A Look at Today’s Secular College Campus

It’s worth noting that “sexual assault” on campus includes drunken hook-ups—often meaning that the “victim” consented, but regretted it. Also, if we took a look at ancient society, we’d find similar numbers on drinking alcohol (wine was the winter source of vitamin C after all) and having sex. The key difference for the latter is simply that people back then were ready to be married and join adult society.

In the same way, Ham and Beamer’s Already Gone details how 90% of those who leave the church have checked out already by the end of high school. So sending these people to Bible College, Cedarville, or wherever would accomplish exactly what? Given that, apart from Maranatha and Cedarville, full degree programs at accredited Christian colleges are rare, I’d argue that sending a “compliant heathen” to Bible college will only make him bitter at the loss of 2-4 years of his life, followed by the inability to pursue a profession of his choice. It will usually harden him against the Gospel.

Even for those whose faith is genuine, Bible college can be a mistake for the same reason. My daughters characterize some as places where the options for a girl are “missionary nurse program” and “pastor’s wife—pastor not included”. Moreover, having gone to two party schools in my youth (Michigan State and Colorado), it’s not that hard to keep one’s faith there—I actually came to Christ at MSU. Part of what went right was I chose a real degree program (nothing with the word “studies” in it—such majors are generally Mickey Mouse), took advantage of honors programs and quiet dorms, and found a church as soon as I came to Christ.

And reality is here that the statistics are as bad (alcohol, fornication) or worse (sexual assault, crime) when people get out there into the working world—so the “worldly cocoon” of the secular university can actually be good training for dealing with real life.

1. If I recall correctly, the book Already Gone (see Bert’s comment above) also points out that of students who leave the church/disown their previously expressed faith, the percentage who do so is actually greater among those who go straight into the work force than who attend a secular college.

2. I’ve seen plenty of examples of kids who graduated from a Christian school (including my alma mater) who went off and then graduated from a Bible college, who years later haven’t attended a church in decades and who furthermore want nothing to do with the faith they once expressed. In fact–and I say this only partly facetiously–if you want to up the odds of that happening, just slap a “Christian Service Award” on a graduating senior at a Christian school. Then check back in on that graduate 10 or 15 years later….. As Bert called them, they were “compliant heathens.”

3. After graduating from my Christian school alma mater, I spent four years at the University of Minnesota. At which one did I witness a student actually drinking alcohol while in the classroom? Not at the U of M. At which one did I witness one student punch another student in the face? Likewise, not at the U of M. At which one was I the object of another male student’s (ahem) attempted advance? Once again, not at the U of M. (I could go on, but I trust you get my point.)

….just as a point, the “research” in “Already Gone” is so unreliable and flawed that I refuse to allow students in my college courses (I teach courses on Youth Discipleship and Family Discipleship) to use it as a source.
FWIW.

[DLCreed]

….just as a point, the “research” in “Already Gone” is so unreliable and flawed that I refuse to allow students in my college courses (I teach courses on Youth Discipleship and Family Discipleship) to use it as a source.

FWIW.

….why you consider the research to be unreliable and flawed. What do you know about the sample, sample size, methodology, etc..? Given that Beemer appears to have made a decent career in marketing research, one would guess that his clients would have at least seen some of his work as worthwhile.

The place I’m coming from is at least from plausibility; I’ve been in a few churches where there were more or less no attendees between the ages of 18 and 35. Plenty of gray, a few parents, a few kids, but a HUGE gap there. So whatever you’ve got to say on this would be of interest.

[DLCreed]

….just as a point, the “research” in “Already Gone” is so unreliable and flawed that I refuse to allow students in my college courses (I teach courses on Youth Discipleship and Family Discipleship) to use it as a source.

FWIW.

AIG provides the first two chapters of the book online:

https://assets.answersingenesis.org/doc/articles/am/v4/n4/already-gone-…

Chapter 1 provides some details about the scope of the survey, the size of the sample(s), the methodology used, and the frequency results. It also discusses similar research and results from surveys done by Barna and by Lifeway (Southern Baptists). In the back of the book (not available online), the frequency results of each of the survey questions is detailed.

Even if you disagree with the methodology, do you disagree with the conclusions?

Larry, we ought to at least concede that if the methodology is flawed, the conclusions are only correct, if at all, by the broken clock theory. No?

