THE INFORMATION LITERACY COMPETENCIES OF EVANGELICAL PASTORS:

A STUDY OF SERMON PREPARATION

by

Gerald E. Lincoln

BA, Appalachian Bible College, 1980

MA, University of Wisconsin—Madison, 1983

MDiv, Grace Theological Seminary, 1988

ThM, Grace Theological Seminary, 1994

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of

School of Information Sciences in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

University of Pittsburgh

2013
5 i
 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION SCIENCES

This dissertation was presented

by

Gerald E. Lincoln

It was defended on

December 9, 2013

and approved by

Sheila Corrall, Professor, School of Information Sciences

James D. Currier, Assistant Professor, School of Information Sciences

Donald Wicks, Associate Professor, Kent State University

Dissertation Advisor: Ellen Gay Detlefsen, Associate Professor, School of Information

Sciences

ii
Copyright © by Gerald E. Lincoln

2013

iii
 THE INFORMATION LITERACY COMPETENCIES OF EVANGELICAL
PASTORS:
A STUDY OF SERMON PREPARATION
Gerald E Lincoln, PhD

University of Pittsburgh, 2013

Information literacy is a skill set that has become important in higher education.
Accrediting agencies expect academic institutions to develop skills in students so that they may
become lifelong learners after graduation. Theological institutions have lagged behind the rest of
higher education in implementing this instruction. Theological institutions have done limited
assessments of the skills students possess at matriculation and during their studies. This study
sought to assess the information literacy skills of graduates of theological institutions while they
were serving in ministry. An understanding of their skills could then be used to improve
instruction in theological education.
The research was conducted as a qualitative research project using grounded theory.
Interviews were conducted using open ended questions with eight Evangelical pastors who had
graduated from sixteen different theological institutions. The questions were directed at the
pastors in their role of preparing sermons, which would require a greater use of information
literacy skills than other pastoral duties. The questions covered the first three Association of
College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Information Literacy Standards.
The results were coded with the ATLAS.ti® program. The outcomes criteria under the
ACRL Standards were used to assess the information literacy skills of the pastors. The research
demonstrated that an information literacy standard is needed for theological education. The
ACRL Standards fail to provide a model that matches the information seeking behavior of
pastors in the workplace. A new standard should include the three main pastoral roles of
preaching, administration, and caregiving and the research skills needed by the student in
theological higher education.
My research provides a theory and model of the information seeking behavior of
Evangelical pastors in the pastoral role. The perceived spiritual need of the congregation became
the common variable which controlled pastoral information seeking behavior. Prayer and Bible
and Bible study were considered primary sources while the perceived spiritual need being
addresses in the sermon became a filter for secondary sources.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................ V

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................... XIII

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................. XIV

PREFACE ...................................................................................................................................XV

GLOSSARY.............................................................................................................................. XVI

1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1

1.1 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................. 1

1.2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ..................................................................... 3

1.2.1 ACRL Competency Standards as a Model of Information Behavior ......... 5

1.3 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ................................................................. 6

1.4 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY .............................................................................. 8

1.4.1 Research questions .......................................................................................... 9

1.4.1.1 Research question ................................................................................. 9

1.4.1.2 Interview Questions .............................................................................. 9

1.5 LIMITATIONS, ASSUMPTIONS, AND DESIGN CONTROLS ................ 12

1.6 DEFINTITION OF KEY TERMS ................................................................... 13

1.6.1 Definition of Information Literacy .............................................................. 13

1.6.2 Sermon ............................................................................................................ 14

v
 1.6.3 Evangelical Pastor ......................................................................................... 15

2.0 THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION .............................................................................. 17

2.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 17

2.2 BRIEF HISTORY OF THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION .............................. 19

2.2.1 Theological seminaries .................................................................................. 20

2.2.2 History of the Bible Institute Movement ..................................................... 22

2.2.1 History of the Bible College Movement ....................................................... 23

2.2.2 Accreditation .................................................................................................. 24

2.2.2.1 Association of Theological Schools .................................................... 24

2.2.2.2 Association for Biblical Higher Education ....................................... 25

2.2.2.3 Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools ........ 26

2.2.3 Curriculum ..................................................................................................... 26

2.2.3.1 Seminary--MDiv Curriculum of SEPTLA Members ...................... 26

2.2.3.2 Bible College ........................................................................................ 29

2.2.3.3 Homiletics ............................................................................................ 30

2.3 THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION AND INFORMATION LITERACY ....... 31

3.0 LITERATURE REVIEW.......................................................................................... 33

3.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 33

3.1.1 Models of Information Seeking .................................................................... 34

3.1.1.1 ACRL Information Literacy Competency Standards ..................... 34

3.1.1.2 Big6™ Model ....................................................................................... 35

3.1.1.3 Kuhlthau’s Information Search Process (ISP) ................................. 36

3.1.1.4 Bruce’s Seven Face Model .................................................................. 37

3.1.1.5 Dervin’s Sense-Making Model ........................................................... 38

vi
 3.1.1.6 Ellis’s Model of Information Seeking-Behavior ............................... 39

3.1.1.7 Bruce’s Six Frames Model ................................................................. 40

3.1.1.8 Summary of Information Seeking Behavior Models ....................... 41

3.1.2 Library Instruction Stages ............................................................................ 42

3.1.2.1 Bibliography Stage .............................................................................. 43

3.1.2.2 Bibliographic Instruction Stage ......................................................... 43

3.1.2.3 Information Literacy Stage ................................................................ 44

3.1.2.4 Library Instruction Summary ........................................................... 45

3.2 INFORMATION LITERACY IN THEOLOGICAL STUDIES .................. 45

3.2.1 Theological Information Literacy Literature ............................................. 45

3.2.1.1 Journals ................................................................................................ 45

3.2.1.2 Classification of Journal Articles....................................................... 48

3.2.1.3 Books .................................................................................................... 48

3.2.2 Summary of Theological Information Literature....................................... 49

3.3 INFORMATION SEEKING BEHAVIORS ................................................... 50

3.3.1 Information behaviors of faculty.................................................................. 50

3.3.1.1 Summary of faculty information seeking behaviors ........................ 53

3.3.2 Information behaviors of students ............................................................... 53

3.3.2.1 Summary of information behaviors of theological students ........... 56

3.3.3 Information behaviors of clergy ................................................................... 56

3.3.3.1 Studies on reading habits of clergy .................................................... 57

3.3.3.2 Studies on information behaviors of clergy ...................................... 60

3.3.4 Clergy and the Sermon.................................................................................. 66

3.3.4.1 Sermon preparation ............................................................................ 66

vii
 3.3.4.2 Preparation Failure............................................................................. 70

3.4 SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ 71

4.0 METHODOLOGY..................................................................................................... 76

4.1 QUALITATIVE RESEARCH .......................................................................... 76

4.2 THE LIMITATIONS OF THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............... 78

4.3 SELECTION OF SUBJECTS .......................................................................... 79

4.3.1 Population....................................................................................................... 79

4.3.2 Contact ............................................................................................................ 80

4.3.2.1 Response ............................................................................................... 81

4.3.3 Participants .................................................................................................... 81

4.3.3.1 Qualifications....................................................................................... 81

4.3.3.2 Selection ............................................................................................... 83

4.4 DATA COLLECTION PROCESS .................................................................. 88

4.4.1 Interview Process ........................................................................................... 88

4.4.2 Research Question ......................................................................................... 90

4.4.3 Interview Questions ....................................................................................... 90

4.4.3.1 Demographics ...................................................................................... 90

4.4.3.2 Training................................................................................................ 90

4.4.3.3 Use of Information in Sermon Preparation ...................................... 92

4.4.3.4 Critical thinking and evaluation ........................................................ 94

4.4.3.5 Knowledge base ................................................................................... 95

4.4.3.6 Extent of information.......................................................................... 95

4.4.3.7 Access Information Effectively and Efficiently ................................ 96

4.4.3.8 Self-Evaluation .................................................................................... 96

viii
 4.4.3.9 Personal resources............................................................................... 97

4.4.3.10 Questions Linking Previous Research............................................. 98

4.5 DATA ANALYSIS ............................................................................................. 99

4.5.1 Coding ............................................................................................................. 99

4.5.2 Assessment Tool ........................................................................................... 100

4.5.3 Descriptive Summaries................................................................................ 102

4.6 CONFIDENTIALITY ..................................................................................... 102

4.7 CREDIBILITY ................................................................................................ 103

4.8 PILOT STUDY ................................................................................................ 103

5.0 DATA ANALYSIS ................................................................................................... 105

5.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 105

5.1.1 Information Literacy Instruction ............................................................... 106

5.2 ANALYSIS OF INFORMATION LITERACY COMPETENCIES .......... 107

5.2.1 Standard One--Determines Extent of the Information Need .................. 108

5.2.1.1 Performance Indicator 1: ................................................................. 108

5.2.1.2 Performance Indicator 2: ................................................................. 114

5.2.1.3 Performance Indicator 3: ................................................................. 120

5.2.1.4 Performance Indicator 4: ................................................................. 125

5.2.2 Standard Two--Accesses Information ....................................................... 126

5.2.2.1 Performance Indicator 1: ................................................................. 126

5.2.2.2 Performance Indicator 2: ................................................................. 129

5.2.2.3 Performance Indicator 3: ................................................................. 130

5.2.2.4 Performance Indicator 4: ................................................................. 135

5.2.2.5 Performance Indicator 5: ................................................................. 136

ix
 5.2.3 Standard Three--Evaluates Information ................................................... 136

5.2.3.1 Performance Indicator 1: ................................................................. 136

5.2.3.2 Performance Indicator 2: ................................................................. 138

5.2.3.3 Performance Indicator 3: ................................................................. 141

5.2.3.4 Performance Indicator 4: ................................................................. 142

5.2.3.5 Performance Indicator 5: ................................................................. 143

5.2.3.6 Performance Indicator 6: ................................................................. 148

5.2.3.7 Performance Indicator 7: ................................................................. 149

5.2.4 Standard Four--Uses Information ............................................................. 150

5.2.5 Standard Five--Legal and Ethical Issues of Information......................... 150

5.2.5.1 Performance Indicator 2 .................................................................. 150

6.0 CONCLUSION......................................................................................................... 153

6.1 PURPOSE ......................................................................................................... 153

6.1.1 Research Sample .......................................................................................... 153

6.1.2 Research Methodology in Hindsight .......................................................... 154

6.2 SIGNIFICANCE FOR THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION ........................... 155

6.2.1 ACRL Standards ......................................................................................... 155

6.2.1.1 Adaptation of ACRL Standards ...................................................... 156

6.2.2 Information Literacy Instruction ............................................................... 157

6.3 SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS: ACRL STANDARDS ONE TO THREE...... 158

6.3.1 Standard One--Determines Extent of the Information Need .................. 158

6.3.1.1 Evangelical Pastor Model: Information Need--Step One.............. 160

6.3.1.2 Evangelical Pastor Model: Information Need--Step Two ............. 162

6.3.2 Standard Two--Accesses Information ....................................................... 162

x
 6.3.2.1 Evangelical Pastor Model: Accesses Information .......................... 165

6.3.2.2 Personal Libraries ............................................................................. 167

6.3.2.3 Personal Resources ........................................................................... 168

6.3.2.4 Theological Library Resources and Concurrent Ministry ............ 168

6.3.3 Standard Three--Evaluates Information ................................................... 169

6.3.3.1 Differentiation of Commentaries ..................................................... 169

6.3.3.2 Critical Thinking and Evaluation.................................................... 169

6.3.3.3 Study of the Biblical Languages ...................................................... 170

6.3.3.4 Exegesis and Sermon Preparation ................................................... 170

6.3.3.5 Model of Information Use Behavior ................................................ 172

6.3.3.6 Theory of Pastoral Information Seeking Behavior ........................ 173

6.4 AREAS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH......................................................... 174

6.4.1 Pastoral Use of Academic Library Resources ........................................... 174

6.4.2 Biblical Language Study ............................................................................. 175

6.4.2.1 Value of Language Study ................................................................. 175

6.4.2.2 Pastoral Use of Commentaries and Language Study .................... 175

6.4.2.3 Critical Thinking and Language Study .......................................... 176

6.4.3 Computer Tools and Sermon Preparation ................................................ 176

6.4.4 Exegesis and “Big Idea” Homiletics ........................................................... 177

6.4.5 Information Seeking Model of Evangelical Pastors and Information

Literacy ..................................................................................................................... 177

6.5 FINAL CONCLUSIONS................................................................................. 178

BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................................... 180

APPENDIX A PASTOR AMOS TRANSCRIPT ................................................................... 199

xi
APPENDICES B—H PASTORAL INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPTS ................................... 224

APPENDIX I SCREENING QUESTIONS ............................................................................ 225

APPENDIX J RESEARCH QUESTIONS ............................................................................. 227

APPENDIX K ATLAS® TITLE LIST ................................................................................... 230

APPENDIX L ATLAS® FOR ALUMNI SCHOOLS ............................................................ 237

APPENDIX M TEAGUE LETTER TO OTHER PRESIDENTS........................................ 243

APPENDIX N TEAGUE E-MAIL TO LBC ALUMNI......................................................... 245

APPENDIX O TEAGUE E-MAIL TO LBC LIST OF PASTORS ...................................... 247

APPENDIX P EXPLANATION OF RESEARCH PROJECT ............................................ 249

APPENDIX Q E-MAIL TO PASTORS.................................................................................. 251

APPENDIX R NOTIFICATION OF SUBJECTS RIGHTS ................................................ 252

APPENDIX S ADAPTED ACRL STANDARDS, PERFORMANCE INDICATORS, AND

OUTCOMES ............................................................................................................................. 254

APPENDIX T FLOWCHART SYMBOLS ............................................................................ 260

xii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: SEPTLA MDiv Requirements ........................................................................................ 28

Table 2: Table of Publications ...................................................................................................... 47

Table 3: Classification of Articles ................................................................................................ 48

Table 4: Hours for Sermon Preparation ........................................................................................ 69

Table 5: Academic Training of Pastors ........................................................................................ 85

Table 6: Demographics of Pastors Interviewed ............................................................................ 88

Table 7: Commonalities and Differences ................................................................................... 106

Table 8: Adapted ACRL Standards ............................................................................................ 108

Table 9: Sermon Topic Selection ................................................................................................ 109

Table 10: Recognition of Commentaries .................................................................................... 119

Table 11: Personal Libraries and Ministry Experience............................................................... 134

xiii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Sermon Topic Planning ............................................................................................... 161

Figure 2: Individual Sermon Topic ............................................................................................. 162

Figure 3: Information Sources Overview ................................................................................... 165

Figure 4: Information Sources .................................................................................................... 166

Figure 5: Personal Libraries ........................................................................................................ 167

Figure 6: Information Evaluation Model .................................................................................... 172

xiv
 PREFACE

I would like to thank my adviser, Dr. Ellen Detlefsen, for putting up with me for these
many years and to the doctoral committee for their critical evaluation.
Lancaster Bible College deserves recognition for providing a professional study grant
which has paid for the doctoral program. Dr. Elaine Huber, Graduate Writing Assistant at
Lancaster Bible College, has proofread the dissertation and provided numerous suggestions for
improvement.
My wife, Kathy, deserves recognition for encouraging me to get this thing done and for
being there. She finally has sympathy after completing her own thesis.
I would like to thank our children, Bruce, Rebekah, and Sarah, who have never known
their father not being a student or librarian. They all have a love of books. Bruce needs to be
recognized, whose greatest ambition in life, if it were not to be able to read, would be to tie his
shoe laces. No one has worked harder at the latter.
I would also like to honor my late parents, Albert and Violet, for instilling a love of
learning. My dad had to drop out of high school months before graduation in 1929. My
grandfather insisted that no woman needed more than eighth grade education. My mother’s
greatest academic achievement was earning a continuing education certificate from the
Evangelical Training Association while in her 40s.
My mother may have inadvertently started me down the library path. At college preview,

to my embarrassment, she told the student dean that I would love working in the library. My

college work study assignment that fall was the library.

xv
 GLOSSARY

ACCREDITATION – A system whereby academic institutions or programs are recognized as

competent. Credits earned at an accredited institution may be transferred to another institution.

ACCREDITING ASSOCIATION OF BIBLE COLLEGES – The former name of the accrediting

body for Bible colleges in the United States and Canada. The name was changed to Association
for Biblical Higher Education in 2004. Also known as AABC.

ARMINIAN THEOLOGY -- A Post-Reformation Protestant theology that disagreed with

Calvinism or Reformed Theology in areas of the doctrine of salvation. The major differences are
in the nature of human free will to accept or resist the offer of salvation and the nature of God’s
election for salvation.

ARMINIANISM – See ARMINIAN THEOLOGY.

ASSOCIATION FOR BIBLICAL HIGHER EDUCATION – An accrediting organization for

theological institutions. This name was adopted when the organization received permission to
accredit graduate and doctoral level institutions and programs in 2004. Also known as ABHE.

ASSOCIATION OF THEOLOGICAL SCHOOLS – An accrediting organization for theological

seminaries. Also known as ATS.

BACHELOR OF DIVINITY – The term used until the twentieth century for the three year
seminary degree after having completed an undergraduate bachelor’s degree. The degree is
abbreviated BD.

BARNA GROUP -- A for-profit polling organization that researches religious opinion. It has
been recognized within Evangelicalism because of its understanding of the unique views of
Evangelicals.

BIBLE COLLEGE – A theological institution which offers an undergraduate degree focused on

ministry. Recently, Bible colleges have expanded to offer graduate and doctoral degrees in
ministry related fields.

xvi
BIBLE INSTITUTE – Undergraduate theological institutions formed by Evangelicals and
Fundamentalists beginning in the late nineteenth century. The schools offered certificates or
diplomas and often refused the concept of accreditation. A few Bible institutes have retained the
name “Institute” but offer accredited degrees at several levels. Other Bible institutes became
Bible colleges or Christian liberal arts colleges as they developed bachelor’s degrees and
received accreditation.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC INSTRUCTION – A term used to describe instruction in the use of library

resources. Information literacy is a more comprehensive term now in common use.

BIBLIOLOGY -- The theological heading for doctrines related to the Bible. Some important
topics concern how the Bible was written, inspiration, canonicity, and interpretation.

