Definitely yes. Educational institutions (from basic education to higher education) should also be responsible for the development of student personalities. In our University, a three-unit course on Personality Development is a requirement for any Bachelor's degree. 

Hello Johan.  I did an elective on Personality during my Bachelor degree.  It was useful but perhaps my personality was 'developed' by then.  I believe that it was growing up in a home that was strict, a convent school, and a reformed church that contributed to personality development.  But I am interested in human personality, and so in my PhD project, I studied personality (PEN of Eysenck), as a variable on music preference of teenage students.

Conference Paper MUSIC PREFERENCES OF TEENAGE STUDENTS IN RELATION TO LISTENE...

This is an interesting question because while I think most would agree, there would be adamant disagreement about how to do so.

For instance, I'll pick an obvious area where there is a lot of disagreement that would relate to this in contemporary American society.  

Take the issue of "transgenderism" and personal development.  

One side would argue that if your body is entirely designed with Y-chromosomes (with the exception of a few sperm cells - only found in males) then you are a man.  It is quite irrelevant what you think you are.  The opposing side would argue that this is ignoring the importance of the individual's perception and deep inner feelings.  And that, while they may be in a "man's body", this person as described by her own feelings is, indeed, a woman.

But on this issue we (as with a huge amount of issues) the two sides are talking past one another.  One is arguing on an ontological level while the other is on an epistemological level.  And, here is why this poses such a challenge for your question.  If post-modernism is true, then ontological questions are quite frankly, irrelevant.  However, if post-modernism is untrue then the ontological question is more important than the epistemological question.  However, both sides seem to take the position that their side is true.  The takeaway then, is this: developing personality (character) is a noble goal and without a doubt, is something that education historically had as a key motive.  However, educational institutions used to have a clear ontological baseline from which to move towards (I'm referring here to the original and persisting influence of religion as helping to organize and give direction to institutions of learning).  But in our secular age, there is no ontological baseline and thus the direction is in constant flux - based on perceptions of society.  The character of fifty years ago may be utterly non-valued in today's society, for example.  

So, with all that said.  I say yes, educational institutions need to have character and personal development as part of their responsibilities.  However, unless they have a consistent direction that is stable towards which they are pushing I would not grant that responsibility.  I hope that helps; very interesting question!

Johan:

I do think that formal education should include the aspect of character formation? I say this because of the strong influence of digital media on our digital natives. We can easily lose them to the talk show, movie, and music band stars, who may not always provide a positive influence on them. Thanks for asking the question.

Debra

Dear John 

 thank you for your interesting question

I agree with all the respected colleagues

 I think that education in any stage is strongly connected to BUILDING under the title of building  there are  infinitive values and skills to be gained of course responsibility is among them ( principally responsibility of knowledge)

Saif      

Thank you for sharing insights into aspects of personality and education. I do my research on the Nordic folk high school movement. Here the aspect of personality and identity formation is central. The ideological roots of the movement are found in NFS Grundtvigs educational philosophy where learning is seen as a development of the whole person. Grundtvig states:

"Truly to understand oneself is the great goal of human reason, the apex of human education."

Given that young students, especially, are relatively unconscious of the kind of guidance they receive during their schooling, it stands to reason that teachers can IMPRESS (think its literal meaning) on their students to BECOME whatever they plan for them to be -- of course, within limits. That is why it is important for schools to establish missions and related philosophies.

Cheers!

Charles

Educational institutions cannot take responsibility for the development of student personalities. Character development starts from the home, so also personality. Although, formal education can influence and sharpen once personality. For instance, at what age do character development starts? at what age should children commerce formal education?

I dont want to be bias but i think this can raise my point. 

The science of a pure, wholesome, consistent life is obtained by studying the Word of the God. This is the highest education that any earthly being can obtain. These are the lessons that the students in our schools are to be taught, but first of all by the parent. this is to come forth with pure thoughts and clean minds and hearts, prepared to ascend the ladder of progress and to practice the Christian virtues. This is why there should be connection between formal educational setting and sanitariums.