Looking at the link (thank you), it strikes me that the foundation for this is work by Barna/Gallup, the SBC, and others. So again, it at least appears plausible. Now the sample; it’s 1000 people, which (I work in stats myself) is on the smallish side for working with what’s called “attribute” data. Note; political polls are often smaller, which is why they’re all over the board. As von Mises said, “man acts”.

On the flip side, when kids leave the church is variable data, so they’re OK there. Same basic thing about when they first started having doubts.

Now regarding the whys, chapter 2 is probably on weak ground in blaming Sunday School—you have confounding variables, post hoc ergo propter hoc (after, therefore because of) fallacy, reporting biases, and the like, and it’s a 10-20% shift in results. You can get good p values out of that for no apparent reason, sad to say.

Finally, implications for what I said; I simply noted that it appears that a lot of people are gone by the end of high school, at least inside. So assuming that DL comes back and notes more about what his objections are, and that is sustained, that assumption would be cast in doubt. We would still, however, be left with the other, presumably more authoritative work of Barna/Gallup and others.

And in terms of theology, if we believe perserverance of the saints/eternal security, we must assume a priori that these kids walking away either were not saved, or have chosen to be carnal Christians—with all due respect to those who don’t divide the flock that way, of course. And why are they not saved? Well, no indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and the cause for that is no response to the Gospel, and that may or may not indicate they actually heard the Gospel in a clear way.

Part of that would include Sunday School and the pulpit, and part would not.

DL, would love to hear more from you on this. I hope I’ve been fair and reasonably accurate in assessing your note.

Just for kicks, I did a two proportion test (Fisher’s exact), and found that for most of the statistical differences between the “Sunday School” and “no Sunday School” crowd did not meet a statistical criterion of p< 0.05, which is usual. On the flip side, the likelihood of random variance causing the stats on when people checked out of church (mentally or more) are statistically significant.

Within the limitations of the study.

Now for giggles, let’s flip things around. Let us assume that additional education—say Bible college—would be a benefit to our kids, and let us try to justify it using Ham and Beamer’s data. Now it’s not exactly the same thing—four years of daily chapel, required core classes, etc., vs. 13 years of weekly Sunday School—but if my look at Ham’s data is right, what is says is that his data does not support the hypothesis that additional education will keep people in the faith.

It’s not the only evidence out there, but it’s something we ought to look at carefully.

Thanks, Larry, for the link. I skimmed the article and found it interesting indeed.

First of all, I’d like to point out that the article isn’t about Already Gone. As far as I can see, it doesn’t even mention it at all, either by way of comment or citation. So the article ISN’T about what you are discussing. (Which is par for the course in on-line discussions.)

Secondly, what the article is about is the decision making process for parents and students about whether or not to go to a secular state college. The article doesn’t flatly say NO, but says, if you do go, go in with your eyes open and well aware and fortified against the dangers.

Yes, many kids are “already gone” for various reasons. But what a tragedy when a real born-again young person gets into a spiritually hostile environment without the personal support system (friends, maturity, church, etc) to aid in maintaining a consistent Christian testimony. What a tragedy when in such an environment a real believer develops an alcohol problem or ends up pregnant or any number of other issues… all because they saved a few dollars going to the state university with the notion “how bad can it be?”

That, it seems to me, is what the article is about. Probably there are problems with the book “Already Gone” Someone lent it to me as an audio book and I quit listening to it. I thought it was shallow and made weak arguments (although its been a few years, so my impressions may be due to faulty memory). I’d urge you, however, to discuss the points made by the article rather than those raised by a book not even mentioned in the article.

Dear Don,

You are correct in your analysis, but the subject has at least remained anchored to the broad concern, namely, our young people who get diverted from the Way.

One crucial point I want to make that IS directly related to the article pertains to advice I give to kids going off to secular college. I tell them that, if they want to remain strong spiritually, they really must get involved with a Christian ministry like CRU, Navigators (or, with less enthusiasm) Inter-varsity. If they go to Purdue (which many in our area do), I suggest Kossuth St. Church (which has an amazing ministry to College kids there) or Faith Baptist.

I was talking to a concerned mom who no longer attends our church. Her son is at college, and she is concerned that her son does not attend church regularly, but he does faithfully attend Navigators. I told her, that given a choice — attending church or going to Navigators, that Navigators would win in my book by a mile (despite their compromises). Kids who are in a discipling ministry (esp. at college age) seem to do so much better! As a matter of fact, few churches can match these organizations when it comes to results, IMO.

