Bob Jones University Enters a New Era

Larry, you know very well that there is a non-subjective difference between an octogenarian and a teenager—I would have hoped it would have been unthinkable for you to even pull a stunt like that, but suffice it to say I am disappointed. Everybody knows that 80 year olds have memory issues relatively unknown to 18 year olds, and everybody here also knows that we are talking about 18 year olds. Honestly….

Moreover, the chief goal of any college or university ought to be to produce graduates who can succeed in the world. Hence, the fact that first tier schools do NOT take attendance, and third tier schools (e.g. community colleges, etc..) often DO, does create an opportunity to correlate taking attendance with a school’s success. BJU simply falls on the wrong side of that regression.

So we’re left, really, with two possibilities. BJU’s mediocre graduation rate indicates either they are making students immature by their policies, or they are selecting for immature students. The latter is definitely part of the problem, as they accept 81% of applicants. But that said, if they’re never letting people suffer natural consequences, but rather make it all artificial consequences (the demerit system is still in force, if not as much as formerly), you’re going to be infantilizing people.

Which is to say that I’d add one thing to what Susan noted. The “sticky wicket” of a student handbook is not only the motivation and the intended results, but also the likely results of the policies. That’s why it matters, a LOT, whether the student handbook actually seems to come from the sources of authority endorsed by university administration. If it doesn’t, you’re engendering contempt for administration and for that source of authority. It’s a big deal.

To get into one of these elite Ivy League type schools, you have to post a near perfect SAT score, take a bunch of AP courses, and have a list of impressive extracurricular activities on your resume that will make you an asset to the university. You have to be an academically advanced go-getter or a stud athlete. BJU has never catered to that philosophy. They have always taken average Joes. If they didn’t think you’d be successful in their rigorous university program — that was OK – they found a place for you in their School of Applied Studies. Develop academically there and when you are ready, transfer into the University. The point is that BJU has never been about exclusivity within their student body. So, yes, not everyone will make it to graduation, but they give people a chance, and try to develop the whole person. They will take someone who isn’t a driven academic and help them become a good student. They will also teach them to grow in godliness and their ability to serve the Lord, both in the workplace and in their local churches. The BJU mission is not the same as an Ivy League school, a state school, or a community college.

[AndyE]

The point is that BJU has never been about exclusivity within their student body.

Perhaps this is a given to us, but maybe it’s good to be reminded of this. What Andy says isn’t true if you want to be technical. BJU will not allow someone who is openly opposed to Christianity, or does not openly provide a public testimony of faith in Christ. It is at its heart a school that presumes students are redeemed Christians, whether they always turn out to be. The criteria upon which they are exclusive might be different than Ivy League type schools, but they would still be exclusive.

Andy, understood, but reality is that there are a lot of schools which do not have an “out for blood” admissions process which nevertheless manage to get far higher graduation rates than does BJU, one example being most of the Big Ten schools. The ugly reality is that one third of incoming freshmen at BJU are leaving without either their college fund or a degree, and in many cases with a fair amount of student loans.

That’s just plain cruel—kids who could be excellent, prosperous tradesmen and such are having their apprenticeship years and funds robbed by this. Yes, the kids are agreeing to the deal, sort of; I would guess not too many schools are pulling prospective students aside and saying “with your ACT scores and high school grades, your odds of graduating are 15% or less.” And yet that is exactly what many colleges know.

Rules/standards must have a specific function in order to provide value. The law in Scripture points us to our inadequacy before Christ’s holiness, and moves us to repentance and faith. It’s clear that in terms of eternity, whether or not we’ve “kept the commandments” is somewhat irrelevant, but we also know that keeping them protects us to some degree from natural consequences here on earth, and by our example serves to point others to Christ.

Much of the time when adults make rules for kids, it’s to help them avoid consequences. We aren’t thinking long and hard enough about whether our rules truly serve to build character, especially if we aren’t doing the heavy lifting of acting as examples, and having a deep and meaningful relationship with those we hope to teach and convert.

There’s a sense of irreducible complexity to the issue of rules, but IMO rules must be relevant and appropriate to the place/time/situation/purpose etc… For example, it’s IMO a bit pointless for a school/college to have rules about what kind of music students are allowed to listen to on their own time, mostly because it is largely unenforceable, but also because it’s more effective to educate people about music and let the Holy Spirit do his work. Do we really think a student handbook is going to lead and guide a student to the truth?

I want to clarify that I think rules are good, and important, but WHICH rules are good and important seems to be the crux of this issue.

