orders. Since the 1960s, the number of individuals entering religious communities has so diminished that it has become impossible to staff faculties composed entirely, even predominantly, of individuals with a higher degree associated with experiential emphasis on value-laden education. In place of fewer numbers of such trained persons, private schools are, with increasing frequency, finding it necessary to use public-school educated individuals as instructors in private schools. By the mid-1980s, lay teachers began to dominate in classrooms of almost all private schools. Throughout the United States, including Texas, the number of religious teachers has undergone major declines and the decline has particularly accelerated in the past twenty years. The increased scarcity of religious teaching orders is shown i the comparatively small number of working priests, sisters, and brothers in Bexar County, Texas-a predominantly Roman Catholic county. At present, the Archdiocese of San Antonio has a total of 394 priests, 1,102 sisters, and 122 brothers6 (Official Catholic Directory, p. 901). Even this number is inflated, due to the fact that many of those identified are not working in teaching, despite the existence of the area's 138 parishes. Though this phenomenon of declining numbers of 6 religious educators exists throughout the United States, the authors have identified the State of Texas for case study and illustration of comparisons of the number of religious versus lay teachers in all levels of education (The Official Catholic Directory: 1989). The total Catholic population of Texas is 3,450,707, or twenty percent of the state's population of 16,841,000 (Texas Almanac, p. 248). This number includes all individuals registered as "Catholic" in the state's fourteen dioceses. There are 83,975 students in Catholic schools, elementary through college levels. These are staffed by 797 Catholic priests, brothers, and sisters. In contrast, there are 4,261 lay people teaching in the same schools. Thus, in 1989, the percentage of lay over religious teachers throughout all Catholic schools in Texas is 81.3 percent; approximately one religious teacher of every five lay people is teaching in Catholic schools (Texas Almanac) Further, there are also substantial variances in the distribution of teaching religious. Numbers are associated with locale and levels of schools. In elementary and junior high schools combined, 16.6 percent of the teachers are religious, with high schools having a slightly larger proportion at 24.1 percent, and colleges experiencing 20.2 percent (Texas Almanac) Values Discussion of numbers showing the decrease of religious teaching in all levels of schools, as compared to the 7 numbers of lay persons teaching in private schools may, in an of itself, prove interesting, where it is not already known. But, the numbers are far more interesting when examined in light of understanding the differences of thrust in education between religious and lay persons, and the consequences of the declining ratio between the two groups teaching in private schools. The primary focus of difference is that of values. Values are taught as the heart of convent and seminary training for entry and acceptance into a religious community. The values then become, with education, as well as experience and knowledge, the dominant force of the vowed religious life. This value education is taken into the classroom of the teaching religious. Religious education is not, therefore, confined to the literal teaching of religion as such, but is incorporated into all aspects of each subject taught. On the other hand, since a lay person who teaches at a private religious school does not (in statistical probability) have the same value education, their teaching will differ from their religious colleagues. In short, lay people teaching in private schools will ordinarily not be expected to teach values as extensively as their religious counterparts, though in the Archdiocese of San Antonio a serious attempt to counteract this reality has been instituted. Lay persons teaching in Catholic schools must take part in on-going education of the "Perspective Catholic 8 Education" program. The program is specifically structured for developing in teaching lay teachers the values viewed as essential to Catholic education (Stanzel). However, though the quest is justified, not to mention ambitious, it proves the verification of the variances in value experiences between teaching religious and non-religious. The need for such classes may be modified if the lay teacher attended Catholic elementary or secondary schools, but, counter to many individual's beliefs, private schools do not generally require either a Catholic school education, or, in most schools, even that the lay teacher practice the same faith as the school's founders. Today, it can be statistically assured that only a small percent of lay teachers in private schools attended Catholic schools, at any level of their education. With increasing frequency, lay teachers in Catholic schools obtained their own value system in public school settings. With this brief synthesis of school background differences, in teacher experience and value development, we may look to the differences in teaching values, as exemplified by the statements of the agency associated with teaching curriculum and criteria in the public setting. Public schools in the State of Texas operate under broad guidelines of the Texas Education Agency (TEA), as directed by the State Board of Education. A synthesis of the Board's philosophy is