spiritual formation in christian higher

SPIRITUAL FORMATION IN CHRISTIAN HIGHER EDUCATION

i


Jonathan D. Woodward

A Dissertation

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Findlay’s College of Education in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

April 2020

Committee: Nicole V. Williams, Ph.D. Chair, Dissertation Committee Carole Haper, Ph.D. Committee Member Jon Brasfield, Ph.D. Committee Member


ii

© 2020

Jonathan D. Woodward

All Rights Reserved


iii

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore spiritual formation in Christian higher education. Three

research questions guided this study: 1) What are leader’s perceptions of spiritual formation

programs? 2) What are the institutional influences affecting spiritual formation programs in

Christian higher education? 3) How are spiritual formation programs in Christian higher

education designed to achieve specific outcomes? To answer these questions, the researcher

distributed an email survey with an opportunity for follow-up interviews to leaders of spiritual

formation programs in Christian higher education institutions who hold membership to the

Council for Christian Colleges and Universities. The findings indicate that leaders of spiritual

formation programs view outcomes and objectives related to increasing students’ awareness of

God and acceptance of God as important. Additionally, findings indicate that denominational

affiliation has significant influence upon spiritual formation programs, including who

participates in these programs to serve students in this capacity. Finally, program design at most

institutions prioritizes chapel. This positions spiritual formation program leaders as

organizational managers who provide opportunities for students to grow and develop spiritually.


iv

Dedication

I dedicate this project to God.

My inspiration for this project comes from Ephesians 3:14-21 containing Paul’s prayer for

spiritual growth. My passion is the same desire to see people grow in their relationship with God.

To my family:

My parents Jon and Angie Woodward

Your love and support led me to believe in myself. Without you both I would have never had the

opportunity to accomplish this lifelong dream. No thank you can adequately describe how

blessed I feel to be your son.

To my sister Mandy Woodward for being my friend and fellow struggling graduate student.

To my grandparents J.D. and Patricia Woodward for your love and encouragement.

To my dissertation committee for their coaching, support and encouragement from the start of

this journey. Dr. Williams, Dr. Haper, and Dr. Brasfield each of you have sacrificed your time to

help me, challenge me, and I am grateful to you all.

I also want to thank my advisor Dr. John Gillham, the Dean of the College of Education Julie

McIntosh, and all my professors at the Ed.D. program at the University of Findlay. The

University of Findlay will always hold a special place in my heart.


v

Table Of Contents

Page

Chapter I: Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1

Background of the Problem ...................................................................................... 1

Rationale & Significance of the Study ...................................................................... 14

Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................. 15

Theoretical Framework ............................................................................................ 16

Research Questions ................................................................................................... 21

Definition of Terms ................................................................................................... 22

Subjectivity & Researcher Positionality ................................................................... 27

Chapter II. Literature Review .............................................................................................. 30

Theories of Spiritual Formation in Christian Higher Education ............................... 30

Biblical Models of Spiritual Formation ........................................................ 30

Developmental Models of Spiritual Formation ............................................ 37

Leader’s Perspectives on Spiritual Formation Programs ......................................... 47

Institutional Influences on Spiritual Formation Programs ........................................ 54

Denominational and Theological Influences ................................................ 54

Spiritual Formation Program Design ........................................................................ 69

Spiritual Disciplines ...................................................................................... 70

Criticisms of Spiritual Formation Programs ................................................. 77

Summary ................................................................................................................... 82

Chapter III. Methodology .................................................................................................... 83

Research Questions ................................................................................................... 83


vi

Research Design ........................................................................................................ 84

Participants & Sampling Technique ......................................................................... 89

Ethical Considerations .............................................................................................. 93

Instrumentation & Data Sources ............................................................................... 94

Data Collection Procedures ....................................................................................... 103

Data Analysis ............................................................................................................ 106

Assumptions .............................................................................................................. 108

Trustworthiness ......................................................................................................... 108

Chapter IV. Results ........................................................................................................... 110

Characteristics of the Sample .................................................................................... 110

Instrument Validity and Reliability .......................................................................... 112

Leader’s Perceptions of Spiritual Formation Programs ............................................ 112

Institutional Influences and Spiritual Formation Programs ...................................... 119

Spiritual Formation Program Design ........................................................................ 129

Summary ................................................................................................................... 140

Chapter V. Conclusions And Recommendations ................................................................. 143

Review of the Study .................................................................................................. 144

Discussion ................................................................................................................. 145

Leader’s Perceptions of Spiritual Formation Programs ................................ 145

Institutional Influences and Spiritual Formation Programs .......................... 150

Spiritual Formation Program Design ............................................................ 154

Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 158

Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 158


vii

Limitations ................................................................................................................ 160

Future Research Opportunities ................................................................................. 161

References .................................................................................................................... 166

Appendix A. Spiritual Assessment Inventory ................................................................. 174

Appendix B. Survey Instrument (Modified SAI) ............................................................ 177

Appendix C. Invitation To Participate in the Study ........................................................ 180

Appendix D. Interview Protocol ...................................................................................... 182

Appendix E. Spiritual Assessment Inventory Scale Key ................................................ 183


viii

List Of Tables

Table Page

1 Stages of Faith ........................................................................................................... 18

2 Spiritual Formation Program Leader’s Perspectives ................................................ 114

3 Chi Square Test ......................................................................................................... 116


ix

List Of Figures

Figure Page

1 The Whole Person ..................................................................................................... 11

2 The Critical Journey .................................................................................................. 41


1

Chapter I. Introduction

Background of the Problem

Spiritual formation is the defining element of Christian higher education. Spiritual

formation is “our continuing response to the reality of God’s grace shaping us into the likeness

of Jesus Christ, through the work of the Holy Spirit, in the community of faith, for the sake of the

world” (Greenman, 2015, p. 24). Institutions of Christian learning are not only interested in

promoting the academic development of students, but the student’s spiritual development as

well. This dual aim is described by Dockery (2008) using the Latin phrase “religio et eruditio”,

which affirms a Christian institution’s “love for God and a love for study, the importance of

devotion and the importance of instruction” (p. 72). This motto is equally representative of

modern Christian higher education institutions in intertwining the two goals of faith and learning,

with a particular emphasis on how faith is foundational to learning. Historically, spiritual

formation has been a desired outcome for higher education institutions and this tradition of faith

commitment is furthered in Christian higher education.

History of Spiritual Formation in Christian Higher Education

The development of Christian higher education throughout history has informed current

practices which are now incorporated into spiritual formation programs. According to Otto and

Harrington (2016) “An important place to begin the discussion of spiritual formation in the

university is with the beginning of the university itself” (p. 254). Higher education and the

church have been intertwined historically, which led to a prioritization of faith equal to learning.

This model of holistic student development was described by Holmes (2001) who wrote, “For

most of the Middle Ages, education was almost entirely the church’s province; it remained so

until scholars…began to pursue learning and teaching on their own, independently of the


2

monastery and cathedral schools” (p. 47). The connection between the church and academy were

intertwined historically and this serves as a precedent throughout the history of Christian higher

education.

Christian higher education contains many theological presuppositions which have been

handed down throughout church history. Augustine was an influential figure in church history,

contributing the epistemology of divine illumination. Augustine describes this approach as “faith

seeking understanding” which represents how faith was seen as a prerequisite to academic

pursuits (Holmes, 2001, p. 104). This epistemology of recognizing God’s role in learning has

remained an integral part of Christian higher education, as “it means that truth comes ultimately

from God, no matter what divinely provided means it is discovered” (Holmes, 2001, p. 106).

Christian higher education presupposes core elements of theology as the basis for higher

learning. This exemplifies the interrelationship of theology and learning, how the Christian’s

theological view of God impacts their approach to learning within Christian higher education.

The Christian higher education institution’s mission and values have been historically

reflected in practical aspects of a student’s education such as the structure and expectations.

Christian higher education institutions have encouraged students to take theology courses and

participate in spiritual formation programs in fulfillment of the faith aspects of the school’s

mission. This was common even among public institutions, similar to required general education

courses in a modern public university. For example, “At Boston College as late as the 1950’s, for

instance, undergraduates took ten philosophy courses, including logic, metaphysics, natural

theology and ethics” (Holmes, 2001, p. 101). Subjects like theology and metaphysics are not

common general courses today in public institutions as many do not require courses relative to

the spiritual development of students. This model of faith seeking understanding can only be


3

found at Christian higher education institutions who have retained this practice which has been a

critical aspect of a university education throughout history.

The greatest shift impacting spiritual formation in higher education was the

Enlightenment, a period which revolutionized thinking during the 17th century and presented a

challenge to the religious and spiritually minded curriculum existing prior. The collective

influence from the Protestant Reformation, classical Humanism, and the scientific revolution all

played a role in how thinking developed about the role of classic and new learning (Holmes,

2001, p. 70). University thinking was shifting during this time away from the recitation of the

classical texts such as Plato and Augustine. Holmes (2001) described this shift in thinking as an

“active engagement that expands the mind, organizing and interpreting material, digesting it and

making it subjectively one’s own, and interrelating the old with the new within a comprehensive

view of the whole world as the work of God” (p. 89). The Enlightenment affected how new ideas

challenged the old ones and higher education began to model itself to reflect these values.

Spiritual formation has always been a consistent value within Christian higher education,

even as the influence of secularism began to impact public institutions. Many Christian higher

education institutions continually established a holistic system of education which sought to add

value to students’ spiritual lives as well as educate their minds throughout history. Methods of

promoting spiritual formation in Christian higher education have been shaped by the continuing

development of the church and the university. The scope of this research is to build upon this

history in order to learn about spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education. The

historic past of spiritual formation in Christian higher education contains many theological

presuppositions which have shaped and defined these institutions over centuries. The mission of

Christian higher education was always to add value to students in the faith, tending to the spirit.


4

Current State of Christian Higher Education

The purpose of this study is to learn about spiritual formation and so the Council for

Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU) is the outside organization used for this study. The

CCCU clearly defines its standards for member institutions, “CCCU institutions are accredited,

comprehensive colleges and universities whose missions are Christ-centered and rooted in the

historic Christian faith” (Council for Christian Colleges and Universities [CCCU], 2020). The

CCCU’s commitment to both academic and spiritual development characterizes its member

schools as holding to the same Christian values which clearly establish each member institution

as distinctively Christian. Each of the institutions associated with this organization claim

university status from a regional accrediting agency as a 4-year college.

The scope of this study is designed to learn about current institutions in Christian higher

education in the United States belonging to the CCCU. The rationale for researching CCCU

schools is due to the size of the organization, distinct Christian mission, and dedication to

spiritual formation. Member institutions of the CCCU span a broad range of denominations,

beliefs, practices, and each define their unique purpose for serving students. Financially,

Christian higher education institutions are different from their public counterparts as they

generally do not receive direct public resources in the same manner a public institution would,

although they do similarly receive tax-exempt status. Due to the fact that Christian higher

education institutions are often affiliated and supported by a denomination or faith tradition

financially, the church then maintains considerable influence on the institution. As an example,

Mount Vernon Nazarene University is affiliated with the Church of the Nazarene and adapts the

denomination’s Articles of Faith as representative of its own theological beliefs. Christian higher

education institutions affiliated with the CCCU hold a value structure represented by three


5

pillars: 1) Integrating biblical truth not just into “spiritual” aspects of the institution but

throughout the academic enterprise 2) Commitment to the moral and spiritual formation of

students 3) Commitment to graduating students who make a difference for the common good as

redemptive voices in the world (CCCU, 2020). This value structure foundationally separates

Christian higher education institutions within the CCCU from public liberal arts institutions.

Each school’s independent denominational identity exists to further distinguish their Christian

mission or faith statement and dedication to the spiritual formation of students.

A misconception in Christian higher education is that these colleges and universities are

exclusive to Christians. While Christian institutions naturally attract Christian students seeking to

deepen their faith, there generally are no requirements of student’s religious commitment or

affiliation. Christian higher education institutions instead make clear their commitment to uphold

and train students according to their values and beliefs, seeking to provide full disclosure to

prospective parents and students during the application and enrollment process. Muntz and

Crabtree (2006) established that Christian higher education institutions “are open to students

from other faith traditions and often to non-Christians interested in studying in a faith-centered

environment” (p. 20). Institutions are more likely to showcase their faith mission to allow

students and parents to decide if each college or university would be compatible with the

education experience they are seeking. Theological beliefs are universally communicated among

institutions affiliated with the CCCU via each institution’s website. Otto and Harrington (2016)

established that this approach creates “an understanding of Christian higher education, which

consists of institutions that maintain the Christian vision and worldview as an organizing

paradigm” (p. 254). With this understanding between the institution and students, institutions


6

practice spiritual formation according to their faith tradition while remaining accepting of all

prospective students from various religious backgrounds.

Secularization is perhaps the greatest modern challenge to spiritual formation in Christian

higher education. Christian colleges and universities each have their own mission and values

however many of which are in opposition to an increasingly secular culture of higher education.

Johnson (2001) emphasized that it is important to understand “spiritual formation is [not to be]

treated as an optional add-on rather than seen as the organizing motif for ministry overall” (p.

314). Spiritual formation is not just an addition, but a defining element in fulfilling the Christian

institution’s mission and commitment to serving students spiritually. The goal of spiritual

formation programs is therefore not to be limited to one program with chapel, but to be

representative of, and encapsulate the experience of spiritual growth at the college or university.

The challenge of secularization is associated with the postmodernist movement and its

effect on education. In an article titled Christian Spiritual Formation in an Age of “Whatever”,

Johnson (2001) cited a paradigm shift towards postmodernism which contains an “antipathy

towards religion, decreased trust in institutions, and decreased respect for public authority”

stating further that “never has the practice of ministry been more complex and more challenging

than it is today” (p. 309). Christian higher education institutions are as a result challenged with

engaging students and adding value to their spiritual lives in this education environment.

Purpose of Christian Higher Education

While Christian higher education institutions are often treated as a homogenous group

within the literature, Litfin (2004) differentiates institutions across a spectrum using two

academic models which detail how an institution’s approach to spiritual formation impacts

students. The first model is a multiversity which focuses on spiritual opportunity for students


7

through programs and opportunities. In a multiversity spiritual formation programs do not have

mandated participation required by the institution and often offer a wide variety of religious

traditions to accommodate a diverse student body. The multiversity model uses an “umbrella”

structure in that all students are to have access to spiritual formation under the umbrella of the

program. This is considered to be the more liberal approach. It allows for a variety of voices to

thrive in the university tradition of free thinking and free speech (Litfin, 2004). A challenge to

the multiversity model is that without a mandate, participation in spiritual formation programs

are less influential as a part of the student experience given that students have no obligation to

attend or participate.

The monastic model of Christian higher education was described by Litfin (2004) as

engaging “any and all ideas from every perspective, but they attempt to do so from a particular

intellectual location, that of the sponsoring Christian tradition” (p. 18). This model is also

considered the systemic approach due to how the spiritual formation program is embedded into

the curriculum. Monastic universities require student participation in spiritual formation

programs and activities including chapel, small group Bible studies, community service, and

occasionally academic requirements such as a mandated Bible minor. A criticism of the monastic

model is that it suppresses religious diversity with the institution aiming for a more engaging

spiritual growth experience for students. The purpose of this stricter posture taken by Christian

higher education institutions is to maintain the school’s commitment to their faith, doctrine, and

to uphold their commitment to serve students spiritually.

The multiversity and monastic university are two academic models which represent the

ends of the spectrum within Christian higher education. Conceptualizing Christian higher

education within this framework does not serve to invalidate or prioritize one approach over


8

another, rather to expound upon the dynamic and nuanced nature of each institution. As Litfin

(2004) has stated, “both models display relative advantages, and both carry relative

disadvantages; thus, it seems to me the two may best be viewed as augmenting one another. They

serve complementary purposes, and we can be grateful for them both” (p. 30). Christian higher

education institutions individually typically contain elements that may be associated with both

models, however the traditions, mission, and intended outcomes may cause institutions to be

more closely aligned with one end of the spectrum.

Beyond the scope of this study, yet still of note, are Bible colleges. Bible colleges

similarly hold a Christian mission or faith statement which guides their education approach. The

difference between Christian higher education institutions and Bible colleges lies in the academic

accreditation and the purpose of these institutions. Bible colleges focus “primarily on theological

majors and preparation for ministry-related careers” while Christian liberal arts schools “provide

a vast variety of majors while integrating faith-related issues into the curriculum” (Muntz &

Crabtree, 2006, p. 19). Bible colleges have a narrower focus designed to prepare students to enter

the ministry while Christian higher education institutions have generally the same variety of

majors that students would find at a public university.

The purpose of Christian higher education is to add value to students academically and

spiritually (Joeckel & Chesnes, 2010; Litfin, 2004; Dockery, 2008). While the methods,

requirements, and programs vary in the pursuit of this goal, each institution shares a common

desire to develop students across both domains. Ma (2003) stated that “Today, Christian higher

education continues to provide educational experiences that are focused on developing young

Christian adults who will exhibit mature Christian character not merely in their intellects, but

also in their hearts and souls” (p. 323). The dual aim of promoting faith and learning in students


9

often intersect at many levels. Due to the structure and relationship between church and Christian

higher education institutions, many Christian higher education institutions’ leaders tend to

overlap with the affiliated church or denomination (Holmes, 2001). These similar aims and

overlap create a necessity to identify the distinctives between spiritual formation in Christian

higher education and the role of the local church.

Spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education are not viewed as a college-

version or replacement of church attendance. Despite this there are strong similarities which can

create confusion. Students are encouraged at many institutions to get involved with a local

church outside of their campus or some institutions will offer a church on campus which operates

autonomously from the school. In Christian higher education, similar to a Sunday worship

service, the speaker in chapel during the week is typically a pastor, missionary, chaplain, or other

religious leader and the subject matter is indistinguishable from a church service in many ways

also. Bearing the similarities, there are examples within the literature of the dividing line

between the purpose of church and spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education.

Dockery (2008) stated that Christian universities “are not meant to be churches or acting as

social agencies, businesses, or mission-sending organizations” (p. 19). On-campus chapel is not

church, it is not meant to replace each student’s involvement in a local church. Spiritual

formation programs are to be supplemental and a provide a higher frequency of worship to

promote spiritual growth. The purpose of Christian higher education is always student-centered

and designed to be conscious of the entirety of student’s spiritual development.

Spiritual Formation within Christian Higher Education

The Bible is a central aspect of Christian education. While biblical literalism is a

denominational, doctrinal, or faith tradition issue, biblical literacy is a universal goal across the


10

spectrum of Christian higher education institutions. One author stated that “education in

evangelical Christianity recognizes the role of the Bible as foundational, followed by theology,

church history, and then a plethora of disciplines encompassing intercultural studies, sociology,

psychology and education” (Steibel, 2010, p. 341). The Bible is the holy scripture of Christianity

and as such, Christian higher education institutions rely upon the Bible to validate their values,

mission, and curriculum as biblical.

The root of spiritual formation is spirituality, a term used in a variety of contexts.

Spirituality is a term which references that which is incorporeal and by its nature is not able to be

measured or understood quantitatively. Even within the context of Christianity, or further still

within Christian higher education, there are endless understandings of spiritual formation shaped

by years of religious beliefs, traditions, and practices. Definitively established is prioritization of

spiritual formation within Christian education. Rhea (2011) stated that “Most if not all Christian

universities claim to give focused attention to the area of spiritual growth” (p. 7). Stiebel (2010)

further supports this notion having said that “No one would question the centrality of spiritual

formation in Christian and Jewish educational practices” (p. 341). The centrality of spiritual

formation is also emphasized by Horan (2017) who proposed “Spiritual formation is and must be

the focus of Christian school programming” (p. 56). The importance of spiritual formation is

well established within the literature and Christian higher education gives that attention to the

domain of the spiritual.

The domain of the spirit is modeled by Dallas Willard (2000) who set forth a model of

“The Whole Person” to illustrate the centrality of the spirit in the life of a person (Figure 1). This

model illustrates the spirit as being the very center of who a person is, also synonymous with a

person’s heart or will. This framework bases this model on biblical evidence of what the spirit is


11

in the life of a person. For example, the Bible says that when Christ died on the cross that he

“Gave up his spirit” (Matthew 27:50; Mark 15:37; John 19:30, New Living Translation). Spirit

according to this framework is the innermost essence of a human being. Willard (2000) also

establishes the universality of the spiritual domain, having stated that “Everyone receives

spiritual formation, just as everyone gets an education. The only question is whether it is a good

one or a bad one” (p. 254). According to this framework the spirit is as much a part of a person

as their physical body or mind and likewise requires formation to reach its potential.

Figure 1. The Whole Person. Reprinted from Renovation of the Heart (p. 40) by D. Willard

Spiritual formation, despite its frequent use, is often noted as being vague in its meaning

thus creating a definitional challenge for research. A definition of spiritual formation is


12

“complicated by terminological imprecision that reflects this vastness and diversity” (Beard,

2017, p. 248). Beard (2017) explained this being a result of spiritual formation being addressed

“from countless theological, sociological, psychological, and philosophical perspectives and is

discussed in popular literature as well as scholarly works” (p. 248). Willard (2000) echoed this

definitional challenge having stated that “Too often spiritual formation is regarded as a catch-all

category that conveys little specific information” (p. 254). Examining the literature and

definitions therein will help to develop an understanding of spiritual formation which will

illuminate “what it is and how it might be done” (Willard, 2000, p. 254).

Definitions of spiritual formation abound within the literature and many specific to the

context of Christian education. Spiritual formation is a term used interchangeably with similar

terms such as Christian spirituality, Christian mentoring/discipleship, or sanctification (Porter,

2008). May (1982) proposed “Spiritual formation is a rather general term referring to all

attempts, means, instructions, and disciplines intended towards deepening of faith and

furtherance of spiritual growth” (p. 6). Forrest and Lamport (2013) defined spiritual formation as

recognizing one’s own human finiteness and seeking sufficiency in Christ. Willard (2002)

defines Christian spirituality as an inner transformation accomplished through the purposive

interaction with the grace of Christ. Collectively these definitions illustrate a common

developmental growth pattern with a Christ-centered emphasis.

A biblical definition of spiritual formation comes from the use of the word spirit within

the Bible. The biblical idea of spirit begins in Genesis when God creates the first man and

“formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life”

(Genesis 2:7). This life is then described, “But there is a spirit within people, the breath of the

Almighty within them, that makes them intelligent” (Job 32:8). And again, reinforcing in Job


13

33:4 that “For the Spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life”. The

Bible depicts the spirit as being the essence of man connected to physical life. At the end of life

one verse states “and the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to the God

who gave it” (Ecclesiastes 12:7). And so, the spirit is the gift of God, the essence of man, and

ultimately our spirit returns to God at the end of life. The Bible distinguishes the spiritual from

the psychical. While our physical bodies may house our spirit, the spirit itself is beyond the

physical realm as it is described in the Bible.

The definition of spiritual formation used in this study comes from Greenman (2015),

who said “Spiritual formation is our continuing response to the reality of God’s grace shaping us

into the likeness of Jesus Christ, through the work of the Holy Spirit, in the community of faith,

for the sake of the world” (p. 24). This definition conceptualizes spiritual formation to include

the personal, relational, and social life of the individual for the purpose of being transformed in

the process of growing into the image of Christ. The strength of this definition is its connection

of theology to practical outcomes, such as those in a higher education context. The goals of

interacting with a community of faith for the sake of the world has a direct connection to the

practices of fellowship and service. Spiritual formation happens on a spiritual level and the Bible

and academic literature combine to describe the nature of the spiritual.

The practical application of spiritual formation in Christian higher education is discussed

in connection with spiritual disciplines. Spiritual disciplines are described in Foster’s (1988)

book titled The Celebration of Discipline which effectively describes the practices applied to

faith development. Various disciplines are expanded upon in this work to extol their value in the

process of spiritual formation. These disciplines are categorized by the author as inward,

outward, or corporate disciplines (Foster, 1988). Spiritual disciplines have application to spiritual


14

formation programs in Christian higher education due to their implementation within these

programs as a part of the curriculum and expectations for students.

Spiritual formation is a very integral part of the Christian higher education experience,

especially at institutions affiliated with the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities.

Spiritual formation is a priority within Christian higher education institutions as evidenced by

their mission statements (Firmin & Gilson, 2010). Spiritual formation is at the very heart of

Christian higher education and research should serve leaders in this context who are seeking to

add value to students to aid in spiritual development.

Rationale & Significance of the Study

This study on spiritual formation in Christian higher education could have significance

for leaders in Christian higher education in developing curriculum and designing programs to

foster spiritual formation at an institution. This study takes an exploratory approach to

understand what leaders of these spiritual formation programs perspectives are, what the

institutional influences upon spiritual formation programs are, and how these programs are

designed. This research will provide insights that go beyond the student experience to gain a

holistic approach about the nature and structure of spiritual formation programs in Christian

higher education. The rationale for this study is rooted in the research that will inform spiritual

formation which is a core element of Christian higher education.

This research primarily benefits leaders in Christian higher education institutions who are

connected with the goal of spiritual formation. This research holds value for professional

practices within spiritual formation programs as well as sharing leader insights on program

design and institutional influences affecting these programs. For institutions, this research will

further apply to the mission statement and/or faith statement through spiritual formation (Firmin


15

& Gilson, 2010). Leaders in Christian higher education connected to the purpose and goal of

spiritual formation include Christian university presidents, university chaplains, directors of

spiritual formation, or deans of chapel. All of these will benefit from this research on spiritual

formation in Christian higher education as it offers insights which will explore leader’s

perspectives on spiritual formation programs.

This research will also benefit students and parents who are seeking to understand what

makes Christian higher education distinctively Christian. Spiritual formation programs offer

insight into how faith is integrated into the campus experience and this research will explain

spiritual formation in Christian higher education. Students and parents may gain value from a

deeper understanding of spiritual formation program leader’s perspectives, the institutional

influences affecting these programs, and the program design elements which impact spiritual

formation in Christian higher education.

Purpose of Study

The purpose of this study was to learn about spiritual formation in Christian higher

education. This study followed a mixed-methods approach which combined survey and interview

data in an effort to provide a holistic picture of spiritual formation programs. The intended

outcome of this research was to provide data which answered what leader perceptions of spiritual

formation programs are, what the institutional influences on spiritual formation programs are,

and understand how spiritual formation programs are designed. The findings from this study hold

relevance to practice within spiritual formation programs and hopefully will hold value for all

leaders in Christian higher education.

The phenomena being explored is the spiritual formation programs which take place

within Christian higher education institutions. The scope of this study targeted institutions who


16

are members of the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities. According to the standards

of the CCCU, each institution is required to hold a Christian mission as well as Christian

distinctives and advocacy (CCCU, 2020). This research provides findings which inform practice

and raise questions to how institutions can add value to students in a way that promotes spiritual

growth.

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework utilized for this study is Fowler’s (1984) Stages of Faith. This

framework has been used to measure spirituality in student populations in Christian higher

education and is common in the literature on the topic of spiritual formation (Estep, 2002;

Fleming & Cannister, 2010; Holcomb & Nonneman, 2004; Otto & Harrington, 2016;

Williamson & Sandage, 2009; Willett, 2010). In a study done by Fleming and Cannister (2010),

the authors stated that “James Fowler’s research is often noted when discussing spirituality in a

broad sense…While his research is not specific to Christianity, some of his research proves

useful to break the surface of a study on spiritual formation” (p. 56). This framework was

designed to have interfaith application which extends beyond Christianity, inclusive of all faiths.

Spirituality itself is not confined to one faith tradition and so Fowler’s model is applicable to any

faith. This framework clearly establishes what faith is, how faith is developed, and how faith

development affects individuals.

Faith Development theory (Table 1) is a six-stage model for describing the process of

faith development. The stages begin at Primal Faith when an infant first begins to develop a faith

relationship with the mother, similar to Erikson’s first stage of psychosocial development which

is Trust vs. Mistrust (Erikson, 1964). Primal faith is considered stage 0 within Fowler’s model.

Stage one is Intuitive-Projective faith, a stage in which a young child begins to communicate.


17

Although not functioning at a high cognitive level, the children are for the first time able to

associate symbols with meaning. The second stage is Mythic-Literal faith. This is the stage in

which children begin to form a better grasp of reality, separating imagination from the real

world. The third stage is Synthetic-Conventional, which occurs near the age of puberty and

during this time children adopt a self-consciousness which Fowler (1984) argues is linked to

“adolescent egocentrism” (p. 153). At this stage children begin to consider how they look

through the eyes of others. Stage four, Individuative-Reflective faith is a transition marked by

introspection related to faith and one’s own spiritual journey.

According to Holcomb and Nonneman (2004), four of the stages are not relevant to

traditional-aged (eighteen to twenty-two-year-old) college students “therefore three stages

remain that are pertinent to the student populations of interests: two, three and four” (p. 97).

Conjunctive faith is the fifth stage in which faith is more solidified, this comes as a result of the

tempering as a result of stage four. In the fifth stage the individual knows what they believe to be

true and develop a sense of having an established, concrete faith. The final stage, universalizing

faith, comes as paradoxes challenge what is accepted by the individual and through this process

the individual becomes self-actualized in their faith and as they embrace the reality of who they

are and what they believe (Fowler, 1984). The author concludes this work describing the

limitations of research on this subject, “In the faith development theory, while we have tried to

describe expectable and predictable stages of growth in faith, we have also sought to

acknowledge this more mysterious and unpredictable vector of extraordinary grace” (p. 303).

Faith development theory is commonly utilized in research pertaining to the spiritual

development of Christian populations and a brief overview provides the application value to

Christian higher education in particular.


18

Table 1.

Stages of Faith

Stage Age Characteristics Pre-Stage: Undifferentiated faith

Infant Trust, hope, and love compete with environmental inconsistencies or threats of abandonment

Stage 1: Intuitive-projective faith

Toddler-preschooler Imitates parental behaviors and attitudes about religion and spirituality. Has no real understanding of spiritual concepts

Stage 2: Mythical-literal faith School-aged child Accepts existence of a deity Religious and moral beliefs are symbolized by stories Appreciates others’ viewpoints Accepts concept of reciprocal fairness

Stage 3: Synthetic-conventional faith

Adolescent Questions values and religious beliefs in attempt to form own identity

Stage 4: Individuative-reflective faith

Late adolescent and young adult

Assumes responsibility for own attitudes and beliefs

Stage 5: Conjunctive faith Adult Integrates other perspectives about faith into own definition of truth

Stage 6: Universalizing faith Adult Makes concepts of love and justice tangible

Note: Reprinted from Stages of faith: the psychology of human development and the quest for

meaning. By Fowler, J.W. (1984). Copyright 1981 by Harper & Row.

Fowler (1984) presents a dynamic definition of faith, detached from any religious

connotations. In an analysis of Fowler’s framework, Holcomb and Nonneman (2010) asserted


19

“Faith in his [Fowler’s] understanding, is not tied to any particular faith tradition, nor is it

content-specific” (p. 94-95). The purpose of this division is to separate the content of a faith

tradition from the process of spiritual formation which occurs within the person. Faith is defined

by Fowler as being more verb than noun, more active than passive (1984). Most clearly this

question of faith within this framework is “On what or whom do you set your heart?” (Fowler,

1984, p. 14). In Christian higher education the answer would be Jesus Christ, which is conveyed

in nearly every mission or faith statement at a Christian institution.

An obvious difference to consider is the use of the term faith formation used in this

framework which differs from the term spiritual formation used within Christian higher

education. The reason for these different terms is due to their relative fields of study. The Faith

Development Theory contained within Stages of Faith (1984) was heavily influenced by

classical psychology and so the term faith development is more closely aligned with the behavior

and experience of the individual. The term spiritual formation, in contrast, is used in Christian

higher education to clarify the objective of the program in relation to fulfilling the mission or

faith statement held by the university. The use of this psychology framework within Christian

higher education research represents the intersection between the two fields. Conceptionally faith

development and spiritual formation are aligned, with faith development being a more specific

model of spiritual formation in that it presents a developmental or linear path during the growth

process.

