Top Ten Reasons to go to a Christian College

In these days of multiplying options, I repeatedly come back to the question, "Why would someone choose a Christian college today?" We can break down this question even further:

• In a perfect world, why would or should someone choose a Christian college? and
• How do our Christian universities line up?

Top 10 Reasons
10. Because it's a solid education
This factor must be a given. A Christian shouldn't suffer educationally because they go to a Christian college. The education they get must be on a par or better than what they would get at a secular institution.

9. Because it's accessible
If going into the world to proclaim the good news of Jesus is at the heart of Christian identity, then Christian colleges will not only be "havens for saints" but also will reach out to the ends of the earth with education from a Christian perspective and with Christian values. It makes sense that Christian institutions would have online and satellite programs in the same way that a healthy church reaches out beyond its walls.

8. Because it's affordable
There should be a partnership between the church and Christian universities that evens out (ideally, that even betters) the financial proposition of going to a Christian university. The most efficient way for the church to make a Christian college education affordable is to give directly to the students with scholarships. The church and university should partner in this endeavor.

7. Because it's a safe, quality environment
By safe I not only mean physically but in terms of things like the tendency of many universities toward rampant drug and alcohol use. By all means a Christian university should be fun and full of all the creative playfulness of the late teens and early twenties. But it should not be the party wasteland that is so many colleges and universities today. In fact, non-Christians should find Christian colleges attractive because of the quality environment.

6. Because of friendships
Many of us formed key life friendships in college. This is one strength of a residential college experience over a commuter college or a university where one gets lost among the masses. In this day and age it may be thought a luxury, but it should be a strength of the Christian residential college that you have close, life friends with deep Christian values. You become who you are around. Those who do not go for whatever reason should recognize that they are missing out on a special community.

5. Because of mentors
If a Christian college is working right, a student should form relationships with professors and other mentors that remain for life. Professors should not be "ivory tower" personalities who don't have time for their students. They should be regularly available for conversation on every level. Informal counseling, life coaching--what happens outside of class will probably be of more lasting value than what happens in class. Decades later, these relationships should continue. As I have told students, you're paying to have me as a resource for life.

4. Because of life trajectory
Where you go to college will likely set your life on a trajectory. Suffice it to say, you should be more likely to leave college headed in a Christ-centered direction if your starting point is a Christian college than if your starting point is not. This makes going to a Christian college extremely significant.

3. To be formed spiritually
A Christian college is not a church but it is a para-church community. Think of it in terms of a small group within a church. You do worship together. You have koinonia. There should be organized discipleship taking place in the dorms and among athletic teams. It should even happen in classes. Spiritual formation is the most important dimension of our lives, and it should be a major dimension of a Christian college.

2. To be formed intellectually as a Christian
Perhaps the focal task of an educational institution in general is intellectual formation. Spiritual formation is more important eternally, but it is not the reason a Christian college exists. There will no doubt be a significant degree of overlap between the learning of a secular and Christian institution, but at a Christian college faith should be integrated with the learning. This integration takes place on several levels: 1) with the faith of the professors and environment, 2) in the way knowledge is applied to life, and 3) in the very presuppositions from which subject matters are approached. A major reason to go to a Christian college is so that one can see one's area of study from a Christian worldview.

1. To be formed in Christian identity
Several of the above points make it clear that the 18-22 years are some of the most formative years of one's life. Where you end up spiritually in your life is more crucial than where you started out. For this reason, the life direction aspect of a Christian college should be of inestimable value. This direction goes beyond what career you choose or who you marry. It has to do with who you are. Because the ideal Christian college is far more likely to form you to be a Christ-follower for life in this most crucial transition period of your identity, this is an incredibly strong reason to go to a Christian college.

Science and Math in a University Curriculum

I heard it when I was in high school. I hear it from my daughter today. "When am I ever going to use this?"

So the square root of 48 reduces to 4 times the square root of 3. Who cares, right? What should be an essential part of a college curriculum in math and science and what depends on career and interest?

1. It seems to me that the most important feature of math and science for everyone is somewhat philosophical. People in a democracy need to possess "evidentiary thinking." Unreflective thinking is the enemy of a democracy, where people just believe whatever they want to believe or just follow unthinkingly whatever traditions they've inherited from their environment.

