Are you a Democratic or a Dictator? Consultative Management: A Practical and Realistic Approach For Managing Our Schools

“As iron sharpens iron, So a man sharpens the countenance (character) of his friend.”  (Proverbs 27:17)

Sometimes it seems like the world is governed by the latest fad. From the clothes we wear to the gadgets we purchase, fads have a way of usurping our better judgment and dictating the way we live our lives.

So it is with the way we manage our schools. In the latter part of the last century and the first half of this century, the industrial revolution and its concomitant “scientific management” theories provided the paradigm for educational practice and leadership. These were hierarchical, “dictatorial” models that placed the reigns of authority and decision making firmly in the hands of senior management.

Schools mimicked these practices by placing school authority in the hands of local school boards and principals. Teachers had very little voice in decision making.

More recently, democratic/empowerment models have come into vogue—at least in theory if not in practice. These empowerment models seek to flatten the hierarchy by dispersing decision making and authority throughout the school. Decision-making is “democratized” by giving teachers direct decision making authority—either individually or through the group.

Chances are good that you manage, consciously or unconsciously, based on one of these models. Are you a dictator or a democrat? The answer may depend more on whether you have had your morning coffee than on being “managerially self-conscious”! Nevertheless, it is an important question. The way you manage will have a direct bearing on the effectiveness of your school and ultimately on the quality of the education that your students receive. So grab a cup of coffee and take a few moments to become more “managerially self-conscious.”

To view a PowerPoint summary of this article, click here (probably the best option) OR view it at SlideShare (http://www.slideshare.net/secret/oxNEi8Ed06thJl)

As indicated above, the management guru’s have classified management styles into two broad categories---old style (Dictatorial) and new style (Democratic). The following table defines and summarizes the pros and cons of each.  To view a larger more readable image, click here.

Industrial Model— Dictatorial/Hierarchical

Defined

A top down management style. Strong leadership is exercised from the top of the organizational chart. Managerial and organizational focus is on the leader’s and the organization’s objectives. The leader dictates goals and policies and maintains a high level of accountability with subordinates.

Pros

Provides strong leadership, a clear sense of direction, clear lines of accountability, and efficiency in decision making.

Cons

Tends to be demoralizing as employees can be made to feel more like “cogs” in the machine rather than like active, intelligent, participating members of a team. By limiting their sense of ownership and responsibility, employees can develop a myopic view of their responsibilities. This model can stifle creativity. Failure to seek the involvement and insights of others can lead to bad decisions. Implementation can become difficult as employees may actively or passively resist change.

Empowerment Model—Democratic/Consensual

A bottom up management style. Seeks a consensus of the group being managed before decisions are made, goals are developed, and policies are written and implemented. Leadership is exercised by the group rather than by an individual. The “leader” “facilitates” decision-making but has a limited role in making them.

Pros

Increases employee participation in decision making. In the short term raises morale and improves feedback and communication. Ensures that those closest to the issues are involved in decision making.

Cons

Can lead to the abdication of leadership with resulting confusion and inertia as time is devoted to building a consensus that may slowly, if ever, be reached. Consensus building can take precedence over making good decisions. This model also diffuses responsibility—everyone’s responsibility becomes no one’s personal responsibility. It also grants an equal “vote” to employees of unequal experience, education, maturity, and wisdom.

Consultative Management—Avoiding Extremes

In their “pure” form, the hierarchical and democratic models represent the extremes in management because they take sound ideas and “absolutize” them. Absolutizing is making an idea or principle so dominate in our thinking and practice that it effectively usurps or excludes others. The result is that an otherwise good idea becomes distorted and what is a positive becomes a negative. Two examples will help illustrate the point.

Illustration: Phonics versus Whole-language

Although it has abated recently, the raging debate over phonics versus whole language created a false and ultimately unnecessary dichotomy between two valid teaching strategies. The research indicates that exclusive commitment to a whole language approach has the tendency to ignore the fundamental skills of sound recognition and decoding so essential to developing good readers. On the other hand, a slavish devotion to phonics becomes just that—slavish: sapping the energy and joy out of reading and decontextualizing decoding skills from reading and writing.

Illustration:  Parenting

Effective parenting requires maintaining a healthy tension between discipline and nurture. Children need a parent’s love and nurture to become well-adjusted adults. However, when love is absolutized, when it is allowed to usurp parental guidance and discipline, it becomes permissive and ultimately unloving. Children raised by passive, permissive, and coddling parents tend to become self-absorbed, self-destructive, self-indulgent, and irresponsible bores who never quite grow up.

On the other hand, strong discipline without love becomes tyrannical. Failure to give our children love can produce emotionally and socially maladjusted and insecure adults who, as the song goes, “seek love in all the wrong places.”

Consultative Management Defined

Fortunately, we do not have to choose between phonics and whole language or between being a tyrant or permissive parent. Likewise, we do not have to choose between being an iron-fisted dictator or an indecisive “facilitator” to be good managers.

Consultative management avoids the “absolutizing” tendency by maintaining the delicate balance and tension between the hierarchical and democratic approaches. It combines the strengths of both approaches while avoiding the excesses of each. Consultative management empowers teachers by making them active participants, consultants, in the decisions that effect them. They give advice, sharing their insights, experience, and recommendations. As a rule, however, they do not make school-wide decisions as a group. Although consensus is desirable, it is not necessary. The head of the school, or the school board, has the responsibility and prerogative to make the final decisions—even if not popular. In fact, good leadership often requires the leader to make unpopular decisions that run counter to prevailing opinions.

Practical Implementation

Theories are only as good as our ability to implement them effectively. The following examples illustrate how to employ consultative management in your school.

Example One: Curriculum assessment and selection

The assessment and selection of curriculum affords an excellent opportunity to employ consultative management in your school. Here are the steps (note, this is not intended to outline the entire curriculum selection process. It is only intended to illustrate how consultative management can be employed in the process.)

1. The Head of school and/or school board defines the school’s educational philosophy, standards, and pedagogical commitments. This is a “directive” (hierarchical) activity—not a democratic or consultative one. These standards are communicated to the school principals and other administrative staff.

2. The principals meet with department heads to review the school’s academic standards and educational philosophy, establishes guidelines for writing and reviewing curriculum objectives, conducting the curriculum review, and for selecting the curriculum. This is both directive and consultative. It is directive in that the school’s standards and educational philosophy are presented as benchmarks or criteria for evaluations. It is consultative in that the principals in consultation with department heads determine the guidelines, procedures, and timelines for completing the work. If the group cannot work out disagreements, the principals issue directives.

3. Multilevel intergrade and intragrade teams of faculty, department heads, and principals are formed (See Figure 1).

4. Under the leadership of department heads, the teams meet to establish/refine academic objectives based upon the school’s philosophy, academic standards, and pedagogical commitments as articulated by the board or the head of school. This is a highly democratic and consultative process among teachers who, using their expertise and years of experience seek to establish clear objectives and to arrive at a professional consensus. However, whenever irreconcilable differences emerge that cannot be resolved, the department heads will direct the teams to a decision. For example, if teacher A tends to emphasize whole language while teacher B is a strong advocate of phonics and if the teachers are unable to come to agreement as to specific objectives, the department head and/or principal will reconcile the differences by making a decision. This prevents participation in decision making from degenerating into turf battles and creating inertia.