A biblical definition of faith also illuminates the meaning and value of faith within

Christianity. In the Bible, the author of Hebrews described faith as being “sure of what we hope

for and certain of what we do not see” and further elaborating “And without faith it is impossible

to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards


20

those who earnestly seek him” (Hebrews 11:1, 6). Faith, biblically, is integral to the Christian

experience, and indistinguishable from the goal of Christian higher education which is also to

“earnestly seek him” (Hebrews 11:6). Fowler’s model reflects the biblical description as he

describes faith as a verb meaning “to set one’s heart upon” based on the translation of the

historic word faith from the 16th century (Fowler, 1984, p. 12). The application being that the

institution, through its faith mission has set its heart upon earnestly seeking God, the propelling

motive driving spiritual formation programs.

Developmentalism and Faith Development Theory

The developmental aspect of Fowler’s (1984) Faith Development Theory is of equal

importance to the definition of faith. Developmental psychology and the influence of Jean Piaget

in particular, are mentioned by Fowler in Stages of Faith as the author stated, “Like many

dimensions of our lives, faith seems to have a broadly recognizable pattern of development”

(Fowler & Dell, 2004, p. 36). Developmental frameworks have been the most common, and truly

a standard within spiritual formation research, with authors Espinoza and Johnson-Miller (2014)

having written:

Christian educators as a whole have to come to accept developmental theories as

a defining paradigm by which to understand the process of Christian

formation…From Piaget we learn about the nature and process of cognitive

growth, including the complementary processes of assimilation and

accommodation at work in the formation and transformation of faith (p. 10).

Developmental theories also emphasize the importance of age, such as Erik Erikson, who

identified key ages for which an individual is faced with a “developmental task” within his

model of psychosocial development (Fowler & Dell, 2004, p. 37). Otto and Harrington focused


21

particularly on the fourth stage of faith development, Individuative-Reflexive Faith, for studying

college-age students (2016). This is because at different stages in cognitive development,

humans have a certain capacity to make meaning of the world.

Developmentalism is also a theme within the Bible as Paul writes to the Corinthian

church “Brothers, I could not address you as spiritual but as worldly- mere infants in Christ. I

gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready” (1

Corinthians 3:1-3). This same reference to spiritual infancy with developmental themes arises in

Hebrews with the author having rebuked their lack of development:

In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach

you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid

food! Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the

teaching about righteousness. But solid food is for the mature, who by constant

use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil (Hebrews 5:12-14).

The literature and biblical evidence both support a developmental model of spiritual formation as

an appropriate framework by which to conceptualize spiritual formation in Christian higher

education. While other models exist, developmentalism remains the dominant framework

concerning this topic.

Research Questions

The following research questions were designed to understand spiritual formation in

Christian higher education. The relevance of this research questions spiritual formation programs

in new ways, examining various factors affecting these programs which inform practice for

educational leaders who serve student’s spiritual needs through these programs.

1. What are leader’s perceptions of spiritual formation programs?


22

2. What are the institutional influences affecting spiritual formation programs in Christian

higher education?

3. How are spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education designed to achieve

specific outcomes?

Definition of Terms

For the purpose of clarity, the following terms have been identified and defined. Each

term is defined within the context of this study and may hold a different meaning beyond the

context of this study. Various fields of study intersect on the topic of spiritual formation

including theology, psychology, and education. All definitions provided contain operational

definitions specific to this research and the study of spiritual formation in Christian higher

education.

Christian Higher Education. Christian higher education includes postsecondary

institutions who hold a Christ-centered mission statement. This term specifically is referring to

protestant Christianity within an institution holding accredited university status with a

distinctively Christian mission. The Council for Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU)

member institutions are an example of such spiritual and academic standards. The CCCU has a

missional devotion to biblical truth, Christian formation, and being a gospel witness (CCCU,

2020). This definition for the purposes of this study excludes institutions without a Christian

mission statement and those lacking university status or regional accreditation.

Discipleship. Discipleship is mentoring others into spiritual maturity and leadership.

Discipleship has its beginnings in Jewish culture in which a Rabbi would develop a personal

relationship with an individual, educating them in religious texts, and would personally minister

to the spiritual needs of the disciple (McCallum & Lowery, 2012, p. 4). Jesus modeled


23

discipleship in the New Testament as he formed personal relationships with an inner circle of 12

disciples. Christ taught them, ministered to their spiritual needs, and commissioned them to go

out and make disciples (Matthew 28:18-19). This term has its roots in the gospel, carried on by

the Christian church and referenced in the field of theology. Discipleship is often an intended

outcome in Christian education and many Christian higher education institutions encourage this

type of relationship between students and faculty (Steibel, 2010). Discipleship is referring to the

one-on-one ministerial relationship.

Disciplines. Spiritual disciplines or simply disciplines are defined by Willard (1998) as

“an activity within our power- something we can do- which brings us to a point where we can do

what we at present cannot do by direct effort” (p. 106). According to Richard Foster (1988)

“Spiritual growth is the purpose of the disciplines” (p. 8). Disciplines may be inward, outward,

or corporate which target the personal, relational, and social aspect of the Christian’s life (Foster,

1988). In the Gospel Jesus modeled spiritual disciplines. For example, “Before daybreak the next

morning, Jesus got up and went out to an isolated place to pray” (Mark 1:35). This exemplifies

the disciplines of solitude and prayer. Within the context of Christian higher education,

disciplines are encouraged and even mandated through spiritual formation programs. Students

are provided opportunities for corporate worship, small group Bible study, and are encouraged to

take personal time to focus on their relationship with God.

Ecclesiology. Ecclesiology is “the term for the area of theology considering the doctrine

of the church… Universally agreed is that the church is the church of Jesus Christ and those who

participate in the salvation of Jesus constitute the church” (Davie, et.al., 2011, p. 180). This

research focused on understanding how the polity and structure of the Christian church

associated with Christian higher education institutions affects spiritual formation programs.


24

Ecclesiology is used exclusively in reference to the church, this context predominantly

references a philosophy of the church in its relationship to Christian higher education

institutions.

Faith. Faith is the dynamic, patterned process, by which we find life meaningful in

having faith we set our hearts upon something (Fowler, 1984). The definition provided by the

theoretical framework Stages of Faith (1984) presents a psychological definition containing no

religious connotations. However, with the context of Christian higher education this term

operationally denotes a Christian orientation with this study. Faith is an action, a verb, which

denotes actively driving or giving life to one’s relationship with God (Hagberg & Guelich,

2005). Biblically, faith is belief which leads to moral actions (James 2). For the purposes of this

study the operational definition of faith is borrowed from Fowler (1984).

Faith Integration. Faith integration fuses Christianity with the curricula in Christian

higher education. This term seeks to expand the use of scriptures beyond a chapel service or

strictly spiritual elements of Christian education to expose students more to the study of the

Bible and the worship of God. This is a philosophy which has been adapted by many Christian

higher education institutions to promote spiritual formation in a way that saturates every aspect

of the university experience, not only recognizing faith as an afterthought (Reisz, 2003).

Morality. Morality is the subject of Lawrence Kohlberg’s theory of moral development

which is highly influential in Christian education research (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991). Like

most psychological terms, the study of morality does not in any way specify one particular faith.

In the context of Christianity, the Bible serves as a moral authority for most Christians,

presenting certain behaviors as wrong, and others as righteous (Galatians 5). While the old

testament provides clear moral rules, Jesus in many ways revolutionized morality to look beyond


25

legalism and institute a morality guided by values. Morality in psychology intersects with

Christian ethics in how spiritual formation affects behavioral change. Morality both in

psychology and Christian morality within theology combine to contribute different aspects of

how spiritual formation and Christian education contribute to the individual moral development

of an individual.

Sanctification. Sanctification is a theological term meaning to be made holy through

being “conformed to the image of Christ” (Porter, 2008, p. 129). This term holds different

theological implications which vary across religious traditions. The use of this term in this study

does not reference any one doctrinal definition, offering a general definition detached from

doctrine (Pargament & Mahoney, 2005). Sanctification is very closely aligned with spiritual

formation as a progressive developmental process and Porter (2008) goes as far to argue that the

existence of sanctification as a theological concept reduces the newer term spiritual formation to

irrelevancy. Sanctification is a theological term, spiritual formation, in contrast, is a term favored

in academic circles.

Soteriology. Soteriology is the study of salvation. Salvation has important implications

for students at Christian higher education institutions and their relationship with spiritual

formation programs. There is some debate in the literature as to whether or not spiritual

formation includes a salvation or conversion experience. Some research includes salvation as the

first step into spiritual formation (Olaroeby, 2016), while others believe that spiritual formation

begins after a person is saved and converted to Christianity (Ziegler, 2018). For the purposes of

this study, salvation is defined as the first step in spiritual formation due to the fact that a

salvation experience is a catalyst for the spiritual formation process.


26

Spiritual Formation. Spiritual formation is a term shrouded in confusion mostly due to its

popularity and broad use within a variety of contexts. Spiritual formation is not inherently

Christian however the operational definition for this study has reflected a distinctly Christian

perspective. The definition adopted for use in this study comes from Greenman (2015) who

defined spiritual formation as “our continuing response to the reality of God’s grace shaping us


for the sake of the world” (p. 24). This definition holds a Christian orientation while

encapsulating human response, God’s role in the process, growth into Christlikeness, and the

practical outcomes within the community and the world. There are various synonyms of spiritual

formation used interchangeably within the literature including spiritual growth, spiritual

direction, and spiritual maturity (Ma, 2003). Differing terminology does exist within the

literature, but the concept of spiritual formation is nearly universally embedded into the mission

of Christian higher education institutions (Tracy, 2002).

Spiritual Formation Programs. Spiritual formation programs in this study refer to programs

within Christian higher education institutions which are designed to serve students spiritually.

These programs include spiritually formative activities such as a chapel service, small group

Bible studies, and community service (Muntz & Crabtree, 2006). Additionally, academic

standards may be included such as a mandatory Bible minor or required courses. Spiritual

formation programs are seen as the manifestation of a Christian higher education institution’s

mission to add value to students spiritually through Christian worship and fellowship. Spiritual

formation programs often serve as a fellowship opportunity for students who are seeking to share

their faith, connect with other believers, and talk about God. Spiritual formation programs are the


27

manifestation of a Christian higher education institution’s commitment to serving students

spiritually.

Subjectivity & Researcher Positionality

The researcher’s experience in both spiritual formation programs and Christian higher

education impact the researcher’s perspectives about this topic. The value of seeking out

potential subjectivity and biases was influenced by Alan Peshkin (1988) who likewise was

researching Christian education. Peshkin (1988) noted that religious views affect a researcher’s

perspectives of faith-oriented institutions in relation to specific doctrine, ideologies, and religious

practices that the researcher may personally agree or disagree with. In conducting his research,

Peshkin found that his “values were at the end of his pen” and his proposed solution to this issue

is actively seeking out personal subjectivity (Peshkin, 1985, p. 227). In the same tradition, the

researcher seeks to become cognizant of personal subjectivity and its potential in influencing the

researcher’s perspectives while conducting this study.

Sue (2001) presented a model of personal identity consisting of three domains by which

to understand the positionality of the researcher. Using this model, the researcher seeks to

consciously seek out potential biases based on personal identity and past experiences. This model

is called the Tripartite framework of Personal Identity (2001), and categorizes identity into

universal, group, and individual levels.

The universal level is the broadest, consisting of shared human experience, thoughts and

feelings (Sue, 2001). There is little at the universal level that differentiates one person from

another. The group level of the tripartite framework contains the researcher’s involvement with

faith groups and relationships, which begin to shape and influence the researcher’s positionality.

The researcher has been involved in the Christian church for his entire adult life which has


28

shaped his identity as a Christian. Additionally, serving in protestant evangelical ministry and

working in education for over 5 years has led to anecdotal experiences which color the

researcher’s perspectives. As a recent graduate from two Christian higher education institutions

and earning degrees in ministry, these experiences have also shaped the group identity of the

researcher in relation to the subject. At the personal level, the researcher holds a personal faith in

Jesus Christ and a belief in the Bible which have produced life-orienting beliefs.

These personally held beliefs and anecdotal experiences may influence the researcher to

be more approving of the value of spiritual formation programs within Christian higher

education due to positive experiences as a student and supporting the value of Christian

education in pastoral ministry. Other factors such as race and socio-economic background may

also hold implications for this research. Pease (2010) spoke to the “invisibility of privilege”, that

those who benefit from privilege are often unable to recognize it (p. 9). The researcher is a white

male from Ohio which may hold indeterminable significance. In consideration of the invisible

role that privilege plays, it is disclosed that these factors may influence the research in ways both

obvious and implicit.

The experience gained from participation in spiritual formation programs within two

Christian higher education institutions also adds a valuable perspective for the researcher which

uniquely qualifies him to conduct this study. Involvement in these programs provides an

experiential understanding of the mission and practices within these programs, although

anecdotal experiences may be challenged through comparison with other institutions (Jones &

Nichols, 2013). Experience from having worked in the fields of education and ministry also

offers insight into the nature and purpose of both Christian higher education and the churches


29

who are so influential in spiritual formation. These experiences serve to benefit the researcher in

contextualizing the nature and mission of Christian education and ministry in a general sense.


30

Chapter II. Literature Review

A review of the literature on spiritual formation in Christian higher education was

conducted. The literature review was guided by the research questions to present the most

relevant research surrounding 1) leaders’ perspectives of spiritual formation within spiritual

formation programs 2) institutional influences upon spiritual formation programs, and 3) how

spiritual formation programs are designed to achieve specific outcomes. The literature provided

different theological perspectives, educational models, and data which add to an understanding

of the topic. This literature review is structured to explore the major topics of theories and

practices of spiritual formation, leaders’ perceptions, institutional influences, and spiritual

formation program design.

Theories of Spiritual Formation in Christian higher Education

Within spiritual formation in Christian higher education theory informs practice. Further,

theology and beliefs about God impact each institution’s philosophy of spiritual formation which

ultimately dictates how they design spiritual formation programs to serve students. Benson,

Roehlkepartain, and Rude (2003) stated the fundamental challenge in making a case for spiritual

development is the associated definitional challenge to precisely establish “What is it?” and

“How is it experienced?” (p. 205). Theories of spiritual formation seek to answer both of these

questions. The literature presents many different perspectives of spiritual formation that aid in

understanding different paths to spiritual formation within Christian higher education.

Biblical Models of Spiritual Formation

Within Christian higher education, many institutions strive to present a biblical model of

spiritual formation which reflects their institution’s commitment to the Word of God. Biblical

models of spiritual formation look to scripture to definitively establish what spiritual formation is


31

and how it is to be done. The theological tradition of biblical exegesis allows leaders in spiritual

formation to answer what spiritual formation is and how it should be approached by believers

based on a contextualized interpretation of scripture applied within the context of Christian

higher education. Inherent in many doctrines across Christianity is a high view of scripture, often

connoting biblical inerrancy, infallibility, and establishing the Bible as the foundation for

spiritual formation. The Bible itself represents this as one verse proclaimed “All Scripture is

inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong in our

lives. It corrects us when we are wrong and teaches us to do what is right. God uses it to prepare

and equip his people to do every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17). For many institutions, this is

the starting point and the emphasis on a biblical approach is reinforced by many institutions,

especially those holding a high view of scripture. However, interpretations of the Bible differ,

thus directly affecting an institution’s theory or philosophy of spiritual formation. The Bible

directly informs these biblical models of spiritual formation, shaping the Christian higher

education institution’s methods and intended outcomes in practical ways.

A biblical model of spiritual formation was presented by Willett (2010) who asserted the

process of spiritual formation takes place in stages not ages. The thesis being that age is no

guarantee of spiritual development. Willett (2010) defended this thesis with biblical support,

claiming that the apostle John was referring to the subjects of his first epistle as “little children”

(1 John 2:12) not as a reference to their age, but rather their current stage of spiritual

development. Willett (2010) then presented a model based on John’s first epistle a biblical

paradigm consisting of 3 stages and 8 milestones which serve as landmarks to measure one’s

spiritual maturity. Willett stated, “The assertion that 1 John 2:12-14 points to three distinct stages

of faith and offers a compelling biblical model for Christian growth is indeed consistent with the


32

apostle John’s teaching, his meaning, and his intent” (Willett, 2010, p. 90). This explanation is

an example of how biblical models of spiritual formation align themselves with scripture, in

effect supporting their argument with the Bible.

The two central research questions Willett used to guide his research were 1) Is John

referring to stages or ages? And 2) How many groups is John addressing? This research

answered these questions with a proposed model which is justified on the basis of how John

explains spiritual formation in his epistles. The author used topical themes of spiritual

development in addition to the exegetical approach from John’s epistles, adding further support

for this model using illustrations such as fitness/physical development (Hebrews 5:12-6:3),

community (Ephesians 4:12-16), and the development of an infant (1 Corinthians 2:14-3:4). This

biblical theory of spiritual development also contained strong themes of developmentalism,

which is extremely prevalent within the literature. The literature shows that biblical and

developmental models of spiritual formation are not juxtaposed, but harmonious. This also

indicates that theories of spiritual formation can be analyzed on both a theological and structural

level.

The faith model proposed by Willett (2010) is organized by categorizing individuals into

three spiritual stages. Stage one is the childhood stage which includes three milestones.

Childhood stage milestones are experiencing grace and forgiveness, embracing God as father,

and growing up together with others spiritually (Willett, 2010). Stage two is the young adulthood

stage where individuals “take ownership of faith” (p. 94). This stage also contains three

milestones where individuals develop a sense of ownership of their own personal faith, link truth

with life, and defeat the enemies of spiritual growth. The final stage in this model of spiritual

formation is the parenthood stage. In this stage individuals develop a sense of spiritual leadership


33

to serve others. The two milestones within this stage are empowering others and being seasoned

by time and experience. This model of spiritual formation is developed to encapsulate stages of

faith maturity with a particular emphasis on the individual’s role within the body of the church

(Willett, 2010).

The research question that guided this study was “how does spiritual growth happen?”

(Willett, 2010, p. 96). This question was explored through the lens of the Bible which led the

author to findings from the text. These stages of spiritual growth: 1) are common to all believers,

2) identify and explain both content and process, 3) are sequential, travelled by every believer in

the same order, 4) cumulative, building on one another, each stage incorporating the preceding

one and serving as a foundation for the next, 5) move us toward maturity, wholeness, and

Christlikeness, 6) are linked to our age, but flexibly so, 7) are idiosyncratic, 8) growth is not

continuous, 9) growth is not inevitable, and 10) stages of growth can be measured (Willard,

2010). These conclusions have important application to research on spiritual formation in

Christian higher education as it describes spiritual formation as biblical, developmental, and

influenced by how the Bible is interpreted or applied within a particular context.

Biblical models of spiritual formation were applied in how individuals “take note of the

distance already traveled as well as plan for the distance yet to be covered” (Willett, 2010, p. 88).

These models served as a template by which spiritual formation program leaders may recognize

a pattern of spiritual growth in student populations within Christian higher education. A model

rooted in the Bible was also theologically defended by the model’s association with the Bible.

In an article titled Modeling Spiritual Formation from a Distance: Paul’s Formation

Transactions with the Roman Christians by Forrest and Lamport (2013), the authors used

biblical support to justify the mission and purpose of spiritual formation within Christian higher


34

education. The thesis of this research connected spiritual formation through online distance

education to the apostle Paul’s ministry to the Roman church, based on his epistle to the Romans.

The author used the book of Romans as a template to expound upon what spiritual formation is

and how it might be done. The authors explained this application having stated that “Paul’s

spiritual formation of the Roman Christians offers Christian educators’ insight into how this

process can be approached even from a distance” (Forrest & Lamport, 2013, p. 110). Spiritual

formation was defined for the purposes of this research as “the process of coming to grips with

our finite humanness and developing an understanding that our sufficiency lies in the person of

Christ” (Forrest & Lamport, 2013, p. 111). This article addressed spiritual formation from an

online education context and uses the Bible to justify a model for spiritual formation.

The support for the author’s theory of spiritual formation comes from biblical passages

which exemplify and support methods of distance ministry. Paul’s epistles make references to a

spiritual connectedness despite physical distance. Paul states, “For though I am far away from

you, my heart is with you. And I rejoice that you are living as you should and that your faith in

Christ is strong” (Colossians 2:5). Paul also uses this same verbiage in his epistle to the church at

Corinth, “Even though I am not with you in person, I am with you in the Spirit. And as through I

were there, I have already passed judgement on this man” (1 Corinthians 5:3). The authors stated

that “the relationship with humans and God is not a proximal relationship, but an incarnational

relationship. Thus, spiritually formative relationships do not necessarily need to emphasize

physical proximity” (Forrest & Lamport, 2013, p. 114). The case made by the authors is an

example of how pedagogical approaches in Christian higher education are defended using

biblical support. The authors offered no biblical model but provided a biblical defense of their

methods for spiritual formation within Christian higher education.


35

The findings from this study are presented in the form of eight implications for spiritual

formation. The authors findings are: 1) the ground of the spiritual formation is the gospel, 2) the

authority of spiritual formation is scripture, 3) the impetus of spiritual formation is transparency,

4) the means of spiritual formation is dialogue, 5) the location of spiritual formation is

community, 6) the motivation for spiritual formation is encouragement, 7) the basis for spiritual

formation is prayer, and 8) the impetus of spiritual formation is accountability (Forrest &

Lamport, 2013). The application of this study to the general field of research on spiritual

formation in Christian higher education is that models are defensible within Christian higher

education when supported biblically with scriptural evidence. Paul’s intent originally was

relative to distance ministry, not to speak to spiritual formation in distance education, yet the

authors use evidence from his distance ministry as biblical evidence which may justify this

method of spiritual formation in online distance education.

Yet another example of a biblical model of spiritual formation comes from Olaoreby

(2016), who wrote “Spiritual Formation in Higher Education: A case for grace-filled service

delivery from the book of Romans”. The purpose statement was set forth by Olaoreby (2016)

who stated, “This paper will be pursuing the course of the Gospel in Romans Pauline model for

the purpose of understanding how spiritual formation takes place in Christian higher education”

(p. 2). This study recognized much of the important literature on the topic of spiritual formation

from the Forrest and Lamport (2013) study, as well as contributions from Willard (2000), as well

as referencing the Bible, particularly the book of Romans, as support to the argument.

Olaoreby’s (2016) thesis established that Romans 1:16 is the central verse to the entire

book of Romans, especially in regard to the process of spiritual formation. In this verse Paul

proclaimed “For I am not ashamed of this Good News about Christ. It is the power of God at


36

work, saving everyone who believes- the Jew first and also the Gentile” (Romans 1:16).

According to Olaoreby (2016), “This statement therefore places the spotlight of spiritual

formation on the gospel as the avenue for transmitting the virtues of Christianity through the

influence of faculty (teachers) on their students in higher education institutions” (p. 3). And so,

using the same epistle from the New Testament the author uses the text to establish the value of

teacher-student mentoring relationships. This approach also implicates the role and value of

teachers, faculty, and leaders of spiritual formation programs in influencing spiritual growth in

the lives of students in a discipleship or mentoring relationship.

The author established three elements from the Bible which holds application to spiritual

formation in Christian higher education. Olaoreby (2016) claimed that “the gospel captures

Paul’s teachings for the spiritual formation of the young believers in Rome just as it does for

spiritual formation of young students today” (p. 4). These three elements are: 1) justification, 2)

sanctification, and 3) glorification (Olaoreby, 2016). Justification is an act of God whereby

humans are made free from the guilt and penalty of sin; this includes and goes beyond

forgiveness to be as if the sin never occurred, based on Romans 1:16 and Romans 5:9-19.

Sanctification means to be made holy, set apart, and is the process of one living for God

according to their sacred purpose, represented in Romans 5:17-23 and Romans 8:1-39.

Glorification is an exaltation to the glory of heaven, whereby a person is in a more splendid

form, from Romans 12:1-12 and Romans 16:20. In setting forth this model, Olaroeby (2016)

similarly defended each point with scriptural support to frame this model as biblical.

Findings and conclusions were presented in five practical steps or applications that

faculty, teachers, and leaders in Christian higher education can implement to add value to

students spiritually through mentoring relationships. These are: 1) posted office hours, 2) life


37

groups/small groups, 3) posting devotional materials for interaction and comments, 4) prayer

request and testimonies forum, and 5) worship service attendance-monitor and guidance

(Olaroeby, 2016). Each of these applications to spiritual formation programs in Christian higher

education connect how “Paul in the book of Romans employed the gospel as the template for

teaching the elements of Christian living in a secular world” (Olaoreby, 2016, p. 11). This model

of spiritual formation communicated the gospel and developed a model for spiritual formation

out of a biblical description.

In summary, the use of biblical support is foundational in nearly every theory or model of

spiritual formation in Christian higher education. Underlying the program design and structural

elements of spiritual formation programs is a theological approach which is rooted in an

interpretation of scripture and application to the context of Christian higher education. Within

that context, the Bible serves as an anchor to validate spiritual value and doctrinal truth. Spiritual

formation in Christian higher education is indivisible from a theological perspective which is a

universal influence within each Christian higher education institution.

Developmental Models of Spiritual Formation

Developmentalism is a common approach within models of spiritual formation in

Christian higher education. These models set forth a linear progression with steps, stages, or

levels of progression. The concept of developmental theory originated from the works of Jean

Piaget, the classical psychologist who developed his Theory of Cognitive Development in

Origins of Intelligence in a Child (Piaget & Cook, 1952). This framework has gone on to

influence many other fields of study, including theory surrounding spiritual formation. While the

theory surrounding spiritual formation in Christian higher education is not solely developmental

in approach, the vast majority of frameworks follow this type of developmental pattern.


38

In an article titled Catechesis, Developmental Theory, and a Fresh Vision for Christian

Education Espinoza and Johnson-Miller (2014) established “The impact of developmental theory

on the field of Christian education cannot be overstated” (p. 8). They further added, “Christian

educators as a whole have to come to accept developmental theories as a defining paradigm by

which to understand the process of Christian formation” (p. 10). Scholarly work in the field of

Christian education has been heavily reliant upon developmental frameworks which contain

“substantial insights and implications that developmental theory can offer Christian education”

(p. 8). The literature review conducted by Espinoza and Johnson-Miller (2014) supports the wide

prevalence in developmental theory in Christian education, particularly in the framing of

spiritual development.

Espinoza and Johnson-Miller (2014) provided an operational definition of catechesis as

“the utilization and embrace of liturgical days, methodical religious practices, and language that

includes all generations” (p. 15). Additionally, provided is the purpose of developmental theory,

“Developmental theory illuminates the nature and process of human growth- mental, emotional,

social, moral reasoning, and existential/spiritual/religious meaning making” (Espinoza &

Johnson-Miller, 2014, p.10). Developmental models frequently connect spiritual growth to other

dimensions of human growth within child development, often the development of the spirit is

likened to the development of the mind and body. In this way, developmental models strive to

offer a holistic approach to these varied dimensions of human growth. The authors recognize the

influence of Jean Piaget as the pioneer of developmental thought. Piaget’s influence is

specifically identified: “From Piaget we learn about the nature and process of cognitive growth,

including the complementary processes of assimilation and accommodation at work in the

formation and transformation of faith” (p. 10). Piaget’s influence is frequently cited by many


39

thought leaders within spiritual formation, including Fowler (1988) in Stages of Faith which

serves as the theoretical framework for this study.

Espinoza and Johnson-Miller’s (2014) explained, “Our argument is that developmental

theory must be incorporated as a vital dimension within a comprehensive theological orientation

that recognizes the theological significance of human growth and related pedagogy” (p. 9). This

thesis recognized the significance both theology and developmentalism in influencing theory

surrounding spiritual formation in Christian higher education. The proposed method presented by

the authors was described as “catechesis, not as informal indoctrination, but as a dynamic

lifelong process of theological and spiritual cultivation for the sake of divine attentiveness” (p.

9). This method is shared by many Christian higher education institutions which seek to serve

students spiritually, while not presuming that students are at equal levels of spiritual

development.

The authors also recognize some challenges to developmental theory within the context

of Christian education. According to Espinoza and Johnson-Miller (2014), “Our newfound

recognition of the inseparable nature of human development and spiritual growth/Christian

maturity led to confusion between human development and spiritual growth even to the point of

equating one with the other” (p. 12). Many models and even the Bible itself use a developmental

approach to explain spiritual growth. Spiritual formation is then, independent from physical

development however, this does not to make them mutually exclusive. Both domains of

development are separate and while they at times may correlate, there is no causational

relationship. The findings from this study come from biblical exposition and literature review

posit “Both Scripture and church history point to catechesis as the faith forming/transforming

process leading to maturity and wholeness in Christ” (Espinoza & Johnson-Miller, 2014, p. 20).


40

The discussion of this fresh vision for Christian education was designed to harmonize the

biblical/theological orientation with the insights of developmental theory, appropriating the

integration of both in spiritual formation programs within the context of Christian higher

education.

The application of this research emphasized the role of developmental theory on the topic

of spiritual formation in Christian higher education. Developmentalism is the primary framework

for understanding spiritual formation evidenced by its broad use within the literature. The thesis

that developmental theory is a “vital dimension within a comprehensive theological orientation”

encapsulates the value of developmental theory while also recognizing the theological elements

within models of spiritual formation (Espinoza & Johnson-Miller, 2014, p. 9). The combination

of theology and a psychological framework, such as developmentalism, are the foundational

elements which comprise most major models of spiritual formation.

The Critical Journey, a book authored by Hagberg and Guelich (2005), presented a six-

stage model for development in the life of faith (Figure 2). Spirituality is defined operationally

by the authors as “the way in which we live out our response to God” (p. 2). The definition of

faith provided is “the process in which we let God direct our lives” (p. 4). This framework

positioned within the literature offered similarities with its developmental approach while also

containing unique elements which distinguish it from many other models of spiritual

development.


41

Figure 2. The Critical Journey

The first three steps in this developmental model delineate the external manifestations of

a life of faith, while the latter three steps are internal. The authors highlight the importance of

conceptualizing this model in its entirety, having said, “all six stages of faith and the Wall are

important in our spiritual journey” (Hagberg & Guelich, 2005, p. 186). The first stage in The

Critical Journey (2005) is when an individual develops an Awareness of God. In finding God, a

sense of awe and meaning enters the person’s life for the first time. The second step is a Life of

Discipleship. This stage is where the Christian is learning, growing, and belonging within the

scope of a community, typically a church or other religious body. Step three is when the person

enters into a Life of Production. The authors referred to this as the “doing” stage in which

individuals take action through Christian service (Hagberg & Guelich, 2005). The fourth stage in

The Critical Journey (2005) is the Inward Journey. At this phase individuals begin to have an

introspective focus, questioning their beliefs and behavior from the previous stages. Spiritual

journeys during phase 4 may appear as doubt, included within the model as “The Wall”


42

(Hagberg & Guelich, 2005). The Wall is an important moment in The Critical Journey because

this stage introduces conflict between the individual’s will and God’s will (Hagberg & Guelich,

2005). The Wall moment is marked by a struggle. For example, not being able to overcome guilt,

reach acceptance of Biblical truths, or challenging ideas that were held over a long period of

time. The fifth stage is the Journey Outward, which brings healing after breaking through the

wall. The Outward Journey is when the individual, in submission to God’s will, lives with the

motivation to serve God. This is having established the trust from successfully completing the

earlier steps in the journey of faith. Finally, the sixth stage is living the life of love in response to

God’s grace. This final stage of The Critical Journey (2005) is the pinnacle of the spiritual

journey in that the believer now is living detached from sin and the world to live according to

God’s grace. The Critical Journey (2005) follows this process to explain how individuals live

lives in the faith. This model follows a Christian orientation which is applicable to the context of

Christian higher education.

The defining elements of the Critical Journey model are the use of the journey allegory, a

cyclical dynamic, and the Wall stage. According to the authors, “A journey involves process,

action, movement, change, experience, stops and starts, variety, humdrum and surprises…A

journey implies more than a quick trip from point A to point B” (Hagberg & Guelich, 2005, p.

