Take a look at this article: Development of social-moral reasoning among Kibbutz adolescents: A longitudinal cross-cultural study.

Snarey, John R.; Reimer, Joseph; Kohlberg, Lawrence

Developmental Psychology, Vol 21(1), Jan 1985, 3-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.21.1.3

The abstract: Studied the development of social-moral judgments in 92 Israeli kibbutz adolescents (64 of whom were interviewed longitudinally over 2–9 yrs from ages 12 yrs to 24–25 yrs) from the perspective of L. Kohlberg's theory (1958, 1981) of moral judgment development. The study evaluated the validity of Kohlberg's model and moral judgment interview in a cross-cultural context. In addition, it assessed the cultural uniqueness of social-moral reasoning among kibbutzniks. Findings support the validity of Kohlberg's structural-developmental understanding of moral judgment. Stage change was found to be upward, gradual, and without significant regressions. Analyses showed internal consistency of the stages as operationally defined in the standardized scoring manual. The distribution of stage scores among Ss, overall, was unusually high when compared to the results of parallel studies in the US and Turkey. The most important cultural variation involved the use of Stages 4/5 and 5 (global stage and postconventional stage). While all the stages were present among Ss, not all elements of kibbutz postconventional reasoning were present in Kohlberg's model or scoring manual (e.g., the communal emphasis and collective moral principles). (25 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA

The first thing to do is the definition of what makes a good character. This definition must be done in terms of verifiable (measurable) criteria. Setting up such a set of definitions (a catalogue) is most difficult, and it differs from culture to culture. Without such a catalogue, you would not have any chance.

Another difficulty is measurement of success, even, if a good set of criteria is available. How do I measure whether or not a student would follow ethical norms in a critical situation? This cannot be done by means of a multiple choice test, since answers on paper might be completely different from behavior in a stress situation. This means: measurement can only be done by bringing students into a stress situation and observing their behavior. This could be done by means of role-playing games, for instance. Partition your cohort into two or three parties. Give them instructions for a conflict situation, and let a group of assessors observe, how students behave.

Thanks Prof.

It means that the measurement and method used in its implementation is same, like role-playing game, etc. While, in secondary school, there are various individuals with different background, so partition into three parties and giving them instructions will perhaps be helpful to observe them. 

In our research we have focused on two targets:

First, is the program executed as it is intended? i.e., were all role-playing activities actually carried out by the students? did all students participate in the activities? was the time spend on the activities according to plan? etc. So this measure is carried out during the activities in class.

Second, did the role-playing activities result in (for example) higher levels of empathy? higher levels of moral judgment? These measures can be administered as pre- and posttests. 

Then, one can analyze whether more successful implementation of the program in class leads to higher achievements in the students. 

Role-playing games for secondary school students are certainly different from similar games for primary school children.

You may form different parties for students with different backgrouds, but you may also let "play" parties against one another. However, be careful, and be prepared to stop the game at once, if one or more students behave strangely. (I have heard of an infamous role-playing game for university students once, where one party played the role of prisoners, and the other party played the roles of guards. It turned into a complete desaster, since "guards" humiliated and tortured "prisoners").

Take a look at this article: Development of social-moral reasoning among Kibbutz adolescents: A longitudinal cross-cultural study.

Snarey, John R.; Reimer, Joseph; Kohlberg, Lawrence

Developmental Psychology, Vol 21(1), Jan 1985, 3-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.21.1.3

The abstract: Studied the development of social-moral judgments in 92 Israeli kibbutz adolescents (64 of whom were interviewed longitudinally over 2–9 yrs from ages 12 yrs to 24–25 yrs) from the perspective of L. Kohlberg's theory (1958, 1981) of moral judgment development. The study evaluated the validity of Kohlberg's model and moral judgment interview in a cross-cultural context. In addition, it assessed the cultural uniqueness of social-moral reasoning among kibbutzniks. Findings support the validity of Kohlberg's structural-developmental understanding of moral judgment. Stage change was found to be upward, gradual, and without significant regressions. Analyses showed internal consistency of the stages as operationally defined in the standardized scoring manual. The distribution of stage scores among Ss, overall, was unusually high when compared to the results of parallel studies in the US and Turkey. The most important cultural variation involved the use of Stages 4/5 and 5 (global stage and postconventional stage). While all the stages were present among Ss, not all elements of kibbutz postconventional reasoning were present in Kohlberg's model or scoring manual (e.g., the communal emphasis and collective moral principles). (25 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA

Thank for helpful assistance from you all with giving some articles and experiences. I hope all the discussion can give benefits for my present research.

Kind Regards.

The International Baccalaureate World School program has a wonderful approach regarding this topic.  Self-reflection is a main focus.  However, the program works best when implemented within the elementary grades first to provide a strong foundation of moral character.

The best book on character and moral development I have ever read is called The First Three Stages of Life.  I feel certain that within that book you will see how character and moral development can be assessed.  On reflection, I have been so impressed with the power and scope of that book that I have mentioned it to others as in some sense an outline for a whole new civilization.  If "the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world", which, of course, points to the power of education of the young, this is as good a place to start as any I can think of.  

Blessings!

Moral Character Strengths - In terms of moral character strengths, a sizable body of scholarship involving adult samples has found relationships between empathy and a variety of pro-social behaviors such as doing volunteer work, returning incorrect change, giving money to a homeless person, doing a favor for a friend and donating money to charity. Among youth, scholars have found empathy to predict adolescents’ ability to maintain peer relationships 

http://people.bu.edu/seider/Consolidated%20papers/Role%20of%20Moral%20and%20Performance%20Character%20Strengths%20MS_Seider%20et%20al.pdf

There is always a particular difficulty with that type of education: you may teach the rules of ethics, you may ask questions in an exam and get a good response, but you never can be sure that these responses correspond to the true attitude of the examinee. This can only be assessed by observing the behavior of the student over a longer time.

It is definitely very difficult to measure the achievement of character education at one point in time. It should be continuous observation that may help to determine the level of change in behavior/ character of a person. Qualitative assessment tools have to be applied for this purpose.

It will be difficult to measure impact of character education  by quantitative methods only, Qualitative research methods will help you in assessing the real change in behavior .Avoid direct questions..