‘ ‘ . -.-.....-,.uq!

   

«659

 

 

 

 

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

PREPARATION FOR CHURCH LEADERSHIP"
TRENDS IN STUDENTS" LEADERSHIP ORIENTATION
AFTER ONE YEAR IN DALLAS THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

presented by

Sid Buzzell

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

 

 

Ph . D . degree in Adminis tration and

Curriculum

 

Date

MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0— 12771

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\l

W

3 1293 10515 2502

 

 

 

 

RETURNING MATERIALS:
IVIESI_J Place in book drop to
LJBRARJES remove this checkout from
m your record. FINES will
be charged if book is

 

returned after the date
stamped below.

 

\y . x
a A
f
; .3
16‘

 

 

 

 

PREPARATION FOR CHURCH LEADERSHIP:
TRENDS IN STUDENTS' LEADERSHIP ORIENTATION
AFTER ONE YEAR IN DALLAS THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

BY
Sid Buzzell

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfilhment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Administration and Curriculum
1982

(@9033?

ABSTRACT

PREPARATION FOR CHURCH LEADERSHIP:
A STUDY OF CURRICULUM EMPHASES AT
DALLAS THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

BY
Sid Buzzell

Theological seminaries are involved in training church
leaders. As questions of effectiveness are discussed,
definitive information is sought to verify often conflicting
claims. This study attempted to describe what happens to
students vis-a-vis leadership during training at Dallas
Theological Seminary.

In 1979, twenty-five entering students at Dallas
Theological Seminary were randomly selected and given the
Ideal Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire, the webb
Inventory of Religious Activities and Interests, the Rokeach
Dogmatism Scale and the Janis-Field Feelings of Inadequacy
scale. The tests were repeated at the end of the first
year. Results were analyzed for difference and for
correlation.

Differences between pre and post-experience scores on
the ILBDQ indicate a change in how the students describe
leadership. The only other difference in scores was an
increase in the Preacher Scale on the webb IRAI. Scores on

the other variables which have been shown in previous

ii

Sid Buzzell

research to reflect leadership orientation did not correlate
in this study.

The academic model of education adopted by most North
American seminaries is equipped to influence thinking about
church leadership. Ability to influence spiritual and
psychological constructs and to develop interest in various
ministry activities appears to be more limited.

More overt emphases on leadership in current course
offerings plus addition of specific courses on church
leadership are recommended. In addition, inclusion of
faculty in research and develogment of leadership emphases
for church and seminary is suggested. Third, exposure of
students to the leadership situation via a practicum is
recommended as early in training as possible. Fourth, a
re-casting of the educational model employed at Dallas
Theological Seminary in terms of adult education guidelines
is urged.

Perhaps most important the peOple of the church and the
faculty of the seminary need to re-think church leadership
development and define the roles each can fill most
effectively. The church has left education of its leaders
to the seminary and the seminary has accepted the challenge.
COOperation between church and seminary which encourages
participation of both in leadership training is recommended

as essential strategy for church leadership education.

iii

© Cepyright by

SID BUZZELL
1982

iv

DEDICATED

TO

Jeanette

Chris and Jon

who patiently understood
willingly helped
enthusiasthically encouraged

and heartily applauded the completion
of this research effort.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The encouragement and direction provided by Ted ward
with the time and effort of committee members Norm Bell,
Charles Blackman and Walter Johnson are warmly appreciated.
Their commitment to developing human potential gave impetus
and direction to the researcher. Their commitment to
quality provided a benchmark for the research.

Dallas Theological Seminary provided time and resources
to pursue the study leading to this research and then opened
themselves up for whatever conclusions the research
generated. The fact that they have nothing to hide
decreased the effort enormously.

Those who typed and re-typed the manuscript were
Jeanette Buzzell, Becky Grangaard and Clifteen Samuelson.
Their patience made it easier to change and re-change the
format and wording. Scott, Jane and Scottie McGall
patiently endured the programming and analysis of data.
Without their flexibility and Gary Wilson's statistical
guidance the research would not have been completed.

Appreciation is expressed to the board and.members of
Westlake Bible Church for allowing the many hours of effort
needed to complete the task. Their encouragement and
support were essential.

To the subjects who completed tests and showed up for
interviews in the midst of academic pressures, appreciation

is expressed.

vi

Chapter

TABLE OF CONTENTS

IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROBLEM

Purpose of the Study . . . .
Importance of the Study . . .
A Broader View of the Problem
Generalizability of the Study
Research Questions . . . . .
Definition of Terms . . .

Scope and Limitations of the S

LITERATURE REVIEW . . . . . .

Leadership Definition . . . .
Nature of the Church . . . .
Leadership for the Church . .
Research on Church Leadership
Self-esteem and Leadership .
Role-concept and Leadership .
Dogmatism and Leadership . .
Leadership Training . . . . .
Overall Summary . . . . . . .

RESEARCH DESIGN AND PROCEDURE

Research Design . . . .
Overview . . . . . . .
Subjects . . . . . . .
Testing and Observation
Instrumentation . . . .
Validity Concerns . . .
Research Design Over Var'
Statistical Analysis .
Research Hypotheses . .

able
Summary . . . . . . . . . .

oooH-oooooo

F INDINGS O O O O O O O O O 0

Summary Data . . . . . . . .
Changes in Variables . .
Correlation Between Variables

tn

d

Effect of Change in One Variable on

Change in Other Variables

Data from Interviews . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . .

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .

Do Students Change, and if so, How?

vii

Chapter Page

5 Is There Correlation Between How
(Cont.) Students View Ideal Church

Leader Behavior and Variables
Influencing Implementation of
that Behavior? . . . . . . . . . . 91

Does Change in Description of Ideal
Church Leadership Predict Change
in Variables Influencing

Leadership Function? . . . . . . . 101
Conclusions and Recommendations
smari zed O O O O I O O O O O O O 108

APPENDIX CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY COMPARING FIRST,
A THIRD AND FOURTH YEAR STUDENTS ON
VARIABLES RELATED TO LEADERSHIP . . . . 117
APPENDIX DESCRIPTION OF DALLAS THEOLOGICAL
B SWINARY O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O 129
APPENDIX EXPLANATION OF THE TEN-YEAR
C LONGITUDINAL STUDY . . . . . . . . . . 133

BIBLImRAPHY O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 135

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page
1 TIME AND VARIABLE MATRIX 53
SUMMARY OF DATA 71
3 SUMMARY OF t TEST FOR MEANS 74
4 SUMMARY OF CORRELATION DATA FROM
HYPOTHESES 7-12 77
5 COMPARISON OF CHANGE IN INITIATION
WITH CHANGE IN ADMINISTRATOR, SCHOLAR,
PREACHER 79
6 COMPARISON OF CHANGE IN CONSIDERATION
WITH CHANGE IN COUNSELOR, SPIRITUAL
GUIDE AND REFORMER 80
7 COMPARISON OF CHANGE IN INITIATION
WITH CHANGE IN DOGMATISM AND
FEELINGS 0F INADEQUACY 81
8 COMPARISON OF CHANGE IN CONSIDERATION
WITH CHANGE IN DOGMATISM AND FEELINGS OF
INADEQUACY 82
9 SUMMARY OF MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS -
FIRST, THIRD AND FOURTH YEAR STUDENTS 120
10 SUMMARY OF RESULTS: t TESTS FOR FIRST
AND THIRD YEAR STUDENTS 121
11 SUMMARY OF RESULTS: t TESTS FOR THIRD
AND FOURTH YEAR STUDENTS 122
12 SUMMARY OF CORRELATION DATA: ILBDQ AND
DOGMATISM, FEELINGS OF INADEQUACY - THIRD
YEAR 123
13 SUMMARY OF CORRELATION DATA: ILBDQ AND

DOGMATISM, FEELINGS OF INADEQUACY -
FOURTH YEAR 124

ix

CHAPTER I

IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROBLEM

In the current clamor for accountability in education,
the theological seminary is facing the question Of
effectiveness. Some (Richard 1975, Mooneyhaus 1976) do not
feel the seminary is effective. Others (Schuller, Breck,
Strommen 1975) have attempted to measure seminary
effectiveness in preparing for ministry, but have failed to
make definitive statements Of seminary's effectiveness in
developing church leaders. In fact, one may search long and
hard for an answer to the question Of seminary effectiveness
in leadership development without finding an answer. The
problem Of Church leadership development is compounded by
the ambiguity with which the term "leadership" is Often used
in the church. Existing together in a given Church are a
number of people referred to as leaders. There are
professional or staff leaders with defined "positions" and,
usually seminary training. There are board members who
function on a volunteer basis, have little or no formal
theological training and relate in a variety of ways to the
professional staff member(s). The variety of relationships
between leaders results from a variety of ecclesiological
conclusions ag§_a variety of interpretations Of these
ecclesiologies.

For the purpose of this study, leadership is limited to

those who are being educated in the theological seminary

(specifically Dallas Theological Seminary) in preparation
for the formal or status or professional leadership role.
The limitation Of the term to this role for the study is not
intended to minimize the validity of its other uses.

The theological seminary's critics make statements
concerning its inability to develOp effective Church
leaders, but cite no data to explain or substantiate the
"ineffectiveness" claim. The seminaries deny the accusation
of critics but no data are forthcoming to substantiate their
claims for effectiveness. The problem is that neither
critic nor advocate can Cite a definitive piece of research
to show what is happening to seminary students in regard to
their development for formal church leadership roles. More
people are discussing church leadership than ever before but
little is being done to substantiate what is being said.

Theological seminaries attempt to train students for
formal Church leadership roles. It is important, therefore,
to develop understanding of students' concepts of their
leadership role and how they change during education. It is
also important to understand what happens to variables
believed to influence implementation of idealized leadership
roles.

The study is intended to increase understanding Of what
happens to students over their first year Of education at
Dallas Theological Seminary especially in reference to four
variables believed to influence leadership effectiveness.

The four variables are: description Of the ideal leader's

behavior, concept Of the leader's role, the leader's level

of dogmatism and leader's feelings of inadequacy.

PURPOSE

The study has three specific purposes. The first
purpose is to investigate in a group of twenty-three
randomly selected freshmen seminary students the nature and
extent Of relationship between description Of ideal leader
behavior and three variables believed to influence their
implementation: concept of leadership role (Fiedler, 1958,
Stogdill, 1948), level Of dogmatism (Bass, McGehee, Hawkins,
Young and Gebel, 1943; Calvin, Hoffman and Harder, 1957) and,
feelings of inadequacy (Bellingrath, 1930, 1944). The
second purpose is to determine if students experience change
in any Of the variables during their first year in seminary
and, if so, in what direction. The third purpose is to
investigate presence or absence of correlations between

changes in variables.

IMPORTANCE

This study is important for four reasons. First, if a
seminary is to develOp effective church leaders it must
investigate what is happening to students regarding
leadership ideology. Second, accurate data are needed to
evaluate seminary curriculum in relation to specific mental

and psychological constructs related to leadership

effectiveness. Third, data are needed to help design
specific leadership courses. Fourth, if curriculum emphases
develop cognitive beliefs about leadership and at the same
time develop affective constructs which frustrate
implementation Of those cognitive beliefs, then seminary
training may contribute to dissonance in the student's mind
as he attempts to form leadership philosophy for his

ministry role in the church.

A BROADER VIEW OF THE PROBLEM

The four statements of importance are best understood
when seen in relation to the condition Of church leadership.
One may assume that with theological seminaries graduating
so many people into the field each year, effective church
leaders would abound.* Such, however, is not the case.
Whether one considers formal leadership (Douglas 1975) or
informal leadership (Gangle 1981, Crossland 1955, Peterson
1981, Ward 1977, Jacobs 1961) the conclusion is the same -
there is a dearth of qualified leadership. Specifically in
reference to formal leadership the Lausanne Covenant,
resulting from a worldwide conference Of Christian leaders

who gathered in 1974 to discuss among other issues, the

 

*Regardless Of whether one uses the term "leadership"
in reference to formal or informal roles, the quality and
number Of church leaders of any kind is related to the
effectiveness of the formal leader. According to New
Testament literature the role of formal leader is to equip
the informal leader for his or her ministry (Ephesians
4:11-16). The effectiveness of the formal leader may be
measured, in part, by the effectiveness Of the informal
leaders.

meaning of church leadership in the world stated, "We
recognize that there is a great need to improve theological
education especially for church leaders" (Douglas l975:7).

This scarcity Of effective church leaders has spawned
questions and concerns about the validity of current models
Of theological education widely accepted in North America.
The use of monetary and temporal resources involved in a
seminary education seem difficult to justify if the products
are not providing needed leadership.

It may be that the formal education model adOpted by
the typical theological seminary (including the one involved
in this study) works against leadership development. While
defining a cognitive view Of leadership consistent with
church needs, the seminary may be placing students in an
environment where becoming the kind of person who can
provide that leadership is discouraged. Simkins addressed
the problem of preparing students for leadership roles in a
formal education setting:

In addition to the ethos Of formal education,

however, its organization and structure have

important implications for the development of

attitudes. The long full-time courses (Often on a

residential basis at the higher levels), the

dominance Of expensive institutions little related

tO local building standards, and the standarized

academic curriculum all encourage the maximum

alienation of the student from his own community

and give rise to expectations which can only be

satisfied in a modern urban environment. As a

child proceeds through the school system,

especially beyond the primary level, the strength

Of these various factors becomes greater. Clearly

an education which alienates rather than

integrates, which encourages the conservative
rather than the innovative and self-interest

rather that community-interest, which gives value
to kinds of learning which are only Of marginal
relevance to real national needs must affect
individual attitudes and patterns of national
development in much deeper and.more complex ways
than simplistic arguments about the content Of the
curriculum imply (1977:27, 28).

In regard to the student's ability to function in his
society, Dore wrote:

At least those who get the certificates and the
jobs will have been well prepared then. At least
the employee-orientation Of the schools will have
prepared them well for their subsequent careers.
In a limited way, yes. They will have learned the
virtues Of punctuality, regularity, hard work,
confonmity to regulation, Obedience to the
instruction of superiors. These are not
insignificant qualities, perhaps. But are they
the qualities most required in the members Of
administrative and managerial bureaucracies given
the task of modernising their society? What Of
imagination, creativity, honesty, curiosity and
the determination to get to the bottom of things,
the desire to do a good job for its own sake?
These are not the qualities likely to be bred by a
prolonged dose of qualification-oriented
schooling--most prolonged in those highest up the
hierarchy on whose initiatives most depends
(1976:11-12).

TO illustrate the formal school's impact on the student
vis-a-vis community leadership, Simmons wrote:

Students are uniformly penalised for creativity,

autonomy, initiative, tolerance for ambiguity and

independence. . . . they are rewarded for
perseverence, good student values, and other

traits that are indicative of docility, industry,

and ego-control (1975:24).

The idea that schooling's environment communicates as
impactfully as its content has been echoed by others
(Brembeck 1971, Bogaert 1976, Dewey 1938). The context Of
the study, then, is Of wider importance than the immediate

questions involved. It relates to the model of education to

which theological seminaries are committed, to the ability
of the seminary's graduates to develop leadership in the
parish and tO the transfer, through foreign missions, of
these same models to the develOping Church in the Third

WOrld.

SUMMARY OF THE PROBLEM STATEMENT

Douglas (1975) wrote of the formal leadership problem
for the church and Jacobs referred tO the more general
crisis in the church leadership: "There is hardly a
congregation to be found in which there is not a scarcity of
leadership" (l961:5). Leadership is currently one Of the
focused issues Of the church (Douglas 1975, Peterson 1977,
Ward 1977, Gangle 1981). An emergence Of seminars, an
increase in books on the subject, a newly introduced journal
entitled Leadership indicate a progressive sensitization to
the subject. Central questions revolve around the issues Of
what leadership is, who should provide it and how the
leaders should be prepared.

This study deals with leadership issues by examining a
given group Of students in a given institution committed to
develOpment of formal or status leadership persons for the
church. The study is approached by raising questions of
what happens to these students in regard to certain
variables believed to be important to the kind of person who
can function successfully in a formal leadership role in a

church. The study does not deal with leadership for the

church pg; gs but with what happens to selected variables in
a group of selected students in a selected institution which
prepared for status leadership for the church.

Since one cannot study everything that happens to a
student, four variables were selected because of a
combination of concerns. First the variables had to be
theoretically relatable to the kind of leadership
apprOpriate to the church. Second, they needed to be able
to be assessed with relatively short instrumentation

devices.

GENERALIZABILITY

This study should have implications beyond the subjects
under investigation. Because subjects are randomly selected
from an incoming class of students at Dallas Theological
Seminary, the findings will relate to the others in that
class and to the entire student body of that school. To a
lesser degree, the findings should apply to students in
other seminaries. It is also reasonable to believe that the
findings would relate to other types Of institutions
preparing students for leadership roles.

Dallas Theological Seminary is a four year post-
graduate school whose purpose "is to prepare eligible
students for various aspects of Christian service through
graduate-level, biblical, theological, and.ministerial
instruction" (Zuck l981:6). Located in Dallas, Texas, the
school has approximately one thousand students and sixty

faculty. Students are from throughout the United States and

include a number Of foreign students. The main degree
program is the Master of Theology, a four year (one hundred
twenty hours and a thesis) course Of study ”designed to
prepare men for a ministry Of Bible exposition as pastors,
teachers, missionaries and leaders in other areas Of
ministry requiring ability in expounding the Scriptures"

(1981:43).

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. What happens during students' first year in
seminary to their view Of how the ideal church
leader functions, their concept Of ministry, their
level of dogmatism and their feelings of
inadequacy?

2. What is the correlation between description Of
ideal Church leader behavior and concept Of
ministry, level of dogmatism and feelings Of
inadequacy?

3. Is there a correlationxbetween Chan e in view Of
leadership and Chan e in concept of ministry,
Chan e in level 0 ogmatism and change in
IeeIings Of inadequacy?

4. Is there any discrepancy or coordination between
views Of leader behavior and factors influencing
implementation Of the behavior?

5. Is there a difference between incoming student's
views Of ideal church leader behavior vis-a-vis
church leadership and current students'?

6. If so, do incoming students' views move toward
student body views during their first year?*

*Tfie question Of further Changes in the variables over
time is being pursued by the researcher in a longitudinal
study, following the subjects in the current study through
the remaining three years of seminary training and first six
years following. Appendix A presents data from a
cross-sectional study using a sample of twenty-five third
and twenty-five fourth year students. They were tested for
view Of ideal leader behavior, dogmatism and feelings of
inadequacy.

 

 

 

10

7. What is the nature and extent of relationship
between ideal leader behavior description and
concept of leader task, dogmatism and feelings Of
inadequacy as demonstrated through previous
research?

DEFINITIONS

A common understanding Of the following words is
essential to interaction with the process and conclusions Of
the study.

Leadership: Is that which aides a group in defining
and/or accomplishing goals which it understands and accepts
(Brilhart, 1967).

Church: An organism--a group Of peOple belonging tO
Christ and existing to evangelize those who are not members
and to edify those who are (Getz, 1974).

Seminary: An institution providing graduate level
theological education for the primary purpose of training
people for church leadership (Elmer, 1981). .

Consideration: The Leader Behavior Description
Questionnaire measures two behaviors basic to leadership:
consideration and structure. These were defined through the
Ohio State Leadership studies to comprise two patterns of
behavior recognized as leadership (Stogdill 1974).

Fleishman Offered the following definition Of consideration:

Reflects the extent to which an individual is

likely to have job relationships with his

subordinates Characterized by mutual trust,

respect for their ideas, consideration for their

feelings and a certain warmth between himself and
them. A high score (on the LBDQ) is indicative Of

11

a climate of good rapport and two-way
communication. A low score indicates the
individual is likely to be more impersonal in his
relations with group members (1957:20).

Structure:

Reflects the extent to which an individual is
likely to define and structure his own role and
those Of his subordinates toward goal attainment.
A high score on this dimension characterizes
individuals who play a very active role in
directing group activities through planning,
communicating information, scheduling,
criticizing, trying out new ideas, and so forth.
A low score (on the LBDQ) characterizes
individuals who are likely to be relatively
inactive in giving direction in these ways
(Fleishman 1957:21).

Dogmatism: Rokeach (1960) ties dogmatism to
Closedmindness which he defines as the extent to which a
person can receive, evaluate and act on relevant information
received from outside on its own intrinsic merits,
unencumbered by irrelevant factors in the situation arising
from within the person or from outside.

Feelings of Inadequacy: The level Of esteem one

 

experiences in social interaction, feelings Of shyness,
degree Of confidence in abilities and concern about the
possibility that friends may have a low Opinion of one.
Used in this study tO measure level of persuasibility.
(Hovland, Janis, Kelley 1953).

Concept of Ministry: This variable, measured by the

 

Inventory of Religious Activities and Interests measures
”interest in activities performed by person employed in a

variety Of church-related occupations" (webb 1968:21). Webb

12

further stated that the items describe the tasks which

persons in church-related occupations perform.

SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS

This study defines what happens to students' view Of
ideal church leadership during their first year Of study at
Dallas Theological Seminary. The variables of dogmatism,
concept Of ministry and feelings Of inadequacy would provide
valuable information to understanding the students but the
study is limited to their relationship with views Of ideal
leader behavior. It is also recognized that other variables
could be considered in relation to leadership. Dogmatism,
concept of ministry and feelings Of inadequacy were selected
because they measure constructs believed by the researcher

tO be particularly relevant to leadership for the church.