CALVINISM -- Calvinism and Reformed theology are terms often used interchangeably to
describe a Post-Reformation Protestant theology originally taught by John Calvin and his
followers. Calvinism is often used in antithesis to Arminian theology to represent a difference in
the doctrine of salvation. Calvinism posits that God is sovereign in the offer of salvation to the
elect and the offer cannot be resisted by human free will. It holds that God’s election was not
conditional on a foreknown response.

CHRISTOLOGY -- The theological heading for doctrines related to the person and work of
Jesus Christ. Some important sections concern Christ’s deity, incarnation, death, resurrection,
and second coming.

CLERGY – The formal collective term for those in leadership roles within the church. The
terms “clergy,” “pastor,” “minister,” and “preacher” are often used synonymously. Many
Evangelical churches do not identify church leaders as clergy because they reject a distinction
between clergy and laity. Where an author is referenced and uses one of these terms, an attempt
was made to use the term of the author. All of these terms could be used to identify those who
are serving in church ministry, especially in the preparation and delivery of sermons

EVANGELICAL PASTOR -- A pastor who holds a theological persuasion of Evangelicalism.

EVANGELICALISM -- A descriptive term for the church movement which holds a high view of
the authority of Scripture and the historic doctrinal beliefs of the Christian church as described in
the early creeds.

EXEGESIS – The process of explaining or interpreting Scripture. Aspects of information

literacy are traditionally taught in exegesis classes.

FLOWCHART SYMBOLS – Symbols developed for graphically designing the steps in

computer programs. Flowchart symbols are used to illustrate the steps in information seeking
behavior. See Appendix T for a chart and definition of symbols used.

FUNDAMENTALISM – A subset of Evangelicalism that practice separation from those whom it

considers have departed from historic doctrinal beliefs.

xvii
FUNDAMENTALIST – An Evangelical who separates from other Evangelicals who have
fellowship or work cooperatively with those who are considered to have departed from historic
doctrinal beliefs.

HAMARTIOLOGY -- The theological term used for the doctrine of sin. Major topics under this
heading are original sin, depravity and the extent of sin, and the consequence of sin.

HERMENEUTICS – “The art or science of interpretation, esp. of Scripture. Commonly

distinguished from exegesis or practical exposition” (Oxford English Dictionary, 2011a).
Aspects of information literacy are traditionally taught in hermeneutics classes. Some courses
labeled hermeneutics focus rather on Bible study methods.

HOMILETICS -- “The art of preaching; sacred rhetoric” (Oxford English Dictionary, 2011b).
Courses in preaching in theological institutions are usually called homiletics.

INFORMATION LITERACY – A skill in the use of information resources. The term is also
used for the pedagogical process by which students are taught how to find and use information in
order to become lifelong learners. Competencies in information literacy have become a
requirement of accrediting organizations. A more complete definition is provided in Chapter I.

LECTIONARY – A list of passages of the Bible to read for Sunday worship services
("Lectionary," 2011). Lectionaries have been used since the early centuries of the church. The
lectionary provides a schedule to read related passages in the Old Testament, the first three
Gospels of the New Testament, and the remainder of the New Testament in a three year cycle.
Evangelical churches have not adopted the custom of using the lectionary.

MASTER OF DIVINITY – The professional degree for ministry or divinity. The degree
normally requires three years of graduate study after completing an undergraduate bachelor’s
degree and is offered at seminaries. The nomenclature was changed from Bachelor of Divinity
in the twentieth century. The degree is abbreviated as MDiv.

MASTER OF THEOLOGY – A one-year graduate degree after completing the MDiv or in some
seminaries a four-year graduate program. It is abbreviated ThM.

MINISTER – An ordained church leader or member of the clergy which in some denominations
could denote a lower rank in a hierarchy. Certain Evangelical churches use this term for church
leaders instead of pastor to de-emphasize clergy-laity differences. See also, CLERGY.

PASTOR – The common term designating leaders in Evangelical churches. A pastor usually
performs the preaching role in church services. See also, CLERGY

PENTECOSTAL – A subset of Evangelical churches which believe the supernatural gifts such
as speaking in tongues, miracles, and healing are operative in the present church.

PEW RESEARCH CENTER – a nonpartisan organization that performs social sciences polling
and research.

xviii
PREACHER -- A person who delivers a sermon. Within Evangelical churches a preacher may
or may not be ordained or recognized as a church leader. See also, CLERGY.

REFORMED THEOLOGY – See CALVINISM.

SEMINARY – An academic institution for training future church leaders, usually at the graduate
level.

SERMON – “A discourse, usually delivered from a pulpit and based upon a text of Scripture, for
the purpose of giving religious instruction or exhortation” (Oxford English Dictionary, 2011c).

SOTERIOLOGY -- The theological heading for the doctrine of salvation. Major topics under
this heading are election, repentance, faith, justification, adoption, and sanctification.

THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY – See SEMINARY.

xix
 1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

The intent of this study is to analyze the information seeking behavior of pastors and how they

shape that information to accomplish a goal within a specific professional activity.1 It examined

the link between the theological education of the pastor and practice. During the normal course

of a week a pastor fulfills several ministry roles which broadly could be categorized as

administration, caregiving, and preaching (Wicks, 1997). The work of administering the day-to-

day activities of the church and its staff is often delegated to the pastor. The caregiving role is

performed by counseling on a myriad of levels and visiting of the sick. The role that is most

visible to the public is the preaching of a sermon. The creation and delivery of the sermon

utilizes multiple skills that should be expected within the theological training of the pastor. It

requires the use of all the skills known within the academic world as information literacy.

Information literacy is not a new subject but rather it is an attempt to focus on a set of

skills requisite for lifelong learning in any subject field. Although these skills are taught to

varying degrees in most academic institutions the post-graduation effectiveness of training has

not been extensively researched. Information literacy derives from the library field although

only a small portion of it is library related. Because information literacy is promoted by

1
Specifically, this study was conducted among Evangelical pastors.
1
librarians and not the faculty, there has been resistance to including it within the theological

curriculum (Badke, 2005, 2009; McGuinness, 2006; Travis, 2008).

The including information literacy within the academic curriculum in higher education

shows a scattered history of success. Information literacy within theological education may even

show less success. A driving impetus for including information literacy comes from librarians

and accreditation agencies which have added it to their requirements. Accreditors have changed

from the historical focus on input and output measures to a focus on outcomes assessment which

attempts to measure what students learn and what they are able to do with their learning.

Higher education is struggling to implement procedures to measure student learning

outcomes. The lifelong learning goal of information literacy extends beyond meeting the

internal requirements to complete a degree or a program. The expectation is for the graduates to

begin a career and continue to learn and grow for the remainder of their working life.

Theological institutions are required to perform outcomes assessment of student learning

by their accreditation organizations. The Association of Theological Schools (ATS) has a long

history of expecting assessment, but member institutions have resisted or failed to create a

culture of assessment (Council for Higher Education Accreditation, 2012; VerBerkmoes, 2006).

The quantity and quality of the literature on assessment of theological institutions is noticeably

smaller in comparison to higher education in general.

Theological graduates serving in preaching ministries present a unique source of data to

assess the utilization of information literacy skills taught within their educational programs. The

creation and delivery of a sermon is one example of the application of the skills in ministry. A

sermon requires the exercise of skills included within all major categories of the definition of

information literacy. The assessment of the preparation and delivery of sermons should reveal

the practice and malpractice of these skills by preachers.

2
 1.2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Information use studies have focused primarily on the transmission of information. A study of

the information literacy skills of students or alumni would simply analyze the process that was

taught and current practice. It would not ask the questions of why an individual used a certain

process. Previous quantitative studies of the information behaviors of pastors had not answered

why certain methods or practices had been used. Some problems lend themselves to numerical

study whereas other problems require knowledge of affect, meaning, and practice than can be

discovered through qualitative methodologies (Patton, 2002). Open-ended questions provide

data from the viewpoint of the subjects instead of the predetermined categories of a questionnaire

(2002, pp. 20-21).

A qualitative research methodology could answer the why questions and also disclose

unexpected data as the subjects were studied. Denzin and Lincoln described the work as

“qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or

interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them” (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005,

p. 3). Qualitative research is not connected with one theory or methodology. Methodologies or

theories developed in one discipline may be borrowed for another discipline (2005, pp. 6-7).

The grounded theory approach to qualitative research was adopted for this dissertation.

The inductive analysis of the data produces a theory based upon the viewpoint of the subjects.

The subjects are describing their process within the workplace specifically with information in

the preparation of a sermon. A quantitative study would have used keywords from their formal

education. This could have biased the results by providing responses in conformity with

expectations instead of actual practices. Other researchers view the interview context as an

3
artificial situation and cannot be free from misrepresentation (J. Miller & Glassner, 2004, p.

125).

Insights from the Sense-Making approach have influenced creation of the interview

questions which rejects closed questions or forcing the interviewee to locate themselves on the

interviewers map (Brenda Dervin, 2010, p. 996). Patton (2002, pp. 363-365) cautions the

qualitative researcher when asking a “Why?” question. The question “Why?” requires

presuppositions in the areas of “cause-effect relationships, an ordered world, and rationality”

(2002, p. 363). It is possible to word questions for the researcher to draw a causal inference.

The screening questionnaire served to qualify potential subjects and yielded demographic

data for general age, experience, education, and Evangelical belief. The data collection in the

pilot study was analyzed as it was collected to adjust interview questions for the research project.

The follow-up questions during the interviews were used to clarify answers in response to the

ongoing analysis of the data from previous interviews (G. Miller, Dingwall, & Murphy, 2004, p.

330).

The preferred location of interviews in a qualitative research is the natural field of the

subject (Patton, 2002, p. 48). The design called that after subjects were randomly chosen an e-

mail request would be made for an interview at their offices. Presumably their offices would be

the site of their personal libraries and it would be possible to scan for quantity and organization.

The objective of qualitative research is to recognize patterns and categorize them

(Saldaña, 2011). Interrelations between the patterns should be a focus (Charmaz, 2005). It is

necessary to read the data multiple times looking for unrecognized patterns (Saldaña, 2011, p.

95).

Grounded theory has been the methodology in other research studies in information

literacy. Bronstein (2007) used grounded theory to develop a model of information behavior of
4
Jewish scholars. Lloyd and others have used grounded theory while focusing research on

information literacy among practitioners in various professions (Fafeita & Lloyd, 2012; Lloyd,

2007, 2009; Lloyd & Somerville, 2006). Du Preez used both Dervin’s Sense-Making

methodology and grounded theory in analyzing the literature of information seeking behavior for

a thesis (2008). Michels (2005) claimed to use grounded theory methodology in a study of

information behavior in biblical studies but did not produce a theory but listed several areas for

further research.

1.2.1 ACRL Competency Standards as a Model of Information Behavior

The ACRL Competency Standards were disseminated as a model of information literacy skills.

Eisenberg (2010) placed it alongside of his Big6™ model and Kuhlthau for comparison

purposes. The Middle States Commission on Higher Education (2003) based a research project

and resulting publication on the competency standards. The expectation was that it would

provide a model to assess information literacy.

Information literacy forms the basis for lifelong learning. It is common to all disciplines,
to all learning environments, and to all levels of education. It enables learners to master
content and extend their investigations, become more self-directed, and assume greater
control over their own learning. An information literate individual is able to:
 Determine the extent of information needed
 Access the needed information effectively and efficiently
 Evaluate information and its sources critically
 Incorporate selected information into one’s knowledge base
 Use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose
 Understand the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of
information, and access and use information ethically and legally (American
Library Association, 2006, pp. 2-3)

The definition was expanded with competencies that would be evident in an information

literate individual. These competencies were used in this study as areas of assessment of the

information literacy skills of pastors.

5
 1.3 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Information literacy was first added as a standard in the accrediting criteria for higher education

in 1994 by Middle States and more recently by the Association of Theological Schools (ATS) for

seminaries (Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools. Commission on Higher

Education., 1994; The Commission on Accrediting of the Association of Theological Schools,

2010). ATS has done research over more than thirty years in the area of what clergy and laity

expect in a pastor (Schuller, Brekke, Strommen, & Association of Theological Schools in the

United States and Canada., 1975). They developed assessment programs for beginning seminary

students and another for graduates. The purpose of the assessment was to help determine

whether those interested in ministry possessed the proper characteristics to succeed and not on

skill development, such as information literacy (Lonsway, 2003, 2006, 2007).

Information literacy instruction is recognized by accreditors as a joint responsibility of

faculty and librarians. Academic librarians have had difficulty in gaining access to the

classrooms to teach information literacy. Theological librarians have a similar or even more

difficult path to providing instruction. Seminary faculty may not recognize the link between

information literacy requirements imposed upon them and the courses they have long taught. A

few institutions have created separate classes for information literacy. Librarians are often

dependent upon an invitation or permission to a class where they have one chance to teach the

subject. The suggestion within the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) and

ATS standards is to have information literacy embedded within the curriculum so that students

are progressively learning and developing skills (Association of College and Research Libraries,

2000, p. 5; The Commission on Accrediting of the Association of Theological Schools, 2010, p.

Section 5.2.1). When the particular skills in information literacy are mapped against the typical

6
curriculum of a seminary, it is possible to see traditional courses that have required the teaching

and application of the concept for decades if not centuries before the terms bibliographic

instruction or information literacy were coined.

Theological institutions need to document the instruction and outcomes for student

learning in information literacy. Because of their interactions with students doing research,

theological librarians have been engaged in convincing administrators and faculty of the need to

teach information literacy. They have not been engaged as well in providing assessment of the

information literacy instruction (Falla, 2007; Limpitlaw, 2007). The literature on assessment of

information literacy within the theological realm is sparse. A few librarians have published

articles on assessment of local information literacy projects which range from thoughts about

assessment to attempts to perform it (Falla, 2007; Gragg, 2005; Lincoln, 2001; Lipton, 2005;

Malcheski, 2004). The studies have lacked rigor that would provide reliability and validity to the

results.

Theological librarians have struggled with administrators and faculty to implement

course integrated information literacy programs or separate courses. 2 Librarians recognize the

need when they work with students who have serious lacunae in research skills. They recognize

that requirements for information literacy are usually placed in the section of requirements for

the library in accreditors’ statements on standards. Librarians take their responsibility seriously

but the faculty do not seem to share this burden as seen by hundreds of publications on faculty-

librarian collaboration in the library literature.

A weakness that librarians and faculty may share is a myopic view that information

literacy is only about library-based research. Some librarians compound the issue by continuing

2
Information literacy in the theological curriculum is expanded in Chapter 2.
7
to use the term bibliographic instruction (BI) when the relationship is a synecdoche (part used for

the whole) rather than synonymous.

Librarians may operate under an unstated assumption that questions the competency of

faculty and students to find and use library resources. Yet faculty perform research and are

published in peer reviewed publications. Students complete research papers and continue to

graduate. Graduates find employment and report success in ministry. Graduates of Bible

colleges and seminaries go on to pastor churches. Pastors research, prepare, and deliver sermons

weekly and manage to please the churches. The gulf between the perceptions of theological

librarians and the constituencies of the academic institutions and churches is a problem needing

investigation.

The assessment of the preparation and delivery of sermons by pastors should be a

productive area to examine strengths and weaknesses in theological training. It reflects every

component of the recognized steps in information literacy. A goal of information literacy is the

development of lifelong learning. The regular sermon preparation of a pastor requires

continuous learning.

1.4 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study is to assess the information literacy skills of pastoral graduates from

Bible colleges and seminaries who are engaged in preaching ministries. Theological librarians

believe that theological students lack these skills and may graduate without being properly

prepared in this area for ministry (Falciani-White, 2008; Gaba, 2008, 2009). Many faculty do

not recognize the same need and resist adding information literacy instruction in an already

crowded curriculum (Limpitlaw, 2007; Wenderoth, 2008, p. 290). A study of those in ministry

8
would indicate whether pastors are prepared and whether changes are necessary in the

theological curriculum.

A historical tension in American theological education has been the balance between the

academic and practical studies. Some seminaries have deemed traditional subjects such as

biblical languages as unnecessary for ministry. Theological librarians may succumb to the same

problem by teaching information literacy components important for success as a student but not

necessarily for ministry.3

1.4.1 Research questions

1.4.1.1 Research question What are the information literacy skills of pastoral graduates from

Evangelical Bible colleges and seminaries demonstrated by their preparation of a sermon?

1.4.1.2 Interview Questions The design and rationale for each question is discussed in the

chapter on methodology. The questions are categorized in Appendix J.

1. How much preaching experience do you have?

2. Could you please tell me about your academic preparation for becoming a pastor?

3. What would you consider your most significant preparation, outside of formal

education, for becoming a pastor?

4. The following questions relate to the study of the biblical languages.

a. How many years of the biblical languages did you take in your formal education?

b. What level of proficiency have you maintained in the biblical languages?

c. What is your attitude towards using the biblical languages in exegesis?

d. How do the results of study in the biblical languages affect your sermon?

3
An example of a syllabus for a stand-alone information literacy class is that of Badke (Badke, 2011). It is designed
for students to research and write an essay or paper and not the normal information need for someone in ministry.
9
5. In your opinion, how well did your theological education prepare you for your

preaching ministry?

6. Could you describe the instruction you received on the use of information

resources?

7. What, if any, training did you receive in school in the use of resources such as

commentaries, magazines and journals, encyclopedias and dictionaries?

8. Could you describe the last sermon that you preached?

9. What are your normal steps used in the preparation of a sermon?

10. How is a sermon topic chosen?

11. What process is used to choose a biblical passage?

12. How did you develop an outline for your last sermon?

13. We have been discussing your process to develop a sermon. Now I would like to

ask you about specific resources that were used in studying the biblical passage chosen

for your last sermon.

a. What role did commentaries have in the study for your last sermon?

b. Commentaries may have emphases such as devotional, homiletical, exegetical,

expository, etc. Could you describe the types of commentaries that you used?

c. How did you use exegetical tools such as lexicons, concordances, and grammars?

d. What magazines or journal articles were used as a resource?

e. What role do resources from the Internet have in your study and sermon

preparation?

14. If you consider your normal practice, what did you do differently in preparing

your last sermon?

10
15. What is your most important consideration in preparing a sermon on a difficult

topic or biblical passage?

16. When a sermon covers a subject with competing viewpoints, even among those in

your church, you are placed in a position where difficult choices need to be made.

a. What choices do you take in presenting the competing viewpoints in your

sermon?

b. What is your process to determine the best view?

