User:PigeonAnecdotes/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Character education

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I'm participating in a group project evaluating the efficacy of grit/character education as a school improvement style. This article is important because it is meant to provide an overview of a complicated set of different programs. It needs to be honest, unbiased, and informative. I'll only be evaluating the introduction, terminology, in-school programs, and issues and controversies sections, as they are most relevant to my work and the page is quite long overall.

Evaluate the article
The article is very detailed; at times this is to its benefit, and at times this is to its detriment. I didn't click on every link, but many of the citations lead to now-defunct pages or 404 errors. The facts that the editors present seem truthful, but the page does not seem to be neutral about character education, especially within the terminology section, which seems to argue character is currently impossible to measure. There are some sentences that state a conclusion without including a citation to back it up, which makes it feel more biased. I'm unsure how one would be unbiased if a ton of evidence all points one way, but that seems to be the responsibility of the Wiki Editor. There's also a quote included in the in-school programs section that is given no context, introduction, or elaboration. Despite the list in the opening section of programs which have historically fallen under the "character education" umbrella, there are not any sections specifically dedicated to summing up the specifics of those programs, nor are there any links to other Wiki pages to provide further elaboration or clarification. There also do not appear to be any sections discussing character education as a solution that fails to address systemic issues, which I am confident has been discussed in academic research before. The talk page appears to have hosted several (unresolved) conversations over the past few decades about the issues with this page, but it doesn't seem that there were many changes to the page as a result, because a lot of what is being criticized (the bias, the generalizations, the lack of specificity, etc) has not changed since they posted. We haven't discussed character education in class yet, but I feel as though this article biases me heavily in one direction.