5). Following this model, you never truly arrive at spiritual formation but something that is being

continually worked out. This cyclical model introduces complications as an individual can be at

different stages simultaneously pertinent to different situations. This model also equates all

levels of formation. No one step is superior to another and all must repeat steps many times in

different ways relative to their individual lives. The authors describe this structure having stated,

“The circle with each stage on the circumference and God in the middle shows that each stage


43

has equal access to God” (p. 252). This model is unique in its inclusion of The Wall, requiring a

breakthrough to promote further spiritual formation (Hagberg & Guelich, 2005). While the

concept of struggling with one’s faith or beliefs is included in many models of spiritual

formation, the idea of a spiritual struggle creating an impasse for the individual is a defining

feature of this particular model. This six-stage model is similar to other models of spiritual

formation and faith development. Each phase illustrates how people think and act within these

stages, bridging biblical theology with a developmental framework for spiritual formation. This

model builds from past research and incorporates new ideas to set forth an almost hybrid-model

of spiritual formation which is grounded in theology, developmentalism, and psychology.

Stages of Faith by James Fowler (1984) is the book containing the theoretical framework

called the Faith Development Theory, which is used in this study and follows a developmental

approach to spiritual formation. Fowler’s (1984) Faith Development Theory illustrates how

human beings conceptualize God and “how the influence of that Higher Being has an impact on

core values, beliefs and meanings in their personal lives and in their relationships with others”

(Fowler & Dell, 2004, p. 34). Faith Development Theory offers six stages of faith development

beginning with Primal Faith and escalating to Universalizing Faith (Fowler, 1984). The

developmental roots of this framework are clearly influenced by Piaget, as the framework

utilizes a tiered model. Fowler and Dell (2004) stated that “Like many dimensions of our lives,

faith seems to have a broadly recognizable pattern of development” (p. 36). This model is

representative of the use of developmentalism within spiritual formation theory.

Fowler’s theory of faith development is influenced by classical Piagetian

developmentalism, as the author cites in Stages of Faith having stated “the research on faith

development owes a great debt of gratitude to Piaget, Kohlberg, and many of their associates”


44

(Fowler, 1984, p. 101). Fowler’s model is heavily influenced by three key thinkers: Jean Piaget,

Erik Erikson, and Lawrence Kohlberg. The influence of these thinkers clearly connects theories

of spiritual formation to psychological models, with various instruments and models utilizing

psychometric measures. These psychological models provide the justification for the linear path

towards spiritual formation as individuals follow the pattern to progress from stage to stage.

In application to spiritual formation in Christian higher education, Otto and Harrington

(2016) specifically isolated the fourth stage, Individuative-Reflexive Faith, as particularly

relevant to Christian higher education:

The years of late teens and early adulthood mark a budding ability to begin to

think critically about ideas that had previously been assumed. Fowler claimed that

it is at this stage in the process of spiritual formation that individuals first (a) are

capable of taking full responsibility for their religious beliefs; (b) begin asking

questions based on the meaning of life, work, death, sexuality, and power; and (c)

begin developing religious ideologies (p. 255).

This reference brings out the connection between physical and cognitive development to faith or

spiritual development. As people grow and develop, their capacity for deepening their faith

increases based on Fowler’s (1984) model. At the young-adult stage individuals begin to

question their beliefs and challenge their thinking with new ideas, a concept typically associated

with the college years.

There is an interesting connection between Fowler’s theory and the Biblical description

of spiritual formation through a process of development. The author of Hebrews exhibits

frustration with the spiritual development of the church having written them:


45

In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach

you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid

food! Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the

teaching about righteousness. But solid food is for the mature, who by constant

use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil” (Hebrews 5:12-14).

Fowler described a similar issue or challenge individuals face when getting stuck in the third

stage of faith development, the Synthetic-Conventional stage. Fowler wrote individuals who are

stuck “do not have a sure enough grasp on its own identity and autonomous judgement to

construct and maintain an independent perspective” (1984, p. 173). This connection illustrates

the similarities between developmental models and the description of spiritual formation from

the Bible.

Estep (2002) authored Spiritual Formation as Social: Toward A Vygotskyan

Developmental Perspective which challenged the majority of research on developmental

approaches in favor of a social-emotional learning-based approach to spiritual formation. Estep

(2002) recognized, “Developmentalism has had an obvious impact on our conceptualization of

spiritual formation, even the terminology of developmentalism has entered our vocabulary, for

example faith development, spiritual development, and the use of the term stages” (p. 141). The

author of this article posited that while Christian growth occurs within a developmental process,

that process does not necessitate a strictly Piagetian developmental model. According to Estep

(2002), “Developmentalism provides a means for Christian educators to frame a description of

spiritual formation in general, partially explain the process of spiritual formation, and prescribe

appropriate educational interventions for spiritual formation” (p. 142). In acknowledging that

developmental theories are dominant within the literature surrounding spiritual formation, the


46

argument is made that a strictly developmental approach may not be best suited to framing such

a multifaceted topic.

The thesis of this article offered that a nonlinear development model of spiritual

formation would offer a new, possibly more accurate model for conceptualizing spiritual

formation within broader human development. The support for this argument was rooted in the

work of Lev Vygotsky, whose work emphasized “the interrelationship between the development

of the mind and its embodiment in social interaction, the relevance of his theory to the fields of

psychology, anthropology, literature, sociolinguistics, and art” (Estep, 2002, p. 143). The

deficiency of attention paid to Vygotsky is valid, as his name is nearly universally neglected

from research surrounding this topic.

Estep (2002) claimed that there is a dichotomy often presented between Vygotsky and

Piaget, which is not necessarily merited. The major difference between the two is the difference

in value that each placed on social interaction, with Vygotsky placing the higher value upon it

with his social-emotional learning approach (Estep, 2002). Their differences have been

exaggerated which has created the dichotomy that development in such a subject as spiritual

formation is either developmental or social-emotional. It may very well be that both theories

impact spiritual formation but there is no further research to validate this. Piaget believed that the

mind formed individually, while Vygotsky surmised that it was a social process of interaction

which led to the development (Estep, 2002). The application of these two researchers among the

literature of spiritual formation leans almost completely towards Piaget, yet Estep’s (2002) work

serves as a challenge to this approach, forcing consideration that social-emotional learning may

influence spiritual formation on some level of analysis.


47

Findings from this theoretical research contained implications for Christian higher

education, most notably regarding the role that social interaction plays in the process of spiritual

formation. Estep (2002) stated “Vygotsky presents an approach to education that can best be

described not as simply student-centered versus content-centered, but as the student-in-

society/culture centered” (p. 154). This holds value for research which is underrepresented

within the literature connecting the value of social development in spiritual formation programs.

As institutions seek to increasingly design programs in ways that promote a fellowship or social

dynamic, this research will continue to add value to how spiritual formation programs might be

shaped from a social perspective.

Leader’s Perspectives on Spiritual Formation Programs

Leaders play an important role in spiritual formation programs. In providing spiritual

leadership, “leaders are expected to know what they are speaking about, and this demands some

sort of internalization of the tradition and competence in living out its resources” (Naidoo, 2011,

p. 119). The literature collectively presents a high priority on the role of leaders of spiritual

formation programs in accomplishing the Christian mission of the university or institution. It has

been well established that “Christian spiritual formation is central to the educational work of the

theological institution” (p. 122). The literature provides insight into what institutions expect from

their educators and leaders at Christian higher education institutions.

Naidoo (2011) conducted research titled An Empirical Study on Spiritual Formation at

Protestant Theological Training Institutions in South Africa. The research questions held a

combined focus on leadership in both Christian higher education and the church. As the author

stated, “Within Protestant theological education, a major consideration in determining the goal

and content of formation is to honor the expectations that the Church has of its leaders” (p. 120).


48

Essentially, leaders in Christian higher education are held to the same standard as ministers

serving in the church. This makes evident the intersection of the church and education institution

on a cultural level, infusing pedagogy with ecclesiology, especially relative to spiritual formation

programs. Christian institutions aim to ensure that teachers, faculty, and leaders are not just

individuals of high academic qualifications, but who also align theologically with the church and

can be a spiritual leader for students who can add value to their spiritual lives.

This research uses a theoretical framework which is a hybrid of two models of practical

theology, which are application-based models emphasizing practice more so than theory. This

framework is designed to show how “academia tends to engage with theology, bringing methods

of a wide range of disciplines of enquiry into dialogue with theology and ecclesial practice”

(Naidoo, 2011, p. 124). The research questions guiding this study were: 1) to find out whether

spiritual formation is being intentionally pursued, 2) to examine the academic and non-academic

methods in which spiritual formation is being fostered in theological institutions, and 3) to

develop a valid and reliable instrument to measure the spiritual formation emphasis at

theological institutions (Naidoo, 2011). This study looked at spiritual formation expectations for

both students and leaders of these programs, however only conducted research on student

populations. The methods for this research followed a mixed-methodological approach using

semi-structured interviews and a student questionnaire (Naidoo, 2011). The holistic approach

this study took led to more information about the role of leaders of spiritual formation programs.

There was a challenge with the interdenominational approach to sampling due to the fact

that the sample “needs to be narrow enough for participants to share a similar understanding of

spiritual formation, yet broad enough so that the data collection will not be biased by a single

denomination’s particular emphasis on doctrine or lifestyle” (Naidoo, 2011, p. 127). This study


49

represented denominational diversity through the design of a two-stage stratified sample which

provided equal representation from all denominational backgrounds. The denominational

categories used by Naidoo (2011) represented major faith traditions. With all of the faith

diversity among Christianity it would be impossible to provide an exhaustive list, therefore this

list aims to account for faith diversity and differences in theology amongst Christian institutions

on a broad level. For this reason, these categories used are to be seen as general guidelines and

this same method of sampling is adopted by many interdenominational studies.

The data for this study was collected by a lecturer or spiritual caregiver involved in

spiritual formation. According to Naidoo (2011), “This added many perspectives, backgrounds,

and social characteristics and yielded a more complete picture of spiritual formation at

theological institutions” (p. 126). The survey distributed was a pilot study for a new instrument,

the Spiritual Formation Index, which measures spirituality based on involvement, rather than a

psychometrically based approach. Data analysis was done using a descriptive matrix used in

comparing, conceptualizing, and categorizing qualitative data. Additionally, Naidoo (2011)

stated “a conceptual map was designed placing theological institutions along a spectrum based

on the intentionality of spiritual formation at their institution” (p. 126). Chi-square tests were a

key element of the data analysis process to determine the significance of an association between

spirituality and institutions.

The findings from this analysis showed that Baptist, Charismatic and Pentecostal

denominations all had scores above 75% for “highest priority” of spiritual formation (Naidoo,

2011, p. 134). The p-value was 0.0091, lower than 0.05 and indicates a significant association

exists between perceptions of priority of spiritual growth and theological institutions at a 99%

level of confidence. Findings from this study show that there are significant differences across


50

institutions in student’s “perceptions of the institution’s priority regarding growth in spiritual

depth and moral integrity” (p. 136). This measurement of spiritual formation as a priority within

theological institutions showed that many Christian higher education institutions prioritize

spiritual formation as a core element of their mission and programming.

This study holds value by establishing the importance of spiritual formation programs as

an intentional outcome within theological institutions. Naidoo’s (2011) study provided

suggestions for future research: “The maturity of future Christian leaders is an important

challenge and needs to be addressed throughout the theological training” (p. 140). This study

identified the priority of leaders in Christian higher education which serve to develop a more

integrated environment for student’s spirituality and education.

In a study titled Assessing Spiritual Formation in Christian Seminary Communities Reisz

(2003) outlined the structural elements and roles of leaders in spiritual formation programs. This

research followed a case study approach and disclaims that these practices examined are “not yet

a model” of spiritual formation (Reisz, 2003, p. 33). The context of this research was within the

context of a Lutheran seminary institution. Within the study the practices and structures are

analyzed and defined, highlighting how the outcome of spiritual formation was pursued within

the institution. The problem statement established that while there are institutional influences

upon institutions, in this case, the Association of Theological Schools who “expect some

manifestation of spiritual formation to be evident and assessable”, does not provide a clear-cut

path towards spiritual formation as “there is no commonly agreed upon model for either spiritual

formation or its assessment” (p. 32-33). This challenge reflects the vague and varied definitions

of spiritual formation across the national landscape of Christian higher education.


51

The research questions which guided ethis study were: 1) Are spiritual disciplines a core

element of spiritual formation programs? 2) Is there an intentional spiritual formation in the

graduate’s ministry setting? Has the pastor/minister been an effective leader and teacher in

forming spiritual development for his or her faith community? And 3) Are there a significant

number of ministry settings served by a school’s graduates who are known by their members and

exteriors to be spiritually formative in significant ways? (Reisz, 2003, p. 38-39). These questions

represent an inquiry into the role of spiritual formation programs, the intentionality of spiritual

formation as a priority of the institution, and how the institution aims to serve students and add

value to them spiritually. Examining an institution’s methods for accomplishing these outcomes

serves to enlighten researchers about common practice within Christian higher education.

Reisz (2003) described the spiritual formation program within the institution having

stated, “Our campus has a long-standing daily chapel tradition with faculty, staff, and students

attending” (p. 33). Chapel is generally considered to be the cornerstone of spiritual formation due

to how it brings together everyone at the institution for the purpose of spiritual development. In

the classroom spiritual formation is also prioritized, as “faculty members pray at the beginning of

their classes or have student prayers” which is designed to lead to show “how disciplines and

practices of the Spirit mark and are integrated into the whole life of the community” (p. 33). This

study was conducted with the purpose of increasing the level of intentionality placed upon

spiritual formation through the structural and leadership elements of the institution.

The methodology of this research tested the effects of a more intentional focus on

spiritual formation by setting into place a faculty-student task force appointed by the president

for the purposes of increasing opportunities for spiritual formation (Reisz, 2003). Additionally, a

director of spiritual formation, who was a former pastor was hired to specifically assist students


52

in their spiritual development. Assessments of spiritual formation were conducted by analyzing

how comprehensively spiritually formative activities are made available to students, levels of

participation in these programs/activities, and interview/survey assessments from students.

The findings from this study revealed that “Spiritual formation also should be

comprehensive in the sense of the extent of spiritual disciplines and educational opportunities

which are made available” (Reisz, 2003, p. 35). Structurally, leadership was instrumental in

setting programs into place which are designed to foster spiritual growth. Daily chapel worship,

spiritually focused elective courses, and quiet contemplative services were all chosen to be

assessed based on the focused intentionality for spiritual formation among other expectations

from the institution’s leadership. A conclusion was that “it is important both that the faculty

support the development of intentional spiritual formation, and that faculty members themselves

are involved, indeed leading, some of these practices and disciplines, even within the

classrooms” (p. 36-37). The role of faculty, staff, and leaders in pursuing the goal of spiritual

formation as an intentional outcome is again emphasized to highlight their influence on the

spiritual growth of students.

Reisz’s (2003) research described in detail a leader’s role and influence upon spiritual

formation programs, which serves to justify this study’s intention to gain their perspectives to

inform practices within spiritual formation programs. These practices, “In most, if not all,

theological schools, worship, prayer, Bible study, theological reflection and prayerful service

ministries in communities have been a part of theological education for centuries” (Reisz, 2003,

p. 39). Reisz recommended “As we create programs of spiritual formation and seek to spiritually

form our students, assessment of these efforts will add to their depth, breadth, utility, saliency,

and validity” (p. 39). This study serves as a clear example of spiritual formation in Christian


53

higher education and justifies the continued research of the role and perspectives of leaders of

spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education.

An article titled Spiritual Formation Goes to College: Class Related Soul Projects in

Christian Higher Education further supported the role and influence of leaders of spiritual

formation programs (Setran, et. al., 2010). The authors “suggested that [spiritual] development is

closely related to faculty encouragement of the processes of spiritual transformation” (p. 401).

The problem statement of this article cited secularization statistics to show that college-age

students are less religious compared to other groups. Secularization is viewed as a challenge to

the leaders in Christian higher education who seek to serve students spiritually in education.

The method proposed to further student spiritual formation are soul-projects in which

leaders of spiritual formation programs lead students in self-inflective exercises (Setran et.al.,

2010). This study further supported the desire to serve students spiritually by those working in

Christian higher education, having said “faculty members often desire to play a role in student

spiritual growth” (p. 404). Spiritual formation is not solely confined to spiritual formation

programs as students may attempt to compartmentalize spirituality from academia, the authors

propose that spiritual formation can pervade the culture of the campus, affecting classrooms and

the broader educational environment. As a part of the research, a Christian educator shared “we

are quite capable of teaching our students about spiritually formative educational theories and

practices” (Setran, et. al., 2010, p. 405). The proposed implementation of soul-projects is built on

the role of faculty serving students through spiritual formation programs.

In summary, leaders of spiritual formation programs are uniquely positioned to meet the

intended outcomes of spiritual formation programs. In the institution’s design to carry out its

mission or faith statement, spiritual formation programs provide leaders and students the


54

opportunity to connect in ways that will promote spiritual growth. The research supports the role

of leaders within this setting to facilitate and develop programs effectively which promote

spiritual formation. The literature emphasizes the value of the leaders of spiritual formation

programs. Of the limited research that does give attention to the topic of leaders, leaders are

highly valued as a critical aspect of the spiritual formation programs in which they serve.

Institutional Influences on Spiritual Formation Programs

Institutional influences affect spiritual formation programs within Christian higher

education. Spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education often share the

discipleship and evangelistic missions of the church. The Christian church intersects with

Christian higher education institutions as the theology of the church tends to shape structures and

approaches taken within spiritual formation programs. Accreditation organizations also exert

influence on spiritual formation programs. Spiritual formation programs are subject to

assessment, which are distinctly different from academic program assessment. Accreditation

organizations can influence spiritual formation programs via their expectations, standards, and

requirements which dictate program design, methods, and theological orientation. The most

recognizable institutional influences upon spiritual formation programs are denominationalism

and accreditation, however in practicality, there are endless factors which shape spiritual

formation programs.

Denominational and Theological Influences

In a study by Greenman (2015) titled Spiritual Formation in Theological Perspective, the

author explored the relationship between spiritual formation and theology. The purpose of the

study was to “offer a theological map of the landscape currently under discussion about spiritual

formation, with particular attention to the ways in which evangelical theological convictions


55

relate to a wider conversation” (Greenman, 2015, p. 23). This study established the central role

that theology plays in spiritual formation, partiularly, how theology shapes denominational

traditions, structure, and doctrine.

The author began with establishing an operational definition of spiritual formation.

Greenman’s (2015) definition of spiritual formation is “our continuing response to the reality of

God’s grace shaping us into the likeness of Jesus Christ, through the work of the Holy Spirit, in

the community of faith, for the sake of the world” (p. 24). This definition offers a comprehensive

description of the purpose, goal, and outcomes from spiritual formation. This definition is rooted

in scripture for example, Greenman (2015) cited that our purpose in spiritual formation is to love

others because God has first loved us (1 John 4:19) and to be transformed into the likeness of

Jesus Christ (Romans 8:29; 2 Corinthians 3:18). The theological orientation of this definition is

also broad enough to be inclusive of all denominations while providing a clear path towards

spiritual formation.

Greenman’s (2015) thesis posited that “Spiritual formation involves spiritual disciplines,

such as prayer, confession, fasting, and biblical meditation as well as corporate participation in

the congregation’s shared life of worship, fellowship and teaching” (p. 26). This is demonstrative

of how the relationship between a robust theology leads to changed behavior. Biblically, Paul

reinforced “God saved you by his grace when you believed. And you can’t take credit for this; it

is a gift from God” (Ephesians 2:8). Additionally, the scripture highlights the relationship

between theology and Christian living, “What good is it, dear brothers and sisters, if you say you

have faith but don’t show it by your actions? Can that kind of faith save anyone?” (James 2:14).

This argument details that theory informs practice for the Christian life and that Christianity is

not a meritocracy. It can be clearly presented that spiritual formation is not an attempt to become


56

righteous or justified by works, rather it is the reflection of having a faith relationship with Jesus

Christ.

A theological definition of spiritual formation also has led Greenman (2015) to have

identified “classic theological issues that are necessarily involved in the discussion of spiritual

formation” (p. 31). These issues are 1) the shape of our creatureliness and sociality as embodied

souls 2) the nature of sin and its consequences 3) the meaning and significance of divine grace

and the atonement 4) the work of the triune God, especially the distinctive work of the Holy

Spirit 5) the meaning of “becoming like Christ” 6) the relationships between conversion,

regeneration, justification, and sanctification 7) the appropriation of the means of grace in the

Christian life, especially prayer and sacraments 8) the relationship between inward growth and

outward service 9) the meaning of love, especially love for God with heart, mind, soul and

strength, and love for one’s neighbor as oneself. Denominations and faith traditions within

Christianity hold different points regarding these classical theological issues, yet all are

theologically oriented. Greenman (2015) presented that Christian speech about spiritual

formation will “necessarily involve a way of handling these complex theological topics, and

probably a number of others not yet listed” (p. 32). Theology is therefore a massive subject with

endless implications into spiritual formation theory and practice.

The findings from this study acknowledged the influence of theology on the subject of

spiritual formation. Greenman (2015) connected theology to practice by having said: “theology

is not an end in itself, but a servant of the church that seeks to ‘equip the saints for the work of

ministry’ (Ephesians 4:12)” (p. 35). The application to Christian higher education are understood

in the theological emphases dictated by the affiliated church, denomination or faith tradition.


57

A chapter within the book The Future of Christian Higher Education titled Preserving

Distinctively Christian Higher Education provides an insight into the structural influences which

affect Christian higher education, particularly in relation to denominational and theological

beliefs (Sloan, 1999). This chapter offered a discussion illuminating the role of the church and

governing authorities within Christian higher education. The authorship from a Christian college

president to an audience comprised of those working in Christian higher education includes a

discussion of the many factors affecting the institution at the leadership level. This discussion

raised questions about what institutional influences in Christian higher education are and what

they should be relative to spiritual formation programs.

The purpose and role of the governing Board within Christian higher education was

described in this chapter. The governing Board of a Christian higher education institution (i.e.

directors, trustees, or regents), according to Sloan (1999), “must meet a religious qualification

for membership” (p. 26). The influence of denominational representation within the governing

board is often mandated as per the laws of the institution itself. For example, Baylor University

is affiliated with the Baptist General Convention of Texas (BGCT). The BGCT does not own and

operate the university, however it does elect 25% of the institution’s regents (Sloan, 1999). This

overlap between ecclesiastical leadership and educational leadership is how denominational

influence is maintained within the Christian higher education institution at a structural level.

Financial ownership is also a factor in a denomination’s influence. “There are some

institutions where it is very clear, or at least it is clearly argued, that a given denomination owns

the institution” (Sloan, 1999, p. 27). In many cases, this relationship brings up a discussion of

legalities to whether a nonprofit (501c3) can own another nonprofit. State laws differ in their


58

answer of this question, however financial ownership in this way determines the extent of control

a denomination can exercise upon a Christian higher education institution.

The ultimate emphasis of this chapter was to establish how to keep Christian higher

education distinctively Christian and Sloan’s (1999) answer to that question lies in the mission

and personnel at the university. Preserving the character of Christian higher education relies

upon the faculty and leadership to put forth a vision and work towards their mission of refusing

to separate religion and life, combining religious meaning with academic truth (Sloan, 1999).

This chapter offers important insight into the inner workings of the structural influences within

Christian higher education from a valuable perspective of a leader within such an institution.

In Exploring Spiritual Formation in the Christian Academy: The Dialects of Church,

Culture and the Larger Integrative Task author Rob Rhea (2011) detailed the unique setting of

the Christian higher education institution to facilitate spiritual formation. The purpose of this

article was to “understand emerging adults within the setting of the Christian academy and

highlight specific areas where Christian higher education leadership should have a clear

understanding and focused priorities” (Rhea, 2011, p. 3). These priorities integrated the church

and culture to form students spiritually who find their identity in the person of Christ and to be a

voice for biblical truth beyond Christian higher education.

In order to describe this setting of Christian higher education, Rhea (2011) used a

framework of sociolinguistics as a way of combining the language of the church with the

language of the culture in order to understand spiritual formation. This framework integrated

identity formation research in connection to spiritual growth. The author stated, “In the milieu of

Christian higher education, many situational dialects exist and are fostered in order to contribute

to the larger, comprehensive educational goal of a Christ-formed mind” (Rhea, 2011, p. 4).


59

Within this framework the goal was to develop students who will understand both church and

culture in order to be a person in the world who will speak for the sake of Christ.

Identity was a key component which separates spiritual development from other areas of

student development within the Christian higher education institution. According to Rhea (2011)

“there is no more important theological issue and language for university students than knowing

one’s identity in Christ” (p. 6). The intended outcome for Christian higher education leaders has

been to communicate to students, “The theological lexicon of the Christian university must be

filled with the truth that nothing the Christian student will ever do or not do can separate them

from the love of God” (p. 6). Ultimately, this article isolates the theological roots of Christian

higher education, which is found in a Christian identity.

This theoretical research found that the academic goals of the Christian academy are in

vain if they fail to praise and glorify God. The purpose and identity guiding Christian higher

education is found in Christianity and the mission of the institution is to impart a sense of

purpose and identity in Christ to the students. Rhea (2011) stated, “Mastering the dialects of

church and culture provide those involved in the task of spiritual formation with a means for the

effective integration and equipping of the students they lead and the institutions they are a part

of” (p. 13). This article held particular relevance in connecting how the influence of

denominational affiliations and faith traditions are imparted to students through spiritual

formation programs.

Accreditation Organizations and Their Influence on Spiritual Formation Programs

There are various accreditation organizations which specifically influence spiritual

formation programs. Beyond the scope of spiritual formation programs is the influence of

academic regional accreditation agencies such as the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) or


60

similar accrediting bodies, as the purpose of this type of accreditation is to affirm the institution’s

standards for academic quality, improvement and accountability, and to ensure that each program

which is accredited is degree-granting (Christian Higher Education Association, 2020). More

relative to spiritual formation programs are the relationships that Christian higher education

institutions have with Christian organizations which have standards for spiritual formation and

faith outcomes such as the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU). The

CCCU’s mission is “to advance the cause of Christ-centered higher education to help our

institutions transform lives by faithfully relating scholarship and service to biblical truth”

(CCCU, 2020). Across the nation there are many other Christian accreditation organizations such

as the Association for Biblical Higher Education, which offers a standard of doctrinal legitimacy

rather than academic quality assurance. The primary focus of these organizations is spiritual

formation programs and faith integration within Christian higher education institutions.

Mission statements provided by Christian higher education institutions often provide the

most direct evidence of an institution’s commitment to Christian spiritual formation. In a Mission

Statement Analysis of CCCU Member Institutions authors Firmin and Gilson (2010) analyzed

and coded 107 mission statements held by institutions affiliated with the CCCU. The authors

sought to understand how “mission statements set the tone for institutional milieu” (Firmin &

Gilson, 2010, p. 60). This analysis of the mission statements of CCCU institutions provided a

valuable view into the nature and culture of these member institutions.

The role and purpose of mission statements, according to the authors, were not only to set

priorities, focus, and objectives, but also historically have been reflective of the strategic

planning process in organizations (Firmin & Gilson, 2010). This would indicate that mission

statements not only provide insight into the values of the institution but also build on that with


61

actionable steps. Mission statements often include a description of how institutions are to work

and plan to achieve those specific outcomes. Mission statements are designed to communicate to

all those outside the organization, including prospective students, parents, or employees, about

how the institution will work to accomplish its mission.

The influence of the CCCU upon member institution’s mission statements was also

described. For example, the authors explained “for universities, mission statements are required

by accreditation agencies; in fact, they drive the strategic planning process in most colleges, and

virtually every institution of higher education possesses one” (Firmin & Gilson, 2010, p. 61).

Many organizations require specific values or elements to be included within a mission statement

in order to be accredited. The CCCU for example establishes, “All CCCU institutions have a

board approved and public institutional mission statement that is Christ-centered and aligns with

the following three commitments” (CCCU, 2020). These aforementioned commitments were

biblical truth, Christian formation, and gospel witness (CCCU, 2020). And so, this serves as a

direct example of how Christian accreditation organizations hold institutions to a specific

standard regarding their mission statement.

Institution’s mission statements also may hold financial implications. Firmin and Gilson

(2010) stated that “Additionally, a university’s monetary supply-line from governmental or

private sources often is tied to its mission statement” (p. 61). This financial relationship included

a financial relationship with a church or denomination either as owners or as a major stakeholder.

Just as legislatures desire to see outcomes-oriented statements for funding purposes (Firmin &

Gilson, 2010), so too do private Christian financers desire to see not just the values, but how the

institution is clearly working towards those values directly. Institutions generally have nothing to

gain with their association with Christian accreditation organizations financially as typically


62

institutions pay for membership or dues. For example, “All CCCU schools support other

Christian colleges and universities and advance the cause of Christian higher education through

participation in the programs of the CCCU and payment of the annual dues” (CCCU, 2020).

Further, the CCCU requires that “All CCCU institutions demonstrate responsible financial

operations, have institutional practices that reflect high ethical standards and operate all financial

and fundraising activities consistent with the standards of the Evangelical Council for Financial

Accountability” (CCCU, 2020). The financial implications of a relationship with a Christian

accreditation organization are worthy of consideration as an indirect influence upon spiritual

formation programs.

The theoretical framework for this study was rooted in an archival research model, used

to analyze the words within each institution’s mission statement at a microlevel (Firmin &

Gilson, 2010). The methods involved in this study began with accessing the 107 CCCU member

institutions utilizing the CCCU’s website, which contained a link to each institution’s home page

(Firmin & Gilson, 2010). Following this protocol, the researchers were then able to analyze the

mission statements using frequency distributions and coding common themes. This study was

conducted in an inductive manner with no preconceived notions prior to the investigation

(Firmin & Gilson, 2010). The researchers did not require cooperation from the CCCU nor

individual institutions simply due to mission statements being openly shared online and thus,

easily collected for analysis.

The findings from this study revealed that the most frequent constructs mentioned in

CCCU mission statements were education (70%), Christian (68%), service (61%), and world

(55%) (Firmin & Gilson, 2010). Less than half of the institutions made reference to remaining

constructs. In a discussion of the results, the researchers were not surprised that education was


63

the most common construct, or that Christian was a concept included in over two-thirds of

CCCU institutions, especially considering that the term is also a part of the CCCU name (Firmin

& Gilson, 2010). There was no intent within the discussion to “judge the adequacy of the

college’s mission and certainly not to judge any individual institution for the words that they use

or do not use in their respective mission statements” (Firmin & Gilson, 2010, p. 66). Each

institution is unique and so it is unfair to consider what should be included, however the dual

priorities of faith and learning are surfacing to be the core of Christian higher education within

CCCU institutions according to their mission statements.

This research has application to this study in expounding upon the connection between

the theoretical elements of a mission statements and spiritual formation outcomes. It is unclear in

the research to what degree an institution’s mission statement influences the student experience

of spiritual formation. The researchers suggested future research to go beyond descriptive data

and look at word pairings at the next level of analysis (Firmin & Gilson, 2010). This study

isolated the key aspects of what institutions say they are in their mission statements, and this can

be further supported with leader’s perspectives of how these institutions are truly working to

serve students both in education and in their Christian faith.

In a study done by Holcomb and Nonneman (2004) titled Faithful Change: Exploring

and Assessing Faith Development in Christian Liberal Arts Undergraduates the authors sought

to “explore and assess the undergraduate faith and spiritual maturation that occurs during a

typical student’s experience at a Council for Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU)

campus” (p. 93). This research provided key insight into the accreditation process associated

with membership to the CCCU.


64

According to the authors, “The core mission of CCCU schools is to develop the whole

person, including not only the intellectual, physical, and social aspects of being human but

moral, and spiritual dimensions as well” (Holcomb & Nonneman, 2004, p. 93). This research

also spoke to students’ intentions in attending CCCU institutions by having stated “students who

attend CCCU institutions do so because they want their faith and spirituality to develop”

(Holcomb & Nonneman, 2004, p. 93). In defining the sample for this study, the authors

explained the general nature and purpose of the CCCU as an accreditation body.

The theoretical framework for this research is Fowler’s (1988) Stages of Faith. Of

particular relevance to this study of college students, the focus was primarily on the transition

between stages three (Mythic-Literal Faith) and four (Individuative-Reflective Faith). The

justification for the use of this framework is that this model emphasizes underlying

psychological structures associated with faith, rather than doctrinal content which is why the

authors argued: “The Fowlerian stage model constitutes an interpretive framework from which to

organize and understand the complex strands of spiritual development” (Holcomb & Nonneman,

2004). This study is notably the largest sample of any study utilizing this framework with over

“240 subjects from six schools, for a total of approximately 600 interviews” (Holcomb &

Nonneman, 2004, p. 100). This study developed insight into the influence of the CCCU as a

Christian accreditation organization and also justifies the use of Faith Development Theory to

study spiritual formation in Christian higher education.