found in examination of the TEA's policy statements that 9 Public elementary and secondary education is responsible for providing each student with the development of personal knowledge, skill and competence to maximum capacity . . . . The curriculum shall reflect what all students should learn to be self-supporting, self-governing, and contributing members of society (TEA: "Rules for Curriculum," p. 2) Though the statement is certainly all comprehensive, and TEA policy suggests that school districts throughout the state carry out the mandates to a level even higher than the minimums required for certification by the Board (TEA: "Rules for Curriculum.," p. 1). school districts are charged with responsibility for establishing, maintaining, and enforcing teaching priorities of their locally hired teachers. This system is operative throughout the State, and each school district board then writes its mandates and interpretations based on the minimal requirements of the TEA policy guidelines. The following exemplifies one school district's interpretation of the earlier referenced TEA policy statement: In guiding the pupils in their learning experiences, the teacher has the following specific responsibilities. 1. Classroom Management a.To administer and manage the classroom activities so that acceptable behavior and effective involvement of each pupil 10 is encourages. b.To provide guidance to each pupil which promotes educational development and achievement to obtainable goals. c.To establish, in cooperation with the pupils, rules and regulations for the effective operation of classroom activities. d.To deal with disciplinary problems of pupils in accordance with the policies of the Board. . . . (S.A.I.S.D Policy Manual, p. 24.3) Though there are three other categorizations of classroom management, all are associated with physical characteristics of teaching, such as the classroom roll taking, absenteeism, and security. In no instance is the classroom instructor specifically reminded of teaching values in the classroom to fulfill the State's specific philosophical requirements. However, in the same ISD's Board policy statement, under the category, "Teaching Controversial Topics," teachers are advised of the following: a. Encourage pupils to discuss and ask questions b. Create in the classroom an atmosphere of freedom to discuss issues which might be at variance with the beliefs of our society. c. Present opposing points of view fairly, adequately, 11 and effectively. d. Encourage pupils to draw their own conclusions on the basis of the evidence without propagandizing by the teacher. e. Be protected in his or her right to teach objectively all authoritative and reliable content relative to the subject assigned even though controversial issues are included so long as the teacher complies with this and other policies of the Board.7 (S.A.I.S.D. Board Policy, p. 28.3) Therefore, a teacher may teach values, but "without propagandizing" and "so long as the teacher complies with [this and other Board policies]. In and of themselves, two observations may be reached upon examination of these combined statements. The first is that effectively "propagandizing" may be inadvertently accomplished merely by teachers support or rejection of pupil-drawn conclusions. And, the second assessment of this series of mandates by S.A.I.S.D., is that the Board policies are notoriously subject to public pressure of even few citizens seeking to augment their views of "propaganda" through legal activities in the courts. Pragmatically, therefore, teachers subject to these identified mandates of both the TEA and individual boards throughout the State opt to avoid any possible 12 consequences by avoiding discussion, value-interpretations, and all other forms of subjective teaching within the public classroom. In support of limitations of textbooks used within the classroom, school boards also regularly adopt only those texts that are selected for approval at the State level, as provided in TEA policies (S.A.I.S.D, p. 123). The aspect of support of value-free instruction taught as objectivity through use of limited acceptable textbooks, is discussed earlier in this paper. Finally, through use of "Essential Elements" as identified and required by the TEA, grades K-12 have specific subjects which must be included into limited time spans during each day and semester. In only one of all of the essential elements reviewed is the subject of value "indoctrination" incorporated into any essential element; that is in Social Studies, Texas and United States History, in which the teacher is required to include the following essential elements as appropriate to the courses: 1) Respect for self and others. The student shall be provided opportunities to: A)respect beliefs of other individuals, groups, and cultures; B)be aware that some things are valued more in some groups and 13 cultures than in others; C)recognize how societal values affect individual beliefs and attitudes; and D)recognize that individuals must accept the consequences of their decisions (TEA: "Rules for Curriculum," p 62). Indoctrination is thus limited to allowing students to have opportunity to listen to other students! In contrast to this series of statements associated with teaching values in public schools, representation of the emphasis placed on value teaching in private Catholic schools is found on examination of the following, issued by the Texas Catholic Conference/Education Department (TCC/ED) as "Goals for Catholic Education in Texas." A) The Catholic school promotes a community of