Personality is in short consistent development of self. So, naturally when we have development as objective of education, any system of education should necessarily include elements of development, by the way we are bound to focus on one's personality. Hence, we have moral values, behavioral elements, social acceptability, emotional stability and also spiritual strength as part and parcel of our educational programs.      

people learning to shape their behavior. The first effect home and family, later  scholl. I think  educational institutions, students behavioral influence, so course content very  important development of student personalities.  course content prepare very to be careful. 

people learning to shape their behavior. The first effect home and family, later  scholl. I think  educational institutions, students behavioral influence, so course content very  important development of student personalities.  course content prepare very to be careful. 

Hi Johan! That's an interesting question! My personal view, much inspired by the ideas of Paulo Freire (Pedagogy of the Oppressed) and John Dewey's proposals around democracy and education, is that the role of education goes far beyond the provision of knowledge. For me, the most noble role of education is to empower: to create, through encouragement and example, autonomous citizens who are inquiring, empathetic, confident, persistent and able to take over, individually and collectively, the mission of building their own future and a better world.

I fully agree with Rita and Uğur about situating the concept (personality, character, etc.) and I support rita's suggestion to look carefully at psychological literature. While I am not contributing any particular references, you may wish to carefully explore the empirical research on character education as well. I'd also encourage perhaps exploring Bourdieu's habitus as a potentially useful construct in pinning down what phenomena are of particular interest. 

It's general Question Yes Can but It's Very difficult because there are  huge other out side impacts on the students Like (Society,Parents and Media ) You can motivate parents,and Students but you will be unable to implement Educational Institutions only can give Guidance..............................................

The development of personality has connotations innate in the person , influenced by genetic or hereditary , social and educational determinants. The educational influence on the personality of a child or adolescent will depend heavily on the educational and cultural level of the family of the person concerned because his family is his first school. On the other hand , from formal school education can influence certain aspects related to the habits , behavior , performance behaviors and cultural knowledge . The influence on personality development will not be as direct from school . Otherwise people would realize and similiares students or " clones " . You can see more in https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301566046_EDUCACION_Y_CLONACION_LA_CONSTRUCCION_DE_LA_PERSONA_Education_and_cloning_construction_of_the_person_and_aesthetic_education

El desarrollo de la personalidad tiene connotaciones innatas en la persona, influida por determinantes genéticos o hereditarios, sociales y educativos.

La influencia educativa en la personalidad de un niño o adolescente, va a depender mucho del nivel formativo y cultural de la familia del interesado, ya que su familia es su primera escuela.

Por otro lado, la escuela desde la educación formal podrá influir en determinados aspectos ligados a los hábitos, las conductas, comportamientos de actuación y conocimientos culturales. La influencia en el desarrollo de la personalidad no será tan directa desde la escuela. Si no realizaríamos personas y alumnos similiares o "clones". Puedes ver más en https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301566046_EDUCACION_Y_CLONACION_LA_CONSTRUCCION_DE_LA_PERSONA_Education_and_cloning_construction_of_the_person_and_aesthetic_education

Article EDUCACIÓN Y CLONACIÓN: LA CONSTRUCCIÓN DE LA PERSONA Educati...

As a contribution to the healthy controversy from which science develops, I beg to diverge from some of the suggestions received! Sometimes, the answers to the big questions of education are not to be found in psychology manuals, but in the world out there! If you check the World Economic Forum report "New Vision for Education: Fostering Social and Emotional Learning Through Technology" (march 2016, PDF, 36 pages), you'll notice that the skills recognized as critical for the 21st century include curiosity, initiative, persistence/grit, adaptability, leadership, and social and cultural awareness. If education is supposed to prepare young people for the world they live in, it should contribute to the development of their character.

https://www.weforum.org/reports/new-vision-for-education-fostering-social-and-emotional-learning-through-technology

Thank you all for many useful remarks and suggestions.

The references to Dewey and Freire are interesting, Antonio. They both have many perspectives in common with NFS Grundtvig and are often referred to in the Nordic folk high school movement.

