«ii .2123! ¢ u v” qr 0 ' 0].“ . km... .jauuw... 1...... fifiwvnu... .Vnm a twig}: 4‘1 .H.,..n.,...m..u......uum 5,2,3... . . | Infi W 9. . . l...’ .1: " .‘O I \ O. 9 VV . . A. . 3. . I I .V v u o .5 ‘. ¢ 9 a . . , . . . _ 1. {Wu u.%wr. . .. . . . .. . 5. 140%.“... Manoeuaflumt. ... U o! '0 ‘ A . 1 . I I .. . . .. 3.1..mutut%««3..f..¢.d.zl. we}: mmNthnKlfi..? .. . . $1M3:¥.wfi¥. ..., . . d3... .. r. :1. A, t. -.. . .-. Q ‘. I I MW”. .1. In. , § an“ .I I. 1 a .xbvmanwfir hn‘flwlxhrllanuflfll 1‘. “I. O . .. n .: 9 u I. It. . it”s z . - - .-. sunny»... ”.4. u . .‘1..1..\.»._1. .1.-. . .1.” 111‘...“ 1|. .4. {I39 ‘ .19.”... .. k3. .4.qu Ru. :uiu!!.- . i 1."... . Jnnmmr..l.._.tv.1 .. ‘l I ‘ ‘ .‘Oyl. _ on]: .tzlw. . . J7.-. . I III . - .. . Q I 7“! lal .. :11. I. ... . .. . I.l. V . .. I. h . a -. 1 .l .I . . . . |cr|ln “fish... “1!... .3 . . 3.1... :(o... ~.&|al.\x¢$d.¥.l.i.uv..uw .2. 4\ KPOVN...4o-A:O\." . 1 III, A 0" | . A {ELF}: . o..w.on|r.|.o v vi. tho‘l.v.l thl‘l1l we. . .IIII v... ..I. ‘IHIIVXIII ‘1'. 7..an 00‘...» .. s v? .o. t . a a. . . (911.1 1... 11:.52.l3 131241.... r- . 4.]..1...I.....1|.:t. $1.. - . . .2: . .- O '.h u 9 .. . ‘ z . . . . 1. P .. . . . ukv‘. s I. .It .- c-lxuxo 3. v. v. . u \ . O aQIYA- « t, }\ liou’fio no» 50);; I. .124. .oflwhnl .10 htw c '0'. L I . . I a. . . . . «111$. .4... . .._ .{ilool . . v ..IC. - 1 4 . I. . . . v V I‘ I I ‘ A c ‘5'. a A u do. -..vJ oh. 4. call ‘31.. u v u... 81 . , v buolstflumd:2 . .3341. tagraflbgfitffiw..: : 1Li(fiutr)rllwt§} _ . . .. . : it...........hm.o.fihut 14.0.1.3 .........i....-. y .. . I )1)....«d.n..»u. .1. .1. .. . x . 2g noun”; m0“. . .ltlwhifilnv‘ .. .1 I... 1 . ‘l . ‘ . .t- 1.... )vs)‘ 3 V 53W.“ n“... «H. . 1!. £ . a.» .Ava 2 0 Q..- ., o. , 91.. In... . ... . .9 7!! . .. . 1.2mm. 2...... $4, -932? :n...2......y.m...3 . -. .._ .w 1 r . . . . . (S. . .. . ...... ,. , . (I; .. .- , - } . . ..... . ..... ~mn....}..«.l._ .. i... 2.. ., .i .... . .. . . .. . ‘ . .n . . 1 .. ‘ .f. . .r. .fitmwl.‘ :1 .3): (vii. .{v . .. . .‘rl.vv. Ex I, .4...u.o v . , . ’« ‘ r mhgflp . J '3 l’. 5”" " -4 j I.“1 “"G‘mljlml‘I‘muw TU‘II‘i-‘I‘T‘mfmn‘lul L). .4. fl", 5 ;a’.";" ”La DE 3'5". frag/.3 -_ 3" " I 3 1293 10676 5294 a". ,,”; :9; 21133;? F '3 ,._.,,,, . -.,- "UduEV\_Ii&uty ' This is to certify that the dissertation entitled IMAGES OF THE PASTOR-AS-LEADER OF NORTH AMERICAN-BORN AND FOREIGN-BORN STUDENTS IN THREE SEMINARIES presented by Leslie Alice Andrews has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph . D . degree in Department of Educational Adminis trat ion \JQQLQ 9 WW ”1327/9 96 Date MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity lutitution 0-12771 MSU LIBRARIES m RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. \.\“ ‘. ‘ a. " Um! i K! T? ‘ r3 " ‘5‘ r. .1 r-m'g 9! . up )1“ » I l was?“ ’ IMAGES OF THE PASTOR-AS-LEADER OF NORTH AMERICAN-BORN AND FOREIGN-BORN STUDENTS IN THREE SEMINARIES By Leslie Alice Andrews A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Adult and Continuing Education 1986 Copyright by LESLIE ALICE ANDREWS I986 ABSTRACT IMAGES OF THE PASTOR-AS-LEADER OF NORTH AMERICAN-BORN AND FOREIGN-BORN STUDENTS IN THREE SEMINARIES By Leslie Alice Andrews North American theological institutions have been criticized for the models of leadership which they export to Third World countries. In view of this criticism, the purpose of this study was to identify and to describe the images of the pastor-as-lead- er in the Church held by North American-born and foreign-born students in three seminaries. The goal was to understand how seminary students view the role of the pastor-as-leader and to determine if seminaries and/or culture have distinct roles in the formation of those images. The research was a cross-sectional descriptive study of first-year and third-year Master of Divinity students in three theological seminaries. Data were collected in two phases. In the first phase, interviews were conducted with 62 students and 12 faculty members, equally divided among the three seminaries. Based on the findings from the interviews, the Pastor—as-Leader Expectations Questionnaire (PALEQ) was designed to test generali- zations made from the interviews. Conclusions reached are: I. Seminary students view the pastor-aS-leader in four distinct ways: Personal, Relational, Functional, and Spiritual. 2. Students tend to form their images of the pastor-as- leader based on associations with leaders whom they deem appro- priate role models. 3. The more education a person has, the more likely he/she is to idealize his/her images of the pastor-as-leader. 4. Seminaries differ among themselves in reference to idealized and particularized images of the pastor-as-leader. 5. Foreign-born subjects view the pastor-as-leader in functional and spiritual ways more frequently than North Ameri- can-born subjects. North American-born subjects, on the other hand, view the pastoral leader more frequently in personal and relational ways. 6. Seminary faculties tend to do curriculum planning without explicit assumptions of what the pastor-as-leader is. 7. Variability existing among seminaries seems to account for different images of the pastor-as-leader held by their students. Dedicated to ROBERT STEPHEN ANDREWS Brother Friend Enabler ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many have accompanied me in my pilgrimage and have helped me to arrive at strategic marker events along the way. lwy deepest appreciation goes to the following who have been particularly significant for this part of my sojourn: To Dr. Ted Ward, mentor and friend, who excels in making the educational journey serendipitous! To Dr. George Ferree, Dr. Joseph Levine, and Dr. Eldon Nonnamaker, committee members, for their helpfulness and encour- agement along the way. To the administration, faculty, and students of Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Delta Seminaries for their wholehearted support and participation in the research. To friends and traveling companions who nourish my dreams and give generously of themselves. In doing so they have enriched the walk immeasurably: Joan Carter, David Hartz- feld, Charlotte Kinvig, and Ruth Ranbo. vi TABLE.OF‘CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS 0 O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 LIST OF FIGURES O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Chapter I UNDERSTANDING THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . . Purpose of the Inquiry . . . . . . . . Importance of the Study . . . . . . . Historical Patterns of Leadership Present Problems . . . . . . . . . Renewal Emphases . . . . . . . . . Recent Studies . . . . . . . . . . Statement of Research Questions . Definitions of Terms . . . . . . . . Population and Sample . . . . . . . Delimitations and Generalizability . Overview of the Study . . . . . . . PRECEDENTS IN THE LITERATURE . . . . . . . . Conceptions of the Curriculum . . . . . Relationship of Theory to Praxis . . Liberal Arts-Professions Relationship . Relationship of Structure and Concept Studies of Theological Education . . Images of the Minister . . . . Carnegie Corporation Study . . Readiness for Ministry Study . Pastorate Start Up Project . . Schorr' 5 Study . . . . . . Ways of Viewung Leadership . Contemporary Research . . . . Biblical/Theological Viewpoints . Linking Research and Biblical Perspec- tives O O O O O O O O O O O 0 vii Research Precedents . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Interviewing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Questionnaires . . . . . . . . . . . . . #7 Likert-Type Scales . . . . . . . . . . . #9 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . 63 Purpose of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Overview of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Research and Operational Questions . . . . . 65 Population and Samples . . . . . . . . . 67 Seminary Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Alpha Seminary Profile . . . . . 69 Beta Seminary Profile . . . . . 72 Gannm Seminary Profile . . . . 75 Instrumentation . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 InterviewrGuide . . . . 78 Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 InterviewrProcedures . . . . . . . . . . 81 Questionnaire Procedures . . . . . . . . 82 Constraints of the Study . . . . . . . . . . 85 FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS OF DATA FROM INTERVIEW PHASE 86 Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Instrumentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 IntervieW'Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Analytic Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Data Reduction During Interviews . . 89 Subsequent Content Analysis . . . . . 9O Uses of Key Words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Faculty Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . 157 Selection of Faculty Interviewees . . . 158 Findings froniFaculty Interviews . . . . 158 Cowmarisons with Student Scores . . . . 158 Thenm Formation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 Validity of Themes . . . . . . . . . . . 160 Analysis of Themes . . . . . . . . 162 Questionnaire Development . . . . . . . . . 165 Criteria for Item Selection . . . . . 166 Items Selected . . . . . . . . . . . . . I66 Validity of Items . . . . . . . . . . . 167 Relating Findings to Research Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I67 viii 5 FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS OF DATA FRGVI QUESTIONNAIRE Instrumentation . Design of the Questionnaire Collection Procedures . Analytic Procedures . Independent Variables Tests Used . Findings Personal Theme . Relational Theme Functional Theme Spiritual Theme Differences Among the Seminaries . Findings for Age . . Differences Based on Ethnic Background . Findings for Year Findings Based on Number of Years Lived in North America in Seminary PHASE Differences Observed Based on Classroom Language Differences Based on Intended Vocation . 6 SUMMARY AND1CONCLUSIONS BIBLIOGRAPHY Major Findings Recommendations for Further Research Differences Observed Within-the-Seminary Differences Observed Among-the-Seminar- Intended Vocation Findings for the Key Words Findings for the Themes General Observations Regarding Differences Within-the—Seminary . IES . Findings for the Key Words Findings for the Themes . Observations About Differences Anmng the-Seminaries Differences Observed Between Ethnic Groups Observations About Differences Based on Ethnic Background . Unexpected Findings Summary and Conclusions . ix 178 178 178 180 180 I81 181 182 182 186 192 198 203 205 205 206 207 207 208 210 211 212 212 213 216 217 217 217 218 221 223 224 224 226 227 230 Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table 403O 4OQO 40100 4.11. LIST OF TABLES Subjects by Seminary, Ethnicity, and Year in Seminary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Students in Alpha, Beta, and Gamma Seminaries 69 Response Rate by Seminary . . . . . . . . . . 84 Reasons for Response Rate at Beta Seminary . 84 Statements Derived from Interviews by seminary O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 90 40 Key Words Identified in Attributional Analysis. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 92 Differences Between Foreign-Born and North Anmrican-Born Subjects on the 40 Key words. 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 93 Differences Between First-Year and Third-Year Seminarians on the 40 Key Words. . . . . 94 Differences Among Alpha, Beta, and Gamma Seminar- ies on the 40 Key Words. . . . . . . . . 95 Differences Among the Seminaries on the 40 Key wordSO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 98 Differences by Age for the 40 Key Words. . . 98 Differences by Year in Seminary for the 40 Key wordSO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 98 Differences by Place of Birth for the 40 Key wordSO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 99 Differences by Number of Years Lived in North Anmrica for the 40 Key Words. . . . . . 99 Differences by Number of Years of Formal Study in English for the 40 Key Words. . . . 100 Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table 4.12. 4.13. 4.26. 4.27. 4.28. #O29O Differences by Program of Study for the 40 Key wordSO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 100 Differences by Intended Vocation for the 40 Key wordSO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 100 Correlations Observed Between the 40 Key‘Words and Age, Years Lived in North America, and Years of Formal Study in English. . . . . 103 Classification of Persons Identified as Leaders. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 10” Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Know" by seminaryO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 105 Classification of "Know" by "Information," "Skill" and "Ambiguous." . . . . . . . . 106 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Gift/Ability" by Seminary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 Frequency of Use of the Key Words "Develop/- Grow" by Seminary. . . . . . . . . . . . 108 Frequency of Use of the Key'WOrds "Model/Ex- ample" by Seminary. . . . . . . . . . . 109 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Teach" by Semin- arYO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 110 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Love" by Seminary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Learn" by Seminary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Servant" by Seminary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Willing" by seminary. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 114 Frequency of Use of the Key‘Word "Authority" by seminarYO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 116 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Administra- tion" by Seminary. . . . . . . . . . . . 117 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Think" by seminarYO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 118 xi Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table 4.30. “O 31. 4032O 4. 4. .33. .34. .35. .36. .37. .38. .39. .40. .41. .42. 43. 44. 4.45. 4.46. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "GoaJ-Orien- ted" by seminaryO O O O O O O O O O O O Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Goal-Orien- ted" by Number of Years Lived in North AmericaO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Responsible" by seminarYO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Organize" by seminarYO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Respect" by SeminarYO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Respect" by Number of Years of Study in English. . . Frequency of Use of the Key‘Word "Spiritual" by seminarYO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Experience" by seminarYO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Experience" by AgeO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Lifestyle" by seminarYO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Position" by Seminary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Listen" by seminaryO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Decisive" by seminarYO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Decisive" by AgeO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Decisive" by Number of Years Lived in North America. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Care" by Seminary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Care" Based on Number of Years Lived in North America. xii 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 126 127 128 129 I31 132 132 133 134 Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table 4.48. 4.49. 4.50. 4.51. #O52O 4.53. 4.54. 4.55. 4.56. 4.57. 4.58. 4.59. 4060O 4.61. 4.62. 4.63. 4.64. Frequency of Use of the Key”Word "Vision" by seminaryO O O O O O O O O O O O O O 135 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Vision" by AgeO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 136 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Discipline" by seminarYO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 136 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Connmnicate" by Seminary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Connmnicate" by Place of Birth. . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Connmnicate" by Number of Years Lived in North America. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 139 Frequency of Use of the Key'Word "Connmnicate" by Number of Years of Study in English. . 140 Frequency of Use of the Key Word WMotivate" by Seminary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 Frequency of Use of the Key Word WMotivate" Based on Number of Years of Study in English. 141 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Confident" by Seminary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 Frequency of Use of the Key‘Word "Humility" by Seminary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 Frequency of Use of the Key‘Word "Sensitive" by seminaryO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O l#5 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Sensitive" Based on Number of Years Lived in North America. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O la6 Frequency of Use of the Key'Word "Sensitive" Based on Age of Subjects. . . . . . . . 146 Frequency of Use of the Key‘Word "Sensitive" by seminaryO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 1‘57 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Open" by seminary O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 1‘48 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Plan" by Seminary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I48 xiii Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table 4065O 4.77. 4.78. 4.79. 5.1. 5.2. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Encourage" by Seminary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Faithful" by Seminary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Character" by seminaryO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 150 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Character" Based on Number of Years Lived in North AmericaO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 151 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Character" Based on Number of Years of Study in English. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 152 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Charismatic" by seminarYO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 153 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Charismatic" by Number of Years Lived in North America. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 154 Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Shepherd" by seminaryO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 155 Frequency of Use of the Key Words "Aggressive/- Assertive" by Seminary. . . . . . . . . 156 Frequency of Use of the Key'Word "Delegate" by SeminaryO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 157 Findings for the 40 Key words for Faculty Inter- Views O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 159 Significant Differences Between Faculty and Student Scores on the 40 Key Words. . . 160 Key Word and Thenw Validities . . . . . . . . .161 Summary of Statistically Significant Findings for Key Words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 Significant Findings for Themes (Interviews). 177 Significant Findings for the Themes (PALEQ). 181 Personal Theme Differences Among the Seminaries for Ideal Scale Pastor-as-Leader. . . . 182 xiv Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table 5017O Personal Theme Differences Among Seminaries for Actual Scale Pastor-as-Leader. . . . 183 Personal Theme Differences Based on Ethnic Background for Actual Scale Pastor-as-Leader. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 18# Differences Between Subjects by Intended vocationO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 185 Personal Theme Differences Among Seminaries for Key word ChOiceSO O O O O O O O O O O O 186 Relational Theme Differences Between First-Year and Third-Year Students for Ideal Scale Pastor-as-Leader. . . . . . . . . . . . 187 Relational Theme Differences Based on Intended Vocation for Ideal Scale Pastor-as-Leader. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 187 Relational Theme Differences Among the Seminar- ies for Actual Scale Pastor-as-Leader. . 188 Relational Theme Differences Based on Ethnic Background for Actual Scale Pastor-as-Leader. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 189 Relational Theme Differences Between First-Year and Third-Year Seminarians for Actual Scale PaStOF-aS-Leader o o o o o o o o o o o o 189 Relational Theme Differences Based on Intended Vocation for Actual Scale Pastor-as-Lead- er O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 190 Relational Theme Differences Among Seminaries for Key‘WordIChoices. . . . . . . . . . 191 Relational Theme Differences Between First-Year and Third-Year Seminarians for Key Word Choices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191 Relational Theme Differences Based on Intended Vocation for Key‘Word Choices . 192 Functional Theme Differences Among Seminaries for Ideal Scale Pastor-as-Leader. . . . 193 Functional Theme Differences Based on Ethnic Background for Ideal Scale Pastor-as-Leader. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 19“ XV Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table 5.18. 5.19. 5.20. 5.21. 5.22. 5.23. 5024O 5.25. 5.26. 5.27. 5.28 5.29. 5.30. 5.31. Functional Theme Differences Between Foreign Students and Non-Foreign Students for Ideal Scale Pastor-as-Leader. . . . 194 Functional Theme Differences Based on Intended Vocation for Ideal Scale PaStOr-aS-Leader. o o o o o o o o o o o 195 Functional Theme Differences Between First-Year and Third-Year Students for Actual Scale paSTOF-aS-Leader. o o o o o o o o o o o 196 Functional Theme Differences Based on Intended Vocation for Actual Scale Pastor-as-Leader O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 196 Functional Theme Differences Among Seminaries for Key Word Choices. . . . . . . . . . 197 Functional Theme Differences Between First-Year and Third-Year Students for Key Word Choices. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 197 Spiritual Theme Differences Between Foreign-Born and North American-Born Subjects for Ideal Scale Pastor-as-Leader. . . . . . . . . 198 Spiritual Theme Differences Between Foreign Students and Non-Foreign Students for Ideal 5C81e PaStOT-aS-Leader. o o o o o o o o 199 Spiritual Theme Differences Between First-Year and Third-Year Seminary Students for Ideal PaStOF-aS-Leadel’. o o o o o o o o o o o 199 Spiritual Theme Differences Between Subjects Based on Christian Ministry Orientation for Ideal Scale Pastor-as-Leader. . . . . . 200 Spiritual Theme Differences Between Subjects Based on Intended Vocation for Ideal Pastor-as- LeaderO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 200 Spiritual Theme Differences Among Seminaries for Actual Scale Pastor-as-Leader. . . . 201 Spiritual Theme Differences Between First-Year and Third-Year Students for Key Word Choices. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 202 Spiritual Theme Differences Based on Intended Vocations for Key Word Choices. . . . . 203 xvi LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 2.1. Cross' Characteristics of Adults as Learners . 29 Figure 4.1. Interview--Direct Questions. . . . . . . . . . 88 Figure 4.2. Interviewu-ProbetQuestions. . . . . . . . . . . 88 xvii Chapter 1 UNDERSTANDING THE PROBLEM Theological education for pastoral leaders is in a state of flux and renewal throughout the world. Pleas for culturally authentic expressions of leadership within the Church abound. Since theological educators wish to influence the life and ministry of the Church through their graduates, the role semin- aries have in the formation of pastors-as-leaders is of consider- able interest. Purpose of the Inquiry The purpose of the study was to identify and to describe the images of the pastor-as-leader in the Church held by North American-born and foreign-born students in three seminaries. Relevant findings from the study will provide a basis for recommendations concerning the seminary's role in the formation of pastors-as-leaders and suggestions for additional research. Importance of the Study Present patterns of theological education for pastors-as- leaders have developed over hundreds of years. Observers of these patterns both in North America and abroad have voiced their criticisms and called for renewal. 2 Historical Patterns of Leadership New Testament leaders were selected for specific functions on the basis of special God-given gifts and abilities (Engstrom, 1976 & 1983; Powers, 1979; Sanders, 1984). All people were to be functioning members of the Church, but some were clearly recog- nized for their leading activities. Schorr (I984) sketches an overview of the pattern which evolved. With the growth of the Church and the passing of time the activity of leading became more and more dominated by a formally trained, hierarchically ordered clergy rather than experienced, gifted individuals (though formal training and gifts are not necessarily mutually exclusive). Eventually the office of "leader" was institutionalized and the education of leaders was defined by the needs of the hier- archy in the institution. Conmfitment to an intellectually educated clergy was reaffirmed by the Reformers of the sixteenth century and brought to New England through the Puritans. By the turn of the twentieth century, four major emphases characterized American theological education: (1) scholarly competence, (2) spiritual formation, (3) practical competence, and (4) secular awareness (Carroll, cited in Schorr, 1984, p. 38). Unfortunately, the first characteristic has provided all too frequently the dominant model for theological education which has in turn been transferred, often uncritically, throughout the world. 3 Present Problems Present patterns of ministerial formation throughout the world have been dominated by western models which are considered inadequate for equipping pastors-as-leaders in Third World countries. Newbigin (1984) claims that ministry patterns and, therefore, ministerial formation introduced by western mis- sions. . . are now seen to have been the imposition of a style of leadership foreign to the cultures in which the church was originally planted. . . The style of leadership envisaged in our western-style theological seminaries can only exist in a colonial situation where there are large funds to support it (p. 5). Ward (1984) identified five problems related to leader- ship in the Church today: passivity of laity, hierarchy, intellectual meritocracy, pride and status, and manipulative tactics. These five problems constitute a self-perpetuating cycle and reflect conditions in secular society. Conn (1984) cited five effects of western cultural presuppo- sitions which correspond closely to Ward's five problems: institutionalism, or equation of learning with schooling; elitism, or equation of professionalism with ministry; alieniza- tion, or equation of teaching missions with‘Western missions; abstractionism, or equation of theorization with knowledge; and pragmatism, or equation of practice with praxis. Farley (1983) described the problem facing the Church and Seminary as the loss of "convictional visions of the work of the ministry": 4 To express it differently, the churches have undergone acculturation (which is, in itself, inevitable) in such a way as to lose their ecclesial character. It is this loss or diminution which is at work when the theological school finds itself perplexed as to what its education is really about. The school has of course a legacy from the past which provides it with a tradition about Christian faith, the ministry, and the church. But these things are present in very formal ways and not as convictional visions of the work of the ministry. . . Today the need for such a vision arises not so much from sectarian narrowmess as from the problems and crises in Christianity itself resulting from the influence of modern culture. Feurerbach, Marx, Freud, and Heilbroner are names which signal these issues. To the degree that the theological school lacks a vision which can incorporate and deal with these matters, its ethos, activi- ties, and pedagogies will be characterized by a certain unreality (p. 13). Farley identifies the root problem as the loss of theological study grounded in "theologia." The root problem may also be characterized as loss of a compelling vision of what the pastor- as-leader is to be. Renewal emphases today in theological education address that dimension of the problem. Renewal Emphases In view of the prevailing problems in the leadership patterns of the Church, attention is being directed to finding ways to bring about change in the leadership structures of the Church. Accreditation and contextualization form two foci for ongoing discussions about renewal within theological education: Accreditation institutionalizes itself around a vision of academic excellence which has the capacity to generalize itself over a diverse number of theological institutions (geographically, culturally and theologically). Context- ualization, by contrast, seeks the criteria of excellence within an individual institution's ability to creatively respond to its own context. The criteria of excellence of an individual institution may not be generalized for another context, though the lessons and processes may provide 5 encouragement and insight for institutions in other contexts (Rowen, 1984, p. 138). Accreditation Accrediting associations such as the Association of Theolog- ical Schools have traditionally been concerned with such indica- tors of excellence as library holdings, faculty qualifications, financial solidarity, and student-to-teacher ratios. Quantitative measurements of excellence used by accrediting associations in the past have shifted increasingly to an outcomes orientation. Non-traditional forms of theological education which also focus on outcomes of the educational process are still generally suspect, however (Frame, 1985; Mdnnery, 1981). In 1980 an International Council of Accrediting Agencies for evangelical theological education (ICAA) was formed to provide a medium for international cooperation in evangelical theological education. One of the express purposes of this organization is to "strengthen the regional accrediting agencies, by develop- ing criteria, procedures, and facilities for evaluating their accreditation schemes and recognizing them" (R0, 1980, p. 27). R0 argues that such an accreditation scheme is necessary because of the prevailing fragmentation due to relatively small student bodies, limited teaching staff, minimal libraries, and dependency on overseas sources in administration and finances. These generally result in low levels of academic quality. Furthermore, top level leadership is still being trained in the West. If such training could be done by Third World nations, so it is argued, more culturally relevant training would be 6 provided, the brain drain to the West would be reduced, and it would be more financially sensible. McKinney (1980) cited three reasons why accreditation would be valuable: First, it could encourage holistic leadership planning at multiple levels. Second, it could encourage excel- lence in ministry. And, third, it could encourage a cultural response to biblical imperatives. Efforts have already been directed toward improvement of theological education in the Third World by the Theological Education Fund of the World Council of Churches. Established in 1958 with an initial capital of four million dollars, TEF. was entrusted with the task of assisting roughly 20 centers of theological education in the Third World to come up to the standards of the best theological faculties of Europe or North Anerica, and of initiating a massive programme to improve libraries and to stimulate the production of theological text books in the major languages of the Third World (Newbigin, 1984, p. 4). Herein lies the difficulty. Though highly successful in its purpose and subsequently, therefore, phased out of existence in two decades, TEF measured excellence by "the standards of the best theological faculties of Europe or North America." A western academic model of excellence continued to be transported to Third World nations along with patterns of leader formation. At this point questions of contextualization surface. Contextualization Contextualization is essentially "a quest for a different vision of excellence" (Rowen, 1984, p. 143). Rowen poses four dimensions which provide curriculum questions generated by 7 contextualization concerns: missiological, structural, theologi- cal, and pedagogical. The missiological dimension asks whether or not "a style of training. . . focuses upon the urgent issues of renewal and reform in the churches, and upon the vital issues of human development and justice in its particular situation?" The structural dimension addresses the question, "Does the school have a form which is appropriate to the specific needs of the culture and its particular social, economic and political situation?" The theological dimension asks, "Does the school or centre seek to undertake the task of 'doing theology' in a way which is appropriate and authentic to its situation?" Finally, the pedagogical dimension focuses on the educational process as a liberating and creative effort. These same dimensions are echoed by Newbigin (1984). Recent Studies Recent studies have produced mixed findings regarding pastoral leadership in the cross-cultural context. Cole (1982), in a descriptive study to determine what constitutes pastoral leadership criteria in ECWA in Nigeria, found that such criteria were most frequently based on traditional values. Harder (1984) explored the perceptions of appropriate leadership behavior for local church pastors in Kenya. He concluded that "group-centered" leadership was the preferred style for the local pastor, and "do-nothing" and "telling" leadership were consistently identified as the least appropriate behaviors. 8 Elliston (1981) concluded that many traditional Samburu (Kenya) leadership values paralleled biblical values. A start- ling indictment was that Some Samburu values contrast with missionary-held values. In many ways the Samburu values are closer to biblical values than western values generally are. The Samburu values are more community and cooperatively oriented; whereas, the missionaries' values tend to be more individu- alistic and competitively oriented. While both value a distributed leadership, the Samburu are more participative and the missionaries are more hierarchical and activistic. McKinney (1979) observed that "Church leaders are being added one at a time from the ranks of seminary graduates instead of being multiplied as church members exercise the gifts which God has given them within the Body of Christ. And the whole Body suffers" (p. 2). If Elliston and McKinney are correct in identifying the weak participative nature of missionary leadership, then curricular questions and implications emerge for North American seminaries engaged in training leadership for the Church of Jesus Christ. The problems facing the Church today regarding its leaders, the renewal emphases under way in seminary education, and the growing shift of Mission from North America to Third World countries all support the need for a study which focuses on the role North American seminaries play in addressing the needs of leadership education for the Church worldwide. Statement of Research Questions The study was organized around four overarching research questions which focused on separate but complementary domains of the study. Images of the Pastor-as-Leader The first research question concentrated on whether or not distinct images of the pastor-as-leader exist among seminary students. Research Question #1 Are there any predictable themes in the emerging images of the pastor-as-leader? Development of Images of the Pastor-as-Leader The second research question focused on whether or not changes occurred in the student's image of the pastor-as-leader over the course of his or her seminary education. Research Question #2 Is the student's image of the pastor-as-leader raised to a more precise level of articulation as a result of seminary education? Cultural Differences in Images of the Pastor-as-Leader The third research question analyzed the differences between the images of the pastor-as-leader of North American-born subjects and foreign-born subjects. Research Question #3 Are there any discernible differences between North Ameri- can-born and foreign-born subjects in their images of the pastor-as-leader? Differences Among Seminaries Since considerable variability exists within theological education, the fourth research question examined differences among seminaries. 10 Research Question #4 Are there any observable differences among seminaries based on students' images of the pastor-as-leader? Definitions of Terms Three words were particularly pertinent to the study. Seminary Seminary refers to graduate theological education institu- tions in North America. The three-year Master of Divinity degree typically is the foundational degree program of theologi— cal seminaries. Church Church refers to the universal Church of Jesus Christ worldwide in contrast to local church (or parish) which is the visible expression of the universal Church in a particular geographical locale. Ima e For the purpose of this study, image is the systematic presentation of seminary students' descriptions of the pastor-as- leader. Population and Sample The Association of Theological Schools (ATS), the major accrediting agency for seminaries in North America, has 198 rnember schools. Of these 198 institutions, 171 are fully accredited and 27 maintain either candidate or associate status. 11 Population The population for this study consisted of all first-year and third-year Master of Divinity students and all faculty members in three of the ATS member schools, Alpha Seminary, Beta Seminary, and Gannn Seminary. Sample Two samples were required for the study. The interview sample consisted of randomly selected first-year and third-year North American-born students; all first-year and third-year foreign-born subjects; and 12 faculty members, 4 nominated by an administrator from each of the seminaries. All students were enrolled in the Master of Divinity program at their respective seminaries. The questionnaire sample was identical with the student population, all first-year and third-year North American-born and foreign-born students enrolled in the Master of Divinity program in three seminaries. Delimitations and Generalizabllity The study was limited primarily by the selected research sample. Three Protestant theological seminaries adhering to essentially the same doctrinal statement were involved. They differed primarily in size, location, and programs. The respondent's ability to identify and to describe the characteristics or qualities of the pastor-as-leader was also a significant limitation. On certain questions, some subjects 12 responded extensively and articulately, whereas others were much more brief and/or less articulate. Responses from subjects during the interview phase were recorded as accurate descriptions of the pastor-as-leader. Due to the nature of the study, however, little could be done to confirm, modify, or disclaim responses. The study was a cross-sectional one. The findings, there- fore, can only be taken as suggestive of the effects seminaries Iggy have on the honing of their students' images of the pastor- as—leader. Generalizability of the study is affected by the matters treated above and by the following issues: theological orienta- tion of the schools; number of subjects who were willing and able to participate in the study; small number of seminaries (N=3); and limited number of foreign-born subjects (N=3O for both interview and questionnaire phases). In spite of these limitations, conclusions that are drawn from the interview and questionnaire data may indicate similiari- ties in other Protestant seminaries throughout North America. A framework has been provided as a result of the study which can facilitate seminary faculties in analyzing their contributions to the formation of their students' images of the pastor-as-leader. Overview of the Study Chapter 1 specifies the purpose of the research as being to identify and to describe the images of the pastor-as-leader in 13 the Church held by North American-born and foreign-born students in three seminaries. Four complementary research questions provide the structure for the inquiry. Significant terms are defined, the background of the problem described, the population and sample identified, and the delimitations and generalizability of the study explained. Chapter 2 surveys precedents in the literature which are appropriate to the study. Huebner's notion of curriculum as an environment-producing discipline integrates the related concerns of differing conceptions of the curriculum within the seminary, the relationship of theory to praxis, the relationship of liberal arts and professions education, the relationship of structure and content, previous research into pastoral leadership, and studies of theological education. Research precedents applicable to the study are also highlighted. Chapter 3 outlines the research design and methodology. Included in the chapter are research and operational questions, p0pulation and sample, seminary profiles, instrumentation, data collection, and constraints of the study. Chapter 4 presents the findings and analysis of data from the interview phase of the study. Analytic procedures, uses of key words by students, uses of key words by faculty, formation of themes, and development of the questionnaire are considered. Findings are related to the research questions. Chapter 5 displays the findings and analysis of data from the questionnaire phase of the study. Once again instrumenta- 14 tion and analytic procedures are discussed, followed by a summary of the findings from the questionnaire. Chapter 6, after summarizing the findings from the interview and questionnaire phases of the study, reveals the conclusions reached in the study. Implications for seminary education, suggestions for implementation of research findings, and recom- mendations for further research are given. In review, the study identifies and describes four images of the pastor-as-leader held by North American-born and foreign-born students in three seminaries. Based upon interviews with 62 students and 12 faculty members and responses to the Pastor-as- Leader Expectations Questionnaire (PALEQ) by 281 students, findings are organized around the ethnic background of the student (North American-born versus foreign-born), differences among the seminaries, and differences within the seminaries. Chapter 2 PRECEDENTS IN THE LITERATURE The purpose of the study was to identify and to describe the images of the pastor-as-leader in the Church held by North Anerican-born and foreign-born students in three seminaries. Theological education presumably affects either the formation or the modification of the images which students use when describing pastoral leadership. The literature of curriculum, adult development, theological studies, and leadership formed the backdrop for this study. The curricular factor addresses the questions of "Who?," "What?," and "Under what conditions?" is theological education conducted? The theological question asks, "What are biblical and/or theolog- ical images of the pastor-as-leader and how are these images influenced by the educational process?" Students in theological seminaries are adults and, there- fore, the adult development question is, "How does the teaching- learning process for adults-as-learners contribute to the formation of their images of the pastor-as-leader?" International studies in leadership suggest that images of leading are grounded in culture (Bass, 1981). The leadership question, then, is, "What are the cultural concomitants of images of leading for seminary students?" 