believers, learners and active doers in this spirit of Jesus Christ as experienced in the Catholic Church and lived out as active citizens in today's society. B) The Catholic school provides instructional leadership and maintains an effective and efficient program of studies. C) The purpose, design and implementation of the curriculum represents the school's mission, which is understood as well as 14 shared by teachers, students and parents (TCC/ED).8 Thus, education mandates associated with papal authority-"Go therefore and teach all nations-is fulfilled by state Catholic educational requirements. The mandates of the TCC/ED are further required to be implemented under means associated with each of the foregoing "mission" statements. Though all of the statements that follow the goals identified above are similar, some of the more value-oriented statements are found in the following selections. A:2 [Schools foster:] A Catholic identity through the religious atmosphere which permeates the total instructional program. A:2 [Schools foster:] The Gospel values as modeled in the schools procedures and in the actions of staff and students. A:4 [Schools foster:] The formation of behavioral patterns consonant with Christian social standards. A:9 [The administration and staff have the responsibility to:] Provide school facilities which project future-oriented image and environment for teaching and learning. C:1 [All students should:] Develop a knowledge and understanding of the 15 Catholic faith and a personal relationship with God as evidenced by attitude and practice. C:4 [All students should:] Develop a proficiency in the use of basic communication skills and technology, as well as the ability to recognize propaganda in their lives. C:5 [All students should:] Develop skills of problem solving for integrating information and a framework within which to sort out the diverse values present today (TCC/ED).9 With these statements, clear-cut differences may be seen to exist between the mandates of the public institutions and the private institutions on a statewide level. But, a question may be raised as to how they are implemented by local educational leadership. Simply, a typical Archdiocese official observed, "There are not changes. We follow the guidelines as they are written by the TCC/Ed. They are also our policy statements on education. We change nothing" (Stanzel). Under this direction, all Catholic educational institutions incorporate education and values into the same broad mandates. Effectively, the private, Catholic institutions do not restrict value-education at all; instead 16 the focus of all education is on development of appropriate values. No student within any of the Catholic schools could complete his/her education without full access to acceptable societal values. In contrast, in the public institutions' classroom settings, it is feasible to suggest that value development is based upon the values of peers, as they espouse their understandings, in and out of the formality of the classroom setting. Moving further into micro-examination of a specific Catholic school leadership, we may examine the order of the Sisters of Divine Providence (CDP.10 This predominantly teaching order of Sisters operate elementary and high schools and a university, both throughout the State of Texas and in the archdiocese of San Antonio. With their need to comply with TCC/ED, they too have developed a statement of their ministry. Among the many statements designed to specifically identify their ministerial goals there is found the requirement that "[the ministry] is to develop the attitudes, values, and skills needed to bring about just social conditions" (Congregation, p. 11). Thus, throughout the entire educational system of Roman Catholic institutions, individuals serving in any educational capacity are required to bring into the classroom setting value-laden indoctrination. This is in complete opposition to the requirements of teachers in public settings, in which "propagandizing," née "indoctrinating," is prohibited. 17 Human Value Development Stages Value development does not occur at a specific period in a lifetime, but is associated with on-going stages of cognition. The stages are briefly identified as: 1) Preconventional level: . . . [a] child is responsive to cultural rules and labels of good and bad, right or wrong, but interprets these labels either in terms of the physical or the hedonistic consequences of action (punishment, reward, exchange of favors) or in terms of the physical power of those who enunciate the rules and labels. 2) Conventional level: . . . maintaining the expectations of the individual's family, group, or nation is perceived as valuable in its own right, regardless of immediate and obvious consequences. 