The methods for this study directly stem from Fowler’s framework as the researchers

utilized a modified version of the interview protocol from Fowler’s Stages of Faith (1988,

Appendix A). Interviews were conducted with video and audio recording and lasted

approximately 1.5 hours each (Holcomb & Nonneman, 2004). Along with the interview, subjects


65

completed the Faithful Change Questionnaire, which is a hybrid of various existing spirituality

inventories, and the Big Five Inventory, which is a measure of personality style. Sampled were

students from six Christian higher education institutions: Asbury College, Kentucky (Methodist);

Azusa Pacific University, California (Interdenominational); Bluffton College, Ohio (Mennonite);

Eastern College Pennsylvania (American Baptist); Eastern Nazarene College, Massachusetts;

and Taylor University, Indiana (Interdenominational). The purpose of selecting these institutions

was to represent denominational diversity among the sample.

The major finding from this study was the understanding the role of crisis as being a key

driver of spiritual growth. Crisis was defined by the authors as “a prolong period of active

engagement with, and exploration of, competing roles and ideologies” (Holcomb & Nonneman,

2004, p. 100). Within the context of spiritual development in Christian higher education, this

means that other beliefs and viewpoints are understood and engaged, which inevitably lead to

critical analysis from the student or individual. This directly describes the transition between

stages three and four within the theoretical framework, further validating its importance in both

research and the field.

The discussion of the results prompted the authors to suggest that Christian higher

education best serves students when it provides an environment which contains “an appropriate

mix of challenge balanced with communal support” (Holcomb & Nonneman, 2004, p. 102).

Spiritual formation is therefore negatively affected by shutting out new ideas, ignoring

disagreement, and unfairly judging those who think differently without fair consideration of

opposing viewpoints. Each CCCU institution is unique in how it sets spiritual goals, but it is

agreed that spiritual growth is an intended outcome at each institution (Holcomb & Nonneman,

2004).


66

This research has large application to continued research on spiritual formation utilizing

the same mixed-methods approach, same framework, and same sample of CCCU member

institution schools. Holcomb and Nonneman (2004) made recommendations for future study,

having stated “we owe it to our students to better understand their level of faith and what we as

educators can do to help stimulate further growth” (p. 102). The authors also stated that “Overall,

pedagogy can be improved through understanding the developmental levels that our students

operate from and the transitions they are most likely to encounter during their college years” (p.

102). The authors proposed the value of the application of this field of research is that it “can

also inform and enable more effective ministry for chaplains, spiritual life directors and

residence life personnel…our hopes is that this study will stimulate further research on the

development of faith and spirituality on both secular and religious campuses” (p. 103). This

study makes a case for researching leaders of spiritual formation programs to meet these

intended outcomes and more effectively serve students spiritually.

Hill (2009) conducted research titled Higher Education as Moral Community:

Institutional Influences on Religious Participation during College. This study utilized the theory

of moral communities to explain institutional influences on student religious participation in both

religious and secular postsecondary education. The problem statement the researcher set forth

was: “While this work has advanced the general understanding of religious life during college,

institutional-level influences have largely gone unexamined” (p. 515). The research questions

from this study included:

1. Are students who are currently enrolled in college more or less likely to attend religious

services than those who are not attending college?


67

2. Among those currently enrolled, do religious institutions develop student religious

practice, or do student fare better at nonreligious schools?

3. Is the institutional impact on religious participation uniform or variable across the

religious traditions of students? (Hill, 2009).

In the literature review conducted for this study, Hill (2009) noted that several studies

supported their claim: “Turning to specific evidence regarding religious service participation,

general population surveys have found a positive correlation between reported educational

attainment and frequency of religious service attendance among American adults” (p. 516).

However, the conducted literature review found that there is a decline in religious service

participation during college years, with freshman attendance being the highest and each

subsequent year has a drop off in religious service participation (Hill, 2009). This reinforces

secularization as the core of the problem statement and furthers the need for this investigation

into institutional influence to combat the threat of a secularization epidemic among higher

education institutions.

The hypothesis presented by Hill (2009) was based in the moral community’s thesis

which “posits that religious life of the individual and in particular its impact on behavioral

norms, is sustained in a context that legitimates religious language, motives and behaviors” (p.

517). Teligious participation is only effective in student spiritual growth if the community

upholds justification which allows individuals to “make meaning” of their life decisions (Fowler,

1984). Each institution’s ability to create this shared moral order is what determines the success

of an institution’s influence. The research stated, “Conservative protestant institutions,

particularly those affiliated with voluntary associations such as the CCCU, maintain stringent

hiring standards for faculty, strict behavioral rules for students and generally sustain high tension


68

with secular components of higher education in the United States” (Hill, 2009, p. 517). The

independent variable was the religious affiliation of the college/student. These are the factors

which contribute to the shared moral order among CCCU member schools.

The data collected for this research was derived from two national datasets: The National

Longitudinal Survey of Youth and the Integrated Post-Secondary Data Service (Hill, 2009). The

methods involved quantitative analysis of data. The dependent measure used in this analysis

consisted of an eight-category measure of religious service attendance ranging from never to

every day (Hill, 2009). Control variables include institutional characteristics such as

dichotomous variable indicating required chapel attendance, student body size, and status as a

four-year institution (Hill, 2009). The analytic strategy estimated the total effect of enrolling and

graduating from college on religious service attendance. Data was described using a table

containing mean, standard deviation, and range of both individual student characteristics and

institutional characteristics (Hill, 2009). This research sought to answer research questions

related to how institutional influence affects religious participation.

The results from this study found that participation in organized religious services drops

substantially when enrolled (Hill, 2009). Also, the study found that college graduates participate

more in religious activities during young adulthood compared to those with some college or no

college at all (Hill, 2009). The findings show “respondents who attend religiously conservative

schools such as the CCCU, Mormon, and Bible colleges have a considerably higher overall rate

of religious participation compared to the rest of the sample” (Hill, 2009, p. 523). Most relevant

to institutional influence is the finding that net declines in religious participation during college

result in net increases after graduation. The author stated, “this finding does not imply that

religious practice during college is unimportant in predicting later levels of religious


69

participation” (p. 523). However, this correlation between low religious participation during

college years may not be indicative of spiritual formation, as the two hold no dependent

relationship within the literature.

This study has valuable application to the research surrounding the role of institutional

influence on students during and after graduation. This study was limited due to the fact that it

measures only religious participation unrelated to faith development theory which focuses on the

depth of faith, rather than measuring participation. Student participation presents much more

quantifiable for data collection than is spirituality which further establishes a need to study this

subject based upon qualitative and quantitative measures. This study still contains valuable data

and more importantly raises further questions about influences from other institutions including

denominations, churches, and accreditation organizations.

Institutional influences upon spiritual formation programs from both denominational and

accreditation organizations are both affect spiritual formation programs in different ways as

indicated in the research. The relationships Christian higher education institutions have with

these outside organizations determine to what degree these institutions have influence. These

influences were designed to benefit the institution through doctrinal accuracy from

denominations and program quality assurance from Christian accreditation organizations.

Spiritual Formation Program Design

The design of spiritual formation programs has a direct effect on students, teachers, and

ultimately fulfillment of the mission of the Christian higher education institution. The design of

these programs is the manifestation of their beliefs, leaders’ influences, and institutional

influences. The culmination of these many factors results in the student experience in attending

Christian higher education institutions and participating in a spiritual formation program. Within


70

spiritual formation program design, the practice of spiritual disciplines within the context of

Christian higher education and the structure of these programs are the core of how spiritual

formation is accomplished on a practical level. These aspects of the literature describe what

institutions are doing in spiritual formation programs and how these programs are set up to

facilitate spiritual growth among the student population.

Spiritual Disciplines

Richard Foster’s (1988) book titled: The Celebration of Discipline is a highly influential

work on the topic of spiritual disciplines. This work was cited by Greenman (2015) as a

“landmark book” which marks the birth of the evangelical spiritual formation movement as it is

known today (p. 23). Spiritual disciplines as a topic of study present a challenge in measuring the

quality or quantity of these practices such as prayer. Spiritual disciplines offer no clearly

appropriate way to evaluate from a scientific perspective, as their purpose is in the domain of the

spiritual. Willett (2010) acknowledged the insightful observations made by Foster in how

spiritual disciplines are meant to “go beyond superficiality and add spiritual depth” (p. 88).

Foster’s book establishes clearly what spiritual disciplines are and the role that they are to play in

the life of a believer.

Spiritual disciplines have been categorized by Foster as inward, outward, and corporate

disciplines (Foster, 1988). The inward disciplines included meditation, prayer, fasting, and study.

The outward disciplines are simplicity, solitude, submission, and service. The corporate

disciplines included confession, worship, guidance and celebration. Each discipline serves as a

chapter within the book as Foster (1988) goes into depth on how to integrate each of these

practices into the life of the believer. Spiritual disciplines were not to be burdensome drudgery,

as Foster put it: “Joy is the keynote of all the disciplines” (p. 2). The intention of these


71

descriptions was to be utilized in a personal context as well as in a public ministry context,

depending on the discipline. Christian higher education institutions have adapted the use of

spiritual disciplines to the context of spiritual formation programs which play a role in many

activities associated with spiritually formative programs.

Biblically, spiritual disciplines are not formally mandated, yet there exist examples of

Jesus assuming his disciples would participate in specific disciplines. Examples of this are when

Christ said within the Sermon on the Mount, “when you pray” and “when you fast” (Matthew

6:5,16). Much of Jesus’ comments on spiritual disciplines were to emphasize the intent, motive,

and state of the heart when participating in these disciplines. Biblically, spiritual disciplines are

intended to be beneficial but not legalistic, as that would result in judging believers on the basis

of these practices.

The essence of Foster’s Celebration of Discipline (1988) is to incorporate these practices

into the life of the believer with a proper approach. In following these disciplines, God is always

the source of worship and the focus is always on God. In taking this time to focus on God, the

spiritual disciplines are designed to create that environment which will lead to a deepening

experience of the individual with God. Incorporating specific disciplines into spiritual formation

programs are likewise designed to produce an opportunity for students to worship God together,

in small groups, and even individually based on the types of disciplines integrated into these

programs.

While Jesus and the Bible are considered the ultimate sources of authority on spiritual

disciplines, Foster’s (1988) Celebration of Discipline essentially establishes a definitional

understanding of spiritual disciplines as well as a contextual understanding of how these acts are

most appropriately applied in a ministry setting. This work clearly defines the purpose and


72

mission of each discipline. The application of these disciplines to Christian higher education is

varied depending on the discipline. For example, corporate worship is a discipline mandated

through chapel attendance requirements at Christian higher education institutions. However,

personal disciplines such as fasting, and prayer are done in isolation and Jesus taught that these

are to be personal (Matt 6:6-16). And so, in recognizing these differences, Christian higher

education institutions rarely have a system of requiring these personal disciplines in the same

way.

In a study conducted by Willard (1998) titled Spiritual Disciplines, Spiritual Formation,

and the Restoration of the Soul, the author described the role of spiritual disciplines within the

structure of spiritual formation. Willard used biblical support to defend the value of spiritual

disciplines in Christian spiritual formation. Spiritual disciplines are how individuals become

active in spiritual growth. Spiritual disciplines are in a sense the practical manifestations of

spiritual formation and these practices are instituted by spiritual formation programs on a

programmatic level to lead students to engage in spiritually formative behaviors. These are

designed to provide an environment that is conducive to spiritual formation rather than lead to

guaranteed spiritual growth.

Willard (1998) explored this topic by simply asking the foundational question “What is

discipline?” (p. 106). The definition provided answered, “A discipline is an activity within our

power- something we can do- which brings us to a point where we can do what we at present

cannot do by direct effort” (p. 106). In defining disciplines, it is impossible to ignore the

theological implications associated with performing these practices as it relates to spiritual

formation.


73

Within the context of Christian higher education, and Christianity in general this concept

is controversial in establishing a biblical soteriology. Spiritual disciplines are not meant to be

misinterpreted in spiritual formation programs as a works-based plan for spiritual formation.

Paul established in Ephesians 2:8 “For it is by grace that you have been saved, through faith- and

this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God.” Willard (1998) stated, “The aim of disciplines

in the spiritual life- and, specifically, in the following of Christ- is the transformation of the total

state of the soul. It is the renewal of the whole person from the inside” (p. 107). The practicing of

faith is not a meritocracy, however nor is it a passive activity. Spiritual formation programs

distinguish themselves from academics within Christian higher education where students are

judged by class rank, GPA, and other metrics. Instead, spiritual formation is conversely

conceptualized as the individual student growing closer to God, interdependent from their past

experiences or where they currently may be spiritually. A constant growth toward becoming

more Christ-like through the integration of practices or disciplines is represented in the literature

and the Bible.

The conclusion that Willard (1998) provided is that spiritual formation is “a matter of

reforming the broken soul of humanity in a recovery from its alienation from God” (p. 108). All

believers are unified in their need for God, based on the biblical depiction of the fall (Gen 3).

This article brings value to the concept of spiritual disciplines within Christian higher education

through establishing the connection of theory (biblical interpretation) to practice (spiritual

disciplines). Spiritual formation in Christian higher education is often shaped by each

institution’s doctrine and biblical interpretations which is represented in the spiritual disciplines

connected with each institution’s spiritual formation program.

Structure of Spiritual Formation Programs in Christian Higher Education


74

Spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education tend to reflect their affiliated

church or denomination’s ecclesiastical structure or church polity. Spiritual formation programs

are often reflective of the ministry of the affiliated church and therefore the same titles, offices,

and authority structures are mirrored in a Christian higher education context. Spiritual formation

programs vary structurally in their requirements and expectations for students. These

requirements are determined by leadership and impact all students who attend these Christian

higher education institutions.

A universal value in the structure of spiritual formation programs in that they are Christ-

centered. Zeigler (2018) suggested that there are “Christologically anemic versions of

anthropologically-centered spiritual formation which pervade the current landscape of Christian

higher education institutions” (p. 74). One of the criticism’s that Zeigler (2018) holds with the

structure of spiritual formation programs is “that strategies of formation focus on behavioral

modification, there is a tendency to locate the activity of formation in the mode of independent

response, and as such, to neglect the ongoing agency of the ascended Christ” (p. 75). If spiritual

formation is to occur at the deepest level of an individual, behavioral modification is only a

surface-level solution.

Zeigler (2018) offered a model of an Objective Trinitarian Participation which structures

spiritual formation on the fact that “Christian existence is sharing in the Son’s relation with the

Father through the Spirit”, this as an alternative to Subjective Moral Formation which “draws the

believer to relate to virtuous ideals; and, with these ideals in mind, directs and modifies behavior

through disciplined training and imitation” (p. 79). This is to refocus the design of spiritual

formation programs to avoid reducing this process to self-improvement. The fear for Christian

higher education leaders is that this will delve the process into “an achievement for which


75

believers must strive” (p. 82). This paradigm shift is what the author suggests must lead spiritual

formation programs to follow not a self-centered design, but a Christ-centered one.

Following the shift described, the findings from this study simply implied a

Christocentric structure which attempts to hear God, followed by obedience and belief. This

offered that participation in disciplines is the fruit of what is occurring within believers on a heart

level. This grounding for a praxis of spiritual formation is rooted in biblical, trinitarian theology,

meant to lead believers into living out the love of God in their everyday lives. The author

suggested that the central question for these programs and one that should guide future study is

“What work does the ascended incarnate Christ do in this description of the Christian life?”

(Zeigler, 2018, p. 74). Again, this requires spiritual formation program leaders to establish what

is God’s role in the process of spiritual formation and what is the role of the person. This is a

deeply theological discussion but provides the basis for the intent of spiritual formation

programs.

The implications of this study showed that Christocentric models of spiritual formation

form the theological basis and defense of every decision within these programs. Spiritual

formation leaders who design programs for students are responsible for tracing every aspect of

the program back to Christ. This reinforced the strong role that biblical theology plays in

spiritual formation programs, while recognizing that influence is as practical as it is theoretical.

Further study of spiritual formation programs and leaders should recognize the importance of a

Christocentric model of spiritual formation.

Labosier and Labosier (2018) conducted A Thirty-Year Experiment in Teaching Spiritual

Formation. This research was described by the authors as an “experiment in theological

education where spiritual formation played a central role in shaping all aspects of a seminary’s


76

structures and curriculum” (p. 125). This study was experimental in nature to understand how an

institutional commitment to spiritual formation would impact a seminary at a programmatic

level.

The methods for this research were non-experimental, following a case-study approach,

as the authors reflected back on their institution to determine how structural changes influenced

outcomes. The thirty-year period spanned from 1985-2015 at the Seminary of the East (SOE)

(Labosier & Labosier, 2018). This study attempted to implement new and creative approaches to

theological education in order to prioritize spiritual formation. The researchers sought to

determine what would happen if they were to allow the institution’s priority for spiritual

formation to “determine all campus dynamics including campus infrastructure, enrollment goals,

faculty rank, in order to better support spiritual formation” (p. 125). This study was designed to

produce findings on the interrelationship between the design of spiritual formation programs and

institutional structure.

The integration of spiritual formation in every aspect of the institution led to

twelve lessons learned, all of which hold value for practices and policies within spiritual

formation programs. The first insight from SOE is that they did not use a traditional A-F

grading system, rather they implemented a Pass/Fail approach which used S for

satisfactory or I for incomplete (Labosier & Labosier, 2018). Faculty were expected to

not just award a grade and walk away but to work with students until they achieve a level

of proficiency. Student’s scores are then based on attendance and participation, only

risking failure if they do not show up and stop trying (Labosier & Labosier, 2018). While

unique in the beginning of this experiment, this evaluation system is now considered

common practice now within spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education.


77

An overview of the 12 lessons, which serve as the findings from this article are each

required for effective spiritual formation program design 1) An openness to experimentation, 2)

Humility and a willingness to learn, 3) A team approach, 4) A sense of vision, 5) A relational

approach to learning, 6) A God-centered biblical-theological vision, 7) Devotion to equipping the

whole person for ministry, 8) An integrated curriculum, 9) A commitment to local churches, 10)

A customized approach for each student, 11) A model for lifelong learning, and 12) An active

dependence on God (Labosier & Labosier, 2018). Each of these lessons has value in establishing

specific program design goals for spiritual formation programs within Christian higher

education. Additionally, these lessons are reflective of the multiple factors which hold influence

in spiritual formation programs.

There are multiple levels of application to this study, including how these programs are

designed to be theologically based, connected to the institution, and expanding beyond the

campus to work with outside organizations such as local churches and nonprofit organizations.

To summarize, “Spiritual formation requires intentionality, especially at the programmatic level”

(Labosier & Labosier, 2018, p. 125).

Criticisms of Spiritual Formation Programs

While much of the literature on spiritual formation affirms its value, criticisms of

spiritual formation as an institutional goal do exist. The main criticism among Christian

protestant scholars existing is that spiritual formation is redundant and thus unnecessary. The

benefit to addressing criticisms to spiritual formation programs is the opportunity to consider

opposing viewpoints which challenge thinking on the topic and lead to discussions about the

effectiveness of spiritual formation programs within Christian higher education.


78

In an article titled Sanctification in a New Key: Relieving Evangelical Anxieties Over

Spiritual Formation Porter (2008) claimed “spiritual formation within evangelicalism is simply

the Protestant doctrine of sanctification in a new key” (p. 129). Porter’s thesis is that spiritual

formation offers nothing which is not covered by the theological doctrine of sanctification.

Sanctification is defined by the author as “the process of the believer being made holy, which is

to be conformed to the image of Christ (Romans 8:29)” (Porter, 2008, p. 129). This definition

among Christian higher education institutions presupposes that the individual is a believer.

Spiritual formation, according to many definitions, for example Olaroeby (2016), includes the

initial conversion, thus not excluding the initial entry into a progressive system of development.

Often the literature represents intersections and overlap between the terminology.

Spiritual formation and terms such as sanctification, discipleship, and spiritual growth,

development, or journey become clouded with vague use operationally. For example, Stiebel

(2010) noted the connection of spiritual formation to discipleship. Olaoreby (2016) presented a

model of spiritual formation which contained sanctification as the second step in a

developmental model of spiritual formation. With an abundance of terminology stemming from

the church, spiritual formation provides organization as these terms fit within a plan for spiritual

formation.

Porter (2008) conceptualized spiritual formation as a movement, citing its influential

thinkers and emphases, which leave spiritual formation as the target of critique. His assumption

is that evangelical Christians are fearful of spiritual formation or that it poses a threat in some

way to orthodoxy. His mission is to speak to these concerns and in doing so he shares his

opinions which serve as the findings from his analysis of the subject. The author’s message is to

relieve concerns is that 1) Spiritual formation is just another passing fad, 2) Spiritual formation is


79

rooted in Catholicism, 3) Spiritual formation is new age, 4) Spiritual formation is contrary to the

sufficiency of scripture, 5) What ever happened to good old-fashioned obedience? 6) Spiritual

formation encourages works righteousness, 7) Spiritual formation is overly experiential, and 8)

Spiritual formation neglects missions/ evangelism (Porter, 2008). Many of these issues are the

subject of articles within the literature and represent the many forms that spiritual formation

takes and the opposition that may face it.

Porter (2008) reinforced this goal having stated, “my hope is that enough has been said to

allay at least some of the anxieties of evangelicals when it comes to the topic of spiritual

formation” (p. 148). Some points have been invalidated, for example that spiritual formation as

a passing fad. The literature on this subject has continued to grow during the time since this

article was written, and so proving spiritual formation is a topic that is to be studied. Both critics

and proponents of spiritual formation can find value from these claims as “it is a profitable

exercise for proponents of spiritual formation to pay attention and attempt to address concerns of

those who have been a bit suspicious of spiritual formation” (Porter, 2008, p. 148). It is unclear

which evangelicals are anxious about spiritual formation or why that would be so.

This article fits within the literature to reinforce that there are many distinct paths of

spiritual formation offered by many different faith traditions. In many cases Christian

denominations and faith traditions are going by the same process by a different name. In the

many frameworks to explain or describe the phenomenon the literature has included terms like

journey (Hagberg & Guelich, 2005; Willett, 2010), which communicate the progressive

development which takes place. This article re-establishes the breadth of the term spiritual

formation to be inclusive of the entire process of spiritual development in the faith.


80

Tracy (2002) authored Spiritual Direction in the Wesleyan-Holiness Movement and

proposed the same critique that spiritual direction is overshadowed by the use of the term

sanctification. The author provided context to the Wesleyan-Holiness movement’s emphasis on

sanctification which is defined as “perfect love, the deeper life, Christian perfection, holiness,

and the fullness of or the baptism with the Spirit” (p. 324). This brings into question if specific

denominational doctrines decrease the relevancy and usefulness of the term spiritual direction in

application within the context of Christian higher education.

The goal of spiritual direction is to help the believer “live a life of love” in a state of

grace which is not static but dynamic (Tracy, 2002, p. 324). This term refers to the process of

growing in the faith after coming into a relationship with God (i.e. conversion, salvation, and

forgiveness). Emphasized within this tradition is continued spiritual development throughout

one’s life. The Wesleyan-Holiness movement derives its doctrine from John Wesley (Tracy,

2002). The author commented “Wesley seldom used the term ‘direction’ fearing that it put too

much power in the hands of the spiritual guide” (p. 326). This concern once again played an

important role in shaping how spiritual formation is to occur through the influence of a spiritual

guide and that has implications for processes within Christian higher education.

The findings from this study reinforce the value of spiritual disciplines as an indicator of

mature spirituality. Personal disciplines, community disciplines, and disciplines of service all

combine to shape the entirety of the Christian growth process following this template (Tracy,

2002). This article contains an insight into denominational influences upon spiritual formation

both as a model and in practice. This critique once again offers no rebuke of the process but

simply implies that another name would be more suitable in representing the process of the

development of an individuals’ spirituality.


81

Steibel (2010) authored Christian Education and Spiritual Formation: One and the

Same? which as the title suggests, implies that spiritual formation is inherent within the structure

of Christian higher education. This article raised a question as to what differentiates Christian

education from spiritual formation. These two interrelated topics were noted to have contained

some similarities and differences. Christian education is defined by Seibel (2010) as “not a

discipline but rather a field or a subset of education” (p. 341). Spiritual formation then, is not an

abstract idea but a term rooted in ordinary life in an ever-deepening love of God, with communal

overtones (Steibel, 2010). This article is written to an audience of teachers in Christian education

to understand and communicate the differences of these concepts to students. Teachers are

encouraged that “Having a balance between formation and instruction is a better route” (p. 349).

The conclusion from this work is that spiritual formation is not inherent within Christian

education and must be emphasized and intentionally integrated into the Christian education

experience. This requires educators within Christian education to illustrate “how Christian

education and spiritual formation each possess unique features and yet are compatible” (Steibel,

2010, p. 352).

The application to this study is establishing that there are distinctives and that every

institution in Christian higher education holds different opinions, viewpoints, and perspectives

about spiritual formation. Some have made spiritual formation the core of their programmatic

structure (Labosier & Labosier, 2018), while others have sought to forgo spiritual formation in

favor of different terminology such as sanctification (Porter, 2008). Regardless the concept is

addressed, even if by another name. Across Christian higher education each institution must

recognize the influence of spiritual formation and establish a plan to serve students spiritually

from a program design standpoint.


82

Summary

Current research on the topic of spiritual formation in Christian higher education presents

many opportunities and challenges for future research. The literature contained key studies

which have furthered the discussion about the theory and practice of spiritual formation

programs in Christian higher education. Existing research contains many theoretical models

which provided value in framing the topic of spiritual formation within the context of Christian

higher education. Methods and theoretical frameworks used in previous research are helpful in

establishing what the most effective approaches to studying spiritual formation are.

The organization of the literature review was based upon the research questions to focus

on the theories of spiritual formation in Christian higher education, leader’s perceptions of

spiritual formation programs, institutional influences upon spiritual formation programs, and

spiritual formation program design. The literature review affirmed spiritual formation programs

are a highly prioritized element of Christian higher education and nearly universally practiced

among Christian higher education institutions. Still, there remain gaps within the literature as

there are questions as to the purpose and nature of these programs structurally or in practical

terms. This study positions itself well within the literature to make a significant and original

contribution to the topic. This contribution has the potential to inform policy and practice

relating to spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education.


83

Chapter III. Methodology

The purpose of this research was to explore spiritual formation programs in Christian

higher education. This research focused on leaders’ perceptions of spiritual formation programs,

the institutional influences upon these programs, and spiritual formation program design. This

chapter is organized to describe the methods, research questions, research design, sampling,

ethical considerations, instrumentation, data collection procedures, data analysis, assumptions

and trustworthiness of the study.

This study is exploratory as it addresses new topics within the field of research

surrounding spiritual formation. For example, while there is much literature surrounding the

theological basis for spiritual formation programs, the practical elements of spiritual formation

program design are comparatively neglected within the literature. Similarly, while many spiritual

formation studies within the context of Christian higher education gather data from students,

leaders of spiritual formation programs perspectives are comparatively neglected. This study was

designed to contribute in a way that builds upon past research in order to explore new

applications such as leader’s perspectives of spiritual formation programs as well as how these

programs are designed.

Research Questions

Guiding this research are three research questions developed to explore more about spiritual

formation programs in Christian higher education. Each question is designed to be answered by

leaders of spiritual formation programs as they address aspects of spiritual formation programs

which are specific to leader’s experiences and responsibilities.

1.What are leader’s perspectives of spiritual formation programs?

2. What are the institutional influences on spiritual formation programs?


84

3. How are spiritual formation programs designed to achieve specific outcomes?

Research Design

This study followed a mixed-methodological design containing both qualitative and

quantitative findings. Mixed-methods research is defined by Johnson, Onwuebuzie, and Turner

(2007) as “the type of research in which a researcher…combines elements of qualitative and

quantitative approaches for the broad purpose of breadth and depth of understanding and

corroboration (p. 123). Spiritual formation programs vary greatly, even between Christian higher

education institutions and so the mixed-methods research design offered both the breadth and

depth most appropriate to study this topic.

The use of mixed-methodology research design is common within the literature on this

topic. As examples, a mixed-methods approach was taken by: 1) Horan (2017) in a study titled

Fostering Spiritual Formation of Millennials in Christian Schools, 2) Holcomb and Nonneman

(2004) in their research Faithful Change: Exploring and Assessing Faith Development in

Christian Liberal Arts Undergraduates, and by 3) Naidoo (2011) in An Empirical Study on

Spiritual Formation at Protestant Theological Training Institutions in South Africa. These

studies cited a rationale for using mixed methods in alignment with Christian higher education.

These examples are evidence that mixed-methods research is common in the field and heavily

associated with the study of spirituality.

Each example justifies the use of mixed-methods research. Holcomb and Nonneman

(2004) deemed a mixed-methods approach appropriate having stated, “In terms of overall project

design, in-depth qualitative interviews coupled with quantitative spirituality surveys over time

enable researchers to determine spiritual growth patterns, identify when those patterns are most

likely to occur, and examine the environments and experiences most conducive to spiritual


85

development” (p. 98). Additionally, Naidoo (2011) cited the opportunity for data triangulation

through the combination of qualitative and quantitative data. This method “added many

perspectives, backgrounds, and social characteristics and yielded a more complete picture of

spiritual formation at theological institutions” (p. 126). The value of this methodological

approach is Horan (2017) who also echoed “quantitative data were bolstered by the qualitative

data which revealed feelings and perceptions of respondents to offer a more complete and rich

understanding of the issue of spiritual formation programs” (p. 63). Collectively, a strong case is

made for the value of a mixed-methods approach to study spirituality in Christian higher

education.

The application to this study is that all share an aim to understand spiritual formation

programs. Holcomb and Nonneman’s (2004) research were designed to explore and assess the

undergraduate faith and spiritual maturation that occurs during a typical student’s experience at

Council for Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU) campuses” (p. 93). It is also of note that

this study also utilized Fowler’s (1984) Stages of Faith as the theoretical framework for this

study. Naidoo (2011) sought to learn about the nature and place of spiritual formation in

theological institutions. The purpose of Horan’s (2017) research was to explore spiritual

formation programs as they relate to millennials in Christian schools. Each of these studies

contain a unique element however each of these share the same topic of spiritual formation in

Christian education. The relevance to this study on spiritual formation leaders is evident in how

past research has continually supported the participants from CCCU institutions, the theoretical

framework, and the mixed-methods design. The collective research surrounding this subject

provides a strong rationale for the research design used in this study.


86

The rationale for using a mixed-methodological approach is due to the complex nature of

spirituality. Spirituality is a topic that requires the use of a research design able to best provide

findings representative of the breadth and depth of the subject. A strictly quantitative approach

would have breadth but would lack depth and potentially validity. For example, Hill’s (2009)

research measured spirituality using a quantitative approach, through the measure of religious

participation. Religious participation is more easily quantifiable; however, religiosity is not a

valid measure of spirituality despite similarities (Williamson & Sandage, 2009). Based on the

theoretical framework used in this study from Fowler’s (1988) Stages of Faith, religiosity

measures would not qualify as a valid measurement of spiritual formation, particularly in

isolation. This challenge requires a qualitative element to effectively study spiritual formation.

For the opposite reason, a strictly qualitative methodological approach would be limiting

to a study on spiritual formation, particularly concerning the scope of the study. Qualitative

research offers depth but at the expense of breadth. As an example, Mayhew (2004) used a

qualitative approach in his research titled Exploring the Essence of Spirituality: A

Phenomenological Study of Eight Students with Eight Different Worldview. A strictly qualitative

approach to spiritual formation aims to learn about what Mayhew (2004) described as “the

essence of spirituality” (p. 650). While this research contained valuable insights into students’

spirituality and worldview, only eight students were interviewed, and each student was the lone

representative of their worldview. Qualitative research on spiritual formation is burdened with

challenges to reliability. A narrow focus for spiritual formation research may fail to be

representative of the larger population, nor would it accurately account for the diversity within

the context of Christian higher education.


