PLACE lN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. To AVOID FINES return on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE U IwVO42m L “fiflfiifiua 6/01 c:/C|RClDateDue.p65-p.15 FRANfEWORKS FOR THE FORMATION OF CURRICULUM PRACTICE IN [(-12 EVANGELICAL SCHOOLS VOLUME I By Karen Lynn Miller Estep A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Educational Administration 2001 FRAMEWORKS FOR THE FORMATION OF CURRICULUM PRACTICE IN K-12 ABSTRACT EVANGELICAL SCHOOLS By Karen Lynn Miller Estep It is apparent from a thorough search of the precedent literature that K-12 evangelical Christian schools lack sufficient resources for educators to frame and guide effective curriculum practice and decision-making. This lack of resources for Christian educators leads to ineffective operating principles that guide curriculum and instruction. While many evangelical educators have an adequate theological preparation or training in educational leadership they often lack sufficient exposure in one or the other. The inability to integrate faith with learning is a significant handicap. Christian educators need resources to frame and guide effective curriculum practice and curriculum decision- making, as they do not understand how to address both the internal forces of theology and the external forces of the community (Vryhor, Brouwer, Ulstein, and VanderArk, 1989). This dissertation probes the literature for related studies, information on the evangelical heritage, curriculum theory, and school governance/leadership to better understand the operating principles that guide the K-12 evangelical Christian school curriculum. To do this 3 self-perpetuated board-run schools affiliated with the Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI) are studied to better understand the internal and external forces that drive their curriculum practice. This study employs case study and comparative case study research methods in the study of three accredited ACSI schools. The findings and conclusions of this research identified internal and external forces that influence the curriculum decision-making process of each school. As a result a curriculum framework is created which identifies curriculum safegu_a_rding as an emergent theory. The internal forces are identified as the organizational culture, having been filtered by the foundations of Christian education: Bible, evangelical theology, and a philosophy of Christian education. They serve as a curriculum safeguard that maintain the organizational culture of the institution filtering the external forces of the community at large. Both forces work together to the advantage of the school, though the internal force is the stronger of the two. The weakness of this research is that there is so much more that needs to be studied concerning operating principles and their impact on curriculum content and pedagogy. Copyright by Karen Lynn Miller Estep 2001 DEDICATION I dedicate this work to my God in heaven, the same God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as He has carried me throughout this journey. I pray that this research project will bring Him glory and will be useful to His Kingdom here on earth in the parental quest of training up our children in the Lord. I dedicate this work to my deceased father, Waltman Junior Miller, who has been my greatest hero in life on this earth; my mother, Twila Marie Schleeter Miller Lochhead, who has been my teacher and nurturer; my husband, James Riley Estep, J r., who has given so much on this journey as a most loving husband, friend, sounding board, reader, encourager, supporter, and who has sacrificed the most to help me; my son, Dylan Scott Estep who has given up much of his play time and family time so that I might achieve when he needed me the most; and my two newest children, Dovie Arlene Thomsbury Estep and Budd Williams Pirrotta Estep, whom have known me only as a working mom and student. These individuals are the very essence of my heart, soul, and life purposes. I love them all with every part of my being and dedicate this work to the values that they have held dear and true which are commendable and honorable and bring glory to our heavenly Father which art in heaven. Amen. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS It is with great reverence that I acknowledge the professionals whom have aided me in my research: Dr. James Riley Estep, Jr., Provost of Kentucky Christian College (Grayson, Kentucky), and Dr. Alvin Kuest, Professor of Christian Education at Great Lakes Christian College (Lansing, Michigan), whom assisted me in my focus on Christian education, and Dr. Eleanor Daniel (Dean of Emmanuel School of Religion (Johnson City, Tennessee), whom directed me initially in the importance of curriculum and most importantly, Dr. Maenette Benham, Professor of Education at Michigan State University (East Lansing, Michigan), who has given so unselfishly to help me cross all obstacles throughout this journey. Likewise, I an grateful to those educators and their institutions whom have been part of my awareness on this journey: Cincinnati Bible Seminary, The Christian Schools of Greater Cincinnati, Foss Avenue Christian School, Lansing Christian Schools, Charlotte Christian School, Eaton County Christian Schools, Mansfield Christian School, Heritage Christian School, Dayton Christian Schools, Carter Christian Academy, and the Association of Christian Schools International. It is only through their sacrifices and encouragement that I have endeavored to take this journey. Finally, I want to acknowledge James and Sue Estep, my in-laws, whom have made this project possible by watching my kids as I traveled to complete this work. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES KEY TO SYMBOLS OR ABBREVIATIONS CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ......................................... 1 Statement of the Problem ...................................... 4 Significance of the Research .................................... 7 Delimitations ................................................ 9 Assumptions ............................................... 10 Frameworks for Theologically Driven Curriculum Practice in Evangelical Christian Schools ................................. 10 Research Question .......................................... 15 ResearchSub—questions.................................;....15 CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF PRECEDENT LITERATURE DRAFT ............ 17 Overview ........................................................ 17 Method of Precedent Literature Review ................................ 17 Previous Studies in Related Areas..................................... 18 Setting the Context for the Study: The Internal Foundation for Decision-making .................................................. 22 How the Evangelical Heritage Influences Curriculum Development . . . 23 The Role of Theology in K-12 Christian Education ........... 31 Evangelical Theology .................................. 39 Major Contributors .................................... 43 vii Implications for Christian Education: Theology is the Intemal Force . . .46 Leading Educators.....................................49 The Influence of the Association of Christian School Internationasrll Setting the Context for the Study: The External Pressures on Curriculum ..... 56 How Curriculum Theory Influences Curriculum Development ........ 57 Other Patterns of Influence .................................... 58 Christian Education ......................................... 65 Setting the Context: School Governance/Leadership ...................... 68 Curriculum Decision-making .................................. 73 Those Involved in the Curriculum Development Process ............ 76 Different Forces Among Schools ............................... 78 Summary ........................................................ 85 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ..................................... 87 Rational for Design Choice ......................................... 87 Time Line ....................................................... 88 Population and Sample ............................................. 90 Data Collection Tools .............................................. 91 Data Management and Protocols ..................................... 92 Data Analysis Procedures/Trustworthiness Considerations ................. 93 Ethical Considerations ............................................. 94 Site Visits ....................................................... 94 viii CHAPTER FOUR: THE FINDINGS WITHIN THREE ACSI SCHOOLS ......... 100 Overfield Christian School (OCS): The Case of Theology’s Impact is Influenced by the Biggest Voice .............................................. 108 School Context ............................................ 108 The OCS Mission and Purpose ................................ 110 The OCS Organizational Structure ............................. 131 The OCS Teachers ......................................... 136 Curriculum: Policy and Practice at OCS ........................ 141 The OCS Board Policies . . . ............................ 140 The OCS Teacher/Personnel Policies ..................... 143 The OCS Student Policies ............................. 145 The 063 Institutional Policies .......................... 148 The OCS Financial Policies ............................ 151 The Transition of Policy into Practice at OCS .................... 151 The Theoretical Analysis: What It Means ....................... 153 Forces that Influence the Purpose of Education at OCS ...... 153 Influences on educational purposes at OCS are both primary and secondary ........................... 154 The foundations of Christian education filter out unwanted influences ........- ............................. I 57 The purpose of education is influenced by primary and secondary influences............................ 160 The Flow of Curriculum-development Activity at OCS ....... 162 God is the source of curriculum.................... 163 The selection of primary perspectives supports the foundations of Christian education................. 166 ix The mission and purpose are identified as the general orientation.................................... 167 Teachers are considered as the secondary perspective. . 169 OCS reacts to external influences.................. 169 OCS prepares, implements, and then evaluates the curriculum .................................... 173 A Framework for Curriculum Flaming at OCS ............. 177 The mission and purpose drive the curriculum planning. 1 78 Foundations drive the course of study at OCS ......... 181 There are several tensions that drive the decision-making process ....................................... 182 Summary: OCS is a Case of Theology’s Impact is Influenced by The Biggest Voice ............................................. 183 Eagle Lake Christian Schools (ELCS): The Case of Teachers’ Perception of Theology ...................................................... 189 School Context ............................................ 189 The ELCS Mission/Accreditation ............................. 196 The ELCS Organizational Structure ............................ 201 Curriculum: Policy and Practice at ELCS ....................... 209 The ELCS Personnel Policies ........................... 209 The ELCS Student Policies ............................. 214 The ELCS Curriculum Policies ......................... 215 The Transition of Policy into Practice at ELCS ................... 218 The Theoretical Analysis: What It Means ....................... 227 Forces that Influence the Purpose of Education at ELCS ..... 227 There are three influences on educational purposes at ELCS ........................................ 229 The purpose of education is influenced by the foundations of Christian education........................... 235 The Flow of Curriculum-development Activity at ELCS ...... 237 God is the source of curriculum .................... 239 The selection of primary perspectives supports the foundations of Christian education................. 241 Teachers and social forces are considered as the secondary perspective to which ELCS reacts to as external influences. .............................................242 The mission and purpose are identified as the general orientation.................................... 244 ELCS prepares, implements, and then evaluates the curriculum .................................... 245 A Framework for Curriculum Planning at ELCS ............ 250 Foundations drive the curriculum planning........... 252 In turn the mission and vision drive the course of study.252 There are several tensions that drive the decision-making process ....................................... 252 Summary: ELCS is a Case of Teachers’ Perception of Theology ..... 254 Columbia Christian Schools, Inc., (CCS): The Case of Institutional Control of Theology ....................................................... 258 School Context ............................................ 258 The CCS Organizational Structure ............................. 264 The CCS Mission, Charter, and Accreditation .................... 265 Curriculum: Policy and Practice at CCS ........................ 266 The CCS Board Member, Faculty, and Personnel Policies . . . .274 The CCS Curriculum Policies L ......................... 279 xi The CCS Student Policies ............................. 283 The Transition of Policy into Practice at CCS ................... 292 The Theoretical Analysis: What It Means .......................292 The primary influence on educational purposes at CCS is the God’s Word ........................................ 293 Influences on educational purposes at OCS are both primary and secondary.......................... 293 There are five primary influences on educational purposes at CCS ....................................... 294 The foundations of Christian education filter out unwanted influences.................................... 300 The purpose of education is influenced by God’s Word, the corporate philosophy, mission statement, and ministry goals ........................................ 303 The Flow of Curriculum-development Activity at CCS ...... 304 Godisthesourceofcurriculum................-....306 The selection of primary perspectives supports the foundations of Christian education ................. 307 CCS’ reaction to external and internal influences ...... 309 Identification of a general orientation drives the preparation, implementation, and evaluation of the curriculum .................................... 316 A Framework for Curriculum Planning at CCS ............. 318 Theology drives the curriculum planning ............ 320 The philosophy, mission, and ministry goals drive the graded course of study ........................... 321 There are Several tensions that drive the decision-making process ....................................... 322 Summary: CCS is a Case of Institutional Control of Theology ....... 323 xii CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ........................ 329 An Emergent Theoretical Construct: “Safeguarding” Evangelicalisrn ........ 329 An Emerging Curriculum Decision-making Framework for ACSI Schools. . . .335 Forces that Influence ........................................ 337 Organizational Culture ...................................... 342 Social Forces .............................................. 345 Influences that are Both Internal and External .................... 346 Theoretical Implications that Require Additional Attention ............... 347 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...................................................... 3 5 1 APPENDIX A: UCRIHS APPLICATION AND APPROVAL LETTER ........... 361 APPENDIX B: LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT OF ACSI AND LETTER OF REDCOMMENDATON FROM THE PRESIDENT OF ACSI ................... 369 APPENDIX C: REQUEST LETTER TO SCHOOL ADMIN ISTRATORS, TELEPHONE PROTOCOLS, CONSENT TO USE SCHOOL, VOLUNTARY CONSENT OF HEAD CURRICULUM SPECIALIST, VOLUNTARY CONSENT OF CURRICULUM SPECIALIST, AND HANDOUT OF INTERVIEW SCHEDULES . 373 APPENDIX D: MATRIX OF PROTOCOLS ................................ 384 APPENDIX E: UCRIHS RENEWAL APPLICATION AND UCRIHS APPROVAL LETTER ............................................................. 386 APPENDIX F: LETTER ASKING FOR CASE REVIEW AND RESPONSE TO CASE FORM ............................................................... 392 APPENDIX G: OVERFIELD CHRISTIAN SCHOOL, SIXTH GRADE SCIENCE, OUTCOMES AND PEFRMANCE OBJECTIVES ............................ 395 APPENDIX H: EAGLE LAKE CHRISTIAN SCHOOL, CALENDAR OF CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND CURRICULUM ADOPTION .......... 399 APPENDIX I: COLUMBIA CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS, INC., GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING TEXTBOOKS TEXTBOOK EVALUTAION FORMS ........... 401 xiii LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Christian Education .......................................... 26 Table 2.2 Evangelism ................................................ 27 Table 2.3 Religious Education ......................................... 29 Table 2.4 Theology and Its Influence on Educational Practice ........... 36 and 37 Table 2.5 Comparison of Curriculum Theorists ............................ 64 xiv LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 A Tentative Conceptual Framework of Curriculum Tensions ......... 12 Figure 2.1 The Purpose of Education and The Forces That Influence Them ...... 59 Figure 2.2 The General Flow of Curriculum-development Activity .............. 60 Figure 2.3 A Framework for Curriculum Planning .......................... 63 Figure 2.4 Comparison of Curriculum Theorists ............................ 64 Figure 4.1 Three Cases of Evangelical Christian Schools .................... 100 Figure 4.2 The Purpose of Education and The Forces That Influence Them ..... 103 Figure 4.3 The General Flow of Curriculum-development Activity ............ 104 Figure 4.4 A Framework for Curriculum Planning ......................... 106 Figure 4.5 A Tentative Conceptual Framework of Curriculum Tension ......... 107 Figure 4.6 OCS’ Organizational Structure— 1999-2000 ..................... 132 Figure 4.7 A Truth Centered Curriculum ................................. 135 Figure 4.8 The Purpose of Education and The Forces that Influence Them at OCS155 Figure 4.9 The General Flow of Curriculum-development Activity at OCS ...... 163 Figure 4.10 A Framework for Curriculum Planning at OCS ................... 178 Figure 4.11 A Conceptual Framework of Curriculum Tension at OCS .......... 185 Figure 4.12 ELCS Organizational Chart .................................. 202 Figure 4.13 ELCS Curriculum-decisions at The High School Level ............. 204 Figure 4.14 ELCS Curriculum-decisions at The Middle School Level ........... 205 Figure 4.15 ELCS Curriculum-decisions at The Elementary Level ............. 206 XV A Figure 4.16 The Purpose of Education and The Forces that Influence Them at ELCS ......................................................... 229 Figure 4.17 The General Flow of Curriculum-development Activity at ELCS ..... 238 Figure 4.18 A Framework for Curriculum Planning at ELCS .................. 251 Figure 4.19 A Conceptual Framework of Curriculum Tension at ELCS .......... 254 Figure 4.20 The Organizational Chart of CCS .............................. 264 Figure 4.21 CCS Curriculum Development Model .......................... 267 Figure 4.22 CCS Curriculum Guide (Course of Study) ....................... 269 Figure 4.23 The Purpose of Education and The Forces That Influence Them at CCS294 Figure 4.24 The General Flow of Curriculum-development Activity at CCS ...... 305 Figure 4.25 CCS Curriculum Development Model .......................... 319 Figure 4.26 A Tentative Conceptual Framework of Curriculum Tensions at CCS ......................................................... 324 Figure 5.1 Matrix of Safeguarding Policies and Procedures .................. 331 Figure 5.2 The Purpose of Education and The Forces That Influence Them at Evangelical Schools .................................................... 336 Figure 5.2 Matrix of Influences ........................................ 340 xvi KEY TO SYMBOLS OR ABBREVIATIONS ACSI Association of Christian Schools International Advanced Placement ASCD Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development ATLA American Theological Library Association CCS Columbia Christian Schools, Inc. CEE Citizens for Excellence in Education CSI Christian Schools International ELCHS Eagle Lake Christian High School ELCS Eagle Lake Christian School EMR Educable Mentally Retarded ERIC Educational Research Information collection ERL Electronic Reference Library EST Educational Service Team K-12 Kindergarten through the Twelfth Grades MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area NCA North Central Accreditation NCOCC North Central Ohio Computer Cooperative National Council of Teachers of Mathematics National Education Association Overfield Christian Schdol Old Testament xvii PPO Pupil Performance Objectives REA Religious Education Association xviii CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION Hass and Parkay (1993) define curriculum as “all of the experiences that individual learners have in a program of education whose purpose is too achieve broad goals and related specific objectives, which is planned in terms of a framework of theory and research or past and present professional practice” (p. 3). As such, the curriculum is critical to education. Yet, when an educator refers to “the curriculum” the meaning of this term is dependent upon the level of the educational system to which they are referring. What each individual refers to could possibly mean any number of things: (1) ideas put forward by educators, (2) policies, procedures, or adopted textbooks, (3) content taught, and/or (4) what is actually learned by the student (Labaree, 1999). Consequently, the term curriculum is ofien used very broadly and is even disputed by individuals involved in curriculum planning. However, despite the disagreements, the need to create a framework for the purpose of making curricular decisions seems to be a generally accepted practice among educators (Beyer and Apple, 1988; Posner and Rudnitsky, 1994). The framework for decision-making is influenced by the institution’s operating principles. The operating principles are the organizational structure and theological beliefs that guide a particular school curriculum framework. Operating principles are influenced by: internal and external forces. The external force is identified as community influence or an indirect influence, as it pertains to external participants involved in curriculum theory, procedures, and policy deliberations (Marshell, Mitchell, and Wirt, 1989). Curriculum specialists operate within a social and cultural environment that imposes certain constraints. The constraints are of two types: direct influences and indirect influences. Direct influences are those that have the backing of constituted authority. They direct curriculum specialists to do certain things and to refrain from doing other things. Second are the indirect influences that are no less important, but their constraints are not the result of legal authority. Indirect influences are certain realities of the social and cultural environment that push curriculum specialists to embrace some decisions and to disavow others (Armstrong, 1989). Therefore decisions about the curriculum can be made at any level within the institution. Curriculum policy [decision-making] is seldom rational or based on research. Decisions are not ofien based on careful analysis of content in the disciplines and on societal needs, or on studies of the learning process and concerns of learners. The official curriculum- the content found in standards, fiameworks, curriculum guides, tests, texts, and the life- is not neutral knowledge. It is knowledge that has been selected by some individual or group and implies a particular vision of what society should be like (McNeil, 1996, p. 290). This is true of every type of educational institution and K—12 schools of a religious orientation are no exceptions to this rule. Therefore, for organizational purposes there is a great need for all educational institutions to address the questions about practice and the forces that affect the curriculum primarily through the curriculum specialists. The curriculum in turn greatly influences the content taught and learned, the procedures used in teaching, the activities incorporated, and how learning is organized and evaluated (Tanner and Tanner, 1990). As with all practice, the operating principles create tensions that educators must recognize and deal with to maintain the directives of institutional missions and goals. Etzioni (in Majchrzak, 1984) maintains that all such forces represent separate social positions and they Compliment each other when dealt with and faced by educators. For the evangelical educator, there are two such forces that influence the evangelical school; they are the internal forces produced by an evangelical heritage (theology) and the external forces provided by the extended community. Evangelical theology is a human construct, that must be preserved within the school’s organizational structure yet remain an internal force. Therefore, the school’s organizational structure maintains the philosophy or theological perspective. The organizational structure promotes the greater (internal) of the two forces. School governance and leadership dictate the influences that affect curriculum decisions by deciding whether a force is external or internal. For this reason educators require an understanding of the operating principles that guide their curriculum framework. This information is vital to understanding the forces educators are influenced by, particularly those within religious K-12 schools of an evangelical (conservative) Christian orientation. The formation of a curriculum fiamework is a necessary tool for all educational institutions because, the curriculum that is at the heart of the school program and ultimately affects what and how knowledge is taught and learned. Educators must deal with the forces that affect the operating principles that pertain to curricular decisions. From the secular setting there are numerous resources covering issues related to curriculum decision making. For example, Lutz and Merz (1992) have used the Dissatisfaction Theory of Democracy to describe the effects that various forces have on school and community relations in policy-making. Likewise, Marsh, Day, Hannay, and McCutcheon (1990) have identified influential forces that create tensions for policy makers. Sergiovanni (1996) talks about the will of the community to learn to work together and in this way create a new type of leadership that builds commrmity. Each of these individuals describe factors that influence decision-making: motivation of stake holders, awareness of innovative approaches, ownership, and several interrelated factors that play an important roll in affecting curriculum development. In most instances these scholars have addressed what is usually the forces for most schools. However, the Christian school is unique as theology is the internal force. It is important to look at the internal force for Christian schools because of this uniqueness. Moore (1993) maintains that the influence theology has on educational practice is an internal force. Christians need to understand the operating principles that guide how theology as a force is managed. Statement of the Problem Despite numerous public school studies on the influences that affect curriculum development, very little information can be formd for the private evangelical K-12 Christian schools. There are private schools that have been in existence throughout the history of Christian education, starting with the parish schools of the Roman Catholic Church and seeing a significant growth since the 1950's (Reed and Prevost, 1993). The information on the forces that drive curriculum decision-making needed to frame and guide effective curriculum decision-making and understanding for Christian educators is ambiguous. Likewise, the lack of resources for Christian educators leads to ineffective operating principles to guide curriculum development. It is apparent from a thorough search of the precedent literature that evangelical K-12 Christian schools lack sufficient resources for educators to understand the uniqueness of their own internal and external forces. Therefore, even though many evangelical educators have an adequate theological preparation or training in leadership they still lack sufficient exposure in one or the other. This handicap is more significant because of the lack of sufficient resources needed to address the internal influence (theology) and external influence (community) by Christian educators (see Vryhor, Brouwer, Ulstein, and VanderArk, 1989). Having said this it should be noted that one association that has attempted to support K-12 schools in this endeavor is the Association of Christian Schools International (here after designated ACSI). ACSI is an evangelical organization whose mission is “to enable Christian educators and schools worldwide effectively to prepare students for life (Association of Christian Schools International, 1999a).” ACSI is a service organization that works with Christian schools in a variety of ways: accreditation, administrator conferences, athletic clinics/tournaments, board member workshops, certification of staff, conventions, consultation/advise, curriculum, curriculum coaching clinics, district meetings, legal/legislative information, new school assistance, preschool training, professional resornces/materials, student activities, and technology summits. However, ACSI is only able to provide a few resources when evangelical educators ask for information and consultation concerning curriculum development. ACSI addresses the curriculum in four ways: (1) by publishing their own set of textbooks with curriculum guides for classroom use, (2) by providing several one-day enabler workshops opportunities offered regionally ’ once a year, (3) by providing consultation with practitioners in the field, and (4) by occasionally publishing a book on the topic. Even with all of this, only one publication, Curriculum Development For Christian Schools: Understanding and Implementing Effective Cgrjculum Decisions (Keenan, 1998), has been written concerning the development of curriculum. Since the issue of curriculum practice is vital to effective preparation of students, the question concerning the affect of both internal and external forces on the curriculum decision-making would likely be important to ACSI. Yet this guide stands alone in addressing the issues of curriculum decision-making. ACSI currently lacks information for educators on the topic of curriculum frameworks; though it appearsmany of its accredited as well as member schools are attempting to deal with the issue: Unfortunately, others may be lost in the struggle of understanding internal and external forces. In order for ACSI to fulfill its mission and address this concern among its constituents, ACSI needs to provide the necessary information concerning these tensions influencing curriculum development by providing a framework for educators to use. Therefore, the design of this study is to look at ACSI schools and provide useful information on how the tensions caused by these two forces affect the curriculurn'decisions. Given this problem the purpose of this study is to generate frameworks that are present in ACSI schools on how Christian schools develop their curriculum. The rhetoric suggests a theological center in the curriculum development process of Christian schools; however, actual practice appears to be uneven. Despite variations between Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI) schools, it is the internal forces that affect curriculum decisions the most (Keenen, 1998). In light of this, guidance for curriculum development in Christian schools is murky, ambiguous and characterized by a lack of resources. Significance of the Research In the field of curriculum planning there have been significant contributions made by secular theorists (e.g. Omstin and Levine (1993), Armstrong (1989), Beane, Toepfer, and Alessi (1986), Posner and Rudnitsky (1994), Kimball (1975), Byme (1977), Kirst and Walker (1972), Marshell, Mitchell, and Win (1989), and Marsh, Day, Hannay, and McCutcheon (1990). Current resources that embrace theological tenants include: the current ACSI resource catalog (December, 1999) which provides one source for educators on curriculum development and ACSI ‘s one-day enabler seminars on curriculum development which are scheduled only once a year for any one region (ACSI, 1999a). The lack of current _sgc_re_d literature resources concerning the development of curriculum for ACSI schools is a serious one. Just as secular settings have constructs that guide curriculum development evangelical educators also need a model for developing curriculum that is aligned with sacred values. In response to this serious gap this study will first survey and compare precedent literature concerning the operating principles of ACSI schools (Chapter Two). Second, this study will propose a set of curriculum guidelines for ACSI educators. Specifically, the fiamework seeks to create a deeper understanding of the operating principles that affect curriculum decisions in three ACSI self-perpetuating board-run schools.1 In addition, this research will help further an understanding of the internal and external forces that drive the curriculum decision-making within three ACSI schools. This is ' Self-perpetuating board-run school: This phrase describes one type of an organizational structure of an ACSI school. This structure is characterized by the self-appointing of board members by the board itself to board positions rather than by the constituents of the school community. important as ACSI schools are intent on preserving the evangelical heritage, but are nonetheless often impacted by the operating principles or voices of both internal and external forces that do not espouse the same motives. Therefore, ACSI schools must deal with the organizational structure that maintains both forces. Evangelical educators and curriculum specialists often lack a formal understanding; of the tensions that influence curriculum decision making and understanding, that this research hopes to provide in the end. A comparative analysis of the three sites will forward a framework for educators. Therefore this research will employ case study and comparative case study methods to examine three ACSI K-12 schools to understand how the operating principles or internal forces that govern the theology and the external forces of the community influence. Without the resource that this study will provide, ACSI constituents will likely maintain a lack of consistency on curriculum decision-making and understanding, as well as remain isolated and uninformed about the forces shaping their curriculum. On the other hand, the benefit of this research is the creation of frameworks for ACSI to inform administrators in their practice about the operating principles that drive curriculum development because of their own unique internal and external forces. This data can be used at an ACSI convention, workshop, or as a journal article for the benefit of evangelical educators. Evangelical educators are in need of a model for developing curriculum practice that is in line with their school’s organizational structure as well as community standards. This research study seeks to forward an operating framework, as represented in three cases, for the self-perpetuating board-run school that is one of three distinct types of ACSI schools. As a result, a clearer understanding of the internal and external forces that drive curriculum practice for the three different organizational structures, what emerges might provide guiding principles for ACSI administrators, school leaders, and educators thereby providing a possible framework. In summary, this research has developed a framework for how curriculum decisions are made in relation to tensions unique to ACSI institutions. The research will benefit Christian school leaders by providing an increase awareness of the issues among ACSI educators. It will provide new information and a deeper understanding of the influences that drive curriculum development. Finally, the research will be useful in creating a curriculum development framework unique to ACSI institutions and their driving tensions. This research will help in further facilitation of the mission of AC8] to evangelical schools worldwide. The project will look at K-12 Christian schools that are current members of ACSI. Delirnitations First, ACSI schools will be the center of focus because they have a set of criteria that uniquely identify them as theologically evangelical. Second, the focus will be only on the conservative evangelical schools from within the ACSI organization as this is where my interest lies with Christian education and not on moderate and liberal theologies. Third, this study only looked at K-12 institutions because of my particular interest in the field of education. Fourth, this study will look at Christian education and not on other types of faith education (e.g., Jewish and Catholic schools). By limiting the project in this way the research is manageable to carry out and will provide useful data for my current position as an administrator with an interest in K-12 Christian schools from the evangelical perspective. This study will not be asking questions that identify specific values such as: What should be taught, why we should teach it, and how should our teaching be organized (Beyer and Apple, 1988)? Though these questions examine how internal and external forces influence curriculum decisions, the study will include how they are determined to be internal or external through the various organizational structures of each school. This study will focus on who or what decides how to answer these questions that identify specific values. Assumptions Going into this study, there are several assumptions about the research topic that might ultimately affect the research design. 1. Internal and External Assumptions: both internal and external forces influence Curriculum practice. 2. Curriculum Development Assumptions: Curriculum practice is value based (Kirst and Walker, 1971; Nias, Southworth, and Campbell, 1992; Win and Kirst, 1972; and Hass and Parkay, 1993). 3. School Organizational Structure Assumptions: When educators better understand both the internal and external influences on their school they are better able to manage both internal and external forces that guide and plan curriculum (Beyer and Apple, 1988). Frameworks for Theologically Driven Curriculum Practice in Evangelical Christian Schools There are three analytical lenses that have been used to help better understand frameworks for theologically driven curriculum practice in evangelical Christian schools. These frameworks deal with the purpose of education and the forces that influence them, the flow of curriculum-development activity, and the decision screens used in the framework used for curriculum planning. These analytical lenses help to look at this research holistically and as a result develop a thorough understanding of the operating principles of curriculum development. These lenses will be beneficial in developing an informed conceptual lens and a set of curriculum guidelines for evangelical Christian schools. 10 Figure 1.1, A Tentative Conceptual Framework of Curriculum Tension, illustrates how the organizational structure creates a barrier between external and internal forces. This structure is significant in understanding how a school’s operating principles are able to maintain the mission and purpose despite influences. The review of precedent literature reveals several forces that appear to be similar to the evangelical school. Therefore, Figure 1.1 is a tentative model based on secular theorist. The clarity of the fi'arnework emerges as data is analyzed for each case study. Hence, the study is inductive and has generated new knowledge about evangelical Christian schools. In this model the internal force is stronger, a concept that is described by Etzioni. Etzioni’s (in Majchrzak, 1984) model bears similarities to a balloon. Etzioni theorizes all forces [influences] represent separate social positions and they actually compliment each other when educators are faced with them and ultimately deal with them. Based on the idea of a balloon, the internal influence represents the school’s theological and philosophical values. The balloon is representative of the organizational structure that includes the leadership of the organization. Figure 1.1 A Tentative Conceptual Framework of Curriculum Tension External Forces are Social forces Internal Axiology Social Action 8 Forces Parental 1nfluence=b <== Personal Evangelism Theological .n Mb” => C: rs ers Publ' h Values Faith-learning Epistemology National / C urriculurn Reforms Integration 11 fl \ National Testing Agencies / Private Organization Foundations The external community’s influence is everything outside the balloon and is defined by position as it relates to the organizational structure. External forces are those influences that are not internal. It is the internal forces that exert the most influence in curriculum decisions and is determined by the balloon itself as the school’s organizational structure determines whether values are on the inside or outside. Curriculum decisions are made as a result of both forces actually working to support the balloon by countering or working against each other. The external force is the community’s influence. 12 Curriculum planning is governed by the operational principles. Who decides what to teach and for what purpose occurs at difl’erent levels within the organization. These levels are societal, institutional, instructional, and personal. The societal level includes boards of education (national, local, or state), federal agencies, publishers, and national curriculum reform committees. At the institutional level, administrators, and faculty groups are the prominent actors. Parents and students also play a role in institutional decision-making (McNeil, 1985, Ornstein and Levine, 1993). If either force is not maintained by the educational leadership curriculum decisions may become ambiguous and ultimately not reflect the operating principles of the institution. Each school has a distinctive governance identity that is unique within ACSI. ACSI schools vary from the church-run school and the self-perpetuating board-run school to the parent- society-run school. Despite the differences, each institution maintains an internal force that is theologically evangelical and supported by the organizational structure. As the school structure differs, so does the strength of forces as they shift from being either a dominant internal or a less powerful external force. For this reason the process of curriculum development changes with the organizational structure of each institution. What is an internal or external force for one school may be the opposite for another. This is clearly seen with the church-run school and the parent-society-run- school. In the former, parents have little say as they do not govern and are a weaker influence, being an external force. Yet in the later, parent-society-run school, parents are the stronger influence in the decision making process. Howard Becker (1932) translated and transmuted the German continuum of Gemeinschaft-Gesellschaft as the sacred-secular continuum (Iannaccone, 1967). He 13 places four types of schools on this continuum using the well know example of Gemeinschaft-Gesellschaft to explain how Christian schools are affected by internal and external forces alike. The forces that are allowed to affect Christian schools influence where these schools are on the continuum. The philosophical foundations of Christian education are rooted in theology that is a body of religious beliefs about God and God’s relationship to the world. Theology is distinctively characterized between Catholic, Protestant, or other mainline denominations. Theological beliefs vary from a body of content knowledge to a theory of a process of understanding. Curricular manifestations are the result of theory that is put into practice. Such theories as those of Burgess (1975, 1996) and Lee (1973) often rely on social sciences. However this is not to exclude the theory of LeBar (1995) that is based on revelation and an understanding of God’s act in education. Directive policy is seen in this literature with Bower (1964), Ford (1991), Gibbs (1992), Harris (1989), Vryhor, Brouwer, Ulstein, and VanderArk (1989), Weeks (1988), and Wyckoff (1955, 1961) all of which write procedures, theories, or manuals for practice. These distinctions can be and often are common in the schools where fundamentalist and evangelicals mix within one institution. It is at these times that the internal and eXtemal forces at play may cause undo tensions for the educational process. There are problems with evangelical teachers who lack both an understanding of teaching practices and of theological beliefs (Burgess, 1975, 1996; Fowler et al., 1990; Gibbs, 1992). It is important to understand the influence individuals have on the curriculum development process. As shown in this figure the process allows for a reaction to 14 Leverage points would include levels of government: private organization foundations, accrediting associations, national testing agencies, textbook-software companies, and interest groups. Besides this there are other leverage points within the school such as teachers, department heads, assistant superintendents for instruction, superintendents, and schoolboards. Schools are influenced by: celebrities, commentators, interest groups, and journalists. The concept of mapping will be useful in identifying the forces within ACSI schools that influence them. Research Question This study proposes to ask, to what extent does evangelical theology guide or impact curriculum development in an evangelical school setting? Research Sub—questions 1. Organizational questions of politics and structure: a. What is it that guides curriculum practice, the dynamics of school structure, and decision-making? b. How do curriculum specialistsi(leaders involved in practice) use or not use operating principles? What values govern their practice? c. What and how do features/dynamics of a particular school government (practice) guide curriculum-development? 2. Curriculum Specialist: a. What role do curriculum developers play? What values (secular or sacred) govern their practice and curriculum-development process? 15 3. Symbol: a. How is theology positioned within this curriculum-development process? b. What tensions have enhanced and/or inhibited this position? 4. Implications: a. How are internal and external forces translated into school related activities? b. What are the implications for understanding how theology is or is not translated into curriculum practice and school related activities? 16 CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF PRECEDENT LITERATURE Overview Four bodies of academic literature have been consulted in this review of precedent literature. This chapter: (1) surveys previous research done in related areas of study, (2) looks at how the evangelical heritage affects curriculum practice, (3) looks at how secular curriculum theory and the larger community affect curriculum practice, and (4) looks at how the structure or governance of schools can affect the curriculum. The review of these four content areas provides background information concerning curriculum development necessary to probe and interpret the data collected from each body of literature as implications emerge for Christian education. Through the process of identifying existing frameworks this review has helped identify what the internal and external forces are in general that affect curriculum decisions. These bodies of literature have helped build a better understanding of evangelical Christian schools and the operating principles that likely guide their unique curriculum frameworks. Method of Precedent Literature Review The search for resources has led to colleagues, professors, university and seminary libraries, and the Internet for understanding the scope of the subject, as well as the major contributors to the field. The initial search included a review of personal library resources and recommended reading lists from related departments at Michigan State University, including lists from both the Department of Educational Administration and the Department of Teacher Education. The current vice president of Academic Affairs and the education professor of Great Lakes Christian College (Lansing, Michigan) were both approached for a recommended reading list in Christian education. Specific needs and interests about my studies have narrowed these broad lists down to what is considered in this literature review. l7 The next step in preparing this review of literature was to pinpoint the leading voices, theories, practices, and research findings in the areas of curriculum theory, Christian education, and K-12 schools. Several libraries have been especially valuable in identifying and acquiring these resources. Institutional libraries that have aided in the search for distinguished leaders in the evangelical heritage and in education are: Calvin College and Seminary (Grand Rapids, Michigan), Great Lakes Christian College (Lansing, Michigan), Michigan State University (East Lansing, Michigan), Trinity International University/Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (Deerfield, Illinois), University of Kentucky (Lexington, Kentucky), Lexington Theological Seminary (Lexington, Kentucky), and Asbury Theological Seminary (Wilmore, Kentucky). These college, seminary, and university libraries have been invaluable in seeking the unique mix of literature sources. The search for information has also lead to the use of the Dissertation Abstracts, the American Theological Library Association (ATLA), Magic 2, First Search, Religious Abstracts, the Electronic Reference Library (ERL), and the Educational Research Information Collection (ERIC) data bases. To generate sources, the following key words and phrases were used in a variety of combinations: education, policy, Christian, private, evangelical, curriculum, research, case studies, theory, grounded theory, tensions, qualitative, research, and K-12. In addition to these searches, this search focused on collective works of individual leaders in these areas. A mixed variety of sources represent articles, essays, books, and abstracts of related research. These sources have aided in effectively grasping the views of leading voices in Christian education, evangelicalism, and curriculum development. 18 . Previous Studies in Related Areas Numerous studies in areas related to this research have been conducted. However, none of them look solely at the evangelical Christian school. These studies do provide direction for framing questions about the internal and external forces affecting curriculum development through school structure and leadership. For this reason additional research is needed to look at how the evangelical school maintains a theological distinctive, despite the various organizational structures they have. Zuck (1963) conducted the most significant study concerning Christian schools. This study looked at both internal and external forces that influence curriculum comparing the evangelical perspective with progressive education, classical-liberalism and neo-orthodoxy. Zuck’s study concluded that the school’s organizational structure as well as internal and external forces drives the curriculum. Hence the various structures of ACSI schools must be considered in designing a research plan that looks at the forces that influence curriculum decisions. However, unlike Zuck’s study, the schools in this proposal will all be evangelical. This study will look with interest at the various political structures that represent different forms of governing and at leadership, hoping to better define how the three distinctive governmental ACSI school structures are influenced either internally or externally in their curriculum decisions. The second related study was done in Nova Scotia during the time between mid to late 1990's (Goddard, 1997) and it serves as another example of research done on the relationship between the internal and external factors and the school organization. This study used the framed theory (Bolman and Deal, 1991) with an adapted systems model (Lunenburg and Ornstein, 1996) to explore the relationship between the internal and external forces as they were influencedby characteristics of change and a notion of interactive-factors (Fullan and Stiegelbauer, 1991) affecting them. It is valuable in that it 19 provides a conceptual framework of the forces, a framework that will be adapted to my own research project. Other relevant studies have identified the importance of preparation on the part of educators (teachers, administrators, and board members) as a force that afi‘ects the curriculum. It was found that the interaction of curriculum with personnel issues such as philosophical conflict among teachers, possible conflict of interest for school employees, and teacher ethics all influence the curriculum (Martin, Glatthorn, Winters, and Saif, 1989). This directly affects the leadership that guides curriculum processes and understandings, which brings to question the importance of preparation and/or resources for teachers and for leadership in understanding the operating principles that guide curriculum fiameworks in the institutions. Case studies by Rosenthal and Fuhrrnan (1981) have provided rich descriptions of the interplay among curriculum specialists. These studies identify external tensions that influence curricultun decisions that may have the same affect as many or all of the tensions in the decision-making process for ACSI schools. They have identified possible forces based on a study of public schools in six different states. Though this study is beneficial, it is yet to be realized how similar these forces will be to those found in evangelical Christian schools. A study of sixty-five new private Christian schools in Great Britain produced a Findings Remrt by way of an interview and mail questionnaire (Poyntz and Walford, 1994). The study concludes that there is wide diversity among the schools as to why they were established. The reports describe ways that a biblically based curriculum is developed and implemented in these schools. The study is relevant, as it will help in writing questions for my research. Its findings aid in understanding, how external and internal factors drive curriculum policy. What the Findings Remrt does not do is deal with only the evangelical schools. Likewise, it deals only with schools in Great Britain and nothing in the United States of America. This report deals in particular with newly 20 established schools while the proposed study deals with preexisting ones. This proposed study will add to what has been accomplished in this previous study by addressing the issues of influential forces that drive the policy in preexisting evangelical schools in the Midwest and Ohio River Valley Regions of the United States of America. Finally, Van Brummelen (1988) analyzed the role of curriculum change agents in a study of Christian schools that are locally autonomous and have little or no external support system. The study looks at three neighboring British Columbia Christian schools using two protocols. The second set of protocols is relevant to this study as it focuses on the significant factors and change agents influencing curriculum implementation in Christian school settings. The relationship to this parallels the proposed study as it points out that individuals also influence curriculum decisions. There are two major factors affecting implementation of change of which the first is significant for the proposed study: (1) how each school’s environment influences its curriculum and (2) the characteristics and behavior of change facilitators or leaders. Other studies will be identified in the following review; studies that are significant lay the foundation for my own inquiry. These studies accentuate the need to research the external and internal forces that affect curriculum decisions and in particular within the evangelical Christian school where very little work has been done. They provide a fiamework for forming questions concerning an understanding for AC SI schools in particular about school structure, internal and external forces, teacher preparation, and leadership as they each influence curriculrun decisions. 21 Setting the Context for the Study: The Internal Foundation for Decision-making This portion of the review will look at ACSI school’s evangelical heritage so as to understand the evangelical philosophy of education and in so doing identify the educational distinctive of evangelical-schools in the field of education. ACSI schools have been chosen for this study, as they are by their own definition evangelical. By focusing on the evangelical heritage and the structure of governance of ACSI schools seeking to preserve that heritage, this research seeks to understand the internal forces of the evangelical philosophy of education which influences curriculum development. The choice to look to the heritage of evangelicalism to define evangelicalism is not a unique idea (Boys, 1989; Gangel and Benson, 1983; Getz, 1974; Little, 1961; Locherbie, 1994; Marsden, 1991; Pazmifio, 1988; Sanner and Harper, 1978). The value in this avenue of inquiry proves beneficial, as the topic of philosophy is quite broad even within the distinctiveness of evangelicalism. Likewise, the decision to pick ACSI schools for this research was made because the association represents a wide scope of evangelical schools nationwide, as well as internationally. Despite the inability to clearly define evangelicalism a sample can be attained, by looking at both the heritage and various ACSI schools. How the Evangelical Heritage Influences Curriculum Development The definition of evangelicalism varies even among evangelicals. However, despite the variations, certain characteristics are true of all evangelicals. Evangelicalism is a conservative inter-denominational movement that has been present in the church for at least the last five centuries, since the time of Martin Luther and John Calvin’s reformations. Antecedents to evangelical thought have been traced through St. Augustine 22 of the fifth century AD. (G. a Knight, 1982; Pazmiflo, 1988) and ultimately the apostle Paul from the first century AD. The movement has had a variety of influences, and thus accounts for its theological diversity and broad definition. Despite the variety of definitions, there are four common points to all evangelicals that may prove more helpful, namely, (1) social action, (2) personal evangelism, (3) conservative, biblical theology, and (4) faith-learning integration. These four historical qualifiers remain constant for all evangelicals. First, social action that is intent on transforming the culture, second, the personal conversion or evangelism of individuals is a factor that identifies the evangelical, and third, is the belief that conservative biblical principles or theology must be maintained by the movement. This is an intentional reaction to liberalism and the modern culture of the nineteenth century (Ellingsen, 1988). Finally, fourth, faith-learning integration stands out as a relatively new term for a long standing belief that Christianity is passed on best by integrating it into every day life (Lockerbie, 1994). Evangelicals have advocated that Christians integrate knowledge with spirituality believing the two cannot and should not be separated (i.e., reason and faith are not mutually exclusive.) To understand better what evangelicalism is, it is important to understand what it is not; namely, frmdamentalism that (Boys, 1989) has also been called evangelism or revivalism. Evangelicalism, like fundamentalism, is a conservative Christian movement devoted to defending the Gospel, however, unlike the fundamentalist, evangelicals would not do this over and against the culture. The evangelical would maintain the fundamental Gospel principles and engage the society to influence it and even transform it (Ellingsen, 1988), a form of social action. Harold Ockenga (1905-1985) believed that the task of the evangelical was to infiltrate their churches rather than separate themselves. Fundamentalism, on the other hand, is historically a particular type of Protestant militant movement that found its beginnings in the evangelical movement. This movement believed it essential to be separatists. Fundamentalism is a contemporary 23 movement beginning in the United States during the middle of the nineteenth century as an offshoot of Protestant evangelicalism. Fundamentalism drew its name from the book. Th; FMentals, published in 1910. Fundamentalism was a stance against modernity or the rapid industrialization and urbanization, new religious theories, and widespread acceptance of Darwin’s theory of evolution and other changes that affected traditional values and institutions early in the twentieth century (Provenzo, 1990). Fundamentalism is the conservative SEW—1.16 of the evangelical tradition. Historically speaking, all fundamentalists are evangelicals but not all evangelicals are fundamentalist. Fundamentalists view education with suspicion, whereas evangelicals do not (though Ellingsen (1988) incorrectly maintains that evangelicalism is a movement formed out of the movement of fundamentalism). Ellingsen’s information is mostly accurate despite the fact this one point has been refuted by others. An example of this is the use of the term evangelicalism by both Calvin and Luther, theologians who predate the Fundamentalist Movement. Evangelicals are not separatists as are their conservative siblings the fundamentalists. Fear of the perceived threat that academic disciplines would dominate the concerns of faith and result in a liberal movement away from biblical truth and conservative theology (Ellingsen, 1988; Estep, 1998) is the context in which both movements grew. However, the movements differ in their approach to the culture in presenting the Gospel (see Table 2.1 and 2.2). The popular view standardized by the media is that fundamentalists and evangelicals are closed-minded, rightwing, and dogmatic. These descriptions often apply to fundamentalism but they are not descriptive of evangelicals. Out of the evangelical movement, fundamentalism has grown as a separate entity with a separatist attitude, an attitude toward the academic community, government, and urbanization. Evangelicals, however, are like the fundamentalist in that theology is emphasized above all else. Yet the evangelical will adhere to the understandings of the social sciences while the fundamentalist would not. Still the 24 evangelicals would not place the social sciences first in education as religious educators would (e.g. James Michael Lee, 1985). Evangelicals would, however, not ignore their value and understand their purpose. 25 Table 2.1 Christian Education (Boys, 1989, pp. 103, 104) FOUNDATIONAL THE CLASSIC EXPRESSION QUESTIONS CHRISTIAN EDUCATION REVELATION o 0 0 0 God’s transcendence emphasized. God revealed progressively in history, as anticipated in the OT and fulfilled in Jesus Christ. Scripture and the preached word dominant. One’s personal relationship with God emphasized. CONVERSION 0 0 Conversion inspired by God’s graciousness. Little interest in its psychological dynamics. FAITH & BELIEF 0 Creedal formulas and Christian doctrine assumed new importance. 0 Reformation themes reclaimed. THEOLOGY o 0 0 0 “Theology in the background; faith and grace in the foreground.” Theology seen as the key constituent of the educational process of the church, the “clue” to education. Theology subsumed education. Emphases of the Biblical Theology Movement shaped curricula. FAITH & Awareness of finitude and sinfulness, of the culture as radically CULTURE askew. 0 Dualistic: persons were caught in a broken world yet lived a graced existence. Less stress on social reform and on the church’s role in society. Pessirnism about human condition-liberals excoriated for naiveté about progress. GOAL OF EDUCATION 0 0 0 Formation of faithful followers of Christ. Development of an ecclesial commitment. “Someone has to make a Christian out of John Dewey.” KNOWLEDGE SOCIAL SCIENCES Truth found in God’s revealed word. Importance placed on understandipg Christian doCtrine. Dominance of theology relativized use of social sciences. Some use of social and developmental psychology. Teaching essentially proclamatory and transmissive. Scripture and doctrine dominated curriculum. Stress given to the theological preparation of teachers. Education for the sake of achieving salvation. CURRICULUM & ' 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 TEACHING EDUCATION AS POLITICAL Note. Permission is granted for use of this material. Educating in Faith: Maps and Visions, M. C. Boys, (1989). HarperCollins Publishers. 26 Table 2.2 Evangelism (Boys, 1989, pp. 34, 35) FOUNDATIONAL THE CLASSIC EXPRESSION QUESTIONS E VANGELISM REVELATION o o Primacy of revelation accorded to Scripture. God’s word meant to “crush” and “crack” the stony heart through the preached word. Fundamentalism emphasized the inerrant character of the Scriptures. CONVERSION Conversion of the affections stressed: “A change of heart, not of opinion.” 0 Preaching engendered personal decisions to reform, to give oneself to Christ. 0 Catholic parish missions aimed at drawing people back to the sacraments. o Mission-leading others to Christ-seen as urgent. FAITH & BELIEF 0 0 0 “Experimental” religion dominated over creedal formulas. Faith developed from one’s experiential knowledge. Fundamentalists emphasized truth as propositional. THEOLOGY 0 Importance varied; more integral to Edwards and Finney than to Moody or Sunday. 0 0 Revivalists modified Calvinism with Armenian emphases. Debate over the “learned ministry” reflected tensions about significance of theolgy. FAITH & Distinction made between supernatural and natural. CULTURE Benevolent societies excoriated materialism and questioned direction of American life. 0 Ambivalence about social reform seen in nearly exclusive stress on the individual. 0 Benevolent societies offered women a public forum. GOAL OF EDUCATION 0 0 0 To deepen one’s personal conversion. Schools established to maintain and deepen conversion. Schools helped to humanize religious life. KNOWLEDGE 0 Knowledge linked to conversion. Fundamentalists stressed “Common Sense.” Spiritual knowledge unified thinking, feeling, and action. Edwards distinguished “notional” and “spiritual” knowledge. Though social sciences not yet “of age,” Finney systematized revivals, thereby anticipating later behavioral systems. Sunday schools helped to mepare for public school system. Curriculum largely oriented to biblical literacy. Provided an impetus for women’s suffrage. CURRICULUM & 0 Teaching essentially transmissive. EDUCATION AS Education vital for reform of society. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 POLITICAL SOCIAL SCIENCES TEACHING Note. Permission is granted for use of this material. Educating in Faith: Maps and Visions, M. C. Boys, (1989). HarperCollins Publishers. 27 In this way, evangelicalism is not classic Religious education (see Table 2.3). Just as evangelicals do not adhere to the militant tenets of fundamentalism, they do not adhere to the liberal criticism of scripture and modernization of theology, or the automatic acceptance of social-science theory. Their philosophy of education is a more holistic one as it does not take the extrerrrist view on any one philosophy but combines the beliefs of many of them. In this way using the commitment of idealism and realism philosophies to emphasize the importance of content in education, pragmatism and existentialism philosophies to consider the student’s learning process and perspective, and finally, Thomism philosophy as a framework for understanding revelation and faith (Daniel and Wade, 1999). 28 Table 2.3 Religious Education (Boys, 1989, pp. 60, 61) FOUNDATIONAL QUESTIONS THE CLASSIC EXPRESSION RELIGIOUS EDUCA TION REVELATION Scripture and traditional forms of worship did not play as central a role. Normative criteria for theology derived from dominant philosophical and scientific movements rather than from ancient texts. God’s immanence stressed. Revelation found in social interaction. CONVERSION Viewed primarily as growth. Became subject of empirical study. Family life and the educational process seen as making conversion unnecessary. FAITH & BELIEF Religious experience more important than dogma and creedal formulas. Danger of church fallinme “uneducational evangelism.” Dogma “unscientific” and linked to authoritarian systems. THEOLOGY Scientific models dominated theological ones. Theological language “translated” into educational terms (e.g., Jesus the “supreme educator”). Lack of interest in metaphysical questions. Modern biblical criticism used Religious pluralism extolled. Sin and guilt de-emphasized. FAITH & CULTURE The sacred and secular seen as essentially harmonious. Progress and democracy extolled. Religion tended to be relegated to periphery as the domain of women and clergy. ' Society seen as theprime educator. GOAL OF The reconstruction of society. EDUCATION Continuous growth. Formation of the whole child. KNOWLEDGE Attention to the link between theory and practice. Emphasis on “objective” knowledge as discovered through empirical methods. Respect for logic and cognition; distrust of emotionalism spawned by revivalism. SOCIAL Very important. SCIENCES Christianity. Precedence given to psychology. TEACHING Curriculum more inclusive and humanistic. CURRICULUM & Child-centered curriculum replaced creed-centered curriculum. ' Interest in social science outweighed interest in theology. Used exemplified reconciliation of scientific method with traditional EDUCATION AS Education seen as first and foremost among the ways of transforming society. Teacherfigarded as guides rather than as authorities. POLITICAL Social reform and educational form linked Curriculum less attentive to doctrine. Emphasis placed on the process of teaching. Uncritical regard for dem j. Note. Permission is granted for use of this material. Educating in Faith: Maps 2_ln_c_l Visipp_s_, M. C. Boys, (1989). HarperCollins Publishers. 29 The evangelical ideology is different from liberal theological tenets and yet similar to secular curriculum theory in that it is an advocate for using social sciences in the formation of curriculum theory when the theory does not refute the truth as revealed in the Bible. Evangelicalism is different from Religious education in three areas: (1) theology, (2) placement of the social sciences, and (3) use of philosophy more than of theology. There are some unique characteristics of organizations that claim to be evangelical (i.e. conservative evangelical churches are very hard to define because of their diversity); however, they are best defined by their theological boundaries. Evangelicals tend to be mixed in with fundamentalist movements because they are more accepting of the conservative dogma and in particular the infallibility of the Word of God, Scripture. Secondly, evangelicals are accepting of inter-denominationalism and often will fellowship with non-evangelicals that are conservative theologically. Typically, evangelicals are mixed with the fundamentalist movement congregations. Therefore, what typifies the evangelical is the centrality of God (Chadwick, 1983, Little, 1961, Gaebelein, 1968, Kienel, 1978, Sanner, 1978, and Butler, 1962). Other movements may place an emphasis on something else but the evangelical will focus on God. Worldwide there are few churches that claim to be evangelical, however, most of the ones that do are from the North American continent. Of these churches the following denominations are affiliated with the evangelical movement: Reformed Tradition, Mainline Pietist traditions, Holiness churches, Pentecostal churches, Restorationist churches, Dispensationalist churches, the heritage of the Radical Reformation, the Free Church tradition, and Lutherans. In addition to these larger denominational movements, most mainline churches (Southern Baptist Convention, Lutheran, Presbyterian Church U.S.A., United Methodist Church, Episcopalians United for Revelation, Renewal, Reformation among American Episcopalians, and Anglican Evangelicals) have within them groups that are evangelical. These mainline churches often have churches or 30 organizations within the larger church body that are distinctly evangelical in origin (Ellingsen, 1988). Evangelicalism is distinguished by conservative moments within any single denomination and is distinctly inter-denominational. The evangelical movement is held together not by the churches themselves but by the post-secondary educational institutions. In North America the most common of these institutions is a three-year Bible college with extensive studies in the Bible. The purpose of which is to train up ministers. The most prestigious of these schools are: (1) Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, IL; (2) Wheaton College, Wheaton, IL; (3) Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, South Hamilton, MS; (4) Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield, IL; (5) Dallas Theological Seminary, Dallas, TX; and (6) Fuller Theological Seminary, Pasadena, CA. Fuller Theological Seminary is the flagship of these schools. In 1983 its faculty and Board of Trustees, made a statement, Mission Bevond the Mission, which states, “The seminary does not assume that evangelical purity demands an isolation from other Christians who do not share our particular [conservative evangelical] heritage. (Ellingsen, 1988, p. 177).” This statement is the essence of what the movement is about, namely inter-denominationalism. These colleges and seminaries are attended by various denominations; however, it is their statements such as Fuller Theological Seminary’s that define the movement because the institutions are not defined by their affiliation but rather their ideal. The Role of Theology in K-12 Christian Education Another way to define evangelicalism is by its distinctive purpose for education apart fi'om other forms of religious education. Evangelicalism is distinguished from other Christian forms of religious education, namely: (1) Religious education; (2) evangelism which is education in the fundamentalist tradition; and (3) Romgn Catholic education (Boys, 1989; Gangel, 1981) in that it bears a unique purpose for education as well as the unique nameW. Differences between Christian education (see Table 31 2.1), “Evangelism” (see Table 2.2), and “Religious Education” (see Table 2.3) are clearly detailed in the following charts. First, religious education is not exclusively Christian as some might think. Because religion has been viewed as a common human phenomenon by many educators, Religious education is a term that applies to more than the Christian religions, for example, the Religious. Education Association (REA) is composed of representatives from Jewish, Buddhist, and Islamic faiths, etc. However, within Christianity itself the term Religious education encompasses Christian liberal theology and philosophies that place little or no emphasis on biblical teaching for the Christian. Religious education includes all non-Christian religious education; and for this reason, education among evangelicals is not usually called religious education. Second, evangelism refers to education whose sole intent is to evangelize. It is often synonymous with educational practices of fundamentalist movements. It is further distinguished as education for the Church and does not recognize the social sciences as does evangelicalism with the faith-learning integgtion concept, but is rrrilitantly practicing separatism. This form of education focuses solely on conversion. Finally, Christian education is not Roman Catholic education, which is a phrase used to describe education that promotes the catechisms of the Roman Catholic Church. Christian education bears the tenants of protestant Christianity in that it is concerned more about reformation than less with institutionalization. What Christian education is and is not, is however, still a reflection of theological values. Christian education is not: (I) a nickname for evangelism meaning that its primary business is not that of producing Christians, (2) a faculty or student body composed of Christians, though these are the prerequisites, (3) who sponsors the school because this can change over time, or (4) the inclusion or exclusion of any course from the school curriculum such as a Bible course. None of these things alone determines whether a school is Christian. A definition however would emphasize that: Christian education deals with the process of teaching and learning, conducted by a Christian 32 teacher from a Christian perspective. Since, both teacher and students are controlled by the Spirit of God, God brings all truth into a living relationship with the truth of the Word of God for integrating the whole of the students’ personality with the Word-centered Christian, theistic world-view, by that enabling him to better serve and glorify God (Chadwick, 1983). What will be important to this study is to understand Who decides these theological values and how they become influential to curriculum development. Christian education is uniquely concerned with faith-learning integration. For the evangelical, education of one’s faith is best achieved by integrating all knowledge and sources of knowledge within a theological framework (Lockerbie, 1994: Estep, 1998, 1999). For this reason, the acceptance of curriculum theory does not pose a threat to Christian education because Christian education finds its purpose in integration, thus creating a Christian world-view. The four distinguishing traits of evangelicals will be discussed here as to their significance in promoting this Christian world-view as the purpose of Christian education. Christian educators understand the value of the community/social action/ life of faith, evangelism/process of learning, knowledge of biblical doctrines/body of doctrines, faith-learning, and epistemological beliefs/body of knowledge in educating as they are connected (Badley, 1994). Therefore, the purpose of Christian education is founded on the premise that there should be a blend of all these things as they are connected (Estep, 1999). All evangelicals share the Christian education distinction founded on traditional interpretations of the Bible as the authority. Despite this array of denominational backgrounds, the ultimate educational goal of evangelicals is to glorify the Creator and this cannot be done in any better way than by membership into His Kingdom. The mission of the church is to evangelize the world (Harris, 1989) by first evangelizing the individual who can then go forth into the world. The ‘evangelical’ label encompasses a 33 diverse if not bewildering array of constituents, from conservative Presbyterians to classic Pentecostal to traditional Anglicans to Mennonites (H. H. Knight, 1997). Social action is the second component promoted by Christian education. Getz (1974) identifies biblical principles essential for evangelism and edification. He points out that the strength of emphasizing Scripture has resulted in a loss of active participation on the part of individual members in the church. Cultural considerations hopefully confront the Christian educator with the need to distinguish cultural and biblical values and to snuggle with questions of contextualization. The community presence in the lives of youth is a high priority as it is essential to the development of a social context in which both teaching takes place, and nurturing an individual into a transformed person (Wyckoff, 1955) occurs. The third component of Christian education is biblical theology, which is prevalent in the philosophy of education for the evangelical. By emphasizing the final authority of Scripture as divine revelation, evangelicals have had to grapple with biblical sources in all areas of faith and practice. Therefore, in dealing with education, they have turned to Scripture and to biblical theology in considering various principles such as the nature of the learner. They emphasize a theological approach in education over and against one that highlights or exclusively uses the social sciences. They emphasize a particular type of prepositional theology over and against process, liberation, existential, neo—orthodox, natural, or other theologies. Thus evangelicals have preferred the term Christian education as compared with Religious education with emphasis on Christian, and an evangelical distinctive of theology that guides their thought and practice (Pazmifio, 1988). The word theological assumes that it is impossible to understand the educational process apart from God himself as a human construct, however, God is the source of all truth (Kienel, 1978). Theology provides the foundation for a Christian philosophy of education (Moore, 1993) (See Table 2.4). Evangelical theology stresses the authority of Scripture as the essential basis for all inquiry. It contributes to the 34 understanding of the nature of all that is real. Knight suggests that a distinct metaphysical and epistemological view will affect one’s stance on axiological questions (G. R. Knight, 1980; Pazmiflo, 1988). 3S E S I I e F K I E o s g n a g s 5 . 3 z O 8 x s g a - g e H H m C O O m . q S - o a i c z o d g fl % 2 ; 5 0 8 9 9 — 5 4 — . . . t c a - e g a c g a n — n i g - 8 5 . - s n I . 3 = - e n i n a l a . ? . 5 8 8 5 3 3 5 8 0 9 E ‘ E E A g l 5 3 § h c ~ 3 1 § 0 4 I K - l a e r 9 — 9 3 0 n u m — i a g g a H « : 8 8 3 , 3 3 8 # — n a v 3 : 8 8 . w 8 9 0 ? $ 3 8 3 9 . 7 6 8 9 8 r e 3 0 . 3 . . . r a E — . . 9 9 — S S 8 — 8 0 . 3 u n g . 3 1 8 . 3 8 o — l l i . 7 — g a n e d o ! E S R E V . 7 8 . . . . 2 0 $ 8 2 e H ? C 0 0 4 8 8 8 8 . . : ) 3 m 2 . 4 0 2 > 2 2 8 3 1 5 5 3 8 — s e g a s u a s { : Q E S — g n i n w o » 8 8 6 8 1 9 . 3 8 . 8 3 5 £ : 0 5 5 0 M E » . . . E S : 6 3 2 V : g n i m a g — . 5 r - g g e w o . q a o — E u - i g n . g n l g g g a - c a « ; 9 5 0 4 . — A S E M : a a i o e s i s a w o s z E . — ! . 3 8 2 0 5 8 8 3 3 9 8 3 3 2 . 1 — l a V . E — a g a s ; : 3 5 3 0 4 . 1 1 — O E C ! I K 8 3 9 5 5 3 3 1 2 9 3 0 4 ; g g e a g s g q g s n g o I I Q E E E E S e u g n e d — g n i n o H « 0 2 > E E R — o g e 8 n “ “ 2 0 5 . — K N O M ” u — t e L 36 : “ e S . 8 8 3 9 8 : 8 5 . n a o m — e c a m : o 8 : 3 9 5 . e F 5 8 a e — o o g . . . u 0 2 : 3 3 9 . - c a m . . . a — g n i g g a s o 8 q 8 § n § n n 8 = o . § . 3 3 8 3 8 5 5 8 — g o l a n a 5 3 . 8 8 . 9 - a v o < § 8 > = fi m m ! fi a R — p a S ! n o . . . o g 3 5 . v u — e a n e R — » 3 : - i o ” 3 5 3 . : . 5 . 3 3 3 0 . % 2 8 m 3 5 m 0 $ . 0 8 5 3 2 0 5 3 3 2 3 5 . g . a y v E — n i g : — » . 9 : 8 — n w o ” . . . x m fi c - ! 1 6 = - u m e . ” O . E a l l - o a i c ; O ; n a . 3 ; 8 . - l a v _ r u x n O 3 0 3 . 3 8 3 A 8 3 3 — m u c a — e c a m : o 8 3 : 3 5 . 5 a B . 5 0 — o c e d A N a — a u q n . . 3 9 8 6 1 . . . 5 . 3 . a . ii I: : 1 2 5 . 8 e r i f § . , § . g n i g a . r 1 — A E « . 8 : 3 ; r o t — t a m 5 3 . 0 2 > 2 2 9 . 3 . 3 . 3 v — 9 4 9 1 0 . 0 — e n o w ? 8 5 . 0 c . . . . E 8 — l a s u a c i l b . - . 3 6 . 2 0 £ - a m e d e . r I - n i e t s n i E u q 2 0 5 9 2 9 9 . % 0 — ! ! 1 3 5 3 1 2 5 3 8 — a t e . I U . 3 5 . - a g e m o 6 9 3 . — K N O M ” . u n - D E O C Authors, Seymour, et al. (1982) organize an exploration of the field of Christian education in terms of five approaches: religious instruction, faith community, spiritual development, liberation, and interpretation. Through these approaches Christian educators can develop the theory and practice of Christian education. The central theme for teaching in all the approaches is the Good News. Seymoru' believes that through understanding these approaches to Christian education a more comprehensive and coherent theory and practice will develop. Each of these, approaches are represented by an individual, not necessarily with the same persuasion, who provided an turderstanding of each approach and its emphasis. This is done to map the literature about the approach. Lee writes about religious instruction as a transmission of belief, practices, feelings, and knowledge. Christian education is a subodiscipline of the social sciences rather than of theology. Christian education draws from all social sciences and modifies itself to acquire a Christian behavior. Westerhoff describes the faith community as the context, content, and method for Christian education theory and practice. Christian education is the catechists and is concerned with initiation and growth. Socialization is equated to enculturation and is the method of this approach. Miller discusses the spiritual development approach to Christian education as a focus on experience and a religious quest. The purpose of education is Spiritual life and the context of education. This approach is controversial as to whether it is Bible based or representative of a life-centered curriculum. Essentially, it recognized the necessity of the Bible and tradition, yet its primary focus is on the religious experience. Liberation theology’s goal as described by Moore is to enable the church and its members to be faithful to the calling of the Kingdom and to recognize forms of oppression within our society. The interpretation approach as described interprets Christian traditions in light of an individual’s present experience in relationship to others in the community. The goal is to make a meaningful connection and shape a way of living that is faithful to experiences and traditions. An understanding of these 38 approaches is significant to understanding what drives the curriculum in an institution. However, Seymour and Miller’s approach to mapping these approaches are unique to the study of education. This mapping idea will likely be adapted to research data as a means for reporting data concerning the external and internal forces that drive curriculum policy in the K-12 Christian school. Finally, faith-learning integration is the fourth component valued by Christian educators. This value is based on the belief that if all truth originates in God, than what is important in education is learning about things with God in mind. Essential to achieving faith-learning integration is: (1) a commitment to the authority of the Bible, (2) the recognition of the contemporary of the Bible and the Holy Spirit, (3) a clear understanding of the nature, source, discovery and dissemination of truth, (4) a curriculum that is totally constructed upon the centrality of special revelation, (5) a demand for the development of a Christian world and life view, and (6) the integration demand that bibliocentric education extends to all areas of student life (Kienel, 1978 and Lockerbie, 1994). Evangelical Theology An awareness of educational issues forces the evangelical educator to consider a vast array of institutions and their interrelationships with the purpose of the evangelical Christian school. Those concerned cannot neglect the educational impacts of families, schools, communities, media, and the larger society in planning and implementing educational programs and curriculum. Such influences must be considered in identifying purposes, developing strategies, implementing programs, and evaluating efforts. In addition, if a school is to be effective, networks must be established with other institutions or vehicles to adequately carry out the Christian school’s intent. To neglect to network with such others is shortsighted and consigns evangelical efforts to the cultural fringe (Pazmifio, 1988). The evangelical Christian school is not like that of the 39 already discussed fundamental school in that it is often more concerned with external forces, believing that these forces must be considered for various reasons. For these reasons it is imperative that the leadership issues of preparedness as well as adequate resources are addressed. When evangelical Christian schools consider these external forces they build a relationship between institutions that can bem to each other as they share the same values. Relationships between institutions can be described as complementing one another in the sense of having input and impacts that supply areas lacking in the other compatible institutions. Another possibility is that of a relationship that is contradictog in the sense that institutions may have distinctly different messages that create dissonance and conflicts for participants. A contemporary example of this is the relationship between the agenda of certain segments of commercial television and the values supported by the church or family. This perception has resulted in the increased development of Christian private and home schools that confirm and/or complement a Christian world-view held by the family (Cremin, 1977). The intent of the evangelical is to complement rather than to contradict. However, this requires a leadership style, organizational structure and institutional understanding of both those internally as well as externally. Though it might be said that evangelical Christian schools to a fault seem to seek external influences to guide them, they none-the-less have individuals that are internally influencing them conservatively and theologically. The vast difference between evangelical Christian schools themselves is theology that is reflected in the differences between believers in Christ and how they feel God reveals Himself to them. One’s understanding of how God reveals Himself will no doubt affect the methods used in the process of Christian education. It also affects the importance placed on certain aspects of teaching. There are an abundant number of different theologies concerning Religious education and they all have their specific impact on schooling (Thompson, 1982 and 40 Miller 1995). Evangelical theology is centered on faith-learning integration. Curriculum-decisions must therefore be focused on Christ as the model for all teaching and learning (Scott, 1983) and likewise integrate the biblical truths with learning. The focus is on Christ and faith in Him and this is accomplished by integrating theology concerning Christ and God into all teaching and learning. Evangelical schools reflect this theory of teaching by maintaining an organizational structure to oversee the forces both internal and external that affect their institution. Scholars from the Reformed tradition (an evangelical tradition) have dialogued about the purpose behind Christian education to improve Christian schools. Twelve affirmations were established because of leaders seeking answers to the following questions concerning a desire to energize and improve schooling in the Reformed tradition: What are we doing? Why are we doing it that way? How do we do it better in the firture? This conclusion from this undertaking was that the needs of the twenty-first century are quite different from those of the nineteenth tradition. First, it was decided that a clearer vision of the purpose for Christian schools is needed to focus on courses being taught from a Christian perspective, training for discipleship, and a development of a Christian world-view individually. What has resulted is that Reformed Christian schools have been likened to fundamentalist Christian schools, and the unjustified imagery of segregation, bigotry, right-wing politics, and anti- intellectualism. This is the result of uninformed parents, educators and others within our society. Second, Reformed Christian schools are plagued like other schools in that what they know is not what they do. They have research that informs their practice that is not - being implemented. Third, they must educate students for the needs of this century and not that of the past. They must be concerned with socioeconomic diversity, the collapse of traditional institutions, and public and private immorality that are prevalent today. 41 Thus, twelve affirmations were written to distinguish Reformed Christian schooling. There may be gaps in the philosophy and practice, research and methods used, and needs and traditions as pointed out by these schools. Since Christian education strives to network teachers, administers, professors, and religious leaders, it would likely serve my research to include these individuals in my data collection (Vryhor et al., 1989). What is clear is that Christian educators are not prepared to teach with a Christian world- view. They are trained in theology and teaching techniques but usually not in faith- learning integration, which is a combination of both theology and teaching methods. The presence of theology in directing the purpose of curriculum is prevalent in evangelical Christian schools; however, the theory behind the curriculum development is purely that of the social sciences. Wyckoff (1961) is concerned with how we guide the student to experience his religion as well as to understand subject matter. Therefore, heavy emphasis is placed on educators having a foundational knowledge of the behavioral sciences and learning theories. His material is based on the findings of the Curriculum Study Committee of the Christian Education Division of the National Council of Churches. At the time of publication it was the only up-to-date study available to Protestant denominations that provides a theory for building curriculums. Wyckoff speaks out for a broader understanding of Christian education. He emphasizes the planning of Christian education. Christian education is seen as a mission and ministry of the church and is most significantly taught through the process of nurturing in worshiping and witnessing as a community and family. The uniqueness of this literature is in the representation of a theoretical framework for designing Christian education curriculum. Though it was on the cutting edge at the time of its publication, it is currently significant because of the precedent it sets with curriculum theory. This is relevant to understanding the external forces that may drive the curriculum in a Christian school in today’s society. - 42 Major Contributors Evangelical educational philosophy has its root in classical realism (Miller, 1995). In the same way that Thomas Aquinas harmonized Aristotelian realism with Roman Catholic theology and created the educational philosophy of Thornifl, evangelicals have harmonized philosophy with their unique theological frameworks. What evangelicals believe about truth and other philosophical tenets is based on their theology. Christian philosophy employs reason as a basic tool for meaning. Evangelicals believe that a philosophy that omits a loving creator fails to account for the meaning that Christians find in life (Sanner, 1978). Therefore, evangelical educators use theology as the root philosophy of education. Evangelicals use theology as a philosophy of education based on biblical doctrines, emphasizing the Theo centric view, and seeking to formulate a unified and coherent notion of God and his revelation in relationship to humanity. This is a theistic phiIOSOphy (a type of theism) that is the central integrating core in Christian education (Chadwick, 1983). Theology informs evangelicals as to their philosophy and is content driven from theology despite the use of philosophical categories. Karl Rahner defines theology as Mpg (Lee, 1985) about ones faith. The theology, as with any philosophy, has educational implications as a natural consequence (Kienel, Gibbs, and Berry, 1995). In this way the philosophy for Christian education is foundationally unique and to the non-Christian, intangible. This close tie between philosophy and theology for the evangelical is a result of a theology concerned with all the truths that relate to God and to man (Sanner, 1978). While philosophy derives its nature and structure from the categories of the human mind, theology derives its structure and consequently its nature from the events of revelation and the literature of revelation, the Bible (Butler, 1962). What evangelicals believe about educational philosophy is the result of their theology. Three tenets of philosophy that are looked at theologically by the evangelical are metaphysics (the nature of reality and of what reality is constituted), epistemology (the 43 study of knowledge), and axiology (the study of values). While the Bible is not a philosophical document, it does provide philosophical benchmarks about reality, truth, and values. Each of-these has implications for a Christian philosophy of education (G. R. Knight, 1980, 1982, Pazmiiio, 1988, and Williamson, 1970). Metaphysics for the Christian maintains a reality that exists at two levels one is uncreated and the second is created. God is uncreated and therefore everything is dependent on him. He is the maker or the creator of everything else both spiritual and physical. Therefore, Christian education must deal with both spiritual and physical realities. Epistemology for the Christian is the basis for rmderstanding knowledge and truth. For the Christian, revelation is an act of God, in which God has revealed truth to man. Romans 1-3 talk of two mediums of revelation through which God has revealed himself: natural revelation (nature) and special revelation (Scripture), the second that supercedes the first. The Christian framework for understanding is based on theology for discerning the truth revealed in scripture and the sciences to understand God’s creation (nature) (Daniel and Wade, 1999). Finally, axiology deals with ethical or aesthetic issues of worth. For the Christian this is about restoring humanity back to the created state of having been created in God’s image (irnggo de), being comprised of body-soul-spirit (1 Thessalonians. 5.23). The theological belief that humanity is not in its created state but has been shattered by sin and that God intends to have humanity restored. There'are three important categories within Christian education philosophy: (I) the centrality of God (education is God centered), (2) the relevance of revelation (God has spoken and his word is genuine and applicable), and (3) that humanity is restorable (which implies that we are lost but that restoration is possible through Jesus Christ). Estep (Daniel and Wade, 1999) points out that God is the unifying theme of the philosophy of Christian education that holds the three tenants together: (1) reality is based on God being the creator, (2) truth is based on the belief that God is the revealer of it, and (3) values are based on the God/humanity relationship. The implications this 44 philosophy has for Christian education are that the ultimate aim is to glorify God and therefore education must be God-centered. Christian education is concerned with the transforming and restoring of an individual’s spiritual life and social consciousness. Evangelical Christians speak in terms of theology and not philosophy; however, the two are synonymous in the Christian world. The theologian speaks from the context of the church, but if the theologian is to analyze and articulate an understanding of truth, then he or she must express the answers in thought-forms understandable for today and consequently must talk about theology as a philosophy (Little, 1961). Gaebelein points out the significance of the uniqueness of Christian theology when he writes, All truth is God’s truth. Whereupon we must conclude that Christian education has a holy obligation to stand for and honor the truth wherever it is found . . . To be sure, revealed truth, as stated in the Word of God and known through Christ, is of higher importance than natural truth. Yet the latter is also within the pattern of God’s truth (1968, pp. 23-24). Though the Christian is concerned with natural truth (natural law) he is more concerned with what God has revealed. Therefore, if there is a philosophy of education for the evangelical Christian, it is most closely related to FLESH; Realism is a reaction against the abstractness and otherworldliness of idealism. For the realist, ultimate reality is not in the realm of the mind. This is a straightforward approach to a world of things that operate according to laws built into the very fabric of the universe. The social position (purpose) of the school in realism is to transmit knowledge settled upon by those who have a clear notion of empirical science and natural law and its function in the universe. The realist school focuses on the conservation of the heritage. It is concerned with passing on the proven facts (G. R. Knight, 1982). Theology seeks and clarifies the 45 meaning of life and life events by filtering faith and revelation (Lee, 1985). This process theologg’' g is the essence of philosophical thought for the evangelical educator. Implications for Christian Edpcation: Theology is The Internal Force The significance of a theology on the philosophical foundations of Christian education for the evangelical is expected to represent an internal force that drives curriculum decisions. The evangelical believes that an individual’s faith needs to be integrated into all aspects of life, faith-learning integration. Faith-learning integration is the crux of Christian education (Bradley, 1994, Estep, 1999, Gaebelein, 1968, Nelsen, 1987, and Niebuhr, 1951). The effects of faith-learning integration can be seen in the docuinal statements, hiring of teachers, teacher education, and certification requirements, accepted teaching methods, and purchase of curriculum that are governed by the organizational structure of institutions. Evangelicalism, in contrast to fundamentalism, holds to the belief that there is no distinction between sacred and secular, while fundamentalism holds that there is a distinction. Hence, the educational curriculum of evangelicalism is far broader than that of fundamentalism. This is not to say that evangelicals do not hold to a form of realism, though they support the influence of social science on Christian education. By the end of the eighteenth century, evangelicals had worked out their own version of beliefs where realism of faith and science do not conflict. Faith always takes precedence over science, a perspective called, “Christ above Culture” (Niebuhr, 1951). The essential evangelical beliefs include authority of the Bible, the historical character of God’s saving work recorded in scripture, salvation based on the redemptive work of Christ, the importance of evangelism and rrrissions, and the importance of a spiritually transformed life (Marsden, 1991and Pazrnifio, 1988). Evangelicalism and fundamentalism are similar in that they are traditionally theological but evangelicals are different in that they have a 46 philosophy of education that is theologically informed. For this study we will not be looking at fundamentalism-evangelical schools but at less militant forms of evangelicalism. Differences within the realm of evangelicalism curriculum are found only in a few doctrines and are not easily distinguished by outsiders. Though they share their beliefs, concerning theology as philosophically foundational to Christian education, they do not share similar beliefs concerning teaching. Teaching methods exercised by various evangelicals vary; most of which do not exclude social science theories except for militant fundamentalist (LeBar, 1995, Little, 1961, Miller, 1961, 1995, and Nelsen, 1987). Fundamentalists often exclude the social sciences except as they have traditionally been accepted at the time of the foundation of American education. There are several leading voices in the area of Christian education philosophy. Those giving the most comprehensive understandings of the field are: Boys, Burgess, Gangel, LeBar, Lee, Little, Miller, Nelsen, and Seymour. Boys (1989) mapped out the differences between religious educators and provided a clear definition of their difference. She places theology at the core of the philosophical differences between Religious educators of all types. These differences are the content of her mapping. Burgess (1975, 1996) is concerned with theory and practice in Religious education. While he tries to create a theory that will cross denominational-lines, he clearly examines the history and progress of theory and practice in Religious education. Burgess produces theories based on the models found in history and in the words of twentieth century thinkers. The theories he identifies originate in five models, one of which is the evangelical/keggmtic model. His definition of this model will be considered in my research project. Gangel (1981, 1983) is the leading voice for evangelical Christian educators. He historically presents the benchmarks for the movement concerning the theoretical perspectives of evangelical Christianity. LeBar (1995) and Little (1961) also represent the evangelical perspectives for Christian education and their work aids in 47 understanding the emphasis placed on the need for Christian education as a form of revelation. LeBar presents a theory of education concerning God as the revealer while Little’s work focuses on the Bible as revelation, both of which have philosophical foundations in theological understandings. Burgess has emphasized Lee’s (1973) work as the best theoretical approach to Religious education. Though his work is not uniquely Christian education it is non-the-less often considered as valuable. Miller’s (1961, 1995) work is also significant in understanding unique differences among Religious educators. He compares the philosophical foundations that are widely accepted as theological beliefs that make each distinctive. Nelsen’s (1987) work highlights the historical differences between Christian education from the evangelical and fundamentalist perspectives. Though these movements have much in common philosophically their practices is quite different. Seymour (1982, 1990, 1992) in all of his books works to relate the theology to practices and outline the significance of our practice. Few of the contributors to Christian education write from the perspective of K-12 education. Despite this, their work has been beneficial as it contributes to the understanding of Christian education and can be applied to K-12 education, church education, and post-secondary education. However, what is written agrees that Christian education must be a balance of content and experience, truth, and life (Lockerbie, 1994). For this reason curriculum decisions must take into account the external forces of the world around them as well as the internal forces of the theology. 48 Leading Educators Though there are few resources concerning a fiamework for curriculum development in the K-12 institution, there are many evangelicals that make all sorts of claims about Christian education and are as a result the leading voices in the discussion on curriculum development. Lois LeBar and James Plueddemann are examples of two that employ the use of contemporary theorists with theological values in curriculum development. They understand the problems with traditional models of curriculum and the advantages of recent research that employs new techniques. LeBar notes that since it is the students that must learn, it is only when they search and learn content and it is relevant the lessons come to life. Experience occupies an essential place in the Christian curriculum (LeBar, 1995). In contrast to LeBar is Frank Nelsen, whom claims evangelicalism but only as a fundamentalist. Nelson writes, “I do not wish to imply that all ideas put forward by non-Christians must be ignored or avoided. Evangelicals may still use the insights of those who do not claim to be Christian, but they must always measure such insights against a sound biblical theology (1987, p. 102).” What these leaders have in common is the assumption that evangelical Christian education though influenced by both the internal theological forces and the external forces of both educational theories and community should be governed in such a way as to allow the internal force to have the most strength in the curriculum fiamework. The eVangelical movement has been influenced by theologians, authors, and ministers; i.e., Jacques Ellul, CS. Lewis, and Helmut Thielicke. These individuals suggest that evangelicals are open to the thoughts and ideas of non-evangelicals, when their ideas have been proven trustworthy. However, it is when the tenants of evangelicalism are in question that there is a resistance to fellowship as Christians by members of the movement. These tenants are described as a: (1) critical orientation toward Roman Catholicism and ecumenical movements, (2) inerrancy of Scripture, (3) affirmation of the Bible’s importance, (4) conversion and sanctification are important 49 over other sacraments, doctrines, and ministry, (5) emphasis on evangelism and mission work, (6) an understanding of Christian ethics in terms of law, and (7) a resistance to fellowship with persons not sharing the these commitments (Ellingsen, 1988). Other leading voices whose writings have had a significant influence on the evangelical movement and thoughts concerning Christian education are: (1) George Albert coe who believed that religious education should be part of general education, (2) William Clayton Bower who did a lot of work in Christian education and curriculum development; he began exploring for the public schools in Kentucky the creation of a moral and spiritual development curriculum, (3) Hugh Hartshome who was concerned with the moral development of the child, (4) Paul Vieth who works on the purpose of the Christian Education, (5) Rachel Henderlite who believed that Christian education had been too strongly influenced by both liberalism and fundamentalism, (6) Randolph Crump Miller whose work linked the content of Christian education with method, (7) Campbell Wyckoff who was concern with the cultural, developmental, and relational issues of the adolescent in Christian education, (8) Sara Little who was concerned with religious instruction and membership into the faith community, (9) Paulo Freire who influenced Christian educators to look at the theory and practice as it applies to liberating oppressed persons, (10) James Michael Lee who emphasized the social sciences in religious education, (I 1) John Westerhoff III who was concerned with socialization being a model for Christian education, (12) Gabriel Moran who agreed the primary importance of theology was in the development of a theory fer religious education, (13) James Fowler because of his work on the stages of faith development, (14) Thomas Groome for his work on experiential education (Reed and Prevost, 1993), and (15) Kenneth Gangel who writes about the characteristics of faith-learning integration within Christian education (Lockerbie, 1994). The evangelical movement has incorporated many theories of these educators. However, these educators are not necessarily evangelical Christians. 50 However, their work is an essential part of the evangelical heritage that defines the practice of Christian education more distinctly. The evangelical heritage is educationally quite strong yet the emergence of evangelicals into the private K—12 education sector is relatively new. Therefore, evangelicals are dependent educationally on non-evangelical resources though there are many conservative resources they are usually published by separatist fundamentalist groups. For this reason it is important to understand the background of the conservative evangelical heritage and the ACSI association that is not a separatist movement though it has many ties to these groups particularly asall evangelicals begin to move toward private education. The Influence of the Association of Christian Schools International Within the evangelical movement rests ACSI, an accreditation association. This association sets out to enable educators to press forward in the area of Christian education. As an administrator in a small Christian school there are several jobs that are solely up to one individual administrator because of budgetary restrictions. One single individual must become skilled in all areas of administration to better serve the needs of the school. However, to acquire the resources needed to manage areas that are not part of one’s specialty they'must seek out the council of fellow administrators. ACSI seeks to be the organization whose goal is to enable such individuals and more importantly the organizations they serve. ACSI seeks to do this by providing services, resources, and information to well over a four thousand schools internationally, representing 90 different countries. Student enrollment in ACSI schools exceeds 870,000 students in educational institutions ranging from preschool to post-secondary schools (ACSI, l999a). 51 ACSI was started in 1978 through the merger of multiple Christian school associations in both the United States and in Canada. It is a nonprofit religious education association, which is run by practitioners with locally elected district representatives and board of directors. Schools retain their individual distinctiveness and operate independent of this association, which has its headquarters in Colorado Springs, Colorado and a legislative office in Washington, D. C. There are nine regional offices in the United States that serve every state by providing a strong program of supportservices (ACSI, 1998). Today, ACSI has three separate categories that describe the various internal school structures that govern the Christian day school. Though there are only three distinguishing types there are variations within these types as each school has its own identity. The first type for the ptu'poses of this research will be referred to as the p_ar_en_- ggieg—run school. Many ACSI schools are operated by a fellowship of churches or by an association of parents that represent several churches. The name association is often given to this group because it is an identity required by such groups for tax purposes in the forming of a corporation. However, many of these schools would not refer to themselves as associations because they have strict guidelines as to their membership in an effort to preserve conservative biblical theology. The second type of school is the church-run school. This is very common and is characteristic of schools started in large churches that support them. Often these schools are smaller in size as they do not serve the larger community but only the elect from their church congregation. The third type of school is the self-mtuating board-run school. This final type is governed by a board of education. Membership onto the board varies between many of these schools however it is usually by appointment of the retiring board member and is not by election. Many ACSI schools are a cross between these three types of schools (ACSI, 1998 and Nelsen, 1987) 52 The internal forces affecting curriculum decisions have to do with who governs the theology. This is decided by the organizational structure of the school itself. There are many forces that constitute internal forces. First, the internal forces can be affected both by the lack of individual preparation in the area of theology or educational methods. These individuals that maintain the internal structure must provide a mix cf knowledge in both theology and curriculum theory. The literature maintains that many evangelical educators lack both a formal academic preparation and an understanding of theology forces the curriculum. Second, evangelical schools are noted for their holy discontent in how they are operated (Vryhor, et al., 1989). By holy discontent, it is suggest that schools do not have a clear vision and purpose for their existence. All of these problems can be traced to the fact that not only do many evangelicals lack formal preparation in education and/or theology but they also lack adequate resources that provide information on how to develop the necessary operating principles. Third, evangelicals known to be a unity movement are likewise inter-denominational and theologically conservative which can account for the fact that many of them appear to be separatists. The effects of inter- denominationalism and conservative theology direct the curriculum in many ways. Ultimately, the internal forces that affect curriculum decisions have to do with how schools are structured and the internal forces that affect them are often none other than the individual’s preparation in theology and curriculum theory, resources on curriculum development, and non—denominationalism. The external forces on the curriculum development are unique to the private schools, as by nature they are not affected by many of the external governing forces that influence a public school though this does vary. Therefore, each school defines their own particular set of external forces and allows for them by seeking their influence or because they do not prohibit their influence. Such external forces might include: fundamentalism/ separatist ideals, state or other government regulations, accrediting association, parents, and local churches. Sometimes these forces have been regulated by acceptance into the 53 school community and separatism away ficm the general populace and governmental regulation with the forming of a separate and sometimes closed Christian community. In many cases disputes that are external are often related to the differences between both conservative evangelicalism and fundamentalism movements whom often share the same community. Many individuals both non-Christian and fundamentalist outside the evangelical community disagree on how Christians should approach the influences of the social sciences for education and label these two forces (sacred and secular) as conflicting forces. However, precedent literature in the field of Christian education maintains that for evangelicals there can be no separation of the sacred from the secular (Ellingsen, 1988). For this reason this research will look at how this is managed in evangelical schools. The inter-denominational movement is accepting of Christians from many conservative backgrounds and is also very accepting of the work of secular education as a result of the work of various individuals in the area of curriculum theory. This is so much the case that it has not been until recently that there has been an enormous exodus of evangelical students from the public school. The reason for this currant move into the private sector of education, which until recently was only a fundamentalist and right winged conservative separatist movement, is that a common ground over religious matters has not been found by public school administrators (Halford, 1998-1999). Evangelicals have been alarmed by recent court cases over religious fieedoms in a few communities where public school educators have tried to avoid religious matters altogether and in doing so brought into question rights and beliefs held firmly by evangelicals, namely the freedom of religious expression. Evangelicals whom believed that all things work together have in the past not been threatened by the public school education knowing that good education will not conflict with religious beliefs and are joining other conservative movements in their choice to attend private Christian schools. 54 Tensions between public and private Christian schools are still relatively low for the evangelicals with most evangelical Christians attending public schools. However, this is not the case with tensions within the evangelical schools that are a growing concern as conservative Christians of both the evangelical movements and the fundamentalist movements unite within a single school community. What creates the tension is not a separation of the secular from the sacred as has been portrayed by the media (Ellingsen, 1988) but a disagreement as to whether there should be a separation. A lack of understanding on the part of many conservatives that enroll in the evangelical school that evangelicals have a firm conviction that all things are acceptable when placed in the context of faith. The acceptance of outsiders (non-evangelicals) into the realm of the evangelical community allows for skeptics and critics to influence decisions about what is appropriate and acceptable. The external tensions found are often created by the vocally diverse elements within the school community. Voices that have not been successful in the public school arena, whom disagree with or are reacting to public school education, and which are theologically or denominationally different from evangelical Christianity because they do not advocate the use of current understandings of the social science research become the external forces. Ways to combat the influences is to have a school structure that is not penetrable by these fundamentalist voices. The internal and external forces on curriculum have been a consideration for many years by the Christian schools. Organizations that have been formed to address the operating issues of the evangelical school have often dealt with the topic of these influences and their affects on schools. However, assistance in the area of curriculum development is still quite limited. These organizations have done well aiding educators in the writing board of policies manuals, student handbooks, and personnel manuals, but frameworks for curriculum development in the evangelical school is very much non- existent. This may be in part because these schools have different governing structures that ultimately affect the power of certain influences. Therefore, this study will seek to 55 look at these two influential forces (both internal and external) that drive curriculum development and study how they influence curriculum decisions in evangelical K-12 Christian schools. Setting the Context for the Study: The External Pressures on Curriculum This section of the review will look at the external forces that affect evangelical schools from the community at large and within its social context. The community would include both professional educators and nonprofessional educators such as parents and church advocates. These individuals in most cases provide the external forces that affect curriculum/theory and they can do this easily as the evangelical employs secular teaching methods that involve the community. Though evangelical schools by nature emphasize theology in every way, adhering to the tenets of faith-learning integration, they also employ teaching methods within the classroom that do not exclude social science theories. Various types of external forces influence the curriculum. In the pluralistic society in which we live, there are multitudes of forces that exert their influence on the curriculum. These forces are a direct result of the trend predicted by Apple (1983). Apple predicted that curricular programming would reflect the splintering of common interests and the polarization of the larger society trends almost twenty years ago. These forces are in fact the result of pressures and conflicts over which the schools have little control. As was predicted, the Christian school movement is part of a polarization movement. Likewise, Goodlad (I977) elaborated on Tyler’s notion of curriculum planning in order to address who best understands the instructional level, institutional level, societal level, state level and federal levels of influences determine what in curriculum (Beyer and Apple, 1988). Essentially everyone is concerned with addressing these forces that influence curriculum development. 56 For the various types of religious educators a theological or social science approach determines their approach to education. The approach that is theological claims that religious instruction is a mode of theology and education draws its norms and practices from theology. The second approach draws its norms and its activities from the action and reflection about the teaching process itself. The theological approach asserts that instruction is for searching for the deepest and most authentic theology and then passing it onto the next generation while the second approach is concerned with the process in which the behavior is facilitated to each learner. The theological approach is value laden and the social science approach is value-free (Lee, 1985). Evangelicals use this theological approach because what they want to be taught is not value-free. However, evangelicals likewise are concerned with the process of learning and do not reject the value found in the second approach concerned with the process itself. How Curriculum Theory Influences Curriculum Development There is not a universal definition of theory and there are three basic realms of knowledge on which theory rests: humanities, social sciences, and the natural sciences. Each realm looks at reality differently and therefore generates theory differently. In the area of curriculum there are two basic sets of theories: scientific and humanistic. The scientific theory is derived from logic, while the humanistic theory is based on values and is very normative (Ornstein and Hunkins, I993). Educators use the theory to attempt to understand the realms of knowledge. Likewise, educators have selected what knowledge they believe should be passed on in the learning process. This is true of educators in both the public and private Christian sectors of K-12 education. For this reason, curriculum theory is at the heart of curriculum decisions for educators. Educational institutions have based their procedures on both research data and on htmches. How one teaches is based on the values they place on a theory. Pinar has separated curriculum thinkers into three categories: traditionalists, conceptual-empiricist, 57 and reconceptualists (Hlebowitsh, 1993). The traditionalists are described as preplanning curriculum procedures in the school. The conceptual-empiricist is similar to the traditionalists in their regard for a scientific rationality but an attempt to influence the school experience not with planning as much as with research-sanctioned ideas that will promote generic applicability. The reconceptualists are determined on liberating the formal school experience by undermining situational learning conditions. These three groups constitute the sum of arguments in today’s educational circles. Other Patterns of Influence In many instances education is first influenced by philosophies and theories; and secondly by social forces such as changes within society, knowledge and the learner. The first being internal and the second being external (Ornstein and Levine, 1993, p. 488) show the influences that affect education for the public school in Figure 2.1. This Figure 2.1 shows that educational philosophies are basic beliefs and values that structure our approach to education. The educational philosophy of which a teacher adopts interacts with events and it is this relationship that affects the aims of education. The result is the approach taken in education and more distinctly to curriculum design, theory, and decision-making. 58 Figure 2.1 The Purpose of Education and the Forces That Influence Them I INFLUENCES ON EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES . . Philosophies and Educational theories - Social forces Changes in: ' 0 30cm Knowledge 0 The learner GENERAL PURPOSES Aims MORE SPECIFIC Goals Goals V V PURPOSES MOST SPECIFIC l V l l V l PURPOSES Objectives Objectives Objectives Objectives Objectives Objectives Note. Ornstein, A. C. and Levine, D. U., Foundations of Education, (5th ed.), (1993). Houghton Mifflin Company. Used with permission. The authors of this figure note that the influences on education are typically the changing philosophies and theories concerning education as affected by social forces. They likewise note that there are typically three social forces; £913.11 in general which would mean shifts in family values, peer groups and even social class, changes in knowledge which would include developments such as found in science and technology, and finally changes in the nature of the me; which might be brought about as a result of delinquency, drugs, peers, and culture. The general purposes or aims of education typically are recognized as standards that are on the larger order such as national and state where the more specific purposes are seen in the goals which reflect missions and 59 purposes of individual schools. The final part of the figure is the most specific purposes that are seen as the objectives of classrooms and of teachers in the curriculum. Armstrong (1989, p. 6) charts the affect of the external influences on the scth in a similar way with one exception in Figure 2.2 the sources of curriculum are the first in a linear process and bear the ultimate authority. Figure 2.2 The General Flow of Curriculum-development Activity CONSIDERATION SELECTION OF OF SOURCES PERSPECTIVES FROM a o society learners MAJOR MEDIATORS REACTION TO - Philosophies of EXTERNAL ’ education INFLUENCES 0 knowledge 0 Psychology of learning V IDENTIFICATION OF A PREPARATION OF IMPLEMENTATION OF 055%,??be THE CURRICULUM “‘5 CURRICULUM r 4 EVALUATION OF THE CURRICULUM 60 Major approaches to philosophy (the internal force) are: idealism, realism, perennialism, essentialism, pragmatism, progressivism, social reconstructionism, existentialism, and philosophical analysis. The external social forces that are often considered by curriculum theorist are: (l) the debate about the basics, (2) the upgrading of content and reduction of electives in secondary schools, (3) the purging of any taint of un-Americanism and secular humanism by Christian movements, (4) teacher preparation that focuses on how to teach, and not on why they teach certain things, (5) tensions between business and organized labor in the fight for curriculum content, (6) preparation of students for the work force, (7) higher standards in the academics, (8) a greater focus on technology, and (9) use Of commercialized systems of curriculum maintenance (Apple, 1983). Both the external and internal forces influence the aims and purposes of education. In the area of curriculum planning, theorist, Tyler, after an eight-year study, formulated a rationale to evaluate the curriculum. This evaluation asked four questions: (I) What educational purpose should the school seek to attain? (2) What educational purposes can be provided that will likely attain these purposes? (3) How can the educational experiences be affectively organized? and (4)How can we determine whether these purposes are being attained? (Beane, Toepfer, and Alessi, 1986, pp. 65-66). Since the development of this foundational framework other theorist, Virgil Herrick, and Hilda Taba have further delineated the questions to include sources of the educational purposes, types of curriculum organizations, and means by which to conduct curriculum evaluations. Tyler’s work does not go without criticism of being two simplistic and limited by Elliot Eisner and Herbert Kliebard in the late 1960's some thirty years later. Joseph Schwab suggested that Tyler’s model of curriculum theory planning was linear and therefore restricting. J. Galen Saylor and William Alexander therefore proposed a systems model that integrates the components in each step of the planning process. 61 By combining the voices of many theorists Beane, Toepfer, and Alessi (1986) propose a curriculum planning theory they call a framework. By calling it a framework instead of theory or model they hope to avoid the suggestions of a linear step-by-step process. (see Figure 2.3). A Framework for Curriculum Planning (1986, p. 67) shows their framework. Within this framework it is theorized that the influences that should guide curriculum theory are influenced heavily by the social sciences as listed at the top of the framework. These would be the forces that should influence a fiamework for decision-making. This framework would be not acceptable to the evangelical Christian school though these influences are believed to be important theology would be more important. 62 . Figure 2.3 A Framework for Curriculum Planning SNVH umnolaano S N A L P E T A T S R C / D N A L A N O I T A N 4 ' 7 S N A L P E D I N P C I R T S I D .0 N O l T A U T l S M T S A R G O R P . j o o n o s - L L A G N I N R A E L - G N I H C A E S N E E R C S N O I S I C E D s r e h t o r b J E H C A O R P P A R A L U C I R R U C S P S C I T S I R E T C A R A H C S E L P I C N I R L L A R E N E G ' o A O R a I I' S D L E I F E G D E L W O N K ] G N I G R E M E ' L A I C O S S E C R U O S E R : S D E E N T C E J B U S [ I S M E L B O R P l l I G N I N R A E L T R E N R A E L l E H T F O F O G N I R U S A E M S E C I V E D - - - — - — - - - — — " - - - - - - - - - - - - - M U L U C I R R U S T N E D D I H [ S E C R U O S E R I S E I T I V I T C A l - T N E T N O C [ S E V I T C E J B O E H T ‘ - Y G O L O H C Y S P N A M U H C I S A B S D E E N L Y IIIIt ' SSAIJDSNO 1mm A - - Y H P O S O L I H P E H T E F I L D O O G - Y G O L O I C O S S C I T S I R E T C A R A H C ‘ Y R A R O P M E T N O C D N A F O T E I C O S Y E R U T U F SNOILVONI'IOJ 63 Methodologies that guide the design of curriculum materials are characteristic of two approaches: (1) Experiential instruction, which raises students interest and motivates them or (2) systematic instruction, which emphasizes the importance of student’s responses leading to the mastery of specific objectives (Nelson, 1990). Theorist developed three camps of curriculum theories: (1) Developmentalist, (2) Interactionist, and (3) Behaviorist. Table 2.5 (p. 19) is a comparison of curriculum theorists and how they view what people learn as a result of the teacher’s role. Table 2.5 Comparison of Curriculum Theorists (Nelson, 1990, p. 19) Developmentalist (D) Teacher’s Role Teach Basic Skills How People learn or lnteractionist (I) or Behaviorist (B) Dewey D Guide no by doing, imitating adult occupations Piaget l n/a n/a by experimenting and interacting with Holt D allow children to no by being allowed to choose what they choose learn and how they learn Montessori D Guide have available by being given choices of self-correcting natural environment Steiner D model, create art yes, at right age by active involvement, awakening of activities appropriate to their stages activities, through » super sensible perception through art, building a relationship movement, music, crafts Brunet I create discovery yes by having scientists create curriculum in activities student’s view; by discovery Reg; D and B No yes, after analyzing by being given relevant learning Skinner B program learning yes by being given tasks appropriate to skill use by adults activities Mager B Englernann B objectives set goals and construct routines analyze task. MI yes goals feedback level and being given immediate by communicating clear objectives and activities that precisely communicate a by being given systematically analyzed concgrt. Note. Nelson, A. (1990). Curriculum Design Techniques. Dubuque, IA Wm. C. Brown Publishers. Reproduced with permission of The McGraw-Hill Companies. Christian Education Theory helps practitioners by prescribing actions to be taken. However, events are not always predictable in reality. Every practitioner should be aware of theory, and should use it as a conceptual framework (Behar and Ornstein, 1992). Too often the Christian is oblivious to theory and what develops is a Christian theory of education that is an exposition of the idea that Christianity is a world-view that encompasses all of life and not simply a series of unrelated doctrines (Gaebelein, 1968). Christian education is education concerning all of life. It is not just about evangelism or just about academics. Christian education is integrating every aspect of life, learning, and faith therefore it is about integrating evangelism (preparing one for the kingdom of God) and academics. It is not against public education as some have sought her out feel; rather it is about faith- learning integration of which cannot be offered outside the realm of Christianity. For this reason there is a need for K-12 Christian education. There is a need for professionalism within it as well. The evangelical is bent on developing this world and life view by relating or integrating theology to all learning. The sacred and secular are united for the student as they are integrated. There is no fear that they will be contradictory but rather than they will accentuate each other as they fashion a people of God that is not separate from the secular society in their function, though they are in their faith (Harris, 1989). With this understood, theory is used to inform practice for the purpose of teaching a Christian world-view. This Christian world-view has at its heart the active role of the student in the learning process. This is not in conflict with what is seen as a need by the National Education Association’s (NEA) report from 1994 (Willis, Schubert, Bullough, Kridel, and Holton, 1994). Evangelical Christian educators (LeBar, 1995) confirm that what is in fact needed is a theory that incorporates the real life application of what is learned in the planned curriculum by relating it to other learned experiences of the student. 65 The first scholar to write a manual of faith-leaning integration that can be used for Christian education in the K-12 setting is Ford (1991). The manual provides insights and guidance based on the accumulation of Ford’s experience in designing curriculum for thirty years. Ford is an advocate of the learning outcomes which focuses in curriculum design, a method sometimes called competency-based education or performance-based learning. This method assumes many delivery systems both instructional and administrative models. Ford confronts the problem of dealing with the affective dimensions of design because little has been done to incorporate this into curriculum design. This model allows designers to identify common learning that all students need to master. A core curriculum is determined that is materialized into a set of equipping outcomes that students must master to minister. This manual brings under the purview of the curriculum design institutional activities that are ofien seen as seemingly non- curriculum—related such as chapel services, lecture series, and revivals. The uniqueness of this manual is that it provides an understanding of how Christian educators have designed the curriculum to suit theological needs with its only limitation being the learning outcomes approach. It is an example of how a Christian curriculum is affected by the social science theories in the process of integration. How well a school integrates the Christian faith is dependent on both internal and external forces imposed by the supporters of the institution. In a study of Christian school curriculum and the supporters of Christian schools, researchers point out differences between the curriculum and the way supporters view the role of Christians’ contemporary society (Van Brummelen, 1988). The study analyzes the role of curriculum change agents that are locally autonomous and have little or no external support system. The study looks at three neighboring British Columbia Christian schools using two sets of questions. The first set of questions focuses on the programs taught in the locally-controlled Christian schools while the second set of questions focuses on the significant factors and change agents influencing curriculum implementation in Christian 66 school settings. Three major factors affecting implementation of change are highlighted: (1) how each school’s environment influences its curriculum; (2) the characteristics and behavior of change facilitators; and (3) the nature of both the old and the new programs. Finally, the goals and philosophies of these three schools are discussed. This is an ' important study as it parallels many of my questions concerning the Christian school and what drives the curriculum development is significant for its methodology, framing questions, and findings that will help frame my dissertation research project. Christian schools have been affected by the external forces of the community in accepting such practices that are inimical to Christian beliefs. Examples of practices that are the result of little or no analysis of their philosophical roots and of which are commonly embraced by Christian educators are: (1) traditional subject matter, (2) process orientation, and (3) social relevance orientation (Fowler, Van Brummelen, andVan Dky, 1990). What should be evident in the Christian school is a fi'amework for curriculum that is distinctly Christian. This framework can then aid in curriculum development. Evangelicals are in agreement that the basic tenets of this framework are: (1) the development within students a Christian world-view that is relevant to living in today’s society, (2) teaching students to serve God as they develop conceptually and employ God-given talents, (3) the curriculum must lead students into making personal and group decisions from a biblical perspective, and (4) the curriculum must be used to help students commit to a heavenly citizenship. Weeks (1988) believes that Christian education should be different from secular education because of its theology and practice. He identifies what a Christian school is and how it functions in his introduction to Christian schooling. Schools are to focus on the duty of parents to oversee the Christian education of their child(ren). First, Weeks notes that the school’s purpose is to assist parents in teaching about God. Second, it is the purpose of Christian schooling to remove objectionable material from the curriculum and to provide the necessary Christian perspective that is objectionable to the purpose of 67 the secular school curriculum. Third, Christian schooling has one major purpose and that is to evangelize, to prepare children for citizenry in the kingdom of God. Fourth, there is the belief that the Christian school will provide higher standards than the public school. A Christian School philosophy concerning the purpose of the curriculum is at the heart of what drives the curriculum and decisions concerning its development in Christian Schools. This book confirms the areas I need to focus my questioning around, namely that there is a philosophical foundation to Christian Education and curriculum development. The evangelical school does not ignore the curriculum theories that are based on research and data but rather it incorporates them into their development of curriculum. The external forces that influence curriculum development are those forces that do not promote a Christian world-view but are rather militantly defiant of the influences of social-science information or are advocates for them without regard to theology. Therefore, similar to the public school the evangelical school is afi‘ected by the society and culture. Setting the Context: School Governance/Leadership Gary Sykes (Shulrnan and Sykes, 1983) using an organizing metaphor has said when talking about public policy that policies must create magnets to draw the talented teachers in, and screens to keep the unqualified out. This is a great metaphor for Christian educators to adhere to as well. Curriculum decisions as they pertain to the hiring of educators need to strive for quality and the standard of objectives established by its philosophy and theology. Like any educational institution this is a prime factor in quality. There is a comparison that should be made between secular and Christian education. This comparison does point out similarities and differences in fiameworks. An influencing force that is obviously similar in both types of institutions (public and Christian schools) as recognized from the literature is the affects of poorly prepared 68 educators. Several evangelicals have agreed that the practice of Christian education is not what it needs to be, thus it influences the objectives of many institutions. Evidence of this scholarly view concerning the lack of preparation needed by educators prevails and is documented in a Chicago convention conversation/discussion concerning Christian Education in Reformed Christian schooling (The Reformed tradition is a segment of evangelical Christianity that followed sixteenth century preacher and theologian John Calvin). It is stated in this document that while individual teachers, administrators, professors, and pastors of this tradition were all involved in trying to answer questions concerning Reformed Christian schooling all obviously believed there was h_oly discontent with K-12 education in the tradition of the Reformed Christian school. In three areas of Christian education it was agreed that there are evidences of gaps between theology and practice, research results and present methods of teaching, some twenty- first century needs, and the traditional aims and goals of schooling (Vryhor, et al., 1989). There is the same concern in public education for the affects of teacher . preparation and disagreement about what agenda educators should focus. The public schools are affected by a lack of understanding because of a lack of preparation (Shulman and Sykes, 1983) and/or agreement concerning educational philosophy and practices (Muncey and McQuillan, 1996). As a result there is a need for strong leadership that is prepared and of which can through staff development improve or strengthen areas of concern. All religious educators must deal with the external forces that drive curriculum development as a result of values and beliefs held by members of the Christian community. In the same way that Christian education can refer to both the evangelical movement and fundamentalist movement (Berliner, 1997), the school community is a collective of various voices from various camps such as the liberal movement. Social theory is one such voice that promotes social transformation, as it is the belief that education should shape major societal goals, processes, and institutions. Another such 69 method used by some Religious educators is the dialectic process between theology and teaching. Within this process is the deeply rooted philosophical belief that self- understanding of one’s faith is constructed meaning that is individual and personal in its characteristics. Essentially, the individual constructs through this dialectic process what it means to be faithful. Faithfulness is defined by differently by each individual. Individuals that are advocates of such theories may be Christian though they are not evangelical as this theory is not theological in nature (Moore, 1989, Seymour, 1990, and Seymour, Miller, Little, Foster, Moore, and Wehrheim, 1982). Christian educators must recognize that these forces may come from the community and when they do they must be prepared for them. Christian educators must know how they feel about each and what they intend to do when these influences affect or threaten to influence a heavily guarded philosophy of Christian education. Several variables can be considered as internal forces that influence decisions since schools are not all alike. The basic reasons for these differences are the diverse voices from the culture surrounding it (Van Brummelen, 1988). Since there are several conflicting values and beliefs for the Christian educator to sort out evangelical educators must sort out theories that have been commonly used in education as to their implications for Christian education and in particular their community. This is not always easy unless they understand the roots and implications of each theory. Christian educators of the evangelical perspective must be prepared professionally in both curriculum theory (but advocating a Christian world-view) and in theological studies (biblical doctrines) to do this. When they fail to understand either, they threaten the purposes of Christian education by becoming a Christian militant refusing to ground their practice with good curriculum theory or they become an educator that lacks the Christian distinctive by abandoning the theological foundation of their conservative theology. Ted Ward is among the scholars who discusses what Christian education should be as he debates the importance of it being Christian in content or educational in theory; a 70 similar discussion is found in the writings of George Albert Coe and Randolph Crump Miller (Gibbs, 1992). What these authors conclude is that when educators compromise or accommodate by emphasizing one or the other they become destructive of the Christian perspective ( Maffet and Dye, 1985). They conclude that Christian educators must address each the content and the theory together without separating them. This research questions the influences that affect how they do this and how this in turn influences curriculum that promotes good Christian content as well as good curriculum theory while dealing with the internal and external forces that may not promote such an ideal. Leadership is believed to be of utmost concern in the building of curriculum theory and practice as leaders direct staff development. Heifeman and Bishop advocate that leadership operates within many facets (influences) such as local challenges and realities of decision-making, professional and societal realities, an educational structure with roles and responsibilities, concerns for impact and consequent behavior of pupils and few or many persons affected by change (Homes, 1971). The leader can help or hinder the process of curriculum development. For this reason educational decisions are greatly influenced by the actions of the educational leader. Therefore, one concern is; “Do evangelical educators carry out their philosophy/theology of education in curriculum practice as it pertains to curriculum development and if they do not, does this constitute an internal and/or external force that influences the formation of policy concerning curriculum?” Meaning is it because of the school (teachers and leaders) or because of the community that they do not follow their ideal operating principles when making curriculum decisions. It is clear from the literature review that many evangelicals believe that the practice of decision-making is not what it ought to be. This project will question the practice of curriculum development with curriculum specialists in well-established schools. Since it is believed that many lack both a sufficient understanding of their 71 practice as it relates to theology and lack the theoretical framework that drives their practice (Gibbs, 1992 and Williamson, 1970) of Christian educators in curriculum development their insight will be a valuable resource. It is thus concluded from this understanding of the literature that there is a great need to prepare evangelical teachers and educational leaders in the practice of faith- learning integration where theology is emphasized as they employ teaching methods based on predominant curriculum theories (Byme, 1977). Therefore, the practice observed may not mirror the philosophy behind curriculum development. The lack of preparation then influences how we develop curriculum, playing an external force and not an internal one, as it is not part of the theology as defined by the evangelical heritage. An example of the lack of preparation is unveiled in a parallel study concerning private schools done in Australia (Bezzina, 1996). In the presentation of their evaluative report presented at the Annual Conference of the Australian Association for Religious Education researchers present a model for Christian education curriculum practice. They present a framework for looking at curriculum planning, implementation, and evaluation in this setting. The problems identified with the integration of this model were a tendency for teachers not to understand the model, teacher difficulty in implementing the critical reflection part, and teachers often see this as a lockstep approach to curriculum. Similarly, to other leading voices in Christian education this report establishes the fact that Christian educators are not sufficiently prepared to plan their curriculum. This parallel study while producing a model for Christian educators to use when approaching curriculum development at the same time points out how unprepared Christian educators are in approaching the curriculum.- There are evidences from other studies that the preparation of educators is an external force on decisions. In a similar study it was found that the interaction of curriculum with personnel issues such as philosophical conflict among teachers, possible conflict of interest for school employees, and teacher ethics all create influences on the 72 curriculum (Martin, Glatthorn, Winters, and Saif, 1989). While in this study teachers are unable to carry out the desires ofthe operating principles it seems that if teachers take a role in decisions that these very points could ultimately influence the process of curriculum development. Burgess (1975) is one of the earliest scholars to point out the lack of preparation by teachers in religious education for understanding philosophy and theology. His work in identifying the approaches to religious education are informative and useful to understanding what has been lacking in the field previously and still today. He combines for a study four distinct approaches to religious education: (1) the traditional theological approach, (2) the social-cultural approach, (3) the contemporary theological approach, and (4) the social science approach. Beyond this he does a compmtive study on the precepts of a theory that incorporates the social sciences into the teaching methods. He concludes that theology and social science should be balanced to produce a teaching- leaming theory. His analysis of the evangelical perspective on religious education help in defining the scope of my research on evangelism and the relevant concerns with this perspective toward curriculum as it pertains to K-12 education (Burgess, 1996). The combination of social science research, curriculum, theory and theology is typical of evangelical curriculum theory. C_urricull_lm Decision-mJalgigg As pointed out previously, both the public and Christian schools share in the influences of the social science on sources of curriculum being society, knowledge and the learner. However, the Christian school goes beyond that to place emphasis on religious doctrines and beliefs concerning where truth originates. Though the social context influences education it does so in a different way for the Christian school than the public school. 73 The effects of the social context in which schools reside are paramount to curriculum planning. Education is an expression of a society, of political and economic systems, and schools must be aligned with the lives and ideas of that culture (Hass and Parkay, 1993). Therefore, social forces play an important part in developing a philosophy and establishing goals for instruction. The social forces that influence the curriculum are none other than difi‘erences and conflicts apparent as a result of changes in the environment, diversity, changing values and morality, family, microelectronics revolution, changing world of work, equal rights, urban and suburban crises, crime and violence, alienation and anxiety, and international tensions. There are three ways in which these forces affect the school curriculum: by fighting for the status quo of tradition and inhibiting change, by speeding up the change process through social and cultural influences, and by creating political pressures that influence decisions (Doll, 1992). How this effects curriculum is that teachers must provide for the individual difference of learners, the teaching of values, the development of self-understanding, and the . development of problem-solving skills and abilities as a result of these changes and new understandings about the needs of the individual learner. The society at large has the most influence on schools where as the immediate culture impact comes from the local community. Hass and Parkay point out that what is important for educators to develop an awareness of the social forces that affect them. It has been noted that the values that are debated between the school (internal) and the community (external) can create an imbalance in the philosophy and practice of an institution (Muncey and McQuillan, l 996). The very nature of the school structure may determine whether secular curriculum theories are an impacting external force on the school itself. The impact on Christian schools occasionally varies because of the school’s organizational structure, which is not consistence from one school to another. There are essentially four types of K-12 Christian schools of which their purpose is ultimately to filter these values that are 74 external forces: (1) church-sponsored, (2) board sponsored, (3) parent-sponsored, and (4) boarding schools (Graendorf, 1981). About 80% of all ACSI schools are having a corporate structure formed out of the local congregation and are a church school, while only 18% are board sponsored schools. The remaining 2% are either church-sponsored . school and are separately incorporated from the church or they are parent-society schools. The later being a school corporation and that has been formed by a group of parents with an elected school board ( Kienel, n.d.). Since there are several types of schools the filtration of theories to make them more evangelical can be done in a multitude of ways: such as required doctrinal statements (for parents, staff, and/or students), established policies (dictating who decides the curriculum), voting privileges (i.e., limited to church members or parent member societies/associations), students (application and interviewing processes), and personnel (hiring process) to name a few. Related case studies produced by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) made available examples of how curriculum decision-making took place in similar settings being affected by different individuals. The studies looked at five groups that influenced curriculum decisions: (1) the school board, (2) teachers, (3) parents, (4) state and local district, and (5) professional and community factions (Martin et al., 1989). In a secular setting these individuals became the influential forces that affected decisions. This is also true of the evangelical Christian school as it is with all institutions because they are in a market society. Community participation can come in many forms all of which influence decisions. In a report published by the Philadelphia Commission on Decentralization and Community Participation three options are suggested for their influence: informal community participation in decision making; advisory participation as an elected or appointed committee from the community; or shared authority and responsibility with a local school board (1970). Schools that use some type of involvement procedure insure 75 the balance of a church filtering system with a community voice. These become the influencing factors that will need to be looked at in this study. Though evangelical schools can limit the effects of some external forces by filtering them through their institutional structure, the evangelical in line with its philosophical/theological nature will nonetheless seek to combine external and internal forces as they pertain to curriculum/theory. The evangelical while insisting on a theological foundation will also seek the guidance of external forces found in the social sciences, theory, research, and community input. Therefore secular theories are an impacting external force on curriculum development for evangelical schools (Power, 1996). Similarly, while the evangelical uses secular curriculum theory and there are parallels found between secular and evangelical theories, there are also some unique differences as the schools, are affected by the community at large. thse Involved in th_e_Q_urriculu_m Development Process Blended church communities ofien face the pressures from conflicting voices within these communities. Occasionally, it appears that Christian schools like the public schools are not as open to combining secular and sacred curriculum/theory practices (Halford, 1998-1999, Provenzo, 1990, and Weeks, 1988). There are several suggested reasons in the literature why a sacred community would not accept new and different ways of teaching, and it is believed that these communities, because of their sentiments have a tendency toward avoiding or resisting change (Vryhof et al., 1989). This includes high evaluations of the holy, of loyalty, allegiance, and patriotism (lannaccone and Lutz, 1970). This is thought to be evident in many evangelical schools that board on fundamentalism. This is common as many smaller communities can afford only one Christian school in the community where both the broadly defined evangelicals and militant fundamentalist parents may find themselves within the doors of the same institution. When this happens we have an example of how external forces often work to 76 influence the existing structure that is evangelical. As already pointed out, Christian educators facing these external forces who are not prepared to make decisions based on evangelical theology are most affected. They are more easily swayed either way to maintain peace when they themselves are uncertain about the suggested militant ftmdarnentalist voices (an external force). There are many examples of such instances in both the public and evangelical school where the community influences decisions. The evangelical school is influenced by the voice of the fundamentalist that often associated with them (Nelsen, 1987 and Ellingsen, 1988). This is not unlike the outside voice of the commlmity that affects even the public schools (Lutz and Merz, 1992 and Muncey and McQuillan, 1996). Influences on decisions are the result of values held by individuals and those values are held for multiple reasons. The evangelical and public schools alike must recognize those values and address them. Though a Christian school may have an evangelical background, it may admit into its student body militant fundamentalists that react to buzz words earmarked by the Christian Right as a threat to Christians. Examples of such are found in the opposition of Christians to the use of outcome-based education and whole-language reading instruction (Berliner, 1997). The firndamentalist voice, while it is historically rooted in evangelicalism, does not represent most evangelicals today. Therefore their influence is external rather than internal, as they are part of the community that influences curriculum decisions from an external position within the school community. Their position is not theologically in line with the theology of modern day evangelicalism. 77 Different Forces AmongSchools Christian schools in an effort to show accountability to constituents, become competitive in a market of schools, seeking ways to supplement the institution financially, seek accreditation, and in making the mobility of students easier for its constituents have sought to gain acceptance of secular agencies by maintaining the same level of academic standards as public schools. Having done this they are by choice open to the external forces of special interests, research and specialization, government involvement, and reform initiatives. All of which add to the mix of tensions that affect the decisions concerning curriculum (Combleth, 1990). In the current environment this is becoming more common with Christian schools. Consequently this study must look at these external forces as they influence the Christian school in curriculum development. The philosophical/theological premise of evangelical education is faith-learning integration and this requires the combination of secular and sacred curriculum for the purposes of creating a world-view. To do this, educators need to be trained in both theology/philosophy and the social sciences. Bower (1964) is one first to create a manual to aid Christian educators in the administration of such an educational program. His manual focuses on the practice of administrating Christian education by providing application techniques to theoretical principles. It provides a study of techniques for the readers for. improving the Christian education program. Bower’s concern for the administering of Christian education is the result of the changing role of our public education. Because the secular realm of education is no longer educating individuals concerning morality and character in line with Christian beliefs, the church has a greater responsibility in taking these on roles. This is why so many Christians are turning to Christian schools though they are second-rate in some of their school programming. As the church takes over the responsibility of education, it realizes the need to train individuals to teach professionally. The problems faced in administering Christian education are none other than the quality of practice despite these pressures. Christians 78 are usually trained in theology/philosophy but not in the social sciences. There is the other extreme as well, where the Christian is highly trained in the social sciences but functions in layrnen’s terms with theology. When either of these exists, which is often, there is a lack of understanding of the need for faith-learning integration. The internal and external values placed on the components of curriculum affect what tensions influence the leadership. There are four main components to curriculum design: (1) a rationale that includes the overall educational goals, (2) a curriculum plan that describes outcomes that are prioritized according to importance, (3) an instructional plan that describes what each unit is about and how it is applicable to the overall teachings, individual outcomes for each unit, teaching strategies that can be used to reach intended outcomes, and (4) an evaluation plan describing behavioral indicators desired as well as not desired when the unit is completed (Posner and Rudnitsky, 1994). Operating principles allow for certain internal and external forces to influence decisions. These forces can be influential at any stage based on the structure of the school and the type of leadership it uses. An example of how external forces take an active role and seek participants in the process of policy-making is noted in the examination of a curriculum framework in the state of New York that reveals the tensions between constructiveness and traditional approaches to curriculum (Grant, 1997). The tensions were noted on three dimensions: learning, teaching, and subject matter. The theories behind the constructiveness and the traditionalist on each of these areas varies as the traditional view sees the learner as passive, the constructivist see the learner as active. When considering the tensions found in teaching methods, the traditionalist often talked in terms of giving knowledge while the constructiveness was intent on teaching them within the context of their environment and understanding. The tensions found in subject matter differences assert that traditionalist view knowledge about particular individual or event matters most important. Therefore the use of standardized testing that focuses on historical details is 79 most important. The constructivist focuses on student thinking, and is concerned about not only the people but also the meaning. They also assume that multiple perspectives will immerse about any topic. How this affects curriculum is directly related to what the institution values in the way of expected curriculum outcomes. How decisions are made is directly impacted by how they are influenced by the curriculum specialists’ values, meaning how they let both internal and external forces influence them. In looking for influences this study will look to the areas in which curriculum decisions are made. Kimball (1975) described six areas of curriculum that established policy: (1) curriculum theory and analysis, (2) curriculum structure, (3) subject area curriculum research, (4) curriculum and teaching method, (5) non-cognitive outcomes in curriculum, and (6) curriculum research and curriculum decisions. Though almost twenty years earlier he describes much the same areas as Posner and Rudnitsky. What is important for this study is how each is influenced internally or externally. Depending on the amount of credence given to either the internal force of theology or the external force of the community Religious education is divided into distinctive categories. There are them that advocate the use of all secular education models for Christian education. These models are based solely on external forces without the influence of theology. When these external forces drive the curriculum decisions, what results is commonly seen as the Christian school that is Christian in name only. The internal force of theology is absent and little distinguishes between these types of Christian institutions and secular institutions. In particular these institutions are driven by external forces outside the realm of religion and heavily influenced by the social sciences (Lee, 1973). These schools mark the differences between Christian education (evangelical) and all other Religious education types. When the evangelical educator adapts their teaching to philosophical teachings without a foundation in biblical theology, they lose what distinguishes them as Christian educators. The fact that some credence is given to a faith places them in the broader realm of Religious education. 80 There are several external forces on curriculum development that in turn affect curriculum development. They included legal requirements imposed on educators by the legislatures, certain ethical constraints, limited availability of learning materials, and interest-group pressures (Armstrong, 1989). These vary within the Christian institution from that of the public one but none-the-less can remain influential by choice. In particular evangelical Christian schools can be affected as they choose to take part in these external forces. Several scholars have identified and categorized any number of tensions that affect decision- making. First, Byme (1977) recognizes three such factors: (1) Educational aims and objectives reflections of the philosophy, (2) the nature of the pupil, (3) tradition, professional leadership, public demand, the influence of secular education, and the use of the scientific method. Second, Kirst and Walker (1972) group tensions that deal with curriculum decisions into three areas: national, state, and local. Finally, others have likewise identified external forces that shape the framework for schools as: (1) state policy, (2) federal agencies, (3) judicial mandates, (4) local schools (Marshall, et al., 1989; Marsh, etal., 1990). These lists combined are very conclusive of external forces that affect curriculum development. In understanding the external forces, educators must understand the tensions that result in power. In particular, the tensions made in history and tradition affect decision making for each state as they have distinguishable political cultures, developed from the influences of their histories. They differ in their regional geography, migration patterns and resultant demography, and value orientations toward the role of government (Elazar, 1984). Who has real power with curriculum varies from state to state, governors, state boards, interest group coalitions, or bureaucracies. The influences of power have been studied throughout the last thirty years. Iannaccone (1967) conducted research on interest groups’ effects on the educational policy system and theorized that such groups evolve through stages that result in increasing coalescing in order to exercise power. Campbell and Mazzoni (1976) almost ten years later examined the power sources and effectiveness of educational policy actors in twelve states. Just a few years after that Rosenthal and Fuhrman (1981) used case studies of six states to provide rich descriptions of the interplay among policy actors. In these studies; who governs, that is, whose values are incorporated into policy, is contingent on the changing influence of government officials, interest groups and coalitions, and bureaucracies. These external tensions are commonly seen as the influences that affect policy-making (Win and Kirst, 1972 and Marshall, et al., 1989). As a result the decisions an institution makes can be influenced by these tensions or powers. An example of this is found in a type of control that can be made with empowerment policies that give the power to change the curriculum to the teacher (Fuhrman and Malen, 1991) or other such individuals. While the who governs issue is influenced by outside pressures, like federal programs and national reports, it is the internal state policy culture that much more often determines who will govern the curriculum. Research shows similarities exist among the states in the hierarchy of influence, the legislature as a whole and its education committees and staffs are everywhere in the highest rung. Each state has its individualized hierarchy. In one state the governor ranks highest; in another, teachers’ organizations; and in another, the courts govern the curriculum. Power and influence ratings do fluctuate, but it is important to know each individual state’s power structures as a way of understanding the subculture of state capitals. Those who live in these worlds know that they must live by unstated rules if they are to gain and maintain influence (Marshall, et al.). Rinehardt (1998) points out the affects of different influences on leadership, namely, influences based on values, assumptions, and principles. In this way it is indicated that leadership plays an important role in the effects of external forces. Rinehardt defines two models of leadership and their characteristics. First, them leadership model which is characteristic of standardization, conformity, organization, 82 productivity, and centralization. Second, them leadership model which is characteristic of diversity instead of standardization, empowerment, not conformity, centered in scriptures rather than pragmatism, and authenticity above productivity and control. As leaders seek a leadership style it is realized that it is not easy to decide which force is more important for administrators. In taking a position and guarding the curriculum of an institution the administrator must understand the mission of the school. In this way, administrators can hold to the values as previously established by the institution. Those values for the evangelical school will be theologically based but beyond that the educator must understand what external forces affect curriculum development beyond this fact. Likewise, the educational leader must decide as to what operating principles will direct the forces that affect them. Meaning what type of leadership is the school advocating (Rinehardt, 1998). The school’s curriculum must grow out of its theology and provide clarity and direction to the staff. If the school’s spiritual and academic direction is to be consistent with its mission, theology must control the decisions made in the evangelical school, especially curriculum decisions. There are at least two significant elements that affect the direction if curriculum theory in evangelical Christian schools. One being, the school philosophy, as it is portrayed by the faculty and leadership and governed internally, second is the society of the school community and its role in the decision making process. Influences on the curriculum can come in the way of theory and practice, research findings, recommended readings, stakeholders, and selection of curriculum materials to name only a few (Connelly and Clandinin, 1988, Gove and Wirt, 1976, Marsh, et al., and Wirt and Kirst, 1989). For the Christian there are likewise several forces that may be constitute a force an example of this is an article that focuses on the New Christian Right’s involvement in school life and the belief and reasoning behind it. Namely, the belief that schools are failing and media disregard of pro school counter arguments. The 83 problems that the New Christian Right has identified or of which they have the most concern with are problems that concern most Americans and in this way bring new players and perspectives into public school government. The article is used to persuade administers to cultivate support for sound educational practices that will relieve the tensions caused by this group (Kaplan, 1994). Likewise, the New Christian Right movement affects Christian schools; as it represents extreme fundamentalists and their views, which tend to critique schools that advocate any hint of similarity to public school practices. A list of the effects, the New Christian Right, has on schools is documented by Nasman (1993). This article describes efforts to combat curriculum challenges and board election tactics in San Diego County in 1990. The article is written out of concern for the democratic decision process of making policies for a pluralistic society that are jeopardized by fundamentalist factions including Citizens for Excellence in Education (CEE). It is important to my understanding the threat that many Christians make on the public schools as well as to their reasons. This is a significant article in that it establishes possible factors that guide curriculum development even for the evangelical Christian School. Social and cultural forces affecting curriculum decisions include traditions, social changes, state and local control, culture-based curriculum ideas, social influences (Doll, 1992). The cultural framework has led to the focus on values. Devise methods to identify and track persistent values and shifis that are incorporated into policy. The fundamental and sometimes competing values for educational policy are quality, equity, and efficiency (Garms, Guthrie, and Pierce, 1978). A study of culture leads to an understanding about the meaning and behavior in patterns associated with policy-making (Spradley, 1979). More importantly and significant it leads to an understanding of curriculum planning (Hass and Parkay, 1993). 84 The literature review connects these bodies of literature to the proposed Summary dissertation topic. Through the process of reviewing this body of literature, a theoretical framework emerges as a proposal for research. This review supports the reason, methods to, and the necessity of research. This project smacks of Christian scholarship and ideologies. For some this is an outrageous idea but possibly for two different reasons. First, for the mainstream university scholars who are skeptical about the idea of taking religious faith seriously as a factor in intellectual being out raged or even polite, non-the-less not understanding why the Christian perspective along with other religious perspectives should be accepted as legitimate in the mainstream academia. Second, Christians and other religious people, especially scholars, who recognize that there might be something like, religiously informed scholarship, may not be clear as to what it amounts to. While there are many religious scholars many of them have not reflected on the relationship of their religion to their intellectual life (Marsden, 1997,). However, I would like to justify this research as valuable because it is a reflection of this researcher’s own evangelical perspective. As others have argued before (Noll, 1994) it should be considered in light of the belief, “that good Christian scholarship may be virtually indistinguishable from scholarship done by anyone else . . . Much of it is compatible with a Christian world view, and yet little of it flaunts that perspective” (Wuthnow, 1995, pp. 40-41). This review of the literature has aided in my concluding three main points. First, evangelical schools do not make a distinction between biblically based knowledge and social science based knowledge in deciphering what is good curriculum theory. Second, theology is the internal force that influences curriculum practice for evangelical Christian educators. Third, school governance does play a part in determining the strength of various community influences. These three facts indicate that the organizational structure of a school might govern what is an internal or external force and in this way guide 85 curriculum decisions and understandings through a set of operating principles. However since ACSI schools are characteristic of three types of school organizational structures these influences will likely vary from school to school. 86 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY This chapter is dedicated to the design of research employed to respond to research questions. The research project itself is qualitative in nature employing 2g _stu_di§ and commtive cgse study methods (Yin, 1994 and Stake, 1995) as a means of investigating data collected from interviews and written documentation. The methods use are standardized and proven methods of qualitative research as outlined by Gall, Borg, and Gall (1996), Marshall and Rossman (1999), Yin (1994), and Stake (1995). Likewise, the case study approach was used successfully with related studies. From this proposed design a better understanding of operating principles in K-12 evangelical schools was gained. Rational for Design Choice This study employed case study and comparative case study methods as a means of researching a sample of ACSI member schools. These methods provide the best possible means for understanding the breadth of information concerning curriculum development and the operating principles that govern both external and internal forces. The case study approach is best for the problem at hand as a thick description (Geertz, 1973) and systematic and detailed analysis will yield valuable explanations and a better understanding of the operating principals in ACSI schools and provide validation of the data. 0 This method has been selected due to the range of the sources used in the case study (e. g. interviews, printed documents, interviews, and the organizational structure of the school that also serves as a contributing factor). 0 Likewise, the research delves deep into complexities and processes, for the researcher to understand the data it must be conducted in the setting where all this 87 complexity operates. This can best be accomplished in the natural settings and best recorded using the case study method 0 The case study will be most revealing, as very little is known concerning the phenomena of the ACSI school curriculum practice. 0 This type of research cannot be done experimentally for practical or ethical reasons. 0 It is not yet clear as to what external and internal forces are relevant variables as they have yet to be identified for ACSI schools. 0 One cannot understand human actions without understanding the meaning that educators or research participants attribute to those actions. Their thoughts, feelings, beliefs, values, and assumptive worlds; the researcher therefore needs to understand the deeper perspectives captured through face-to-face interactions of the interviewing process (Marshall, 1985, 1987). o The case study approach to research is needed to focus on the school organization (Marshall and Rossman, 1999) as this is a study of society and culture within the conservative evangelical Christian school. Time Line The research plan consists of several steps prior to gaining access to sample schools. The following time line may provide further clarification of the process used to recruit schools and gain access: 0 February 3, 2000— UCRIHS approved the research proposal (see Appendix. A). 0 February 14-15, 2000— Dr. Derek J. Keenan was approached concerning project approval. Dr. Derek J. Keenan, Vice President of Academic Affairs 88 for ACSI, wrote a letter of introduction and approval. This letter was e- mailed to me to use when I approached individual schools requesting access (see Appendix B). March 1-22, 2000 — Information concerning research project and a request for access of seven schools was mailed out. Phone calls were placed to follow-up on the written requests. Consent Forms and Interview sign-ups were also sent once approval was granted (see Appendix C). April 3, 2000 — Site visit, data collection, and interviews at Overfield Christian School (see Appendix D). April 5 and 6, 2000— These were the dates of the site visit, data collection, and interviews at Eagle Lake Christian School. April 25, 2000- Final approval was granted from the last of seven schools. Only three schools accepted the invitation to participate. May 15-17, 2000— These were the dates of the site visit, data collection, and interviews at Columbia Christian School. May 22, 2000— Letters of appreciation to three participating schools were sent out. January 26, 2001—UCRIHS renewal approval was granted on this date (see Appendix E). April 1, 2001—Head Curriculum Specialist were asked to review cases and respond (see Appendix F). 89 Population and Sample The mpulation for this research is ACSI-accredited schools. The choice to use ACSI-accredited schools provides a finite population that is defined by a unique set of standards within this evangelical association as defined by Association of Christian Schools International 1999 International Membership Directory (ACSI, 1998). ACSI- accredited schools have been chosen for this study as a means of both identifying evangelical schools with a given set of criteria and to narrow the focus of the study to a manageable topic. The project is limited because it only interviews a small group orm of schools even from within the selection of ACSI schools. ACSI identifies three main types of organizational structures; the church-run school, the self-perpetuating board-run school and the parent-society-run school. This sample includes three schools that are self-perpetuating board-run schools which have been already identified organizationally by their structure by ACSI. Criteria for the sample which are purposefully selected, is based on the following criteria: 0 ACSI Accredited 0 Located within the Mid-American and Ohio River Valley Regions 0 Have grades K-12 0 Have a minimum of 500 students enrolled - Their organizational structure will be of a self-perpetuating board-run school. 0 Individual school administrators, and key individuals whom serve as curriculum specialist must consent to volunteer for the project 0 A school must consent to participate in the project 0 Schools that try to balance both evangelical theology and academic standards (faith and learning integration) 9O The criteria changed slightly from the proposed project. The reason for the change is two fold: first, the Mid-West Region was divided into two separate regions, thus forming two separate regions, the Ohio River Valley Region and the Mid-American Region and second, the need for additional sample schools that meet criteria and would agree to participate when the first schools declined. Data Collection Tools Four sets of documents were sought from each participating institution and in this way reflect maximum variation to documentdiverse variations and identify important common patterns (Marshall and Rossman, 1999). . Set 1 Documentation was written statements fi'om ACSI schools that indicate the operating principles of the institution. This set of documents includes: documents that lay out the organizational structure of each institution (organizational structures, handbooks, and other artifacts) and documents used to guide curriculum development and instruction (mission statement, value statements, vision statement, philosophy, published or original curriculum guides). The purpose of which is to investigate what is perceived and actually employed as far as theological and secular values. Set 2 Documentatign was the transcript from each cm'riculum specialists interviewed. These specialists were identified from Set 1 Documentation (administrators, teachers, and possibly non-site experts that are involved in translating theology to school curriculum). This data will include maps made by those interviewed, and they will indicate leverage points for curriculum decisions (Kirst and Walker, 1971). The purpose of which is to investigate how curriculum is developed. Set 3 Documentation is a set of transcripts and discussions with ACSI school curriculum specialists that proves to be beneficial in determining and validating relationships or non-relationships, tensions, and further contextual richness. This third set of data originally included focus group discussions. However, these were dropped on 91 the request of the curriculum specialists of the schools, with the approval of the chairing advisor, due to the redundancy of data. (In fact, one site requested that the focus groups be dropped as a condition of their participation in the research.) Set 4 Documentation is the examination of current studies and literature as it relates to this study. Though no specific study has been formd there are some parallels in previous studies. Data Management and Protocols Acquiring access to the sample was done in the following manner: (1) a letter of request sent to the president, Ken Smitherrnan, of ACSI, who referred the matter to Dr. Derrek Keenan, Vice President of Academic Affairs, of ACSI. Keenan granted approval and wrote a letter of introduction to sample schools, (2) copies of a letter of approval from ACSI, a letter of invitation from the researcher, and a consent form was sent to selected schools, and (3) a follow-up phone call confirming the acceptance of the school, and establishing a means of access to written documentation collection, interview dates, and a site visit. The collection of written materials was the first step in data collection. However, much of the documentation is a result of requests made at the time of observation. E_lit_e interviewing (Marshall and Rossman, 1999) and Mardized open-ended interviews (Patton, 1990 and Gall, Borg, and Gall, 1996) was incorporated as methods for collecting information from curriculum specialists on site. Questioning followed the pre- established set of protocols (see Appendix D). Observations were used as a means of validating the researcher’s data-analysis. Likewise, head curriculum specialists were asked to confirm each case as presented for their school. Additionally, comparative case study methods have been used to confirm and validate the data in light of ACSI K-12 evangelical Christian schools. 92 A review of documents supplemented interviewing, as the gathering and analyzing of documents produced by the organization provide an unobtrusive method, rich in portraying the values and beliefs of participants in the settings. The interviews were one to one-half hour each and used the established set of questions (see Appendix D). Elite interviewing was used as those interviewed provided an overall view of an organization or its relationship to other organizations. This included all curriculum specialists as established in the first phase of written documentation and analysis. They will be able to report on the organization’s policies (Marshall and Rossman, 1999). However, some interviews reflected a more (Patton, 1990) as members of the curriculum committee was or was not able to answer these questions as concisely though the same questions were used for both. A hand held tape recorder was used to record remarks that are verified. Questions were asked of each interviewee by the researcher. Interviewees were asked to map out the organizational structure of the school on a piece of paper. A set of notes and observations, likewise, proved valuable in the data collection process. Data Analysis Procedures/Trustworthiness Considerations Case Study and Compative Case Study methods were used to analyze the three cases to find commonality from which to create frameworks. By using pattem-matching (Yin, 1994) as a form of comparison of the three cases of ACSI schools the study was able to gain an understanding of how evangelical educators should understand and work with a set of common operating principles that guides their curriculum decisions and understandings. This was a secondary analysis across the three cases after each was independently analyzed. The purpose of which was to show the degree to which the operating principles may or may not fit one or more frameworks for curriculum development within ACSI schools. An also this information validated the uniqueness and consistency within evangelical schools. 93 Ethical Considerations Each school is identified by a pseudo-name assigned at the beginning of the data collection. Information in the form of artifacts was collected and stored separately from other cases used in the study. To report the interview data the researcher used a form of brief quotations from recorded conversations during the interview process. The tapes from these interviews have been kept as well as transcribed copies of brief quotations hour the interviews. To verify the data collected with an internal check of this researcher’s interpretation the process of triangulation is used. Following the data collection copies of the cases were sent to each school and a follow-up call to verify the information serves as a means of an internal validity check. Information gathered from interviews and written documentation was analyzed and reviewed by participants from each site in this way maintaining an external validity check of the data Each school was asked for their initial reaction to the data. In this way it provided a triangulation of the data from the interview, gathered documents, and feedback from participant review of analysis. Site Visits The data was collected from three sites representing three schools. Data collection consisted of written documents, taped curriculum interviews, hand drawn organizational charts, and the researcher’s notes of observations and dialog. The information was collected in the spring of 2000 when each school was visited by the researcher. Overfield Christian school’s (OCS) visit lasted one day. At this sight the administrator greeted the researcher and began the visit with a tour of the facility and an explanation of the history and present situation. Seven curriculum specialists were identified by the superintendent and were interviewed. These individuals were involved 94 with the curriculum as board members, teachers, parents, administrators, and committee members. Documents that were identified through the interview process were collected during this visit. These documents included the following: the board policy manual, course of study, various course outlines, diagram of the “Truth Centered Curriculum”, diagram of the organizational structure, and organizational decision maps. The site visit to Eagle Lake Christian School (ELCS) took a total ofthree days. During the site visit extensive interviews with administrators, lead teachers, department heads, and other specialists took place. Interviews were held in a small office within the high school building. Those interviewed answered protocol questions and drew process charts clarifying how decisions are made at ELCS helping identify and gather relevant documents for data. During this visit time twenty-five individuals were interviewed. Interviews were conducted in a room adjacent the main high school office. It was apparent that everyone was cordially receptive to the project though there was a hint of caution from many including the high school secretary and the high school principal. Curriculum specialists upon arriving often entered with the belief that the researcher was evaluating them, was critical of Christian schools, or reveal confidential statements curriculum process and peers. To address any of their concerns, prior to each interview volunteers were informed about the purpose of the research and given a brief verbal vita about the researcher. Afler talking with several individuals it was apparent that this was a model Christian school and was very accustom to outsiders. Even those that hinted as such unease seemed competent and had nothing to hide about their feelings or their own abilities. 95 Written documents that were gathered were of various types. Information Packets, New Student Enrollment Procedures, ELCHS Profile brochure, school calendar, Tuition and Transportation Schedule, “The Intercessor” (a Parent Teacher Fellowship brochlue), statement of faith, Course Information on 6‘“, 7m, and 8"I grade language Arts, Personnel Handbook, Policy Manual, Request for Reconsideration of Library Materials, General Considerations To Be Applied To The Selection of Any Literary Work, “The Eagle Lake Herald” the high school student newspaper, Program of Course Offerings, Student Life Task Force Information, Calendar of Curriculum Development and Curriculum Adoption, and samples of several “Course of Study” worksheets. Each of the artifacts from the site visit proved valuable in understanding the curriculum process at Eagle Lake Christian School, The document collection is comprised of both formal documents approved by the organization, taped interviews which have been transcribed, and informal documentation in the form of hand drawn charts produced at the time of the interview by those being interviewed. First, the Information Packets had various brochures available concerning the school. Some of these items were the Profile brochure that answered various questions about the mission, vision, facility, staff, history, location, standards, certification, and programming for the school. Also included were brochures with pictures and additional information about grade level programming, the school calendar, tuition and transportation, the Parent Teacher Fellowship, and the Statement of faith. This packet provided essential information about the setting and structure of this case. Second, the Course Information for 6’”, 7'“, and 8th grade Language Arts gave an example of how this school has developed its own curriculum rather than using a 96 published curriculum. The “Program of Course Offerings,” the “Calendar of Curriculum Development,” “Curriculum Adoptions,” as well as the samples of several “Course of Study” worksheets documents the systematic and updated completeness of the curriculum process that individuals talked about. Third, the “Personnel Handbook,” “Policy Manual,” “Request for Reconsideration of Library Materials,” as well as the “General Considerations To Be Applied To The Selection of Any Literary Work” document are proved to provide evidence of “safeguards” that protect the curriculum process from external forces. Finally, the information on the “Student Task Force” proved to be enlightening. It is apparent that this advisory committee would represent parents concerning the academic, spiritual, social, behavioral, and psychological aspects of past, current, and future student life. This committee is charged with the responsibility to review, discuss, analyze, survey, and finally, make recommendations to the ELCS Board of Directors relative to various aspects of student life (Forward, “Concept of the student Life Task Force,” 1993). This school was one of the seven schools picked for the research. When seeking approval the head administrator, Dr. Simpson, asked if the board needed to be involved in the process, which he hoped to avoid. If the researcher made such a request it would likely stopped access to Eagle Lake Christian School. Unsure of how this would or would not affect the project but realizing that at this point, four of the seven schools that met the qualifications had turned the request down it was decided to agree with the request. 97 CCS was the last site chosen for research because of its size. In comparison to the original seven schools meeting the criteria for the project this school seemed to present a project of its own. However, upon completing the data collection it was realized that this site was in very similar to the other two sites researched. CCS was chosen when five of the seven schools backed out or turned the proposal down. The site visit to Columbia Christian Schools (CCS) took three days. During the site visit extensive interviews with curriculum specialists: administrators, the curriculum director, and department heads took place. Curriculum specialist drew process charts clarifying how curriculum decisions are made with in the school and helped in identifying and gathering related written documents for data. Individual interviews were taped and the researcher collected the process charts that were used in clarifying how decisions are made within the school. In addition to this, curriculum specialist helped in identifying and gathering related written documents for data. Interviews took place in various offices and a cubical in the high school library. Written documents that were gathered were of various types: Curriculum. policy. student information, the Constitution, student handbooks, staff handbooks, Information packets, and teacher-evaluation forms. In additions to these formal documents that were provided during the site visit individuals were asked to draw, chart, map, or in some way show the process of curriculum decision-making. Once this was drawn on paper individuals were asked to elaborate on what influenced decisions and what factors directed the process. Both types of documents were gathered based on information revealed during the interview sessions. 98 Curriculum documents were in many forms. These formal documents aided in understanding this complex system that was clearly defined for all individuals. These documents were the “Curriculum Development Model” that outlined the process and the “Curriculum Study (Course of Study)” that outlined the CCS’ written curricultun. In addition to these are “CCS, Inc. Five Step Curriculum Development Process”, “CCS, Inc. Guidelines For Evaluating Textbooks, Textbook Evaluation Forms”, “Rubric for evaluating Critical Learning Skills and Pupil Performance Objectives, CCS, Inc.”, “Rubric for Evaluating a Course Outline, CCS, Inc.,” samples of the “Course of Study for Ninth Grade Integrated English Course/English I and Eleventh Grade Language Arts Course/English III”, sample “Critical Learning Skill lists for Microsoft Excel 97, Microsoft Word (Proficient Exam)”, “Fourth Grade Science /Health, Algebra 1, and Geometry,” Position Papers on the following topics: Outcome Based Education, Alternative Assessment, and Whole Language and Language Arts, a sample of Needs Assessment and the Results for the Science/Health Department and Physical Education Department, information concerning the Ohio Writing Project for Early English, Composition, and Assessment Program: Portfolio Program, and Student Evaluation Materials. 99 CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS WITHIN THREE ACSI SCHOOLS This chapter presents three case studies, using data collected from three evangelical Christian schools: Overfield Christian School (OCS), Eagle Lake Christian School (ELCS), and Columbia Christian Schools, Inc (CCS). These schools are located in the Mid-America Region and Ohio River Valley Region of the United States of America as recognized by the Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI).2 Each school has over five hundred students in the kindergarten through twelfth grades (K-12) and is ACSI-accredited (see Figure 4.1). These three case studies provide insight into what drives how curriculum is developed within three self-perpetuated board-run, evangelical Christian schools. Figure 4.1 Three Cases of Evangelical Christian Schools School Board Administrators Personnel Founded Student State Affiliation Structure Count Count Accreditation OCS Self- l Superintendent, 72 1961 652 OH State charter Perpetuated l Home-school Teachers and ACSI Director, and Support Staff 2.5 Principals ELCS Self- l Superintendent 130 1965 1350 IN State Non-public Perpetualed and 3.5 Teachers and Support Staff Administrators ACSI Self- Perpetuated CCS l Superintendent, 9 Principals. and 2 Home-school Directors 330 Teachers and Support Staff Founded 1963 Consolidated 1971 2800 OH State charter ACSI 2 Mid-American Region serves Christian schools in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wisconsin. The Ohio River Valley Region serves Christian schools in Kentucky, Ohio, and West Virginia (ACSI International Membership Directogy, 2000). 100 Each case study is comprised of three parts. First, a description of the school is provided to establish an understanding of its environment. Next, examples of curriculum policy and procedure are identified in each case to clearly define the nature of curriculum development at each site. Three theoretical frames discussed in chapter two are then used in an overlapping way in a theoretical analysis of the contextual information and in this way determines what is going on in the case. Finally, given this analysis of the contextual material the research questions are addressed using a flame. The cases of OCS, ELCS, and CCS will provide insight into understanding how curriculum is developed and will identify the influences that appear to drive the curriculum of each school. Case studies were employed to provide a rich description of each of these schools so as to better understand the frameworks used in the development of cluriculum. Using the case study approach the curriculum development process is illuminated best through the use of multiple sources of information. This approach has allowed for the triangulation of several sources: ACSI, multiple taped interviews of curriculum specialist, school documents concerning curriculum, as well as the observations of the researcher. Case studies also show the complexity of variables and their interaction in each case. The information is an in-depth description about the site visit, selection of the site, environment, history, organization and governing structure, mission, accreditation, state affiliation, decision-making process, and the policies that govern in the areas of administration, teachers, support staff, and student enrollment. This description clearly defines the conditions under which policy and procedures concerning curriculum are determined. 101 The three frameworks utilized in the theoretical analysis are: Ornstein and Levine’s (1993, p. 488) “The Purpose of Education and the Forces That Influence Them”, Armstrong’s (1989, p. 6) “The General flow of Curriculum-development Activity”, and Beane, Toepfer, and Alessi’s (1986, p. 67) “A Framework for Curriculum Planning” (see Figure 4.2, Figure 4.3, and Figure 4.4). The purpose of this analysis is to understand each case in light of the components as defined by these frameworks, namely: educational purposes, influences, the process of curriculum development, and the decision part of curriculum planning. The first framework, “The Purpose of Education and Forces that Influence Them,” (see Figure 4.2) offers an explanation of how philosophical, theoretical, and social forces brought about by changes in society, knowledge and the learner affect the educational aims of schooling. Ornstein and Levine’s, (1993) framework theorizes that educational philosophy and educational theories influence the approach taken to - education when the adopted philosophy and educational theories interact with changing social forces. Through this interaction, or relationship, the aims of education are influenced. As a result, the general purposes (aims), more specific purposes (goals), and most specific purposes (objectives) are all affected. This framework delineates how the philosophies and educational theories are substantially, influenced by social forces. In using this framework to analyze each evangelical Christian school, a two-fold question surfaces: What are the philosophical and theoretical influences on educational purposes in Christian schools? How do philosophies, educational theories, and social forces interact to influence the purpose of education in Christian schools? 102 Figure 4.2 The Purpose of Education and the Forces That Influence Them l _ _ . SOCla-l forces Changes .ln: 0 0 Society Knowledge 0 The learner INFLUENCES ON EDUCATIONAL Philosqphles and . Educational theories PURPOSES ' GENERAL PURPOSES Aims V V MORE SPECIFIC PURPOSES Goals . Goals MOST SPECIFIC l t l l v 1 P Ulu USES Objectives Objectives Objectives Objectives Objectives Objectives Note. Ornstein, A. C. and Levine, D. U., Foundations of Education, (5th ed.), (1993). Houghton Mifflin Company. Used with permission. The second framework, “The General Flow of Curriculum-development Activity” (see Figure 4.3) by Armstrong (1989, p. 6), charts the flow of how curriculum is developed. This theory places a considerable amount of emphasis on the sources of curriculum as the process’ starting point. In this theory the consideration of curriculum sources is followed by the selection of two perspectives for educating. The two perspectives in this figure are the philosophies of education that identifies an approach such as idealism, realism, perennialism, essentialism, pragmatism, progressivism, social 103 reconstructionisrn, existentialism, and philosophical analysis; while the psychology of learning is concerned with the science of learning and considers the emotional and behavior of students. The perspectives result in reactions to external influences that afl‘ect the curriculum development process. This is followed by the identification of a general orientation and the preparation of the curriculum before the curriculum is implemented. The final stage is the evaluation of the curriculum. Using Armstrong’s framework to follow the phases of activity in the general flow of curriculum development provides an understanding of what drives the process of curriculum development in these schools. Figure 4.3 The General Fiow of Curriculum-development Activity CONSIDERATION SELECTION OF OF SOURCES PERSPECTIVES FROM 0 o Society Learners MAJOR MEDIATORS REACTION TO 0 Philosophies of EXTERNAL ’ education ’ INFLUENCES - Knowledge Psychology of learning 0 V IDENTIFICATION OF A PREPARATION OF IMPLEMENTATION OF GENERAL ORIENTATION THE CURRICULUM ' THE CURRICULUM f s} EVALUATION OF THE CURRICULUM 104 The third analytical lens, “A Framework for Curriculum Planning” (see Figure 4.4) by Beane, Toepfer, and Alessi (1986, p. 67) proposes a non-linear fiamework for curriculum planning. Originating from the social sciences, the frameworks depicts curriculum planning as being guided by decision screens which include principles of learning, characteristics of the learner, general resources, curricular approaches to the subject, broad fields, social problems, emerging needs, and organized knowledge. In addition, curriculum is equally guided by the foundation, goals, and general objectives. All of these elements are networked in a non-linear fashion to give rise to curriculum development. This framework will be used in each case study to better understand curricultun planning, the influence of the foundations, and decision screens on the curriculum plans themselves in Christian schools. 105 S N E E R C S D N O I S I C E . I : I : I : l I S D E E N S D L E I F D A O R B L A I C O S T C E J B U S D E Z I N A G R O S M E L B O R P G N I G R E M E E G D E L W O N K R A L U C I R R U C S E H C A O R P P A ] l l S C I T S I R E T C A R A H C S E C R U O S E R L A R E N E G S E L P I C N I R P G N I N R A E L R E N R A E L l L E H T l F O F O I E H T N E D D I H M U L U C I R R U C : l f k— . l 1 - - Y G O L O H C Y S P N A M U H C I S A B S D E E N Figure 4.4 A Framework for Curriculum Planning SNV‘H "010318803 N A L P E r A r s S “ L A N O I T A N R O / D N A . N A L P S C 6 0 3 W - T C I R T S I D _ , M A R G O R P L : 0 0 H C S ~ L L A S N O I T A U T I S G N I N R A E L - G N I H C A E T G N I R U S A E M ' j S E C I V E D I S E C R U O S E F S E I T I V I T C A T N E T N O C S E V I T C E J B O [ - - - - - - - — — - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - l . SiAIDBI'BO 1'83"!!! - Y H P O S O L I H P E H T E F I L D O O G S'IVOO H F O Y R A R O P M E T N O C D N A Y T E I C O S E R U T U F — Y G O L O I C O S S C I T S I R E T C A R A H C SNOILVONflOrl 106 Figure 4.5 is used to draw conclusions about the research question with which the figure is concerned. First, the placement of social forces and theological values in relation to the organizational structure of the school; secondly, identifying the external forces and the internal forces of each case, and third, answering the research question, “To what extent does evangelical theology guide or impact curriculum development in an evangelical school setting?” This framework is the final theoretical analysis for the individual cases. Figure 4.5 A Tentative Conceptual Framework of Curriculum Tension External Foreee are Social forces Technology Federal Agencies \s h 11 / l rganizational Stractu 1 Boards of Educmion / \s Axiology $0018: Action Accrediting / Associations Internal P tal lnflucnce=> Personal Evangelism Forces Biblical are Theology Publ'sh <::= Theological => :3 l CPS Values Epistemology MflflPhYSICS National /7 Integration Faith-leaming Cumcujum Reforms \lnterest GTOIIPS Private ' xNational Organization Foundations Testing Agencies 107 Overfield Christian School (OCS): The Case of Theology’s Impact is Influenced by the Biggest Voice School Context Overfield, Ohio is a northern city within the ACSI Ohio River Valley Region (ACSI, 1998). This city has a population of 50,600 (AAA North America Road Atlas, . 1999). One interstate runs outside the city connecting it to the state capital. There is a small airport which serves to connect residents and nearby communities to larger cities. Overfield Christian School (OCS) is located near the outskirts of this industrial city about seven minutes from the interstate. The students at OCS commute from one of four counties served by the school. OCS is a self-perpetuating board3 run school. The board hires the administration of the school that consists of a superintendent, one home school director,4 a secondary (grades 9-12) school principal, a half time junior high principal (grades 7-8), and an elementary (grades K-6) school principal. There are fifty-three (53) teachers and nineteen (19) support staff which include, custodial, secretarial, and maintenance personnel. The school operates out of one building on the site that has expanded over 3 Self-perpetuating board: This phrase describes the organizational structure of an ACSI school. This structure is characterized by the appointment of board members by the board itself rather than election by the school community. 4 This is the administrative director who coordinates/oversees OCS staff and students involved with the home school programs. This would include admissions, textbooks, supervisors and field coordinators, standardized testing of all students, college entrance exams, involvement in extra-curricular activities, and cumulative student records. (OCS Board Policy Manual, 5520:5003-4) 108 several construction projects to house its total enrollment of 652 students in grades preschool through twelve. In addition to full-time students, the school networks with home-schooled families to provide oversight, academic credit, textbooks, and learning resources. The home-school program allows these students to participate in some courses and extra-curricular activities as an enhancement to their home school program. The board has made provisions for OCS to provide a pre-kindergarten-Melfth grade (PreK-IZ) education and run the local Christian radio station. OCS represents one of the larger, well-established evangelical Christian schools associated to ACSI. The K- 12 school has continuously been a member of the Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI) since it began in 1961 at the request of the board, having met the requirements of ACSI Accreditation (ACSI, 199%). The superintendent provided a brief history of the school, the people, and institution to supply background information on the organization. Additionally, he navigated a short tour of the school. The layout of the building was well organized beginning with the preschool at one end and ending with the high school at the opposite end. The building has been added to at various stages as the school has grown in number. The school offices are appropriately located with the age groups they served. The central office is in the center near the main entrance. The entire site is built on the ground level with parking in the front and back. Located behind the building are also the playground area and the athletic fields. The history of OCS is that of progression, and the facility itself is a symbol of that with each addition. 109 The history that was recounted by the superintendent was likewise evident in the written documents collected from the school. Overfield Christian School was founded in 1961 by a group of evangelical Christians who held two basic convictions. First was the conviction that the education of their children was not the state’s responsibility but their own. Second was the conviction their children should be educated by individuals who love God and think biblically. The founders of OCS agreed with Charles Hodge of Princeton who said a century ago that education without God and the Bible would become the most affective machinery for propagating atheism that this sin cursed world has ever known (OCS Course of Study, p. 2). The written documents pointed out that Overfield’s main purpose for creating this school community was to support parental belief that religion should not be separated from learning, the main focus of which is to integrate biblical truths with academic learning. This belief supports the concept that education is the responsibility of the parent. In turn, this belief supports the frarner’s conviction; students should be educated by Christian teachers rather than by secular ones or even institutions that do not have supporting biblical convictions. From the time of its conception to the present these two basic convictions of the OCS school community have not changed. The OCS Mission and FEES}: OCS is driven in purpose and mission. The board has written a clear statement for both, which are referenced often during interviews. Both the mission statement and the purpose statements of OCS drive the institution. ”0 The mission statement of OCS clearly states values protected by the organizational structure of the school. The OCS mission statement is as follows: Overfield Christian School exists as an extension of the Christian home and church to fulfill God’s commands to teach His words “diligently tmto our children” (Deuteronomy 6:5-7). Our foundation rests upon acknowledging Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and the Bible as the Word of God——the final authority in truth and practice (11 Timothy 2:15). We strive to assist each student to grow in excellence spiritually, academically, socially, and physically (Luke 2:52) through the Godly ministry and examples of teachers, administrators, board members and staff (Titus 1:15-16). We serve with the cooperation of parents who support us through their prayers and involvement in the activities of Overfield Christian School (Ephesians 6:4) (Approved 11/18/93) (OCS Board Policy MM, 1 100: 1001). The mission statement has five assertions: (l) The school is an extension of the home and church, (2) The foundations of the school rest on knowing Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and the Bible as the Word of God being the authority in truth and practice, (3) The school seeks to assist with students as they grow spiritually, academically, socially, and physically, (4) The school intends to do its work through Godly-ministry and examples by both the personnel and board members, and (5) The school works cooperatively with parents in this ministry (OCS Board Policy Man_u_a_l, 1100:1001 ). These assertions reportedly are important influences that drive curriculum at OCS through the development of policies and procedures concerning OCS curriculum and curriculum development. 111 An example of the application of these assertions is a response to needs in the home, family, academic, and community. In response to input from various individuals the superintendent, Mr. Schleeter, stated that OCS endeavors to work on public relations with both the community and parents. He noted that he tries to “keep abreast of what area businesses are looking for.” This means student who are not college bound must have employable skills. He stated as an example, “Fast food employers want employees who can count change.” OCS serves not only the community but also the family and home, when students possess these basic skills. The purpose statement makes six assertions about the organization. Two of these assertions place emphases on establishing, conducting, operating, and maintaining a Christian school and recruiting students from homes that are basically Christian. These assertions state: 1 To establish, conduct, operate and maintain a Christian school or schools for educational purposes below college or university level to provide adequate and competently trained faculty and administrators for such school or schools. 2 To recruit students from homes that are basically Christian, train them for and guide them into the fields of leadership that will honor God and be directly responsible for the cause of Christ, whom we love and serve (OCS Board Policy Manual, 1012). To describe the importance of the mission and purpose statements, Mrs. Williams, a parent, teacher, and board member serving on the Educational Policies Committee stated the most important factor which influences curriculum is the board’s role in setting policy in line with the mission and purpose. She further explained, “Policy is a guide that 112 reflects our mission and purpose, [which] are tied by policy.” She explained that the board looks at the “big picture” when setting policy. Once policy is set, it is the institution’s responsibility to carry it out. Williams explained this to mean, “knowing it, reviewing it, and applying it.” Both the mission and purpose statements assert that OCS is an extension of the home and church. This assertion is evident in at least two ways. First, timing the first day of the site visit high school students were preparing to lead a worship service in music for a school chapel service. This is a direct link to the church and its acts of worship. Second, the superintendent, Mr. Schleeter, noted that parents are involved in curriculum decisions, thus linking the home with the school. Parents are involved * through the Educational Policies Committee. Both of these concepts were evident at the time of the visit. The Educational Policies Committee serves to fulfill the intent of the mission and purpose according to both the documents and the superintendent. The board requires parents to be represented on this committee since they oversee the curriculum. The superintendent noted that the committee is always comprised of at least, “two board members, one administrator, one elementary teacher, one secondary teacher, and two to three parents,” all of which are picked yearly. It is the board’s expressed intent that this committee is responsible for insuring the OCS mission and purpose and what they represent. The policy for the Educational and Personnel Committee states: The committee is appointed in accordance to Sec. 2616. The committee takes the initiative and by specific board consent or mandate, takes action in the following areas: 113 1. To review issues relating to professional personnel. This implies investigating qualifications of candidates for administrative positions; recommending a salary schedule and other benefits such as sick leave, pensions, hospitalization, etc., to the finance committee; establishing the general conditions of employment, such as teaching assignment and pupil load. The principal of the school is generally charged with the responsibility of coordinating all arrangements with respect to employment. 2. To investigate and interpret the school curriculum. The education committee activates itself in two ways to make sure that: the requirements of the state laws are fulfilled; the requirements of the school’s own philosophy are satisfied in the course of study. 3. To keep itself informed in regard to the quality, which includes the Christian character, of the instruction and to evaluate all educational activities, equipment, and discipline which are essential factors in meeting the objectives of the school. 4. To develop and enforce a policy of admission of pupils. The responsibilities of the education committee do not conflict with the responsibilities of the professional personnel. The two groups work together for a common goal, each contributing from the resources of his education, experience, and judgment. (Issue Date: 10/27/83, Approved: 11/17/83, Reviewed: 1/19/95 (OCS Board Policy MM, 2720:2010) The Educational Policies Committee has three responsibilities that directly influence curriculum decisions. The committee is responsible for OCS personnel, 114 curriculum, quality, as well as Christian character of personnel, and the admission of pupils. The main objective of the committee is to oversee OCS and to do so by investigating, interpreting, monitoring, developing and enforcing OCS curriculum and personnel. The committee’s objective is to protect the mission, values, character, and integrity of the institution. . The mission statement and the pm'pose statement allude to a Statement of Christian Faith. OCS has a twelve-point statement of Christian faith. The preamble reads: “Our commitment aligns itself with the philosophy that the only real answer to the needs of our youth lies in a personal relationship with Jesus Christ” (OCS Board Policy MM 1200:1001-1004). The theology is expressed in twelve articles on the following topics: (1) the Holy Scriptures, (2) the only triune God, (3) the Lord Jesus Christ, (4) the Holy Spirit, (5) the creation and fall of man, (6) salvation by grace through faith, (7) righteous living and good works, (8) the existence of Satan, (9) the second coming of Christ, (10) future life bodily resurrection and eternal judgment, (11) the one true Church, and (12) the separation from the world. These articles fully explain the biblical foundations for the theological beliefs given in the Statement of Christian Faith. 1. We believe THE HOLY SCRIPTURES: accepting fully the writings of the Old and New Testaments as the very Word of God, verbally inspired in all parts and therefore wholly without error as originally given of God, altogether sufficient in themselves as our only infallible rule of faith and practice. (Matt. 5:18; John 10:35; John 12:42; 178:17: 11 Tim. 3:16; 11 Peter 2:21). 115 We believe in THE ONLY TRIUNE GOD: who is personal, spirit, and sovereign (Mark 12:29); and eternal in His being, holiness, love, wisdom, and power (Psalm 18:30; 147:5; Deut. 33:27); absolutely separate and above the world as its Creator, yet everywhere present in the world as the Upholder of all things (Gen. 1:1; Psalm 104); self-existent and self- revealing in three distinct persons- the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (John 5:26; Matt. 28:19; 11 Cor. 13:14), each of whom is to be honored and worshiped equally as true God (John 5: 23; Acts 5:3-4). We believe in THE LORD JESUS CHRIST: who is the Second Person of the Triune God, the eternal Word and Only Begotten Son, our great God; and Saviour (John 1:1; 3:16; Titus 2:13; Rom. 9:5); that, without any essential change in His divine Person (Heb. 13:8), He became man by the miracle of Virgin Birth (John 1:4; Matt. 1:23), true Man, one Person with two natures (Col. 2:9; Rev. 22:16); that as Man, He was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin, (Heb. 4:15; John 8:46); that as the perfect lamb of God He gave Himself in death upon the Cross, bearing there the sin of the world, and suffering its full penalty of divine wrath in our stead (Isa. 53:5-6; Matt. 20:28; Gal. 3:13; John 1:29); that He arose again from the dead and was glorified in the same body in which He suffered and died (Luke 24:36-43: John 20: 25-28): that as our great High Priest He ascended into heaven, there to appear before the face of God as our Advocate and Intercessor (Heb. 4:14; 9:24; [John 2:1). 116 We believe in THE HOLY SPIRIT: who is the Third Person of the Triune God (Matt. 28:19; Acts 5:3-4), the divine Agent in nature, revelation and redemption (Gen. 1:2; Ps. 104:30; I Cor. 2:10; 11 Cor. 3:18) that He convicts the world of sin (John 16:8-11), regenerates those who believe (John 3:5), and indwells, baptizes, seals, empowers, guides, teaches, and sanctifies all who become children of God through Christ (I Cor. 6:19; 12:12-13; Eph. 4:30; 3:16; Rom. 8:14; John 14:26; I Cor. 6:11). We believe in THE CREATION AND FALL OF MAN: that he was the direct creation of God, spirit and soul and body, not in any sense the product of an animal ancestry, but made in the divine image (Gen. 1:26- 28; 2:7, 18-24: Matt. 19:4; I Thess. 5:23); that by personal disobedience to the revealed will of God, man became a sinful creature and the progenitor of a fallen race (Gen. 3:1—24; 5:3), who are universally sinful in both nature and practice (Eph. 2:3; Rom. 3:23; Rom. 5:12); alienated from the life and family of God (Eph. 4:18; John 8:42-44», under the righteous judgment and wrath of God (Rom. 3:19: 1:18), and have within themselves no possible means of recovery or salvation (Mark 7:21-23: Matt. 19:26: Romans 7:18). We believe in SALVATION BY GRACE THROUGH FAITH: that salvation is the free gift of God (Rom. 3:24; 6:23), neither merited nor secured in part or in whole by any virtue or work of man (Titus 3:5; Rom. 4:4-5; 11:16), but received only by personal faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (John 3:16; 6:28-29; Acts 16:30-31; Eph. 2:8-9), in whom all true 117 believers have as a present possession the gift of eternal life, a perfect righteousness, sonship in the family of God, deliverance and security fi'om all condemnation, every spiritual resource needed for life and godliness, and the divine guarantee thatthey shall never perish (I John 5:13; Rom. 3:22; Gal. 3:26; john 5:24; Eph. 1:3; 11 Peter 1:3; John 10:27-30); that this salvation includes the whole man, spirit and soul and body (I Thess. 5:23- 24): and apart fi'om Christ there is no possible salvation (John 14:6; Acts 4: 12). We believe in RIGHTEOUS LIVING AND GOOD WORKS: Not as the procuring cause of salvation in any sense, but as its proper evidence and fruit (I John 3:9-11; 4:19; 5:4; Eph. 2:8-10; Titus 2:14: Matt. 7:16-18; I Cor. 15:10); and therefore as Christians we should keep the word of our Lord (John 14:23), seek the things which are above (Col. 3:1), walk as He walked (1 John 2:6), be careful to maintain good works (Titus 3:8), and especially accept as our solemn responsibility the duty and privilege of bearing the Gospel to a lost world in order that weak may bear much fruit (Acts 1:8; 11 Cor. 5:19; John 15:16); remembering that a victorious and fruitful Christian life is possible only for those who have learned they are not under law but under grace (Rom. 6: 14), and who in gratitude for the infinite and undeserved mercies of God have presented themselves wholly to Him for His service (Romans 12:1-2). We believe in THE EXISTENCE OF SATAN: who originally was created a holy and perfect being, but through pride and unlawful ambition rebelled against God (Ezek. 28:17-18; Isa. 14:13-14; I Tim. 3:7); thus becoming utterly depraved in character (John 8:44); the great adversary of God and His people (Matt. 4:1-11; Rev. 12:10), leader of all other evil angels and spirits (Matt. 12:24-26; 25:41), the deceiver and god of this present world (Rev. 12:9; 11 Cor. 4:4); that his powers are supematurally great, but strictly limited by the permissive will of God who overrules all his wicked devices for good (Job 1:1-22; Luke 22:31-32); that he was defeated and judged at the cross, and therefore his final doom is certain (John 12:31-32; 16:11; Rev. 20:10); that we are able to resist and overcome him only in the armor of God and by the Blood of the Lamb (Eph. 6:12-18; Rev. 12:11). We believe in THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST: that His return from heaven will be personal, visible, and glorious—a Blessed Hope for which we should constantly watch and pray, the time being unrevealed but always imminent (Acts 1:11; Rev. 22:20); that when He comes He will first by resurrection and translation remove from the earth His waiting Church (I Thess. 4:16-18), then pour out the righteous judgments of God upon the unbelieving world (Rev. 6:1-18:24) afterward descend with His Church and establish His glorious and literal kingdom over all the nations for a thousand years (Rev. 19:1-20z6; Matt. 12:41-43), at the close of which He will raise and judge the unsaved dead (Rev. 20:11-14), and finally as the Son of David, deliver up His Messianic Kingdom to God the Father (1 Cor. 15:24-28), in order that as the Eternal Son He may reign 119 forever with the Father in the New Heaven and the New Earth (Luke 1:32- 33; Rev. 21 :1-22:6). 10. We believe in FUTURE LIFE BODILY RESURRECTION AND ETERNAL JUDGMENT that the spirits of the saved at death go immediately to be with-Christ in heaven (Phil. 1:21-23; 11 Cor. 5:8), where they abide in joyful fellowship with Him until His second coming, when their bodies shall be raised fi'om the graves and changed into the likeness of His own glorious body (Phil. 3:20-21; I Cor. 15:35-38; I John 3:2), at which time their works shall be brought before the Judgment Seat of Christ for the determination of rewards, a judgment which may issue in the loss of rewards, but not the loss of the soul (I Cor. 3:8-15); that the spirits of the; unsaved at death ascend immediately into Hades where they are kept under punishment until the final day ofjudgment (Luke 16:19-31: 11 Peter 2:9 ASV), at which time their bodies shall be raised from the grave, and cast into the place of final and everlasting punishment (Rev. 20:11-15; 21 :8; Mark 9:43-48; Jude 13). ll. We believe in THE ONE TRUE CHURCH: the mystical Body and Bride of the Lord Jesus (Eph. 4:4; 5:25-32), which He began to build on the day of Pentecost (Matt. 16:18; Acts 2:47), and will complete at His second coming (I Thess. 4:16-17); and into which all true believers of the present age are baptized immediately by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12:12-13 with 1:2); that all the various members of this one spiritual Body should assemble themselves together in local churches for worship, prayer, 120 fellowship, teaching, united testimony, and the observance of the ordinances of our Lerd. 12. We believe in SEPARATION FROM THE WORLD: that since our Christian citizenship is in heaven, as the children of God we should walk in separation from this present world, having no fellowship with its evil ways (Phil. 3:20 ASV; H Cor. 6:14-18; Rom. 12:2, Eph. 5:11), abstaining from all worldly amusements and unclean habits which defile mind and body (Luke 8:14; I Thess. 5:22; I Tim. 5:6; I Peter 2:11; Eph. 5:3-11; Col. 3:17; Eph. 5:3-5, 18: 1 Cor. 6:19-20). We understand that the above Articles do not by any means exhaust the content of our creed which is the whole Word of God, and they are not intended to set a limit beyond which faith cannot go within this Word; but we do believe that in so far as these Articles extend, they are a true presentation of the sound doctrine taught in the Scriptures, and therefore binding upon us as Christian believers (Approved 5/61) (OCS Board Policy Mm, 1200:1001-1004). Policies that are directly affected by the mission statement deal with personnel, students, and instruction/curriculum. In particular, the biblical basis for policies on personnel character and qualifications, student acceptance and instruction are supported with beliefs about the Bible, God, righteous living, the true church, and separation from the world. These articles address the issues that are theologically based and which propose to support a school where Christian children being taught only by Christian teachers. 121 In the same way, the philosophy of OCS is based in evangelical theology and as a result, the mission statement is aligned to it. The key to understanding the curriculum at OCS is in understanding its Christian philosophy of education. . The philosophy deals with the source of knowledge, God’s involvement and design for mankind, the purpose of mankind in citizenship, the need for separation from the world and the role of parents in education. The philosophy statement states: It is the philosophy of OCS that neutrality in education is a dangerous myth. All education has agar; world-view. To omit God is to teach that either He does not exist or that He is irrelevant. Education with a Biblical world-view is neither parochialism nor indoctrination. It is simply more candid about its presuppositions than is secular education. These presuppositions include the following: 1. God is, and He has not been silent; 2. He has spoken in the Scriptures and in the Person of Christ Jesus Who is the fullness of Deity in bodily form; 3. The universe came into existence by the Word of God; 4. People are made in God’s image; 5. All people are fallen and sinfirl; 6. A firll salvation from sin is found in Christ and in Him alone; 7. History is under the sovereignty of God and will consummate in the return of Christ and His righteous reign. The vindication of this world-view is seen in two facts. First, materialistic philosophy must ‘borrow’ the conclusions of the Christian world-view in order to 122 have any meaning for human existence. Second, education in Western Civilization was born of the Christian world-view. The philosophy of OCS makes no compromise whatsoever with the evolutionary world-view that has come to dominate and degrade Western Civilization. Chan__c_e and Qeajga are antithetical. The early chapters of Genesis are taken as seriously as the rest ofScripture because Jesus took them that way as did all the New Testament writers. Jesus’ resm'rection from the dead is the ultimate empirical evidence for believing Him and all of Scripture. He, Himself, made the two inseparable. In the Biblical world-view alone is foundM motivation for achievement and excellence in education. “Never be lacking in zeal, but keep your spiritual fervor, serving the Lord.” (Rom. 12:11) “So that you may be able to discern what is m and may be pure and blameless until the coming of Christ.” (Phil. 1:10) “Our people must learn to devote themselves to doing what is good, in order that they may provide for daily necessities and not live unproductive lives.” (Titus 3:14) “So then, each of us will give an account of Himself to God.” (Rom. 14:12) This world-view also provides the only adgqpatg basis for responsible civic and social participation. “Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God. Show proper respect to everyone: Love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, honor the King.” (I Peter 2:16, 17) The compelling moral absolutes of the Biblical world-view make possible self- govemment without freedom leading to chaos. The most acute social problems 123 are addressed in the same manner: “As we have opportrmity, let us do good to all people . . . (Gal. 6:10). Since all people are made in God’s image and since there is no priestly class at all in the New Testament, it is the philosophy of OCS that all honest occupations have dignity and meaning before God. This includes “the academic preparations” for these vocations. This is especially true of the work of taking the glorious Gospel of the Grace of God in Christ to all the world. Christian education has no “sacred/secular” distinctions. “And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the Name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him” (Colossians 3:17). While Christian education emphasizes the eternal over the temporal. there is no rigid dichotomy between “spiritual and physical” as in platonic philosophy. The human body is “fearfully and wonderfully made” by God. The body will be raised in the resurrection of both the saved and the lost. The believer’s body, in this present age, is the Temple of God the Holy Spirit. The philosophy of OCS is to teach that “each of you should learn to control his own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the heathen, who do not know God . . .” (I Thess. 4:4, 5). This has implications for styles, fashions, and social practices. As to competitive sports and physical education, it is the philosophy of OCS that “physical training is of some value, but godliness has value for all things . . .” (I Tim. 4:8). The philosophy of OCS implies that those who constitute the school board, support staff, faculty must be “redeemed with the precious blood of 124 Christ . . . born again . . .through the living and endming word of God.” (I Peter 1:18-23) It also implies that only parents and students who share this world-view can profitably take part in this educational endeavor. The Philosophy of OCS is written both on this paper and on the hearts of the faculty and staff. “We loved you so much that we were delighted to share with you not only the gospel of God but our lives as well, because you had become so dear to us; . . . for you know that we dealt with each of you as a father deals with his own children, encouraging, comforting, and urging you to live lives worthy of God, who calls you into His Kingdom and glory.” (I Thess. 2:8, 11, 12) These words express the deepest feelings of the faculty and staff toward students and their families; the chief motivation for serving at OCS being miLtry not monetary. Education at OCS is not intended to replace (and indeed can never fully replace) the Biblical roles of godly parents and Christ-honoring, Bible-teaching churches. OCS does not exist for the purpose ofmm providing private education, but instead exists to Mata: to families and to their churches by offering Christ-centered, Biblically faithful, elementary and secondary education (Approved 1/19/95) (OCS Cou_rse of Stgdy 1995-96. pp. 2-5). The components of OCS’ philosophy are as follows: (1) two convictions regarding the responsibilities of instruction, (2) a belief in the broad potential of education that is biblically based, (3) a belief that neutrality in education is a dangerous myth, (4) a Christian world-view, and (5) the belief that education at OCS ministers to its families and to their churches. OCS’ philosophy of education is an extensive statement 125 expressed in a little over three pages of text all of which is founded on evangelical theology. The two convictions, expressed by the founders of the school, are still voiced at OCS today. First, the responsibility of educating children is the sole responsibility of the parents and not of the state. This would imply that when the First Amendment guaranteed separation of church and state that parents had the right to insist on education in another form other than that provided by the government. It also implies that the best way to educate is to integrate the religious life of the child with the academic life. Also voiced is the conviction that the best way to educate children is through Christian teachers. These are people that believe in God, love God, and teach from a biblical perspective. These convictions are based on the belief that education without God and the Bible promotes atheism in the most affective way. This is one of its founding principles. OCS’ philosophy proclaims an infinite educational potential, a view that is based on two Bible passages. The first passage, Romans 11:36, states, “For from Him (God) and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever! Amen.” The second passage, Colossians 2:3, states, “Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.” These verses point to the belief that God is the center or focus of attention, and it is through Him and for His glory that all things are made, and all wisdom and knowledge are found in Christ. Wisdom and knowledge are believed to be infinite, not limited to the Bible but broadened to creation itself (OCS Cour§e of Study 1995-1996, p. 2). 126 OCS’ philosophy downplays the world-view that education can be neutral in a child’s life. The Christian world-view promotes the idea that educators must be candid about presuppositions concerning God. These presuppositions are as follows: (1) God is still active, (2) God reveals Himself through the Scripture, Christ, and the Creation, (3) God brought everything into existence by His Word, (4) people are made in God’s image, perfect and without sin, (5) people have sinned, (6) people are saved through Christ alone, and (7) history is under God’s sovereignty and it will consummate with the return of Christ. It is through these theological presuppositions/hermeneutics that the formdations of Christian education are based. Understanding OCS’ basic assumptions about teaching, learning, and knowledge as it pertains to curriculum formation are outgrowths of these presuppositions. This Christian world-view promotes several concepts. First, Jesus’ resurrection fi'om the dead is the empirical evidence for believing Him and the Bible. Second, the Bible is motivation for achievement and excellence in its counsel. Third, the Bible promotes responsible civic and social participation with moral absolutes concerning self- govemment that does not lead to chaos. Fourth, human beings are all made in the image of God and have equal opportunity to honest occupations that have dignity and meaning before God. Fifth, the body is a temple for the Holy Spirit and that persons should act holy and honorable, which has implications for style, fashion, and social practice. Sixth, the concept that those that constitute the board of trustees, support staff, faculty, etc. must be redeemed through Christ having been born again, living, and endearing the Word of God. This has implications for parents and students who share in the educational endeavor. This philosophy states that God’s Word is to be written on paper and on the 127 hearts of the personnel at OCS. The philosophy states that the chief motivation for serving at OCS is ministry and not financial compensation. Though OCS is a ministry it non-the-less strives for academic recognition and validation through accreditation by the Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI). at both the elementary (K-6) and at the secondary (7-12) levels. The board, administration, faculty, and stafi‘ are required to make provision every seven years to allow for re-accreditation by ACSI of the respective schools (OCS Board Policy Manaal, 5600:5620, 5005). This process requires the school to accept some influences from outside its organizational structure. The prerequisites for accreditation mandate that the school meet certain outside standards or influences from the national and state level and are a real indication as to the influences ACSI Accreditation places on OCS. There are eight prerequisites to fulfill before a first site visit for the ACSI accreditation process can occur. These prerequisites require that (1) teachers are state certified and have sufficient credits in Bible and the philosophy of Christian education, (2) schools have adopted a board policy manual which includes policies for operation, finance, students, and personnel, (3) schools have adopted a curriculum guide, (4) schools meet the local, state, and federal guidelines on transportation for vehicles and drivers, (5) schools have a certified media specialist, (6) schools have a minimum of fifteen (1 5) library books per student and no less than one thousand five hundred (1,500) volumes as a base, (7) schools have seventy-five (75) students per grade units or one hundred fifty (150) students in a K-12 unit, and (8) that the school has approval from ACSI after the initial site visit (ACSI, 1999b). Because these requirements are detailed, schools are not 128 considered until they meet all eight prerequisites. In particular, the outside influences include state certification of teachers and state and federal guidelines. The mission and purpose statements not only support a relationship with ACSI, but also support the influence of the charter by the State of Ohio as a non-public school.’ This charter status assures that the school will have access to state funds allotted for non- public schools, the athletic association, and other state competitions and events. Maintaining this relationship requires that in keeping with the purpose statement that OCS “provide adequate and competently trained faculty and administrators”, and the 003 Board ofTrustees requires that the school maintain this status. Mrs. Hall, an ocs teacher, notes that the reason for keeping the state charter is because of the expectations of peers, neighboring schools, and the needs of several transfer students to have similar standards between schools. The board, Educational Policies Committee, and educators are open to the possibility that someday OCS might possibly need to separate from the State. This could happen if the State of Ohio becomes less tolerant of Christian schools and begins to make demands on them that would contradict the OCS mission statement, philosophy of education, or adopted Christian values. Which at this point OCS may choose to discontinue the state charter. The secondary principal, Mr. Weber, stated that OCS wanted to keep the charter because of its benefitsin' testing, college requirements, athletics, politics, and funding. The charter helps OCS meet the standards taught in its 5 Ohio’s charter schools are exempt fi'om most state education laws and regulations and operate under a maximum of five years. Funding for these schools is limited to the state foundation amount per student and does not include funds from local property taxes. Charter schools must employ teachers properly certified by the Ohio Department of Education and must take part in the state’s proficiency testing program. (hunt/"w“ a, uscllartcrshcoolsorgpub"sp-’l 2, Legislative Summary, September 2000, p. 2). 129 community. Excepting a question or two on evolution, the charter does nothing to violate a moral, so OCS keeps the charter. Students take the Ohio test in fourth and sixth grades to prepare for the required ninth grade test. Students may take the test in the twelfth grade seeking available college scholarships. Weber continues, “[We] take the test under protest to keep our charter and we are higher [in achievement] than the public [school].” By taking the test OCS is in a political position to make recommendations concerning the test. The board has a policy requiring the school to maintain its charter status. This policy states, “OCS is chartered by the State of Ohio as non-public Pre-K, elementary (K- 6) and secondary (7-12) schools. OCS will seek to comply with the State of Ohio minimum standards as outlined in . . . the Elementag and Secondag Schools Minimum Standards as published by the Ohio Department of Education” (OCS Boar_d Policy Mug, 5610: 5005). At this time there are only a few standards that influence OCS and they are the certification of teachers, approval of the curriculum by the state, and state mandated testing. In addition to the charter and accreditation, OCS participates in the North Central Ohio Computer Cooperative (NCOCC). The goal of NCOCC is to provide electronic communications and information resources that will assist in the collaboration and exchange of information between the NCOCC and other member schools, institutions of higher learning, and the Ohio Department of Education. This cooperative networks with participating school libraries that participate in the Intemet for additional resources and reference. 130 The OCS Organizational Structure The OCS mission statement and purpose statement support the need for an organizational structure (see Figure 4.5) that assists in student growth. The statement: “We strive to assist each student to grow in excellence spiritually, academically, socially, and physically (Luke 2:52) through the Godly ministry and examples of teachers, administrators, board members, and staff (Titus 1:5-16) . . .We serve with the cooperation of parents who support us through their prayers and involvement in the activities of OCS (Ephesians 6:4)” emphasizes the effort to assist and serve through the OCS institution. The diagram of the organizational structure shows the various ways this can happen- through the age appropriate education of elementary, junior and senior high school, through the home school program, the athletic program, technology, and radio. It is apparent that the OCS mission is being realized in the organizational structure and that despite outside influences OCS is more intensely influenced by the mission and purpose statements. 131 Figure 4.6 OCS’ Organizational Structure— 1999-2000 ‘ ocs Boer'dofEducation W l Elementty IF . 1 —'——T Business Murmur-roe “a.” Supervisor Jr.High Turkic HUI t___,_ Teclmology Radio Directorof Home School Dem Pmclpal r.____ W School D'ueclnr School Dem W Development i - l SCRIP W W Custodial Secretly Am“: Staff D F (‘1de Faculty lidStIfl‘ PM Inst-ff Cica- Fm and Stlfl' BM Office _ Secretmes The maintenance of the school mission and pmpose is the responsibility of the self-perpetuated board that oversees the organization through policy-making. Under the board of trustees is the superintendent, Mr. Schleeter. He is a well-informed administrator Who has experience in leading workshops and seminars for ACSI, networks with various ACSI administrators, and appears to be well-loved and respected by his staff and peers. He is a very cordial man who speaks with great authority while having a very quiet and peaceful manner. This was apparent in his desire to ask questions about the researcher and her work. 132 The superintendent presides over the principals, home-school director, athletic director, technology director, the school radio station manager, business manager and the director of development. Additional individuals under these people include faculty and staff, home school coordinators, coaches, academic dean, SCRIP6 coordinator, business office secretaries, maintenance supervisor and custodial staff. In cases dealing with curriculum, Schleeter has given much authority to the principals. The principals, in tin-n, have passed much of this down to teachers. Mostly, teachers and principals make and approve curriculum decisions. Elementary teacher, Mrs. Williams states: “The principal goes to the board for approval sometimes. . . . If the principal decided to purchase it then we would purchase it . . . The board . . . did not approve any textbook selections.” Williams goes on to reflect about her perspective as an educator, “As a teacher I would say 1 have a lot of input on what books we use. I do believe that if I go to my principal she will let me have input in change as she has already, this year.” Recommendations concerning the curriculum can originate from outside the organizational structure, but in most instances, it will pass through the committee to the board. One exception is when changes are approved temporarily; this is usually by a principal. Prior to the OCS data collection and site visit the superintendent shared a personal concern for Christian organizations via e-mail. He voiced his concern for the organizational structure of Christian schools in general saying, “I find it somewhat 6 SCRIP refers to a tuition-assistance program used by families to support their tuition accounts. Families use the SCRIP Company as a clearinghouse for goods and services available with local merchants to receive tuition assistance fiom these merchants. 133 disconcerting that in Christian school circles the form of government an institution uses is not open to debates” (Schleeter). This was elaborated on during the site visit as he explained his opinion of OCS’ organizational structure as being too authoritative and not allowing for the Holy Spirit’s leading through Christian teachers and parents. Schleeter described the role of the board, Educational Policies Committee, and the administrators for OCS (March, 1999). The board has a three-fold role: (1) “accountability,” (2) “staff selection/evaluation,” and (3) “goal evaluation.” He then described the role of the Educational Policies Committee saying they are ultimately “responsible” and do the “legwork” for the board in securing the mission of the school through curriculum decision-making processes. Finally, he noted that the administration is the “change agent. They [administrators] recognize needs and want to do something about it.” These three levels of the organization- administrators, committees, and board- members oversee the work of the teachers who have a lot of say. Because OCS teachers are entrusted with the curriculum and in a sense model Christianity, the superintendent orients all teachers to a concept known as “a truth centered curriculum.” Schleeter created the “A Truth Centered Curriculum” (see Figure 4.6) diagram. A diagram that is familiar to personnel at OCS. Schleeter uses this diagram with OCS teachers in discussions concerning teacher influence on students who witness their life as it is modeled on a daily basisin the classrooms. The superintendent claims this diagram was patterned after a concept presented in materials developed by 134 Rosalie J. Slater, MS. and Verna M. Hall under the “Foundations of American Christian Educator.”7 Figure 4.7 A Truth Centered Curriculum A TRUTH CENTERED CURRICULUM PHILOSOPHY ETHICS/MORALITY Creded in God‘s Inns: Individuality WORD Specific Revelation CREATION con anth Love General Holiness FAMILY Cl . . \ Libeltv “Law of Love" I LAW HISTORY Revelation CHRIST Self- Personal Revelation Govemment POLITICS ECONOMICS SClENC E SOCIOLOGY 7 This diagram explains this superintendent’s version of what curriculum should be in the Christian school. The focus being on biblical truths taught through the modeling of people led by the Holy Spirit in every academic field. It is through the medium of Christian teachers that students integrate their faith and learning in a practical way with each subject area. 135 Schleeter pointed out the importance of centering curriculum on God’s truth, love and holiness. From this central foCus, truth is revealed through the Wogd the specific revelation of God, through creation the general revelation that comes fi'om knowing that someone created everything which we can not duplicate, and from Qh_ri_s_t the personal revelation that comes through knowing the Savior that has given His life as an example, as a sacrifice which pays for our wrong. Centering curriculum on truth and in particular issues concerning knowledge, learning, and tmderstanding outcomes for students are developed. These outcomes concern being created in God’s image, the Christian principle of individuality, Christian liberty (the “Law of Love), the Christian principle of self-government, Christian ethics, Christian character, and the Christian principle of unity and property. These lessons originate with God and are integrated into core subjects such as: philosophy, ethics/morality, family, politics, economics, mathematics, sociology, science, history, law, music, and art. The curriculum is truth centered as God is believed to be the source of all truth. The OCS Teacfl OCS teachers drive the curriculum. Though OCS has a self-perpetuated board at the top of its organizational structure which provides protective measures to insure the mission is being conducted, the administrator believes that teachers need to have a significant voice in OCS cuniculum decisions being led by the Holy Spirit as the 136 Educator. Therefore, teachers are encomaged to drive the curricullnn through their respective school principals. Curriculum decisions are proposed at various levels within the organizational structure. The board has established five committees: (1) Finance, (2) Educational Policies, (3) Physical Assets, (4) Public Relations, and (5) Spiritual Life (OCS Board Polig MM 2700:2009-2014). These are the board committees that make recommendations to the board. These committees are made up of board members, administrators, teachers, and parents. Curriculum recommendations are made in three ways: by the principal, by the teacher, or by a committee. However, the board makes curriculum decisions concerning the OCS Course of Study. There are some decisions that are not considered major decisions and are often made by the teacher and/or principal. Ultimately, the board has delegated curriculum decision-making authority to principals and teachers. Recommendations for curriculum change most often stem from teacher requests. The elementary principal, Mrs. Johns, states, “Teachers have a lot of say because of their . credentials and selection process before hiring.” Teachers in essence have the “biggest voice.” The exception to this would be an occasion during which the principal, superintendent, or board initiates the process, having recognized a need and wanting to initiate change. It is more likely the principal would initiate this than the superintendent or the board. When asked to think about what factors went into the decision making process in the last year, Mr. Weber, the secondary principal, indicated that teachers were the determining factor. He explained, “Rarely do I, the administrator, tell teachers what to 137 do.” It is the teacher who determines what needs to be done in the classroom. Teachers are encouraged to drive the curriculum decision making process at OCS and have been given full reign to deal with the curriculum. The elementary principal seemed to be more proactive than the secondary . principal in initiating curricullnn change. The secondary principal admittedly was not reviewing the curriculum and had allowed other things to take priority. The high school principal said, “We look at curriculum as rotated [on a five year cycle of review], but it has not worked well. There are too many meetings.” OCS, at the secondary level in particular, relies heavily on teachers bringing issues to the table as needed while the elementary seem to actively employ the systematic review of curriculum. The secondary principal explains that the cooperating teachers tend to come to the administrator, and the administrator sets the changes in motion. This was echoed by an elementary teacher who pointed out that at the elementary level the curriculum is under closer scrutiny, “The course of study is reviewed every five years.” Despite differing situations, both Mr. Weber, the high school principal, and Mrs. Johns, the elementary principal, are responsible for overseeing the curriculum process, though the elementary process is more than thorough. The superintendent noted that when a good Christian text could not be found that the teacher’s role in seeming a biblical focus was more crucial. However, the concern specifically identified by the superintendent in each case is for the “assumptions going into content and the conclusions coming out. Each must carry an eternal perspective.” According to Mrs. Hall, an OCS elementary teacher, OCS is moving away fi'orn being a textbook driven school and moving toward being curriculum driven. What is considered 138 important are “state, biblical, and proficiency” standards. The focus is placed on the teacher to responsibly achieve these standards. It is apparent that the board is responsible for the curriculum; however not all of the changes need approval from them. Most changes drafted by teacher requests and approved by the principal. The oversight of the Educational Policies Committee provides for the investigation and evaluation expected of the board in this self-perpetuated board- run school. Curriculum: Policy and Practice at OCS The OCS Board Policy MM has seven parts: organization, board, personnel, student, instruction, finance, and auxiliary organizations. These parts contain policies that frame the operations of OCS in these seven areas. The manual was originally approved in 1983, reviewed in 1990 and 1995, and was under review at the time of the site visit in 2000. Included in the front of the manual are the institution’s Articles of Incorporation. For the purpose of this research, only policies connected with curriculum will be discussed here. Policies for the board fit into eight categories: qualifications, orientation, number, length-of-term, nominations/elections, duties, committees, and meetings. Three of these categories influence curriculum at OCS: qualifications, orientation, and committees. The self-perpetuated board is the ultimate governing agent of the school. The board is important in the curriculum process, as it is responsible for maintaining the mission of the school through the development and carrying out of policy in areas that affect curriculum. 139 Through policy the foundations of Christian education drive cunicullnn decisions. The foundations of Christian education are biblical, theological, and philosophical. First, board policies establish the biblical mandates and examples that the institution models. Second, policies establish a theological framework through which to view things and create an evangelical understanding. Third, the institution adopts a philosophical approach to Christian education. Policy supports the influence of biblical, theological, and philosophical foundations on cuniculum development. The OCS Board Policies In the area of board member qualifications, it is noted that both qualifications and orientation safeguard the positions held by individuals that oversee, approve, and evaluate curriculum. The policy states: School board members are to be in full agreement with the mission statement, the statement of faith, and the philosophy of education of Overfield Christian School. They shall have received Jesus Christ as their personal Savior, be of good standing in their community, and have a good reputation for spirituality and wise judgment. They must also be willing to work well with others and be able to allocate sufficient time to function well. School board members shall be at least 21 years of age, and shall be fiom various walks of life. They shall be selected primarily for their convictions on Christian education and not on their separate accomplishments or social standings. Policy #3400 regarding marriage, divorce and remarriage shall apply 140 to all board members (Last Approved: 11/17/94) (OCS Board Policy Manual, 2100:2001 ). The qualifications screen potential board members. All board members are required to agree with OCS’ mission, philosophy, and to be born again Christians, of good standing in their community, have a good reputation for spirituality and wise judgment, be willing to work well with others, and have enough time to function well as a board member. In this way the mission of OCS is protected from potential non-Christian board members who would not be deemed capable of leading OCS spiritually. Following the approval of new board members by the existing board, new members are required to go through orientation “to provide smooth continuity of board service and to heighten morale, the board shall provide for the orientation and the continuing education of its members” (OCS Board Policy Manyg, 2200: 2001). This policy states that new board members will meet with the president of the board and/or with the superintendent of OCS. During this meeting the following topics are reviewed: where OCS has been, where it is today, and where it is going. Included in this discussion are the history, mission, philosophy of Christian education, minutes of the last six months, financial summaries fiom the past year, policy and procedmes, board roster and introductions, board committees and purpose, current major projects, organizational chart/staff review, and future projects (Approved, 1/19/95) (OCS Boar1dljolicv MM, 2230: 2002). The point of which is to insure that each board member thoroughly understands the OCS organization, having been oriented to the history and its organizational vision for the future. 141 In addition to the orientation, board members are required to be educated in the philosophy of Christian school education. “Each new board member will view an ACSI approved video series covering the ‘Philosophy of Christian School Education’” ((_)C_§ BM Policy Manual, 2220: 2002). They are also required annually to take part in an in- service. This policy states: Each year an inservice will be held covering at least one of the following topics; current issues facing Christian education, policy-making, boardroom procedures, decision-makin , master planning, problem solving, board ethics, and any other requested topics. In addition the board members will read an assigned book presenting information concerning Christian education and/or boardroom procedures. A time of discussion will be scheduled at the subsequent inservice. During each term of office, each board member will attend at least one board member conference offered by ACSI and/or teacher’s conference offered by ACSI. It is the responsibility of the vice president of the board of education to coordinate the inservice for the board members (Approved 1/19/95) (OCS Board Policy Manual, 2230:2002). The orientation of board members has three components. First, members are required to understand the mission of OCS. This is handled by the president or by the superintendent. Second, OCS board members must understand the philosophy of Christian schooling. This is accomplished through the promotion of an ACSI video series. Finally, orientation is an ongoing process for board members. This can be 142 accomplished by attending an ACSI convention or conference for board members. The three-fold process insures a smooth transition into the board and creates knowledgeable board members. The OCS Teacher/Personnel Policies Policies that govern the personnel within the OCS organization include administration, teachers, and support stafl‘. These policies protect these positions in the areas of certification, professional abilities, Christian beliefs, and character expectations. Individuals who do not meet or fail to continue to meet the standards established are considered a threat to the institution’s core values, and provisions for their release or oversight in hiring have been clearly outlined in these policies; thus safeguarding the institutional mission and purposes. The personnel policies seemed to be a predominant influence on the policy and practice surrounding OCS curriculum. Those hired at OCS must meet spiritual and educational requirements. Not only does the employment of personnel secure the curriculum, but the evaluation and in-service policies also monitor the curriculum for the purposes of safeguarding the OCS mission. The policy on the spiritual requirements states: All personnel who are employed at OCS shall demonstrate a personal commitment to Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, as well as an ongoing commitment to the school’s statement of faith, its philosophy of education, and its objectives. Every individual employed by OCS shall also be regularly and 143 actively involved in a Bible-believing church (OCS Board Policy Manual, 31 10:1). The spiritual requirements seek to assure the presence of a model teacher. As pointed out in the mission statement, OCS strives to assist in the growth of all students through the ministry and examples of teachers, administrators, board members, and staff. This is possible because these qualifications for teachers and others establish the Christian character within the professional staff that is desired by the mission to be modeled for students. The criteria are most concerned with the spiritual, professional, moral, and church involvement standards. All personnel are expected to fully meet the expectations of these criteria as outlined in the policy manual. The criteria are used to measure personnel. This is an example of how the organizational structure safeguards the curriculum through personnel policy. There are three educational requirements for OCS teachers and administrators. Teachers are required to hold a four-year degree, hold a current State teaching certificate/licensure, or be in the process of certification, and be certified by ACSI, or in the process of certification. The administrators are not required to be certified, but are required to have formal training in educational administration (OCS Board Policy Maaual, 3120: 1). Both the spiritual and the educational requirements protect the curriculum and are seen as essential qualifying requirements for educators at OCS in gaining ACSI certification. 144 Went—REES. There are seven types of student policies: Admissions, Attendance, Discipline, School Dress Code, Academic Guidelines, Activities, and Health Safety. Of these seven, the admission policy (OCS Board Policy Manual, 4100:4002-4003) and discipline policies (OCS Board Policy MM, .4300. 4310: 4004-4006) had the most influence on the curriculum of the school. These policies safeguard the curriculum and require appropriate behaviors of students, expecting them to act in a Christian manner and conduct themselves accordingly. The Admissions Policy emphasizes parental support of the philosophy and teaching of OCS. There are seven procedures which have been adopted to assure consistency: (1) application and fee, (2) interview, (3) provisional point of consideration, (4) age requirements for kindergarten, (5) discrimination, (6) acceptance letter, and (7) the annual review of the admissions process. These procedures insure consistency in the OCS ministry. Students applying for admission to OCS must go through a selective process. During the interview of the prospective student and his or her parent(s), the following points are considered: 1. Involvement with a Bible-believing church. 2. Total family enrollment of all school-age children. 3. Special needs due to academic deficiencies, or learning disabilities. 4. Parents’ and applicant’s personal relationship to Jesus Christ. 5. Lifestyle of the family and its compatibility with the philosophy of the school. 6. Lifestyle of the individual applicants and conduct in previous school. 145 7. The purpose for applying to Overfield Christian School (OCS Boa__r_d Policy Marga] 4100:4002). The purpose of this interview process is to determine whether the student fits the parameters for admission into OCS. The environment for learning is influenced by student behavior and lifestyle. Only families with students willing to work at being a part of this community are accepted. If individuals are identified as unacceptable for admission through this process, then admission is denied. The admissions policy plays an important role in maintaining the mission statement of OCS. The policy states, The mission of Overfield Christian is to, “exist as an extension of the Christian home and church, to fulfill God’s commands to teach His words ‘diligently to our children’ (Deuteronomy 6:5-7). Our foundation rests upon acknowledging Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and the Bible as the Word of God— the final authority in truth and practice (2 Timothy 2:15). We strive to assist each student to grow in excellence, spiritually, academically, socially and physically (Luke 2:52) through the GODLY ministry and example of teachers, administrators, board members, and staff (Titus 125-16). We serve with the cooperation of parents who support us through their prayers and involvement in the activities of OCS (Ephesians 6:4).” It is therefore necessary that parents support the philosophy and teaching of the school if they are to enroll their children in it’s [its] ministry (OCS Board Policy _lyl_a_n_u_al;_ 4100:4002). The school further maintains that to support this they must maintain it through a discipline policy. This policy is likewise based on the premise that “conduct unbecoming to a Christian reflects unfavorably not only on the school, church and home, but also on 146 the Savior” (gs Board Policy Manual, 4310: 4004-6). This policy has three foundational points. The first rests on the beliefthat ocs students have a Christian testimony to maintain. The second point states that attendance at OCS is a privilege to those willing to support the basic principles and purpose of the school. When a student shows him/herself to be in opposition to OCS, or he or she maliciously destroys school pr0perty then he or she may be dismissed or asked to withdraw. Finally, students are expected to learn self-discipline. Christian behavior is outlined in four guidelines with biblical references: (1) that responsibility and authority to discipline comes from God, (2) discipline has moral content and disobedience is the core of sin, (3) Christian love is at the heart of discipline and correction and chastening are essential in the firmness of love, and (4) all discipline is designed to point out sin. This policy goes on to point out nine good habits that the school would like to see: respect, promptness, cheerful obedience, responsibility,- corntesy and respect, cooperation, cleanliness, truthfulness and honesty, and moral conduct. This policy assures the OCS school atmosphere is conducive to a Christian environment. Students who are unwilling to conform to this can be asked to leave when they become behavior problems. The concept behind this discipline policy is to provide a positive environment for Christian education, ensuring that the environment is conducive to education in general. 147 The OCS Inatructiognal Policie§ Instructional policies are divided into seven categories: course of study, textbooks, faculty handbook, calendar, home school, chartering/accreditation, and a temporary policy for Internet usage. The categories each contain policies that express and preserve the expectations of the board such as what will be taught, what should be considered, what type of individual can teach, when and how many days teaching will take place, expectations/requirements for home schools, validations through chartering and accreditation, and appropriate use of technology. The course of study8 guides the teaching in OCS classes, outlining both desired outcomes and courses. The course of study that has been adopted by OCS includes, but is not limited to, the following curricular areas: 1. Language arts (reading, writing, spelling, oral and written English, and literature) 2. Social sciences (geography, history of the United States and of Ohio, and government at the national, state, and local levels) 3. Mathematics 4. Natural science 5. Health education, physical education 6. Fine arts 7. Biblical studies (OCS Board Policy Manual, 5100:5140, 5001) 8The OCS Course of Study for 1995-1996 (most recent edition) was obtained for review. This is not their updated version; however, this was the only hard copy they had available at the time of data collection. The researcher was informed that though this book had been updated it was not yet printed. The administration did believe that it was an accurate sample for the purposes of my research as only minor changes have been made since its printing four years ago. 148 The intent of this policy is to itemize what will be taught formally, and hence is not restrictive, but rather serves to express and preserve the core courses that have already been approved by the board. The education committee may make recommendations for change to the core courses. However, usually changes are requested by teachers and not by the committee. The course of study in more detail shows the outcomes. This is the case in the newly revised course of study a copy of the science outcome objectives and performance objectives for sixth grade. The lead teacher and all science teachers had input and created this curriculum. The sixth grade objectives are similar to all K-6 objectives (see Appendix G). The objectives for each grade were set up to include five areas for the learner including the following: (1) biblical foundation, (2) scientific inquiry, (3) scientific knowledge, (4) conditions for learning science, and (5) applications for science learning. This was accompanied by an outlined list of eight to ten performance objectives for each grade. Having reviewed the curriculum guides for the elementary level, this was typical for each subject area. The elementary curriculum was well established and the process for review and evaluation was set in motion through the initiative of the elementary administrator. Overfield Christian High School’s graduation requirements call for one unit of Bible for each year a student is enrolled at OCS. In addition to Bible units, a graduating senior must meet the minimum State of Ohio requirements.9 OCS provides ample 9 Students must accumulate eighteen units in grades 9 thru 12 and pass the Ohio Proficiency Tests. The eighteen units must include: English (4 V2 units), Math (2 units), Physical Education and Health (1 unit), Science (1 unit), Social Studies (2 V2 units) as outlined in sections 3301-35-01 through 3301-35-04 of the Elementary and Secondary Schools Minimum Standards as published by the Ohio Department of Education (OCS Bag; Policy Manual, 5550:5610). 149 opportunities in extra-curricular as well as co-curricular activities. Students may participate in a variety of athletic teams, band, pep band, and choir (OCS Boa_ad Policy Manual 4000:4543, 4012). The requirements are in line with the State expectations for high school graduations and with OCS’ theological beliefs in strong biblical emphasis. OCS policies have many purposes. The course of study outlines the scope and sequence as well as objectives for each course taught at OCS. The purpose is to guide decisions by educators in each class and to establish a standard that can be evaluated. Textbook policies concern issues in reviewing, evaluating, and adopting textbooks that line up with the course of study, the mission, purpose, and theology of evangelicalism. The faculty handbook covers a multitude of policies that govern personnel. These policies handle the selection, evaluation, guidelines, staff development, and responsibilities of faculty. The calendar, though seemingly minor, covers the instructional time allotted in the day and the year. The home-school policies talk about guidelines, testing, and admittance of students into the school. Chartering/accreditation policies guide the curriculum in demanding that the institution is current with governing regulations concerning: teacher certification, curriculum standards, testing standards, and professional development. Finally, the use of the Internet provides guidelines for technology of this kind and is directly related to curriculum design. These policies each guide decisions concerning what is taught, who teaches, and the atmosphere in which it is taught. Mr. Razor, the secondary, department head for Bible, talked about textbook selection and some the concerns that he has as the Bible instructor. First, teachers must think about what is appropriate for seniors in preparing them for the secular environment 150 i of college. Teaching at OCS is not about sheltering students in such a way as to create ignorance. Secondly, Bible curriculums should “steer away fi'om lessons on eternal security and tongues and gifts.” These topics are divisive for evangelicals and are not essential to the mission and purpose of OCS. Since OCS is a not church sponsored it should not teach anything that would not be accepted by an inter-denominational group. The OCS Financial Policies Financial policies have eight categories: fiscal year, budget, fees, accounts, purchases, insurance, development, and student aid. The financial polices influence the curriculum in various ways. In particular, budget, purchasing, and development policies influence the curriculum decisions in the areas of textbook selection as well as resources and professional development. Interviews indicated that in reviewing the curriculum and planning for change this was key to the availability of published curriculum sources. Financially, OCS is limited and the approval of budgetary funds for curriculum purchases and professional development depends on limited yearly donations or invested incomes from the OCS foundations. Changes in the curriculum are budgeted on a rotated basis as not'to unduly strain the budget each year. Excess flmds are set aside and used for emergencies or at the “pleasure of” or as desired by the administration. These policies reflect the attitude of administrative control as well as limited funds. The Transition of Policy into Practice at OCS The transition of policy into practice is dependent upon the community of OCS. The board, board committees, and administration create and provide constant oversight of 151 policy. However, it is the personnel who are responsible for the practice of policy. Because of this system of oversight the institution is able to maintain its foundations of Christian education, and in so doing, fulfill its mission. OCS depends on individuals to carry out this mission. Policies control teachers, what is taught, and the environment of the school as it pertains to the type ofstudents admitted. The OCS Organizational Structure 1999-2000 emphasizes the board’s authority over policy through a chain of command including: superintendent, principals, directors/managers/secretaries, etc. According to the organizational structure, there were other individuals that directly answered to each of these listed individuals. This chain of command is maintained through policies. Policies for the board, personnel, and students control OCS by controlling teacher selection, and student admissions. In this way, OCS has built a foundation that has lasted for several years and will likely continue to support and safeguard the institutional beliefs. Teachers are oriented and professional development is supplied to continue building support for a Christian philosophy of education as well as for building awareness and understanding once individuals are selected to the board or as personnel. This process insures that an adequate environment is maintained for students whom have also been seleCted. The Educational Policies Committee’s sub-committee provides another system which maintains the organization. This committee systematically reviews the curriculum each year with the intention of reviewing the entire curriculum every five years. This is an internal process that reviews the curriculum on a rotational basis. Decisions made in the process include such things as changing textbooks, adding courses, buying additional 152 resources, looking at testing results and standards, and surveying the community for input on additional course. The committee makes recommendations of various kinds to the board concerning the curriculum, budget, and staffing: yet these recommendations generally originate at the request of teachers. Student policies were important in assuring the ideal atmosphere for all students. Not only are spiritual prerequisites established by the student policies but also academic standards. As a result, graduating students are high-achievers school wide as validated by both Stanford Achievement Test (SAT) scores and the Ohio State Proficiency Test scores. There is a balance between academics and spirituality. OCS controls the institution through the adoption and application of policy. The transition of policy into practice insures that OCS maintains the spiritual atmosphere, professionals, and curriculum for Christian education. Policy is paramount to the development of curriculum and curriculum decisions. Theoretical Analysia: What It Mea_n_s Forces that Influence the mose of Education at OCS Ornstein and Levine’s model (1993) (see Figure 4.2) attempts to explain the nature of forces that influence the purpose of education. The forces identified in their model are philosophies, theories, and changes within society. Furthermore, the philosophies are basic beliefs and values that structure our approach to education. The educational philosophy is adopted by the teacher, who interacts with changes in society, knowledge, and the learner (social forces), affecting the general purposes or aims of education in developing the curriculum. Events that constitute social forces are changes 153 in social life and culture, e.g. differences in opinions. as to what constitutes knowledge I and the recognition of new diverse types of learners. Ornstein and Levine (1993) theorize that education is affected by philosophies and theories as they interact with changes in the society. Therefore, as society changes, the purpose of education also changes. This in turn affects the aims, goals, and objectives of education, causing each of them to likewise change. I_n_fl_aearces on educational ses at OCS are both ' and seeon In the case of OCS (see Figure 4.8),there are three influences on educational purposes: (1) the foundations of Christian education (the Bible, theology, and philosophy), (2) teachers, and (3) social forces. The primary force, foundations of Christian education, is used as a filter. The purpose of which is to filter out secondary forces of opposing values and beliefs. Therefore, the secondary forces must meet the biblical, theological, and philosophical value and belief standards of OCS. If they meet these standards they are influential, however, if not they are rejected. 154 Figure 4.8 The Purpose of Education and The Forces That Influence Them at OCS SECONDARY INFLUENCES ON EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES PRIMARY (FILTER) INFLUENCES ON EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES GENERAL PURPOSES Socialfcrees Bremen: Christi-r Convictions outside the -norm of evangelicalism ACSI Textbook Coup-lies Fiance Teachers State of Ohio Chuter (Standards md Tests) Nnional Stmdads and Tests Curriculum Theory College Requirements y l W Bible - Theology - Philosophy W l I Rejected Influences ‘ (filtered out) Aim: Mission and Purpose Statements f V MORE SPECIFIC Goals: Course of Study Goals: Course of Study PURPOSES l t l MOST SPECIFIC PURPOSES Objectives Objectives Objectives Objectives Objectives At OCS both the teachers and social forces are secondary to the primary influence. Though teachers and social forces are influential, they are only capable of this influence with board approval. The foundations of Christian education drive the curriculum at OCS as they are the basis of all curriculum planning. 155 The secondary influences are both internal and external, and the board determines whether they have influence or not by aligning them with the basic beliefs and values of the primary influences which are biblical, theological, and philosophical in nature characteristic of the foundations of Christian education. In this way, the board determines if these secondary influences have an internal or external influence on the institution. The primary influence is internal and serves as a filter for this process. The primary influences, foundations of Christian education, are foremost founded ontheacceptance ofthe BibleastheWordofGod. ThisisestablishedintheOCS Statement of Christian Faith that states: We believe THE HOLY SCRIPTURES: accepting fully the writings of the Old and New Testaments as the very Word of God, verbally inspired in all parts and therefore wholly without error as originally given of God, altogether sufficient in themselves as our only infallible rule of faith and practice. (Matt. 5:18; John 10:35; John 12:42; 178:17: 11 Tim. 3:16; 11 Peter 2:21). This philosophical principle is an expression of evangelical theology that is supported with biblical references in a manner familiar to evangelical Christians. Christian education bases its doctrinal belief or statement of faith in the infallibility of the Bible. OCS’ philosophy of Christian education is biblically based and theologically accepted by the evangelical world. An example of a social factor as it relates to the foundations of Christian education is the ACSI Accreditation process. This process is a social force that has been approved by the OCS Board of Trustees. Its influence is significant because, although OCS is a ministry, it allows for ACSI to motivate it, to gain academic recognition and 156 validation through accreditation. The board has determined that board members, administration,“ faculty, and staff are required to make provisions every seven years to allow for re-accreditation by ACSI (OCS Board Policy Mang 5600:5620, 5005). The re-accreditation process requires the school to accept some influences fi'om outside its organizational structure. The prerequisites for accreditation mandate that the school meet certain outside standards or influences fi'om the national and state level and are a real indication as to the influences the ACSI Accreditation places on OCS. Of the eight prerequisites for accreditation, there are three that demand social expectations. First, teachers are to be state certified. Second, all schools must meet the local, state, and federal guidelines. Third, all schools must have a certified media specialist (ACSI, 1999b). ACSI as well as the school’s charter with the State of Ohio are both external forces supported by the Board of Trustees. The board determined when external - influences such as these are maintained. These influences may be rejected at any time though currently the board has a policy requiring the school to maintain its charter status OCS Board Policy Manual, 5610: 5005). They have been accepted as they are not in conflict or disruptive to adherence to the foundations of Christian education. The foundations of Christian education filter out unwanted influences. The foundations of Christian education are used as a filtering system for everything else, making this filtering system the primary influence on educational purposes. The curriculum specialists at OCS use metaphors that describe the primary influence on educational purposes. The metaphors used are: “biblically-aligned,” 157 “biblically-based with no compromise to curriculum,” “bible-centered oriented,” “theological foundations,” and “theologically driven.” The commonality of this list suggests that the curriculum is founded philosophically on a biblical and theological basis. Considering this in light of the written philosophy of Christian education, the foundations of OCS’ Christian education are summarized in three words: biblical, theological, and philosophical. It is through this primary influence filter that the secondary influence, teachers and social forces, are considered. If teachers and social forces are in agreement with the primary influence, they are allowed to be influential in the educational process at OCS. This means that teachers who find themselves in agreement are more likely to be hired; social forces that likewise are in agreement will be taken into consideration as viable and important to the OCS curriculum. However, teachers and social forces that are proven to have a conflict in interest to the foundations of Christian education are rejected. Teachers and social forces that are rejected are unable to align themselves with the foundations of Christian education. These include the Bible, evangelical theology (as established in the doctrinal statement), and the philosophy of Christian education. They are rejected because of spiritual and educational reasons that do not align themselves with OCS’ beliefs and values. Because their influence is crucial to the educational purposes of OCS, there is a standard to be met in consideration of the foundations of Christian education, and they must undergo the process of approval to meet that standard. The Educational Policies Committee plays a major role in the process of filtering for approval, as the committee is responsible for OCS personnel, curriculum, quality as well as Christian character of personnel, and the admission of pupils. The main objective 158 ofthe committee is to oversee ocs by investigating, interpreting, monitoring, developing and enforcing every aspect of CCS as well as curriculum and personnel. The committee’s objective is to protect the institution. When this is done, the influences of teachers and social changes are filtered appropriately by the system. When social forces as mentioned in the interview and data collection are considered, the Educational Policies Committee as well as the rest of OCS are expected to evaluate the influence and make recommendations to the board of trustees. ForOCS the items that have been considered a social force are businesses, Christian convictions outside the norm of evangelicalism, ACSI, fixtbook companies, finance, state of Ohio charter, state and national tests, curriculum theory, college requirements, and national and state standards. These social forces potentially influence OCS and are evaluated systematically by the committee and board. Rejected influences that are filtered out in this process are things that do not comply with the Bible, evangelical theology, or the philosophy of education. Items that OCS has at this time filtered out are Christian convictions outside the norm of evangelicalism (Mr. Razor, OCS Bible Department Head) and some textbooks that promote a non-Christian standard (Philosophy of Christian Education, OCS Coarse of SLudy 1995-1996. pp. 2-5). In the future, OCS might possibly drop its chartered status and not accept state funding because of state standards that promote opposing beliefs. It is believed that if these things are not filtered out then they may affect the educational purposes at OCS. Presently, the concern is for the status of the current state charter that does allow for some money to be spent on OCS students. for non-religious purposes. If the Charter 159 demanded that certain curriculums were to be taught and these curriculums conflicted with the Bible, statement of faith, and philosophy of education as recognized by OCS, then OCS would refuse the financial support they currently receive at this time. The filtering of secondary influences is significant in preserving the general purpose of education at OCS. The general purpose is outlined in five assertions by the mission statement and the pin-pose statement. First, the five assertions of the mission statement are: (1) The school is an extension of the home and church; (2) The foundations of the school rest on knowing Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and the Bible as the Word of God being the authority in truth and practice; (3) The school seeks to assist with students as they grow spiritually, academically, socially, and physically; (4) The school intends to do its work through Godly-ministry and examples by both the personnel and board members; and (5) The school works cooperatively with parents in this ministry (OCS Boad Policy Manual, 1100:1001). The board approves the influences whether they are internal or external. However, these influences are approved based on their alignment with the general purpose of education as stated in the mission and purpose of OCS. According to Mrs. Hall, an OCS elementary teacher, what is considered important are “state, biblical and proficiency” standards. The focus is placed on the teacher to responsibly achieve these standards for each area in the specific goals. The mse of edlfluion i§ influenced by prim and secondary influences. OCS does not allow for any secondary influence unless it is first evaluated or filtered, as suggested in Figure 4.8. In this way both teachers and social forces have been 160 able to influence the purpose of education at OCS. As a result, the foundation of Christian education, teachers, and Social forces appear to We the mission and purpose of OCS. This is accomplished through a blending of biblically, theologically, and philosophically based assertions, which are established though the doctrinal statement that is biblically referenced, the ocs philosophy of Christian education, and a reaction to social forces by teachers. It is the teacher who is responsible for framing the goals and objectives of education that are realized in the most general goals of the mission and purpose at OCS. Once teachers are selected at OCS through the hiring process that is based on the foundations of Christian education, they are responsible for carrying out the mission and purpose or general purposes of education at OCS. More specifically, they are intently involved in writing, reviewing, changing, and assessing the needs of the more specific purposes through the goals as established in the course of study. Finally, at the classroom level they are key to developing and interpreting the most specific purposes or objectives. As already stated; OCS feels bound to work with the social forces imposed by the community. However, to do so, their influence is monitored to maintain the mission of the school. The mission statement has five assertions: (l) The school is an extension of the home and church; (2) The foundations of the school rest on knowing Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and the Bible as the Word of God being the authority in truth and practice; (3) The school seeks to assist students as they grow spiritually, academically, socially, and physically; (4) The school intends to do its work through Godly-ministry of and examples by both the personnel and board members; and (5) The school works cooperatively with parents in this ministry (OCS Board Policy Manual, 1100:1001). It is 161 these assertions that drive curriculum at OCS. The social forces that influence OCS are evaluated based on their ability to align with the mission statement’s assertions. th Flow of Cagiculg-develonment Activity at OCS Armstrong (1989, p. 6) suggests that the flow of curriculum-development activity originates with the sources of curriculum. The flow moves in a linear progression. This activity then has seven stages: consideration of sources, selection of perspectives from major mediators, reaction to external influences, identification of a general orientation, preparation of the curriculum, implementation of the curriculum, and evaluation of the curriculum. An adaptation of this model (see Figure 4.9) is used to understand how and to what extent evangelical theology guides the curriculum-development processes at OCS. 162 Figure 4.9 The General Flow of Curriculum-development Activity at OCS CONSIDERATION or SOURCES SELECTION OF IDENTIFICATION OF A PRIMARY GENERAL PERSPECTIVE ORIENTATION God 5 Via Bible Fm cram. Mun-Sim V18 CW Wblim Via Nature Via Christian Teachers Biblical M Imposew Philosophical Theological CONSIDERATION OF REACTION TO PREPARATION OF THE SECONDARY PERSPECTIVE EXTERNAL MUENCES CURRICULUM r. *Crudu qftbe Course of Teachers U I may Sod-[forces WW Atrium Appmvnl M Objectives ] Educational Mela Grade Level Goal: V EVALUATION OF THE CURRICULUM IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CURRICULUM Bead Teacher System Radar by the Educational Panda Sub- Wee Am Teacher God is the source of curriculum. At OCS the source of curriculum is God. This is a religious belief that insists all knowledge and truth come from God via the Bible, Christian publishers that lend a perspective, nature or a general understanding, and Christian teachers. God being the 163 Creator is the source though both understanding and knowledge may be revealed through another source. OCS is convinced that knowledge does not change but is revealed by God. Likewise, OCS believes knowledge comes from God. The school does not believe knowledge is a social force that they will allow to influence the curriculum process (QC_§ M of Study 1995-1996. p. 2). Knowledge is not something that is constructed by an individual. It emanates from God as students seek to understand God’s revelation to humankind. Both the philosophy of education and the mission statement of OCS make claims that support the belief that God is the source .of the curriculum. In particular, the Bible is referenced as the Word of God and this parallels to an understanding that Jesus is also the incarnate of His Word. The philosophy statement bases itself on two such claims when it states: Education with a Biblical world-view is neither parochialism nor indoctrination. It is simply more candid about its presuppositions than is secular education. These presuppositions include the following: 1. God is, and He has not been silent; 2. He has spoken in the Scriptures and in the Person of Christ Jesus Who is the fullness of Deity in bodily form (OCS Coutrse of Study 1995- .Vfl, pro-2). . In a similar way the mission claims to be fulfilling the desires of God by teaching the Bible. It also claims the Bible as the Word of God. The OCS mission statement is as follows: I64 Overfield Christian School exists as an extension of the Christian home and church to fulfill God’s commands to teach His words “diligently unto our children” (Deuteronomy 6:5-7). Our foundation rests upon acknowledging Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and the Bible as the Word of God— the final authority in truth and practice (11 Timothy 2:15). We strive to assist each student to grow in excellence, spiritually, academically, socially, and physically (Luke 2:52) through the Godly ministry and examples of teachers, administrators, board members and stafl‘Cl‘itus 1:15-16). We serve with the cooperation ofparents who support us through their prayers and involvement in the activities of Overfield Christian School (Ephesians 6:4) (Approved 11/18/93) (OCS Wolicv Manual, 1 100: 1001). This statement focuses on two aspects of God as the source of curriculum. First, God’s Word is to be taught. Second, God’s Word is the final authority in truth and practice. For both, the concept of God notes that He is the source of curriculum. The outcomes focus on student understanding of the topics: being created in God’s image, individuality, Christian liberty, the Law of Love, self-government, spirit- controlled, Christian ethics, Christian character, unity and union, and property. These lessons originate with God and are integrated into core subjects taught at OCS such as: philosophy, ethics/morality, family, politics, economics, mathematics, sociology, science, history, law, music, and art. Yet as the diagram demonstrates the lessons are revealed through the Bible, nature, and Christ. Both the philosophy and mission statements, in addition to the Bible, identify teachers as a means for relaying the curriculum. OCS believes that the best way to 165 ' educate children is through Christian teachers. These are people that believe in God, love God, and teach from a biblical perspective (OCS Cogse of Study 1995-1996. pp. 2-5). These convictions are based on the belief that education without God and the Bible promotes atheism in the most affective way. The teacher and the printed curriculum are both a resource for curriculum at OCS. The school admittedly seeks Christian publishers fi'om which to purchase textbooks. However, when this resource is lacking, it is up to the teacher to fill the void. The superintendent, Mr. Schleeter, was concerned more with the influence a teacher had on the curriculum realizing the importance of the “assumption going into content and the conclusions coming out.” At the classroom level both the teacher and Christian publishers are resources through which God delivers the curriculum. A clear distinction for OCS is in the consideration of the sources of curriculum because God is the ultimate source. God is known through the Bible, nature, Christian publishers, and Christian teachers. This was the repeated theme of the philosophy and mission of OCS. The selection of primary perspectives supports the foundations of Christian education. ' The primary perspective by which education is viewed at OCS is through the foundations of Christian education. There are three components to this perspective: biblical, theological, and philosophical. God being the source of education is significant in the selection of this primary perspective as already determined. Therefore, the Bible is essential to this source as it is the Word of God. However, the foundations of Christian education also rest on the interpretation of the Bible. For OCS, this is an evangelical I66 interpretation or theology. The third component of this perspective is a philosophical understanding about values and beliefs concerning education. The statement of faith supports evangelical. Christian theology as a primary perspective (revised, June 1994). This statement is typical of evangelical Christians in that it is not all conclusive in the beliefs held by some evangelicals, yet it is very firm on seven points of faith that all evangelicals have in common. The OCS philosophy statement supports this evangelical stance in that it supports biblically based education that it is neither, too limitative nor restrictive in regard to biblical interpretation. The foundations of Christian education are the primary perspective established by the organizational structure of the board. It is maintained through the selection of board members and personnel by way of policy. This perspective is based on three core elements: biblical principals of God’s Word, evangelical theology or interpretations, and a philosophy of Christian education. The mission and p_ur_p_ose are identified as the general orientation. OCS is driven in mission and purpose of which the board has written clear statements. Both the mission and the purpose statements of OCS drive the institution. The mission statement of OCS clearly states values protected by the organizational structure of the school. An example of the application of these assertions is OCS’ response to input from various individuals from the community, including families, businesses, and students. The superintendent, Mr. Schleeter, stated that OCS endeavors to work on public relations with both the community and parents. First he noted that he tries to “keep abreast of I67 what area businesses are looking for.” This means student who are not college bound must have employable skills. He stated as an example, “Fast food employers want employees who can count change.” We serve not only the community, but also the family and home when our students possess these basic skills. The purpose statement makes six assertions. Two of these assertions place emphasis on establishing, conducting, operating, and maintaining a Christian school and recruiting students from homes that are basically Christian. These assertions state: 1 To establish, conduct, operate, and maintain a Christian school or schools for educational purposes below college or university level and to provide adequate and competently trained faculty and administrators for such school or schools. 2 To recruit students from homes that are basically Christian, train them for and guide them into the fields of leadership that will honor God and be directly responsible for the cause of Christ, whom we love and serve (OCS Board Policy Manual. 1012). To describe the importance of the mission and purpose statements, Mrs. Williams, a parent/teacher who serves on the Educational Policies Committee stated the most important factor which influences curriculum is the board’s role in setting policy in line with the mission and purpose. She further explained, “Policy is a guide that reflects our mission and purpose, [which] are tied by policy.” She explained that the board looks at the “big picture” when setting policy. Once policy is set, it is the institution’s responsibility to carry it out. Williams explained this to mean, “knowing it, reviewing it, and applying it.” I68 The identification of a general orientation is theological, philosophical, and biblical, as well as representative of the foundations of Christian education. This is accomplished through teacher requirements with ACSI certification in the area of philosophy of Christian education and biblical studies, the acceptance of OCS’ statement of faith, and character qualifications. The outcome assures a general orientation in the philosophy of Christian education for the teachers and administrators at OCS. It is through a combination of biblical mandates and examples that OCS orients itself toward education, a theological framework through which to view education and create an understanding, and a philosophical approach to education unique to OCS. Teachers are consideredgas theWW Teachers are considered external prior to their hiring. However, once a teacher is accepted into the organization they are part of the organization and have a considerable amount of influence. Social forces are likewise external in their perspective until they are approved. Teachers and social forces are continually evaluated through policies and procedures to insure they do not pose a moral threat to the mission and purpose of OCS. OCS reacts to extflai influences. The foundations of Christian education are used as a filtering system for everything else, making this filtering system the primary influence on educational purposes. The curriculum specialists at OCS use metaphors that describe the primary influence on educational purposes. The metaphors used are: “biblically-aligned,” “biblically-based with no compromise to curriculum,” “bible-centered oriented,” l69 “theological foundations,” and “theologically driven.” The commonality of this list suggests that the curriculum is founded philosophically on a biblical and theological basis. Considering this in light of the written philosophy of Christian education, the foundations of OCS’ Christian education are summarized in three words: biblical, theological, and philosophical. . It is through this primary influence filter that the secondary influence, teachers and social forces, are considered. If teachers and social forces are in agreement with the primary influence, then they are allowed to be influential in the educational process at OCS. This means that teachers who find themselves in agreement are more likely to be hired; social forces that likewise are in agreement will be taken into consideration as viable and important to the OCS curriculum. However, teachers and social forces that are proven to have a conflict in interest to the foundations of Christian education are rejected. Teachers and social forces that are rejected are unable to align themselves with the foundations of Christian education- these being, the Bible, evangelical theology (as established in the doctrinal statement), and the philosophy of Christian education. They are rejected because of spiritual and educational reasons that do not align them with OCS’ beliefs and values. For example, the Educational Policies Committee plays a major role in the process of filtering for approval, as the committee is responsible for OCS personnel, _ curriculum, quality, Christian character of personnel, and pupil admissions. The main objective of the committee is to oversee OCS and to do so by investigating, interpreting, monitoring, developing and enforcing every aspect of CCS as well as curriculum and 170 personnel. The committee’s objective is to protect the institution. When this is done, influences of teachers and social changes are filtered appropriately by the system. The process of hiring teachers serves as a filter in the application and interview process and the professional evaluation process. The policy for the Educational Policies Committee states: The committee is appointed in accordance to Sec. 2616. The committee takes the initiative and by specific board consent or mandate, takes action in the following areas: I To review issues relating to professional personnel. This implies investigating qualifications of candidates for administrative positions; recommending a salary schedule and other benefits such as sick leave, pensions, hospitalization, etc., to the finance committee; establishing the general conditions of employment, such as teaching assignment and pupil load. The principal of the school is generally charged with the responsibility of coordinating all arrangements with respect to employment. To investigate and interpret the school curriculmn. The education committee activates itself in two ways to make sure that: the requirements of the state laws are fulfilled; the requirements of the school’s own philosophy [is] are satisfied in the course of study. To keep itself informed in regard to the quality, which includes the Christian character, of the instruction and to evaluate all educational activities, equipment, and discipline [that] which are essential factors in meeting the objectives of the school. 171 4 To develop and enforce a policy of admission of pupils. The responsibilities of the education committee do not conflict with the responsibilities of the professional personnel. The two groups work together for a common goal, each contributing from the resources of his education, experience, and judgment (Issue Date: 10/27/83, Approved: 11/17/83, Reviewed: 1/19/95) (OCS Boa_rd Policy Mm 2720: 2010). When social forces as mentioned in the interview and data collection are considered, the Educational Policies Committee as well as the rest of the OCS are expected to evaluate the influence and make recommendations to the board of trustees. For OCS the items that have been considered a social force are businesses, Christian convictions outside the norm of evangelicalism, ACSI, textbook companies, finance, state of Ohio charter, state and national tests, curriculum theory, college requirements, and national and state standards. These social forces potentially influence OCS and are evaluated systematically by the committee and board. Rejected influences that are filtered out in this process are things that do not comply with the Bible, evangelical theology, or the philosophy of education. Items that OCS has at this time filtered out are Christian convictions outside the norm of evangelicalism (Mr. Razor, OCS Bible Department Head) and some textbooks that promote a non—Christian standard (Philosophy of Christian Education, OCS Course of S_tu‘dy 1995-1996. pp. 2-5). In the future it is possible that some funding that has strings attached and possibly national and state standards that promote opposing beliefs may result in OCS dropping its chartered status with the state. It is believed that if these things are not filtered out, they may affect the educational purposes at OCS. 172 OCS reacts to external influences having put in place an organizational structure that investigates, reviews, and approves the curriculum. The board is responsible for and gives final approval of changes to the curriculum; however, investigating, reviewing, and making recommendation is done by assigned committees. Though several committees set policy to protect the curriculum, the curriculum is still reviewed by the Educational Policies Committee or one of its sub-committees. Committees consist of both administration and teachers and are ofien given direction from within or by head teachers and lead teachers. Both the board and the committee have their own roles in assuring that the curriculum is in line with the philosophy and mission of OCS. OCS prepares, implements, and then evaluates the curriculum, The preparation of the curriculum is accomplished through the writing of a course of study for OCS. Though this work was mostly accomplished prior to ACSI accreditation, it is ongoing with the addition of new courses or changes made in courses. This is evident in the adoption of a new science curriculum for grades one through six as was reported by Mrs. Cline, a teacher at OCS. This process is overseen by an Educational Policies sub-committee, but was, and usually is, initiated by teachers. Teachers are responsible for preparing the course of study for new or revised curriculum. This is accomplished by the detailed writing of the goals and objectives. Once the curriculum is prepared in writing it is ready for the next step that is to implement it. The implementation of the curriculum is the teacher’s responsibility. However, implementation is investigated and overseen by both the Educational Policies Committee 173 and the principals. In addition to this, the Educational Policies sub-committee oversees the curriculum in a more systematic review. Superintendent Schleeter reported that this was a systematic process that created a five-year cycle. The system allows for one-fifth of the curriculum to undergo a thorough review each year. This pace insures that the entire OCS curriculmn has been reviewed every five years. The policy for the Educational and Personnel Committee states: The committee is appointed in accordance to Sec. 2616. The committee takes the initiative and by specific board consent or mandate, takes action in the following areas: . 1. To review issues relating to professional personnel. This implies investigating qualifications of candidates for administrative positions; recommending a salary schedule and other benefits such as sick leave, pensions, hospitalization, etc., to the finance committee; establishing the general conditions of employment, such as teaching assignment and pupil load. The principal of the school is generally charged with the responsibility of coordinating all arrangements with respect to employment. 2. To investigate and interpret the school curriculum. The education committee activates itself in two ways to make sure that: the requirements of the state laws are fulfilled; the requirements of the school’s own philosophy are satisfied in the course of study. 3. To keep itself informed in regard to the quality, which includes the Christian character, of the instruction; and to evaluate all educational activities, 174 equipment, and discipline which are essential factors in meeting the objectives of the school. 4. To develop and enforce a policy of admission of pupils. The responsibilities of the education committee do not conflict with the responsibilities of the professional personnel. The two groups work together for a common goal, each contributing from the resources of his education, experience, and judgment (Issue Date: 10/27/83, Approved: 11/17/83, Reviewed: 1/19/95) (OCS Board Policy Manual, 2720: 2010). The Educational Policies Committee has four responsibilities that directly influence curriculum decisions. The committee is responsible for OCS personnel, curriculum, quality, as well as Christian character of personnel, and the admission of pupils. The main objective of the committee is to oversee OCS and to do so by investigating, interpreting, monitoring, developing and enforcing every aspect of CCS as well as curriculum and personnel. The committee’s objective is to protect the mission, values, character, and integrity of the institution. In cases dealing with curriculum, Schleeter has given much authority to the principals. The principals, in turn, have passed much of this down to teachers. Mostly, teachers and principals make and approve curriculum decisions. Mrs. Williams states: “The principal goes to the board for approval sometimes . . . If the principal decided to purclmse it then we would purchase it . . . The board . . . did not approve any textbook selections.” Williams goes on to reflect about her perspective as an educator: “As a teacher I would say I have a lot of input on what books we use. I do believe that if I go to my principal she will let me have input in change as she has already this year.” 175 Recommendations concerning the curriculum can originate from outside the organizational structure, but in most instances, it will pass through the committee to the board. One exception is when changes are approved temporarily; this is usually by a principal. Prior to the ocs data collection and site visit the superintendent shared a personal concern for Christian organizations via e-mail. He voiced his concern for the organizational structure of Christian schools in general saying, “I find it somewhat disconcerting that in Christian school circles the form of government an institution uses is not open to debates” (Schleeter). This was elaborated on during the site visit as he explained his opinion of OCS’ organizational structure as being too authoritative and not allowing for the Holy Spirit’s leading through Christian teachers and parents. Schleeter described the role of the board, Educational Policies Committee, and the administrators for OCS. The board has a three-fold role: (I) accountability, (2) staff selection/evaluation, and (3) goal evaluation. He then described the role of the Educational Policies Committee saying they are ultimately “responsible” and do the “legwork” for the board in securing the mission of the school through curriculum decision-making processes. Finally, he noted that the administration is the “change agent. They [administrators] recognize needs and want to do something about it.” These three levels of the organization- administrators, committees, and board members oversee the work of the teachers who need to share their opinions. It was apparent that the board was responsible for the curriculum; however not all of the changes needed approval from them. Most changes were drafied by teacher requests and approved by the principal. The oversight of the Educational Policies I76 Committee provides for the investigation and evaluation expected of the board in this self-perpetuated board-run school. A Framework for Curriculum Planning at OCS Several constructs of Beane, Toepfer, and Alesse’s (1986, p. 67) model did not explain curriculum planning at OCS. However, overlaying this theory on the case revealed that OCS has a more linear approach to curriculum planning. At OCS the cuniculum plan influences and the decision screens come into play, once the foundations have been considered and once the course of study is established (see Figure 4.10). 177 Figure 4.10 A Framework for Curriculum Planning, at OCS MISSION STATEMENT PURPOSE STATEMENT FOUNDATIONS OF CHRISTIAN EDUCAITON Biblical Mandates Theological Framework Philosophical Approach and Examples COURSE OF STUDY Scope and Sequence . Goals/Objectives/Outcomes CURRICULULM PLAN DECISION SCREENS INFLUENCES , Busrnesses National and State standards College Requirements State and National Testing Textbook Companies ACSI Accreditation Finance Curriculum Theory Parents Student Needs Christian Convictions outside the - norm of evangelicalism State of Ohio Charter The missionand purpose drive curriculum planning. The curriculum planning at OCS is driven by both mission and purpose statements. These statements are characterized by clearly stated values that are protected by the organizational structure of the OCS institution. These statements reflect the comer stones of the foundations of Christian education by asserting the necessity and acceptance of biblical mandates and examples, a theological framework, and a philosophical approach to education. For this reason both the mission statement and the purpose statements are recognized as the elements that drive the curriculum planning for the institution. The OCS mission statement, previously sited, is as follows: Overfield Christian School exists as an extension of the Christian home and church to fulfill God’s commands to teach His words “diligently unto our children” (Deuteronomy 6:5-7). Our foundation rests upon acknowledging Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and the Bible as the Word of God—-the final authority in truth and practice ([1 Timothy 2:15). We strive to assist each student to grow in excellence spiritually, academically,.socially, and physically (Luke 2:52) through the Godly ministry and examples of teachers, administrators, board members and staff (Titus 1:15-16). _We serve with the cooperation of parents who support us through their prayers and involvement in the activities of Overfield Christian School (Ephesians 6:4) (Approved 11/18/93). Between the mission and the purpose statement there are seven assertions that drive the curriculum planning at OCS. The mission statement has five of them: (1) The school is an extension of the home and church; (2) The foundations of the school rest on knowing Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and the Bible as the Word of God being the authority in truth and practice; (3) The school seeks to assist with students as they grow spiritually, academically, socially, and physically; (4) The school intends to do its work through Godly-ministry and examples by both the personnel and board members; and (5) The school works cooperatively with parents in this ministry (OCS Board Policy Man_ual, 1100:1001). The purpose statement makes six assertions about the organization but only two of these assertions seem to drive the curriculrun. These place emphases on 179 establishing, conducting, operating, and maintaining a Christian school and recruiting students from homes that are basically Christian. These assertions state: 1. To establish, conduct, operate and maintain a Christian school or schools for educational purposes below college or university level to provide adequate and competently trained faculty and administrators for such school or schools. 2. To recruit students from homes that are basically Christian, train them for and guide them into the fields of leadership that will honor God and be directly responsible for the cause of Christ, whom we love and serve (OCS Board Policy Manual, 1012). To describe the importance of the assertions that the mission and purpose statements make, Mrs. Williams, a parent, teacher, board member serves on the Educational Policies Committee, stated that the most important factor which influences curriculum is the board’s role in setting policy in line with the mission and purpose. She further explained, “Policy is a guide that reflects our mission and purpose, [which] are tied by policy.” She explained that the board looks at the “big picture” when setting policy. Once policy is set, it is the institution’s responsibility to carry it out. Williams explained this to mean, “knowing it, reviewing it, and applying it.” These assertions are important influences that drive curriculum at OCS. They do so through the development of policies and procedures concerning OCS cuniculum and personnel who handle the curriculum. In this way the OCS culture cultivates an organizational structure that protects the values of statement. I80 Foundations drive the course of study at OCS. The formdations of Christian education in turn drive the course of study. When the course of study is evaluated, needs are based on the mission and purpose of OCS. All aspects of the curriculum are evaluated and reviewed by the Education Committee to insure that they are based on biblical, theological, and philosophical foundations as outlined in the mission and purpose of OCS. OCS policies have many purposes, however, protecting the course of study is one of the most important. The course of study outlines the scope and sequence as well as objectives for each course taught at OCS. The purpose is to guide decisions by educators in each class and to establish a standard that can be evaluated. For example, textbook policies concern issues in reviewing, evaluating, and adopting textbooks that line up with the course of study, the mission, purpose, and theology of evangelicalism. The board generally approves decisions concerning the OCS Course of Study. Yet, there are some decisions that are not considered major decisions and are often made by the teacher and/or principal. At OCS recommendations for curriculum change most often stem from teacher requests. The elementary principal, Mrs. Johns, states, “Teachers have a lot of say because of their credentials and selection process before hiring.” Teachers in essence have the biggest voice. The exception to this would be an occasion during which the principal, superintendent, or board initiates the process, having recognized a need and wanting to initiate change. It is more likely the principal would initiate this than the superintendent or the board. However, ultimately, the board that has delegated curriculum decision-making authority to principals and teachers likewise, requires board oversight from one assigned committee. 181 When asked to think about what factors went into the decision making process in the last year, Mr. Weber indicated that teachers were the determining factor. He explained, “Rarely do I, the administrator, tell teachers what to do.” It is the teacher who determines what needs to be done in the classroom. Teachers are encouraged to drive the curriculum decision making process at OCS and have been given full reign to deal with the curriculum. There are several tensions that drive tha decision-mp process. It is apparent that several tensions have driven the decision-making process at OCS. These tensions are both influences that affect curriculum plans and influences through which decisions are screened. First, in regard to curriculum plans, OCS is considerate of businesses, the national and state standards and testing, college requirements, textbook companies, ACSI accreditation, finance, Christian convictions outside the norm of evangelicalism, and the State of Ohio charter. OCS does consider several principles of learning in its consideration of cuniculum. These considerations do affect the curriculum planning in regard to curriculum theory, parents, and student needs. They create tensions that must be considered a framework for curriculum planning. Unlike many institutions the secondary principal noted that curriculum theory “affects us [OCS] minimally . . . it is driven by an individual teacher or the principal as very few [teachers] have masters, so they are not abreast of new theories.” However, the elementary principal noted that OCS feels curriculum theory is immrtant, but many see the pendulum of theories go back and forth. 182 She “encourages seminars and in-service training” with all of her teachers. OCS does not promote one theory of education on a school-wide scale. However, in meeting the needs of individuals and request of parents, teachers are encouraged to seek out curriculum theories. Additionally, OCS has the benefit of a resource room and home schooling options that provide for parental choices as well as considerable options for students based on their needs. In this way the characteristics of the learner are considered beyond the traditional classroom sense. OCS is curriculum- driven, facing the needs of the school and at the same time making decisions with consideration given to the general resources. The desire to meet the needs of students relates to the influence of both the learner and curriculum theories. Though OCS prides itself in not being an experimental school, and is therefore not prone to being innovative, they are influenced by the need for curriculum theories that address the needs of learners. This is most ofien in the area of developmental needs, disabilities, and even in interest, the latter changing with the culture. Mrs. Johns, when asked what was more important in making curriculum decisions pointed out that the development of children and how they learn was. at the top of her list of factors. Summg: OCS is a Case of Theology’s Irnflt is Influenced by The Biggest Voice The research question asked of OCS is; to what extent does evangelical theology guide or impact curriculum development in an evangelical school setting? Additionally, sub—questions were asked about the organizational structure, the role of the curriculum specialist, the influence of theology and other tensions in the curriculum development 183 process, and how internal and external forces translate into school related activities, as well as what are the implications for rmderstanding how theology is or is not translated into curriculum practice and school related activities? To answer these questions three frameworks were used: (1) the purpose of education and the forces that influence them at OCS, (2) the general flow of curriculum-development activity at OCS, and (3) a framework for curriculum planning at OCS. These frameworks pointed out that theology is one element of the foundations of Christian education on which decisions are based. Theology’s impact is greatly influenced by the teachers who have the biggest voice and the most influence in curriculum planning. Therefore, the OCS cuniculum process is a case of theology’s impact is influenced by the biggest voice. The mission and purpose statement are at the cornerstone for curriculum decisions at OCS. However, embedded within these statements are assertions that outline a foundation of Christian education. This foundation has three distinct components: the Bible, theology, and philosophy. As such theology is extremely important to curriculum planning. When decisions are made about the curriculum these statements and the foundations of Christian education are used as a guide to new decisions and as tools to evaluate existing practices. The organizational politics and structure at OCS are tied to theology. As such theology is one component in the process that guides curriculum practice, the dynamics of school structure, and decision-making. Theology is a value that governs OCS’ practice by determining who teacher and what is taught. Likewise, theology goes as far as determining who governs. As a result there are several tensions that effect curriculum planning at OCS. 184 In exploring a conceptual framework of curriculum tensions for OCS (see Figure 4.11) it is apparent that OCS faces influences differently than what was expected from a review of precedent literature. For OCS, the internal forces play a major role in driving the curriculum. These forces are recognized as the mission and purpose, the foundations of Christian education, the course of study, and teachers. The internal forces at OCS are determined by the assertions made in the mission and purpose statements, the foundations of Christian education, the course of study, and teachers. Figure 4.11 A Conceptual Framework of Curriculum Tension at OCS External Forces are Social forces Community Businesses Christian Convictions outside the norm of evangelicalism x Courseaof Study Student Needs / ission and Purpose F TCSCI'ICI’S COMPIIIICS Finance ==> <:=l 0' "3 A" ==I> <2==I (Christian and non-Christian) Theological Values Foundations of Christin Education (Theology. Philosophy. College / R uiremen eq aid-Bible) \ State of Ohio Non- Public School Charter lea Accreditation II Katerina... Testing Agencies and Standards 185 OCS curriculum specialist identified several driving forces as internal influences through the interview process. ThOugh it was stated that the assertions made in the mission statement were a driving force by Mrs. Williams, a board member, parent, teacher, other specialists listed God’s Word, student needs, and parents as influences. In addition to this, all OCS administrators noted that the actions of teachers became an influence in the development of the scope and sequence, objectives, and the curriculum review. Finally, the three components of the foundations of Christian education were identified in the documentation concerning the statement of faith, qualifications of personnel and student admissions as well as the OCS philosophy of education. Though the influences can be broken down in several ways, these three have been identified as driving the curriculum as internal forces. These internal influences are established and protected by the organizational structure. The organizational structure is comprised of the board of trustees, all the administration, board committees, and sub-committees. The purpose of this group is to create policy that will fulfill the OCS mission and purpose, and in this way allow the foundations of Christian education and teachers to drive the cuniculum. Policy is implemented to drive the curriculum. The organizational structure in this figure is defined as having the responsibility of safegr_Ja_r_ding the curriculum process. This is done through the establishing policy, as noted by Mrs. Williams: “Policy is a guide that reflects our mission and purpose.” She points out that the board must look at the big picture for the school and set policy to guide the curriculum process. Teachers determine what is important and what is taught. I86 Teachers and administrators determine what the practice is, but it is the responsibility of the board to establish the guide by providing board policy. Board policies then safeguard the school’s cuniculum by board member selection, administrative, teaching, and stafl‘ hiring, student admissions, curriculum approval, and finally, the evaluation and review of all of these systems. Having created policies for all of these provides a gauge for measuring and defining the steps in the curriculum process. The concept ofm the curriculum process through this organizational structure from external non-theological values is evident from the data collected fiom OCS. The external forces are, in fact, social forces that are brought about by the actions of those outside the norms of the institution, those norms being the internal forces; the organizational structure has allowed for some of these to influence the school. However, safeguards are in place to reject any force that might be contrary to accepted theology if there are sufficient reasons. The community at large creates the external forces. -It is the external forces that are outside the organizational structure of OCS. Their influence is determined by the policy established by the organizational structure. External forces originate with those who influence OCS but are not part of the institution, but rather are part of the community at large. Influences that have been recognized are those brought to OCS from an outside source and are, by definition, external. These influences are controlled by the parameter established by policy. For OCS these influences have been identified as community businesses, Christian convictions outside the norm of evangelicalism, ACSI accreditation textbook companies both Christian and non-Christian, finarice, the State of Ohio non-public school charter, 187 state and national testing agencies, curriculum theory, college requirements, and state and national standards. The faculty handbook covers a multitude of policies that govern personnel. These policies handle the selection, evaluation, guidelines, staff development, and responsibilities of faculty. The calendar, though seemingly minor, covers the instructional time allotted in the day and the year. The home-school policies talk about guidelines,testing, and admittance of students into the school. Chartering/accreditation policies guide the curriculum in demanding that the institution is current with governing regulations concerning: teacher certification, curriculum standards, testing standards, and professional development. Finally, the use of the Internet provides guidelines for technology of this kind and is directly related to curriculum design. These policies each guide decisions concerning what is taught, who teaches, and the atmosphere in which it is taught. Despite the differences found at OCS as compared to the proposed frameworks, curriculum planning is similar in other ways. First, there are influences that affect the purpose of education at OCS. These influences, however, are sorted as to their potential affect on the curriculum and the general purposes or mission of OCS. The OCS curriculum has a general orientation around which a written curriculum is prepared. A course of study is established with specific goals and objectives for the purposes of identifying a written curriculum. Likewise, this cuniculum is implemented and evaluated as in any other institution. The framework for planning the curriculum has the same components in its make-up, as it is comprised of foundations, goals, general objectives, curriculum plans and decision screens. I88 Eagle Lake Christian School (ELCS): The Case of Teachers’ Perception of ' Theology School Context Eagle Lake Christian School (ELCS) is located in the ACSI Mid-American Region (ACSI, 1998). The city of Eagle Lake is in a cormty of 403 square miles and is one of the largest cities in the United States with a population of 1.5 million people. Eagle Lake is 85% white, 14% black, .9% Hispanic, and .1% other population. It is part of a nine-county Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) of 3,532 square miles. A great place to run a business and for families, it is consistently ranked as one of the cleanest and safest cities in the US. (limp "caulclakccom ”business! dcmouraphicshtml). The Eagle Lake campus is on a 38.5-acre tract of land just inside the belt line of the state capital. Students come from surrounding counties and the neighboring city of Lewis (ELCHS Profile, 2000). Several members of the parent community have chosen ELCS because of its ideal location off the interstate and convenience in commuting to and from work around the capital area. The ELCS sight meets the needs of its large student body within the confines of one location, housing all grades fiom kindergarten through twelfth. Newly constructed facility additions provide several opportunities beyond the basic educational goals for students to become involved in extra-curricular and co-curricular activities. The campus facility maintains easy access to and from school as well as high visibility for those passing the institution. These factors make ELCS desirable, as it is feasible to attend ELCS and receive a well-rounded education. 189 The school has several newer buildings on one site that house the enrollment of 1,350 students in grades Kindergarten through twelve grades. The physical plant includes elementary, middle school, and high school buildings, three computer labs, two libraries, one combination elementary gym/lunch room, one 1,000-seat gymnasium with weight room. and 325-seat Band/Choir assembly room with stage, one lighted soccer field and two practice fields, one lighted all-weather track, baseball and softball diamonds, and five tennis courts. A new cafatorium with stage, cafeteria, and additional classrooms will be completed in [the] fall of 2000 (ELCHS Profila, 2000). The physical plant is aesthetically pleasing and very functional for its educational purposes. There are multiple lanes of traffic leading into the facility: one for dropping- off and picking-up children by busses and commuters, one leading to adjacent parking for students, and a third one for staff and personnel parking near several building entrances that is also used for exiting the grounds. Several individuals direct traffic at pique time on the main parking lot. The buildings lay off to the south side of the property with the exception of the business offices, athletic facility, and auditorium, which are on the north side. The elementary, middle school, high school, and library buildings are side by side with sidewalks connecting them. The athletic fields are to the side and back of the campus. The new high school building, still under construction, draws attention to itself in the center of the campus. It is to ELCS’ advantage that the entire campus is located on one site. The statistical information is as follows: 190 ELCS has students in grades K-12. Total enrollment is approximately 1,350 with 355 students in the high school. The total faculty and support staff numbers 130 and the system is divided into Elementary (K-S), Middle School (6-8), and High School (9—12). ELCS is governed by a board of Christian businessmen and is directed by an administrator, three principals and one assistant principal. All faculty members have Bachelor degrees, and 40-45% have their Masters degree (ELCHS Profile, 2000). ELCS is a very well organized school with a strong support staff. Many of these individuals have been committed to ELCS for several years. Despite the large enrollment, there is a small campus environment that is extremely friendly. On the days of the site visit there was a familiarity among staff, students, and families. Despite such familiarity, the school is academically aggressive as ELCHS (Eagle Lake Christian High School) is a college prep school. As a result, “eighty to ninety percent of ELCHS graduates attend four-year colleges and universities” (ELCHS Profile, 2000). Therefore, students have available several means of testing that allow for competitive scholarships for college. The following standardized tests are used: . . . 9th and 10th Grade- Stanford Test of Academic Skills io‘h Grade-PSAT/NMSQT 11'“ Grade-PSAT/NMSQT (Several students have earned National Merit recognition) These test are not just available but “ELCS encourages students to take the SAT or the ACT in the 11'“ and 12‘” grades. The average SAT scores for the Class of 1999 were: Verbal 585, Math 593, Composite 1178, when. 91% of the class took the SAT. The 191 average ACT scores for the class of 1999 were: Composite 26 when 29% of the class took the ACT”(ELCHS Profile, 2000). These scores are publicized, and the school is very competitive with the area schools, both public and private. The publication of scoresisusedtopromotetheschoolbasedonitsacademic rccordinachievement. These scores are published in the ELCHS Profile (2000) that is handed out to those who inquire about ELCHS. In addition to this, curriculum studies at the high school are divided so students have a variety of elective courses from which to select while meeting the requirements for graduation. Students are able to pick between general and college prep programs. The high school has eight class periods. A normal student load is 6-7 classes and one study hall. With permission and qualification, a student may take a full or a reduced load. Two-to-three-hours of homework per night is common. High School students pick between two tracks: College Preparatory (44 credits) and General Graduation (40 Credits) to fulfill graduation requirements (ELCH_S Profile 2000). ELCHS is focused on meeting not only the needs but also the desires of the constituents in providing for educational options. Dual options provide opportunity for two types of students, general and college-bound students. Beyond this the advanced student is offered another opportunity. The school provides for academically advanced students through a selection of advanced placement courses. Advanced students may take advantage of higher level classes because, ELCHS offers Advanced Placement (AP) courses in Biology, Chemistry, and Senior English. Additional courses may be offered in the future. No additional 192 credit is given nor are grades weighted. Students may earn high school credit through correspondence courses to broaden their course selection, or for re- mediation. Eagle Lake Christian High School does not rank students except for valedictorian and salutatorian designations (ELCHS Profile, 2000). In addition to this students with diverse needs are seeing their needs met by the classroom teachers whom have been encouraged to keep up on the issues surrounding curriculum theory through “workshops, teacher, meetings, speakers, in-service and conferences” stated Mrs. West. She explained, “We try” to make sure all ofour teachers are “aware of need.” Meaning, they want their teachers to look at diverse learners and to understand individual student needs. She stated that “all teachers” are expected to go to conferences and they do so at different times. Likewise, she noted'that as a staff the main one at this time has been concentrating on Multiple Intelligences. Students at ELCS seemed to take education seriously. The school’s academic identity is characterized not only by its graduation requirement but also by the test scores produced by its students. ELCS’ ability to have a wide selection of offerings draws students in from various backgrounds while at the same time creating an atmosphere of academic diversity. ELCS claims to challenge students both academically and spiritually. Likewise, it claims that ELCS is interested in the whole life of the student (ELCHS Profile, 2000). The site visit revealed that the spiritual aspect of Christian education is challenging, as students are expected to know and understand their Christian heritage in a cognitive way. Evidences viewed at the time of the Sight visit revealed that ELCS has a scope and sequence as well aS course objectives for each grade level Bible course. In addition to I93 this, the school intentionally builds beyond content to master the spiritual aspect of each A individual student for life application. The spiritual aspects of this integrated approach to education are sought in several ways: (1) working to maintain a spiritual atmosphere on their campus, (2) the integration and application of biblical principals, values, and ethics in all programming and courses, (3) the examples modeled by ELCS leadership and personnel, (4) required participation in weekly group worship, and (5) daily devotions with teachers and peers. The school is able to challenge students academically as well as spiritually. The student profile makes a claim for this in the following statement: Chapels are held weekly with speciaISpeakers, musicians, films, or ELCS students/faculty ministering the principles of God’s Word to the students. Seminars and assemblies are held during the year for special spiritual emphasis and/or other areas of interest. Students attend daily Bible classes taught by a variety of teachers. The Bible curriculum is designed to give general Biblical knowledge and principles with the desire to see each student glow in his/her personal relationship to Jesus Christ. New Testament Survey (9), Old Testament Survey (10), Bible Doctrines (11), and Issues and Answers (12) (ELCHS Profile, 2000). In addition to academic and Spiritual integration the social life of students is addressed through the athletic and fine art programs at ELCS as well as other extra- curricular activities. Extra Curricular Activities include athletics, drama, music, and student government. Inter-scholastic competition is provided for both boys and girls. The high school competes with other Christian, private, parochial, and public schools. 194 Girls’ sports include basketball, cross-country, golf, tennis, soccer, softball, track and volleyball. Boy’s sports include baseball, basketball, cross-cormtry, golf, soccer, tennis, and track. Other sports may be added. Opportunities for dramatics through the production of one or two plays/musicals per year have been provided. Students may select music instruction by taking Concert Band, Pep Band, Choir, Strings, and/or Ensemble. These groups compete in district and state competitions. The opportunity for developing leadership skills includes class officers, club involvement, and community projects through Student Government experiences (ELCHS Profile. 2000). In an effort to meet community needs the school was founded in 1965 and has been a continual member of ACSI since 1988. Currently, ELCS is an ACSI-accredited school. It has been and is currently supported by a strong Parent-Teacher Fellowship. The middle school uniquely is committed to character development and discipleship. Various elective and advanced courses supplement the curriculum. Ample opportunity in extra-curricular activities is provided for students to be able to explore and achieve success. At the high school level there is likewise a commitment to character development and discipleship. This curriculum has a strong college preparatory curriculum offering twelve areas of study with sixty-five course offerings. Students are provided with competitive interscholastic athletics, outstanding concert band and pep band, strong choir, and challenging drama productions as well (“ELCS Information Packet”, 1999-2000). Since its inception, ELCS has continually endeavored to meet the needs of the community. 195 The currant Vision Statement reads, “The vision of Eagle Lake Christian School is to provide an outstanding spiritual and educational environment where, working with Christian families and churches, all students will be thoroughly prepared to fulfill God’s purpose for their lives” (ELCHS Profile, 2000). Historically, the school has been working to continue to seek to fulfill this vision. The ELCS Mission/Accreditation The ELCS mission statement is printed in the ELCHS Profile and distributed in the school’s information packet. It states, “The mission of Eagle Lake Christian School is to glorify God through the discipleship of students and the pursuit of excellence in education with the Bible as the foundation and Jesus Christ as our focus.” The emphasis is placed on glorifying God through students and their pursuit of excellence in education, using the Bible as a foundation and focusing on Jesus Christ. The adopted philosophy of the school promotes the same philosophy. In keeping with the standards of excellence in this statement, ELCS was ACSI- accredited in the 1996—97 school year (ELCS Personnel Handbook, p. 4). At this time ELCS is seeking additional accreditation by North Central Association (NCA) agency.‘0 This would give regional accrediting status to ELCS benefiting the graduates as they seek jobs and admission into institutions of higher learning. Though ELCS is accredited by ACSI, it has not sought a Similar status through the State accreditation process by choice. Dr. Simpson states: “This venture is being sought by ACSI and accepted'by ELCS. ACSI is working with NCA to grant dual accreditation to ACSI-accredited schools. 196 We look at what the State has published [curriculum] . . . Frankly, a lot of what goes on [in this state] is not something we’d want to handle here. One problem I would just throw out to you, one of the reasons we have chosen not to be accreditedbythe State. . . isthattheywouldrequireustotakethe. . . statewide test of Educational Progress and the philosophy is that the test is tied to the State approvedcurriculumandsothetestthattheStateusesistiedtocurriculumthat the State has approved. But we’re not using State approved curriculum. And so when worked through, the thought of becoming accredited through what is called the freeway procesa here . . . they would not give us a waiver on testing, and what sense does that make? Ifwe’re not using the curriculum they’ve approved they would not give us a waiver to take the test that they’ve developed. We’d rather use something like the Stanford Achievement Test as opposed to something tied into the State . . . curriculum. Dr. Simpson stated that ELCS safeguards against al_l external influences, even those of the ACSI accreditation-process. The school tries to keep informed as much as possible and subjects every possible influence to the procedures established by policy to filter out unwanted influences. Through this policy ELCS is open to what others think, looking at such things as the State homework for curriculum and testing, the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), and the Mel Gabler Association very seriously. It is only after subjecting these influences to thorough examination that the ELCS board considers it for approval. In addition to this there are several influences as a result of technology money and area business interest. Parent Foundations have no say in what is taught yet give money 197 to the elementary computer lab (Mrs. Hunolt, elementary computer teacher). However, Mr. Mena, the technology director noted that area businesses have helped with new software changes in the computer labs. In addition to this, Mrs. Black, the Director of Library Services, noted that ELCS received $8,000 from a foundation for library materials. The school also receives electronic resources, which are tied to the curriculum, and links them to the T-l line with the state public library. Mrs. Black noted that in the future issues ofaccess and material use might arise with the State library. When these influences become controversial with the values and beliefs of ELCS the board will likely decide to discontinue their influence. The philosophy of ELCS that is tied to its doctrinal statement, as represented in the ELCS statement of faith, influences curriculum decisions despite its origin. ELCS’ philosophy of education is innately theological. The philosophy is simply stated in that, “Eagle Lake is non-denominational and adheres to the doctrinal statement of the Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI). It is intended that each student will obtain a Christ-centered and Biblically-integrated education with an emphasis on academic excellence” (ELCHS Profile, 2000). Despite this statement both cuniculum specialists and the head administrator profess ACSI is not a major influence to curriculum decisions. Mrs. West, the third grade lead teacher, explained how a Christ-centered theology is a factor or influence in the development of curriculum in an effort to build awareness among students. She described the practice of the philosophy of Christian education. In practice this means that ELCS “integrate Christ as center in life in each subject.” She goes on to explain that this creates student awareness and is the general purpose of I98 education at ELCS. Mr. Palm, the high school English teacher, echoed this sentiment, I when he stated, “Philosophy is first and foundational” in influencing the development of curriculum. Mrs. McCain, the middle school department head for Language Arts, gives an example of what being biblically integrated means. She states that it is the teacher’s intent to “teach discernment” and this is “very important” to the development of curriculum. She gives the example of non-Christian textbook use in the upper grades. Teachers read textbooks to see what they are trying to teach: humanism, political correctness, etc. “If using [them], [teacher are to]. be able to show how it [the textbook] differs or disagrees from the Word of God [Bible].” Mrs. Roseboom, the middle school science department head, likewise indicated that the “approach to curriculum is through the Bible with the general purpose being to create a Christ-centered world-view. Though the theology and the philosophy of Christian education may have been adopted from ACSI initially, ACSI does not control the curriculum. Rather, the initial adoption only demonstrates that they were in agreement to begin with. When asked, “Is there anything outside the institution that affects cuniculum decision?” Dr. Simpson, the head administrator, noted that ELCS was not bound to ACSI but only to “What is in line with philosophy.” Though ELCS’ adopted doctrine and philosophy of education have been established by ACSI Dr. Simpson maintains that ACSI does not control them. The foundations of Christian education are the driving force behind curriculum decisions at ELCS. ELCS’ statement of philosophy emphasizes theological philosophies with the expectation of a biblical basis and reasoning for education. It gives evidence that theology is key to what drives curriculum decision. Staff members are expected to I99 hold not only state certification for teaching, acquire ACSI certification through additional biblical studies and philosophy of Christian education courses, and be active professing Christians. Through these avenues, the foundations of Christian education are made known and reviewed as well as established as the core to curriculum decisions. The expectation is that the educators will then promote the theological and philosophical values of Christian education. The head administrator was asked, “Outside this institution what affects curriculum decisions?” He responded by stating, We value our independence so we don’t take any money from anyone . . . We buy the best that’s available in keeping with our philosophy. We are accredited by the Association of Christian Schools International, but we don’t feel bound by that at all. They ask to see our curriculum and we gladly show that to them but they don’t dictate what to do about that. We are in the process of application with North Central [Association]. If that meant we had to teach things we don’t want to teach we’d drop that in a heartbeat. Dr. Simpson clarified this statement when he commented, “The Word of God is the foundation for all we do, not ACSI.” Though ELCS claims and likewise appears to be independent of ACSI that maintains a powerful influence on the school. The influence of ACSI originally appeared to be at the root of ELCS’ statements of philosophy and doctrine, as both originated with ACSI and refer to ACSI. However, Dr. Simpson maintains, Eagle Lake’ philosophy is not a carbon copy of the ACSI philosophy Statement. 200 The ELCS M’tional Structure The organizational structure of the board has final say over the administration The administration of the school is comprised of a head administrator and two full-time principals (one for the high school and one for the elementary school). In addition to these chief administrators are two assistant principal. One serves as part-time teacher in the secondary but oversees the middle school. The other serves as a full time assistant to the elementary school principal. The organizational chart (ELCS Policy MM, Revised 3.17.92) (see Figure 4.12) of ELCS visually presents the process of decision making, starting with the Board of Directors. ELCS is a self-perpetuating board-run school. The Head Administrator, Dr. Simpson, is second in line. Under the Head Administrator is the Director of Business Affairs, Director of Testing, Director of Library Services, Director of Health Services, Director of Printing Services, Director of Transportation, the three principals, and the Director of Facilities and Development. The decisions on every level pass through the head administrator before seeking final board approval. 201 Figure 4.12 ELCS’ Organizational Chart Organizational Chart BOARD OF DIRECTORS AD ISTRAT R REQEE! IONl§ [ (§) DIR. OF BUSINESS LEMENTARY MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL DIRECTOR OF FACILITIES AFFAIRS Assistant to the Principal r GRADES K-5) l (GRADES 6-8) (Grades 942) Bookkeeper I Sew Fm CIPAL PRINCIPAL PRINCIPAL AND DEVELOPMENT Aceoums Payable Mgr Dept Chair pervisor of Buildings and Bookstore erager -5) Teaching Staff ds Supervisor of Food Servtees Eg; eachers‘ Aides ' ' ' Guidance and l Maintenance HT/SAT Director of Director of Director of Director of Library Services G and T — Library Clerks _ Counseling “— Cm Athletic Director Cheerleader Coaches Custodians Sponsors ‘ Cheerleader Sponsors Health Services Assistant Nurse Nursing Students Printing Services Tmsprxunion — Assistant to the Director Bus Drivers Maintenmee In the spring of 2000 the secretary who answered the telephone could not explain how board members were put into position. Dr. Simpson, however, expressed verbally that the board decides its own membership. ELCS’ status is verified by ACSI the accrediting agency in its annual directory of ACSI schools (ACSI. 1998). The self- perpetuated board-run school elected its own members. 202 Interviewed curriculum specialists drew various charts that described the decision making process for curriculum. These charts stated that the board ultimately approved the curriculum and that the principals were entrusted by the administrator and board to oversee the process. Dr. Simpson states, “Well, to be real honest, a large part of our strategy here is to train and have faith in the teachers that are part of our program here. And sowe doputalotoffaith inourteachersthatareteachinginthose subjectareasto pull in resource materials to look at things that contradict Scripture.” The detailed work of drafling a curriculum proposal would be overseen by the department heads in the upper grades and the lead teachers for each grade level in the elementary grades. The proposals would be overseen by the principals and then passed to the head administrator who would pass it to the board for final approval. Figure 4.13 illustrates the process for making curriculum decisions at the high school level. This diagram was drawn by an Eagle Lake Christian High School (ELCHS) curriculum-specialist. It was explained during the interview with the high school department head that proposals originate at any level, such as a teacher, principal, or even student level. However, once the department decides to review the proposal, the department head teacher is obligated to carry out this process as outlined. The department head receives individual unit alternatives and is responsible for surveying available publishers when texts are needed. In the process of textbook selection, the department head would fill out detailed screening forms or evaluations for each textbook reviewed. The department head then recommends three choices, usually in the form of textbooks, to the principal who reviews the recommendations and makes a 203 recommendation to the Board for a final decision or a review by the depMent for further investigation. Figure 4.13 ELCS Curriculum-decisions at the High School Level Teacher _ . Surveys Fills out Mled (Department Head) available ‘ '——"" screening forms publishers iST (evaluation) Receives individual unit alternatives Turns In beat 3 School Board choices to finally chooses principal — . The department head is responsible for much of the work done in preparing for changes. The department head collects individual unit alternatives and surveys available publishers before sending it onto the principal. They are responsible for the organization of teacher input at their level, and following this, for the presentation of three choices to the principal. The final decision comes from the board, but the recommendation comes from the teachers in the department. Mr. Kroger, the middle school principal, draws an institutional chart (see Figure 4.14) to represent the middle school process of curriculum decisions. His chart indicates how he must ofien coordinate with both the elementary lead teachers and the high school department heads. Decisions at the middle school level must be made with consideration of where students are coming from as well as where they go after their middle school experience. There are times that the middle school coordinates with the elementary, 204 particularly when considering the sixth grade. At other times, they must coordinate with the high school. However, he noted that most ofien from grade six and above, curriculum decisions were made through the department and not by grade level. Figure 4.14 ELCS Curriculum-decisions at the Middle School Level Principal D I Head Mathl Teachers ‘ . MW Textbook (Evaluated by MS. Selection Principal and Dept. Heafl 0 0 Stanford Otis-Lennon 3. Scope and Sequence mm 0 0 Course Descriptions M res Elem. - 5" Math [Lead Teacher] 1 Grades K-6 Courses 7-12 > 6-8 h—il Dept. Head M.S. :I \ 9.12 H.S. —4 Dept. Head This chart shows how a fifth grade textbook decision was made in coordination with the middle school math department. In choosing a new textbook at the elementary, teachers coordinated with middle school department heads in the decision process. Figure 4.14 shows how the middle school department head collaborated with the fifih grade math teachers in the elementary, in a process that not only considered the scope and sequence and course descriptions, but also the middle school test scores. The purpose behind this collaboration was to evaluate the past, look to the future, and in this way 205 improve the system when selecting the most appropriate textbook in light of all information. Figure 4.15, as drawn by a lead teacher at ELCS elementary, describes the curriculum-decision responsibilities of the lead teacher. In the elementary, the lead teacher coordinates the work of the grade level teachers. In this case there are five grade level teachers, one of whom is a lead teacher. The elementary lead teacher serves in the ' same capacity, as the secondary department head. At the elementary the lead teachers are responsible for all subjects; and in the secondary the department head is responsible for a subject area such as math or science. Work on elementary curriculum stems from the grade level perspective rather than the department level where courses are singled out by subject area. The lead teacher reports curriculum proposals that a team of five teachers developed to the elementary principle, Mrs.Wilhoit. Figure 4.15 ELCS Curriculum-decisions at the Elementary Level. Mrs. Wilhoit (Elementary Principal) Me (Lead Teacher) Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Me 206 The elementary system in essence is similar to the secondary model. However, at this level the lead teacher is responsible for organizing proposals instead of the department head. Proposals come to the lead teacher who is assigned to each grade level. Teachers working at that grade level work as a team under the lead teacher’s direction. Proposals are made the same way, and once they are approved by the principal go to the board for final approval. In practice it was apparent that the elementary principal team is more active in giving directives to the decision making process. This was apparent in various interview statements. Mrs. Little, an early elementary lead teacher noted: Sometimes it (a cuniculum decision) starts at the top and comes down . . . For example, it could start at the top, and Mrs. Wilhoit, comes across or wants us to think about revising certain subjects of curriculum. Ands so she’ll come to me with that information or questions, or idea and then I will have a meeting with the five grade level teachers and we will discuss it, and then whatever we decide or find out- whatever information we gather- I will present it back to Mrs. Wilhoit. The elementary principals often suggest ideas to be considered; yet this was not usually the case at the middle school and the high school levels where the administration was further removed. At these levels math teachers, art teachers, computer teachers, and V science teachers all made statements that directives initiated with them. Occasionally, the head administrator had input but otherwise even the curriculum review was up to them. Teachers gave suggestions and the principals approved it. Mrs. Trout, an elementary lead teacher, described the process that the curriculum decision process sometimes starts with the teacher and at other times starts with the 207 administrator. Trout recounted that changes in this year’s workbook on math skills were teacher initiated, but last year it was an administrative decision to change the math book. She goes on to point out that despite the administrative directive, “the teachers always have a lot of input.” She explained that teacher input comes in the form of teacher evaluation of different texts, and discussion with teachers, administrators, and on occasion parents who have evaluated the textbooks in the same manner as teachers. She listed the steps during her interview. 1. Starts with the teacher or administrator 2. Teachers are asked to evaluate different texts 3. Discussion with teachers and administrators 4. Sometimes parent input 5. Teachers might pilot the program [in one class section only] 6. Demonstrations from publisher Mrs. West, an elementary lead teacher noted that a curriculum change was initiated because of parental input. In that situation they changed the “fourth grade curriculum had too much of a jump. The third was not challenging, yet the fourth really was.” She went on to explain that the parents complained and the administration gave the teachers a directive'to make changes. The teacher then proceeded with making a proposal. . While discussing the decision making process with Dr. Simpson, the words of curriculum specialist were echoed. Dr. Simpson in speaking about his role in the decision making process stated, “I am the one responsible, but as I said, I invest my responsibility in each of my principals and they invest their responsibility in their 208 department heads and lead teachers. Ultimately the board would hold me accountable.” Curriculum approval must proceed through several steps to gain approval before implementation. Curriculum: Policy and Practice at ELCS A copy of the ELCS Policy Manual outlines well-defined policies and practices concerning curriculum-decisions. Included in the manual were policies concerning the governance of personnel, students, and curriculum. These policies insured continual evaluation and allowed for necessary changes. The ELCS Personnel Policies Three groups of policies govern personnel and influence curriculum decisions. These policies affect teacher certification, adherence to beliefs and practices, and the evaluation of the faculty. These policies are important because teachers are entrusted with the responsibility of developing the curriculum and these policies insure that though teachers have control they are still answerable to the board. All teachers hired at ELCS are required to meet two types of certification. The policy determining this is the “ACSI and state teacher certification” (ELCS Personnel Handbook, p. 4). This policy states: “Each faculty member is expected to complete the necessary requirements for Standard Certification with ACSI” and hold a valid State license. Information regarding either certification or license can be obtained through the "ACSI certification provides qualified Christian school educators with professional credentials. Applicants must have a college degree and should have or will be required to complete training in the biblical philosophy of education, formal Bible instruction, and appropriate teacher and/or administrator training. 209 Special Projects Coordinator.” Certification is a form of validating teaching credentials for both the school and its teachers in the areas of education and biblical philosophy. The policy, “Adherence to Beliefs and Practices by ELCS Personnel to the adopted Statement of Faith and Non-Denominational Status” (ELCS Policy Manual, dated 11/29/90) is the next step in assuring qualified personnel. This policy requires all personnel, volunteer or paid, to sign statements to verify their agreement of and support of the statement of faith and the non-denominational status of ELCS. They must adhere to this policy to insure that ELCS personnel promote evangelical Christianity. The essence of a school community is dependent upon a unified belief concerning the Lordship of Jesus Christ. ELCS personnel are expected to adhere to the Statement of Faith [elsewhere called Doctrinal Statement] published in the school profile brochure (Revised, June 1994). The seven points to this statement are (l) a belief that the Bible is the only infallible, authoritative word of God, (2) that there is only one God who exists as the Trinity, (3) the deity of Christ, (4) the necessity of regeneration by the Holy Spirit for salvation, (5) belief in the resurrection of both the saved and the lost, (6) belief in the spiritual unity of believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, and (7) belief in the present ministry of the Holy Spirit by the indwelling of the Christian. These points are backed with multiple scriptural references signifying their theological foundation. Individuals working at ELCS must sign and be in full agreement with this statement. The ELCS Statement of Faith is evangelically based. It has seven core beliefs that all personnel, volunteers, and board members must agree to when working with the school in any capacity. These beliefs are: 210 We believe the Bible to be the inspired, the only infallible, authoritative, inerrant Word ofGod (II Timothy 3:16, 11 Peter 1:21). We believe there is one God, eternally existent in three persons—Father, Son and Holy Spirit (Genesis 1:1, Matthew 28:19, John 10:30). We believe in the deity of Christ (John 10:33); His virgin birth (Isaiah 7:14, Matthew 1:23, Luke 1:35); His sinless life (Hebrew 4:15, 7:26); His miracles (John 2:11): His vicarious and atoning death (I Corinthians 15:3, Ephesians 1:7, Hebrews 2:9); His resurrection (John 11:25, I Corinthians 15:4); His ascension to the right hand of the Father (Mark 16:19); His personal return in power and glory We believe in the absolute necessity of regeneration by the Holy Spirit for salvation because of the exceeding sinfulness of human nature, and that men are justified on the single ground of faith in the shed blood of Christ and that only by God’s grace and through faith alone we are saved (John 3:16-19, 5:24; Romans 3:25, 5:8, 9; Ephesians 2:8-10; Titus 3:5). We believe in the resurrection of both the saved and the lost; they that are saved unto the resurrection of life, and they that are lost unto the resurrection of damnation (John 5:28, 29). We believe in the spiritual unity of believers in our Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 8:9, I Corinthians 12:12, 13, Galatians 3:26-28). We believe in the present ministry of the Holy Spirit by whose indwelling the Christian is enabled to live a godly life (Romans 8:13, 14; 1 Corinthians 3:16, 6:19, 20; Ephesians 4:30, 5:18) (ELCS Policy Manual, dated 6/94). 211 Agreement with this policy guards against non-evangelical teachings and beliefs. Association with ELCS requires agreement, providing a measurement that establishes the essential beliefs of evangelical Christianity. In this way maintaining what is taught and who is influential in decision making at every level. Finally, these policies that govern the evaluation of faculty (ELCS Policy Manual) safeguard the ability of the faculty to carry out the curriculum that is hidden or modeled in their personal witness of subject matter and spiritual life by setting a standard of qualification. The faculty is evaluated on instructional effectiveness, teaching techniques, professional characteristics, personal attributes, effective planning, classroom environment, and attitude toward school and co-workers. To complete this evaluation data is collected in eight ways: 1. INFORMAL OBSERVATIONS by the appropriate principal(s). 2. CLASSROOM OBSERVATIONS by the appropriate principal(s). A minimum of two classroom observations per year is required. POST-OBSERVATION CONFERENCES between employee and principal(s). A FORMAL EVALUATION INSTRUMENT completed by the appropriate principal(s) by April 1 of each established evaluation year. A POST-EVALUATION INSTRUMENT will be held between the appropriate principal(s) and the Administrator during the week following the formal evaluation process. A decision relative to the possibility of continued employment of the teacher in question will be forthcoming from this meeting. 212 6. A POST-EVALUATION PROCESS CONFERENCE will be conducted A between the faculty member and the principal(s) within two (2) weeks alter the formal evaluation process is completed. Results of the evaluation and the recommendation of the principal(s) relative'to continued employment will be shared with the employee. 7. ALL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NON-RENEWAL (DISMISSAL) will be presented by the Administrator to the Board of Directors at the April meeting. The Administrator will inform the teacher in question of the Board’s actions. ' 8. CONTRACTS FOR THE NEXT SCHOOL YEAR WILL BE OFFERED TO THOSE TEACHERS WHOSE ONGOING EMPLOYMENT IS NEEDED. SINCE INDIVIDUAL FACULTY COMPENSATION WILL BE DETERMINED AT THE MAY MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, WRITTEN CONTRACTS WHICH REFLECT THESE COMPENSATION AMOUNTS, WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE UNTIL AFTER THE BOARD MEETING (ELCS Policy M_gn_ual;). The varied means of data collection insures that individuals are adequately and fairly evaluated based on multiple sources. It is the job of the evaluating principal to make a recommendation as to the professional competency and to note areas of commendation, areas needing improvement, as well as employment recommendations. Principals recommend either a regular contract, probation, or dismissal based on these evaluations (ELCS Policy Manual). Because the administration entrusts the curriculum to the faculty to such a degree, these policies propose to insure that the curriculum is 213 gf_egu_ar;d;ed_, by employing these standards with each employee. The purpose of faculty policies is to oversee the credentials of personnel, guarantee they present themselves evangelically rather than denominationally, and to evaluate them in an ongoing way as to guarantee adequate credentials of all personnel. MCS Student Policies One policy explains the enrollment criteria of students at ELCS, the “Student Admissions Policy” (ELCS Policy Mgn_u§l_, adopted 4/20/95). This policy is accompanied by the “Student Admissions Procedures” (ELCS Policy Mama, adopted 1/8/90) that lists the steps that new students must take for enrollment. The purpose of this policy is to insure an appropriate match of students with the spiritual and academic standards of ELCS. The atmosphere of heightened acadenrics and spirituality is critical to the curriculum process. Therefore, the prerequisites require a 2.3 grade point average and a composite achievement score at the 60'“ percentile or higher. In addition to this, at least one parent or the student (if they are in grades 6-12) must be able to provide a statement of salvation and dedication to Christ. Students entering the 9-12 grades must likewise provide a statement of salvation and dedication to Christ. Student-applicants entering grades 6-12 must also indicate that they truly want to be a part of the ELCS student body. Asking parents and secondary students to provide a clearly written statement of salvation and dedication to Christ insures the appropriate environment at ELCS will remain constant. Students who rebel against this form of education are declined admission. Even at the sixth grade levelistudents are expected to have a positive 214 disposition toward the school. ELCS is an elite school in that only Christian families are served. The admissions procedure is described as follows: submit the following (1) an application, (2) fee, (3) a copy of records, and (4) fill out a questionnaire and reference form (“ELCS Information Packet”, 1999-2000). An interview is set up with the student, parents, and a school principal. Student applicants will be accepted or denied, and students become enrolled upon the acceptance by ELCS and the receipt of all forms and fees. The reason for reviewing the grade point average and composite achievement score information is to insure a student’s academic capabilities. Students entering ELCS at any point beyond kindergarten from the public school may struggle academically because of the high standards pushed at ELCS. Students who with poor academic performances at another school are not accepted to ELCS. Many times students were still accepted but did not enter at the grade level expected from their last school for fear they could not keep up academically (Interviews). The ELCS. Curriculum Policies ELCS has very few policies concerning the curriculum itself. The curriculum policies are simply two: Textbook Evaluation and Textbook Recommendation/Adoptions (ELCS Policy Manual, revised 6/24/92). The assumption is that when a course is adopted, a text is also adopted. In the absence of a published text, a curriculum is written by the staff, evaluated, and recommended using the guidelines of these two policies. 215 These textbook policies are stated as follows: In a K-12 school, the teachers and administrative staff will frequently find it necessary to replace old or unwanted textbooks with new ones. The replacement process may simply consist of purchasing the latest copyright edition of the same book. Or, it may be prudent to select an entirely different textbook. If this latter action is necessary, it is important for ELCS educators to thoroughly evaluate the best books available. Although this evaluation process will have certain informal characteristics, a formal written evaluation of books under consideration is also necessary. A “Textbook Evaluation Report” . . . is available for use in the textbook evaluation process. This report includes the name of the reviewed textbook, the academic subject area, the grade(s) affected, review committee member names, and the dates of the review process. Committee members identify the strengths and weaknesses of the particular book. Finally, a section is provided in which review committee can record their general reaction to the textbook. If the textbook review committee decides to recommend to the administration and Board of Directors that a new textbook be adopted, the recommendation should be in the written form of a “Textbook Recommendation/Adoption Proposal.” Furthermore, in order for any textbook change to be implemented for the following school year, the “Textbook Recommendation/Adoption Proposal” must be submitted to/approved by the Board of Directors no later than the regularly-scheduled May meeting (EL_CS_ Policy Manual, revised 6/24/92). 216 Though the proposals come from teachers, ELCS policy demands an investigation on the part of the teachers and approval by the board. This investigation takes place before a recommendation for textbook adoption is written and is concerned with the investigation of influences as well. The “Textbook Recommendation/Adoption” policy recognizes that there are several influences that affect curricular decisions recognizing the need to evaluate. The policy states: ’ One of the most critically-important tasks of school educators is the adoption of appropriate textbooks for the students. In addition to the usual concerns, such as copyright date, academic content, cost, appropriate supplementary materials, readability level, design, graphics, etc., a Christian school must also carefully weight any anti-“God, humanistic, liberal teachings that may permeate the total message of the textbook. This being the case, it behooves the educators involved in the textbook evaluation process to take their job very seriously and make appropriate textbook adoption recommendations. All potential textbooks considered for adoption at ELCS must be screened by an ad hoc textbook evaluation review committee (see Textbook Evaluation policy). Since May is the Board deadline for consideration/approval of proposed textbook changes for each subsequent year, the textbook evaluation process should commence months before this May deadline. After the screening process has been completed, each committee will make a textbook recommendation/ adoption proposal to the appropriate principal, the Administrator, and the Board of Directors. This formal, written recommendation will come in the form of a “Textbook Recommendation/Adoption Proposal” . . . This written form includes 217 various pieces of information about the textbook, subject, publisher, textbook review committee members, and why and when a new textbook is needed. Furthermore, it is required that the appropriate principal and Administrator concur (signatures required) in order for the formal proposal to be presented to the Board of Directors. If such commence is received, the textbook adoption process becomes finalized after approval by the Board of Directors (ELCS Policy Manual, revised 6/24/92). Though teachers have the opportunity to give a let of input in textbook decisions, they must show that they have done investigative work before making a recommendation. In particular, this process is safeguarded by requiring first a committee screening, followed by the building principal’s approval, and finally a recommendation by in followed by the head adrninistrator’s. Once these individuals have approved the process, the board of directors will finalize the decision. Teachers are given a lot of room to make decisions but the process is safeguarded. . The Tra_n_sition of Policy into PLactice gt ELCS It is the responsibility of the ELCS Board of Directors to oversee the entire system of curriculum formation, and in this way transition the core beliefs established in policy into practice. To do this they have provided a system of safeguiding. At ELCS curriculum changes usually originate with teachers. However, once a recommendation for change is made, it has several procedural steps to pass through before being reviewed by the curriculum committee and passed on to the board for approval. This system of safeguards was developed to protect the curriculum from external influences. 218 The organizational structure relies heavily on the advice of teachers for recommendations and on the administrators for oversight. The head administrator summed this up by stating, “I am the one responsible. But as I said, I invest my responsibility in each of my principals and they invest their responsibilities in their department heads and lead teachers. Ultimately, the board would hold me accountable.” The system of safeguards is complex and there are several types of safeguards within the system, yet each is important to practice. . Two of the safeguards built into the organizational structure are the concepts of the lead teacher at the elementary level and the department heads at the secondary level. These individuals in either case are responsible for many things in the cuniculum process. Two responsibilities that stand out: (1) their initial evaluation of curriculum with their assigned teaching team and (2) the fact that in some instances these teachers are responsible for piloting all new curriculum before it is tried out by the school on a full scale. One lead teacher said: There were five first grade classrooms, and as lead teacher I would try the curriculum out with my class and see how my class responded. See progress that they made, and while doing that I could tell the other teachers when it was adopted okay. This is the way this curriculum is taught, when it asks you to do this, this may work, this may not work. So in other words, I work out all the little chinks in it before my teachers begin teaching the curriculum. In addition to this safeguard, the administration and the board become additional safeguards to the process. This lead teacher went on to explain, “She [administrator] ‘ would take it to the board at the Board Meeting and say this is the new curricultun that 219 first grade would like to use. We have to fill out a form of criteria as far as what spiritual value it has, how does it meet the needs ofthe first graders, and content ofit, and its moral value for us and how we use it within the curriculum.” There are two forms: Textbook Evaluation Report and Textbook Recommendations/Adoption Proposal Form (ELCS Policy Ma_n_u;a_l, Revised 6.24.202) for use school wide. 1 At the secondary level, it was apparent that the principals are less involved in initiating the curriculum process, though they still were informed and responsible for giving approval. It is at this level in particular the teachers have more control and influence in the curriculum process. The secondary teachers emphasized this point very clearly on several occasions. The difference between the grade/building level administration was more clearly pointed out by the teacher who emphasized the difference between elementary and secondary/elective classes. First, when speaking about the entire institution, the lead administrator said, “A large part of our strategy here is to train and have faith in the teachers that are part of our program. And so we do put a lot of faith in our teachers that are teaching in those subject areas to pull in resource materials [and] to look at things that contradict Scripture.” This very concept was echoed often in the interviews. However, in addition to this statement were statements concerning who initiated curriculum changes. One lead computer teacher when talking about elective classes stated; If there is a class I want to introduce, I would consult with the principals involved. If the class that is currently being taught and we want to change what’s taught in the class -those decisions basically, if it is my class, I really don’t have anyone I can consult with . . . So I just do it. If it is one of the other computer teachers, 220 typically they consult with me. Ifit is an existing class, they just change it. If there’s a class that needs to be added— like this coming year we are going to add a Web Page Design class, and so that is going to take quite a bit of effort, I go to the principal and propose it and as long as he says “yes” then we go forward. And as far as deciding what the class is going to contain, whoever ends up teaching the class is probably going to get to do a lot of decision making on that tmless they come in real late. One foreign language teacher pointed out that finances and the number of students are factors in determining if there is to be a class or not. “Foreign language, because it is an elective -what we do with foreign language depends on the number we have,” she said as she explained that the principal did not make this decision. Because of the financial considerations, this decision became an administrative one. However, there are classes that are not elective, and which are not traditional academic classes, that seem to have the same guidelines as computer/technology courses though they had been around for several years and were core to the curriculum, such as middle school Bible. Mr. Small, a teacher at ELCS Middle School, stated, “For Bible class, when they first started, they kind ofjust lefi it up to me for what I wanted to do . . . In my position, [I] don’t have to go to anyone, but I always bounce it off the principal, and I always try to keep him up-to-date on what I’m doing.” In the way of curriculum, ELCS has a fairly new system of curriculum review. However, as explained by the secondary math department head and assistant middle school principal, this system that was “willy-nilly” had become more structured in the last couple of years when the school became an ACSI school. There is a yearly cycle of 221 review for the curriculum now. For the elementary, this is more by grade level, and for the secondary, this is done through a department. Next year the secondary will be working on the course descriptions, as they had not gotten to that yet. After talking with elementary through secondary administrators and teachers, it seemed evident that the secondary, middle school through high school, was in need of someone to oversee the process of writing curriculum. ELCS has already established a course of study for all grades, though it is currently updating the middle school section. In addition to this the school has a process of evaluating the curriculum. At present the main concern is with newly created classes and changes in the approved curriculum brought about by the final stage of the third phase, the evaluation of the curriculum. ELCS is very dependent upon the teacher’s total involvement in the formation of curriculum. This is probably more crucial at the secondary level than at the elementary, as the administration is not as in tune to the curriculum. It was evident that the elementary principals often made the majority of recommendations for changes in the curriculum, but at the secondary, the system admittedly was not functioning at its best. Teachers were found to be more involved in the initiation of changes. At both the secondary and elementary level, the principals were involved in reviewing the curriculum requests before they went on to the school administration. It was in this phase of the process that the structure seemed to be the strongest. This may have more to do with the gifts of each administrator. It was obvious that the elementary administration played a more change-agent role than the high school administration. 222 The budget played a large part in determining what courses were being taught. The administration/board would not consider spending money if the curriculum choice was not well thought out the year before through the department committee or the grade level teachers. The essential needs were always taken care of, but the changes and requests for additional classes were dependent upon student interest and needs that were determined through process. ELCS was very good at looking at the needs of students and evaluating whether their needs were being met by listening to parents or students involved in the Student Life Task Force. By its own definition this is “an ad hoc committee of parents, Board members, and the school Administrator assembled to discuss and analyze various areas of student life. Most of the focus of this committee will be on the middle school and high school areas. The Administrator will serve as the chairperson of the Student Life Task Force” (p. 2). The purpose of which is to help students grow in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. This force will look at all aspects of the student’s life noting strengths and weaknesses, making appropriate recommendations. ELCS states it has the right and would exercise its rights to terminate all external pressures not in agreement with their philosophy and doctrinal statements. The internal ones are internal because they are in harmony with both the ELCS philosophy and doctrine. Internal influences that affect curriculum decisions are prayer, theology, the adopted mission statement(s), scope and sequence/objectives, the process of systematic curriculum review, board decisions, the role of the administrator, principal, and teacher, and student needs and interest. These influences are internal because they have met the criteria established by the board to be internal influences. 223 The external influences that influence ELCS are curriculum theory, finances, college requirements, testing, ACSI, the state, business, professional organizations, national standards, parents, personal Christian convictions outside the norm of evangelicalism, community perspective and textbook companies. These influences are reported to be external, as they do not meet the criteria as established by the board to influence curriculum. However, they do influence curriculum in so much as they do not threaten the evangelical values established through the philosophy and doctrinal statement. One of the concerns of the school community that might have been an internal influence was the lack of Christian texts. In some instances teachers used secular textbooks that promoted non-Christian values. In other instances they could not find a suitable textbook and the teaching team made a decision to go to a secular textbook, making the teachers responsible for developing safeguards within the curriculum. In either instance the curriculum is safeguarded by the organizational structure which oversees every decision. The administration states that the teachers are the ultimate safeguard of the curriculum, much faith is placed in them. In reference to secular versus Christian textbooks he states: We just won’t out-of-hand always take a Christian text . . .the instruction I’ve given my principals is that all things being equal let’s use the Christian text. And so if all things aren’t equal we aren’t going to use the Christian text . . .We do put a lot of faith in our teachers that are teaching in those subject areas to pulling resource materials to look at things that contradict Scripture. So there again we’re 224 - falling back on our mission and vision statement that says that the foundation of all we do is the Word of God. We’re focusing on Jesus Christ and we’re tying to pull out areas of contradiction with that. But we don’t shy away from teaching evolution; we just don’t teach it as fact. But we want kids to understand evolution, and we want them to know about it. But we are not going to teach it as fact and if the textbook does teach it as fact we may not have a choice. Even if there was another Christian school publisher that had a book we could use for AP Chemistry, if it wasn’t good enough we still wouldn’t use it. So we’re depending on the teacher to pull out fi'om their experience and from that textbook and from other sources, supplementary material. Now we have done some things to help them, for example, we have a membership with Creation Research Group so there are things like that available to our science teachers that would help them with current research that’s being done in some of those areas. But we do depend quite heavily on our teachers. The elementary principals likewise noted that the teachers are the maj or-force behind the curriculum process because they are out there on the fi'ont line. As administrators, they are confident in teacher abilities because they are both well informed and challenged through professional development. Because teachers take advantage of professional development opportunities provided by the institution, the curriculum is preserved and in this way influenced not by outside forces but internal ones. These administrators also noted that because of the age factor and the developmental capabilities of elementary students they would not consider using texts that promote non-Christian values. However, they could see how a secondary teacher 225 could use such a text with some care. It could also serve as an opportunity in teaching older children how to critically analyze the material. Such topics that this could handle might include lifestyles, choice, and families. Therefore, Christian texts are used at the elementary level where Christian values are of a concern. A lead teacher stressed the need for teachers to become proactive with issues concerning textbooks. In talking about the needs of children and textbooks as they pertain to multicultural classrooms she stated; With the variety of children I have in my classroom, does this curriculum ethnically meet the needs of all of my students? I have looked at curriculums that I personally have had problems with, and I have shared this with the publishers, a few curriculums would be offensive. They are offensive to me as a minority, and I would consider that they might be offensive to someone else. So when looking at curriculum-- I have 25 students in my class— if it may be offensive to one parent than it is not worth it. We want to be sensitive to every single parent because every child in our classroom is important. And before the Lord we have to do that; we have to be very discerning when it comes to the curriculum. In another instance this same teacher noted: We have a publisher that sent us excellent reading books, but there were things in those books that we spiritually could not enter into our classrooms, for example, witchcraft. We sent our concerns to the publisher. And I believe it was the following year, they took all those stories out and sent us an entirely new set of books, and we adopted those books into the second grade curriculum because we saw that the content was different. And it did coincide with everything that we 226 wanted to teach the children, the values we wanted to teach the children. The accreditation process did have some affect on the curriculum process. The ACSI-accreditation of this institution resulted in a more refined and blended curriculum. Teachers indicated that the process of accreditation helped them identify the importance of their mission and place it as the highest of importance. Theoretical Angus What It Mw Ornstein and Levine’s (1993), Armstrong’s (1989), and Beane, Toepfer, and Alessi’s (1986) fiameworks will be used individually to analyze the ELCS case in regard to influences, flow of development, and planning curriculum. Ornstein and Levine’s work leads to understanding the purposes and influences that have affected the ELCS classrooms. Armstrong’s framework, further aids in deepening an understanding about the curriculum development process at ELC S and how and when influences affect the process. Bean, Toepfer, and Alessi’s fi'amework is concerned with how to plan the curriculum it identifies the progressive stages of curriculum planning and highlights the influences that are part of the planning process. By overlaying these three frameworks the process of Curriculum development is better understood in an analysis of ELCS. Forces That Influence The Purpose of Education at ELCS This ELCS fi'arnework (see Figure 4.16) serves two purposes: (1) to identify the influences and the general purposes of education and (2) to explore how these influences lead to the more spggiflc and most snecific purposes within curriculum development. The first stage of this model identifies those forces that have an influence and identify the 227 general purposes of education at ELCS. A close look at how ELCS teachers and administrators have defined the general purpose as part of this process of identification. In the second stage, two questions are explored: How do influences and general purposes lead to more specific purposes and in turn how does this drive the most specific purposes of curriculum development, such as the objectives, scope and sequence, and course descriptions? Through these two stages the purpose of this fiamework is served. ,c . . ’ m ’ d ‘ - " W 228 Figure 4.16 The Purpose of Education and The Forces that Influence Them at ELCS . E 3 ” a INFLUENCES ON EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES Teachers and Administrators State Competitions Technology Money Student Life Task Force Association of Math Standardized Testing College Entrance Textbooks Parents Curriculum Theory Religious Associations State Curriculum Framework Area Businesses Diverse Learners Needs of Students GENERAL PURPOSES MORE SPECIFIC PURPOSES V Aims: Statement of Faith - Philosophy of Christian Education - Bible l l l Goals: Mission and Vision Statements Objectives: MOST SPECIFIC Scope and Sequence PURPOSES Course Description Objectives: Scope and Sequence Course Description There are three influences on educational gumses at ELCS. In the case of ELCS there are two influences on educational purposes: teachers who are overseen by the administrators, who are likewise monitored, and social forces 229 that are external to the organizational structure. Though both influences can affect the general purposes of education, they do not necessarily get a chance to as determined by the ELCS safeguards. The teachers’ influence is monitored primarily by the administration. The administrators are screened based on the values and beliefs established as the general purposes of education and are monitored by the board. In the same way, social forces must go through evaluation with administrative or teacher recommendation, textbook evaluation and recommendation procedures, committee investigation, and final approval of the board. Monitoring of these influences insures the general purposes are maintained. Dr. Simpson, head administrator, best summarized the influence of teachers and the administrators when he stated, “A large part of our strategy here is to train and have faith in the teachers that are part ofour program here. And so we do put a lot offaith in our teachers that are teaching in those subject areas to pull in resource materials to look at things that contradict Scripture.” The detailed work of drafting a curriculum proposal would be overseen by the department heads in the upper grades and the lead teachers for each grade level in the elementary grades. The proposals would be overseen by the principals and then passed to the head administrator who would pass it to the board for final approval. He followed this by stating: “I am the one responsible, but as I said, I it my responsibility in each of my principals, and they invest their responsibility in their department heads and lead teachers. Ultimately, the board would hold me accountable.” ELCS is likewise influenced by social forces such as state competitions, the Student Life Task Force, associations of math, testing- both standardized and college entrance, textbooks, parents, curriculum theory, state curriculum frameworks, money for 230 technology, and area business needs. Their influences do not dictate the purpose or goals of education; rather, they are examined for appropriateness of influence. They do not shape the purpose of education; instead ELCS’ philosophy shapes their influence. At ELCS influences are kept from changing the philosophy and statement of faith that reflect the general purposes. To some extent they influence the school in the more specific purposes or goals but not through changing the mission and the vision as suggested by Ornstein and Levine’s model (1993). Dr. Simpson explains that the guiding rule is the philosophy when he states: We value our independence so we don’t take any money from anyone . . . We buy the best that’s available in keeping with our philosophy. We are accredited by the Association of Christian Schools International, but we don’t feel bound by that at all. They ask to see our curriculum and we gladly show that to them, but they don’t dictate what to do about that. We are in the process of application with North Central [Association]. If that means we had to teach things we don’t want to teach, we’d drop that in a heartbeat. However, Simpson’s statement is not meant to suggest that there is no impact from the social forces, but rather that those influence are monitored for approval. There is evidence that the social forces have influence. One such influence results from the accreditation process. Though ELCS is accredited by ACSI, it has not sought a similar status through the State accreditation process by choice. Dr. Simpson states: We look at what the State has published [curriculum] . . . Frankly, a lot of what goes on [in this state] is not something we’d want to handle here. One problem I would just throw out to you-one of the reasons we have chosen not to be 231 accreditedbytheState. . . isthattheywouldrequireustotakethe . . . statewide test of Educational Progress and the philosophy is that the test is tied to the State approved curriculum and so the test that the State uses is tied to curriculum that the State has approved. But we’re not using state approved curriculum. And so when worked through, the thought of becoming accredited through what is called the freewaymcgshere . . . theywould notgiveusawaiverontesting, andwhat sense does that make? Ifwe’re not using the curriculum they’ve approved they would not give us a waiver to take the test that they’ve developed. We’d rather use something like the standard achievement test as opposed to something tied into the State . . . curriculum. Dr. Simpson stated that ELCS safeguards against all external influences, even those of the ACSI accreditation process. The school tries to keep abreast of information as much as possible while subjecting any possible influence to the procedures established by policy. Through this policy ELCS is open to what others think, looking at such things as the State framework for curriculum and testing, the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), and the Mel Gabler Association (a conservative Christian association) very seriously. It is only after subjecting these influences to thorough examination that the ELCS board considers it for approval. I Mrs. West, an elementary lead teacher, indicated that both parents and the needs of students are influential. She noted that a curriculum change was initiated because of parental concerns about the curriculum and how it prepared students for the next grade. In that situation the “fourth grade curriculum had too much of a jump. The third was not challenging, yet the fourth really was.” She went on to explain that the parents 232 complained and the administration gave the teachers a directive to make changes. The teachers then proceeded with making a proposal. ELCS has similar standards for extra-curricular activities, yet because there is a need to compete with larger schools, provisions are allowed. Extra curricular activities include athletics, drama, music, and student government. Inter-scholastic competition is provided for both boys and girls. The high school competes with other Christian, private, parochial, and public schools. Girls’ sports include basketball, cross-country, golf, tennis, soccer, sofiball, track and volleyball. Boys’ sports include baseball, basketball, cross-country, golf, soccer, tennis, and track. Other sports may be added. Opportunities for dramatics through the production of one or two plays/musicals per year have been provided. Students may select music instruction by taking Concert Band, Pep Band, Choir, Strings, and/or Ensemble. These groups compete in district and state competitions. The opportunity for developing leadership skills includes class ofi'lcers, club involvement, and community projects through Student Government experiences (ELCHS Profile. 2000). These activities insure competition and diversity to meet the needs of a large student body while still meeting the standards through constant monitoring of the activities. In addition to this, ELCS uses the work of the Student Life Task Force to evaluate whether student needs are being met or not. They do this by listening to parents or students involved in the Student Life Task Force. By its own definition this is “an ad hoc committee of parents, board members, and the school administrator assembled to discuss and analyze various areas of student life. Most of the focus of this committee will be on the middle school and high school areas. The Administrator will serve as the chairperson 233 of the Student Life Task Force” (p. 2). This task force is designed to allow student needs and parents to be influential. Mrs. West noted that ELCS encourages teachers to keep up on the issues surrounding curriculum theory through “workshops, teachers’ meetings, speakers, in- service and conferences.” She stated that “all teachers” are expected to go to conferences andtheydo soatdifferenttimes. Likewise, shenotedthatthestaffhasbeen concentrating on Multiple Intelligences. “We try” to make sure all of our teachers are “aware of need.” Meaning, ELCS wants its teachers to look at diverse learners and to understand individual student needs. In an effort to serve a variety of students, curriculum studies at the high school are divided so students have a variety of elective courses from which to select while meeting the requirements for graduation. Students are able to pick between general and college PFCP programs. Textbooks are also an influence and concern for ELCS. Policy demands that they are evaluated, because ELCS recognizes the influence that texts have on the educational purposes of the school (I_3_LCS Policy Manual, revised 6/24/92). Another influence is money, and in particular, money that is used for technology. Money has come through several different sources such as parent foundations that have no say in what is taught yet give money to the elementary computer lab (Mrs. Hunolt, elementary computer teacher). However, Mr. Mena, the technology director noted that area businesses have also helped with new software changes in the computer labs. Likewise, Mrs. Black, the Director of Library Services, noted that ELCS received $8,000 from a foundation for library materials. The school also receives electronic resources, 234 which are tied to the curriculum, and links them to the T1 line with the state public library. Thereareissuesofaccessandmaterial usethatcouldinthefutureconflictwith ELCS and its general purposes, yet at this time the sources of money have not exhibited such influences. The pmse of education imflumcw by the foundation of Christian education. At ELCS the influences are of secondary importance to the general purposes of education, being the foundations of Christian education (Statement of Faith also called Doctrinal Statement, Philosophy of Christian Education, and the Bible). Eagle Lake is non-denominational and adheres to the doctrinal statement of the Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI). It is intended that each student, according to the general purposes of education, will obtain a Christ-centered and Biblically-integrated education with an emphasis on academic excellence” (E_LCHS Profile, 2000). Mrs. West reflected on the foundations of Christian education when asked to explain how theology is a factor or influence in the development of curriculum, she talked about building awareness among students. The third-grade lead teacher described the practice of the philosophy of Christian education. In practice this means that ELCS “integrate Christ as center in life [and] in each subject.” She goes on to explain that this creates student awareness and is the general purpose of education at ELCS. Mrs. McCain, the middle school department head for Language Arts, gives an example of what “being biblically integrated” means. She states that it is the teacher’s intent to “teach discernment” and this is “very important” to the development of curriculum. She gives the example of non-Christian textbook use in the upper grades. 235 Teachers read textbooks to see what they are trying to teach: humanism, political correctness, etc'. “If using [them], [teachers are to] be able to show how it [the textbook] difi‘ers or disagrees from the Word of God [Bible] .” Mrs. Roseboom, the middle school science department head, likewise indicated that the “approach to curriculum is through the Bible with the general purpose being to create a Christ-centered world—view. The Christian philosophy of education links itself to both theology and the Bible as the general purposes of education at ELCS. The philosophy is simply stated in that, “Eagle Lake is non-denominational and adheres to the doctrinal statement of the Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI). It is intended that each student will obtain a Christ-centered and Biblically-integrated education with an emphasis on academic excellence” (ELCHS Profile. 2000). The philosophy has a general purpose and is linked to the influential voice of the teacher and social forces. As a result, when social forces create the need for change, educators consider the needs of the learner and the desires of the Christian community to preserve evangelical morals and standards. These things influence the purposes of curriculum but fiom an external perspective. They must be evaluated through the lens of ELCS’ theological philosophies before they are allowed to influence the more specific purposes or goals of education. It is after this scrutiny that the most specific purposes or objectives of education may be formed, serving as the scope and sequence for each grade and course description. The scope and sequence and course descriptions are the basis for the written curriculum of the grade level and classroom. Because ELC S entrusts the teachers having had a predominant influence on curriculum decisions, they are screened closely. The application for teaching and hiring, 236 . - - k ' . a . . . 4 2 ‘ - n u n " as well as the evaluation process, help to insure that the system can maintain the demand of the expectations while being monitored by the administration. Because of the teacher role, teachers collaborate to make recommendations to the administration. This system protects the general purposes of education from various influences as seen fit by the teachers and administration of the institution. In turn the more specific and most specific purpose of ELCS is likewise safeguarded as to maintain the standard already established within the system. In summary, the purpose of education and the forces that influence ELCS are in many ways similar or identical to those proposed by Ornstein and Levine (1993). However, the influence of the statement of faith, philosophy of Christian Education, and Bible are seen as general purposes and the mission and vision for ELCS are seen as more specific purposes. The scope and sequence and course of study are the most specific purposes and are placed further down on the chart than what Ornstein and Levine believe is typical of education. They are the final reaction to the general and specific purposes and the influences on both, a reaction that creates the most specific purposes of education at ELCS. The Flow of Curriculum-development Activity at ELCS Armstrong’s model (1989, p. 6) will be used to understand how and to what extent evangelical theology guides curriculum-development processes at ELCS. The general flow of how the curriculum is developed at ELCS seems to have eight steps rather than seven as theorized by Armstrong’s model (1989). Essentially, the curriculum- development activity at ELCS is similar to what Armstrong proposed, but the content is 237 different. The process of activity takes on a new form as a result of the shift in content. I Starting with the identification of the sources of curriculum this flow chart models how the perspectives and the general orientation of the curriculum affect the preparation, implementation, and evaluation of the curriculum. This model (see Figure 4.17) is beneficial in understanding how the curriculum-development activity is driven as well as to what extent it is driven by internal and external forces. Figure 4.17 The General Flow of Curriculum-development Activity at ELCS CONSIDERATION CONSIDERATION OF CONSIDERATION OF OF SOURCES PRIMARY SECONDARY a Teachers PERSPECTIVES PERSPECTIVES 6“ Via Bible Via Publishers Via Christian Teachers Fm aim Soda! Forces Eduction Biblical State and national standards Textbooks Theological Curriculum Frameworks Area Business Needs Philosophical Parents l l REACTION TO EXTERNAL INFLUENCES Tenders W - PREPARATION OF IDENTIFICATION OF THE CURRICULUM A GENERAL HeadAMW Board ofDireaorr Won swam! ' ”mm ’ Course Description 1 EVALUATION OF IMPLEMENTATION THE CURRICULUM OF THE > Bartram CURRICULUM AW Evaluation Systematic Review Mariam/Policy CW Tm 238 God is the source of curriculum, ELCS contends that the source of curriculum is God. All truth, knowledge, and understanding comes from God. For example, this may be via the Bible, Christian or non-Christian publishers, or teachers. The belief that society and learners can dictate what is knowledge is shunned by ELCS, and the source of curriculum is not changing. When asked, “Who determines what is important?” one lead teacher’s response indicated that it was God. She stated, “When making a decision on curriculum . . . first of all we pray, we ask God’s guidance because we don’t want to introduce anything that would not be honoring to the Lord.” The Bible is used as a guide and source for understanding as indicated in the statement of faith (Statement of Faith, Revised, June 1994). ELCS promotes the use of the Bible in many of its organizational statements, e. g., both the mission and doctrinal statements clearly note its significance to the development of curriculum. The mission statement states (ELCHS Profile. 2000), “The mission of Eagle Lake Christian School is to glorify God through the discipleship of students and the pursuit of excellence in education with the Bible as the foundation.” This statement promotes the Bible as essential to the curriculum as a source. In the same way the Statement of Faith [elsewhere called Doctrinal Statement] published in the school profile brochure (Revised, June 1994) establishes the importance of the Bible calling it the only infallible, authoritative Word of God. In this way advocating the Bible as an important avenue through which God communicates. Though the Bible is important as an authoritative guide and resource, it is also studied through textbooks as another means through which God’s truth is revealed. This does not mean that all truth is spiritual truth or that the Bible teaches about math and 239 music. However, the Bible does state that all things originated with God the Creator. Therefore, when God’s work is acknowledged in the teaching of various textbooks they are more likely to meet with approval. For this reason, ELCS endeavors to seek out Christian publishers when possible. Mrs. McCain, the middle school department head for Language Arts, gives an example of non-Christian textbook use in the upper grades. Teachers read textbooks to see what they are trying to teach: humanism, political correctness, etc. “If using [them], [teachers are to] be able to show how it [the textbook] differs or disagrees from the Word of God [Bible].” Mrs. Roseboom, the middle school science department head, likewise indicated that the “approach to curriculum is through the Bible with the general purpose being to create a Christ-centered world-view.” When looking for textbooks teachers look for publishers that use God as a source. Textbook decisions often rely on the approval of teachers. The administration states that the teachers are the ultimate curriculum safeguard and that much faith is placed in them. Yet, the superintendent indicated that though the curriculum relies on various sources (the Bible, publishers, and Christian teachers), it ultimately finds its source in God. This is done through the work of the Godhead (The Trinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) as suggested by the statement of faith (Revised, June 1994) that advocates a belief in the present ministry of the Holy Spirit by the indwelling of the Christian. Therefore, advocating that Christian teachers are likewise avenues through which God reveals and makes His will known. 240 The selection of grimy Emives was the foundations of Christian education. The second stage of curriculum-development activity is the selection of primary perspectives. For ELCS that perspective is the foundation of Christian education. The foundation is based on truth as revealed in the Bible, evangelical theology, and a philosophy of education. The Bible is considered an authoritative Word of God. Through this source, God reveals Himself. This is interpreted with the help of the Holy Spirit in the lives of Christians. The application of which is seen in the philosophy of Christian education. The primary perspective for ELCS curriculum-development is the foundation of Christian education. How does the foundation emerge biblically, theologically, and philosophically? ELCS has adopted a statement of faith that establishes a presupposition for biblical authority (Revised, June 1994). This document is further established with theological interpretations. Additional statements found in the statement of faith are made and biblically referenced. This establishes a theological understanding that has been identified as evangelical. Finally, ELCS has adopted a philosophy of education that is admittedly a philosophy of Christian education. Just as the statement of faith is an interpretation of the Bible so is] ELCS’ philosophy of education. This philosophy is innately theological. The philosophy is simply stated: “Eagle Lake is non-denominational and adheres to the doctrinal statement of the Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI). It is intended that each student will obtain a Christ-centered and Biblically-integrated education with an emphasis on academic excellence” (ELCHS Profile, 2000). This is simply identified here as being theological and Christian in its foundation. 24! The foundation of Christian education is the primary perspective for curriculum development at ELCS. Mr. Palm, the high school English teacher, echoed this sentiment, stating, “Philosophy is first and foundational” in influencing the development of curriculum. It is based on how the theoretical application of evangelical theology would interpret the Bible. Teachers and social forces are considered as the secondary firspegtjves to which ELCS reacts to as external infllgnces. The third stage is the consideration of a secondary perspective. This perspective is determined by society and established by social forces that highlight state and national standards, textbooks, parents, curriculum frameworks, area and business needs. It is here that the second phase of activity is distinguishable. Teacher input is vital in the curriculum-development activity at ELCS. The elementary principals noted that the teachers are the maj or-force behind the curriculum process because they are out there on the fiont line. As administrators, they are confident in teacher abilities because they are both well informed and challenged through professional development. Because teachers take advantage of professional development opportunities provided by the institution, the curriculum is preserved and in this way influenced by internal forces. Teachers protect the curriculum fi'om social forces that might adversely influence the curriculum. Even so they are not the only curriculum proposal safeguard. ELCS policy demands an investigation on the part of the teachers and approval by the board for all curriculum proposals. For example, before a recommendation for textbook adoption 242 r... ' I L is written an investigation of influences takes place. The “Textbook Recommendation/ Adoption” policy, as previously sited, recognizes that there are several influences that affect curricular decisions recognizing the need to evaluate. Though teachers have the opporttmity to give a lot of input in textbook decisions, they must show that they have done investigative work before making a recommendation. In particular, this process is safeguarded by first requiring a committee screening, followed by the building principal’s approval, and finally a recommendation by the head administrator. There are several social forces that are considered in the curriculum- development at ELCS. As sited previously, Dr. Simpson identifies several that are directly a result of society or the needs of the learner. Social forces come in a variety of ways. Some of these forces are the result of peer groups such as professional organizations. Dr. Simpson stated that ELCS tries to keep abreast of information as much as possible while subjecting any possible influence to the procedures established by policy. ELCS is open to what others think, looking at such things as the State fi'amework for curriculum and testing, the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), and the Mel Gabler Association very seriously. Other curriculum Specialist noted forces in addition to these. There are several influences, that have already been sited, that affect the curriculum as a result of technology» money and area business interest. Parent Foundations have no say in what is taught yet give money to the elementary computer lab (Mrs. Hunolt, elementary computer teacher). However, Mr. Mena, the technology director noted that area businesses have helped with new software changes in the computer labs. In addition to this, Mrs. Black, the Director of Library Services, noted 243 that ELCS received $8,000 from a foundation for library materials. The school also receives electronic resources, which are tied to the curriculum, and links them to the T1 line with the state public library. There are issues of access and material use that could in the future conflict with ELCS and its general purposes. It is only afier subjecting these influences to thorough examination the ELCS board considers it for approval and therefore these are secondary to the foundations of Christian education. In the fifth stage of development there is a reaction to the internal and external influences. All influences are placed according to their significance to the purpose of education. “Placing them” simply means to identify them as internal or external forces. An internal force is one that comes fiom within the institution and an external force is one that is society-based and influences the institution fi'om outside the norms of the Christian school setting. At this point of the activity a formdation is being established to prepare the curriculum. The mission and vision are identified as the general orientation. In the sixth stage the general orientation is revisited in accordance with ELCS’ mission and vision statements. The identification of a general orientation would suggest how one teaches. This is done through general in-service and ACSI certification. As a result, when social forces create the need for change, educators consider the needs of the learner and the desires of the Christian conununity to preserve evangelical morals and standards. These things influence the purposes of curriculum but fiom an external perspective. They must be evaluated through the lens of ELCS’ theological philosophies before they are allowed to influence the more specific purposes or goals of 244 5..., L E education. It is afier this scrutiny that the most specific purposes or objectives of education may be formed, serving as the scope and sequence for each grade and course description. The scope and sequence and course descriptions are the basis for the written curriculum of the grade level and classroom. Because ELCS entrusts the teachers and they have a predominant influence on curriculum decisions, they are screened closely. The application for teaching and hiring, as well as the evaluation process, helps to insure that the system can maintain the demand of the expectations while being monitored by the administration. Because of the teacher role, teachers collaborate to make recommendations to the administration. This system PIOIOCIS the general purposes of education fiom various influences as seen fit by the teachers and administration of the institution. In turn the more specific and most specific purpose of ELCS is likewise safeguarded as to maintain the standard already established within the system. ELCS mares, implements, and evaluates the curriculum. In this stage the curriculum is prepared and ELCS develops a scope and sequence followed by the course description. The school would consider the general course of study through the development of a scope and sequence. Then teachers would write the course descriptions as their next stage in the curriculum process. Evidences viewed at the time of the sight visit revealed that ELCS has a scope and sequence and course objectives for each grade level Bible course. In addition to this, the school intentionally builds beyond content to master the spiritual aspect of each individual student for life application. The spiritual aspects of this integrated approach to 245 j n l u n a s fi n a t ‘ 2 ‘ ' " a. . education are sought in several ways: working to maintain a spiritual atmosphere on their campus,through the integration and application of biblical principals, values, and ethics in all programming and courses, through the examples modeled by ELCS leadership and personnel, and though required participation in weekly group worship, and daily devotions with teachers and peers. The school is able to challenge students academically as well as spiritually. The student profile makes a claim for this in the following statement: At ELCS the fifth grade textbook decision was made in coordination with the middle school math department. In choosing a new textbook at the elementary, teachers coordinated with middle school department heads in the decision process. The middle school department head collaborated with the fifih grade math teachers in the elementary, in a process that not only considered the scope and sequence and course descriptions, but also the middle school test scores. The purpose behind this collaboration was to evaluate the past, look to the future, and in this way improve the system when selecting the most appropriate textbook in light of all information. A lead teacher at ELCS elementary describes the curriculum-decision responsibilities of the lead teacher. In the elementary, the lead teacher coordinates the work of the grade level teachers. In this case there are five grade level teachers, one of whom is a lead teacher. The elementary lead teacher serves in the same capacity, as the secondary department head. At the elementary the lead teachers are responsible for all subjects; and in the secondary, the department head is responsible for a subject area such as math or science. Work on elementary curriculum stems from the grade level perspective rather than the department level where courses are singled out by subject 246 area. The lead teacher reports curriculum proposals that a team of five have developed to the elementary principle, Mrs.Wilhoit. ELCS states it has the right and would exercise its rights to terminate all external pressures not in agreement with their philosophy and doctrinal statements. The internal ones are internal because they are in harmony with both the ELCS philosophy and doctrine. Internal influences that affect curriculum decisions are prayer, theology, the adopted mission statement(s), scope and sequence/objectives, the process of systematic curriculum review, board decisions, the role of the administrator, principal, and teacher, and student needs and interest. These influences are internal because they have met the criteria established by the board to be internal influences. E This ELCS framework serves two purposes: (1) to identify the influences and the general purposes of education and (2) to explore how these influences lead to the more specific purposes and the most specific purposes within curriculum development. The first stage of this model identifies those forces that have an influence and identify the general purposes of education at ELCS. A close look at how ELCS teachers and administrators have defined the general purpose is part of this process of identification. In the second stage, two questions are explored: How do influences and general purposes lead to more specific purposes and in turn how does this drive the most specific purposes of curriculum development, such as the objectives, scope and sequence, and course descriptions? Through these two stages the purpose of this framework is served. As a result, when social forces create the need for change, educators consider the needs of the learner and the desires of the Christian community to preserve evangelical morals and standards. These things influence the purposes of curriculum but from an 247 external perspective. They must be evaluated through the lens of ELCS’ theological philosophies before they are allowed to influence the more specific purposes or goals of education. It is after this scrutiny that the most specific purposes or objectives of education may be formed, serving as the scope and sequence for each grade and course description. The scope and sequence and course descriptions are the basis for the written curriculum of the grade level and classroom. The scope and sequence and course of study are the most specific purposes and are placed filrther down on the chart that what Ornstein and Levine (1993) believe is typical of education and are the final reaction to the general and specific purposes and the influences on both, a reaction that creates the most specific purposes of education at ELCS. In the eighth stage the curriculum is implemented. That is the responsibility of the teachers and is overseen directly by the building administrators. Dr. Simpson states, “Well, to be real honest, a large part of our strategy here is to train and have faith in the teachers that are part of our program here. And so we do put a lot of faith in our teachers that are teaching in those subject areas to pull in resource materials to look at things that contradict Scripture.” Mrs. Trout, an elementary lead teacher, described the process that the curriculum decision process sometimes starts with the teacher and at other times starts with the administrator. Trout recounted that changes in this year’s workbook on math skills were teacher initiated, but last year it was an administrative decision to change the math book. She goes on to point out that despite the administrative directive, “the teachers always have a lot of input.” She explained that teacher input comes in the form of teacher 248 evaluation of difi‘erent texts, discussion with teachers and the administrators, and on occasion parents who have evaluated the textbooks in the same manner as teachers. She listed the steps during her interview. I. Starts with the teacher or administrator 2. Teachers are asked to evaluate different texts Discussion with teachers and administrators Sometimes parent input 5. Teachers might pilot the program [in one class section only] 6. Demonstrations from publisher Two of the safeguards built into the organizational structure are the concepts of lead teacher at the elementary level and the department heads at the secondary level. These individuals in either case are responsible for many things in the curriculum process. Two responsibilities that stand out: (1) their initial evaluation of curriculum with their assigned teaching team, and (2) the fact that in some instances these teachers are responsible for piloting all new curriculum before it is tried out by the school on a full scale. One lead teacher said: There were five first grade classrooms, and as lead teacher I would try the curriculum out with my class and see how my class responded. See progress that they made, and while doing that I could tell the other teachers when it was adopted okay. This is the way this curriculum is taught, when it asks you to do this, this may work, this may not work. So in other words, I work out all the little chinks in it before my teachers begin teaching the curriculum. Finally, in the ninth stage, there is a systematic review of the curriculum. The 249 curriculum would be implemented and then evaluation would take place as recognized by the Calendar of Curriculum Development and Curriculum Adoption (see Appendix H). This is a systematic process that rotates for everyone and is a six-year cycle. The general flow of curriculum-development activity is characterized by a total of three phases and nine stages at ELCS. ' In the way of curriculum, ELCS has a fairly new system of curriculum review. However, as explained by the secondary math department head and assistant middle school principal, this system that was “willy-nilly” had become more structured in the last couple of years when the school became an ACSI school. There is a yearly cycle of review for the curriculum now. For the elementary, this is more by grade level, and for the secondary, this is done through a department. Next year the secondary will be working on the course descriptions, as they had not gotten to that yet. After talking with elementary through secondary administrators and teachers, it seemed evident that the secondary, middle school through high school, was in need of someone to oversee the process of writing curriculum. A Framework for Curriculum Planning at ELCS The homework for curriculum planning at ELCS (see Figure 4.18) starts with three components of the foundation of Christian education: biblical truths, mandates, and examples, theological framework, and a philosophical approach. This foundation supports both the mission statement and the vision statement that establish the basis for adopting the course of study. Once the course of study is established, the scope and sequence and course descriptions are written. It is at this point that the influences are 250 considered and decision screens are used to consider the curriculum. This is not to suggest that the influences or screens always affect the curriculum. The influences and decision screens are considered last intentionally. This creates a linear approach to curriculum planning. Figure 4.18 A Framework for Curriculum Planning at ELCS FOUNDATIONS OF CHRISTIAN EDUCAITON Biblical Truths Theological Framework Philosophical Approach Mandates and Examnles 7 ELCS MISSION STATEMENT ELCS VISION STATEMENT l COURSE OF STUDY Scope and Sequence Course Description CURRICULULM PLAN DECISION SCREENS INFLUENCES Area Business Needs Standardized Testing College Entrance Professional Organizations State Curriculum Framework Textbook Companies ACSI Accreditation Technology Money Religious Associations Competitions C ' 1 Th “eggs eory Student Interest Student Needs prof ' nal Organizat' essro Alumni ions Teachers Prayer Foundations drive the curriculum planning. Beane, Toepfer, and Alessi have theorized (1986, p. 67) that curriculum planning is not linear, but this is not the case at ELCS. All curriculum planning stems fiom the foundations of Christian education of which theology is a component. Theology is not only a. component of the foundation but is established and supported in both the mission and vision statements. As previously noted, the mission states; “The mission of Eagle Lake Christian School is to glorify God through the discipleship of students and the pursuit of excellence in education with the Bible as the foundation and Jesus Christ as our focus” (fl._C_ILS_ ELITE 2000). These statements both support the concept of a foundation of Christian education. In a similar way, the vision statement is evident of a theological component. The Vision Statement reads, “The vision of Eagle Lake Christian School is to provide an outstanding spiritual and educational enviromnent where, working with Christian families and churches, all students will be thoroughly prepared to fulfill God’s purpose for their lives” (ELCHS Profile, 2000). All three statements support a philosophical, biblical, and theological foundation of Christian education. In turn the mission_and vision drive the course ofM The mission and vision statements both reflect the foundation of Christian education. The administration as sited before explains how these statements drive the course of study through the work of the teachers. ELCS is very dependent upon the teacher’s total involvement in the formation of curriculum. This is very evident at the secondary level than at the elementary as the secondary administration is involved in the 252 curriculum at this level. It was evident tlmt the elementary principals often made the majority of recommendations for changes in the curriculum, but at the secondary, the system admittedly was not functioning at its best. Teachers were found to be more involved in the initiation of changes. There are several tensions that drive the decision-making Mess. There are several tensions that drive the decision-making process at ELCS. These tensions are either curriculum plan influences or decision screens. The influences are characteristic of external forces that can affect students and educational needs. While the decision screens influence how students are taught and what needs are addressed. Both types of tensions are external to the organizational structure of ELCS. For example, student needs are considered by ELCS, yet the curriculum is driven by the scope and sequence for the entire school and consideration for student needs are secondary. Another example is found in textbook decisions, because the curriculum is not textbook-driven either. In looking at the four divisions to the curricular approach there is evidence for some consideration of state requirements, consideration of broad fields, and emerging needs such as those of college preparation and the business world. Finally, the idea of organized knowledge is likewise considered in regard to philosophy, but considered further as a philosophy of Christian education, future areas of technology, college, and human needs. These examples are of influences that are external to the ELCS organization. 253 Sum_mgy: ELCS is a Case of Teachers’ Pmtion of Theology In exploring a tentative conceptual fi'amework of cuniculum tensions at Eagle Lake Christian School (see Figure 4.19), the internal forces remain the theological values, and the community or society are the external forces. In particular, individuals identified the internal forces as administrators, teachers, God’s guidance through prayer (1“ grade lead teacher interview), department or grade level teams, student needs, student interest, the board of education, curriculum theory, mission and vision statement, scope and sequence, and theology. However, the main driving force would be the theology as perceived by the teachers. Figure 4.19 A Conceptual Framework of Curriculum Tension at ELCS External Forces are Social Forces Area Businesses \ State Curriculum Framework \3 Scope and Course Descriptions Textbook : (Christian and nan-Christian) Foundations of Christian Education (Theology, PhilosOphy. College % and Bible) Requiremen \ \National Council of Teachers of Math (NCTM) / 11 Mel Gable: Association KMusic Lab Technology Grant (Local University and Sound Tree Cooperation) State High School Athletic Association 254 The organizational structure in this figure is defined as having the responsibility ofW the curriculum process. It is able to accomplish this responsibility through the setting of policy by the Board of Directors that is overseen by the administration. However, the cuniculum process is still driven and initiated in most cases by teachers. 4 In this setting there are several types of safeguards at work as a result of the personnel. They are the concept of a department head or lead teacher, curriculum teams, piloting the curriculum, curriculum review as outlined in the curriculum review calendar, written curriculum to supplement the occasional secular text, informed and professionally challenged teachers, mentoring of new teachers, and disclaimers added to the curriculum. In addition to these items, the policy manual that establishes the board member selection, a: E hiring of personnel, student admissions, curriculum approval, and the evaluation and review of the curriculum all work together to safeguard the curriculum process at ELCS. However, the external influences on the organization are external. They are not driven by the mission and vision of the institution, but are varied as to their purpose and even their ability to influence. Their influence is either accepted or restricted by the organizational structure of ELCS. The organizational structure itself determines the extent of that influence. These external forces are State curriculum framework, conservative Christian organizations, parents, volunteers, national standards, standardized tests, grants, ACSI, outside competitions, Indiana High School Athletic Association, National Council of Teachers of Math, curriculum theory, parent advisory council, textbooks, alumni, Library, church doctrines, college board test, Student Life Task Force, 255 and a local university and business scholarship which provided technology. These influences are the result of the community and the extended community of ELCS. ' There are several driving forces behind curricular decisions at ELCS, however, each seems to be controlled by the teachers. The forces were identified through interviews at ELCS were: the teacher’s role, student needs, student interests, State standards, business needs, role of the board, parents, curriculum theory, textbooks, mission and vision statements, AC SI and State certification, accreditation, scope and sequences, college entrance, standardized testing, grants, and finances. These major themes permeated the interviews during the three-day visit. Other themes that seemed to come up but of which were minor in comparison were the influence of professional organizations, alumni, and outside competitions. Still, each theme found significance with the ELCS teachers. Within this organizational structure teachers controlled the influences that drive the curriculum. Of these major and minor themes the internal influences and factors that drive the curriculum process were the teacher’s role. student needs, student interest, the board, the mission and vision statements, internal finances, and the scope and sequences that were developed by the teachers themselves. The external influences that drive the curriculum process were state’s influence in standards, teacher certification, ACSI teacher certification and accreditation, business, national standards, parents, textbook companies, opportunities for outside competition, standardized testing, curriculum theory, college preparation, finances, professional organizations, and alumni. The Board of Directors where the ultimate authority in providing the organizational structure that safeguarded the institution so that only those that meet the standards of the organization were internal 256 rather than external influences. The internal influences play a larger role in driving the curriculum process than any external influence. In comparing ELCS to these three frameworks, it is clear that a Christian distinction is not only evident in the curriculum process but is also safeguarded by the institution. These distinctions are the Christian philosophy of education and places first in order of importance, biblical truths that out weigh social forces concerning knowledge, society, the learner, and the use of the social sciences in teaching. Though influences and teachers alike are controlled through various policy safeguards within the ELCS organization the teachers are given the authority to make decisions concerning what influences the curriculum beyond evangelical Christianity. ELCS uses policies to preserve the evangelical heritage of its identity. Board members, teachers, students, curriculum, textbooks, as well as other items are governed and controlled by policies for candidacy, employment, admittance, and use as associated with the school. These policies safeguard the institution’s mission, vision, and character that identify and associate it with evangelical Christianity, making it distinctly different from other educational institutions. Yet, the teachers control the driving forces behind curriculum decisions at ELCS. 257 PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your rear” TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if reques%-1 1/5 DATE DUE | DATE DUE W W9 N j V D 4 2 110; J —9—7—2—-0-0-9 / /——-—* / 5/01 c:/C|RCIDatGDU°~965'°“5 #J" FRAMEWORKS FOR THE FORMATION OF CURRICULUM PRACTICE IN K-12 EVANGELICAL SCHOOLS VOLUME 11 By Karen Lynn Miller Estep A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Educational Administration 2001 Columbia Christian Schools: The Case of Institutional Control of Theology School Context Columbia Christian Schools (CCS) is located in the ACSI Ohio River Valley Region (ACSI, 1998). The population of this city is about 180,000, not counting the surrounding area. The area is known for its history of innovations and industry. The city is ideally located with transportation in and out of it having easy access to more than half of the nation’s population. As a result Columbia renders a similar proportion of the nation’s income. There are an abundance of businesses, a technical school, two universities, one community college, one seminary, and three medical colleges with specialties (him: Columbia 'com ’busincss dcmouraphicslilml). By land there are three interstates connecting the city to outlying areas. For these reasons, Columbia is an ideal location for a Christian school of its size. The school was founded in 1963 and has continuously been a member of ACSI since then. Currently, CCS is an ACSI accredited school having met the requirements of ACSI. The school’s accreditation and association with ACSI affords Christian resources, services, professional development, training, and opportunities for student activities outside the school itself. This accreditation establishes standards of teachers, curriculum, and policy for the school giving approval to the institution. In addition to accreditation, CCS has sought and is currently chartered by the State of Ohio. In the thirty-eight years of its existence CCA has grown from one class of 14 students into the largest non- denominational Christian school system in the United States. CCS, Inc. is the organization that oversees the running of the institution; it is an inter-denominational, co- 258 educational ministry formed in March 1971, as a result of the consolidation of three schools that were established in 1963 (“CCS Information Packet”, 2000). The administration of CCS is made up of one superintendent and‘nine principals; one principal for each campus site. The school operates in a three county area and oversees a group of home-schools with two co-administrators. This administrative team is responsible for an enrollment of 2,200 students in preschool through twelfth grade and a home school program for grades K-8 (“CC S Information Packet”, 2000). The main office is located in one of three middle and high school buildings (grades 7-12) in a low-income area of the city. The location seemed incongruous to the student body that comes from suburban areas to the inner-city buildings. Homeless individuals were encountered within a block or two of the site each day. However, the campus itself is quite beautiful sitting upon a hillside among large trees. Parking is difficult as the day progresses, but is manageable. The doors of the building are locked once school starts. Those entering must identify themselves and state the purpose of their presence. Most of the interviews were conducted in the main building, though there were two visits to neighboring buildings outside the city limits. CCS has several outlying buildings that serve there large school community as the school covers a tri-county area. In addition to traveling there were several rescheduled interviews as many of the central ofl’ice administrators were on call for responsibilities that called them away immediately to the State capitol to work with State lawmakers. These administrators admittedly play an important role in advocating for Christian schools on both a state and national level and are expected to do so. 259 Because CCS is not identified or affiliated with any one church or denominational group of churches, it is categorized as a non-parochial school. Additionally, it is called a private school, incorporated in Ohio as a nonprofit corporation. The school is distinctively Christian because it offers education in a positive Christian atmosphere, and approaches all knowledge as part of a biblical and Christian world-view. It is an inter- denominational school, because board members, teachers, parents and students represent many denominations and churches. CCS’ enrollment makes it the largest Christian school in the United States. CCS serves over 2,200 students (this total includes students connected through the home- school program) representing 400 churches. Mr. Nevada, the Assistant Superintendent of Educational Services stated that there are 600 churches involved in this non- denorninational ministry. They take great pains not to infringe on churches by having “zero tolerance on denominational bashing.” The ethnic diversity of the campus consists of 60% Afi'ican American students, 100 different types of churches, and 38 % from single parent families (“CCS Information Packet”, 2000). Hence, the diversity on campus is seen in two distinct ways: church denominations and ethnic heritage. CCS intends to address the needs of students in this diverse setting by educating through extracurricular activities, assessments, and special services. Extracurricular activities provide several opportunities including. plays, musicals, sports, and ministry for students to become socially involved in deveIOping their skills. At the same time assessments have proven the school’s ability in academics and validate a balance of activities. Students with handicaps, needing remedial help, as well as those that are gified in various academic areas are able to take advantage of additional programming 260 provided by CCS. These special services have provided the opportunity for a large number of diverse learners to take advantage of CCS’ programs. Despite its diversity CCS has established standards for evaluation and has established standards that students have been able to accomplish. ‘ CCS utilizes the Stanford Test of Academic Skills to evaluate student progress. Typically our students score nearly one grade level (9 months) higher than their grade level. The tests indicate that our students are challenged and are achieving well beyond their anticipated level based on IQ. At the high school, students can participate in PSAT, PLAN (PACT), SAT, and ACT national test. Our students’ combined scores continue to be above the national norms. In fact, CCS students’ verbal/language sections are significantly higher than national norms (“CCS Information Packet”, 2000). As a result, CCS students are able to make great advances academically. They are noted for their accomplishments in multiple areas of achievement and advertise them proudly. There are five items concerning accomplishments that CCS boasts about: I. 92% of our graduates attend post secondary institutions 2. CCS is one of only 16 schools in the nation chosen by the prestigious Carnegie Foundation to participate in preparing a model for The Basic School. 3. CCS is ranked in the top ten in student participation at the Ohio State Science Day. We have had 76 make it to the State level as well as seven finalists and three alternates who have represented Ohio at the International level. 26] 4. Our Junior Achievement Company, Apex Productions, consistently receives top honors in competition with approximately 100 other companies. Apex Productions has been a Blue Chip company 9 out of the past 10 years. OurFineArtsprogramisoneofthebestintheMiami Valley. Recentlyinthe tri-State Scholastic Art Awards competition, our students won 6 awards including silver and gold and one student’s portfolio was cited as the most outstanding portfolio in the exhibition (“CCS Information Packet”, 2000). Special services have allowed more than the average—grade student to get involved in Christian education. These services are in some cases assigned to certain campuses and may vary from each campus. Students are bussed to the campus based on choice and need. This is the case with Special Education, services are offered for learning disabled students at all campuses, however, special education for the educable mentally retarded (EMR) student is only available at one campus. Three classes, three teachers, two full time aides, and 20+ students are enrolled in these classes (Mr. Beans, a CCS elementary principal). The following are provided at CCS: Special Education (LC and DH) Honors Courses Technology Program Junior Achievement Comprehensive Music Program Comprehensive Art Program Drama Program Athletics 262 0 Ministry Opportunities 0 Mission Trips (“CCS Information Packet”, 2000) Curriculum documents at CCS take on many forms. The formal documents aided in understanding this complex system that is clearly defined for all individuals. These documents are the “Curriculum Development Model” that outlines the process for developing the curriculum and the “Curriculum Guide (Course of Study)” that outlines the process for implementing the curriculum. In addition to these, CCS, Inc. Five Step Curriculum Development Process, CCS, Inc. Guidelines For Evaluating Textbooks, Textbook Evaluation Forms, CCS, Inc., Rubric for Evaluating Critical Learning Skills and Pupil Performance Objectives, CCS, Inc., Rubric for Evaluating a Course Outline, samples of the Course of Study for Ninth Grade Integrated English Course/English I and Eleventh Grade Language Arts Course/English 111, sample of the Critical Learning Skill lists for Microsoft Excel 97, Microsoft Word (Proficient Exam), Fourth Grade Science/ Health, Algebra I, and Geometry, Position Papers on the following topics: Outcome Based Education, Alternative Assessment, and Whole Language and Language Arts, a sample of Needs Assessment and the Results for the Science/Health Department and Physical Education Department, information concerning the Ohio Writing Project for Early English, Composition, and Assessment Program: Portfolio Program, and Student Evaluation Materials. OCC has a comprehensive collection of policies or procedure. The CCS annizational Structure CCS’ constitution states in “Article III: Organization, Relationships, and Authority,” that the Board of Directors is the governing body of the corporation. The 263 criteria for board membership states that each member shall be noted as a professing and exemplary Christian. Other than this they are required to have their children enrolled in the school unless the Directors have approved otherwise. CCS didnothaveaformal organizafionalmaptopresenLandhenceithadtobe drawn at the time of the interviews. Curriculum specialists who were interviewed understood the structure very well and were able to draw a map for the researcher. Figure 4. 20 is representative of a combination of two drawings: One was provided by the Director of Curriculum and Instruction, Dr. Gleason, and the other was provided by the high school principal, Mr. Dawd. Figure 4.20 The Organizational Chart of CCS Board of Directors i Superintendent t Educational Service Team + Director of Curriculum and Instruction l Department Department Department Department Department Had Head Head Head Head l l l l Department‘s Department‘s Department‘s Department‘s Department‘s That That That That Teachers Teachers Teachers Teachers Teachers 264 This organizational chart is not representative of the entire CCS organization; however, it does show the organizational chart as it afi‘ects curriculum. In this figure the Educational Service Team (ETS) is made up of administrators only. The purpose of this team as it applies to curriculum is to scrutinize any curriculum proposal for changes. This chart does not suggest that there is only one director or five department heads and departments in the entire school. The chart is representative only of the organizational structure as was reported by curriculum specialists in their hand drawn charts. The CCS Mission_, Charter, and Accreditation The CCS campuses are united by the CCS mission and goals, and despite the large administrative team required to lead its many sites. Posted in every main school office are copies of the mission statement and the educational goals. Their posting is so evident that visitors read them. The mission of CCS, Inc. states: CCS, Inc. recognizes that God, through His Word, the Bible, is the absolute authority and basis for all truth. In total dependency upon Him, desiring to work with the local church and the evangelical community, we seek to assist Christian families in their Biblical responsibility to train their children to become Christlike [Christ-like], and to fulfill God’s purpose for their lives in the home, church and society (“CCS Information Packet”, 2000). At the state level, CCS is chartered by the State of Ohio. The purpose for this charter is not to accept state or federal funding, but to meet the standards established by the curriculum and the athletic association. CCS does not accept funding from the state. The school is of suflicient size, and it is important that graduates meet the requirements 265 of colleges as established by the state. Also, because of the school size the athletic program benefits from the charter by playing against larger schools, making the competition better matched. CCS is fortunate to have numerous students from which to select teams (Mr. Dawd). It was very clear that CCS would not accept state or federal funding so as to insure that they would not become dependent on it. Curriculum: Policy and Practice at CCS CCS has a well-organized system of checks and balances regarding curriculum decisions. This is a model that has been visualized in a “Curriculum Development Model” (see Figure 4.21) followed by the curriculum committees. The eleven stages: God’s Word, corporate philosophy and mission statement, ministry goals, needs assessment, department philosophy and goals, textbook exploration, graded course of study (Including the scope and sequence, critical learning skills, performance objectives, course outline, etc.), in-service faculty, implement new course outlines and textbooks, in- service faculty, and needs assessment. The model allows for a repeat at any time in the process or for the last six steps to be skipped in the event of a needs assessment, a maneuver that allows for decisions to be made quicker or reviewed again once a faculty in-service is completed. This insures that the needs of both the teachers and the students will be met. 266 Figure 4.21 CCS Cun'iculum Development Model CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT MODEL n c w w - n c r c z n o z g - d i a m g o x : GOD’S WORD 3 CORPORATE PHILOSOPHY AND MISSION STATEMENT 11 MINISTRY GOALS £1 NEEDS ASSESSMENT (2:) [1 DEPARTMENT PHILOSOPHY AND GOALS [l TEXTBOOK EXPLORATION fl GRADED COURSE OF STUDY (Scope and Sequence. Critical Learning Skills, Performance Objectives. Course Outline. etc.) [1 INSERVICE FACULTY [l IMPLEMENT NEW COURSE OUTLINES AND TEXTBOOKS £1 INSERVICE FACULTY £1 NEEDS ASSESSMENT <—_—_;(> 267 In addition to this, CCS uses the diagram called “Curriculum Guide (Course of Study)” (see Figure 4.22) to explain the steps involved in the development process. The steps of this guide are described in detail in the document “Five Step Curriculum Development Process.” The first step in this model is that of Department Needs Assessment/Evaluation. This is a five-month process that outlines the steps of administrators in determining the needs ofa department. Those involved in this step are the administration, Director of Curriculum and Instruction, the Educational Service Team (EST) and possibly the school board. The needs assessment is an important part of the evaluation of curriculum. This information would not only assess the student performance on standardized, proficiency and classroom levels but would also assess the desires of the community, parents, and alumni. The information gathered is considered in updating and improving sections of the course of study every five years. 268 Figure 4.22 CCS Curriculum Guide (Course of Study) CURRICULUM GUIDE (COURSE OF STUD!) GOD’S WORD HOLY SPIRIT (John 16:13) Corporate Philosophy TEACHER MODEL (Living Curriculum LK 6:40) Mission Statement Ministry Goals Department Philosophy and Goals [l Biblically Integrated Scope and Sequence (Principles. Knowledge, Skills, Character Qualities, Critical Learning Skills) U Course Outline including Textbooks, materials, resources, measurable objectives S T A T I C D Y N lnservice — teaching strategies [1 Daily Classroom Lesson Plans (3: C: J3 A M Student Assessment C> [:9 C9 Intervention . C Student Attainment of Goals C2] C3 <2) I? and Objectives 269 An examination of the “cos, Inc. Needs Assessment Science/Health Department Physical Education Department” revealed a survey that polled a parent audience concerning the science, health and physical education programs at CCS. The survey asked for information about the person filling out the survey using a Likert Scale to analyze responses. Children of these parents were also asked to respond. The fourth part of the survey asked for written responses concerning the parent’s opinion about the main strengths, weakness, and other comments or suggestions concerning these three programs at CCS. This assessment provides input from those investing in CCS’ educational programming ' The next two steps in this model consist of an internal evaluation, using a simple rubric for evaluating the elements sought in the curriculum. These rubrics (e.g. “Rubric for Evaluating Critical Leaning Skills” and “Pupil Performance Objectives, CCS, Inc.”) ask if the person evaluating would answer questions by marking one (1) if the curriculum being evaluated exceeds the expectations, two (2) if it meets the expectations, or three (3) if it does not appear to meet the expectations. Evaluators were also asked to comment if they did mark th_r;eg using this rubric. In this way, the second step considers department philosophies, goals, scope and sequence, and the third step is concerned with critical learning skills, pupil performance objectives, competency testing, intervention, and library resources. . The fourth step in this model engages in the writing of the course outline and the evaluation and selection of textbooks. It is followed by a final stage that focuses on implementation and adjustment of the fourth stage. Both of these stages take place once the curriculum is adopted and is carried out, possibly as the curriculum is piloted. As in 270 the last two steps, once a curriculum is adopted it is reviewed using the same rubric criteria as one being reviewed and considered for the first time (“Rubric for Evaluating a Course Outline, CCS, Inc.”). When the textbook is reviewed or considered for adoption, it uses a set offorms that ask questions about the student text concerning cost, appearance and use, biblical emphasis, questionable content, strengths and weaknesses. In a similar way the workbook/activity book and teacher’s edition are questioned. Additionally, each book is considered in light of working readability for this grade level. The primary guidelines for the evaluation of textbooks are: 1. As a Christian school, our primary desire is to secure Christian textbooks in all of our classes. 2. You are required to evaluate at least three textbooks as long as they are available. 3. Secure evaluation textbooks through the Director of Curriculum and Instruction. Generally, secular texts will be approved for exam only after Christian textbook publishers have been considered. 4. Have at least two people evaluate each textbook (department members may be able to arrange release time and volunteer parent professionals can be used). 5. Return the completed forms, at least three, to your Department Chair who will summarize and submit to the Director of Curriculum and Instruction. 6. What school year will the textbook be implemented? (“CCS, Inc. Guidelines for Evaluating Textbooks/Textbook Evaluation Forms”, revised 2/99) 271 With each of the five steps there are safeguards that protect against influences that are contrary to already established standards. Though everyone has input, the curriculum is evaluated in a uniform manner way at several levels with the expressed desire to eliminate unwanted influences (“CCS, Inc., Guidelines for Evaluating Textbooks/Textbook Evaluation Form”). The primary influences being God’s Word, corporate philosophies, mission statement, and ministry goals all of which stem from the first, God’s Word. This primary influence is a filter used in the oversight of the curriculum process. One high school principal, Mr. Stott, equated biblical truth [God’s Word] to theology when asked; how is theology a factor and/or influence in the development of curriculum? Stott explained that we should look at curriculum with a biblical filter. However, to do this, educators need to be trained so in-service provides another safeng to facilitate implementation and/or adjustment needed to insure success. The process places the primary importance on God’s Word and the Holy Spirit but of equal importance are the teacher or the living curriculum and an alignment of the corporate philosophy, mission statement, ministry goals, department philosophy and goals and the Biblically integrated scope and sequence. The principles, knowledge, skills, character qualities, and critical learning skills are developed in detail in the scope and sequence. CCS has gone further than the philosophy and mission in identifying ministry goals. Individually fiamed, these goals are displayed on the walls of every CCS building in the main office. The administrators at each school made reference to the goals during interviews. These goals are: 272 1. To serve the home and local church as they train young people to have a personal and intimate relationship with Jesus Christ (Deut. 6:5-7). 2. To provide a Christ-centered educational program which is based on the authoritative Word of God (11 Tim. 2:15). 3. To equip students to evangelize and disciple others and to encourage involvement in practical ministry opportunities (Matt. 28:19-20). 4. To offer a Christian education which unifies the body of Christ in accord with Biblical principles and our Statement of Faith (Eph. 4:1-6). 5. To employ and develop mature Christian faculty and Staff members who minister through the power of the Holy Spirit to their family, students and community by word and action (Luke 6:40). 6. To follow Biblical principles in all of our practices, policies, and guidelines (11 Chron. 1:10). 7. To communicate, internationally, the purpose and objectives of Christian education by sharing the mission, goals, and resources of Dayton Christian Schools (PS 9:11). ° 9 1 To balance gifts, tuition, financial aid, the salaries, expenses, and planning for the future (I John 3:17-18) (“CCS Information Packet”, 2000). Each of these rubrics, guidelines, and procedures are useful in the evaluation and review of all influences that affect the cuniculum in light of God’s Word, corporate philosophy of Christian education, the mission statement, and ministry goals. It is to be used by those responsible for the evaluation and review of the curriculum. The system is 273 comprehensively designed to address each influence that affects the curriculum in any way. CCS BM Member, Faculg, and Personnel Policies Important to the cmriculum are those who teach and govern. All those involved in the school community must make application for membership within the community. Board members are required to do the following to make application: fill out a “Ministry Application [for] Board Member,” Sign a document called, “Giving a Good Report,” make a declaration of ethical and moral integrity, and Sign a “Board Member Covenant.” Faculty likewise must make application using a Similar process. They must fill out the “Ministry Application [for] Faculty,” making a declaration of ethical and moral integrity, and are also required to Sign the “Authorization to Release Reference Information” form. These documents serve the purpose of aligning all personnel to the evangelical perspective. Personnel unable to agree with the character demands of these agreements are not eligible for employment or service at CCS. Employees of CCS must recognize and support the corporate philosophy [Educational Philosophy], mission statement, and ministry goals (CCS Facility/SQ Handbook, 1998, pp. 100-4, 100-5, 100-6, and 100-7). The curriculum process is dependent upon the use of the corporate phiIOSOphy, mission statement, and ministry goals for developing the curriculum (Curriculum Development Model and Curriculum Guide (Course of Study). The Corporate Philosophy of CCS encompasses the view expressed in each of these statements and goals. The philosophy states: 274 The educational philosophy of Dayton Christian is based on a God-centered view, oftruthandmanaspresented inthe Bible. SinceGod createdandsustainsall things through His Son, Jesus Christ, the universe and all life are dynamically related to God and have the purpose of glorifying Him. This is pointedly true of man who was made in God’s image, different in kind from all other creation, with the unique capacity to know and respond to God personally and voluntarily. Because man is a sinner by nature and choice, however, he cannot, in this condition, know or honor God in his life. He can do this only being born again through receiving Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, and thus be enabled to do God’s will, which is the ultimate purpose of his life. The entire process of education is seen as a means used by the Holy spirit to bring the student into fellowship with God, to help him become strong or mighty in the spirit, to assist him in developing the mind of Christ, to train him in Christ-likeness, to teach him to respond like God and to help the student demonstrate Christ-like character qualities so that he can fulfill God’s total purpose for his life personally and vocationally. He is taught the Bible so he may understand God as well as His own true nature and function as God’s image. He is developed and related to God as a whole person, that is: spiritually, mentally, physically, and socially. He is taught to see all truth as God’s truth and to integrate it with, and interpret it by, God’s Word. He is educated as an individual with his own unique abilities and personality who learns to live and work with others at home, in the church and in a changing secular society. He interacts with 275 and is taught by parent and teacher models who are themselves born again and ' have this perspective on life. The authority for such an education comes both fiom God’s command that children be taught to love God and place Him first in their lives and from the fact that parents are responsible for the total education and training of their children. At the parents’ request, the Christian school, along with the church, becomes a partner in giving this education. The Christian school is an extension of the local evangelical, fundamental church’s Christian education program, serving the parents in fulfilling their responsibility of educating the child (CCS Faculty/Staff Handbook, 1998, pp. 100-4-100-7). There are seven areas of policy that govern personnel: criteria for hiring, curriculum and evaluation, professional standards and enrichment, relationships, procedures, discipline, and the business office procedures and information (C_CS_ Faculty/Staff Handbook). Those that pertain to curriculum matters are the criteria for hiring, curriculum and evaluation, professional standards and enrichment. Mr. Snodgrass, the superintendent/director of personnel states, “We do not yield to pressures of the world.” Rather it is the duty of CCS to “guard zealously” the school. Therefore, all employees are expected to Sign a statement of faith and to make a declaration of ethical and moral integrity prior to consideration for hiring. Each of these documents is found in the employee application for candidates to Sign. Additionally, a letter to every employment candidate states, the following: 276 Before your interview, you will need to read at least one of the books listed below. 1. Still Educating for Eternity, Claude E. Schindler, Jr. and Pacheco Pyle, ACSI Publishers, Colorado Springs, CO. 2. The Philosophy of Christian School Education, Edited by Paul A. Kienel, ACSI, PO. Box 35097, Colorado Springs, CO 80935-3509, (800) 367- 0798. 3. Sowing for Excellence, Claude E. Schindler, Jr. with Pacheco Pyle, ACSI Publishers, Colorado Springs, CO (CCS, 2000). Additionally, the required statement of faith has eight points that emphasize absolute truth from God, a belief in the Trinity, the deity of Jesus Christ, the sinfulness and need of regeneration by the Holy Spirit, the ministry of the Holy Spirit, the resurrection of both the saved and the lost, the spiritual unity of believers, and the creation of man being a direct act of God. The statement of faith reads as follows: Columbia Christian School was founded and functions upon the basic fundamental principles of the Word of God, and it espouses the historic Christian view of life as presented in the BIBLE. Every Columbia Christian School employee and school family must agree to the following statements: 1. I believe the Bible to be the verbally inspired and only infallible, authoritative, inerrant Word of God (11 Tim. 3:16; 11 Pet.1: 21). 2. I believe that there is one God, eternally existent in three persons: Father, Son and Holy Spirit (Gen. 1:1; John 10:30; John 10:37, 38). 277 . I believe in the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ, in His virgin birth, in His sinless life, in His miracles, in His vicarious and atoning death through His Shed blood, in His bodily resurrection, in His ascension to the right hand of the Father, and in His personal return in power and glory (Isa.7: 14; Matt. 1:23; Luke 1:35; Heb.4: 15; Heb. 7:25; Jn. 2:11; Heb. 9:12; Eph.l:7; Col. 1:14; Jn. 11:25; Acts 1:11; Rev. 19:11-16). . I believe that man is sinful by nature and that regeneration by the Holy Spirit is essential and an absolute necessity for his salvation (Rom. 3:19, 23; Jn. 3:16-19; Jn. 5:24; Eph. 2:8-10; Tit.3: 5, 6). . I believe in the continuing ministry of the Holy Spirit, by whose indwelling the Christian is enabled to live a Godly life (Eph.5: 18; Eph. 4:30; I Cor.3: 16; I Cor. 6:19-20). . I believe in the resurrection of both the saved and the lost. They who are saved unto eternal life and they who are lost unto eternal damnation (Jn. 5:2 8- 29). . I believe in the Spiritual unity of believers in our Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. 8:9; I Cor. 12:12-13; Gal. 3:26-28). . I believe in the creation of man by the direct act of God (Gen. 1:26-28; Gen. 5:1-2). Note: CCS neither supports nor endorses the World Council of Churches, National Council of Churches or any other world, national or regional organization which gives Christian recognition to unbelievers or which advocates multi-faith union (CCS Board Policy Manual, 100-2). 278 These eight points are evangelical in nature and are neither restrictive nor all encompassing of individual denominatiom. CCS’ Department Chair for Bible calls this evangelical approach, “Plain Vanilla Evangelicalism.” He explained it to mean that CCS does not concern themselves with doctrinal battles concerning eschatology, signs and gifts, eternal security, the mode of baptism, and choices in Bible translations. The point is to be inter-denominational in CCS’ curriculum approach. CCS places the importance of the “living curriculum” as critical to their mission. The living curriculum is defined as the teacher model. They base this definition on the Bible passage, Luke 6:40: “A student is not above his teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like his teacher.” The point being that the teacher is a component of the curriculum that should not be taken lightly. For this reason the criteria for hiring focuses on the prospective teacher’s ability to model and express the values of CCS. The CCS Curriculu_m Policies The position of the teacher model is parallel to the position of the course of study in the “CCS Curriculum Guide (Course of Study)” (see Figure 4.22). The course of study having been established on the basis of the CCS corporate philosophy, mission statement, ministry goals, department philosophy and goals, a biblically integrated scope and sequence, course outline which includes textbooks, materials, resources, measurable objectives, and teaching strategies. God’s Word is at the top of this organizational structure and the Holy Spirit guiding both the written curriculum (course of study) and the teacher model (living curriculum). This provides a balance. The teacher and the course of study as a unit produce daily classroom lesson plans, assessment, intervention 279 to reach the goals and objectives ofthe curriculum, and the student attainment of goals I and objectives (CCS Board Policy Manual, pp. 200-5). This model points out the necessity for both the written curriculum and the living curriculum to be governed or lead by the Holy Spirit. This is based on the Bible passage, John 16:13 which reads, “But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into alltruth. Hewill notspeakonhisown;hewillspeakonlywhathehears,andhewilltell you what is yet to come.” Because of this belief that the Holy Spirit lead in the curriculum activity process, the corporate philosophy and the living cuniculum are placed in this model after the Holy Spirit but parallel to one another. Even though the Holy Spirit is over the written curriculum and the teacher model, principals evaluate teachers to guard the curriculum. The evaluation process guards against potential problems created by teachers in writing their own curriculum. A concern of the CCS administration in this larger setting is that teachers at times create a “curriculum burden.” One interview revealed that sometimes CCS is plagued with “teachers that do not see beyond the larger picture. They see only what they think is important” noted Mr. Nevada, the Assistant Superintendent of Educational Services, during his interview. The course of study and the evaluation system are in place to hold everyone accountable to the entire curriculum. Part of the duty of the CCS organizational structure is safeguarding the curriculum against those who teach. This is accomplished not only through the application process but also through the evaluation process. The adopted process to 280 evaluate teachers is known as the “Career Development: An Evaluation Process.” It is used to evaluate faculty members. The board policy for this process states: Each employee’s overall performance and progress will be evaluated for that given year (1-4 years at CCS, semi-annually; 5 years or more at CCS, annually) or as required. . 1. This evaluation is to focus on: a) the character quality strengths and weaknesses that directly contributed to or detracted from his ministry at CCS (use character quality assessment form), and b) on the employee’s progress in achieving those objectives related to his position. 2. An evaluation is to be made by the employee’s immediate supervisor and by the employee himself. The employee and his immediate supervisor will meet to discuss the content of both evaluations. 3. Additionally, employee is to complete a personal spiritual inventory Sheet for his own use on an annual basis (F_aculty and Staff Handbook, 1 999-2000). The process calls for three stages: Pre-observation conference, observation, and a post-observation conference. The pre-observation conference serves to establish an observation date and to discuss areas to be evaluated. Employees are asked to fill out the “Character Quality Evaluation” form prior to the post-observation conference and to place it in a sealed envelope. The administrator is responsible for all formal observations and the evaluation of those observations. Administrators observe and evaluate both areas listed on a check sheet and areas requested by the teacher using the “Class Analysis by 281 Observation” form. There are thirteen areas on the check sheet to be evaluated using this process. The school uses this evaluation process to safeguard the curriculum. The school supports the process of evaluation in the following statement: CCS are [is] committed to an evaluation procedure which emphasizes the continuous development of its faculty in order to provide for optimum student growthandprofessional growth. Thiscanbestberealizedthlougha comprehensive program of cooperative appraisal by the individual teacher and the principal (“Career Development: An evaluation Process”). It was obvious that the focus for any CCS procedure was that of evaluation and the purpose was to safeguard CCS from unwanted influences. Language Arts teacher Mr. Munce noted that the Superintendent/Director of Personnel, Mr. Snodgrass, had the gift of discernment when picking personnel. This went beyond policy and was more of a practice that was based on the belief that direction was given by the Holy Spirit through unanimous agreement. When asked to respond to this statement, Mr. Snodgrass responded by giving an example of the personnel committee’s procedure when interviewing faculty candidates. This committee hired individuals based on unity in the committee. If there was one person who did not feel comfortable with the candidate than they knew the Holy Spirit was not leading them toward that choice. Everyone made a conscious decision that if they were not in agreement then they would continue to look for an individual that had their total agreement. The gift of discernment was his willingness to rely on the committee’s agreement rather than his own personal preference. 282 The CCS Student Policies The registration and admission process for students requires written and verbal commitments for both academic and spiritual excellence of students at the upper level. Likewise, parent commitments are expected at the elementary level along with student acceptance of these commitments. The written commitments require signatures as part of the application process. In addition to this, parents and students are interviewed so that the spiritual commitments can be openly discussed along with academics. Included in this process are four forms used to make these decisions about admission: “Family Registration Form,” “Pastoral Reference,” “Student Admission Form,” and “Student Health Record.” Additionally, all applicants must have a recommendation from their pastor and subscribe to the statement of faith (“CCS Information Packet”, 2000). In order for secondary students to become enrolled at the secondary level-they must be able to clearly write their testimony (CCS Student Admission Fcm, 2000). In addition to this, parents of these students must also write a testimony. Students are asked, “What does it mean to be a Christian and how did you become a Christian?” They are then asked to describe their church attendance and activity. Older students and their parents are asked to Sign the statement of faith, and reference checks are done to validate the information. Elementary students are admitted only if their parents are able to write these testimonies. Each family is interviewed by the administration before they are accepted. This part of the process safeguards the Christian atmosphere essential to the learning goals. 283 The philosophical foundation for CCS is theological (CCS Facillty/Staf’f Handbook, pp. 100.4-100.7). The four-page Educational Philosophy of CCS is focused on the God-centered view of truth and man as presented in the Bible. The process of educating is seen as a means used by the Holy Spirit to bring the student into fellowship with God by the CCS environment. The authority to do this is given by God. There are twenty-seven aims and objectives that stem from this philosophy. Each is supported by Scripture passages (e. g. “To teach that the Bible is the inspired and the only infallible authoritative Word of God, thus developing attitudes of love and respect toward it (11 Tim. 3:15, 16, 17; II Pet. 1:20, 21)”) (p. 100-5). Their philosophy is therefore theologically based. In addition to these philosophical aims and objectives the school has nine aims for working with the homes of students (e.g. “To aid families in Christian growth and to help them develop Christ-centered homes (Eph. 5:22-23; 11 Pet. 3:18)”). The basis for these aims and objectives are also theological. CCS sees one of its duties is to nurture the student into an evangelical community way of life, and proposes to do this by working with the home. This is expressed in several stated objectives. One such objective states that CC S is “to assist parents in keeping up with the changing culture and its effect on the home and the implications for their children” (CCS FaLculty/Staff Handbook, pp. 100-7). Supporting this view, Mr. Munce, a department head, stated that the desire of CCS is to “expose kids to purity.” The school is very much in tune with the world and the pressures on the youth in our society. This school works to counter that affect by creating a counter culture for the students. 284 Rather than curriculum policies there are procedures for developing the curriculum and the “CCS Course of Study” itself. CCS uses several rubrics, models laid out as procedures, for curriculum specialists to develop the written curriculum. There are severalnotedproceduresthatseemtobeindicativeofwhatmightinsomecasesbe referred to as policy, because teachers are expected to use them and abide by them as if they were policy. The first of these is the “CCS, Inc. Five Step Curriculum Development Process.” This process outlines month by month the process of curriculum development. Step one is the “Department Needs Assessment/Evaluation” This is a five-month process of evaluation and proposal writing followed by submitting to the EST for approval. Step two is the “Philosophy, Goals. Scope and Sequence” work. During this step individuals are to keep in mind the “Needs Assessment Results.” Step 3 is designated for “Critical Learning Skills/Pupil Performance Objectives, Competency Testing/Intervention, and Resource Library” work. A plan must be written for all of these areas. Step 4 is work on the “Course Outline/Textbook Evaluation and Selection. Again, this involves more writing. Step 5 is called “Implementation/ Adjustment, In-Service.” This final step is established for the purpose of making sure the plan works by running the program for 2-3 months and evaluating it fiequently to determine success and or necessary changes. Another Step in the evaluation of curriculum governs textbooks. A form called the “CCS, Inc. Guidelines for Evaluating Textbooks, Textbook Evaluation Forms” (see Appendix I) is used in this phase. This is a seven-page document used to consider textbooks. It states that the primary desire is for all classes to use Christian textbooks and that at least three textbooks should be reviewed when available for every course 285 evaluated, and that secular texts will be approved for exam only after Christian textbook publishers have been considered. The evaluation of textbooks is done by at least two people. After completing the textbook forms, they are to return the completed forms to thedepartrnent chairto submittothe DirectorofCurriculumandInstmction. Items that are considered in the evaluation of textbooks are cost, appeal, durability, content, biblical emphasis, and questionable content. These six areas concern support for Christian values, distorted content, any promotion of violence, world-views, false religions, and presentation of social or moral problems. Mr. Brush, one elementary principal, explained that often there are parents that do not want their children exposed to some material and for that reason, “We do not want to offend the weaker brother, especially at the elementary level.” Dr. Gleason, Director of Curriculum and Instruction, clarified that if at all possible a Christian text was considered but when that was not possible CCS has had graphics removed as well as questionable material so that a text could be used with minimal to no concern. In addition to these concerns, the textbook form asks for a list of strengths/weaknesses, resources, and copyright information. Teachers are asked to consider the text’s readability and to gauge it with a provided readability graph. Each element insures CCS educators consider all the concerns for educating students in a spiritual as well as academic manner. Finally, CCS provides two rubrics for evaluating curriculum. The first is called “Rubric for Evaluating Critical Learning Skills and Pupil Performance Objectives.” This rubric has ten items that need attention. 286 1. Are biblical principles and character qualities a part of the document? 2. Is there a balance presented between Biblical principles the students memorize, define, and/or list and those that are integrated into the course (see next item). 3. Are students given opportunities to practice the character qualities or to‘ apply the Biblical principles? i.e.: The student will show diligence in preparing a science fair project. The student will demonstrate obedience by following directions when given. The student will recognize that God is orderly and precise and expects that of us as believers. 4. Does the document express the skills in terms of student behaviors? 5. Is there a balance between higher order thinking Skills and lower order thinking skills? 6. Do the skills seem grade appropriate? 7. As far as you can tell, are the skills reflective of national or state standards and are they consistent with CCS standards? 8. Is the document readable—can you understand it? 9. Is the assessment realistic (will the assessment take a reasonable amount of the teacher’s time)? 10. Are the skills supportive of the philosophy of this discipline? 287 The second is called, “Rubric for Evaluating a Course Outline,” and it has twelve items to be considered. 1. Does the “Course Outline” conform to the CCS. format? 2. Are biblical principles and character qualities an integral part of the document? Does the document have approved resources listed for the students or teachers? Are the resources listed current and available? Are the necessary keys and teacher’s edition listed? Is there something significantly “Christian” in the course description and in the measurable objectives? Is the course evaluation balanced between testing, homework, exams, projects, quizzes, reports, class participation, etc.? Does the “Course Outline” contain the Critical Learning Skills that have been approved? 9. IS the document understandable and easy to use? 10. Is the document consistent with the department’s “Scope and Sequence?” 11. Are required activities/projects listed and clear as to evaluation criteria? 12. Do the course’s measurable objectives reflect activities that involve more than just memorization, listing, and matching? (i.e.-are higher order thinking Skills and application of those skills listed as measurable objectives? 288 Individuals using either of these rubrics are asked to consider each item and using a three-point scale indicate if the item for that course (1) exceeds the expectations, (2) meets the expectations, (3) does not meet the expectations. The last point requires a written comment. .The foundations of Christian education (Bible, theology, and philosophy) drive the curriculum decisions for CCS through the policies and procedures used in hiring faculty and staff. This commitment to the institution’s philosophy and values is maintained by the Board of Directors’ oversight. CCS has established a detailed system of checks and balances that allow it to review and evaluate all things in light of its philosophy and values. There is an intentional effort by the board to insure that all individuals working with CCS are committed to preserving the core values of the evangelical tradition. CCS policies have been established to insure that the selection of personnel and new board members is handled in a manner that would discern between spiritual and non-spiritual values. These policies affect the selection of the “Living curriculum” or teacher and protect the institution fiorn external influences that affect the curriculum in the selection of the board that maintains this identity. CCS is able to do this though policies by ensuring the personnel committee’s ability to discern, having provided a system of checks and balances, maintaining the institution’s integrity through proper oversight. The system of checks and balances as it pertains to the review of curriculum is being carried out at CCS. All curriculum changes are discussed first by teachers. These teachers are then expected to provide a written proposal to the administrative team for consideration. The next step for curriculum proposals is for them to be reviewed by the 289 Educational Service Team (EST), a team comprised of all administrators. Once curriculum proposals have approval from the EST, they are sent to the Board of Directors for final approval. This is a long process but a process that insures that the written curriculum meets with the criteria already established. The Director of Curriculum and Instruction is responsible for overseeing this entire process. Teachersareinvolvedinthisprocessfromthevery beginningtothe final stageof initiation of change. To initiate change once approved by EST, the teachers must then producethecom'seofstudythatwillaccompanythechange. Itistheteacherswhomust implement the curriculum. To do this they are allowed to attend various in-service sessions or receive training to prepare them for implementation. Mrs. Goodman, the department head for grades Kindergarten thru sixth grade math, stated that CCA does not experiment with their classes. Rather, they only do what they know has been proven to work, this applies even when writing their own math curriculum for the elementary grades. Teachers are very involved in the formation of curriculum and the recommendation of changes and modification. It is apparent that CCS is constantly evaluating student needs and checking to see if the changes they have implemented are working or not. Mrs. Goodman noted that changes are recommended based on research evaluation, the review of tests results, as well as other procedure forms used by CCS. With every curriculum decision there is an evaluation, or two, of student needs. Once this change is implemented, it is evaluated to see if it is working. Systematically, portions of the total curriculum are reviewed yearly, in an effort to insure that student’s nwds are being met. 290 There are several external forces that influence CCS on the state and national level. Therefore, CCS has put in place a system of checks and balances that determines if any of these forces have any voice in what takes place at the school. The external influences are curriculum theory, finances, college requirements, testing, ACSI, the state, businesses, national standards, parents, alumni, personal Christian convictions outside the norm of evangelicalism, the community, and publishers. Any influence tlmt potentially affects the curriculum at CCS is monitored. The purpose of such monitoring is to determine if the influences fall within the parameters of the educational goals of CCS. The Administrative Team and the Board of Directors both monitor influences. The CCS administration as a result is very active politically with the state and national legislators as was evident in the needed change of my appointments with Mr. Snodgrass, who were reported that he must travel to the capital for a meeting concerning legislations that being presented. CCS takes an active roll in the laws that affect Christian Schools in the state and nation as a way of countering the unwanted external forces that potentially influence CCS and other Christian schools. These external influences serve only to balance the internal ones. They help gauge the standards and expectations established by internal influences. Yet at the same time, CCS, while listening and even abiding by state standards, is ready to make a break if these influences cause them to relinquish any of their core values as held in their philosophy of education, mission statement, and belief statement. 291 The Transition of Poli_cy into Practice at CCS The CCS Board of Directors has the responsibility of overseeing the entire institution. Though there are several administrators, the board demanded that each administrator, individual school, and team of teachers adopt the same practice in accordance with ccs policy. The board of directors uses policy to define the expectations and to establish limits as guidelines. However, it is the responsibility of the teachers and the administrators to follow these guidelines and the responsibility of the board to oversee that. This elaborate system is a system of checks and balances. Everyone is expected to work together but the board takes responsibility in seeing that it is accomplished. — Theoretical Analysis: What It Mew This analysis will look at the frameworks of Ornstein and Levine (1993); Armstrong (1989); and Beane, Toepfer, and Alessi (1986) for an understanding of what influences curriculum decisions for CCS. The first of the three models will identify CCS’ influences and then be used to explain the details of how these influences lead to the purposes of education. The second model will be used to understand how the flow of curriculum affects decisions. Finally, the third model, in the same way as Beane, Toepfer, and Alessi used their own model (1986), will outline the design and practice of curriculum development. Unique to this case, is the existence of an original CCS model for curriculum development planning. 292 Them influence on educationalm at CCS is the God’s Word. The first step in understanding this model (see Figure 4.23) is the identification of the forces that influence CCS. The primary influences are God’s Word, corporate philosophy, the mission statement, ministry goals, and the teacher model- each pending approval fiom the first. God’s Word is the unchanging influence whereas other influences can be evaluated. Teachers (CCS Faculg/Staff Hande) and secondary influences are systematically evaluated (see Figure 4.22 CCS Curriculum Guide). Each influence is evaluated throughout the process and guided by various rubrics for curriculum evaluation in an effort to maintain the primary influences on CCS’ educational purposes. ‘ T ? ” t i 293 Figure 4.23 The Purpose of Education and The Forces That Influence Them at CCS PRIMARY INFLUENCES 0N EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES God’s Word V Corporate Philosophy Mission Statement Ministry Goals 6 Teacher Model Living Curriculum GENERAL Aims: l PURPOSES Department Philosophies and _ SECONDARY INFLUENCES ON EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES * Social forees (Changes in): Society Christian Denominations ' T T ' . . - . 1 , l Testing State recognition ACSI State Charter MORE SPECIFIC Goals: Scope and Sequence The learner (K-12 all subjects and grade levels) 0 Student Needs PURPOSES Curriculum Theories 0 0 Outcomes Based Educ. Whole Language / MOST SPECIFIC Objectives: PURPOSES Critical learning skills, performance objectives, and course outlines EDUCATIONAL SERVICE TEAM (EST) l Maintenance of Primary Influences: Through the Evaluation of all Purposes (General, More Specific, and Most Specific) OVERSIGHT Thereare five primagy influences on educational purgises at CCS. The “CCS Curriculum Guide” (see Figure 4.22) identifies five primary forces that influence its educational purposes: God’s Word, corporate philosophy, the mission statement, ministry goals, and the teacher model (living curriculum). The guide indirectly indicates the influence of several secondary forces that influence the 294 curriculum. These secondary forces are generally realized through needs assessments and stafi development. However, God’s Word is at the top of this organizational structure (CCS Board Polig Manual, pp. 200-5) and ultimately influences the relationship between CCS and any other influence. The Corporate Philosophy of CCS states: The educational philosophy of Columbia Christian is based on a God-centered view of truth and man as presented in the Bible. Since God created and sustains all things through His Son, Jesils Christ, the lmiverse and all life are dynamically 3' 2!- related to God and have the purpose of glorifying Him. This is pointedly true of man who was made in God’s image, different in kind from all other creation, with the unique capacity to, know and respond to God personally and voluntarily. Because man is a sinner by nature and choice, however, he cannot, in this condition, know or honor God in his life. He can do this only being born again through receiving Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, and thus be enabled to do God’s will, which is the ultimate purpose of his life. The entire process of education is seen as a means used by the Holy Spirit to bring the student into fellowship with God, to help him become strong or mighty in the Spirit, to assist him in developing the mind of Christ, to train him in Christ-likeness, to teach him to respond like God and to help the student demonstrate Christ-like character qualities so that he can fulfill God’s total purpose for his life personally and vocationally. He is taught the Bible so he may understand God as well as His own true nature and function as God’s image. He is developed and related to God as a whole person, that is: spiritually, mentally, 295 " r ? “ r physically, and socially. He is taught to see all truth as God’s truth and to integrate it with, and interpret it by, God’s Word. He is educated as an individual with his own unique abilities and personality who learns to live and work with others at home, in the church and in a changing secular society. He interacts with and is taught by parent and teacher models who are themselves born again and have this perspective on life. The authority for such an education comes both from God’s command that childrenbetaughttoloveGodandplacel-Iimfirstintheirlivesandfiomthefact that parents are responsible for the total education and training of their children. At the parents’ request, the Christian school, along with the church, becomes a partner in giving this education. The Christian school is an extension of the local evangelical, fundamental church’s Christian education program, serving the parents in fulfilling their responsibility of educating the child (CCS FaculW/Sta_ff Handbook, 1998, pp. 100-4-100-7). The philosophy itself establishes the authority and reason for this placement of God’s Word. It is based on values and beliefs held by this theologically evangelical group. One high school principal, Mr. Stott, gave an example of the importance of God’s Word and its relationship to theology when asked, “How is theology a factor and/or influence in the development of curriculum?” Stott explained that we “should look at curriculum with a biblical filter.” Stott notes that the Bible, being the Word of God, is of primary importance to the educational purposes. Second, to, but equally important, is the mission of CCS, Inc. that states: CCS, Inc. recognizes that God, through His Word, the Bible, is the absolute 296 authority and basis for all truth. In total dependency upon Him, desiring to work with the local church and the evangelical community, we seek to assist Christian families in their Biblical responsibility to train their children to become Christlike [Christ-like], and to fulfill God’s purpose for their lives in the home, church and society (“CCS Information Packet”, 2000). i The mission statement likewise identifies the importance of God’s Word, theology, and ministry. This leads into the importance of realizing that CCS is a ministry and as such it has several ministry goals. These goals are identified as primary forces that influence curriculum decisions. Involvement in practical ministry opportunities (Matt. 28:19-20) The teacher model is identified as a primary influence in curriculum decisions. Being identified as the “living curriculum.” This description of the teacher is based on the Bible passage, Luke 6:40: “A student is not above his teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like his teacher.” The point being that the teacher is a component of the curriculum whose influence should not be taken lightly. The social forces do have a significant impact on curriculum decisions at CCS but only as allowed by the administration and board. Still there is much consideration for their influence at every level. As an example, for testing purposes, the State curriculum has a significant influence when a subject is taught in the scope and sequence. Another example is in the influence of colleges such as a decision to use the Modern Language Association (MLA) style Sheet with upper level students in preparation for college since most colleges have this as an expectation for students (Mr. Munce). This is an example of a “most specific goal” as it is a performance objective Specific to given Language Arts 297 courses and other courses requiring written assignments. Once a change is considered the board again reviews the proposal using theological philosophies consistent with the evangelical institution as a type of check and balance before the change is approved. Social forces have the power to make strong statements when there are changes in the culture. At CCS there are two types of changes in which forces can be grouped, they are as follows: changes in society, the learner, or curriculum theories. CCS has several forces within each of these groups. Changes in society have brought about issues of doctrine or theological beliefs. The CCS statement of faith in its eight points is s... evangelical in nature but neither restrictive, nor all encompassing of individual denominations. Mr. Linn, Department Chair for Bible, calls this evangelical approach, “plain vanilla evangelicalism.” He explained it to mean that CCS does not concern itself with doctrinal battles concerning eschatology, signs and gifts, eternal security, the mode of baptism, and choices in Bible translations. Mr. Nevada, the Assistant Superintendent of Educational Services stated that there are 600 churches involved in this non- denominational ministry. They take great pains not to infringe on churches by having little tolerance for denominational division. The point is to be inter-denominational in CCS’ curriculum approach and the curriculum must always be evaluated in light of this issue. Another social issue is equated with standardized, state, and national testing and standards. Mr. Snodgrass reported that CCS is itself influential in what is adopted at these levels and tries to keep abreast of the issues. However, sometimes it is important for CCS to adapt to changes for the sake of graduates and college entrance requirements. 298 L T " , - 7 1 The needs of the learner are a potential Social force which influences the curriculum. This is not an unwanted influence even though it is routinely evaluated in light of the primary forces. The first step in curriculum planning at CCS is to distribute and collect data concerning needs. This information comes fiom teachers, parents, community, alumni, and testing and is used by educators intent on providing alternatives. In providing for the needs of students, several special services have allowed more than the average-grade student to get involved in Christian education. Students are bussed to a particular CCS campus based on choice and need. An example of this case is with special education services, as only one campus offers this type of setting (Mr. Beans, a CCS elementary principal). However, CCS also provides honors courses, technology programming, junior achievement, a comprehensive music program, comprehensive art program, drama program, athletics, ministry opportunities, and mission trips (“CCS Information Packet”,‘2000). These programs are provided to meet the needs and desires of the culture. CCS is a flagship for other Christian schools, as such many of its personnel have been leaders in several controversial issues surrounding curriculum theories. There are several position papers that staff members have written from a Christian perspective: Outcomes Based Education and Whole Language are two of them. The school does investigate new ideas and often publishes a position paper once the idea has been piloted. This is the case with each of these initiatives. 299 ' T ? . m _ ? I The foundations of Christian education filters out unwanted influences. The corporate philosophy is a theological philosophy of education and it is influential to the purpose of Christian education at CCS. Unlike Omstein and Levine’s theory (1993), the social forces, though they may affect the curriculum process (Superintendent), do not have any such influence without the approval of the Board of Directors. Dr. Gleason states that CCS will not accept any state or federal funding so that the school is not bound to the secular government would provide oversight of such fimding. This is one example of the result of such board filtering of unwanted social forces. . In this way the system safeguards the curriculum process by starting with and ending with theology (Mr. Dawd). Mr. Dawd, the high school principal, stated that theology is extremely important in the development of curriculum. Though he admitted that the cuniculum development teams look at several outside things that influence the curriculum, he noted, “We keep current, but theology has greater impact.” In the same way Dr. Gleason noted that when considering curriculum changes the philosophy of the department is critical to decisions about all changes. The curriculum committee is responsible for the work of evaluation and review of new proposals and current practices. When their work is done they hand it over to the Educational Service Team (EST) reviews proposals in light of the primary influences on educational purposes: God’s Word, corporate philosophy, mission statement, and ministry goals. Both of these processes use previously approved rubrics to guide them through this process. 300 Within the curriculum-development process there are three rubrics that aid in the evaluation and review of curriculum. The first of which is the “Rubric for Evaluating a Course Outline, CCS, Inc.” that is used routinely to both evaluate and review newly written or previously used course outlines. The second rubric is the “Rubric for Evaluating Critical Learning Skills and Pupil Performance objectives, CCS, Inc.” This rubric likewise walks the committee through a previously established checklist. Finally, the “CCS, Inc., Guidelines for Evaluating Textbooks/Textbook Evaluation Form” has established a system for those to easily and consistently evaluate textbooks. Each of these rubrics are used repeatedly by administrators, curriculum specialists, and the board to evaluate and filter out unwanted forces that may influence strldents, and are likewise used to insure that those items that are believed necessary are included. The safeguards are not limited to the written curriculum but are also extended to the “living curriculum” and all those that are part of the educational process at CCS. Employees of CCS must recognize and support the corporate philosophy [Educational Philosophy], mission statement, and ministry goals (CCS Faculty/Staff Handbook, 1998, pp. 100-4—100-7). The curriculum process is dependent upon the use of the corporate philosophy, mission statement, and ministry goals for developing the curriculum (Curriculum Development Model and Curriculum Guide (Course of Study). Mr. Snodgrass, the superintendent/director of personnel states emphasized the lack of association with worldly pressures and the amount of guarding that was done to protect the school. Therefore, all employees are expected to sign a statement of faith and to make a declaration of ethical and moral integrity prior to consideration for hiring. 301 ' 1 1 ‘ t — i F T Each of these documents is found in the employee application for candidates to Sign. Additionally, a letter to every employment candidate states: Before your interview, you will need to read at least one of the books listed below. I. Still Educating for Eternig, Claude E. Schindler, Jr. and Pacheco Pyle, ACSI Publishers, Colorado Springs, CO. 2. The Philosophy of Christian School Education, Edited by Paul A. Kienel, ACSI, PO. Box 35097, Colorado Springs, CO 80935-3509, (800) 367- 0798. 3. Sowing for Excellence, Claude E. Schindler, Jr. with Pacheco Pyle, ACSI Publishers, Colorado Springs, CO (CCS, 2000). The state legislation on proficiency testing influences the creation of new classes in the high school, the sequencing of classes to accommodate testing periods, and the modification of some classes to include certain material. Mr. Stott, a high school principal, noted that at this time CCS has “decided to do the testing until it violates biblical principles.” However, in the future it may be determined that the state testing does violate a biblical principle. When that happens CCS may determine not to participate in the testing. This diagram points out the teaching forces that make-up the “living curriculum” will likely influence the curriculum, it also notes that such forces will be evaluated again in the end using theology as the guide. They will be evaluated by the theological philosophy of the institution before they are allowed to influence the purpose of education. The aims and goals and objectives that follow are then reconsidered for a 302 ° T — T — F second time to insure that it is in Went with the theological philosophy of CCS (Dawd). The secondary math department head, Mrs. Lovel, stated that the overall purpose is established in the sc0pe and sequence of the curriculum. The scope and sequence indicates the overall purpose of each grade level and course. The purpose of education is influenced by God’_sWord, the comrate philosophy, mission statement, and minim goals. Within the guidelines of God’s Word, the corporate philosophy, mission statement, and ministry goals, teachers become responsible for the curriculum at the classroom level. It is at this level that teachers react to society, the needs of the learner, and curriculum theory influences. CCS has previously established the general pggppses at the department level (see Figure 4.21 CCS Curriculum Development Model). This is the establishment of a department philosophy and goals and though it is constantly re- evaluated, it is not often changed. 1 The more smcific pmses of education are defined for all grades. These purposes are comparative to other grade levels in establishing the scope of the curriculum as well as the sequence or order for introducing, studying, and mastering the concepts. The more specific purposes of education have already been established through board approval. Using the “CCS, Inc., Five Step Curriculum Development Process” the more Specific purposes are reviewed, being the standard in the review. In the second step, department philosophies, goals, and scope and sequence are considered as a means to measure new proposals. Therefore, the purposes that can be influenced by social forces must be acceptable in light of these purposes. 303 " T _ . _ , . , . ‘ The most sgific pmses of education at CCS are defined in the critical learning skills, performance objectives, and course outlines. These purposes are covered in great detail for each course at CCS. Teachers are expected to closely follow the objectives as defined and refiain fiom bringing in their own desires without board approval. These purposes are likewise used as a standard for which to measure new proposals. Mr. Stott, a high school principal, noted that when teachers give way to “personal beats and desires” while teaching they become what is commonly called a “curriculum burden” by CCS curriculum specialist. The point being that “good curriculum does not rely on personal bent,” rather it relies on good planning and development. The secondary influences created through social forces are only influential on the purposes of education and not on the primary influences. The primary influences are sacred and unchanging. The curriculum committee can recommend changes as a result of these social influences on any of the purposes of education. Proposals are considered in light of the primary influences and must meet with the approval of the EST and the board before they are implemented. Once they are implemented they will be evaluated again by the EST and systematically by the curriculum committee. The Flow of Curriculum-development ActivityatCCS How CCS develops the curriculum (see Figure 4.24) is slightly different then that visualized by Armstrong (1989, p. 6). At CCS the source of knowledge is God. However, this may be via the Bible, Holy Spirit or Christian teachers. The second stage of curriculum-development activity is the selection of perspectives and for CCS the 304 perspectives are limited to the corporate philosophy, mission statement, and ministry goals. Thethirdstageisareactiontobothexternalandintemalinfluencesthatdrive curriculum decisions. This reaction results in the development of policies and procedures that create a system of checks and balances. The check and balance system is overseen by the Educational Service Team (EST) and the Board of Directors. Figure 4.24 The General Flow of Curriculum-development Activity at CCS CONSIDERATTON OF SOURCES SELECTION OF REACTION TO EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL God PERSPECTIVES INFLUENCES Via Bible CW Philosophy WW "I D ——-—-—D Via Holy Spirit MissionW Cuntarlunr Policies and ' r j r ' - r r e Via Christian Teachers m GM Board of Directors EST 4 I IDENTIFICATION OF A EVALUATION OF GENERAL PREPARATION OF THE THE CURRICULUM ORIENTATTON , CURRICULUM ’ PROPOSALS 0W Research EST ”'W" ”d God. W Board of Directors if EVALUATION OF THE CURRICULUM IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CURRICULUM We Review Teachers Teachers Board ofDirectors ETS 305 The general orientation of the curriculum is defined by department philosophies and goals. When this is identified in the fourth stage of curriculum-development activity the curriculum is ready to be prepared. The preparation of the curriculum has two phases, research and proposal. Once both phases are completed the next stage is an evaluation of the curriculum proposals that are carried out by EST and then by the Board of Directors. When the curriculum meets their approval, teachers are entrusted to implement it. The curriculum is systematically reviewed in the final stage on a regular i basis. This evaluation is the responsibility of teachers, EST, andpthe Board of Directors. God is the source of curriculum. God is the source of the curriculum. This is clearly stated in the mission statement. When it comes to curriculum decisions the process that has been visualized in a “CCS Curriculum Development Model” (see Figure 4.21) there are eleven stages. In this model: God’s Word is at the top of the eleven steps. Though everyone has input, the curriculum is evaluated in a standard way at several levels with the expressed desire to eliminate unwanted influences (CCS, Inc., Guidelines for Evaluating Textbooksl‘ Textbook Evaluation Form). The primary influences being God’s Word, corporate philosophies, mission statement, and ministry goals all of which stem fi'om the first, God’s Word. This primary influence is a filter used in the oversight of the curriculum process. Though God is the source of the curriculum it is through His Word that he is revealed or His truth is revealed. As already sited, one high school principal, Mr. Stott, equated biblical truth [God’s Word] to theology when asked; how is theology a factor 306 and/or influence in the development of curriculum? Stott explained that we “should look at curriculum with a ‘biblical filter’ .” However, to do this, educators need to be trained so in-service provides another safeguard to facilitate implementation and/or adjustment needed to insure success. However, this is not to diminish the work of the Holy Spirit or of teachers. The CCS curriculum process places the primary importance on God’s Word and the Holy Spirit but of equal importance are the teacher or the “living curriculum.” Their model points out the necessity for both the written curriculum and the living curriculum to be governed or lead by the Holy Spirit. The model is based on the Bible passage, John 16:13 which reads, “But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.” Because it is believed that the Holy Spirit lead in the curriculum activity process, the corporate philosophy and the living curriculum are placed in this model after the Holy Spirit but parallel to one another. CCS contends that, though God is the source of the curriculum, this curriculum reaches the students through the Bible, the Holy Spirit, and Christian teachers. Each of which are directly linked to God. Therefore, they are equated with the source of curriculum. The selection of mrsmctives sumrts the foundations of Christian education. There are three perspectives for viewing the CCS curriculum: Corporate Philosophy, Mission Statement, and Ministry Goals. Throughout the process of researching, proposal writing, implementation, and evaluation the curriculum is 307 considered using these perspectives. These perspectives are tied to presuppositions about God and how He reveals Himselfand truth. Likewise, these perspectives are tied to an understanding of the reason for education. Employees of CCS must recognize and support the corporate philosophy [educational philosophy], mission statement, and ministry goals (CCS Faculty/Sing Handbook, 1998, pp. 1004—100-7). The curriculum process is dependent upon the use of the corporate philosophy, mission statement, and ministry goals for developing the curriculum (Curriculum Development Model and Curriculum Guide (Course of Study). The Corporate Philosophy of CCS encompasses the view expressed in each of these statements and goals. The philosophical foundation for CCS is theological (CCS Faculty/Stag Handbook, pp. 100.4-100.7). The four-page Educational Philosophy of CCS is focused on the God-centered view of truth and man as presented in the Bible. The process of educating is seen as a means used by the Holy Spirit to bring the student into fellowship with God by the CCS environment. The authority to do this is given by God. There are twenty-seven aims and objectives that stem from this philosophy. Each is supported by scripture passages (e.g. “To teach that the Bible is the inspired and the only infallible authoritative Word of God, thus developing attitudes of love and respect toward it (II Tim. 3:15, 16, 17; II Pet. 1:20, 21)”) (p. 100-5). Their philosophy is therefore theologically based. _ The Mission Statement is the second perspective that is considered by CCS. This statement clearly outlines the goals and objectives of Christian education having 308 ‘ 1 . T a - . a _ 1 . . - r 1 considered the source. The statement also indicates how the source of curriculum is maintained through the Bible. It establishes the nwd for ministry based on the desires of God. CCS has gone firrther than the philosophy and mission in identifying ministry goals. The aspect of ministry as established in these goals identifies the task as a service to God and the church community. The selection of perspectives at CCS is focused on the corporate philosophy, mission statement, and ministry goals. The perspective is purely theological and from an evangelical perspective. The overall emphasis being that CCS is ministry minded and approaches the curriculum as such. CCS’ reaction to external and internal influences. Because the perspective for education is tied to a Christian philosophy, a mission statement that identifies God as the source of curriculum, and ministry goals that give direction to education, CCS must react to both external and internal influences in order to maintain this Christian perspective. Their reaction takes on the form of policies and procedures. These are divided into seven areas of policy that govern personnel: criteria for hiring, curriculum and evaluation, professional standards and enrichment, relationships, procedures, discipline, and the business office procedures and information (CCS Faculty/Staff Handbook). Those policies that pertain to curriculum matters are the criteria for hiring, curriculum and evaluation, professional standards and enrichment. The reason for such a reaction to external influences is best identified by Mr. Snodgrass, the superintendent/director of personnel who states, “We do not yield to pressures of the world.” Rather it is the duty of CCS to “guard zealously” the school. 309 Therefore, all employees are expected to sign a statement of faith and to make a declaration of ethical and moral integrity prior to consideration for hiring. Each of these documents is formd in the employee application for candidates to sign. Additionally, a letter to every employment candidate states, This material serves the purpose of orienting individuals to the perspective chosen by CCS. Additionally, they require personnel to sign the statement of faith that has eight points that emphasize absolute truth from God, a belief in the trinity, the deity of Jesus Christ, the sinfulness and need of regeneration by the Holy Spirit, the minisu'y of the l' 5 Holy Spirit, the resurrection of both the saved and the lost, the spiritual unity of believers, andthecreationofmanbeingadirectactofGod. Even though the Holy_ Spirit is over the written curriculum and the teacher model, principals evaluate teachers to guard the curriculum. The evaluation process guards against potential problems created by teachers in writing their own curriculum. A concern of the CCS administration in this larger setting is that teachers at times create a “curriculum burden.” One interview revealed that sometimes CCS is plagued with “teachers that do not see beyond the larger picture. They see only what they think is important” noted Mr. Nevada, the Assistant Superintendent of Educational Services, during his interview. The course of study and the evaluation system are in place to hold everyone accountable to the entire curriculum. . Part of the duty of the CCS organizational structure is safeguarding the curriculum against those who teach. This is accomplished not only through the application process but also through the evaluation process. The adopted process to 3l0 1 — . h evaluate teachers is known as the “Career Development: An Evaluation Process.” It is used to evaluate faculty members. It was obvious that the focus for any CCS procedure was that of evaluation and the purpose was to safeguard CCS from unwanted influences. Language Arts teacher, Mr. Munce noted that the Superintendent/Director. of Personnel, Mr. Snodgrass, had the gift of discernment when picking personnel. This went beyond policy and was more of a practice that was based on the belief that direction was given by the Holy Spirit through unanimous agreement. When asked to respond to this statement, Mr. Snodgrass responded by giving an example of the personnel committee’s procedure when interviewing faculty candidates. This committee hired individuals based on unity in the committee. If there was one person who did not feel comfortable with the candidate than they knew the Holy Spirit was not leading them toward that choice. Everyone made a conscious decision that if they were not in agreement then they would continue to look for an individual that had their total agreement. The gift of discernment was his willingness to rely on the committee’s agreement rather than his own personal preference. This is expressed in several stated objectives. One such objective states that CCS is “to assist parents in keeping up with the changing culture and its effect on the home and the implications for their children” (CCS Faculty/Staff Handbook, pp. 100-7). Supporting this view, Mr. Munce, a department head, stated that the desire of CCS is to “expose kids to purity.” The school is very much in tune with the world and the pressures on the youth in our society. This school works to counter that affect by creating a counter culture for the students. 3ll Rather than curriculum policies, there appear to be procedures for developing the curriculum and the “CCS Course Of Study” itself. There are several rubrics, and models that lay out procedures, for curriculum specialists to follow. These procedures are used to develop the written curriculum. There are several noted procedures that seem to be indicative of what might in some cases be referred to as policy, because teachers are expected to use them and abide by them as ifthey were policy. Items that are considered in the evaluation of textbooks are cost, appeal, durability, content, biblical emphasis, and questionable content. These six areas concern A support for Christian values, distorted content, any promotion of violence, world-views, false religions, and presentation of social or moral problems. Mr. Brush, one elementary principal, explained that ofien there are parents who do not want their children exposed to some material and for that reason. He stated, “We do not want to offend the weaker brother, especially at the elementary level.” Dr. Gleason, Director of Curriculum and Instruction, clarified that if at all possible a Christian text was considered but when that was not possible CCS has had graphics removed as well as questionable material so that a text could be used with minimal to. no concern. In addition to these concerns, the textbook form asks for a list of strengths/weaknesses, resources, and copyright information. Teachers are asked to consider the text’s readability and to gauge it with a provided readability graph. Each element insures CCS educators consider all the concerns for educating students in a spiritual as well as academic manner. The foundations of Christian education (Bible, theology, and philosophy) drive the curriculum decisions for CCS through the policies and procedures used in hiring 312 faculty and staff. This commitment to the institution’s philosophy and values is maintained by the Board of Directors’ oversight. ccs has established a detailed system of checks and balances that allow it to review and evaluate all things in light of its philosophy and values. There is an intentional effort by the board to insure that all individuals working with CCS are committed to preserving the core values of the evangelical tradition. CCS policies have been established to insure that the selection of personnel and new board members is handled in a manner that would discern between spiritual and non-spiritual values. These policies affect the selection of the “living curriculum” or teacher and protect the institution from external influences that afi'ect the curriculum in the selection of the board that maintains this identity. CCS is able to do this though policies by insuring the personnel committee’s ability to discern, having provided a system of checks and balances, and maintaining the institution’s integrity through proper oversight.- The system of checks and balances as it pertains to the review of curriculum is being carried out at CCS. All curriculum changes are discussed first by teachers. These teachers are then expected to provide a written proposal to the administrative team for consideration. The next step for curriculum proposals is for them to be reviewed by the Educational Service Team (EST), a team comprised of all administrators. Once curriculum proposals have approval from the EST, they are sent to the Board of Directors for final approval. This is a long process but a process that insures that the written curriculum meets with the criteria already established. The Director of Curriculum and Instruction is responsible for overseeing this entire process. 313 — - ' F 1 ‘ 7 ‘ ” — t i T Teachers are involved in this process from the very beginning to the final stage of initiation of change. To initiate change once approved by EST, the teachers must then produce the course of study that will accompany the change. It is the teachers who must implement the curriculum. To do this they are allowed to attend various in-service sessions or receive training to prepare them for implementation. Mrs. Goodman, the department head for grades kindergarten thru sixth grade math, stated that CCA does not experiment with their classes. Rather, they only do what they know has been proven to work, this applies even when writing their own math curriculum for the elementary grades. Teachers are very involved in the formation of curriculum and the recommendation of changes and modification. Even though the Holy Spirit is over the written curriculum and the teacher model, principals evaluate teachers to guard the curriculum. The evaluation process guards against potential problems created by teachers in writing their own curriculum. As already noted a concern of the CCS administration in this larger setting is that teachers at times create a “curriculum burden.” One interview revealed that sometimes CCS is plagued with “teachers that do not see beyond the larger picture. They see only what they think is important” noted Mr. Nevada, the Assistant Superintendent of Educational Services, during his interview. The course of study and the evaluation system are in place to hold everyone accountable to the entire curriculum. There are several external forces that influence CCS on the state and national level. Therefore, CCS has put in place a system of checks and balances that determines if any of these forces have any voice in what takes place at the school. The external influences are curriculum theory, finances, college requirements, testing, ACSI, the state, 3l4 businesses, national standards, parents, alumni, personal Christian convictions outside the norm of evangelicalism, the community, and publishers. Any influence tlmt potentially afi‘ects the curriculum at CCS is monitored. The purpose of such monitoring is to determine if the influences fall within the parameters of the educational goals of CCS. The Administrative Team and the Board of Directors both monitor influences. As a result, the CCS administration as a result is very active politically with the state and national legislators. This was evident in the needed change of my appointments with Mr. Snodgrass who was traveling to the capital for a meeting concerning legislations that being presented. CCS takes an active roll inthe laws that affect Christian schools in the state and nation as a way of countering the unwanted external forces that potentially influence CCS and other Christian schools. These external influences serve only to balance the internal ones. They help gauge the standards and expectations established by internal influences. Yet at the same time, CCS, while listening and even abiding by state standards, is ready to make a break if these influences cause them to relinquish any of their core values as held in their philosophy of education, mission statement, and belief statement. CCS places the importance of the “living curriculmn” as critical to their mission. The living curriculum is defined as the teacher model. They base this definition on the Bible passage, Luke 6:40: “A student is not above his teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like his teacher.” The point being that the teacher is a component of the cru'riculum that should not be taken lightly. For this reason the criteria for hiring focuses on the prospective teacher’s ability to model and express the values of CCS. 315 The CCS board of directors has the responsibility of overseeing the entire institution. Though there are several administrators, the board demanded that each administrator, individual school, and team of teachers adopt the same practice in accordance with CCS policy. The board of directors uses policy to define the expectations and to establish limits as guidelines. However, it is the responsibility of the teachers and the administrators to follow these guidelines and the responsibility of the board to oversee that. This elaborate system is a system of checks and balances. Everyone is expected to work together but the board takes responsibility in seeing that it is accomplished. Identification of a general orientation drives the mfiog, implementatiorg and evaluation of the curriculum. The general orientation of the curriculum is identified through the various departments. The process has been visualized in the “CCS curriculum Development Model” (see Figure 4.21) for curriculum committees to follow. Of the eleven stages to this model the curriculum committees must align the curriculum with the department philosophy and goals that have already been established. It is the Board of Directors that has developed this system of checks and balances, and it is the board that oversees that the system is maintained. The Board of Directors is responsible for establishing policy, and the ETS is responsible for carrying out the policies as is described by Mr. Stott, one high school principal. At CCS this is a tactic that will later serve to determine what type of reaction internal and external influences receive. 