5. Once objectives have been clearly defined, curricula are assessed based on those objectives and pedagogical commitments.

6. Curriculum recommendations are given to the principals for approval. Once approved by the principals, the recommendations are summarized for the Head of the school who makes the final decision and authorizes the purchase or recommends further review and changes.

Example Two: Administrative Reorganization

A growing school will periodically require a reassessment of its administrative organization and staffing levels. Using the hierarchical model, the head of the school and his or her executive staff evaluate the school’s organizational structure, make any modifications, and implement those changes with little or no input from subordinates. In some instances, the school board may undertake the responsibility for the reorganization and implement changes with little or no direct involvement by the school’s administrators or teachers. Although efficient, the result can be misunderstanding, low morale, mistrust, and bad decisions if those closest to the issues are not involved in the decisions.

The democratic approach involves everyone who may be impacted by the reorganization. Through a series of meetings an effort is made to arrive at a consensus as to the best course of action. Theoretically, no decision is made that will negatively impact any member of the staff until agreement has been reached.

Achieving consensus can become more important than arriving at the best decision. If there are irreconcilable differences within the group, no decision is made thus perpetuating inefficiencies or bad decisions are made in an effort to arrive at the lowest common denominator upon which everyone can agree.

The consultative approach seeks to arrive at the best decision for the school by soliciting the counsel of affected school personnel while leaving the final decision in the hands of the person or persons vested with the authority to make it. Figure 2 illustrates the process.

Consultative management preserves the positive elements of both the hirerarchical and democratic models while ameliorating their respective negative elements. It incorporates the active participation of school staff, raises morale, and ensures that decisions are based upon the wisdom, expertise, and experience of those closest to the issues. It also promotes strong leadership, a clear sense of direction, clear lines of accountability, and efficiency in decision making.

Strong leaders make strong schools. A strong leader is wise enough to seek the advice and counsel of his colleagues and subordinates, sensitive enough to care about their concerns, and strong and confident enough to make decisions—even the unpopular ones. Consultative management is designed for strong leaders.

Technorati Tags: Leadership,Management,Leadership style,Dictator,Democracy,Democratic,Authoritarian,Christian School,Strong leader,Empowerment,Vision

Click to read full article>>>

Down the Drain! Why We are Wasting Time and Money and What To Do About It

The Wall Street Journal Agrees! 

Well, in the interest of honesty, humility, and full-disclosure, let me qualify.  I doubt that the editors, reporters, and columnists of the WSJ have read anything I've written! 

Nevertheless, it was gratifying to read a recent article in the WSJ that echoes some of the principles that I have outlined in previous articles concerning how to create an effective staff training program, including Rethinking Staff Development: "This Too Shall Pass.". 

Why—despite our best intentions and the investment of substantial time and money in training do our schools remain largely unchanged? 

What I find interesting, somewhat heartening (misery loves company!), but not surprising is that U.S. corporations have the same problem with training that we have in our schools.  Training does not necessarily translate into individual or systemic change.  A lot of time and money is being wasted on well intentioned but largely ineffectual training efforts.

According to Harry J. Martin in his WSJ article, "Lessons Learned":

The key to effective training isn't necessarily what happens in the classroom. It's what you do afterward. Teaching employees new skills is one thing. Getting them to apply what they have learned is quite another. 

With some studies suggesting that just 10% to 40% of training is ever used on the job, it is clear that a big chunk of the tens of billions of dollars organizations spend annually on staff development is going down the drain. 

Chalk some of it up to human nature: Training involves change, and change creates anxiety that people seek to avoid. In other cases, old habits and workplace pressures can break down even the strongest resolve to use newly acquired skills and knowledge.

Sound familiar?

Many of our employees approach staff training with the usually unspoken confidence that "this too shall pass." Teachers often view in-service as something to endure or a time to catch up on relationships. For most, it is not an occasion for deep reflection; it is seldom stimulating, and seldom leads to change in the classroom or systemic change in our schools. Each year we pick our in-service topic, throw it against the wall and hope it will stick. It usually doesn't!

So, how do we stop wasting our money and everyone's time?  The key is systematic and sustained follow-up.  Here are some tips from the WSJ article that reinforces and expands upon the points I made in my previous article on this subject.

Practical Suggestions from the WSJ Article

Harry Martin asserts that

if organizations want their training-and-development programs to yield better results, they need to create a workplace environment that actively encourages people to change.

The key to doing that: Make sure that support doesn't end when workers walk out the training-room door.

Simple activities such as having trainees write down how they plan to use new skills or knowledge on the job, or having them discuss their progress with peers and supervisors can significantly increase the amount of learning that is transferred to the workplace. Here is a look at follow-up techniques my team found to be most effective.

1.  Putting it on paper

When employees are asked to write an action plan detailing how they expect to use what they learned in training, something interesting occurs: Just writing it down makes it more likely to happen. Outlining what needs to be done, when, and with whom, reduces confusion, helps trainees visualize the outcome and provides a document against which progress can be assessed.

The managers in a Midwestern manufacturing company were asked to develop personal action plans for each of the main content areas of the training program. They didn't have to submit the action plans to anyone, but they were asked to report informally about their efforts in meetings with supervisors, fellow trainees and members of the human-resources department.

Many of the trainees initiated projects as a result of the training program and action planning that resulted in substantial cost reductions in some divisions. The company's top executives said they were surprised and impressed by the number of projects that were initiated and completed during that time.

Asking Good Questions

What is perhaps most interesting are the suggested follow-up questions that trainees were required to answer in their personal development plans:

• What will you do to implement a concept from today's session?
• When will you do this?
• What results do you expect and how will they be measured?
• When do you expect to see these results?
• What assistance or support will you need to implement your plan?

These would be great questions to have teachers answer after training sessions in our schools.

2. Measuring Results

There will be follow-up. That's the idea behind another effective post-training activity: the performance assessment. When employees know that they are going to be observed and given feedback on their performance, the motivation to use newly learned skills and knowledge increases.

Assessment usually measures specific behaviors targeted by the training. For example, if a training program seeks to improve a person's ability to conduct meetings, one could ask meeting participants to evaluate how well the trainee does along a variety of measures, such as developing a proper agenda or keeping the meeting on track. Another approach would be to estimate cost savings that result from improved use of meeting time.

The Midwestern manufacturer used this technique on the 237 managers who participated in its training program. The managers' supervisors rated them before they went through training and then six weeks and three months afterward. They were rated on skills addressed by the training, such as goal setting, leadership style, listening skills, team building and written communication.  significant improvement in performance was reported three months following the training.

This is very similar to my argument in my previous article:

We modified the evaluation instrument to match our expectations. The evaluation instrument includes a number of specific expectations tied directly to prior staff training, e.g., use of technology, questioning techniques, etc.

This heightens faculty attentiveness and response to training by making it clear that "This shall NOT pass." We expect that the concepts and skills covered during staff training WILL BE IMPLEMENTED IN THE CLASSROOM. Failure to do so is not acceptable.

In other words, we are not offering ideas for consideration during in-service, we are providing training. To make this point clearer, consider an example in another profession, the medical field. Can you imagine a physician attending a training conference on the latest techniques in surgery and then ignoring them on the operating table? Can you imagine your physician going to a professional conference with the attitude that “this too shall pass?” Of course not; true professionals take training to enhance their practice--not to go through the motions. Similarly, can you imagine your tax accountant going to a seminar on changes in the tax code and then choosing to ignore them when preparing your tax return? Doing so would be malpractice and would result in fines, revocation of a license, and possible imprisonment. You could multiply the example indefinitely for pilots, attorneys, engineers, etc.