We're overlapping with philosophy here, but the default state of human thinking is "premodern." It is magical thinking. I realize I am on a trajectory of tension with some Christian voices that want to re-enchant the world. But those who completely reject modernism are not only enemies of truth but they are nutters who need to turn in their cell phones and go live on a farm without tractors. They make Christians look stupid.

So a good college education will include competency in scientific method.

2. This may sound mean, but one of the most important functions of math and science in a curriculum is to confront us with how stupid we are. In America, everyone thinks their opinion is as valuable as anyone else's. But we are, on the whole, incompetent thinkers. We're blurring into philosophy again, but logic has to be one of the most important elements of a college philosophy class. It is crucial for a democracy that people be able to think straight or at least be able to recognize those who can.

One of the most important functions of math and science is to humble us.

Of course there is often math in specific fields people go into. It would be ideal if the math requirement of a university were tailored to specific disciplines. A ministry student, for example, might learn math in the context of church budgeting, church loans, fund raising, planning for retirement, etc. Economics is, after all, very mathematical.

3. The most controversial aspects of a science curriculum have to do with our understanding of the world. I watched Interstellar last week, and one of the most fascinating moments to me in the movie was where a public school teacher chastises a parent for letting his daughter think that the US ever went into space. Everyone knows, she suggests, that the lunar landing was a story invented by the US to cause the Russians to spend themselves into the grave trying to compete.

(By the way, the movie is fascinating to describe, but a little boring to watch. If I could put together clips and then just tell you what happens in between scenes, I think it would be much more enjoyable.)

Most of us get our science from one of two places--the scientific community or the evasive maneuver machine of America's current situation. Because of my experience in biblical studies, I don't trust the "round up the usual suspects" machine that has evolved in America to talk people out of believing the scientific community on various issues. From a probabilistic perspective, the majority of actual experts in science are far more likely to be correct than the idiosyncratic puppets rounded up to tell people what they want to hear on Fox News.

The situation of the Christian college is particularly sensitive, since there are powerful voices that are willing to throw significant amounts of money at counter-science. I've always been glad that most people aren't smart enough to try to sabotage quantum physics or relativity (although I am curious to know if part of American rhetoric against relativism may go back to an initial reaction against Einstein's theory). Christian nuclear physicists are free to follow the evidence wherever it seems to lead.

In fact, another part of the miracle of us winning WW2 is the fact that Hitler didn't trust the Jewish scientists at the forefront of a lot of nuclear physics developments in the 1930s.

4. Christian colleges have to be very sensitive to these issues, however. They just have to be. I've always felt that if a professor can present options and evidence fairly, the choice of position can be left to the student. I have personally found that, if a person is truly a truth-seeker, the most likely truths have a tendency to gnaw at your soul until you eventually submit to them.

So it is just the case that, at many Christian colleges, professors will have to be very sensitive to these sorts of issues. It's just not helpful to take a "matter of fact" approach. In such circumstances, a good teacher has to re-enact looking at the evidence for the very first time, as if he or she doesn't know where it will likely lead, at least in introductory classes.

And it goes without question that professors really should genuinely have a permanently open mind. Paradigms do shift from time to time.

Making money off Christians...

Skip to #4 below if you want to know that this post is about. Key sentence in this post: "I have a hunch that, in Christian circles, it is the most ideologically conservative professors who are most in attitude like the professor in God's Not Dead."

1. I work at a Christian university. It would be interesting to know what people think we do here. Probably what people most want us to do is train students with the skills to be able to find a good job. I think indeed that society has more or less dictated to us that "skills for work" are our number one task. Seems completely appropriate to me.

As a Wesleyan Christian university, many of us think a primary goal of an education is the spiritual formation of the students, to facilitate a deeper love for God and others and a deeper commitment to Christ. We have required chapels. There are small groups meeting on campus. Professors are expected to integrate their faith with their teaching and in general with how they interact with students. I'm in a reading group that this week spent an hour reflecting on IWU's goal of seeing our students become "sanctified" in the sense of growing toward spiritual maturity while they are at IWU.

There is another goal a good university will have and that has to do what are traditionally called the "liberal arts." No, that isn't "liberal" in the way we currently use the word. The phrase has been around for centuries, long before our contemporary sense of conservative and liberal existed. I almost feel we need to come up with a different phrase because of how stupid people are today.

The liberal arts are about making us reflective humans who aren't just slaves to whatever ideas and habits we happen to be born into. They are about learning how to think objectively. They are about being able to understand how people and groups different than we are think. We learn from the past to help us live for the future. They are about appreciating things that distinguish us as humans from other animals, things that enrich life like art and music.