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

The focus Of this study is the effect of formal
training on one's concept Of church leadership. The
researcher has attempted to describe how students'
definition Of ideal church leadership changes and how the
student changes in three areas believed to influence ability
to function as a leader: (1) perception of ministry, (2)
level of dogmatism and (3) feelings of inadequacy.

An investigation Of related literature provides
perspective for interpreting and applying the data gained
through this study. The literature review will be limited
to the following: (1) church leadership definition, (2)
effects of leaders' task concept, dogmatism and feelings of
inadequacy on ability to lead and (3) approaches to church

leadership development.

LEADERSHIP DEFINITION

Defining leadership is a complex task. Stogdill
grouped definitions under eleven categories with an average
Of seven definitions in each. He concluded: "There are
almost as many definitions of leadership as there are
persons who have attempted to define the concept" (1947:7).
A single, encompassing definition Of leadership, therefore,
may be not only difficult to construct but also too general

to be of much value. Gibb grouped definitions

13

14

under six categories and made a clear distinction between
"headship" and "leadership." He stated that the term
leadership "applies only when this (influence) is
voluntarily accepted or when it is in a shared direction"
(1965:213). Although there are some who disagree (COOper
and McGaugh 1963; Janda 1960), there is general agreement
about the distinction between the leadership/headship or
domination definitions. The differentia are important to
deliniating a definition Of leadership and are, therefore,
included:

1. Domination or headship is maintained through
an organized system and not by the
spontaneous recognition, by fellow group
members, Of the individual's contribution to
group locomotion.

2. The group goal is Chosen by the head man in
line with his interests and is not internally
determined by the group itself.

3. In the domination or headship relation there
is little or no sense Of shared feeling or
joint action in the pursuit of the given
goal.

4. There is in the dominance relation a wide
social gap between the group members and the
head, who strives to maintain this social
distance as an aid to his coercion Of the
group.

5. Most basically, these two forms of influence
differ with respect to the source Of the
authority which is exercised. The leader's
authority is spontaneously accorded him by
his fellow group members, and particularly by
the followers. The authority Of the head
derives from some extragroup power which he
has over the members of the group, who cannot
meaningfully be called his followers. They
accept his domination, on pain of punishment,
rather than follow (Stogdill 1968:216).

15

The fact that definitions are similar enough to be
grouped, and different enough to be separated into groups
suggests that researchers Observe various phenomena which
may legitimately be labeled as leadership. By combining
four strands Of leadership thought one may move, logically,
toward sorting out the definitions and either selecting or
constructing one that is useful. These four strands are
developed briefly.

1. Fiedler and the Contingency Model. Fiedler
prOposed a model of leadership which suggested the
difficulty (if not impossibility) of defining leadership
apart from its context. His study Of least preferred
coworker (1967) demonstrated that a person may be an
effective leader under one set of conditions and an
ineffective one even with the same group under different
conditions. Further research by Fiedler, O'brien and Ingler
(1969) and Foa, Mitchell and Fiedler (1970) was able to
match person and situation to maximize leadership potential.

Fiedler generated a series Of studies to investigate
two phenomena. First, one style Of leadership was
associated with effective group performance in one set of
circumstances but not in others. Second, in those others, a
quite contrary style seemed most effective (Fielder 1964).
Fielder summarized and integrated the results Of the studies
and suggested: "that the prediction Of group performance on
the basis Of leader attributes (styles) is contingent on the
specific, situational context in which the leader Operates"

(1964:154).

16

2. Interaction Theory. Closely related to Fielder's
work but predating and undoubtedly contributing to it is the
interaction theory. Based on their research, Sherif (1948),
Sanford (1952) and Fielder (1969, 1973) suggested that the
leader's role is determined not only by his qualities and
acts, in the abstract, but based on the extent to which he
is perceived by the led, to use these factors apprOpriately.
Leadership is, then, an interaction between the variables Of
the leadership situation. Gibb gave six summary statements
which comprise the important aspects Of interaction theory:

1. Groups are mechanisms for achieving
individual satisfactions.

2. Any group is a system Of interactions within
which a structure emerges by the development
Of relatively stable expectations for the
behavior of each member. Such expectations
are an expression of each.member's
interactional relations with all other
members and are, Of course, determined by the
other members' perceptions of his personal
attributes and his performance on earlier
occasions.

3. This role differentiation is a characteristic
Of all groups, and some role patterns appear
tO be universal. However, the nature Of the
group-task situation, the size of the group,
and a great variety Of other variables
determine the role needs of the
group-in-situation.

4. The association Of a particular individual
member with the performance of a role or
pattern of roles is largely determined by the
particular attributes Of personality,
ability, and skill which differentiate him
perceptually from other members Of the group.

5. Leadership is but one facet, though perhaps
the most visible facet, Of this larger

17

process of role differentiation. Leadership
is simply this concept applied to the
situation Obtaining in a group when the
differentiation Of roles results in one or
some Of the parties to the interaction
influencing the actions Of others in a shared
approach to common or compatible goals.

6. Leadership, like any other role behavior, is
a function Of personal attributes and social
system in dynamic interaction. Both
leadership structure and individual leader
behavior are determined in large part by the
nature Of the organization in which they
occur. Leadership structure is relative,
also, to the pOpulation characteristics Of
the group or, in other words, to the
attitudes and needs Of the followers
(1968:270, 271).

A graphic illustration of the interaction theory is

given:

Leadership Situation

 

r9 Goals ‘“

 

 

People

 

 

it ‘il
Le der+——> Led

A

i

*5 Circumstances ‘-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Each variable in the total situation exists in
interaction with each Of the others: never in isolation. A
change: or perceived change in any part of the situation
affects the other parts. What a leader does at one time in
the organization may be perceived, legitimately, as
leadership and at another time the same action may prove to

be counterproductive to the organization. Anyone who fails

18

to recognize the complexity Of a dynamic situation cannot
provide consistently effective leadership for it.

The trait and behavior approaches to leadership
definition or explanation failed at this point. It was
found that people with certain traits led in one situation
and not others. Some behaviors were labelled leadership
behaviors in one circumstance and not in others. What is
more accurate is that certain traits and/or behaviors are
related to leadership where they are appropriate to the
situation.

3. Focused vs. Distributed Leadership. The

 

interaction theory explains the need for the third strand Of
thought; that of focused versus distributed leadership.

Gibb (1964) stated that leadership is a function which may
be performed by various members Of a group. He suggested
distributing leadership as a means Of functioning from
strength by allowing the person most qualified to provide
leadership the Opportunity to exercise leadership at that
point.

This ideology depends on separating leadership from a
single individual and seeing it as a function which.may be
provided by various members Of a group at various times.
Brilhart (1974), Benne and Sheats (1948) and Bales (1950)
listed leadership functions under two headings: task
functions and maintenance functions. Bales (1958) found
that task and social leadership can rarely be performed

equally well by the same person. Gibb concluded that: “If

19

there are leadership functions which must be performed in
any group, and if these functions may be 'focused' or
'distributed', then leaders will be identifiable both in
terms of the frequency and in terms of the multiplicity or
pattern Of functions performed" (1968:215).

4. Leader as Completer. The fourth strand Of

 

ideology considered for definitional purposes, then is that
Of leader as completer. Schutz (1970) contributed a concept
that allows distributed leadership to exist alongside a
designated leader. His model Of "leader as completer"
suggested that functions of leadership in an organization
are like those Of the ego in a individual personality.

The best a leader can do is to Observe which

functions are not being performed by a segment Of

the group and enable his part to accomplish them.

In this way he minimizes the areas of inadequacy

of the group (1970:61).
He also suggested that there are times when the most helpful
behavior the designated leader can perform is restraint.
Schutz summarized the role Of the leader under four points:

(1) to know what functions a group needs: (2) to

have the sensitivity and flexibility to sense what

functions the group is not fulfilling: (3) tO have

the ability to get the things needed by his group

accomplished; and (4) to have the willingness to

do what is necessary to satisfy these needs, even

though it may be personally displeasing (1970:62).

Summary. Leadership, then, is best defined as distinct
from headship or domination. It is most clearly understood
in relation to a specific situation, and even there should
be allowed to maintain its dynamic nature Of interaction.

Finally, leadership should be seen as something distinct

from a given individual thus allowing the designated leader

20

Opportunity to encourage the strongest member in a given

situation to function.

NATURE OF THE CHURCH

This section will not attempt a solution to various
theological problems concerning the church which have
existed for centuries. It will, however, state the writer's
views concerning Scriptural teaching on the nature Of the
church. The conclusions from the definition Of leadership
will be combined with the ones concerning church. Then one
can attempt to define church leadership.

The most common Scriptural analogy for the church is a
body (1 Corinthians 12; Romans 12; Ephesians l, 4, 5;
Colossians l, 3). The head Of the body is Christ (Ephesians
1:22 and 4:15-16; Colossions 1:18).

The church—as-body concept is spelled out by Richards
as a living organism:

If we are tO understand who we are as the church,

we must begin by affirming our identity as

Christ's body. NO approach to organization and

administration can reach sound conclusions apart

from the recognition that, in essence, we

Christians are members of a living organism.

Every principle or organization must flow from

this understanding; every practice must be in full

harmony with it. we can never be effective

leaders in the church until we realize, with Paul,

that we "are the body Of Christ, and each one of

(us) is a part Of it" (I Cor. 12:27) (1980:30).

The reason Richards made such a point of the organismic

nature Of the church is to contrast it with church-as-

organization. The Apostle Paul (Ephesians 4:12-16)

21

presented the organic interrelation of the body's parts and
concluded that the church grows by the contribution of each
part--by that which "every joint supplies.” Paul (I
Corinthians 12) emphasized the unity of the body when he
said that no part can claim itself unimportant (vv. 12-20)
nor can it claim it has no need of other parts (vv. 21-25).
Findlay introduced the section of his commentary on I
Corinthians 12:

The manifold graces, ministries, workings (4ff.),
that proceed from the action of the Holy Spirit in
the Christian community, stand not only in common
dependence upon Him (v. 39), but are mutually
bound to each other. The Church Of Christ is "the
body" for the Spirit Of God; and these Operations
are its correlated functional activities (12 ff.).
Differentiation is the essence Of bodily life.

The unity of the Church is not that of inorganic
nature, a monotonous aggregation Of similars, as
in a pOOl Of water or a heap Of stones; it is the
oneness Of a living organism, no member Of which
exercises the same faculty as another. Without
"many members," contrasted as foot with hand or
sight with smell (14-17), there would be no body
at all, but only a single monstrous limb (19). In
God's creative plan, it is the integration and
reciprocity Of a multitude of distinct organs that
makes up the physical and the social frame (18
ff.) (1970:89).

Since any functioning body must have a head, Paul carried
his analogy through by stating that the church-as-body has
Christ as its head. Richards summarized this concept:

Then Paul reveals the appointment Of Jesus to a
position in which His power is to be exercised.
"God placed all things under His feet," Paul
writes, "and appointed Him to be head over
everything for the church, which is His body, the
fullness Of Him who fills everything in every way"
(Eph. 1:22-23).

22

The thrust Of Paul's argument is clear:

1. Jesus lives.

2. Jesus possesses ultimate power.

3. Jesus is God's gift to us, appointed to
be head over everything for us.

Our struggle tO understand leadership must begin
with the recognition that in the church we are
dealing with a living Christ; that this Jesus acts
in "the present age" as well as "the age to come":
and that it is God's express intention that Jesus
is to function as "head over everything for the
church, which is His body." Whatever role human
leadership may play in the church, it must not
intrude into the realm of Jesus' headship or claim
His prerogatives. Jesus and Jesus alone is head
Of the body (1980:8).

The church, then, is a living organism with the living
Christ as its head. The members function in a reciprocal
relationship. The church's purpose is defined by Getz
(1974) as evangelism and edification. Getz argues from an
inductive study of the Acts and Epistles; suggesting that
Acts gives activities and results, while the Epistles give
directives and Objectives.

The church's strategy was for individual members to
function. Paul wrote that gifted* people were given to
equip the saints:

And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and

some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers,

for the equipping Of the saints for the work Of
service, to the building up Of the body Of Christ;
until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and Of
the knowledge Of the Son Of God, to a mature man, to
the measure Of the stature which belongs to the fulness
of Christ. As a result, we are no longer to be

*Tfie concept Of gift in New Testament literature refers
to an ability given by God to assist one in service to the

church. The concept is develOped in Romans 12, I
Corinthians l2 and Ephesians 4.

23

children, tossed here and there by waves and

carried about by every wind Of doctrine, by the

trickery Of men, by craftiness in deceitful

scheming; but speaking the truth in love, we are

to grow up in all aspects into Him, who is the

head, even Christ, from whom the whole body, being

fitted and held together by that which every joint

supplies, according to the prOper working Of each
individual part, causes the growth of the body for

the building up of itself in love (Ephesians

4:11-16).

He stated in I Corinthians 12:7 "for tO each one is
given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good."
He then explained that each member is to minister to each
other member.

The church, then, is an organism, a group Of people
belonging tO Christ and existing to evangelize those who are
not members and to edify those who are. Although very
little is spelled out concerning its government, one fact is

made clear: Christ is the head Of His church.

LEADERSHIP FOR THE CHURCH

In review, it has been stated that leadership must be
defined in relation to a specific context. The context has
been defined as the formal or status leadership position in
a local church. The next question is: "What is formal
church leadership?"

If one begins with Christ's teaching to the apostles
during their preparation for leadership, an important
concept is defined. In both His modeling and His statements

He emphasized a service approach to leadership.

24

He frequently remarked that He, the Son of God, was
under and obedient to authority of the Father (Matthew
26:39; John 5:19; Mark 9:37). He submitted Himself to the
Roman authorities and taught His followers to do likewise.
Christ also modeled a willingness to give Himself to the
needs of His followers even to the extent of sacrificing His
life for them.

Not.many direct statements are recorded in the Gospels
concerning leadership, but those which exist have a common
theme: "the one who is greatest among you will be your
servant" (Matthew 20 and 23; Mark 10; John 13).

In the book of the Acts, the apostles' leadership took
the form of teaching and keeping order in a newly forming
church. Beginning in Chapter 6, there is a gradual
distribution of leadership to others until in Chapter 15,
at the council of Jerusalem, the apostles, elders and "the
whole church" at Jerusalem were involved in defining policy.
In the Epistles, where churches without apostles had to
function, there is little said about leadership but much
said about unity and service among members. A few summary
statements give the flavor of New Testament Church
leadership:

From Richards:

Paul's words to Timothy in II Timothy 2:24-25

highlight a critical aspect of the identity and

the ministry style of spiritual leaders: "The

Lord's servant must not quarrel; instead, he must

be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful.
Those who Oppose him he must gently instruct, in

25

the hope that God will give them repentance
leading them to a knowledge of the truth."

Leaders in the body of Christ should never forsake
the role of servants. Even when they are Opposed
to a plan or program, they are not permitted to
demand, but must remain gentle in instruction and
rely on the head of the body to change the hearts
of their Opponents (or their own) (1980:102).

As leader, they are called to be servants. Ward
explained:

For the Christian community, the issue isn't
leadership, anyway, it is servanthood. ”Let those
who would be great among you become your
servants." "He who is least among you, this is
the one who is great" (Matt. 20:38; Luke 22:26;
Mark 9:35). "The kings of the Gentiles lord it
over them, and those who have authority over them
are called Benefactors . . . NOT SO WITH

YOU . . .1" (Luke 22:25). The church must define
leadership differently. To do less, especially to
borrow the secular frame of reference and
concepts, is to secularize the church . . . .
Leadership is not so much bringing peOple out of a
wilderness as it is sharing in a journey. This
sharing is as a peer "You have but one teacher,
you are all brothers . . . and do not be called
leaders, for one is your leader, Christ" (Matthew
23:8, 10), and sharing is to be done as would a
servant. In the church, those who would lead
(better to say minister?) are to serve as agents
of the Holy Spirit's gifts to the church (1977:33,
34).

One qualifies for Church leadership, then, in a way that is
logically consistent with the nature of the church. The
contingency model suggests an appropriate link between the
leadership situation and the leadership style. The church
exists to serve God and man and those most competent to lead

are those most prepared to serve.

26

RESEARCH ON CHURCH LEADERSHIP

WOod stated the question of his study (WOOd l981:xi):
"Was it legitimate for mainline protestant ministers to
involve their churches in social action Opposed by the
majority of their members?"

WOOd selected seven protestant denominations that had
at least one million members nationally and a history of
active participation in social issues. The sample consisted
of two thousand one hundred sixty-five members, two hundred
four officers and ninety-six ministers. The subjects were
sent questionnaires and a comparison was made of leaders'
and.members' attitudes toward involvement in five social
action issues. On two issues arising from the core values
of the church; racial justice and economic
Opportunity-emembers and ministers were sharply divided.
The bulk of Wood's work is an investigation of the ethics of
the church leaders making decisions contrary to the ideals
of the members. WOod wrote:

This book assesses whether a formal legitimacy can

elicit members support for unpOpular policies and

whether a belief in legitimacy is needed to

reinforce formal legitimacy. Drawing on Weber and

others I develOp a concept of legitimacy that is

grounded in the collective values fostered by an
organization. I argue that at least in voluntary
organizations leadership that bases its Claims to
legitimacy on the collective values of the
organization will be more effective than that

based on rational-legal claims. Indeed in the

democratic society this type Of legitimacy seems

essential when the core values of an organization

lead to policies disliked by the majority of its
members (1970:14).

PLEASE NOTE:

Page 27 is lacking in
number only per school.
No text is missing.
Filmed as received.

UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS INTERNATIONAL.

28

Organizational transcendence and legitimate leadership are
Offered by WOod as explanations to validating leaders'
unpopular decisions. "Organizational transcendence occurs
when an organization uses its name and other resources in
actions not predictable from its members' attitudes toward
those actions" (WOod 1981:72).

Transcendence is legitimate, WOOd stated, when the
organization gives that power to its leaders. It is also
legitimate when followers give power to leaders even though
the transfer is not institutionalized by the organization's
policy. Transcendence then is dependent on legitimacy which
is WOod's second explanation to validate leaders control
even when making unpOpular decisions. Legitimacy is

described by Wood:

Michael's iron law of oligarchy implies that
organizational policies out of line with members
attitudes necessarily constitute displacement of
organizational goals by leaders pursuing their
vested interests; hence such policies and such
leadership are not legitimate. On the contrary I
have suggested that such policies may be
legitimate when members voluntarily subject
themselves to a formal system of control that they
believe has the right to coerce the surrender of
their wishes to established goals of the
organization (Formal legitimacy) or where members
voluntarily support dissonant policies because
they believe that they should do so (belief in
legitimacy) (1981:14).

A third means Of validating unpopular decisions is most

relevant to church leadership. Core values Of the church

29

are used as claims for legitimacy for leaderships' values.
Value-fostering organizations are based on fundamental
values that can provide the legitimacy for organizational

actions.

In the case of religious organizations leaders
frame policy on social action to reflect the
fundamental values of the church . . . . They
then use those values as a basis proclaiming
legitimacy for controversial issues by bringing to
consciousness the members belief in those general
values-~thus raising the rank of those values
within members heirarchies (Rokeach l973)--and by
encouraging members to apply the general values to
the specific policies" (1981:99).

The results Of the study showed that ministers and members
were sharply divided on social issues with layleaders
falling between these two. WOOd explains why there has not
been more conflict on these issues. These explanations
follow:

(1) Members tendency to shift to churches with
ministers whose views are similar to theirs; (2)
members misperception of their ministers views;
(3) members and ministers considerable agreement
in the areas in which they interact most; (4)
members belief that lay Officers have the most
influence on social policy; (5) shared norms that
give ministers license to disagree with members;
(6) ministers tendency to carry out their social
action ministries in a nonthreatening way
(1981:156).

Summary. The church is presented in Scripture as a
body consisting of members in a reciprocal relationship.
Christ is the head and the church's leaders are intended to
serve the body as a member. The concept of church-as-

organism is predominant in Scripture. Wood's study

30

demonstrates a different reality. The church membership and
leadership appear to be involved in a power struggle with
members searching for a.minister they agree with. The idea
of switching churches tends to localize the organism to a
group of separate organizations. The contrast in the two
sections of this review may more clearly define why some
leaders find it difficult to prepare for "church"
leadership. Fiedler's contingency model appears
particularly relevant as one attempts to define which kind

Of church to prepare to lead.

SELF-ESTEEM AND LEADERSHIP

Early studies of leadership focused on leader traits
and behaviors. Bowden (1926), Bingham (1927), Tead (1929)
and Kilbourne (1935) supported the idea that one who
possessed the greatest number Of desirable traits would
lead. Although both Stogdill (1970) and Gibb (1968), after
extensive literature surveys, reported the inadequacy of
trait theories to encompass the complexities of leadership,
they did support self-confidence as an.important contributor
to leadership's existence. The review in this study is not
attempting to validate self-confidence or a level of
inadequacy feelings as a leadership trait but to describe
its relationship to one's ability to lead.

Stogdill's review of leadership traits from 1904 to

1970 need not be repeated here. Some of his conclusions,

31

however, are critical. "The authors reporting data on the
relationship of self-confidence to leadership are uniform in
the positive direction of their findings" (1970:53). In a
compilation of studies, he showed that as Of 1948 there were
seventeen studies showing positive correlation between
leadership and self-confidence. Between 1948 and 1970, he
found twenty-eight more. In that period (1904-1970), he
found no studies showing zero or negative correlation
(1970). Gibb concluded his review by stating that: "the
general implications of these findings is that leaders, more
or less consistently, rate higher in self-confidence or self
assurance" (1968:218).