Why then do we permit professional teachers to ignore their professional training and fail to apply it in their classrooms? Are not the souls and minds of students more precious than the physical well being of a patient or the size of our tax refund.

Help From Peers

Sometimes a little help from friends can inspire trainees to give new skills a try. That's the thinking behind peer meetings -- when trainees get together to discuss how they are applying the skills and information from training and what effect their efforts are having on the organization's operations.

To provide trainees with support and motivational encouragement, the Midwestern manufacturer scheduled a series of hour long peer meetings with each training group between two and 12 weeks following their training session.

While not every trainee had a lot to say initially, many did, and their success and enthusiasm eventually encouraged even the most skeptical member to give the new skills a try.

Peer meetings were found to be especially helpful to trainees working in divisions where management support for training was deemed weak. An analysis of performance data showed that the more peer meetings those trainees attended, the more learning they transferred to the workplace -- even if they lacked support from their division manager.

Supportive Supervisors

Speaking of management support, an actively involved and supportive boss greatly increases the odds that employees will apply what they learned in training. By assuming the role of coach or mentor, the boss can communicate expectations to trainees, keep them focused, provide encouragement and help eliminate roadblocks to success. Engaging the boss in this process involves creating the opportunity for the supervisor and the trainee to meet.

Both the Midwestern manufacturer and the industrial supplier required trainees and their immediate supervisors to meet to review and discuss the trainees' action plans. The meetings were designed to provide motivation and support for the trainees and to encourage supervisors to take an active role in helping their subordinates meet their goals.

Access to Experts

Sometimes trainees need additional information before they can finalize and deploy an action plan. Companies can help by providing technical support -- things like reference materials, additional data in training topics, or access to experts from inside or outside the company who can answer questions.

Research shows that employees who participate in follow-up meetings with instructors after training are more likely to apply new skills and knowledge on the job.

The industrial supplier had each of its trainees meet monthly with a project director to discuss training transfer. The meetings typically lasted an hour and focused on the trainee's action plan for that month's training session. The project director helped them formulate the plan and spot potential problems.

Just Do It!

Either through intuition or training, most of what is outlined above is not new information for most of us.  Our problem is not usually a lack of knowledge, it is often a lack of will or discipline. 

We may know the right things to do but as leaders we often fail to do them.  We too often are "hearers but not doers" of what we know we should be doing.

As school leaders, we are the stewards of the students, staff, and resources entrusted to our care.   We must, for God's glory and those for whom we are responsible, ensure that positive systemic change is happening in our schools.  We just have to do it!

Technorati Tags: Leadership style,training,effectiveness,change,reform,leadership,staff development,professional development,human resources,WSJ,Wall Street Journal

Click to read full article>>>

Where is the Grace? I Thought This Was a Christian School!

By: Märni Halvorson, Ed.D., Head of School (Covenant Day School)

Did you know that there are more than fifty separate references to discipline in Scripture and that every one of them talks about its benefits to the one being disciplined? Further, God, our Father, goes so far as to say that the failure to exercise discipline exposes a lack of love for our children.

Look at these verses from Hebrews 12: “the Lord disciplines the one he loves, and chastises every son whom he receives…God is treating you as sons. For what son is there whom his father does not discipline? If you are left without discipline…then you are illegitimate children and not sons.” What a counter-cultural idea that is in today’s society where we are no longer shocked by the sight of public temper tantrums or news interviews with parents who insist that there was nothing they can do about the criminal behavior of their out of control minors.

We have allowed our absolutely appropriate revulsion over all forms of child abuse to push us into the opposite ditch and an incorrect understanding of what it means to discipline.

Discipline and discipling are fraternal twins. Both are means of training or teaching -- or mentoring. Parents, and educators, who are serious about following God’s lead, will make it their goal to excel in this area.

What does “Godly discipline” look like? At Covenant Day School we believe that it should be characterized by love, wisdom, consistency and the development of habits that minimize the need for correction or reproof.

Our goal as teachers and administrators is discipling our students so that they will be spared the consequences of wrong behaviors. Every one of our students is a fallible human, and it is inevitable that there will be occasions when discipline includes a punitive element. The purpose of such discipline is to redeem the situation insofar as possible so that the student will be better equipped for faithful service to the Lord and redirected on a better life course. All of us want our children/students to be people of character and integrity; all of us want them well prepared to assume positions of responsibility. None of us wants the pain of seeing a child face the consequences of behavior that repeatedly violates the rules of the state or personal morality. The ESV version of Proverbs 12:1 puts it bluntly, “Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.”

In our school wisdom and consistency are guides by which we try to measure our rules. We are careful to make sure that what we ask of our students is for their good and not our convenience. We try very hard to match our expectations to the age and abilities of our students and we recognize that parents are our partners in discipling and certain areas like spanking or curfew restrictions are decisions for them alone.

As a school we are blessed by a unity between home and school that is apparent in the day to day behavior of our students. The vast majority of behavioral issues are handled without fanfare in the classroom or between teacher and parent.

Occasionally, a situation arises that involves more than one student or a behavior that requires more than basic intervention. When this happens the wisdom of experienced administrators is brought to bear. What must the school do in order to redirect the student to a Godly life course, to be consistent with the school’s standards for behavior and for the encouragement of families who have entrusted their sons and daughters to us with an expectation that the school’s leaders would remain committed to principle even when their decision might be criticized?

Our first step is to pray. We seek the Lord’s guidance and direction for our decision. We know that we are fallible and that our decisions can affect a student’s future. We try to be objective. We really listen to the student’s account of the events that have brought us to this point. We want to understand the circumstances and balance grace, truth, and mercy. We know that there are times when students, especially teenagers, do foolish things, and we want to discern as best we can what actually happened and why.

We know that every decision we make sets a precedent so carefully ponder options. We meet with parents as well as with the student, and invite their input. When we make decisions, we try to look beyond the immediate future for the student involved and for the entire student body. We make a decision and inform the student involved and their parents. We refer them to their youth pastors for further mentoring and encouragement. We do all that is possible to respect the confidential nature of any corrective discipline issues, even when that means that we must respectfully decline to discuss a specific situation with the parents of other students. It is our conviction that this policy is most helpful in doing all we can to assure that our actions might reflect our concern for the future of the student who we love enough to reprove as necessary.

Because of CDS’s standards, there may be times when the consequences, from the world’s perspective, seem unfair or stern. Others will not be made aware of all the facts and sides of a situation because we do not provide details about these issues or their specific consequences. We know this puts us at risk of misunderstanding but that is less concern than failing to do what we think is honoring to God and ultimately best for students.

We strive earnestly to reach the hearts as well as the minds of our students.

We are not interested in blind conformity or obedience for appearance sake nor the ease of the faculty and staff. We want to be in actuality a school that is focused on developing disciples (or as our mission statement says, “that students would be salt and light for God’s glory”).

We desire greatly that parents would partner with us and support us in the challenging times even as we seek to come alongside students and their parents. We hope that over the years we have established a record of trust; that you have confidence in those who are partnering with you in this shepherding process. While we want the youngsters to be happy, we are even more concerned that they are growing in holiness. Our desire is to train hearts that yearn to be obedient to the Lord, even when no one is monitoring them, even when it causes hardship.