87

A mixed- methods design was necessary to answer each research question due to the

differences between each research question. Research question one seeks to gain leader’s

perspectives of the spiritual formation programs they lead. To answer this question, a

quantitative analysis strategy is utilized to identify perspectives relating to the core purposes of

spiritual development. These purposes are measured using the Spiritual Assessment Inventory

(SAI) across the dimensions of a leader’s value or importance placed upon outcomes or

objectives relevant to promoting an awareness of God and a realistic acceptance of God (Hall &

Edwards, 1996). For research questions, two and three however, there are no existing

instruments to properly evaluate institutional influence and program design, especially within

programs as unique as spiritual formation programs. Therefore, a qualitative analysis strategy is

most appropriate to explore and answer these questions. A mixed-methods design allows for

each of these questions to be answered using a data collection and analysis strategy which is

most appropriate to effectively answer each research question.

The quantitative element to this research design is a survey (Appendix A). This survey

includes Likert scale questions, extended response questions, demographic information, and a

final question inviting the participant to take part in a follow-up interview. The survey Likert

scale questions were developed as a modified version of the Spiritual Assessment Inventory

(SAI) which is further described in the instrumentation section.

The qualitative aspects of this research design are included within the survey (Appendix

A) and comprise the entirety of the follow-up interviews (Appendix D). The questions which

comprise the follow-up interviews were developed by the researcher and approved by a board of

experts from the CCCU in alignment with the second and third research questions. The nature of


88

the second and third research questions necessitate the qualitative approach taken with the short

answers contained within the surveys and the follow-up interviews.

The necessary components to a mixed-methods research design are the inclusion of both

qualitative and quantitative data. In the Holcomb and Nonneman (2004) study the authors

explained these components as follows: “both qualitative interview and quantitative survey

measures are necessary. Survey questions can answer the ‘what’ questions (that, is what people

believe), but only person-to-person interviews can get at the ‘why’ and the ‘how’ behind the

what” (p. 94). This same rationale is used in this study to differentiate between research question

one to explore what leaders of spiritual formation programs perspectives are, from research

question three, how spiritual formation programs are designed. Accounting for each question

requires a specific research design appropriate for what is being explored specifically.

The theoretical framework used in this study also lends itself to a mixed-methods

research design based on how Fowler (1984) describes the development of faith. Faith within

this framework is not in any way linked to the specific content, as it is not uniquely Christian or

any other single religious tradition. Rather faith is how individuals make meaning of their

experiences (Fowler, 1984). Faith development is modeled in six stages, emphasizing

psychological structures based on the works of Jean Piaget, Erik Erikson, and Lawrence

Kohlberg. Faith Development Theory (1984) is a hybrid of these models which include elements

of developmental psychology and morality to determine how people believe, rather than what

they believe (Demarest, 2008). In Christian higher education, the content is typically well

established, while the methods differ which distinguish how these institutions promote spiritual

formation.


89

This study was rooted in the existing literature and acknowledged the use of both a

mixed-methods research design and Stages of Faith (1984) framework within other studies of

spiritual formation in Christian higher education. Previous research exemplifies the value in how

studies conducted on the topic of spiritual formation using the Stages of Faith framework

appropriate a mixed-methods research design to account for the developmental progression of

faith while still acknowledging the depth of meaning-making faith as experienced by individuals.

Participants & Sampling Technique

The participants for this study are leaders of spiritual formation programs at Christian

higher education institutions holding membership to the Council of Christian Colleges and

Universities (CCCU). Nationally, there are 7,769 accredited post-secondary institutions, of those,

4,724 are degree granting institutions (U.S. Dept of Education, 2015). There are 1,625 public

institutions serving 14.7 million students and 2,099 private institutions serving 5.6 million

students and among the private institutions 1,024 are religiously affiliated (U.S. Dept of

Education, 2015). CCCU institutions comprise 144 of these religiously affiliated institutions

representing 29 denominations (CCCU, 2020). 118 are what would qualify as member

institutions with the other 26 being labeled international affiliates as they are institutions outside

of the United States.

The CCCU is a Christian accreditation organization. This organization was founded more

than 40 years ago with a vision to “create a broad association of Christian colleges that would

support promoting and leadership activities for member schools and provide a unifying voice for

higher education in the public square” (CCCU, 2020). This association is comprised of many

institutions with varying beliefs and doctrinal stances, however, are united as being Christian.

Their stated mission is “to advance the cause of Christ-centered higher education and to help our


90

institutions transform the lives of students by faithfully relating scholarship and service to

biblical truth” (CCCU, 2020). Adoption of this mission is required for member institutions. In

pursuit of this mission, the CCCU and its institutions share three basic educational commitments:

1) Biblical integration throughout the academic enterprise, 2) A shared commitment to the moral

and spiritual formation of students, and 3) A commitment to graduating student who make a

difference for the common good as redemptive voices in the world (CCCU, 2020).

In a practical sense, CCCU membership for a Christian higher education institution offers

many benefits including: 1) Participation in a network of like-minded Christian institutions, 2)

Access to CCCU-sponsored professional development conferences, 3) Participation in a national

association of advocacy in the federal legislative agenda, 4) Data analysis from surveys and

reports, 5) Copies of the CCCU’s biannual magazine 6) Ability to post job openings to the online

CCCU career center, 7) Listing on the CCCU’s website with a link to the institution, and 8) The

opportunity to participate in an innovative consortium that enables institutions to share online

courses to increase revenue, retention, and completion (CCCU, 2020). To become a member,

institutions must apply and undergo a review of their institutional type and accreditation,

cooperation and participation among other Christian higher education institutions, institutional

integrity as it relates to financial stewardship, employment policies to only hire full-time faculty

members and administrators who profess faith in Jesus Christ, and evaluate alignment of

advocacy efforts consistent with Christian beliefs and principles (CCCU, 2020). Members who

effectively meet all of these criteria in the application process and pay annual dues become

governing members who have the authority to vote. Other memberships include associate

members for schools who do not hold accreditation, collaborative partners for institutions who

differ on doctrinal stances, and international affiliates for institutions outside the United States.


91

For member institutions, the commitment to moral and spiritual formation is practically

manifested within spiritual formation programs most directly and integrated into all other aspects

of the Christian higher education experience more indirectly. Each institution affiliated with the

CCCU has a spiritual formation program in place which is led by various positions including

Dean of Chapel, Campus Chaplain, and Director of Spiritual Formation. Each of these positions

and titles ultimately are responsible for the spiritual formation of students and the program that is

dedicated to facilitating students’ spiritual growth.

For this study, the CCCU provided a list of leaders of spiritual formation programs to

serve as the participants for this study. To gain allowance for this list the researcher had to

submit a research request form and go through a process of approval in cooperation with a

committee of Christian higher education researchers at institutions affiliated with the CCCU. The

list provided by the CCCU contained the contact information for 165 leaders of spiritual

formation programs who were invited to participate in this study via email. These participants

are appropriate for this study because of their affiliation with the CCCU, in which membership

requires both regional accreditation and a commitment to spiritual formation. Each institution’s

relationship with the CCCU ensures that member institutions share a Christian mission and are

accredited institutions of higher learning.

The sampling method used in this study was based on a convenience sampling technique.

Convenience sampling for the purposes of this study is defined as drawing representative data

from those who volunteered to participate in the study (Gentles, et. al., 2015). The benefit to this

study’s design is that membership with the CCCU pre-determines that all possible participants

are both accredited higher learning institutions and hold a Christian mission statement including

a commitment to spiritual formation. Horan (2017) similarly used a convenience sample when


92

sampling secondary teachers and administrators employed at United States private Christian

Schools with Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI) membership. Ma (2003) also

used a convenience sampling method when surveying students on campus at 20 Christian higher

education institutions. This convenience sampling method was based on three criteria:

availability, different denominational affiliations, and geographic diversity (Ma, 2003).

This study likewise sought to achieve denominational and geographic diversity through

inclusion of all CCCU member institutions from across the nation. The list provided by the

CCCU contained the names and emails of spiritual formation program leaders who were

representative of spiritual formation programs from a national geographic perspective.

Denominational affiliation is a key demographic within Christian higher education that

influences both the theory and practice of spiritual formation. As defined by Rhodes (2015) “A

denomination is an association or fellowship of congregations within a religion that have the

same beliefs or creed, engage in similar practices, and cooperate with each other to develop and

maintain shared enterprises” (p. 13). In practicality, “Schemes based on denominational

affiliation are the most common approach to religious classification, particularly for Protestants”

(Steensland, et. al., 2000, p. 292). The categorization of denominations is required to most fairly

represent the diverse range of denominations, doctrines, and faith traditions which are influential

in spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education.

According to Willett (2010) “various denominational traditions offer distinctly different

paths to follow and landmarks by which to measure one’s progress to [spiritual] maturity (p. 88).

The model used for classifying denominations used in this study comes from Naidoo (2011) who

authored An Empirical Study on Spiritual Formation at Protestant Theological Training

Institutions in South Africa. In this study the author stated “The sample…needs to be narrow


93

enough for participants to share a similar understanding of spiritual formation, yet broad enough

so that the data collection will not be biased by a single denomination’s particular emphasis in

doctrine or lifestyle” (Naidoo, 2011, p. 127). While denominational differences clearly affect

spiritual formation, an inclusive sampling strategy mitigates the threat of one particular

denomination unfairly representing spiritual formation across all Christian higher education

institutions in America.

This study followed an interdenominational approach through its sampling method of the

CCCU member institutions. The CCCU is an interdenominational organization and this study is

representative of the inclusion within the organization of Christian denominational traditions.

Based on the nature of this study and similar research this method of convenience sampling will

be most representative of spiritual formation program leaders in order to answer the research

questions.

Ethical Considerations

This study presented a less than minimal risk for leaders of spiritual formation programs

at Christian higher education institutions who participated. There existed a potential for social

risk regarding participants who shared a negative viewpoint of the spiritual formation programs

on their survey responses or interview responses. This holds the potential to negatively affect

professional and peer relationships with undetermined consequences if superiors from within the

institution were aware of a shared negative response.

In an effort to mitigate this risk, survey data is anonymous (Appendix B), and interview

data is confidential (Appendix D). When transcribing interview data, names were redacted from

the data and replaced with a random number. The number-name key was kept on a password

protected computer by the researcher. In order to not isolate individual participants, data analysis


94

focused on descriptive group statistics and codes/themes from multiple interviews which aims to

further protect the privacy of respondents. In this way the researcher was able to assure

participants that surveys would be anonymous and follow-up interviews would remain

confidential.

Instrumentation & Data Sources

The instruments used in this study are a survey and follow-up interview protocol which

are each based upon existing instruments. The survey contains a modified version of the Spiritual

Assessment Inventory (SAI) instrument to explore leader’s perspectives of spiritual formation

programs aligned with the first research question (Hall & Edwards, 1996). The follow-up

interviews were developed to answer research questions two and three based upon the interview

protocol from Stages of Faith (1984) and Mayhew (2004). Combined, these both influenced the

approach to provide data to answer each of the research questions.

Spiritual Assessment Inventory

The SAI was originally created with a Judeo-Christian perspective, justifying its use and

application in measuring spiritual formation in Christian higher education. According to the

authors, “the Spiritual Assessment Inventory was designed specifically to study change and

growth in Christian populations” (Hall, Reise, & Haviland, 2007, p. 173). With an emphasis on

Christian populations, this instrument held a natural application to spiritual formation programs

in Christian higher education given its previous use both in the literature and the field (Astin,

Astin, & Lindholm, 2011; Holcomb & Nonneman, 2004). The SAI is particularly used within

Christian higher education institutions as a tool to evaluate the spiritual formation of students as

an outcome of spiritual formation programs. As an example, Oral Roberts University (2020)

utilizes the Spiritual Assessment Inventory to measure the spiritual growth of students. All


95

students attending the institution are assessed using this instrument when they enter the

university and upon graduation. The SAI is an instrument holding influence both in research and

practice among spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education.

The SAI was introduced in 1996 and consists of two primary dimensions (quality of

relationship with God, and Awareness of God) and five subscales (Awareness, Realistic

Acceptance, Disappointment, Grandiosity, and Instability). This instrument is designed for self-

assessment and items use a Likert-scale question format to provide scores for each subset. Since

the SAI was first introduced, it has ranged from 40 to 63 items due to several factor analyses

before the most recent version containing 47 items. The original participants of the study were

193 students from a university, then after factor analyses the instrument was then administered to

a sample of 470 subjects from two local universities. And so, from its inception, the SAI has had

application within a higher education context.

The original purpose of the SAI was to be a “theoretically based measure of spiritual

maturity viewed from a Judeo-Christian perspective and designed for clinical use by pastoral

counselors, psychotherapists, as well as researchers” (Hall & Edwards, 1996, p. 233). The

theoretical framework for the SAI was articulated based upon several other instruments. This

model broadens how spiritual development is conceptualized to include psychometric measures

and the authors further explain that the SAI “could aptly be called a model of psychospiritual

development” (Hall & Edwards, 2002). This psychologically oriented instrumentation is aligned

with the Stages of Faith (1988) which also is based on psychological models from Piaget,

Erikson, and Kohlberg. The use of a psychospiritual model such as the SAI is appropriated by

the degree to which spirituality and psychology seem to intersect at the topic of spiritual

formation.


96

Up until the SAI was introduced, the dominant framework in the field was

intrinsic/extrinsic (I/E) religious orientation. This was criticized due to the relationship of

spirituality and religion evolving, with spirituality distinguishing itself as its own separate field

of study among researchers (Hill, 2009). The introduction of the SAI drew upon object relations

theory and attachment theory, consistent with “sizable literature on God image/representation

indicating that one’s relational/emotional development is mirrored in one’s relationship with the

Divine, however that is perceived by the individual” (Hall & Edwards, 2002, p. 341). The SAI

was in this way a pioneer model which utilized psychometric measures in the study of

spirituality while also distinguishing spirituality itself as unique from the measure of religion.

Hall and Edwards (1996) clarified the intended application of the instrument, having

stated, “The SAI is designed for clinical as well as research use” (p. 342). Each dimension and

subset have both a definition and purpose within the SAI. The first dimension is Quality of

Relationship with God. This is defined by the authors as “aiming to provide a holistic view of

spiritual maturity that incorporates both spiritual awareness capacities and relational quality

capacities” to address the question of what the quality of one’s relationship with God is (Hall &

Edwards, 1996, p. 234). In application to this study, this serves the purpose of understanding

how leaders of spiritual formation programs aim to understand the quality of student’s

relationship with God. The second quality is Awareness of God. Awareness is defined by the

authors as “a capacity that needs to be developed, rather than being an automatic part of the

Christian life. Capacity for spiritual awareness is distinct from but related to the manner in which

people relate to others” (Hall & Edwards, 1996, p. 237). The awareness concept is based on

relational anthropology “derived from New Testament teachings on the nature of communication

with God and contemplative spirituality traditions” (Hall & Edwards, 1996, p. 234). These


97

perspectives were integrated to develop the SAI as a theoretically based and psychometrically

valid measure of spiritual maturity for clinical and research use.

The SAI instrument was utilized in alignment to specifically answer research question

one: What are leader’s perspectives of spiritual formation programs in Christian higher

education? This instrument relates to the research question because the CCCU (2020) holds a

commitment to spiritual formation, to “form students of moral commitment who live out

Christian virtues”. Spiritual formation programs themselves are “a formational activity”,

specifically designed to add value to students and not to individually address the negative subsets

of Disappointment, Grandiosity, or Instability among students in Christian higher education

(Naidoo, 2011, p. 118). For this reason, a modified version of the SAI was adapted to meet the

specific context of the first research question.

The survey included a modified version of the SAI, comprising the first 19 survey items.

These items were aligned with assessing spiritual formation leader’s perspectives of spiritual

formation programs as it relates to their primary objectives of forming students spiritually,

specifically in relation to their awareness of God and realistic acceptance of God. Modifications

were made to tailor each question to leaders’ perspectives rather than individual students’ self-

perceptions. For example, the question: “My experiences of God’s presence impact me greatly”

was modified to “Students experiences of God impact them greatly” (Hall & Edwards, 1996).

While modifications adapted the context to target leaders of spiritual formation programs, the

content of each item was preserved.

The modifications to the SAI were reviewed and approved by a team of experts from the

CCCU as a part of the research request process. The original SAI instructions stated: “Please

respond to each statement below by writing the number that best represents your experience in


98

the empty box to the right of the statement” which was modified to “For each item below, please

rate how important this objective or outcome is to you in your role as chaplain or spiritual

formation director”. This modification to the instructions is representative of how each item was

contextualized to answer research question one pertaining to leader’s perspectives of spiritual

formation programs.

The subsets of Awareness of God and Realistic Acceptance are those determined to be

most closely aligned with the practice and purpose of spiritual formation programs by a team of

expert reviewers from the CCCU. Based on the literature the mission and goals of spiritual

formation programs are in essence to promote an awareness of God and realistic acceptance of

God in students who are attending Christian higher education institutions. In theological terms,

the salvation and sanctification of believers represents the spiritual goals for all students. Horan

(2017) to this point, noted: “Christian education fosters spiritual rebirth and gradual growth in

Godliness toward maturity” (p. 62). Spiritual formation as defined operationally in this study is

inclusive of both conversion and development in the Christian life and so these subsets from the

SAI align with these aspects of that definition.

The SAI itself serves as the foundation of how this study is designed to answer the first

research question relative to what leader’s perceptions are of spiritual formation programs.

Utilizing the appropriate subsets, the SAI was specifically modified to answer the level of

importance leaders place upon outcomes or objectives relative to the Awareness and Realistic

Acceptance of God in spiritual formation programs.

Interview Protocol

The interview protocol was also developed based upon relevant research and expert

review from a board of CCCU experts. The theoretical framework by Fowler (1984) was most


99

influential in the development of the interview protocol. Consistent with what Fowler dubbed

“faith development interviews” this protocol shared a semi-structured format (Fowler & Dell,

2004, p. 35). While the purposes of faith development and spiritual formation are similar, the use

of follow-up interviews in this study are distinct in both content and length.

The interview protocol was designed for this study to answer research question two and

three: What are the institutional influences on spiritual formation programs? And How are

spiritual formation programs designed to achieve specific outcomes? Questions were developed

by the researcher and approved by a board of CCCU experts to provide qualitative data in

alignment with these questions.

The interview protocol instrument created is comprised of seven questions which are

generally open-ended in alignment with the exploratory purpose of this study. Questions

expound upon short answer questions from the survey to serve the purpose of triangulating data

while offering a more in-depth insight into institutional influences upon spiritual formation

programs and spiritual formation program design.

Validity

Since its development the SAI has been repeatedly supported by correlations with outside

measures to prove the instrument’s construct and convergent validity. Construct validity was

demonstrated by correlating the SAI with the Bell Object Relations Inventory which is an

established measure of object relations development (Hall & Edwards, 2002). Further, Hall and

Edwards (2002) stated, “The results of hierarchical regressions provide further evidence of the

incremental validity of the SAI (p. 352). In the Hall and Edwards 2002 study the validity of the

SAI was supported through use of the Pearson Product Moment correlations to show construct

validity with other tools such as the Bell Object Relations Inventory (Bell, 1991), the


100

Intrinsic/Extrinsic-Revised (Gorsuch and McPherson, 1989), the Spiritual Well-Being Scale

(Ellison, 1983), and the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (Emmons, 1987). Hall and Edward’s

(2002) analysis determined the SAI showed incremental validity over the Spiritual Well-Being

Scale and Intrinsic/Extrinsic Revised in predicting object relations development. This along with

the five-factor structure was also corroborated by a confirmatory factor analysis (Hall and

Edwards, 2002). Validity for this instrument has been established by continued research which

confirms the SAI as an effectual instrument to measure spirituality in Christian populations.

Further validating the SAI was an Item Response Theory Analysis done by Hall, Reise,

and Haviland, (2007) which evaluated the psychometric properties of the study. This analysis

measured the ability of the SAI to accurately measure spirituality based upon the Item Response

Theory. This analysis showed large discriminations between items as questions being most

relevant to one construct and less relevant to another (Hall, Reise & Haviland, 2007). Despite

these large discriminations, the authors confirm that “based on this Item Response Theory

analysis… researchers and clinicians comfortably can continue using the SAI in its present

form.” (Hall, Reise, & Haviland, 2007, p. 175). This confirms that while questions can

theoretically be improved, there exists a reasonable degree of information and precision. No

items on the scale failed to hold value to one or more subset scores. This measure describes

important validity markers of each item included in the SAI to provide a deeper analysis that

each item serves its purpose in effectively measuring the desired subset scores. These continued

validation studies have led to an established record of validity for the Spiritual Assessment

Inventory.

The modified version used in this study contains validity based upon the scales that are

already published. This establishes validity because these scales have already been vetted to


101

ensure content validity. Content validity was also established by having a board of content

experts from the CCCU review my instruments and approve their validity through the research

review process. This process was required to gain approval for use of the list of spiritual

formation leaders in Christian higher education. The modified version included a contextual shift

from the original self-perceptions to leader’s perceptions of items as programmatic outcomes and

objectives within spiritual formation programs. The rationale for each modification was to

contextualize the instrument to this study to answer the first research question.

The interview protocol was also reviewed by the same team of content experts through

the research review process at the CCCU. Alongside the survey, the interview protocol was

vetted to ensure that it sufficiently aligned with research questions two and three. Content

validity was established through approval following the research review process with CCCU

researchers who were content experts on the topic of spiritual formation in Christian higher

education.

Reliability

The SAI has also been continually supported as reliable since its inception. The reliability

of each of the subscales was estimated using Cronbach’s coefficient alpha measure of internal

consistency. Originally, the values for each scale were: Instability, 0.88; Defensiveness/

Disappointment, 0.91; Awareness, 0.90; Realistic Acceptance, 0.76; and Grandiosity, 0.52 (Hall

& Edwards, 1996). The values for the scales were similar or slightly improved six years later

when reliability of factor scales measured: Awareness, 0.95; Disappointment, 0.90; Realistic

Acceptance, 0.83; Grandiosity, 0.73; and Instability, 0.84 (Hall & Edwards, 2002). These values

are indicative that the subsets used in this study, Awareness and Realistic Acceptance, were two

of the most reliable among the subsets. The reliability of the SAI increased due to a text-retest


102

conducted with a subsample of 17 subjects (Hall & Edwards, 1996). The test-retest reliabilities

for the five scales were: Instability, .94; Defensiveness/ Disappointment, .93; Awareness, .83;

Realistic Acceptance, .59; and Grandiosity, .56 (Hall & Edwards, 1996). These improvements

have led to current high levels of reliability across the subsets in the SAI.

The authors stated that “It is important to note, the SAI met or exceeded acceptability

criteria (theoretical basis, sample representativeness/generalization, reliability, and validity) that

Hill (2005) has established for religion and spirituality measures.” (Hall, Reise, & Haviland,

2007, p. 159). After multiple revisions and factor analyses of the SAI with different samples, the

data showed that the factor structure is very stable and the scales are reliably consistent (Hall,

Reise, & Haviland, 2007). Studies have confirmed that the Spiritual Assessment Inventory has

met acceptable criteria for spirituality within the standards established within the literature.

The modified instrument incorporates the two subsets with the highest levels of reliability

based on Cronbach’s alpha scores. Initially, Awareness held an excellent score of 0.9 which was

improved to 0.95, while Realistic Acceptance held an acceptable 0.76 and improved to 0.83

which is considered a good indication of internal consistency. Continued research on the SAI has

further improved its reliability, which from the beginning was above acceptable standards of

reliability. The reliability of the modified version is based upon the original reliability scores of

the SAI which are indicative of high levels of reliability, particularly with the subsets of

Awareness and Realistic Acceptance.

The interview protocol underwent examination using the Interview Protocol Refinement

(IPR) framework (Yeong et. al., 2018). This framework is “an effective tool for improving the

interview protocol reliability and validity” through a “refinement process” (Yeong et. al., 2018,

p. 2700). This process enhances reliability through expert feedback of the interview protocol


103

which allows the researcher to “anticipate respondent answers…[and] ensure understandability”

(p. 2702). This interview protocol underwent extensive review from a team of experts in the field

and serving as faculty in CCCU member institutions. This review included the IPR framework

involving that the researchers: 1) ensure alignment between interview questions and research

questions, 2) construct an inquiry-based conversation, and 3) Receiving feedback on interview

protocols (Yeong et. al., 2018). Each of these steps improved the reliability of the use of the

interview protocol for use in this study.

Data Collection Procedures

Following a mixed-methodology research design, the primary means of data collection

used in this study was an email survey and follow-up interviews. The data collection process is

organized within this section concerning how the researcher contacted participants, distributed

instruments, and general data collection procedures.

The participants contacted for this study came from a list provided by the Council for

Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU). Only member institutions within this organization

were included on this list. The academic and spiritual standards of the CCCU organization

required assured that these participants were qualified and appropriate for participation in this

study. The participants were contacted by email from the contact information on the list provided

by the CCCU.

Participants were contacted with a link to the survey using survey monkey online survey

software. The invitation to participate in the study was sent out to all possible participants on the

email list once a week over the course of four weeks. A letter of implied consent was attached to

the invitation to participate. The implied consent letter informed participants about the nature of

the study, time expectations, and provided contact information for the researchers for any


104

participants who had questions (Appendix C). This letter assured participants that this study had

received approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of Findlay. The

purpose of this letter was to serve as an implied consent form accompanying the online survey

invitation to inform participants about the study.

Implied consent notified participants of the purpose of the study and assured participants

that their responses were anonymous. It further explained that their data will in no way be

identified with them and will not be disclosed. Participants were given the option to discontinue

participation at any time without prejudice. The intent for this study to be completed as a part of

graduation requirement was also shared with participants.

Participants spent an average of 6 minutes to take the survey. The initial expectation was

that the time expenditure would be greater due to the inclusion of two comment response

questions, however participants answered the 25 questions in less than the expected time on

average. The time spent may be reflective of the 19 Likert-scale questions which comprised the

majority of the survey. The range of time spent was from 3-12 minutes.

The final question of the survey used for this study was how participants were contacted

for participation in a follow-up interview. Participants who selected yes to the question “Would

you be interested in participating in a follow-up interview for further discussion of your

perspectives about spiritual formation programs?” were displayed the researcher’s email address

with the message: “Please contact the researcher at this email to set up a time for a 30-minute

follow up interview”. Not all participants who selected yes contacted the researcher via email.

This step was necessary, however, to retain anonymity for participants.

The medium for the survey distribution was through a link within the email to

surveymonkey.com. This medium for survey distribution was a professional and established


105

organization which offered the study another level of security for the data, basic data analysis

tools, and the ability to export data. Symonds (2011) cited surveymonkey.com as an effective

testing tool for research purposes. This survey was 25 total questions and due to the number of

questions a purchased standard subscription was required for data collection.

Interviews were collected after setting up a time with participants who reached out to the

researcher. This process led to the data collection of interviews. The interviews were conducted

in a semi-structured format allowing for follow-up questions. The protocol itself consisted of

seven questions aligned with the research questions. All participants were asked the seven

questions.

Interviews were all conducted via phone call and recorded using an iPad or tablet device

with permission from all participants for the purposes of transcribing the data for coding

analysis. The researcher led the conversation to ensure that each interview was 30 minutes in

length. All interviews did spend exactly 30 minutes with each of the participants.

All data collected was secured on a password-protected computer on a private hard drive.

Surveys were anonymous and interviews were confidential. The processes to mitigate the risk to

participants served as the rationale for the procedures of participants contacting the researcher to

set up a follow up interview, and also the rationale for the redaction of names from interview

data.

Data Analysis

Quantitative data from the survey was first analyzed through general descriptive statistics

which provided basic information about the number of participants who selected a number on the

Likert scale and percentages for each item. This general data was provided via the report

generated from surveymonkey.com and presented the results within a bar graph for each


106

question. Each question was analyzed individually to determine scores and percentages. Tables

were created to show the results from the study.

The null hypothesis for the first question being tested is that leaders of spiritual formation

programs believe that spiritual formation programs within Christian higher education are not

effective in affecting student’s awareness and acceptance of God. This null was tested by

significance testing using a chi square analysis. The hypothesis for research question two was

that the main institutional influences upon spiritual formation programs are denominations and

Christian accreditation organizations. For research question three the hypothesis is that spiritual

formation programs are designed to meet the institutional goals set forth by the college or

university, particularly relating to the spiritual or Christian aspects of the held mission statement.

The results were analyzed by the researcher following a coding process detailed by Saldana

(2015).

To answer research question one regarding spiritual formation program leader’s

perspectives, a quantitative analytic strategy was utilized. The analytic strategy included

descriptive statistics and significance testing. Descriptive statistics displayed percentages of

responses from all participants. A chi square analysis was conducted for each item to determine

if each answer was a function of randomness or if leaders feel strongly about these items. This

analysis sought to better understand each question and speak to the importance of each item in

answering what leader’s perspectives of spiritual formation programs are.

Research question two and three relating to institutional influences upon spiritual

formation programs and spiritual formation program design are aligned with a qualitative

analytic strategy. Qualitative data analysis was conducted on both extended response questions

within the survey as well as interview data. The coding process used for qualitative data analysis


107

comes from the work of Saldana (2015) who defined coding as “a word or short phrase that

symbolically assigns a summative, salient, essence-capturing, and/or evocative attribute for a

portion of language-based or visual data” (p. 3). The qualitative data analysis developed codes,

categories, and themes based upon the data. The first phase of coding was preliminary pre-

coding which guided the emergent investigation (Saldana, 2015). This began at a large scale and

utilized holistic coding methods which focused on large sections of qualitative data. This

opening round of coding established starter concepts which were later supported or contradicted

by other comparable qualitative data (Saldana, 2015). This formative stage of the process gave

shape to emergent themes in the coding and qualitative data analysis process.

The second phase of the coding process focused on developing a sense of “categorical,

thematic, conceptual and/or theoretical organization” building upon pre-coding analysis

(Saldana, 2015, p. 207). Axial coding constructed an analytic interpretation relating codes to sub-

codes and themes while distinguishing dominant and non-dominant codes. This process was

increasingly selective, and codes were established based on specific text rather than broader

generalizations from the pre-coding phase. Axial coding began to pinpoint themes from the data

with greater accuracy. The coding process continued for multiple rounds leading to the

researcher having established a sufficient analysis of the qualitative data. The data then was

reflected in a data table describing which codes, concepts, and themes are reflected in the

qualitative data. Final analysis combined all qualitative research within the table to illustrate the

findings with percentages of support from respondents. The qualitative data analysis was an

ongoing process which led to the final analysis. The entirety of the qualitative data produced

codes and themes which add to the discussion and raise new questions creating opportunities for

further research.


108

Assumptions

This study made several assumptions. These are factors which the researcher assumes to

be true and does not question in the data analysis. This study was based on the following

assumptions:

1) Participants answered survey and interview questions honestly when sharing their

perspectives

2) Participants have experienced the same or similar phenomenon’s within spiritual

formation programs in Christian higher education

3) Participants were not influenced by any outside individual or institution which would

cause them to be untruthful or provide data which was misleading

Trustworthiness

To ensure the trustworthiness of this study, the design was founded on contacting

participants from a list provided by the Council of Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU).

This step made this study trustworthy because the CCCU as an outside organization holds

expectations for member institutions. These expectations are based on academic accreditation as

a university as well as requiring a Christian commitment to spiritual formation of the student

body. This representation strategy assured that all participants in this study were leaders within a

spiritual formation program at a Christian higher education institution who is an approved

member of the CCCU.

The mixed-methodological approach offers additional trustworthiness due to multiple

methods of data collection and analysis. This insulated the findings of this study from biases that

would otherwise be exposed without the triangulation of data from the survey and interview.

This research was designed to explore spiritual formation with a holistic approach in order to


109

lead to findings which will illuminate leader’s perspectives of spiritual formation programs

utilizing both methods.

The validity for this study was supported by the Spiritual Assessment Inventory

instrument, which was modified for the first set of questions contained within the survey. This

instrument demonstrates validity and reliability in measuring spirituality within Christian

populations (Hall, Reise, & Haviland, 2007). Further, the continued study of this instrument

along with its extensive use within Christian higher education research have added to the

trustworthiness of this study.