17. What affect did the preparation of your last sermon have on you?

18. How do you determine that you have enough information to prepare a sermon?

19. When you need to know something, how confident are you that you can find the

answer?

20. If you did not find the answer in your personal library resources, describe the

steps you would use to fill this need.

21. Please describe the process that you use to evaluate yourself after delivering a

sermon?

22. The following are three questions on the process you use to develop and maintain

your personal library and other information resources.

a. Could you describe the instruction you received concerning building your

personal library?

b. Could you describe your plan for developing your personal library resources?

c. How do you organize your personal library?

d. How do you find materials in your personal library?

23. Do you use any electronic libraries such as Logos®, Accordance®, BibleWorks,

etc.?
11
 24. What role does an institutional library (public or academic) have in your sermon

preparation?

a. When was the last time that you used the resources of an institutional library for

sermon preparation?

b. What other role would an institutional library have in your life?

25. What journals or magazines do you subscribe to for personal or professional

reading?

26. The American Theological Library Association provides a database of theological

titles in electronic full text. This is a copy of the periodical titles (Appendix K).

a. How would access to these titles help you in sermon preparation and ministry?

b. Some Bible colleges and seminaries provide free access to the database for

alumni. Do you know whether your school provides access? Appendix L

c. If your school does not provide free access would you be willing to pay $150 per

year for a personal subscription? Why?

27. In what other ways than you already have mentioned do you use the Internet for

sermon preparation and ministry?

1.5 LIMITATIONS, ASSUMPTIONS, AND DESIGN CONTROLS

Although ethical use of information is an area under the rubric of information literacy, this study

did not research the topic of sermon plagiarism. The study is limited to Evangelical pastors.

They are least likely to use a lectionary or have a denominational structure that would direct or

12
supply basic components of the weekly sermon4. Evangelical churches may have more than one

preaching service during the week. The sermon under study was limited to that preached at a

Sunday morning service which is likely to be the most formal and well prepared.

Specific details of the preparation and delivery of the sermon were studied by means of

interviews. The interviews were conducted in two parts: (a) structured interviews with prepared

questions asked of each subject followed by (b) unstructured questions to clarify answers. The

interviews consisted of one session one to two hours in length. No contact was made with the

subjects after the interview.

The study assumes that pastors have received theological training in Bible, hermeneutics,

biblical exegesis, theology, and homiletics and controlled for those who have not had this formal

training in the screening phase. It assumed a Bible college graduate in pastoral studies had taken

courses similar to the Master of Divinity (MDiv) seminary graduate. The screening requirement

of graduation from a theological program eliminated preachers who lacked formal training.

1.6 DEFINTITION OF KEY TERMS

1.6.1 Definition of Information Literacy

Information literacy has several definitions and standards within higher education around the

world. There is a standard promulgated by the Standing Conference of National and University

Libraries (SCONUL) for Britain, and Australia has the Australian Information Literacy Standard.

In the United States, the ACRL, a division of the American Library Association, provides this

definition:

4
This follows the recommendation of Roland (2008, p. 99) that a future study be conducted on a group of pastors
who do not use a lectionary to choose a biblical passage for the sermon.
13
 Information literacy is a set of abilities requiring individuals to “recognize when

information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively the

needed information.” (American Library Association, 2006, p. 2)

The American Association for Higher Education and the Council of Independent

Colleges endorsed the definition showing that it is not a librarian-only viewpoint.5

1.6.2 Sermon

The most popular form of sermon taught in Evangelical theological education is an expository.

Although other forms of sermons may be preached, expository preaching is the expected norm in

Evangelical churches. Haddon Robinson, a well-known professor of preaching, defines it as

follows:

Expository preaching is the communication of a biblical concept, derived from and

transmitted through a historical, grammatical, and literary study of a passage in its
context, which the Holy Spirit first applies to the personality and experience of the
preacher, then through the preacher, applies to the hearers. (H. W. Robinson, 2001, p. 21)

The sermon is a discourse normally delivered orally before a church congregation.

Sermons are sometimes published in written form or distributed in audio or visual format.

Churches are beginning to place the sermons on the Internet for a broader audience to hear.

A preacher is taught to include several components in a basic sermon. A title and an

organizational structure are expected. As an oral presentation with a specific purpose, a sermon

has features that make it different from a scholarly paper or an article. A proposition statement

helps the listener follow the organizational structure and may be repeated as part of the transition

between major points. Illustrations in the form of a story help the listener move from the abstract

to a concrete understanding of the instruction. Applications are included to exhort the listeners

5
Information literacy and its predecessor, bibliographic instruction, have been dismissed as librarian-only concerns.
Accreditors usually place information literacy in the library section of the standards.
14
to make changes in their thought or actions. A conclusion summarizes the intent of the sermon

and provides further opportunity to make an exhortation or application.

1.6.3 Evangelical Pastor

A pastor is a person in Evangelical churches who is placed in a leadership position. Major

responsibilities are preaching, administering the organization of the church, and providing

caregiving such as counseling and visitation of the sick and those in need. An Evangelical pastor

is usually responsible to a board or the congregation directly. The majority of Evangelical

churches and denominations left the mainline Protestant denominations beginning in the 1920s in

what is described as the Modernist-Fundamentalist splits. The inspiration of Scripture was a

critical element in the division. Inspiration has been further qualified by the term inerrancy

which holds that the original biblical autographs were without error.

During the 1940s some Fundamentalist leaders and denominations softened their stance

on separation and sought to be called New Evangelicals or just Evangelicals. Fundamentalists in

this work are considered a subset of Evangelicalism as there would be little difference in their

relevant theological education programs. The study of the Bible has a central place in their

curriculum and academic preparation.

Individuals could hold theological positions common to Evangelicals and not be a part of

the movement. Hackett and Lindsay showed that the research definition can result in a wide

variance of between 7% and 47% in the percentage of the US population considered as

evangelicals (2008, p. 499). The Pew Research Center placed the percentage at 26.3% (Pew

Forum on Religion & Public Life, 2007). The Barna Group found the term “born again” to be

inadequate to identify an Evangelical although it may have been sufficient decades ago. It is a

biblical term used in non-Evangelical churches more frequently now. The following is their

definition of an Evangelical Christian.

15
 “Born again Christians" are defined as people who said they have made a personal
commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in their life today and who also
indicated they believe that when they die they will go to Heaven because they had
confessed their sins and had accepted Jesus Christ as their savior. Respondents are not
asked to describe themselves as "born again." (The Barna Group, 2007)

Barna developed the definition with seven other theological views distinctive to

Evangelicals.

“Evangelicals" meet the born again criteria (described above) plus seven other
conditions. Those include saying their faith is very important in their life today; believing
they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs about Christ with non-
Christians; believing that Satan exists; believing that eternal salvation is possible only
through grace, not works; believing that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth;
asserting that the Bible is accurate in all that it teaches; and describing God as the all-
knowing, all-powerful, perfect deity who created the universe and still rules it today.
Being classified as an evangelical is not dependent upon church attendance or the
denominational affiliation of the church attended. Respondents were not asked to
describe themselves as "evangelical.” (The Barna Group, 2007)

The definition of Evangelical was used to limit the population under study to those who

claim to be “born again” and hold to the seven theological conditions.6 The Evangelical

movement consists of denominations, associations and independent churches who share a

common perspective and approach. Individuals and pastors may move from one group to

another and find few distinctives. Evangelicals have maintained a distinct approach to

theological education and the manner that sermons are prepared and delivered. It is this

distinction which makes it possible to study them as a homogeneous group.

6
The limitation is not intended to disparage groups such as the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) as
non-evangelical.
16
 2.0 THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION

2.1 INTRODUCTION

The most visible product of theological education is the sermon. Every Sunday across the

country and around the world, pastors are preaching sermons. Large churches may have multiple

morning services where the same sermon is preached. The sermon may even be preached on

Saturday evening. In conservative churches the same pastor may preach a second sermon on

Sunday evening. It is common for a pastor to teach a Sunday School class or other study during

the week. There may even be a funeral to conduct on short notice.

The writing of a good sermon is time consuming. The allotted time for sermon

preparation may be displaced because the typical pastor has a full schedule and serves multiple

functions in the church. Preaching is the most visible and regular teaching role. Donald Wicks

identified three main roles of a pastor as preaching, administration, and caregiving (1997).

Administration and caregiving could be valid roles to study pastoral information literacy skills

but are outside this researcher’s interest and training.

An informal teaching responsibility of pastors is answering questions. This may be

similar to the role of a reference librarian but may have a caregiving as well as a teaching

function. People may drop by or call with a question on a topic of spiritual significance. Some

questions may come up during a class or conversation on Sunday. An answer will be expected.

17
 One pastor, a former librarian, saw many parallels between the two professions (Tanner,

1994, pp. 35-37). Tanner found that pastors would provide information with which they were in

theological agreement in summary form and unlike a reference librarian would not provide the

sources (Tanner, 1994, pp. 247-248). Other pastors used prayer with counselees as a means of

disseminating information (Tanner, 1994, pp. 246-247). The former librarian pastor recognized

that his practice of reference services in a public library may have crossed the line into

counseling.

One caregiving role of pastors is providing counseling with people in the church. Many

churches do not allow couples to be married within the church unless they have completed

premarital counseling. Marriage and family counseling may be on the pastor’s schedule.

Visitation with shut-ins and those in the hospital are recurring tasks that need to be done.

Pastoral counseling could be a valid area to research the competencies of information literacy.

The third role of administration is receiving increasing attention within theological

education in the form of leadership programs. Wicks (1997) found that pastors tended to use

denominational resources and confirmed previous studies where informal sources were used in

administration (Phillips, 1992).

Finding and using information is common to each role of a pastor. Instruction in

theological literature has been a core objective in theological education for centuries but not at

the behest of librarians. Bibliographic instruction (BI) was library-centric focused on how to

find resources in an academic library. Information literacy as a term has been in general use

since the 1990s but may have been coined by Zurkowski (1974, p. 23). The modern components

of information literacy are described by Davies (1974, p. 39). Some authors use the terms

synonymously possibly by intention (Phillips, 2000, 2001). One major difference in theological

education is a concern for a personal library instead of only an academic library.

18
 2.2 BRIEF HISTORY OF THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION

Why is a brief history of theological education in America important to this study? The church

has a long history of not being satisfied with the product of its leadership development efforts.

The church has wrestled with the tension between the pursuit of knowledge in the academic

realm and practice in ministry. A lifelong integration of knowledge, learning, and practice is at

the core of information literacy.

Higher education in America began with the founding of Harvard College. Its classical

curriculum consisted of Latin, Greek and Hebrew being taught in the first two years and divinity

in all years. The sciences were taught beginning in the second year and mathematics in the

fourth (Rudolph & Carnegie Council on Policy Studies in Higher Education, 1977). This

curriculum was the standard for other early colleges in America (Rudolph & Carnegie Council

on Policy Studies in Higher Education, 1977).

The early American church depended upon the classical education of theology, biblical

languages, Bible, and history being taught in the academy and practice taught in the church

setting. Academic training beyond college did not exist in New England. The informal “schools

of the prophets” was the name given to the pastoral training program for “New Light” or “New

Divinity” Congregationalists in New England beginning in the mid-eighteenth century (Kling,

1997, p. 185). The training consisted of a mentoring or internship relationship with an existing

pastor. It was a means for spiritual training and careful review of prospective pastors. This

pattern of ministerial training lasted for about 75 years and had its limitations, especially when

the training was conducted by only one pastor. The pastoral intern would read dogmatic

theologies and possibly a few works of opposing theology. Kling (1997) claimed a typical pastor

19
overseeing the internship held a library collection occupying six feet of book shelf space. The

remedy for these limitations led to the creation of theological seminaries.

2.2.1 Theological seminaries

The establishment of theological seminaries for ministerial training had its parallel with other

professions. Law, medicine, and the church all had used apprenticeships after college for

training. This had been the practice of the European guilds since the medieval period (Kling,

1997). The first American medical school was founded in 1765 and the first law school and first

seminary were founded in 1784 (Kansfield, 1970; Sweet, 1937).

The church developed the seminary to combine the theological subjects with the practical

while building upon a classical college education. After the American Revolution, public

universities were founded that did not have an interest in the classical training as a background to

ministry (Sweet, 1937). When the colleges dropped the traditional classical education, the

seminaries had to change their curriculum.

When the Dutch Reformed Protestant Church took the step to appoint a professorate of

theology in 1784, they did not create a seminary in the modern sense although this advance in

pastoral training eventually became New Brunswick Theological Seminary (Kansfield, 1970).

The next three decades saw other denominations found seminaries such as Andover, Xenia,

Pittsburgh, Princeton, and Bangor (Kelly, 1924).

Andover was begun in 1808 as a three-year graduate level program with multiple

professors (Fraser, 1988). The actual curriculum was derived from experimentation and took

almost twenty years to stabilize. The third year of Andover’s program focused on church history

and was expanded after 1828 to include pastoral theology.

Andover developed the curricular pattern that other seminaries would follow. The

seminary program for Andover by 1839 and Harvard in 1845 both included courses on
20
homiletics (Kelly, 1924, pp. 65-66). A comparison of the curriculum of seven major seminaries

(Garrett, Union, Rochester, Princeton, Oberlin, Lutheran, General) in 1870 showed they differed

little except in denominational distinctives (Kelly, 1924, p. 89). They each emphasized the study

of the Bible in English and the original languages.

By 1922, the curriculum had changed dramatically for all but Princeton. The study of the

Bible in English and the original languages had decreased and more emphasis was placed on

practical theology (Kelly, 1924). Princeton had decreased the biblical requirements slightly and

added some practical theology requirements. Practical theology includes topics such as pastoral

studies, homiletics, religious education, public worship, and music. A survey of students found

practical theology important in order after English Bible but Greek and Hebrew were considered

important by only 26.1% (May, Brown, & Shuttleworth, 1934, p. 128, V1).

The period between 1870 and 1922 is significant because of the change of theology

occurring in America. The Modernist/Fundamentalist differences were emerging and had

already split some churches. The split at Princeton Theological Seminary would not occur until

1929. The Fundamentalist and later Evangelical schools have maintained a greater emphasis on

the languages and the Bible in their educational institutions.

In 1900 the median education for admittance to theological seminary was one year of

college (Rudolph & Carnegie Council on Policy Studies in Higher Education, 1977, p. 179).

Seventy-one of the 165 seminaries had an undergraduate degree as a prerequisite (Rudolph &

Carnegie Council on Policy Studies in Higher Education, 1977, p. 179). In comparison to the

other professions, none of the law or medical schools required a college degree for admittance in

1900 (Rudolph & Carnegie Council on Policy Studies in Higher Education, 1977).

The educational preparation required of students for entry to seminaries has varied by

school and period. Although Andover originally required a college degree, between 1809 and
21
1836 42 students out of 693 finished studies without one. Kelly (1924, pp. 29-30) found a

variation between needing a college degree, some college, to no requirements specified. ATS

will permit a seminary to enroll up to 10% of its students in the Master of Divinity (MDiv)

program who lack an undergraduate degree (The Commission on Accrediting of the Association

of Theological Schools, 2007).

2.2.2 History of the Bible Institute Movement

The nineteenth century saw the founding of numerous colleges. Many of them were founded as

denominational schools and limited to a small area or set of beliefs (Rudolph, 1962, p. 69). By

the 1840s colleges were providing a non-classical program of study for teachers or businessmen

(Potts, 1988) . Other programs such as chemistry and agriculture were added although the

demand was not high.

The clergy were being replaced by professional academics in the classroom and college

presidencies (Jencks & Riesman, 1968). Businessmen and other professionals were replacing

clergy on college boards. This all contributed to a secularization of the curriculum and the

colleges.

Some church leaders believed existing seminaries were becoming more liberal in their

views on Scripture, which was then having the same impact in churches. The movement known

as the “Third Great Awakening” was happening from about 1875 to 1915 (McKinney, 1997).

Evangelists such as Dwight L. Moody and Billy Sunday were preaching across America and

drawing large crowds and numerous converts. The new converts needed spiritual leaders and the

evangelists did not look to the seminaries to provide them. These concerns gave impetus for the

creation of the Bible institute movement.

The Bible institute movement sought to fill a need for trained workers for the masses in

the United States. These masses were frequently the uneducated laborers and immigrants.
22
Seminary graduates tended to gravitate toward larger churches in urban areas (H. W. Boon,

1950). The Bible institute provided an educational level appropriate for many who were willing

to enter ministry but were unprepared for seminary (H. W. Boon, 1950). Dwight L. Moody

wanted workers who filled in the gap between the masses and the seminary graduate. He did not

want workers who were “over-educated” but could preach the gospel to the unconverted who

never went to church (Brereton, 1990, p. 53).

The Bible institutes did not look at themselves as competitors to the seminaries. They

had been in operation for decades before they started offering courses that were in pastoral

theology (Brereton, 1990, p. 68). Because the institutes were founded by leaders of what

became Fundamentalism, there were few if any seminaries that would have been theologically

acceptable even without considering the different mission.

The Bible institutes were not overtly anti-intellectual (Brereton, 1990, pp. 33-35) but

there were latent undertones. A. T. Pierson was reputed to say, “Facts show that scholastic

training is not necessary for effective ministry” (Brereton, 1990, p. 63). When the Accrediting

Association of Bible Institutes and Colleges was formed in 1947, the standards required a library

of only 2,000 volumes (H. W. Boon, 1950, p. 200). A small library may not prove anti-

intellectualism but it would not provide intellectual resources and there would be little need for

bibliographic instruction. What they did fear was that years of college and seminary training

might take spiritual fervor from the student.

2.2.1 History of the Bible College Movement

The Bible colleges of today trace their origin to the curricular expansion of the Bible institutes.

Bible institutes initially offered a one year program and gradually expanded to three year

diplomas. When institutes started offering a bachelor’s degree, they often changed the name to a

23
Bible college. The one feature which distinguishes the Bible college from the earlier religious

colleges and today’s Christian liberal arts colleges is that all students are training for ministry.

2.2.2 Accreditation

There are three theological accrediting bodies in North America: the Association of Theological

Schools (ATS), the Association for Biblical Higher Education (ABHE), and Transnational

Association of Christian Colleges and Schools (TRACS). Theological institutions often have

regional accreditation and program accreditation in specialized areas.