At a Christian liberal arts college, part of this broader enrichment includes learning about the Bible and usually a Christian philosophy class, one that examines life from a faith standpoint. IWU just this year added a required theology class. They studied the OT and NT already, but now Christian beliefs will be taught in a course that organizes core beliefs into a systematic form.

 2. And now for the title to this post. First of all, the title is not about Christian colleges making money off people. I assure you that the pastor of a medium sized church earns more than the vast majority of Christian college professors. I know one Christian college where the most senior professors earn a little over $50,000 a year. If you think anyone at your neighborhood Christian college is getting rich, think again.

What inspired this post is a recent event at IWU that, as usual, was twisted in social media. Why anyone continues to think you are getting the straight scoop in social media is beyond me.

First of all, you're insane if you think IWU is liberal. I am a Republican and the fact that I feel the need to say so in itself indicates how stupid the situation is. I assure you that the very few people at IWU who are Democrats don't tell anyone about it. I'm not even sure who they are, if that is any indication.

IWU had Mike Pence, Republican governor, on campus recently. Susan Brooks has been on campus. I can't remember when any Democratic candidate on this level has ever been on campus. Once upon a time when someone wanted to start a student Democrat organization, it took a little time for everyone to process that and I'm not even sure if it still exists. A Republican professor had to serve as its faculty advisor because no one could find a professor who was a Democrat to do it. We're suing the government so that we do not have to provide abortion associated health care in our insurance.

It is a disgrace for our context to be such that I feel like I should say these things. College is about learning to think objectively, which means that you need to understand the positions of people who disagree with you. Those who are afraid to hear opposing points of view--and can't do so without exploding--probably aren't very confident in the views they claim to have. Critical thinking isn't necessarily about changing your position. It's about holding your positions with eyes wide open, not as a robot.

3. So there was a recent event. I think it was actually part of a series initiated by students. Once again, they searched high and low for someone who might try to present at least some contrast, even if the person had to play the Devil's advocate. If you know what I'm talking about, if you've seen the small snippet, you can see that the thrust of the panel was so overwhelmingly pro-life that it is absurd to the highest degree to think that IWU has any ambiguity at all in its position on abortion. It doesn't.

A warning here. A good thinker gets suspicious when the deck is stacked or when s/he thinks opposing views are being treated like straw men. Having a panel that is so overwhelmingly stacked in one way, where it even feels like the pro-life team is almost bullying the person drafted to create contrast, will actually have a tendency to push the smarter students in the room away from the dominant position.

I wish someone else had served in the "push back" role. I don't know if the guy knew he was destined to be a sheep to the slaughter. I know at least two people turned down the role knowing it would be a piranha fest. The professor basically said he was conflicted. He was pro-life but he recognized that there were difficult situations sometimes. As you would expect, he's been stoned in the social media since the event.

4. Now to the real point of this post. The organization that presented the pro-life position has seemed to have a hey-day with this thing. Here's my hunch. It sure seems like they are using this event to raise money for their organization. They've taken a snippet of the event and put it on their website and now seem to be raising money off it.

So here's a scenario that I wonder if we are prey to, now speaking in general. Do organizations that advocate for certain causes make money off public frenzies like this one? Take a situation. Blow it out of proportion. Play into the fears or anger of your constituency. Raise a bunch of money off the masses.

In this case, you already have this stereotype that universities are liberal. You all know the movie, God's Not Dead. Here's an ironic thought. Could it be that conservatives sometimes act like the atheist in this movie? There are no doubt liberals at secular colleges that badger those who disagree with them. But could it be that some Christians act this way toward those who disagree with them? If you watch the video of this event, who is most badgering the other side?

I have a hunch that, in Christian circles, it is the most ideologically conservative professors who are most in attitude like the professor in God's Not Dead. Both liberals and conservatives are surely guilty of bullying those who disagree with them, yes? Absolutely yes! But that's just not what college is supposed to be like.

I'm thinking of a Christian college I know. IMO, the president's recruitment strategy is to vilify other Christian colleges as liberal. He or she loves programs that skewer the liberal and the atheist. I have at least heard that any faculty or administration person who disagrees with him/her is quickly pushed out of the university. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if s/he tries to use this event against IWU if s/he hears about it, to try to recruit for his/her own college.