316 The sixth stage reacts to the proposed curriculum. This stage is a standard evaluation of the curriculum by comparison to the ministry goals, department philosophy, course description, objectives, and units with pupil performance objectives (PPO). If all the criteria at this level are met than the teachers implement the curriculum in the seventh stage. Teachers are primarily responsible of the implementation of the cturiculum. They are seen as part of the curriculum and are recognized as the “living curriculum.” CCS places the importance of the “living curriculum” as critical to their mission. The living curriculum is defined as the teacher model. As previously sited, they base this definition on the Bible passage, Luke 6:40: “A student is not above his teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like his teacher.” The point being that the teacher is a component of the curriculum and should have the ability to model and express the values of CCS. The final stage of the curriculum development process at CCS is the five-year cycle (Mr. Nevada) used to review the curriculum. This evaluation incorporates the work of teachers, administrators, and the board. CCS’ model is very similar to Arrnstrong’s model (1989) that also ends with a systematic review of the curriculum once it is adopted and implemented. This review insures CCS will constantly be evaluating student needs and checking to see if the changes they have implemented are working or not. Mrs. Goodman noted that changes are recommended based on research evaluation, the review of tests results, as well as other procedure forms used by CCS. With every curriculum decision there is an evaluation, or two, of student needs. Once this change is implemented, it is evaluated 317 to see if it is working. Systematically, portions of the total curriculum are reviewed yearly, in an efi‘ort to insure that student’s needs are being met. A Framework for Curriculum Planning at CCS In looking at Figure 4.4 (Beane, Toefer, and Alessi, 1986, p. 67) and comparing CCS’ own curriculum development model (see Figure 4.25), it is apparent that the decision screen through which curriculum is sifted is not the social sciences, but rather it is the corporate philosophy, mission statement, ministry goals, needs assessment, department philosophy and goals, and textbook exploration. CCS’ own model is linear as opposed to Beane, Toefer, and Alessi’(1986) model that is intentionally not. CCS’ model gives little attention to the social sciences except possibly in the area of the “Graded Course of Study”. Furthermore, CCS’ elaborate system of checks and balances does not intend to let any influence dictate what the school can or cannot do. It is clear that the distinctiveness of CCS is the theology that drives the curriculum and the organization’s system of checks and balances that maintains it. 318 Figure 4.25 CCS Curriculum Development Model CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT MODEL n c z a - n c r c z n o z g - n e m a g e w x GOD’S WORD 3 CORPORATE PHILOSOPHY AND MISSION STATEMENT 11 MINISTRY GOALS D NEEDS ASSESSMENT {:21 11 DEPARTMENT PHILOSOPHY AND GOALS I1 TEXTBOOK EXPLORATION l1 GRADED COURSE OF STUDY 11 INSERVICE FACULTY ll (Scope and Sequence. Critical Learning Skills, Performance Objectives. Course Outline. etc.) IMPLEMENT NEW COURSE OUTLINES AND TEXTBOOKS fl INSERVICE FACULTY fl NEEDS ASSESSMENT <:> 3l9 " “ l fl ‘ fi W Theology drives curriculum plmg‘. Admittedly God’s Word is the most important element of the cuniculum for CCS, however, it is the theology that is apparent in the corporate philosophy, mission statement, ministry goals that drives the curriculum planning. The Corporate Philosophy of CCS encompasses the view expressed in each of these statements and goals. The philosophy states: A The educational philosophy of Columbia Christian is based on a God-centered viewoftruthandmanaspresentedintheBible. SinceGodcreatedandsustains all things through His Son, Jesus Christ, the universe and all life are dynamically related to God and have the purpose of glorifying Him. This is pointedly true of man who was made in ,God’s image, different in kind fi'om all other creation, with the unique capacity to know and respond to God personally and voluntarily. . Because man is a sinner by nature and choice, however, he cannot, in this condition, know or honor God in his life. He can do this only being born again through receiving Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, and thus be enabled to do God’s will, which is the ultimate purpose of his life. The entire process of education is seen as a means used by the Holy spirit to bring the student into fellowship with God, to help him become strong or mighty in the spirit, to assist him in developing the mind of Christ, to train him in Christ-likeness, to teach him to respond like God and to help the student demonstrate Christ-like character qualities so that he can fulfill God’s total purpose for his life personally and vocationally. He is taught the Bible so he may understand God as well as His own true nature and function as God’s image. He 320 ' W ' E “ “ — r e is developed and related to God as a whole person, that is: spiritually, mentally, physically, and socially. He is taught to see all truth as God’s truth and to integrate it with, and interpret it by, God’s Word. He is educated as an individual with his own unique abilities and personality who learns to live and work with others at home, in the church and in a changing secular society. He interacts with and is taught by parent and teacher models who are themselves born again and have this perspective on life. The authority for such an education comes both from God’s command that children be taught to love God and place Him first in their lives and from the fact that parents are responsible for the total education and training of their children. At the parents’ request, the Christian school, along with the church, becomes a partner in giving this education. The Christian school is an extension of the local evangelical, fundamental church’s Christian education program, serving the parents in fulfilling their responsibility of educating the child (CCS Faculty/Staff Handbook, 1998, pp. 100-4-100-7). L The mission statement likewise identifies the importance of God’s Word, theology, and ministry. This leads into the importance of realizing that CCS is a ministry and as such it has several ministry goals. These goals are identified as primary forces that influence curriculum decisions. The philosophy, mission, and minim goals drive the aged course of stu_c_ly, The course of study having been established on the basis of the CCS corporate philosophy, mission statement, ministry goals, department philosophy and goals, a 321 ' Biblically integrated scope and sequence, course outline which includes textbooks, materials, resources, measurable objectives, and teaching strategies. God’s Word is at the top of this organizational structure and the Holy Spirit guiding both the written curriculum (course of study) and the teacher model (living curriculum). This provides a balance. The teacher and the course of study as a unit produce daily classroom lesson plans, assessment, intervention to reach the goals and objectives of the curriculum, and the student attainment of goals and objectives (CCS Bogd Policv Manual, Pp. 200-5). There are several tensions that drive the decision-making process. Needs assessment, textbook exploration, and in-service for faculty, create several tensions that drive the decision-making process at CCS. They are able to drive the process only as permitted by the organizational structure. In this way CCS maintains control over the curriculum. CCS surveys yearly to assess student and community needs yet the results of this survey are viewed in light of God’s Word, the corporate philosophy, mission statement, ministry goals, and department philosophy and goals. If the needs do not align themselves to the values and believes as asserted in these statements than they are not allowed to influence curriculum decisions. However, if they do align they have a significant ability to impact. Another example is textbook exploration. The tensions provided by this study may have several sub-points, such as cost, teacher resources, Christian teachings, academic material. The tensions are safeguarded by the institution. ‘ 322 Summply: CCS is a Case of Institutional Con_t_rol of Theolpgy In exploring a tentative conceptual framework of curriculum tensions (see Figure 4.26) for Columbia Christian Schools, Inc., the internal forces remain the theological values, and the community remains the external forces. Curriculum specialists interviewed recognized internal forces as driven by theology and defined them as: God’s Word, corporate philosophy, mission statement, ministry goals, student needs, course objectives, and critical learning skills. The external influences were defined as textbook publishers, the State legislation, business, national standards, parents, area Christian community, Distance Learning on the Web, State of Ohio charter, Ohio curriculum model, Columbia community, testing, finances, professional organizations, colleges, alumni, outside competition opportunities, curriculum theory, AC SI, and grants. The organizational structure provides the safeguards through policy, documentation, application, evaluation, and systematic review. This safeguard evaluates not only- the written curriculum as it is authored internally or externally by publishers but also the “living curriculum,” meaning those that are teaching at CCS. 323 Figure 4.26 A Tentative Conceptual Framework of Curriculum Tensions at CCS External Forces are Community Forces Critical Learning Skills 5‘“ WW Disturce [earning-0n the Web X Come Obiectives minim Parents AreaChristien Community \3 Ohio Curriculum Model Internal ¢ ACSI CCS Alumni=> <= ThJggml <=rguebr§titohgks Ministry Goals “m” Mission Staeruetrt Values Finances 6:? Course Objectives Needs Assessments % Testing /7 / Critical Inning Skills Curriculum \ Business 0'3"“ K Professional x Organizations Columbia Community National S I I Colleges Unique to CCS is the “Daniel Concept.” Daniel being a biblical character that lived in what the people of God considered the pagan culture of Babylon in the time of the Old Testament was a devout believer who was bold even toward the king of Babylon. The “Daniel Concept” focuses on the belief that CCS needed to play a larger role in exhibiting its own influence at the state and national level. Like the story of Daniel this is not popular or easy within the current culture that demands a separation of church and state. However, this is done through the activity of the teachers in writing and publishing 324 position papers on educational hot topics and through the presents of key administrators I who lobby on behalf of Christian school in general. When talking about the “Daniel Concept,” Dr. Gleason stated that CCS would “impact the Babylonian Culture” by representing Christ and not CCS. . Mr. Brush an elementary principal also spoke of the “Daniel Concept” and reported that it meant that Christian personnel from CCS would take a position on a committee at the State level to look at topics such as: Outcomes Based Education and biased questions on the Ohio Proficiency Test. The “Daniel Concept” is a Christian principal of “Going out into the world”(Mr. Brush). ' The driving forces behind the development of curriculum at CCS are linked to the theological philosophies adopted by the institution. There seem to be several things that have driven the curriculum as a result of the CCS corporate philosophy and they are: mission, statement of faith, ministry goals, department philosophies, and critical learning skills. However, the individuals have been the teachers, administrators, and the Board of Directors. There are numerous influences, but each (including teachers, administrators, and board members) has been evaluated by the same principles as the curriculum. Questions have been asked as to their ability to support and model the philosophy, evangelical theology, ministry goals, and objectives of critical learning skills. This has been done through an elaborate system of checks and balances. CCS is a well-established school that is concerned with providing the “living curriculum” as well as a written one that meets its standards. Yet, unique to this study, CCS is also concerned with the “curriculum burden” that is likely attached to the Living curriculum. CCS feels strongly that this burden must also be monitored and controlled. 325 1 fl ” T A W To do so it has a large administrative team is responsible for overseeing both the living and written curriculums of CCS. In addition to this, the Board of Directors is responsible for overseeing this administrative team for the same reasons. This oversight and evaluation has been established through the creation of an elaborate system of checks and balances. This system is maintained through written policies and procedures and the oversight of many individuals. Several themes, both major and minor, concerning the influences and forces that affect the curriculum process at CCS were noted through the interview process. Major themes that develop throughout the interview process were: what drives curriculum, philosophy and mission, the cuniculum development process, the role of board members, teachers, administration/directors, student needs, teacher needs, the State’s influence, textbooks, outside competitions, testing, God’s Word, critical learning skills, prayer, finances, professional organizations, college preparation, alumni, scope and sequence, curriculum theory, ACSI, theology, and the influence of business. These themes permeated the interview conversations. Other themes that seemed to come up, but were minor in comparison, were student interest, national standards, parents, curriculum theory, personal Christian convictions, community perspective, and outside competitions. CCS has a curriculum process that is Spurred on by God’s Word. In addition to this, the philosophy, mission statement, goals, critical learning Skills, and student needs drive the process. This school system guards every aspect of the system including what they identified as the “curriculum burden” (Superintendent) individuals teacher preference and bias. 326 CCS has an elaborate system of checks and balances. This is achieved through policies and procedures that have been established over a period of time. This system uses the work of teaming teachers, teaming administrators, and the Board of Directors to preserve what it holds dear. Specifically, CCS preserves the philosophy of education that is based onthetheological beliefs ofevangelicalism. . . ) ” a t g e r A L - r T { 0 . 327 CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS This study examined three schools accredited by the Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI) in an effort to answer the research question, “To what extend does evangelical theology guide or impact the curricular development in an evangelical school setting?” As a result of my examination three cases were written: The Case of Overfield Christian School (OCS), The Case of Eagle Lake Christian School (ELCS), and The Case of Columbia Christian Schools (CCS), Inc. The data that I drew on to construct the cases were gathered through site visits, interviews with curriculum specialists identified by the administrator, and the collection of school documents and curricular materials. All three schools are located in the Midwest Region and Ohio River Valley Region as designated by ACSI. As an educator and school administrator at several evangelical Christian schools, I have been concerned about how curricular decisions were made. I found few resources that helped me as an administrator and only anecdotal guidelines that assisted curriculum directors and teachers. This lack of resources (empirical understanding) for Christian educators leads to ineffective operating principles to guide curriculum development. Despite numerous public school studies on the influences that affect curriculum development few if any focus on the Christian school. ACSI the organization that has attempted to support K-12 schools in this endeavor. Yet, ACSI currently lacks sufficient information for educators on the topic of curriculum frameworks. This gap in the knowledge base, the focus of my study, has revealed a tension between internal influences (theology) and external influences (community) that Christian educators must 328 address before they can frame an effective curriculum decision-making model that is formded on Christian principles. The findings of this study examined how the tensions caused by these two forces affect the curriculum decisions in order to generate a framework that can be helpful to Christian school administrators. My contribution to ACSI is important because understanding how internal and external forces drive curriculum decision-making can help ACSI school leaders preserve the evangelical heritage. Hence this chapter has three purposes: (1) the identification of an emerging theoretical construct that most strongly defines the curriculum uniqueness of the decision-making process across the three K—l2 evangelical Christian schools; (2) a discussion of an emerging curriculum framework for ACSI schools; and (3) a discussion of next steps. An Emergent Theoretical Construct: “Safeguarding” Evangelicalism In the field of curriculum planning there have been significant contributions made by secular theorists including Omstein and Levine (1993), Armstrong (1989), Beane, Toepfer, and Alessi (1986). The case study comparison of three ACSI self-perpetuated board-run schools highlights both the similarities and the differences between schools. The key similarities are focused on the foundations of Christian education: biblical truth, philosophy of Christian education, and evangelical theology. These Similarities seem to emphasize the goal of these particular schools to preserve and maintain evangelical heritage through the socialization of students to a particular set of religious principles. This is accomplished through the organization’s written (formal) curricular policies and procedures. The three cases that ground this study help to understand the different 329 nuances of each school’s organizational practices, which include communication channels and styles, decision-making processes, role and task of teachers, parents, and others. Nonetheless, it is the desire of each of the three schools to allow the organizational culture, based in evangelical principles, to be in control of the curriculum. It is with the defining of that culture that differences were pronounced. When evaluating the curriculum decision-making process from Omstein and Levine’s theory (1993) it is evident that the schools consider the importance and ramifications of both internal (evangelical principles) and external (social) influences. What Omstein and Levine’s model (1993) missed that is integral to understanding the curriculum decision-making Process, is that the schools employ a filter that safeguards the values and beliefs of evangelical heritage and life. 330 Figure 5.] Matrix of Safeguarding Policies and Procedures Policy/Procedure § ELCS CCS FOR BUILDING AN ORGANIZATION CULTURE Board Member @lification 0 Agreement with written statements X Christian Character and reputation 0 o Orientation Personnel - Certification or Educational Recnlirements e Spiritual Requirements 0 Christian beliefs/ agreement with written statements 0 Character expectations X O Church involvement Student Policies Admissions Attendance Discipline Dress Code Academic Standards Activities X Life Style Curriculum Resources 0 Course of Study o Textbook Adoption/Evaluation X Library 0 Curriculum Review 0 Committee Work 0 0 0 Teacher Review Board Approval Administrative Review APPROVAL OF SOCIAL FORCES X State and National Testing and Frameworks Professional Organiutions Community Input Student Assessment X X X X X ACSI X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 331 Figure 5.1 demonstrates the breath of safeguarding across each of the three cases. This figure notes the various policies and procedures that make up the system of safeguarding. An analysis of the three schools in this study have determined that evangelical foundations are not an influence but rather a standard for beliefs or criteria that serves as a filter in curriculum decision-making processes. The concept of safeguarding suggests that there is “something to protect.” The data indicates that the purpose for safeguarding is to preserve what has been established as norm for the evangelical Christian community that is most ofien outlined in their philosophy and doctrinal statements. For example, the evangelical Christian community believes that the source of knowledge is God, that children should be taught by Christian teachers, parents are responsible for providing for their child’s education, and that faith and learning Should be integrated so that Jesus Christ becomes the focus of all that a child does. The three cases of schools each promote this concept as an evangelical norm. In building and maintaining an organizational culture that safeguards evangelical principles the selection of board members is extremely important. Because Board members are required to oversee, approve, and evaluate curriculum (OCS Bopapd Policy MM, 2100:2001; ELCS Board Policy Ma_n_u_al_) their selection must be aligned to the internal forces of the school culture. In every case, the selection process of policy makers fit the values safeguarded by the school. Policies that govern personnel, to include administration, teachers, and support staff, also safeguarded the organizational culture based in Christian beliefs. Individuals who did not meet or failed to continue to meet the standards were considered a threat to the institution’s core evangelical values, and often resulted in provisions for their release. Oversight in hiring, evaluation, and release has 332 been clearly outlined in personnel policies, thus, safeguarding institutional mission and purposes. At ELCS several documents provided evidence of oversight, i.e., the “Personnel Handbook,” “Policy Manual,” “Request for Reconsideration of Library Materials,” “General Considerations To Be Applied To The Selection of Any Literary Work”, “CCS, Inc., Guidelines for Evaluating Textbooks/Textbook Evaluation Form,” “Rubric for Evaluating a Course Outline, CCS, Inc.,” “Rubric for Evaluating Critical Learning Skills and Pupil Performance objectives, CCS, Inc,” and “CCS, Inc., Guidelines for Evaluating Textbooks/Textbook Evaluation Form.” In particular, this process of safeguarding in this case required, first, a committee screening, followed by the building principal’s approval, and finally a recommendation by the head administrator’s. Once these individuals had approved the decision, the board of directors would scrutinize the proposal and make their decision. Student policies also preserve and maintain the evangelical values and beliefs of the school. There are seven types of student policies: Admissions, Attendance, Discipline, School Dress Code, Academic Guidelines, Activities, and Health Safety. Of these seven, it was apparent that the admission policy and discipline policies (OCS Board Policy Manual, 4100:4002-4003; 4300. 4310: 4004-4006, ELCS Boprd POIIQ/ MM, and “CCSjnforrnation Packet”, 2000) had the most influence on the curriculum of the school. These policies safeguard the curriculum and require student behavior that is, to act in a Christian manner and conduct themselves accordingly. Safeguarding includes oversight of internal affairs as well as external pressures. For example, Dr. Simpson (an administrator) Stated that ELCS safeguarded against all 333 " ? r a e " - n a I ~ . n d M n i external influences, even those of the ACSI accreditation-process. Although, ELCS is open to what others think, e.g., looking at such things as the State fiamework for curriculum and testing, and the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), it is only afier subjecting these influences to thorough examination that the ELCS board consider integrating any standards into their current practice. One lead teacher explains: She [administrator] would take it to the board at the Board Meeting and say this is the new curriculum that first grade would like to use. We have to fill out a form of criteria as far as what spiritual value it has, how does it meet the needs of the first graders, and content of it, and its moral value for us and how we use it within the curriculum For all three schools in this study, the accreditation criteria affected the outcome somewhat, but not the decision-making process. After close scrutiny the ACSI- accreditation standards resulted in minor curricular changes. As a lead teacher explained: We really didn’t find anything major because we had really explored all of our options as far as curriculum . . . It was really just a matter of blending from one grade to another. And not, for example, when we went through everything that was taught with a fine-tooth comb to see where it was introduced, where is it reinforced, where should it be mastered. And then when we realized that this should be mastered by third grade, then it should be reinforced in second grade. But we already had the curriculum. We had the tools to do this. It was just a matter of fine-tuning. 334 An Emerging Curriculum Decision-making Framework for ACSI Schools Omstein and Levine’s work leads to understanding the evangelical purposes and influences that have affected the Christian school classrooms. This fiarnework (Figure 5.2) is used to answer the research question; “To what extent does evangelical theology guide or impact curricular development in an evangelical school setting?” Based on this study what was discovered is that there are five ways theology guides the curriculum (1) by setting a standard for the organization (2) by filtering out influences that do not comply with the evangelical beliefs and values, (3) theologically informing the purposes such as the aims and goals, (4) in that the curriculum content is theologically laden as God is in every subject, and (5) theology shapes the campus ethos or organizational culture through prayer, chapel, by providing a lens on reality that is distinctive, and also impacts the curriculum processes to the fullest extent as one of three foundations that safeguard the curriculum. This lens best describes the curriculum process that places theology as a first priority in these three schools e.g., philosophy, mission, vision, goals, purposes, governance, finance, teacher selection and evaluation, student admissions and needs, and textbook selection. In this way theology is central to the curriculum decision- making process. 335 Figure 5.2 The Purpose of Education and The Forces That Influence Them at Evangelical Schools Organizational Culture Social Forces Internal Influences External Influences of the are INFLUENCES ON EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES 0 Internal External 0 0 o 0 0 0 Governing Board Administrators Teachers Course of Study Needs Assessment 0 Studarts 0 MS 0 0 Community Requirements 0 0 0 0 0 0 . . 0 Curriculum Theory Finance College Requirements ACS] National/State Standards and testing Business Needs Alumni Parents Professional Organizations 0 Christian Convictions outside the norm of evangelicalism Community e Textbook Publishers _ a . L — “ - s ' W - a - . . g a A SAFEGUARD Foundations of ' (Filter) Christian Education 1 0 o o Biblical Theological Philosophical GENERAL PURPOSES Aims as defined by: Mission, Vision, or Purpose Statements or Educational or Ministry Goals MORE SPECIFIC Goals: performance Objectives, Critical Learning Skills, Scope PURPOSES and Sequence, and a Graded Course of Study MOST SPECIFIC PURPOSES Objectives: Course Descriptions and Objectives and Course Outline l OVERSI‘I‘E Board, Administration, Teachers, and Committee 336 Theology sets a standard for the organization as it influences the mission, vision, purpose, doctrine, and ministry goals of the organization. Likewise, it is important in the effort to filter out influences that do not comply with the evangelical beliefs and values. As already established, theology informs the purposes such as the aims and goals of the institution. Theology is an interpretive source of the curriculum content that is laden with the teachings about God is in every subject. Finally, theology shapes the campus ethos or organizational culture as a guiding expectation about the culture and ministry of the school. Theology is involved at every level and serves as a safeguard to the curriculum [ i. 7 i Forces that Influence The influences for these evangelical schools are two: the internal influence of the organizational culture and external influence of social forces. By comparing the three cases it is realized that the organizational culture is an internal influence that is responsible for preserving and maintaining beliefs and values, as such, it exerts more power once evaluated and filtered as a means of preservation. Social forces are external influences that are the result of the school’s interaction with the community at large. These influences are equally important, however, they do not carry as much influence or power in the curriculum decision-making process because they are external. External influences are those influences that may or may not be allowed to have some bearing on the institution but as a result of social forces not necessarily compatible to the Bible, theology, and philosophy of these schools. These forces likewise may not be compatible to other elements of the organizational culture that have been accepted at some point, e. g. course of Study and educational and ministry goals. Like all the internal influences of the 337 organizational culture, the external influences that are social forces are filtered as a means of safeguarding evangelical beliefs and values. However, external influences might not be accepted as part of the organizational culture as determined by the evaluation, and thereareinstanceswhereexternal influencesareallowedtoafi‘ectthe institutionaspart of the culture, and this is not necessarily consistent between cases. Figure 5.2 organizes the data from the three cases showing how each school categorized influences according to their internal or external placement. The foundations are internal and in turn determine the organizational culture that is also internal. However, social forces that are by nature external are sometimes considered for acceptance as internal forces. In which case, they may be justified or approved by the organizational culture to be important and not in conflict with biblical truth, evangelical theology, or the philosophy of Christian education. The internal force is the stronger influence, a concept that is described by Etzioni. Etzioni (in Majchr'zak, 1984) considered the internal force as the stronger influence for which the organizational structure was responsible for protecting. In these three cases preserving and maintaining these beliefs and values is accomplished through a process called safegu_a_r_ding. This process is an evaluation based on the foundations of Christian education: biblical truth, evangelical theology, and a philosophy of Christian education. In particular the process is accomplished through the development of policy and procedures. However, the internal force for evangelical Christian schools is the organizational culture and not the structure as was believed at the start of this project. Etzioni maintained in that all forces [influences] represent separate social positions and they 338 actually compliment each other when dealt with and ultimately faced by educators. The internal forces come from the governing board, superintendent, administrators, teachers, committees, adopted courses of study, needs assessment, the Daniel Concept (the school’s influence on the commrmity). Based on this idea, the internal influence . represents the school’s organizational culture that provides a social force and position. 339 Figure 5.3 Matrix of Influences Influences . Overfield Eagle Lake Columbia (Dlmnral Force y. (E) External Force Christian Christian Christian School School Schools Biblical Truth God’s Word I I I Evangelical Theological Direction through Prayer I I Theoltgy I I Philosophy of Christian Education Philosophical Foundations of Christian Education I I I Mission Statement I I I Purpose 1 I I Vision I Orgflizational Culture Course of Study I I I Process of Systematic Curriculum Review I I l Boards Role in Decision Making 1 I I Administrator/ Principal’s Role in Decision Making I l l Teacher’s Role in Decision Making I I I Social Forces Curriculum Theory IE IE IE Finances IE IE IE Testing IE IE IE Student’ Needs IE IE IE Student Interest IE IE IE College Requirements E E E ACSI E E E Influence of State Parents Influence of Business Influence of the Nation Influence of Professional Organizations Personal Christian convictions outside the norm Christian Text book companies Community Perspective E E E E E E E E E E E E E E Alumni E E E E E E E E E E E E 340 Internal forces are identified through an evaluation and acceptance that is determined by alignment with biblical truth, philosophy of Christian education, and evangelical theology: the foundations of Christian education. Once a force is determined to be internal it is part of the organizational culture, e.g. board members selection, teachers, students, courses of study, student needs, parent and community interests, afliliations such as ACSI or start chartering. External forces are also examined and though they may be influential they may not be accepted as internal forces that are the most influential. There is some variance between institutions as the organizational ~35 3 culture determines. The external community’s influence is everything outside and is defined by position as it relates to the foundation of Christian education. External forces are those influences that are not internal. It is the internal forces that exert the most influence in curriculum decisions. The school’s foundation determines whether values are on the inside or outside. Curriculum decisions are made as a result of both forces actually working to support the balloon by countering or working against each other. The external force is the community’s influence. Only through a process of filtering forces could an external force become and internal influence. This filter is comprised of biblical, theological, and philosophical beliefs and values, which are the foundations of Christian education. As such they are influenced by many forces which necessitates them being overseen by the organizational culture. Though the allowable impact of which each of these schools grants any influence differs; each of the schools hold to the belief that all influences should be 34] H ” r 5 “ - e e r F considered and it is the job of the school organizational culture to oversee those influences. In order to preserve the evangelical character of the institution, if an influence poses a thretu to the school’s philosophy or theology than it is definitely an external influence. As such, measures are used to extract their ability to have an impact. Where as internal influences are allowed to have a significant amount of influence, the importance and ramifications of providing oversight to both internal and external influences on a continual basis is vital to maintaining evangelical beliefs and values. Organizational Culture The board is solely responsible for determining the mission and vision of the institution as well as the general goals and purposes of education and ministry. Yet, many of the curriculum decision are determined by the organizational culture that is comprised of teachers, committees, parents, students, board, and others. It is clear that the purpose of education is influence the most by the organizational culture of the evangelical Christian school. The forces within this organizational culture are those of the governing board, administrators, teachers, the approved course of study, and needs assessment results. They exert the most influential force as they are allowed to be internal forces that serve to carry out and maintain the general purposes of the institution. They are given their power to influence having met the standards of the foundations of Christian education and having accepted the responsibility of overseeing the core beliefs and values of the schools. 342 Primary to the functioning of the organization is the responsibility of the self- perpetuated board in defining the purposes of the school. The purposes of education are seen in three ways: generally, more specifically, and most specifically. The general purposes are defined through statements and goals, as defined by the mission, vision, and/or purpose statements or in the educational or ministry goals. Though how this is identified for each school is not distinct for any school, it is clear that the general purposes are identified for evangelical Christian schools by the organizational structure. The more specific goals as well as the most specific goals are characteristic of the curriculum planning, writing, and implementation. Again, different schools will identify these goals in unique ways, though in principal they are the same. The more specific goals are characteristic of a systemic understanding of the goals of the curriculum. They often map the curriculum by department, grade levels, and school wide. The most specific goals, however, are identified at the level of a specific grade, course, and units. Both of these types of goals produce the written curriculum. One identified internal influence is that of the curriculum committee that is directly related to administrators, teachers, students, and sometimes parents. The curriculum work on a regular basis takes place with a curriculum committee. These committees typically do the ‘leg work’ for this task. The first step of this work is identifying student needs; that is followed by decisions concerning how to best address those needs. Decisions concerning the curriculum are made for various reasons but are usually based on a needs assessment. The second step is to develop the actual curriculum plan. This process may vary slightly with schools because of a particular orientation yet the form is the same in that it is a general picture of the department philosophy and goals, 343 l ‘ l resources, and a detailed course of study. The third step is to supply necessary in-service tofacultysothattheyareequippedtousethecurriculum. Thesethreestepsare preparation steps for curriculum development. Once decisions concerning the course of study, policy, procedures, students, and staff are made it is the responsibility of the organizational culture to determine how to preserve and maintain those decisions. The foundation for curriculum planning is the foundation of Christian education. This is characterized by a biblical base, evangelical theological interpretation, and philosophy in keeping of Christian beliefs and values. This foundation supports the general objectives of the institution that are often stated in school philosophy statements, vision statements, mission statement, and purpose statements. However, these goals are sometimes found in the statement of faith or a combination of them all. In turn the foundation for curriculum planning is realized in the meeting of both ministry and educational goals for the evangelical Christian school. Systematically, each of these items are reviewed, evaluated, studied, and changed by elements of the organizational culture. The organizational culture continues to influence the school by providing oversight of all the policies and procedures that have been established to maintain the internal force that is characterized by the foundations of Christian education. Though initially and through the process of designing cuniculum it is noted that the purposes of education are influenced by the organizational culture that culture provides final oversight through evaluation and review. Curriculum is ultimately overseen by the organizational culture. Oversight at all three schools is provided through a systematic review of the curriculum. This oversight 344 I : 4 j : - o - § . I ; o t is the responsibility of teachers, committees, and administrators who answer to the board. In the three cases of evangelical Christian schools it was very clear that the reaction to all influences was the development of policies and procedures. The organizational culture was responsible for this duty and likewise for overseeing the policy and procedures. Though the board in every case had final authority they always acted on the advise of committees, teachers, and administrators. The policies preserved the beliefs and values of evangelicalism; while the procedures provides rubrics for guides to evaluation, review, and creation within the curriculum process. SocigLForces In the evangelical Christian school decisions are screened based on their ability to influence, in maintaining and preserving the evangelical Christian identity that is characterized by core beliefs and values. The process of curriculum development and planning should be well thought out and an institutional concern. In the three cases the involvement of the board in this process as well was the enormous influence of the teacher was evident. However, the evangelical Christian school was also characterized by a deep since of responsibility toward maintaining the beliefs and values of the faith. This was accomplished in all three cases because of planning. The model labels the work of the board in defining the foundations, general objectives, and goals. This aspect of the planning is less likely to change and as a result the systematic review of curriculum (every five years) is the work of a curriculum committee and not that of the board. 345 Curriculum theory represents a very board field of understanding. All three schools had their teachers involved in learning more about this area for the purpose of bettering their teaching methods. However, all three schools had biases towards curriculum theory. Theory is considered a tool for teachers to use. Certain theories met with agreement such as phonic based reading grow and multiple-intelligence, but each of these schools emphasized their speculation and reserve where curriculum theory is concerned. This preparation is followed by two steps, which insure the success of curriculum. First, an immediate evaluation is completed to assess the needs of students are being met as planned with the curriculum changes, that teachers have been sufficiently oriented and prepared, and that there are adequate resources for teaching and reinforcing the curriculum. Second, all curriculum is reviewed in light of a needs assessment every five years. This allows for the necessary review of curriculum, in put form various sources, budgetary planning, and time to evaluate. These final steps are crucial to maintaining the curricultun in the evangelical Christian school. Influences that are Both Internal and External In the area of finance each school noted that the ability to afi'ord curriculum ideas was an influence. This was the internal influence. Finances are identified as external influence, they are representative of individuals not directly related to the institution such as the following: foundations, grants, and State monies. For this reason finance is seen as both an internal and external influence on the three organizations. 346 What curriculum theory and finance have in common is the fact that in these three cases they were examples of social forces that exhibited some internal influence on these schools. Their influence was permitted by the organization and in particular the board of directors. Though their influence is seen as external it was accepted and allowable as there was not perception of threat to biblical truth, theology, or philosophy of the schools in their instance. The three cases maintained that there are influences as a result of social forces that afi'ect the purpose of education. The typical influences for evangelical Christian schools are curriculum theory, finance, college requirements, ACSI, national/state standards and testing, business needs, alumni, parents, professional organizations, Christian convictions outside the norm of evangelicalism, community, and textbook publishers. These social forces influence the school only as allowed by the school itself. Theoretical Implications that Require Additional Attention It is clear that for these three Christian schools the evangelical heritage is maintained through a system of safeguards. That system is the evangelical culture itself, the very foundations of Christian education that are based on theology, philosophy of Christian education and on biblical standards. What was discovered is that the system is culturally maintained through the foundations. Policy and procedures provided the guidelines that are maintained through the board, personnel, and community continual oversight, evaluation, and review of the curriculum process. However, this research is not a representative sampling of ACSI schools, though a framework has been identified further research needs to test the emerging theory in numerous ways. 347 ' ,; Knowing this there are four major needs for firrther research and inquiry. First, there should be a closer scrutiny of ACSI schools, and a representative sampling. Second, further testing of this framework as well as others in order to better understand evangelical schools. Third, data should be studied concerning the impact of the decision- making process on content and pedagogy. Fourth, this same research could be applied universally to other types of schools, e.g. both Jewish and Catholic schools. a The intricate practice of safeguarding the evangelical heritage needs to be examined more closely as to the dynamics of the organizational culture, e.g., board, personnel, students, community. Likewise, the selection and defining of policies and procedures as well as purposes and goals for the organization should be scrutinized. In addition to this understanding of the safeguarding process, its effectiveness and affect on the educational processes should be studied. Further research will bring clarity to curriculum decision-making processes for curriculum planners as to how internal and external forces influence the school organization. The need, value, and character of a safeguarding system that maintains the evangelical heritage and its beliefs and values provide a tool for maintaining the evangelical culture. This piece of information is valuable to school leaders who are who are entrusted with the responsibility of maintaining the evangelical identity as well as overseeing the purposes and general aims of the institution. Such information will be valuable to curriculum planners as evangelical schools are in a unique position that places them at the grass root level for decisions. Evangelical schools have very few standards at the state or national level that they are required to meet. In essence curriculum planners often write their own curriculum, as there are 348 limited resources and few pre-packaged materials. These individuals require an understanding of the foundations, orientation, and sources of curriculum for the evangelical school. Thisisfirrtheraugmented bythefactthatthis researchrevealedthatthereisa major need for the development of sound textbooks and resources that reflect excellent academics as well as evangelical beliefs and values. It was made apparent that there is a growing need for secondary textbooks that represent both the evangelical philosophies and meet the expectations of academic excellence. Each ‘of the schools pointed out the weaknesses of Christian publishers to an evangelical perspective. Religious textbooks are generally of two types: representing a specific church background with biases or lacking in an understanding of the Christian world-view and seemingly very secular. Those textbooks that are evangelical in their approach to Christian education often lack the advanced academic material for upper level classes. In many cases, there are no textbook series. Curriculum planners are left to their own resources and creative works. Though this research brings understanding to teachers as to how what they teach best reflects the foundations of Christian education teacher likewise need to understand how they can negotiate outside values into the process within this model. Often times it is the teacher who initiates change in the evangelical school curriculum. They need a grass root understanding of the foundations and how they are key to the curriculum. In the same way parents and students who benefit as their desires and needs are assessed, can better understand the influence of the foundations of education on the curriculum. They can also better negotiate important social values into the process within this model with this new understanding. Teachers in the evangelical school need to know 349 how they fit into the curriculum decision-making process and this framework brings clarity and understanding to that concept. Additional research will only bring a better understanding of how all can negociate those needs. Finally, there are not any articulated frameworks for ACSI organizations or leaders of particular schools (i.e. Jewish and Catholic). These fi'ameworks help with clarity and the building of a better understanding of the issues surrounding curriculum decision-making. In particular, answering questions about influences that drive curriculum decisions. Evangelical educators often find themselves torn between the secular community and the social forces that exert pressure and the evangelical culture that is key to the purposes and goals of the institution. This framework provides clarity and understanding of how these influences are identified and how the institution filters out unwanted influences that are in conflict with evangelical beliefs and values. 350 I ii. ’ E ‘ BIBLIOGRAPHY ACSI. (December 8, 1999)a. Association of Christian Schools International Information and Available Resources. [Online] Available http://wwwacsiorgj. . (1999)b. Reaching for Excellence Thropgp Accreditation: An introduction pp Q; ACSI Proces_§. Colorado Springs, CO: ACSI. . (1998). Association of Christian Schools International: 19991ntemational Membership Directory. Colorado Springs, CO: ACSI. Apple, M. W. (Jan. 1983). Curriculum in the year 2000: Tensions and possibilities. 1_’_hi_ Delta Lappap, 64(5), 321-26. Armstrong, D. G. (1989). Developing and Documenting the Curriculum. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Beane, J. A., Toepfer, C. G., Jr., and Alessi, S. J ., Jr. (1986). Curriculum Planning and Development. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, Inc. Becker, H. (1932). Svstemptic Sociology. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons. Behar, L. and Omstein, A. (Nov. 1992). An overview of curriculum: The theory and practice. NASSP Bullgtr_n,' 76 (547), 32-44. Berliner, D. C. (1997, Spring). Educational psychology meets the Christian right: Differing views of children, schooling, teaching, and learning. Teacher College Record 98 (3), 381-416. Beyer, L. E. and Apple, M. W.(Eds.). (1988). The Curriculum: Problemp. Politics, and Possibilities. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Bezzina, M. and others (1996, October). Shared Christian Praxis as a Basis for Religious Education Curriculum: The Parramatta expeiience (Available from ERIC Document Reproduction Service No ED401266 Note: 22 p. Evaluation Report, 142; Conference Paper, 150). Paper presented at the Annual Conference of The Australian Association for Religious Education in Southport, Australia. Bolrnan, L. G. and Deal, T. E. (1991). Reframing Organizations: Artistry. Choice, and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Bower, R. K. (1964). Administering Christian Education: Principles of Administration for Ministers and Christian Leaders. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 351 Boys, M. C. (1989). Educating in Faith: Mag and Visions. San Francisco: Harper Row, Publishers. Bradley, K. (1994, Spring). The faith-learning integration movement in Christian higher education: Slogan or substance? Journal of Rmh on Christian Educatiop, 3 (1), 13-33. Burgess, H. W. (1975). An Invigtion to Religious Education. Birmingham, AL: Religious Education Press. Burgess, H. W. (1996). Models of Religious Education: Theog and Practice in Historical and Contempgm Persmctive. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books. Butler, J. D. (1962). Religious Education: The Fofltions and Practice of Nurture. New York, NY: Harper and Row. Byme, H. W. (1977). A Christian Approach to Education. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House. Campbell, R. and Mazzoni, T. (1976). State Policy making for the Public Schools. Berkeley, CA: McCutcheon. Chadwick, R. (1983). Christian school education. In K. Gangel (Ed.). Toward a Harmony of Faith and Learning: Eggs on Bible College Curriculum. Farrnington Hills, MI: William Tyndale College Press. Connelly, F. M. and Clandinin, D. J. (1988). Embers a_s Curriculpm Planners: Narratives of Experience. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Combleth, C. (1990). C_urriculam in Context. New York, NY: The Palmer Press. Cremin, L. A. (1977)._T_radition_s of American Education. New York, NY: Basic Books. Daniel, E. and Wade, J. W. (Eds). (1999). Estep, J. R., Jr. “Philosophical-historical foundations of Christian education.” Foundations for Christian Education. Joplin, MO: College Press. Doll, R. C. (1992). Curriculum lmpmvement: Decision Making and Process (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Elazar, D. (1984). American Federalism (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Harper and Row. Ellingsen, M. (1988). The Evangelical Movement: Growth. Impact. Controversy, Dialog. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House. 352 Estep, J. R., Jr. (1998, Fall). Faith as the transformer of learning: Toward an evangelical approach to faith-learning integration in Christian higher education. Christian Education Journal 2(2), 59-76. Estep, J. R., Jr. (1999). [Dis]Integration: Faith and learning in the Bible college cuniculum. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the American Association of Bible Colleges (A. A. B. C.). Virginia Beach, VA. Ford, L. (1991). A Curriculum Desigp Manual for Theological Education. Nashville, TN: Broadman Press. Fowler, 8., Van Brummelen, H. W., and Van Dyk J. (1990). Christian Schoolmg' : Education for Freedom. Republic of South Africa: Potchefstroom University for Christian Higher Education. Fuhrman, S. 1-1. and Malen, B. (Eds). (1991). The Politics of Curriculum and Testing. New York, NY: The Falmer Press. Fullan, M. G. and Steigelbauer, S. (1991). The New Meaning of Educational Change (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press. Gaebeleirr, F. E. (1968). The Pattern of God’alruth: Problems of Integm'on in Christian Education. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Gall, M. D., W.R. Borg, and J. P. Gall (1996). Educational Regarch: An Introduction (6th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longrnan Publishers. Gangel, K. (1981). Building Leaders for Church Education. Chicago: Moody Press. Gangel, K. and Benson, W. (1983). Christian Education: Its Histogy and Philosophy. Chicago: Moody Press. Garms, W., Guthrie, J ., and Pierce L. (1978). School Finance: The Economics and mlitics of Education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Getz, G. A. (1974). smmng the Focus of the Church. Chicago, IL: Moody. Gibbs, E. S. (Ed). (1992). A Reader in Christian Education: Foundations and Basic Pmtives. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House. Goodlad, J. I. and Richter, M. N., Jr., (1977). Decisions and levels of Decision-Making: Process and Data-Sources. Curriculum and Evaluation. Bellack, A. A. and Kliebard, H. M. (eds.). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing Corporation. Gove, S. K. and Wirt, F. M. (1976). Political Scienceand School Politics. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. 353 Graendorf, W. G. (Ed). (1981). Introduction to Biblical Christian Education. Chicago, IL: Moody Press. Grant, S. G. (Fall 1997). A policy at odds with itself: The tension between Constructivist and traditional views in the New York State Social Studies Framework. Journal of Curriculum and Sum‘sion (1), 92-113. Halford, J. M. (Dec.1998 and Jan.1999) A call for proactive policies on religion. Educational Leadership, 88. Harris, M. (1989). Fashion Me a People: Curriculum in the Church. Louisville, KY: John Knox Press. Hass, G. and Parkay, F. w. (13¢). (1993). Curriculum Pl ' : A New A ach. (6th ed). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. ' .g Hlebowitsh, P. S. (1993). Radical Curriculum Theog ReconsideredpA Historical Approach. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Homes, M. J. (1971). Th__e____ K-12 Curriculum Directorrn Michigan: His Characteristics and His self-mmeptions of Leader Behavior with respect to Staff Development. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. Iannaccone, L. (1967). Politics in Education. New York, NY: Center for Applied Research in Education. Iannaccone, L. and Lutz, F. W. (1970). Politics, Power and Policy: The Govemingpf Local School Districts. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company. Kahn, R. and Cannell, C. (1957). The Dma_n_rics of Interviewing. New York, NY: John Wiley. Kaplan, G. R. (1994, May). Shotgun wedding: Notes on public education’s encounter with the new Christian right. Phi Delta Kappan, 75 (9), Kl-K12. Keenan, D. J. (1998). Curriculum Development for Christian Schools: Understanding and _Irpplementing effective curriculum Decisions. Colorado Springs, CO: Association of Christian Schools International. Kienel, P. A. (n.d.). “Patterns of organization and procedure for Christian school Boards.” Starting a Christian School?: Models of articles of Incomration and By Laws for Youflew Schppl. Colorado Springs, CO: The Association of Christian Schools International Publication. Kienel, P. A. (Ed). (1978). The Philosophy of Christian School Education. Whittier, CA: Association of Christian Schools International. 354 Kimball, R. B. (1975). Recent Research in Curriculm. Paper presented to the Annual 3 Meeting of the Northeast Educational Research Association (6th Ellenville, New York, October 30, 1975). Kirst, M. W. and Walker, F. W. (1971, December). An analysis of currrculum policy- makingW6) 479-509 Washington. D C: American Educational Research Association. Kirst, M. W. and Walker, D. F. (1972). An analysis of curriculum policy-making. In J. E. Bruno (Ed), Emeggm'g lssues in Edupatiop: Policy Implicatiog for Schools (pp. 161-194). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Knight, G. R. (1980). Philosophy Ad Education: An Iptroduction in Christian Persmstive. Berrien Springs, Ml: Andrews University Press. Knight, G. R. (1982). Issues and Alternatives in Educational Philosophy. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press. Knight, H. H., 111. (1997). A Future For Truth: Evangelical Theology in aPostmodern World. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press. LeBar, L. (1995). Education Thaals Christian (Rev. ed). Wheaton, IL: Scripture Press Publications Inc. Labaree, D. F. (1999, May 19). The chronic failure of curriculum reform, _E____ducation Wee—_k (pp. 42-44). Bethesda, MD. Education Week. Lee, J. M. (1973). The Flow of Religious Instruction: A Social Science Approagh. Birmingham, AL: religious Education Press. Lee, J. M. (1985). The Content of Religious Education: A Social Science Approaph. Birmingham, AL: Religious education Press Inc. Little, S. (1961). The Role of the Biblern ContemmraryChristian Education. Richmond, VA: John Knox Press. Lockerbie, D. B. (1994). A Passion For Learning: The History of Christian Tho_ught on Education. Chicago, IL: Moody Press. Lunenburg. F. C. and Omstein, A. C. (1996). Educational Administration: Concepts and Practices (2nd ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Lutz, F. and Men, C. (1992). The Politics of School/Communig Relations. New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University. 355 Maffet, G. J. and Dye, C. M. (1985). The Educational Thopglrt of Cornelius Van Til: Philosophical Foundations of the Contemmm Christian School Movement. A shortened version of a paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-Westem Educational Research Association (Chicago, IL, September 27-29, 1984). Majchrzak, A. (1984). Methods for Policy Rmh: Applied Social Research Method Series Vol 3 Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. Marsden, G. (1991). Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. Marsden, G. (1997). The Outrageous Idea of Christian Scholarship. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Marsh, D., Day, C., Hannay, L., and McCutcheon, G. (1990). Reconceptualizing School- based Curriculum Development New York, NY: The Falmer Press. Marshall, C. (1985). Appropriate criteria of trustworthiness and goodness for qualitative research on education organizations. Qualily and Qu_aptig, 19, 353-3 73. Marshall, C. (1987). Remrt to the Vanderbilt Policy Education Committee. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University. Marshall, C., Mitchell, D., and Wirt, F. (1989). Culture and Education Policy in the American States. New York, NY: The Palmer Press. Marshall, C. and Rossman, G. (1999). Desigplng Qualitative Research (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Martin, D. S., Glatthom, A., Winters, M., and Saif, P.(1989). Curriculum Leadership: Case Studies for Program Practitioners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. McNeil, J. D. (1985). Curriculum: A Comprehensive Introduction (3rd ed). Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company. McNeil, J. D. (1996). Curriculum: A Comprehensive Introdpction (5th ed). New York, NY: Harper Collins College Publishers. Miller, R. C. (1961). Christian Nurture and the Church. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Miller, R. C. (Ed). (1995). Theologles of Religious Education. Birmingham, AL: Religious Education Press. 356 ' .3 Moore, A. J. (Ed). (1989). Religious Education asrSocial Transformation. Birmingham, AL: Religious Education Press. Moore, J. R. (1993). A handout: “Theology and its influences on educational practice.” Chicago, IL: Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. Muncey, D. E. and McQuillan, P. J. (1996). Reform and Resistance in Schools and Classrooms: An Ethnoggphic View of the Coalition of Essential Schools. New Haven, MA: Yale University Press. Nasman, D. (1993, October). Combating the religious right in San Diego County. School Administrator 50(9), 28-30. Nelsen, F. C. (1987). Public Schools: An Evangelical Appraisal. Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Company. Nelson, A. (1990). Curriculum Desigp Technigues. Dubuque, IA Wm. C. Brown Publishers. Nias, J ., Southworth, G., and Campbell, P. (1992). Whole School Curriculum Development in the PM School. Washington, DC: The Falmer Press. Niebuhr, H. R. (1951). Christ and Culm. New York, NY: Harper and Row. Noll, M. (1994). The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans. Omstein, A. C. and Hunkins, F. (1993). Curricplpm: Foundations, Principles and Issues (2“ ed). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Omstein, A. C. and Levine, D. U. (1993). Foundations of Education. (5th ed). Boston, MA: Houghton Mif’flin Company. Patton, M. ‘Q. (1990). Miamive Research and Eva1_uation Methods (2nd ed). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Pazmifio, R. W. (1988). Foundational Issues in Christ_ia_n Education: An Introduction in Evangelical Perspective. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House. Philadelphia Commission on Decentralization and Community Participation. (1970). Remrt of the Commission on Decentralization and Communily Participation; A Multiple Option Approach to School-Community participation. Philadelphia, PA: Author. Posner, G. J. and Rudnitsky, A. N. (1994). Course Design: A Guide to Curriculum Development for Teachers (4th ed). White Plains, NY: Longrnan. 357 Power, E. J. (1996). Educational Philosophy: A Histog fiorn the Ancient World to Modern Amerjpa New York, NY: Garland Publishing, Inc. Poyntz, C, and Walford, G. (1994). The New Christian Schools: A Survey. Educational Studig 20, (1), 127-143. . Provenzo, E. F., Jr. (1990). Religious ngamentalism and Amerim Education: A Battle for the Public Sphools. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Reed, J. E. and Prevost, R. (1993). A Histog of Chrig’an Education. Nashville, TN: Broadman and Holman. Rinehardt, S. T. (1998). Upside Down: The Paradox of Servant Leadership. Colorado Springs, CO: Navpress. Rosenthal, A. and Fuhrman, S. (1981). Legislative Education Leadership in the States. Washington DC: Institute for Educational Leadership. Sanner, A. E. and Harper, A. F. (Ed). (1978). Exploring Christian Education. Kansas City, MO: Beacon Hill Press of Kansas City. Scott, D. (1983). Philosophy of Christian education. Christian Education Journal 4 (2), 37-42. Sergiovanni, T. J. (1996). Leadership for the Schoolhouse: How is it Different? Whv is it Immrtant? San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Seymour, J. L. (Ed). (1992). Mapping Christian Education: Approaches to Congrpgational Learning. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press. Seymour, J. L. and Miller, D. E. (Eds). (1990). Theological Approaches to Christian Education. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press. Seymour, J. L., Miller, D. E., Little, 5. P., Foster, (2. R., Moore, A. J., and Wehrheim, C. A. (1982). Contemmm Approaches to Christian Education. Nashville, TN: Abingdon. Shulrnan, L. and Sykes G. (Eds). (1983). Handbook of Teaching and Policy. New York, NY: Longman. Spradley, J. (1979). The Ethnographic Interview. New York, NY: Rinehart and Winston. Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Stuay research: Perspectives on Lractice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 358 Tanner, D. and Tanner, L. (1990). History of the @1001 Curriculum. New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company. Thompson, N. H. (Ed). (1982). Religious Education and Theology. Birmingham, AL: Religious Education Press. Van Brummelen, H. (1988). In the Training and Instruction of the Lord: curriculum and Its Change Agents in Three Christian Schools. Canada: British Columbia. Vryhor', S., Brouwer, J ., Ulstein, S., and VanderArk, D. (1989). 12 Affirmations: Reformed Christian Schoolmg' for the let Centpry. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House. Weeks, N. (1988). The Christian School: An Introduction. Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth. Williamson, W. B. (1970). Langr_r_age and concepts in Christian Education. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press. Willis, G., Schubert, W. H., Bullough, R. V., Jr., Kridel, C., and Holton, J. T. (Eds). (1994). The American Curriculum: A Documentg Histogy. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishing. Wirt, F. and Kirst, M. (1972). The Political Web of AmericapSchools. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company. Wirt, F. and Kirst, M. (1989). The Politics of Education: Schools in Conflict. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing Corporation. Wuthnow, R. (March 1995). “The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind: A Symposium,” M 51: 40-41. Wyckoff, D. C. (1955). The Task of Christian Education. Philadelphia, PA: The Westminster Press. Wyckoff, D. C. (1961). Theogand Design of Christian Education Curriculum. Philadelphia, PA: The Westminster Press. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Zuck, R. B. (1963). The Holy Spirit in Your Teaching Wheaton, IL: Scripture Press. 359 APPENDIX A UCRIHS APPLICATION AND APPROVAL LETTER 360 APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF A PROJECT INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS INITIAL REVIEW (and 5 yr. renewal) UCRII-IS . University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects David E. Wright, Ph.D.. Chair 246 Administration Building, Michigan State University East Lansing, MI 48824-1046 PHONE (517) 355-2180 FAX (517) 353-2976 E-Mail - UCRIHS@pilot.msu.edu WEB SITE - http:/Mww.msu.edulunitlvprgslucrihsl Office Hours: M-F (8:00 A.M.-Noon & 1:00-5:00 PM) DIRECTIONS: Please complete the questions on this application using the instructions and definitions found on the attached sheets. (revised 4199) 1. Responsible Project Investigator Additional lnvestigatofls): Name: Maenette Benham Name: Karen Lynn Miller-Estep Social Security Numben 575-74-2235 Student ID#: A24403419 Department: Educational Administration College: Education I accept responsibility for conducting the proposed research in accordance with the protections of human subjects as specified by UCRIHS. including the supervision of faculty and student co-investigators. Signature: 2. Address: If there are more than two investigators. please indicate who should receive correspondence. and provrde further addresses on a separate page. Responsible Project Investigator Additional Investigatcr(s) 'should receive correspgndence Karen Estep Professor Maenette Benham 1926 Donora St. 425 Erickson Hall Lansing, MI 48910 Dept. of Educational Administration E. Lansing, MI 48824 Phone #2 517-355-6613 Phone it. Fax 4. 517-353-6393 Fax #2 call (w) first 517-543-4325 Email: mnennamflmsuedu Email:WW 517-484-6372 (h) 8. 517-543-4064 (w) 3. Title of Project FRAMEWORKS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF CURRICULUM IN K42 ‘ EVANGELICAL SCHOOLS I FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ! Subcommittee Agenda 361 Have you ever received Preliminary Approval for this project? No [X] Yes [ ] If yes. what IRB # was assigned to it? Funding (if any) NA MSU Contracts and Grants app. # if applicable Has this protocol been submitted to the FDA or are there plans to submit it to the FDA? No [X] Yes [ ] If yes. is there an IND #? No [ ] Yes [ ] IND # Does this project involve the use of Materials of Human On'gin (e.g., human blood or tissue)? No [X] Yes [ ] When would you prefer to begin data collection? February 14, 2000 Please remember you may not begin data collection without UCRIHS approval. Category (Circle a,b, or c below and specify category for a and b. See instructions pp. 4-7) a. This proposal is submitted as EXEMPT from full review. Specify category or categories: 0 This proposal is submitted for EXPEDITED review. Specify category or categories: 2-6 c. This proposal is submitted for FULL sub-committee review. 10. Is this a Public Health Service funded, full review, multi-site project? No [ ] Yes [ ] If yes. do the other sites have a Multiple Project Assurance IRB that will also review this project? [ ] No. Please contact the UCRIHS office for further information about meeting the PHSINIH/OPRR regulations. [ ] Yes. Please supply a copy of that approval letter when obtained. 362 11. Project Description (Abstract): Please limit your response to 200 words. This project will look at three to six Association of Christian School International (ACSI) K-12 schools that are selfoperpetuated board ran schools in an effort to forward a better understanding of the internal and external forces that drive curriculum practice. Case Study methods will be used to look individually at each school. In addition, Comparative Case Study methods will be used to compare schools. Four sets of documentation will be collected to build rich cases on each school: (1) written documents, (2) interviews with curriculum specialists, (3) . observations and small focus groups, and (4) the examination of current studies and literature to each case. The findings of this research will be used to present a set of Frameworks of the formation of curriculum policy within the three types of ACSI schools. 363 12. ' Procedures: Please describe all project activities to be used in collecting data from human subjects. This also includes procedures for collecting materials of human origin and analysis of existing data originally collected from human subjects . Interviews with curriculum specialists (e.g., board members, administrators, parents, teachers) (see Item #1 for a list of protocol questions) 0 Small focus group discussions with curriculum specialist (see item #1 for a list of protocol questions) e Protocols for phone calls (see Item #2) Handout for Interview scheduling (see #3) . 13. Subject Population: Describe your subject population. (e. 9., high school athletes, women over 50 wlbreast cancer, small business ovmers ) Association of Christian Schools lntematlonal (ACSI) schools, Institutions with grades K-12, and curriculum specialists (i.e., administrators, teachers, school board members, curriculum committee members). The study population may include (check each category where subjects may be included by design or incidentally): Minors Pregnant Women Women of Childbearing Age Institutionalized Persons Students Low Income Persons Minorities Incompetent Persons (or those with diminished capacity) H H 3 2 2 2 3 3 H I Number of subjects (including controls) Approximately 30-60 How will the subjects be recruited? (Attach appropriate number of copies of recruiting advertisement. if any. See p. 13 of UCRIHS instructions) Letter of Invitations and consent forms 0 a First to the President of ACSI (see item 4) Second to three-six selected sample schools (see items 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9) If you are associated with the subjects (e.g.. they are your students, employees, patients), please explain the nature of the association. These subjects (curriculum specialists) work within schools that are associated to Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI) which I am also a principle of a school within this same association. 364 e. If someone will receive payment for recruiting the subjects please explain the amount of payment. who pays it and who receives it NA f. Will the research subjects be compensated? [X] No [ ] Yes. If yes, details concerning payment, including the amount and schedule of payments, must be explained in the informed consent. 9. Will the subjects incur additional financial costs as a result of their participation in this study? [X] No [ ] Yes. If yes. please include an explanation in the informed consent. h. Will this research be conducted with subjects who reside in another country or live in a cultwal context different from mainstream US society? [X] No [ ] Yes. ( 1) If yes, will there be any corresponding complications in your ability to minimize risks to subjects, maintain their confidentiality and/or assure their right to voluntary informed consent as individuals? []No []Yes. (2) If your answer to h.1 is yes, what are these complications and how will you resolve them? 14. How will the subjects‘ privacy be protected? (See Instructions p. 8.) This project will employ measures to insure confidentiality. . Human subjects will be treated with strict confidence on the part of the investigator and confidentiality will be maintained. lnforrnation will be handled in the following ways: (1 ) Responses will be recorded using pseudo-names for the purpose of insuring that the human subjects are not identified, (2) pseudo- names will be used for schools or other entities that might be referenced to in the demographics of each school, and (3) identifying information (identifiers) will be altered in the reporting of the information, as needed to maintain confidentiality without altering the data. 0 Human subjects will remain anonymous in any report of research findings. 15. Risks and Benefits for subjects: (See Instructions p. 9.) There is a slight risk to the human subjects in this project. Individuals may share sensitive information about the school during the small focus group discussion to other members of the group. During this time I will be starting the discussion by recapping information gathered from interviews. As a safeguard to individuals I will (1) review what I want to share with the individuals at the end of each individual interview so that they can themselves suggest how to use this information in the small groups and (2) I will generalize all information that is shared in the focus groups so as not to identify individuals. 365 16. Consent Procedures (See Instructions pp. 9—13.) A letter granting permission to use ACSI schools will be requested. Consent forms will be required of all participating schools, head curriculum specialists, and curriculum specialists, stating their willingness to volunteer for the project (see items 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9). CHECKLIST: Check off that you have included each of these items. If not applicable, state NIA: [X] Completed application [X] The correct number of copies of the application and instruments. according to the category of review (See instructions p. 14.) [X] Consent form (or script for verbal consent), if applicable [NA] Advertisement, if applicable [X] One complete copy of the methods chapter of the research proposal 366 MICHIGAN STATE u N r v E R s I T Y February 3, 2000 TO: Maenette K. BENHAM 425 Erickson Hall RE: IRB# 00-038 CATEGORYz2-G APPROVAL DATE: February 3, 2000 L . TITLE: FRAMEWORKS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF CURRICULUM IN K-12 EVAGELICAL SCHOOLS The University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects' (UCRIHS) review of this project is complete and I am pleased to advise that the rights and welfare of the human subjects appear to be adequately protected and methods to obtain informed consent are appropriate. Therefore. the UCRIHS approved this project. RENEWALS: UCRIHS approval is valid for one calendar year, beginning with the approval date shown above. Projects continuing beyond one year must be renewed with the green renewal form. A maximum of four such expedited renewals possible. Investigators wishing to continue a project beyond that time need to submit it again for a complete review. REVISIONS: UCRIHS must review any changes in procedures involving human subjects. prior to initiation of the change. If this is done at the time of renewal. please use the green renewal form. To revise an approved protocol at any other time during the year, send your written request to the UCRIHS Chair, requesting revised approval and referencing the project's "RBI! and title. Include in your request a description of the change and any revised instruments, consent forms or advertisements that are applicable. PROBLEMS/CHANGES: Should either of the following arise during the course of the work, notify UCRIHS promptly: 1) problems (unexpected side effects, complaints. etc.) involving human subjects or 2) changes in the research environment or new information indicating greater risk to the human subjects than existed when the protocol was previously reviewed and OFFICE or RESEARCH approved. If we can be of further assistance, piease contact us at 517 355-2180 or via amaiI: UCRIHS@piIot.msu.edu. Please note that all UCRIHS forms are located on the web: http://wwwmsu.edulunitlvprgs/UCRIHSI llalverslty Cemmlttse an Sincerely, llesearch Involving Human Subjects Michigan State University 246 Administration Building watt} Es! Lansing, Michigan David E. Wright, Ph.D. 48824-1046 5178552180 DEW: br FAX: 517/353-2976 cc: Karen Lynn Miller-Estep Weir mrnsuadu/user/ucrihs 1926 Donora St. E-Marl: ucrrnSOmsumu Lansing, MI 48910 The Michigan Sure University IDEA IS msmuriomr Diversify Eccentric: m Aaron MSU rs an Immune-amen ECU) 'CCC: 73"!” "$771395 " 367 APPENDD§ B LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT OF ACSI AND LETTER OF RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PRESIDENT OF AC SI 368 Karen L [an Miller-Es tep 1926 Donora Street. Lansng, Ml 48910 one:(w)51 543.4064 (h)517.484.6372 E-marl: karenestep@aor.com February 15,2000 Dr. Ken Smithennan, President Association of Christian Schools International PO. Box 35097 Colorado Springs, CO 80935-3509 Dear Dr. Ken Smitherrnan: I am a school administrator at Charlotte Christian School in Charlotte, Michigan. which is a memberofACSI, butinadditiontothislamcurrently workingonresearchinK-IZ Educational Administration at Michigan State Univ«sity. I would like p«'mission to use ACSI schools as the focus of my Ph. D. research The goal and purpose of this project are to look at three to six ACSI K-12 schools and write case studies for the self-papetuated board ran schools. In this way to forward a better understanding of the internal and external forces that drive cuniculum practice. The research will look at each school separately and then compare them The schools chosen for this project will be selected according to the following: AC SI Accredited Located within the Mid-American Region Have grades K-12 Have a minimum of 500 students enrolled Their organizational structure is that of a self-perpetuating board ran school Individual school administrators and key individuals whom serve as cuniculum specialist muSt consent to volunteer for the project 0 A school official representing the school must consent to allow the school to participate in the project Th«e are a few details that you should know about this project. First the research will be done on site at three to six schools and will include the collection of written documents. interviews (one hour each) with curriculum specialists (e.g., board members. administrators. teachers. parents) as designated by the administrator. site observations will take place. as well as small focm group discussion (one hour) with curriculum specialists who have already been interviewed. Second. schools and individuals interviewed will remain anonymous in any reports of research findings. Finally. there are no financial benefits to this research project However. information and knowledge gained through this project may eventually benefit ACSI and those schools associated with AC SI. In the next day or two I will be calling to confirm that you have received this request and to answer questions you may have concerning the mica.Wm stating \‘fl ganQy-gl 9f mv m 9f ACSI sghmls for this pmjggj. Thank you for considering this opportunity- 369 Questions concerning this research can be directed to the following individuals: University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects David E. Wright, PhD. Chair 246 Administration Building Michigan State University East Lansing, MI 48824-1046 517-355-2180 517-353-2976 Fax MW Professor Maenette Benham 425 Erickson l-Iall Dept. of Educational Administration Michigan State University East Lansing, MI 48824-1046 517-355-6613 517-353-6393 Fax mpgghamccmag . ggu Sincerely for Christ. Karen Estep 370 Subj: ACSI Date: 2115/2000 9.54251 AM Eastern Standard Time From: Bonnie_ChurchQacsi.org (Chuch, Barrie) To: karenesteanolcom CkareneatestoLcorn) CC: Steve.8abbltt¢acsi.org (Babutt, Steve), MW.” (Keartan. Derek) February 14, 2000 Dear Cfnlstian School Admiristrator: Oneoftheblesslnga ofourmovernantlathecareflmnarvdthmchthe Mal ofleadersflp fills In terns ofrasea'chandlrmlarnentatlcn oflhd raeearchintoschools.ACSlispleuedthatKaranEstaphastakenupJnhar doctoralworkatMlcliganStleLflyersltthechaluueofaddreaalrgthe dtalneedforcunlculumdeveloprnantinCIvistianschoob. Yomassistancesdththislnportarnwkwiflbagredlyameciated. particularlytorntheparspactivaofltsteluetotheChrlstImsehenl movement. Outletaumdeveloprnentlsanaatbreteryculstiansehoolthat daeiraatootcellnltscallngtoservelts clientele. - Sincerely, «...OLE_Obj...» Derek J. Keenan, Ed.D. Vice President, Academic Affairs ' I I - - “ 4 : { 1 ' - ‘ " ‘ F " ' ' “ " — ‘ 7 ‘ — Headers Retum-Path: Recehed: from rfy-za01.mx.aol.com (fly-n01.nil.acl.com [172.31.36.97l) try air-za04.ma'tacl.com M7_b1.24) wlth ESM1P;Tue, 15 Feb 2000 09:54:514500 Received: from acelntexACSl (1208.157353]) by w-za01.mx.aol.eom (\67_b1.24) with ESMTP: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 09:54:22 - 0500 Received: by ACSINTEXwIth Internet Mdl Service (552050.21) ld <14MZFKA»: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 07:51:30 -0700 Message-ID: <6DFC43FZBE81m11887000AOC9E7CDBCOIEDB4QACSINTE» From: “Church, Bonrie" To: "karenestepoaolcom' skaraneatepcaolccnp Cc: 'Babta'tt, Steve' , 'Keanan. Derek“