2.2.2.1 Association of Theological Schools

ATS is the professional accrediting body for theological seminaries. A school must offer the

Master of Divinity (MDiv) degree to be considered for accreditation. This degree is normally

three years of full time study and is the first professional degree.

ATS initiated a program to provide outcomes assessment of students in the 1970s

(VerBerkmoes, 2006, p. 6). The program was announced in 1973 as the “Readiness for Ministry

Project” (Schuller, 1973; Schuller, Strommen, & Brekke, 1973) and was ready for

implementation by 1976 (Schuller, 1976). The program was designed to assess beginning and

graduating students. The assessment was designed to include the needs of different

denominations and included field observation for graduates. Both areas would be important for

this research project although few Evangelical schools were members of ATS at the time. The

expectation was that feedback from the assessments would have an effect on curriculum in the

seminaries (McCarter & Little, 1976).

Readiness for Ministry as an assessment strategy was renamed “Profiles of Ministry”

after 1988 (Lonsway, 2006). Surveys of clergy and laity were conducted in 1973-74, 1987-88

and in 2003-04 to determine what was expected of clergy. The laity valued competence in

24
preaching and leading worship at a statistically significant value more highly than clergy. The

clergy valued “Clarity of Thought and Communication” at a significantly higher value than the

laity (2006, p. 121). ATS has attempted to create instruments that would have validity and

reliability. They are comfortable with the scores but continue to improve them. They have not

conducted a study on the predictive validity of the instrument (Lonsway, 2007).

ATS places information literacy under category “5.2 Contribution to Teaching, Learning,

and Research” and this statement has been strengthened in the latest standards.

5.2.1 The library accomplishes its teaching responsibilities by meeting the

bibliographic needs of the library’s patrons; offering appropriate reference services;
providing assistance and training in using information resources and communication
technologies; and teaching information literacy, including research practices of
effectively and ethically accessing, evaluating, and using information. The library should
collaborate with faculty to develop reflective research practices throughout the
curriculum and help to serve the information needs of faculty, students, and researchers.
5.2.2 The library promotes theological learning by providing instructional
programs and resources that encourage students and graduates to develop reflective and
critical research and communication practices that prepare them to engage in lifelong
learning (The Commission on Accrediting of the Association of Theological Schools,
2010, p. 84).

Information literacy is now an explicit responsibility of librarians along with collaboration with

faculty.

2.2.2.2 Association for Biblical Higher Education

The Bible institutes were founded before the period of accreditation in higher education. James

Gray of Moody Bible Institute had attempted to form an accrediting body in 1918 but this did not

succeed (McKinney, 1997, p. 174). As accreditation became a greater concern, the Accrediting

Association of Bible Institutes and Colleges was founded in 1947 (Association for Biblical

Higher Education, 2005, p. 4). The name was shortened and slightly changed over the years. It

became the Association for Biblical Higher Education in 2004 when it was authorized to accredit

graduate programs.

25
 The original standards for the Accrediting Association required that only 75% of the

faculty be college graduates (H. W. Boon, 1950). They also required that 75% of the faculty be

Bible institute graduates or ordained ministers (Reynhout, 1947). The United States Department

of Education required that this standard be raised to a minimum educational level for faculty of a

master’s degree (McKinney, 1997).

Some Bible colleges have left the movement and become liberal arts colleges. Other

Bible colleges have added seminaries and graduate schools. Members with regional

accreditation have been voluntarily leaving ABHE. The permission to accredit schools on the

undergraduate and graduate level allowed it to expand into seminary accreditation. ABHE

makes it essential that librarians “teach information literacy” (Association for Biblical Higher

Education, 2009, p. 28).

2.2.2.3 Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools

A third theological accrediting agency was founded in 1979 and is recognized by the Department

of Education and the Commission on Higher Education is the Transnational Association of

Christian Colleges and Schools (TRACS). They have a detailed theological statement that

members must affirm. TRACS requires “bibliographic instruction” (Transnational Association

of Christian Colleges and Schools, 2009, p. 75) but does not acknowledge the concept of

information literacy.

2.2.3 Curriculum

2.2.3.1 Seminary--MDiv Curriculum of SEPTLA Members The MDiv degree historically

has been the professional degree that was expected of pastors. A pastor who graduated from a

Bible college and completes a Master of Arts at a seminary may have taken substantially the same

Bible and theology classes. Seminaries do not require a specific undergraduate major for

26
matriculation. The MDiv is used in this as the example of the typical training a pastor would

receive.

The required curriculum for MDiv programs in Protestant institutions affiliated with the

Southeastern Pennsylvania Theological Library Association (SEPTLA) is provided in Table 1.

Not all institutional members of SEPTLA have MDiv programs. It contains examples from

across the theological spectrum. The order of the schools ascends from the lowest number of

credits in biblical languages, Bible and theology. Evangelical schools such as Baptist Bible

College & Seminary, Biblical, Calvary Baptist, Philadelphia Biblical University7, and

Westminster have substantially more requirements in these areas similar to the mainline

denomination at the beginning of the 20th century. Westminster admits students from a wide

denominational perspective but the portion of graduates using a lectionary may be higher than

other Evangelical seminaries.

7
Philadelphia Biblical University recently changed its name to Cairn University.
27
 Table 1: SEPTLA MDiv Requirements

Theology
Greek

Greek or Hebrew

Practical Theology

Internship

Electives
etc.
Church History,
Unclassified,
Total
MDiv Credits
Total
Theology, Bible,
Languages,
Biblical
Bible
Hebrew
Palmer Theological
Seminary 0 0 4 26 4 10 6 14 2 66 18

Lancaster Theological
Seminary 25 9 12 33 15 94 21

Princeton Theological
Seminary 0 0 14 12 12 4 24 24 90 24

Lutheran Theological
Seminary, Philadelphia 3 3 21.5 9 21 18 15 90.5 36

Baptist Bible College &

Seminary 8 13 17 11 5 20 17 3 94 37

Moravian Theological
Seminary 25 15 23 9 19 91 38

New Brunswick
Theological Seminary 4 4 30 14 16 6 14 8 96 38

Lutheran Theological
Seminary, Gettysburg 3 19.5 21 17 19.5 10.5 90.5 41

Evangelical Theological
Seminary 0 0 9 30 15 18 0 12 6 90 42

Westminster
Theological Seminary 0 0 19 17 26 30 6 13 92 56

Calvary Theological
Seminary 14 10 20 16 20 10 6 96 60

Biblical Theological
Seminary 0 10 18 21 33 15 3 90 64
Reformed Episcopal
Theological Seminary 10
8 30 18 18 10
4 98 66
Philadelphia Biblical
University 12
9 24 15 33 93 69

(All numbers are for semester credit hours except Palmer which reported in units.)

There are differences in opinion on the languages among Evangelicals which can be seen

in the works of Kaiser (1981), Winegarden (1951), Perry (1961), and Robinson (2001). Kaiser is
28
a scholar in the Old Testament and Hebrew whereas Winegarden, Perry, and Robinson were

homileticians.8 Kaiser stated “[i]f the text of Scripture is central, then a mastery of Hebrew,

Aramaic, and Greek is a basic requirement” (1981, p. 48). Kaiser, in the same work, lambasted

institutions of theological education for the failure to teach how to move from exegesis to

preaching (p.22-23). Winegarden, writing from a homiletics perspective, claimed that in the

“early denominational seminaries, homiletical education was sacrificed for the sake of exegetical

and Biblical studies” (p. 276). A more contemporary homiletician encouraged the use of the

languages in sermon preparation (H. W. Robinson, 2001, pp. 61-62).

2.2.3.2 Bible College Historically the Bible has been part of the name of this educational

movement because the chief textbook was the Bible. The focus was on the English Bible

although Greek and Hebrew could be studied as electives. The attempt was made to study the

whole Bible in a series of courses. Different approaches were developed at the schools. James

Gray at Moody Bible Institute developed the synthetic method which became popular at many

schools. The use of commentaries was discouraged because the students were encouraged to

develop their own conclusions (Brereton, 1990, p. 89). Columbia Bible College created a series

of questions that the students were to answer from their study of Scripture (Brereton, 1990, p.

89). This was similar to the “schools of the prophets” of the eighteenth century except their

questions were on the study of secondary works.

The Bible institute curriculum was fragmented with a large number of one credit classes

(Reynhout, 1947, p. 18). Students were in class from twelve and one-half hours to nineteen

8
This researcher, while teaching second year Greek, asked Perry about having students
incorporate exegetical work into the preparation of a sermon and he rejected it as if there should
be a wall between the two. Not all seminaries take this viewpoint but it helps to understand why
pastors would stop using the biblical languages in sermon preparation.
29
hours per week. They were studying between six and twelve different subjects in that week.

Dugan (1977) attempted to find a theory of education within the Bible institutes. He looked at

the descriptions of the courses of twelve early institutes. He did not provide a summary of this

area. Lectures were the primary teaching method. Students were to memorize passages of

Scripture and the class notes (Dugan, 1977).

Required involvement in Christian service has been a part of the “informal curriculum”

since the beginning. The practical application of Christian service was formerly done by

mentoring the college graduate in the “schools of the prophets” approach. This was after the

individual had graduated from college. Bible college students are required to perform some kind

of Christian service each week throughout all the years of enrollment.

2.2.3.3 Homiletics The initial inclusion of homiletics within the seminary curriculum is unclear.

Kelly (1924, pp. 64-65) traces it to an offering in 1830-31 at Harvard. The course was titled

“Composition and Delivery of Sermons and the Duties of the Pastoral Office” (p. 65).

Winegarden (1951) wrote a dissertation on the history of homiletical education in America. He

focused on the textbooks that were used in the courses. The first textbook was written in 1824

by the professor of the Harvard course. He examined the books from thirty-eight authors who

published books between 1824 and 1950. He intended to write a chapter on important homiletics

professors but found they were also the authors of the textbooks (p. 59). His work brings

together a plethora of data which are difficult to follow and lacks a comprehensive analysis.

Winegarden observed that the homiletics professors were themselves seminary graduates

who had been trained for pastoral ministry and not teaching. He recommended that homiletics

professors receive training in oratory and speech in preparation for teaching (p. 280). The

30
advisers for his dissertation were published authors on homiletics who were seminary educated.

Lloyd M. Perry took his student’s advice and completed a second doctorate in speech education.

Perry (1961) reviewed 68 books published between 1834 and 1954 in America by

homiletics teachers. He attempted “to discover trends and emphases in the philosophy,

materials, and methodology” (p. 494). The philosophies of the authors were in education

“Christian idealism” and in speech a “rhetorical approach” (p. 495). He concluded the authors

would not have been able to agree on a definition of key terms such as “preacher, rhetoric,

preaching, homiletics, and sermon” (p. 495). Perry was not able to find a single textbook for

teaching of preaching. He did not find significant bias in teaching homiletics due to theological

or denominational differences.

Perry found no consensus on the order of steps in the creation of a sermon (p. 276). The

application of this within information literacy is that the order as given in the ACRL

competencies would not necessarily be the order of preparation of a sermon. He found three

elements common to the sermon; introduction, body, and conclusion. He also found twelve

“functional elements” mentioned in the books (p. 199). Some of these elements were

application, argumentation, exhortation, and illustration. Perry did not mention the use of other

preachers’ sermons in the preparation of a message.

2.3 THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION AND INFORMATION LITERACY

Theological education may be described as in a formative stage of modern information literacy

instruction or may be described as a long standing practice, if the curriculum is examined.

Information literacy skills are required for each step in the weekly sermon. The theological

31
curriculum had been designed to supply skills in each area before the library profession

developed information literacy and accrediting organizations mandated it.

Dissatisfaction with the product of on-the-job practical training led to the creation of

theological schools. The colleges had emphasized biblical languages and theology which

developed critical thinking skills. The lack of ministry skills led to training in practical theology,

including the sermon. Preaching and parish ministry require formal and informal

communication skills.

Changes in Protestant perspectives have shaped the theological curriculum and the

sources of information for a sermon. Evangelicals have maintained the centrality of the Bible as

the source and standard for measuring views and that a sermon will be based upon Scripture. It

is expected that personal beliefs and practices will be judged from Scripture. It is expected that

the pastor and church members will be lifelong learners but that improvements are needed

(Granger, 2010). It is still librarians that call for improvement in library research skills.

32
 3.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

3.1 INTRODUCTION

Several information seeking models are surveyed, each of which have special purposes. The

ACRL model was designed by librarians to assess information literacy in higher education. The

Big6™ model was developed for teaching problems solving and information literacy skills on

the primary and secondary education levels. Kuhlthau’s model and Bruce’s Seven Faces model

were developed to explain the information seeking behavior of people and share steps with the

ACRL information literacy model. Dervin was concerned with the way people make sense of

information they encounter and is a narrow section of information literacy. Ellis’s model was

developed for explaining the way people search for information. Bruce’s Six Frames model

presents how teachers present information literacy instruction.

A brief background is provided in the stages of development of library instruction in

higher education culminating in what is now known as information literacy. The literature of

bibliographic instruction and information literacy in theological education is surveyed.

There are three groups of people to consider when reviewing information literature.

Faculty and students are both involved in utilization of information literacy skills in higher

education. Relatively few research studies have been conducted on their information seeking

behavior and skill levels.

33
 Knowledge of the information seeking behavior in the workplace is being recognized as a

more fruitful direction of research. This project looks at the workplace skills of Evangelical

pastors as they prepare a sermon. Previous studies on the information behaviors of pastors are

reviewed. This is followed with a discussion of information literacy skills used in sermon

preparation.

3.1.1 Models of Information Seeking

3.1.1.1 ACRL Information Literacy Competency Standards The ACRL Standards are based

upon a six-step model:

 Determine the extent of information needed

 Access the needed information effectively and efficiently
 Evaluate information and its sources critically
 Incorporate selected information into one’s knowledge base
 Use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose
 Understand the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of
information, and access and use information ethically and legally
(American Library Association, 2006, pp. 2-3)

The ACRL standards were created by higher education librarians and “endorsed by the

American Association for Higher Education (October 1999) and the Council of Independent

Colleges (February 2004)” (American Library Association, 2006, p. [i]). As an information

behavior model, they are similar to the other models. The Standards have been combined with

performance indicators and outcomes to create a means of assessing information literacy. The

general nature of the standards was intentional and institutions are expected to adapt them to the

local needs (2006).

Several subject fields have modified the ACRL information literacy standards to better

assess their educational outcomes ("Information literacy standards for anthropology and

sociology," 2008; "Information literacy standards for science and engineering/technology," 2006;

"Information literacy standards for teacher education," 2011). The standard for journalism was

34
directed at both the student and professional ("Information literacy competency standards for

journalism students and professionals," 2012).

Teske (2002) argued that ATS should adopt the ACRL Standards for seminaries. He

depended upon a plan for implementation which was taken from Brown (2000). A contribution

is the survey of the textbooks where the standards are addressed even when they were published

before the standards (Teske, 2002).

3.1.1.2 Big6™ Model Big6™ is a step-by-step model originally developed to teach research and

technology skills (M. Eisenberg & Berkowitz, 1990). Eisenberg (2010) claimed that it is the

predominant model used worldwide in K-12 education. The creators have a business website to

market the method. The model has six steps:

1. Task Definition
1.1 Define the problem
1.2 Identify the information needed
2. Information seeking strategies
2.1 Determine all possible sources
2.2 Select the best sources
3. Location and Access
3.1 Locate sources
3.2 Find information within sources
4. Use of Information
4.1 Engage (e.g., read, hear, view)
4.2 Extract relevant information
5. Synthesis
5.1 Organize information from multiple sources
5.2 Present information
6. Evaluation
6.1 Judge the result (effectiveness)
6.2 Judge the process (efficiently)
(M. B. Eisenberg, 2010, p. 42; Lowe & Eisenberg, 2005, p. 65)

The similarity to other information literacy models has been shown by charts with side by

side comparisons. One chart compared Big6™ with the ACRL Information Literacy

Competency Standards, Kuhlthau, and the joint American Association of School Librarians /
35
Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AASL/AECT) Information

Literacy Competency Standards (M. B. Eisenberg, 2010, p. 41). A similar comparison in chart

form omitted the ACRL Standards but included the Pitts/Stripling Research process and the New

South Wales Information Process (Lowe & Eisenberg, 2005).

The pedagogical approach used for Big6™ is to teach the steps as a problem solving

approach that they can then apply in different situations (Lowe & Eisenberg, 2005). It is not

conceived as a linear process but that all steps eventually need to be completed (M. B. Eisenberg,

2010). Eisenberg (2010) claimed that the process should be integrated within existing subjects in

the curriculum. Eisenberg was involved in a study of information literacy standards for K-12

education at the same time Big6™ was created (Spitzer, Eisenberg, Lowe, & Doyle, 1998).

3.1.1.3 Kuhlthau’s Information Search Process (ISP) Kuhlthau created the initial model in

1983 based upon a qualitative study and further developed it with quantitative research and case

studies (Kuhlthau, 2005, 2007). There are six stages to the model:

1) Initiation
2) Selection
3) Exploration
4) Formulation
5) Collection
6) Presentation (2005, pp. 230-231)

A component of ISP that is significant for theological studies is the inclusion of the affective

domain. At all stages of the process the “thoughts, feelings and actions” are recorded (Kuhlthau,

2005, p. 230). The ministry of a pastor operates within both cognitive and affective areas. The

pastor should interact with information personally in the affective domain and is also looking for

information that does the same for those hearing a sermon. The model recognizes limitations on

the researcher in “four criteria: task, time, interest, and availability” (Kuhlthau, 2005, p. 232),

which are also limits upon a pastor.

36
3.1.1.4 Bruce’s Seven Face Model Bruce proposed that information literacy should be viewed

as people experiencing information (Bruce, 2003, 2011). Librarians approach information

literacy as a set of skills to be developed (American Library Association, 2006). Bruce

published her model in 1997 which was based on empirical research (Bruce, 1997, 1999). Each

face defines information literacy as an experience in a different area although the original model

used “is seen” instead of “is experienced” (Bruce, 1997, p. 110).