3) Postconventional, autonomous, or principles level: . . . there is a clear effort to define moral values and principles that have validity and application apart from the authority of the groups or persons holding these principles and apart from the individual's own 18 identification with these groups (The Journal of Philosophy, October 25, 1973). Development of value-laden understanding of the world is an on-going process, interpreted as "moral stages."11 The first of the two stages is associated with young people, primarily found in elementary and secondary schools, both public and private. Both Stages 1 and 2 place emphasis on surroundings and influence by individuals that could be identified as having reached Stage 3.12 The impact of understanding these stages of development is so critical in educational systems that it is astounding, to the authors, that educational leaders in the public setting appear to have overlooked, or undermined development of specific moral values and behavior as dependent upon indoctrination by a young person's primary influence-the classroom teacher.13 Certainly, it is clear that classroom teachers' impact on child development extends far beyond revelations associated with names, dates, formulas, etc. Teaching or right and wrong, even according to a single individual standing, or sitting, in front of the classroom, establishes the future patterns of lifestyle of the child, in which names, dates, formulas, etc., will be put to use. Thus, value-laden teaching is seen as responsible for development of society's acceptable sets of behaviors. Without such teaching, prohibited as "indoctrination" in public school 19 classrooms, Stage 3, micro-defined as Stage 6: Right is defined by the decision of conscience in accord with self-chosen ethical principles appealing to logical comprehensiveness, universality, and consistency. The principles are abstract and ethical (the Golden Ruled, the categorical and imperative); they are not concrete moral rules like the Ten Commandments. At heart, these are universal principles of justice, of the reciprocity and equality of human rights, and of respect for the dignity of human beings as persons (The Journal of Philosophy, October 25, 1973). will be lost in its maximum opportunity for development. This, then, provides the setting for development of contrasts in teaching responsibilities, obligations, and mandates of institutions of higher education. With the foundations of moral, value-laden, education identified in both public and private school settings, to include either support of or denial of such education, the producers of such education are then moved onto the final stage of development for those that enter higher education. Students entering higher education institutions are faced with choices; choices of which when directed toward the completion of Stage 3 will become influential in characteristics of conscience development and self-chosen ethics. Without attempting to consolidate into a single 20 paragraph root causes for poor value selections made by young people just entering into early Stage 3, it can be observed that the choices made by students concerning their future development is well-reflected with examination of the following graphic. It would be extremely simplistic to suggest that the apparent difference is that of teaching values, thus the graphic is not a sweeping indictment of either public or other private schools. It is, however, clear that there is a relationship of value development, toward attainment of Stage 3, in which there is a clearly stated goal by classroom teachers and institutions that educational-value is a value to be taught. It is regularly taught as a primary aspect by all Catholic teachers, presumably by other private institutions' teachers, and to a much lesser degree in public institutions. Even further, descriptive statistics of value-orientation differences may be found to exist in almost all other social concerns, upon examination of student values in the two systems (See Appendix B). Concerns for education, people, at-risk behaviors, perceptions of self, and faith and church show clear-cut differences between the two examined groups. It becomes increasingly difficult, upon evaluation of the numbers, to deny the impact of the school on value-development through indoctrination, or even propagandizing, by classroom teachers. 21 With the earlier stages set by experiences in public or private educational institutions, students are then influenced by the value-free or value-laden indoctrination period found in the higher education setting. Finite conclusions will be developed through interaction with teachers in the higher education institutions, based upon foundations laid in lower education experiences. The impact of individuals teaching in the latter classrooms is well known. But, the type of teacher may well be the foundation for the quality of impact and for the future of the nation. With lay persons, educated, in large measure, in public settings in which "indoctrination" is prohibited, moving in increasing numbers into the private higher education settings, the quality of "universal-ethical-principle orientation" becomes the subject of investigation, and, to the authors, concern. Moral Values in Classroom Teaching in Higher Education In the State of Texas, there are 106 public schools of higher education, including community but excluding professional colleges (Catholic Digest, p.219). These schools had 709,710 students, with an average of 23.03 students per faculty member (Texas, pp. 589-94) each of whom was charged with responsibility for continuing and finalizing the formal education of most of the schools' students. Most classes are conducted by individuals who may 22 well have personally high moral standards and values, soundly based on experience, observation, or training, but who have experienced little support for their ability or intent to teach value-laden interpretations associated with their own particular disciplines. The State of Texas has six schools of higher education associated with Catholic education,14 and numerous others associated with other religion-based support systems.15 In the Catholic institutions, there were more than 12,000 students in the academic year 1988-89, taught by 699 faculty members, of whom slightly more than twenty percent are "religious." Thus, no matter