16 Huebner (1975) identified five value systems in education: technical, political, scientific, aesthetic, and ethical. The particular value system adopted for discussion of an issue significantly influences perception and understanding of the issue. Consequently, curriculum is an "environment-producing" discipline in contrast to a "knowledge-producing" discipline, according to Huebner. Other factors influence the environment in which theological education takes place. These factors, identified from the literature, will be discussed in view of the effect each has on the environment of theological education: conceptions of the curriculum; theory-praxis relationship; liberal arts-professions education relationship; and structure-concept relationship. Conceptions of the Curriculum The field of curriculum has a relatively short history beginning in the late 18005 (Schubert, 1980). Subsequent to the work of early influential thinkers such as Bobbit, Dewey, and Whitehead, the Tyler Rationale (Tyler, 1969) dominated the curriculum field for nearly 40 years. Tyler raised four impor- tant questions about education related to purposes, experiences, organization, and evaluation. During the 19705 Tyler's Rationale was challenged by a group known as the Reconceptualists (Pinar, 1975). The curriculum field was in a state of flux and was reflected in Eisner's (I979) taxonomy of different orientations to the curriculum: cognitive l7 process, academic rationalism, personal relevance, social reconstruction and social adaptation, and curriculum as technol- ogy. Huebner (1966) argued that prevailing conceptions of the curriculum were inadequate because they related the educative process "only to the world of man's technique, and exclude ties to the world of his spirit." The problem stemmed from an overdependency upon a conception of value as goals or objectives, and, therefore, an overdependency upon learning as the major characteristic of man's temporality. The problem could be corrected by designing an educative environment in which valued educational activity could occur. The "designing is inherently a political process by means of which the curricular worker seeks to attain a just environment" (p. 94). Phenix (1974) argued that human consciousness is rooted in transcendence, "the experience of limitless going beyond any given state or realization of being." The possibility of "something more," therefore, than is presently realized is basis for "further projected ideals." A transcendent-oriented curriculum is characterized by five criteria: hope, creativity, awareness, doubt and faith, and wonder, awe, and reverence. These criteria suggest implications for the curriculum of individuality, wholeness, and inquiry. Both Huebner and Phenix want to free curriculum thinkers from the narrow constraints of means-ends thinking about education. l8 Divergent voices of the 1970s challenged the adequacy of schooling to fulfill the expectations of its advocates. The "deschooling" movement received its impetus fronuFreire (1970) and lllich (1971), who contended that schooling forms of educa- tion co-opt the social-access function. They questioned the school's capability of delivering on its promises. Ward (n.d.) likened schooling to a leaky ship which is in constant need of repair. He identified abstract and sequential forms of learning as the most appropriate objectives of formal schooling. Doyle (1976) sought "to interpret both the aspirations for and the disaffection with schooling" (p. 18). He concluded that Schools grew from an incidental position in the American experience to become a panacea for national crises and ills. The urgent question of today is whether schooling has the resources and the spirit to meet the demands of rising entitlements (p. 75). Rowen (1984) honed in on theological education. Contextual- ization forms the rubric under which the "relationship of educational practice and the historical, social and cultural context" may be discussed. Rowen outlines four dimensions of contextualization concerns which provide the curriculum ques- tions: 1. Missiological. Is the school, center, or undertaking seeking to develop a style of training which focuses upon the urgent issues of renewal and reform in the churches, and upon the vital issues of human development and justice in its particular situation? 2. Structural. Does the school have a form which is appropriate to the specific needs of the culture and its particular social, economic, and political situation? 19 3. Theological. Does the school or center seek to under- take the task of "doing theology" in a way which is appro- priate and authentic to its situation? 4. Pedagogical. Does theological education see the educational process as a liberating and creative effort? Does it attempt to overcome the besetting charges of elitism and authoritarianism in both the method and products of its program to release the potential of the servant ministry? (Rowen, 1984, p. 67). Relationship of Theory to Praxis Whitehead stated, "It must never be forgotten that education is not a process of packing articles in a trunk" (1929, p. 33). Ideas are not to be stored--they are to be used. He understood the power of ideas and appreciated the "rhythm of education" in human development. Whitehead emphasized that ". . . education should turn out the pupil with something he knows well and something he can do well" (1929, p. 48). Sinclair-Faulkner (1981) asserted that the contemporary disjunction between theory and practice as one of abstract ideas and their application differs from that prior to the development of technology and modern science: Praxis meant roughly the same as "practice" now means ("doing"), but there was no conviction that praxis is what really counts. The order of importance was, if anything, reversed by a tendency to honour theoria over praxi . Theoria did not refer to abstractions whose worth is measured in terms of their applicability to practical ends. Theoria was "contemplation," an activity complete in itself and focussed on higher things, while praxis was "doing," a worldly activity which Plato (and to a lesser extent Aristotle) tended to regard as less worthy than theoria. Origen echoed him when he compared theoria and praxis to Mary and Martha. My point is that our spiritual ancestors did not take it for granted that theory is an abstraction intended to serve 20 practice. For them theory included the contemplation of God, an activity that is different from worldly practice and that is certainly not subordinate to it. At their best (or what I hold to be their best) they understood that to be fully human is to live a life in which both theoria and praxis are harmoniously united (p. 326). In spite of the philosophical affirmation of the interdepen- dence of theory and praxis as exemplified by Whitehead and Sinclair-Faulkner, the struggle to achieve integration has been a creative tension for professions education generally. Socializ- ing individuals to a professional identity was proposed as one way to achieve integration (Anderson, 1974). The theological concern for the relationship of theory to praxis is shared with other professions. Nyre & Reilly (1979) hailed the effort to achieve integration as a dominant trend of professions education in the 19805. Speaking from his medical perspective, Pellegrino described the problenu "Medicine then comes into being not with the basic or clinical science, but when it is engaged with the existential condition of an individual person" (1977, p. 5). Holloman (1977) sees the issue as the "yin and yang of learning and doing" in which different types of education produce different types of people. For him the problem is resolved by separation of theoreticians and practitioners: "For it is in the scholar's hands that the arts and sciences rest. And it is in the hands of the professional--the lawyer, doctor, engineer--that a functioning society rests" (1977, p. 20). Wolterstorff (1984) described three stages, one past, one present, and one anticipated, which reflect patterns of response 21 prominent in American evangelical colleges from the beginning of the century on. In Stage I the focus was on piety and evange- lism, and in Stage II on the integration of faith and culture. Stage III, Wolterstorff observes, must emphasize the Christian in society. And at this point theory and praxis coalesce: . . . such a college will have to be far more concerned than ever before with building bridges from theory to practice. Throwing some abstract political science at the student along with some abstract economics and sociology will not do the trick. The goal is not just to understand the world but to change it. The goal is not just to impart to the student a Christian world-and-life view--it is to equip and motivate students for a Christian way of being and acting in the world. And there is not a shred of evidence that simply putting abstract theory in front of them will alter their actions [italics added] (pp. 46-47). Wolterstorff's analysis regarding the Christian college might well be paraphrased in reference to the Seminary's role in preparing pastoral leadership: "The goal. . . is to equip and motivate pastors for a Christian way of being and leading in the Church and world. And there is not a shred of evidence that simply putting abstract theory about leading in front of them will alter their leadership." The "Pastorate Start Up Project," a study of recent seminary graduates' entry into professional ministry, confirne Wolter- storff's analysis: They [critical incidents] did not show evidence of a mature wedding of theory and practice. Even with the insight and knowledge acquired in the seminary, beginning ministers had a hard time acting appropriately in the context of minis- try. . . (Oswald, 1980, p. 10). Some theological educators are trying to take seriously the challenge to wed theory and practice more effectively. The AMCEA 22 Institute, serving five countries in East Africa, acted on the idea that "courses in theology have little theological value if they are not seen as a process of reflection on experience leading to action" (Hearne, 1982, p. 7). The starting point was the life experience of the participants. The building of a Christian community--"to be experienced rather than talked about"--was the basic task of the year in which all other study and training was to occur. Ognibene and Penaskovic examined an approach to teaching theology courses "in which 'asking and feeling' are equally important concerns" (1981, p. 99). They emphasized the student as "self-learner" and insisted on enhancing his/her "self-con- cept." Ognibene and Penaskovic claim that "authentic thinking involves two elements: dialogue and communication" (p. 105). For dialogue to take place, the instructor must trust the students. There must be an ethic of interdependence in order for dialogue to occur. In the interdependent dialogic situation, the attitudes, feelings, impressions, approaches, verbal and non-ver- bal communication among the class members are significant and are fostered (p. 105). They believe that problem-posing education enables students to feel like masters of their own thinking and, therefore, conclude by outlining seven strategies for developing interpersonal connmnication and for promoting effective group discussion. In 1969 15 Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish clergymen and laymen, with a grant from the Danforth Foundation, began shaping plans "towards a five-year experiment with a form of theological education appropriate to the needs of persons entering the 23 ministry in the metropolitan area" (Fletcher & Edwards, Jr., 1971, p. 23). The "Inter-Met" educators felt a moral issue was at stake "in the social deprivation of seminarians" in that "the inordin- ate power of academic persons in their educational program deprives them of an opportunity to learn skills required for practice of the ministry" (p. 22). The principles of education, therefore, which they promulgated reflected a strong commitment to ministerial education within the context in which they would actually serve. The fourth of the nine principles, for instance, was that "MJnisters who will administrate need early experience in managing economic, organizational, and human resources" (p. 24). These representative cases highlight intentional efforts to join theory and practice in theological education. Curriculum is an environment-producing discipline. 'When considering the formation of pastors-as-leaders, it is important that the environment correspond as nearly as possible to the actual circumstances under which pastors will lead. Liberal Arts-Professions Relationship The Canadian Connfission on National Development in Arts, Letters, and Science summarized the debate over the relationship of the liberal arts to professions education: "Humanistic studies do not belong only to the faculty of liberal arts but should pervade the professional schools as well. They should permeate the entire university. A professional school without the humanities is little more 24 than a technical institute" (cited in Carmichael, 1961, p. 71). Liberal education is concerned with the ideas which have dominated culture and their meaning and is viewed as an important channel for infusing human values into a "high tech" society. Pellegrino (1977) insists that the liberal arts can foster attitudes of the mind which relate to the "capacity for critical and dialectical reasoning for evaluating evidence and raising significant questions." The tension is to balance the opposing technological and human values as the professions confront them. Hollomon (1977) argued, for instance, that the engineer has a responsibility "to inform the rest of us poor citizens of the consequences to society of actions with respect to technological matters" (p. 24). Interdisciplinary liberal arts courses at the profes- sional level have been introduced in the 19805 to better prepare professionals for practice (Nyre & Reilly, 1979). At a time, however, when other professions are reemphasizing the role of liberal education, theological education is demon- strating some evidence of retreat from it. An informal study done of admissions requirements for 13 leading North American theological seminaries disclosed that admissions requirements for liberal arts studies were being drastically reduced (Kieffer, 1986). Protestant educators in the eighteenth century, according to Gilpin (1984), assumed 25 what had long been assumed in Western culture, that the goal of education was the comprehensive formation of character. It was aideia. By the inculcation of piety, civility, and learning the student was to be fitted for responsible public life (p. 85). Seminary, "a plot of ground in which seedlings were cultivated for later transplanting," was adopted as a metaphor of theologi- cal education. The metaphor suggested an interdependent relationship between church and school and also conveyed a picture of the relation between religion and liberal learning. Increasingly complex institutional and theological factors have challenged this initial ideal of the seminary. A "hot house" environment for theological education is no longer considered an adequate model, although a compelling and comprehensive alternative model is not yet forthcoming. Relationship of Structure and Concept Dewey defined experience as that which ". . . both takes up something from those which have gone before and modifies in some way the quality of those which go after" (1938, p. 35). Eisner (1982) echoed Dewey when he said a crucial transactional rela- tionship exists between the qualities of the environment and the cognitive structures of an organism. Structure provides some of the content of experience and the qualities of the environment which participate in the shaping of human conception. Law history (Cardozo, 1977) typifies the search within the professions to find a proper fit between structure and content. 26 Legal education began by "Reading Law" in the offices of practi- cing lawyers--a totally clinical method. The "Textbook and Lecture" era emerged out of simultaneous appointments by univer- sities of professors of law. The "Case Method" and closely related "Socratic Method" followed in the 19th century. The "Clinical Method" began about mid-20th century. In 1973 a proposal to go "on beyond clinical education" to "meaningful experience" (Cardozo, 1977) was put forward. Cardozo concludes, somewhat cynically, that with the turmoil concerning curriculum, teaching methods, and growth, ". . . it is hardly surprising that lawyers and legal educators admit that they have no clear ideas of what the students are supposed to be learning to do" (1977, p. 48). The issue of the relationship of structure and concept has deep roots. Flexner's study of over 150 medical schools in 1910 was a "scholarly and devastating analysis of educational facili- ties and offerings" which precipitated the close of over half of the then extant medical schools (Anderson, 1974) when it was discovered that doctors were graduating having never been exposed to living patients. Gardner (1964) highlighted the importance of the structure when he said that They [young people] do not assimilate the values of their group by learning the words (truth, justice, etc.) and their definitions. They learn attitudes, habits and ways of judging. They learn these in intensely personal transac- tions with their immediate family or associates. They learn them in the routines and crises of living, but they also learn them through songs, stories, drama and games. They do not learn ethical principles; they emulate ethical (or 27 unethical) people. They do not analyze or list the attri- butes they wish to develop; they identify with people who seem to them to have these attributes. That is why young people need models, both in their imaginative life and in their environment, models of what man at his best can be (pp. 153-154). A parallel question suggested by Gardner's commentary is whether or not images of the pastor-as-leader can be communicated apart from role models of effective pastoral leaders whom they can emulate. Newbigin (1984) in his discussion of theological education in a world perspective struck a stinging criticism at the structure of western theological education when he said that patterns of ministry and therefore of ministerial formation introduced by western missions are now seen to have been the imposition of a style of leadership foreign to the cultures in which the church was originally planted. . . The style of leadership envisaged in our western-style theological seminaries can only exist in a colonial situation where there are large foreign funds to support it (p. 5). Curricularists have been sensitive to the way in which language tends to structure one's perception of reality. Huebner (1975) identified six uses of language by theorists: (1) descriptive; (2) explanatory; (3) controlling; (4) legitimizing; (5) prescriptive; and (6) affiliative. Kliebard (1975) examined modern curriculum theory in view of the notions of education derived from the mechanistic conception of man (stimulus-response); the technology-systems analysis approach to human affairs (input-output); and the production metaphor for curriculum design (producer—consumer). 28 Apple (1975) argued that the use of "organized skepticism" and conflict could counterbalance the tacit assumptions being taught through the "hidden curriculum" of schools. He reasoned that first, the hidden curriculum tacitly assumes that man is recipient of values and institutions rather than creator and recreator of values and institutions; and, second, that the nature and use of conflict is negative. The significant danger is not that theoretical thought offers no mode of critiquing and changing reality, but that it can lead to quietism or a perspective that, like Hamlet, necessitates a continuing monologue on the complex- ity of it all, while the world tumbles down around us" (Apple, 1975, p. 115). Others have examined the structure-concept issue in terms of how best to teach concepts within the structure of disciplines (Schwab, 1962; Donald, 1983). Eisner (1982) insists that different forms of representation are required to facilitate optimum learning: The use of a tight prescriptive curriculum structure, sequential skill development, and frequent testing and reward are classic examples of form becoming content. What pupils learn is not only a function of the formal and explicit content that is selected; it is also a function of the manner in which it is taught. The characteristics of the tasks and the tacit expectations that are a part of the structured program become themselves a part of the content. In this sense teaching and curriculum merge. The distinc- tion between the two as method and content will not hold once it is seen that the means that one employs itself defines the covert structure that embodies a significant part of what it is that students learn (p. 12). The way in which adults are expected to learn is influential on the way they will eventually lead and expect others to learn. To speak of adult—as-learner is implicitly to distinguish between adults and children. Knowles (1978) posited the term andragogy, 29 the science of teaching adults, to distinguish from pedagogy, the science of teaching children. Much debate centers around whether or not the distinction is dichotomous or continuous; whether or not adult learning is significantly different from children's learning or simply a continuation of it. Knowles himself is not clear in the distinction. Cross (1976) suggested a model for integrating the research on characteristics of adult learners. The'CAL model is useful for discussing the variety of factors to be considered in designing adult education programs (Figure 2.1). Figure 2.1. Cross' Characteristics of Adults as Learners CAL "Personal Characteristics" ----------------------- Physiological/Aging---------------------- -------------------- Sociocultural/Life Phases------------------- --------------- Psychological/Developmental Stages-------------- "Situational Characteristics" Part-time versus Full—time Learning Voluntary versus Compulsory Learning Physiological/aging characteristics derive from the physical development and decline of human beings. Motor, sensory, mental abilities fit here. For instance, it used to be thought that intelligence declined with age, a result of physiological decline. A distinction between fluid and crystallized intelli- gence has since replaced that false assumption. 3O Piaget (Campbell, 1976, pp. 71-74) noted that adult intelli- gence is qualitatively different from that of children and proposed four tasks for the development of operational struc- tures: (1) maturation of the body, nervous system, and mental functions; (2) experience; (3) social transmission; and (4) self-regulation. Experience and self-regulation begin to supercede maturation and social transmission in young adulthood. The CAL model also accounts for sociocultural/life phases of adults. Life phases refer to those distinct periods of adulthood when the given task is generally defined by one's chronological age, although not exclusively, including marriage, establishing a family, settling into a life's work, buying the first home, caring for aging parents, and preparing for retirement (Gould, 1978; Levinson, 1978; Sheehy, 1976, 1981). Erickson formulated eight psychosocial stages of human development (1950), three of which relate specifically to adulthood: intimacy versus isolation, generativity versus stagnation, and integrity versus despair. He called the stages crises, meaning critical times of heightened vulnerability and potential human growth. The stages are sequential and must be successfully completed before the next one can be undertaken. Furthermore, each succeeding stage completes and absorbs the preceding one. Critical to the issue of education for adults is the task of completing one's self-concept as a responsible, independent personality. As a person matures, therefore, it becomes increas— 31 ingly important to achieve independence, to gain the respect of others, and to be recognized as an autonomous individual. Education which perpetuates the dependency of childhood (Freire, 1970; Illich, 1971) reinforces a survival stance toward learning rather than a growth stance. The situational characteristics in Cross' (1981) model-- part-time versus full-time learning and voluntary versus compul— sory learning--further emphasize the reality that adults have other things to be about in their lives, and whatever learning they undertake is of an entirely voluntary nature and part of other aspects of living rather than the whole. Knowles (1978) posits four fundamental assumptions which affect adult teaching-learning situations: (1) An adult's self-concept requires increasing autonomy as it matures. (2) Adults' readiness to learn is predicated on their life phases and developmental tasks which confront them. (3) Adults have an increasing reservoir of experience which should be a major source of further learning. (4) Adults' orientation to learning is one of problem-solving rather than subject-learning. Based on their extensive review of the literature on teaching adults, Brundage and Mackeracher (1980) proposed three basic modes of teaching: directing, facilitating, and collabor- ating. Each mode represents both a distinctive teaching behavior and a continuum of teaching behaviors. The directing style of teaching is highly structured with the teacher maintaining maximum control of the teaching-learning 32 situation. Directing is most advantageous when time is an important variable and "with material which, by social conven- tion, professional supervision, or law, is prescribed for certain roles and/or certification" (p. 58). The facilitating style of teaching focuses more on helping the learner to discover personal meanings, when there are few time constraints, and with an experience or gestalt in which the learner structures relationships between the parts rather than the teacher. The collaborating style of teaching works best within a "connmnity of learners" in which learner and collaborator share as co-learners "in the discovery and creation of shared meanings, values, skills, and strategies" (p. 60). Brundage and Mackera- cher conclude that each mode is functional for some adult learners, in some learning contexts, and for some content; and that no one mode will serve all purposes. Some matches between teaching modes and learner characteristics have been studied. For example, the directing mode is most productive when matched with learners who prefer dependent learning behaviours, or when used as the teaching mode at the point where learners enter a new program or begin to learn wholly new content (1980, p. 60). The practical outworking of the structure-concept problem for theological educators is observed in conclusions drawn by the "Pastorate Start Up Project": The graduates moved from being passive/dependent within an educational system to being a leader/teacher of a commun- ity. There was much in seminary life that encouraged students to submit to the systenn Criticisms of seminary life were usually discouraged or punished. Attempts at having a peer relationship with faculty were usually rejected. If seminarians were too quiet, autonomous or private they were held suspect. If they asked too many 33 questions in class they were frowned upon. They needed to find the middle ground to fit in. In examinations they were expected to give back to faculty only what they had been given in lectures. They experienced a dramatic and radical shift on moving to a parish connmnity. There they were expected to be clear, precise authority figures in matters of faith and life. Passive/dependent behavior usually got them into a pile of trouble (Oswald, 1980, p. 11). The environment of theological seminaries all too often fails to correspond closely enough to the environment in which graduates will actually lead. The seminary is a bridge from the world of lay leadership to professional leadership. As such, experiences within the seminary should change gradually, as students walk from one side of the bridge to the other, to conform more and more closely to the world of the Church. In this way the new pastor-as-leader may not have to experience a drastic disjunction as is frequently reported (Oswald, 1980). Studies of Theological Education As Fletcher and Edwards (1971) remarked, "Theological education, like violence, has been heavily investigated." And repeated studies continue to show that ministers feel that seminaries do not adequately prepare them for their roles. Images of the Minister Hough (1984) relates the historical study of Ronald Osborn who "has argued that in certain periods of American history there have emerged dominant ministerial types who defined the profes- sion in a given period of time" (p. 65). Osborn identified five of these types: The Master, the Revivalist and the Pulpiteer, 34 the Builder, the Manager, and the Therapist. The Master was the dominant character during the 17th and 18th centuries. The authority of the Master rested on an existing authorita- tive body of literature and a personal knowledge of that literature. The Master was the one who was authorized in some way to teach it. . . . He was expected to give intel- lectual leadership in the traditional scholarly disci- plines. In addition, he increasingly spoke with clarity and authority on issues of public policy (Hough, 1984, p. 66). In the 19th century, the dominant social character shifted to the Revivalist and the Pulpiteer as a result of the develop- ment of the modern idea of the profession. Oratory, according to Osborn, replaced instruction as the dominant mode of clergy activity (Hough, p. 72), and the "princes of the pulpit" then emerged. The Builder emerged with the dawn of the twentieth century. The Builder was "the organizer and motivator of organizations" (Hough, p. 73). Consequently the "learned ministry" shifted to the "modern professional" as the model for theological education. The Manager and the Therapist have been suggested as images for the present. Managerial science is the body of theory of how organiza- tions work, and the professional manager is one who under- stands this theory and has learned formally or informally the technology of organizations. The Manager has learned how organizations can be made to function by the use of certain techniques that work. . . [and] offers his effective assistance to the organization in designing its programs so that it can solve its problems and implement its strategies (Hough, p. 77). The Therapist is to the individual what the Manager is to the organization. The Therapist deals with the means by which 35 purposes may be achieved, not with moral debate. "Whatever else the churches in the mainline Protestant denominations may want of their ministers, they want a leader who can counsel effectively and manage well" (Hough, p. 78). Hough adds his own image, that of Practical Theologian. The Practical Theologian gives reflective leadership to the church as it envisions its ministry in the world and in doing so faces four leadership tasks: (1) representing "the church's memory of Jesus Christ for the sake of the continuing renewal of the identity of the Christian community"; (2) giving "leadership in the reflec- tive practice through which that identity can be given concrete, historical expression"; (3) managing the institution by utilizing the best insights available from anywhere in the culture; and (4) counseling. Carnegie Corporation Study The Carnegie Corporation of New York financed a study begun by The American Association of Theological Schools in 1954 which focused upon theological schools' preparation of persons for the parish ministry and the role of the minister in contemporary life. The researchers sought to collect compre- hensive data about the seminaries and their qualitative assess- ment (Niebuhr et al., 1957, p. ix). Questionnaires were used to gather information about changes that had taken place in the status and work of seminaries during the 20 year period from 1934 to 1954. All the accredited members of the ATS, almost all of the associate members, and 36 36 schools not affiliated with the Association participated. Representation within the sample of the denominational and regional patterns of American church life, of size, of financial strength, and of racial distribution of institutions was sought. On site interviews were conducted at 90 of the schools (Niebuhr, Williams, & Gustafson, 1957, pp. x-xi) Anmng the findings of the Carnegie study was "the need for some imaginative new approaches to church administration." Ineptness in handling organizational problems and in personal relationships were frequently cited as causes of ministerial failure. Ministers frequently reported that they needed "to see more clearly what we are aiming at in our church activities, and we need specific knowledge of how things can be done in order to go in the right direction" (p. 106). The researchers con- clude, Unquestionably there are severe limits to what any classroom course can accomplish, yet the need has emerged from our study for a greater attention in the schools to the way in which the organizational and administrative activity which bulks so large in the life of the American minister today can be placed upon a foundation of Christian church- manship and effective method (Niebuhr, Willianm, & Gustaf- son, 1957, pp. 106-107). The directors of the study claim that The greatest defect in theological education today is that it is too much an affair of piecemeal transmission of knowledge and skillsLiand that, in consequence, it offers too little challenge to the student to develop his own resources and to become an independent, lifelong inquirer, Agrowing constantly while he is engaged in the work of the ministry (Niebuhr, Willianm, & Gustafson, 1957, p. 209). Niebuhr (1956) suggests that the image of clergy is that of pastoral director in contrast to priest or preacher. This 37 changing image is reflected in the reality that the Church "in any place at any time is deeply influenced in its institutional forms by the political and economic society with which it lives in conjunction" (Niebuhr, 1956, p. 90). In this situation the temptation of ministers to become business managers is balanced by the opposite temptation to maintain the kind of status and authority their predecessors enjoyed in more hierarchically ordered society. The question is not whether the ministry will reflect the institutional forms of leadership in the world but whether it will reflect these with the difference that Christian faith and church life require; whether, in short, the minister will remain "man of God" despite the fact that he is now a director instead of a ruler (Niebuhr, 1956, p. 90 . For Niebuhr the spiritual director's first function is that of "building or 'edifying' the church," of bringing "into being a people of God who as a Church will serve the purpose of the Church in the local community and the world" (1956, p. 82). The spiritual director's greatest commitment of time and thought is the care of a church, the administration of a community that is directed toward the whole purpose of the Church, namely, the increase among men of the love of God and neighbor; for the Church is becoming the minister and its 'minister' is its servant, directing it in its service (1956, p. 83). Readiness for Ministry Study In 1973 the Association of Theological School undertook studies to discover the important criteria denominations and seminaries thought a person should possess who was about to enter the professional leadership of the church (Schuller, Brekke, & Strommen, 1975). The Readiness for Ministry Project involved over 5000 persons randomly selected from a stratified sample of professors 38 in theological schools, senior seminary students, seminary alumni who were engaged in active ministry, denominational officials, and lay respondents. The fornml purpose of the RPM Project stated: The general strategy for the project will be to identify areas and criteria of readiness used by widely differing groups in American religious life, to develop and test specific measures for the assessment of those characteris- tics, and to publish these measures, introducing them to the religious community and seminary populations with specific helps for their use (Schuller, Brekke, & Strommen, 1975, p. vi). Subsequently a series of assessment tools were developed and have been extensively field tested for their validity and reliability in evaluating readiness for ministry characteristics in seminarians. Since 1976 approximately 80 seminaries, schools of theology, and other institutions have used the program of assessment annually. Over one million dollars have been invested in this program of personal and professional assessment of clergy. Subsequent refinements of the instrumentation to allow for sensitivity to other theological persuasions led to the implementation of a revised instrument in 1985. Although the Association's study sought to determine what theological education ought to do by defining the criteria characteristic of those judged to be ready for ministry, it did not describe or prescribe the operant curricular models to bring those desired ends about. In other words, a consensus of desirable qualities a minister should possess was the essential outcome of the study. No specification or justification for what should be taught, to whom, under what conditions, or how these 39 three were to be interrelated was proposed. From the criteria gleaned from the random sampling of 5000 persons representing 47 denominations or religious bodies within the Association, 64 core clusters each with an underlying criterion of readiness for ministry were identified upon which instruments were subsequently developed. Several of the scales within the Readiness for Ministry profile relate to specific qualities of the pastor-as-leader. Pastorate Start Up Project The Alban Institute, Inc., of Washington, DC, undertook a three year study, supported by a Lilly Endowment, Inc. grant, to study the "transition clergy make when moving from one pastorate to another." The study concluded "clergy encountered their most difficult time in ministry while crossing the boundary from seminary education to fulltime parish ministry" (Oswald, 1980, p. 22). Eight denominations, 10 different seminaries, and 102 graduates from these seminaries participated over a six week time span in small group discussions about their transitions from seminary to parish. One component of the study focused on identifying the "surprises" seminary graduates encountered in their early months of ministry. Several of these surprises touch on part of the role of the pastor-as-leader: On the one hand they were overwhelmed with both the burden and the boredom of administration. 