The first face: information literacy is experienced as using information technology for
information awareness and communication
The second face: information literacy is experienced as finding information from
appropriate sources
The third face: information literacy is experienced as executing a process
The fourth face: information literacy is experienced as controlling information
The fifth face: information literacy is experienced as building up a personal knowledge
base in a new area of interest
The sixth face: information literacy is experienced as working with knowledge and
personal perspectives adopted in such a way that novel insights are
gained
The seventh face: information literacy is experienced as using information wisely for the
benefit of others (Bruce, 1999, pp. 36-42)

The Seven Face Model may have a workplace application for the pastor. Because of the

experiential model, the pastor could walk through the faces in the delivery of a sermon. The first

three faces would be a controlled setting but the last four faces are an experiential goal of a

sermon.

37
3.1.1.5 Dervin’s Sense-Making Model The Sense-Making approach of Dervin was developed

to study how humans find understanding in a world of chaos. It recognizes that people have a

“body-mind-heart-spirit” and live in time and space (Brenda Dervin, 1999, p. 730). These

distinctions are important in theological studies because the pastor must make sense of multiple

interpretations of the biblical text and present it to an audience living in a world of chaos.

Sense-Making attempts to counteract what it sees as an assumption in research of a single

path for knowledge creation (Brenda Dervin, 1999). Although librarians often view information

literacy as a series of steps one uses to create an information product, the preacher may use a

different sequence of steps for different parts of a sermon or seek answers in prayer. The

research strategy taught by professors of homiletics or exegesis may be quite different than those

taught by information professionals.

Sense-Making recognizes forces that can impel and impede movement (Brenda Dervin,

1999). Evangelicals impose on themselves the constraint of a belief in the inspiration and

inerrancy of Scripture. Scripture itself was written over multiple centuries by a number of

human authors and in three languages. The modern preacher is attempting to bridge the gap

between languages, culture, time, and interpretive viewpoints.

Sense-Making begins with the view that humans want to create order out of chaos

(Brenda Dervin, 1998, p. 37; 2003). It views humans as able to discuss how they have made

sense of forces around them but it does not assume that they will always be clear. They will also

be willing to speak of their failings, if trust is developed. Sense-Making places the researcher in

dialogue with the subjects. It attempts to use a utopian methodology to rid itself of unstated

assumptions common in information research since the literature on information behavior is

replete with assumptions on what is expected of pastors (Brockway, 1974; Erdel, 1982; "How

much do ministers read," 1961; Lancour, 1944; Voigt, 1954). The Sense-Making model has
38
influenced several researchers in the theological realm (Michels, 2005, 2009; Milas, 2008;

Roland, 2008).

Power is considered to be a core component of the Sense-Making approach (Brenda

Dervin, 1998, p. 41; Foreman-Wernet, 2003, p. 8). A pastor preparing a sermon works alone and

uses study skills and the information resources at hand. The act of delivering a sermon could

display interpersonal power or emphasize the power role of the preacher.

3.1.1.6 Ellis’s Model of Information Seeking-Behavior Ellis was researching information

retrieval systems and recognized that results of laboratory testing of systems did not match the

operational results (Ellis, 1984a, 1984b). He observed that the assumptions underlying the

testing procedures were not empirically tested (Ellis, 1984a, pp. 268-269). Data from the

subjects doing the tests were ignored as irrelevant. It was his intent to create an empirically

based model of information seeking behavior to clarify development of information retrieval

systems (Ellis, 2005, p. 138). Because previous studies were based upon faulty theory, he argued

that grounded theory should be used to develop theories of information seeking behavior (Ellis,

1984a, p. 271).

Ellis’s behavior model of information seeking was first proposed in his dissertation

(1987) and developed in later publications:

 Starting: activities characteristic of the initial search for information.

 Chaining: following chains of citations or other forms of referential
connection between material.
 Browsing: semi-directed searching in an area of potential interest.
 Differentiating: using differences between sources as a filter on the nature and
quality of the material examined.
 Monitoring: maintaining awareness of developments in a field through the
monitoring of particular sources.
 Extracting: systematically working through a particular source to locate
material of interest. (Ellis, 1989, p. 238; 1993, p. 480; 2005, pp. 138-139).

39
Additional activities of verifying and ending were necessary for physicists and the activities of

selecting and sifting for English literature which may be applicable for pastors (Ellis, 1993, p.

482).

The model would fit Wilson’s definition of information searching behavior as “the

‘micro-level’ of behavior employed by the searcher in interacting with information systems of all

kinds” (2000, p. 49) It is not a comprehensive information literacy model but looks only at the

activities in the searching area. The model has been applied by researchers in a wide cross-

section of subject disciplines (Bronstein, 2007; Ellis, 1993, 1997, 2005; Makri, Blandford, &

Cox, 2008; Meho & Tibbo, 2003). One criticism of the model is that it does not explain the

behavior relating to the knowledge or work tasks of the researchers (Järvelin & Wilson, 2003).

Ellis (2005) recognized that aspects of the affective domain of information seeking were not

included in the model.

3.1.1.7 Bruce’s Six Frames Model The Six Frames model correlates the concept of teaching

and learning by professors, librarians, and scholars with the way information literacy is delivered

(Bruce, Edwards, & Lupton, 2006, p. 3). The frames are viewed as the model for constructing

the class and teaching whether consciously or not. The models are stand-alone methods of

teaching that may align with other information literacy models since “[e]ach frame brings with it

a particular view of IL, information, curriculum focus, learning and teaching, content, and

assessment” (Bruce et al., 2006, p. 3),.

(1) The Content Frame

(2) The Competency Frame
(3) The Learning to Learn Frame
(4) The Personal Relevance Frame
(5) The Social Impact Frame and
(6)The Relational Frame (Bruce et al., 2006, p. 3)

40
 The first four frames would be familiar to students of information literacy instruction

although the authors would include the fifth as familiar also (Bruce et al., 2006). The Content

Frame begins where the teacher is the expert passing on information literacy, usually in a subject

discipline, and assessment measures how much content was learned by students. In the

Competency Frame the teacher models skills and assessment measures the level of skill attained.

The assessment rubrics for the ACRL Standards would be a form used in this frame. The teacher

in the Learning to Learn Frame would stress collaborative learning and focus on the thinking of a

professional. Assessment would be based on the solution to problem. The teacher in the

Personal Relevance Frame seeks to motivate students to learn. Self-assessment is by the use of a

portfolio.

The fourth, fifth, and sixth frames appear to have relevancy not only in higher education

but also in ministry. The preacher is a seeker for information during the sermon preparation

phase but the communications product is the sermon. The preacher steps into the role of a

teacher during the delivery of the sermon. The last three frames would seek an affective domain

outcome. It would be an area for further study to correlate the clergy’s view on teaching and

learning with the frame of delivery chosen and the work roles as developed by Wicks (1997).

The frames provide a structure or lens to view the history of library instruction and delivery

modes used in higher education.

3.1.1.8 Summary of Information Seeking Behavior Models Each of the models for

information seeking behavior was designed for a specific problem. The ACRL standards were

designed for assessing information literacy and are not conducive to creating theory. ACRL,

Big6™, and Kuhlthau have major similarities in each of the information literacy steps. Big6™

was designed for primary and secondary education to teach problem solving and is more

41
appropriate in curriculum development. Kuhlthau’ ISP and Dervin’s Sense-Making models have

appealed to research in theology because they both account for feeling and thoughts in the

affective domain. Kuhlthau’s ISP has the advantage of accounting for the task and time which

are crucial for a preacher preparing sermons. Dervin’s Sense-Making model is more focused on

understanding a specific aspect of human endeavor. It is too narrow of a theory for the complete

steps in information literacy. Bruce’s Seven Faces model emphasizes the experiential aspects of

information literacy and parallels the goals a preacher desires in a sermon. It includes each step

in the normative definition of information literacy. Ellis’s model is more narrowly focused upon

the searching aspects. It is best incorporated as a model within the fuller model when

researching information literacy. Bruce’s Six Frames model provides a framework to recognize

a teacher’s concept of teaching and learning by the design of their classes. The model was

designed for information literacy but would be applicable in other subject fields.

3.1.2 Library Instruction Stages

Colleges in post-Civil War America added specialized academic programs which needed library

collections. College libraries were managed by faculty members who performed this as a part

time function. Libraries were only open briefly during the week. The growth in collections was

accompanied by changes in organizing and managing libraries. The dictionary catalog of Cutter

and classification system of Dewey provided a means to organize and find books in the library

(Hopkins, 1982, p. 134). In time, librarians recognized that students were not prepared for

library research and began providing this instruction. The instructional role of librarians in

higher education has progressed through several stages using different nomenclature.

42
3.1.2.1 Bibliography Stage

The fact that the first librarians were professors explains their approach to teaching how

to use library resources. The library instruction literature of the period was not research oriented

but descriptive. It was also evangelistic to the cause of library instruction appearing in

government reports (O. H. Robinson, 1880; Winsor, 1880) and summaries from library

conference talks (Davis, 1886). It was typical for the publications to include a mixture of

philosophy of student needs along with basic bibliographic sources for chosen fields. The role of

teaching was emphasized by describing how professors worked in the library on Saturdays

helping students (O. H. Robinson, 1880, pp. 21-24). The concept of self or lifelong learning was

already a component (E. H. Woodruff, 1886). The term “bibliography” (Bishop, 1912; Davis,

1886; Schneider, 1912) was used to describe the instruction although the term was not

universally accepted at the beginning (E. H. Woodruff, 1886).

3.1.2.2 Bibliographic Instruction Stage

“Bibliographic instruction” was the new term that Babcock (1913) used for library

instruction. He was careful to describe the previous instruction in “bibliography” as inadequate.

College students needed to know how to use library tools which had not been the emphasis of the

previous courses (p. 134). Bibliography had been taught by professors but Babcock called for

bibliographic instruction to be taught by trained librarians. The division of responsibilities

between trained librarians and faculty for library instruction was not a settled issue. Salmon

(1913, p. 301) spoke of her disagreement with a committee of New England librarians who

favored instruction by librarians. She favored course integrated library instruction given by

professors. This early difference between the models of separate courses and course integrated

library instruction continues in the library literature. Course integrated instruction has spawned

43
the literature on collaboration between librarians and faculty. Hopkins asserted in his history

that Salmon was an example of a professor not recognizing trained librarians as equals (1982, p.

194).

3.1.2.3 Information Literacy Stage

There has been an extensive volume of literature published on library instruction since

1876. Several authors have attempted to write histories of library instruction. Lorenzen (2001)

observed the decline in publications between the 1930s and the 1960s and attributed it to

opposition from within the library profession. Renewed interest in the 1960s came from growth

in both the number of students and library collections (Salony, 1995, p. 40). Hopkins (1982)

believed librarianship had developed to the point in the 1980s that bibliographic instruction

could provide a general education overview for undergraduates in an age of specialization. His

interest was not purely student needs but enhancement of the library profession.

The volume of publications increased enough that Reference Services Review began

compiling an annual series of annotated bibliographies in 1973. The growth in publications went

from 29 in the first year to 286 in 1998 (Sproles, Detmering, & Johnson, 2013, p. 397). Rader

claimed there were more than 5,000 publications between 1973 and 2002 (Rader, 2002). The

latest count of articles was 510 for 2009, 404 for 2010 (Johnson, Sproles, & Detmering, 2011, p.

552), and 522 (Johnson, Sproles, Detmering, & English, 2012, p. 602).

In a study of the information literacy literature for the first decade of the twenty-first

century, peer reviewed articles were classified as to type of articles. The categories used and

percentages were descriptive 40%, other 19.2%, empirical 28.2%, and theoretical 12.6%

(Sproles et al., 2013, p. 406).

44
3.1.2.4 Library Instruction Summary

Library instruction has progressed through three stages in higher education. The first

stage was bibliography or the basic literature of the field with minimal instruction on library

research. The second stage focused upon using the library tools of the catalog and indexes to

find information. The third stage of information literacy incorporated using the library tools and

the use of information in writing. This stage requires the collaboration of faculty as the subject

experts.

Theological education has not followed this same pattern. Seminary librarians are

expected to possess degrees in both a theological field and library science. They have subject

expertise and often teach as a faculty member. The literature of theological library instruction

shows an incipient pattern of information literacy before that concept was in vogue.

3.2 INFORMATION LITERACY IN THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

3.2.1 Theological Information Literacy Literature

The majority of the literature on theological information literacy occurs in journal publications.

Very little is published in the secular library literature. The authors do cite the secular literature

frequently. The literature in book format is predominately intended as textbooks for theological

research classes.

3.2.1.1 Journals An initial bibliography of 229 journal articles was prepared on bibliographic

instruction or information literacy in a theological context. Searching was done in the standard

library and information science indexes and the ATLAS and Christian Periodical Index of

theological literature. Searching was also conducted in a multidisciplinary discovery database

45
and Google Scholar. The bibliographies of relevant works were checked for further citations.

Very few citations appeared in the secular journals. The publications were analyzed after the

pattern of Sproles et al. (2013) but no attempt was made to eliminate non-peer reviewed articles.

46
 Table 2: Table of Publications

Journal Title Citations

American Theological Library Association Summary of Proceedings 86
Journal of Religious & Theological Information 37
Theological Librarianship 22
Christian Librarian 17
Theological Education 13
Australian Academic & Research Libraries 2
Currents in Theology and Mission 2
Information Research 2
Review of Biblical Literature 2
British Journal of Religious Education 1
Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 1
Canadian Association of Information Science, Conference Proceedings 1
Criswell Theological Review 1
Drexel Library Quarterly 1
Evangelical Review of Theology 1
Journal of Information Literacy 1
Journal of Information Science 1
Journal of the Interdenominational Theological Center 1
Kairós 1
Library & Information Science Research 1
Lutheran Quarterly 1
Public Services Quarterly 1
Reference Librarian 1
Reformed Review 1
Teaching Theology & Religion 1
The Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science 1
The Library Quarterly 1
Trinity Journal 1
Westminster Theological Journal 1
Total 203

47
3.2.1.2 Classification of Journal Articles Collected journal articles were classified by type as

descriptive, research, theoretical, or a literature review. “Descriptive” was used for works that

reported observations or anecdotes from professional practice. It is not possible to evaluate the

applicability of anecdotes in other situations. “Research” was used for studies where data were

collected and analyzed using quantitative or qualitative methodologies. “Theoretical” was used

for publications that critiqued or proposed a new theory. “Literature Review” was used for

publications that provided bibliography and also classified and analyzed the works cited. The

articles were classified next by common information literacy topics within each type. Twenty-

six articles were eliminated as not being pertinent to information literacy although the words may

have been included in the article text.

Table 3: Classification of Articles

Descriptive Literature Review Research Theoretical Totals

Assessment 3 - 1 1 5
Collaboration with Faculty 5 - - 1 6
General 23 - 3 3 29
Information Behavior 11 1 29 6 47
Instruction via Technology 34 - 3 1 38
Instruction or Course Design 33 - 4 10 47
Librarians as Teachers - - - 3 3
Personal Libraries - - 2 - 2
Standards 5 - - - 5
Theological Libraries 13 - 4 - 17
Theological Writing 4 - - - 4
Totals 131 1 46 25 203

3.2.1.3 Books A traditional feature of theological education until the 1980s was a requirement

for students to write a master’s thesis as a capstone project. The return of bibliographic

instruction in the 1960s was accompanied by the publishing of theological research textbooks for

48
use in instruction in theological writing (Barber, 1982; Barber & M., 2000; Bolich, 1986; Bollier,

1979; Delivuk & Edward, 1985; Janvier, 2000; J. R. Kennedy, 1974, 1984; Kepple, 1981; Krupp,

1989, 1990; Sayre & Roberta, 1973; D. C. Tucker, 1989). Bollier (1980), addressing theological

librarians, called for three levels of library instruction: orientation, bibliographic instruction, and

theological bibliography. He believed that theological bibliography would better prepare

students for lifelong learning. The theological research books use the approaches and concepts

of teaching of the first three frames of Bruce (Bruce et al., 2006, p. 3)

A perusal of the textbooks showed that instruction could go beyond bibliographic

instruction into what could be termed theological bibliography. The communication aspect of

information literacy was not being neglected either. The books addressed writing research

papers and oral communication which is another standard seminary requirement in the form of

homiletics.

3.2.2 Summary of Theological Information Literature

The vast majority of the literature on theological information literacy (64.5%) is descriptive. The

theoretical literature was 12.3% but this is deceptive since many of the articles raised theoretical

issues but not in a substantive fashion. There were 46 articles or 22.6% that reported on

empirical research. Many of these reports had been published in conference proceedings without

significant details on methodology or data. The conclusions were presented but it is not possible

to determine accuracy or validity of the findings.

Theological information literacy articles regularly cite the professional literature from the

library and information science field. The information behavior models of Dervin and Ellis were

used as part of the methodology in several studies. The models of Kuhlthau and Vakkari were

referenced. Bronstein (2007) was the only author to survey a variety of information behavior

49
models. There appears to be only a smattering of knowledge of information seeking behavior

among authors of articles on theological information literacy.

3.3 INFORMATION SEEKING BEHAVIORS

The literature on library instruction in secular colleges focuses on the preparation of the student

to do research for classes. The concept of lifelong learning was added as a component in the

development of information literacy. Early research and publications in the theological context

focused on the information behaviors and personal libraries of clergy and not students.

Publications on library instruction in theological studies started to appear in the early 1980s. The

information behavior that first received attention was the reading habits of clergy.

3.3.1 Information behaviors of faculty

A small corpus of material is now available on the research behaviors of theological faculty.

Gorman (1990) conducted his quantitative study because little was known about the research

habits of humanities scholars in an academic setting and even less about theologians (p. 139).

Almost twenty years later, Penner (2009a) made the same claim in her literature review although

a few more studies had been conducted. She did attempt to show how theologians parallel

humanities researchers in their information behaviors.

Gorman (1990) follows earlier studies on pastors in that the use of the theological library

is a focus. He found that theologians did use the institutional library but relied on browsing to

find journal articles and books. A significant source of information was consultation with

colleagues. Theologians relied on personal libraries just as pastors and scholars in the

humanities did.

50
 Gorman (1990) sampled faculty from seven theological institutions in Australia by the

use of a questionnaire. The sample was small and no attempt was made to do statistical analysis.

The results were tabulated and percentages provided. It is difficult to discern significance from

the results.