Richardson and Hanawalt studied two hundred fifty-eight
adult men (ages twenty-six and Older). Through demographic
information they grouped respondents as supervisors and
non-supervisors, office-holders and non Office-holders.
Supervisors were those who had fifteen or more persons under
their direction or supervision in an executive capacity.
Office-holders are persons who report at least two
presidencies or important chairmanships held since the age
of twenty-one in a recognized organization. There were
ninety supervisors and forty-seven office-holders. Using
the Bernreuter Personality measure and the Flanagan scale to
correlate personality constructs with leadership the ‘
researchers attempted to explore personality traits
associated with leadership. The correlates for

Self-Confidence which is relevant to the current research

32

were significant. The conclusion was that "Office-holders
are found to be . . . more self confident that non
office-holders or than the norms for adult men. Supervisors
are . . . more self confident than non-supervisors"
(1943:316).

Dittes studied the relationship between self-esteem and
individuals' attraction to and gratification from a group.
Results indicated that "persons made to feel well accepted
in a group found the group attractive" (1959:58). Not a
surprising conclusion. However, the significance of Dittes'
work for the present study is a related finding that the
difference in attractiveness "was significantly greater
among persons with low self-esteem than among persons with
high self-esteem, low self-esteem being taken as an
indication of strong need for acceptance" (1959:59).

Bowers (1963) studied seventeen foremen and three
hundred thirty male subordinates in a packaging material
plant to examine the effect Of self-esteem on leadership
style. Data were gathered through questionnaires and
analyzed by Spearman rank difference correlation
coefficients. The first hypothesis expected a positive
correlation between the foreman's self-esteem and his
supervisor's support. This hypothesis was accepted. The
second hypothesis expected a negative correlation between
the foreman's self-esteem and the extent to which he employs
a group approach. This hypothesis was also accepted.

Third, it was hypothesized that a positive correlation would

33

exist between the foreman's self-esteem and his
subordinate's attitude toward him. The hypothesis was
confirmed. The fourth hypothesis stated that the foreman's
perception of subordinates' attitude toward him would not
accurately reflect their expressed attitude but would
correlate positively with the supervisor's. Both parts of
the hypothesis were confirmed.

The last two hypotheses dealt with impact of attitude
on the foreman's relationship to subordinates. According to
the fifth hypothesis, the poorer the attitude which the
foreman perceives to exist toward him among his subordinates
the more he attitudinaly alienates himself from those
subordinates. The correlation confirmed the hypothesis.
Hypothesis six stated that alienation from subordinates
would be related to the foreman's supportive behavior toward
subordinates and accepting less their Opinions and advice in
problem solving and decision making. Correlations between
alienation and rated supportiveness and between alienation
and his rated acceptance of Opinions and advice supported
the final hypotheses. Bowers concluded that the foreman's
self esteem translates for him the behavior of his superior
into mandates for his own actions.

Kipnis studied self-confidence and leadership using
seventy-seven navy petty officers as subjects. "The Object
of the study was to examine the relationship between lack of
confidence in one's leadership ability and reliance upon

passive leadership techniques to COpe with supervisory

34

problems" (1962:291). The subjects responded to
questionnaires related to two variables, correction of
performance and self-confidence. Using analysis of variance
to analyze data, Kipnis found that Officers "classified as
low in Self-Confidence were significantly less willing to
hold diagnostic talks with the subordinate, and
significantly more often endorsed both referring the
subordinate to a superior and placing the subordinate on
report" (1962:294). It would seem, then, that willingness
to hold face-to-face discussion for problem solving is
negatively related to self-confidence in the leader.

Shainwald re-examined self-confidence and Opinion
leadership. "Other researchers have presented evidence
which suggests that selected personality variables,
particularly self-confidence, exhibit a positive
relationship with Opinion leadership" (l973:3).

Two hypotheses were investigated by the study:
"Self-esteem is positively related to Opinion leadership"
and "self-esteem is personally related to interpersonal
information seeking" (1973:4).

Three hundred male, married college students responded
to questionnaires. The data were used to measure Opinion on
three tOpics: men's fashion, men's grooming and automotive
care products; their self esteem and Opinion
giving/receiving. Using Spearman rank-order correlation to
analyze data, Shainwald found significant correlation

between self-esteem level and opinion leadership behavior.

35

The second hypothesis, that there is correlation between
self-esteem and interpersonal information-seeking, was
rejected at the .05 level.

Elmer (1980) found that "feelings of inadequacy" was
the leading factor given by both pastors and ex-pastors as
why they would or did leave the ministry. "It was one of
the two factors to receive a majority percentage from
pastors" (1980:92).

Summa y. The effect of self-esteem, self-confidence
and feelings Of inadequacy on leadership does exist. Though
no trait or combination of traits adequately explains
leadership existence; personality and specifically

self-concept does influence how a leader functions.

ROLE-CONCEPT AND LEADERSHIP

What place does clear understanding of the leadership
role or expectations have in leadership effectiveness?
Stogdill reviewed research findings and pointed out that
because various definitions of leader expectations exist
among followers, incompatible demands are often made. These
varying ideas of the leaders' role often produce anxiety and
uncertainty in the leader resulting in role conflict.
Stogdill listed and defined several of the most thoroughly
researched types of role stress. The first in his list is
of primary concern for this study: "Role Ambiguity (Kahn
et. al; 1964). In role ambiguity, the role is not clearly

defined or the individual cannot determine what he is

36

expected to do" (1974:315). Kahn, WOlfe, Quinn, Snook and
Rosenthal (1964) found that role conflict increases as the
ambiguity of the situation increases. Stogdill cited seven
studies which show relationship between role ambiguity and

specific problems: job dissatisfaction, Rizzo, House and

 

Lirtzman (1970), Tosi (1971); strain and tension, Wispe and

Thayer (1957), Miller (1968); frustration, Bunker (1955);

 

pressure and conflict, Moore and Smith (1953); and confusion

 

of goals, Mullen (1954).

Jacobsen, Charters and Lieberman wrote a theoretical
paper based on literature review and research they had
performed to investigate some of the determinants of
union-management relationships. NO data were given from the
study but its conclusions were used illustratively. The
thesis of the paper was that:

1

One of the approaches used (to gain insight into

the functioning of complex organizations) tended

to have relatively uniform expectations about the

behavior of persons in various positions and that

the behavior of these persons is interpreted in

terms of such expectations (1951:18).

The authors pointed out that the degree of consensus of
expectations about a role heavily influences the integration
of peOple in an organization. As would be expected, an
organization or person without clear role definition adds
potential impediments to role satisfaction. Another vital
conclusion of the study was that "there is a strong

relationship between a steward's expectations of his own

37

role and the expectations which he attributes to workers"
(1951:23).

Levinson (1959) reported that an analysis of roles in
various types of organizations suggests that if member
personality and organizational role demands are incongruent,
the member may leave by force or expulsion, remain with the
organization but in a state Of apathy, gain enough power in
the organization to change its demands, or adapt his
behavior so it conforms to demands.

Schwirian and Helfrich (1968) surveyed two hundred
nineteen executives and concluded that the greater the
extent to which the executive believes that community
activity is a legitimate aspect of his role the greater his
involvement in community activities.

These and many other reports substantiate the necessity
of Clear role perception on the part of both the leader and
follower if job satisfaction, success and interpersonal
integration are to exist. A further question of this study
was the clarity of the church leader's role.

Holmes (1972) pointed out that the concept of the
pastor's role is changing and will continue to do so.
Calvin Theological Seminary has been attempting to clarify
the school's function by clarifying the role they are
preparing students to fill. In 1976, the faculty adOpted a
statement of personal qualifications which they believe
should be developed in a person preparing for church

ministry.

38

This document was influenced by a research study
performed by "The Advisory Committee on Seminary Program"
and reported on in 1975. The report listed "the four major
tasks of ministry: preaching, teaching, pastoral care and
administering (including leadership)" (1976:S). The
questionnaire used in the study was designed to define the
functional role of the pastor.

Schuller, Brekke and Strommen conducted a literature
review and a survey study of two thousand clergy and laity
from forty-seven denominations to build a taxonomy of
ministry. Their question is stated: "Could we develop
criteria for contemporary ministry that are specific and
concrete enough to be used as a basis for assessing
readiness tO begin service in an ordained capacity?"
(l975:l). Their data resulted in seven core clusters of
activity which people expected the pastor to perform. The
seventh cluster is entitled "The Minister as Leader.” Their
current research is attempting to define the church leader's
role more precisely.

Summa y. Clear understanding of role expectations is
important to satisfaction on the part of both leader and
follower. Neither is able to evaluate leadership
effectiveness if "effective" is ambiguously defined. The
institutions primarily responsible in American church
structure for equipping leaders is attempting to clarify the

role their graduates are supposed to fill.

39

DOGMATISM AND LEADERSHIP

Dogmatism as a specific subset of authoritarianism was
clarified by Rokeach (1952). From the pOpular work of
Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswick, Levenson and Sanford (1950) on
authoritarianism, Rokeach attempted to measure
closedamindedness as a separate variable. He developed and
reported the research results of a scale that would.measure
Dogmatism (1956). The hypotheses were confirmed in
Rokeach's study leaving him with the conclusion that "the
Dogmatism scale represents a measure of general
authoritarianism while, in contrast, the F scale measures
right authoritarianism" (1956:41).

Robinson and Shavers reported that:

Although several relevant studies have been done

(Rokeach, 1960; see also the reviews by Kirscht

and Dillehay, 1967; Ehrlich and Lee, 1969; and

Vacciano, Strauss, and Hochman, 1969), it is still

not clear whether the Dogmatism Scale is

sufficiently distinct from the F Scale to settle

the debate concerning "authoritarianism of the

left" (1969:296, 297).

Hanson conducted a study with three hundred one college
students and concluded that "the data support Rokeach's
hypothesis that the Dogmatism Scale taps general
authoritarianism . . ." (1968:94).

An extended definition of dogmatism was offered by
Roberts and Hermann:

The construct of "dogmatism" which has been

theoretically and Operationally dealt with in a

series of papers by Rokeach and others, has

generally been defined as "(a) a relatively closed

cognitive organization of beliefs and disbeliefs
about reality, (b) organized around a central set

40

of beliefs about absolute authority which, in

turn, (c) provides a framework for patterns of

intolerance and qualified tolerance toward others"

(8, p. 195). Dogmatism, then, is considered to be

a form of general authoritarianism, a cognitive

state which transcends the boundaries of racial,

religious, or political intolerance or prejudice

(1958:67).

Of particular interest to the subject of leadership is
Rokeach's (1960) prOposition that the cognitive system of
closed-minded (dogmatic) persons is highly resistant to
Change. Ehrlich and Lee conducted a review of literature
and reported their findings.

The basic principle that closed-minded persons are

less able than Opendminded persons to learn new

beliefs and to change old beliefs is verified.

However, five variables are found to intervene

between belief acquisition or change and Open- and

closed-mindedness: the authority source Of the

new beliefs, the syndrome relevance of their mode

of communication, the belief congruence and

novelty of the new beliefs, and their centrality

to the individual (1969:249).

If one concludes, then, that a person high in dogmatism
has more difficulty dealing with new ideas, what effect
would dogmatism have on problem solving? Vacchiano, Strauss
and Hochman (1969) conducted a literature review on
Rokeach's concept of dogmatism and organized their findings
under ten headings, one of which is ”Problem Solving and
Rigidity." Rokeach (1960) used problem solving behavior to
demonstrate the dogmatic individual's inability to cope with
new conceptual systems and to organize a new set of beliefs.
The conclusion of this section of the review was that
”Rokeach's hypotheses that HD's (High Dogmatics) are less

able to organize new beliefs and integrate them into their

41

existing belief system in problem solving is supported by
these findings" (1969:268).

A number of researchers have supported Rokeach's (1960)
hypotheses that dogmatic individuals will avoid belief
discrepant information and will find it threatening. White
and Alter (1965), Pyron (1966) and Tosi, Fagan and Frumkin
(1968) supported the threat and avoidance concept. Foulkes
and Foulkes (1965) and Kleck and Wheaton (1967) found that
high dogmatics had greater recall and greater capacity to
use information that was consistent with their beliefs than
that which was discrepant.

Zagona and Zurcher conducted a study "to determine the
extent to which dogmatic and nondogmatic persons will
demonstrate their characteristics in group situations or to
determine the manner in which group processes will reflect
the attributes of the membership of the groups involved"
(1964:265). In the introduction, they summarized the
dogmatic individual as one who (a) accentuates the
differences between his belief and disbelief systems, (b)
denies evidence that is contrary to his belief system, (c)
allows contradictions to exist within his own disbelief
systems and (d) disregards as irrelevant similarities
between his belief and disbelief systems.

Zagona and Zurcher tested six hypotheses grouped under

two headings:

42

In the Classroom

The High-Dogmatic group is leader-oriented
and its members prefer lectures to
discussion. If held, novel points of view
are rarely expressed and spontaneity is
minimal.

The High-Dogmatic group shows a preference
for clearly structured topics and
instructional situations. Its members are
typically uncreative and they are routine and
conventional. They are disturbed by behavior
(on the part of the instructor) that does not
conform to their expectations Of the role
behavior of an authority figure.

Ingroup Interaction Experiments Dealing
with Controversial Material

There is a more active concern
(Preoccupation, perhaps) on the part of High
Dogmatics with the problem of leader
selection. Rokeach's theory suggests that
the dogmatic individual, whether or not he
identifies with the leader or the follower,
is at any rate leader-follower, oriented.

As in the classroom situation, the need for
structure overshadows the need for expression
of spontaneity.

When group consensus is reached, challenges
by authority figures produce reactions that
are characteristic of the High- and the
Low-Dogmatic groups: the High-Dogmatic group
becomes insecure, wavers in its conviction,
and evidences signs of reduction in group
cohesion. On the other hand, the
Low-Dogmatic group tends to defend its
consensus and, if anything, becomes more
unified by a Challenge from the authority
figure.

Group consensus by the Low-Dogmatic group is
reached with.more difficulty: i.e., after
more time is spent in discussion, than is the
case in the High-Dogmatic group; however,
when the two groups are brought together to
present and to defend their decisions and to
arrive at a general consensus, the
Low-Dogmatic group-decision prevails
(1964:257, 258).

43

The method for testing hypotheses was to select thirty
high and thirty low dogmatics and place them in separate
undergraduate psychology classes at the University of
Arizona where they were enrolled as students. The authors,
as course instructors, observed the two classes to determine
any systematic differences. They were watching for level of
interaction, facility in determining group consensus on
controversial issues, develOpment of leadership and
responses to challenges by authority figures.

Groups were assigned to separate rooms, given a
controversial issue which they had to resolve in twenty
minutes and report their conclusion to the
instructor/experimenter. Upon hearing the report the
researcher disagreed with and ridiculed the group's
conclusion. The other experimenter and a team Of observers
Observed the transaction. In a second study the groups
presented their conclusions to one another and attempted to
reach a grand consensus. After both groups presented their
conclusions they were, again, challenged by the
experimenter. As before, the procedure was being observed.

The conclusions are informative. "Every hypothesis
suggested by the theory of dogmatism and tested in this

investigation has been confirmed" (1962:260).

LEADERSHIP TRAINING
Zaleznik (1977) concluded that there are no known ways

to train great leaders. Gibb (1964), Stogdill (1974),

44

Fiedler (1973), Perrow (1979) have, in varying degrees of
finality, stated the same conclusion. Perhaps the most
consistent aSpect of leadership training approaches has been
the inconsistency of the results.

Both Stogdill (1974) and Gibb (1964) offered extensive
literature reviews on the subject of leadership training.
Various approaches have been taken to train leaders and
Stogdill lists lectures with textbooks, group discussion,
case studies, films, recordings, role playing, psychodrama,
sociodrama, business games, in—basket problems and group
exercises as some of the common methods. He stated that the
most widely used method is the group—dynamics laboratory, or
sensitivity training group. Based on research by Lippit and
White (1943) and Levin (1939), the group dynamic approach is
aimed at developing democratic leadership.

It must be concluded that the research on

leadership training is generally inadequate in

both design and execution. It has failed to

address itself to the most crucial problems of

leadership--consequences Of training for

acquisition and retention of the role, maintenance

of leadership under concerted challenge of

legitimacy of the role, and effects of leadership

on group performance and member satisfaction.

Training that ignores these issues can hardly be

called training in leadership (1974:199).

Barnard (1946) organized leadership training approaches
into three schools: decision making, institutional and one
which he called "main stream" which had two branches, one of

which dealt with.morale, productivity and leadership, and

the other with group structure. Barnard's conclusion

45

concerning leadership training was that it does not work
consistently enough to name g;method as effective.

Fiedler wrote an article entitled, "The Trouble with
Leadership Training Is It Doesn't Train Leaders" (1974). In
the article, Fiedler discussed his contingency model of
leadership which argues for placing leaders where they fit
best and training them there. It appears that leadership is
too complex to divorce from a specific situation. To train
someone to "lead" is inadequate. There is overwhelming
evidence to argue against its effectiveness. A prior series
of questions need to be addressed: "Who leading whom, to do
what, under what circumstances?" Leadership training is
best accomplished through exposure of the individual being
trained to the situation. What appears ineffective are
attempts at training leadership apart from the setting or at
least a clear reference to the setting where leadership is
to occur.

On-the-scene leadership training takes three similar
but distinct forms: mentor relationship, internship and
praxis. Levinson called the mentor a transitional figure
who fosters development from "child-in-relation-to-parental-
adults to adult-in-peer-relation-to-adults" (1978:75).
Zaleznik (1977) reported that while apparently destined for
a mediocre career, peOple who form one-to-one relationships
are able to accelerate and intensify their development.
Zaleznik listed the following strengths of the mentor

relationship in leadership development: (1) it can be

46

individually tailored; (2) the acceptance by the mentor of
the training task suggests that the mentee is being trained
by someone who wants to do so; (3) the step-by-step
observation involved allows for development of complex
skills of leadership. Lunding (1978) listed some dangers:
(1) the fear of being eclipsed.may'move the mentor to act
destructively at strategic moments; (2) the mixture Of love,
loyalty and debt contribute to the high number of mentor
relationships that end with strong conflict; and (3) the
mentor may try to remake the mentee in his own image--even
to the point of resenting attempts on the part of the
protege to do things his own way. Perhaps the greatest
danger is the learning of function without theory. The
young man may learn a skill by Observing given situations.
Without understanding why_the mentor acted as he did, the
mentee could blunder by acting inappropriately in a
different situation.

Internships appear to be the most common means of skill
development. While the mentor relationship is seen as an
"after" schooling phenomenon, the internship is an in-school
or during school phenomenon. De Puydt (1975) called an
internship a planned series of learning activities that a
student engages in outside the classroom that contribute to
total education development. Three factors characterize the
internship approach. First, the student is being prepared
(or has been prepared) through academic course work to

engage in meaningful work experience. Second, the

47

internship project provides a laboratory setting for
application of knowledge resulting in accelerated learning
and.more lasting competence. Third, because each individual
is unique, the medium of instruction can be tailored to the
student's learning mode.

A third approach to learning with.important
implications for leadership development is called praxis.
The forum or activities of either the mentor or internship
approaches may be used for a praxis experience in leadership
development. What makes praxis unique, however, is emphasis
on unity of theory and practice. O'Gorman (1979) explained
the philosophical and functional dimensions of praxis. She
emphasized that praxis is reflective awareness of action.
Reflection, theory and philosophical activity can alter
one's view of a situation without ever doing anything to
alter--or improve--the situation. Activity, even that which
is immediately "helpful" if not related to a larger view of
things, may ultimately prove diasterous. Activity never
explains itself. It needs a theory.

Freire (1973) emphasized the importance of pedagogy of
praxis. He stated that reflection on action must beget
reflection itself as well, so that one is conscious of his
consciousness. The demands of a complex and dynamic
leadership situation will leave the unreflective person
behind. Dewey (1938) suggested four decades ago that the
use of intelligence, of reflective thought should be

habitual. Both mentor and internship approaches to

48

leadership development should include emphasis on praxis so
learning becomes habitual.

Mentor relationships and internships, with praxis as
both a learning goal and a medium of instruction, are used
in leadership education. A study of literature reveals how
little praxis is emphasized and may help explain why so
little leadership training trains leaders.

Church Leadership Develgpment. Church leadership

 

develOpment has traditionally taken place in the seminary
but under a different name. Emphasis has been on
ministerial training and on gifts associated with ministry
activities. The subject of "leadership" has frequently been
equated with teacher development (Gangel 1970) or management
(Engstrom 1976; Dayton and Engstrom 1979) to the point of
losing a clear distinctive. A common emphasis found among
writers on church leadership is that of organizational
functions and role expectations (Bentz 1968). Church
renewal emphasis, spurred by Trueblood (1960), Richards
(1970), Snyder (1975) and Getz (1974) placed greater
emphasis on interpersonal relationships. The call away from
function for function's sake and an emphasis on development
of persons encouraged some new direction in church
leadership thought. PeOple in churches wanted to
participate more directly. They wanted to shape the
direction and emphasis of the church. Leadership began to
require greater interpersonal skills. Mead stated that the

person of the pastor is a key tool of the trade. "The

49

pastor's ability to be deeply and personally involved with
the people in the parish or community directly affects the
quality of what happens to them in pastoral care" (l973:3).
Keating (1978) strongly emphasized personal relationships
throughout his book on church leadership.