40 On the other side were people needing/demanding some personal time and attention. Since there was always more to do than could readily be fitted to one day's work, these new clergy had to quit at the end of the day with a lot left undone. Managing time, setting priorities and locating resources were badly needed skills. . . . The experience of being catapulted into a position of authority was disconcerting to some of these graduates. They had to deal with the confusion of having much authority imputed to them, yet feeling quite powerless at effecting change in the parish (Oswald, 1980, pp. 8-9). Another measurement in the study was the listing of one or two critical incidents in ministry. Of the critical incidents cited, Over seventy-five percent of the skill training required in these critical incidents was in the areas of general human relations and interpersonal conflict. These graduates' difficulties in managing themselves within a variety of intricate human relationships were compounded by the highly synbolic, and often conflicting, role expectations of their parishioners. The ability to build, maintain, and repair interpersonal relationships was the crucial foundational skill needed (Oswald, 1980, p. 10). Conflict between seminary expectations and rewards and parish expectations and rewards was acute: The seminary played down the practical skills needed for the ministry and placed great value on intellectual acumen. In the parish setting, the value of practical skills required for interpersonal and group relationships, organizational matters, counseling, administration, stewardship, evangel- isny Christian education, etc. was clear. In seminary, however, these skills were denigrated. Training for them was often referred to derogatorily as "how to" courses. Taking practical courses was compared to learning how to use a flannelgraph, or organizing a stewardship campaign-~hardly on a level with learning how to do theology or Biblical exegesis. . . . Where the seminary demanded a competitive spirit, parish life called for collaboration. In seminary, students competed with each other for high marks and faculty approv- al. They learned to work alone. They were almost never asked to work together or given a grade for collaborative work. In the parish, most of their efforts had to be in 41 collaboration with others. Those graduates who served as assistants or associate pastors discovered how few skills they had been given for working so closely with another person (Oswald, 1980, p. 11). In summary, five key areas of difficulty were identified in which congruence in experience was demonstrated by the various groups from different traditions and institutions: the practice of ministry, personal spirituality and wholeness, the constructive handling of conflict, interpersonal skills, and self-care and survival skills. For the practice of ministry, the single most prominent problem was the integration of the "total practice of an ordained parish minister." Pastors could perform isolated acts of ministry quite well, but they "were surprised to discover that these did not add up to the total practice of an ordained parish minister" (Oswald, 1980, p. 15). These clergy had difficulty formulating an image of who or what they were in the life and development of the parish as a whole, rather than in the lives of individual members. This problem often focused around their authority in parish decision making (Oswald, 1980, p. 15). Schorr's Study Schorr (1984) undertook a study "to ascertain what select seminary professors and ministers from across North Anerica believe to be the most important abilities (in terms of know- ledge, skills, and/or attitudes) that a pastor should possess in order to best help fulfill the ministry and mission of the local church" (p. 248). The sample consisted of 105 professors and 110 senior pastors, representing 11 seminaries, in the United States and Canada. Schorr used a modified Delphi technique in his 42 study to identify 15 ability statements, 2 of which focused on knowledge, 7 on skills, and 6 on personal attitudes and quali- ties. Several interesting conclusions emerged from the study. First, pastors and seminary professors did not differ signifi- cantly in the way they ranked the 15 abilities: (I) areas of personhood; (2) pastoral skills of communication, evangelism and worship; (3) knowledge abilities; and (4) abilities of counse- ling, management, and lifelong learning. Schorr notes that these priorities seem to concur with all but 2 of the 11 characteris- tics determined by the Readiness for Ministry Project. Theologi- cal position ("liberal" or "conservative") accounted for the greatest variation in responses. Generally, senior pastors "felt they had moderate to considerable need for growth, training and/or education in the priority abilities" (Schorr, 1984, p. 264). Of particular interest to seminaries were two findings which were not among the stated purposes of the study: There is a strong feeling among a number of pastors and seminary professors that theological schools should formu- late a more holistic approach to theological education which would emphasize the integration of knowledge, skills and areas of personhood. This would include a commitment to the integration of theory and practice throughout the entire preservice and in-service educational program by utilizing approaches which facilitate integration (p. 266). A call for holistic education, for lifelong education, and for collaboration were all deemed important implications for seminary curriculum. 43 Ways of Viewing Leadership Both contemporary researchers and biblical/theological thinkers have highlighted a multiplicity of ways of viewing leadership. Contenmorary Research Stogdill (1974) reviewed more than 3000 books and articles on leadership and concluded that 11 foci for definitions of "leadership" exist. Bass (1981) expanded and revised Stogdill's Handbook of Leadership and, while retaining the same foci, highlighted 10 theories of leadership: great-man theories, trait theories, environmental theories, personal-situational theories, psychoan- alytic theories, interaction-expectation theories, humanistic theories, exchange theories, behavioral theories, and perceptual and cognitive theories. In addition to research based on the different theories of leadership, Bass describes research related to women, Blacks, and different cultures. To date, however, no all-encompassing theory of leadership has emerged. Rather, Bass concludes, . . . it is believed that characteristics of the individual and demands of the situation interact in such a manner as to permit one, or perhaps a few, persons to rise to leadership status. Groups become structured in terms of positions and roles during the course of member interaction. A group is organized to the extent that it acquires differentiated positions and roles. Leadership represents one or more of the differentiated positions in a group. The occupant of a leadership position is expected to play a role that differs from the roles of other group members (Bass, 1981, p. 38). 44 Biblical/Theological Viewpoints Various writers on "biblical leadership" have enumerated "lists" of criteria grounded in the Bible for the pastor-as-lead- er. Stott (1985), for instance, identified five "essential ingredients" of leadership in general, and of Christian leader- ship in particular: vision, industry, perseverance, service, and discipline. In the New Testament, more emphasis is placed on the "character, values, attitudes, behavior and commitment of leaders, as these reflect Christlikeness" than on their activity (Richards & Hoeldtke, 1980, p. 117). The "lists," therefore, generated by various writers, although overlapping to a consider- able degree, differ according to the specific biblical passages being cited. Several key concepts are used repeatedly by numerous thinkers. One concept is "servant-leader" (Dale, 1984; Engstrom, 1976 & 1983; Greenleaf, 1977; Moore & Neff, 1985; Powers, 1979; Richards & Hoeldtke, 1980; Sanders, 1967; Stevens, 1985). These representative thinkers view servant leadership as unambitious and unauthoritarian; as a heart attitude and as a lifestyle; and as self-sacrificing. Privilege is negated and responsibility accentuated. The authors recognize Jesus as the premier servant-leader. A second biblical concept is "shepherding." Barrs (1983) points out that the biblical pattern for relationship between the shepherds and sheep is one of freedonk-freedom to be led by the 45 shepherds and sheep is one of freedom--freedom to be led by the Holy Spirit and to approach God directly since each is a priest before God. The shepherd-sheep model follows the model of Jesus, the Good Shepherd (Moore & Neff, 1985). The shepherd-leader fulfills his/her role by nurturing and caring for his/her followers and by meeting their needs (Richards & Hoeldtke, 1980). "Giftedness" is another biblical concept. God has given special gifts for ministry to each individual within the Church (Richards & Hoeldtke, 1980; Yu, 1975). Those who lead have received a special gift for that purpose (Engstrom, 1976 & 1983). Christians are a priesthood of believers who live in community and use their spiritual gifts for the benefit of all. Leadership is plural (Barrs, 1983), and there is an interdepen- dency of leadership/submission as all use their gifts (Powers, 1979). Linking Research and Biblical Perspectives Numerous parallels exist between the theories of leadership developed by contemporary researchers and the prominent ideas elaborated by biblical/theological thinkers. The great-man theories resemble the character descriptions of the pastor-leader in scripture, the interaction theories the interdependency of individuals within the priesthood of believers or Body of Christ. No one theory or concept is adequate to convey the complexity of factors affecting the task of leading. But the ideas which control a person's image of the pastor-as-leader will have, presumably, a great deal to do with how the pastor actually 46 leads his/her congregation. Research Precedents Research precedents for interviewing, questionnaires, and scaling were important to the design of the study. Interviewing A moderately-scheduled interview design enables the re- searcher to discover the "universe of discourse" (Gorden, 1969) which every social group has. A funnel question sequence (Stewart & Cash, 1978) begins with a broad, open-ended question and proceeds with increasingly restricted questions and thereby encourages freer association for the interviewee. For purposes of data reduction a tape recorder can be used, since studies investigating the effects of tape recording . . . agree that there is little evidence that the use of tape recorders increases resistance to the interview, decreases or destroys rapport, or alters respondents' answers. . . the use of tape recorders during survey interviews slightly increased the accuracy of response. Confirming evidence of re5pondents' acceptance of tape recorders comes from clinical and counseling situations (Weiss, 1975). Probe notes are essential, nevertheless, to remind the interview- er of specific points which should be elaborated or clarified later in the intervieW'(Gorden, 1969). The probe notes "should not be voluminous, but should include only key words or phrases to remind the interviewer of what the respondent has said" (Gorden, 1969, p. 290). 47 Questionnaires How to design the questionnaire and how to stimulate responses to the mailed questionnaire have received considerable attention. Designing the Questionnaire Six factors are involved in designing a good data collection instrument (Fowler, 1984): defining objectives; focused discus- sion; framing questions; design, format, and layout of the questionnaire; pretesting; and questionnaire length. Advantages and disadvantages impact overall questionnaire effectiveness (Isaac & Michael, 1981). Advantages are that a questionnaire is inexpensive; it is wide-ranging; it can be well designed, simple and clear; it is self-administering; and it can be made anonymous. Disadvantages are that a low re5ponse rate can occur; the questions may not be understood by the respondent; and the addressee may not actually be the one who answered the question- naire. Pretesting a questionnaire with individuals who are repre- sentative of the population is essential for clarifying and refining questions on the instrument (Isaac & Michael, 1981). Stimulating Response to the Questionnaire High response rates are desirable in order to minimize the effect of bias due to nonrespondents who may be systematically different from the population from which they were drawn. Response rates vary considerably. 48 Fowler asserts that "Academic survey organizations usually are able to achieve response rates with designated adults in the 75 percent range with general household samples" (1984, p. 48). Heberlein & Baumgartner (1978) found a mean final response rate of 60.6% with slightly over two contacts. Final response in the Heberlein & Baumgartner study (1978) was found to increase with a high initial response rate, the use of follow-up contacts, the use of a special third contact and a topic that is salient to the respondent. On the other hand, an increase in the length of a questionnaire, measured in terms of the number of pages, tended to decrease the final response rate. Linsky (1975) examined techniques which employed "mechanical or perceptual means to facilitate responses, those that use broad motivational factors to build on social and personal values of the respondent, and those that offer direct rewards for return of questionnaires." His study reviewed the research in education, business, sociology, and psychology over a 35 year period. Linsky also found that use of one or more follow-ups or reminders, pre-contact with respondents, type of postage, cash rewards, and the sponsoring organization positively influenced the response rate. Generalization was not possible for explain- ing the place and importance of the respondent for the survey, personalizing the questionnaires, anonymity, appeals based on the social benefits or altruism of the respondent, and length of questionnaire. 49 Likert-Type Scales Several different methods are used for the study of atti- tudes. Summated rating scales were first developed by Likert in 1932 (Edwards, 1957). Definition of "Attitude" Edwards (1957) follows Thurstone's definition of "attitude": "The degree of positive or negative affect associated with some psychological object." An attitude not immediately observable is considered a hypothetical or latent variable (Green, 1954). Synonyms for "attitude" then are "trait," "intervening varia- ble," "latent variable," and "factor." The distinguishing mark of an attitude, however, is its response covariation. In each measurement method, covariation among responses is related to the variation of an underlying variable. The latent attitude is defined by the correlations among responses (Green, 1954, p. 336). An "attitude universe" is the set of behaviors which comprise an attitude. Dimensions of Attitudes Shaw and Wright (1967) summarize six dimensions of atti- tudes: l. Attitudes involve evaluation of concepts regarding the characteristics of the psychological object in question and prompt motivated behavior. 2. Attitudes are understood to vary in quality and intensi- ty on a continuum from positive through neutral to negative. "The strength or intensity of the attitude is represented by the extremity of the position occupied on the continuum, becoming 50 stronger as one goes outward from a neutral position" (p. 7). 3. Attitudes are learned in contrast to being innate or resulting from personal development and maturation. Attitudes are learned through interaction with social objects and in social events or situations. Since they are learned, attitudes demonstrate the same properties as other learned reactions. . . and they are subject to further change through thinking, inhibition, extinction, fatigue, etc. (Shaw'& Wright, 1967, p. 8). 4. Attitudes have specific social referents. These referents may be abstract as well as concrete objects, such as political issues, world problems, and Godhead. 5. Attitudes possess varying degrees of relatedness to one another and occupy different positions of centrality or peripher- ality in the subsystem into which they have been integrated. The more central an attitude's position, the more resistant it is to change. Two plausible reasons may account for this. First, each central attitude is surrounded by numerous peripheral attitudes which would require breakdown in order for the central attitude to change. Second, the more central an attitude is, the greater its value or importance is to the person holding it. 6. Attitudes are relatively stable and enduring. In addition to the arguments of point five, perceptual closure also accounts for such stability: Since the more central attitudes are more definitive, they offer a higher degree of perceptual closure. To the extent that an assumption is warranted that all persons strive for at least some minimum degree of closure, these central attitudes should tend to be maintained unchanged on this basis alone (Shawr& Wright, 1967, pp. 9-10). 51 Scott (1968) catalogs eleven properties of an attitude: direction, magnitude, intensity, anbivalence, salience, affective salience, cognitive complexity (or differentiation, or multiplex- ity), overtness, embeddedness, flexibility, and consciousness. Of these, the greatest attention has been devoted to measuring magnitude (or intensity). Magnitude is the property with which the Likert-type scale is concerned. In summary, then, attitudes involve an individual's affect or feelings toward some concrete or abstract social object. These attitudes are learned and are relatively stable and enduring. The strength of the attitude varies with the indi- vidual holding it and is a function of its value or importance to the person. "Leadership" is an abstract social object and attitudes of subjects toward the pastor-as-leader, therefore, may, be examined using a Likert-type scale. Criteria for Attitude Statements Edwards (1957) examined the work of Wang, Thurstone and Chave, Likert, Bird, and Edwards and Kilpatrick and extracted and summarized the following criteria for attitude statements: 1. Avoid statements that refer to the past rather than to the present. 2. Avoid statements that are factual or capable of being interpreted as factual. 3. Avoid statements that may be interpreted in more than one way. (Edwards suggests a useful technique for overcoming this problem statement. Ask several individuals to respond to 52 the statements as they would if they had favorable attitudes toward the object under consideration. Then ask the same individuals to respond to the statements as they would if they had unfavorable attitudes. If the individuals can give similar responses of acceptance or rejection when they assume different attitudes, then those statements are not likely to be of value in an attitude scale.) 4. Avoid statements that are irrelevant to the psychologi- cal object under consideration. 5. Avoid statements that are likely to be endorsed by almost everyone or by almost no one. 6. Avoid statements containing universals such as "all," "always," "none," and "never" which often introduce ambiguity. 7. Avoid the use of words that may not be understood by those who are to be given the completed scale. 8. Avoid the use of double negatives. 9. Select statements that are believed to cover the entire range of the affective scale of interest. 10. Keep the language of the statements simple, clear, and direct. 11. Make the statements short, rarely exceeding 20 words. 12. Write each statement to contain only one complete thought. 13. Use such words as "only," "just," "merely," and others of a similar nature with care and moderation in writing state- ments. 53 14. Write statements, whenever possible, in the form of simple sentences rather than in the form of compound or complex sentences. Method of Summated Ratings Summated rating scales are one of six major scaling tech- niques (Green, 1954): the judgment methods, scalogram analysis, the unfolding technique, latent structure analysis, and rating methods are the other five. The summated rating method falls into a response method classification, since it depends upon the data given by respondents. Fundamental assumptions. A major assumption underlying the summated rating scale is that there will be differences in the belief and disbelief systems of those with favorable attitudes toward some psychological object and those with unfavorable attitudes. The items on a Likert-type scale are monotonically increas- ing functions of the attitude under consideration. In other words, the more favorable a person's attitude, the higher his expected score for the item would be (Green, 1954). It is not assumed that this will be true for each and every statement in the universe relating to the psychological object, but only with respect to certain subclasses of statements (Edwards, 1957, pp. 10-11). A second assumption is that the distribution of probabili- ties of response to any item increases as one moves from high to low along the attitude continuum (Lemon, 1973, p. 177). The regression line is linear in form; therefore, the sum of the scores from several items are linearly related to the respon- 54 dent's position on the attitude continuum (Lemon, 1973, p. 178). In contrast to cumulative scaling and consensual locating scaling, item position is not considered. The number of items rather than the position of items is important. Constructing summative scales. Several steps are involved in constructing summative scales. Summated rating scales require the collection of a large number of opinion statements which seem relevant to the specific attitude being studied. These statements should then be classi- fied into favorable and unfavorable categories with approximately the same number of statements in each category. Covering the entire range of the domain of interest is important. Testing statements. The statements are then presented to a pilot group of subjects who are asked to respond to each in terms of their degree of agreement or disagreement with it. Five possible categories of response are required. Although the wording may vary from scale to scale, the categories generally are "strongly agree," "agree," "neither agree nor disagree" (or "undecided"), "disagree," and "strongly disagree." Scoring responses. The responses are scored 0, l, 2, 3, 4 (or 1, 2, 3, 4, 5). The weighting of the responses is such that those that are most favorable will always have the highest positive weight. Thus, "strongly agree" for positively worded statements and "strongly disagree" for negatively worded state- ments will be scored a 4 (or 5). 55 Each respondent's scores are then summed over all items, providing a total score for him or her. When attitude scales were developed in this way, "the scores based upon the relatively simple assignment of integral weights correlated .99 with the more complicated normal deviate system of weights" (Edwards, p. 151). Shaw points out that "Since the linear correlation of the total score with the general attitude factor approaches unity as the number of items increases, there is some justification for the scoring procedure" (1967, p. 24). The distribution of attitude scores for a particular group can be transformed into 1 scores in terms of the following formula: I:50+lO(X-X) S A new distribution of scores is provided which has a mean of fifty and a standard deviation of ten. This permits a standard interpretation of scores which is free from differences in means and standard deviations of the various tests (Edwards, 1957, p. 159). Analyzing items. The next step in constructing a summated rating scale is to select those items which best differentiate between the respondents on the basis of their total scores. Two ways can be followed. The first way is by forming a frequency distribution of scores and then selecting the 25 percent of subjects with the highest total scores and the 25 percent of subjects with the 56 lowest total scores. These two groups then provide criterion groups for evaluating individual statements through the use of t-scores. The t-test is a significance test of differences in means of the two groups on each item which measures the degree to which a particular statement differentiates between the high and low groups in their responses to each item. As a crude and approximate rule of thumb, we may regard any 1 value equal to or greater than 1.75 as indicating that the average response of the high and low groups to a statement differs significantly, provided we have 25 or more subjects in the high group and also in the low group (Edwards, p. 153). Once the 1 value has been determined for each item, the statements can then be arranged in rank order according to those values. The 20 to 25 statements with the largest 3 values are then selected for the attitude scale. The critical ratio (C.R.) is a widely used index of item discrimination for Likert-type scales and is based on the differences in item scores for subgroups with high and low total scores respectively (Green, 1954, p. 351). The critical ratio makes use of the scores of the two subgroups rather than the scores of all respondents as does the correlation between item scores and total scores. The t-test and critical ratio ap- proaches are essentially the same. The second way, correlational methods, correlates the scores on each item with respondents' final scores. Those items, then, which demonstrate the highest correlations are chosen for the final scale. A correction is necessary in the correlational procedure because the total score includes the item score as a 57 component. A correction formula was developed by Peters and Van Voorhis (1940) for overcoming the artificially inflated score (Scott, 1968, p. 219). Scott (1968) points out that this procedure can yield deceptive results if the initial scale is made up of two or three different kinds of items. Each item may then correlate with the total score, even though it would correlate much better with its own indepen- dent cluster, considered alone, and would thus better be included in that subscale only. If the scale consists of two subclusters of items which are negatively correlated with each other, item-total correlations are likely to be near zero and the subscales will not be detected (p. 219). If it is suspected that all items may not be unidimensional, then correlating each item with every other item may be preferred. Green (1954) also cautions that high item-scale correlations are sometimes taken "as presumptive evidence of a single common factor." Two or three equally strong factors may be reflected in the items. Therefore, determining the homogeneity of the scale provides an alternative way of testing the single factor. In assessing the relative merits of different approaches to item analysis, Edwards insists that "It is doubtful, however, whether any of the methods of item analysis in current use would result in an ordering of the statements that is essentially different from the ordering we obtain in terms of 1 values" (1957, p. 155). Lemon concurs: "Correlational techniques are more commonly used but the two methods generate substantively similar results" (1973, p. 180). Of particular value in the Likert-type scale is that it demonstrates that a large number of mediocre items can be just as 58 good as a small number of precise items (Green, 1954). There- fore, where any doubt exists as to the precision of the items the number should be increased to insure reliable scores. Test administration. Once the 20 to 25 items with the highest correlations have been identified, the final scale can be constructed and administered to a group of respondents. These respondents are instructed to rate their agreement with each item. The final score is calculated by summing the item scores. Interpreting Summative Scales Interpretation of scores on a summated rating scale is dependent upon the distribution of sample scores (Edwards, 1957; Lemon, 1973; Shaw, 1967). The major difficulty in interpre- tation relates to the neutral point. Intermediate scores can be obtained either by checking the mid-points of the agree- ment scales on each item or by checking opposite extremes. Although a well-constructed scale should eliminate the latter incidence, the possibility of such an occurrence still exists (Lemon, 1973). No reference to an absolute scale is made. Therefore, the scores of respondents who are distributed along a continuum can only be interpreted relative to one another. In other words, it is not possible to say that beyond a certain point all scores indicate a favorable attitude and below it they all indicate an unfavorable attitude. Edwards (1957) believes that the absence of knowledge of a zero point is a handicap only if our major interest is in being 59 able to assign individuals to either favorable or unfavorable attitude categories toward the object being considered. Lemon (1973) argues that By and large an absolute measure is unnecessary for most practical purposes, since measurement is largely concerned with differences between individuals on the same instrument, or variations in attitude over time measured in the same way. However, it does mean that a substantial body of information has to be gathered at any one time in order to create norms against which individual scores can be judged (p. 182). Shawr& Wright (1967) caution that the scale should always be standardized on a sample drawn from the target population because of this limitation. Summated rating scales may be used as well in at least three situations as equal-appearing interval scales: in comparing the mean change in attitude scores as a result of the application of some experimental variable; in comparing the mean attitude scores of two or more groups; or in corrrelating scores on one attitude scale with scores on other scales or with other measures of interest (Edwards, 1957). Reliability of Summated Scales Reliability of a scale provides an index of the extent to which repeated measurements yield similar results. Summated scales are concerned with the reliability of an individual's score rather than the reliability of group statistics such as means and proportions. In the latter instance discrepancies are due to sampling different individuals. But, "If chance fluctua- tions cause relatively large shifts in an individual's score, then any particular determination of the score is practically 60 meaningless" (Green, 1954, p. 338). Reliability has two aspects which Cronbach has called "stability" (test-retest) and "equivalence" (parallel-forms). The coefficient of stability measures the degree of shifts in the scores of individuals on a test administered to the same group of respondents on two different occasions. Stability is increased due to memory and familiarity with the scale and diminished by extending the time interval between administrations of the test. Administration of the same test is often intended to determine the degree of "change" due to the application of some variable. This practice might then suggest low stability. Green notes, however, that In studies of attitude change we are concerned with consistent shifts of response syndromes. In this case, low stability of the score is expected. But it is important to know the reliability of the 'change.' This can be discover- ed by means of equivalent scales (1954, p. 339). Equivalence derives from the notion of equivalent scales of items from the same universe. Presumably if such scales are indeed equivalent, they will yield very similar scores. If equivalence is not demonstrated, generalization beyond the specific items in the scale may not be made. One way for obtaining reliable scores by equivalence on summated scales is the split-half technique. Scores on the odd-numbered statements may be correlated with scores on the even-numbered statements. But since it is desirable for the two scales to have similar scale-score distributions, similar patterns of inter-item correlations, and similar reliabilities, 61 it may be best to construct such scales from matched or paired samples of items (Green, 1954, p. 339). Whatever the method used for estimating the coefficient of equivalence from a single set of items, the methods depend on the homogeneity of the scale, or the interrelationships among the items. If the scale is homogen- eous, it will generally be a reliable one. Edwards states that According to the evidence at hand, there is no reason to doubt that scales constructed by the method of summated-rat- ings will yield reliability coefficients as high as or higher than those obtained with scales constructed by the method of equal-appearing intervals" (1957, p. 162). In fact, the reliability coefficients typically reported for summated scales are above .85, "even when fewer than 20 items make up the scale" (Edwards, 1957, p. 156). Shawr& Wright (1967), on the other hand, claim that the Likert procedure "yields moderately reliable scales." Such reliability is due, in their thinking, to the neutral point of the scale and, therefore, Likert-type scales "probably should be treated as ordinal scales" (p. 24). Lemon (1973) cites the 1946 Edwards and Kenney study which compared the Thurstone and Likert techniques of attitude scale construction. Their study showed that summated scaling correla- ted highly with equal appearing intervals and took approximately half the time to construct. There seems to be ample evidence to conclude, therefore, that summated rating scales are highly reliable overall and require far less time than other methods of scale construction. 62 Summative scales appear to be the easiest scales to con- struct. Suitable items are easier to devise, since fewer assumptions are required than with other scaling models. Because of the methods of selection and item analysis, the content of summative scales is likely to be representative of the attitude domain. Multidimensionality in item development, however, must be watched for and satisfactory norms established by use with sufficiently large numbers. Their reliability generally is quite satisfactory. Summary Curriculum is an environment-producing discipline (Huebner, 1975). Several factors influence the environment of theological education: conceptions of the curriculum held by educators; the relationship of theory to praxis; the relationship of the liberal arts to professions education; the relationship of structure to concept; and divergent perceptions of the role of the leader. These factors interact to shape the environment in which students study and, consequently, contribute to the kinds of images of the pastor-as-leader which students have. Three different areas related to research design were particularly vital to this study: interviewing, questionnaires, and Likert-type scales. Relevant findings were reviewed from the literature. Chapter 3 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY A worldwide interdependency between theological institutions exists at several levels. One level of interdependency has resulted from the experience of students who have been exposed to different images of leading in the Church while studying abroad. Another level of interdependency has developed from inter- national cooperation by accrediting associations. Still a third form of interdependency has derived from the interrelationships between nationals and expatriates who serve in their countries. Purpose of the Study Because of the interrelationship and interdependency of Church (universal), Mission (international), and Seminary (particular), this Study sought to identify and to describe the images of the pastor-as-leader in the Church held by North Anerican-born and foreign-born students in three seminaries. Because Church, Mission, and Seminary each operate with certain tacit images of the pastor-as-leader, articulation between the three in order to suggest areas of increased coher- ence in the worldwide educational enterprise of the Church was considered important. The Seminary was a logical starting point for this articula- tion for three reasons. First, it serves the Church by training 64 pastors who contribute to the formation of these images through their own modeling. Second, it serves the Mission by training missionaries who are carriers of certain images of leading to cross-cultural settings. Third, it trains foreign nationals who take these images of leading back to their own countries and churches. Overview of the Study The study required two data collection phases. The first phase consisted of semi-structured interviews with 62 first-year and third-year students and 12 faculty members in three North Anerican seminaries. Data collected in this phase were used to develop a questionnaire, the Pastor-as-Leader Expectations Questionnaire (PALEQ), for data collection in the second phase of the study. Data collected from 281 subjects during the questionnaire phase of the study were used to clarify and refine generaliza- tions about seminarians' images of pastoral leadership derived from the interview phase. Data from both the semi-structured interviews and PALEQ were analyzed for relationships between the independent variables of Seminary, Year in Seminary, Age, Sex, Ethnic Background, Number of Years of Study in English, Number of Years Lived in North Anerica, Seminary Program, and Intended Vocation. Association with faculty images of leading was also measured. 65 Research and Operational Questions Five research questions and operational questions guided this study. Research Question #1 Is the student's image of leading in the Church raised to a more precise level of articulation as a result of Seminary education? Operational Question #1 What are the primary images which students associate with the concept of leading? Operational Question #2 Who are the individuals whom students recognize as leaders? Research Question #2 Are there any predictable themes in the emerging image of the pastor-as-leader? Research Question #3 Are there any discernible shifts or trends away from early imagery toward other images? Operational Question #1 How do first-year and third-year seminary students' images of the pastor-as-leader differ? Operational Question #2 How do first-year and third-year seminary students differ from professors in their images of the pastor-as-leader? 66 Research Question #4 Are there any observable factors related to those trends? Operational Question #1 Is the student's Seminary related to those trends? Operational Question #2 Is the student's Sex related to those trends? Operational Question #3 Is the student's Age related to those trends? Operational Question #4 Is the student's Ethnic Background related to those trends? Operational Question #5 Is the Number of Years Lived in North America related to those trends? Operational Question #6 Is the Number of Years of Study in English related to those trends? Operational Question #7 Is the student's Intended Vocation related to those trends? Operational Question #8 Is the student's Program of Study related to those trends? Research Question #5 Are the emerging trends rooted in culture or in scripture? Operational Question #1 How congruent are the images of the pastor-as-leader which first-year and third-year seminary students hold with images held by seminary professors? 67 Operational Question #2 How congruent are the images of pastor-as-leader which first-year and third-year seminary students hold with images of the pastor-as-leader described in the literature? Population and Samples The study involved three seminaries of varying sizes in the East, Midwest, and West of North America. Population The population consisted of all first-year and third-year Master of Divinity students at three North American theological seminaries (Alpha, Beta, and Ganmm Seminaries). Samples Since two different data collection phases were required, two different samples were involved. Interview Sample Sixty-two Master of Divinity students (Table 3.1) constitu- ted the sample for the interview phase of the study: 22 from Alpha Seminary, 20 from Beta Seminary, and 20 froNIGanme Semin- ary. Of these 62 students, 32 were foreign nationals and 30 were North Americans. The 30 North American subjects were randomly selected: 5 first-year students and 5 third-year students, or 10 from each seminary. Because the numbers were small, all foreign national subjects who qualified as first-year or third-year M.Div. stu- dents were selected. 68 TABLE 3.1 Subjects by Seminary, Ethnicity, and Year in Seminary ETHNICITY SEMINARY & YEAR Alpha Beta Gamma TOTAL N. American Junior 5 5 5 15 Senior 5 5 5 15 Foreign Junior 6 5 5 16 Senior 6 5 5 16 TOTAL 22 20 20 62 Four faculty members from each of the three seminaries were nominated by the appropriate administration official to be interviewed by the researcher. Half of the 12 professors were from the academic disciplines and half from the applied disci- plines. Questionnaire Sample The sample for the questionnaire phase of the study was identical with the population for the overall study: all first-year and third-year Master of Divinity students in Alpha (N=45), Beta (N:3l4), and Gamma Seminaries (N:91), for a total of 450. Seminary Profiles Alpha, Beta, and Gamma Seminaries are located in the East, Midwest, and West of North America. Two are sister institutions of the same denomination, and all three adhere to virtually identical doctrinal statements. 69 The seminaries range in size from 1300 to 312 to 133 students respectively. Each seminary is strongly committed to the training of leadership for the Church in North America and throughout the world. Profiles, including enrollment statistics, faculty size, and degree programs, for each seminary are provi- ded. Table 3.2. Students in Alpha, Beta, and Ganna Seminaries Seminary Independent Alpha Beta Gamma Variable Foreign NAM Foreign NAM Foreign NAM TOTAL Age 29.8 28.7 32.2 26.2 28.2 28.0 28.9 # Yrs NAM 7.8 24.6 4.0 26.2 4.2 27.8 15.5 # Yrs Study 6.1 17.6 8.8 17.8 6.0 17.4 12.0 Alpha Seminapy Profile Alpha Seminary, located in the West of North Anerica, is the smallest of the three seminaries which participated in the study. Enrollment Alpha Seminary enrolled 133 students for the 1985-1986 academic ternu Of these 133, 98 were full-time students and 35 were part-time students. Faculty Alpha Seminary employs 7 full-time faculty members, 11 part-time faculty members, and 4 administrative personnel. 