Michels’ (2001) thesis was the basis for a journal article (2005) where biblical studies

faculty were the subject of a study on information behavior. The model of information seeking

behavior was that of Ellis. The study was qualitative in nature with some reliance on Dervin’s

Sense-Making model. He developed his interview questions to answer the following questions:

How do researchers define their research problem? How do they determine appropriate
tools and resources? and How do they use those tools to resolve their research problem?
(Michels, 2005, p. 97)

An initial result was that the respondents reported consulting few people in the research

process but, when queried directly about people who had been contacted or had provided help,

there was a significant increase in the number. Michels believed that they did not consider them

as information resources but as providing support and feedback. Of the two respondents who

commented upon academic librarians, one researcher appreciated the technology skills of the

librarian and the other believed librarians had little to offer beyond interlibrary loan because of

not knowing the subject (Michels, 2005). He identified the role that colleagues performed in the

development and modification of research problems as an area for further research (105).

Wenderoth (2007, 2008) interviewed eight theologians at two seminaries in order to

discover their actual research behavior. She found the professors preferred to study at home and

avoided the library because of students asking questions. Professors consulted with colleagues

when they had an information need. None of these professors went to the seminary library to do

research. Six of the eight used Amazon.com and its added information to begin research. They

claimed to have learned to do research while writing their dissertations. They did not expect
51
students to have research skills nor was it considered their job to teach them this skill. One

professor protested that the seminary teaches students how to do academic research and not

practical research that would be encountered in ministry.

Wenderoth (Wenderoth, 2007, 2008) undertook this research because in an address at the

2006 annual meeting of the ATLA, she mentioned that most knowledge in the area of faculty is

anecdotal. She used an interview process of data collection of the theological faculty members.

No mention was made of whether she took notes or recorded the interview. She did not provide

a methodology or framework for the study. She reported findings but recognized that they also

were anecdotal.

Lu (2009) examined Karl Barth’s correspondence with contemporaries as he wrote his

commentary on Romans. Lu used domain analysis as a means of studying Barth’s information

behavior. Lu generalizes from the study of one well-known theologian that theologians

communicate with each other in the creation of new knowledge.

Bronstein (2007) used grounded theory methodology to investigate the research of Jewish

scholars. The information behavior model was that of Ellis which proposes stages or types of

activities in the process. He proposed a modified model with three phases to describe their

research process. The activity was dependent upon the place or time within the research process.

The initial phase was to find one item that would lead to more items by following its citations.

A second study of Jewish studies scholars was conducted with a narrower focus on

research (Bronstein & Baruchson-Arbib, 2008). The two theoretical frameworks consisted of the

cost-benefit ratio and the least effort principle. The methodology was mixed with a

questionnaire followed by a qualitative study conducted with 25 interviews of researchers. The

two greatest difficulties the researchers had were the distance to resources and computer

interfaces that were not easy to use (Bronstein & Baruchson-Arbib, 2008).
52
3.3.1.1 Summary of faculty information seeking behaviors Very little is known still about the

information behavior of theological faculty. Lu’s (2009) and Michels’s (2005) methodologically

rigorous studies both found significant usage of the invisible college. The studies of Jewish

scholars (Baruchson‐Arbib & Bronstein, 2007; Bronstein, 2007) was more rigorous but very

narrow. The authors were even unsure of the generalizability of their results.

Bronstein and Baruchson-Arbib (Baruchson‐Arbib & Bronstein, 2007) looked at the

Jewish scholars as a proxy for Jewish humanist scholars. It would be expected that theological

faculty would share similar research needs as humanist scholars (Gorman, 1990). Other research

has shown that humanists need access to primary source material (S. Boon, Johnston, & Webber,

2007). The few narrow studies of faculty lessen the confidence in the knowledge on information

seeking behaviors of theological faculty even as the authors recognize.

3.3.2 Information behaviors of students

Information behavior studies of theological students show the developing pattern discovered in

pastors. The studies show the lack of information literacy skills of the students. This issue is not

surprising since some faculty were not concerned about the students’ skills or considered it their

responsibility to teach this.

Brunton (2005) attempted to correlate information literacy instruction and the effect on

information seeking behavior of theological students. She gave pre-test and post-test surveys to

measure a library instruction session given in one class. The instrument was not provided but it

appears to have used a Likert scale measurement of student opinion. She then conducted

interviews with a small sample of students. The responses provided in the interviews were used

to show that students believed that they were gaining skills although no assessment was made of

actual outcomes.

53
 Gaba (2008, 2009) presented preliminary results of a qualitative study on the research

methods of MDiv students of seminaries in the Chicago Area Theological Library Association

(CATLA) at the annual meetings of the American Theological Library Association. Because of

the oral presentation format, the evidence was only anecdotal. This was an initial attempt to

document the lack of research skills of theological students. The study was completed and

published in 2011 (Gaba & Ganski).

Gaba’s (2008, 2009) quotes from students showed they lacked an understanding of how

to find and use resources. They felt like they were in overload and did not have enough time to

spend in research. They were satisfied with the materials in their personal libraries or what they

found in the seminary library. They would use the Internet and bookseller sites to help with

finding material. The students were more likely to use books than journal articles in research.

Students who received instruction in using the library were more aware of available resources.

Gaba and Ganski (2011) wrote the completed study of MDiv students in CATLA.

Interviews were conducted with small groups and a local librarian. Gaba, the interviewer, chose

not to be neutral and conducted the interview with the intent to influence the students (p. 125).

The study was conducted over several years and in 2010 a quantitative survey of the students

was added. Gaba and Ganski found from the surveys that 80% preferred reading bound books

versus only 12% for online materials (p. 130). No demographic could account for this major

difference but younger students were noted as favoring hard copy text (p. 131).

The survey asked students to value items on a Likert scale as important for research. The

only significant item was that owning an item in a personal library was rated low whereas it

being available at the institutional library was highest. They did report that students who owned

the computer program, Logos®, valued it for writing papers (p. 136). Currency of the materials

was less important for students from conservative denominations where doctrinal traditions were
54
held. This was noticeable in the responses between conservative Lutheran students versus those

from a more liberal Lutheran seminary (p. 137).

Gaba and Ganski (2011) found the library catalog and the ATLA database as the top two

tools used for “identifying and locating sources for academic research” (p. 139) with the personal

library placing third. Internet search engines placed ninth. Less than half of the students “almost

always” (p. 140) used the library catalog. Students who had received formal library instruction

were more likely to use multiple tools for research. The small number of international students

tended to use free Internet resources they could use in their home countries.

The student’s view of the MDiv degree influenced research patterns. Students who

looked at the degree as step leading to ministry preferred convenience. Students who viewed the

degree as academic pursued greater research (Gaba & Ganski, 2011).

The report of this study was disappointing. It was published in the ATLA conference

proceedings instead of a peer reviewed journal. Ganski did provide a proper literature review.

The researchers did not describe a methodology beyond simply stating group interviews were

conducted and part way through the study a questionnaire was added. Bias would have been

introduced when the researcher took the position of an advocate for the libraries during the

interviews and a local librarian was allowed to observe. The data from the questionnaire was

tabulated but statistical analysis was not conducted. The analysis of the interviews was reported

with conclusions and anecdotal supporting evidence but no data were provided for independent

analysis.

Penner (2009b) studied the information behavior of theological students in a non-

traditional seminary in the Czech Republic. She used students with an educational background

in the West as a control group to compare those from Central and Eastern Europe. Books and

journals were heavily used by all students but doctoral students used quantitatively more
55
materials and types of materials. However, the doctoral students did not limit themselves to

materials within their denominational or theological perspective as Wicks (1997, p. 94; 1999, pp.

211, 221) found with pastors in the preaching role. Penner did not explore the difference in role

between doing doctoral research and preaching a sermon. When students were asked about use

of the library, search skill training was rated the lowest item on the list but she lists it in the

summary as an area for improvement based upon an open-ended question where the data were

not provided. The results of this study may be atypical due to the student population, location

and format of instruction.

Milas (2008) analyzed the acknowledgements sections of theological dissertations at

Harvard. He sought to test whether the role of those persons acknowledged differed between a

PhD and a ThD student. The ThD is a degree targeted for future administrators or ministers

instead of academics. The ThD students acknowledged more clergy whereas the PhD students

acknowledged librarians and people who possessed PhDs and ThDs.

3.3.2.1 Summary of information behaviors of theological students A study of information

behaviors of theological students that would use sound theory and methodology and where

confidence could be placed in the validity of the results is still needed. Penner (2009b) may have

validity but the generalizability of the results outside of the institution is questionable.

3.3.3 Information behaviors of clergy

Research on clergy provides the majority of publications within the theological realm but even

then the cumulative total is small. The studies have become more rigorous since 1944 and have

moved from reading habits to information seeking behaviors. It is noteworthy that these studies

began as research in workplace behavior and the secular research is now trending towards that

model.

56
3.3.3.1 Studies on reading habits of clergy The focus of the first thirty years from 1944 to

1973 of information behavior research of clergy was on their reading habits. Reading was

actually more expansive than simple reading as they considered different activities that would be

separated in later studies.

Lancour (1944) concluded that reading was very important to pastors from his study of

Union Theological Seminary graduates. A questionnaire was distributed to a random sample

over a 35-year period with seven chosen from each class year. The data were reported to be in

textual form but were tabulated as if they were quantitative. The graduates mostly read books

and periodicals that they purchased for their personal libraries. They began ministry with a

systematic plan to keep up-to-date in the field but consistently departed from it due to time and

financial constraints. One question found 25 of 115 respondents delegating reading to others and

89 did all of their own reading (p. 32). They would have liked to have learned more about

reading books and thinking in seminary. Lancour summarized their reading habits as falling

short of an expected standard given their “high educational background and so rich an

opportunity for intellectual leadership (p. 35).

Hawkins (1954) studied the reading interests of students and alumni of the School of

Medicine and Candler School of Theology at Emory University. The topics which they found

most interesting to read were related to their vocations (pp. 28-31). The data were tabulated in

tables but no statistical analysis was attempted. The researcher may have been biased towards

reading books but some doctors noted reading professional periodicals (pp. 49-51).

Voigt (1954) wrote about the importance of pastors’ reading as if too little was being

done. Christianity Today ("How much do ministers read," 1961) in an anonymous report used a

small random sample of clergymen but an otherwise unscientific survey found over half of the

respondents used the local library occasionally or regularly. Ten of the 43 respondents
57
considered that the public library held the right kind of books for a minister. The only

conclusion is a sense that pastors were not reading enough books.

Tucker (1956) argued for reading of literature to enhance the personal and professional

life of the minister. De Klerk (1968) studied the reading habits of ministers in the Christian

Reformed Church. He found they did more reading for ministry than non-ministry. However,

the survey questions did not delve deep enough to isolate sermon preparation

Huseman (1970) studied the expenditures of Lutheran pastors for books and periodicals.

The survey instrument which was included could have provided data for analysis of other

information behaviors. Huseman collected demographic data on education and data on specific

books and periodicals read. The report did not go beyond the role of the personal library

developed for pastoral reading and study. He found that those who spent more on books also

read more books each year. They reported spending 8.8 hours per week in sermon preparation

(p. 8)

Brockway (1974) reported on a survey of the reading habits of Connecticut pastors. Over

96% of the pastors held a graduate degree. Almost 90% spent three hours or more per week

reading and the majority spent over seven hours. Most of the reading was done for sermon

preparation. Pastors generally purchased the materials that they read and a small percentage

used libraries (p. 126). The article concluded that Hartford Seminary library would need to

change policies so that pastors would use their resources more. An ideal standard of reading was

not proffered but it was assumed to be unmet.

Erdel (1978) studied the reading habits of ministers in the Evangelical Mennonite

Church. Although the denomination only had twenty-one churches but the survey was

completed by nineteen ministers. Their personal libraries were used for ministerial work and

were strongest in biblical studies (p. 53). The English Bible and commentaries were the two
58
most important types of works in sermon preparation but none considered movies as having any

import (pp. 68-69). The use of “sermon by other preachers” was ranked 19 in the tabulation of

sources deemed important (p. 68) but actual use in their last sermon was ranked 7 (p. 70) The

mean for time spent on sermon preparation was four hours and twenty minutes (p. 70).

Erdel (1982) compiled a review of the literature on pastoral reading habits. His

conclusion was that they do not read at the level they would be expected for the level of their

education. He seems to have an expectation that is unstated other than calling it “low reading

levels” (p. 145).

Rice (1979) sought to study the reading habits of pastors within one denomination. Rice

constructed twenty-six categories of knowledge which he considered the pastor should read

because this knowledge was required for ordination within the denomination. He made a point

that every pastor should move from being taught to being a self-learner (p. 12). He did observe

that seminary-trained, bi-vocational pastors read than those who had gained ordination through

home self-study (p. 123). This difference in reading would suggest a possible area of research on

lifelong learning outcomes within today’s distance and online education programs. Rice thought

the reading of other preachers’ sermons would be valuable for pastors to freshen their own

sermons. The survey instrument was included and data were tabulated in tables but no statistical

analysis was done.

Tanner (1993) studied the reading habits of ministers within one denomination using a

mailed questionnaire. The rate of return was less than hoped for but there was close to a 95%

confidence rate in the findings. He compared the results with a book industry study of adult

reading habits. The majority of the reading by ministers was for sermon preparation and

professional areas.

59
 Tanner (1993) identified pastors’ book allowances and use of reference works as possible

areas for further study. He found ministers who received a book allowance read significantly

more books than American adult book readers. A second area for further study was the use of

reference works. He found that 42% used a Greek Bible and 7% a Hebrew one. The Hebrew

usage may be within norms but the Greek usage may reflect a particular denominational

distinctive of the Christian Church. The emphasis on the use of Greek or Hebrew may be

dependent not only upon educational background but also theological distinctions.

Summary of reading habits of clergy These studies were conducted using quantitative

methods which did not inclde statistical analysis. The studies were conducted mostly by

librarians who as a result were disappointed in the pastoral reading habits. No standard is ever

provided but an analogy may be made with Bruce’s Seven Frames of teaching with a librarian

expectation for a ideal reading habit of a clergy member.

3.3.3.2 Studies on information behaviors of clergy Porcella (1973) marks a change from

studying reading habits to researching information behaviors of pastors. He presented a

theological librarian’s perspective as had earlier studies. He positied a dichotomy between

information behaviors of conservative versus liberal pastors. This dichotomy is seen in his

hypothesis:

In their use of information resources, conservative ministers tend to depend largely upon
the Bible and aids to Biblical interpretation and exposition, because their primary concern
is to prepare people for heaven; while liberal ministers tend to depend more upon current
materials—books, newspapers, television, and motion picture—because their main
concern is to help people to better lives in this. (Porcella, 1973, pp. 13-14)

Porcella’s hypothesis presents a number of problems for his study. He appears to assume

that “primary concern” and “main concern” are synonymous parallel relationships. He could

have tested whether conservative or liberal ministers would have considered the temporal
60
distinctions as mutually exclusive. He appears to deny that liberal ministers have a concern for

the afterlife and conservative ones have no concern for how people live in this life. In various

places (pp. 10-11, 96) he does state that he is limiting the role to pulpit preaching although the

hypothesis only states that he will study the use of information.

Porcella’s survey instrument measured over 200 variables and was given to 117 ministers

with a 96.5% rate of return (p. 97). The respondents were rated with a “doctrine index” and a

“social issues index” (p. 97) to distinguish the conservative and liberal minister. A weak

correlation between doctrinal position and the types of materials was found. The conservatives

did use the Bible more than the liberals in preparation of the previous week’s sermon as he had

hypothesized (pp. 97-100). He did not include the sermonic helps types of materials in his study

which would have been of interest for this study. Porcella suggested that role concepts of pastors

should be a major variable in future studies (p. 116). Wicks (1997) and Phillips (1992) used role

distinctions as a component in their dissertations.

Tanner (1994) undertook a study of preaching pastors in a Midwestern college town

based upon the demographic suggested by (Porcella, 1973, pp. 101, 112). Although some

demographics of the community were considered typical, they had a high educational level and

were undergoing a high rate of growth with many new churches being planted. He presented a

whole chapter on the pastor as an information gatherer (pp. 110-207). He made a distinction

between self-generated information needs and that of others. The pastors rated their personal

libraries as the top information source with people in the congregation as the second. The

decline in importance of biblical languages can be seen in that on a scale of 1 to 25, Greek

language tools were 13th and Old Testament Hebrew language tools were eighteenth of 25 in

ranking. One information source that pastors used was a lectionary for the sermon topic. Some

61
pastors subscribed to services that offered illustrations and data to accompany the lectionary in

hopes of lessening their work.

Tanner (1994, p. 138) found that commentaries were the highest rated sources of

information for conservative pastors. Greek tools were relatively highly rated but Hebrew tools

were the lowest rated print sources. The languages tools had the highest standard deviation,

indicating a high difference of opinion over the value of language tools among conservatives.

He did observe that almost all pastors who talked about the Biblical language tools were also

theologically conservative.

The two most popular periodicals pastors read were Christianity Today and The Christian

Century. The Christian Century was read by the more ecumenically minded pastors.

Christianity Today was read by the more conservative pastors but was rejected by some as too

liberal and by others as too conservative (Tanner, 1994, p. 161).

Tanner (1994, p. 145) identified surrogate readers as an area for further study. Some

pastors’ wives read books and provided information they thought would be important. He

included abstracting services provided for pastors in the category of a surrogate. They used the

abstracting services as a way to keep current and cope with the lack of time to read widely.

Pastors also read preaching journals for sermon illustrations and ideas. One provided an

example of a sermon that he had preached from a preaching journal (p.160). He attributed the

use of preaching journals more to the theologically conservative pastors. Many used lectionaries

as an aid in sermon preparation (pp. 134-138). The lectionaries provided the same type of

sermon examples with aids such as illustrations as the journals. Few of the conservative pastors

used lectionaries.

Phillips (1992) investigated the relationship between pastoral roles and information

behaviors. Pastors reported a mean of 6.76 hours in preparation for a sermon although there was
62
a standard deviation of 5.26 hours (p. 86). They reported a mean library size of 1003.59 volumes

with 50.44% of the books for sermon preparation (p. 71). One pastor reported subscribing to

four magazines on homiletics, having retained forty years of sermons, and was adding 40 more

each year (p. 78). Phillips’s description was vague but it appears the pastors depended upon only

a few reference books and commentaries for most of their sermon preparation. The use of

formal sources for preaching were preferred with a p value less than .05 and that they were more

likely to use informal sources for administrative decisions.