A trend away from the seminary approach is emerging in
reference to church leadership development. The seminary
has been the accepted approach to leadership training in
EurOpe and North America and, consequently through missions
to much of the Third WOrld Church. Reaction to the expense
and, Often, ineffectiveness of formal education structures
encouraged some to re-think church leadership development.
Kinsler (n.d.) and Winter (1969) report on theological
education by extension, one of the more popular alternatives
to seminary. The theory behind the program is similar to
Freire's praxis emphasis. The learner studies prepared
materials in a paced program while involved in life
processes of work, community, family and church. He also
meets weekly with an instructor who participates with him in
reflective discussion to aid in integrating learned
materials with functional realities.

A bit further from the traditional seminary approach is
the one suggested by Hahn (1977). She places church
leadership development exclusively in the church. The
congregation assists in the on-the-job, in-the-problem
process of training. Hahn is attempting to expose the

potential leader to the realities of congregational life.

50

Summa y. Whether discussing church leadership or
leadership development in general, emphasis is placed on
awareness of the situation where leadership will occur.
Increased emphasis on human relations in the church is
changing the complexion of church leadership and,

consequently, church leadership training.

OVERALL SUMMARY

A reason for so many different definitions of
leadership is failure to specify the context in which
leadership is to function. By combining four strands of
leadership ideology: the contingency model, interaction
theory, focused versus distributed leadership and leader as
completer a theoretical framework is established for
thinking about leadership in a given situation. The church
as a leadership situation was examined. The nature of the
church as an organism plus the unique reality that Christ is
the Head Of the Church and all its members are brothers
requires a particular kind of leadership. Christ (Matthew
23) called for a servant approach to leading in the church.

Three constructs come into focus when one considers
servant leadership: the leader's concept of the role, level
of dogmatism and feelings of inadequacy. These three
constructs influence one's ability to lead rather
dramatically.

Leadership training has been a largely unsuccessful

endeavor. Fiedler (1974) suggested that leaders need to be

51

. .

selected for a given role and trained in-situ. Two primary
approaches to on-the-job training for leaders has been
internship and mentor relationship. Freire (1973) suggested
praxis as a basis for any type of in-service education
structure. For either the intern or mentee praxis appears
essential. Leadership training for formal roles in the

church needs to include exposure, while a student, to the

leadership situation.

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH DESIGN AND PROCEDURE

The design for the study was descriptive. Twenty-five
entering students were randomly selected. They were tested
in the fall and spring of their first year in seminary and
those data analyzed to determine the effect of that

treatment on the variables.

RESEARCH DESIGN
The research design was a one-group pretest-posttest
design. The intervening variable was one year Of seminary

training.

OVERVIEW

The study investigated relationships between, and
changes in description of leader behavior, concept of
ministry, dogmatism level and feelings of inadequacy over
eight months, September l979-April 1980.* Both time and
variables are discussed under separate headings below. A

graphic demonstration of relationships is shown in Table l.

 

*The period involved in the study is the first year of
a ten year longitudinal study. Subjects will be tested each
year during their seminary training and during the first six
years after its completion. The purpose of the study is to
measure degree, and direction of change while in seminary
and while functioning in the minitry.

52

 

53

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 1 TIME AND VARIABLE MATRIX
Time
Variables Aug. Sept. Oct.-Feb. March April
ILBDQ X X
Webb IRAI X X
Rokeach Dogmatism x X
Janis-Field Feeling
of Inadequacy X x

Interview X x x X
Treatment T -----------------------------------

X=Testing/Observation

T=Treatment

The study was designed to describe change in variables,
correlation between variables and effect of change in the
description of leader behavior on change in concept of

ministry, level of dogmatism and feelings of inadequacy.

SUBJECTS

Twenty-three men (one failed to complete the IRAI for
test 2 and no data were available for him; one dropped from
school in October 1979 making it too late to start another
subject in the study) were randomly selected from the
entering class of two hundred fifty students. Their ages
ranged from twenty-three to thirty-four years. Twenty-two
had undergraduate degrees and two completed masters. Ten
have no religious training in their course work, eight had

some courses in undergraduate study and six majored in

54

religious studies. Their G.P.A. ranged from 2.5 - 4.0
(2=2.5, 6=3.0, 15=3.5, 1=4.0). Their attitude toward formal
schooling ranged from "discouraging and uncomfortable" to
"very positive" (twenty stated "moderately to very
positive," two "enjoyable at times" and one "discouraging
and uncomfortable"). Each had graduated from a different
college (one Bible College, three Christian Colleges, one
military academy and eighteen various universities). Their
church background was varied (fourteen from Bible churches,
four from Baptist, two from "other", and one each from
Presbyterian, Congregational and Roman Catholic). Degree of
involvement in church as a child was also varied (five not
at all, three occasionally, seven participated regularly and
eight were very active and held leadership positions).
Twelve felt their church training was adequate, six felt it
was outstanding, one was neutral and four felt it was
inadequate. Most grew up in "theologically conservative"
churches (twenty-one), one labelled his as "middle-of-the-
road" and three were from liberal. Their current church
affiliation was predominantly Independent Bible (twenty)
with one each in Methodist, Presbyterian and Congregational.
The most preferred profession was teaching (with fifteen
stating much interest), second was pastor (eleven), then
missions (nine), church staff (eight), community action
(eight) and chaplain (one). Nineteen of the subjects were

married.

55

TESTING/OBSERVATION PROCEDURE

Participants were selected in August and a letter of
introduction tO the study, including information for the
initial meeting, was sent through campus mail. At the
initial meeting of all participants held the first week of
class, an overview of the study was given and packets
containing the tests were distributed.

The subjects were asked to complete the tests at home
and return them to the researcher's Office as soon as they
were completed. They were asked not to discuss the
instruments with anyone, especially one another. As the
tests came back, they were scored so the raw data were ready
before the interview was conducted. In order to avoid
contamination of the subjects, little interpretation of data
was done in the interview. The interviewer focused.mainly
on questions of clarification and expansion of test results.
Each interview lasted between thirty and forty-five minutes.

Educational Experience. The educational experience Of

 

the students consisted of fifteen hours of class work over a
four day Class week (Tuesday-Friday) with a thirty minute
chapel each class day. Most students regularly attend a
church service on Sunday and many are involved in some
capacity of ministry on a volunteer basis. The majority of
the students were employed part-time (ten to twenty hours a
week). The first year consists of a prescribed course load
so students were involved in an almost identical study

prOgram. The courses follow: Elements of Greek (three

56

hours), Bible Study Methods (three hours), Theology (three
hours), Bibleology (three hours), Church History (three
hours), Educational Program of the Church (two hours) and
Introduction to WOrld Missions (two hours).

The study was conducted at Dallas Theological
seminary.* The purpose of the seminary is to prepare mature
Christian leaders for various ministries throughout the
world. This purpose is pursued through the teaching of
Biblical literature, theological study, development of
spiritual gifts and the Spiritual life.

The school is accredited and affiliated with the
Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. It is
denominationally unrelated and its faculty represent various
denominational or independent traditions. Aimission to the
student body of the seminary requires that a person be born
again and in agreement with the doctrinal statement of the
seminary. The courses of study are intended for those who
have completed (with above average academic records) a
course leading to the A.B. degree or its equivalent. The
Seminary Catalogue places emphasis on the subject of
"student life." The emphasis is on the promotion of the
student's spiritual life, citing the use of Bible teaching
in the classroom, daily Chapel services, a day of prayer

held each semester, advisee meetings, the availability of

 

*A detailed description of Dallas Theological Seminary
is given in Appendix B: "Description of Dallas Theological
Seminary."

57

counseling and standards of conduct. The availability and
encouragement to participate in various kinds Of ministries
available in the

Dallas/Fort Worth area is also seen as a crucial
contribution to student life.

The Master of Theologngrogram. All the subjects in
the study were enrolled in the Master of Theology Program.
This four year course Of study is designed to prepare men
for a ministry of Bible exposition as pastors, teachers,
missionaries and leaders in other areas of ministry
requiring ability in expounding the Scriptures. The program
required a minimum of ninety semester hours, a thesis,
meeting of field education requirements and a commitment to

the purpose of the seminary.

INSTRUMENTATION

Four instruments were used to measure variables and an
interview helped clarify ambiguities. The instruments and
interview procedure are described:

Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire—Ideal. The

 

ILBDQ measures initiating structure and consideration as two
fundamental dimensions of leader behavior; the same as the
LBDQ. The Ideal (ILBDQ) is designed to indicate what a
leader ought to be rather than what he is. The form
consists of forty short, descriptive statements of ways in
which leaders may behave. Respondents check one of five

answers indicating frequency with which a leader should act.

58

Halpin (1947) stated that: "For the Consideration Key, the
estimate of reliability is .85, which, when corrected by the
Spearman-Brown formula is raised to .92. Correspondingly,
the estimated reliability of the Initiating Structure is
.71, which is raised to .83 by the Spearman-Brown
correction" (1955:20).

The Rokeach Dogmatism Scale. This instrument is

 

designed to measure individual differences in Openness or
closedness of belief systems. It was chosen over the F
scale used to measure authoritarianism because according to
Plant (1960) and Robinson and Shavers (1973), the Dogmatism
Scale measures general authoritarianism as Opposed to the
political Liberalism-Conservatism orientation of the F.
lAlso, the D scale is viewed as concerning the way an
individual adheres to a belief and 22E the specific content
of the belief. The shortened form (Troldahl and Powell,
1955) was used. It contains forty items with a six point
Likert type scale for response. Robinson and Shavers
reported a corrected split-half reliability coefficient of
.84 for the test. NO information on validity other than
correlations with the total dogmatism scale scores is given.
The Revised Janis-Field Feelings of Inadquacnycale.
This instrument is designed to measure inadequacy feelings
using twenty-five items with a five point Likert scale
response. Split half reliability of .72 and .88 were
reported by Egly in two studies. A correlation of .54 was

found between between positive and negative halves Of the

59

instrument (Robinson and Shavers, 1973). Validity is
supported by Hamilton (1971) who found a correlation of .60
between the instrument and self rating of esteem, and .24
with peer-esteem. Greenbaum (1966) found a correlation of
.35 between Janis-Field Scale and a measure of social
desirability.

Webb Inventory of Religious Activities and Interests.

 

The Webb Inventory (IRAI) contains eight-two questions
related to biographical data and two hundred forty to the
actual inventory. They are designed with a Likert type
response. Webb gave a general description of the inventory:

The Inventory of Religious Activities and
Interests (IRAI) is a paper-and-pencil, self
report inventory designed to measure interest in
activities performed by persons employed in a
variety of church—related occupations. The items
describe tasks which persons in church related
occupations perform. Respondents indicate their
degree of interest in performing each activity.
The inventory is concerned with identifying and
measuring 'what the person likes, pays attention
to, and does with satisfaction and enjoyment'
(Roe, 1956), which in a psychological sense,
constitutes a basic definition of interest. In
this sense the instrument is intended to be
primarily descriptive and only secondarily
predictive. In usage it is descriptive to the
extent that the subject's responses indicate his
liking for the activities as he understands them
at the time of responding to the items (l968:5).

The IRAI contains eleven scales, ten factors and a
Check scale. The content of each scale is briefly
described:

1. Counselor. Activities which involve bringing

 

comfort and encouragement to lonely, troubled and sick
persons and working with people to help them resolve

problems primarily of a personal or family nature.

60

2. Administrator. Tasks related to planning,

 

promoting and executing various church-related programs.

3. Teacher. Items related to the administration of
and teaching in the religious education program of a Church.
4. Scholar. Activities involving teaching at the
theological school or college level, and engaging in

scholarly research or writing.

5. Evangelist. Activities related to evangelism and

 

evangelistic work.

6. Spiritual Guide. Activities directed toward

 

assisting people to develOp a deeper and more mature faith.

7. Preacher. Tasks which involve developing speaking

 

skills, preparing and delivering sermons and.making talks
and addresses before various groups.

8. Reformer. Activities that involve speaking out
against evil and social injustice and participating in
programs of community betterment.

9. Priest. Activities concerned with conducting
programs or periods of worship and performing sacred rites

and rituals.

10. Musician. Activities concerned with conducting a

 

music program for a church.

11. Check scale. A variety Of activities that are
likely to be unpleasant to perform or that are fairly
routine clerical tasks. The score on this scale is intended
for use in estimating whether the subject's scores on the

remaining scales are invalid because he responded to the

61

items incorrectly or in a careless manner (webb 1970:3). The
ten role scales are believed to encompass the salient
expectations of a variety of Church-related occupational
roles as they are performed within the tradition Of
Protestantism.

Since the study was designed to analyze concept Of
ministry as it related specifically to person orientation
and Eg§k_orientation, only those scales from the IRAI which
most Clearly reflect those interests were used.* The scales
used to reflect a person orientation were: Counselor,
Spiritual Guide and Reformer. The scales used to reflect a
Eggk (professional) orientation were: Administrator,
Scholar and Preacher. It was assumed that the other four
scales, as defined by Webb, were either not specific enough
tO clearly fit in one category and not the other (Teacher,
Evangelist), not seen as part of the leadership concept of
the church tradition represented by the subjects (Priest) or
not perceived by the subjects as related to leadership
(Music). Since the categories will be analyzed primarily in
regard to change within the given category and not in
relation to each other, this division will not seriously
affect the results of the study. If a specific scale were
available to measure the categories under question it would
have been used. Use Of the IRAI, however, was felt to be

more accurate than constructing an instrument for the study.

 

‘See note under "Validity Concerns," p. 58.

62

Although the scale may be used for counseling and
guidance of those contemplating church related occupations,
or by church boards for screening applicants, the primary
use of the IRAI is as a research tool. webb (1968) stated
that: " . . . it could be used for the study of the effects
of seminary or other training programs on role perception
and student interest." He then describes a study similar to
this one as an illustration.

Webb reported on the reliability and validity of the
test: " . . . the reliability coefficient for the ten role
scales vary within the relatively narrow range of .82 to
.87. Reliability for the check scale is .81" (webb
1970:25). Concerning homogeneity Webb stated: "For the
role scales the values range from .87 to .92. For the total
scales the homogeniety estimates for the role scales range
from .93 to .96. For the check scale the estimate equals
.88" (1968:34). Due to a complex system of measuring
validity concerns, Webb gave these data in a series of
charts where stated preference is listed across the top Of a
matrix and the choices of the respondent rank—ordered
beneath each category. This was done because various
occupational tendencies relate to one another in varying
degrees. He stated:

If interest plays a part in a student's

occupational choice, and if the scales are valid,

it can be expected that for any given occupational

category, scores of students planning to enter an

occupation in that category will be highest on the

role sca1e(s) involving the activities which are

perceived to encompass the major activities of

persons involved in occupations falling in the
category (1968:50).

63

An examination of the appropriate tables (18-21, pp. 36-39)
shows this to be consistently true. Webb stated further
that: " . . . the relative ranking of median scores on the
other scales reflects differentiated interests in respect to
activities for carrying out this predominant interest or
intent." Examination of the same tables further support

this view.

VALIDITY CONCERNS

The sample was selected randomly by typing the name of
each entering student on a slip of paper, placing the slips
in a box and drawing twenty-five slips out of the box.
Three of the original twenty-five refused to participate so
three more names were drawn. Two of those three
participated. The final name was then drawn and the student
agreed to participate. The fact that four of the
twenty-nine contacted chose not to participate may have
added a factor of "voluntarism" to the sample.

The researcher found standardized tests to measure the

four variables concerned.* The subjects received the tests

 

i‘Thie Webb Inventory of Religious Activities and
Interests was not designed specifically to separate subjects
into person or task orientation to ministry so the scales
felt by the researcher to best represent these inclinations
were selected. A .8 inquiry was conducted with ten
professors at the Dallas Theological Seminary who had served
as pastors to test the validity of the prOposed division of
scales. Seven of the ten agreed with the distinction
between scales. Two felt all the scales represented an
interest in people because that is what the ministry
involves. One felt the definitions of variables given by
Webb were not valid.

64

during the first week of class. They had been through three
days of orientation and, therefore, had some exposure to the
seminary environment. Since the orientation schedule was so
full, the dean of students asked that the tests not be given
during that time. The researcher would have preferred
initially testing prior to any group experience
contamination but this was not possible.

Test-retest design is subject to reactive effect.
Because testings were separated by a nine month interval, it
is assumed this effect is minimal. Given the rigorous
academic schedule of the subjects, it is doubtful that the
reactive effect was a major concern.

The Hawthorne effect was another concern of the
researcher and although it exists as a possible rival
hypothesis, the lack of attention between the first and
second testing/interview period was designed as a part of
the study. The researcher had no contact with the subjects
other than normal academic exposure. A minimum.of feedback
and explanation was given to subjects to avoid any sense of
what a "good" or "bad" score was.

The independent variables were uncontrolled by the
researcher and were quite varied among subjects. Some
worked, some were married, some were heavily involved in
ministry. They all took the same courses, though not all
with the same professors.

The descriptive nature of the study demanded a

realistic setting. Therefore the study involved a

65

two-points-in-time assessment of the subjects. The

conditions were not experimental.

RESEARCH DESIGN OVER VARIABLES

Four dependent variables were measured to determine
existence, direction and degree of change. Three of the
variables, dogmatism level, feelings of inadequacy and
concept Of ministry were then correlated with the fourth
variable, description of idealized leader behavior, to
examine degree of relationship between them. The

independent variable was involvement in seminary curriculum.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Two types of statistical analysis were used to analyze
data. The t test was used to analyze difference scores and
product-moment correlation to analyze correlational data.

Since part of the study attempted to determine if there
was a difference in scores on the same subjects, t test for
related sample test was used. The subjects were randomly
selected to control robustness in relation to nonmal
distribution. The unit of analysis was the group mean
rather than individual scores because subject treatment was
related. Although some aspects of treatment were
individual, the majority of factors most directly related to
variables under questions were related.

Correlations were examined using the Pearson
product-moment correlation coefficient because data were

obtained from an interval scale.

66

RESEARCH HYPOTHESES

The hypotheses fall into four categories: those

dealing with change in variables, those dealing with

correlations between variables, those related to effect of

change in one variable on others and those dealing with

effect of change on correlations.

Hypotheses dealing with change in variables (research

questions 1-4, Chapter 1).

1.

2.

Hypotheses dealing with correlations between ILBDQ and

There will be a decrease in initiation score
on the ILBDQ between test 1 and test 2.

There will be an increase in consideration
score on the ILBDQ between test 1 and test 2.

There will be an increase in functional
orientation to ministry as measured by:

a. Administrator
b. Scholar
c. Preacher

scales on the IRAI between test 1 and test 2.

There will be a decrease in person
orientation to the ministry as measured by:

a. Counselor
b. Spiritual Guide
c. Reformer

scales on the IRAI between test 1 and test 2.

There will be an increase in the Rokeach
Dogmatism scores between test 1 and test 2.

There will be an increase in the Janis-Field
Feelings of Inadequacy scores between test 1
and test 2.

concept of ministry, dogmatism and inadequacy scales

(Research Questions 5-7, Chapter 1).

67

A positive correlation will exist between:
7. Initiation (on the ILBDQ) and:

a. Administrator

b. Scholar

c. Preacher

on the IRAI.
8. Consideration (on the ILBDQ) and:

a. Counselor

b. Spiritual Guide

c. Reformer

on the IRAI.

9. Initiation (on the ILBDQ) and Dogmatism
level.

10. Initiation (on the ILBDQ) and Feelings of
Inadequacy.

A negative correlation will exist between:
11. Consideration (on the ILBDQ) and Dogmatism.

12. Consideration (on the ILBDQ) and Feelings of
Inadequacy.

Hypotheses dealing with change in ILBDQ scores and
change in concept of ministry, dogmatism and feelings of
inadequacy (Research Questions 8-10, Chapter 1).

13. (a) If there is increase on Initiation score
on ILBDQ from test 1 to test 2, there
will be increase in:

(1) Administrator
(2) Scholar
(3) Preacher

on the IRAI.

13. (b) If there is decrease on Initation score
on the ILBDQ from test 1 to test 2,
there will be decrease on:

(1) Administrator
(2) Scholar
(3) Preacher

on the IRAI.

68

14. (a) If there is increase in Consideration
score on the ILBDQ from test 1 to test
2, there will be increase on:

(1) Counselor
(2) Spiritual Guide
(3) Refonmer

on the IRAI.

14. (b) If there is decrease in Consideration
score on the ILBDQ from test 1 to test
2, there will be decrease on:

(1) Counselor
(2) Spiritual Guide
(3) Reformer

on the IRAI.

15. (a) If there is increase on Initiation score
on the ILBDQ from test 1 to test 2,
there will be increase in:

(l) Dogmatism
(2) Feelings Of Inadequacy.

15. (b) If there is decrease in Initation score
on the ILBDQ from test 1 to test 2,
there will be decrease in:

(1) Dogmatism
(2) Feelings of Inadequacy.

16. (a) If there is increase in Consideration on
the ILBDQ from test 1 to test 2, there
will be decrease in:

(l) Dogmatism
(2) Feelings Of Inadequacy.

16. (b) If there is decrease in Consideration on

the ILBDQ from test 1 to test 2, there
will be increase in:

(1) Dogmatism
(2) Feelings of Inadequacy.

Hypotheses dealing with effect Of score change on
correlations between scores (Research Question 11, Chapter

1).

