Rules of Engagement --A surprising correlation between colleges and the Church

Jason has been posting for some time about involving ourselves in the life of the church and that there are not enough opportunities for involvement -- for everyone. I think he's probably right because the church is referred to as the "body" of Christ -- every part but the head (which is Christ himself) is to be occupied and operated by believers. This gets a little difficult because noone wants to be a toenail or a fat cell -- both however, quite necessary. Not finding areas to become meaninfully involved has two direct causes -- 1) there are not enough opportunities, and 2) people are too lazy to grow spiritually and create opportunities.

In terms of colleges and universities, Pascarella & Terenzini - two widely published authorities on student success -- made a sweeping statement in their 1991 How College Affects Students that said "What students do in college counts more in terms of what they learn and whether they will persist in college than who they are or even where they go to college." While these two guys are secularists and have no spiritual intent for this statement, let's rephrase this sentence:
"What Christians do in the church counts more in terms what what they learn and whether they will remain in the church than who they are or even where they go to church." In very basic terms colleges and churches somewhat concerned with the same mission: to create change [learning]. Obviously the end goal is different, but the missions are still interestingly similar.

Alexander Astin (another secular education researcher) wrote in his 1984 Student Involvement Developmental Theory that "...involved students tend to be more satisfied with their educational experiences." Let's rephrase this statement: Involved Christians tend to be more satisfied with the church experience. Again, interestingly similar.

Higher education, like Christianity cannot effect the change [learning] it is supposed to when participants are merely spectators. It simply cannot work. Back to my 2 causes for not getting involved. The ways we work to rectify lagging engagment in our students are #1 to create an environment that is supportive of new initiatives, and #2 to empower the students when they take initiative. In the other case, when students are lazy positive reinforcement encouraging/facilitating their interests within the context of college is the best way to change behavior. While we certainly do not have to option to "punish" the students, experience tells me that negativity works to inhibit desired behavior. Discipline without support seems only to create problems. Encouraging active participation includes an examination of how our policies and procedures either encourage or discourage involvement. In college, there are a set of benchmarks for engagement that represent literally thousands of pages and countless hours of research. These benchmarks are a recipe for success in terms of student involvement, satisfaction, retention, and graduation. They include: level of academic challege; active and collaborative learning; student interaction with faculty and staff; supportive campus environments; and enriching educational experiences. Once again, these are from secular researchers but can easily be edited to apply to the church. For example "level of academic challenge can be rephrased to setting ambitious goals. "Collaborative learning" can become interactive bible studies in informal group settings. "Student interaction with faculty and staff" becomes Christian's communication and working with the Church's leadership. "Supportive campus environments" becomes Support for ideas that do not conflict with scripture. And, finally, "enriching educational experiences" becomes conferences, seminars, & fun outings that direct attention toward God and spiritual growth.

Of course parameters must be set that always hold to Biblical truth as the supreme standard, and that also reflect the mission of the Church -- which should obviously include evangelism and fellowship.

So having said all of that...It would seem that rather than just create additional opportunities (which is a good thing!) we should also strive to be a supporting environment (and I believe we are) and take great pains to reach out to those not just in our inner circle -- that reaching out includes supporting their initiatives. If we become a Christian culture known for rewarding good ideas with support and encouragement, I think it will go along way toward motivating the spectator into action. All of this material regarding engagement also reflects a need for a better understanding of what actually motivates folks: some key theories from secular researchers that seem to be right in line with biblical truth include: McClelland's need theory - that people will be motivated to be involved if their needs for achievement, affiliation, and power (meaning they have what it takes to succeed) will be met in some way through that involvment; the Intrinsic reward theory that suggests people will get involved if what they are doing is internally rewarding; and that folks will get involved if that involvement facilitates progress toward an important goal.

I didn't mean to write a dissertation, but these are just some of the aspects of involvement that I see a great correlation with the church -- after all, we are an organization made up of redeemed humans -- and we all need to feel meaningful. Jesus took the most diverse and average 12 men and gave them the most meaningful involvement opportunity ever -- He used it to change the world.