70 Degree Programs Alpha Seminary offers four different degree programs: Master of Divinity, Master of Religious Education, Master of Missiology, and Master of Christian Studies. Subjects Twenty-two subjects, 10 North American-born and 12 foreign- born, were interviewed. North American subjects were randomly selected. Because the number of foreign-born subjects was limited, all subjects of Oriental descent were chosen to partici— pate. S35. Twenty men and 2 women were interviewed. Both women were foreign nationals. figs. The average age for all 22 subjects was 29.3 years. North American-born students averaged 28.7 years and foreign-born students 29.8 years, or a difference of 1.05 years between the two groups. The age range for all subjects was 23-years to 50-years. North American subjects ranged in age from 25-years to 36-years and foreign national subjects from 23-years to 50-- years. The median age for both North American-born subjects and foreign-born subjects was 27.5 years. Ethnic Background. Of the 22 subjects, 8 were born in Canada; 1 in the United States; 1 in Malaysia; 1 in Viet Nam; 2 in China; and 9 in Hong Kong. Number of Years Lived in North America. North American- born subjects had lived an average of 24.6 years in Canada or the United States. Foreign-born subjects, on the other hand, had 71 lived an average of 7.8 years in North America, or 16.8 years less time than North American subjects. Number of Years of Study in English. North Anerican-born subjects had studied an average of 17.6 years in English between kindergarten and the present. This reflects a difference of 11.5 years more than foreign-born subjects who had averaged 6.1 years of study in English. Program of Study. Eleven subjects were M.Div. (Master of Divinity) students; 7 were M.Miss. (Master of Missiology) students; 2 were M.C.S. (Master of Christian Studies) students; 1 was an M.R.E. (Master of Religious Education) student; and l was an unclassified student. Seminary Year. Eleven subjects were in their first-year of study; 5 were in their second year of study; and 6 were in their third year of study. Of these, 5 North American-born subjects were in their first-year of study; 1 was in his second- year of study; and 4 were in their third-year of study. Of the foreign-born subjects, 6 were in their first—year of study; 4 were in their second-year of study; and 2 were in their third-year of study. The study was designed to have only subjects from the M.Div. program. Because of the size of Alpha Seminary, however, it was impossible to secure an adequate number of subjects, particularly foreign-born students, who satisfied this require- ment. Therefore, in order to have a broader cross-cultur- al representation, foreign-born students from other programs 72 of study were included. Furthermore, it was not possible to secure an adequate number of third-year foreign-born subjects. Most foreign students elect one of the two—year programs because of time constraints upon their study programs. Therefore, 33% of the total foreign-born subjects were second-year rather than third- year students. For purposes of data analysis, therefore, second-year and third-year subjects were combined. Intended Vocation. Of the 22 Alpha Seminary students, 2 intend to be pastors in North America; 1 plans to be a pastor overseas; 12 expect to be missionaries; and 7 indicated other plans. The "other" category included counseling, tentmaking, broadcasting, children's work, writing, and uncertain. Fifty percent of all subjects stated they intended to be missionaries, and 32% of the subjects were enrolled in the Master of Missiology program, a cross-cultural degree track. Summary of Alpha Seminary Profile On the basis of the profile of Alpha Seminary, it was hypothesized that the independent variables likely to contribute most to the outcomes of the study were the Number of Years of Lived in North America; the Number of Years of Study in English; and Ethnicity. Beta Seminary Profile Beta Seminary, located in the North Anerican Midwest, is the largest of the three seminaries which participated in the study. 73 Enrollment Beta Seminary enrolled 1308 students in the 1985 Fall term. The 1308 included all students in master's and doctoral level programs, resident and non-resident, full-time and part-time. 483 students were enrolled in the Master of Divinity (MnDiv.) program during the Winter 1986 term, of which 211 were first-year students and 134 were third-year students. Faculty Beta Seminary employs 45 full-time faculty members (7 administrative) and 27 visiting faculty members. Degree Programs The Seminary offers a wide variety of degree programs, in addition to the M.Div., including M.A., M.R.E., D.Min., D.Miss., and Ed.D. Subjects Twenty subjects, 10 North American-born and 10 foreign-born, were interviewed. S35. Nineteen men and l woman were interviewed. The woman was a North American. Sixteen women constitute 3.3% of the M.Div. population at Beta Seminary. Ag_. Beta Seminary subjects averaged 29.2 years in age. Foreign subjects had a mean age of 32.2 years and North American subjects 26.2 years, or a difference of 6 years between the two groups. The range for all subjects was 22-years to 36-years, with North American subjects spread between 22-years and 32-years and foreign subjects spread between 25-years and 36-years. The 74 median age for all subjects was 30-years; for North American-born subjects 26-years; and for foreign-born subjects 32.5-years. Ethnic Background. Of the 20 Beta Seminary interviewees, 10 were born in the United States, 2 in Hong Kong, and 1 each in the countries of Brazil, Ghana, Guatemala, Japan, Korea, Kenya, Taiwan, and Thailand. Foreign students constitute 5.8% (28) of the M.Div. enrollment of Beta Seminary. North American-born subjects were randomly selected. Because the number of foreign-born subjects was limited, all foreign students enrolled in the M.Div. program were inter- viewed. Due to the limited number of foreign-born subjects, the second-year student with the highest number of accumulated credits was included with the four third-year students. Number of Years Lived in North America. North American-born subjects had lived an average of 26.2 years in the United States. Foreign-born subjects had lived an average of 4.0 years in North America, reflecting a difference of 22.2 years between the two groups. All subjects had averaged living 15.1 years in North America. Number of Years of Study in English. All subjects had averaged 13.3 years of study in English. North American-born subjects had averaged 17.8 years and foreign-born subjects 8.8 years, or a difference of 9 years. Program of Study. All 20 subjects in Beta Seminary were enrolled in the Master of Divinity (M.Div.) progrann Of these 20, 10 were first-year students, 1 was a second-year student 75 (foreign), and 9 were third—year students. Seminarinear. Five North American-born and 5 foreign- born subjects were first-year students. Five North American-born and 4 foreign-born subjects were third-year students. One foreign-born subject was a second-year student. Intended Vocation. Of the 10 North American-born subjects, 4 indicated plans to enter pastoral ministry in North America, 2 into education, and 4 were undecided. Foreign-born subjects were much more decisive about their intended vocations. One planned to enter North American pastoral ministry, 6 overseas pastoral ministry, 1 missionary service, 6 education, and 1 undecided. Five intended to combine pastoral ministry with education work, thus accounting for the 15 choices among 10 subjects. Summary of Beta Seminary Profile On the basis of Beta Seminary's profile, it was anticipated that the independent variables of Ethnicity, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years of Study in English would likely contribute the most information about images of the pastor-as-leader which characterized Beta Seminary students. Gamma Seminary Profile Gamma Seminary, located in the Eastern part of the United States, is a middle-sized seminary. Enrollment Gamma Seminary enrolled 312 students for the 1985—1986 academic terni(Ganne Seminary, 1985). 76 Faculty Gamma Seminary employs 15 full-time faculty and 5 adjunct faculty. Three of the 15 full-time faculty are also administra- tors. Degree Programs Ganne Seminary offers a Master of Divinity degree for North Anerican Ministries and a Master of Divinity degree for Overseas Ministries. Both degrees require three years of course work. In addition to the M.Div. degree, a two-year Master of Professional Studies (M.P.S.) in Missions is offered. Wonen comprised 31.7 percent of the student population. Of the 312 students, 66 were first-year students and 48 were third-year students. Subjects Twenty subjects, 10 North American-born and 10 foreign-born, participated in the interviews. North American-born subjects were randomly selected from the first-year and third-year classes. All foreign-born subjects who qualified as either first-year or third-year students were interviewed. Sex. Seventeen men and 3 women were interviewed. Two of the women and 8 of the men were foreign-born students. figs. Gamma Seminary subjects averaged 28.1 years in age. Foreign~born subjects had a mean age of 28.2 years and North Anerican-born subjects 28.0 years, or a difference of .2 year between the two groups. 77 The age range for all subjects was 22-years to 35-years, with North American-born subjects spread between 22-years and 35-years and foreign-born subjects spread between 25-years and 35-years. The median age for both North American-born and foreign-born subjects was 27.5 years, or 27.0 years for North American-born subjects and 28.0 years for foreign-born subjects. Ethnic Background. Ten of the subjects were born in the United States; 4 in Korea; 2 in Hong Kong; and 1 each in Burkina Faso, Ecuador, Philippines, and Zimbabwe. Number of Years Lived in North America. Subjects had lived an average of 16.0 years in North America. North American-born subjects had lived an average of 27.8 years in North America. Foreign-born subjects had lived in North America an average of 4.2 years. A difference of 23.6 years in time lived in North Anerica exists between the North American subjects and the foreign national subjects. Number of Years of Study in Epglish. Subjects in Ganne Seminary had studied an average of 11.7 years in English. North Anerican-born subjects averaged 17.4 years, in contrast to foreign-born subjects who had a mean score of 6.0 years. A difference of 11.4 years average exists between the two groups of subjects in Gamma Seminary. Program of Study. All subjects were enrolled in the Master of Divinity program. Seminary Year. The 20 subjects were equally divided between first-year and third-year students, or 10 for each year. 78 Intended Vocation. Five of the subjects intend to enter pastoral ministry in North America and 5 pastoral ministry overseas. Seven plan to be missionaries, 1 an evangelist, and 4 educators. (Two indicated either/or options between pastoral ministry and educational service and, therefore, were included in each category bringing the total to 22 rather than 20.) Fifteen of the 20 subjects, or 75.0 %, expect to engage in cross-cultural ministries. Summary of Gamma Seminary Profile The greatest differences in variables among subjects at Gamma Seminary are reflected in their Number of Years Lived in North America; Number of Years of Study in English; and Ethnic Background. These variables were expected, therefore, to contribute the most information to understanding differences among subjects regarding their views of the pastor-as-leader. Instrumentation Two separate instruments were required for data collection, an Interview'Guide and the Pastor-as-Leader Expectations Ques- tionnaire (PALEQ). InterviewrGuide An Interview'Guide (Chapter 4) was developed to facilitate semistructured interviews of 62 first-year and third-year students and 12 faculty members. Eight direct, open-ended questions were used to allow the interviewee to associate as freely as possible with his or her 79 images of the pastor-as-leader. Follow-up probe questions were utilized to clarify responses given by interviewees to the direct questions. Questionnaire A questionnaire was developed based on the data collected from the 74 interviews. Objective of PALEQ The Pastor-as-Leader Expectations Questionnaire (PALEQ) was designed to verify generalizations drawn from the interview phase of the study. Independent Variables Information was collected on eight independent variables: Seminary, Sex, Age, Ethnic Background, Number of Years Lived in North America, Number of Years of Study in English, Year in Seminary, and Intended Vocation. Dependent Variables Four dependent variables were measured with PALEQ: Person- al, Relational, Functional, and Spiritual. These four variables (themes) reflect systematic presentations of the ways in which seminary students and faculty described the pastor-as-leader during the interviews. Measurement Four different strategies were used to measure student attitudes toward the pastor-as-leader with PALEQ: 4 open-ended questions; 20 Likert-type statements regarding the ideal pastor- as-leader; 20 Likert-type statements regarding the pastor which 80 the respondent knew best; and 5 forced choice sets of words. Likert scale. A Likert-type scale was used to permit subjects to respond in terms of the degree to which each item reflected their images of leading in the Church. Open-ended questions. Research on the relative merits of closed and open questions on questionnaires "suggests that the two formats produce very similar information" (Borg & Gall, 1983, p. 419). Therefore, open-ended questions were used as a way to verify the responses being secured with the Likert-type scale. Forced choice questions. The four words in each of the five clusters of words were selected on the basis of their power (frequency of citation during interviews). Each word in a cluster represented one of the four independent variables (factors or themes) being measured. Pretest PALEQ was pretested at a fourth seminary with three first- year and three third-year students. These subjects reflected very similar characteristics as subjects in the target popula- tion. Conmleting the questionnaire took approximately 15 to 19 minutes per subject. Appropriate suggestions from the pretest were incorporated in the final revision of PALEQ. Validity The validity of PALEQ was checked at two points. The 40 key words identified during the interviews based on frequency of citation were clustered into one of four themes: Personal, Relational, Functional, and Spiritual. Twenty-four of the 40 key 81 words achieved a validity of 1.0. Twelve of the key words had a validity of .8, and 4 a validity of .6. Overall validity for each of the four themes was .93 (Personal), .95 (Relational), .87 (Functional), and .83 (Spiritual). Twenty key words were selected from the original 40, 5 from each of the four themes, for development as items for PALEQ. The 20 items subsequently developed from the key words were then checked for their validity. Overall validity for each of the four themes based on the 20 items was 1.0 (Personal), 1.0 (Relational), .93 (Functional), and .93 (Spiritual). Data Collection Data were collected in two phases: the interview phase and the questionnaire phase. IntervieW'Procedures Once subjects were enlisted for interviewing, standardized procedures were followed in each interview. Enlistment of Subjects Each of the 62 students selected for interviewing was contacted by letter and invited to participate in the semi- structured interviews. Follow-up phone calls were made until all subjects originally selected were scheduled for interviews. The 12 faculty members were nominated by the appropriate institution administrator and then contacted by the researcher. 82 Procedures All interviews took place on the respective Seminary campuses and were conducted by the researcher. At the beginning of the interview, a statement of purpose about the nature of the research was made. "Small talk" was used to help establish rapport with the interviewee. Confidentiality was guaranteed in order to permit the freest possible expression of thinking and feeling about issues of leadership. Opportunity was provided for the subject to ask any questions he or she might have. Each subject was asked if the interview might be recorded, and all 74 interviewees granted permission. Interviews ranged in time from 30 minutes to 60 minutes duration; the average inter- view lasted approximately 45 minutes. Data Reduction Primary data reduction was done during the interviews as the researcher transcribed each key word, phrase, or sentence offered by the interviewer. Recordings of the interview were referred to only to clarify ambiguity in the transcriptions made during the interview. Questionnaire Procedures The population consisted of 450 first-year and third-year students in Alpha, Beta, and Gamma Seminaries. Each subject in the population received the questionnaire. Letter of Transmittal A letter of transmittal was sent with PALEQ which, though brief, stressed the reasons why the student's cooperation was 83 essential. In two of the seminaries the letter of transmittal was written by the Dean of the Faculty. In the third it was written by the researcher. The purpose of the study was ex- plained and a request for return of the questionnaire by a certain date made. A self—addressed envelope was enclosed for the student's use in returning the questionnaire. Follow-Up Approximately one to two weeks after the initial question- naire was mailed, phone calls were made to each subject to find out if they had received the questionnaire; to thank them if they had already completed it; and to request that they complete it as soon as possible if they had not already done so. In this preliminary follow-up, it was possible to identify subjects who had already responded and to delete them from future follow-up efforts. Also, subjects who did not belong in the p0pu1ation but had received PALEQ were dropped from the study. Response Rate A total of 281 subjects responded to the questionnaire, or 62.4%. Ten completed questionnaires were received too late for inclusion in the final computations. Response rate by seminary is provided in Table 3.3. 84 Table 3.3. Response Rate by Seminary . Seminary N % Returns Alpha Seminary 45 97.3 Beta Seminary 314 54.2 Ganne Seminary 91 67.0 TOTAL 450 62.4 Beta Seminary had the largest number of students in the population and the lowest percentage of responders. In order to determine if non-responders were systematically different from responders, therefore, 10 percent of Beta's presumed non-respond- ers to the first mailing of PALEQ were randomly selected for follow—up. The results are summarized in Table 3.4. Table 3.4. Reasons for Response Rate at Beta Seminary Reason N=314 % Returned PALEQ 6 27.3 Too Busy 7 31.8 Not Reached 5 22.7 Miscellaneous 4 18.2 TOTAL 22 100.0 85 Constraints of the Study The study is limited in its generalizability to the three institutions involved. The findings and conclusions drawn, however, suggest promising avenues to continue exploring leader- ship for the Church in other institutions which share similar concerns. A further constraint relates to the cross-sectional nature of the study. A longitudinal study to determine the changes in images of leadership is needed to rule out unforseen confounding variables among the participants in the study. Since the questionnaire items were derived from interviews with first-year and third-year students, however, it is assumed that the present findings are descriptive of those subjects and will provide a launching point for longitudinal studies in the future. A third constraint is that PALEQ is based on the number of verbal citations of subjects for certain key words. Additional study needs to be done to clarify more fully precisely what subjects understand those words to mean. A final constraint of the study is that the results are not generalizable beyond foreign students studying in a second language in North American theological seminaries. These subjects have undergone an acculturation process simply by living in North America which distinguishes them from lay persons or church leaders in their home countries who have not had access to similar study opportunities. Chapter 4 FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS OF DATA FROM INTERVIEW PHASE The purpose of the research was to identify and to describe the images of the pastor-as-leader in the Church held by North Anerican-born and foreign-born students in three seminaries. Two different instruments were used to gather information pertaining to the research questions. Interviews were conducted to identify the language which seminary students use when describing the pastor-as-leader and to make generalizations about their emerging images of pastoral leadership. The data from the interviews were then used to design a questionnaire to check generalizations derived from the interviews. Findings from the interview phase will be examined in this chapter and findings from the questionnaire phase will be considered in Chapter 5. Interviews An interview guide was developed and interview protocol established for the interviews with 62 students and 12 faculty members fron1Alpha, Beta, and Gamma Seminaries. Instrumentation Eight questions formed the core of the interviews and were generally asked in the same order (Figure 1). The first three questions were asked of all subjects, and the fourth one only of 87 foreign-born subjects. Subjects' responses to the core questions were proved further (Figure 2). Questions were structured to proceed from broad, open-ended statements, to more specific ones in order to allow subjects to associate as freely as possible with their personal images of the pastor-as-leader. Interview Protocol Interviews were conducted under similar conditions for all 74 subjects (62 students and 12 faculty members). Each interview lasted from 30 to 60 minutes, with most interviews ranging between 45 and 60 minutes. Permission was obtained from each subject to tape record the interview. Preceding the interview subjects were engaged in informal conversation to help them to relax. The researcher then provided a brief overview of the purpose of the research and answered any questions respondents had (Gorden, 1969). Eight demographic items were noted: Seminary, Sex, Age, Ethnic Background, Year in Seminary, Number of Years Lived in North America, Number of Years of Study in English, Program of Study, and Intended Vocation. 88 Figure 4.1. Interviewu-Direct Questions. 1. What cones to your mind when you think of the words "lead," "leading," "leader," "leadership"? Think of several people you recognize as leaders, then name those individuals and describe them one-by-one. How do people become leaders? You've had the opportunity to live in two cultures. Please- describe the differences you've observed between the way people in your culture lead and the way North Americans lead. (Asked only of foreign-born subjects.) What is the role of the seminary in developing pastoral leaders for the Church? What might discredit/disqualify pastoral leadership? What are your personal strengths and weaknesses as a leader? As you reflect over the interview, are there any areas you'd now like to go back to and elaborate on or additional insights about leadership you'd like to offer? Figure 4.2. Interviewz-Probe Questions. What do you mean by "servant leadership"? How does administration differ from leadership? What leader would you most like to be like? How should authority be expressed? What was Jesus' pattern of leadership? What are some other ways a leader should "treat" people? What kinds of things are too authoritative? Who are the leaders in your culture? 89 Analytic Procedures Data were reduced during the interviews. Subsequently a content analysis was made followed by a statistical analysis. Thematic organization based on the content and statistical analyses led to item selection for the questionnaire. Data Reduction During Interviews As interviews progressed, the researcher wrote down each idea offered by the interviewee. Ideas were recorded as words, phrases, or sentences. For instance, when asked Direct Question #1, many subjects simply enumerated a series of words such as "independent," "example," and "complex." Each word was listed as a separate idea. Other subjects used phrases, such as "gravity of the responsibility" or "leading behind the scenes through influence and lifestyle." Occasionally entire sentences were transcribed, such as "A leader is able to take direction based on the informa- tion he has." Since all interviews were tape recorded as well as written out during the interview, the researcher was able to check tapes to clarify any ambiguous or confusing transcriptions. The number of ideas generated about leadership during the student interviews totaled 4,338 statements for all students in the three seminaries. The distribution of responses is displayed in Table 4.1. 90 Table 4.1. Statements Derived from Interviews by Seminary. % of Total Seminary N M Responses Alpha Seminary 1266 57.5 29.2 Beta Seminary 1525 76.2 35.2 Gamma Seminary 1547 77.4 35.6 TOTAL 4338 70.0 100.0 Subsequent Content Analysis A content analysis of the 4,338 ideas discovered by data reduction during the interviews was conducted from an attribu- tional point of view (Krippendorff, p. 113). From the analysis, verbal citations (identified as key words) which subjects used to describe the pastor-as-leader were identified. Key Words Key words occurring frequently were noted. Thirty-four different words and their cognates were initially identified for frequency of re5ponse by subjects. A second observer was trained to identify key words and to conduct a cross check of words identified by the primary re- searcher. In this way 6 new key words were identified and added to the researcher's original list of 34, bringing the total to 40 key words. The 40 key words became the dependent variables, and frequency counts for each one became the raw scores which were used to compare subjects on the various independent varia- 91 bles by means of 13 statistical tests. The results of this key word analysis are displayed in Table 4.2. Overview of Tests The 40 key words frequently cited by subjects as they responded to the direct and probe questions throughout the interview were submitted to 13 different tests for statisti- cal analysis. t tests. t tests for independent means were conducted for the independent variables Place of Birth (Table 4.3) and Year in Seminary (Table 4.4) for each of the 40 key words. Scores on the dependent variables (key words) were derived from an interval scale, and it was assumed that they reflected a normal distribution in the population and that score variances for the population were equal. In order to avoid the possibility of a Type I error (reject- ing the null hypothesis when it is correct), a significance level of .10 was established for interpreting the results from t tests for data derived from the interview phase of the study. 92 Table 4.2. 40 Key words Identified in Attributional Analysis. Theme N M SD Know 187 3.02 1.92 Gift/Ability 132 2.13 1.99 Develop/Grow 112 1.81 2.24 Model/Example 112 1.81 1.77 Teach 87 1.40 1.57 Love 84 1.36 2.22 Learn 79 1.27 2.81 Servant 78 1.26 2.00 Willing 76 1.23 1.74 Authority 61 .98 1.38 Administration 58 .94 1.96 Think 57 .92 1.26 Goal-Oriented 54 .87 1.17 Responsible 53 .86 1.35 Organize 50 .81 1.31 Respect 49 .79 1.23 Spiritual 48 .77 1.13 Experience 47 .76 1.27 Lifestyle 47 .76 1.58 Position 45 .73 1.22 Listen 44 .71 1.10 Decisive 43 .69 1.29 Care 41 .66 1.00 Vision 41 .66 1.23 Discipline 39 .63 1.17 Comnmnicate 37 .60 1.08 Motivate 34 .55 1.03 Confident 31 .50 .89 Humility 30 .48 .98 Sensitive 30 .48 .86 Share 28 .45 .73 Open 26 .42 .68 Plan 26 .42 .75 Encourage 23 .37 .70 Faithful 18 .29 .70 Character 17 .27 .63 Charismatic 16 .26 .67 Shepherd 16 .26 .54 Aggressive 13 .21 .74 Delegate 11 .18 .46 93 Table 4.3. Differences Between Foreign-Born and North American- born Subjects on the 40 Key Words. P Key Word M SD t (l—tailed) Care North American 0.45 0.85 1.580 .058 Foreign 0.85 1.08 Charismatic North American 0.41 0.85 1.728 .043 Foreign 0.12 0.41 Connmnicate North American 1.00 0.24 2.880 .003 Foreign .24 0.49 Learn North American 1.70 0.46 1.612 .054 Foreign 1.50 0.50 Model/Example North American 2.41 2.04 2.636 .005 Foreign 1.27 1.26 Position North American 1.07 1.46 2.117 .018 Foreign 0.42 0.85 Shepherd North American 0.38 0.61 1.678 .047 Foreign 0.15 0.43 Teach North American 1.76 1.94 1.681 .047 Foreign 1.09 1.05 Willing North Anerican l. 7 0.50 1.779 .038 5 Foreign 1.34 0.47 94 Table 4.4. Differences Between First-Year and Third-Year Seminarians on the 40 Key Words. P Key Word M SD t (l-tailed) Administration lst-year 1.28 2.52 1.279 .102 3rd-year 0.64 1.20 Authority lst-year 0.69 0.95 1.574 .058 3rd-year 1.24 1.63 Charismatic lst-year 0.38 0.39 1.332 .092 3rd-year 0.15 0.36 Communicate lst-year 0.38 0.72 1.482 .070 3rd-year 0.79 1.30 Encourage lst-year 0.24 0.50 1.363 .087 3rd-year 0.48 0.82 Know lst-year 2.59 1.94 1.661 .049 3rd-year 3.39 1.82 Listen lst-year 0.41 0.67 2.022 .022 3rd-year 0.97 1.31 Love lst-year 2.10 2.84 2.587 .006 3rd-year 0.70 1.09 Open lst-year 0.28 0.52 1.551 .061 3rd-year 0.55 0.78 Responsible lst-year 0.62 0.85 1.272 .103 3rd-year 1.06 1.65 95 Analysis of variance. Analysis of variance tests were conducted to determine if Alpha, Beta, or Gannn Seminaries differed significantly among themselves on any of the 40 "key words." Results of these analysis of variance tests are shown in Table 4.5. The one-way analysis of variance yielded significant differences on 6 of the 40 key words (Table 4.5). Table 4.5. Differences Among Alpha, Beta, and Gannm Seminaries on the 40 Key Words. Seminary Dependent Variables Alpha Beta Gamma F p Goal-Oriented 7 l3 9 2.533 .086 Responsible 7 ll 9 2.380 .099 Decisive 9 10 1 4.352 .017 Humility 7 7 2 2.631 .079 Character 5 6 0 3.477 .036 Delegate 4 5 0 2.408 .097 For each dependent variable (key word) where a statisti- cally significant F ratio was found (the ratio of between-group variance to within-groups variance), post hoc t tests were conducted to determine which group means differed significantly from one another. This t test differed from those conducted on the independent variables of Place of Birth and Year in Seminary in that the standard error was derived from the variances of all the groups rather than from the variances of the twe specific groups being compared. 96 The post hoc t tests yielded significant differences between [Alpha Seminary and Beta Seminary on dependent variables goal-ori- ented (t=2.248, p=.028) and responsibility (t:2.l70, p=.034); between Alpha Seminary and Gannm Senunary on the key word humility (t=2.263, p=.027); and between Beta Seminary and Ganne Seminary on the key words decisive (t=2.946, p=.006), character (t:2.603, p=.013), and delegate (t=2.098, p=.040). Where statistical significance existed, it was inferred that the means were likely drawn from different populations. Alpha Seminary was low on both goal-oriented and respon- sible, whereas Beta Seminary was high on both. Alpha Seminary was high on humility, whereas Ganne Seminary was low on humility. Beta Seminary was high on decisive, delegate, and character, whereas Gamma Seminary was low on all three. One-way analysis of variance procedures differed on one factor (Seminary), whereas two-way analysis of variance proce- dures differ on two factors. The latter procedure was conduc- ted on key words where statistical significance was observed for the one-way analysis of variance. Chi-square tests. The chi-square test was used to analyze research data in the form of frequency counts which could be placed in two or more categories. The 40 "key words," measured as continuous variables, were split into either two or three categories, depending on the overall frequency of their citation by subjects (e.g., "None" and "l or More"). 97 Frequency counts were made to determine the number of subjects who did or did not use a key word in relationship to each of the independent variables: Seminary, Age, Place of Birth, Year in Seminary, Number of Years Lived in North Anerica, Number of Years of Formal Study in English, Program of Study, and Vocational Plans upon Graduation from Seminary. Chi-squares were computed on the observed frequencies in order to test the null hypotheses that there were no differences among the independent variables in the distributions of subjects' responses ("None" and "1 or More"). The continuous independent variables Age, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years of Formal Study in English were categorized into three groups of subjects, with each group containing approximately one-third of the 62 subjects. A phi coefficient for a fourfold table (discrete variables) or the contingency coefficient (C) for more than four cells (continuous variables) was calculated to provide an estimate of the magnitude of the relationship between the variables in the chi-square table. Cramer's V (or V-squared) is used instead of C when required to compare key words which require phi. Summary tables of results obtained from chi-square tests are provided for each of the independent variables in order to compare differences among the key words. 98 Table 4.6. Differences Among the Seminaries on the 40 Key Words. Correlation Key Word Chi-Square p Coefficient Character 6.748 0.034 .313 Decisive 10.435 0.005 .351 Delegate 5.406 0.067 .283 Goal-Oriented 4.67 0.097 .265 Love 8.255 0.083 .343 Table 4.7. Differences by Age for the 40 Key Words. Correlation Key Word Chi-Square p Coefficient Decisive 8.722 0.005 .38 Experience 8.777 0.067 .352 Sensitivity 4.95 0.084 .272 Vision 11.08 0.004 .389 Table 4.8. Differences by Year in Seminary for the 40 Key Words. Correlation Key Word Chi-Square p Coefficient Love 7.857 0.020 .335 Motivate 7.384 0.025 .326 99 Table 4.9. Differences by Place of Birth for the 40 Key Words. Key Word Chi-Square p Coefficient Charismatic 3.618 0.057 .242 (phi) Communicate 5.047 0.025 .285 (phi) Organize 2.659 0.103 .207 (phi) Model/Example 2.237 0.036 .311 (C) Position 4.667 0.097 .265 (C) Shepherd 3.332 0.068 .232 (phi) Teach 6.397 0.094 .306 (C) Table 4.10. Differences by Number of Years Lived in North Anerica for the 40 Key Words. Correlation Key Word Chi-Square p Coefficient Care 11.381 0.023 .394 Character 5.304 0.071 .281 Charismatic 4.637 0.098 .264 Connnnicate 4.66 0.097 .264 Decisive 5.209 0.074 .278 Goal-Oriented 5.713 0.057 .29 Sensitive 5.164 0.076 .277 100 Table 4.11. Differences by Number of Years of Formal Study in English for the 40 Key Words. Correlation Key Word Chi-Square p Coefficient Character 5.029 0.081 .274 Communicate 5.254 0.072 .28 Listen 9.206 0.056 .36 Motivate 13.817 0.008 .427 Respect 5.966 0.051 .296 Table 4.12. Differences by Program of Study for the 40 Key Words. Key Word Chi-Square p Cgefficient Administration 3.508 0.061 .238 Lifestyle 4.878 0.027 .28 Re5ponsible 2.804 0.094 .213 Shepherd 4.364 0.037 .265 Vision 3.636 0.057 .242 Table 4.13. Differences by Intended Vocation for the 40 Key Words. COrrelation Key Word Chi-Square p Coefficient Delegate 12.392 0.002 .408 Motivate 8.771 0.067 .352 Responsible 4.763 0.092 .267 101 Stepwise multiple regression. The independent variables Age, Number of Years Lived in North America (NAM), and Number of Years of Formal Study in English (Study) were used as predictor variables for each of the 40 key words which served as the criterion variables. Multiple regression was used to provide an estimate "both of the magnitude and statistical significance of relationships between variables" (Borg & Gall, 1983, p. 596). Since "A rough rule of thumb is to increase sample size by at least 15 subjects for each variable that will be included in the multiple regression" (Borg & Gall, 1983, p. 603), and since the sample size was 62, multiple regression was accepted as a meaningful measure of association between the predictor variables and the criterion variables. Of the 40 criterion variables, 9 obtained a Multiple Correlation Coefficient (R) with an acceptable level of signifi- cance, p < 0.10 (Table 4.14). Four values are included in each multiple regression table: the Beta weight, Stepwise Multiple Correlation (R), Stepwise (R squared), and the probability of chance (p). The Beta weight ranges between -l.00 to +1.00 and is the standardized regression coefficient. It represents the relative importance of each individual variable in predicting the depen- dent variable. The multiple correlation coefficient (R) measures the magnitude of the relationship between the criterion variable and the predictor variables Age, Number of Years Lived in North 102 .Anerica, and Number of Years of Formal Study in English. The multiple determination coefficient (R squared) reflects the amount of variation in the criterion variable that is predictable from a combination of the three predictor variables. The probability of chance (p) helps to determine whether the obtained value of R is significantly different than 0. Leader Models One additional analytic procedure was followed. Subjects were asked to think of people they recognized to be leaders and to describe those individuals (Direct Question 2). 224 leaders were identified by the respondents, and these in turn were clustered into 9 categories. Table 4.15 depicts the clusterings. Since subjects understood that the focus of the research was upon the pastor-as-leader, it is understandable that pastors were mentioned most frequently as leaders by respondents. In the vast majority of cases, pastors named were those subjects knew personally. In a few instances, however, distinguished pastors of national stature were cited. The second most frequently cited leader included educational administrators (presidents, deans), professors, and teachers. These were, without exception, persons whom subjects were able to observe directly. Persons were included in the "Public Figure" category because of their general recognizability to a substantial proportion of the population. Political (e.g. Ronald Reagan) and religious (e.g. Billy Graham) figures were mentioned most 103 Table 4.14. Correlations Observed Between the 40 Key Words and Age, Years Lived in North America, and Years of Formal Study in English. Corre- Stepwise Variable Beta lation (R) (R squared) p Connunicate 0.3329 0.1108 0.0750 Age 0.0810 NAM 0.3191 Study 0.0368 Confident 0.3176 0.1008 0.1002 Age -0.0181 NAM -0.4249 Study 0.5068 Decisive 0.3497 0.1322 0.0396 Age -0.3055 NAM -0.26l5 Study 0.2710 Discipline 0.3497 0.1223 0.0534 Age -0.0121 NAM -0.4436 Study 0.5619 Motivate 0.3656 0.1337 0.0378 Age -0.1154 NAM -0.4l32 Study 0.5364 Position 0.3313 0.1337 0.0378 Age 0.0440 NAM 0.0380 Study 0.3065 Responsible 0.3329 0.1108 0.0750 Age -0.2738 NAM ~0.2615 Study 0.2616 Teach 0.3434 0.1180 0.0607 Age —0.0106 NAM -0.2177 Study 0.4845 Willing 0.3275 0.1073 0.0832 Age 0.1145 NAM 0.1306 Study 0.1717 104 frequently, but also included were military, historical, and dictator personalities. Because of the diversity of types of figures included in this category, its influence on respondents is not as easily understood. Table 4.15. Classification of Persons Identified as Leaders. Leader-Cluster N % Pastor 73 32.59 Educator 42 18.75 Public Figure 30 13.39 Fanfily Member 23 10.27 Denomination/Parachurch 17 7.59 Peer 16 7.14 Local Church Layperson 10 4.46 Miscellaneous 12 5.36 TOTAL 224 99.55 Family members constituted 10.27% of the total number of leaders cited. Fathers were mentioned in more than half of the instances and by 19.4% of all subjects. Brothers were identified four times, mothers two times, and five other relatives one time each. If the third category of "Public Figure" is discounted because of its diversity, the first, second, and fourth categor- ies constitute 61.6% of all leaders cited. These, in turn, may be explained by their proximity to the subjects, since nearly all 105 model leaders were either immediately associated with the subject or directly observable by him or her. The remaining five categories account for an even larger percentage of total leaders based on the "proximity" factor. Uses of Key Worcb Each of the 40 key words will be described. Only those findings, however, which achieved a .10 level of significance will be reported. 510: "Know" includes cognitive information, and numerous specific categories of knowledge were mentioned such as Bible, hermeneu- tics, and theology. Knowing the "different issues," as well as being "well—informed," "well-educated," and a "thinking" person were cited. Being "knowledgeable" requires a willingness to learn, logic, and intelligence. The key word "know" was cited 187 times by 90.3% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.17). Table 4.17. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Know" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 60 20 90.9 Beta Seminary 55 17 85.0 Gamma Seminary 72 19 95.0 TOTAL 187 56 90.3 106 Since "knowing" may be used in several different ways, it was sub-divided into three categories: "knowing," as in "to know facts or information"; "knowing," as in "to know how to do something"; and "knowing," as distinct from either information or skill. The latter category included all ambiguous statements which could not readily be classified in one of the first two categories. Frequently, "knowing" classified in this category was used in the sense of "knowing a person," or "understanding" (Table 4.18). Table 4.18. Classification of "Know" by "Information," "Skill" and "Ambiguous." information Skill Anbiguous Seminary N % N % N % Alpha Seminary 36 60.0 8 13.3 16 26.7 Beta Seminary 31 56.4 6 10.9 18 32.7 Gamma Seminary 36 50.0 18 25.0 18 25.0 TOTAL 103 55.1 32 17.1 52 27.8 Significant findings Third-year seminarians cited the "know" an average of 3.39 times to 2.59 times for first-year seminarians. t test. An analysis of the difference between the means of first-year (M=2.59) and third-year seminarians (M=3.39) resulted in a t of 1.661 with p < .049, one-tailed. In repeated testings, 95 times out of 100, there will be a true difference between first-year and third-year seminarians in their use of the key 107 word "know" and third-year seminarians will use the term more frequently than first-year seminarians. Gift/Ability "Gift/ability" incorporate the ideas of "special ability," "tool," "gift," "capability," and "talent." They were cited 132 times by 75.8% of all 62 respondents (Table 4.19). Subjects attributed this giftedness to God, a natural inclination or disposition, or some combination of the two. Table 4.19. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Gift/Ability" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 36 14 63.6 Beta Seminary 52 17 85.0 Gamma Seminary 44 16 80.0 TOTAL 132 47 75.8 Develop/Grow "Develop" or "grow" refer to an individual's commitment to cultivate continuously more and more of his distinctive poten- tial as well as the potential he observes in other people. These key words were mentioned 112 times by 67.7% of all respondents. Significant Findings Students enrolled in the M.Div. program cited "develop/grow" more frequently than students enrolled in other programs. Also, students intending to serve in North American settings following 108 graduation stressed "gift/develop" more than did other students. Table 4.20. Frequency of Use of the Key Words "Develop/Grow" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 23 13 59.1 Beta Seminary 51 15 75.0 Gamma Seminary 38 14 70.0 TOTAL 112 42 67.7 t tests. An analysis of the difference between the means of students enrolled in the M.Div. progran1(M=2.00) and those enrolled in other progranm (M=l.00), yielded a t of 1.391, p < .083, one-tailed. In repeated tests, 97.7 times out of 100, M.Div. students will speak of "develop/grow" twice as frequently as students enrolled in other programs. An analysis of the difference between the means of subjects based on their vocational plans also yielded significant results. Students focusing on an overseas (outside North America) voca- tions (M:2.24) cited "develop/grow" nearly one and three quarters times more frequently than did students planning to work in North America or who were uncertain (M=1.31) as to their vocational plans (t=1.648, p < .050, one-tailed). Model/Example "Model" and "example" include the ideas of "emulation," "imitation," or living out what one professes or preaches. 109 Subjects frequently thought of motivating others to do certain things by setting examples for then» "Model" and "example" were named 112 times by 71.0% of the 62 subjects. Table 4.21. Frequency of Use of the Key Words "Model/Example" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 34 16 72.7 Beta Seminary 41 17 85.0 Gamma Seminary 37 11 55.0 TOTAL 112 44 71.0 Significant Findings North American-born subjects cited the key words "model/ex- ample" nearly twice as frequently as foreign-born subjects. t test. A t test between the means of North American-born subjects (M=2.4l) and foreign-born subjects (M=1.27) yielded a t of 2.636, p < .005 level, one-tailed. These same results would be achieved 99.5 times out of 100 in repeated tests. Analysis of variance. A two-way analysis of variance by Place of Birth while controlling for Seminary supported the t test results, with F:6.684, p < .012. Cross tabulations. Cross tabulations for Place of Birth and frequency of citation of "model/example" further substantia- ted the preponderance of use by North American-born subjects (chi-square=.632, p < .036). 110 Teach The key word "teach" refers to the office of teacher, the activity of teaching and training others, and a particular aptitude to communicate through teaching. "Teach" was cited 87 times by 66.1% of all subjects (Table 4.22). Table 4.22. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Teach" by Semin- ary. Number of Number of ‘% of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 27 12 54.5 Beta Seminary 32 16 80.0 Gamma Seminary 28 13 65.0 TOTAL 87 41 66.1 Significant Findings North American-born subjects used the key word "teach" approximately one and three-quarter times as frequently as foreign subjects. t test. Analysis of the difference between the means between North American-born subjects (M:1.76) and foreign-born subjects (M=1.09) yielded a t of 1.681, p=.047, one-tailed. In repeated studies, 95 times out of 100, North American-born subjects will use the key word "teach" more frequently than foreign-born subjects. Multiple regression. Analysis by multiple regression using the independent variables of Age, Years Lived in North America, 111 and Years of Formal Study in English showed a slight correlation (r-squared=.1l80, p < .0607) with the key word "teach." 11.80% of the variance in "teach" can be explained by the joint effects of the independent variables Age, Number of Years Lived in North Anmrica, and Number of Years of Formal Study in English. Beta value for Years of Formal Study in English displayed a relative importance of 48.45%, p < .018, in predicting the variable "teach." _L__o_v_e "Love," as a key word, was cited by 51.6% of the 62 subjects 84 times (Table 4.23). One subject noted, "A leader is a lover." The leader displays genuine love for people by regarding their feelings, by expressing concern and compassion, particular- ly for those who are weak or hurting, and by consistently acting in the best interests of those being led. Table 4.23. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Love" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 31 16 .72.7 Beta Seminary 21 8 40.0 Gamma Seminary 32 8 40.0 TOTAL 84 32 51.6 Significant Findings First-year seminarians used the key word "love" more frequently than did third-year seminarians. 112 t test. First-year seminarians displayed a mean of 2.10 and third-year seminarians a mean of .70 (t=2.587, p < .006, one- tailed). In repeated tests a true difference between first-year and third-year seminarians will be observed 99 times out of 100 and first-year students will cite "love" three times more frequently than third-year students. Analysis of variance. Two-way analysis of variance by Seminary and Year in Seminary yielded similar results (F:7.673, p < .008). Cross tabulations. Cross tabulations for frequency of response (None, 1—3 Times Per Subject, and 4 or More Times Per Subject) while controlling for Seminary further supported the more frequent use of the key word "love" by first-year seminari- ans for the key word "love" (chi-square:8.255, p < .083). LEE The key word "learn" focuses on the need of the individual to be constantly learning from many sources, such as experience, other persons, or studies, in order to lead. "Learn" was cited 79 times by 59.7% of all subjects (Table 4.24). Significant Findings North American-born subjects speak of "learning" slightly more frequently than foreign-born subjects. t test. A t test to analyze the differences between North American-born subjects (M=1.70, SD=.46) and foreign-born subjects (M=1.50, SD=.50) resulted in a t of 1.612, p < .054, one-tailed. 113 Table 4.24. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Learn" by Semin- ary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 40 14 63.6 Beta Seminary 15 9 45.0 Gamma Seminary 24 14 70.0 TOTAL 79 37 59.7 In repeated tests, 95 times out of 100, North American-born subjects will speak of pastoral leadership as characterized by "learning" more frequently than foreign-born subjects. Servant "Servant" connotes an attitude or mindset to serve and help through one's position. Occasionally subjects juxtaposed the idea of servanthood with those of power or authority. Both strength and gentleness characterize the "servant" attitude. "Servant" was used 78 times by 45.2% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.25). Significant Findings First-year seminarians used the "servant" theme more than twice as frequently as third-year seminarians. t test. Analysis of the difference between the means of first-year seminarians (M=l.72) and third-year seminarians (M=.85) yielded a t of 1.735, p < .042, one-tailed. More than 95 times out of 100 in repeated tests, the same results would be obtained, and a true difference, therefore, exists between 114 first-year and third-year seminarians in their use of the key word "servant." Table 4.25. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Servant" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 27 12 54.5 Beta Seminary 38 10 50.0 Gannm Seminary 13 6 30.0 TOTAL 78 28 45.2 Willing The key word "willing" refers to the subject's inner motivation, usually to be helpful toward others. She uses her abilities and position on behalf of other people. "Willing" was mentioned 76 times by 45.2% of all subjects (Table 4.26). Table 4.26. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Willing" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 22 9 40.9 Beta Seminary 31 12 60.0 Gamma Seminary 23 7 35.0 TOTAL 76 28 45.2 115 Significant Findings Significant differences were observed among subjects on the basis of Place of Birth, Seminary Program, and the joint effects of Age, Nunmer of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years of Study in English. t tests. North American-born subjects (M=1.57, $02.50) cite "willing" nearly 20% more frequently than do foreign-born subjects (M:1.34, SD=.47). A t of 1.779 had a significance level of p < .038, one-tailed. Ninety-six times out of 100 in repeated tests North American-born subjects will speak more frequently of "willing" than foreign-born subjects. Master of Divinity students (M:1.38, SD=1.86) also used "willing" more frequently than students in other progranm (M=.58, SD=.86), with a t of 1.420, p < .079, one-tailed. Multiple regression. Analysis by multiple regression to determine the joint effects of Age, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years of Study in English displayed a correlation of r=.3275 (r-squared:.1073), p < .0832. Age had a negative correlation and Number of Years Lived in North America and Number of Years of Study in English approximately equal correlations, though not at high levels. Authority "Authority" signifies "over-under" relationships within structured contexts and is generally recognized as necessary but also easily abused. Authority may be forceful, intimidating, commanding, authoritarian, or authoritative. 48.4% of the 62 116 subjects mentioned it 61 times (Table 4.27). Significant Findings Third-year seminarians used "authority" 1.8 times more frequently than first-year seminarians. Table 4.27. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Authority" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 16 10 45.4 Beta Seminary 28 13 65.0 Gannm Seminary 17 7 35.0 TOTAL 61 30 47.5 t test. Analysis of the difference between the means of first-year seminarians (M=.69) and third-year seminarians (M:1.24) yielded a t of 1.574, p < .058, one-tailed. A true difference, exists, therefore, between first-year and third-year seminarians and in repeated tests the same results will be observed 94.2 times out of 100. Analysis of variance. Two-way analysis of variance by seminary and year in seminary revealed similar findings (F=2.703, p < .102). Administration The key word "administration" and its cognates (admini- strate, administrator, etc.) encompass the ideas of managing and overseeing the total organization. "Administration" is 117 sometimes viewed as synonymous with leading, but more frequently is considered a necessary but not sufficient basis for leader- ship. "Administration" was used 58 times by nearly one-third of all subjects (Table 4.28). Table 4.28. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Administration" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 23 9 40.9 Beta Seminary 24 6 30.0 Gamma Seminary 11 5 25.0 TOTAL 58 20 32.2 Significant Findings First-year seminarians cited "administration" more frequent- ly than did third-year seminarians. Students enrolled in programs other than the Master of Divinity program used "admini- stration" twice as frequently as those in the latter program. t test. Analysis of the difference between the means of first-year (M:1.28) and third-year seminarians (M=.64) yielded a t of 1.279, p=.102, one-tailed. These same results will be achieved 90 times out of 100 in successive testings. Cross tabulations. Cross tabulations for frequency of use of the key word "administration" ("None" and "1 or More") by Program while controlling for Seminary demonstrated that 26.5% of Master of Divinity students (N=49) and 53.8% of students in other 118 programs (N:13) used "administration" at least one or more times (chi-squarez3.508, p < .061). Think The key word "think" sometimes referred to thinking as an ability, sometimes as an activity. "Think" was mentioned 57 times by 45.2% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.29). No significant results were found in further analysis, however. Table 4.29. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Think" by Semin- ary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 19 8 36.4 Beta Seminary 22 12 60.0 Gamma Seminary l6 8 40.0 TOTAL 57 28 45.2 Goal-Oriented "Goal-oriented" was used by 46.8% of subjects a total of 54 times (Table 4.30). The goal-oriented person sets goals for himself and for the organization he leads. Being goal-oriented involves setting direction and leading others in the established direction. Most subjects viewed goals as being established at leader-initiation. Significant Findings The longer a subject had lived in North America the more likely he was to use the key word "goal-oriented." The Seminary 119 in which a subject was enrolled was also a factor in anticipating his frequency of use of "goal-oriented." Table 4.30. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Goal-Oriented" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 11 7 31.8 Beta Seminary 25 12 60.0 Gannm Seminary 17 9 45.0 TOTAL 53 28 45.2 Cross tabulations. Cross tabulations for frequency of use by Number of Years Lived in North Anwrica yielded a chi-square of 5.713, p < .057. Subjects were divided into thirds, with the first one-third having lived in North America the least number of years and those in the upper one-third the greatest number of years. 63.6% of subjects in the upper one-third category cited "goal-oriented" at least one or more times compared to 47.6% and 26.3% of subjects in the lower and middle one-third categories (Table 4.31). The question raised is how to account for the apparent diminished use of the key word by the middle one-third of subjects (5) and the subsequent rise in use by the upper one-third of subjects (14). Analysis of variance. Analysis of variance disclosed a significant difference in use of "goal-oriented" by Seminary 120 Table 4.31. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Goal-Oriented" by Nunber of Years Lived in North America. Number of Years Frequency 0-7 8-24 25-Hi TOTAL None ll 14 8 33 l or More 10 5 14 29 TOTAL 21 19 22 62 (F=2.533, p < .086). This difference was a result of greater use of the key word by subjects in Beta Seminary compared to subjects in Alpha Seminary who used it the least number of times (t=2.248, p < .028). Responsible "Responsible" entails accountability and dependability. and is one of the more sobering qualities of the leader identi- fied by subjects, for the leader has assumed oversight of the welfare of others, whether to a family, a group, or a church. 43.5% of the 62 subjects spoke of the leader's "responsibility" at least one or more times for a total of 53 times (Table 4.32). Significant Findings Third-year seminarians demonstrated 1.7 times greater awareness of the "responsibility" of leadership than did first- year seminarians. Subjects enrolled in the Master of Divinity program cited the key word more frequently than did subjects enrolled in other programs. The joint effects of Age, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years of Formal Study in English displayed a positive correlation with the key 121 Table 4.32. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Responsible" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 10 7 31.8 Beta Seminary 27 11 55.0 Gamma Seminary 16 9 45.0 TOTAL 53 27 43.5 word. And those whose Intended Vocation was either cross cultural ministry or uncertain cited "responsible" two and a half times as frequently as those focusing on North American ministry. t test. Third-year seminarians cited "responsibility" 35 times (M=1.06) compared to 18 times for first-year seminarians (M=.62). A t test to analyze the difference between the means of the two groups yielded a t of 1.272, p < .103, one-tailed. In repeated tests, therefore, 90 times out of 100, third-year seminarians will use the key word "responsible" more frequently than first-year seminarians. Cross tabulations. Analysis of the independent variable "Program of Study" indicated that 49.0% of M.Div. subjects (N:49) thought in terms of "responsible" compared to 23.1% of those enrolled in "Other" programs (N=13) (chi-square=2.804, p < .094). This may indicate an awareness pastorally-oriented students have of the responsibility the pastor carries for the spiritual well being of his/her congregation. 122 51.5% of subjects whose Intended Vocation was either cross cultural in focus or uncertain cited "responsible" compared to 20.0% of those whose Intended Vocation was North American ministry (chi-square:4.763, p < .092). Multiple regression. The joint effects of the independent variables Age, Years Lived in North America, and Years of Study in English explain 11.08% of the variation in "responsible" (p < .0750). The relative value of Age showed a negative correlation (Beta=-.2738; p < .032). Organize "Organize" encompasses both the activity of leading an institution-as-organization and the style with which one does it. Structured patterns are provided for implementing plans and procedures used to achieve goals. 41.9% of the 62 subjects cited "organize" and its cognates a total of 50 times (Table 4.33). Table 4.33. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Organize" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 12 9 40.9 Beta Seminary 23 11 47.8 Gamma Seminary 15 6 30.0 TOTAL 50 26 41.9 123 Significant Findings 51.5% of foreign-born subjects (N233) used the key word "organize" compared to 31.0% of North American-born subjects. Cross tabulations. Cross tabulations for frequency of use of "organize" by Place of Birth yielded a chi-square of 2.659, p < .103. We may be confident that in repeated tests 90 times out of 100 foreign-born subjects will speak of "organize" more frequently than North American-born subjects. Respect "Respect" includes both respecting others and being re- spected by them and must be earned and not demanded. Though "respect" for the leader may involve respect for her position, more frequently it refers to who she is, what she knows, and how she relates to those with whom she works. It was cited 49 times by 40.3% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.34). Table 4.34. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Respect" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary l4 8 36.4 Beta Seminary 17 9 45.0 Gamma Seminary l8 8 40.0 TOTAL 49 25 40.3 124 Significant Findings The Number of Years Lived in North America and the Number of 'Years of Study in English both demonstrated significant relation- ship to the key word "respect." Cross tabulations. Cross tabulations for frequency of use by the Number of Years of Study in English (Table 4.35) yielded a chi-square of 5.966, p < .051. Subjects were divided into thirds, with the first one-third having studied in English the least number of years and those in the upper one-third the greatest number of years. Table 4.35. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Respect" by Number of Years of Study in English. Number of Years Frequency 0-7 8-16 17-Hi TOTAL None 16 8 13 37 1 or More 4 ll 10 25 TOTAL 20 19 23 62 20.0% of subjects in the lower one-third category cited "respect" at least one or more times compared to 57.9% of those in the middle one-third category and 43.5% of those in the upper one-third category. A certain amount of education appears to increase a subject's inclination to use the key word "respect" followed by a leveling off effect. 125 Spiritual In describing the "spiritual" leader, subjects spoke of his relationship with God, prayer, knowledge of the Bible, moral purity, and Christ-likeness. "Spiritual" was cited 48 times by 45.2% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.36). Table 4.36. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Spiritual" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 19 10 45.4 Beta Seminary 18 11 55.0 Gamma Seminary 11 7 35.0 TOTAL 48 28 45.2 Significant Findings None of the findings reached an acceptable level of signifi— cance. Experience "Experience" was viewed as important because of its practi- cal, "hands on" approach to leadership. It minimizes dogmatism and enhances one's relational skills. "Experience" was cited 47 times by 38.7% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.37). Significant Findings Younger subjects cited the key word "experience" more frequently than did older subjects. 126 Table 4.37. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Experience" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 19 10 45.4 Beta Seminary 18 11 55.0 Gamma Seminary ll 7 35.0 TOTAL 48 28 45.2 Cross tabulations. Cross tabulations for frequency of use by age yielded a chi-square of 8.777, p < .067. Subjects were divided into thirds, with the first one-third being 22 to 26 years old (N=24), those 27 to 30 years old (N=19), and those 31 to 50 years old (Nzl9). Table 4.38. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Experience" by Age. Age Frequency 22-26 27-30 31-50 TOTAL None 13 13 12 38 l or More 11 6 7 24 TOTAL 24 19 19 62 45.8% of subjects in the 22-26 years bracket cited "experience," compared to 31.6% of those in the 27-30 years bracket, and 36.8% of those in the 31-50 years bracket. In repeated tests, there- fore, 93 times out of 100, younger subjects will cite the key word "experience" more frequently than older subjects. 127 Lifestyle "Lifestyle" connotes matching what one says with what one does. One's leadership may be validated or disqualified by her lifestyle. Simplicity and dedication were seen as important qualities of overall lifestyle, which was mentioned 47 times by 35.5% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.39). Table 4.39. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Lifestyle" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 15 8 36.4 Beta Seminary ll 6 30.0 Gamma Seminary 11 7 35.0 TOTAL 37 21 33.9 Significant Findings Subjects enrolled in programs of study other than the Master of Divinity cited the key word "lifestyle" more frequently than those enrolled in the Master of Divinity program. Cross tabulations. 28.6% of those enrolled in the M.Div. program cited "lifestyle" compared to 61.5% of those enrolled in other programs (chi-square:4.878, p < .027). Position "Position" involves rank and structure and is viewed as both "inherited" through the maturing process and earned on the basis of effective experience. "Position" was cited 45 times by 128 38.7% of the 62 subjects as a basis for leadership (Table 4.40). Table 4.40. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Position" by Seminary. ‘ Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 7 6 27.3 Beta Seminary 16 7 35.0 Gamma Seminary 22 11 55.0 TOTAL 45 24 38.7 Significant Findings Place of Birth was a strong factor in citing "position," with North American-born subjects mentioning it more than 2.5 times as frequently as foreign-born subjects. t test. An analysis of the difference between the means of foreign-born subjects (M=.42) and North American-born subjects (M:1.07) yielded a t of 2.117, p < .018, one-tailed. In repeated tests, 98 times out of 100, North American—born subjects will cite the key word "position" more frequently than foreign-born subjects. Cross tabulations. Cross tabulations disclosed similar findings (chi-square:4.667, p < .097). 51.7% of North American- born subjects cited "position" compared to 27.2% of foreign-born subjects. Analysis of variance. Gamma Seminary exhibited a higher orientation toward use of "position" (F:2.258, p=.112) than the 129 other two seminaries, with a significant difference between it and Alpha Seminary (t=2.099, p=.040). Multiple regression. The joint effects of the independent variables of Age, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years of Formal Study in English accounted for 10.98% of the variation in the key word "position" (p < .0773). Listen "Listening" requires taking time to hear what others are saying and is an important means of communicating concern for those one leads. To "listen" demands disciplined response, of not speaking before the leader has heard what the Speaker is trying to say. Listening involves two-way communication and is a skill which can be developed. 41.9% of the 62 subjects Spoke of "listening" 44 times (Table 4.41). Table 4.41. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Listen" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 14 9 40.9 Beta Seminary 9 7 35.0 Gamma Seminary 21 10 50.0 TOTAL 44 26 41.9 Significant Findings The amount of time a subject had invested in education was the single most prominent indicator of her view of the relative 130 importance of "listening" to leading. t test. Third-year seminarians (M=.97) spoke of "listening" 2.4 times more frequently than first-year seminarians (M=.41). An analysis of the difference between their means yielded a t of 2.022, p < .022, one-tailed. In repeated tests, 98 times out of 100, third-year seminarians will cite the key word "listen" more frequently than first-year seminarians. Analysis of variance. A two-way analysis of variance for Year in Seminary while controlling for Seminary supported the findings of the t test (F=3.603, p < .060). Cross tabulations. Cross tabulations for frequency of response by Number of Years of Study in English were again consistent with the t test and analysis of variance tests (chi- square=9.206, p < .056). Multiple regression. Analysis to determine the joint effect of Age, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years of Study in English revealed that study displayed a relative Beta weight of 38.07% (p < .064) in accounting for the variation in "listen." Decisive "Decisive" includes the ability to make decisions, even unpopular ones; coping with crisis situations; and permitting others to make decisions in areas of their responsibility. It was mentioned 43 times by 32.3% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.42). 131 Significant Findings Seminary, Age, and Number of Years Lived in North America were all significant in the frequency of citation of the key word "decisive." Table 4.42. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Decisive" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 16 9 40.9 Beta Seminary 25 10 50.0 Gannm Seminary 2 1 5.0 TOTAL 43 19 31.1 Analysis of variance. One-way analysis of variance dis- closed significant differences between Alpha, Beta, and Gannm Seminaries (F:4.352, p < .017). Post hoc t tests between the three seminaries revealed a t of 2.946, p < .006, between Beta Seminary and Gamma Seminary. Cross tabulations. Cross tabulations for frequency of response by Seminary supported the analysis of variance finding (chi-square:10.435, p < .005). Cross tabulations for frequency of response by Age also yielded a high level of significance. Subjects were divided into thirds, with the first one-third being 22 to 26 years old; the second one-third being 27 to 30 years old; and the third one- third being 31 to 50 years old (Table 4.43). 54.2% of the 132 younger one-third of subjects cited "decisive"; 21.1% of the middle one-third of subjects; and 15.8% of the older one-third of subjects (chi-square:8./22, p < .013). Table 4.43. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Decisive" by Age. Age Frequency 22-26 27-30 31-50 TOTAL None 11 l5 16 42 1 or More 13 4 3 20 TOTAL 24 l9 19 62 The number of years lived in North America also yielded significant results (chi-square:5.209, p < .074). Subjects were grouped in thirds according to the number of years they had lived in North America (Table 4.44). Subjects who had lived in North Anmrica 8 to 24 years cited the key word approximately two times more frequently than either subjects who had lived in North Anmrica less than 8 years or more than 24 years. Table 4.44. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Decisive" by Number of Years Lived in North America. Number of Years Lived in North America Frequency 0-7 8-24 25-Up TOTAL None 16 9 17 42 1 or More 5 10 5 20 TOTAL 21 19 22 62 133 Multiple regression. Multiple regression analysis using Age, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years of Study in English indicated that 13.22% of the variance in use of the key word "decisive" could be accounted for by the joint effects of those three independent variables (p < .0396). Age displayed a negative relative weight measured by its Beta value of -.3055. 93:2 The "caring" leader is characterized by genuineness, compassion, understanding, and friendliness toward those she leads. "Care" was mentioned 41 times by 38.7% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.45). Table 4.45. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Care" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 17 10 45.4 Beta Seminary 10 5 25.0 Gamma Seminary l4 9 45.0 TOTAL 41 24 38.7 Significant Findings Foreign-born subjects cited "care" nearly twice as frequent- ly as North American-born subjects. Number of Years Lived in North America was also significant in determining the frequency of use of the key word. 134 t test. An analysis of the difference between the means of foreign-born subjects (M=.85) and North American-born subjects (M=.45) yielded a t of 1.580, p < .058, one-tailed. In repeated tests, therefore, 94 times out of 100, foreign-born subjects will cite the key word "care" more frequently than North American-born subjects. Cross tabulations. Cross tabulations by the Number of Years Lived in North America yielded a chi-square of 11.381, p < .023. Subjects were divided into three approximately equal groups based on the number of years they had lived in North America (Table 4.46). 33.3% of subjects who had lived in North America the fewest number of years cited "care" at least one or more times; 57.9% of those in the middle one-third; and 27.3% of those in the upper one-third. Table 4.46. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Care" Based on Number of Years Lived in North America. Number of Years Frequency 0-7 8-24 25-Up TOTAL None 14 8 16 38 Once 5 3 5 13 2 or More 2 8 1 11 TOTAL 21 19 22 62 The use of the key word "care" appears to peak after a certain amount of exposure to North American influence and then to decline afterwards to the original level of use. 135 Vision "Vision," as characteristic of a leader, refers to his ability to "dream dreams," to maintain a clear perspective on where he wishes to go, to be future-oriented, to see the "enlarged view" or "big picture," and the capacity to communicate this vision to others. "Vision" was frequently described as something which God gives to the pastor for the church. "Vision" was cited 41 times by 29.0% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.48). Table 4.48. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Vision" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 6 4 18.2 Beta Seminary 15 7 35.0 Gamma Seminary 20 7 35.0 TOTAL 41 18 29.0 Significant Findings Age was the strongest indicator of a subject's inclination to use the key word "vision." Cross tabulations. Subjects were divided into three approximately equal groups based on their ages (Table 4.49). 57.9% of subjects in the 27 to 30 years old group spoke of "vision" compared to only 16.7% and 15.8% in the younger and older groups respectively (chi-square=11.08, p < .004). 136 Table 4.49. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Vision" by Age. Age Frequency 22-25 27-30 31-50 TOTAL None 20 8 16 44 1 or More 4 ll 3 18 TOTAL 24 19 19 62 Discipline "Discipline" generally referred to "self—discipline," both morally and spiritually. Subjects also spoke in terms of particular disciplines which a leader might exercise, such as those of prayer, study, and devotion. "Discipline" was noted 39 tinms by 37.1% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.50). Table 4.50. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Discipline" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 12 9 40.9 Beta Seminary 11 6 30.0 Gamma Seminary 16 8 40.0 TOTAL 39 23 37.1 Significant Findings Number of Years of Study in English contributed modestly to subjects' use of "discipline" as a way of describing the pastor- as-leader. 137 Multiple regression. Multiple regression analysis disclosed that 12.23% of the variation in the dependent variable "disci- pline" could be accounted for by the independent variables of Age, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years of Study in English (p < .0534). Beta values revealed that the relative weight of Number of Years of Study in English was 56.19%, compared to a negative Beta weight of -44.36% for Number of Years Lived in North America. The relative weight of Age was small. Communicate Effective "communication" requires being articulate, clear, and precise. It includes both communication through interper- sonal relationships and public ministries, such as preaching and teaching. "Communicate" requires discretion in choosing what to say and what not to say, and tactfulness in the way in which the leader states his views. The key word "communicate" was mention- ed 37 times by 33.9% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.51). Table 4.51. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Connmnicate" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary ll 8 36.4 Beta Seminary 10 7 35.0 Gamma Seminary 17 7 35.0 TOTAL 38 22 35.5 138 Significant Findings Place of Birth, Year in Seminary, Number of Years Lived in North America. and Number of Years of Study in English all yielded significant results in suggesting which subjects cited the key word "communicate" more frequently. t tests. More than four times as many North American-born subjects (M=1.00) spoke of "communicate" as foreign-born subjects (M=.24). A t test to analyze the difference between the means yielded a t of 2.880, p > .003, one-tailed. 1n repeated tests, therefore, more than 99 times out of 100 North American-born subjects will cite "communicate" more frequently than foreign- born subjects. Year in Seminary was another determinative factor. More than two times as many third-year seminarians (M=.79) cited "communicate" as first-year seminarians (M=.38). A t test to analyze the difference between the means yielded a t of 1.482, p < .070, one-tailed. Cross tabulations. Cross tabulations by Place of Birth yielded similar results as the t test (chi-square=5.047, p < .025), with 21.2% of foreign-born subjects electing to use "communicate" compared to 48.3% of North American-born subjects (Table 4.52). Number of Years Lived in North America disclosed that the longer a subject had lived in North Anmrica, the more likely he was to report "communicate" in reference to pastoral leader- ship. Subjects were divided into groups based on the length of 139 Table 4.52. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Connmnicate" by Place of Birth. Place of Birth Frequency Foreign North American TOTAL None 26 15 41 1 or More 7 14 21 TOTAL 33 29 62 time they had lived in North America, with approximately one- third in each group. 19.0% of those who had lived in North Anmrica 7 years or less used "communicate," 31.6% of those in the 8 to 24 years, and 50.0% of those 25 years or more (chi- square=4.66, p < .097) (Table 4.53). Table 4.53. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Connmnicate" by Number of Years Lived in North America. Number of Years Frequency 0-7 8-24 25-Up TOTAL None 17 13 ll 41 1 or More 4 6 11 21 TOTAL 21 19 22 62 Number of Years of Study in English (Table 4.54) produced similar results as Number of Years Lived in North Anmrica. Only 15.0% of subjects with the fewest Number of Years of Study in English spoke of "communicate" compared to 36.8% and 47.8% in the middle and upper one-third categories respectively (chi-square: 5.254, p < .072). 140 Multiple regression. Analysis by multiple regression or Age, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years of Study in English revealed that 11.91% of the variation in the dependent variable "communicate" can be accounted for by the joint effects of these factors, with Number of Years Lived in North America yielding a Beta weight of .3191 and, therefore, accounting for the highest relative weight in the variation. Table 4.54. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Connmnicate" by Number of Years of Study in English. Number of Years Frequency 0-7 8-16 17-Up TOTAL None 17 12 12 41 l or More 3 7 11 21 TOTAL 20 19 23 62 Motivate "Motivate" means to inspire others to work toward goals. Though rewards may be used occasionally, the leader more fre- quently seeks to develop answers to the "Why?" certain things should be done. "Motivate" was mentioned 34 times by 32.3% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.55). Significant Findings Year in Seminary and Number of Years of Study in English showed a significant relationship to the frequency of citations of "motivate." 141 Table 4.55. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Motivate" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 12 5 22.7 Beta Seminary 14 9 40.9 Gamma Seminary 8 6 30.0 TOTAL 34 20 32.2 Cross tabulations. Number of Years of Study in English disclosed a significant trend toward increased usage by those who have studied longer in English (Table 4.56). Table 4.56. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Motivate" Based on Number of Years of Study in English. Number of Years Frequency 0-7 8-16 17-Up TOTAL None 19 12 11 42 1 or More 1 7 12 20 TOTAL 20 19 23 62 Subjects were grouped into three categories, with approxi- mately one-third in each category, depending on the number of years they had studied in English: 5.0% of subjects who had studied the least amount of time in English cited "motivate" compared to 36.9% of subjects in the middle group and 52.1% of those in the high group (chi-square=13.8l7, p < .008). 142 Additional cross tabulations revealed that 39.4% of third- year seminarians cited "motivate" and 24.1% of first—year seminarians (chi-square:7.384, p < .025). Clearly the Year in Seminary (C=.326) and Number of Years of Study in English (C:.427) were related to a subject's citation of "motivate." Intended Vocation was also significant in suggesting which subjects would speak of "motivate." 29.8% of subjects planning on cross cultural vocations or who were uncertain cited "moti- vate" compared to 40.0% of those planning on North American vocations (chi-square:8.77l, p < .067). Multiple regression. Multiple regression analysis yielded a 13.37% (p < .0378) relationship between the independent variables Age, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years of Study in English in their influence on the key word "moti- vate." Beta weights for Number of Years Lived in North America and Number of Years of Study in English were -.4132 and .5364 respectively. Confident The key word "confident" describes the leader's personal ability to act with self-assurance and even boldness. He does not waver in leading because of insecurity. "Confident" was cited 31 times by 31.6% of the subjects (Table 4.57). Significant Findings Differences between subjects were observed on the basis of their Program of Study and the joint effects of Age, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years of Study in 143 English. Table 4.57. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Confident" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 11 8 36.4 Beta Seminary 10 5 25.0 Gamma Seminary 10 6 30.0 TOTAL 31 19 30.6 t test. A t test to analyze the difference between the nmans of M.Div. students (M=.58, SD=.96) and students in other programs (M=.17, SD=.37) yielded a t of 1.440, p < .076, one- tailed. In repeated tests, 92.4 times out of 100, Master of Divinity students will speak more frequently of the need for confidence in pastoral leadership than other students. Both distributions were skewed, however, with standard deviations considerably higher than the means. Multiple regression. Multiple regression analysis to determine the joint effects of Age, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years of Study in English yielded a positive correlation of 31.8%, p < .100. Number of Years of Study in English contributed the most weight (Beta=.5068). Humility "Humility" is best viewed as the antithesis of pride and an air of superiority. Positively it is putting others ahead of 144 oneself and recognizing one's limitations. "Humility" is a willingness to do whatever may be required, however lowly, to get a job done. It was mentioned 30 times by 25.8% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.58). Table 4.58. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Humility" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 17 7 31.8 Beta Seminary 11 7 35.0 Gamma Seminary 2 2 10.0 TOTAL 30 16 25.8 Significant Findings Seminary was the most significant variable for understanding a subject's citation of the key word "humility." Analysis of variance. One-way analysis of variance by seminary yielded a significant difference between the three seminaries (F:2.631, p < .079). Post hoc t tests revealed a significant difference between Alpha Seminary and Ganmm Seminary (t=2.263, p < .027). Sensitive The key word "sensitive" suggests alertness to people's feelings, discernment, and consideration. 25.8% of the 62 subjects mentioned it 30 times (Table 4.59). 145 Significant Findings Subjects who had lived the greatest number of years in North Anmrica tended to cite "sensitive" more frequently than those who had lived in North America fewer years. Younger subjects generally cited "sensitive" more frequently than older subjects as well. Table 4.59. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Sensitive" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 9 5 22.7 Beta Seminary 10 5 25.0 Gamma Seminary ll 8 40.0 TOTAL 11 18 29.0 Cross tabulations. Subjects were divided into three groups, with approximately one-third in each group, based on the number of years they had lived in North America (Table 4.60). 14.3% of subjects in the low group cited "sensitive" compared to 26.3% and 45.% of subjects in the middle and upper groups respectively (chi-square:5.l64, p < .076). Younger subjects tended to cite "sensitive" (Table 4.61) more frequently than older subjects. Subjects were divided into three groups, with approximately one-third in each group, based on their ages. 33.3% of those in the youngest group mentioned "sensitive" compared to 42.1% and 10.5% of those in the middle 146 Table 4.60. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Sensitive" Based on Number of Years Lived in North America. Number of Years Frequency 0—7 8-24 25-Up TOTAL None ‘ 18 14 12 44 l or More 3 5 10 18 TOTAL 21 19 22 62 and upper groups. Age seems to increase an individual's inclina- tion to cite "sensitive," but at a certain point the trend reverses itself and drops off significantly. Table 4.61. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Sensitive" Based on Age of Subjects. Age of Subjects Frequency 22-26 27-30 31-50 TOTAL None 16 11 17 44 l or More 8 8 2 18 TOTAL 24 19 19 62 Sharing To "share" means the leader makes her ideas, experiences, and feelings available to other people. She shares failures as well as successes, and passes along credit where due to followers. The leader may also share her leadership. The key word "share" was mentioned by 33.9% of the 62 subjects 28 times (Table 4.62). 147 Significant Findings No significant results were found for the key word "sensi- tive." Table 4.62. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Sensitive" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 11 7 31.8 Beta Seminary 10 8 40.0 Gamma Seminary 7 6 30.0 TOTAL 28 21 33.9 Open The "open" leader is authentic, vulnerable, and transpar- ent. He is quick to acknowledge his humanness and areas of personal struggle. "Open" was cited 26 times by 32.3% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.63). Significant Findings Third-year seminarians cited "open" two times more frequent- ly than first-year seminarians. t test. Analysis of the difference between means of first- year seminarians (M=.28) and third-year seminarians (M=.55) yielded a t of 1.551, p < .061, one—tailed. 148 Table 4.63. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Open" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 10 7 31.8 Beta Seminary 6 5 25.0 Gamma Seminary 10 8 40.0 TOTAL 26 20 32.2 Plan "Planning" involves setting direction and defining a strategy for the overall organization. A leader who plans lays the tracks for moving the organization in the right direc- tion. "Planning" was referred to 26 times by 29.0% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.64). Table 4.64. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Plan" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 8 6 27.3 Beta Seminary 13 8 40.0 Gamma Seminary 5 4 20.0 TOTAL 26 18 29.0 Significant Findings No significant differences between sub-groups were discovered for the key word "plan." 149 Encourage The leader who "encourages" uses compliments and personal support with followers. He is affirming of their talents and helps them to achieve their maximum potential. "Encourage" was mentioned 23 times by 27.4% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.65). Table 4.65. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Encourage" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 12 9 40.9 Beta Seminary 5 4 20.0 Gamma Seminary 6 4 20.0 TOTAL 23 17 27.4 Significant Findings Third-year seminarians used "encourage" more than twice as frequently as first-year seminarians. t test. An analysis of the difference between the means of first-year seminarians (M=.24) and third-year seminarians (M=.48) yielded a t of 1.363, p < .087. In repeated tests, therefore, 97 times out of 100, third-year seminarians will cite "encourage" more frequently than first-year seminarians. Faithful "Faithful" refers to the leader's quality of standing behind her commitments and was cited 16 times by 14.5 of subjects (Table 4.66). 150 Table 4.66. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Faithful" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 3 2 9.1 Beta Seminary 10 4 20.0 Gamma Seminary 3 3 15.0 TOTAL 16 9 14.5 Significant Findings No significant results were found for the key word "faith- ful." Character "Character" refers to a leader's strength of personality or moral quality and was cited 17 times by 17.7% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.67). Table 4.67. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Character" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 7 5 22.7 Beta Seminary 10 6 30.0 Gamma Seminary 0 0 0.0 TOTAL 17 11 17.7 151 Significant Findings Seminary, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years of Study in English all demonstrated significant relationship to the key word "character." The shorter the duration of time a subject had lived in North America and studied in English, the more likely he was to cite "character." Analysis of variance. One-way analysis of variance by Seminary indicated a significant difference between the three seminaries (F=3.477, p < .036). Post hoc t tests then identified a significant difference between Beta Seminary and Gamma Seminary (t=2.603. p < .013). Cross tabulations. Number of Years Lived in North America (Table 4.68) was a significant factor in subjects' use of "character." Subjects were divided into three groups according to the number of years they had lived in North America, with approximately one-third in each group. 33.3% of the subjects in the group having lived in North America the fewest number of years cited "character" compared to 10.5% and 9.1% in the middle and upper groups respectively (chi-square:5.304, p < .071). Table 4.68. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Character" Based on Number of Years Lived in North America. Number of Years Frequency 0-7 8-24 25-Up TOTAL None 14 17 20 51 1 or Mbre 7 2 2 11 TOTAL 21 19 22 62 152 Number of Years of Study in English was also significant. Once more subjects were divided into three groups, with approxi- mately one-third in each group depending on the number of years they had studied in English (Table 4.69). 30.0% of those who had studied in English 7 years or less cited "character"; 21.1% of those with 8 to 16 years of study; and 4.3% of those with 17 or more years of study (chi-square:5.029, p < .081). Table 4.69. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Character" Based on Number of Years of Study in English. Number of Years Frequency 0-7 8-16 l7—Up TOTAL None 14 15 22 51 1 or More 6 4 1 11 TOTAL 20 19 23 62 Thus the longer a subject had lived in North America, or the more years she had studied in English, the less likely she was to refer to "character" as a characteristic of the leader. Charismatic The leader who is "charismatic" has an ability to draw people to himself by making a good impression on them. "Charis- matic" was also viewed as a "grace" or a "gift" given by God. It was mentioned 16 times by 17.7% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.70). 153 Table 4.70. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Charisnmtic" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 4 4 18.2 Beta Seminary 4 3 15.0 Gamma Seminary 8 4 20.0 TOTAL 16 11 17.7 Significant Findings Year in Seminary, Place of Birth, and Number of Years Lived in North America all yielded significant results in the citation of "charismatic" as a characteristic of the pastoral leader. t test. Analysis by Year in Seminary revealed that first- year seminarians (M=.38) exhibited two and a half times greater use of the key word "charismatic" than third-year seminarians (M=.15). A t test yielded a t of 1.332, p < .092, one-tailed. In repeated tests, therefore, 90.8 times out of 100, there will be a true difference between first-year and third-year semin- arians who use the key word "charismatic." North American-born subjects (M=.4l) cited "charismatic" nearly three and a half times as frequently as foreign-born subjects (M=.12). A t test yielded a t of 1.728, p < .043, one-tailed. In repeated tests, 95 times out of 100, North Anwrican-born subjects will cite "charismatic" more frequently than foreign-born subjects. 154 Cross tabulations. Cross tabulations by Place of Birth substantiated the finding of the t test for Place of Birth (chi- square=3.6l8, p < .057). 27.6% of North American-born subjects cited "charismatic" at least one time compared to 9.1% of foreign-born subjects. Number of Years Lived in North America also showed signifi- cant results. Subjects were divided into three groups, with approximately one-third in each, corresponding to the number of years they had lived in North America (Table 4.71). 9.5% of the subjects who had lived in North America seven years or less cited "charismatic" compared to 10.5% of those in the middle group and 31.8% of those in the upper group (chi-square=4.637, p < .098). Table 4.71. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Charismatic" by Nunber of Years Lived in North America. Number of Years Frequency 0-7 8-24 25-Up TOTAL None 19 17 15 51 1 or More 2 2 7 11 TOTAL 21 19 22 62 Shepherd "Shepherd" is a biblical term usually understood today as "pastor." The "shepherd-leader" is someone who both goes ahead of his followers to lead the way, fulfills a nurturing function, and acts to protect those he leads from doctrinal impurity. It 155 was cited 16 times by 21.0% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.72). Table 4.72. Frequency of Use of the Key WOrd "Shepherd" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 2 2 9.1 Beta Seminary 8 6 30.0 Gannm Seminary 6 5 25.0 TOTAL 16 13 21.0 Significant Findings North American-born subjects highlighted the "shepherd" role of the leader more than twice as frequently as foreign-born subjects. t test. A t test between North American-born subjects (M=.38) and foreign-born subjects (M=.15) yielded a t of 1.678, p < .047, one-tailed. In repeated tests, 95 times out of 100, North American-born subjects will cite "shepherd" more frequently than foreign-born subjects. Cross tabulations. The findings by t test analysis were further supported by cross tabulations analysis (chi-square: 3.332, p < .068). 26.5% of all subjects enrolled in the Master of Divinity program, the track leading to pastoral vocation, cited "shepherd" (chi-square:4.364, p < .037). 156 Aggressive/Assertive The ideas "aggressive" and "assertive" were generally used in an interchangeable way and emphasized the leader's propensity to put himself forward. The theme was mentioned 13 times by 11.3% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.73). Table 4.73. Frequency of Use of the Key Words "Aggressive/Asser- tive" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 6 2 9.1 Beta Seminary 5 3 15.0 Gamma Seminary 2 2 10.0 TOTAL 13 7 11.3 Significant Findings No significant results were found for the key words "aggres- sive/assertive." Delegate The leader who "delegates" involves others in ministry and directs them in reaching goals. Delegating is a particular skill which may be developed and requires a willingness to share responsibilities. "Delegate" was cited 11 times by 14.5% of the 62 subjects (Table 4.74). Significant Findings Seminary and Vocational Choice were both significant factors in subjects' tendency to cite the key word "delegate." 157 Table 4.74. Frequency of Use of the Key Word "Delegate" by Seminary. Number of Number of % of Seminary Responses Subjects Subjects Alpha Seminary 5 4 20.0 Beta Seminary 6 5 25.0 Gamma Seminary 0 0 0.0 TOTAL 11 9 14.5 Analysis of variance. One-way analysis of variance by seminary revealed significant differences between the seminaries (F:2.408, p < .097). Post hoc t tests disclosed a significant difference between Beta Seminary and Ganwm Seminary (t=2.098, p < .040). Cross tabulations. Cross tabulations supported the analysis of variance findings. 18.2% of subjects in Alpha Seminary referred to "delegate," 25.0% in Beta Seminary, and none in Gamma Seminary (chi-square:5.406, p < .067). 23.7% of subjects planning on cross cultural vocations or uncertain regarding their future vocations cited "delegate" compared to none for those planning on North American vocations (chi-square:12.392, p < .002). Faculty Interviews Twelve faculty members were interviewed in order to compare student attitudes with faculty attitudes toward the pastor-as- leader. 158 Selection of Faculty Interviewees Four faculty members from each seminary, for a total of twelve, were designated by the appropriate administrator in each of the seminaries to be interviewed by the researcher. Two of the four members taught in theoretical disciplines and two members in applied disciplines. Findings from Faculty Interviews The findings from the faculty interviews along the same 40 key words identified from student interviews are summarized in Table 4.75. Conparisons with Student Scores t tests were conducted between faculty and student scores for each of the 40 key words. Faculty cited 10 of the key words significantly more frequently than students (Table 4.76): "shepherd," "administration," "model/example," "organize," "vision," "think," "gift/ability," "spiritual," "delegate," and "develop/grow." In repeated tests, these same results would be observed at least 91.6 times out of 100. 159 Table 4.75. Findings for the 40 Key Words for Faculty Interviews Key Word N M SD Modeling 42 3.50 3.25 Gift/Ability 40 3.33 3.17 Know 36 3.00 3.44 Develop/Grow 33 2.75 1.53 Administration 34 2.83 2.82 Servanthood 24 2.00 2.77 Think 23 1.92 3.25 Organization 20 1.67 1.43 Teach 19 1.58 1.94 Vision 19 1.58 3.07 Spiritual 18 1.50 1.66 Responsible 17 1.42 2.10 Authority 15 1.25 2.71 Decisive 12 1.00 1.35 Goal 12 1.00 1.63 Humility 11 0.92 1.94 Lifestyle 11 0.92 1.44 Respect 11 0.92 1.38 Confident 10 0.83 1.34 Motivation 10 0.83 0.89 Shepherd 10 0.83 0.80 Willing 10 0.83 1.14 Connmnication 9 0.75 1.01 Share 9 0.75 1.36 Position 8 0.67 1.18 Encourage 7 0.58 1.32 Experience 7 0.58 0.95 Learn 7 0.58 1.12 Loving 2 0.50 0.87 Character 5 0.42 0.64 Delegate 5 0.42 0.64 Plan 5 0.42 0.64 Caring 4 0.33 0.47 Charismatic 4 0.33 0.85 Sensitivity 4 0.33 0.62 Open 3 0.25 0.43 Listen 2 0.17 0.37 Aggressive/Assertive 1 0.08 0.28 Discipline 0 0.00 0.00 Faithful 0 0.00 0.00 160 Table 4.76 Significant Differences between Faculty and Student Scores on the 40 Key Words. Faculty Student p Key Word M SD M SD t (l-tailed) Shepherd .83 .80 .26 .54 3.063 .002 Admini- stration 2.83 2.82 .94 1.96 2.796 .003 Model/Example 3.50 3.25 1.79 1.78 2.558 .006 Organize 1.67 1.43 0.84 1.33 1.917 .028 Vision 1.58 3.07 0.63 1.22 1.792 .037 Think 1.92 3.25 0.92 1.26 1.787 .037 Gift/Ability 3.33 3.17 2.15 1.99 1.670 .048 Spiritual 1.50 1.66 0.82 1.20 1.650 .050 Listen 0.17 0.37 0.69 1.10 1.617 .053 Delegate .42 0.64 0.18 0.46 1.519 .065 Develop 2.75 1.53 1.81 2.23 1.381 .084 Learn 0.58 1.11 1.27 1.68 1.351 .089 Students' Preferences for Key Words Students cited two of the key words more frequently than faculty: "listen" and "learn." These same results would be observed at least 92.1 times out of 100 or more in repeated tests. Theme Formation The 40 key words were grouped according to their perceived logical relationship into four themes: Personal, Relational, Functional, and Spiritual. Validity of Themes The four themes were submitted to a panel of five judges for validation. The results of this process are summarized in Table 4.77. 161 Table 4.77. Key Word and Thenw Validities. THEME/ Key Word Theme Key Word N Validity Validity PERSONAL .93 Know 187 1.0 Develop/GrOW' 112 .8 Learn 79 1.0 Willing 76 .8 Think 57 1.0 Responsible 53 1.0 Lifestyle 47 .8 Discipline 39 1.0 Confident 31 .8 Humble 30 1.0 Faithful 18 1.0 Character 17 1.0 Total 746 RELATIONAL .95 Love 84 1.0 Respect 49 .8 Listen 44 1.0 Care 41 1.0 Sensitive 30 1.0 Share 28 1.0 Open 26 .8 Encourage 23 1.0 Total 325 FUNCTIONAL .87 Model 112 .8 Teach 87 .6 Authority 61 .8 Administration 58 1.0 Goal 54 1.0 Organize 50 1.0 Experience 47 1.0 Position 45 1.0 Decide 43 .8 Connmnicate 37 .6 Motivate 34 .8 Plan 26 1.0 Aggressive l3 .8 Delegate 11 1.0 Total 678 SPIRITUAL .33 Gift 132 .6 Servant 78 1.0 Spiritual 48 1.0 Vision 41 .8 Shepherd 16 1.0 Charismatic 16 .6 Total 331 162 Analysis of Themes Once the four themes--Personal, Relational, Functional, and Spiritual-~were identified and validated, they were submitted to a series of tests to determine if there were any relationships between them and the nine independent variables. The results are reported by theme. Personal Thenm Analysis The Personal Theme focuses on the characteristics of the pastor-as-leader as an individual. This cluster of qualities was deemed important for the leader to possess but is not necessarily limited to leaders. The qualities included within it tend to accentuate individualism. Although they might contribute to effectiveness within the other themes, nevertheless they could stand apart from them. Two areas of significance were discovered through statisti- cal analysis. Birth Place. North American-born subjects (M=13.13) cited key words within the Personal Theme more frequently than foreign- born subjects (M=10.59), t=1.77l, p < .039, one-tailed. Year in Seminagy. Third-year seminary students (M=12.91) spoke more frequently in terms of personal characteristics of the leader than did first-year seminary students (M=10.67), t=1.443, p < .061, one-tailed. Relational Thenm Analysis The Relational Theme highlights those characteristics or behaviors which facilitate positive interpersonal interactions 163 between pastoral leader and congregant. The pastor-as-leader acts with the interest of the parishioner in mind as well as the interests of the church-as-organization. No significant differences were disclosed in any of the statistical analyses performed. Functional Theme Analysis The Functional Theme stresses those things which the pastor-as-leader dpgs. Many of the tasks from this theme are characteristic of the generic management field and as such are not unique to the pastor-as-leader. They tend to emphasize the efficiency dimension of leadership in contrast to the effective- ness dimension. A number of significant findings were discovered through the statistical analyses of this theme. Seminary. One-way analysis of variance disclosed a signifi- cant difference between the three seminaries involved in the research (F=4.394, p < .016). Subsequent t tests showed signifi- cant differences between Alpha Seminary (M:9.00) and Beta Seminary (M:13.95), t=2.830, p < .006, one-tailed; and between Beta Seminary (M:13.95) and Ganwm Seminary (M=10.00) t=2.206, p < .032). Ag_. Correlation and linear regression analysis of the Functional Theme along the independent variable of Age showed a negative correlation (r=-0.237, p < .060). The older a student is, the less likely he or she is to speak in functional terms about the pastor-as-leader. 164 Birth Place. A t test between North American-born subjects (M=13.23) and foreign-born subjects (M=8.75) further disclosed a significant difference between the two groups (t=3.l67, p < .001, one-tailed). North American-born students speak in functional terms one and a half times more frequently than do foreign-born subjects. Number of Years Lived in North America. Correlation and linear regression analysis disclosed a positive relationship between the number of years a subject had lived in North America and the probability of his or her describing the pastor-as-leader in functional terms (r:.284, p < .024). In other words, the longer one lives in North America, the more prone the person is to speak in functional terms. Number of Years of Study in English. Through correlation and linear regression analysis, a moderately strong relationship between number of years a subject had studied in English and use of the Functional Theme was discovered (r=.415, p < .001). Faculty. A t test between mean scores of faculty and students revealed that faculty (M=16.58) Speak in functional terms one and a half times more frequently than do students (M=10.92), t=2.877, p < .003, one-tailed. Spiritual Thenm Analysis The Spiritual Theme encompasses those ideas which can be attributed to distinctive biblical or theological principles. Although other leaders may think of themselves as serving, for instance, the "servant" motif is a prominent biblical concept 165 of leadership and as such is presumed to shape a seminarian's thinking about the pastor-as-Ieader. Four significant findings were uncovered. Seminary. A t test between Alpha Seminary (M=4.36) and Beta Seminary (M=6.75) disclosed a significant difference between the two (t=2.157, p < .017, one-tailed). Students at Beta Seminary Speak in theological terms over one and a half times more frequently than do students at Alpha Seminary. No significant differences were found among the three seminaries. Birth Place. A significant difference between North Anmrican-born subjects and foreign-born subjects was disclosed by a t test. North American-born subjects (M=6.23) Speak in theological terms more than one and a third times as frequently as do foreign-born subjects (M=4.56), t=1.725, p < .043, one- tailed. Seminary Program. Students enrolled in the Master of Divinity progran1(M=5.72) speak in theological terms of the pastor-as-leader nearly one and a half times more frequently than do those enrolled in other progranm (M=3.92), t=l.462, p < .073, one-tailed. Questionnaire Development The 40 key words discovered through content analysis of the 74 interviews were clustered into four themes. These themes (factors) were submitted to a validity check, and key words were selected from each of the themes for item development for the 166 Pastor-as-Leader Expectations Questionnaire (PALEQ). Criteria for Item Selection Once emerging themes were identified and validated, five criteria were used for selecting five key words from each theme. Items were then developed for inclusion in the PALEQ from the 20 key words. Criteria The five criteria used were (1) frequency of verbal citation by interviewees; (2) validity level of the key word within the theme; (3) proportionate representation from each of the four themes, that is five words from each; (4) number of significant findings for each key word; and (5) level of significance for each finding. Items Selected Twenty key words were eventually selected for development as items for PALEQ, or five key words from each of the four themes. Personal Theme The key words "know," "develop," "learner," "willing," and "responsible" were selected from the Personal Theme. "Think" was not chosen even though it had the fourth highest frequency of verbal citations since it was considered to be broadly included in the concept of "know;" Overall theme validity was .87. Relational Theme For the Relational Theme, the key words "love," "respect," "listen," "sensitivity," and "open" were chosen. Although higher in frequency of citations than either "sensitivity" or "Open," 167 "care" was not included since it seemed to be encompassed in the word "love." Overall theme validity was .95. Functional Theme "Model," "teach," "authority," "administration," and "goal" were included in the Functional Theme. They were the five most frequently cited words for this theme. Overall theme validity was .87. Spiritual Theme "Gift," "servant," "spiritual," "vision," and "shepherd" were selected for inclusion in the Spiritual Theme. Even though "gift" achieved a validation level of .6, it was nevertheless included for two reasons: first, to have balanced represen- tation of key words from each of the four themes, and, second, because it was next to the most powerful key word in all four themes in frequency of citation. Overall theme validity was .83. Validity of Items Once the 20 items were developed from the 20 key words representing each of the four themes, they were submitted to a panel for validity checking. The 20-item questionnaire achieved an overall validity of .97; the Personal Theme 1.0; the Relation- al Theme 1.0; the Functional Theme .93; and the Spiritual Theme .93. Relating Findings to the Research Questions The data derived from the Interview'Phase of the study will be related to the Research Questions. Findings from both the analysis of the 40 key words and from the analysis of the 168 four themes will be used. Research Question #1 "Is the student's image of leading in the Church raised to a more precise level of articulation as a result of Seminary education?" Operational Question #1: "What are the primary images which students associate with the concept of leading?" Students cited 40 different key words (Table 4.2) as they described the pastor-as-leader. Each word was analyzed for its possible association with the independent variables of Seminary, Age, Sex, Ethnic Background, Number of Years Lived in North Anmrica, Number of Years of Study in English, Year in Seminary, Program of Study, and Intended Vocation. Significant differences were found on all but of the 40 key words. Operational Question #2: "Who are the individuals whom students recognize as leaders?" Pastors, educational administrators, professors, and teachers, public figures, and family members were cited most frequently as people whom subjects recognized as leaders. Almost all identified leaders were either immediately associated with subjects or directly observable by them. Research Question #2 "Are there any predictable themes in the emerging image?" The 40 key words, identified because of frequency of citation by subjects, were grouped on the basis of logical relationship into four themes (factors): Personal Theme, Rela- 169 tional Theme, Functional Theme, and Spiritual Theme. These themes were then submitted to a panel of judges for validation. The Personal Theme achieved a validity of .93, the Relational Theme .95, the Functional Theme .87, and the Spiritual Theme .83. Research Question #3 "Are there any discernible shifts or trends away from early imagery toward other images?" Operational Question #1: "How do first-year and third1year seminary students' images of the pastor-as-leader differ?" Key words. First-year subjects cited "administration," "charismatic," and "love" more frequently than did third-year subjects. Third-year subjects cited "authority," "communicate," "encourage," "know," "listen," "open," and "responsible" more frequently than did first-year subjects. Themes. First-year students did not use any of the four themes (Personal, Relational, Functional, Spiritual) significant- ly more frequently than third-year students. Third-year seminarians cited the Personal Theme significant- ly more frequently than did first-year seminarians. Operational Question #2: "How do first-year and third-year seminary students differ from professors in their images of the pastor-as-leader?" Key words. Seminarians cited the key words "listen" and "learn" significantly more frequently than did faculty members. 170 Faculty members cited the key words "shepherd," "administra- tion," "model/example," "organize," "vision," "think," "gift/- ability," "spiritual," "delegate," and "develop/grow" signifi- cantly more frequently than did seminarians. Themes. Faculty members spoke in Functional terms one and a half times more frequently than seminary students did. Other- wise, no significant differences were found between faculty and students. Research Question #4 "Are there any observable factors related to those trends?" Operational Question #1: "Is the student's Seminary related to those trends?" Key words. Seminaries differed significantly in their use of the key words "love," "goal-oriented," "responsible," "deci- sive," "humility," "character," and "delegate." Themes. Significant differences were discovered between seminaries in the use of the Functional Theme and the Spiritual Theme. Operational Question #2: "Is the student's Sex related to those trends?" An insufficient number of females sampled precluded answer- ing this question. Operational Question #3: "Is the student's Age related to those trends?" Key words. Subjects were clustered into three groups based on their ages, with approximately one-third of all subjects in 171 each group. Younger subjects used the key words "decisive," "experi- ence," and "sensitive" more frequently than did older subjects. The middle group, however, cited "vision" more frequently than either the younger group or the older group. Themes. Age is negatively related to the Functional Theme (r=-0.237, p < .060). The older a subject is, the less likely she is to speak in terms of what the pastor dppp as leader. Operational Question #4: "Is the student's Ethnic Background related to those trends?" Key words. Subjects born outside North America cited the key words "care," "communicate," and "organize" more frequently than subjects born in North America. Subjects born in North America, however, cited "charisma- tic," "learn," "model/example," "position," "shepherd," "teach," and "willing" more frequently than did foreign-born subjects. Themes. North American-born subjects utilized the Personal Theme more frequently than did foreign-born subjects. Operational Question #5: "Is the Number of Years Lived in North Anmrica related to those trends?" Key words. Significant differences were found based on the Number of Years Lived in North America on seven of the key words. Subjects were divided into three groups, with approxi- mately one-third in each group, based on the number of years they had lived in North America. 172 Subjects who had lived in North Anmrica the longest period of time cited "charismatic," "communicate," and "sensitive" more frequently than subjects in the other groups. They also cited "goal-oriented" more frequently than those in the other groups, although there was a significantly diminished number of citations in the middle group over the low group. Subjects who had lived in North America the shortest period of time cited "character" more frequently than subjects in the other groups. Subjects who had lived in North America an intermediate period of time cited "care" and "decisive" more frequently than subjects in the other groups. Themes. The longer a subject had lived in North America, the more likely the person was to cite the "Functional Theme." No significant relationships with the other three themes were found. Operational Question #6: "Is the Number of Years of Study in English related to those trends?" Key words. Differences were noted on five key words based on the Number of Years of Study in English: "character," "communicate," "listen," "motivate," and "respect." Subjects were divided into three groups (low, middle, and high), with approximately one-third in each group, corresponding to the number of years they had studied in English. Subjects in the low group cited "character" more frequently than subjects in either the middle or high groups. 173 Subjects in the high group cited "communicate" and "moti- vate" at a significantly higher frequency than did subjects in either the low or middle groups. "Listen" registered a Beta weight of 38.07% when the variables of "Age," "Number of Years Lived in North America," and "Number of Years of Study in English" were measured for their joint effects. The middle group was high in its use of "respect" compared to the low group and the high group. There may be an increase in tendency to emphasize "respect" with education which levels off after a certain amount of exposure. Themes. Third-year students cited the Functional Theme more frequently than first-year students based on correlation and linear regression for Number of Years of Study in English (r=.415, p < .001). Operational Question #7: "Is the student's Intended Vocation related to those trends?" Key words. Differences were observed on three key words, "delegate," "motivate," and "responsible," based on the student's Intended Vocation. In all three instances, subjects planning on cross cultural vocations or who were undecided spoke more frequently of the key words than those planning on North American vocations. Themes. No significant differences were observed between Intended Vocation and the four themes. 174 Operational Question #8: "Is the student's Program of Study related to those trends?" Key words. Differences were observed on five of the key words based on the student's Program of Study: "administration," "lifestyle," "responsible," "shepherd," and "vision." Subjects enrolled in the M.Div. program cited "responsible," "shepherd," and "vision" more frequently than subjects enrolled in other programs. Subjects enrolled in other programs cited "administration" and "lifestyle" more frequently than subjects enrolled in the M.Div. program. Summary Data were collected from 74 interviews with 62 students and 12 faculty members at three seminaries. A content analysis was done and 40 key words identified for statistical analysis from the interview data. The key words were then grouped into four themes: Personal, Relational, Functional, and Spiritual. Summary of Key Word Findings The key words were statistically analyzed for possible significant relationships with the independent variables: Seminary, Age, Sex, Ethnic Background, Number of Years Lived in North America, Number of Years of Study in English, Year in Seminary, Program of Study, and Intended Vocation. Significant relationships were observed on 30 of the key words. An insufficient number of women sampled precluded computa- Table 4.78. Key Words. 175 Sunnmry of Statistically Significant Findings for Key Word Know Gift Develop Mooei Teach Love Learn Servant Willing Author- ity Admini- stration Think Goal Respon- sible Organ- ize Respect Spiri- tual Exper- ience Life- style Posi- tion Listen Deci- sive Care Vision Disci- pline Connun- icate Moti- vate Confi- dent Humil- ity Sensi- tive Share Open Plan Encour- age Faith- ful Char- acter Charis- matic Shep- herd Aggres- sive Dele- gate TOTAL Sem- inary Age Sex Ethnic 10 Sem Pro- NAM Study Year gram X Voca- tion 176 tion of relationships between them and the key words. In addition to the other eight independent variables listed in Table 4.78, statistically significant results were achieved for nine of the key words through multiple regression analysis to determine the effect of the interaction of Age, Number of Years Lived in North Anwrica, and Number of Years of Study in English. Ten of the key words were significantly related to ethnici- ty; 11 to Year in Seminary; 9 to the interaction of Age, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years of Study in English; 7 to Seminary; 7 to Number of Years Lived in North Anmrica; 5 to Program of Study; 5 to Number of Years of Study in English; 4 to Age; and 3 to intended Vocation. Summary of Theme Findings The 40 key words were grouped into four themes: Personal, Relational, Functional, and Spiritual. The Personal, Functional, and Spiritual Themes were all significantly related to two or more of the independent variables (Table 4.79). The Personal Theme was significantly related to Ethnic Background and Year in Seminary. The Functional Theme was significantly related to Seminary, Age, Ethnic Background, Nunber of Years Lived in North America, Number of Years of Study in English, and Faculty. The Spiritual Theme was significantly related to Seminary, Ethnic Background, and Program of Study. 177 Table 4.79. Significant Findings for Themes (Interviews). Independent Themes Variables Personal Relational Functional Spiritual Seminary Yes Yes Age Yes Sex Ethnic Background Yes Yes Yes # Years in N. America Yes # Years of English Yes Year in Seminary Yes Program of Study Yes Intended Vocation Faculty Yes TOTAL 2 0 6 3 Chapter 5 FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS OF DATA FROM QUESTIONNAIRE PHASE The purpose of the research was to discover and to describe the images which seminary students have of the pastor-as-leader in the local church. Findings and analysis of data derived from the interview phase were presented in Chapter 4. The findings and analysis of data from the subsequent questionnaire phase of the study are presented in this chapter. Instrumentation Based on the 74 interviews conducted with 62 students and 12 faculty members in three theological seminaries, a questionnaire (PALEQ) was developed for collection of data to confirm and to broaden understanding of the findings from the interview phase. Design of the Questionnaire Four themes emerged out of an analysis of the 40 key words discovered during the interviews: Personal, Relational, Func- tional, and Spiritual. A 20-item questionnaire, the Pastor-as- Leader Expectations Questionnaire (PALEQ), was composed of five items from each theme. Validity The Personal Theme had a validity of 1.0; the Relational Theme 1.0; the Functional Theme .93; and the Spiritual Theme .93. Overall validity for the 20 items was .97. 179 Demographic Items Responses to 12 demographic items were used to discover possible associations of data collected with the independent variables. Sentence Completions Subjects were asked to complete four sentences: (1) "A leader is. . ."; (2) "A person becomes a leader by. . ."; (3) "To be effective as a leader, a pastor must. . ."; and (4) "The most important thing about the pastor-as-leader is. . ." The sentence completions were designed to serve two pur- poses. First, they permitted subjects to express their immedi- ate associations with the pastor-as-leader. Second, they provided a way of determining how many of the themes subjects associated with the pastor-as-leader and their fluency in speaking of pastoral leadership. ideal and Actual Scales Two scales of 20 items each were developed using a Likert- type scale format. The first scale measured the strength of the subject's ideal images of the pastor-as-leader. The second scale measured the strength of the subject's images of the pastor he knew best, or an actual pastor's reflection of the characteristic being measured by the item. Key Word Forced Choices Subjects ranked five sets of four words each from the most important to the least important for pastoral leadership. Each word in a set represented a key word from one of the four themes 180 (Personal, Relational, Functional, and Spiritual). Key words were clustered by power based on frequency of citation by subjects during the interviews. Forced choices were used to measure the strength of a subject's commitment to a given theme when potentially conflicting options were present. Collection Procedures The questionnaire was photocopied, one side only, and distributed with a letter of transmittal. Letters of transmittal were written by the Dean of the Faculty in Alpha Seminary and Gannm Seminary and by the researcher in Beta Seminary. A self-addressed return envelope was enclosed in the envelope containing the questionnaire and the letter of transmittal. Anonymity was guaranteed and no attempt was made to identify subjects other than by phone calls to ask if they had returned the questionnaire. Approximately one week after PALEQ was mailed, each subject was phoned to find out if he or she had completed the question- naire and, if not, to encourage them to do so. A second follow- up effort was made in Beta Seminary with a note four weeks after the initial mailing. Analytic Procedures Themes were analyzed by examining the findings from the ideal scale, the actual scale, and the key word forced choices to discover any significant relationships with the independent variables. 181 Independent Variables Eight independent variables were examined for possible relationships with the data: Seminary, Sex, Age, Ethnic Back- ground, Year in Seminary, Number of Years Lived in North America, Number of Years of Study in English, and Intended Vocation. Tests Used Four tests were used to analyze the data: analysis of variance, t test, chi-square, and correlation and linear regres- sion. The significant findings for the four themes are summar- ized in Table 5.1. Table 5.1. Significant Findings for the Themes (PALEQ). Independent Themes Variables Personal Relational Functional Spiritual Seminary Yes Yes Yes Yes Sex Age Yes Yes Ethnic Background Yes Yes Yes Yes Year in Seminary Yes Yes Yes # Years in NAM Yes Yes # Years in English Yes Yes # Years in Foreign Yes Yes Intended Vocation Yes Yes Yes 182 Findings Significant findings were discovered for each of the four themes. These will be related within theme by ideal scale, actual scale, and key word forced choice outcomes. Personal Theme The Personal Theme describes the pastor-as—leader in terms of his or her individual qualifications. it includes such characteristics as personal character, knowledgeableness, confi- dence, and inner motivation. The Personal Ideal Scale Seminary and Age yielded significant results for subjects' inmges of the ideal personal pastor-as-leader. Seminary. Gannm Seminary had a significantly higher mean than Beta Seminary when different t tests between seminaries were conducted (Table 5.2). In repeated tests, 92 times out of 100, Gannm Seminary students will speak more frequently of the pastor-as-leader in terms of his or her personal qualities than Beta Seminary. Table 5.2. Personal Theme Differences Among the Seminaries for Ideal Scale Pastor-as-Leader. Seminary N M S.D. t p Alpha Seminary 43 23.30 1.70 Beta Seminary 173 22.88 1.78 1.752 .077 Gamma Seminary 61 23.31 1.51 183 figs. Correlation and linear regression for Age and ideal scale for the personal pastor-as-leader yielded an R of 0.115, p < .056. in repeated tests, 94 times out of 100, the older a subject is, the more positive his attitude will be toward the pastor-as-leader in terms of personal qualities. The Personal Actual Scale Seminary, Ethnic Background, Number of Years Lived in North America, Number of Years in Foreign Language Classrooms, and Intended Vocation yielded significant relationships with sub- jects' images of the pastor-as-leader they knew best. Seminary. Gamma Seminary students were more positive toward the pastor-as-leader they knew best as exemplifying personal qualities than were students in Alpha Seminary and Beta Seminary (Table 5.3). Table 5.3. Personal Theme Differences Among Seminaries for Actual Scale Pastor-as-Leader. Seminary N M S.D. F p Alpha Seminary 43 19.60 3.14 Beta Seminary 172 20.86 2.64 4.94 .008 Gamma Seminary 60 21.17 2.19 Post hoc t tests between seminaries disclosed significant differences between Alpha Seminary and Beta Seminary (t=2.78, p < .006), and between Alpha Seminary and Gannm Seminary (t=2.79, p < .004). 