69

17. Where hypotheses 13-15 are accepted, the
correlations between the variables in those
hypotheses will be higher in test 2 than in
test 1.

18. If hypothesis 16 is accepted, the correlation

between variables involved will be lower in
test 2 than in test 1.

SUMMARY

In order to answer questions Of effect Of seminary
training on description Of ideal church leadership, concept
of ministry, level of dogmatism and feelings of inadequacy,
twenty-five entering students were selected and tested on
the variables. They were re-tested in April of that year and
results analyzed with t tests to determine difference in
means and with Pearson product-moment correlation to test

relationship between variables.

IV

FINDINGS

The study was done in an attempt to describe what
happens to students at Dallas Theological Seminary in
relation to church leadership. The hypotheses are organized
in four categories for analysis: hypotheses dealing with
change in variables, those dealing with correlation between
variables, those examining the relationships between changes
in variables and those dealing with effect of variable

change on correlations between those variables.

SUMMARY DATA
Before examining hypotheses, the means and standard

deviations from tests are presented in summary fashion on

Table 2.

CHANGES IN VARIABLES

The first question of the study concerns the effect of
one year of seminary education on students' definitions of
leadership and selected variables believed to influence
leadership behaviors. Therefore, the variables were

measured early and late in one academic year.

Hypothesis 1. There will be a decrease in initiation
score on the ILBDQ between test 1 and test 2. The score
decreased from test 1 (i=42.66) to test 2 (X=39.58). The

difference is significant (t=3.22, alpha at .05=1.71).

70

71

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF TEST DATA
TESTING 1 TESTING 2
VARIABLE i S.D. i S.D.
N=23

ILBDQ - INITIATION 42.66 3.53 39.58 6.04
ILBDQ - CONSIDERATION 47.33 5.00 50 4.24
IRAI - ADMINISTRATION 49.9 13.9 52.39 14.8
IRAI — SCHOLAR 65.82 16.78 65.34 18.58
IRAI - PREACHER 69.08 16.27 70.43 17.46
IRAI - COUNSELOR 63 15.2 60.3 20.37
IRAI - SPIRITUAL

GUIDE 81.60 10.73 80.43 12.6
IRAI - REFORMER 46.69 12.35 46.08 13.38
DOGMATISM 166.7 23.66 170.87 23.21
EELINGS OF
NADEQUACY 13.25 6.98 12.5 7.13

 

 

 

 

ILBDQ Measures - Description of Idealized Leader Behavior
IRAI Measures - Concept of Ministry

 

72

Hypothesis 2. There will be an increase in

 

consideration score on the ILBDQ between test 1 and test 2.
There was significant difference in scores on test 1
(X=47.33) and test 2 (X=50). The t score was -2.40 while

significance at .05 was -l.7l.

Hypothesis 3. There will be increase in a functional

 

orientation to ministry between test 1 and test 2 as
measured by the Administrator, Scholar and Preacher scales
of the IRAI. There was an increase in the Administrator

scale (from i1=49.9 to i =52.39) but the t of -1.47 did not

2
reach the critical value of -1.71. Therefore the null
hypothesis was not rejected. A slight decrease on the
Scholar scale (X1=65.82, X2=65.34) produced a t of .204 and
was, therefore, not significant.\ The Preacher scale

increased between test 1 (X=69.08) and test 2 (X=70.43) a

significant amount (t=-2.7l).

Hypothesis 4. There will be a decrease in person

 

orientation to the ministry as measured by the Counselor,
Spiritual Guide and Reformer scales on the IRAI. There was
a decrease on the Counselor score (X1=63 to x2=60.3) between
tests but the t of .592 failed to reach significance. On
the Spiritual Guide scale, a decrease from 81.6 to 80.43
produced a t Of .565 which failed to reach significance so
the null hypothesis was accepted. A slight decrease from
46.69 to 46.08 failed to reach significance with a t of

.339. There was no change in Reformer score.

73

Hypothesis 5. There will be an increase in the Rokeach
Dogmatism scale between test 1 and test 2. The increase
from x1=166.7 to x2
failed to reach the significance level of -1.71. There was

=l70.87 produced a t of -l.24 which
not a significant increase in dogmatism.

Hypothesis 6. There will be an increase in the
Janis—Field Feelings of Inadequacy scores between test 1 and
test 2. There was actually a decrease on this score
(£143.25 to 322=12.5) the t of .715 was not significant.

Hypotheses 1-6 are summarized on Table 3.

CORRELATIONS BETWEEN VARIABLES

The second question of the study examined the nature
and strength of correlations between variables. An N of 23
with 2 degrees of freedom at .05 produces a significance
level of 1.717. The correlation questions are examined

under hypotheses 7-12.

Hypothesis 7. A positive correlation will exist

 

between Initiation score on the ILBDQ and Administrator,
Scholar and Preacher scales on the IRAI. The significance
level of 1.717 was reached for Administrator and Scholar but
not for Preacher on test 1. On test 2, the alpha for .05
was reached on all three scales. The correlations between
Initiation and Administrator were .424 (t=2.15) for test 1

and .638 for test 2 (t=3.80). For Scholar, r Of .598

74

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF t TEST FOR.MEANS N=23
HYPOTHESISI' VARIABLE i1 i2 t SIGNIFICANCE
Ho: LEVEL at .05
1. x1 x2 INITIATION 42.66 39.58 3.22 1.717
2. x1 x2 CONSIDERATION 47.33 50 -2.40 -1.717
3. x1 x2 ADMINISTRATOR 49.9 52.39 -1.47 -1.717
x1 x2 SCHOLAR 65.82 65.34 .204 -1.717
x1 x2 PREACHER 69.08 70.43 -2.71 -1.717
4. x1 x2 COUNSELOR 63 60.3 - .037 1.717
x1 x2 SPIRITUAL 81.60 80.43 .565 1.717
GUIDE
x1 x2 REFORMER 46.69 46.08 .339 1.717
5. x1 x2 DOGMATISM 166.7 170.87 -1.24 -1.717
6. x1 x2 FEELINGS OF 13.25 12.5 .715 -1.717
INADEQUACY
Note: HO: 1, 2 measured by ILBDQ; H : 3, 4 by IRAI

O

 

75

produced a t of 3.41 for test 1 while an r of .457 (t=2.36)
was reached on test 2. The correlation between Initiation
and Preacher started at a level below significance (r=.338,
t=1.65) on test 1 but an r of .514 produced a t of 2.75 on

test 2.

Hypothesis 8. There will be positive correlation
between Consideration on the ILBDQ and Counselor, Spiritual
Guide and Reformer scales on the IRAI. On test 1, the
correlations between Consideration and Spiritual Guide
(.445) reached significance (t=2.27). The correlations
between Consideration and Counselor (r=.289, t=1.38) and
Consideration and Reformer (r=.027, t=-.123) were not
significant. On test 2, none of the correlations reached
significance. Consideration and Counselor produced an r of
.167 and t of .777. Consideration and Spiritual Guide
correlated at .076 with a t of .351 while Reformer and

Consideration had an r of .111 and t of .511.

Hypothesis 9. There will be positive correlation
between Initiation on the ILBDQ and Dogmatism. Neither test
1 (r=.211, t=.993) nor test 2 (r=.163, t=.761) showed

significant correlation.

Hypothesis 10. There will be positive correlation
between Initiation score on the ILBDQ and Feelings of

Inadequacy. On test 1, the correlation score of .173

76

produced a t of .804 and was not significant. On test 2,
there was no correlation (r=.120, t=.555) between Initiation
and Feelings of Inadequacy. There is no correlation between

Initiation and Feelings of Inadequacy on test 1 or 2.

Hypothesis 11. A negative correlation will exist
between Consideration on the ILBDQ and Dogmatism. On test
1, the correlation of .230 produced a t of 1.08. The
correlation not only failed to reach significance but was a
positive correlation. On test 2, the r of -.666 produced a

t of -4.09 and was, therefore, significant.

Hypothesis 12. There will be a negative correlation
between Consideration on the ILBDQ and Feelings of
Inadequacy. In test 1, there was no correlation (r=.017,
t=.079) and test 2 produced a small and insignificant
correlation Opposite to that hypothesized (r=.178, t=.832).

Data from hypotheses 7-12 are summarized on Table 4.

EFFECT OF CHANGE IN ONE VARIABLE ON CHANGE IN OTHER
VARIABLES

The third question examines the effect of changes in
definition Of leadership (as measured by the ILBDQ) on
variables believed to influence how one perfonms as a
leader. Is change in leadership description accompanied by

changes in other variables?

77

:OHHUHOHHOO O>Hummoc uGGOHmwcmHm u mie
HHHOHHHamHm

m «

ucmowmwomwncH u H R

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HHH.H u on H u aaaHa
H H HHm. HHH. HHH. awe. .Hmm o e H 6m
. . . . .0 .m
H m Hmm one am H mee O o H Ha
. . . . .00.
H H see aeH an H man u e H as
. . . .Ha
m H: me.~ eHm me H amm H e H oa
m m em.~ wee. He.m mam. .aom H e H Ha
. . . . .c«
m m. ea m ame emH H ewe H e H as
H Home H Hams H H H H "on
ODNAH ENE 20
oneammonzoouu
ZOHBdHBHZHflH
mmHmaHm<> mummmeoaHm
onmHOHa N Hams H Hume

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nch mummmfiomwm 26mm flafla ZOHBdflmmmOU ho NMdZZDm

v mam48

78

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:OHumHOHHOO o>Hpmooc unavamwcmfim u wit
HaaoHHHaon u m .
HHHOHHHHSHHHH u H .
HHa.H . at N .me. . aaaHa
O O O O OH Com
H H Hma «SH ape eHe o e H NH
.oo
ms: H ee.eu Gee.u ae.H emu. o o e H HH
H H mmm. eHH. eem. HRH. e H OH
H H Hes. HGH. mam. HHH. e H a
a Hams H Hume H H H H "on
oamHH was 20
onHammaHmzoouo
ZOHHRHBHZHHH
mmHmaHma> mammmeoawm
onmHomo H Hams H same
I H. mmmmmaomwm 20mm «Ema ZOHHqummou mo wmgm Holden: a wage

79

Hypothesis 13a. If there is increase

 

 

score on ILBDQ from test 1 to test 2 there
Administrator, Scholar and Preacher scales
the IRAI.

13b. If there is decrease

 

test 1 to test 2 there will be decrease in

Scholar and Preacher scales on the IRAI.

in Initiation

is increase in

on

in ILBDQ-I from

Administrator,

Since there was significant decrease in Initiation

score (as stated in hypothesis 1), hypothesis 13b. is

examined. Table 5 presents a summary of data for the

hypothesis.

TABLE 5 COMPARISON OF CHANGE IN INITIATION WITH

CHANGE IN ADMINISTRATOR, SCHOLAR, PREACHER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

VARIABLE 521 :12 t RESULTS
if £3322 ILBDQ - 42.66 39.58 3.22 #17112

INITIATION
ADMINISTRATOR 49.9 52.39 -1.47 #1=#2

then

xsz SCHOLAR 65.82 65.34 .204 #1=#2
PREACHER 69.08 70.43 —2.71 #1< #2
Hypothesis 13 is rejected in its stated form, None of

the variables decreased significantly and the Preacher scale

increased a significant amount (t=-6.38, significance at

.05=-1.717).

Hypothesis 14a.

 

80

 

If there is increase in Consideration

score on the ILBDQ from test 1 to test 2 there is increase

in Counselor, Spiritual Guide, Reformer scales on the IRAI.

14b.

 

If there is decrease in Consideration

score on the ILBDQ from test 1 to test 2 there is decrease

in Counselor, Spiritual Guide and Refonmer scale on the

 

 

 

 

 

 

IRAI. Data for hypothesis 14 are summarized on Table 6.
TABLE 6 COMPARISON OF CHANGE IN CONSIDERATION WITH
CHANGE IN COUNSELOR, SPIRITUAL GUIDE AND REFORMER
VARIABLE 21 i2 t RESULT
if 121022 ILBDQ - 47.33 50 -2.40 :1< :2
CONSIDERATION
COUNSELOR 63 60.3 .592 #1=#2
these
xi<x2 SPIRITUAL GUIDE 81.60 80.43 .565 #l=#2
REFORMER 46.69 46.08 .339 #l=#2

 

 

 

 

 

Since there was an increase in Consideration from test

1 to test 2 and it reached significance as stated in

hypothesis 2, hypothesis 14 (a) is examined. Scores for
Counselor, Spiritual Guide and Reformer did not change. An
increase in Consideration score does not predict an increase
in Counselor, Spiritual Guide and Reformer. Hypothesis 14a
if not accepted. Hypothesis 14b is not examined because of

increase in Consideration score.

81

Hypothesis 15a. If there is increase in Initiation

 

score on the ILBDQ, there is increase in Dogmatism and
Feelings of Inadequacy.

HEB. If there is decrease in Initiation
score on the ILBDQ, there is decrease in Dogmatism and
Feelings of Inadequacy. Since there was significant
decrease in Initiation, hypothesis 15a is summarized on
Table 7 and analyzed.

TABLE 7 COMPARISON OF CHANGE IN INITIATION WITH
CHANGE IN DOGMATISM AND FEELINGS OF INADEQUACY

 

 

 

 

VARIABLE 21 i2 t RESULT
1f iiziz ILBDQ - 42.66 39.58 3.22 41>:42
INITIATION
DOGMATISM 166.7 170.87 -1.24 #1=#2
thep
x1’ x2
FEELINGS OF 13.25 12.5 .715 #1=#2
INADEQUACY

 

 

 

 

 

The significant decrease in Initiation was not followed by a
decrease in either Dogmatism or Feelings of Inadequacy. In
fact, Dogmatism showed a slight though insignificant
increase while Inadequacy Feelings remained practically

unchanged. Therefore, hypothesis 15 is not accepted.

Hypothesis 16a. If there is increase in Consideration

there is increase in Dogmatism and Feelings of Inadequacy.

82

15b. If there is decrease in Consideration

score on the ILBDQ from test 1 to test 2 there is decrease

in Dogmatism and Feelings of Inadequacy.

The significant

increase in Consideration score leads to an analysis of

hypothesis 16a. These data show that neither Dogmatism nor

Feelings of Inadequacy changed with Consideration.

TABLE 8 COMPARISON OF CHANGE IN CONSIDERATION WITH
CHANGE IN DOGMATISM AND FEELINGS OF INADEQUACY

 

 

 

 

 

VARIABLE i1 i2 t RESULT

1f 116:2 ILBDQ - 47.33 50 -2.40 :1< :2

CONSIDERATION

DOGMATISM 166.7 170.87 -1.24 :1=#2
.thei
x1< X2

FEELINGS OF

INADQUACY 13.25 12.5 .715 :1=#2

 

 

 

 

 

Hypothesis 16a is not accepted.

Increase in Consideration

was not accompanied by increase in Dogmatism or Feelings of

Inadequacy.

Hypotheses l7 and 18.

Since none of the hypotheses in

 

question 3 (#13-16) are accepted, hypotheses l7 and 18 are

not relevant and are, therefore, not analyzed.

83

DATA FROM INTERVIEWS

Additional data of non-quantitative nature were
gathered through interviews. Subjects were asked to talk
about how they described good church leadership, how they
felt about seminary as a preparatory experience and about
"the ministry." Each interview lasted between thirty and
forty-five minutes. The interviewer asked the questions and
took notes while students responded. Data from interviews
supported findings from the testing and were used in

interpreting and drawing conclusions from test data.

SUMMARY

There was significant difference between test 1 and
test 2. Initation on the ILBDQ decreased and Consideration
increased. On the Inventory of Religious Activity and
Interest scores, the Preacher inventory increased. Positive
correlations were found between Initiation and
Administrator, Scholar and Preacher. Negative correlation
was discovered between Initiation and Feelings of

Inadequacy.

CHAPTER.V

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Theological seminaries attempt to prepare peOple for
church leadership roles. The seminaries, their students and
the churches they serve expect that people who attend a
theological seminary will be better leaders than those who
do not. The assumption is that the seminary student will
change in some way. Searching for a definitive statement on
leadership as to how students should change (from those
wanting better leaders) or how they should pg changing (from
those who "produce" leaders) or how they SEE changing (from
those who are training to be leaders) reveals that
definitive statements are rare.

The purpose Of this study was to contribute data for
the third statement: how seminary students are changing.
This study has attempted to examine what happens to students
regarding leadership at Dallas Theological Seminary. The
data were gathered from a random sample of twenty-three
incoming students at the start and finish of their first
year. The essential question is: "are they becoming the
kind of individuals who are better prepared to provide
leadership for Churches than they would otherwise be?"

The data from the study speak to how students describe
leadership and how they are changing as persons who will be
expected to function in leadership roles. These data were

organized for examination under three questions. First, do

84

mars...

85

students actually change and if so, how? Second, is there
correlation between how students describe ideal leader
behavior, their concept of what ministry is, their level of
dogmatism and their feelings of inadequacy? Third, if a
student changes in his description of ideal leader behavior,
does he also change in his View of ministry, his level of

dogmatism and his feelings of inadequacy?

DO STUDENTS CHANGE AND IF 80, HOW?

What, specifically, happens to a student during his
first year Of training in Dallas Theological Seminary in
relation to leadership? Does his description of how church
leaders should behave Change? Does his interest in ministry
activities performed by church leaders change? Does the way
his mind handles ideas change? DO his feelings of
inadequacy change?

Chapge in Description of Ideal Church Leader Behavior.
Students changed in relation to how they describe ideal
church leader behavior. The instrument (ILBDQ) and
researcher were careful to point out that subjects should
describe behavior of church leaders as they believed it
should ideally be exhibited.

Initiation of structure, described by Fleishman (1957)
as characterizing one who actively participates in directing
group activities, planning, communicating information,
scheduling and criticizing, decreased significantly (at .005

level). After the first year in seminary, the subjects

86

believed initiation of structure was not as desirable for
the ideal church leader as they did at the beginning of the
year.

Consideration, the other variable on the ILBDQ, is
described by Fleishman (1957) as characterizing one who is
likely to have job relations characterized by mutual trust,

respect for other's ideas, consideration for other's l

feelings and a degree of warmth between them and himself.
Subjects increased on the consideration score (change
significant at .025). As students describe leader behavior

in a church they are changing from stronger to weaker

 

idealization of initiation and weaker to stronger

 

idealization of consideration.

 

Change in Concept of Ministry. Six scales were used

 

from the Webb Inventory of Religious Activities and
Interests to determine change in what subjects--as
prospective church leaders-~actually were interested in
doing. Three scales reflect an interest in
less-direct-contact (Administrator, Scholar and Preacher)
and three an interest in more-direct-contact activities
(Counselor, Spiritual Guide and Reformer). Only one of the

six scales showed significant change. Students increased in

 

their interest in the Preacher factor. The seminary under
study places great importance on preaching and this emphasis
was reflected in those scores.

Change in Dogmatism. Increase in dogmatism was

hypothesized. It was believed that exposure to absolutist

87

teaching in Bible courses and a highly objective approach to
theology and study of New Testament Greek would tend to
increase closed-mindedness. This was not confirmed by the
data. There was neither increase nor decrease.

Changes in Feelings of Inadequagy. The hypothesis for

 

the variable stated a significant increase would be apparent

over the year. Exposure to professors in each discipline

«Lit- ‘f!

who demonstrate high levels of competency added to the

(it

academic atmosphere and competitive nature of student
relations would, it was felt, produce an increase. The
data, however, indicate the students neither increased nor
decreased in feelings Of inadequacy.

Discussion. An understanding of how students are
changing contributes data for curriculum evaluation. Two
questions are raised by the data: "Why are students
changing in their description of idealized leader behavior?"
"Why are they changing in the observed direction?" There
are currently no courses in the curriculum which deal
specifically with the subject of leadership, yet change in
leader description occurs. The fact that students are
changing significantly in a given direction may or may not
be what the seminary faculty desires or intends. NO course
or planned experience states change in leadership ideology
as a goal. It happens. Why and how are not determined.

Dogmatism and Feelings of Inadequacy did not change.
Though exposure to a sometimes absolutized curriculum

approach did not close the mind, neither did it Open the

88

mind. Vacchiano, Strauss and Hochmann (1969) found that
persons high in dogmatism to be rigid and to have difficulty
making decisions. Zagona and Zurcher (1964) found that
highly dogmatic persons had difficulty working with others
in problem solving tasks and that they exhibited little
tolerance with views contradictory to their own. If the
trend toward high consideration continues among the subjects
with no decrease in dogmatism, the student may be describing
a leadership style in his mind that he will have difficulty
fulfilling as a person.

Feelings of Inadequacy have also been shown to work
against a high consideration approach to leadership. One
who is low in self-esteem or feels inadequate in relating to
others tends pep to pursue the kinds of leadership where
consideration has to be shown (Kipnis 1962, Bowers 1963).
Attention must be given to the kind of person the potential
leader is becoming. The way he idealizes leader behavior is
in a direction consistent with servant-leadership described
in the New Testament as ideal for the church. If he is not
becoming the kind of person who can function as his mind
believes he should, the seminary experience may contribute

to his frustration as a leader.

 

Recommendations

1. ‘ More attention should be given to the kind of
person a student is becoming. A predominantly academic
oriented curriculum apparently influenced student's

description of leader behaviors. Those variables which

89

influence how well he performs in those described roles may
need a different curriculum model than the seminary is
equipped to provide.