Larry said: Ron says something similar. But my guess is that you probably didn’t do this with a first day hire right out of high school who had never had a job before. And you probably didn’t do it on his second day. Perhaps you started on the third day. Or fourth. Who knows. But you knew that his lack of experience at the job and in the workforce period meant he was unable to contribute much of anything to the discussion. You understand that he needed to mature in the job and gain a little experience before being able to contribute much.

Actually, we did. In our “Before the Floor” training, even with kids just out of high school and working their first job, we encouraged them to ask “Why?’ from the very first day. We also expected and encouraged them to look at how to do things “a different way”. As a matter of fact those are two of IKEA’s principles of business. I found it beneficial for workers and refreshing for me after being in an atmosphere where asking why and doing things differently were not enthusiastically embraced.

[Bert Perry] Andy, understood, but reality is that there are a lot of schools which do not have an “out for blood” admissions process which nevertheless manage to get far higher graduation rates than does BJU, one example being most of the Big Ten schools. The ugly reality is that one third of incoming freshmen at BJU are leaving without either their college fund or a degree, and in many cases with a fair amount of student loans.

That’s just plain cruel—kids who could be excellent, prosperous tradesmen and such are having their apprenticeship years and funds robbed by this. Yes, the kids are agreeing to the deal, sort of; I would guess not too many schools are pulling prospective students aside and saying “with your ACT scores and high school grades, your odds of graduating are 15% or less.” And yet that is exactly what many colleges know.

Spot checking some of the Big10 graduation rates, I see Michigan at 90%, Mich St at 78%, Ohio St at 83%, and Iowa at 69%. So, there is a range. The BJU rate of 63% is lower but not by that much in some cases. The average graduation rate is 59%. I’m just googling and finding these. Some are from 2012; others are more recent. Based on all this, I’m not sure what kind of point you can make.

The fact of the matter is that college isn’t for everyone, and some people simply run out of money. Some people find out that BJU isn’t for them. I very much doubt that doing away with required class attendance would have any impact on graduations rates.

What Ron is referring to here is often described by the Japanese term Kaizen, or “good change”, loosely translated. It’s a huge deal in “lean” operations, and Ikea, for whatever other good or bad features they have, is a leader in this. They’ve done huge innovations in packaging (flat pack furniture), worldwide distribution, and more this way.

And in the case Ron is referring to, as well as the one I’m referring to, it again is very clear that treating young people, even high school dropouts whose lives scarcely show discipline in other regards, as adults bears huge fruit. It also spares those supervising them the effort and time of counting demerits and the like.

As trainers of new co-workers, we’d always smile at the usual first question every new employee asked. “Why do we all have to wear these ugly bright yellow shirts?” The answer: So customers can find us if they need help. (you’d have to be in an IKEA on a Saturday with 15.000 customers to understand why this is a great idea.) I suppose we could have said, “Because that’s the way we do things around here.

Another reason to encourage why questions from new employees is because it allowed IKEA veterans to realize how we were perceived by new customers who weren’t familiar with IKEA. For those of you who know IKEA: Those big signs explaining shopping lists that you see when you come in the store? Co-worker idea. The 60’ by 80’ foot banner on the front of the store advertising Seize The Day with those bold letters prominently displayed that was removed within an hour of being put up. Co-worker noticed it.

Andy, the point is simple; even though BJU can say they’re “better than average” and “almost as good as the worst Big Ten school” (Nebraska at 66.8% graduation), that still leaves a third of students without their college fund, without a few years of their life, and without a degree. Moreover, the deans at BJU (and all over) know exactly who left in good academic standing, and who did not. If they’re not determining who has a reasonable chance (say 50% of graduating and who does not by looking at the demographics of those on academic probation, they’re saying “I’m fine with taking tens of thousands of dollars from students and giving them bupkus.” Major.Moral.Failure, no?

I would guess that the motivation for attendance rules has a lot to do with this as well; they know, or think they know, that these less-than-qualified students are not on the narrow path to a mortarboard, and hence they think if they “compel” them to be in class, they’ve got a chance. The down side is that marginal students who are smart enough to come to class miss a few minutes of instruction each day and are less likely to graduate, and all students note “this isn’t how the Gamecocks do this down the road.”.

At best, it’s an attempt to paper over a situation the deans have the informaiton to avoid. At worst, it actively discourages and infantilizes students.

I think we can and should set aside this whole discussion about people with handicaps or mental defect, because the last time I checked, BJU didn’t have a ton of those students. Furthermore, we are talking in general terms about the general population of Christians.

