A Denomination and Its Colleges: a Mixed Methods Study Mark A
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Olivet Nazarene University Digital Commons @ Olivet Scholarship – President's Office President's Office 2009 The hC urch of the Nazarene: A Denomination and Its Colleges: A Mixed Methods Study Mark A. Mountain Olivet Nazarene University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.olivet.edu/pres_facp Part of the Higher Education Administration Commons, and the Higher Education and Teaching Commons Recommended Citation Mountain, Mark A., "The hC urch of the Nazarene: A Denomination and Its Colleges: A Mixed Methods Study" (2009). Scholarship – President's Office. 1. https://digitalcommons.olivet.edu/pres_facp/1 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the President's Office at Digital Commons @ Olivet. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scholarship – President's Office by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Olivet. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE: A DENOMINATION AND ITS COLLEGES: A MIXED METHODS STUDY by Mark C. Mountain A DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College at the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Education Major: Educational Studies Under the Supervision of Professor Jody C. Isernhagen Lincoln, Nebraska November, 2009 THE CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE: A DENOMINATION AND ITS COLLEGES: A MIXED METHODS STUDY Mark C. Mountain, Ed.D. University of Nebraska, 2009 Adviser: Jody C. Isernhagen The purpose for this study was to provide a framework for the Church of the Nazarene to examine the ongoing church-college relationship. At the Church of the Nazarene’s centennial, this study sought to examine the balance between institutional mission and academic philosophy on church-relatedness in the Church of the Nazarene’s higher education bodies within the United States. In this sequential explanatory mixed method study, priority was given to the qualitative methodology. The qualitative approach came in the collection of narratives and interviews. The quantitative method was a survey conducted using scaled questions to gather information from a broad range of individuals from the various schools. The research explored seven of the eight undergraduate institutions of the Church of the Nazarene in the United States. The eighth institution was used for the pilot study. The seven institutions researched in this study were identified with pseudonyms to maintain anonymity. The research included an internet survey distributed to general church leaders, district superintendents, local church pastors, board of trustee members, college/university administrators, college/university faculty, and college/university staff, with selective follow-up interviews. The central question for research was, “In an effort to create an identity for the future, how is the institutional mission presently expressed by the higher education institutions of the Church of the Nazarene?” The conclusions reached through the quantitative research illustrated a lack of familiarity with the institutional mission. There was also a noted dissatisfaction with freshman’s spiritual maturity and only a minimal increase in maturity upon graduation. The qualitative research brought to light several themes. The first was that the Church of the Nazarene is very unique its relationship between church and college. A second theme that was evident was the strong sense of institutional loyalty. And a third was the need was to protect the mission while continuing to expand the influence of the institution. DEDICATION The whole effort of these pages could be summed up in the words of my 8-year- old, 3rd grade daughter, “Daddy, it has taken you this long to write a book, my class can do it in a couple of days.” Never more encouraging words has one heard. The days and nights I have spent through these years have been felt by my family and so to Amanda, Claire, and Kate I say, “Thank You!” These words are of course are not enough, but they must suffice for trips missed, play dates skipped and long nights locked away to work. My wife Amanda has encouraged and has done the work of two parents so often through these days, so together we rejoice in the completion of this study. To my advisor Dr. Jody Isernhagen this journey would have never been possible without you. I would have been lost in the desert, wandering aimlessly at times trying to find my way to this end. You have guided me well and I thank you for your kind words, hours of reading and patience with my many questions. Thank you also goes to my committee of Dr. Larry Dlugosh, Dr. Ron Joekel, and Dr. Julie Johnson and their assistance in completing this effort. Thanks go to so many along the way who shared their words of encouragement and at times gave me the push I needed to just keep going. Through this process I have learned that life is more than just this work. In the days to come all that has been studied will be tucked away and used at odd moments, but most of all these pages are the culmination of not simply my work, but the efforts of so many who had to pick up the slack when I needed to be somewhere else or doing something else and to each and every one, and in humility I say thank you! In Loving Memory of: Catherine Mansfield, Milton Mountain, Landon Mountain, and Connor Mountain i Table of Contents Chapter 1 ............................................................................................................................1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................1 Purpose of the Study ..........................................................................................................4 Significance of the Study .............................................................................................5 Organization of Research ............................................................................................6 Research Questions ......................................................................................................8 Limitations of the Study ..............................................................................................9 Researcher Bias ............................................................................................................9 Confidentiality ..............................................................................................................9 Definitions ...................................................................................................................10 Summary .....................................................................................................................10 Chapter 2 ..........................................................................................................................12 Literature Review and Framework ..........................................................................12 Historical Studies .......................................................................................................15 1920s ......................................................................................................................16 1930s ......................................................................................................................16 1940s ......................................................................................................................16 1950s ......................................................................................................................17 1960s ......................................................................................................................19 1970s ......................................................................................................................22 1980s ......................................................................................................................24 1990s ......................................................................................................................27 2000s ......................................................................................................................32 Chapter 3 ..........................................................................................................................36 Methodology .....................................................................................................................36 Introduction ................................................................................................................36 Purpose of the Study ..................................................................................................37 Research Questions ....................................................................................................38 Quantitative Research .....................................................................................................39 Quantitative Sample ..................................................................................................39 Quantitative Instrument ............................................................................................40 Quantitative Variables...............................................................................................40 Quantitative Pilot Study ..................................................................................................42 Quantitative Data Gathering Procedure .................................................................44