184 In repeated tests, 99 times out of 100, Ganmn Seminary students will have more positive attitudes toward the personal qualities of the pastor-as-leader they know best than either Alpha Seminary or Beta Seminary students, and Gannm Seminary students will have more positive attitudes than Alpha Seminary students have. Ethnic Background. Students born in North America demon- strate more positive attitudes toward the personal qualities of the pastor-as-leader they know best than do students born outside North America (Table 5.4). Table 5.4. Personal Theme Differences Based on Ethnic Background for Actual Scale Pastor-as-Leader. Ethnic Background N M S.D. t p Foreign-born 29 19.72 2.95 2.11 .017 N. American-born 240 20.82 2.60 In repeated tests, 98 times out of 100, North American-born subjects will demonstrate more positive attitudes for the Personal Theme than will foreign-born subjects. Nunber of Years Lived in North America. Positive attitudes for the Personal Theme are slightly correlated with the Number of Years Lived in North Anwrica (R:0.112, p < .061). Number of Years in Foreign-Language Classrooms. Number of Years in Foreign-Language Classrooms is slightly negatively correlated with the Personal Theme (R:0.159, p < .009). The more 185 time a subject spends in foreign-language classrooms, the less positive his attitude will be toward the personal qualities of the pastor he knows best. intended Vocation. Subjects anticipating involvement in bicultural vocations are more positive about the personal qualities of the pastor-as-leader than are those who expect to work with people of one culture or ethnic group only (Table 5.5). Table 5.5. Differences Between Subjects by Intended Vocation. Bicultural Vocation N M S.D. t p Yes 96 21.05 2.46 1.435 .074 No/Uncertain 178 20.57 2.76 In repeated tests, 93 times out of 100, bicultural vocational subjects will be more positive about the personal qualities of the pastor-as-leader they know best than will non-bicultural subjects. Personal Theme Key Words Significant findings were registered by Seminary and by intended Vocation for Personal Theme key word choices. Seminary. Post hoc t tests between seminaries disclosed a significant difference between Alpha Seminary and Beta Seminary on subjects' rankings of the word clusters (Table 5.6). 186 Table 5.6 Personal Theme Differences Among Seminaries for Key Wbrd Choices. Seminary N M S.D. t p Alpha Seminary 44 12.30 15.21 Beta Seminary 174 10.22 2.12 1.406 .08 Gamma Seminary 61 10.38 2.06 Although Alpha Seminary students did rank the Personal Theme key words higher than Beta Seminary or Ganmm Seminary students, their variance was greater than the variances for either of the other seminaries indicating more heterogeneity in their responses. Relational Theme The Relational Theme reflects students' images of the pastor-as-leader in relationship to other people. They expect him or her to care genuinely and deeply about those he or she leads. This care is expressed in such ways as being sensitive to others' needs, listening to them, encouraging their development, and reciprocal respect. The Relational Ideal Scale Year in Seminary and intended Vocation yielded significant results. Year in Seminary. Third-year seminary students spoke more favorably of the pastor-as-leader in relational terms than did first—year students (Table 5.7). 187 Table 5.7. Relational Theme Differences Between First-Year and Third-Year Students for Ideal Scale Pastor-as-Leader. Year in Seminary N M S.D. t p First-year 122 22.11 2.10 2.04 .02 Third-year 135 22.61 1.81 In repeated tests, 98 times out of 100, third-year students will Speak more favorably of the pastor-aS-leader in relational terms. Intended Vocation. Subjects anticipating bicultural vocations spoke more positively of the pastor-as-leader in relational terms (Table 5.8). Table 5.8 Relational Theme Differences Based on intended Vocation for Ideal Scale Pastor-as-Leader. Bicultural Vocation N M S.D. t p Yes 97 22.53 1.92 1.28 .099 No 181 22.20 2.02 In repeated tests, 90 times out of 100, subjects anticipating bicultural vocations will speak more positively of the pastor-as- leader in relational terms than will non-bicultural vocational subjects. The Relational Actual Scale Significant findings for the Relational Theme actual scale were registered for Seminary, Ethnic Background, Year in Semin- ary, Number of Years of Study in Foreign-Language Classrooms, and 188 Intended Vocation for subjects. Seminary. Analysis of variance by Seminary (Table 5.9) yielded significant differences among the seminaries. Post hoc t tests disclosed that the major variance was between Alpha Seminary and Beta Seminary, t=2.554, p < .011. Table 5.9. Relational Theme Differences Among the Seminaries for Actual Scale Pastor-as-Leader. Seminary N M S.D. F p Alpha Seminary 43 18.86 3.38 Beta Seminary 176 20.19 2.96 3.29 .037 Gamma Seminary 60 19.82 3.09 In repeated tests, 99 times out of 100, Beta Seminary students will be more positive toward the relational pastor-as- leader than Alpha Seminary students. Ethnic Background. North American—born subjects are Slightly more positive toward the relational pastor—as-ieader than foreign-born subjects (Table 5.10). In repeated tests, 95 times out of 100, North American-born subjects will speak of the relational pastor-as-leader more positively than foreign-born subjects. Year in Seminary. First-year seminary students spoke more positively of the relational pastor-as-leader than did third-year students (Table 5.11). 189 Table 5.10. Relational Theme Differences Based on Ethnic Background for Actual Scale Pastor-as-Leader Ethnic Background N M S.D. t p Foreign-born 30 19.03 2.69 1.60 .053 N. American-born 243 19.98 3.09 Table 5.11. Relational Theme Differences Between First-Year and Third-Year Seminarians for Actual Scale Pastor-as-Leader. Year in Seminary N M S.D. t p First-year 122 20.16 2.69 1.42 .077 Third-year 135 19.62 3.35 Number of Years in Foreign-Language Classrooms. Correlation and linear regression yielded a negative relationship between time spent in foreign-language classrooms and attitude toward the relational pastor-as-leader (R=-0.126, p < .035). In repeated tests, 96 times out of 100, the more time spent in foreign-lan- guage classrooms, the less positive will the student's image of the relational pastor-as-leader be. Intended Vocation. Subjects anticipating bicultural vocations had slightly more positive attitudes toward the relational pastor-as-leader than did non-bicultural vocational subjects (Table 5.12). 190 Table 5.12. Relational Theme Differences Based on Intended Vocation for Actual Scale Pastor-as-Leader. Bicultural Vocation N M S.D. t p Yes 98 20.35 2.82 1.71 .042 No/Uncertain 180 19.69 3.17 In repeated tests, 96 times out of 100, bicultural vocational subjects will display more positive attitudes toward the rela- tional pastor-as-leader than the non-bicultural vocational subject. Relational Theme Key Words Seminary, Year in Seminary, and Intended Vocation yielded significant results for the Relational Theme key word choices. Seminary. Significant differences were observed among the seminaries based on subjects' rank ordering of key words in word clusters (Table 5.13). Post hoc t tests among the seminaries yielded a t of 2.619, p < .009 between Alpha Seminary and Beta Seminary, and a t of 2.007, p < .045 between Alpha Seminary and Gamma Semin- ary. In 97 tests out of 100, Alpha Seminary students will rank order relational key words for the pastor-as-leader higher than other seminary students. The standard deviation for Alpha Seminary, however, was high compared with the other seminaries suggesting a less homogeneous grouping of responses. 191 Table 5.13. Relational Theme Differences Among Seminaries for Key Word Choices. Seminary N M S.D. F p Alpha Seminary 44 16.01 16.11 Beta Seminary 173 13.66 2.10 3.48 .031 Gamma Seminary 61 13.97 2.28 Year in Seminary. First-year seminary students rank ordered the relational key words for the pastor-as-leader more highly than did third-year students (Table 5.14). Table 5.14. Relational Theme Differences Between First-Year and Third-Year Seminarians for Key Word Choices. Year in Seminary N M S.D. t p First-year 123 14.93 9.72 1.45 .072 Third-year 134 13.66 2.32 in repeated tests, 93 times out of 100, first—year seminar- ians will rank relational key words for the pastor-as-leader higher than third-year seminarians will. Intended Vocation. Students intending to be employed outside of North America upon graduation from seminary, or who were uncertain, ranked the relational key words for the pastor- as-leader significantly higher than did subject planning on vocations in North America (Table 5.15). 192 Table 5.15. Relational Theme Differences Based on Intended Vocation for Key Word Choices. North America Vocations N M S.D. t p Yes ' 197 13.78 2.18 1.61 .052 No/Uncertain 79 15.23 12.05 In repeated tests, 95 times out of 100, subjects either planning on vocations outside of North America or uncertain as to geographical location will rank relational key words for the pastor-as-leader higher than do North American vocationally oriented subjects. Functional Theme The Functional Theme reflects students' images of the pastor-as-leader in relationship to the things she p233. Activities such as setting goals, planning, motivating, and teaching are included as they support the ministry of the church as organization. The functionally oriented pastor-as-leader thinks of requirements for leading in reference to the overall institution rather than to himself (personal) or to individuals (relational). The Functional ideal Scale Seminary, Ethnic Background, Number of Years in English— Speaking Classrooms, and Intended Vocation displayed significant findings. Seminary. Significant differences exist between the three seminaries in the way their students view the functional pastor- 193 as-leader (Table 5.16). Table 5.16. Functional Theme Differences Among Seminaries for Ideal Scale Pastor-as-Leader. Seminary N M S.D. F p Alpha Seminary 43 20.12 2.55 Beta Seminary 174 19.35 2.38 4.41 .013 Gamma Seminary 61 20.33 2.56 Post hoc t tests yielded significant differences between Alpha and Beta Seminaries (t=1.839, p < .064), and between Beta and Gamma Seminaries (t=2.687, p < .008). In repeated tests, therefore, 99 times out of 100, Gannm Seminary students will feel more positive about the functional pastor-as-leader than will either Alpha or Beta Seminary students; and Alpha Seminary students will feel more positive than do Beta Seminary students. Ethnic Background. Significant differences were observed between foreign-born subjects and North American-born subjects (Table 5.17). In repeated tests, 97 times out of 100, foreign-born subjects will be more positive in their attitudes toward the functional pastor-as-leader than North-American-born subjects. Subjects who identified themselves as foreign students differed significantly from students who did not identify themselves as foreign (Table 15.18). 194 Table 5.17. Functional Theme Differences Based on Ethnic Background for Ideal Scale Pastor-as-Leader. Ethnic Background N M S.D. t p Foreign-born 29 20.48 2.66 1.82 .033 N. American-born 243 19.60 2.44 Table 5.18. Functional Theme Differences Between Foreign Students and Non-Foreign Students for Ideal Scale Pastor-as- Leader. Foreign Student N M S.D. t p Yes 20 20.40 2.91 1.35 .088 No 258 19.63 2.42 In repeated tests, 91 times out of 100, foreign students will be more positive toward the functional pastor-as-leader than the non-foreign student. Both persons born outside North America and those who identify themselves as foreign students, therefore, have more positive attitudes toward the functional pastor-as-leader. Nunber of Years in English-Speaking Classrooms. The longer a subject spent in English-speaking classrooms, the less positive She was likely to be toward the functional pastor-as-leader (R:-0.137, p < .023). Intended vocation. Subjects anticipating bicultural vocations were more positive toward the functional pastor-as-lea- 195 der than non-biculturally oriented subjects (Table 5.19). Table 5.19. Functional Theme Differences Based on Intended Vocation for Ideal Scale Pastor-as-Leader. Bicultural Vocation N M S.D. t p Yes 96 20.02 2.41 1.70 .043 No 181 19.49 2.48 In repeated tests, 96 times out of 100, biculturally oriented subjects will have more positive attitudes toward the functional pastor-as-leader than non-biculturally oriented sub- jects. The Functional Actual Scale Year in Seminary and Intended Vocation yielded significant findings regarding subjects' attitudes toward the pastor they knew best in relationship to the functional pastor-as-leader. Year in Seminary. First-year students had more positive attitudes toward the functional pastor-aS-leader they knew best than did third-year students (Table 5.20). In repeated tests, 95 times out of 100, first-year semin- arians will be more positive in their attitudes toward the functional pastor-as-leader they know best than third-year seminarians. Intended vocation. Subjects anticipating bicultural vocations were more positive in their attitudes toward the functional pastor-aS-leader they knew best than non-biculturally Se 11’: 01 196 oriented subjects (Table 5.21). Table 5.20. Functional Theme Differences Between First—Year and Third-Year Students for Actual Scale Pastor-as-Leader. Year in Seminary N M S.D. t p First-year 124 19.15 2.46 1.67 .046 Third-year 133 18.59 2.79 Table 5.21. Functional Theme Differences Based on Intended Vocation for Actual Scale Pastor-as-Leader. Bicultural Vocation N M S.D. t p Yes 96 19.25 2.73 1.59 .054 No 182 18.72 2.58 In repeated tests, 95 times out of 100, subjects antici- pating bicultural vocations will be more favorable toward the functional pastor-as-leader they know best than non-biculturally oriented subjects. Functional Thenm Key Words Subjects demonstrated significant differences based on Seminary and Year in Seminary when ranking Functional Theme key words. Seminary. Significant differences were observed among Alpha, Beta, and Gamma Seminaries students based on their ranking of the functional key words (Table 5.22). 197 Table 5.22. Functional Theme Differences Among Seminaries for Key Word Choices. Seminary N M S.D. F p Alpha Seminary 44 11.61 15.31 Beta Seminary 174 9.29 2.02 4.406 .013 Gamma Seminary 61 9.31 1.88 Post hoc t tests yielded significant differences between Alpha and Beta Seminaries (t=i.839, p < .064), and between Alpha and Gamma Seminaries (t=2.687, p < .008). In repeated tests, at least 94 times out of 100, Alpha Seminary students will rank functional key words higher than either Beta or Gamma Seminary students. The standard deviation for Alpha Seminary, however, is higher than its mean, suggesting a skewed distribution and less homogeneity among its students than among students in Beta and Gamma Seminaries. Year in Seminary. First-year seminarians ranked functional key words higher than did third-year seminarians (Table 5.23). Table 5.23. Functional Theme Differences Between First-Year and Third-Year Students for Key Word Choices. Year in Seminary N M S.D. t p First-year 123 10.21 9.25 1.30 .095 Third—year 134 9.14 1.87 In repeated tests, 90 times out of 100, first-year seminar- ians will rank functional key words for the pastor-as-leader 198 higher than third-year seminarians will. The standard deviation is greater for first-year than for third-year seminarians, however, suggesting greater variation in their attitudes. Spiritual Theme The Spiritual Theme mirrors students' images of the pastor- as-leader based on his grounding in biblical and/or theological concepts such as servant, shepherd, vision, gifts, and spiritu- ality. The Spiritual Ideal Scale Significant differences were identified among subjects based on the spiritual ideal scale for pastor-as-leader, inclu- ding Ethnic Background, Year in Seminary, Intended Vocation, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years in English-Speaking Classrooms. Ethnic Background. Both subjects who are foreign-born and who identify themselves as foreign students have more favorable attitudes toward the spiritual pastor-as-leader than do North American-born subjects based on the Spiritual Theme ideal scale (Tables 5.24 and 5.25). Table 5.24. Spiritual Theme Differences Between Foreign-Born and North American-Born Subjects for Ideal Scale Pastor-as-Leader. Ethnic Background N M S.D. t p Foreign-born 30 22.97 1.89 1.28 .100 N. American-born 243 22.50 1.89 199 In repeated tests, 90 times out of 100, foreign-born subjects will have more positive attitudes toward the spiritual pastor-as-leader than will North American-born subjects. Table 5.25. Spiritual Theme Differences Between Foreign Students and Non-Foreign Students for Ideal Scale Pastor-as-Leader. Foreign Student N M S.D. t p Yes 20 23.35 1.65 1.94 .025 No 259 22.50 1.90 In repeated tests, 98 times out of 100, foreign students will have more positive attitudes toward the spiritual pastor-as- leader than non-foreign students will. Year in Seminary. Third-year seminary students displayed more positive attitudes toward the spiritual pastor-as-leader than did first-year students (Table 5.25). Table 5.26. Spiritual Theme Differences Between First-Year and Third-Year Seminary Students for Ideal Pastor-as-Leader. Year in Seminary N M S.D. t p First-year 122 22.35 1.96 1.42 .076 Third-year 135 22.69 1.82 In repeated tests, 92 times out of 100, third-year seminar- ians will be slightly more positive toward the spiritual pastor- as-leader than first-year seminarians. 200 Intended Vocation. Persons whose intended vocations are Christian ministry were more positive in their attitudes toward the spiritual pastor-as-leader than persons not intending on Christian ministry vocation (Table 5.27). Table 5.27. Spiritual Theme Differences Between Subjects Based on Christian Ministry Orientation for Ideal Scale Pastor-as- Leader. Christian Ministry N M S.D. t p Yes 263 22.62 1.83 2.68 .004 No 11 21.09 2.19 Subjects contemplating bicultural vocations were also more positive in their attitudes toward the spiritual pastor-as- leader than non-biculturally oriented subjects (Table 5.28). In repeated tests, 99 times out of 100, subjects antici- pating Christian ministry vocations will have more positive attitudes toward the spiritual ideal pastor-as-Ieader than will non-Christian ministry oriented subjects. Table 5.28 Spiritual Theme Differences Between Subjects Based on Intended Vocation for Ideal Pastor-as-Leader. Bicultural Vocation N M S.D. t p Yes 98 22.82 1.88 1.71 .042 No 180 22.41 1.88 201 in repeated tests, 96 times out of 100, biculturally oriented subjects will be more positive toward the spiritual pastor-as-leader than non-biculturally oriented subjects. Number of Years Lived in North America. The longer a subject lives in North America, the less positive his attitude toward the Spiritual pastor—as-leader will be (R:-0.105, p < .077). Number of Years in English—Speaking Classrooms. The longer a subject spends in English-speaking classrooms, the less positive her attitude toward the spiritual pastor-as-leader will be (R:-0.139, p < .021). The Spiritual Actual Scale A significant difference was observed among seminaries based on students' attitudes toward the spiritual pastor-as-lea- der (Table 5.29) they knew best. Table 5.29. Spiritual Theme Differences Among Seminaries for Actual Scale Pastor-as-Leader. Seminary N M S.D. F p Alpha Seminary 44 19.56 2.96 Beta Seminary 171 21.01 2.80 2.57 .076 Gannm Seminary 60 20.68 2.59 Post hoc t tests disclosed a significant difference between Alpha Seminary and Beta Seminary (t=2.251, p < .024). In repeated tests, therefore, 98 times out of 100, Beta Seminary students will have more positive attitudes toward the spiritual 202 pastor-as-leader they know best than Alpha Seminary students. Spiritual Thenm Key Words Year in Seminary, Age, and Intended Vocation yielded significant results for Spiritual Theme key words when subjects ordered sets of key words. Year in Seminary. Third-year seminarians rank ordered key words for the spiritual pastor-as-leader higher than first- year seminarians (Table 5.30). Table 5.30. Spiritual Theme Differences Between First-Year and Third-Year Students for Key Word Choices. Year in Seminary N M S.D. t p First-year 123 16.27 1.57 3.04 .002 Third—year 134 16.89 1.68 In repeated tests, 99 times out of 100, third-year seminar- ians will rank key words for the spiritual pastor-as-leader higher than first-year seminarians. Ag_. The older a subject is, the higher she tended to rank key words for the spiritual pastor-as-leader (R:0.121, p < .044). Intended vocation. Subjects anticipating bicultural vocations ranked Spiritual Theme key words for the pastor-as- leader higher than non-biculturally oriented subjects (Table 5.31). In repeated tests, 95 times out of 100, biculturally oriented subjects will rank Spiritual Theme key words for the 203 pastor-as-leader higher than non-biculturally oriented subjects. Table 5.31. Spiritual Theme Differences Based on Intended Vocations for Key Word Choices. Bicultural Vocation N M S.D. t p Yes 98 16.80 1.55 1.61 .052 No 180 16.46 1.74 Summary of Questionnaire Findings Significant outcomes were achieved for each of the four themes-~Personal, Relational, Functional, and Spiritual--and for all the independent variables but Sex. Findings will be summar- ized by independent variables. Differences Among the Seminaries Significant differences were found among the three seminar- ies on all four themes. Personal Theme Gamma Seminary was significantly higher than Beta Seminary on the personal ideal scale and higher than both Alpha and Beta Seminaries on the personal actual scale for the pastor-as-leader. Alpha Seminary, however, was higher than both Beta and Gannm Seminaries for the Personal Theme key word choices. The standard deviation for Alpha Seminary was considerably higher, however, than the other seminaries' standard deviations. 204 Relational Theme No significant differences were found among the seminaries on the relational ideal scale for the pastor-as-leader. Beta Seminary was significantly higher than Alpha Seminary on the relational actual scale for the pastor-as-leader. Alpha Seminary was higher than both Beta and Gannm Seminar- ies for the Relational Theme key word choices. The standard deviation for Alpha Seminary was considerably higher, however, than the standard deviations for the other seminaries. Functional Theme Gamma Seminary was significantly higher than both Alpha and Beta Seminaries on the functional ideal scale, and Alpha Seminary was significantly higher than Beta Seminary on the same scale. No significant differences were found among the three seminaries on the functional actual scale. Once more Alpha Seminary was higher than both Beta and Ganwm Seminaries for the Functional Theme key word choices and with a higher standard deviation than the other seminaries. Spiritual Theme No significant differences were found among the seminaries on the spiritual ideal scale or for the Spiritual Theme key word choices. Beta Seminary was significantly higher than Alpha Seminary on the spiritual actual scale. 205 Findings for Age Two significant relationships were discovered for Age, one with the Personal Theme ideal scale, and the other with the Spiritual Theme key word choices. Personal Theme Age was slightly correlated with the Personal Theme ideal scale (R:0.115, p < .056). Spiritual Theme Age was also slightly correlated with key word choices for the Spiritual Theme (R:0.12l, p < .044). Differences Based on Ethnic Background Significant differences were observed on the basis of ethnic background for all four themes. Personal Theme North American-born subjects' attitudes on the personal actual scale toward the pastor they knew best were higher than foreign-born subjects' attitudes. Relational Theme North American-born subjects' attitudes on the relational actual scale toward the pastor they knew best were higher than foreign-born subjects' attitudes. Functional Theme Both foreign-born subjects and foreign students demonstrated more positive attitudes on the functional ideal scale than did North American-born subjects or non-foreign students. 206 Spiritual Theme Both foreign-born subjects and foreign students showed significantly more positive attitudes on the spiritual ideal scale than did North American-born subjects or non-foreign students. Findings for Year in Seminapy Significant differences were found based on Year in Seminary for the Relational, Functional, and Spiritual Themes. Relational Theme Third-year seminarians demonstrated more positive attitudes toward the pastor-as-leader on the relational ideal scale. First-year seminarians, however, displayed more positive atti- tudes on the actual scale and rank ordered the Relational Theme key words more highly than did third-year seminarians. Functional Theme No Significant differences were found for the functional ideal scale. First-year seminarians had more positive attitudes toward the functional pastor-as-leader they knew best and higher rankings of Functional Theme key words. Spiritual Theme Third-year seminarians had more positive attitudes than first-year seminarians toward the pastor-as-leader based on the spiritual ideal scale. They also rank ordered the Spiritual Theme key words more highly than first-year seminarians did. 207 Findings Based on Number of Years Lived in North America Significant differences based on the Number of Years Lived in North America were observed for the Personal and Spiritual Themes. Personal Theme The longer a subject lives in North America, the more likely he is to display a positive attitude toward the pastor-as-leader based on the personal actual scale (R:0.112, p < .061). Spiritual Theme The longer a subject lives in North America, the less likely he is to display a positive attitude toward the pastor-as-leader based on the spiritual ideal scale (R=-.139, p < .021). Differences Observed Based on Classroom Language Significant negative correlations were observed on all four themes based on classroom language. Personal Theme The more time a subject had spent in foreign-language classrooms, the less positive his attitude was toward the pastor-as-leader based on the personal actual scale (R=-0.159, p < .009). Relational Theme The more time a subject had spent in foreign-language classrooms, the less positive his attitude was toward the pastor-as-leader based on the relational actual scale (R=-0.126, p < .035). 208 Functional Theme The more time a subject had spent in English-language classrooms, the less positive her attitude was toward the pastor-as-leader based on the functional ideal scale (R=-0.137, p < .023). Spiritual Theme The more time a subject had spent in English-language classrooms, the less positive her attitude was toward the pastor-as-leader based on the spiritual ideal scale (R:-0.139, p < .021). Differences Based on Intended Vocation Significant differences were observed on all four themes, and biculturally oriented vocational subjects were higher in all instances. Personal Theme Subjects anticipating bicultural vocations were more positive in their attitudes toward the pastor-as-leader based on the personal actual scale than were non-biculturally oriented subjects. Relational Theme Subjects anticipating bicultural vocations had signifi- cantly more positive attitudes on both the relational ideal and actual scales and also rank ordered the Relational Theme key words higher than non-biculturally oriented subjects. 209 Functional Theme Subjects anticipating bicultural vocations had more positive attitudes toward the pastor-as-leader based on both the function- al ideal and actual scales. Spiritual Theme Subjects anticipating bicultural vocations displayed significantly more positive attitudes toward the pastor-as-leader based on the spiritual ideal scale and rank ordered the Spiritual Theme key words higher than did non-biculturally oriented subjects. Individuals planning on Christian ministry vocations also displayed more positive attitudes toward the pastor-as-leader on the spiritual ideal scale than did those individuals not planning on Christian ministry vocations. Chapter 6 SWMARY AND CONCLUSIONS North American seminaries have been criticized for their models of leadership which are exported to Third World countries (Newbigin, 1984; Conn, 1984; McKinney, 1979). The purpose of the study, therefore, was to identify and to describe the images of the pastor-as-leader in the Church held by North American-born and foreign-born students in three seminaries. Such a descrip- tive study should help to clarify the nature of the models being criticized. Curricularists like Eisner (1979) and Schubert (1980) have identified different conceptions of the curriculum. Distinct ways of viewing the curriculum-making enterprise implicitly support the premise that a seminary's philosophy of curriculum will significantly impact the images of the pastor-as-leader obtained by its students. Whether in law (Cardozo, 1977), medicine (Anderson, 1974), or engineering (Hollomon, 1977), professions educators continue to wrestle with the relationship of structure and content in the education enterprise. Tacit assumptions are taught through the "hidden curriculum" of schools (Apple, 1975) which must be made explicit if an "environment-producing" curriculum (Huebner, 1975) can be constructed which contributes to the formation of pastors- as-leaders whom Third World, as well as North American, churches .— 211 will welcome. Major Findings Major findings revolved around differences observed within- the-seminary, differences observed among-the-seminaries, and differences observed based on ethnic background. Variables The independent variables of Seminary and Year in Seminary relate to differences within-the-seminary and differences among-the-seminaries. These variables are under the direct control of the seminary faculty. The independent variables of Ethnic Background, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years of Study in English-Language Classrooms (or Foreign-Language Classrooms) relate to possible cross-cultural differences which are, there- fore, less under the immediate control of seminary faculties. Age represented a potentially confounding variable due to the effects of maturation and was, therefore, included for comparative purposes. Intended Vocation was analyzed based on the assumption that persons intentionally pursuing bicultural vocations might be systematically different from persons not thinking in bicultural terms. Procedures Interviews were conducted with 62 first-year and third-year seminarians and 12 faculty members. Out of the interview phase 40 key words were identified which subjects cited frequently to 212 describe their images of leading. The 40 key words were logi- cally grouped into four themes for structuring the Pastor-as- Leader Expectations Questionnaire (PALEQ). PALEQ was administered to a population of 450 first-year and third-year seminary students in three North American theological institutions. Of the 450 subjects, 281 completed the question- naire. Several conclusions may be drawn from the findings of these two data collection phases. Differences Observed Within-the-Seminary Differences within-the-seminary were identified by analyzing data from the interviews for each of the 40 key words and data from PALEQ for the four themes in relationship to the independent variable Year in Seminary. Findings for the Key Words First-year seminarians cited the key words "administration," "charismatic," and "love" more frequently than did third-year seminarians. Third-year seminarians cited "authority," "communicate," "encourage," "know," "listen," "open," and "responsible" more frequently than did first-year seminarians. Certain questions emerge from the data of key words regard- ing possible effects of seminary education. For instance, what do seminary students mean by "authority"? Since third-year students speak of authority more frequently than first-year students, does the seminary contribute directly to the develop- 213 ment of their understanding of authority? If so, how? Understandably, third-year students use more key words significantly more frequently than do first-year students, since much of theological education focuses on communication skills. Of interest, however, is the absence of more precise theological language. For instance, not one of the seven key words cited more frequently by third-year students than first-year students is from the Spiritual Theme which incorporates specifically biblical/theological language. If language shapes the way people think and subsequently influences their behavior, what are the implications for pastors-as-leaders who do not spontaneously think in biblical and/or theological terms? Findings for the key words suggest that first-year students speak more frequently of abstract qualities of the leader, whereas third-year students cite more frequently concrete, skill-related characteristics, e.g. "charismatic" versus "commun- icate." Are the skill-related terms indeed more precise ways of articulating the less tangible qualities of leadership, or do they reflect movement away from valuing of less tangible quali- ties? Findings for the Themes Significant differences within-the—seminary were observed for all four themes. Personal Theme Third-year students during the interviews cited Personal Theme characteristics of the pastor-as-leader more frequently 214 than did first-year students. Why do third-year seminarians focus more frequently on the personal qualities of the pastor-as-leader? First, they have spent nearly three years studying and preparing themselves to be pastors. Consequently, their sensitivities to the demands and responsibilities of being a pastor are likely heightened. Second, and closely related to the first, most of the biblical and/or theological language about pastoral leadership is descriptive of the necessary character qualities of the pastor. Much is said about what the pastor ii and very little about Eflél she does. Third, education generally tends to create an intellectual meritocracy (Ward, 1984) and such a meritocracy would reinforce individualism. Seminary education is not exempt from such a possible outcome. Two possible extremes must be balanced with this focus on the personal qualities of the pastor-aS-leader. Strong, respon- sible, and well-educated leadership is a desirable outcome of seminary education. Such an emphasis could lead to excessive authoritarianism, however, because of the leader's presumed superior qualifications for the role of leading to the detriment of appropriate emphasis on the communal aspects of leading. Relational Theme Based on the findings froniPALEQ, third-year students were more positive toward the relational pastor-as-leader than were first-year students when considering the ideal pastor-as-leader. 215 First-year seminarians, however, were more positive about the relational qualities of the pastor they knew best and rank ordered relational key words higher than did third-year seminar- ians. Two factors may explain the difference between third-year and first-year students. Third-year seminarians have invested three years in theological studies. They may now have over idealized views of the pastor-as-leader and may be more critical of the pastor-as-leader in general as a result of their train- ing. Furthermore, they may be more removed in time from the pastor they know best. Functional Theme First-year seminarians had more positive attitudes toward the functional pastor-aS-leader they know best and higher rankings of Functional Theme key words based on findings from PALEQ. No significant differences between first-year and third-year students were disclosed based on the ideal scale. First-year seminarians, having more recently come to seminary from their local churches, may simply still be closer to the world of "function" when thinking about the pastor-as-leader than third-year seminarians. In the light of such studies as Carnegie Corporation's (Niebuhr, Willianw, & Gustafson, 1957) and the Pastorate Start Up Project (Oswald, 1980), lack of proficiency in managerial functions such as planning, organizing, and directing is a leading factor in pastoral leadership default. How ought 216 seminaries to address this need? Spiritual Theme Third-year seminarians displayed more positive attitudes toward the spiritual pastor-as-leader based on the ideal scale of PALEQ than did first-year seminarians and also rank ordered the Spiritual Theme key words higher. Greater familiarity with biblical and theological language after three years of seminary education may account for third- year students' more positive attitudes toward the spiritual pastor-as-Ieader. Third-year students were not higher, however, for frequency of verbal citations in the Spiritual Theme during the interview phase. Their recognition of biblical/theological language may simply be greater, therefore, than first-year students and not reflect a substantially stronger commitment to the spiritual leader image. General Observations Regarding Differences Within-the-Seminary A general pattern emerged in which third-year seminarians consistently demonstrated more positive attitudes toward the pastor-as-leader when confronting ideal situations, but first- year seminarians were more positive in their attitudes toward the pastor-as-leader when facing actual situations. Possibly third-year seminarians display more positive attitudes in the idealized context because of the "ivory tower" effects of seminary education. No doubt their analytical powers increase as do their expectations of pastoral leadership. Consequently less congruence is obtained between their idealized 217 views and their actual images of the pastor-as-leader. Potential problems for seminarians who graduate with a discrepancy between their ideal and actual views of the pastor- as-leader are excessive expectations of themselves on the one hand, or disillusionment with pastoral leadership on the other. Differences Observed Among-the-Seminaries Differences between-the-seminaries were identified by analyzing data from the interviews and PALEQ for each of the key words and themes in relationship to the independent variables Ethnic Background, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years in English Language Classroonw (or Foreign Language Classrooms). Findings for the Key Words Significant differences were observed among-the-seminaries in students' citations of the key words "goal-oriented," "respon- sible," "decisive," "humility," "character," and "delegate." Beta Seminary students cited "goal-oriented," "responsible," "decisive," "character," and "delegate" more frequently than Alpha Senfinary and Gamma Seminary students. Alpha Seminary students cited "humility" significantly more frequently than either Beta Seminary or Gamma Seminary students, and Gannm Seminary students were lower than Alpha Seminary and Beta Seminary students on all six words. Findings for the Themes Significant differences among-the-seminaries were observed 218 for all four themes. Personal Theme Based on the PALEQ, Gamma Seminary students had significant- ly more positive attitudes toward the personal pastor-as-leader based on both the iggpi and actual scales than did students from Alpha Seminary or Beta Seminary. Alpha Seminary students were higher than both Beta and Gamma seminarians for the personal key word choices. Relational Theme Beta Seminary was higher than Alpha Seminary on the pastor- as-leader relational actual scale. Alpha Seminary was significantly higher than both Beta and Gamma Seminaries for the key word choices. Functional Theme Gamma Seminary was significantly higher than both Alpha and Beta Seminaries on the functional pastor-as-leader ipgpi scale. Alpha Seminary was significantly more positive than Beta Seminary on the iggpl scale and more positive than both Beta and Gannm Seminaries for the key word choices. Spiritual Theme Beta Seminary students had more positive attitudes toward the Spiritual pastor-as-leader based on the actual scale than Alpha Seminary students. Observations About Differences Among-the-Seminaries Gamma seminarians were Significantly higher than Alpha and Beta seminarians on the Personal and Functional Themes based on 219 either the ideal, actual or both ideal and actual scales. Beta seminarians were higher than Alpha and Gamma seminar- ians on the Relational and Spiritual Themes based on the actual scale. Alpha seminarians, however, were higher than either Beta or Ganme seminarians for the Personal, Relational, and Functional Themes, based on the forced key word choices. How might the differences among-the-seminaries be explain- ed? If curriculum is indeed an "environment-producing" (Hueb- ner, 1975) discipline, environmental differences among the seminaries would likely provide a partial explanation. Alpha Seminary is the smallest of the three seminaries and is located in the agricultural heartland of North America. Many of Alpha's students, therefore, come from small rural back- grounds. Until recently Alpha Seminary had a tightly prescribed, classical theological curriculum. Alpha is the most homogeneous of the three seminaries