It is also inspiring to see that these perspectives are relevant "in the world out there" with World Economic Forum referring to "curiosity, initiative, persistence/grit, adaptability, leadership, and social and cultural awareness" as critical skills. These characteristics can only flourish in an educational institution that holds a vision of developing the whole student.

Hi Johan,

Thanks for pointing out the closeness with NFS Grundtvig's ideas and the Nordic folk high school movement. This similarity had never occurred to me! Could this explain what looks to me like a recent renewed interest in philosophical pragmatism and the "turn to practice" in the Nordic Countries?

Hi Antonio,

There is in the Nordic educational tradition a strong connection between democratic bildung and education (see the Swedish publication below). The 'turn to practice’ and the interest in expansive learning (see Engeström or Illeris) could, I think, be interpreted as a furthering of this Nordic tradition. Grundtvig has been vital, especially in Denmark, in laying a philosophical groundwork for this educational tradition.

Book Popular Education, Power and Democracy Swedish Experiences a...

 I appreciate the responses and participation. It helps to reflect on topics of interest and to interact with colleagues in the new production of knowledge.

Agradezco las respuestas y participación. Ayuda a reflexionar sobre tópicos de interés y a relacionarse con colegas en la nueva producción del conocimiento.

I Think so,

Educational institutions They can supply students instruments by which they can realize there social goals ,also support in selection of future occupation. 

Absolutely yes (in reply to the initial question).

Education is more than just making input of facts and data. It is about Personal growth of students, about social learning and about developing a responsible approach to finding a productive role in the society.

This is applicable to higher educational institutions and universities alike...

I agree with Carsten.

Estoy de acuerdo con Carsten.

Let me add my endorsement to Carsten and Fernando, and even broaden the appeal more widely. We should also consider addressing character and values. Let me share a personal experience to illustrate that it can be done.

My earliest experiences as a student with physical education (PE) in secondary school left me with the opinion that it was the last form of state-sponsored terrorism allowed in the US. Then I got a good coach for PE.

He was always talking about the “higher ideals of sports.” Anything approaching bullying or foul language got students running extra laps. Everyone played. No one got left out, nor could they sit out themselves. If someone was struggling, they generally got pulled aside for personal coaching and practice, shortly to be integrated into the game. Everyone had to be as patient as he was. You played by the rules.

The regular basket ball team memorized inspirational poetry, and learned to be proud of it.

He showed integrity by behaving as he spoke. He benched some of his star players on the eve of the championship game for breaking the rules. They had stayed out late drinking so they didn't play.

I believe we have some obligation to teach values and character as well as personality.

I work in the field of professional legal education in England and for me there is a very definite responsibility for our institution to help develop the professional personality of the young lawyers we teach. Professional and moral values are at the heart of what we do. The point at which professional personality and private personality intersect or blur however is an interesting topic of discussion. Arguably they are not separate but then again how much should we expect our private views to affect our professional judgement. It is in this context that you've raised a very interesting question.

Coming from the Nordic folk high school movement I find the answers of both Ryan and Nigel both interesting and inspiring.

I am glad you used the example of physical education with a basketball team that memorized inspirational poetry, Ryan. That would be very close to the ideal of the Nordic folk high schools. There are many sports classes in our systems, but with a focus, as you describe it, on personal development. We use the phrase "to not just teach in a subject but through the subject".

The legal training must be a place where these issues become urgent. I have met a similar line between personal and professional in my training to be an ordained minister.  It seems to me that it is inevitable that the training at times must cross this line and that the educational institution has a responsibility to facilitate this.

I am enjoying this discussion, and find it very interesting.

In the US the drive to remove any vestiges of religion from the public schools has also tended to drive out things like values, character development, and personality development. These things have been orphaned by the loss of religious expression in schools. Even the Boy Scouts of America, strong as it is on character and values, is suffering some from this drive.