I’ll try to clarify again, Larry, but I want to respect your wishes to disengage from the thread as well. You said:

As I think about this conversation, it seems to me that there are two basic sides and two basic approaches. There is the side that focuses on the idea of legality (which is arbitrary as Greg points out) and the side that focuses on morality. To me, being an adult is a moral state in which one is able to care for themselves and live responsibility and respectfully towards others. For some that happens in their mid-teens and for others that happens quite a bit later. For me reaching the moral idea of adulthood requires training until it is reached. It doesn’t magically happen on a birthday, which is the other side, that adulthood happens on the 18th birthday come hell or high water.

I have never argued that once a person reaches a set age (18), they are magically adults. What I am saying is that by the time someone has reached 18 (or is old enough to start college/grad school, in Greg’s daughters’ cases), they should be mature enough that they do not need the fine-grained rules that BJU have put in place in the past. Furthermore, if they have been shielded from life’s consequences (for whatever reason), then they should be exposed to the school of hard knocks. Yes, some people won’t be ready…I get that, but if you’re going to send an eighteen year old to college, then they should not need the kind of close supervision of their life that BJU required.

When I started classes at NBBC on my 18th birthday, I didn’t need someone to tell me don’t stay up past 11, or to wear a shirt and pants to class, or to get to work on time I knew the rules, and I knew that my education there was dependent on abiding by those rules. If I had failed out or been disciplined out, that was on me, and no peer-monitoring program or in loco parentis organizational policy would have kept me from doing so. NBBC undertook no small measure of effort in order to work with people that needed whatever help, discipleship, and mentoring possible. Adam can attest to that.

NBBC also had a policy that I must wear a tie to class, and it made me nuts sometimes, but I also knew that if I didn’t do it, I’d eventually be thrown out. That was the ‘term and condition’ for remaining a student. I didn’t need to have a long talk with the Dean to get that. As a new student and new Christian, I was incredibly fortunate that one of the staff took me under his wing and discipled me. He did what the rules at NBBC never could because he poured himself into my life and the lives of many, many other students, and he worked in areas of my life that NBBC could never touch with any rule, policy, or guideline. He could do that because we had a relationship, not because NBBC had a policy.

Don mentioned this a while back:

Dr. Bob Sr meant to build an institution that taught young people how to live, not just how to make a living. Maybe you don’t value that, but I think it is extremely important.

I guess what I am saying is that by the time someone reaches college, they should already know “how to live”. It’s the parent’s responsibility to do this, not BJU’s [or any other institution’s] , and I think they have realized that. I think that a lot of the rules put in place at BJU were put there to achieve something that was never achievable via rules in the first place, and consequently, I believe that most of those rules were usually unfairly administered or applied (this is part of why I objected to Maddi Runkles’ punishment for getting pregnant at the time - did HCA treat everyone engaging in premarital sex the same way? I very highly doubt it, and Maddi noted that there were other students with worse records that were able to walk at commencement.). For example, did everyone at BJU get the exact same enforcement of rules with no objective aim (no long hair, for example?) Did everyone at BJU get the exact same punishment for each infraction every time?

You and Don and others seem to think that putting good rules into effect will create good Christians. I don’t think that’s right or even achievable.

I’m reviewing a fraud case right now. A compliance rep from an major insurance carrier responded to our agency’s request for information. The rep has an email footer with a quote. I usually ignore these, but I couldn’t help but be struck by how relevant this quotation is to our present discussion here. It’s from Booker T. Washington:

Few things can help an individual more than to place responsibility on him, and to let him know that you trust him.

I was skeptical that this was a real quote, but the Booker T. Washington Society features it on their site, so that’s good enough for me. We should think about that statement, because it encapsulates the great divide between the two approaches to Christian maturity we’ve seen on this thread. Everything I’ve tried to say on this topic is summed up in that quotation. Think about it.

My philosophy about the role of the undergraduate university:

1. I pay money
2. University provides service (i.e. education)
3. I study diligently
4. My work is graded fairly and accurately by University
5. I hopefully pass all classes and graduate
6. I proudly frame my degree, and place alumni bumper sticker on my car
7. Transaction over. I will proudly pay alumni dues.

Discipleship and Christian growth = local church.

University = toolbox for career opportunities and personal growth through a field of study

[Jay]

You and Don and others seem to think that putting good rules into effect will create good Christians. I don’t think that’s right or even achievable.

Not at all, but I think that an authority structure can produce outstanding disciplined leaders, which is what I think a Christian university should do for good Christians.

Don, what do you mean by ‘authority structure’? Several of us are trying to understand what your perspective is, and we are at a loss. I suspect that you have something in mind that differs from most of us.