110

Chapter IV. Results

In this chapter, the results from the data analysis are presented. The data were analyzed

from the two sources as indicated in Chapter III: an online survey and follow-up interviews. As

indicated in Chapter I, the data were analyzed with a focus on three research questions: 1) What

are leaders’ perceptions of spiritual formation programs? 2) What are the institutional influences

affecting spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education? 3) How are spiritual

formation programs in Christian higher education designed to achieve specific outcomes? Each

of these questions were addressed and examined throughout this study.

Characteristics of the Sample

Survey participants were asked to complete a demographics section comprised of three

questions to better understand the experience levels of the leaders, the size of the institution, and

denominational affiliation of the institution. Each of these demographic questions were

specifically designed to better understand the characteristics of the sample, particularly to

illuminate the size and nature of the spiritual formation program to better understand how these

factors may influence leader’s perceptions of spiritual formation programs.

This study contacted 165 spiritual formation program leaders in a list provided by the

Council for Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU). There were 36 responses to the survey

for a response rate of 22%. Four survey participants additionally participated in the follow-up

interviews. Based on the responses, spiritual formation program leader’s experience levels

ranged from 1 to over 30 years, with an average of 13.8 years of experience. In response to this

question some participants expanded upon their experience level outside of their current position

but within the context of Christian higher education. Numeric values were solely included in the

data collection.


111

When asked how many students are enrolled at spiritual formation leader’s institutions,

responses were predominantly within the 500-5,000 student range 27 (75%). Additionally, 5

(14%) respondents were serving at schools with less than 500, 3 (8%) with between 5,001-

10,000 students, and only 1 (2%) were at an institution with more than 10,000 students.

The denominational affiliation of the institution was measured using Naidoo’s (2011)

categories from a research study on spiritual formation at theological institutions. This method of

utilizing institutional profiles was designed to be “narrow enough for participants to share a

similar understanding of spiritual formation, yet broad enough so that the data collection will not

be biased by a single denomination’s particular emphasis on doctrine or lifestyle” (p. 127).

Spiritual formation leaders participating in the survey were asked which denominational

affiliation most closely aligns with their institution with the options of Anglican, Baptist,

Charismatic, Methodist, Pentecostal, Presbyterian, and Reformed. The results of institutions

denominational affiliations were 9 (31%) Baptist, 7 (24%) Pentecostal, 7 (24%) Methodist, 2

(7%) Charismatic, 2 (7%) Presbyterian, 2 (7%) Reformed, and 0 (0%) Anglican.

The characteristics of the sample are fairly evenly distributed among experience levels

and denominational affiliation. Institution size is less so with a strong majority (75%) of schools

serving 500-5,000 students who are enrolled in the institution. This information illustrates the

characteristics of the sample as it relates to spiritual formation programs in Christian higher

education.

The qualitative interviews followed-up on the same topics within the survey. There were

four participants in the follow-up interviews which led to qualitative data. Each of the

participants will be discussed in this chapter using a pseudonym to ensure confidentiality while

avoiding being impersonal. The first participant will be called Ken, the second Anna, the third


112

Jim, and fourth Rob. Each of the participants are at a different CCCU institution. The locations

of the Christian higher education institutions, where they serve as leaders of spiritual formation

programs are across the nation, with each representing a different state in America. Each

participant also is at an institution with a unique denominational affiliation and no two share the

same denominational background or affiliation.

Instrument Validity and Reliability

There were two instruments used in collecting data for this study: an online survey and a

follow-up interview. The survey was based on the Spiritual Assessment Inventory (SAI) which

has an established validity and reliability which is detailed in Chapter III. Both instruments were

vetted and analyzed by a board comprised of faculty from CCCU member institutions who were

experts in this field of research. This instrument also has been used in measuring the spirituality

of Christian populations in Christian higher education since being introduced in 1996. The

modifications ensured both instruments were correctly framed to the context of each participant

and they were focused to directly answer the research questions.

In an effort to increase validity and reliability, the same questions were asked of all

participants both in the survey and in the follow-up interviews. The mixed-methods design

offered a combination of both short-answer responses within the survey and follow-up interviews

targeting the same research questions. This allowed for data triangulation as the follow-up

interview information was richer and provided more in-depth insight from spiritual formation

program leaders.

Leader Perceptions of Spiritual Formation Programs

The first research question analyzed was What are leaders’ perceptions of spiritual

formation programs? In examination of the data from participating leaders of spiritual formation


113

programs, survey questions 1-19 were aligned to answer this question. Quantitative data analysis

was utilized to gain leader’s perceptions of spiritual formation programs. This method of data

analysis aimed to describe leaders’ perceptions of spiritual formation programs at this level of

analysis.

The first step in analyzing the results was describing the data (Table 2). This information

indicates the responses to the items on the survey which were modified from the Spiritual

Assessment Inventory (SAI) in which participants were instructed to rate how important each

outcome or objective was in their role as chaplain or spiritual formation director. This analysis of

19 questions showcased the stronger percentages of answers from spiritual formation program

leaders were viewed as generally important or very important.

The results from each survey item are displayed to show how spiritual formation program

leaders generally place a high level of importance upon each outcome or objective. Each

outcome or objective is linked with promoting the awareness and acceptance of God from the

SAI. The table describes the percentages and shows how a majority of the responses are heavily

skewed towards the higher values which indicate that each item is important to spiritual

formation program leaders.

The original SAI as well as the modified survey offered a 5-point Likert scale response to

each item containing 1) Not Important, 2) Slightly Important, 3) Neutral, 4) Important, and 5)

Very Important. These 5 categories were condensed into 3 in the analysis which are 1)

Unimportant, 2) Neutral, and 3) Important. This change was made to more concisely represent

the information provided in the survey as the difference between important and very important,

as an example, is inconsequential.


114

To answer the first research question, this analysis shows that spiritual formation

program leaders hold a generally positive perspective regarding the value of outcomes and

objectives which promote the awareness and realistic acceptance of God. This would also

indicate that the purpose of spiritual formation programs is aligned with the measurements in the

SAI as each item from the two subsets is resoundingly supported by the results.

All items with the exception of one (item 16), were viewed as important by 80% of

respondents. This shows strong positive perceptions from leaders pertaining to spiritual

formation programs. Item 16 on the survey was “Students experience an awareness of God

speaking to them personally” which may have been due to theological beliefs about how God

communicates with humanity. This outlier also held the highest negative perception as

unimportant (11%). Based on the analysis there is a consistency across each item contained

within the survey and the majority is completely dominated by leaders who find each outcome or

objective to be important in their role.

Table 2 Spiritual formation leader’s perspectives of how important each outcome or objective is in their role.

Question Unimportant Neutral Important

1. Students have a sense of how God is working in their lives.

0% 3% 97%

2. God’s presence feels very real to students

0% 6% 94%

3. Listening to God is an essential part of student’s lives.

3% 8% 89%

4. Students are aware of God prompting them to do things.

8% 6% 86%


115

5. Student’s experiences of God’s responses to them impact them greatly.

8% 6% 86%

6. *Students are aware of God’s presence in their interactions with other people.

3% 9% 88%

7. Students are aware of God responding to them in a variety of ways.

0% 6% 94%

8. Students are aware of God attending to them in times of need.

0% 6% 94%

9. Students are aware of God telling them to do something.

6% 11% 83%

10. Student’s experiences of God’s presence impact them greatly.

0% 6% 94%

11. Students have a sense of the direction in which God is guiding them.

6% 6% 88%

12. *Students are aware of God communicating to them in a variety of ways.

0% 9% 91%

13. Students are aware of God’s presence in times of need.

0% 6% 94%

14. From day to day, students sense God being with them.

0% 4% 89%

15. Students have a sense of God communicating guidance to them.

0% 8% 92%

16. Students experience an awareness of God speaking to them personally.

11% 25% 64%

17. Students have a strong impression of God’s presence.

3% 17% 80%

18. Students are aware of God being very near to them.

0% 3% 83%


116

19. When students consult God about decisions in their lives, they are aware of God’s direction and help.

3% 8% 89%

Note. N=36 for all items unless question is marked with an asterisk (*). Items with an asterisk

represent one less participant N=35.

The data was also subject to significance testing from a chi square analysis conducted on

each item (Table 3). This analysis was utilized to determine if answers were a function of

randomness or if there was statistically significant evidence that participants feel strongly about

each item contained within the survey. Significance testing was conducted in order to determine

whether or not to accept the null hypothesis.

The significance testing using the Bonferroni correction resulted in no items being

statistically significant at less than a level of 0.005. As only levels below this value are

significant, no items were below the threshold to be considered significant. This result from the

significance test indicate that responses may not be seen as statistically significant and so the null

hypothesis is accepted. Worthy of consideration is that the Bonferroni correction is a

conservative test. Additionally, the Bonferroni correction was made with the categories

condensed into three options: 1) Unimportant, 2) Neutral, and 3) Important. Two degrees of

freedom (2df) were used in the test.

Additional corrections were required in order to interpret the significance based upon the

chi squared scores. A Bonferroni correction was implemented in order to account for the

significance across 19 items. The significance threshold was raised (p<0.10) in attempt to offset

the strictness of the Bonferroni correction. The correction produced a new p-value to determine


117

significance by dividing the original p-value (0.10) by the number of items (19) to produce a new

significance level of (0.005). Accounting for this correction, any value equal or lesser to 0.005 is

considered significant. This correction was utilized due to the number of questions asked to give

a more accurate representation of the significance.

Table 3 Significance Test

Question Number N Chi-square Value

P- Value df Bonferroni Correction

Significance (p<0.005)

1 36 4.286 0.117 2 no 2 36 6.705 0.034 2 no 3 36 1.277 0.528 2 no 4 36 1.556 0.459 2 no 5 36 8.878 0.011 2 no 6 35 3.321 0.190 2 no 7 36 6.705 0.349 2 no 8 36 6.705 0.349 2 no 9 36 1.476 0.478 2 no 10 36 4.286 0.117 2 no 11 36 6.705 0.349 2 no 12 35 2.326 0.312 2 no 13 36 6.705 0.349 2 no 14 36 9.951 0.006 2 no 15 36 8.878 0.011 2 no 16 36 0.0003 0.999 2 no 17 36 8.498 0.142 2 no 18 36 7.582 0.022 2 no 19 36 1.277 0.528 2 no

These results held meaning pointing to how spiritual formation program leaders held

generally positive perceptions of their programs. The SAI subsets of awareness and realistic

acceptance of God were supported as important outcomes and objectives within spiritual


118

formation programs. The findings answer what spiritual formation program leader’s perspectives

are based upon the descriptive data presented.

Findings from the significance testing revealed that no items were above the threshold to

be statistically significant. This outcome was influenced by the use of the Bonferroni correction

which reduced the significance level to 0.005. Due to the number of items in the survey, the

Bonferroni correction accounted for error and no items are beyond the error margin. This result

affects the interpretation of the findings, requiring further study to establish significance.

The reasoning for utilizing the Bonferroni correction was to answer research question 1

about spiritual formation leader’s perspectives by testing the degree to which leaders feel

strongly about these items. While the statistical analysis of the responses shows an

overwhelmingly positive perspective of these items, the significance testing does not show

statistical significance. Additional future research with a larger sample size would likely have

improved significance levels.

In answering the research question about what spiritual formation program leader’s

perspectives are regarding the programs in which they lead, it can be surmised that leaders

associate value and importance to these programs. This value is linked to the promotion of an

awareness and acceptance of God which are aligned with the core purposes based upon the

subsets from the Spiritual Assessment Inventory. Still, no results are statistically significant

using the significance test and so the null hypothesis can be accepted. Despite the high

percentages of numbers on the high end of the scale, the number of questions shifts the error

margin to account for an increase in possibilities.

In summary, the results answer the question of leader’s perspectives based on the

responses to the survey items. The results from the demographics section presents a sample with


119

a range of experience levels and denominational affiliations. Chi square significance testing

confirms that the responses are due to the fact that leader’s feel strongly about these outcomes or

objectives, rather than being the result of random error. The quantitative data tells the story of

leader’s perspectives and the results will inform conclusions of how these perspectives fit within

the literature on the topic.

Institutional Influences and Spiritual Formation Programs

The second research question analyzed was What are the institutional influences affecting

spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education? To answer this question, data

collected from survey responses and follow-up interviews which aligned to this question were

combined. Included in the survey is a short answer response section asking leaders of spiritual

formation programs what the institutional influences are at their institution. The survey also asks

this question to provide more in-depth responses to identifying what institutional influences upon

these programs may be and how they influence spiritual formation programs in Christian higher

education.

To analyze the survey and interview data a coding process was followed which is

outlined by Saldana (2015) in the Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. This process

begins with pre-coding, then axial coding, which continues for several rounds as necessary to

establish codes and larger themes. A full explanation of this process is described in Chapter III.

The results from this process will be shared in this chapter.

In an effort to structure the information, this study examined the survey question as a

separate entity and then analyzed the four follow-up interviews to address the research question.

There is overlap among the data collected but the results are organized separately for the

purposes of data triangulation.


120

Survey Responses

There were 35 responses to survey question 20 What are the institutional influences upon

spiritual formation at your institution? (i.e. denominational affiliation, accreditation

organization, etc.) How do these influences affect spiritual formation at your institution? Of

these responses the predominant institutional influence identified was denominational

affiliations, followed by accreditation organizations, and finally financial interests/ stakeholders.

Denominational affiliation is presented as many leaders of spiritual formation programs

as having influence which pervades the institution thus affecting programming. One respondent

stated that the denominational influence happens “on a macro level.” Several respondents

mentioned how denominational influence impacted the mission and theology of the university,

which underlies everything at the institution.

One theme which stood out among survey responses was the limitations of these

institutional influences on spiritual formation programs. Limitations was not an aspect of the

question and yet respondents shared how these institutional influences can be limiting, while

others defend that despite these influences there is no limitation upon the spiritual formation

programming. One respondent stated “these influences have a moderate impact on the spiritual

formation of students. They are regulatory in nature which gives ample flexibility to achieve

institutional goals.” Another respondent affirmed “the affiliation informs some of our

foundational beliefs while not hindering our opportunities to approach spiritual formation in a

variety of ways.” Others in contrast, shared perspectives that institutional influences contain

“strong informal expectations… and we have to manage our decisions with respect to these”.

Denominational influence is defended as more helpful than to detract from the overall spiritual

formation programs or in some way be limiting, perhaps the clearest representation was from one


121

respondent who shared “Denominational influence occurs at our university, but it isn’t too

limiting. We try to honor and respect our heritage while moving forward in the faith to pursue

the Lord.” The results from this survey include many defenses to the benefits of a foundation

from a denominational tradition. Given this support it is interesting that many spiritual formation

program leaders shared this theme of denominational influence being limiting or restrictive.

Accreditation was a topic mentioned by many in the survey responses and themes arose

about the general lack of influence accreditation organizations have on spiritual formation

programs. One respondent expressed both the lack of influence and responsibilities:

Our accreditation body is the Higher Learning Commission. First, the Higher Learning

Commission does not have any direct influence on our spiritual life program; however,

the HLC does make sure that we are doing what we are say we are doing, and we must

provide data to prove it.

This is reinforced also by one response:

Obviously, the university wants to maintain a compliant status with its accrediting

agency. That ensures students at off-campus locations will have access to comparable

spiritual growth opportunities. As for the curriculum, or body, of spiritual formation that

is in the hands of the university.

Strikingly, there is only mention of academic accreditation agencies such as the Higher Learning

Commission, rather than Christian or faith-based accreditation agencies like the Council for

Christian Colleges and Universities which are focused on the areas of Christian spiritual growth,

the main intended outcome within spiritual formation programs. The omission of Christian

accreditation agencies is an intriguing aspect of the results which raises questions about the

influence of these organizations.


122

The final theme from the survey responses is the institutional influences and the effect

that they have on finances both for the institution and specifically the spiritual formation

programs themselves. Each institution is unique both in its financial standing and sources of

revenue which support spiritual formation programs at the institution. One respondent simply

replied “School politics. Have to appease lots of stakeholders.” While this response does not

identify institutional influences, it does speak to the challenge that faces finances and funding for

these programs. Another response stated:

Budget limitations pose some of the greatest challenges to spiritual formation strategies,

since there aren’t direct, quantitative results to back up what we are doing. It’s easier to

get financial support to host events than to support spiritual retreats and relationships.

The funding of different aspects of spiritual formation programs differs as some spiritual

formation programs “emphasize missions” as one respondent stated. The influence of finance is

mentioned as an influence that affects spiritual formation leaders and the results show that this is

a factor at least at some institutions.

In summary, the survey responses to institutional influences shared results that leaders of

spiritual formation programs are influenced by denominational affiliation primarily, less by

accreditation organizations, and some are influenced by financial stakeholders who influence

spiritual formation programs at these Christian higher education institutions. Each of these

influences is evidence of the many factors which impact spiritual formation programs and the

leaders of these programs.

Follow-Up Interviews

Follow-up interviews provided in depth responses on the topic of institutional influences

on spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education. In response to again asking the


123

research question to participants within the interview format, responses carried similar codes and

themes. The first codes and themes were simply leader’s perspectives about the institutional

influences and from that line of questioning, a theme presented itself about the role of

denominational influence in an academic environment which is representative of a diverse range

of faith backgrounds and beliefs.

Ken.

When asked about institutional influences Ken responded:

I mean we are a part of the CCCU and we are a part of more regional stuff as well here.

We have denominational roots but are not denominationally affiliated. We have a

strategic partnership with the church, but I would say none of those so far in my job have

impacted my day-to-day building of a spiritual formation program. I see those being

resources that I would like to tap into, but they have not had a day-to-day impact so far.

This statement aligned with the survey responses which indicate that institutional influences are

more an organizational relationship than felt as impactful to spiritual formation program leaders.

Anna.

Anna, when asked about institutional influences stated:

So, we are a part of a denomination. So that definitely influences us. I would say that one

of the biggest influences is the chapel speakers that we bring in. So, a lot of who we look

for are people within our faith tradition, or at least know how to function in that space.

And then that also affects our student body, of like who comes [enrolls in the institution].

Anna’s comments stood out as she recognized the influences which are felt indirectly such as

chapel speakers and generally the institution’s role in shaping the spiritual formation of students

according to their doctrinal beliefs.


124

Jim.

Jim stated:

Yeah, the denomination piece is a factor. Every semester we have revival which is really

focused on the spiritual lives of students. Those speakers really need to be in line with the

denominational values. During the semester it is less of a requirement, just because in

chapel we are not diving into deep theological distinctions. But in a revival space where

there are five services, we have to be more thoughtful about that.

The researcher followed up with a question “And so how are the speakers decided? What is the

process for that?” To which Jim responded:

Yeah that would lead me to the other institutional influence which is really my boss who

is the dean of students, the associate vice president for student development, as well as

the president. Those two folks really guide some of the pieces, who we have come in

chapel, who comes to speak for revival, making sure that our faith tradition part of our

mission statement is really clung to.

Here again, the code of institutional influences being a determining factor in speakers at the

institution arises.

Rob.

In response to asking about institutional influences, Rob answered:

We are a denominationally affiliated university and all of my directors are from churches

within the denomination. Most of them have backgrounds and upbringings in the

denomination… Our purpose statement comes from the doctrinal statement from the

denomination, and so we all have to be in line with what we are doing.

Rob further commented:


125

Institutionally, I think that other things influence us, like chapel is mandatory so we

don’t have to push chapel or even defend chapel, it’s just part of our ethos… I feel like

our administration prioritizes what we do. Accreditation comes into play because we are

preparing for our next visit from our regional accrediting agency.

Rob explained the evaluation process surrounding the institutional influences and how

accountability measures affect spiritual formation programs:

So, they started requiring student services, which we are a part of, also assess what their

different areas are doing. So, we had to develop outcomes and enter into an assessment

process that we have been in every year. And so that has helped us a lot.

Finally, Rob stated, “You know churches and pastors would be an outside influence in who I

would schedule in chapel and what our chapels are like and that sort of thing. I haven’t found

any of them to be constricting though”. Results from Rob’s interview showed the differences

between denominational influences from an institutional standpoint, accreditation influences

through evaluation, and the influences of local ministry.

Spiritual Diversity

One of the themes which stood out was the influence of spiritual diversity among the

student body. Nearly all interviewees commented on the challenge of serving students who are

coming from a diverse range of experience with their religion and spirituality. This comes as a

challenge to leaders of spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education who are

attempting to serve all students spiritually, despite the differences among students from a

spiritual standpoint.

To this point, Ken contrasted:


126

What I like about the local church is that there is great life stage diversity and I really

miss that. Getting to work with older people and married, single, divorced 6 kids, no kids,

like there is great life stage diversity and I have very little of that here. It is mostly 18-22-

year old’s who are single. But the spiritual diversity is vast… Trying to capture all of that

and feed those who are already following and appeal to those who are not.

This difference between ministry in a local church setting and being a leader of a spiritual

formation program provides contrast which helps to understand campus ministry as a parachurch

organization.

Anna bolstered this point as well having stated:

So that kind of diversity we see increasing. And serving a student body that is

increasingly diverse while also adhering and submitting to the denominational leaders

above us is a significant thing that we talk about fairly regularly in leadership. So,

denomination is a big influence…[and] accrediting bodies definitely play into the health

of our whole organization and …really affects what we do.

Jim also added that he sees his unofficial mission statement in his role as follows:

I want to see every student take steps closer to Jesus. From whatever that looks like.

Wherever they are on the spectrum of being close to Jesus or not being close to him. I

want to see them move forward in that relationship with Jesus. So that is kind of the lens

that I take with spiritual formation.

Diversity of spirituality is also accounted for in programming according to Rob, who

stated:

We offer one or two teams that are offered to students of different faith backgrounds

where they don’t have to be a believer to participate in these particular teams and so the


127

focus of these particular teams is service but they are with a team leader who clearly

understands the gospel, understands disciple making, and is working with those students

to help them understand the gospel and understand what it means to be a follower of

Jesus.

Even in Christian higher education there is evidence of programmatic accommodations for

students who are not Christian, however the mission of the institution is to accept students as

they are and expose all students to the Christian faith without forcing anything upon them. Rob

stated:

And so, our core values and outcomes would resonate more with the mission statement

of the university. Those values inform how we are going to invest in lives and develop

followers of Jesus. So, I have never thought of it as informing what we do but it certainly

fences what we do.

Spiritual diversity was a code which appeared in all four interviews and seems a significant

aspect of how influences impact both leaders and students in the context of spiritual formation

programs.

In summary, the institutional influences affecting spiritual formation programs are

denominational influences, accreditation influences, and spiritual diversity. Each of these themes

arose through a combination of survey responses and follow-up interview data. These findings

raise further questions and merit future discussion about these influences.

In analyzing these results, it seems that the resounding answer to the question: What are

the institutional influences affecting spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education?

is that denominational influence is the most common. Based on the survey data and interview

responses, denominational influence is varied in terms of the role that it plays but it is nearly


128

universally acknowledged by leaders of spiritual formation programs. The hypothesized

influence of Christian accreditation organizations, along with other influences contained much

less unison among participants. Spiritual diversity was also a common theme presented and this

research raises questions about how different institutions are influenced by denominations while

attempting to serve students from a diverse range of backgrounds. This explains that of the

institutional influences denominational affiliation is very strong, while others are much less so,

making denominational affiliation a priority within spiritual formation programs.

The universal acknowledgement of the role that denominational influence plays in this

study illuminates how spiritual formation program leaders are impacted by the Christian higher

education institution’s religious ties. Simply acknowledging the existence of denominational

influence does not quantify the extent to which that is influential. The existence of

denominational influence is the intersection between two organizations, the church and the

education institution, manifesting itself in various ways. One key aspect as noted by this study is

the decision-making power or control that is removed from spiritual formation leaders. To

varying degrees spiritual formation program leaders do not have the authority to solely decide

who speaks to students in chapel. This is decided by various positions including vice presidents,

the president, the board, or other body consisting of church leadership. It is resoundingly

confirmed that based upon these strategies the spiritual formation aspect is seen as top priority

and the voices which influence the students are given careful consideration by not only the

spiritual formation program leader, but by the leaders in the administration of the Christian

higher education institution also.

The results show that influence from the church heavily outweighs influence from

academic circles. Based on results from the interviews with spiritual formation program leaders,


129

the greater attention to denominational guidelines and doctrinal accuracy is a greater concern

within spiritual formation programs. Further discussion may explore the link between the

spiritual formation program leader’s role as promoting church doctrine while also serving the

interests of the academic institution. How these programs incorporate responsibilities to serve

students spiritually in an academic setting may lead to future questions about the purpose of

spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education.

Spiritual Formation Program Design

The third research question analyzed was How are spiritual formation programs in

Christian higher education designed to achieve specific outcomes? To answer this question, data

collected from both survey responses and follow-up interviews were examined. Included in the

survey is a short answer response section asking leaders how spiritual formation programs are

designed to meet specific outcomes at their institution. The interview also examines program

design to provide in-depth responses to understanding the structural elements of spiritual

formation programs.

The qualitative data analysis procedures for this question followed the structure outlined

by Saldana (2015) in the Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. This process begins with

pre-coding, then axial coding, which continues for several rounds as necessary to establish codes

and larger themes. A full explanation of this process is described in Chapter III. The results from

this process will be shared in this chapter.

In an effort to structure the information, this study examined the survey question as a

separate entity and then analyzed the four follow-up interviews to address the research question.

Survey Responses


130

Question 21 of the survey was directly from the research questions asking How are

spiritual formation programs designed to meet specific outcomes at your institution? Who has

influence over this process at your institution? This question was designed to provide data which

aligned with this research question specifically and add context to the structural and hierarchical

systems which influence spiritual formation at Christian higher education institutions.

Based on responses, a strong theme arose recognizing a team-based approach to the

design of spiritual formation programs. The rationale for this team approach is often the size of

the spiritual formation program in order to serve all students on campus. For example, one

respondent shared:

We have a very decentralized process; many people are involved in spiritual formation

largely because we have a large spiritual formation requirement for students. Our office

with two full time staff and three graduate assistants oversees chapel daily and gives

structure to over 150 small groups as well.

Another respondent cited a committee approach:

We have a spiritual life committee that meets twice a year that helps to design and

promote the spiritual life opportunities on campus…by attending chapel, weekly bible

studies, worship events, prayer events, Fellowship of Christian Athletes events, spiritual

life forums, and a host of other events.

While ultimately one role at the institution is responsible for spiritual formation programs, a

team effort is required to implement the programs to promote the spiritual formation of students.

One respondent shared, “I make those decisions as Vice President for Spiritual Development. I

work with a team of student leaders and faculty/staff to form programs and make decisions”.

Another cited interdepartmental cooperation in that “Both student development staff and a


131

spiritual life committee guide the programming”. Each of these results are evidence of the broad

team-based approach to spiritual formation programs.

The alternative description of spiritual formation program design is that one individual is

tasked with the responsibility for outcomes. A respondent answered simply “Campus Minister.

We have a strategic plan”. Another cited that “The president sets the spiritual tone and values.

The spiritual life department implements”. Similarly, another respondent stated, “Vice President

of Spiritual Life and campus chaplain”. Another response directly stated “Dean of the Chapel” as

the individual who designs the structure and determines the outcomes of spiritual formation

programs.

Another theme of spiritual formation program design is a multi-dimensional approach to

spiritual formation that incorporates a variety of means to serve students spiritually. One

respondent expounded on this transition having stated:

This institution was a chapel only campus when I first arrived. In other words, students

had to attend chapel to receive their chapel credits. About three years ago, we made a

drastic shift to offer more opportunities for students to get their required spiritual life

credits... [due to this] we saw an increase of students hitting their goal.

Another leader of a spiritual formation program shared “programs emphasize small group

discipleship, mentoring and peer to peer mentoring”. Another added “We offer corporate times

of worship through student led weekly services, we encourage private worship and prayer

through our open small chapel on campus and we have student leaders who direct prayer and

Bible study events on campus”.

A final code is the assessment protocol which influences how programs are designed and

how structures are set up to measure spiritual formation program outcomes. The dual


132

responsibility of implementation and assessment was shared by one respondent who stated, “I am

in the process of assessing the outcomes and the current program’s effectiveness in achieving

those outcomes”. Another shared “The mission of the university has core

commitments/outcomes that relate in part to spiritual formation and are measured by academics,

and spiritual life has four outcomes that drive spiritual life programming and are assessed by

spiritual life”. Accountability standards were shared by one respondent having stated, “We don’t

have defined outcomes that we are supposed to design our programs to meet, but we do often

submit reports that demonstrate the outcomes of our programming. Those reports are submitted

to the Vice President of Student Development, who puts together a report for all aspects of

student development”. Accountability standards was a theme that was evident from the results.

Follow-up Interviews

Data from follow-up interviews provided results which aligned with the research question

and was qualitatively analyzed. The most common theme that emerged from among the

interviews is the role of campus chapel in a spiritual formation program. Each interview led to a

description of chapel from leaders of spiritual formation programs.

Ken.

Ken explained what he saw as the essence of spiritual formation program design:

I would say that the biggest rock in our spiritual formation is chapel. Within that [we are]

trying to do both evangelism and discipleship. So, we require chapel attendance not every

time, but about half the semester…By requiring chapel attendance and by structuring that

time in a way that seeks to draw in those who are not yet following Jesus and deepen the

faith of those who are.


133

At Ken’s institution, chapel is a graduation requirement for students and so he stated that “we are

pretty motivated as are the students to make sure that they achieve the required amount of

[chapel] credits”.

The philosophy and approach taken to spiritual formation programs, and specifically

chapel was something that Ken elaborated on in more detail. Ken shared how his goal is to:

Build a chapel program that is compelling and relevant to all students…So we are

making it so that they want to come. Obviously, they have to come but we are making it

so that they don’t hate it so that you are dealing with the problem on the front end.

Further, Ken shared his different philosophy for chapel which separates it from the local church.

Ken stated:

I have a background as a local church pastor and so I have a conviction that I shouldn’t

just create a faux church for our students on campus. And so that is one of the things that

I wrestle with- just how much to do that.

He later expresses his fear that a program-heavy approach may detract from student’s

involvement in local churches beyond campus. Ken commented, “My fear with a small group

Bible study is that it creates another layer of spiritual life for the students who are most likely to

get involved with the local church, which is what I really want to happen”. From these results it

is evident the centrality of chapel to a spiritual formation program from a design standpoint, as

well as how a leader’s or institution’s philosophy of ministry frames what the roles of campus

ministry and local church involvement should be for students.

Anna.

Anna provided details about the structure of the spiritual formation program with a

specific emphasis on chapel requirements. She stated:


134

Students are required to go to 33 opportunities for a chapel credit a semester…we still

have our plenary chapels Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday at 10am. We basically have a

chapel credit opportunity for the whole school Monday through Friday at 10am. And we

have small group activities that are led by organizations...they can sponsor up to 4 chapel

credit opportunities per semester. And then if they are a discipleship leader, that offers

students up to one [credit] per week.

Anna’s institution followed the most elaborate system for chapel or spiritual formation credits

with many outside opportunities. Equally unique was how spiritual formation goals were

enforced.

When asked what happens to students if they fail to earn enough spiritual formation

credits, Anna shared, “they get fined” expanding, “So, you do have the students who are just

intentionally withdrawn. And they won’t go at all”. Anna stated that essentially these students

just incorporate their fines to their estimated expenses for the semester. The rates and charges

were discussed by Anna who recalled, “I think they get fined $20 for each chapel they don’t

attend. So, if they only attend 30 of the 33 credits, they will get charged $60 for those three that

they missed total. I think up to $200”. Based on this system of enforcing spiritual formation,

students can theoretically graduate and have no negative impact to their academics if they incur

the financial penalties.

Going further into depth about chapel in specific, Anna stated:

Where we still are right now is basically large group and small group spiritual gatherings

that fit certain requirements for it to be counted as chapel credit. But it’s pretty much just

going to be like a normal chapel service, like a worship service. Or something that is a

small group and led by somebody who is approved.


135

Based on the metrics a recent analysis conducted by the Student Life department revealed that

“Two thirds of our students who are actively engaged. In like our small group structures and

crosswalk student ministries. Meaning that two thirds of our students attend at least once a

month”. These measures of engagement further allow the department to determine the

effectiveness and reach of the spiritual formation program on campus for students.

