Can Positive Education Research Inform Neo-Aristotelian Character Education? A Scoping Review of Positive Education Strengths Intervention Research

Over the past two decades, neo-Aristotelian character education (NCE) has become increasingly influential. Nevertheless, two recent reviews identified important gaps in quantitative longitudinal NCE research. A potential solution to this problem is for NCE to draw on the adjacent field of positive education (PE), but recent reviews of PE research hint at potential barriers to doing so. The purpose of this review is to assess the extent of these barriers. My results demonstrate that the majority of PE strengths intervention (PESI) studies employed Multicomponent Positive Psychology Interventions (MPPIs); PESI studies frequently used signature strengths approaches to teaching strengths; many strengths were rarely (<10% of studies) investigated; eudaimonic wellbeing outcomes were measured infrequently in PESI studies, and PESI studies rarely evaluated the impact of a PESI on eudaimonic wellbeing mediated by a strength. I conclude that PESI is currently unable to fill the quantitative longitudinal gap in NCE research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
British Journal of Educational Studies
Published
2026-10-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2026.2748356
Primary Topic
Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Can Positive Education Research Inform Neo-Aristotelian Character Education? A Scoping Review of Positive Education Strengths Intervention Research

Peter D. Oldham
British Journal of Educational Studies
Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
article

Can Positive Education Research Inform Neo-Aristotelian Character Education? A Scoping Review of Positive Education Strengths Intervention Research

Peter D. Oldham
article en

Abstract

Over the past two decades, neo-Aristotelian character education (NCE) has become increasingly influential. Nevertheless, two recent reviews identified important gaps in quantitative longitudinal NCE research. A potential solution to this problem is for NCE to draw on the adjacent field of positive education (PE), but recent reviews of PE research hint at potential barriers to doing so. The purpose of this review is to assess the extent of these barriers. My results demonstrate that the majority of PE strengths intervention (PESI) studies employed Multicomponent Positive Psychology Interventions (MPPIs); PESI studies frequently used signature strengths approaches to teaching strengths; many strengths were rarely (<10% of studies) investigated; eudaimonic wellbeing outcomes were measured infrequently in PESI studies, and PESI studies rarely evaluated the impact of a PESI on eudaimonic wellbeing mediated by a strength. I conclude that PESI is currently unable to fill the quantitative longitudinal gap in NCE research.

British Journal of Educational Studies
University of Birmingham (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon
Can Positive Education Research Inform Neo-Aristotelian Character Education? A Scoping Review of Positive Education Strengths Intervention Research — Peter D. Oldham · British Journal of Educational Studies (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS