How to Save the Christian College

Who We Are:
The Crisis of Identity and Culture in Christian Higher Education

Origins are important. They can tell us a lot about where we came from, who we are, and where we might be headed. The heritage of Christian higher education in the United States draws from centuries of deep tradition. The academic traditions follow in the footsteps of Oxford, circa 1096 A.D, and the roots of western philosophy and learning. The spiritual traditions are inspired by the teachings and faith of the Judeo-Christian community. The modern Christian university now finds itself at a great cultural impasse. With the increasingly questioned value of higher education, the number of incoming college students dwindling, and an overwhelmingly secularized academic institution holding sway, Christian universities desperately need to take stock of their values and what these values mean in a post-Christian context. The purpose of this post is to recommend the exploration of three vital questions for the survival and growth of the Christian academic community;
1) What is the purpose of higher education?
2) How do Christ and a biblical world view inform the university model?
3) What is the value of a Christian university and how can this value be leveraged to maintain Christian schools as a viable and excellent institution?

Religious Education is a Social Issue

“How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching?” - Romans 10:14 (English Standard Version).

What people believe about themselves and the world around them is critical. History has shown that belief and perception play a critical role in the formation of society and the environment. Organizational theorists have spent a great deal of time fascinated by the phenomena of human creativity: the unique human ability to dream and to create new realities and concepts. One manifestation of the research has been “Enactment Theory,” which looks closely at the companies and organizations that seem to be able to create, rather than to respond to the market around them. What many of these researchers, including sociologist Andy Crouch, have discovered is that the world people believe tends to be the world they create. This concept has especial pertinence to the many pressing needs of the world. For example, ending the world water crisis is estimated to cost anywhere from 40 billion to only 11.4 billion per year (World Health Organization). To put that data into perspective, the United States alone spends 7 billion on chewing gum, 11 billion on dog food, 22 billion on ice cream, 40 billion on hard drugs, and 67 billion on pornography. Five days of global military spending would give food, water, and sanitation to every needy person on the planet (“The End of Poverty” Sachs). It would seem that ending the world’s greatest humanitarian challenge is not so much a matter of capital as it is cultural imagination, heart, and belief. Oxford economist Paul Collier in his best-selling work, “The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries Are Failing and What Can Be Done About It,” says that the greatest untapped resource of our world is the innate “creative capacity” of its human inhabitants. If we want to change the world, we must first learn to challenge and to change what people believe. In much of the western world, the primary venue for the exchange of beliefs and ideas has been, and will continue to be the university. Institutions that exemplify and instruct the teachings and values of Christianity are shaping the beliefs of the key change-makers on the planet.

Christians involved in higher education are also accountable for a much greater social issue. If the biblical assertions are true, than belief in and acceptance of the gospel of Christ has either a wonderful or horrific eternal significance. In the light of such monumental consequence all other issues are subservient. Higher learning communities present a wonderful opportunity for the proclamation and examination of this gospel. If humans are, as Lewis would suggest, much more than “mere mortals,” then their eternal well-being is surely the paramount social issue of this and any other time. A Christian university, as its name might suggest, should then be a place that does everything in its power to advance the cause of Christ.

Culture and Identity

“All institutions in higher education are concerned about their identity – about how they wish to be perceived.” - Dr. James Arthur

The ancient Hebrew people were masters of a shared tradition of faith that informed their cultural identity. Thousands of years ago, from three simple sentences, Hebrew people understood reality and God in this way. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Even when it was still incomplete and broken the Holy One drew it near to himself, loved it, and made it into something beautiful.” This paraphrase will fall vastly short of the magnitude of what is being discussed, but it begins to paint a picture. Genesis continues to say that God made man “in His image.” The same God who crafted creation and called it good made man and invited him to help make it great. This narrative of participation, inherited by the Christian community, created the two most mission-based cultures in history. The challenge faced by many Christian colleges is the lack of a strong guiding narrative and identity. Most find themselves caught between being a religious institution or an academic institution in an American culture that is increasingly intolerant of the suggestion that a university might be both. The tendency to either play down faith for secular and academic relevance or to play up faith to attract like- minded students, donors, and faculty has created a schism in the ranks of Christian colleges. To be certain, there is no room for ambiguity when the stakes are so high. Ambiguity of vision breeds ambivalence and the eventual decay of a once powerful culture. Trying to play the middle ground is often a very slippery slope. In his article “Faith and Secularization in Religious Colleges and Universities,” Dr. James Arthur, professor of education at Canterbury Christ Church University, explains the danger of the spiritual education dichotomy

“When a university is not overtly concerned with producing future leaders of a particular religious body or developing them personally within a particular religious tradition, then secondary goals take precedence. When religiously affiliated colleges and universities are simply associated with service programmes or developing good moral character, then they do no more and no less than good secular universities... To take any college’s or university’s claim for mission at face value would be both naïve and simplistic. The mission has to be evidenced in the decision‐ making and policies of an institution, in particular in the actions and commitment of senior management.”

It would be unwise to presuppose how Christian vision and identity specifically manifest themselves in each community. The crux of Christian culture stems from a tightly knit community centered in a shared faith. From there the cultural variations can differ greatly. Leadership at Christian universities needs to maintain a great vigilance of core beliefs and to learn to keenly discern between critical and non-critical cultural issues.

Defining a College Education

This fall, out of 314 million inhabitants, 22 million U.S. citizens will go to college. To put that in perspective, this number is just short of educating the entire population of Australia every year. The current culture of the United States celebrates and expects young students to go to college as part of their preparation for the workforce and society. This cultural norm, however, is being challenged by a diminishing return on investment as the economy shifts away from traditional economic forms. Dr. David Ray of Oklahoma University speaks in depth about the shift of culture in higher education over the past 100 years. While speaking about education at the turn of the 20th century, he states, “It was explicitly interdisciplinary. The point was to expose students to the achievements of humanity in science, art, literature, music, and motivate students to continue exploring those things for a life time.” College was an extremely resource- intensive program aimed at creating a powerful, well-rounded individual within only a small percentage of the age cohort. In 1920 Dr. George Vincent, president of the Rockefeller foundation, pointed out that a college education was the province of only 2% of a generation. World War II changed this. With the return of the veterans from the war came the advent of the

G.I. Bill and a time of increased prosperity and expansive government. By the 1950’s and 1960’s, 50% of the age cohort would go to college with roughly 25% of them graduating. This influx of students and funding created a radical shift in the philosophy of higher education. College became a way to develop a specific skill set for the purpose of upward mobility. The response of universities was to streamline the disciplines, increasing efficiency through focus. Led by the influences of modernism, industrialization, and a powerful education marketplace, it became easy for the purpose of a college to be about a product or program instead of creating a certain type of person. This transactional approach works well until the value proposition is challenged. Today a different job market, for-profit colleges, cultural shifts, and the internet all challenge the equation. Complicating the equation, the cost of college has grown, in some cases by as much as 450%, while comparative household spending power for the middle class has actually shrunk. The perceived identity of colleges of all types is changing swiftly. The university model is in desperate need of transformation, but doing so in a healthy manner will require a clear sense of identity and purpose. If Christian universities can properly synthesize and communicate their values, the rich cultural identity and endowed purpose of these institutions may give them a key competitive advantage.

Communicating Identity

Once the vision, identity, and culture have been formed, the last great hurdle for Christian educators is how to communicate their strengths. Most all universities answer to a diverse audience. Christian colleges are peculiar in that they do not fit neatly into any of the constituent groups. As a university that does not answer only to academics, they have become sequestered from the scholarly world. As a legal organization, they are viewed by the government and philanthropist as “religious” and therefore not applicable to many grants and corporate funding sources. As a Christian organization, the college is not always mission specific and therefore has earned the label “para-church.” They exist as one of George Simmel’s “strangers” who find themselves stranded in the space between communities. Being a cultural outlier, however, is not without benefits. In a time of turmoil and change, the ability to speak out of a rich heritage spanning centuries can be invaluable. The most commonly employed communication strategy by Christian universities is to segment their audiences, secular and religious, and create messages tooled specifically for their interests. When done well, this has allowed Christian communities to be masterful cultural chameleons and influencers (1st Corinthians 9:19-23). If not done well, this segmentation leads to a confusion of identity both within and without the organization as identity is sacrificed in the name of relevance. The changing times are an excellent opportunity for the Christian colleges to rediscover the value of their unique heritage and powerful mission. Heeding the old maxim “what you sell people with is what you sell them to,” the leadership of a savvy Christian college may want to investigate creative ways to put stock in its unique identity rather than hiding it. Leadership expert and TED speaker Simon Sinek is quick to point out in his book “Start With Why” that value in the modern age is no longer a calculation, but a perception. The populations of the United States and scholarly community have begun to form a poor perception of Christian universities, but this may have stemmed from an internal crisis of identity and value. Creating a conversation across Christian higher education about identity and culture can help to change these internal beliefs and allow for a cohesive movement of God’s people to create and communicate an identity that represents the gospel they proclaim.

Christian Identity and Perceptions of Scholarship

The plight of Christian Higher Education is the negative perception that Christian scholarship is somehow inferior to the academics of the secular world. In their article “Balancing Religious Identity and Academic Reputation at a Christian University” James Swezey and Christopher Ross point out that, “Protestant universities have been a part of the American education landscape since the founding of Harvard University (1636), yet the perception exists that explicitly religious universities are de facto inferior in reputation to secular institutions.” Despite almost all western higher education having roots in the Christian tradition very little credit seems to be given to the foundations of the university system. To give an idea of the academic climate, there are nearly 2,000 religiously affiliated institutions of higher education world-wide (Arthur, 2006) and 895 in the United States (NCES 2011). The great majority of these schools arise from the Christian Faith. The National Center for Education Statistics reports that as of 2011 there were 4,599 degree granting institutions in the United States. This includes two- year institutions, traditional four-year institutions, for-profit, and non-profit universities. Christian institutions amount to a surprising 19.4% of the higher education of the United States. It would be negligent for the secular world to discredit such a substantial part of the collegiate collection. From a standpoint of faith and culture, it would be even more unwise for Christians to withdraw from scholarship. If Christian universities can solidify their identity and purpose in education, they could greatly resculpt the narrative surrounding faith-based education.

A critical question that needs to be answered is, “What, exactly, constitutes the Christian University identity?” This definition is necessary to inform the a-religious and the Christian. Once formed, this identity will need to be effectively communicated to a diverse audience. This paper will examine two of these key constituents, the community of Christian universities and the secular scholarly world, in order to contrast the cultural values and morays that need to be understood to create a new image of Christian Higher education in the minds of both parties.

Christian Identity

Christianity is a religion uniquely connected to identity. Unlike other faiths that place deity at a distance, the God of the Bible claims to both dwell in and “clothe” his disciples (“Do you not

know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you?” 1 Corinthains 3:16 and “For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” Galatians 3:27). Even the word Jesus chooses for disciples, μαθητής (mathētēs), is indicative of taking on the very nature, character, and identity of one’s teacher. In Luke 6:40 Jesus tells his followers “A disciple is not greater than his teacher, but everyone when fully trained (κατηρτισμένος) will be like his teacher.” The apostle Paul begs his followers to “Be imitators (μιμηταί) of me, just as I also am of Christ” (1 Corinthians 11:1). Followers of Christ find themselves with a very serious charge to consider the bracelet cliche, “What would Jesus do?” with a deep and holy imperative. The biblical case would seem to support that every action, every thought, every conversation and interaction of the Christian person should be reflective of the nature of Christ because the personhood and deity of Christ are at once represented within them.

From the very beginning of the biblical account, God designed man to be in His image (Genesis 1:26). Indeed, the participatory God of the garden gave two commandments to man;

"Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” (Genesis 1:28) The oft mistranslated and misused commandment that man should “subdue” the earth and “have dominion” over it actually comes from two Hebrew words that can help to set the stage for the Christian identity in practice. The word “subdue” is born from “kabas” which means, in very strong language, “to cultivate, to bring to its fullest.” The second word, “rada,” commands that humans nurture and protect creation. Both words carry a definite air of authority, kingship, and responsibility (Ensor). To be in the image of God, to share his identity, necessarily implies a powerful call to action in this world. Not sequestered to the Old Testament, the call is heard again in the famous words of James, “for as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also” (James 2:26). A complete Christian identity beckons the believer to be engaged with reality in the same fullness as their savior, who was both God and man, engaged in it. The case for Christian identity needs to be made so that cultural and business practice might be understood and informed by it.

Identity in Secular Universities

Understanding the current culture of secular education begins with a discussion of history. For all of the good ushered in by the enlightenment of the 18th century, modernism brought with it a new set of philosophical challenges. Many began to see the university as an unhindered and unchecked mecca for rational enquiry. Every new scientific discovery solidified the belief that knowledge and truth were something ultimately attainable through the pursuit of reason. This idea that all things were knowable became known as modernism.

A key difference between the secular university and a Christian university is how they answer the question, “What is truth?” For the Christians, truth will ultimately be found in God. For the secular, reason is the chief and only authority. This narrow view of epistemology currently exists in the majority of western universities (Arthur 2006). The crazed economic boom of the industrial era put a premium on masters of the physical sciences. Whereas a college education once created a certain type of liberal arts scholar, employers now wanted specific skill sets. With this funding pipeline in place, colleges and universities were heavily influenced to become glorified job training centers that prized the sciences (Swezey & Ross 2012). It was, as business consultant and former university Vice President Dr. Nathan Mellor would say, very much like “increasing the horse power of the car without adjusting the steering or the breaks” (Mellor 2013). The proposed God of the Christian faith was neither quantifiable nor attainable through cold rationality. This stubbornness on the part of the divine to fit itself inside the new paradigm would result in religion’s exclusion from the scientific method.

Two world wars and the start of the nuclear age cracked the pristine shell of modernist thought. Soon to follow was the prominence of the de-constructionist and existentialist in what became known as post-modernism. It is important to remember that both schools of thought, modernism and post-modernism, are really two sides of the same coin. As different as their conclusions may be, a secular institution operates from the assumption that reason and the human experience are the preeminent sources of knowledge throughout the world. The scholarship from these institutions, because they cannot allow for the divine, will necessarily resort to a de facto operating principle that makes them, in many ways, diametrically opposed to Christianity.

Christian Scholarly Reputation

The main way universities attain a reputation in the age of modern education is scholarly research (Strober 2007). For the past century, research has largely been defined by the secular

persuasion. Even liberal arts colleges, famous for their emphasis on teaching and holistic education, have begun to reward their faculty based on research efforts (Strober 2007). With the majority of universities being governed by secular philosophy, it has become increasingly difficult for Christian universities to attract top research talent willing to maintain Christian values, governance, and educational philosophy. Over time, this practice allowed the perceived gap in academia to grow ever wider, prompting the researchers Mixon, Lyon, and Beaty (2004) to assert, “If they [religious universities] remain faithful to those religious convictions that call them into being, then they must accept academic mediocrity and dwell in the backwaters of academic culture” (p. 401) The greater prevalence of secular universities dictates a standard that, intentionally or not, often reflects poorly on the Christian counterpart. In response, many Christian Universities have sought to diversify their talent pools by recruiting faculty who did not share their religious beliefs. However, as Swezey points out, “If the religious institution does recruit scholars of high reputation sans allegiance to any mission statement, they will enhance their diversity, but risk losing their religious distinctiveness, thus blurring their religious identity in the process.... The concern for many at Christian universities is whether or not they can maintain their religious identities while simultaneously seeking to raise academic stature, or will succumb to the forces of secularization that eviscerated the religious identities of other institutions” (Swezey 2012). Godless scholarship may be the key to academic reputation with the secular majority, but a religious education stands to lose that which is held in the highest regard for a penultimate goal.

Economics

Money, unsurprisingly, has a huge impact on the culture and identity of a university. This is especially true of the American higher education marketplace. 

“It is no less than the commercialization of higher education, which can result in universities having a weak grasp of the scope of their educational mission.” (Arthur, 2006)

A key distinction to make between the religious and secular institutions is how they are funded. Secular institutions are public. In short, they receive a good deal of state and local government funding, who become key stakeholders and decision makers in university strategy. In contrast, Christian Universities are non-profit organizations and receive more limited funding from public sources despite offering much of the same value. So, while they still give tax deductions to donors (just as not-for-profit public universities would), they do not receive the same funding and draw from a much smaller pool of applicable grants. Two observations can be concluded. First, the current policy of the government, while it feigns religious neutrality, actually promotes a secular education system that disallows and discredits faith in the world of research. Second, because they lack major funding from the government and most large public foundations, Christian schools need to rely heavily on their core constituency for financial and in-kind support. With the academic system stacked against them, many universities opt to invest heavily in their value as first class teaching and religious institutions. It may be that their unique religious identity and culture will be what allows them persist throughout the rapidly evolving educational marketplace.

The Christian University as a Social Enterprise

“The one who remains in me—and I in him—bears much fruit, because apart from me you can accomplish nothing.” - John 15:5

A social enterprise is an economically viable company with a social purpose that supersedes their bottom line return. A wise social entrepreneur may even use their obstacles to their advantage. Christian Universities are not too different. In his lecture turned sermon, The Weight
of Glory, C.S. Lewis pointed out, “A university is a society for the pursuit of learning” (Lewis 1942) and a Christian University need be no exception. What Christian education can offer in contrast to secular education may be its greatest competitive advantage. Whereas most of academia has constructed “temples to the goddess of reason”, Christians can pursue truth through a very different lens while avoiding many of the pitfalls unchecked rationality entails. In his BBC radio address “Beyond Personality,” C.S. Lewis uses the biblical analogy of salt to describe a believer’s fulfillment in Christ. Lewis proposes that someone who has only tasted salt would think it incredibly overpowering and unfit to add to food. However, anyone who has tasted a dish with the proper amount of salt knows that salt only calls out the true flavors to be found within. In Mathew 5:13 Jesus tell his followers, “You are the salt of the earth, but if salt has lost its taste, how shall it saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trampled under people's feet.” The positive image provided by this maxim is a Christian identity creating the very essence needed to call out the fullness of the world. Being a Christian is not “heavenly compromise for no earthly good,” but a new freedom and empowerment to rediscover an original identity and narrative. In another famous speech, “Learning in Wartime,” Lewis pleads with the students and faculty of Oxford that, “To be ignorant and simple now—not to be able to meet the enemies on their own ground—would be to throw down our weapons, and to betray our uneducated brethren who have, under God, no defense but us against the intellectual attacks of the heathen. Good philosophy must exist, if for no other reason, because bad philosophy needs to be answered. The cool intellect must work not only against cool intellect on the other side, but against the muddy heathen mysticisms which deny intellect altogether.” Christian education is only one path, one more venue through which the Lord can be served by a Christian. As such it falls under the commission of Paul the Apostle for a believer to, “work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men” (Colossians 3:23 ESV). Or, as Lewis continued to say to Oxford, “every duty is a religious duty, and our obligation to perform every duty is therefore absolute” (Lewis 1942). The gap between the secular and religious institutions is based on a presumption that the work of the agnostic scholar is stronger than that of his Christian counterpart. Changing this perception does not mean defecting to the other side, but learning to leverage and cultivate the potential to be found in a Christian identity.

Creating the Culture of Christian Higher Education

“We need something to set against the represent, to remind us that the basic assumptions have been quite different in different periods and that much which(now) seems certain...is merely temporary fashion” - C.S. Lewis (1949)

Christian Universities desperately need a cohesive strategy to maintain their competitive positioning in an ever-intensifying educational market. Thus far, this paper has established a great need for a new defining of terms and an understanding of the cultural history that has brought about the present day predicament. There is more than enough precedent to support the thesis that the actions and beliefs of one culture set the stage for the creation of the cultures to come. The difficulty arises in challenging and changing deeply entrenched cultural beliefs from the institutional level. From their various mission and vision statements, it can be inferred that most Christian Universities share three primary goals:

  1. 1)  To promote the Christian faith;

  2. 2)  To educate students;

  3. 3)  To perpetuate the University as a place of scholarship and business.

Encompassed within these three broad goals are a wide array of more particular objectives specific to the traditions, beliefs, and business philosophies of each school. What unites them is their broad white-washing in the secular academic culture and commonly held public opinion. Christian Universities need to understand their own cultural significance and history so that they can effectively create and communicate an identity that brings value to the institution and furthers their primary goals.


The Church of Christ University


Culture can be measured in static as a collection of artifacts and societal norms, but it can also be defined as an ever dynamic relational exchange between members of a community (Crouch). Both definitions are a key to crafting identity. History then becomes critical in understanding the cultural roots of beliefs and can either be a great boon or bane in the construction of organizational identity. The Christian Universities stemming from the Church of Christ Restoration Movement are an excellent case study in the importance of history and setting future strategy. The Church of Christ movement is a superb reflection of the euphoric rise of modernistic optimism countered by significant cultural identity struggles in the new century that, if allowed to continue, significantly threaten the future of the movement. The historical appeal to rationality creates a keen parallel to the scholarly world of the past two centuries. The Restoration Movement, led by staunch modernist Alexander Campbell and his otherwise predisposed counterpart, evangelical apocalyptic preacher Barton Stone, believed that it was possible and beneficial to restore the specific beliefs and practices of the first century Christian church. Church of Christ scholar Dr. Richard Hughes in his work, “Discovering Our Roots: The Ancestry of Churches of Christ,” makes the excellent point that churches, or cultures for that matter, “that root their identity in efforts to restore ancient Christianity are susceptible to the illusion that they have escaped the influence of history and culture altogether.” Their refusal to acknowledge a shared past has often prohibited them from making well-advised decisions about who they are in the present and who they hope to become. If a Church of Christ university can discover ways to adapt and thrive in this modern age, it must surely be possible for almost any of their peer faith group to follow suit.
This is not to say that the tradition is without its distinct advantages. Most every COC University utilizes some sort of weekly or daily convocation. Often this takes the form of a short devotional chapel service. In an age of detachment, the COC schools can offer connection to a generation of millenials who are hungry for purposeful community. Given their Christian faith, COC universities also typically express a level of commitment to service and philanthropy, another critical bridge in United States and World culture. Even acapella singing has become popular in recent years through NBC’s hit show, “The Sing Off.” Church of Christ Universities have yet to really capitalize on their heritage of a rich tradition of rhetoric and oration. This has become especially valued by world culture in recent years through forums like the TED conference and the success of online churches, speeches on youtube, and podcast. A comparative understanding of Church of Christ history with contextual cultural observation can highlight opportunities for COC leadership to leverage their identity to the community at large.

Strategy

A large organization trying to balance a wide variety of roles needs a model that can incorporate the scope of its activities. Hambrick’s Strategy Diamond walks an organization through an assessment of: what arenas or cultures they are operating within, what vehicles are bringing them to these arenas, what competitive advantages or “differentiators” they possess, and the order and speed at which they will make the changes necessary to reach goals. All of this is then considered as part of a large framework for economic viability or, for a social enterprise, economic sustainability mixed with social impact.

Example: Hambrick Strategy Model for a Church of Christ University

Goals:
Fulfill the Great Commission.
Build the brand of the University.
Ensure the financial well-being of the school.

1) Arenas:

  1. Higher Education Marketplace

  2. Churches of Christ

  3. Private/Corporate Donors

  4. Scholarship and Academia

  5. Local and National Cultural Reputation

2) Vehicles

  1. Advancement/Development Teams

  2. Academic Programs/Publications

  3. Conferences, Concerts, Lecture Series, Art Galleries, and Other Events

  4. Curriculum

  5. Para- University Organizations (Foundations, Institutes)

3) Differentiators

  1. Campus Community

  2. Class Size/Access to Faculty

  3. Religious Identity and Practice

  4. Attention to Service/Social-Justice

  5. TransformativeEducationalPhilosophy

  6. Church of Christ/RestorationMovement Heritage

4) Staging and Pacing

  1. Relationships Development

  2. Creating Community within student body and alumni

  3. Targeted Community Campaigns (Churches of Christ/Christian churches)

  4. New Marketing and Events in Key Markets

5) Economic Logic

  1. Increased Brand Image

  2. Increased Recruitment/Retention rates

  3. Increased Rapport with Current and Potential Donors

     

Cultural Implementation

Hambrick’s model can allow an organization to stay focused on issues that are both mission- critical and economically sound, but enacting the cultural components will require more finesse. In “Culture Making: Rediscovering Our Creative Calling,” Andy Crouch, who is a firm believer that culture is something constantly being produced by all those who participate in community, provides a helpful lens with which to evaluate every created good. His five questions are meant to help inform observations of existing cultural artifacts just as much as they are meant to guide the creating of new ones:

  1. “What does this cultural artifact assume about the way the world is?

  2. What does this cultural artifact assume about the way the world should be?

  3. What does this cultural artifact make possible?

  4. What does this cultural artifact make impossible (or at least very difficult? What new forms

    of culture are created in response to this artifact?” (Crouch 29)

Having answers prepared for these questions can help a University be intentional with everything from new campus buildings to drafting a newsletter. Establishing identity and mission, which often includes the gospel, requires that each team member is aware of the cultural significance of their actions. In recent years this model has been used to great effect by schools like Oklahoma Christian, who in 2006 began a partnership with the Rwandan government to bring ten of the country’s top young scholars to the school with a full tuition scholarship. When the world culture had assumed Rwanda could not be rebuilt, OC joined a strong contingent of those who believed that it should be. Since then, the Rwandan Presidential Scholars program has been an incredible success. It now boasts well over one hundred alumni and has even spread to other select private Christian institutions. The Rwandan students themselves hold a collective 3.9 GPA and have launched a variety of philanthropic and social enterprise ventures. For Oklahoma Christian, a small private Church of Christ university, the Rwandan Scholars program has been an amazing opportunity to recast their cultural narrative on an international stage. This intrepid relationship with a once war-torn country has brought to Oklahoma Christian a new reputation, a transformed internal culture, and a terrific collection of new and powerful allies with a vested interest in the university’s future. In one strategic move OC was able to recruit and to educate a higher caliber of student, promote the gospel, and enjoy a fantastic return on its investment. In doing so, they answered all three of their primary goals and set the stage for sustainable growth for years to come.

The success of programs such as the Rwandan Presidential Scholars program, Harding University’s Institute of Church and Family, and Pepperdine University’s Waves of Service initiative are proof of the need for creative representation of identity, values, and culture as a means to further the ultimate goals of the university. Other Christian universities considering the challenges presented by identity would do well to examine how they might create similar systems to provide them with a new platform to communicate their values and identity.

Works Cited and Consulted

Arthur, J. (2008). Faith and Secularisation in Religious Colleges and Universities. Journal Of Beliefs & Values, 29(2), 197-202.
Crouch, A. (2008). Culture making: Recovering our creative calling. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

Ensor, J. (2010). Rethinking Waverly: Rediscovering Jesus, re-imagining the world. Tulsa, OK: Yorkshire Publishing.
Hatch, Mary Jo; Cunliffe, Ann L. (2012-11-22). Organization Theory: Modern, Symbolic and Postmodern Perspectives (Page 76). Oxford University Press. Kindle Edition.

Lewis, C. S. (2009-06-03). Weight of Glory (Collected Letters of C.S. Lewis) (p. 184). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.
National Center for Education Statistics (December 2012). "Table 5 Number of educational institutions, by level and control of institution: Selected years, 1980-81 through 2010-11". U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved 21 May 2014.

Pink, D. H. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.
Postic, David. (2013, January). “#Collegeproblems.” Retrieved from URL: http:// tedxtalks.ted.com/video/collegeproblems-David-Postic-at

Ray, David. (2014, January). “What is a College Education.” Retrieved from URL: http:// tedxtalks.ted.com/video/What-is-a-college-education-Dav;search%3Adavid%20ray
Sinek, S. (2011). Start with why: How great leaders inspire everyone to take action. New York, NY: The Penguin Group.
Swezey, J. A., & Ross, T. (2012). Balancing Religious Identity and Academic Reputation at a

Christian University. Christian Higher Education, 11(2), 94-114. doi: 10.1080/15363759.2012.65092

Ryan Groves