Jim.

The central role that chapel plays was a part of the results from Jim as well. Jim quickly

stated, “So right now, chapel is our main thing. That is kind of the thing we really focus on, in

part because we have to do it, it is kind of the big thing that we need to do”. Additionally, Jim’s

institution offers many other programs which also are a part of the spiritual formation program.

Jim shared, “Other ways [of promoting spiritual formation] are special events. There are events

that we host and are trying to host like Christian Ted talk types of events, worship nights, things

for our students like songwriting boot camps and that kind of thing”. While all of these additions

are included, they do not have as dominant or consistent role as chapel does.

Jim also spoke to how chapel is evaluated, having stated that “the two biggest ones are

our chapel surveys, which we do every semester at the end of the semester”. This evaluation

process allows Jim as the leader of the program, and other spiritual formation department staff to

ask how students are doing spiritually. Jim shared, “My hope is that myself and those in my

department, my worship and spiritual formation coordinator are taking the time out of our

training opportunities to ask these questions”.

The standards for the spiritual formation program for students Jim described in detail as

well. Jim shared:


136

Yeah so, we have kind of a solid number- 27. That is what we ask students to get. What

we communicate to them is that Monday and Wednesday chapel is required. But we kind

of run it based on the number 27…the average number of chapels in a semester, and then

we say that you get seven skips. So, their goal is 20 chapels a semester.

A follow-up question again asked what if students do not meet the spiritual formation credit

requirement. Jim answered, “If they fall into a range of 14-19, they go on chapel probation. And

if they fall below that number it is possible dismissal. Now it would be tough for us, I really hope

that we never get there”. Jim’s approach is to work with students to get them off of the probation

list. Being on probation for students “they miss 10% of their athletic season, if they are on

campus curfew is reinstated, there is a curfew for all freshman students, so that is reinstated, and

you can’t be a student leader in any capacity if you do not hit that mark”. So essentially there is a

tiered system where consequences are increased based on the student’s participation in spiritual

formation programs.

Rob.

During the interview, Rob shared about program design and the role of chapel within

spiritual formation programs. Rob stated that:

We designed our spiritual life opportunities around [intended outcomes] except for

chapel. Chapel you know, is institutional. But we are still considering our outcomes when

we program for chapel. One of our biggest outcomes is that we want students to have an

understanding of the Bible when they graduate.

Rob elaborated to share that biblical literacy is a challenge that he is facing from a program

design standpoint, as he explained, “We find that students, when they come in, are pretty

illiterate when it comes to the Bible and so anything we do is going to help them increase their


137

understanding of the Bible”. And so, in meeting these outcomes the design of the program does

prioritize student attendance at chapel.

Rob established that “we have chapel, which is mandatory for traditional undergraduate

students, we also have discipleship ministry. Nothing else [besides chapel] is mandatory”. Rob

also shared how chapel has been consistent within spiritual formation programming from the

beginning yet evolving in different ways also. As Rob explained:

Chapel has not changed at all, but how we have done chapel has changed a little bit. So,

we have gotten better at programming. In the time I have been here we have moved from

one chapel with all students, to two chapels in a day with only a quarter of students in

each chapel, then we would do it again. Now we are back to two chapels and when we do

chapel half of the students are in one and the rest in the other, but we are in a new facility

which seats 4,000…So that changes our programming obviously.

This description illustrates how the size of the student body affects the structure of spiritual

formation programming as it relates to chapel.

The requirements for students were also explained by Rob, “Traditional undergraduate

students enrolled in seven or more units are required to attend 15 chapels a semester. Currently

we offer 18 chapels plus an online makeup for a total of 19”. If students fail to meet these

requirements Rob stated, “If they don’t get to 15 and they get 14 they fail chapel.”. As a follow-

up question, the researcher asked if chapel is a graduation requirement to which Rob responded,

“It’s not, it just affects their GPA”. The grading system is not a traditional A-F but more of a

pass/fail system which uses the letters CP (chapel pass) or CF (chapel fail). Rob then elaborated:

So, if they pass chapel, they don’t get any credit for it but if they fail chapel it dings their

GPA like failing a one-unit class. It is truly a pass/fail type of thing. But it is not a


138

graduation requirement so technically a student could fail chapel every semester and still

graduate as long as their GPA [is acceptable].

And so, at Rob’s institution, chapel is enforced only by a potential negative outcome to a

student’s GPA each semester.

The evaluation of spiritual formation was also a topic of discussion in which Rob shared:

We do two things [for assessment of spiritual formation]. We helped pilot a survey which

measures spiritual life and now we are doing a longitudinal study where every fall we ask

students to participate in that survey. It measures where the student population is in their

spiritual walk as well as what they think is important that we do [within the spiritual

formation programming]. A lot of what is in there [the survey] is in line with our

outcomes and so that really helps us to get a feel for the campus.

This was one of the more robust descriptions of an evaluation strategy for spiritual formation

programs. Rob emphasized that these strategies were the result of years of continuing

improvement planning.

Throughout the program design of spiritual formation programs many leaders shared that

their institution has a priority on chapel attendance for students. Further, it seems that while there

are a wide variety of policies in which to enforce chapel spanning from graduation requirements,

fines, or academic consequences, each institution has their own system for enforcing student

participation in spiritually formative activities. The results are representative of not only the

program design but dig deeper into answering why leaders use that specific approach. Factors

which influence programming can include hierarchical structures within the institution, missions

or desired outcomes based on faith traditions, and the individual influences of the leaders

themselves in having influence over the program in which they preside. From this, it is evident


139

that there are strong similarities between the overall goal and general structure which assimilate

spiritual formation programs to one another, while each offers a distinct path shaped by its

leaders, faith tradition, and philosophy of serving students spiritually.

Analysis of these results indicate that spiritual formation programs are designed with an

emphasis on chapel attendance. Chapel serves as the worship service on campus and leaders of

spiritual formation programs are ultimately responsible for these weekly services. Attendance at

chapel is how students are evaluated and awarded a grade. Denominational affiliation also

impacts chapel especially relative to the choosing of guest speakers and doctrinal teachings

incorporated within spiritual formation programs. This may place spiritual formation program

leaders as more organizational managers, with other offices such as the president and board

influencing decisions on what is taught and who is teaching at chapel or any spiritually formative

event taking place at the institution.

In answering how spiritual formation programs are designed to achieve specific

outcomes, chapel is the core of spiritual formation program design for leaders. The resources and

organization devoted to chapel at many Christian higher education institutions is significant and

so the spiritual formation leader represents in many ways, the head of the chapel program.

Chapel is the most consistent and obvious aspect of the spiritual formation program design for

students, but these programs are not limited simply to chapel.

Beyond chapel, outreach programs, discipleship, fellowship, and worship opportunities

all fall within the scope of spiritual formation programs. With such a wide range of campus

cultures, sizes, and facilities, the opportunities for these types of events differ. Further many

institutions offer mission trips for students to participate in. These are all linked to spiritual

formation programs through the institution’s organization and structure. While these are all


140

aspects which are incorporated within spiritual formation programs, the role of chapel as a

flagship representation of the institution’s commitment to the spiritual formation of students is

evident.

Spiritual formation program design are a reflection of the priorities and values of the

institution. These programs are designed in such a way to reflect the mission of the institution

and equip students to grow in their spiritual lives. These programs undergo continual

development and are always in a state of flux to adapt to new ideas and opportunities to promote

student’s spiritual formation. Some aspects of spiritual formation programs are pillars, such as

chapel, but other aspects are flexible such as mission trips and are very dependent upon

resources. Ultimately, spiritual formation program design is the result of the decisions made at

the administrative level down to the leader of the program. Many factors influence these design

decisions, but most leaders cite an adherence to denominational values and procedural

precedents from the institution.

Summary

The three research questions focused on exploring the perspectives of leaders of spiritual

formation programs in Christian higher education institutions. The first question was What are

leaders’ perceptions of spiritual formation programs? Based on the quantitative data from the

survey the results indicated that leaders felt that the many outcomes and objectives for spiritual

formation in Christian higher education were important to them. The responses, however, were

not statistically significant following the Bonferroni correction, which is to be interpreted that

there is possibility that these responses are not above the margin for error. Despite this, the

descriptive statistics reveal that spiritual formation program leaders maintain a high level of

value and importance on promoting student’s awareness and acceptance of God. These aspects


141

define the purpose and mission of spiritual formation programs based on spiritual formation

program leader’s perspectives.

In examination of research question 2, What are the institutional influences affecting

spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education?, the results revealed that the most

relevant institutional influences were denominational influences. To a much lesser degree,

accreditation held some influence for some institutions, however the priority for most institutions

is maintaining accredited status with a regional accrediting agency. Even spiritual formation

program leaders recognized the importance of academic or regional accreditation, and this came

at the expense of recognizing accreditation bodies more pertinent to spiritual formation

outcomes. Interview data confirmed the influence of denominations within Christian higher

education institutions however the influence of Christian accreditation organizations remains

unsubstantiated.

Research question 3 was: How are spiritual formation programs in Christian higher

education designed to achieve specific outcomes? The results of program design emphasized a

priority on chapel which served as the cornerstone for spiritual formation programs nearly

universally. The greatest contrast among institutions in their programmatic and systematic

approaches to spiritual formation lied in their enforcement of student attendance at chapel. Some

institutions held chapel as a graduation requirement, another institution utilized a fine system,

while another still would impose academic probation which included a curfew, affected

participation in sports and limited student leadership roles. The results essentially show that

Christian higher education institutions are pursuing the same thing, spiritual formation, in

different ways and to different ends. However, it is the unifying goal of adding value to students

spiritually that all institutions shared.


142

After reviewing data, two unintended findings appeared. Unanimously, leaders of

spiritual formation programs made no mention of Christian accreditation organizations which

hold standards for spiritual formation. There was a variance among methods for implementing

spiritual formation across institutions who are members of the Council for Christian Colleges

and Universities, despite the standards for spiritual formation. Each institution represents their

own commitments and values which balance their institutions values with their commitment and

membership to accreditation organizations such as the CCCU. Conclusions and

recommendations based on these findings will be discussed in chapter 5.


143

Chapter V. Conclusions And Recommendations

Chapter I discussed spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education. Spiritual

formation has been an integral part of Christian higher education historically and currently

spiritual formation remains a core element of the Christian higher education experience with

dedicated programs, leaders, and administration solely dedicated to student spiritual formation.

Chapter II focused on the research related to spiritual formation in Christian higher

education. In examining current models and frameworks, the influence of developmentalism and

theologically oriented approaches were very prominent. Collectively the literature addressed

leader’s perspectives of spiritual formation programs, institutional influences upon spiritual

formation programs, and spiritual formation program design.

The mixed-methodological approach was described in Chapter III. This study used two

main data sources: a survey and an interview. The survey was administered via email to leaders

of spiritual formation programs within institutions affiliated with the Council for Christian

Colleges and Universities (CCCU). The interview was a follow-up to the survey after the leader

of spiritual formation program responded.

Lastly, Chapter IV discussed the results of the research questions. In examination of

research question 1, What are leaders’ perceptions of spiritual formation programs?, the results

from the survey indicated that leaders held positive perceptions of spiritual formation programs.

Leaders overall felt that objectives and outcomes relative to student’s awareness of God and

acceptance of God were important. The second research question, What are the institutional

influences affecting spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education?, indicated that

denominational influence and Christian accreditation organizations influence spiritual formation

programs. Research question 3, How are spiritual formation programs in Christian higher


144

education designed to achieve specific outcomes?, led to unintentional findings which emerged

following data analysis. From the previous four chapters’ ideas, research, and data, the

conclusions below were developed.

Review of the Study

The purpose of this study was to better understand spiritual formation programs in

Christian higher education. The research questions guiding this study focused on leader’s

perspectives of spiritual formation programs, institutional influences, and program design. This

study was exploratory in nature, seeking to better understand aspects of spiritual formation in

Christian higher education which are common practice with less research support.

This study applied the Faith Development Theory from the book Stages of Faith by

James Fowler (1988). This six-step model of faith development connects the fields of

psychology and theology to present a holistic understanding of development in the faith. This

framework established a basis for understanding how faith is developed in application to spiritual

formation within the context of Christian higher education.

This study utilized a mixed-methods approach which included data collection from a

survey and follow-up interviews. The survey was a modified version of the Spiritual Assessment

Inventory (SAI). Follow-up interviews offered data triangulation while providing more in-depth

data which led to additional findings. The findings from this study showed the integral role that

spiritual formation programs play within Christian higher education.

Leaders of spiritual formation programs at CCCU institutions were contacted to

participate in the online survey using a list provided by the organization. The instrument was

administered via Survey Monkey, an online survey software, through an email solicitation which

included a link to the survey.


145

The research questions for this study were:

1. What are leaders’ perceptions of spiritual formation programs?

2. What are the institutional influences affecting spiritual formation programs in Christian

higher education?

3. How are spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education designed to achieve

specific outcomes?

Discussion

The majority of research has focused on evaluation of student spirituality (Ma, 2003),

while less effort has gone into understanding leader’s perspectives of spiritual formation

programs. The research questions were formulated to quantify leader’s perspectives of spiritual

formation as well as gain their perspectives on institutional influence and program design.

Leaders’ perceptions of spiritual formation programs

The findings of this study indicated that leaders’ perceptions of spiritual formation

programs are positive based on the importance of outcomes and objectives of promoting the

awareness of God and acceptance of God in the lives of students. For this study Fowler’s (1988)

Faith Development Theory was utilized in connection to spiritual formation in Christian higher

education. Following this framework, leaders target students to promote spiritual growth which

occurs developmentally between stage 3 Synthetic-Conventional Faith and stage 4 Individuative-

Reflective (Fowler, 1988). The differences between these two stages of faith development are to

be considered in a discussion of the results. Stage 3 Synthetic-Conventional faith is a conformist

stage in which individuals’ faith is influenced by those around them. For students this is most

connected with parents, yet extends to other social influences such as church, school, and

extended family which may have the potential to influence or shape the student’s formation. The


146

fourth stage in contrast is when individuals begin to challenge the faith values and beliefs they

grew up with. In the fourth stage faith is tested by critical scrutiny which challenges the beliefs

from stage 3, refining them through the process. Applied to the context of Christian higher

education, students are away from their childhood homes presumably for the first time and into

an environment that may challenge ideas previously held or force students to consider new ideas.

Leaders of spiritual formation programs are the facilitators of this transition as it relates to

spiritual formation. During this period faith is developing and students are being intentionally

formed spiritually. And so, leader’s perceptions are influenced by where students are currently in

relationship to faith and spiritual development, as well as what these programs are aiming to

accomplish in student’s lives.

The operational definition of spiritual formation used in this study provided by Greenman

(2015) is “Spiritual formation is our continuing response to the reality of God’s grace shaping us


for the sake of the world” (p. 24). This definition connects the internal aspects of faith

development with outcomes such as community of faith. This survey in connection to this

definition connected the theory of spiritual formation with measurable outcomes.

This connection between theory and practice were evident within the results of this study.

For example, survey item 8 asked about students being aware of God attending to them in times

of need. Every response to this item was either very important (75%), important (19%), or

neutral (6%) with no leaders responding that this is slightly important or unimportant. This

connects directly with the first part of the definition of spiritual formation in that God’s grace is

shaping individuals into the likeness of Christ (Greenman, 2015). Based on this alignment

between this definition and the results from this study spiritual formation leaders seem to be in


147

agreement with the definition in first prioritizing spiritual formation of an individual level which

serves as a prerequisite for fellowship or service. The spiritual disciplines which follow are

motivated by the individual’s personal awareness and acceptance of God in their lives.

In connection to the theoretical framework these results show how leaders of spiritual

formation programs prioritize the development of students from stage 3 to stage 4. Fowler (1988)

describes stage 3 as when “a person’s experience of the world now extends beyond the

family…Faith must synthesize values and information; it must provide a basis for identity and

outlook” (p. 172). Attending college at a Christian higher education institution would provide the

type of environmental context which fits the description of the third stage of Synthetic-

Conventional Faith. This application especially applies to first year students who are expanding

their worlds beyond the family and extending to other influences. During the four-year period at

a Christian higher education institution, students are growing into the fourth stage in a “novice

adulthood” in which persons form their first adult life structures (Fowler, 1988, p. 181). Leaders

of spiritual formation programs prioritize these outcomes to ensure that students are establishing

these life structures in a way that will facilitate spiritual formation.

Objectives and outcomes incorporate the formation of life structures as a part of the

spiritual formation program expectations. Spiritual formation programs may intentionally or

unintentionally be designed to create habits during this period to establish religious participation

in students current, and future adult life structures. Reisz (2003) emphasized the central role that

chapel plays in the spiritual formation programming for students in Christian higher education.

Required chapel attendance may include the purpose of creating worship attendance habits which

influence how these young adults are establishing life structures. Christian higher education can

aim to establish these patterns in students’ lives through spiritual formation programs requiring


148

attendance at religious services. It is to be considered that religious attendance may continue on

throughout the student’s adult life beyond the Christian higher education institution due to the

formation resulting in a life structure. This is what Willard (2000) refers to when explaining how

spiritual formation as a concept contains “certain activities as ‘spiritual’ work or exercise” to be

a form of training for their future lives as members of a religious body or church. Perspectives

from participants in this study echoed the same concept, with one participant citing chapel as a

“faux church”, although recognizing the differences between the local church and campus

chapel. Spiritual formation program leaders are generally in alignment with the literature on how

the role of chapel intersects with the purpose of the local church as not a replacement, but a

supplemental parachurch ministry.

Perspectives held by leaders are also subject to biases or their background which has

caused them to believe their held opinions about spiritual formation. For example, sociological

influences such as church membership, their employer’s doctrinal statement, or their personal

background may each hold confirmation biases for leaders of spiritual formation programs.

Further study into potential biases is required to better understand how leaders are affected.

Horan (2016) cites that these sociological ties are influential as parents serve an influential role

in the spiritual development of students. However, as students leave the home to attend a

Christian higher education institution Fowler’s (1984) framework indicates that this is a period in

stage 4 where previous ideas are challenged by new ideas about faith which lead to either a

change in views or individuals becoming more strongly rooted in their beliefs. In this way, the

spiritual formation programs serve as a test as this new experience will continue to shape

student’s faith lives.


149

The exploratory nature of this study illuminates the complexity of spiritual formation in

Christian higher education. This necessitates further study to understand in depth how leaders,

students, and administration at the institution all combine to form a program which is spiritually

formative. Each institution holds to a unique faith tradition, even though broadly Christian, it

seems that for spiritual formation the theological details deeply affect practices and beliefs.

The academic and spiritual nature of Christian higher education is interwoven. Worthy of

consideration is how the academic standards of the institutions may affect the commitment to

spiritual goals, as both are valued but institutions may prioritize spiritual formation over

academics or vice versa. CCCU institutions range academically from R2 classified institutions

based on the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education to smaller private

universities with little research activity (Carnegie Classification on Institutions of Higher

Education, 2020). Examining spiritual formation programs at institutions of a particular research

classification may hold insight into how academics impact an institutions commitment to

spiritual formation.

Spiritual formation program leader’s perspectives are also to be understood as unique to

each particular leader. While for many in this position there is a system in place and expectations

from the university, many leaders expressed a freedom to pursue spiritual formation in a variety

of ways. The freedom in which these spiritual formation program leaders are allotted in their

positions may also hold value in understanding differences among Christian higher education

institutions. Ziegler (2018) pointed out that “doctrine matters, and furthermore, that the ordering

of doctrine matters” (p. 75). The prioritization of perspectives is equally influential because a

leader or Christian higher education may hold to a belief but if not actively integrated within

spiritual formation programs the students may be unaware of its existence.


150

Institutional influences and spiritual formation programs

In review of the second research question, it was important to review the findings in

chapter 4. The second research question was asked of spiritual formation program leaders as well

as discussed within the follow-up interviews. The survey responses closely aligned with the

interview responses. Ultimately, results indicated that denominational influence was the largest

influence upon spiritual formation programs and in contrast, that affiliation or membership to a

Christian accreditation organization was less influential in spiritual formation programs.

This research question was based on a hypothesis that denominational influence and

Christian accreditation organizations were influential in spiritual formation programs. The results

confirm that denominational influences impact spiritual formation, while results do not indicate

that membership with a Christian accreditation organization holds influence within spiritual

formation programs. This contrast raises questions as to why denominational influence is so

much greater than Christian accreditation organizations based on leaders of spiritual formation

programs perspectives.

One possible explanation for this contrast is the difference in the financial relationships

that Christian higher education institution’s hold with denominations and Christian accreditation

organizations. Sloan (1999) noted, “There are some institutions where it is very clear, or at least

it is clearly argued, that a given denomination owns the institution” (p. 27). The author

expounded on the legal complications of one nonprofit 501c3 owning another nonprofit within

states. While the legal dynamics are beyond the scope of the research question, it is worthy of

consideration the financial relationships that denominations have as owners or part-owners,

making them a primary stakeholder with a theological perspective (Greenman, 2015). As such,

denominations may prioritize their influence in spiritual formation programs as an extension of


151

their organization. In a study of Christian institution’s mission statements, it was acknowledged

that “a university’s monetary supply-life from governmental or private sources often is tied to its

mission statement” (Firmin & Gilson, 2010, p. 61). A financial relationship with a denomination

as a monetary supply-line would hold influence within Christian higher education institutions.

Findings from this study indicate that leaders of spiritual formation programs are

removed from the political control which occurs at a higher level within the institution’s

hierarchy. One participant stated, “I see those [institutional influences] being resources that I

would like to tap into, but they have not had a day-to-day impact so far”. Another participant

stated “denomination is a factor” adding later in the interview that decision makers include “the

dead of students and the associate vice president for student development. As well as the

president” who guide pieces of the program and ensure that the denominational traditions are

upheld in the program.

Christian accreditation organizations are an expense to Christian higher education

institutions. For example, the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities stated, “All CCCU

schools support other Christian colleges and universities and advance the cause of Christian

higher education through participation in the programs of the CCCU and the payment of annual

dues” (CCCU, 2020). This statement indicates that membership dues and participation of

programs are the sources of revenue for the organization. The CCCU offers a tiered list of

membership categories with each having its own list of services from the organization and dues.

Due to this financial relationship, Christian accreditation organizations provide a quality control

service for Christian higher education institutions and as such are not in a position to dictate

specifics within spiritual formation programs.


152

Many questions arise when examining institutional influences on spiritual formation

programs in Christian higher education. The results indicate that it may not be appropriate to

combine denominational influence with Christian accreditation organizations under the category

of institutional influences. This is due to the wide gap in the findings between the influence of

denominational affiliation against Christian accreditation organizations. Each relationship is

unique and focused on different priorities, with denominations focusing on doctrine, and

Christian accreditation organizations focusing on quality control of core Christian beliefs (Otto

& Harrington, 2016; Willard, 1998). While extremely similar at a surface level, each is unique in

its purpose.

When discussing these results within the context of the literature relative to each

institution’s financial relationship it raises questions as to the role and influence that finances

play into the influence of spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education. Based on

the literature, denominations are a monetary supply-line, while Christian accreditation

organizations are an expense (Sloan, 1999). With the greater influence correlating with financial

support, it may be indicative that money translates to influence (Labosier & Labosier, 2018).

Leaders of spiritual formation programs failed to mention the influence of Christian accreditation

organizations; however, several explained the importance of regional accreditation. It may be

safely assumed that Christian accreditation is far less valuable to a Christian higher education

institution than regional accreditation, at least financially. And so, the financial implications of

the relationships that Christian higher education institutions hold with outside organizations is a

worthy consideration relative to influence upon spiritual formation programs, and perhaps the

institution as a whole.


153

Other institutional influences include the local church, pastors, and other ministry leaders

who are involved in some way with a Christian higher education institution’s chapel program.

One participant supported this idea, having shared, “I think there is a lot of overlap between

being a university chaplain and serving in a local church”. Multiple leaders explained the process

for inviting speakers to chapel as detailed in Chapter IV. Collectively, this process was described

as a decision which required approval from the institution to ensure that speakers are

representative of the denomination and faith tradition. And so institutional influence, particularly

from denominational leadership has influence both inside the institution and in terms of who the

institution brings in to speak to students.

Institutional influence also has a relationship to religious participation in Christian higher

education within the literature (Hill, 2009; Ma, 2003). This directly shapes the student

experience of spiritual formation and also is linked to identity formation. This raises questions

about intentionality of identity formation. Identity formation was not directly mentioned

however, many spiritual formation program leaders did represent the idea through trying to

promote what Astin, Astin, and Lindholm (2011) called “inner development- the sphere of

values and beliefs, emotional maturity, moral development, spirituality, and self-understanding”

(p. 39). This inward focus for spiritual formation brings up many questions about how

institutional influence is affecting students relative to these areas of inner development, identity

formation, and religious participation.

It is a challenge to specifically isolate the influence of money within Christian higher

education institutions from any outside organization. For research institutions holding a CCCU

membership it may be that federal mandates and requirements to qualify for federal financial aid

are equally as important as money from an affiliated church or denomination. Compliance to


154

meet these federal standards lead to institutions securing the financial aid based on academics.

Similarly, it may be that smaller institutions who may not be as competitive for academic

financial aid must then focus more on aid from churches and denominational influences. This

may serve as an explanation of why smaller institutions may emphasize denominational

standards and doctrinal accuracy over academics. There exists little research which provide data

into the financial relationships that sustain Christian higher education institutions and so this

discussion leads to a need for future research to explore this aspect of Christian higher education.

Institutional influences are complex and often tied to multiple other factors including

finance, church relations, and organizational affiliations. These relationships greatly impact

spiritual formation programs in ways both obvious and implicit. The Christian higher education

institutions set of values which guide the relationship between faith, finance, and academics

creates vastly different institutions based upon these factors. The nature of these relationships

and implications of various factors are very complex. These findings raise questions for further

study to determine more specifically the effects of these relationships.

Spiritual formation program design

The third research question was also aligned with one survey response question and the

follow-up interview. Results showed the centrality of chapel within spiritual formation programs

as a cornerstone. Many leaders in spiritual formation programs hold a title which is directly

related to chapel such as Dean of Chapel or Campus Chaplain. Structurally this emphasizes the

high priority institutions are placing upon this particular aspect of spiritual formation. A

discussion of these results within the context of the literature leads to questions about how

spiritual formation programs are incorporating spiritual disciplines, which is a key topic both

within the literature on spiritual formation and in practice among leaders of spiritual formation


155

programs. Leader’s perceptions of which spiritual disciplines apply to students within the context

of Christian higher education and rationale for spiritual disciplines impacts both students and

leaders’ experiences of spiritual formation programs.

Richard Foster’s book titled: The Celebration of Discipline (1988) serves as a

commonly used framework for conceptualizing spiritual disciplines within the research

surrounding spiritual formation. Foster’s influence is cited by Greenman (2015) and Willett

(2010) within their research of spiritual formation. Foster (1984) categorizes spiritual disciplines

as inward, outward, and corporate. In examining the results from this study within these

categories it is evident that most spiritual formation programs institute the disciplines of worship

(chapel) and service (missions/community service) as requirements within spiritual formation

programs.

The institution of the disciplines of worship and service may be due to the fact that these

disciplines require organizational leadership. The role and responsibility of spiritual formation

program leaders is to facilitate spiritual growth in the student body and a key aspect of that is

providing students with opportunities to worship God and serve others. While many campuses

offer student-led programs, they are often smaller in scale and more precise in their mission (i.e.

Fellowship of Christian Athletes). And so, spiritual formation programs require organizational

leadership to design programs that can provide opportunities for student development in these

specific disciplines which facilitate spiritual growth. Further exploration into the role of spiritual

formation leader’s as organizers and facilitators of spiritual disciplines, specifically worship and

service could contribute to a more developed understanding of spiritual formation program

design.


156

Individual spiritual disciplines such as prayer, meditation, and fasting require less

organization as they are by nature more of a personal conviction upon the individual. Based on

the biblical support, Jesus proposed privacy and modesty in inward disciplines, for example his

suggestions to pray in a private closet or not tell others when you fast (Matthew 6:5,16). Based

on the results, spiritual formation programs follow in this tradition as inward disciplines are not

outright mandated, however these practices are encouraged through chapel, worship services,

and Bible studies. Further study into how inward disciplines are recognized within spiritual

formation program design would offer additional insight into how spiritual formation programs

are designed to serve students at the individual level.

While the results from this study provided a general overview of spiritual formation

programs, questions are raised about specifics. One dimension of spiritual formation

programming is the use of spiritual disciplines. Continued study on the practices and disciplines

within spiritual formation programs could provide meaningful data on how these differences

distinguish one Christian faith tradition from another in a Christian higher education setting.

Understanding which disciplines are being instituted and why could offer further insight into

different approaches to spiritual formation.

Structurally, spiritual formation programs are varied depending on factors including the

size of the institution, the leadership structure, and the values that guide the institution. Spiritual

formation programs are subject to the history and culture of the institution which in some ways

establishes precedent for how spiritual formation is to be done. Also, of consideration is the

dynamic between academic departments, faculty, and their relationship with spiritual formation

programs. According to the research there is a high priority for Christian faculty who will

integrate faith into every subject taught and be a model of Christian character for students


157

(Olaroreby, 2016; Naidoo, 2011; Reisz, 2003; Setran et. al., 2010). Results from this study

showed that generally these programs are perceived to be consistent in terms of content and

purpose, however there have been new developments within these programs which spiritual

formation program leaders utilize to test and experiment with to explore opportunities for

improvement.

The literature reiterates a concern among Christian higher education leaders about the

secularization of these institutions. It is valuable to address the findings in relationship to this

concern of secularization to determine if anti-secularization influences leaders of spiritual

formation programs in their approach to their role. The threat of secularization upon Christian

colleges and universities has been noted in the literature (Joeckel & Chesnes, 2012; Stark, 1999).

Spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education are in many cases seen to be the

defense against this challenge as they are “fundamentally different from secular settings in that

these schools integrate faith and learning in their educational programming (e.g., lesson plans,

spiritual formation and Bible classes, chapel, group mentoring, and Christian service

opportunities)” (Horan, 2016, p. 67-68). It is clear that the intent of such programs is to bolster

the spiritual formation of students, while at the same time offering students a Christian

orientation for their lives. This in effect, combats against secularization and the threat that is

facing many Christian higher education institutions.

Spiritual formation program design remains a very complex process which is shaped by

many factors. At its core, most spiritual formation programs pride themselves on a Christ-

centered and biblically based spiritual formation approach which aims to serve students

spiritually through the various programs offered. Each program is unique in their balance


158

between their individual commitment to their beliefs, denominational influences, and academic

influences upon these programs.

Conclusion

After a review of the data and using it to further current research, it is clear that spiritual

formation program leader’s perspectives are generally positive regarding objectives and

outcomes for student’s spiritual formation. In addition, the influence of institutions including

denominations and Christian accreditation organizations provided mixed results. Denomination

seems to be much more influential to spiritual formation program leader’s perspectives and

Christian accreditation organizations is less so. The indeterminable influence of finance is an

area of discussion as this is explored further. Finally, spiritual formation program design is

shown to be based around spiritual disciplines which are outward and corporate, rather than

inward disciplines which are more private (Foster, 1988). The role of spiritual formation

program leaders in facilitating and organizing opportunities for spiritual growth is to be

considered within the context of these programs. From this knowledge gained, recommendation

and opportunities for future research were developed.

Recommendations

Reviewing possible recommendations for reflection to occur more often in spiritual

formation programs in Christian higher education was apparent. After receiving results from

leaders of spiritual formation programs, it was apparent that the topic of chapel was the central

focus nearly universally, of spiritual formation programs. Reisz (2003) indicated that chapel was

a unifying experience for all people within Christian higher education and is the cornerstone of

spiritual formation for many institutions. In order to better understand spiritual formation


159

programs, chapel needs to be evaluated to see what common themes, spiritual disciplines, and

design exist across Christian higher education institutions.