If your student is involved in a discipline situation, we ask that you, too, first pray over the situation and seek the Lord’s wisdom before acting. If your child is not involved, we ask that you model discretion for them by refusing to pass along what you may be told by your child or others. As the parent of your child, you are the spiritual leader in your home. Your child will trust and follow your lead. Help them to understand that The Lord has a purpose for all that comes into our lives, even if we have knowingly blundered. Use these situations to help your youngster understand why rules and policies should be respected, even if their purpose is not obvious at first glance.

Please join us in praying that our students will respond well to our instructing, training, and disciple-making such that there would be minimal need for discipline. Pray for our faculty and administrators to be disciplined in our own lives, to become more like Christ as we disciple our students. We are praying for you as you raise your sons and daughters in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. As we support each other, let us remember how much we need God’s grace every single day.

Technorati Tags: Discipline,Classroom Management

Click to read full article>>>

The Way We'll Be ... What the Polls Show

Where is our country headed?  What are the trends that will shape American culture?  These are the questions that John Zogby, CEO of Zogby International, seeks to answer in his new book, The Way We'll Be: The Zogby Report on the Transformation of the American Dream. Drawing on surveys he conducted over a 20-year period, Zogby analyzed responses from all age and demographic groups to project tectonic shifts in our nation.

Dematerializing

• Institutional authority is all but dead and gone.  Self-reliance and self-determination are on the rise.
• "Green" is more than a good slogan ... the young especially have internalized sustainability as a life goal, and that's true across the planet.
• Christian conservatives, especially those under thirty, have moved far beyond their putative spokesmen on issues such as stem cell research, global warming, and health care. 
• American values remain strong, but Americans increasingly see themselves as part of a bigger picture.

Global, Networked, and Inclusive (First Globals)

• Eighteen to twenty-nine-year-olds care about more than themselves.
• Young adults celebrate diversity.
• The entire world excites them, not just their community or nation on earth.  The young think and buy globally (patriotism will not sell products), and they are sensitized to global issues from human rights to AIDS and poverty, even though they might not always command the facts.
• First Globals poll liberal on many issues but they are more devoted than any other age group to finding common ground on tough social issues.
• Just about everything is in the public domain (e.g., through social networks like MySpace and FaceBook), up to an including intimate details of their lives.

New American Dream-The Secular Spiritualists

• Zogby defines "Secular Spiritualists" as those who believe that the American dream is measured in spiritual, not material, fulfillment.
• For at least one in three Americans, spiritual fulfillment is a higher priority than acquisition, ownership, and consumption.
• They buy of course, but they buy in accordance with their re-prioritized lives.  Cut the frills, mute the whistles, give good value.  It's back-to-basics for this new stealth force of American society.
• Secular Spiritualists are not big spenders even when they can afford to be.
• God matters to many of them, but they aren't building their lives around specifically religious values.  They're looking for more meaning, not more doctrines and isms to live by.

One True Thing

• People are demanding truth.  Everyone today has a "B.S."  detector.
• People want reality and authenticity (Those who have seen City Slickers will understand the reason for the video below!).

• Men and women want the same things in each other: natural over silicon, good personality over great bodies, real over make-believe.
• In a world dominated by sizzle, it's all about the steak.

What I find particularly amazing is how current the book is.  In his introduction, Zogby writes:

As I write, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is sinking like a stone,and the president and Congress are scurrying to cobble together a stimulus package.  Either way, the media is certain to be panting after the story, but in a very real sense the public is already ahead of wherever such news is headed. 

Our polling consistently shows not only that the wealth isn't being shared equally--that's obvious--but that average Americans have made fundamental adjustments in their expectations, their needs, and their values, and that those adjustments are creating whole new paradigms through which people are making consumption and political choices that will shape the nation in the decades to come.

Polling also reveals generational divides and suggests how the weight of public opinion will shift as one generation yields dominance to the next, and the next ... Through asking questions that move beyond the present and try to get at how people will respond to situations that might arise in the future, we can anticipate changes in society ... and advise organizations how they must adapt to new realities.

That's what this book is about: the current state of America, the likelihood of the close-in future, and the movement of our underlying social geology.  Put another way, this book explores who we are, what's changing, and the way we'll be. (pp. xiv-xv)

He compares and contrasts the perspectives of four generations across political parties and income distribution.  He divides the generations as follows:

• The Private Generation (1926-1945)
• The Woodstock Generation (1946-1964)
• The Nike Generation (1965-1978)
• The First Globals (1979-1990)--usually referred to as Generation Y.

What Are His Conclusions?

• The America of 2020 will be a more tolerant nation.
• Our people by then will have lived for two decades in a new world of less.  We will have gotten comfortable with the limitations on us and embraced the Zen of more minimal lifestyles and consumption patterns.
• We will expect our leaders to talk straight: Hype, hokum, and hooey--in politics, in advertising, wherever it appears--will be punished.
• We'll care about this fragile planet in hitherto unseen ways
• The Private Generation will fill their golden years with volunteering, mentoring, and lifelong learning opportunities.
• Woodstockers will finally get tired of trying to look and act like their children.
• Nikes are going to bond with their families as no generation before them.
• First Globals are ready to go anywhere, experience everything, and work and live in exotic places.
• Americans will continue to define themselves less and less by paid work.  "It's who I am, not what I do."
• In the battle between science and anti-science, science wins.  No more Terri Schiavos, and no more global warming denial idiocy.  Alternative fuels will heat and light our world.
• The church of the future will be a bungalow on Maple Street, not a megastructure in a sea of parking spaces.  It's intimacy of experience people long for, not production values.
• The nation of the future will be in a strange way more intimate too.  Americans want to live in a world with other people, not in a walled empire surrounded by enemies.
• My surveying shows that we are in the middle of a fundamental reorientation of the American character, away from wanton consumption and toward a new global citizenry in an age of limited resources.

It is clear that Mr. Zogby has liberal leanings, evidenced by the fact that Arianna Huffington of the Huffington Post is one one of the endorsers of the book and by his many statements throughout the book that reveal his liberal worldview.  

Nevertheless, his liberalism does not invalidate solid research and data, though it can shade his interpretations and predictions.  To the extent that the data is reliable (and there is no reason to think that it is not), there is much to be gleaned from the book.

The role of the leader is to do his or her  best to peer over the horizon seeking to understand the trends and events that will affect our students, our families, and our schools so that we can position them to serve Christ effectively this century.

The Way We'll Be provides a window into our possible future. 

__________________

Zogby, J. (2008). The way we'll be: the Zogby report on the transformation of the American dream. NY: Random House.

Technorati Tags: Zogby,polls,trends,politics,megatrends,culture,prediction,survey

Click to read full article>>>

Off to Beirut Lebanon!

In the Lord's providence, I am leaving for Beirut Lebanon on December 5, returning on December 15.  I will be meeting with the leadership of perhaps as many as 32 Christian schools to discuss how we might work together to strengthen our respective schools and enrich the professional development of our faculties and the learning experiences of our students.

I will periodically post updates on my trip to this blog (including pictures), my Facebook account, and via Twitter.  I am returning to the U.S. with a stop over in Paris so I will post some nice pictures from Paris as well. 

