Christian school communities are composed of stakeholder groups, including staff, parents, students, alumni, donors, and the board. These groups have a stake in students developing a Christ-centered worldview.

 

Question: What’s your stakeholders’ perspective of a guaranteed, viable Biblical perspective curriculum?

• Guaranteed: All teachers at a given Christian school teach specified Bible content in each subject they teach.
• Viable: All teachers have sufficient instructional time to teach the specified Bible content.
• Biblical perspective: The specified Bible content is formatted as Biblical principles. Each Biblical principle is supported by at least 3 Bible passages.
• Curriculum: The specified Bible content is documented in the curriculum.

Here are responses from Christian educators like you:

 

Teacher: Our stakeholders probably haven’t thought about a guaranteed, viable Biblical perspective curriculum. Our board and parents would be supportive of developing one and would think having one is a nice idea. I think teachers might look at this in terms of how hard it would be to develop and implement. I think our administrator would think it would be great to have one and would be concerned about the amount of work it would take staff to develop one.

 

Principal: The mission and vision of our school imply that a guaranteed, viable Biblical perspective curriculum is important to us. Parents would have some degree of expectation that this would be in place. Most of our teachers would place a high value on it, but not know what it takes to develop it. Having a guaranteed, viable Biblical perspective curriculum is a very high value for the administration, and we’re talking about getting one in place. Our board wants us to have a one and would expect us to develop one.

 

Consultant: Most people I’ve interacted with have not considered having a  guaranteed, viable Biblical perspective curriculum. When I made a presentation about such matters at a Christian school board, the board was more concerned about students getting into high-powered universities. I said doing Biblical perspective would not detract from this, but they continued to feel it would. They felt that spiritual matters were the province of the church. Another time I visited a school that wanted to offer a distinctively Christian education—this school would welcome having a guaranteed, viable, Biblical perspective curriculum..

 

Teacher: Our board, administration, staff, and parents all want to help our students develop a Christ-centered worldview. The board has policies about our program fostering a Biblical worldview and about teachers teaching from a Biblical perspective. The administration carries out these policies. Practically speaking, what this looks like is teachers modeling Christ-like behavior, doing devotions and chapel, and using teachable moments to help students connect what they study and what the Bible teaches.

 

Everyone, including parents and students, seems to be satisfied with this—because they assume what we’re doing is the best that can be done. I don’t think our stakeholders are aware of the possibility of having a guaranteed, viable Biblical perspective curriculum. I think if they were, all stakeholder groups would want to have one. I think if they were and they found out we don’t have one, they’d wonder why.

 

Consultant: I find several perspectives about a Biblically oriented or foundational curriculum to be in play with stakeholders of Christian educational programs:

 

One group seems to have no clue what that is nor do they typically care as long as their children are safe (from whatever they might be concerned about) and the educational program seems to be sound. These folks do not seem to be deeply motivated for or convicted about the need for a curriculum that has strong roots in Biblical truth, which may be a reflection of their own spiritual life (or lack thereof) or a lack of awareness of the concept.

 

They will typically wonder what all the fuss is about concerning the Bible, why the school commits to what they perceive as “Sunday school activities”—chapel, mission trips, spiritual activities, and constant Bible references in documents and the classroom. Typically, it is their sense that the school is a “private” school rather than a Christian school.

 

A second group of stakeholders knows that being a Christian organization and having the Bible central is important, but they think a separate chapel time, mission trips, prayer, and other spiritual disciplines and references are fine as long as they don’t intrude into the academic and instructional day. They see the two as distinctive and compartmentalized, having little to no influence on each other.

 

They seem happy to have “spiritual instruction” and yet are disinclined to commit to the scriptures as the definitive tome on truth and so see its influence in all of the instructional program. Their preference is that the school be a “preparatory” school that has Christian values, but just not too many of them.

 

A third group emerges as those who understand the need for all truth to be placed in the sieve of the scriptures and so expect all instruction and curriculum to be both guided and shaped by a Biblical perspective on all disciplines and subjects. These individuals are deeply committed to the need for a completely Biblically integrated instructional program and will identify those areas that veer too far from their perception of that truth.

 

This group can overdrive this conviction with strong opinions about what the Bible says about key contents (especially history and science) and can impose a personal belief on the broader educational system, but they are generally able to be wooed into meaningful negotiations about their concerns. They have very high expectations for the curriculum to be both guaranteed and viable in terms of its Biblical perspective, and know the school would not be a “Christian” school otherwise.

 

Next question: Where are you/your school in terms of having a guaranteed, viable Biblical perspective curriculum?

 

Target Biblical perspective. Today.