in faculty and students and consciously seeks to cultivate a communal climate for learning. Of the three seminaries, Alpha has the highest ratio of foreign to North American students, and 50 percent of its students in all programs anticipate bicultural vocations. Of the three institutions, Alpha Seminary appears to be the most communally oriented as observed in such factors as student- faculty retreats, small group ministries throughout the campus, small student-faculty class ratios, and a variety of joint 220 student-faculty social events throughout the year. (Alpha Seminary students cited professors as recognized leaders more frequently than either of the other seminaries, reinforcing the "hunch" of closer bonds between faculty and students.) Beta Seminary is the largest of the three seminaries. It is located in a geographically cosmopolitan locale. Like Alpha Seminary, its program is founded upon a tightly prescribed classical theological model. Greater pluralism and diversity, however, characterize Beta's program by virtue of the larger student body and facul- ty. Academic excellence as reflected in its faculty is prized: Outstanding scholars, noted for their defense of orthodox Christianity and committed to earnest piety and the evangel- ical faith on which the school was founded, were added to the faculty from many denominations (Beta Seminary Catalog, 1983-1985). Self-perception of the faculty and administration of Beta is that "In a unique sense, . . . [it] is a love gift from [the denomination]. . . to the entire Church of Jesus Christ." Such a stance fosters considerable pluralism within its educational environment. Beta Seminary seems to be the most academically oriented of the three seminaries as observed in such factors as faculty publications, types of required courses in the M.Div. program, and higher level degree programs available. Gamma Seminary is the mid-sized seminary in the study and is located in a large cosmopolitan area. Its faculty has self-consciously based its curriculum on a combined theological 221 and social science model of education: . . . programs emphasize the necessary cross-disciplinary encounter between theology and the social sciences. Such an encounter reflects a concept of the church as spiritually created in Christ and empirically evident in human culture and society (Gamma Seminary Catalog, 1984-1986). Gamma Seminary is the only one of the three seminaries, for instance, which has required courses in the M.Div. program entitled (or their equivalent) "Man as Social & Cultural Being" and "Person and Ministry." The remaining courses reflect a similar effort to take a "cross-disciplinary encounter" serious- ly. Differences Observed Between Ethnic Groups Three independent variables were used to identify differen- ces between ethnic groups: Place of Birth, Number of Years Lived in North America, and Number of Years in English Classrooms (or Foreign Language Classrooms). Personal Theme North American-born subjects demonstrated more favorable attitudes toward the personal pastor-as-leader than did foreign- born subjects based on the interviews and on PALEQ. The Number of Years Lived in North America was positively correlated with favorable attitudes, and Number of Years in Foreign Language Classrooms was negatively correlated with favorable attitudes on PALEQ. Relational Theme North American-born subjects exhibited more positive attitudes toward the relational pastor-as-leader than did 222 foreign-born subjects. Number of Years in Foreign Language Classrooms was negatively correlated with positive attitudes. Functional Theme Findings for the Functional Theme were reversed for the interviews and PALEQ. Foreign-born subjects and foreign students both demonstrated more favorable attitudes toward the functional pastor-as-leader than did North Anmrican-born subjects on PALEQ. North American-born subjects, however, cited functional key words more frequently than did foreign-born subjects. The Number of Years in English Classrooms was negatively correlated with positive attitudes toward the functional pastor- as-leader on PALEQ. But for frequency of verbal citations discovered during interviews, both the Number of Years Lived in North America and the Number of Years of Study in English were positively correlated with the Functional Theme. The discrepancy likely is related to the language difficulty for subjects who were being interviewed in English as a second language and, therefore, who were less verbal generally than North American-born subjects. Spiritual Theme Foreign-born subjects and foreign students were also more positive toward the spiritual pastor-as-leader than were North American-born subjects and non-foreign students when measured by PALEQ. Furthermore, the longer a subject had lived in North America, or the more years he had spent in English classrooms, the less positive his attitude was toward the spiritual pastor- 223 as-leader. A discrepancy similar to the one found on the Functional Theme was discovered on the Spiritual Theme. North American-born subjects tended to cite spiritual key words more frequently than foreign-born subjects. The language barrier for foreign-born subjects is likely the determinative explanation for the discrep- ancy. The language difficulty explanation is supported by the findings from the key words themselves, in that foreign-born subjects were higher than North American-born subjects in frequency of citations on only 2 of the 10 words where signifi- cant differences existed. Since fluency in verbal citations was not an issue for respondents on PALEQ, the findings from that are likely to be more representative of differences based on ethnic backgrounds of subjects. Observations About Differences Based on Ethnic Background North American culture reinforces positive attitudes toward the personal and relational pastor-as-leader. In contrast, foreign cultures appear to contribute to positive attitudes toward the functional and spiritual pastor-as-leader. Why? North American society is characterized by two seemingly paradoxical tendencies: one toward "self-actualization" and the other toward "high touch." North Americans have traditionally prided themselves in their rugged individualism, and businesses and educational institutions have been characterized by highly competitive climates. Conmetition from foreign markets has 224 challenged North Americans to pursue more balanced relational managerial styles, however. Foreign societies, such as the Chinese, tend more toward conservatism and authoritarianism which involve respect for tradition and for the elderly (Yu, 1975; Bass, 1981). Because group cohesiveness is prized and conformity rewarded, foreign- born subjects emphasize the other-than-temporal (spiritual) and organizational maintenance activities (functional). Intended Vocation Subjects either anticipating bicultural vocations or open to that possibility were significantly higher on all four themes as measured by PALEQ than subjects who expected to be working with only one ethnic group. Students expecting to engage in cross-cultural ministries may have received special training in culture learning in one form or another. This training likely would expose students to pluralistic ways of perceiving and "doing" ministry. Unexpected Findings Several unexpected findings emerged during the course of the research which suggest possible hypotheses for further explora- tion. Faculty menbers were presumed to reflect a composite image of leading for the institutions they represented. Faculty diverged, as expected, in the ways in which they discussed pastoral leadership. It became clear, however, that little 225 conscious attention is given individually or institutionally to conceptualizing the nature of the pastor-as-leader in distinction from his/her numerous other roles and, consequently, to curricu- lar implications for training pastoral leaders. For instance, approximately half of the faculty members interviewed stated that they had never considered what a pastor- as-leader is supposed to be or do. One faculty member remarked at the end of the interview, "I didn't think I knew that much about leading!" Thus, tacit images of the "pastor-as-leader" may need to be made explicit by faculties before further curricular implications can be considered. Foreign students tended to provide historical or biographi- cal narratives as a way of responding to the interview questions, in contrast to North Americans who were more matter-of—fact and abstract in their responses. Overall response rate to PALEQ was directly related to the size of the institution. The smaller the institution, the higher the rate of return suggesting a greater readiness to cooperate and assist others. Follow-up efforts were inversely related to the rate of return as well. Subjects at Alpha Seminary, smallest of the three seminaries in the study, cited faculty members as examples of leaders more frequently than did subjects at the largest seminary (10 to l). The degree of communityycohesiveness may have influenced this outcome. 226 Recommendations for Further Research Several reconnendations for ongoing research are posited as a result of the study. First, the study was predicated on an analysis of the frequency of verbal citations (key words) of seminarians. Follow-up research Should analyze the meanings of the language employed by seminarians using a method such as the semantic differential measurement instrument (Osgood, Suci, & Tannenbaum, 1957). Second, the study was cross-sectional in nature. A longitu- dinal study would add power to the findings. Since the first- year of ministry is critical to ongoing pastoral leadership effectiveness (Osweld, 1980), extending the study through the first year of ministry might illuminate ways in which images of the pastor-aS-leader are strengthened, diminished, or altered after field experience. Third, the study was limited to three seminaries in North America which embrace similar faith and mission statements. Replicating the study using a more diverse p0pu1ation is needed for strengthening the ability to make broader generalizations about the relationship of seminary education to the formation of images of the pastor-as-leader. Fourth, a similar study should be conducted among pastors in the field with varying lengths of experience, such as 1 year, 3 years, 5 years, and 10 or more years. The findings from such a study would provide valuable information to seminaries as they 227 weigh the degree of congruence or lack of congruence between actual pastors' images of their roles as leaders and their students' images of the pastor-as-leader and the subsequent curricular implications. Finally, additional descriptive research is needed among cross-cultural leaders to determine the kinds of models of pastoral leaders desired and to clarify their perceptions of North American models of leadership presumably being exported to other countries. Summary and Conclusions Six summary statements with concomitant conclusions and/or questions are offered. 1. Students in the three participating seminaries have four distinct images of the pastor-as-leader: Personal, Relational, Functional, and Spiritual. On all measurements across all three seminaries, the functional pastor-as-leader ranked lowest. Interestingly, much of the literature identifies functional leadership skills as among the most needed for the pastor; these skills are most closely associated with prevailing leadership theory in the secular market. The seminary is confronted with a difficult dilemma: how far should it go in adopting and/or adapting models of leadership from secular sources? The relational pastor-as-leader ranked third, and the personal and spiritual pastor-as-leaders tied for first. One 228 implication is that what seminaries do best is precisely related to that which is individual. in contrast to the Relational and Functional Themes, which highlight the leader's involvement with people, the Personal and Spiritual Themes distinctly stress individual development. A serious question is how seminaries can equip pastors to be community builders, since the Church is among other things a community of believers, if their programs focus on that which is individual and competitive by nature? Although one of the two highest themes in PALEQ findings, the Spiritual Theme was lowest on interview findings. When faced with choices involving biblical and theological language, seminarians will consistently rank such choices high. When talking spontaneously about the pastor-as-leader, seminarians do not frequently speak in biblical and theological language. A question to pursue then is which of the two outcomes would be the controlling one for actual practice. 2. People develop their images of leading based on associ- ations with leaders whom they deem to be appropriate role models. Therefore, if seminarians' images of the pastor-as-lead- er are to change, should students have faculty-leader-models with whom they can closely identify and who self-consciously seek to affect their images of the pastor-as-leader? If so, how is this to be done when the professor's role is something quite different from the pastor-aS-leader's role? 3. The study suggests that the more education a person has, the more likely he is to idealize his images of the pastor-as- 229 leader. Theological educators must continue to grapple with the theory-praxis issue. How d9 students learn to lead without leading? Is it at all reasonable even to expect seminaries to influence images of leading? 4. Seminaries differ among themselves in reference to idealized and particularized images of the pastor-as-leader. Thus, environment seems to reinforce either more abstract or more concrete images of the pastor-as-leader. Should there be seminaries which are clearly recognized for their "theory" while others are recognized for their "practice"? Is it possible to find ways to articulate supporting relationships between such seminaries? 5. Persons vary in whether or not they view the leader in personal, individual ways, or in functional, corporate ways based on their ethnic background. Changes do occur as persons become enculturated to new cultures. 15 there a culturally transcendent image of the pastor-as-leader? If not, why not, given the presuppositions of a theological education? And if so, what is that image? How might that image be consciously articu- lated and developed in students? 6. Seminary faculties tend to plan curriculum without explicit assumptions of what the pastor-as-leader is. Can the overall effect of the seminary curriculum on the would-be pastor-as-leader be other than haphazard until more conscious attention is given to the role of the seminary in the formation of pastors-as-leaders? BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Alpha Theological Seminary, Catalog 1983-1985. Anderson, G. Lester. (1974). Trends in education for the professions. (Research Report No. 7). Washington, DC: Anmrican Association for Higher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 096 889) Apple, Michael W. (1975). The hidden curriculum and the nature of conflict. In WillianiPinar (Ed.), Curriculum theoriz- ing: The reconceptualists (pp. 95-119). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing. Barrs, Jerram. (1983). Shepherds & sheep; A biblical view of leading & following. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press. Bass, Bernard M. (1981). Stogdill's handbook of leadership (rev. ed.). Neerork: The Free Press. Beta Theological Seminary, Catalog 1983-1985. Borg, Walter R., & Gall, Meredith D. (1983). Educational research: An introduction (4th ed.). New York, Longman. Braaten, Carl E. (1982). The contextual factor in theological education. Dialog: A Journal of Theology, 2i, 169-174. Bradburn, Nornmn M., & Sudman, Seymour. (1979). Improving interview method and questionnaire design. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Browm, Katherine. (1981). An apocryphal parable: The differ- ence between a seminary and a garden. Crux, iZ(2), 18-19. Brundage, Donald H., & Mackeracher, Dorothy. (1980). Adult learning principles and their application to program planning. Ontario: The Minister of Education, Ontario. Burge, E. J. (1982). Higher degrees in theology, 1950-1974: A statistical analysis and a commentary. Thought, 82(704), 114-120. 231 Buzzell, Sid. (1982). Preparation for church leadership: Trends in students' leadership orientation after one year in Dallas Theological Seminapy. Unpublished doctoral disser- tation. Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI. Canmbeil, Sarah F. (Ed.). (1976). Piaget sampler: An intro- duction to Jean Piaget through his own words. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Cardoza, Michael H. (1977). No title. In Bruno A. Boley (Ed.), Crossfire in professional education: Students, theiprofes- sions and society (pp. 38-55). New York: Pergamon. Carnflchael, Oliver C. (1961). Graduate education: A critique and a prggram. New York: Harper & Brothers. Carnegie Connfission on Higher Education. (1973). The purposes and theyperformance of higher education in the U.S. ap- proaching the year 2000. New York: McGraweHill. Chowg Wilson W. (1980). An integrated approach to theological education. In Paul Bowers (Ed.), Evangelical theological education today: An international perspective (pp. 49-60). 'Nairobi, Kenya: Evangel Publishing House. Cole, Victor Babajide. (1982). Leadership criteria and their sources among ECWA churches of Nigeria: Implications for curriculum in ministerial trainipg. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI. Conn, Harvie M. (1979). Theological education and the search for excellence. Westminster Theological Journal, ii, 311-363. Conn, Harvie M. (1984). Teaching missions in the third world: The cultural problems. In Harvie M. Conn & Samuel F. Rowen (Eds.), Missions & theological education in world perspec- tive (pp. 249—279). Farmington, MI: Associates of Urbanus. Conner, Ross F. (Ed.). (1981). Methodological advances in evaluation research. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. Crenfln, Lawrence A. (1975). Curriculum making in the United States. In WillianiPinar (Ed.), Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists (pp. 17-35). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing. Cross, K. P. (1976). Accent on learning: Improving instruction and reshaping the curriculum. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dale, Robert D. (1984). Ministers as leaders. Nashville, TN: Broadman Press. 232 Dewey, John. (1938). Experience & education. New York: Collier Books. Dobson, Kenneth. (1980). Three types of theological education. SEAJT, 31(1), 26-36. Donald, Janet G. (1983). Knowledge structures: Methods for exploring course content. Journal of Higher Education, 23, 31—41. Doyle, Walter. (1976). Education for all: The triumpth of professionalism. In O. L. Davis, Jr. (Ed.), Perspectives on curriculum development 1776-1976. Washington: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Edwards, Allen L. (1957). Techniques of attitude scale con- struction. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc. Eisner, Elliot W. (1982). Cognition and curriculum: A basis for deciding what to teach. New‘York: Longman. Eisner, Elliot W. (1979). The educational imagination. New York: Macnfillan Publishing Co. Elliston, Edgar James. (1981). Curriculum foundations for leadership education in the Samburu Christian community. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State Universi- ty, East Lansing, MI. Elmer, Duane H. (1980). Career data as indicators for curricu- lum development in theolpgical education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI. Engstrony Ted W. (1976). The making of a Christian leader. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. Engstront Ted W. (1983). Your gift of administration. Nash- ville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers. Erickson, Erik H. (1950). Childhood and society. New‘York: W. W. Norton and Cowmany, Inc. Farley, Edward. (1983). Theologia: The fragmentation and uniiy of theological education. Philadelphia: Fortress. Ferris, Robert W. (1982). The emphasis on leadership as servanthood: An anaiysis of curriculum commitments. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State Universi- ty, East Lansing, MI. 233 Fitz-Gibbon, Carol Taylor, & Morris, Lynn Lyons. (1978). How to design a program evaluation. Beverly Hills: Sage Publica- tions. Fletcher, John C., & Edwards, Tilden H., Jr. (1971, March). Intermet: On-the-job theological education. Pastoral Psychology, pp. 21-29. Fowler, Floyd 3., Jr. (1984). Survey research methods. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE Publications. Frame, Randy. (1985, February 1). "Cheap" degrees: Are they worth it? Christianity Today, pp. 38-42. Freire, Paulo. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New‘York: Herder and Herder. Gannm Theological Seminary, Catalog 1984-1986. Gardner, John William. (1964). Self-renewal: The individual and the innovative society. New York: Harper & Row; Glaser, Barney G., & Strauss, AnselniL. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Nev/York: .Aldine Publishing. Gilpin, W. Clark. (1984). The seminary ideal in American Protestant ministerial education, 1700-1808. Theological Education, 20(2), 85-106. Gorden, Raymond L. (1969). Interviewing: Strategy, techniqges, and tactics. Homewood, IL: The Dorsey Press. Gould, Roger L. (1978). Transformations: Growth and change in adult life. New York: Simon and Shuster. Green, Bert F. (1954). Attitude measurement. In Gardner Lindzey (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology. Theory and method: Vol. 1 (pp. 335-369). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Inc. Greenleaf, Robert K. (1977). Servant leadership. New York: Paulist Press. Hadsell, John S. (1982). We heard the church: Towards a many-celled seminary. International Reviewrof Mission, 11. 179-183. Harder, Kenneth Ray. (1984). Kenyan church leaders: Percep- tions of appropriate leadership behaviors. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI. 234 Hartwig, Frederick, with Dearing, Brian E. Exploratory data analysis. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. Hearne, Brian. (1982). Teaching theology as praxis and experi- ence. Lumen Vitae, 21, 7-25. Heberlein, Thonms A., & Baumgartner, Robert. (1978). Factors affecting response rates to mailed questionnaires: A quantitative analysis of the published literature. American Sociological Review, 13, 447-462. Hollomon, J. Herbert. (1977). No title. In Bruno A. Boley (Ed.), Crossfire in professional education: Studentsy the professions and society (pp. 18-24). New York: Pergamon. Hough, Joseph C., Jr. (1984). The education of practical theologians. Theological Education, 20(2), 55-84. Houle, Cyril O. (1980). Continuing learning in the profes- sions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Huebner, Dwayne. (1975). Curricular language and classroom meanings. In Willian1Pinar (Ed.), Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists (pp. 217-236). Berkeley, CA: McCut- chan Publishing. Huebner, Dwayne. (1966). Curriculum as a field of study. In Helen F. Robison (Ed.), Precedents and Promise in the Curriculum Field (pp. 94-112). New York: Teachers College Press. Illich, Ivan. (1971). Deschooling society. New‘York: Harper & Row. Isaac, Stephen, & Michael, William B. (1981). Handbook in research and evaluation (2nd ed.). San Diego: EdITS Publishers. Joyce, Bruce, & Weil, Marsha. (1980). Models of teaching (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Kieffer, Dale. (1986). Report of liberal arts admissions requirements for selected seminaries. Unpublished report. Kliebard, Herbert M. (1975). Bureaucracy and curriculum theory. In WilliannPinar (Ed.), Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists (pp. 51-69). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing. 235 Kliebard, Herbert M. (1975). Metaphorical roots of curriculum design. In WillianiPinar (Ed.), Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists (pp. 84-85). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan PUD1Ithng. Kinsler, F. Ross. (1978). The extension movement in theolqgical education. South Pasadena, CA: WillianiCarey Library. Knowdes, Malcolm. (1978). The adult learner: A neglected Species (2nd ed.). Houston: Gulf Publishing. Krippendorff, Klaus. (1980). Content analypis: An introduction to its methodology. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. Lassey, WillianiR., & Sashkin, Marshall (Eds.). (1983). Leadership and social change (3rd ed.). San Diego: University Associates. Lemon, Nigel. (1973). Attitudes and their measurement. London: B. T. Batsford Ltd. Levinson, Daniel J. (1978). The seasons of a man's life. New York: Ballantine Books. Linsky, Arnold S. (1975). Stimulating responses to mailed questionnaires: A review. Public Opinion Quarteriy, 32, 82-101. Lobkowicz, Nicholas. (1967). Theory and practice: History of a concept fronnAristotle to»Marx. London: University of Notre Dame Press. Luidens, Donald A. (1983). Of cotton, competition, and clergy careers. Reforned Review, gg, 53-73. Macdonald, James B. (1975). Curriculum theory. In William Pinar (Ed.), Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists (pp. 3-16). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing. McKinney, Lois. (1979, April). Theological education overseas: A church-centered approach. Emissary, pp. 1-8. McKinney, Lois. (1980). Serving the church in cultural con- text: The role of academic accreditation. In Paul Bowers (Ed.), Evangelical theological education today: 1 An internationalyperspective (pp. 34-48). Nairobi, Kenya: Evangel Publishing House. Maxann Donald A. (1983). Clergy careers in a social context. Refornmd Review, 36, 77-81. 236 Melinsky, M. A. H. (1982). Alternative training for Anglican ministries in the United Kingdom. International Review of Mission, ii, 213-217. Minnery, Tom. (1981). Short-cut graduate degrees short-change everybody. Christianity Today, 22(10), 735-738. Mitchell, Nathan. (1981). Teaching worship in seminaries: A response. Worship, 22, 319-324. Moore, John, & Neff, Ken. (1985). A New'Testament blueprint for the church. Chicago: Moody Press. Newbigin, Lesslie. (1984). Theological education in a world perspective. In Harvie Mn Conn & Sanmel F. Rowen (Eds.), Missions & theological education in world perspective (pp. 3-18). Farnfington, MI: Associates of Urbanus. Nicholls, Bruce J. (1980). Evangelical theological education in the 19805. In Paul Bowers (Ed.), Evaqgelical theological education today: 1 An international perppective (pp. 5-23). Nairobi, Kenya: Evangel Publishing House. Nicholls, Bruce J. (1982). The role of spiritual development in theological education. In Paul Bowers (Ed.), Evangelical theological education today: 2 Agpnda for renewal (pp. 13-25). Nairobi, Kenya: Evangel Publishing House. Niebuhr, H. Richard. (1956). The puipose of the church and its ministry: Reflections on the aims of theological educa- tion. New York: Harper & Brothers. Niebuhr, H. R., & Williams, D. D. (Eds.). (1983). The ministry in historical perspectives. New'York: Harper & Row; Niebuhr, H. R., Williams, D. D., & Gustafson, J. M. (1957). The advancement of theological education. New York: Harper & Row. Nyre, G. F., & Reilly, K. C. (1979). Professional education in the eighties: Challenges and reSponses. (Research Report No. 8). Washington, DC: Anmrican Association for Higher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 179 187) Ognibene, Richard, and Penaskovic, Richard. (1981). Teaching theology: Some affective strategies. Horizons, 8(1), 97-108. Osgood, Charles E., Suci, George J., & Tannenbaum, Percy H. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana, IL: Univer- sity of Illinois Press. 237 Oswald, Roy M. (1980). Crossing the boundary between seminary andyparish. Washington, DC: The Alban Institute, Inc. Payne, Stanley L. (1979). The art of asking questions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Pellegrino, Edmund D. (1977). "Society, technology and profes- sional expertise." In Bruno A. Boley (Ed.), Crossfire in professional education: Students, the professions and society (pp. x-17). New York: Pergamon. Phenix, Philip H. (1974). Transcendence and the curriculum. In Elliot W. Eisner & Elizabeth Vallance (Eds.), Conflicting conceptions of curriculum (pp. 117-132). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing. Pinar, William (Ed.). (1975). Curriculum theorizing: The reconcaptualists. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing. Powers, Bruce P. (1979). Christian leadership. Nashville, TN: Broadman Press. Richards, Lawrence 0., & Hoeldtke, Clyde. (1980). A theology of church leadership. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House. Ro, Bong Rin. (1980). Opportunities for international coopera- tion. In Paul Bowers (Ed.), Evangelical theological education today: 1 An international perspective (pp. 24- 33). Nairobi, Kenya: Evangel Publishing House. Routh, Porter. (1979). Preparation of ministers competent to minister. Theological Education, pp. 102-108. Rowen, Samuel F. (1984). Accreditation, contextualization and the teaching of missions. In Harvie Mu Conn & Samuel F. Rowen (Eds.), Missions & theological education in world perspective (pp. 137-155). Farmington, MI: Associates of Urbanus. Rowen, Samuel F. (1981). Curriculum foundations, experiences and outcomes: A participatory case study in theological education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI. Sanders, J. Oswald. (1984). Paul the leader. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress. Sanders, J. Oswald. (1967). Spiritual leadership. Chicago: Moody Press. 238 Schorr, Henry H. (1984). Senior pastor needs for preparatory and continuing professional education as perceived by seminaryiprofessors and senior pastors. Doctoral disserta- tion, Northern Illinois University. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International (published on demand). Schubert, William. (1980). Curriculum books: The first eighiy years. Washington, DC: University Press of America. Schuller, David S., Brekke, Milo L., & Stronnwn, Merton P. (1975). Readiness for ministry: Volume II--assessment. Vandalia, OH: The Asociation of Theological Schools in the United States and Canada. Schuller, David S., Stronnmn, Merton P., & Brekke, Milo L. (Eds.). (1980). Ministry in America: A report and analysiay based on an in-depth survey of 47 denominations in the United States and Canada, with interppetation by 18 experts. San Francisco: Harper & Row. Schwab, J. J. (1962, July). The concept of the structure of a discipline. The Educational Record, 43, 197-205. Scott, WillianiA. (1968). Attitude measurement. In Gardner Lindzey & Elliot Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology Vol. 2 (2nd ed.) (pp. 204-273). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Inc. Senn, Frank C. (1981). Teaching worship in seminaries: A response. Worship, 22, 325-332. Shawg Marvin E., & Wright, Jack M. (1967). Scales for the measurement of attitudes. New‘York: McGrawhHill Book Company. Sheehy, Gail. (1976). Passages: Predictable crises of adult life. New York: Bantam Books. Sheehy, Gail. (I981). Pathfinders: Overcoming the crises of adult life and findipg your own path to well-being. New York: Bantam Books. Sinclair-Faulkner, Tom. (1981). Theory divided from practice: The introduction of the higher criticism into Canadian Protestant seminaries. Studies in Religion, i2, 321-343. Stevens, R. Paul. (1985). Liberating the laity: Equipping all the saints for ministry. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. 239 Stewart, Charles J., & Cash, WillianiB., Jr. (1978). Interview- ing: Principles and practices. Dubuque: Wnu C. Brown Company. Stogdill, Ralph M. (1974). Handbook of leadership. New‘York: The Free Press. Stott, John R. W. (1985, August 9). What makes leadership Christian? Christianity Today, pp. 24-27. Struening, Elmer L., & Guttentag, Marcia. (1975). Handbook of evaluation research. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. Tyler, Ralph W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Walters-Bugbee, Christopher. (1982). Emphasizing the congrega- tion: New directions for seminaries. Christian Century, 32, 1131-1136. Ward, Ted. (I984). Servants, leaders and tyrants. In Harvie M. Conn & Samuel F. Rowen (Eds.), Missions & theological education in world perspective (pp. 19-40). Farmington, MI: Associates of Urbanus. Ward, Ted. (n.d.). Schooling as a defective approach to education. Unpublished manuscript. Weiss, Carol H. (1975). Interviewing in evaluation research. In Elmer L. Struening & Marcia Guttentag (Eds.), Handbook of evaluation research Vol. 1 (pp. 355-395). Beverly Hills: SAGE Publications. White Janms R. (1981). The teaching of worship in seminaries in Canada and the United States. Worship, 22, 304-318. Whitehead, Alfred North. (1957). The aims of education. New York: The Free Press. Wolterstorff, Nicholas. (1984). The mission of the Christian college at the end of the 20th century. Faculty Dialogue, i, 39-48. Yu, Danny Kwok Leung. (1975). A consideration of leadership style and multiple staff ministpy and their implications for unity anmngst Chinese churches in North America. Unpub- lished doctoral dissertation, Fuller Theological Seminary, Pasadena, CA. APPENDIX APPENDIX PASTOR-AS-LEADER EXPECTATIONS QUESTIONNAIRE INSTRUCTIONS: Please complete each part of this survey as fully as possible. PART 1: Please answer each question, either by placing a check mark in the appropriate box beside it or by filling in the blank. 1. What seminary are you enrolled in at the present? 2. Sex A: Male B: Female 3. Age 4. Place of birth A: _____ Africa B: _____ Asia C: _____ Latin America (including Caribbean and Brazil) D: _____ North America E: _____ Other; please specify: 5. How many years have you lived in North America? 241 PALEQ: Page 2 6. 10. 11. 12. Year in Senfinary M.Div. Program A: _____ lst-Year (less than 32 hours) B: _____ 2nd-Year (32 hours but less than 64 hours) C: _____ 3rd-Year (64 hours or more) D: _____ Other; explain: Are you a "Foreign Student" from outside North America? A: Yes B: No How many years of schooling from kindergarten to the present have you had in English-speaking classrooms? How many years of schooling from kindergarten to the present have you had in other-than-English language classrooms? Where, geographically, do you expect to be employed upon graduation from seminary? A: In U. S. or Canada B: Other; please specify: Will you be involved primarily in Christian ministry? A: Yes B: No C: Uncertain Will your ministry involve people from two or more cultures (ethnic groups)? A: Yes B: No C: Uncertain 242 PALEQ: Page 3 PART 11: Please complete each of the following statements: 1. A leader is 2. A person becomes a leader by 3. To be effective as a leader, a pastor must 4. The most important thing about the pastor-as-leader is 243 PALEQ: Page 4 PART ill: in each item below there are two questions: "Do you agree with this statement?" and "Is this statement true of the pastor you know best?" Assume that "pastoral leader" refers specifically to the pastor-as-leader in a particular church or parish setting. Circle the letter which reflects your degree of agreement with the statement: SAzStrongly agree; A=Agree; U:Uncertain; D:Disagree; SDzStrongly disagree. * 1. The pastor must express love in personal relationships with people in order to be an effective leader. a SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD 2. Pastoral leadership requires much reading and study. SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD 3. The pastor gets people to do things by setting examples. SA A U D SD 15 this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD 4. A pastor must have a special gift of leadership froniGod in order to lead. SA A U D SD IS this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD PALEQ: Page 5 244 (SA=Strongly agree; AzAgree; U:Uncertain; DzDisagree; SD=Strongly disagree) The pastor should earn the respect of those he/she leads. SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D The pastor must continually be developing as a person. SA A U D SD is this true of the Pastoral leadership SA A U D SD Is this true of the Without a servant's being able to lead. SA A U D SD Does the pastor you pastor you know best? SA A U D calls for strong teaching abilities. pastor you know best? SA A U D heart, the pastor is severely limited know best have a servant's heart? SA A U D Listening well to all viewpoints is essential to strong pastoral leadership. SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD SD SD SD SD if--a~ 241 PALEQ: Page 2 6. Year in Seminary M.Div. Program A: _____ lst-Year (less than 32 hours) B _____ 2nd-Year (32 hours but less than 64 hours) C: _____ 3rd-Year (64 hours or more) D Other; explain: 7. Are you a "Foreign Student" from outside North America? A: Yes B: No 8. How many years of schooling from kindergarten to the present have you had in English-Speaking classrooms? 9. How many years of schooling from kindergarten to the present have you had in other-than-English language classrooms? 10. Where, geographically, do you expect to be employed upon graduation from seminary? A: In U. S. or Canada B: Other; please specify: 11. Will you be involved primarily in Christian ministry? A: Yes B: No C: Uncertain 12. Will your ministry involve people from two or more cultures (ethnic groups)? A: Yes B: No C: Uncertain 242 PALEQ: Page 3 PART 11: Please complete each of the following statements: 1. A leader is 2. A person becomes a leader by 3. To be effective as a leader, a pastor must 4. The most important thing about the pastor-as-leader is 243 PALEQ: Page 4 PART III: in each item below there are two questions: "Do you agree with this statement?" and "Is this statement true of the pastoriyou know best?" Assume that "pastoral leader" refers specifically to the pastor-as-leader in a particular church or parish setting. Circle the letter which reflects your degree of agreement with the statement: SA:Strongly agree; AzAgree; U:Uncertain; D:Disagree; SD:Strongly disagree. 1. The pastor must express love in personal relationships with people in order to be an effective leader. SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD 2. Pastoral leadership requires much reading and study. SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD 3. The pastor gets people to do things by setting examples. SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD 4. A pastor must have a special gift of leadership froniGod in order to lead. SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD 244 PALEQ: Page 5 (SA:Strongly agree; A:Agree; U:Uncertain; DzDisagree; SD=Strongly disagree) The pastor should earn the respect of those he/she leads. SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD The pastor must continually be developing as a person. SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD Pastoral leadership calls for strong teaching abilities. SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD Without a servant's heart, the pastor is severely limited in being able to lead. SA A U D SD Does the pastor you know best have a servant's heart? SA A U D SD Listening well to all viewpoints is essential to strong pastoral leadership. SA A U D SD 15 this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD PALEQ: Page 6 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 245 (SAzStrong agree; AzAgree; U:Uncertain; DzDisagree; SD=Strongly disagree) The pastor must continue to learn from many sources, includ- ing from his/her experience in the current ministry setting. SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD A pastor must have a strong sense of personal authority in order to lead. SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor your know best? SA A U D SD The pastor must have a clear biblical vision for the mission of the congregation. SA A U D SD is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD The pastor needs to be sensitive to the feelings of people in his/her congregation. SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD The pastor must be motivated from within to be helpful in Christlike ways. SA A U D SD IS this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD PALEQ: Page 7 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 246 (SA=Strongly agree; A=Agree; U:Uncertain; D:Disagree; SD:Strongly disagree) The pastor must give careful attention to routine administrative duties. SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD Skills as a shepherd are very important in leading. SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD The pastor must be open and transparent about his/her own personal strengths and weaknesses. SA A U D SD IS this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD The pastor must see himself/herself as an accountable person. SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD The pastor must have a strong commitment to goals and be able to lead people toward them. SA A U D SD Is this true of the pastor you know best? SA A U D SD 247 PALEQ: Page 8 (SA:Strongly agree; AzAgree; U:Uncertain; D:Disagree; SD=Strongly disagree) 20. The pastor must be a deeply and genuinely spiritual person. SA A U D SD SA A U D SD PART IV: Frequently the pastor-aS-leader is caught between two equally desirable characteristics or skills from which to lead. Choices must, therefore, be made on the basis of which quality is deemed most important of all the possible choices. Assign a value of 1, 2, 3, or 4, with 1 being the most desirable, to each word in each set of words. Use each number (1, 2, 3, 4) within each set only once. 21. love 24. administration gift knowledge vision sensitivity model willingness 22. shepherd 25. developing goal-oriented respect thinker servant openness teacher 23. learner authority listener spirituality (DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE) 2. 3. "Ill11111111111111is