Phillip’s (1992) study did look at computer usage although it had increased since

Troxel’s study (1987) but the Internet was not yet widely used. He concluded that theological

students should be taught computer skills, evaluation of sources for different roles, personal

library development, and lifelong learning skills (Phillips, 1992, pp. 136-137).

Wicks (1997) divided the work roles of clergy into preaching, caregiving, and

administration. He found the top five sources used in the preaching role were the “Bible”,

“personal library”, “books”, and “religious magazines/journals”, with “newspapers” and

“personal clippings/file” tied for fifth (p. 82). This was consistent with previous studies. The

use of the personal library was related to ease of use (p. 153).

He found that 1.1% used no print sources for preaching while 71.7% used three or more

(p. 86) with a mean of 4.9 sources (p. 100). The specific sources used were the Bible and then a

“commentary or lexical aid” (p. 107). It was unclear whether the first source of illustrations was

print resources although he did include personal situations as a source.

Wicks (1997) conducted interviews with twenty pastors from various backgrounds. The

conservative pastors also used Greek language aids (p. 109) and Preaching Today for preaching

work. Five of the conservative pastors made a point of reading sources outside of their

theological perspective (p. 110). A frustration was information retrieval (p. 157), which for the
63
pastors included “poor filing systems” and “not knowing a good source for sermon illustrations”

(p. 130). Nearly all of the interviewees had access to a computer at work and some used e-mail

but the Internet was not widely used yet.

The rising use of computers and availability of the Internet has spawned research into this

phenomenon in ministry (Smith & Smith, 2001b).9 Smith and Smith found the greatest use of

the Internet was for denominational purposes at 61.1%. Since 85% of the respondents were

Methodists or Episcopalians, which have strong denominational identity, it probably accounts for

this high usage. Attempting to limit the study to parish clergy may have introduced bias in the

usage for preaching resources. They found that 54.5% used the Internet for homiletical purposes

at least occasionally. Of those who used the Internet for sermon resources, 54.7% were for

“ideas and illustrations” and 30.4% for full sermons (p. 17). Smith and Smith claimed their

study did not support the concern that the Internet was being used for sermon plagiarism

although a major portion of the article lists resources that other preachers are using as sources to

plagiarize. It would have been helpful if they had provided the survey instrument and statistical

analysis of the data.

Roland (2008) used a single case study approach “to discover and describe the process by

which a single clergy member interprets Scripture in the preparation of his Sunday sermons” (p.

5). He collected his data by attending Sunday morning services and making a recording of the

messages. The clergy member provided Roland with a written copy of the sermon after the

service. After Roland created an electronic copy of the manuscript, he compared the audio

recording to it. Differences between the manuscript and the actual message delivered were

recorded. He then prepared questions for an interview with the preacher on Monday. The

9
The use of computers by pastors had climbed from Troxel and Phillips so that 88.8% owned a computer and used it
in some capacity.
64
interview was divided between an unstructured and a semi-structured period. During the

unstructured period the preacher recounted the preparation and delivery of the sermon. The

semi-structured period was devoted to listening to the sermon with breaks when the preacher

made a comment or the researcher asked a question. Both interview sections were recorded,

transcribed, and analyzed.

A limitation Roland (2008) found with his informant was the use of the lectionary to

determine the biblical text and to some extent the topic of each week’s sermon. Since part of his

project was to discover the process of choosing a text and topic, it proved to hinder his study. He

suggested that further studies be conducted with clergy who do not use a lectionary (pp. 99, 138-

139). Roland suggested subjects could be from Nazarene or Baptist churches, although other

Evangelical pastors do not use a lectionary.

Roland’s informant had studied biblical Greek for four years and biblical Hebrew for two

years on the undergraduate level (p. 73). He had also studied Latin and German because of their

importance in his theological tradition. His study using the biblical languages continued in

seminary and he continued to use them in sermon preparation, although he admitted to not

keeping up his proficiency in Hebrew or German. No reference is made to his using a computer

or the Internet within the study.

Summary of studies on information behaviors of clergy Most of the literature produced

on the information behaviors of clergy has derived from theses or dissertations with concomitant

forced rigors. Porcella (1973) was a massive quantitative study with over 200 variables. He

discovered issues that a quantitative study could not answer. He suggested that future studies

should differentiate the work roles of clergy and later dissertations have found it a fruitful

variable.

65
 Tanner (1994) used a qualitative methodology and Dervin’s Sense-Making theory to

examine the nexus of clergy as filling a librarian role. Tanner conducted over 80 interviews in

the data collection phase. His dissertation was later published as a book and included extensive

quotations that may be mined for other purposes.

Phillips (1992) and Wicks (1997) used the work roles in their dissertations as suggested

by Porcella (1973). Phillips used a quantitative methodology and Wicks was mixed quantitative

and qualitative. The discovery of open and closed sources of information by Wicks is significant

and may have been a result that Porcella was seeking. The question is whether the closed

sources are the result of other variables. Roland (2008) limited himself to the role of preacher in

his qualitative study using Dervin’s Sense-Making theory. This is a significant but narrow study

when related to information literacy.

3.3.4 Clergy and the Sermon

3.3.4.1 Sermon preparation The preparation and delivery of a sermon is one activity where

information literacy competencies may be demonstrated. Park (2006) reported how student

sermons within a Catholic seminary were being used to assess skill development which resulted

in curricular changes. The students found the self-evaluation helpful after viewing peer and

faculty evaluations. Resner (2010) incorporated self-assessment into homiletics classes

including topics which utilize information literacy skills.

The preparation of a sermon may be done in several steps although not in the same

sequence for all types of sermons. A topical sermon starts with a topic and uses several biblical

passages to develop the idea. A textual sermon allows the organization of the biblical passage to

determine the organization and topic of the sermon. An expository sermon uses a biblical text to

develop an idea or topic and the outline is developed around the topic from material in the text

(Braga, 1969).
66
 The definition of expository preaching by Haddon Robinson (2001) exhibits several

features of information literacy:

Expository preaching is the communication of a biblical concept, derived from and

transmitted through a historical, grammatical, and literary study of a passage in its
context, which the Holy Spirit first applies to the personality and experience of the
preacher, then through the preacher, applies to the hearers (p. 21).

A cursory search of WorldCat® finds nearly all recent books on expository preaching to

be published by Evangelical publishing houses. Koller (1962) considers expository preaching to

be the best method to feed the church and the pastor. Other sermon types are taught but

expository preaching receives the major focus among Evangelicals.

The first step in creating a sermon is the selection of a topic or biblical passage. A

method that is recommended is to create a schedule or plan for months or the year in advance (H.

W. Robinson, 2001, p. 54). This plan differs from lectionaries because the plan is solely the

creation of the pastor for preaching to a church and meeting a need. A plan allows the preacher

to be working on sermons in advance and not to be hindered by lack of study time in the days

before the sermon is to be preached (H. W. Robinson & Gibson, 1999).

The development of the sermon differs between individuals. Some start from a reading

of the biblical book to reach a broad concept and then work to develop a narrower sermon

covering a smaller section (H. W. Robinson, 2001). Another individual may use grammatical

diagramming of the text (Zemek, 1992) or discourse analysis.

The exegesis of the biblical text is done using techniques learned in hermeneutics,

exegesis, and Bible classes. Exegesis requires the use of primary tools such as concordances and

reference tools such as lexicons and grammars. Word study books may be used to help

understand certain words in the original languages. Bible dictionaries and commentaries are

67
often consulted for clarification or confirmation of the analysis. Nearly all of the basic tools are

available in electronic form by products designed for pastors.

Once the exegetical idea of the biblical text is understood, the preacher moves to develop

a homiletical idea and purpose (H. W. Robinson, 2001). The preacher develops the sermon

outline to accomplish a purpose. The expository sermon parts from the textual sermon at this

point since the latter would be based on the outline of the biblical text.

The sermon outline contains distinct parts to communicate the homiletical idea and

purpose. Robinson (2001) includes parts that “explain, prove, apply, or amplify points” (p. 140).

Illustrations and applications are the parts most readily identified by hearers. Published “stock”

sermon illustrations (Foster, 1952; Keefer, 2005; Tan, 1979; Wallis, 1975) become the source of

stories told by many preachers which become familiar to church-goers. Preachers are taught to

develop a file of potential sermon illustrations and how to use them properly (H. W. Robinson,

2001; H. W. Robinson & Larson, 2005). The introduction and conclusion are the last portions

written before the title, although Mayhue (1992) included illustrations at this late step in the

sermon.

When compared with the ACRL competencies, a sermon concept or idea is categorized

as part of the “extent of information” needed. The study of the biblical passage includes both

accessing information and critical thinking to evaluate the biblical text within the literary,

historical, and social context. Evangelical writers emphasize the role of the Holy Spirit in

applying the concept to the preacher (Anderson, 2005; Koller, 1962; MacArthur, 1992; H. W.

Robinson, 2001). The application incorporates the within both the knowledge base and affective

domain. The message is communicated for the purpose of applying it to the hearers of the

sermon.

68
 The number of hours spent in sermon preparation varies widely. A 1934 study found that

ministers spent 22.5 hours per week (mean) with a standard deviation of 8.2 on homiletical work

(May et al., 1934, p. 180, V.4, Table 130). Although this study did not account for the number

of sermons being prepared each week, 90% claimed to regularly preach on Sunday evening and

98.2% on Sunday morning (May et al., 1934, p. 182, V4, Table 131). Porcella (1973) found a

mean of 3.89 hours (p. 111) for the last delivered sermon. Erdel (1978) found an average of four

hours and twenty minutes (p. 70) on sermon preparation. Table 4 presents the hours that were

reported by several authors for the time used to prepare sermons each week. Some difficulties

with the data are a report of mean or median hours. Two authors reported the number of hours

per week but the pastors were preaching more than one sermon each week. The hours used for

sermon preparation each week varied widely.

Table 4: Hours for Sermon Preparation

Author Hours One Sermon per Hours Two Plus Sermons per
Week Week
May et al. 1934 22.50
Baumann 1967 17.18
Huseman 1970 8.8
Porcella 1973 3.89
Erdel 1978 4.33
Phillips 1992 6.76
Tanner 1994 6.17

Baumann (1967) conducted a survey among Evangelical Free Church pastors concerning

their preaching. The data could have been analyzed by statistical methods but were only

tabulated into charts. The pastors believed effectiveness was more dependent on the content of

the sermon than the delivery. The factors that made preaching most effective were “skillful

69
exposition,” and “careful research and organization” (p. 156). “Use of illustrations” was fourth

in importance after “No Report” and “techniques of delivery” was fifth (p. 156). Pastors reported

an average of 17.18 hours per week in sermon preparation (p. 111), which cannot be compared

with other researchers because they most likely were preaching more than one sermon per week

(p. 143). He found that 41.1% read printed sermons of other preachers frequently and 47.2%

occasionally (p. 116). Baumann (1967) was aware of the possibility of preachers using these

sermons improperly but did not include plagiarism in his study. The use of Greek in sermon

preparation was reported by 60.3% of the preachers. Social issues were topics in few sermons by

the preachers in this denomination (pp. 132-135).

3.3.4.2 Preparation Failure There has been a growing volume of popular literature on the issue

of plagiarism of sermons (O. W. Allen, Jr., 2006; R. J. Allen, 2005; Bailey, 1989; Beckelhymer,

1974; Buchanan, 2007; Erickson, 2003; Graves, 2004, 2005; Indermark, 2007; Jeter, 2005a,

2005b; Lombaard, 2003; Long, 2007; McKay, 2003; Michels, 2009; Mulligan, 2005; Munroe,

1997; Rebeck, 1997; Sataline, 2006; Shelley, 2002, 2005; "Spiritual shortcuts: The cheating

epidemic reveals a deeper issue," 2005; "When pastors plagiarize," 2002; Willimon, 1997; M.

Woodruff & Moore, 2003; Younger, 1994). Plagiarism falls under the “ethical use of

information” in the ACRL standards. The influential teacher of preaching, Haddon Robinson,

provided this definition of plagiarism.

"In the world of scholarship, when things are put in print, any idea taken from someone
else must be credited in a footnote. In the world of preaching, a pastor who takes sermons
from other preachers—word for word—without giving credit is guilty of plagiarism" (H.
W. Robinson & Larson, 2005, p. 586).

Robinson then expanded on how and when to give credit in a sermon

70
 Gibson (2008), homiletics professor at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, wrote a

small book condemning plagiarism which was derived from a lecture series given at Lincoln

Christian College and Seminary in 2005. He includes a history of plagiarism and sermonic

plagiarism, the ethical issues, and ways to avoid it. He identified several reasons why pastors

might plagiarize. Pastors may compare themselves to famous preachers and feel themselves

lacking or they may attempt to compete with them. Laziness is a problem but lack of time was

relegated to an excuse. The ethical issues plagiarism poses for ministry were discussed by

Graham (2010) in his dissertation.

Plagiarism may also result from failure in the process of theological education. A student

may misuse works in writing papers just as in any other academic field. Phillips (2002) noted

the problem in preachers plagiarizing sermons but he also listed Internet based services that

provided papers on various topics for purchase by students. There are services which write

custom theological papers to meet specific requirements. Gaba (2009) found students

developing poor research habits which may hinder the proper preparation of a sermon when they

enter ministry. The plagiarism of a sermon may evidence a failure to actuate different

components of information literacy competencies while receiving their theological education.

3.4 SUMMARY

The history of theological education has shown a tension that exists between the academic and

practical. The response has been to create informal opportunities to enhance the practical or

create the new academic institutions of seminaries and Bible institutes and colleges where the

71
balance may be controlled. A third concern within the context of academic training has been the

cultivation of the spiritual side of the individual.

The level and content of the knowledge that are needed is a source of disagreement

within and between denominations. Some academic institutions require more courses in

theology, Bible, biblical languages, and church history, believing that knowledge in all of these

areas is needed even if they are not used in ministry. Some institutions have a few required

classes in Bible and theology with electives in the other areas but place emphasis on practical

classes in preaching, counseling, and administration.

The academic institutions from the seventeenth century through the nineteenth

emphasized the teaching of the biblical languages. The modernist-fundamentalist split of the

early twentieth century marked a change in the teaching of biblical languages. The conservative

academic institutions continue to require biblical languages and the liberal schools tend to have it

as an elective in the curriculum.

Ministry in its early American form was limited to a single pastor serving one or several

churches with some missionary activities by a few. The number and types of ministry roles have

grown through the centuries. Larger churches have multiple staff members that have specialized

in different roles that one pastor may have performed.

The tension between the academy and the practitioner of ministry has not escaped the

library. The librarian and the library are a part of the academy with their own perspectives of

what is needed in preparation for ministry. The early studies of the reading habits of clergy

expressed a disappointment with the amount of reading being done. There was an expectation or

an ideal that the librarians had that was unmet. Librarians have had a major role in pushing the

accrediting bodies to require information literacy to enhance what they have seen as lacking in

72
training across multiple disciplines. There is no known study that links the development of

information literacy skills in the academe with improved performance in church ministry.

The studies of pastors have emphasized that they are similar to humanities scholars in

dependence upon the use of their personal libraries for their information needs. Some of the

studies emphasized the books at the expense of periodicals in the personal libraries. The concern

of the researchers was not on the development of the personal library but increasing usage of the

local institutional libraries. They recognize that pastors have found it difficult to organize and

retrieve materials from their personal collections. There is no study on the training that pastors

have received in the development and management of a personal library for ministry. There is

no known study of the process that pastors use to develop and maintain the personal library.

The emphasis on the personal library was cultivated early in theological training

education. The studies of students showed that they had a tendency to depend upon items in

their personal libraries instead of the academic library when it was possible. The quality of the

material was not as important as the ease of retrieval. The studies of theological faculty showed

that they did not use the academic library, if it could be avoided in favor of personal libraries and

colleagues as sources. The faculty did not expect students to know how to use the academic

library and did not believe it was their responsibility to teach them. A faculty holding this

philosophy may be resistant to incorporating information literacy within the curriculum.

Pastoral use of computers in ministry has grown as personal computers have become

nearly ubiquitous. The use of the computer to access the Internet for information to use in

sermon preparation is noted. The access to electronic books whether through purchase of

individual titles or commercial theological collections has not been explored.

The ATLASerials® database of full text theological journals from the American

Theological Library Association is available for individual or institutional subscription for

73
alumni. The use of journal articles by seminary students has not been correlated with use by

pastors in ministry? The research does not exist to show whether ATLAS® is fulfilling a pastoral

need or whether it is designed to meet the theological librarian ideal of pastoral information

need.

Several studies have focused on the preparation and delivery of a sermon as a function

where practices of a pastor may be assessed. The sermon is a frequent activity, the most formal

and public of any act of pastoral ministry. It has the advantage of using all of the competencies

of information literacy in its preparation and delivery. A study of this process in pastors who

have been in ministry for some time cannot be a strict assessment of their academic program.

They will have adapted their learning to their own process. The study of their recall of what they

were taught compared to their current practice would help the researcher understand their

thought process and serve to inform the theological curriculum especially in information literacy

programs.

There are several steps in the preparation of a sermon that are consistent for all. A topic

and biblical passage must be chosen. At a minimum, the sermon will have an introduction, body,

and conclusion. An information need of pastors is finding illustrations to use in the sermons.

The process of choosing a topic and passage was frustrated in Roland’s (2008) dissertation

because of the use of a lectionary. The use of sermons that are purchased over the Internet or

through publications has developed into a problem with conservative pastors. A study of the

process of the preparation of a sermon, including those who plagiarize them, would serve as a

contribution to theological education. The extent of the plagiarism problem has not been

established in any studies.

Lonsway reported from the ATS study that laity valued “Competent

Preaching/Competent Worship Leading” higher than clergy and clergy valued “Clarity of
74
Thought and Communication” (2006, p. 121) statistically higher than laity. The study did not

provide the components for “clarity of thought and communication” (p. 121) as multiple

questions were used to create this category. Baumann’s (1967) study of conservative pastors

found that they valued content more highly than delivery. He did include the components that

were valued in ranked order and they would appear to align with the ATS study. A study of the

motivations behind the attempt to provide “clarity of thought and communication” (Lonsway,

2006, p. 121) and the content in sermons may help to explain why pastors are willing to

plagiarize sermons.