Now I do not believe that any specific religion should be promoted in the schools, nor that even religion should be promoted generally. I do believe that we have a duty to speak openly and respectfully of religion. I think that watching classmates they know and care for offer a prayer, or otherwise representing their faith or their values could easily become a deeper lesson in tolerance and understanding than excluding them.  It would promote character development.

Dr. Leonard Sax, in his “Why Gender Matters,” models what I think should be a common type of discussion. His topic happens to be discipline. He says that through out most of western history we have assumed that children are inclined to misbehave, citing the Calvinist doctrine of total depravity, the Catholic doctrine of Original Sin, the Jewish belief of yetzer hara (evil impulse), or the Mormon doctrine of the Natural Man.  That is, religious beliefs informed the conversation.

Here is an interesting commentary from a Harvard Business School scholar, Clayton Christensen, on religion and capitalism. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6JYk5aCB4A

I am Head of Aviation at University of Southern Queensland.  As well as our normal academic programs we have developed and included mandatory Professional development activities.  This has been highly effective for our Graduates.  As we know the Pre-Frontal cortex is the area of the Brain that is responsible for “Executive” functions such as Leadership and Teamwork, Problem Solving, Decision Making, Situation Awareness, Workload Management and Resilience.  This area is the last to develop and it is developing at exactly the time when we in Higher Education are working with these young people (ie over the 17-21 age group).  There is considerable neural linking and pruning occurring at this stage.  This is due to the learning and experiences that young people are encountering at this stage.  It is effectively “hard wiring” the executive functions.   In Aviation all the skills I mentioned previously (plus a few more) are considered critical “non technical skills” and are mandated as part of the Skill set of Pilots.

There is simply no doubt that Universities should be expending considerable effort in the development of “Professional” skills such as these and developing resilience in our graduates.  This can only be achieved through a planned and directed process with the clear outcomes in mind throughout the process.  We have developed a Professional Development Student Community of Practice for our students where they get to understand and practice all these skills during the time they are with us.  Results of our research into employability (in Airlines ie direct entry Pilots as opposed to being employed in general Aviation) of our graduates before and after we introduced the community of practice showed an increase from around 20% to approximately 80%.  No change in the academic component of the course but a focus on their professional development made this change.  I have a couple of papers in “Teaching in Higher Education” that discusses our community of Practice if you would like to know more.  I think this is a vital issue for all students and can be transferred to many if not all areas of endeavor with appropriate modifications.

Greetings Paul,

Your adding Community of Practice has developed all the required skills in the students, that is great achievement.  Congratulations.

Respectfully,

Asha 

Dear Paul

Many thanks for your contribution.

One of my research interests is communities of practice in legal education and in the legal profession. Indeed, partly inspired by meeting Dr Etienne Wenger two years ago, I'm currently researching that area for my professional doctorate in legal practice. 

I would really like to hear more about your work. Would it be possible to email you maybe?

Nigel

I firmly believe universities should promote comunities to foster intentionally student development, such as autonomy, interpessoal relationships, emocional, identity, ethical and moral development, critical consciousness.

personality development occurs along with increasing knowledge and skill. it is integral part of the education system. the institution has an obligatory duty to groom the character of students. the ethical conduct of student may not be ensured but the institution is bound to ensure the transmission of knowledge, demonstration of correct/appropriate conduct, the philosophy behind it and outcomes of good/bad behavior. more sophisticate to call it professional ethics. if an institution is able to provide an ethics practicing product i.e. student/professional to society, it would be great achievement. the teaching of ethics should be compulsory part of formal curriculum.

Your research on the development of "professional skills" is impressive, Paul. The development of a Professional Development Student Community of Practice and the increased employability of pilots through it is a very useful reference in the Nordic educational debate.  Here employability is often used to argue against educational structures that develop "soft" skills such as "Teamwork, Problem Solving, Decision Making, Situation Awareness, Workload Management and Resilience".

Thanks also to Nigel, Joaquim and Shahina for contributing to making this an interesting question.

Most schools have guidance and counseling services and chaplaincy programs which are generally meant to assist and mould students character and personality.