A key finding from this study was the influence of denominations within spiritual

formation programs. An important area of continued research which can build upon this would

be the study of denominational affiliations and church relations within Christian higher

education. According to Rhea (2015) “A denomination is an association or fellowship of

congregations within a religion that have the same beliefs or creed, engage in similar practices,

and cooperate with each other to develop and maintain shared enterprises” (p. 13). The CCCU

represents 29 denominations (CCCU, 2020). Within Protestant Christianity the most common

religious classifications are those which are based upon denominational affiliation (Steensland, et

al., 2000). A key recommendation is separating institutional influences for individual study.

While this research looked at institutional influence from a broad perspective, a more focused

approach to a single denomination or particular Christian accreditation organization may bring

out differences among these influences. A case-study approach may be fitting in aiming to better

understand these individual influences.

In addition, the role of spiritual formation program leaders as organizers and facilitators

of opportunities for spiritual growth could offer further insight into the purpose of spiritual

formation programs. A clear understanding of the role and responsibilities would aid in

effectively supporting these leaders in accomplishing the goals set forth by the institution and the

department. This is especially important in connection to the promotion of spiritual disciplines

(Foster, 1988). Willard (1998) defined disciplines as “an activity within our power- something

we can do- which brings us to a point where we can do what we at present cannot do by direct

effort” (p. 106). Spiritual disciplines are the practical manifestation of belief within spiritual


160

formation programs and provide the opportunity for students to live out their faith. Additional

study into specifically what spiritual disciplines are required, encouraged, and how they are

enforced would add insight into spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education.

The methods and curriculum utilized within spiritual formation programs also could

illuminate the purpose and design of spiritual formation. Determining to what extent these

program leaders are following a template or are exercising the freedom to spontaneously

determine topics applicable to students would aid in further establishing an understanding of how

spiritual formation programs operate. How programs are designed to reflect the institutional

goals and mission statement can delve deeper to understand how spiritual formation programs

are aligned to achieve these outcomes set forth.

Studying Christian higher education and the promotion of spiritual formation within that

context would also be an excellent opportunity for a sociologically oriented study. Hill (2009)

inducted the theory of moral communities to study institutional influences and religiosity.

Religiosity is more quantifiable through religious participation; however, this approach could be

adapted to research spirituality using valid instruments. The community element of Christian

higher education is intertwined with the value of Christian fellowship within the church. Future

research could build upon the connection between the two communities to establish if and how

they differ.

Limitations

This study was subject to limitations in various ways. The scope of this study was limited

to member institutions of the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU). Data

collection only targeted leaders of spiritual formation programs at institutions affiliated with the

CCCU from a list provided by the organization. The rationale behind this data collection method


161

ensured that each participant was a part of a CCCU institution who was held to an equal standard

in upholding their Christian faith. There are many Christian institutions outside of the scope of

this study who would have otherwise been eligible to participate in this study, however the

inclusion of these institutions would skew the organizational standards set forth by the CCCU.

This research decision creates a basis that all institutions are approved as member institutions

who uphold a Christian mission statement and hold requirements for spiritual formation.

Limitations are associated with this limited sample size as other institutions are excluded.

The study of spiritual formation brings limitations due to the nature of the topic. Spiritual

formation cannot be measured in isolation strictly quantitatively. It is difficult to account for how

variances between institution’s beliefs about spiritual formation may affect responses from

participants. Likewise, it is difficult to isolate institutional influences and the multiple factors

that are at play within Christian higher education such as finance, structure, and differences in

beliefs. Confirmation bias may affect leaders of spiritual formation programs whose perspectives

and responses are influenced by outside organizations, denominations, affiliated groups, and the

leadership culture in their organization. The existence and impact of these biases is

indeterminable in this research. Participants may also feel less inclined to share a critical view of

their spiritual formation programs due to this risk. In order to mitigate these limitations all

research was confidential, and participants were assured of their surveys being anonymous and

interviews confidential. These measures created anonymity to encourage participants to feel

secure and provide truthful responses which would lead to accurate data.

Future Research Opportunities

The implications of this study should inform further research on spiritual formation in

Christian higher education. After an examination of this research project, it was decided there are


162

several aspects of the study that could lead to future research opportunities. One such

opportunity would be to conduct this study on students to compare perspectives of spiritual

formation programs. This could also include both leader and student perceptions of

denominational influence, Christian accreditation organization, and program design. This would

offer the opportunity to compare differences in perceptions of spiritual formation programs from

both leaders and students. Students’ high levels of interest and involvement to grow spiritually

would intersect with leaders’ perspectives to show how spiritual formation programs are

affecting students and how the design of spiritual formation programs leads to these outcomes

(Muntz & Crabtree, 2006).

This comparison between leader and student perspectives would also broaden the scope

to capture the dedication to spiritual formation as a campus or community (Reisz, 2003). The

entirety of the student experience expands far beyond spiritual formation programs and is

influenced by students’ relationships with professors as well as other students. This holistic

approach to studying spiritual formation in Christian higher education would also combat the

compartmentalization of the academic and spiritual aspects of the student experience (Reisz,

2003). Research that is driven by the holistic student experience would be most appropriate in

identifying factors which impact spiritual formation at these institutions.

Another opportunity for future research would be measuring Christian higher education

institution’s leaders and institutional mandates for student religiosity. One of the findings from

this study was the priority that chapel holds within spiritual formation programs. This finding

could tender a platform for a future large-scale study aimed at providing statistics for religiosity

through measuring requirements or mandates for worship service attendance, Christian

community service participation, and involvement in missions. This would delve further into the


163

specifics of a student’s experience within a spiritual formation program at a Christian higher

education institution. This would also be an indicator of common practices among Christian

higher education institutions and possibly creating a standard for general expectations across

Christian institutions.

The major finding from research question 2 about institutional influences was the high

level of influence that denominational affiliation has on leader’s perspectives of spiritual

formation programs. Future studies could aim to understand in more depth the influence that is

held by denominations in making decisions for individual Christian higher education institutions.

A challenge in this approach to understanding denominational influence was noted by Naidoo

(2011) in separating “spiritual formation… [yet] not based on a single denomination’s particular

emphasis on doctrine or lifestyle” (p. 127). An interdenominational approach is challenging to

simultaneously provide a clear path towards spiritual formation, while being inclusive of

doctrinal differences across institutions (Greenman, 2015). A future qualitative study could

provide opportunities to research denominationalism within Christian higher education

institutions.

A qualitative approach would likely be most appropriate in aiming to understand the

nuances of denominational affiliation within Christian higher education institutions. The findings

showed that the relationships between Christian higher education institutions and the affiliated

church or denomination are extremely complex due to factors, not least of which is financial

(Sloan, 1999). Private Christian institutions are unlikely to volunteer financial information

however, individuals may be able to explain the nature of the relationship between the churches

and education institutions without focusing specifically on numbers.


164

Student spiritual formation is also impacted by the doctrinal stances taken by any

Christian higher education institution. The spiritual outcomes or objectives relative to students is

of interest to determine how spiritual formation programs are designed to impart students with a

specific value structure or faith framework as a part of their experience in Christian higher

education. Willett (2010) stated “various denominational traditions offer distinctly different

paths to follow and landmarks by which to measure one’s progress to [spiritual] maturity” (p.

88). These differences perhaps are the reasoning “there is no commonly agreed upon model for

either spiritual formation or its assessment” (Reisz, 2003, p. 33). Additional study may seek to

understand if any one model or assessment/evaluation method would be appropriate across

denominational lines. A new model of spiritual formation in Christian higher education has the

potential to establish such a model which may provide a standard for spiritual formation

programs across denominational lines. This would offer a level of consistency which would have

the potential to improve information for students, parents, and Christian higher education

institutions themselves to communicate what they believe, what they teach, and specifically how

their programs are designed to serve students spiritually.

In building upon this idea, determining how standards are established and how spiritual

formation programs are evaluated remains a challenge for all Christian higher education

institutions in relation to spiritual formation programs. Findings from this study contain

examples of how different Christian higher education institutions design their spiritual formation

programs to involve students though negative reinforcement including fines, institution of a

curfew, and making participation a graduation requirement. There clearly is no consistent model

which is broadly accepted across institutions and this presents opportunity for further study into

what Christian higher education institutions are doing to promote or enforce spiritual formation


165

on their campuses, their methods for student involvement, their rationale, and the outcomes on

students’ spirituality.

The findings from this study have raised many new questions about spiritual formation in

Christian higher education. There is cause for reflection on how we feel about leader’s

perspectives, institutional influences, and program design in spiritual formation programs across

Christian higher education institutions. Future research has the opportunity to build upon these

findings in seeking to understand the balance between priorities both academic and spiritual in

Christian higher education. Future research should reflect the priority that Christian higher

education institutions give to the formation of student’s spiritual lives. Research on this topic has

the potential to inform how Christian higher education institutions approach spiritual formation

and how they can add value to student’s lives.


166

References

Astin, A. W., Astin, H. S., & Lindholm, J. A. (2011). Cultivating the spirit: How college can

enhance students' inner lives. John Wiley & Sons.

Beard, C. B. (2017). Connecting spiritual formation and adult learning theory: An examination

of common principles. Christian Education Journal, 14(2), 247-269.

Bell, M. 1991. An introduction to the Bell Object Relations and Reality Testing Inventory. Los

Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.

Benson, P.L., Roehlkepartain, E.C., & Rude, S.P. (2003). Spiritual development in childhood

and adolescence: Toward a field of inquiry. Applied developmental science, 7(3), 205-

213.

Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education (2020).

https://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/index.php

Council for Christian Colleges & Universities (CCCU). (2019, November 14). Our Institutions.

CCCU. https://www.cccu.org/

Davie, M., Grass, T., Holmes, S., McDowell, J., & Noble, T. (2016). New Dictionary of

Theology. Inter-Varsity Press.

Demarest, B. (2008). Reflections on developmental spirituality: Journey paradigms and

stages. Journal of Spiritual Formation and Soul Care, 1(2), 149-167.

Dockery, D. (2008). Renewing Minds: Serving Church and Society through Christian Higher

Education, Revised and Updated. B&H Publishing Group.

Ellison, C. W. (1983). Spiritual well-being: Conceptualization and measurement. Journal of

psychology and theology, 11(4), 330-338.


167

Emmons, R. A. (1987). Narcissism: Theory and measurement. Journal of personality and social

psychology, 52(1), 11.

Erikson, E. H. (1964). Youth: Change and challenge. Basic books.

Espinoza, B. D., & Johnson-Miller, B. (2014). Catechesis, developmental theory, and a fresh

vision for Christian education. Christian Education Journal, 11(1), 8-23.

Estep, J.R. (2002). Spiritual formation as social: Toward a Vygotskyan developmental

perspective. Religious Education, 97(2), 141-164.

Firmin, M. W., & Gilson, K. M. (2010). Mission statement analysis of CCCU member

institutions. Christian Higher Education, 9(1), 60-70.

Fleming, L. F., & Cannister, M. W. (2010). Assessing the spiritual formation factors most

effectual in the renovation and sanctification process of adolescents in New England. The

Journal of Youth Ministry, 9(1), 55-91.

Forrest, B. K., & Lamport, M. A. (2013). Modeling spiritual formation from a distance: Paul's

formation transactions with the Roman Christians. Christian Education Journal, 10(1),

110-124.

Foster, R. J. (1988). Celebration of Discipline, rev. ed. Harpers.

Fowler, J. W. (1984). Stages of faith: the psychology of human development and the quest for

meaning. Harper & Row

Fowler, J.W., & Dell, M.L. (2004). Stages of faith from infancy through adolescence:

Reflections on three decades of faith development theory. The handbook of spiritual

development in childhood and adolescence, 34-45.


168

Gentles, S. J., Charles, C., Ploeg, J., & McKibbon, K. A. (2015). Sampling in qualitative

research: Insights from an overview of the methods literature. The qualitative

report, 20(11), 1772-1789.

Gorsuch, R.L., & McPherson, S. E. (1989). Intrinsic/extrinsic measurement: I/E-revised and

single-item scales. Journal for the Scientific study of Religion, 348-354.

Greenman, J. P. (2015). Life in the spirit: spiritual formation in theological perspective.

InterVarsity Press.

Hagberg, J. O., & Guelich, R. A. (2005). The critical journey: Stages in the life of faith. Sheffield

Publishing.

Hall, T. W., & Edwards, K. J. (1996). The initial development and factor analysis of the Spiritual

Assessment Inventory. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 24(3), 233-246.

Hall, T. W., & Edwards, K. J. (2002). The Spiritual Assessment Inventory: A theistic model and

measure for assessing spiritual development. Journal for the scientific study of religion,

41(2), 341-357.

Hall, T. W., Reise, S. P., & Haviland, M. G. (2007). An item response theory analysis of the

Spiritual Assessment Inventory. The International Journal for the Psychology of

Religion, 17(2), 157-178.

Hill, J. P. (2009). Higher education as moral community: Institutional influences on religious

participation during college. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 48(3), 515-534.

Hill, P. C. (2005). Measurement in the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality: Current Status

and Evaluation.


169

Holcomb, G. L., & Nonneman, A. J. (2004). Faithful change: Exploring and assessing faith

development in Christian liberal arts undergraduates. New Directions for Institutional

Research, 2004(122), 93-103.

Holmes, A. F. (2001). Building the Christian academy. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing.

Horan, A. P. (2017). Fostering spiritual formation of millennials in Christian schools. Journal of

Research on Christian Education, 26(1), 56-77.

Holy Bible: New Living Translation (2007). Tyndale.

Joeckel, S., & Chesnes, T. (2010). A slippery slope to secularization? An empirical analysis of

the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities. Christian Scholar's Review, 39(2),

177.

Joeckel, S., & Chesnes, T. (2012). The Christian college phenomenon: Inside America's fastest

growing institutions of higher learning. Abilene Christian University Press.

Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed

methods research. Journal of mixed methods research, 1(2), 112-133.

Johnson, S. (2001). Christian spiritual formation in an age of “whatever”. Review &

Expositor, 98(3), 309-331.

Jones, B. A. & Nichols, E. J. (2013). Cultural competence in America’s schools: Leadership,

engagement and understanding. Information Age Publishing, INC.

Labosier, B., & Labosier, J. (2018). A Thirty-Year Experiment in Teaching Spiritual Formation:

Twelve Lessons We Learned. Journal of Spiritual Formation and Soul Care, 11(2), 125–

140.

Litfin, D. (2004). Conceiving the Christian college. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing.


170

Ma, S. Y. (2003). The Christian college experience and the development of spirituality among

students. Christian Higher Education, 2(4), 321-339.

May, G. M. (1982). Care of Mind, Care of Spirit. Harper Publishers

Mayhew, M. J. (2004). Exploring the essence of spirituality: A phenomenological study of eight

students with eight different worldviews. NASPA Journal, 41(4), 647-674.

McCallum, D., & Lowery, J. (2012). Organic discipleship: Mentoring others into spiritual

maturity and leadership. New Paradigm.

Muntz, P., & Crabtree, D. (2006). All Together Different: The World of Christian Higher

Education. Journal of College Admission, 192, 16-21.

Naidoo, M. (2011). An Empirical Study on Spiritual Formation at Protestant Theological

Training Institutions in South Africa 1. Religion and Theology, 18(1-2), 118-146.

Olaoreby, I. (2016). Spiritual Formation in Higher Education: A case for grace-filled service

delivery from the book of Romans. Christian Higher Education, 15(5), 2-12.

doi:10.1080/15363759.2016.1208594

Oral Roberts University. (2020). Assessment Strategies. http://www.oru.edu/oru-

experience/spiritual-formation/assessment-strategy/

Otto, P., & Harrington, M. (2016). Spiritual formation within Christian higher education.

Christian Higher Education, 15(5), 252-262.

Pargament, K. I., & Mahoney, A. (2005). Sacred Matters: Sanctification as a Vital Topic for the

Psychology of Religion. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 15(3),

179-198.

Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students (Vol. 1991). Jossey-

Bass.


171

Pease, B. (2010). Undoing privilege: Unearned advantage in a divided world. Zed Books Ltd.

Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity—one's own. Educational researcher, 17(7), 17-21.

Peshkin, A. (1985). Virtuous subjectivity: In the participant-observer’s I’s. Exploring clinical

methods for social research. 267-282.

Piaget, J., & Cook, M. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children (Vol. 8, No. 5, p. 18). New

York: International Universities Press.

Porter, S. L. (2008). Sanctification in a new key: relieving evangelical anxieties over spiritual

formation. Journal of Spiritual Formation and Soul Care, 1(2), 129-148.

Reisz, F. (2003). Assessing spiritual formation in Christian seminary communities. Theological

Education, 39(2), 29-40.

Rhea, R. (2011). Exploring spiritual formation in the Christian academy: The Dialects of church,

culture, and the larger integrative task. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 39(1), 3-15.

Rhodes, R. (2015). The complete guide to Christian denominations: Understanding the history,

beliefs, and differences. Harvest House Publishers.

Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.

Setran, D. P., Wilhoit, J. C., Ratcliff, D., Haase, D. T., & Rozema, L. (2010). Spiritual formation

goes to college: Class-related “soul projects” in Christian higher education. Christian

Education Journal, 7(2), 401-422.

Sloan Jr, R. B. (1999). Preserving distinctively Christian higher education. The future of

Christian higher education, 25-36.

Steensland, B., Robinson, L. D., Wilcox, W. B., Park, J. Z., Regnerus, M. D., & Woodberry, R.

D. (2000). The measure of American religion: Toward improving the state of the art.

Social Forces, 79(1), 291-318.


172

Steibel, S. R. (2010). Christian education and spiritual formation: one and the same? Christian

Education Journal, 7(2), 340-355.

Sue, D. W. (2001). Multidimensional facets of cultural competence. The Counseling

Psychologist, 29(6), 790-821.

Symonds, E. (2011). A practical application of SurveyMonkey as a remote usability-testing

tool. Library Hi Tech, 29(3), 436-445.

Tracy, W. D. (2002). Spiritual direction in the Wesleyan-Holiness movement. Journal of

Psychology and Theology, 30(4), 323-335.

U.S. Department of Education, (2015). National Center for Education Statistics, Higher

Education General Information Survey (HEGIS)

Willard, D. (1998). Spiritual disciplines, spiritual formation, and the restoration of the

soul. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 26(1), 101-109.

Willard, D. (2000). Spiritual formation in Christ: A perspective on what it is and how it might be

done. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 28(4), 254-258.

Willard, D. (2002). Renovation of the Heart. NavPress.

Willett, D. (2010). A biblical model of stages of spiritual development: The journey according to

John. Journal of Spiritual Formation and Soul Care, 3(1), 88-102.

Williamson, I. T., & Sandage, S. J. (2009). Longitudinal analyses of religious and spiritual

development among seminary students. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 12(8), 787-

801.

Yeong, M., Ismail, R., Ismail, N., & Hamzah, M. (2018). Interview Protocol Refinement: Fine-

Tuning Qualitative Research Interview Questions for Multi-Racial Populations in


173

Malaysia. The Qualitative Report, 23(11), 2700-2713. Retrieved from

https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol23/iss11/7

Ziegler, G. W. (2018). Is it Time for a Reformation of Spiritual Formation? Recovering

Ontology. Journal of Spiritual Formation and Soul Care, 11(1), 74-92.


174

Appendix A

Spiritual Assessment Inventory Todd W. Hall, Ph.D.

Keith J. Edwards, Ph.D. Instructions:

1. Please respond to each statement below by writing the number that best represents your experience in the empty box to the right of the statement.

2. It is best to answer according to what really reflects your experience rather than what you think your experience should be. 3. Give the answer that comes to mind first. Don't spend too much time thinking about an item. 4. Give the best possible response to each statement even if it does not provide all the information you would like. 5. Try your best to respond to all statements. Your answers will be completely confidential. 6. Some of the statements consist of two parts as shown here:

2.1 There are times when I feel disappointed with God.

2.2 When this happens, I still want our relationship to continue.

Your response to the second statement (2.2) tells how true this second statement (2.2) is

for you when you have the experience (e.g. feeling disappointed with God) described in the

first statement (2.1).

1 2 3 4 5

Not At Slightly Moderately Substantially Very All True True True True True

1 I have a sense of how God is working in my life.

13 God recognizes that I am more spiritual than most people.

2.1 There are times when I feel disappointed with God.

14 I always seek God's guidance for every decision I make.

2.2 When this happens, I still want our relationship to continue.

15 I am aware of God's presence in my interactions with other people.

3 God's presence feels very real to me. 16 There are times when I feel that God is punishing me.

4 I am afraid that God will give up on me. 17 I am aware of God responding to me in a variety of ways.

5 I seem to have a unique ability to influence God through my prayers.

18.1 There are times when I feel angry at God.


175

6 Listening to God is an essential part of my life.

18.2 When this happens, I still have the sense that God will always be with me.

7 I am always in a worshipful mood when I go to church.

19 I am aware of God attending to me in times of need.

8.1 There are times when I feel frustrated with God.

20 God understands that my needs are more important than most people's.

8.2 When I feel this way, I still desire to put effort into our relationship.

21 I am aware of God telling me to do something.

9 I am aware of God prompting me to do things.

22 I worry that I will be left out of God's plans.

10 My emotional connection with God is unstable.

23 My experiences of God's presence impact me greatly.

11 My experiences of God's responses to me impact me greatly.

24 I am always as kind at home as I am at church.

12.1 There are times when I feel irritated at God.

25 I have a sense of the direction in which God is guiding me.

12.2 When I feel this way, I am able to come to some sense of resolution in our relationship.

26 My relationship with God is an extraordinary one that most people would not understand.

SAI v7.1r

1 2 3 4 5 Not At Slightly Moderately Substantially Very

All True True True True True

27.1 There are times when I feel betrayed by God.

37 I find my prayers to God are more effective than other people's.

27.2 When I feel this way, I put effort into restoring our relationship.

38 I am always in the mood to pray.

28 I am aware of God communicating to me in a variety of ways.

39 I feel I have to please God or he might reject me.

29 Manipulating God seems to be the best way to get what I want.

40 I have a strong impression of God's presence.

30 I am aware of God's presence in times of need.

41 There are times when I feel that God is angry at me.

31 From day to day, I sense God being with me.

42 I am aware of God being very near to me.

32 I pray for all my friends and relatives every day.

43 When I sin, I am afraid of what God will do to me.

33.1 There are times when I feel frustrated by God for not responding to my prayers.

44 When I consult God about decisions in my life, I am aware of God’s direction and help.


176

33.2 When I feel this way, I am able to talk it through with God.

45 I seem to be more gifted than most people in discerning God's will.

34 I have a sense of God communicating guidance to me.

46 When I feel God is not protecting me, I tend to feel worthless.

35 When I sin, I tend to withdraw from God.

47.1 There are times when I feel like God has let me down.

36 I experience an awareness of God speaking to me personally.

47.2 When this happens, my trust in God is not completely broken.

SAI v7.1r Ó 1996 Todd W. Hall and Keith J. Edwards


177

Appendix B

Spiritual Assessment Inventory (Modified)

Thank you for agreeing to take part in this survey measuring leader’s perspectives of

spiritual formation programs, institutional influence on spiritual formation programs, and

spiritual formation program design. This survey should take about 20 minutes to complete.

Statement of Anonymity

All responses are completely anonymous. Responses to anonymous surveys cannot be

traced back to the respondent. No personally identifiable information is captured unless you

voluntarily offer personal or contact information in any of the fields. Additionally, your

responses are combined with others and summarized in data analysis to further protect your

anonymity.

INSTRUCTIONS For each item below, please rate how important this objective or outcome is to you in

your role as chaplain or spiritual formation director: 5 4 3 2 1

Very Important Important Neutral Slightly Important Not All Important

(Modified Survey Distributed to Participants via SurveyMonkey.com)

1. Students have a sense of how God is working in their lives.

2. God’s presence feels very real to our students.

3. Listening to God is an essential part of student’s lives.

4. Students are aware of God prompting them to do things.

5. Students’ experiences of God impact them greatly.

6. Students are aware of God’s presence in their interactions with other people.

7. Students are aware of God responding to them in a variety of ways.

8. Students are aware of God attending to them in times of need.


178

9. Students are aware of God telling them to do something.

10. Student’s experiences of God’s presence impact them greatly.

11. Students have a sense of the direction in which God is guiding them.

12. Students are aware of God communicating to them in a variety of ways.

13. Students are aware of God’s presence in times of need.

14. From day to day, students sense God being with them.

15. Students have a sense of God communicating guidance to them.

16. Students experience an awareness of God speaking to them personally.

17. Students have a strong impression of God’s presence.

18. Students are aware of God being very near to them.

19. When student’s consult God about decisions in their lives, they are aware of God’s

direction and help.

20. What are the institutional influences upon spiritual formation programs at your institution?

(i.e. denominational affiliation, accreditation organization, etc.) How do these influences affect

spiritual formation programs at your institution?

21. How are spiritual formation programs designed to meet specific outcomes at your

institution? Who has influence over this process at your institution?

22. Would you be interested in participating in a follow-up interview for further discussion of

your perspectives about spiritual formation programs?

o Yes


179

o No

*If yes, researcher’s email is displayed, along with the message “Please contact the researcher

at this email to set up a time for a 30-minute follow up interview”.


180

Appendix C Dear Spiritual Formation Program Leader,

You are invited to participate in a study targeting leaders of spiritual formation programs

in Christian higher education. This research is exclusive to spiritual formation program leaders at

institutions who are members of the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU).

You were selected as a possible participant in this study because of your role at the institution

meeting these standards. If you decide to participate, please follow the link attached to complete

the survey. Your response to this survey is implied consent. This survey is designed to provide

data on spiritual formation programs in Christian higher education. It will take approximately 30

minutes. No benefits accrue to you for answering the survey, but your response will be valuable

to furthering this field of research surrounding spiritual formation programs. Any discomfort or

inconvenience to you derives only from the amount of time taken to complete the survey.

Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can be identified

with you will remain confidential and will not be disclosed. Your decision whether or not to

participate will not prejudice any future relationships with The University of Findlay. If you

decide to participate, you are free to discontinue participation at any time without prejudice. You

will be made aware of any information that varies from what has been provided to you and/or

might affect your willingness to continue to participate in the project.

This survey and consent waiver have been approved by Institutional Review board at The

University of Findlay which guarantees that research involving human subjects follows federal

regulations. If you have any questions about your rights as a human subject please contact the

IRB chair, at [email protected].


181

We will submit the results of this study for publication in its entirety. The unprocessed data will

be destroyed 3 years after publication. If you are interested in the project results, please email us

with for information on retrieving the data. Please keep a copy of this email for your records. If

you have any questions regarding this project feel free to contact Dr. Nicole Williams at

[email protected] or at (614) 353-1224.

This project is being completed as part of graduation requirements for our Doctor of Education

program. If you have any questions about this project you may contact Jonathan Woodward at

[email protected] or my research adviser, Dr. Nicole Williams at

[email protected].

Thank you for your time.

Principal Investigator- Dr. Nicole V. Williams

Student Investigator- Jonathan D. Woodward


182

Appendix D Interview Protocol

1. How are spiritual formation programs designed to achieve specific outcomes?

2. Do you consider spiritual formation programs to be consistent or are new developments

added regularly? If so, how often and could you describe them?

3. What are the institutional influences upon your school’s spiritual formation program?

Can you describe how their influence affects these programs?

4. How is student spiritual formation measured/evaluated at your institution?

5. What are the expectations for students in spiritual formation programs relative to

participation and proficiency? How would you rate the efficacy of these expectations?

6. Does your institution hold a mission or faith statement that guides your approach to

spiritual formation programs? In what ways?

7. What methods/spiritual disciplines are used in spiritual formation programs to bring

about spiritual growth in the collective student body? How would you rate their efficacy?


183

Appendix E Spiritual Assessment Inventory Scale Key

SPIRITUAL ASSESSMENT INVENTORY

Copyright Todd W. Hall, Ph.D. & Keith J. Edwards, Ph.D.

Instructions 1. Please respond to each statement below by writing the number that best represents your experience in the

box to the right of the statement. 2. It is best to answer according to what really reflects your experience rather than what you think your

experience should be. 3. Give the answer that comes to mind first. Don't spend too much time thinking about an item. 4. Give the best possible response to each statement even if it does not provide all the information you would

like. 5. Try your best to respond to all statements. Your answers will be completely confidential. 6. Some of the statements consist of two parts as shown here:

2.1 There are times when I feel disappointed with God. 2.2 When this happens, I still want our relationship to continue.

Your response to 2.2 tells how true statement 2.2 is for you when you have the experience of feeling disappointed with God described in statement 2.1.

1 2 3 4 5 Not At Slightly Moderately Substantially Very

All True True True True True 1 I have a sense of how God is working in

my life A 13 God recognizes that I am more spiritual

than most people G

2.1 There are times when I feel disappointed with God

D 14 I always seek God's guidance for every decision I make.

IM

2.2 When this happens, I still want our relationship to continue

RA 15 I am aware of God's presence in my interactions with other people

A

3 God's presence feels very real to me A 16 There are times when I feel that God is punishing me

I

4 I am afraid that God will give up on me I 17 I am aware of God responding to me in a variety of ways

A

5 I seem to have a unique ability to influence God through my prayers

G 18.1 There are times when I feel angry at God

D

6 Listening to God is an essential part of my life

A 18.2 When this happens, I still have the sense that God will always be with me

RA

7 I am always in a worshipful mood when I go to church.

IM 19 I am aware of God attending to me in times of need

A

8.1 There are times when I feel frustrated with God

D 20 God understands that my needs are more important than most people's

G


184

8.2 When I feel this way, I still desire to put effort into our relationship

RA 21 I am aware of God telling me to do something

A

9 I am aware of God prompting me to do things

A 22 I worry that I will be left out of God's plans

I

10 My emotional connection with God is unstable

I 23 My experiences of God's presence impacts me greatly

A

11 My experiences of God's responses to me impact me greatly

A 24 I am always as kind at home as I am at church.

IM

12.1 There are times when I feel irritated at God

D 25 I have a sense of the direction in which God is guiding me

A

12.2 When I feel this way, I am able to come to some sense of resolution in our relationship

RA 26 My relationship with God is an extraordinary one that most people would not understand.

G

1 2 3 4 5

Not At Slightly Moderately Substantially Very All True True True True True 27.1 There are times when I feel betrayed

by God D 37 I find my prayers to God are more

effective than other people's G

27.2 When I feel this way, I put effort into restoring our relationship

RA 38 I am always in the mood to pray. IM

28 I am aware of God communicating to me in a variety of ways

A 39 I feel I have to please God or he might reject me

I

29 Manipulating God seems to be the best way to get what I want

G 40 I have a strong impression of God's presence

A

30 I am aware of God's presence in times of need

A 41 There are times when I feel that God is angry at me

I

31 From day to day, I sense God being with me

A 42 I am aware of God being very near to me

A

32 I pray for all my friends and relatives every day.

IM 43 When I sin, I am afraid of what God will do to me

I

33.1 There are times when I feel frustrated by God for not responding to my prayers

D 44 When I consult God about decisions in my life, I am aware of His direction and help

A

33.2 When I feel this way, I am able to talk it through with God

RA 45 I seem to be more gifted than most people in discerning God's will

G

34 I have a sense of God communicating guidance to me

A 46 When I feel God is not protecting me, I tend to feel worthless

I

35 When I sin, I tend to withdraw from God

I 47.1 There are times when I feel like God has let me down

D

36 I experience an awareness of God speaking to me personally

A 47.2 When this happens, my trust in God is not completely broken

RA


185

Scales: A = Awareness RA = Realistic Acceptance (Formerly = Healthy Ambivalence) D = Disappointment (Formerly = Defensiveness) G = Grandiosity (Formerly = Narcissism) I = Instability (Formerly = Splitting) IM = Impression Management (New Scale, experimental) Scoring Instructions: The score for each scale is the average of answered items. If the respondent omits more than half the items for a given scale, the scale cannot be scored. Scoring of the RA scale items (designated by xx.2 item numbers) depends on the respondent’s answer to the corresponding disappointment item (designated by xx.1 item numbers). If the respondent answers “not at all true” (1) on the xx.1 item, then the corresponding xx.2 item is NOT included in the RA scale average score. For example, if he/she rates item 2.1 as a “1”, then item 2.2 is not included in calculating the RA scale score average.

spiritual formation in christian higher

Documents