If you would like to receive the updates to this blog as they are posted, be sure to subscribe for updates by email--see the right side of this blog for the place to subscribe.

Finally, feel free to comment on the posts as I post them. 

Technorati Tags: Beirut,Lebanon,Paris

Click to read full article>>>

Discover Christian Schools

By Harold Naylor, Jr., Director of Institutional Advancement The Christian Academy

Critical thinking, character education, safety and security, uncovering God-given talents and passions, and developing a Christian view of the world.  These are some of the reasons Christian parents invest large sums of money for tuition in a local Christian school.

However, most (90% by some estimates) evangelical parents put their children in the local public school.  They (fondly) remember their own school days and declare, "I went to public school and I turned OK."  These parents, and the ones that desire for their children to be "salt and light" in the local school are the reason for the launching of www.DiscoverChristianSchools.com , a communications initiative to speak directly to parents about the total education of their children.

The initiative produces weekly radio spots, Christian Education Commentary, that are carried on 117 stations across the US.  The web site has had over 300,000 unique visitors and still gets 4,000 hits per day.  A Google search on "Christian schools" puts the site in the #2 position.

WORLD magazine's founder, Joel Belz, recently described www.DiscoverChristianSchools.com

...a notable effort to help parents discover the good things happening on the school front.

Schools need to band together to get the word out that the local Christian school is the best partner a parent can find for the training of their child.  This communications effort also helps schools crystallize and amplify their message as they seek to put critical information on their on web site and into the hands of prospective parents.

Schools can join the effort at no cost, but the campaign is maintained by gifts.  If you would like more information on how to bless children, parents, and schools, please call National Director John Fedele (toll free) 866-576-4546 or email at jfedele@DiscoverChristianSchools.com.

Technorati Tags: Christian schools,Christian education

Click to read full article>>>

A Great Reason for Christian Education

By By Steve Cornell, Senior pastor, Millersville Bible Church, Millersville PA

In the very near future, America will cease to be the primary sending nation for Christian missionaries. Already large numbers of missionaries are being sent from places like Latin America, India and South Korea (to name a few). They are even being sent to reach Americans. Why is it that evangelical Churches in America are full (especially in their Mega forms) and yet a steadily decreasing number of Christians answer the call to take the gospel to the ends of the earth? The answer might surprise you. Let me explain.

A major ideological shift: The tyranny of tolerance

In the last twenty to thirty years, we (in the West) have experienced a major ideological shift with regard to religious truth. America, as a free nation, has supported the existence of a diversity of religions. But, with the recent shift, we have moved to a required acknowledgment of the validity of each religion as a truth option. Tolerance, we are told, mandates this outlook on religious beliefs. And, in the new system, no exceptions to tolerance will be tolerated.
Tolerance is considered the peacekeeping virtue of a pluralistic society. It is the primary quality for maintaining pluralistic civility. Yet while peace and respect for diversity are important, gaining them through socially imposed tolerance is misguided and dangerous. It is also a departure from the proper understanding of tolerance itself.

The true virtue of tolerance is unnecessary when people surrender or silence commitments to real differences. Tolerance only becomes a functional virtue when two people or groups of people strongly disagree and yet treat each other with respect. Where disagreements either do not exist or do not matter, there is no need for tolerance.

Ironically, the tolerance being required today is a form of intolerance. It requires people to keep their differences to themselves. It promotes a monolithic culture—where everyone is increasingly forced to conceal the multi-cultural dimensions of society. What we end up with is diversity we can’t talk about lest we offend those who disagree. An entire generation of Americans have been socially conditioned under the tyranny of tolerance.

Pressure on religious communities:

In the cause of promoting and protecting pluralistic civility, social pressure is particularly placed on religious communities to de-emphasize all positions that could be perceived as claims to superiority among the religions of the world. Under the tyrannical rule of the twisted version of tolerance, people have been conditioned to be deeply suspicious of attempts to privilege one religious tradition or teaching as normative for all. If a religious tradition claims to have special access to truth about God, it is considered intolerant no matter how respectfully it relates to others. Absolute religious and moral opinions are considered potential threats to pluralistic civility.

Division of truth: Personal and public
Social conditioning based on radical tolerance is strengthened by the division of truth into personal and public categories. Moral and religious opinions are widely viewed as matters of personal taste like preferences for chocolate over vanilla. Media and academic elite (the primary means for social conditioning) have tried to persuade the public that moral and religious opinions (unlike scientific facts) are merely personal matters we should keep to ourselves. An unsuspecting public has been taught to marginalize and trivialize religion and morality into a private sphere irrelevant to life in the real world.

Public education: learning environments for the tyranny of tolerance

Participants in public learning institutions face an imposed rule of tolerance that requires acceptance and celebration of each person’s moral and religious beliefs and practices. In his extensive research concerning the thinking and beliefs of American teenagers, Professor Christian Smith suggested that among today’s young students, “The strategy for dealing with religious and moral disagreement is: ‘You don’t go there’” (Soul Searching). To avoid hurt feelings or unnecessary conflict, young people have learned to avoid particulars and absolutes and talk about everything in strictly non-offensive ways. This is the safer option if they wish to be accepted rather than ostracized.

This social conditioning has produced in our young people (and in many adults) in our churches an in-articulacy with regard to the faith. A learned capacity to talk about differences becomes unnecessary in a society that asks us to avoid speaking in particular or absolute categories. As a result, large numbers of people are not only unable to articulate what they believe and why they believe it, they are guarded against beliefs that are too particular or in any way exclude or offend the beliefs of others.

Even if they actually hold to particular moral or religious beliefs, they have learned to suspend their commitment to them in most social circumstances. And, since they have been taught that moral and religious opinions are merely matters of personal taste, why stir things up over such matters? You don’t go there.

Exceptions to the rule of tolerance:

Exceptions to this rule of tolerance are found in areas where society decides acceptable views for everyone. The primary tools of influence on these matters come through the media and academia. Elitists in these fields pressure others to see things their way or face ridicule and condescension. Uniformity of opinion is required for all who wish to be considered open-minded and progressive. Those who see things differently will be labeled (among other things) narrow, backwards and right-wing conservatives.

For examples, homosexual lifestyles and gay marriage must be considered acceptable. Abortion is a fundamental right and not the taking of innocent life. All religions lead to God in their own way and the value of religion is found not in its truthfulness but in the benefit it brings to adherents. As long as you are sincere in your efforts to serve God, it doesn’t matter what religion you follow. Conversely, one must never publically refer to what the bible teaches—outside of Church at least. Those who are brave enough to do this should expect to hear collective groans and sighs about the presence of “one of those radical Christians.”

No need for evangelism or apologetics classes:

Under this kind of social conditioning, it becomes unnecessary to be trained in moral argument or to learn how to constructively engage someone in a discussion about different beliefs. Young people in particular might question the value of such training. Why talk about things that could be perceived exclusive or violations of pluralistic civility. Some might even suspect hidden imperialistic agendas designed to oppress a minority group or to impose your politics on others. Let’s not go there.

