Church Attendance and Student Achievement

The Sociological Quarterly published a notable research report on student achievement and church attendance.The bottom line of the report: students who attend church weekly have higher GPAs. Additionally, they are less likely to drop out of school and connect better with other students in school. The entire journal article can be read here.

LiveScience.com also reported on the research:

Students who attend religious services weekly average a GPA .144 higher than those who never attend services…The study does not suggest God is smiling on the students, per se. Rather, it identifies several reasons the students do better:

- They have regular contact with adults from various generations who serve as role models.
- Their parents are more likely to communicate with their friends’ parents.
- They develop friendships with peers who have similar norms and values.
- They’re more likely to participate in extracurricular activities.

What I find most fascinating about this secular research is the importance of attending church. In order to raise student achievement, the student must be attending a church regularly. An emphasis on religion was not enough to boost student achievement – they must be involved in a local church.

This empirical tidbit from the Sociological Quarterly presents a catch-22. As revealed in the research in my book, Essential Church, 70% of those that drop out of the church will do so between the ages of 18 and 22. Now even secular research is demonstrating the need for churches to connect better with the younger generation. And it’s distressing that the church is losing these students at the same time that it could be providing them the most guidance.

The Managerial Hurdles to Church Work

Much debate exists in the academic world on the difference between managers and leaders. Some say the leader position and the manager position are mutually exclusive – managers are concerned with how things are accomplished; leaders are concerned with what is accomplished. Others see overlap between the two roles. Regardless of the technicalities of the debate, much church work must be managed. And this work can become a hurdle for the church leader without proper management.

In doing some reading for my PhD, I came across a great selection on the nature of managerial work in organizations. When I read Gary Yukl’s chapter on this subject in Leadership in Organizations, it resonated with me regarding the church. So I’ve adapted his section for leaders within the church. Listed below are several managerial hurdles for the church leader. This list is not comprehensive, but it shows how the management of work itself can become a hurdle for leadership. Perhaps it will connect with you as it did with me.

The pace of requests is frenzied and unpredictable. Pastors and church leaders receive a ceaseless amount of requests for information and guidance. These requests range from the vitally important to the mundane. They come in the form of authorizations for critical ministry decisions or non-essential matters of church facility operations. The difficulty arises when the leader becomes so inundated with requests, that he or she can no longer discern what is primary, secondary, tertiary, or totally imprudent. In this scenario the leader ends up fixing the squeakiest wheel.

The substance of work is disjointed. The sheer variety of tasks involved in ministry can become daunting. Church leaders will go from counseling someone on serious personal issues to calling the air conditioner repairman. The disjointed nature of ministry work can make the leader lose sight of the true vision of the church.

The work can become reactive. Sometimes pastors and church leaders can feel more like firemen than gospel workers. They react to “fires” in the church because of the gravitational pull of immediate needs. Clearly, some situations require leaders to put a hold on everything. The problem, however, surfaces when this reactive management mode overtakes and detracts from the proactive planning necessary for leading God’s church.

Decision-making and planning can become too incremental. Rarely are decisions in the church made cleanly and distinctly within a specific timeframe. Rather, decisions evolve over time and across many segments of the church. Autocratic leadership seldom benefits the church, but prolonged decision processes can become an emotional drag on a leader. As a result, the leader spends an inordinate amount of time managing and assuaging the emotions of others.

Leading and ministering within the church is a privilege. And the ever-changing culture makes for exciting ministry opportunities. It is my hope and prayer that I lead through the challenges rather than simply managing the work.

Goodbye Indiana!

Erin and I leave for Sarasota, Florida early tomorrow morning. We have enjoyed our ministry in Southern Indiana. Though we are excited about our new season of ministry, we will greatly miss many people. And we will continue to pray that God works here in incredible ways.

 

The view of the landscape from our front porch will change – from corn to palm trees – but the mission to reach the people of the community remains the same.

A New Season of Ministry

As some of you may know, my wife and I are moving to Sarasota, FL to begin a new phase of ministry at Sarasota Baptist Church. We’re incredibly excited. Ironically, this new season of ministry begins at the height of hurricane season. We arrive on Wednesday at about the same time as Fay.

HT: Tim Brister

Transactional or Transformational Church Leadership?

In 1978 James MacGregor Burns published his seminal work, Leadership. This book shifted and shaped the paradigm on leadership studies. As a result of his work, researchers and biographers discussed less the character traits of leaders and focused more on the engagement of leaders with their followers for a common goal. Burns’ book focused primarily on the political sphere, but his leadership theories struck a chord with many. Other experts in the field quickly picked up Burns’ mantle, empirically measuring and validating the theory of what became transformational leadership that is popular today.

The main idea that Burns proposed was a differentiation between transactional and transformational leaders.

Transactional leaders utilize a social exchange to accomplish their goals. The example of politics is used frequently: you vote for me and I’ll do this for you. These leaders use a quid pro quo to lead. In the financial world, this exchange can take the form of incentives for productivity or disincentives for a lack of productivity. Those with the authority are able to offer something in exchange for a following. And they can take away things when followers don’t follow well.

Transformational leaders operate much differently. These leaders inspire people to reach for a common goal. They develop, train, and mentor future talent. They empower people to accomplish tasks. Creativity, transparency, and authenticity are valued. Leaders and followers alike know what the goal is and how to achieve it. These leaders show everyone the big picture and why it’s important.

For the most part, leaders should act in a transformational capacity. There are times for transactional leadership – a Sergeant under fire in a foxhole needs to use his authority without explaining the “big picture” to everyone. In general, however, the idea is to motivate people with a common purpose and not press them in a certain direction with power-wielding authority.

Unfortunately, I see too much transactional leadership in the church. It can take a couple of forms: autocratic pastors or power-hungry parishioners letting everyone know who pays the bills. Clearly, these two examples are polar extremes, but they do emerge in lesser degrees. The greater problem that occurs in many churches is the level of comfort derived from a transactional environment. A group of people give to the church; the pastor mollycoddles them. Faithful stewardship and caring for a flock are biblical, but an exchange for the two is not healthy.

Christ obviously exemplifies the best leadership practices. He is a servant-leader. His model is the one to follow. He is the one to follow. As servant-leaders, however, we can act in a transformational way. How can people within the church become more transformational? What helps create a transformational environment in the church? I’ve listed below a few examples.

Become a champion of the mission statement. Almost every church has a mission/purpose/values/vision statement. It may be several paragraphs long, but it is the rallying point for all ministries in the church. It may need some refining, but it is the common goal for the church. Run with it. Champion it. Memorize it. Tactfully show everyone how the ministries of the church fall under it. And use it as a means of making Christ-followers.

Celebrate conversions. What a great way to show everyone the “big picture” by throwing a huge party for anyone that comes to know Christ through the ministries of the church

Recognize publicly. Recognize people publicly when they do something creative or accomplish a significant goal. Most people like to be recognized when they accomplish something. Pastors and leaders should find a tactful way to let the church know when someone accomplishes a significant goal. This recognition will remind everyone what they are working for and encourage them to keep moving forward as a church.

Be a vocal supporter. Some of my favorite people within the church are the “quiet” supporters – those who send notes in the mail or place cards discretely on my desk while I’m not there. I cherish the joyful surprises of reading them. As much as church leadership needs quiet supporters, however, leaders also need vocal supporters. People willing to stand up in business meeting and say they are proud of the direction of the church. Members prepared to put their own neck on the line for the pastors and other leaders. And people who squelch backbiting when they hear it in Bible study classrooms or at church dinners.

What do you guys say? Any other suggestions for a transformational church environment?