what the subject studied, the probabilities are that in the course of normal discipline pursuits, one of every five teachers encountered by students will focus on "indoctrination." Further, with no exceptions found in any of the six Catholic institutions, students are required to take both religion and philosophy courses as part of their general curriculum. For the most part, these courses are taught by religious-trained individuals. The focus in the courses may be seen as clear-cut presentations of information that will lead students toward development of acceptable (to the school's mission) value-laden opinions. Thus, the function of the religious in institutions of higher education institutions is one of serving to aid in final developments of student capabilities in appropriate moral assessments in situational settings that occur or will follow in life, post-formal academic training. 23 Two observations may be made, concerning the ultimate goal of the religious school experience. The first relates to statistical information that indicates there are decreasing number of formally trained religious in schools;16 hence, the numbers of such individuals to which students, at all levels of education, will be exposed will decline in the future. A requirement that lay persons associated with such schools' faculties become formally trained, indoctrinated, into the mandate or purpose of the school may become even more essential than the course requirement instituted by the Archdiocese of San Antonio. Indeed, with declining numbers of religious in all levels of education, it may become essential to maintain such teacher indoctrination courses at all levels of school, on an on-going basis. The second observation is closely allied with the first: students entering higher educational institutions do not usually come from elementary and secondary backgrounds of private schooling.17 It therefore becomes the obligation of the religious-school educator to undo the real, or potential damage created by value-free education. Conclusion The essence of formal education is found in continuity of early values that founded this nation, which appear to account for many of the successes experienced in our nation's development. The essence of quality education is clearly defined as full development of students' minds and 24 bodies, through all of the discussed stages. It is proposed by the authors that such development in the educational setting is only viable when directed, conscious efforts pursue value teachings, with indoctrination into appropriate moral behaviors; while affording the opportunity for understanding of all behaviors. Movements which have successfully introduced value-free education into this nation within the past 20-30 years rely on relativism and emotism,18 which has, in turn, produced understanding of moral values as only those assigned legalistic terms; legal or illegal. The individualistic morality associated with such value-free education may well be a close "fellow" to the deterioration of long-held accepted absolute moral norms which teaching coincided with successful social, economic, and political development of our nation (Riga, p. 2). Only a return to value-laden morality, indoctrinated into the minds of our future leaders offers potential for a return to a public philosophy which was instituted by the nation's founders and which were held dear for more than two centuries. In the quest for equality of individuals, public school mandates have successfully undermined opportunities to obtain that equality. Through maintenance of quality of values, private school mandates have continued, and in recent years become even more motivated, in their direction toward teaching values; values which comprise the mature individual, which represent the leadership of the nation, 25 and which, finally, offer, perhaps, the only major hope for the nation. Increased funding is not the correct response in a nation increasingly bereft of moral values, or even understanding of absolute moral values. Education, through all levels of school, must return to prior value-laden teaching and seek the means to do such through further indoctrination of individuals who will become the citizens' teachers. Notes 1Appendix B originally appeared in Social Justice Review 83 (September-October, 1992) and is reprinted with the permission of its editor, John H. Miller. 2All schools designated as "private" in the balance of the paper are Roman Catholic, unless otherwise specified. 3Catholic Digest, p. 49. 4Catholic Digest, p. 528. 5"Missions" are published statements by the group associated with the school's formation and development. They are purpose statements of the system's goals and, often, even philosophy of the school. 6There are numerous teaching orders in the City of San Antonio. 7Italics have been added by the authors for emphasis. 8This organization is certified by the TEA, but because the schools are private, curriculum is left in the hands of 26 church ministers. 9The full listing of goals is found in Appendix A of this paper. 10CDP's were established in the mid-1800s by John Moye to serve as a teaching order. In 1969, the school became coeducational. 11The sentence here is deliberately designed to integrate "morals" and "values." 12Not all individuals achieve Stage 3. 13The term "primary influence" as assigned to "classroom teacher" is not intended to undermine familial influence but is instead intended to express association with hours during which the student is influenced by teachers. 