A growing number of people actually feel that there is something morally repugnant about followers of one religion maintaining that they are correct in their beliefs and that sincere adherents of other religions are mistaken in what they believe. Most college students, for example, accept the idea of some creative force behind the existence of the universe. “What is a debated topic is how you move from this rather impersonal force to the beliefs of a particular religious tradition, and especially whether in affirming the truth-reliability of one path, you must stand against the truth-reliability of all other paths.” (Professor Daniel Liechty, Illinois State University).
The new tension is not about belief in God but whether or not it is “safe” to believe in one absolute deity. The tyranny of tolerance has scared people into postures of neutrality. It feels safer to choose not to believe anything too conclusively but to hold all beliefs in their broadest terms. The by-product is a culture that has lost its ability to think, discuss and debate. “Whatever” has become the common response to differences on morality and religion. In this environment, it becomes increasingly hard to train people to share and defend their faith.

A new social etiquette

Social etiquette requires acknowledgement of the independent validity of every faith. Those who attempt to convert people to their religious beliefs are viewed as religious chauvinists. It’s not enough to maintain (as we should) that each person is free to follow and express his or her own religion. Now we must treat each religious belief as equally valid and abandon, as unacceptably arrogant, any attempt to convert others to a different religious opinion. Strangely, this approach “… forecloses on open-mindedness in the same breath by which it extols the virtues of open-mindedness. Both the irony and tragedy of this fierce intolerance stem from the fact that it is done in the name of tolerance” (D. A. Carson, God and Culture). The new mantra is: “No exceptions to tolerance will be tolerated”.

Effect on Christian witness and missions

Should we be surprised that Christians with a missionary faith feel intimidated by this attitude? How can they obey Jesus’ call to, “go and make disciples of all nations” (Matthew 28:19), without being considered rude and intrusive? Under the tyranny of tolerance, how should we think about Jesus statement, “I am the way, the truth and the life. No man comes to the father but through me” (John 14:6)? Should we change Jesus’ words and make him say, “I am a way, a truth, and a life. People can come to the father through me or any other means they desire.”

It’s tempting to feel marginalized by the selective tolerance of our culture. The primary object of intolerance is Christianity. Islam doesn’t receive the same level of ridicule and hostility. Professors who openly mock Christianity wouldn’t dare attack the Islamic faith in university classrooms. But like the first followers of Christ, we must not compromise the message of salvation. In a fiercely pluralistic and polytheistic Roman society, the early apostles testified of Jesus that, “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). They did not offer this as a personal opinion among many equally valid options. This was proclaimed as a fact of prophecy and history.

When Jesus described his true disciples in the beatitudes (see Matthew 5:10-16), he included persecution as distinguishing mark (cf. John 15:20). Persecuted people live provokingly different lifestyles in the world. They are true difference-makers and Jesus picks up on this when he reminds his disciples that they are the salt of the earth and the light of the world. He also cautioned them not to follow the temptation to dilute the salt or hide the light. The followers of Jesus must be like well-lit cities on a hill that cannot be hidden. We must capture strategic places of influence for Jesus and not allow ourselves to be marginalized by the pressures of selective intolerance.

Witness with wisdom and grace:

Considering the atmosphere I have described, Christian witness should be offered with wisdom and grace. Scripture that is particularly applicable exhorts us to, “Be wise in the way you act toward outsiders; make the most of every opportunity. Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone” (Colossians 4:5-6). Given the prevailing distortions of tolerance and the misdirected attitude toward religious beliefs, it is also wise to emphasize the inclusive parts of our message. The good news of salvation is meant for all people.

At least seven truths related to the gospel apply to all people - without exception.
1. God has demonstrated his love for all people (John 3:16).
2. God desires the salvation of all people (I Timothy 2:3-4).
3. God has made provision for the salvation of all people (I John 2:2).
4. God commands all people to repent (Acts 17:30).
5. God will hold all people accountable for their response (Acts 17:31).
6. God takes no pleasure in anyone’s rejection of his provision (Ezekiel 18:23,32).
7. God will save all people who place faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (John 3:16).

Final note:
A Good reason for Christian Education Christian Schools and colleges provide learning contexts for our children and youth to talk freely and openly about absolute moral and religious beliefs. They do not have to suspend their commitments to these beliefs or feel unsafe to discuss them. They are able to learn how to articulate why they believe what they believe. Many who work in these environments are discouraged due to decreasing enrollments and funding. Yet the work being done in Christian education is vital to the advancement of the gospel and the preservation of liberty and justice for all. Keep on providing the context for faith to flourish!

Questions for discussion:
1. What are the long-term affects for those who spend large amounts of time in environments where they learn to avoid talking about particulars and absolutes?
2. Would a learned ability to suspend commitment to one’s belief lead to moral compromise in similar circumstances?
3. How can churches address these matters and the issue of inarticulacy regarding the faith?
4. How does Christian teaching that all people are created equal in the image of God serve as the only reliable basis for true tolerance?
5. Does tolerance ask too little of people?
6. Would it be better to use the word respect instead of the term tolerance? If so, Why?
7. How would a call to radical neighbor love over tolerance be more socially transformative from a Christian perspective?
8. How do the salt and light metaphors relate to the roles of Jesus’ followers in the world?

Technorati Tags: Christian schools,Christian education

Click to read full article>>>

What Do Good Coffee and Good Teaching Have in Common?

By Jason A. Van Bemmel (Headmaster, New Covenant Christian School)

In our School Business class this summer, Dr. Mosbacker had us read “The Peanut Butter Manifesto” by a VP from Yahoo! I was inspired by the title to do some reflection on the connection between good coffee and good teaching. My reflections then became “The Coffee Manifesto.” I shared this with our teaching staff at an in-service a few weeks ago, and they loved it. It humorously serious, and I thought you might find this enjoyable.

The Coffee Manifesto: Will it Be Starbucks or Sanka?

I love watching old Andy Griffith shows on DVD from the library. They are a perfect way to unwind after a long day. The DVDs from the library have the original sponsor spots which closed the shows when they aired. These old commercial spots are fun to watch, but one thing really bothers me: Andy Griffith pitched Sanka.

I love Andy Griffith.

I hate Sanka.

Sanka is an example of what should never be done to coffee. Sanka has two nasty qualities, which make it barely qualify as coffee:

1. Sanka is chemically decaffeinated.
2. Sanka is instant coffee.

Coffee should never be robbed of its stimulating effect. This is why most sensible people drink coffee. Rob coffee of its caffeine and you have lost the essence of what coffee is. The only worse thing you can do is to then freeze-dry the coffee so people can make it in an instant.

Coffee is meant to have caffeine. Coffee is meant to be brewed right before you drink it. Sanka is an attack on the essence of coffee. As much as I love Andy Griffith, it pains me to see him hawking this rubbish that no human being should be forced to drink.

Teaching is like coffee, and the same kinds of critical elements that make for good coffee also make for good teaching. The essence of coffee is to stimulate. The essence of teaching is the same.

John Milton Gregory says that the essence of teaching is to stimulate the mind of the student for self-activity. “The true stimulant of the human mind is a question, and the object that does not raise any questions will stir no thought.”

Compare for a moment the stimulating effect of Sanka with a more excellent coffee – Starbucks. Drink Sanka and you are ready to fall asleep. Drink Starbucks and you’re ready to take on the world.

What is the effect of your teaching on your students? Does it call for action, stimulate thought, excite the mind, get the life ready for response?