So what is the impression we get here? It is of a college where professors are encouraged to be militant for a particular conservative point of view and where anyone who disagrees or even asks questions is quickly silenced. In short, it looks like a college situation where the ideal is for the attitudes of professors to be just like the professor in the movie God's Not Dead, just on the opposite side of the issue. Now isn't that ironic?!

5. The bottom line is that I hope we as Christians will be better thinkers than this. Brain science tells us that we do not think as well when we are in an emotional frenzy. Could it be that there are groups out there that are preying on our irrationality? In this scenario, they would know, consciously or intuitively, that the more worked up we get, the more money they can raise. And we seem to mindlessly play right into their hands.

Truth is no respecter of person. A real commitment to truth requires us to be willing to change our positions on things given a sufficient reason. The other approach talks a lot about truth, but it's really about preserving its own traditions.

God's not afraid for us to question whether he exists, because he knows he does.

Drury Prognosticates on the Future of Ministerial Education

I hope that the presentation of Keith Drury on the future of ministerial education will be made available somewhere online (I'll post the link here when I find it). As usual, he not only is a step ahead of most of us in seeing the trajectory of education but he has bottom line insights we all ignore at our own peril.

Here are first two "Get ready; it's coming" moments:

1. Students will increasingly shop around for their gen. eds online and nearby.  Like "Hotwire" or "Travelocity," they'll shop for the cheapest, most convenient Western Civ. course on some pooled list on a website.  That means institutions that invest too much of their future in the liberal arts or gen. ed. parts of their universities (even if they're trying to sell a "Christian worldview" version of it) are doomed to fail.

2. Residential campuses will have to sell the campus life.  Come here because our professors and staff live with the students.  They're available in the evening and will respond to texts.  This is a spiritually formative campus. It's fun to come here and live here. They won't come for the courses, since they will be able to do that anywhere online, probably cheaper.

Choosing and Evaluating Church Curriculum

This morning I found myself summarizing a chapter by Keith Drury called, "Choosing and Evaluating Curriculum.”  It's in a book called Discipleship That Transforms.  As usual, it is crystal clear and eminently practical.

Curriculum is “a planned sequence of learning experiences that organizes learning and change in an orderly manner to accomplish the spiritual development of people” (192). Or to unpack his definition:

• Good curriculum is planned—it plans learning sometimes over ten years or more.
• It is sequential—it asks about the best order to learn material.
• It is organized and orderly.
• It asks not only about what people need to know but how they need to change, especially in terms of spiritual development.

Here are some important terms often used in relation to curriculum (193-95):

• Goals and objectives: Goals are long term (over months and years) while objectives are more short term (in a unit or single lesson).
• Outcomes: The direction of education these days is more toward talking in terms of outcomes—what should a student know, be able to do, or just be in general at the end of an assignment. Preferably, the outcome should be measurable, something you could demonstrate was accomplished.
• Cognitive-affective-behavioral: These are types of outcomes. Cognitive refers to things someone might know. Affective outcomes relate to feelings or attitudes. Behavioral outcomes have to do with actions or skills.
• Educational mission: What is the entire multiyear curriculum plan trying to accomplish? Drury gives an example: “To help individuals recognize God as revealed in Scripture, respond in personal faith, seek to follow him as fully devoted Christians, be incorporated into Christ’s church and become actively involved in God’s mission in the world, as they live in the full power of the Holy Spirit growing to Christian maturity” (194).
• Scope and sequence: The scope is the range of material to be covered. The sequence is the order of material to be covered.
• Area or theme: Sometimes a scope and sequence can be broken down into themes (e.g., salvation, vocation, etc.).
• Teaching strategy: The pattern used to move through each lesson in the curriculum, taking into account factors like age level readiness and attention span. Here is an example: 1) hook (capture interest), 2) book (study the Bible), 3) look (examine life—apply), and 4) took (enact into life).

In a local church, Drury recommends the following as a process for selecting curriculum:

• Organize the decision-makers. Who should decide?
• Establish your evaluation criteria. How will you evaluate curriculum?
• Examples include age appropriateness, whether it fits your theology, how expensive is it, how much preparation does it require of teachers, how widely can you use it among groups, does it give application or only talk theoretically, etc.
• Weight the criteria. Which factors are most important to you?
• Send for samples and documentation.
• Evaluate the curriculum materials.
• Make a decision.
• Plan periodic assessments of the material.