2. Clearer definition of what church leaders actually
do and training for competence in those functions may
decrease feelings of inadequacy.

3. Dogmatism may be decreased through more use of

discussion, group problem-solving and group task

'H -5 ind- "3]

accomplishment. A discovery rather than lecture-memorize-
examination approach to content may also contribute to
Opendmindedness. More use of seminar-type courses where an
atmosphere of inquiry is promoted, where views are aired and
discussed, where professors are able to demonstrate openness
and, where existant, lack of air-tight conclusions would
make it "safe" and honorable to admit lack of closure on
complex issues. When conclusions are given without benefit
of exposure to the questions that often accompany those
conclusions, students may tend to want certainty where doubt
has always been evident.

4. Greater attention needs to be paid to ministry
activities other than preaching. The only ministry activity
scales out of six that demonstrated increased interest was
Preacher. Church leaders, to be effective, must be
competent in other activities as well. A realistic
presentation of the values of skills as an administrator,
scholar, counselor, spiritual guide and reformer may

encourage student interest in those activities.

90

5. Research asking why students scores on the ILBDQ
scales change during the first year is needed. The shift in
scores is not a stated curriculum emphasis and is not
controlled by conscious effort. Although the researcher
believes that the change is consistent with a Biblical
concept of leadership, the seminary administration and
faculty need to detenmine if they believe the change is
desirable. As influencing factors and administration
statements of value are compared, curriculum can be more
intelligently designed to either enhance or minimize the
changes.

6. The lack of difference in scores on ministry
interest, Dogmatism and Feelings of Inadequacy needs to be
investigated. The influence these variables have on
leadership ability is well documented. Students should be
made aware of how these variables influence leadership
function early in their seminary education. Further
research directed specifically at how one's dogmatism level,
feelings of inadequacy and role concept are influenced
should be conducted and results considered in curriculum
evaluation.

7. Design and implement a course, or courses, or part
of a course specifically to teach church leadership
principles. A course dealing with ecclesiology and church
polity team-taught by theology department and local pastors
would be helpful. The purpose of the course would be to

clearly outline for students as early in their training as

91

possible what is needed for effective church leadership, and

how seminary education contributes.

IS THERE CORRELATION BETWEEN HOW STUDENTS DESCRIBE IDEAL
LEADER BEHAVIOR AND VARIABLES INFLUENCING IMPLEMENTATION OF
THAT BEHAVIOR?

The study not only provides data concerning change in
students but how and to what extent the variables in
question tend to be integrated in the subjects. Do certain
interests and personality constructs normally found
clustered in a particular type of leader exist in a
predictable manner in the students? The following

conclusions are made on the basis of the study.

Correlation Between Initiation and Interest in Ministry

 

Activities. Both test 1 and test 2 showed significant

 

correlation between Initiation and Administrator and
Scholar. Preacher correlated significantly on test 2.

There is a correlation between students' idealization of
initiation for leader's behavior and interest in activities
related to the role of administrator, scholar and preacher.
This correlation is not unusual given the definitions of the
variables concerned.

The activities in question require less personal
relationship activities and more study, organizational and
public-speaking functions. Subjects who believe leaders
should initiate activities of others express interest in

ministry activities which support that ideal.

92

Correlation Between Consideration and Interest in
Ministry Activity. In test 1 and test 2, there was no
correlation between Consideration and scales reflecting
interest in person-contact ministry activities. The
hypothesized correlation was based on the belief that one
who saw Consideration as ideal church leader behavior style
would also express interest--as a prospective church m
leader--in.ministry activities requiring face-to-face 9
contact with people. Yet Counselor and Reformer failed to f
correlate with Consideration on both test 1 and test 2. The
correlation that existed between Consideration and Spiritual
Guide on test 1 disappeared on test 2 because of the
increase in Consideration score. Apparently, the subjects
see no discrepancy in defining Consideration as ideal for
leader's behavior and then, as prospective leaders not
showing a similar degree of interest in those activities
which would provide them with Opportunities to function
according to their ideals.

Correlation Between Initiation and Dogmatism. Evidence
indicates that dogmatic persons would avoid leadership
situations that require discussion and non-directive
approaches to decision making (Ehrlich and Lee 1969). The
initiatory style of leadership should correlate with
dogmatism. This was not found to be the case in the study.

One cannot conclude from this study that high initiation is
a predictor of dogmatism nor dogmatism a predictor of

initiation at the levels they reached among the subjects.

93

Correlation Between Initiation and Feelings of

 

Inadequacy. Bowers' (1963) evidence that a negative

 

correlation would exist between a leader's self-esteem and
extent to which he employs a group approach led the
researcher to hypothesize a positive correlation between
Initiation and Feelings of Inadequacy. The small

correlations that did exist in both test 1 and test 2 were H

h.”
n...—

far from significant. Students' scores do not correlate on

‘12::-

the two variables.

Correlation Between Consideration and Dogmatism. The

 

definitions of these two variables led to a hypothesis that
they would be negatively correlated. Research by Rokeach
(1960) Vacchiano, Strauss and Hochmann (1969) support the
direction of the hypothesis. In test 1 there was no
correlation. In test 2, where Consideration had increased
significantly and Dogmatism did not change, a significant
negative correlation was found. A person with high
consideration score would be less inclined to be high in
dogmatism than one who is low. It may not mean that low
consideration predicts dogmatism, only that there is a
better chance of its existence.

Correlation Between Consideration and Feelings of

 

Inadequacy. Because of the evidence that high feelings of

 

inadequacy tend to make one avoid interpersonal contacts in
leadership situations (Kipnis 1962, Tower 1963, Dittes
1959), it was believed a negative correlation would exist

between these two variables. No correlation was found

94

between the two variables in this study. Even though
inadequacy feelings make implementation of high
Consideration as a leadership style difficult, students
apparently do not see them as mutually inconsistent enough
to produce a negative correlation on these scales. It is
encouraging that there was no positive correlation but a
negative correlation would be desirable.

Perhaps in a context where one is allowed to idealize
rather than practice leadership (i.e., a school where
"leaders" are developed) the impact of attempting to lead in
a way the mind idealizes but the person finds difficult to
support is not experienced. One can believe relationships
are important to the leadership role for which he is
preparing and at the same time have difficulty developing
and maintaining relationships in his leadership style.

Discussion. The correlation studies were done in an

 

attempt to determine presence or absence of relationship
between variables. Consideration and Initiation scales on
the ILBDQ were used to define students' concept or

description of leader behavior and then other variables

 

believed to influence ability to function as a leader were
correlated with the described ideal.

Overall there was little correlation among variables.
It.may be that existence of so little correlation among
students on variables which have been demonstrated in
leadership research to influence one another suggests a lack

of integration of leadership ideals and personal behavior.

95

Students may not be thinking in terms of which ministry
skills, mode of thinking and kind of person are required to
behave in the leadership fashion they are idealizing. There
seems to be no problem in describing Consideration as ideal
behavior and showing little interest in the role of
counselor, spiritual guide or reformer. The research period
covered only the first year of seminary and generalization
of the results to the four years of seminary training needs
to be guarded. Elmer (1980) found, however, that graduates
of the five seminaries in his study felt a greater emphasis
was needed in their training on people-building skills.

Lack of correlation between Initiation and both
dogmatism and feelings of inadequacy do not correspond with
previous research findings. The work done by others (Bowers
1963, White and Alter 1965, Pyrom 1966) used subjects
already in leadership roles rather than students preparing
for leadership. The relative safety provided by the
academic environment may make it easier to idealize a
leadership description for oneself without facing up to the
realities of what one must do or become to make the ideal
real. Freire (1970) wrote of the "banking concept" of
education where educational experience is stored away for
the future. In the case of this study the banking concept
suggests that students are postponing the tasks involved in
becoming the kind of person who can function as a leader
until they "need" to be that person. The immediate role

concern is that of being a student. Ability to form a

96

concept in the mind that does not correspond with the
reality of one's person may be a result of a banking
mentality toward personal development in the subjects.

The possibility also exists that the curriculum
philosophy at Dallas Theological Seminary focuses on the
cognitive to such an extent that compartmentalized education
is taking place. Eisner and Vallance (1974) named five

conceptions of curriculum: development of cognitive

 

processes, curriculum as technology, gurriculum.for

self-actualization and consummatory experience, curriculum

 

 

for social reconstruction, and academic rationalism. The

 

 

first two stress the "how" of education. The cognitive

 

development approach concerns itself with development of

thinking process, of learning how to learn. The technology

 

approach focuses more on the mechanics of the
teaching-learning process. "It is concerned not with the
process of knowing or learning, but with the technology by
which knowledge is communicated and learning is
facilitiated" (1974z7). The curriculum philosophy of Dallas
Theological Seminary is primarily a cognitive process with
positive orientation toward technology. Attention to
self-actualization is minimal as a curriculum.emphasis.
Eisner and Vallance state that the curriculum as self
actualization approach "conceptualizes education as a
liberating force, a.means of helping the individual discover
things for himself . . . it formulates the goals of

education in dynamic personal process terms" (l974z9).

97

Seeing curriculum as a self actualizing opportunity/
responsibility by administration, faculty and students would
provide a different set of evaluation criteria. Success
would not be measured by differences in skills, and/or
ability to memorize, process and reproduce information. The
primary concern would be the development of persons. The
small amount of attention to developing people who can
function as leaders and large amount of attention to
developing students' cognitive skills may contribute to a
lack of correlation between variables normally found
correlated in a particular kind of leader--the kind
idealized by the student.

There was correlation between Initiation and interest
in ministry activities hypothesized to be correlated with
it. Apparently students do have a set of interests that
enable them to function in an initiatory manner. Of all the
correlations only these began with significance (two of the
three) and continued to be significant (three of the three
in test 2). The question that arises, however, is whether
or not description of Initiation will continue to decrease
as it did from test 1 to test 2.* It may be that seminary
training--if the trend established during the first year
continues--is changing students' description of a church
leader in such a way that the activities they are interested

in will not serve them. They are not developing interest in

 

*See cross-sectional study in Appendix A.

98

the kinds of activities needed to perform in the new role
they are idealizing.

The decrease in Initiation and increase in
Consideration seems to fit well with a biblical view of
servant-leader. Students appear to be picking up that
emphasis. They do not appear to understand the meaning of
the idealized role well enough at the time the data were
gathered to demonstrate interest in.ministry activities
which correspond with their idea. They appear, also, to be
unaware of the importance of openflmindedness and sense of
adequacy in their role as leaders.

Recommendations. The integration of ideas and interest

 

and of ideas and person is important to developing a person
to function in a given role. The task of helping a student
re-define a concept is the easier and perhaps therefore the
primary focus of education. Attention.must also be given to
those variables which are less obvious to both student and
teacher. Development of interest and training in
activities of ministry, attention to the thinking process
and levels of adequacy also need attention. Four
recommendations are made toward that end.

1. Research of the kind being conducted by Rowen
(1981) and Elmer (1980) needs to be both studied and
replicated at Dallas Theological Seminary. Their attempts
to discover as precisely as possible what is happening to
students and graduates provide valuable information for

curriculum develOpment. Before one can reasonably ask what

"‘ "Lal

.. “I.

‘A_.

99

changes ought to be made, one must define and describe what
is. Serious and disciplined curriculum evaluation is
recommended.

2. Research needs to be done to describe what the
effective Christian leader is like. Realizing that one has
difficulty finding agreement on criteria for effectiveness
makes one hesitant to suggest such a project, but the
difficulty of the task does not minimize its importance.
Students need to be confronted not only with the fact of
servant-leadership but with working examples of the servant
leader. Ministry functions need to be clearly defined and
described. The decision-making process involved in
distributed leadership style suggested by the New Testament
church structure needs to be addressed. The mode of
thinking--of interacting with other ideas--is essential to
effectiveness. Gathering facts about what effective leaders
are and do, and the translation of those facts into
curriculum goals is basic to an education that encourages
correlation between the ideal and the real.

3. Testing of students to determine (and help them
understand) how they score on scales in relation to
currently functioning church leaders would provide
Opportunity to advise students about which skills and
constructs need to be given specific attention and which can
be given less emphasis. Students are currently left on
their own to select a major and design an elective course

load. They often major in their strengths and avoid their

100

weaknesses because academic success is more predictable
under those circumstances. If recommendation 2 (above)
provides a description of what the effective leader does
well, and the student is shown what he can do during his
training to develoP constructs and skills that will increase
his effectiveness then seminary training may take on more
immediate relevance.

4. Seminar-type courses dealing specifically with the
array of spiritual and psychological constructs essential to
servant leadership would provide opportunity to address the
issues of leader development. Students should be encouraged
to minister to one another both as a means of personal
development and to provide Opportunity to define, develOp
interest in and gain confidence in skills used in later
leadership roles. Done as part of the course work provides
supervision Of these activities. More important it gives
ministry activities equal status with cognitive activities.

5. According to Fiedler's contingency model,
different leadership situations require different types Of
leaders. The church has many leadership needs. Describing
various roles and helping students fit those roles suggests
a variety Of curriculum designs to help develop a variety of
gifts. The strong emphasis on studying and preaching needs
to be accompanied by emphasis on the whole array of
constructs and skills that make servant-leaders effective.

6. The seminary is well equipped to influence thought

development. It has not demonstrated effectiveness in

101

communicating the need to develOp a holistic view of the
leader's role. The seminary should not attempt to work
alone in leadership develOpment. It should define what it
can and cannot do well. Students should be exposed to
various church leadership situations. The threat of
exposing lack of expertise by asking questions may be far
less in a seminary "student" than in a seminary "graduate".

The errors of a student who is developing leadership skills

are easier for both church members and students to endure
than the mistakes made by pastors who have finished
seminary. Church exposure should also clarify needs for
skill and personality develOpment which are unique to each
individual. Both church and seminary can then be employed
by the student to assist in leadership education.

7. Students need to be challenged and guided into
personal develOpment. The theological seminary cannot
settle for changing students' minds about how to describe
ideal church leaders. They must grapple with the question

of developing people who can lead.

DOES CHANGE IN DESCRIPTION OF IDEAL CHURCH LEADERSHIP
PREDICT CHANGE IN VARIABLES INFLUENCING LEADERSHIP FUNCTION?

An assumption of schooling is change, growth,
development of certain knowledge, skills and/or
psychological constructs. People go to school, usually,
because they expect something to happen to them. The first

question asked in this study was: "do people change, and if

102

so how?" Data from the study demonstrated evidence of
change. The present question is designed to clarify how the
subjects change. Is there any pattern Of change? Is change

in the way a student describes leadership accompanied by

 

change, in the same direction, in variables which influence

ability to function in the manner being described? If a

person, for instance, increases in idealization of E
Consideration does he also increase in his interest in m
Counselor, Spiritual Guide and Reformer role behaviors? The M
following conclusions are drawn from the study.

Decrease in Initiation Is Not Followed by Decreased

 

Interest in Related Ministry Activities. The significant
decrease in Initiation score indicates less tendency to
idealize a leadership style characterized by direct
involvement with peOple. A decreased interest in activities
of administrator, scholar and preacher would be expected as
well. The scales of Administrator and Scholar did not
change and the scale for Preacher increased. There is no
problem with the changes or lack of changes, per se. When
a role description changes, but interest in its associated
activities remain unchanged or change in the other direction
there is a problem. A concept is idealized and role
definition and interest does not follow. A continuation of
similar change over four years could produce frustration and
anxiety (Stogdill 1974), job dissatisfaction (Rizzo, House

and Lirtzman 1970) and goal confusion (Mullen 1954) as the

103

leader tries to understand and implement his leadership
role.

Increase in Consideration Is Not Accompanied by

 

Increased Interest in Related Ministry Activities. Subjects

 

significantly increased in tendency to describe the ideal
church leader as one who should have job relationships with
subordinates which reflect trust for their ideas,

consideration for their feelings and warm interpersonal

a“ 1.. u
’-‘ .__r 5 o a-
(l - n

relations. Their interest in Spiritual Guide, Reformer and
Counselor did not change. Their interest in Counselor
decreased significantly. The same potential of role
confusion surfaced in the Initiation score change is evident
here. For a student to describe a personal orientation to
leadership as ideal and to increase in that tendency appears
consistent with a servant-leader concept appropriate for the
church. That change in score appears consistent with
seminary emphasis. One wonders, however, if and when
interest in ministry behaviors necessary to fulfill the
ideal will increase.

Decrease in Initiation Is Not Accompanied by Decrease

 

in Dogmatism and Feelings of Inadgguacy. Ehrlich and Lee

 

(1969), Rokeach (1960) and Zagona and Zurcher (1964) show
the effect of dogmatism on leadership. Their indications
are that one high in dogmatism would tend toward or be more
comfortable in a leadership situation with high initiation.

A decrease in Initiation would, ideally, be accompanied by a

104

decrease in Dogmatism. Not so in this study. While
Initiation decreased, Dogmatism remained stable.

Research findings by Kipnis (1962) and Shainwald (1973)
indicate that one high in Feelings of Inadequacy would
prefer a leadership situation high in idealizing Initiation
for church leaders but did not decrease in Feelings of
Inadequacy. The mind of the student is changing concerning
how ideal church leaders should lead but the psychological
constructs are remaining fixed.

Increase in Consideration Is Not Accompanied by
Increase in Dogmatism or Feelings of Inadequacy.
Consideration behaviors are difficult for the high dogmatic
and for one who has high feelings of inadequacy. Therefore
one would prefer to see an increase in consideration
accompanied by a decrease in Dogmatism and Feelings of
Inadequacy. This was not seen in the study.

Discussion. Students define ideal church leadership

 

differently at the end of their first year in seminary than
they did at the beginning of that year. They did not change
in their interest toward related.ministry activities nor in
psychological constructs important to their functioning in
the manner they idealize. It appears that students do not
have a clear picture of what they are preparing for. The
fact that interest in only one ministry activity changed and
that in a way Opposite to what one might predict from the
change in leadership definition is cause for concern. There

may be some surprising role conflict for these students when

105

they enter ministry. These data support Ehmer's (1980)
finding that many who left the ministry reported the
seminary had not equipped them well; and those who had not
left the ministry felt a greater need for training in
interpersonal relations.

Perhaps the reason subjects could idealize
consideration and either remain the same on scores related
to direct contact with people is reflected in the high
increase in score on the Preacher scale. The high status
given to preaching at the seminary may be leaving students
with the conclusion that preaching ig the ministry. There
is increase in perceived value of leaders relating to people
but not an equally clear understanding of how one goes about
it.

The subject of how one's mind handles ideas and one's
feelings of inadequacy were not addressed during the period
covered in the study. They should be. Leaving to chance
variables that influence one's ability to function in a role
as much as these do the role of church leader should be
addressed as early in training as possible. They should be
presented as goals of training.

Another factor that may explain the discrepancy in
change among variables is the theory-practice dichotomy that
often characterizes formal education. The practice of
ordering courses and faculty into departments and students
into majors in departments is convenient for administrative

functions. The Bible, language and theology departments

106

deal with theory and Scripture study. The pastoral
ministry, christian education, missions and field education
departments deal with practice. The separation has
advantages of convenience. However, as this dichotomy
filters to the classroom the student has no problem building
separate categories for theory ("an ideal church leader
should be . . .") and function ("I like to . . .").

One of the most revealing parts of the study is the
lack of integration of changes in students. To change the
mind and not the person is to invite frustration for the
student when he functions in a leadership role.

Recommendations. The conclusions from the correlation
between changes question Of the study lead to some
recommendations. What can be done in the training process
to aid integrated changes in variables believed to influence
one another?

1. Establish integrated change as a goal of the
curriculum. Tough (1978) stated that the most common
motivation for pursuing a learning project among adults is
some anticipated use or application Of the knowledge or
skill. Students should be made aware of the changes that
are and are not taking place during training. They should
be aware of what is necessary and what is helpful to the
roles they are idealizing and they should be given
assistance in becoming a person who can be a church leader.
The seminary has staff members who are testing and

interviewing students already so the structure exists for

107

this type of assistance. Holistic development of people
should be a stated ang_evident goal.

2. The question of clustering of change points out
further need for exposure of students to the leadership
situation. If the student becomes aware of need for
holistic development by having weaknesses in ability to
function with peOple surfaced; or by having to accept
divergent views, or by experiencing feelings of inadequacy
in specific skills, he is more apt to pursue development in
those areas. Under the current model Of education only the
academic problems surface in any significant fashion. Often
field education is conducted with little or no supervision
and feedback. The peOple involved in the internship or
off—campus ministry have little stake in the student and
often find it easier to tell him what he wants to hear than
to risk a possible confrontation. A longer-term commitment
to a local church or mission where there is time to know and
be known by peOple, to trust and be trusted by peOple may
lead to greater integration of the kinds of developmental
tasks that need to be evidenced. The whole mentality of
change, adjust and learn needs to be rephrased into terms of
developing and maturing human beings who are becoming
effective church leaders. To see isolated changes in
thinking or hear statements that indicate a student is
learning or see improvement in a skill or skills may tempt

one to overlook the larger quest of human development. The

108

seminary makes a contribution to develOping leaders but
should not attempt to accomplish the whole task.
Specifically, what is being recommended is longer
internships under closer supervision. Internship
supervisors need to be trained. The Doctor of Ministry
program offers a source of manpower for supervisors. Since
those in the D. Min. program are currently in ministry, two
tasks could be combined: teaching the practitioner how to
become involved in a praxis experience with a fledgling
minister and teaching the young minister what it takes to be

a church leader.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SUMMARIZED

The following conclusions and recommendations are
intended to draw together the major points of the study.
The questions of what was found and what.may be done about
it are summarized.