Good coffee takes time to roast and brew properly. Starbucks roasts their beans until the bitterness is gone and the complexity of flavors can be fully tasted. If the beans are not roasted as long, the bitterness of the raw bean remains and the complex and more subtle flavors of the bean cannot emerge. Yet even properly roasted coffee beans must be ground and brewed properly, too. BUNN coffee makers can brew a pot of coffee in just 2-3 minutes, but coffee grounds need to be exposed to hot water dripping through them for 6-6.5 minutes for ideal results.

Like good coffee, good teaching cannot be rushed. It takes time to stimulate the minds of our students to inquire, discover, know, understand, appreciate and apply the complex truths we have to teach them. The bitter flavors of a rush to judgment, a quick and dirty answer, will dominate teaching that is rushed. The more subtle and complex flavors of contemplation, genuine understanding, appreciation, delight, discrimination, and transformation take much longer to emerge and can be overwhelmed by cheaper and easier and much less transformative elements if teachers do not have patience with the teaching process.

Good coffee is roasted and brewed carefully, with attention to detail and discrimination. Roasted coffee has over 1,000 flavor and aroma compounds. Only 30 of these make the best-tasting coffee.

Likewise, good teaching must be careful and discriminatory. The world is full of thousands of ideas. Most of them will not make our students think God’s thoughts after Him. They will poison, rather than enhance, their ability to live a life that pleases God. The teacher must be careful and pay attention to detail so as not to confuse, overwhelm or dishearten students.

Good coffee can stand on its own or can be enhanced and enjoyed with a variety of flavors added to it. Starbucks comes in different roasts and brews and adding flavored syrups and creamers makes it taste even better without obscuring the essence of what makes the coffee excellent. Cheap coffee, on the other hand, needs flavor enhancers to try to mask the cheap and bitter quality of the coffee.

Quality teaching also speaks for itself. It can come in a variety of subject areas (or “roasts”) – history, English, math, languages, etc. Each of them, while varying from each other, can still be recognized as excellent teaching with the same core essence – stimulating the mind of the student to self-action, discovery and understanding with patience and discrimination. Teaching can be flavored with field trips, feasts, celebrations, videos, games, etc. These additions make excellent teaching even more enjoyable. Poor teachers try to mask poor teaching with videos, games, and field trips (often meaningless ones), trying to compensate for poor teaching by adding lots of flavorful fun. This may amuse some students, but it cannot really make up for the fact that the teaching itself in its essence is poor and does not stimulate the minds of students to quality thinking and acting.

Good coffee must be properly strong, as even quality coffee is not very good when it is too weak. The more coffee grinds you use, the more complex and robust the flavors you can produce. Of course, you can also make coffee that is too strong.

Good teaching must also be delivered at the appropriate strength. Teachers need to be assertive, bold, joyful and confident. They should lead and guide their class from a position of strength, not weakness. Of course, a teacher can be overbearing – too strong – and overwhelm their students and keep them from being able to properly express themselves, ask questions, discover the truth for themselves and exercise dominion over their piece of God’s creation. So teaching, like coffee, must be properly strong but not overly assertive.

Finally, when good coffee is brewing, it is enticing. The aroma of good coffee draws people to it – even people who don’t drink coffee. In fact, I have heard many people smell good coffee brewing and say, “I wish I drank coffee.”

So also, good teaching should be enticing. It should attract students to the truth. It should make them want to have a drink from the fountain of knowledge. As our teaching entices students, we can then equip them to be life-long learners because they will want to learn and to love to learn.

God has given us the highest privilege – to stimulate the minds of our students to know God’s truth, to embrace His goodness, to love His beauty. We have been called by God to entice our students to the highest truths, the greatest goods. We have the opportunity to make an eternal difference in the life of a child made in the image of God. Our students are looking for something to believe, for someone to follow. They want to be stimulated. The real question for us, as educators, is simple: What will we offer them – Starbucks or Sanka?

Technorati Tags: Teaching,Coffee,Starbucks,Sanka,Andy Griffith,Engaged,Effective Teaching,Education,Reform

Click to read full article>>>

"Daddy, Is That the Bad Man?" Election 2008

Depending on your political views you will react to Barack Obama's election with excitement as in "Hurray, our country can now move forward with much needed change!" or with dread and resignation as in "Oh no, his election portends our country's continued moral, political, and cultural decline!" Given that most of my readers are evangelical Christians, I suspect the latter reaction is more common.

Be careful. Your children/grandchildren are watching, your students are watching, and an unbelieving world is watching.

Let me share a story with you. When my oldest daughter was about seven or eight years old I remember walking past the den and hearing my daughter pointing at the TV and asking with big saucer eyes, "daddy, is that the bad man?!" She was anxiously pointing at President Clinton.

A piercing pang of guilt shot through my soul. I realized that through my verbal editorializing during news casts that I had taught my daughter to fear and dishonor the President of the United States in direct violation of what the Scriptures teach: "Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor." (1Pe 2:17)

When Peter wrote those words, Nero was the emperor of Rome.

(To those inclined to cynicism, I AM NOT equating President Elect Obama with Nero.)

My point is that if Peter could encourage the early Christians to honor the man that was feeding them to lions and impaling them upon poles and burning them alive to light his gardens, then surely we can pray for and honor our new President notwithstanding our political views.

Let me suggest that we have a wonderful opportunity to bear a great testimony to the transforming power of the Gospel in how we respond to the election.

1. Pray for our new President and mean it.

(I Peter 2:17; Romans 13:1) The Scriptures do not differentiate for whom we pray.

First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior... (1Ti 2:1-3)

2. Pray for our country.

Although the structures and policies of government have a profound impact for good or evil, it is the character of individual citizens that ultimately determines the character of any country. More than a good president, we need powerful faithful pulpits, godly families, and strong Christian schools. Pray that the Lord's Spirit will blow throughout our land bringing with Him revival and deep rooted reformation.

3. Verbally express due honor to the Office of the President and to the man who occupies it.

It is perfectly legitimate, in fact necessary, to express opposition to those values and policies that are clearly in violation of biblical teaching. It is not legitimate to hurl vindictive and mean spirited abuse at anyone, including the President Elect.

I can think of no better example than David. Even though King Saul was pursuing David to imprison or kill him, David responded by honoring his persecutor because of the office he held.

And the men of David said to him, "Here is the day of which the LORD said to you, 'Behold, I will give your enemy into your hand, and you shall do to him as it shall seem good to you.'" Then David arose and stealthily cut off a corner of Saul's robe.

And afterward David's heart struck him, because he had cut off a corner of Saul's robe. He said to his men, "The LORD forbid that I should do this thing to my lord, the LORD's anointed, to put out my hand against him, seeing he is the LORD's anointed."

So David persuaded his men with these words and did not permit them to attack Saul ... Afterward David also arose and went out of the cave, and called after Saul, "My lord the king!" And when Saul looked behind him, David bowed with his face to the earth and paid homage ... Behold, this day your eyes have seen how the LORD gave you today into my hand in the cave. And some told me to kill you, but I spared you. I said, 'I will not put out my hand against my lord, for he is the LORD's anointed.' ... As soon as David had finished speaking these words to Saul ... Saul lifted up his voice and wept. He said to David, "You are more righteous than I, for you have repaid me good, whereas I have repaid you evil. (1Sa 24:4-17)

Notice the impact of David's response on Saul. David's demonstration of trust in God and respect for the authority that God had sovereignly appointed had a profound impact on Saul. David's response gave great testimony to the power of God's Spirit and was used by God to instruct the King.