The kids who do not take my advice and do not get involved in a college-specific Christian ministry usually do not do well. Those who do usually do well. That’s been my limited experience. I don’t have a poll of a thousand young people to back it up, I admit.

I also want to add this: many kids (reared in Christian families and in church) are looking forward to experimenting and have a “back of the mind” agenda to see what they are missing. So they set themselves up for spiritual failure and sabotage their chances for doing well spiritually. It is this mindset that the article misses. Although they will not admit it verbally, they want to enjoy sexual adventures on campus, get drunk, and find out what they are missing. So they set themselves up for spiritual failure.

Les and Leslie Parrott claim that people turn away from the Bible (like creation) because that is “for kids.” They have an agenda to be grown up, and the way we relate to our kids suggest the Bible is for kids and families — not their concern. I think getting heavy theologically (teaching them deeper doctrines, etc.) might help prevent some of this so that they feel like adult Christians before they go to college. Don’t know that as a fact, just a thought.

Don writes:

But what a tragedy when a real born-again young person gets into a spiritually hostile environment without the personal support system (friends, maturity, church, etc) to aid in maintaining a consistent Christian testimony. What a tragedy when in such an environment a real believer develops an alcohol problem or ends up pregnant or any number of other issues… all because they saved a few dollars going to the state university with the notion “how bad can it be?”

The question in my mind is that if 18 years of discipleship at the home church leaves a young person unable to find a church, find friends of good character, and resist sin, is it going to help to send them for four more years to the pastor’s alma mater and be immersed in more of the same teaching that left them unable to cope with adult life? Or are we more likely to send a lot of unsaved kids who speak “churchy” fluently to Bible college to subvert what they’re doing there?

(this is why Already Gone and the Barna research are so important—they indicate that if you greatly increased the # of kids going to Bible college, you’d most likely be sending mostly heathens)

Personally, I think that latter is more likely, and if I were persuaded that my almost 18 year old was unable to find a church, friends, or resist sin, I think I’d apologize to her and see where to go from there. I also should note that I concur strongly with Ed’s commendation of intensive discipleship in churches—I had such a situation at MSU with South Baptist Church, and from what I saw on summer missions and interactions with the “hometown” crowd, what we’d learned compared very favorably with what the kids in Bible colleges were learning. In many regards, we were stronger because we (a) didn’t have a cocoon of rules (ignoring Colossians 2:21-23 IMO) “protecting” us and (b) we had a consistent stream of new believers among us.

Go but eschew “Greek” and dorm life! Doesn’t work in all cases, but many can commute to a very good school while living with Mom & Dad.

[Jim]

Go but eschew “Greek” and dorm life! Doesn’t work in all cases, but many can commute to a very good school while living with Mom & Dad.

I actually had a great time living in the dorms and being the “emperor” of “Sigma Pi Alpha Mu” fraternity—it was our joke on an honors floor, and we’d have an annual “mosey” with fliers poking fun at the excesses of “real” Greek houses. Sigma Alpha Mu, originally a Jewish fraternity, was not entirely amused at that, given the similarity and non-kosher reference to our fraternity name. :^) The lads and I also started a tradition of giving the ladies in the dorm carnations during finals week after hearing a stress-induced squabble. Lots of wonderful times….

Really, though, dorm life was a great place to make friends, interact a bunch including Bible studies, and be challenged by pagans. I was on an honors floor in a quiet dorm that routinely filled vans going to South Baptist to the point of being rather overloaded and unsafe. The risk of dorm life, really, was the same as off campus—that you’d get on a party floor and not be able to study. Or, in apartments around MSU, Cedar Village, or “the Hill” above campus at Ski U. It’s what you make of it, really. Great place to let your light shine, IMO. Lots of friends there had about the same experience, really.

Parties and “loose” people? Believe it or not, not that much of an issue. I went to one about the second day at MSU and walked out after about half an hour of watching people tremulously approach a bowl of Everclear punch and wince as they took a sip. Apparently they don’t call it firewater for nothing, and it was the worst party I’ve ever been to. B.O.R.I.N.G. The guys that were drunk and fornicating in college were…. by and large the guys who had been doing so, or who had wanted to do so, in high school.