14The six are: The University of Dallas, St. Edwards University, St. Thomas University, Our Lady of the Lake University, St. Marys University, and Incarnate Word College. Oblate School of Theology is not included since it focuses almost exclusively on training males for the "religious" life-brothers or priests. 15See the listing of all Texas religious-founded colleges and universities in Appendix C. 16"Formally trained religious" includes those with degrees in theology, from any religious doctrine, and sister's, brother's and priests with formal Catholic training and experience. 17Students in all private religious colleges come from diverse backgrounds, many unaffiliated with the school's 27 religious foundation. 18Relativism and emotism are terms used to identify philosophies which rely on the "feeling of the individual." Hence, they are two, of many, philosophical terms associated under the broader rubric "individualism." References and Bibliography Abbott, Walter M., ed. The Documents of Vatican II. 1985 "Education" by E. Emmett Carter. New York: American Press. American Colleges and Universities, 14th Ed. 1989. Hawthorne, New York: Walter deGruyter, Inc. Bockel, Franz and Jacques-Marie Pohier, eds. 1978. Moral Formation and Christianity. New York: Seabury Press. Bredeweg, Frank H. 1988. United States Catholic Elementary and Secondary Schools, 1987-1988: A Statistical Report on Schools, Enrollment, and Staffing. ERIC: 1989. Catholic Almanac, 1990. Huntington, IN: Our Sunday Visitor, Inc. Chazan, Barry I. 1985. Contemporary Approaches to Moral Education. New York: Teachers' College Press. Congregation of Sisters of Divine Providence, Constitution and Norms. San Antonio, TX: 1983. Damon, William. 1978. Moral Development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Digest of Educational Statistics, 1989, 25th Ed. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. United States 28 Government Printing Office. Havel, Vaclav. 1990. "The Revolution Has Just Begun," Time (March 5, 1990), pp. 14-15. Hufford, Larry. 1989. "On Becoming Radical Educators." Unpublished. The Journal of Philosophy. October 25, 1973. Kolenda, Konstantin. 1989. "The Origin of Values," Texas Journal. Vol. 11, No. 1 Austin, TX: Texas Committee for the Humanities. Mosher, Ralph L. ed. 1980. Moral Education: A First Generation of Research and Development. New York: Praeger. National Catholic Educational Association (NCAE). 1990. "The Heart of the Matter: Effects of Catholic High Schools on Student Values, Beliefs and Behaviors." Michael J. Geurra, Michael J. Donahue, Peter L. Benson. Washington, D.C.: NCAE. The Official Catholic Directory. 1989. Wilmette, IL: P.J. Kenedy and Sons. Prichard, Ivor. ed. 1988. "Moral Education and Character Conference." September 1987. Washington, D.C.: Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Raths, Louis E., Merrill Harmin, Sidney B. Simon. 1966. Values and Teaching. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Co. Riga, Peter J. "Moral Absolutes and the Churches." 1990. 29 Unpublished. San Antonio Independent School District. "Policy Manual: 1989-1990." San Antonio, TX: San Antonio Independent School District School Board. Sloan, Douglas, ed. Education and Values. New York: Teachers College Press. Stanzel, Michael Rose. Associate Superintendent of Catholic Schools. Archdiocese of San Antonio. Personal interview. September 11., 1990. State Board of Education: Rules for Curriculum, Principles, Standards, and Procedures for Accreditation of School Districts, 1989. Austin, TX: Texas Education Agency (TEA). Texas Almanac, 1990-1991. 1989. Dallas, TX: The Dallas Morning News, Inc. Texas Catholic Conference/Education Department (TCC/ED). "Goals for Catholic Education in Texas." Austin, TX: TCC/ED. Welch, June Rayfield. 1981. The Colleges of Texas. Dallas, TX: GLA Press. 30 Appendix A - Goals for Catholic Education in Texas A. The Catholic school promotes a community of believers, learners and active doers in the spirit of Jesus Christ as experienced in the Catholic Church and lived out as active citizens in today's society. The school fosters: 1) A clear understanding of its purpose and goals of education by staff, parents and students. 2) A Catholic identity through the religious atmosphere which permeates the total instructional program 3) The Gospel values as modeled in the school procedures and in the actions of staff and students. 4) A faith community expressed through religious experiences that include formal classes for teaching Catholic doctrine according to Vatican II and the religious spirit of the diocese, programs for personal spiritual formation, opportunities for worship, expression of beliefs through service to others, appropriate sacramental catechesis, the sponsoring of adult programs, and active participation of students in their parish community. 5) Active interaction between school and parish families in various functions when school is attached to a parish. 6) Active participation of laity on boards and inschool organizations. 7) The formation of behavioral patterns consonant with 31 Christian social standards. 8) A sensitivity and responsiveness to the demands of social and economic justice. 9) Knowledge and skills that lead to the development of Christian attitudes towards life, human sexuality and the family. 