Conclusions.

 

1. Students are changing in the way they describe
ideal church leadership but not in the way they
conceptualize the leader's function, their level of
dogmatism or their feelings of inadequacy. The academic
nature of the theological seminary is better equipped to
change thinking than to develop interests and influence
personality constructs. The realization that a one year
study may not allow time for change in personality

constructs led the researcher to conduct a ten—year

109

longitudinal study following the same subjects through their
seminary training and first six years of ministry. In
addition a cross-sectional study using a sample Of third and
fourth year students was conducted to provide some
comparative data for this report on the first year of the
longitudinal work. The cross-sectional study revealed no
significant change in scores on Dogmatism and Feelings of
Inadequacy from the first year sample (see Appendix A).

2. Variables which previous research indicate should
correlate do not do so. There is some discrepancy in
subjects' description of leadership and the way they
conceptualize the activities church leaders engage in.
Interest in task initiation correlates with associated
activities. Interest in persons does not correlate with
associated activities. Neither description correlates in a
predictable way with dogmatism or inadequacy feelings.
Students appear not to have a realistic integration between
their description of how a church leader should ideally
perform and the skills needed or personality constructs
essential to that performance. This is true at the
beginning and end of their first year of training.

3. As students change their description of how church
leaders should function, they do not change in variables
which influence how they function. It is understandable
that a student would enter seminary with a description of
ideal church leader behavior that is not supported by his

ministry activity interest and/or his means of interacting

110

with new ideas and/or his feelings about his adequacy as a
leader. If, as the student progresses through seminary,
however, that discrepancy continues or increases, there is
cause for concern. The study showed that there was no
change in the discrepancy. In fact, the views of leadership
changed significantly but the other variables did not. One
year of seminary training did not sufficiently shape
thinking concerning leadership-aseministry to influence a
clustering of leadership description, ministry activities
and kind of person into a consistent whole.

Recommendations.

 

Four recommendations are Offered; any one or any
combination of which would address the question of church
leadership develOpment for seminary students.

1. Include an overt curriculum emphasis designed to
define, critique and develOp church leadership. Two
approaches are more specifically suggested. First,
introduce courses dealing primarily with the subject of
church leadership. Second, add a leadership emphasis to
already existing courses. The subject of leadership is
evident in Bible courses (English and Greek and Hebrew),
theology courses (especially Ecclesiology) and church
history courses in important though not always apparent
ways. In pastoral theology, Christian education and
missions courses the subject is more obviously apparent.
Whether covertly or overtly existent, the subject Of

leadership needs to be surfaced and addressed throughout the

111

courses in the curriculum. One would ideally like to see a
coordination of these emphases so overlap and "underlap" are
minimized.

2. Faculty participation in early research and
develOpment of curriculum emphases in leadership would
increase its quality and the predictability Of its results
being implemented into curricular realities. The focal
point Of leadership development in seminary is not a new
course on the subject nor a new instructional objective in
an old course. Though these approaches are important, the
focal point is an administration and a faculty committed to
the task of assisting future church leaders in their own

process of development. A participatory effort including

 

faculty and aimed at defining curricular outcomes, needs and
strategies would contribute to curriculum development.
Three research questions are relevant to this study.

First, more research is needed to clearly describe what
effective church leaders are like. Current church leaders
should be asked what they see as areas of needed develOpment
in effective leaders. These data then need to be
incorporated into curriculum goal statements. The seminary
needs a continued emphasis on what students know. They need
renewed emphasis, however, on what kind of person students
are becoming as leaders for the church.

Second, as data describing what effective church
leaders are like are applied to courses in leadership and to

broader curriculum issues in the theological seminary,

112

perhaps additional types of evaluation questions could be
pursued. If, as literature indicates the variables in this
study do influence how one performs as a leader, those
institutions which prepare leaders may benefit from a
knowledge of how their students are being affected in
relation to the variables. Additional questions
investigating why the data from this study show what they do
would provide more specific curriculum conclusions. The
longitudinal study which continues this research is one
attempt to integrate findings from student experience with
findings from leadership experience. By studying the same
subject in both roles, more precise data are available to
investigate the ability of training to move students in the
direction, during training, that they will move during
leadership function. Similar kinds of questions designed to
clarify relationship between effect of training and effect
of function need to be explored.

Third, and more specifically, evaluation of courses
needs to go beyond professor's performance as an educational
technician. Questions dealing with specific contribution to
development of awareness, interest and skill in specific
ministry functions which it was specifically designed to
develOp need to be asked. Courses and parts of courses need
to be justified in relation to the referent situation and
evaluated accordingly. Adoption of questions similar to
Tyler's for analyzing and evaluating curriculum may

contribute to clarifying curricular goals. Tyler (1949)

113

suggested asking what the purposes of the school are: what
experiences are needed to accomplish the purposes: what is
the most effective ways to organize experiences; and how
does one most precisely determine if purposes are being
achieved.

3. Efforts to involve students in their first year of
seminary training to a practicum experience specifically
designed for leadership develOpment is a third suggestion.
Students come to Dallas Theological Seminary from a variety
of background experiences. A practicum would help surface
strengths and needs essential to designing an informed
course of study and involvement through the four years of
more formal and remaining years of less formal leadership
development.

The practicum should go beyond the first year, however,
and be incorporated as a vital part of the educational
experience. Dewey (1938) and Freire (1970) are two of many
who pointed out the importance of experience in education
(along with Moses, Jesus and James). Simkins (1977)
expressed concern that isolating students for four years may
disassociate them from their society. The present study
shows change in mental but not psychological constructs.
Most professional schools require internship as a vital part
of training. The need to include a realistic exposure to
actual ministry situation of sufficient duration and
intensity to surface needs and give a realistic view of what

is being prepared for is strongly recommended. The change

114

in mentality from "not-yet-indministry-training" to
"in-service—development-Ofeministry-skills" could change the
whole complexion of ministry preparation.

The seminary should not be replaced as an institution
of ministry preparation. It should justify its existence
and evaluate its effectiveness by its ability to serve the
church. It needs to ask what it is and is not equipped to
accomplish. The church also needs to ask what it (the
church) can and cannot do to prepare church leaders. Each
should then join their efforts and do what each can do best.
Neither should attempt to do what the other can do better.
Doyle (1976) expressed the problem of society's willingness
to let the school monOpolize the education process. The
church has in large measure defined education of church
leaders as the seminary's task. The seminary seems all too
glad to accept the job. What many churches--and seminary
graduates--are discovering to their dismay is that the
seminary cannot do it alone. The suggested solution offered
by some of the seminary's critics is to let the church do
all the training. This is not the answer either. As both
seminary and church define what each can and cannot do and
join to COOperatively engage in theological education of
God's people leaders can be recognized. They can develOp
clear descriptions of how effective leaders behave. They
can understand what ministry skills are needed to implement
those behaviors. They can develop students' mental process

to receive ideas--even discrepant ones—-from others. They

115

can help students feel adequate enough for the task to
engage in leadership roles as servants.

4. A final recommendation involves re-casting the
educational model employed at Dallas Theological Seminary in
terms of adult education guidelines. Since the students are
college graduates the adult education strategy is more
apprOpriate. Knowles (1973) suggested that more than a
change in strategy and methodology separates pedagogy and
andragogy. A change in attitude on the part of
administration and teachers toward learning goals, toward
the learner's abilities and toward the student-teacher
relationship characterizes andragogy. If adult students are
viewed by teachers as passive, dependent learners whose
experiences (past and present) are of little worth, students
tend to believe it--or they become frustrated with the
treatment and abort the educational pursuit. If students
are perceived by teachers as fellow learners capable of
increasing self directedness, the educational environment
will be characterized by greater mutuality, respect,
collaboration and discussion. These sorts of environmental
changes would contribute to Opening the mind and decreasing
inadequacy feelings. Students would be more involved in
planning their course of study--based on intelligent
interaction with what effective leaders are like and on what
specific personal weaknesses and strengths they have
discovered through testing and interview. Mutual

self-diagnosis is a basis of andragogy and of praxis. In a

116

pedagogical environment diagnosis is done almost completely
by others. A school involved in educating adults for
leadership roles cannot ignore andragogical principles.

The sorts of changes suggested by Knowles requires an
attitudinal change on the part of faculty and
administration. Introducing new'methods will not suffice.
Therefore, introduction Of a long-range faculty development
program of the type described by Goff (1975) and Davis
(1976) are recommended. writers in faculty development
agree on the need for a slow pace in introducing and
implementing such programs. Some steps have been taken at
Dallas Theological Seminary in faculty development but the
"educational technician" flavor warned against in
practically every piece of literature about the subject have
characterized these introductoryxattempts. Unless faculty
members and administrators are convienced of the need to
re-think educational approaches to leadership develOpment
not much will change. The long view of carefully and
strategically introduced faculty development is foundational
to any other changes.

Church leadership is a multi-faceted reality. To those
interested in pursuing the formal or status leadership role
the theological seminary offers an invitation: "Let us help
you be a better leader." The contribution of this research
is to help describe some of what the seminary can and cannot

do; or at least what one seminary is and is not doing.

 

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY COMPARING
FIRST, THIRD AND FOURTH YEAR STUDENTS
ON VARIABLES RELATED TO LEADERSHIP

CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY COMPARING
FIRST, THIRD AND FOURTH YEAR STUDENTS
ON VARIABLES RELATED TO LEADERSHIP

A longitudinal study takes time. In an attempt to gain
some understanding of what may happen with the subjects
under study over the four year period in seminary, a
cross-sectional study using samples from the third and
fourth year students was conducted. A cross-section study
provides background data for the one year study. Though not
used to interpret findings, the cross-sectional data
provides a contextual background for findings in the one
year study.

The cross-sectional data also assist in.making worthy
hypotheses for the next phase of the longitudinal study. In
addition, this information serves as an aid in avoiding
premature conclusions based on early findings. The danger
of forming those conclusions based on the cross-sectional

data is present but less tempting.

DESIGN

The study investigated three of the four variables used
in the longitudinal study: Leader Behavior Description,
Dogmatism and Feelings Of Inadequacy. The fourth, interest
in religious activities, was excluded because of the amount
of time needed for subjects to complete the questionnaire

and the expense to analyze it. It was felt that asking

117

118

students to complete all four tests would seriously affect
the rate of returns. Therefore, the choice was made to
eliminate the IRAI.

The subjects were selected from the third and fourth
year classes at Dallas Theological Seminary. One hundred
names were randomly selected from each class. A letter of
introduction to the study was mailed one week before the
tests were distributed. Sixty-eight third year students and
forty-three fourth year students returned the completed
tests. In order to maintain equal sample sizes,
twenty-three test packets were randomly selected from each
class and analyzed. The same instruments used in the
longitudinal study were used in the cross- sectional study.

The data were analyzed using t tests and Pearson
Product-Moment Correlation. Differences in.means between
first and third and between third and fourth year subjects
were the point Of inquiry. The hypotheses for the
cross-sectional study are designed to determine significance
Of change in variables over time.

There were eight research hypotheses.

l. The first year students' scores will be higher on
the ILBDQ-I than third year students'.

2. Third year students' scores will be higher on the
ILBDQ-I than fourth year students'.

3. First year students' scores will be lower on the

ILBDQ-C than third year students'.

119

4. Third year students' scores will be lower on the
ILBDQ-C than fourth year students'.

5. First year students' scores will be lower on the
Dogmatism scale than third year students'.

6. Third year students' scores will be lower on the
DOgmatism scale than fourth year students'.

7. First year students' scores will be lower on the
Feelings Of Inadequacy scale than third year students'.

8. Third year students' scores will be lower on the

Feelings of Inadequacy scale than fourth year students'.

DATA ANALYSIS

To assist in informed analysis Of individual
hypotheses, summary data are given in Tables 9 through 13.

The data are analyzed using t test for individual
samples. An alpha level of .05 with 21 d.f. produced a
significance level of 1.71. Correlations are examined using
Pearson Product-Moment Correlation formula. The hypotheses
examining difference are shown first, followed by those

examining correlations.

SUMMARY

Between scores on test 2 taken by first year students
at the end of their first year and the scores for third year
students, there were no changes. There was a significant
correlation for third year students between Initiation on

the ILBDQ and Feelings of Inadequacy.

120

 

 

MUfiDONQGZH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

am.m mq.~H mH.m ma.ma ma.s m.~H mm.m m~.ma so mozHamms
c~.m~ GH.osH mo.m~ mm.~sa H~.m~ sm.csa Gm.m~ s.wmfl smHsmzooo
m~.¢ on.mv em.v ~.se v~.¢ \ om oc.m ow.~v oncomaH
mm.m on.mv mm.m we vo.m mm.am mm.m mm.s¢ HuomoaH
IO.” M scam m ovum M snow «I

mamamma>
a game m same a name H umms

 

 

 

 

 

mBZMQDBm Mdmw EBMDOW 92¢ QmHmB .BmMHh
mZOH¢H>ND QM<QZ¢Em Qz< wZGmZ m0 Mmdzzbw

a mamfia

121

hosovmpmcn mo umcwammh I .H .m«

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

cmuamoom om «muumm 3m. . 3.2 92 mmmmm ..H .m J
omuswoum om “mmumm ZN. n 3&3 36: mm Mum $3568 .m
smuamoom on «mmumm 3m. «.3 cm mm M~m undead .m
amusmoom om “mmnmm 2.7 2 8.3 mm wmm Tones A

20353 u mm mm on ”"35ng
H5.Humo. um mamas mmuz

mBZmQDEm Mdmfi DMHEB OZG BmMHm mom mammfi u

"mBQDmmm ho fimfizzbm

OH mandfi

122

homsooomcn mo mmcwHOOh I .H .m«

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

couscous om «emumm «em. 3.3 3.3 «m Mmm «.H .s .m
Omuamoom om Smumm a2. 3...: $.23 am Nmm 239588 .s
omuomoom om «emumm mg. 3.3 TS «m wmm ouoomfl .m
638an on «em vmm 2.? 3.2 3 qmwmm Ton—SH .m

2339mm u mm mm on "“3335,
35.3umc. um madam muuz

mBZmDDBm mfimw mBmDCm 92¢ QmHmB mom mammfi u

umBQDmmm ho MKdEZDm

HH mnm<9

123

homeomomcH mo mwcfidmom I .H .m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

«as. mmc.n m3.m3 \~.m¢ I.H .m\ons<mmonzoo
«mm. mm3.I mm.~53\~.mv zmHsaZOOO\ons<mmonzoo
m~.m mmm. m3.m3 \me ..H .m\ons¢HeHzH
moo. mac. mm.ms3\~¢ sausasooo \onsaHstH
u u AM\mm magmaHma>
3s.3umc. um mamas m~uz
mam» omHms

MUflDOMQflZH ho mUZHAmmh .SmHB¢SUOQ GZ¢ ODQQH
"flafla ZOHBdAmmmOU m0 NMdZZDm NH mamfla

124

homovoomcH mo meowawmm I .H .m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mam. I mNH.I mq.~3 \o>.mv «.H .m\onsammonzoo

see. «we. o3.cs3\ms.mq smHsazuoo\ons¢mmonzoo

man. I ~mo.I m¢.~3 \mm.mv «.H .m\onsaHstH

ohm. mva. o3.cs3\om.me zmHsasooo \onsaHstH

u u aM\mm mmam<Hm<>
35.3ume. um magma mmuz

m¢9> 999909
MU¢9099¢2H 90 mUZqumm .SmHB¢ZUO9 92¢ O999H
u¢B¢9 20HB¢AmmmOU 90 Mm¢229m MH 999¢B

125

The comparison of mean scores between third and fourth
year students showed a significant increase from third to
fourth year on Initiation scores. There were no other
changes in means. The correlation between Initiation and
Feelings of Inadequacy that existed among third year

students disappeared with the increase in Initiation.

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

The increase in tendency to describe consideration as
ideal church leader behavior seen during the first year
appears not to be a long-term trend. Perhaps the increase
in the first year raises scores to such an extent that
further increase is not to be expected (mean at the end of

the first year is 50, possible score is 60). The Initiation

 

score showed a reverse movement after the first year's
decrease. The third year students' scores did not change
but between third and fourth year the Initiation scores
increased. The difference may be attributed to various
factors such as exposure to internship, reality of imminent
graduation and assumption of leadership role or some
phenomenon in course work during the fourth year. The study
did not reveal why the score differences did or did not
occur but did describe their nature. A study attempting to
deal with the "why" question would provide helpful data for
curriculum evaluation.

The fact that there were no differences in dogmatism or

feelings of inadequacy scores over the three samples

126

indicates that seminary training does not make a measurable
difference in how students deal with ideas or how adequate

they feel in relationships and abilities.

DISCUSSION OF CORRELATIONS

Correlation between one's concept or description Of
ideal church leadership and variables believed to influence
it are desirable. The correlation found between initiation
and inadequacy feelings for third year students was
hypothesized. Past research indicates such a correlation is
not unusual. What is unusual, however, is that the
correlation exists only among third year students. In the
fourth year sample, the correlation was not found.
Variables which one would expect to find correlated either
positively or negatively in effective leaders demonstrated

no relationship among students.

CONCLUSIONS

Comparison Of data from the third and fourth year
students with those of first year students and with one
another leads to the following conclusions.

1. Students' description of ideal church leadership
remains stable from first through third years. In the
fourth year, there is an increase in tendency to idealize
Initiation, a reversed trend from the first year where the

score decreased.

127

2. Dogmatism and Feelings Of Inadequacy score remain
stable over the four years. There is no difference in
scores between entering and graduating students.

3. The only variables that correlate for third and
fourth year students are Initiation on the ILBDQ and
Feelings of Inadequacy for third year students. Since the
correlation disappeared again in the fourth year, the
variables correlate among fourth year students as they do

among first year students.

RECOMMENDATIONS

l. The seminary should, with the help of effective
church leaders, describe what ideal church leadership is and
what kind of person it takes to function in that role. If
the seminary is going to train for church leadership, it
must take time to clarify what the end product of its
curriculum is. This descriptive task must start with
Scripture, but must also include extensive input from the
church leaders.

2. Seminary and church leaders should cooperatively
design a curriculum that can encourage development of
students into the kind of people who can function as church
leaders. Add to the focus on cognitive and skill

development as curriculum goals by including spiritual

128

develOpment as the overall educational goal. Then, together
with churches, investigate how seminary and church as a team
can participate with students who want to develop as church
leaders.

3. The seminary should not take full responsibility
for develOping church leaders. Both seminary and church

should define what each can do and do it.

APPENDIX B

DESCRIPTION OF DALLAS THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

 

 

 

DESCRIPTION OF DALLAS THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

The study was conducted at Dallas Theological Seminary.
The school will be presented under the following topics:
Purpose, Accreditation and Affiliation, Admission, Student
Life and the Master of Theology Program. The information is

taken from the l981-82 catalogue.

Pur ose: The primary purpose of Dallas
THeoIogical Seminary is to prepare eligible
students for various aspects of Christian Service
through a graduate level Biblical, theological and
ministerial instruction. The seminary seeks to
maintain the highest standards of theological
instruction leading to seminary degrees. Quality
instruction is provided to prepare mature
Christian leaders for various Christian ministries
throughout the world. Each degree program seeks
to implement its goals through instruction in
Biblical Literature, evaluation of various systems
of theological thought, development of spiritual
gifts and the cultivation of the spiritual life
(Zuck, l981:6).

Accreditation and Affiliation: Dallas Theological
Seminary is a member of the Southern Association
of Colleges and Schools, the regional accrediting
agency of the Southern States with accreditation
of programs leadings to the Th.M., S.T.M.,
M.A.B.S., D.Min., and the Th.D. degrees. Dallas
Theological Seminary is denominationally
unrelated. The faculty, the governing boards and
students are members of various denominational or
independent churches. The Seminary seeks to serve
those of like Biblical faith in evangelical
Protestantism and welcomes to its student body
qualified persons who are in sympathy with the
Seminary's doctrinal position (1981:10).

Admission: The student body of Dallas Theological
Seminary is limited to persons who show evidence
that they are born again, are yielded to the Will
of God, are endowed with necessary spiritual gifts
and are in general agreement with the doctrinal
statement of the Seminary. Admission to the
Th.M., S.T.M. and Th.D. programs is limited to men
who anticipate the Christian ministry as their

129

130

vocation. The courses of study are planned
specifically for those who have completed with
above average academic records a course leading to
the A.B. degree or its equivalent from an
accredited college or university (1981:16).

Student Life: Recognizing that the effectiveness
of the Lord's servant is directly related to his
spiritual maturity, the promotion of the student's
spirituality is uppermost in the concern Of the
faculty. The academic pursuit of Biblical and
theological studies must be accompanied by a
growing spiritual life, sensitive to God's will
and ways. In numerous ways this Seminary seeks to
encourage the student not only to have an academic
comprehension of Biblical truth but also to
acquire an intimate daily walk with their God
being filled, led and impowered by His spirit. In
their classes the faculty have an ideal means for
encouraging spiritual growth. In addition the
following are some of the means used to promote
the spiritual life of the student body.

Cha e1: Chapel is held each morning Tuesday
througfi Friday during the fall and spring
semesters and each wednesday morning during summer
school. Chapel sessions include worship services,
prayer meetings and messages by a member of the
faculty and other outstanding Christian leaders
such as pastors, missionaries, teachers, laymen
and others.