David's example comes down through the millennia to instruct us on how we should respond. As a Christian community we have the same opportunity. Instead of moaning, complaining, predicting the apocalypse, the end of civilization as we know it and verbally assailing and demeaning the President Elect, we have the opportunity to show watching students and a watching world that Christians can disagree without being disagreeable. We can oppose bad policy and evil without being vindictive, mean-spirited, and disrespectful.

4. Use the election to teach your students (and faculty?) how to work through the various policy issues from a biblical perspective--not from a Democratic or a Republican one.

On a survey we once conducted, a student wrote the following: "Republican = Christian? Where does that come from?" That thinking student understood that some teachers where implicitly teaching that Republican political philosophy and policy were equivalent with biblical Christianity.

That is false. There are points of Biblical connection with both Republican and Democratic policies. Neither Party has a corner on truth or virtue.

Sound doctrine transcends political ideology, party affiliation, and cultural and ethnic identification. In this sense, Christianity is always trans-political and trans-cultural.

5. Instead of always protesting what is wrong, offer solutions and prepare our students to do the same.

Several years ago I edited and co-authored School Based Clinics and Other Critical Issues in Public Education (Crossway Books). Here is a portion of what I wrote that I believe applies to how Christians should be responding to public policy issues in a constructive Christ honoring fashion--regardless of who occupies the White House.

… Unfortunately, much of our cultural dilemma results from the failure of Christians to cultivate a Christian mind, and the result has been the abandonment of most fields of knowledge to those with a secular mind. This abandonment takes two forms: either withdrawal from public debate as it concerns the formation of public policy because we are ill equipped to offer an effective and relevant alternative; or worse, Christians who are involved in public debate are so secular in their thinking that their recommendations represent only slight modifications to secular proposals. In other words, instead of the Christian evangelizing his culture, he has been evangelized by it. Because many Christians have failed to cultivate a Christian Mind (in part due to a lack of instruction from church leaders), many believers are unaware of just how secular their thinking has become.

This is a particularly relevant point in light of the increased political activity of the religious right. In reaction to the rapid erosion of ethics and morality in our country, many Christians have taken up the call to be salt and light by active involvement in the political process. This is a good and vital part of any effort at cultural reform. But a note of caution is in order. As Christians, we must not confuse Christian principles with conservative Republican (or Democratic) politics. They are not the same thing. We must be careful not to confuse theology with ideology, as biblical theology always transcends any particular ideology. Although it can be reasonably argued that portions of the current Republican platform reflect biblical principles-for example, its opposition to abortion-this does not mean to think Christianly is to think like a conservative Republican. There are instances where elements of biblical truth can be found in the platform or the candidates of either party.20

Thus, the Christian who wishes to function as salt and light in his culture must devote himself to the study of Scripture and seek through that study to properly interpret all of life. Once having achieved a measure of understanding, he is better prepared to make application of what he has learned to his home, his church, his vocation, and to his civic responsibilities. It should be added that this is not to imply that his knowledge must be exhaustive or that each believer must be a scholar.

Nor does it mean that he refuses to participate in public discourse until he believes he has a complete comprehension of his theology or of any given issue. Learning is a lifelong task. Since we are created as finite beings, exhaustive knowledge is beyond our grasp. Although certain knowledge is possible, exhaustive knowledge is not. Therefore, the challenge of the believer is to seek to simultaneously increase his knowledge while diligently applying that which he already knows. This is then the theological component of our Christianity, and it is the foundation upon which the relational component is built …

Moreover, the absence of viable alternatives puts the Christian in the position of always criticizing, attacking and tearing down. For example, when school based "health" clinics are proffered as the solution to teenage pregnancy, the Christian community finds itself aggressively opposing their implementation-and rightly so. Unfortunately, criticism in the absence of alternatives creates an atmosphere in which the Christian community, instead of being viewed as a constructive force in the community, is viewed as a bunch of uncaring obstructionists who do not care about the health of teenagers. We protest such accusations as unfair, but such attitudes are in part understandable if all we have to offer is criticism. It is here, at the policy level that Christian scholars from every discipline can contribute in a tangible way to the reclamation of the culture. Frequently, Christians who are seeking to arrest the implementation of harmful and immoral programs often find themselves at the mercy of a secular establishment armed with research, which "proves" their position. Although much of the research is less than conclusive or is even faulty, it nevertheless adds credence to whatever policy is being proffered.

Consequently, the Christian community finds itself in a noncompetitive position in the marketplace of ideas and by default relinquishes policy formation to the secular establishment. A case in point is provided by the necessity of this writer relying almost exclusively on secular research to demonstrate that as currently constituted, "values-free" sex education and family planning programs are ineffective and inappropriate responses to escalating rates of teenage pregnancy. Fortunately, some of the researchers within the family planning establishment itself have cited the failures (on solely pragmatic grounds), thus giving us a fighting chance. This is not always the case.

As a practical point, the development of distinctly Christian think tanks, which combine the skills of theologians from various orthodox persuasions, the expertise of Christian scholars from many different disciplines, and the practical insight of the policy analyst and those experienced in the "realities" of the political process would be of inestimable value in assisting the Christian community in its role as salt and light.

To read the two chapters I authored, click here. (PLEASE NOTE: the first chapter deals with teenage pregnancy; the second chapter addresses the Christian community's response to public policy.) Also note that you will notice what appear to be typos. These are not typos. The chapters were scanned into a PDF file and the OCR program misinterpreted some of the text.

Rather than bemoaning what is wrong, we are responsible to teach our students how to think biblically and how to apply biblically informed thinking to specific policy issues. This should be an exciting and very positive endeavor with the goal of working to see "God's will done on earth as it is in heaven."

6. Celebrate the moral progress that his election represents.

"What, moral progress with the election of a President who aggressively supports abortion rights and gay marriage?" Yes.

Although by most measures the United States is in moral decline, the election of an African-American president reflects significant moral progress on the racial front. Christians should celebrate this achievement and recognize it publicly, not withstanding other legitimate moral concerns.

Celebrating progress on one moral front does not imply endorsement of the President Elect's positions on other social issues.

As Christians, we should, we must, be intelligent and thoughtful enough to celebrate the good while addressing the wrong. The fact that our country has elected an African-American president should be an occasion to celebrate this momentous achievement with those with whom we may disagree on most every other issue. We should model this attitude for our children, our students, and a watching world.

Imagine, if you will, how this must feel to millions of African-American families and to their young children. African-American mothers and fathers can now turn to their children and say, "In America, you can be anything you wish to be if you are willing to work for it." Is that not something that we would want every parent to be able to say to every child?

7. Remember that "for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to His purpose."

The church of Christ is the focal point of history, with Christ being preeminent. God superintends the affairs of men in such a way as to establish genuine free moral agency and personal responsibility, for the good of His people, and for His glory. Ultimately, this election is for our good and God's glory. This does not mean that everything that occurs will be good but God promises to work all things together for the good of His people.

Pray, rest in God's wise providence, respect those in authority, work for what is right, model dignity in word and deed before your students and teach them how to think, how to love, and how to Glorify the King of Kings and Lord of Lords!

Technorati Tags: Obama,Election,Prayer,Pray,Authority,Dignity,Worldview,Biblical wordlview,Politics,Republican,Democratic,Racism

Click to read full article>>>