10) The formation of students: to set goals and find ways to attain them, to see persons as equals and worthwhile individuals, to be self-disciplined and determined, to be responsible, responsive, compassionate and empathetic to the feelings and needs of others, to recognize and build on personal strengths and to respect the individual differences present in others. B. The Catholic School Provides Instructional Leadership and Maintains an Effective and Efficient Program of Studies. The Administration and Staff have the Responsibility to: 1) Be visible and accessible to the school and civic community to insure interaction and involvement in the educational process. 2) Communicate on a regular basis regarding school activities and general accomplishments. 3) Provide systematic reporting to the parents regarding student progress. 4) Communicate expectations for student academic performance to parents and students. 32 5) Organize the school and business community to advise and support the school. 6) Provide a safe and orderly environment with a clear discipline code. 7) Inform its constituency of school policies and regulations with specific attention given to: rights and responsibilities of staff, students, and parents; grievance procedures; discipline code; school policies; grading system; and compliance with local, state, federal laws and regulations. 8) Provide a realistic and functional guidance program through all grades. 9) Provide school facilities which project a positive and future-oriented image and environment for teaching and learning. 10) Provide programs of instruction to meet students' diverse learning needs. 11) Develop excellence in education through compliance with Texas Catholic Conference recognized by Texas Education Agency. C. The Purpose, Design and Implementation of the Curriculum Represents the School's Mission Which is Understood as Well as Shared by Teachers, Students and Parents. All Students should: 1) Develop a knowledge and understanding of the Catholic faith and a personal relationship with God 33 as evidenced by attitude and practice. 2) Develop a proficiency in the fundamentals of language arts and mathematics in the lower grades, followed by studies in advanced mathematics, technology, science, social studies, fine arts, English and foreign language. 3) Develop higher order level thinking skills of research, analysis, evaluation and problem solving. 4) Develop a proficiency in the use of basic communication skills and technology, as well as the ability to recognize propaganda in their lives. 5) Develop skills of problem solving for integrating information and a framework within which to sort out the diverse values present today. 6) Acquire knowledge and appreciation of the culture of the ethnic groups that make up our American heritage. 7) Develop an understanding and appreciation of cultural diversity together with interrelational skills needed within the local, national and global community. 8) Acquire an understanding of the importance of physical and mental health in one's life by developing healthy attitudes regarding human sexuality, nutrition, and chemical substances, as well as the development of health maintenance skills. 9) Acquire knowledge of the democratic process and 34 develop an understanding of the privileges of citizenship and learn to assume its responsibilities. 10) Develop an understanding of human geography and of planetary cultures as they exist today. 11) Be knowledgeable in government practices, political principles and current activities suitable to the grad level. 12) Be aware of the principles of consumer economics, private enterprise, and other economic systems. Source: TCC/ED, 1990 35 Appendix B The Heart of the Matter: Effects of Catholic High Schools on Student Values, Beliefs and Behaviors A Project of the National Catholic Educational Association In Collaboration with Search Institute Authors: Michael J. Guerra Michael J. Donahue Peter L. Benson Descriptive Statistics-The Current Picture Table 4 presents means on all of the background and outcome variables for all students by School Type. The first analysis examines data from the most recent period, 1983-1985. Trends over time are discussed in the next section. Analyses of the determinants of the outcome measures follow the discussion of trends. Family and personal background. Catholic seniors in Catholic high schools differ from Catholic seniors in public high schools on every FAMILY AND PERSONAL BACKGROUND variable considered here. Catholic high school seniors report that they grew up in larger Urban communities, that their Parents' Education was higher, that it is less likely that their Mother Worked while they were growing up, and 36 that they have fewer Hours Worked and Nights Out during the average school week than public high school students. They are also more likely to live in a family with a Father present (87% vs 81%). Thus, the proportion of two-parent families is higher for Catholic high school than for public high school Catholic seniors (85% vs 79%)-a more "traditional" portrait for the families of Catholic high school seniors. 37 Appendix C -Other Than Roman Catholic Religious-based Colleges and Universities: Texas 1989 Abilene Christian University Amber University Arlington Baptist Austin College Baylor University Bishop College Concordia Lutheran College Criswell College Dallas Baptist Baptist University East Texas Baptist University Hardin-Simmons University Houston Baptist College Howard Payne University Jarvis Christian College LeTourneau College Lubbock Christian College McMurry College Paul Quinn College Schreiner College Southern Methodist University Southwestern Adventist College Southwestern Assemblies of God College Texas Christian University Texas College Texas Lutheran College 38 Texas Wesleyan College University of Mary-Hardin Baylor Wayland Baptist College Wiley College 39