 

Day of Pra er: Once each semester the
students and facuIty join in a day of prayer.
This is a spiritual highlight of the year in which
seminary and individual needs are brought to the
Lord in intercessory prayer. The day is climaxed
with a worshipful communion service in
commemoration of the Lord's death, resurrection
and return.

Advisee meetings: Each student is assigned
to a faculty member thus giving each faculty
member about eighteen advisees. These students
meet periodically as a group with their faculty
advisor for prayer, Bible study and fellowship.

 

Counseling: Counseling is available to the
students through several means, the dean of
students, the director of counseling, the seminary
chaplain, faculty advisors and, in fact, the
entire faculty, two of whom are psychiatrists.

 

131

Standards of Conduct: The faculty recognizes
the freedom 6? each student to develop under the
leadership of the Holy Spirit. Since the students
at the seminary are already recognized as
Christian leaders by men and women in the
community, it is essential that they exemplify a
God controlled life both on and off the campus.
The seminary believes that the use of tobacco and
intoxicating beverages and other questionable
practices are not suitable for Christian leaders.
Students are expected to share these convictions
and abide by them.

 

Student Activities: The results of
theological study should be reflected in a dynamic
Christian outreach. The Dallas-Fort WOrth area
provides splendid opportunities for student
witness. Area churches welcome students to teach
Sunday School classes and lead young peOples
groups. The missions, jails, Christian youth
organizations and hospitals in the city provide
choice fields for effective testimony. As the
student advances in his studies he will find other
openings in Christian Education, church music and
church extension. Advanced students are sometimes
able to serve as pastors while in Seminary but new
students are advised against seeking pastoral
appointments since such work may severely hamper
their academic pursuits. The Department of Field
Education directs the students to real life
situations through a flexible program of field
education courses involving a variety of
ministries (1981:36-38).

 

The Master of Theology Program: Since all of the
subjects in’the study are enrolled in the Th.M.
program, the specifics of that program are given:
Purpose--the four year Master of Theology degree
program is designed to prepare men for a ministry
of Bible exposition as pastors, teachers,
missionaries, and leaders in other areas of
ministry requiring ability in expounding the
scriptures. The Th.M. Program is the main
curriculum program of the Seminary. A.major in
the Master of Theology Program must be selected by
the students in one of the following departments:
Semitics and Old Testament Studies, New Testament
Literature and Exegesis, Bible Exposition,
Systematic Theology, Historical Theology, Pastoral
Ministries, Christian Education or WOrld Missions.
Requirements for a.major are stated in connection
with the course offerings of each department. Two
basic curricula are provided in the Master of

 

132

Theology degree program. Curriculum "A" is for
those who enter without Greek and Curriculum "B"
is for those entering with Greek. In order to be
admitted to candidacy for the Master of Theology
degree the following requirements must be met:

(1) The student must have completed with credit a
minimum of 90 semester hours with a.minimum grade
point average of 2.00; (2) He must have filed an
acceptable thesis syllabus or project syllabus:

(3) He must have removed all entrance
deficiencies; (4) He must be making satisfactory
progress toward meeting field education
requirements thereby evidencing ability and
acceptability in Christian Ministry; and (5) He
must have evidenced a commitment to the purpose of
the Seminary. The prescribed course of study
leading to the degree of Master of Theology
normally required four (4) years or eight
semesters of resident work including six (6) hours
of field education. A minimum grade point average
of 2.00 is required for graduation. A
comprehensive examination in theology including
Biblical and historical backgrounds is required as
a condition for graduation and is related to 408
Senior Theology. The completion of minimum
requirements does not, however, automatically
qualify the student for the degree. He must have
evidenced to the satisfaction of the faculty,
solidarity of Christian character, ability and
acceptability in Christian ministry and commitment
to the purpose of the seminary (1981:43—46).

APPENDIX C

EXPLANATION OF THE TEN-YEAR
LONGITUDINAL STUDY

EXPLANATION OF THE TEN-YEAR
LONGITUDINAL STUDY

The present study is designed as the first-year report
of a ten-year longitudinal study. The longer project.
measures subjects through four years of seminary training
and first six years of ministry experience. The focus is on
correlation between seminary preparation and professional
practice.

The following needs for information will be pursued by
the study:

1. We need to know what seminary training is doing,
specifically to students' concept of leadership and to
variables believed to influence the implementation of those
concepts.

2. We need to know what post-graduation ministry
experience does, specifically to students' concept of
leadership and to variables believed to influence the
implementation of those concepts.

3. we need to know how what happens in seminary
correlates with what happens in early professional
experience.

4. We need to know if classroom teaching and seminary
atmosphere cooperate or compete in what they communicate to
students vis-a-vis church leadership.

The study is important for four reasons:

1. Many graduates have problems adjusting to church

leadership roles. The data from the study will inform those

133

134

who help counsel students and graduates who feel anxiety
over these adjustment problems.

2. Seminaries are coming under criticism for
inadequacy to train for church leadership (Richards 1973).
Claims of inadequacy are difficult to substantiate or refute
without data related to subjects' development over time of
training and experience.

3. Shaping of curriculum based on data from the
proposed study should make transfer from seminary to church
easier and more productive.

4. By developing clearer understanding of the issues
and questions of the first six years of ministry, the
seminary curriculum can be more specifically designed to
provide praxis experiences that enable graduates to maximize
personal develOpment through the years of experience.
Seminaries may be able to adjust their emphasis to prepare
students for continued development as they prepare them for

ministry.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswick, Else, Levinson, D. J., and
Sanford, R. N. The Authoritarian Personality.
New York: Harper, I950.

 

Amirthaus, Smauel. "New Styles in Theological Education,"
Evangelical Revies of Theology, VOl. 3, No. l,
II§i127.

Bales, R. F. Interaction Process Analysis, Reading:
Addison-Weslty, 1950.

"Task Roles and Social Roles in Problem Solving
Groups," in Elanor E. Maccoby, T. M. Newcomb, and
E. L. Hartley. Readings in Social Ps chol , New
York: Holt, Rinehart, and—Winston, 1358.

Barnard, C. I. "The Nature of Leadership," in S. D.
Hoslett, Human Factors in Management, New York:
McGraw Hill, 1946.

Bass, B. M., McGehee, C. R., Hawkins, W. C., Young, P. C.,
and Gelad, A. S. "Personality Variables Related
to Leaderless Group Discussion Behavior," Journal
of Abnormal Social Psychology, 1953, 18, 120-I28.

Bellingrath, G. C. Qualities Assgciated With Extracurricula
Agtivities of tfie High School, New York: Teachers
College Contributions to Education, 1930.

Benne, K. 0., and Sheats, P. "Functional Roles of Group
Members," Journal of Social Issues, 1948, 4(2),
41-49.

Bentz, W. Kenneth. "Consensus Between Role Expectation and
Role Behavior Among Ministers," Communit Mental
Health Journal, Vol. 4, No. 4, 1968, 30I-306.

Bingham, W. V. "Leadership." In H. C. Metcalf, The
Psycholggical Foundations of Management. New
Yor : S aw, 27.

Blizzard, Samuel W. "The Parish Minister's Integrating
Roles," Religious Education, VOl. 53, No. 4, 1958,
374-380.

 

Boice, James M. "Church and Seminary: A Reciprocal
Relationship," Christianity Today, Vol. 23, No. 9
(Feb. 2, 1979) 14, 15.

135

136

Bowden, A. O. "A Study of the Personality of Student
Leaders in the United States." Journal of
Abnormal Social Psychology, 1926, 21, 1493160.

 

Bowers, D. G. "Self-esteem and the Diffusion of Leadership
Style," Journal of Applied Psychology, 1963, 41,
135-140.

Brilhart, John K. Effective Grogp Discussion. Dubuque:
William C. Brown,I967:

Brinker, P. A. "Supervisors' and Foremen's Reasons for
Frustration,“ Personnel Journal, 1955, 34,
101-103.

 

Calvin, A. D., Hoffman, F. R., and Harden, E. D. "The
Effect of Intelligence and Social Atmosphere on
Group Problem-Solving Behavior," Journal of
Social Psychology, 1957, 45, 61-74.

 

 

Cattell, R. D., Stice, G. F. "Four Formulae for Selecting
Leaders on the Basis of Personality," Human
Relations, 1954.

 

Conn, Harvie M. "Theological Education and the Search for
Excellence," The westminster Journal, VOl. 41, No.

2 (Spring, 19797—3II3363.

Cooper, J. B., and McGaugh, J. L. Inte rating Princi les of
Social Psychology, Cambridge: Schenkman, 1563.

 

 

Dayton, Edward R. and Engstrom, Ted. W. Strat for
Leadership, Old Tappan: Fleming H. ReveII CO.,

 

Dewey, John. Ex erience and Education, New York: Collier
Books, I938.

Dittes, J. E. "Attractiveness of Group as a Function of
Self-esteem and Acceptance by Group," Journal of
Abnormal Soccial Psychology, 1959, 52, - .

 

Dore, R. The Diploma Disease: Education, Qualification and
Development, Allen and Urwin, I976.

 

Douglas, J. D., ed. Let the Earth Egg; His Voice:
InternationaI Congress on Evangelization,
Minneapolis: WOrld'Wide Publications, I975.

 

 

Drake, R. M. "A Study of Leadership," Character and

 

137

Ehrilich, J. J. and Lee, D. "Dogmatism, Learning and
Resistance to Change: A Review and New Paradigm,
Psychological Bulletin, 1969, 11, 249-260.

Eisner, Elliot W., and‘Vallance, Elizabeth, eds. Conflicting
Conceppion of Curriculum, Berkley: McCutchan,
I974:

 

Elmer, Duane. Career Data as Indicators for curriculum
Develo ent in Theological Education, UnpfihIished
Ph.D. Dissertation, Michigan State University,
1980.

Engstrom, Ted. The Making of a Christian Leader, Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1976.

Fiedler, Fred E. "A Contingency Model of Leadership
Effectiveness," in L. Berkowitz, Advances in

Experimental and Social Psyghology, New York,
Academic Press, I964.

 

A TheoEy of Leadership Effectiveness, New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1967.

Leader Attitudes and Group Effectiveness, Urbana:
University of Illinois Press,_I958.

"Style or Circumstance: The Leadership Enigma,"
Psycholggy Today, March, 1969.

"The Trouble with Leadership Training Is It
Doesn't Train Leaders," Psyghology Today, Feb.,
1973.

 

Fiedler, F. E., O'brien, G. E., and Ilgen, D. R. "The
Effect of Leadership Style Upon the Performance
and Adjustment of Volunteer Teams Operating in
Successful Foreign Environment," Human Relations,
1969, 23, 503-514.

Findlay, G. G. The Expositer' s Greek Testament Vol. 2,
Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Erdmans Pfiblishing Co.,
1970.

 

 

Fleishman, E. A. "A Leader Behavior Description for
Industry," in R. M. Stogdill and A. E. Coons,
Leader Behavior its Description and Measurement,
COIumbus: Ohio State University, Bhieau 0
Business Research Monograph No. 88,1957.

Foa, U. 6., Mitchell, T. R., and Fielder, F. E.
Differential _Matching, Seattle: University of
Washington, Department of Psychology, 1970.

138

Foulkes, D., and Foulkes, S. H. "Self-Concept, Dogmatism
and Tolerance of Trait Inconsistency," Journal of
Personalipy and Social Psychology, 1965, 3,

 

 

 

I04-lll.
Freire, Paulo. Peda of the Oppressed, New York: Herder
and Herder, I970.

Conscientizing as a Way for Liberating," Ladoc
Keyhole Series, No. 1, II, 29a, Latin American
Division, USCC, 1973.

 

Gangel, Kenneth 0. Building Leadegs for Church Education,
Chicago: Moody Press, 1981.

 

Leadership for Church Education, Chicago: Moody
Press, 1970.

 

 

Getz, Gene A. Shar enin the Focus of the Church, Chicago:
Moody Press, I974.

Gibb, Cecil. "Leadership," in Handbook of Social
Psychology, 2nd Edition, Ed: by Lindzay, Gardner,
and Aaronson, Elliot, Addeson: wesley Publishing
Co., 1968.

 

 

Greenbaum, C. "Effect of Situational and Personality
Variables on Improvisation and Attitude Change,"
Journal of Personalipy and Social Psychology,
1966’ I, 266-269.

 

Hahn, Celia A. Inter/Met: Bold Experiment in Theological
Education, washington, D.C.: Albon Institute,

 

 

Halpin, Andrew. "Leader Behavior and Leadership Ideology,"
Harvard Educational Review, Winter 1955, 25,
I8:32. —-

 

Hamilton, D. "A Comparative Study of Five Methods of
Assessing Self-Esteem, Dominance, and Dogmatism,"
Educational and ngchological Measurement, 1971,
:1, 441-452.

 

Hanson, D. J. "Dogmatism and Authoritatianism," Journal of
Social Psyghology, 1968, 16, 89-95.

 

Holmes, Urban T., III. The Future Shape of Ministry, New
York: Seabury Press, I97I.

 

Hovland, Carl I., Janis, Irving L., and Kelley, Harold H.
Communication and Persuasion, New Haven: Yale
University Press, I953.

 

139

Jacobsen, E., Charters, W. W., and Lieberman, S. "The Use
of Role Concept in the Study of Complex
Organizations," Journal of Social Issues, 1951, 1,
18-270

 

Janda, K. F. "Towards the Explication of the Concept of
Leadership in Terms of the Concept of Power,"
Human Relations, 1960, ll, 345-363.

Kahn, R. L., WOlfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., Snoek, J. D., and
Rosenthal, R. A. "Organizational Stress: Studies
in Role Conflict and Ambiguity," New York: Wiley,
1964.

Keating, Charles J. The Leadership Book, New York: Paulist
Press, 1978.

 

Kilbourne, C. E. "The Elements of Leadership," Journal of
Coast Artillery, 1935, 15, 437-439.

 

 

 

Kinsler, F. Ross. The Extension Movement in Theol ical
Education, South Pasadena: William Carey Lihrary,
n.d.

 

Kipnis, D., and Lane, W. P. "Self Confidence and
Leadership," Journal of Applied Psychology, 1962,
15, 291-295.

Kleck, R. E. and Wheaton, J. "Dogmatism and Responses to
Opinion-Consistent and Opinion-Inconsistent
Information," Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 1967, 5, 249-2521

 

 

Levinson, D. J. "Role, Personality, and Social Structure in
the Organizational Setting," Journal of Abnormal
Social Psychology, 1959, 55, 170-I80.

 

The Seasons of a Man's Life, New York: Ballentine
Books, I978.

Lunding F. J., Clements, G. L., and Perkins, D. 8.,
"Everyone Who Makes It Has A Mentor," Harvard
Business Review, July-August 1978, 89-IOI.

 

Michels, Robert. Political Parties. New York: Free Press,
1962.

 

Miller, D. C. "Using Behavioral Science to Solve
Organizational Problems," Personnel
Administration, 1968, 51 (I), 2I-29.

 

Moore, J. V., and Smith, R. G. "Some Aspects of
Noncommissioned Officer Leadership," Personnel
Psychology, 1953, 5, 427-443.

 

140

Mullen, J. H. "The Supervisor Assesses His Job in
Management," Personnel, 1954, 5;, 94-108.

 

O'Gorman, Francis.

Petersen, Gilbert. "Church Leadership Development," in
Church Leadershi Development, Glen Ellyn:
Scripture Press, I977.

Plant, W. T. "Rokeach's Dogmatism Scale as a Measure of
General Authoritarianism," Psychological Reports,
1960, 5, 1964.

 

Pyron, B. "A Factor Analytic Study of Simplicity -
Complexity of Social Ordering," Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 1966, 33, 259-272.

 

 

Richards, Lawrence 0. A New Face for the Church, Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, I970.

 

Richards, Lawrence 0., and Hoeldtke, Clyde A. ATheology
for Church Education, Grand Rapids: Zondervan
Publishing House, 1980.

 

 

Richardson, Helen M. and Hanawalt, Nelson G. "Leadership as
Related to the Bernreuter Personality Measures:
III. Leadership Among Adult Men in Vocational and
Social Activities," Journal of Social Psychology.
1943, 51, 308-317.

 

Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J., and Lirtzman, S. I. "Role
Conflict and Ambiguity in Complex Organizations,"

Administrative Science Quarterly, 1970,15,
I501163.

Roberts, Alan B., and Herrmann, Robert S. "Dogmatism, Time
Perspective and Anomie," Journal of Individual

 

 

 

Robinson, John P., and Shavers, Philip R. Measure of Social
Psychological Attitude, Ann Arbor: Survey
Research Center InstiEute for Social Research,
1973.

 

Rokeach, Milton. "Dogmatism and Opinionation on the Left
and on the Right," American Psychologist, 1952, 7,
310.

"The Nature and Meaning of Dogmatism,"
Psychological Review, 1954, 55, 194-204.

 

"Political and Religious Dogmatism: Alternative
to the Authoritarian Personality," Psychological
Monographs, 1956, 15.

 

141

The Open and Closed Mind, New York: Bosic Books,

The Nature of Human Values, New York: Free Press,
I973.

Outcomes: A_Participatory Case Stu in
Theological Education, Unpublished Ph.D.
Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1981.

 

Rowen, Samuel F. Curriculum Foundations, Experiences, and

Sanford, F. H. "Research on Military Leadership," in J. F.
Flanagan ed., Psychology in WOrld Emergeney,
Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1952.

 

Schuller, David S., Brekke, Milo L., and Strommen, Merton P.
Readiness for Ministr , Vol. 1, Vandalia:
AssociatiOn of TheoIogical Schools, 1975.

Schutz, W. C. "The Ego, FIRO Theory, and the Leader as
Completer," in L. Petrullo and B. M. Bass.

Leadership and Interpersonal Behavior. New York:
HoIt, Rinehart and Winston, I961.

 

Schwirian, K. P., and Helfrich, Margaret, L. "Economic Role
and Community Involvement iof Business
Executives," Sociological Quarterly, University of
Georgia, Ph.D., I973. \

Sherif, M. An Outline of Social Psychology, New York:
Harper, I960.

Simkins, Tim. Non-Formal Education and Development,
Manchester Monographs, Number 8, Department of
Adult and Higher Education, The University of
Manchester, 1977.

Simmons, J. How Effective is Schooling in Promoting
Learning? A Review of the Research, Staff WOrking
Paper Number 200, International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development.

Snyder, Graydon. "Present Trends in Theological
Education.", Brethern Life and Thought, Vol. 23,
No. 3 (Summer, I978).

Snyder, Howard A. The Problem of Wineskins: ’Church

5tructure inepTechnogogical Age, Downers Grove:
Intervarsity Press, 1 75.

 

142

Stogdill, Ralph M. "Personal Factors Associated with
Leadership: A Survey of the Literature," Journal

 

Eeader Behavior: Its Descriptionend Measurement.
Columbus: The Bureau of Business Research, 1957.

 

 

Handbook of Leadership, New York: The Free Press,
1974.

 

Tead, O. "The Technique of Creative Leadership," in Human
National and Management. New York: McGraw-HiII,
1929.

 

Tosi, D. J., Fagan, T. K., and Frumkin, R. M. "Relation of
Levels of Dogmatism and Perceived Threat Under
Conditions of Group Personality Testing."
Psychological Reports, 1968, 25, 638.

 

Tosi, H. "Organization Stress as a Moderator in the
Relationship Between Influence and Role Response,"
Academic Management Journal, 1971, 55, 7-20.

 

 

Trueblood, Elton. The Com ay of the Committed, New York:
Harper and Row, I96I.

Vacchiano, Ralph B., Straus, Paul S., Hochman, Leonard.
"The Open and Closed Mind." Peychological
Bulletin, 1969, 15, 261-273.

 

 

Ward, Ted. "Facing Educational Issues," in Church
EeadershipDevelopment, Glen Ellyn: Scripture
Press, 1977.

 

Webb, Sam C. Revised Technical Manual: The Ipventogy of
Religious Acpiviiies and Interests, Princeton:
Educational Testing Service, 1970.

 

 

Weber, Max. Economy and Society, New York: Bedminster

Press, I968.

Wells, Vernon L. "A Study of Leadership," Adult Leadership,
October, 1974.

 

 

White, B. J., and Alter, R. D. "Dogmatism,
Authoritarianism, and Contrast Effects in
Judgment," Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1965, 55,
99-101.

Winter, Ralph ed. Theol ical Education by Extension, South
Pasadena: WiIIiam Carey Lihrary, I969.

 

 

143

Wispe, L. G., and Thayer, P. W. "Role Ambiguity and Anxiety
in an Occupational Group," Journal of Social
Peychology, 1957, 55, 41-48.

 

WOod, James R. "Authority and Controversial Policy: The
Church and Civil Rights," American Sociological
Review, 1970, 3_s_, 1057-10697

Zagona, S. V. and Zurcher, L. A. "Participation,
Interaction, and Role Behavior in Groups Selected
From the Extremes of the Open-Closed Cognitive
Continuum," Journal of Psychology, 1964, 55,
255-264.

 

Zaleznik, Abraham. "Managers and Leaders: Are They
Different," Harvard Business Review, May-June,
1977.

 

"Managers and Leaders: Are They Different?",
Hervard Business Review, May-June 1977, 67-78.

 

Human Dilemmas of Leadership, New York: Harper

and Row, I966.

Zuck, Roy, ed., Dallas Theological Seminary 1981-82 Catalog.
1982.