The question arises in my view, not only at institutional level.

In my investigation in relation to the development of social skills, it turned out that it is essential for the development of social skills, to have a role model. This can promote the development of social skills by their behavior, decisions and opinions. At the same time it has been show that child development is significantly influenced by negative models into adulthood. Thus, this issue arises not only with respect to the institution, but also to the individuals.In addition, the investigation showed that (influenced here regarding Baumgarten`s theoretical aesthetics), the development of social skills is influenced through positive techniques of aesthetics.

Following the statements of Minokowski, it is clear from an anthropological perspective that we all have a responsibility for the development of our fellow men.

For the self-development of the human being needs others as our helper, partner and "Fellowship development". Every becoming human is a co-will (E. Minkowski).

I often get to hear that it is no longer possible, however, to change skills or attitudes, when people are growing up. This means that the responsibility for the development of personalities is not held as a primary responsibility of educational institutions of adults.

However, the evaluations of my seminars show different results. Even older adults who are studying or have a training, confirm a change of attitude by the acquisition of knowledge of anthropology and its practical application in concrete situations.

Thus, I see very well at a primary responsibility of educational institutions for the development of personalities as their task.

I believe that formal education should not have responsibility for developing the personality of the students, curricular I mean, even if they have to collaborate on it, since all the training and the education that students receive, somehow influence the development of the personality. There are genetic and social determinants that influence much the development of the personality. Social determinants are related, in part, the relationship of students in educational settings, and therefore, in some matizarán also his personality.

The goal or object of the educational institutions work with identity is a central issue that has been voiced in the answers to this question. In the educational tradition of the Nordic folk high school movement the development of students personality is an object in itself. The student should find his or her own goals and the role of educator is more of a dialogue partner then a master leading towards a specific goal. The learning trajectory is not predicted as an inward trajectory towards a specific goal but the process is ideally seen as open.

I have used Renée DePalmas' development of Etienne Wengers' theories to describe this open learning trajectory in a transformative community of practice.

Article Leaving Alinsu: Towards a Transformative Community of Practice

We are exploring Grit as an aspect of personality and how our university can help build grit.

Absolutely yes!

I am an italian teacher of middle school and I think that this aspect is no longer to be underestimated. We are the professionals in education and training and since we establish ongoing educational relationships with students we are responsible for the development of their personalities.

What we probably are not yet sufficiently aware is that we have a great responsibility and we should master the techniques of communication and relationship much better than we do currently.

This is a somewhat controversial, but very interesting question. I think the previous answers covered quite some space, but I think the critique on this perspective fell a bit short.  

One way or another, educational institutions will always make an imprint on students' personalities. The main question is, can you distinguish between "objectively" positive personality dimensions or are you just following institutional and/or political biases. An older, but nonetheless interesting read is "The effects of education as an institution" by Meyer (1977).  

Article Learning, Institutions, and Economic Performance

Article Moral Education in America: Schools and the Shaping of Chara...

Article Institutional Arrangements and Stratification Processes of I...

Thank you, Nicole, Giulia and Xaver.

I would say that the acknowledgement that all educational institutions 'will make an imprint" and the responsibility this understanding gives is decisive for answering this question. Subsequently comes a discussion about the goals or 'positive personality dimensions' that should govern a conscious use of 'techniques of communication and relationship'. There is, as several have pointed out, a danger of steering students’ personal development towards goals that are set by that institution as desirable.

Hello doctor, I agree with you that greetings

Building the character of the student will be indirectly through the influence of the agents and teachers, 

The direct building of the student's personality is through the formulation of curricula related to the positive construction of the personality

Hi  ابتسام صاحب الزويني  and Salam Jassim.

Thank you for revitalizing this question. I agree with you, Salam, that the agency of the teacher is vital for the personal development of the students. The teacher can either hamper development by upholding educational practices that are reproductive and monological or open for development through reflection and dialogue.

Dear Prof. Johan Lövgren

Yes, they should. Education not only provides students with knowledge, but also develops their personalities to adapt well to their future work environment, and how to communicate with colleagues.

