What is the “mission” of Adventist education?

We are now nearing the completion of our education summit. I’ve sat in meetings now for two days. Lots of information. I’m grateful for the investment of time by so many people, but I’m worried that in having such a meeting whether we are doing anything more than diagnosing what we already know. And what do we know?

Basically that only 25-30% of Adventists enroll their children in Adventist schools. I am told we should take comfort in the fact that this percentage is significantly higher than other parochial school systems, yet it does not comfort me. And the bottom line is that while our churches have grown in North America over the last 60 years enrollment in Adventist schools has remained stagnant. The bottom line: as churches grow the percentage of Adventist families who value Adventist education has declined.

So what is the solution?

In our keynote address we were told by Dr. David Smith that millennials learn differently so we need to teach differently. I agree.

Then we were told by Bob Kyte, president of Adventist Risk Management, that we need to use basic business practices summarized from a number of classics in business management about our need for mission, building a team and collaboration, etc. Sounds great, and kudos to him for turning around Pacific Press last decade. The one point he did make that I thought was significant was that we need a clear mission.
The problem is that now after two days of meetings I’ve heard so many different “mission” ideas for Adventist education that I don’t believe that we have made any real progress to figuring out what the “mission” of Adventist education should be. In fact, I’m now sitting in another presentation and the presenter  is reminding us that we need to follow the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy to discover our “mission.” BUT, WHAT IS IT? The implication is that if we only followed the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy more faithfully we wouldn’t have the problem that we are in. But I’ve studied the Spirit of Prophecy and as I listen I am not hearing anything new that we aren’t doing already.

One school of thought is that the mission of Adventist education is to introduce our young people to a saving relationship with Jesus Christ. But, how is this different from any other Christian school? I agree, our schools should do that, but is there something more?

Another school of thought is that our schools are evangelistic outposts. The reason they exist is to do evangelism. OK. If that is the case then we are in serious trouble because we need to really get serious about education if we are going to finish the gospel commission and try to have the biggest schools that we possibly can. I think this is actually a bit of a trap because as Adventist parents have stopped sending their kids to our schools collectively that we have tried to keep our schools floating by filling them with other children. After all, aren’t they important, too?

But is this really the reason why we have an Adventist educational system? I hope not or we may never see the eschaton.

Then there is the school of thought that if we could only “fix” our schools: whether that is the pastor, teacher, school board, better facilities, or improved curriculum then our schools would be fixed. Adventist schools exist for academic excellence. The problem is that there will always be other schools who can do better.

I would suggest that the real challenge is that the reason our schools are in decline is that we have forgotten our Adventist past. It all boils down to identity. Why are we Seventh-day Adventists? If we truly understand that question then I think we can “fix” the problem of Adventist education. We have not had a single presentation that really explores our Adventist identity, or, for that matter, tries to identify our Adventist past, and specifically how we have gotten to where we are at today.

Our earliest pioneers were actually opposed to Adventist education. After all, if we believe that Jesus is coming again soon, then why take the time to education youth? There are public schools if you have to do that.

But, with time, Ellen White in 1872 cast a broad vision for what Adventist education could be: a comprehensive and holistic approach to learning that encompass the entire person. You see, it is all about a worldview. It is preparing people to think for themselves. And for that matter, it is not only introducing that young person to a relationship with Jesus Christ, but preparing them to be ready to meet Him and tell others about His soon return.

If that is indeed the case then Adventist education is very radical. It is not about the academics–as important as they are. It isn’t just about having a Bible class or chapel. It is an entire way of thinking and approach to life that is all encompassing.
The challenge is that some of the earliest failures in Adventist history related to Adventist education came about when people tried to take the latest trends in education and applied them to Adventism. That is why some of our earliest Adventist educators really struggled. They took the classical curriculum and just added a Bible course.
Later, when Ellen White went to Australia and then also was instrumental in relocating Battle Creek College to the newly purchased property in Berrien Springs, Michigan, to become Emmanuel Missionary College, both of these schools were radical because they were more than just a school with curriculum with added Bible courses. They were an all-encompassing curriculum that prepared both the heart and mind to be prepared to know Jesus Christ. Then young people would be effectively trained to go out and tell others of the Adventist apocalyptic vision (i.e. the second coming).

So, as we near the conclusion of this MAUC Education Summit, I’m grateful for all of the diagnostic information, but at the end of the day, what really counts is that we figure out what is the real “mission” and purpose of Adventist education. When we can agree on that then I think we can begin to figure out why Adventist education as a whole has been and continues to be on a gradual slope of decline.