Hi Dr. Johan Lövgren,

Education and personality are interrelated to one another. Institutions do not only provide students with education and courses to attend, they also provides students with an environment and possibilities that can positively impact students' personalities.

Tes they should.

I do believe that institutions should focus on teaching careers and professions. Therefore, it is necessary to develop the broad personality of the student as a part of the curriculum.

Yes i strongly believe institute have to teach the course some thing related to human values added courses that includes what to do ? how to do with right understanding. how to built the relationship with others? also some professional ethics related courses need to taught in UG level. Human value added education is so important in today world.

Thank you for your contributions Nguyễn, Abdullah, Giulia, Subhi and Karthigeyan. It is good to receive such an unequivocal response to this question. Many observe the need to widen the traditional ambition of an academic institution to include personal development and values. Like you say in your article Giulia, such a widened focus will create "successful learning, self-fulfillment and... positive social impact"

Education should be able to transform thoughts and behaviour. It can be improved by proper grooming by mentors. Education can help to improve soft skills.

I can only agree, Sajad. For education to shape personalities it must focus on the transformation of "thoughts and behaviour" through the "grooming of mentors". To take responsibility for "soft skills" as an area of development will be necessary for educational institutions to have that kind of impact.

Education, in essence, should contribute to forming the perfect integrated personality, through curricula and educational activities focusing on this purpose.

I disagree with some previous positions, but I must admit that very convenient arguments are offered for this forum.

An integral education of the professional is the social commission that is posed to the educational institution.

The harmonious development of the personality of the human being is an inseparable part of this comprehensive professional training.

The professional is above all a human being.

What is the use of having a well-trained professional to apply science?

Would not the human gains be greater if the integral development of all its areas is also taken care of?

Now once the student arrives at the university, he must ask himself: What are the most accurate pedagogical and psychological interventions to contribute to this purpose?

Dear Reinaldo Requeiro, I agree with you on this integrated development, but who is responsible for that?

Thanks Johan Lövgren.

Yes--knowledge, skills, AND attitudes are to be taught in competency-based instruction. There are three broad competency areas: Discipline-based, Intrapersonal-based, and Interpersonal-based.

Whether our imputing of morality into our colleges of teacher of education are intentional or eclectically random, we are either teaching them or allowing them.

In A Nation Unmoored – CRC Study Shows Americans Reject Moral Truth Rooted in God’s Word, American Worldview Inventory, CRC, Tracy Munsil (2020) stated that "the latest findings from Dr. George Barna, Director for the Cultural Research Center at ACU, most Americans reject any absolute boundaries regarding their morality. A majority of adults surveyed—58%— instead believe that moral truth is up to the individual to decide. This latest study shows that secular views of morality are flooding American culture, including the Christian church. Perhaps most stunning, the survey found that those attending evangelical churches, which believe the Bible to be the true, reliable word of God, are just as likely to reject absolute moral truth (46%) as to accept its existence (48%). And only a minority of born-again Christians—43%—still embrace absolute moral truth. The pull of secularism is especially strong among younger Americans."

As an evangelical Christian professor in a college of education, I find it to be our mandate to teach what and who we are, why we should explicate it, and give avenues and training as to "how" to explicate our identity - that is if we truly espouse it. Dr. Joe Aguillard

Yes, of course! because the role of education in relation to personality is undeniable. Actually, education can help Increase Memory and Thinking Skills: Memory and thinking skills can be considered as showstoppers of your brain. Your thinking skills and memory can easily impress anyone. Excellent thinking skills will lead to healthy discussion and will give you an unforgettable personality.

Developing personalities, and especially values, seem to go hand in hand with religion. However, here in the USA, discussing religion has become a deadly sin in the education world. I think that is unnecessary.

Even the Boy Scouts has dropped this ball.

The BSA could have made it a place where youth learn to value others with different faiths, and defend them. The point of the BSA is to make that level of difference in the lives of youth. Instead, they model generic "non-denominational" worship.