75
 4.0 METHODOLOGY

4.1 QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

The literature on the information behavior of clergy contains numerous examples of collecting

quantitative data that were either not analyzed or significant conclusions could not be found.

The nature of the problem is complex and it is difficult to isolate variables that can be measured.

Few pastors are willing to take the time out of their schedules to complete a lengthy

questionnaire. Alternatively, their work is filled with acts of oral communication. They are

accustomed to communicating with precision in theological matters and few are reluctant to

speak of their theological training. The topic is relevant because there was no dissertation or

published work that specifically addressed the combination of information literacy and sermon

preparation. It is also clear that the preparation of a sermon has required all of the competencies

of information literacy for many centuries before this concept or pedagogical perspective was

identified.

A qualitative approach was chosen because of the complexity of the variables being

researched. It allows the researcher to discover patterns through interactions with subjects of the

study. The researcher seeks to discover the perspectives of the population being studied. The

method inductively draws salient issues from those being researched instead of shaping the

results through the testing of hypotheses.

76
 Grounded theory was developed by Glaser and Strauss (1967) and was built upon a

positivist view where knowledge is based upon science. Charmaz (2005) advocates a movement

away from positivism to a constructivist epistemology and calls her method constructivist

grounded theory. She inserts the researcher into the interpretation of the data along with the

informant during extended interviews. Her major concern is the accuracy of the interpretation

instead of letting the interviewee provide the interpretation according to Glaser (2012). He

claimed a constructivist approach would allow the researcher to not confront personal bias. Bias

in interpretation is reduced in grounded theory by collecting data from many sources and

conceptualizing the data so that personal views drop out (Glaser, 2012).

This study used a grounded theory approach as it is able to provide theories of the

interaction between the academic subject of information literacy and the practice of sermon

preparation. Glaser (2009) claimed grounded theory is ideal for a novice writing a thesis or

dissertation because it can produce original and relevant research. The novice is more willing to

see new patterns instead of forcing the data into preconceived patterns. The theory itself was not

derived from a view of research but developed through Glaser’s own research and teaching using

the method (Glaser, 2009).

The ACRL Information Literacy Standards begin with an assumption that the proper

steps in research are known. Grounded theory does not impose a theory on the research or

presume to know the process of the subjects carrying out an activity. The necessity for using

grounded theory is similar to the problem experienced by Ellis (1987) where conventional

quantitative research methods did not explain the problems. The ACRL Standards were

provided as a generic model but do not explain the information seeking process of successful

pastors because they were created for students in a different context. Ellis adopted the grounded

77
theory approach and was able to develop theories and models of information seeking behavior of

researchers in multiple subject fields (Ellis, 1993, 1997, 2005).

In grounded theory everything that is recorded, seen, or said is considered to be data to be

analyzed. The initial analysis is by assigning codes to patterns recognized in the data. At this

stage the categories are descriptive. Glaser (2012) claimed that the constructivist grounded

theory of Charmaz (2005) failed to move past the descriptive stage to conceptualize theories.

The researcher must continue to review the data conceptualizing categories and recoding

(Holton, 2010; Saldaña, 2009). Saturation with the data and recognition of concepts will cause

the researcher to collapse descriptive codes into conceptual codes as theory develops

(Hernandez, 2009; Holton, 2010). The researcher can stop collecting data when the point of

theoretical saturation has been reached (Breckenridge & Jones, 2009; Glaser, 1978; Holton,

2010). The process of doing grounded theory also requires writing of theoretical memos in

parallel with the coding process. Memos slow the coding process but also prevent the

development of a theoretical framework too early in the process (Holton, 2010).

4.2 THE LIMITATIONS OF THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The relatively small size of the sample does not make it possible to generalize to the whole

population of Evangelical pastors. The population was diverse in age and of the institutions from

which they received theological instruction. Core theological tenets are largely shared between

denominations and associations of Evangelical churches. Evangelical theological education has

a homogenous nature due to institutions using the same textbooks and professors receiving

doctoral degrees from a small number of schools.

78
 4.3 SELECTION OF SUBJECTS

4.3.1 Population

The sample size was a minimum of eight and a maximum of fifteen individuals. There is no

required minimum size of sample for qualitative research. One criterion for the size of a sample

is to determine a minimum size that would be sufficient to provide coverage of the topic to meet

the objective of the study (Patton, 2002, pp. 242-246). The maximum would be determined

when no new information is being given by the interviewees.

The sample was drawn from several sources within the region around Lancaster,

Pennsylvania for convenience purposes of conducting interviews in person. One source was

from alumni of several Evangelical Bible colleges and seminaries who are members of SEPTLA.

Baptist Bible College & Seminary, Biblical Seminary, Calvary Baptist Seminary, and

Philadelphia Biblical University were contacted as their graduates would likely pass the

screening questionnaire (Appendix I). A second source was an e-mail list that Lancaster Bible

College had developed of Evangelical pastors. This list provided potential participants from a

larger number of schools. The population was expanded to include Appalachian Bible College,

Dallas Theological Seminary, Grace Theological Seminary, Moody Bible Institute, Talbot

Theological Seminary, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Washington Bible College & Capital

Bible Seminary.

The population was not expected to be gender or racially diverse. The theological

viewpoint of Evangelical churches varies and some do permit women to serve in various roles on

a church staff. It would not be expected to find a female pastor engaged in a preaching role in a

significant number of Evangelical churches. Also, the number of racial minority pastors would

79
be small even though it is growing in the 21st century. No minority pastor was chosen in the

random selection to be interviewed.10

None of the pastors identified themselves as a fundamentalist. Appalachian Bible

College is the only school that was contacted that currently self-identifies as fundamentalist in

viewpoint. Several of the schools from which the pastors graduated were considered

fundamentalist in the recent past but do not now self-identify as fundamentalist on their websites.

There should have been a number of alumni who are fundamentalist pastors. There is no way of

knowing the reason why they were not in the sample although some may have considered it a

matter of separation from association with Lancaster Bible College since it is no longer a

fundamentalist school.

4.3.2 Contact

The initial contact with pastors was made by a letter or e-mail from Dr. Peter Teague, President

of Lancaster Bible College (Appendix M) on October 28, 2011 to the President of the other

institutions, requesting participation by sending an e-mail (Appendix Q) to their alumni. The

design protocol called for the institutions to send the e-mail so that they could maintain

confidentiality with their alumni addresses. Attached to Dr. Teague’s letter was an explanation

of the research project (Appendix P). It is impossible to know how many e-mails were sent to

alumni. The e-mail requested the pastors to send the researcher an e-mail indicating their interest

in participating. The pastors who responded were sent a short set of screening questions

(Appendix I). On November 10, 2011, the LBC president’s office re-contacted the schools that

had not sent out the e-mail requesting permission.

10
It is not known whether any of the pastors who passed the screening questionnaire were a minority.
80
4.3.2.1 Response The alumni offices of Philadelphia Biblical University, Biblical Theological

Seminary, and Moody Bible Institute were known to have sent the e-mail to alumni. E-mails

from those willing to participate began to arrive on November 1, 2011 and the screening

questionnaire was sent to each respondent as they arrived. A total of 46 people returned the

screening questionnaire. Two e-mails were received from graduates of Grace Theological

Seminary in the middle of December but were too late to participate.

4.3.3 Participants

4.3.3.1 Qualifications The qualifications of the participants were validated using screening

questions (Appendix I). The rationale for these specific questions is as follows:

1. Did you graduate from a Bible college or seminary? Yes No What school(s)?

Except in the possibility of a few Evangelical denominations, the local church determines

the minimum qualifications of a pastor it calls. The pastor could have no formal theological

training or have attended without completing studies. If information literacy has been integrated

into the theological curriculum either formally or informally, one who has not graduated may not

have received this instruction. The identification of the school is intended to add variation to the

sample.

2. What year did you graduate with your highest theological degree?

The year that the pastor graduated was used to select participants from several different

decades. Bibliographic instruction and information literacy instruction have not been

implemented consistently at theological institutions. There may or may not be a difference

between graduates who have or have not received intentional information literacy instruction. A

stratification of the sample by time period was expected to provide insight to the research.

Participants were asked about their academic preparation for ministry (Appendix J, Question 2).

81
It is possible a pastor received information literacy instruction in a non-secular institution and the

skills were adapted to theological education.

3. Did you take any courses on homiletics while in school? Yes No

Students may graduate from a Bible college without having studied preaching and still

become a pastor. A homiletics course generally integrates Bible, theology, and research skills in

the development of a sermon. The lack of a course in homiletics would force a pastor to be self-

taught and possibly miss instruction that is being researched in this project.

4. Would you consider yourself to be an Evangelical Christian according to this

nine point definition by The Barna Group? Yes No

“Born again Christians" are defined as people who said they have made a
personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in their life today and who
also indicated they believe that when they die they will go to Heaven because they
had confessed their sins and had accepted Jesus Christ as their savior."
“Evangelicals" meet the born again criteria (described above) plus seven other
conditions. Those include saying their faith is very important in their life today;
believing they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs about
Christ with non-Christians; believing that Satan exists; believing that eternal salvation
is possible only through grace, not works; believing that Jesus Christ lived a sinless
life on earth; asserting that the Bible is accurate in all that it teaches; and describing
God as the all-knowing, all-powerful, perfect deity who created the universe and still
rules it today” (The Barna Group, 2007).
Evangelical churches are a significant segment of the churches in the United States. The

largest ATS accredited theological seminaries are Evangelical (Association of Theological

Schools in the United States and Canada, 2007, p. 5). Bible colleges are a phenomenon within

the Evangelical church. This homogeneous sampling was expected to reduce variation that is

extraneous to this research. For this research project, the theological educational background is

more important than the specific belief. This definition could have caused some potential

participants not to agree because of not desiring to self-identify as an Evangelical instead of a

Fundamentalist. Only pastors who answered in the affirmative were selected. If the ongoing

82
research indicated that there was a significant variation that needed to be investigated, a pastor

who met all other qualification criteria would have been selected from those who answered no.

5. Do you regularly preach in a church ministry? Yes No

This question was intended to screen out those who conduct itinerant ministries or are not

preparing sermons every week. Itinerant preachers often have a number of sermons that are

preached regularly in different locations and not regularly using research skills which are the

focus of this research. A pastor preaching at the same church will need new sermons that meet

the diverse needs and backgrounds of a church body. Pastors were selected from those who

answer in the affirmative.

6. Do you use a lectionary for choosing your sermon topics? Yes No

The choice of a topic and biblical passage for a sermon is an important step within

information literacy skill development which the use of a lectionary decreases or eliminates. The

use of a lectionary by the informant hindered the research conducted by Roland (2008). A pastor

who used a lectionary was not be selected for an interview.

7. In what city and state do you minister?

This question was intended to locate participants who would be convenient to interview.

It also permitted travel to locations that would be at a further distance in order to find enough

participants or if the sample was not providing meaningful results.

4.3.3.2 Selection A random sample was selected from those who met the screening

qualification. The variables of institution and decade of graduation were used. A range of

schools and period of academic preparation was desired. The intent was to have no more than

three from any one school. Participants represented the past three decades from the graduation

83
criteria. Preference was given to those who were within one day’s driving distance of Lancaster,

Pennsylvania.

The pilot study was conducted with three Lancaster Bible College graduates from the 29

respondents from all schools who were qualified according to the screening questions. They

were divided into three groups by the date of their last degree and one person was chosen by

random from each period for a pilot interview.

The remaining 26 respondents who met the qualification in the screening questionnaire

were separated by period in which they had received their last theological degree. Three of the

26 respondents were eliminated because they were in Europe or multiple states away from

Lancaster, Pennsylvania. A limit of no more than three graduates from one theological school

was imposed. Interviews were requested with eleven pastors. Three pastors were not able to

arrange a meeting time for an interview. Eight pastors were interviewed for this study who met

the qualification of having graduated from a Bible college or seminary and having taken a course

in homiletics while in school. They all were involved in regular preaching ministries within a

church. They all described themselves as Evangelical Christians according to the definition of

the Barna Group. The schools and degrees they had received is represented in Table.

84
 Table 5: Academic Training of Pastors

Pastors Degrees Bachelors Masters Doctorate

Biblical Theological Seminary 1 1 1
Evangelical Theological 1 1 1
Seminary
George Fox Evangelical 1 1 1
Seminary
Gordon Conwell 1 2 1 1
Grace Theological Seminary 1 1 1
Grand Rapids Theological 1 1 1
Seminary
Lancaster Bible College 4 5 2 3
Luther Rice Theological 1 1 1
Seminary
Messiah College 1 1 1
Moody Bible Institute 2 2 2
Nyack College 1
Pennsylvania State University 1 1 1
Philadelphia Biblical University 1 1 1
Talbot Theological Seminary 1 1 1
UC San Diego 1
United Wesleyan College 1 1 1
Unknown 1 1 1
Westminster Theological 1 1 1
Seminary
Word of Life Bible Institute 1 1
Totals 23 8 10 4

85
 Three of the pastors had graduated with a degree from Lancaster Bible College. Two

pastors had a BA and a MA from Lancaster Bible College. One of these had graduated from a

Bible institute and transferred to Lancaster Bible College for the BA and MA and then

completed a DMin at another institution. The other Lancaster Bible College graduate was the

only one interviewed that had attended only one Evangelical institution. One pastor graduated

with a MDiv and DMin from a theological seminary and then completed a graduate certificate in

preaching at Lancaster Bible College. This information was learned during the interview and

had not been provided on the screening questionnaire. This pastor did not provide the school for

his undergraduate degree in philosophy. One pastor graduated from Luther Rice Theological

seminary, which is accredited only by TRACS.

The eight pastors, who were interviewed, had attended or graduated from sixteen

different Evangelical liberal arts colleges, Bible colleges, or seminaries. Three pastors had

completed a DMin program, one was enrolled in a DMin program and one held a PhD from a

seminary. None held only an undergraduate degree. Twenty-three degrees (plus one graduate

certificate) were distributed among the eight pastors.

The screening questionnaire asked for the year that potential respondents had graduated

with their last theological degree. The pastors chosen to be interviewed last graduated between

1985 and 2009. The year of graduation did not correlate with level of preaching experience.

Two pastors that were interviewed had graduated in 1985 but one had 41 years of ministry and

the other had 29 years. A pastor with 46 years experience last graduated in 1999. One pastor

last graduated in 2007 but had 35 years of ministry experience. Four pastors had between 29 and

46 years of preaching experience and the other four had between seven and 14 years.

The sample of pastors had a wide range of diversity for Evangelical pastors. They had

seven to forty-six years of preaching experience. They were pastors of Evangelical churches
86
across the spectrum from conservative to the more liberal side of Evangelicalism. All of the

pastors had at least a master’s level theological degree. All but one of the pastors had graduated

from multiple theological institutions.

They lacked diversity in gender representation as was expected among Evangelical

churches (p. 85). One church had a female youth pastor on staff.11 There was one female Bible

college graduate who responded but did not meet the requirements of the screening

questionnaire.

The eight pastors were assigned names of biblical characters in alphabetical order as they

were interviewed for the purposes of anonymity. The order of the transcripts in the appendices

parallels the naming of the pastors. The year of the last degree in the screening questionnaire did

not correlate with pastoral experience because they all continued with theological education after

entering the ministry. Pastoral experience did have some correlations with the number of years

of biblical language instruction received. There seemed to be a correlation with biblical

language instruction and the choice of electronic biblical studies library purchased. Personal

finances were a factor with the two pastors who did not own an electronic library.

11
This information was learned during the interview of a pastor.
87
 Table 6: Demographics of Pastors Interviewed

Pastor Years of Pastoral Year of Last Electronic Library

Biblical Experience Degree
Languages
Amos 3 Greek 46 years 1999 BibleWorks
1 Hebrew
Benjamin 1 Greek 7+ years 2009 none
Caleb 1.5 Greek 29 years 1985 BibleWorks
1 Hebrew
David None 7-8 years 2008 Logos®
Ethan 4 Greek 41 years 1985 BibleWorks
2 Hebrew
Felix None 8 years 1990s Logos®
Gideon 0.5 Greek 14 years 2006 Logos®
2.5 Hebrew
Hosea 2.5 Greek 35 years 2007 none, free Internet
.5 Hebrew
.5 Aramaic

4.4 DATA COLLECTION PROCESS

4.4.1 Interview Process

Qualified respondents were contacted by telephone or e-mail to arrange an appointment

preferably at their office. This allowed them to have ready access to their resources and

examples when responding to a question. It also permitted the researcher to see their personal

libraries.

The following statement was provided to each potential participant when contact was

made to arrange the appointment and before the formal interview was conducted.

I am the director of the library at Lancaster Bible College. I am in the process of

doing research for my doctoral dissertation at the School of Information Science of the
University of Pittsburgh. The research will specifically look at the practice of pastors in
the preparation and delivery of a sermon. I plan to conduct the interview using open
ended questions. I expect the interview will last for one or two hours. It is hoped that
theological education will be improved by the results of this study.

88
 You will never be identified in the dissertation or any derivative work. I will be
recording the interview for later analysis. The nature of this type of research requires that
I provide you with a written notice of privacy that you must agree to before we can
conduct this interview.

The interviewee was provided the University of Pittsburgh, Institutional Review Board

approved statement of compliance with confidentiality (Appendix R). The approved process did

not permit contact with the interviewee after the interview. The analysis would have benefited

from the ability to have follow-up questions to clarify responses. When the pastor had

understood and agreed to the compliance statement, the interview process proceeded. An

attempt was made to be empathetic with the interviewees but at the same time not to indicate

approval or disapproval of their responses.

The interviews were recorded with a Philips Voice Recorder Model LFH0662/40 in MP3

format. A copy of the recording for each interview was preserved for submission with the

dissertation. The interview recordings were converted to text by a professional service. The

transcribed texts were manually corrected by comparing the recording to the output. This

required listening to the recording multiple times for each interview. Each time a text was

quoted, the recording was again used to verify the text. The files of the recording and text were

named in sequential order with a biblical name beginning with the letter of the Pastor A- Amos,

Pastor B- Benjamin, etc. for mnemonic purposes.

The interviews were conducted between November 16 and November 23, 2011. An

attempt was made to transcribe the interviews with Dragon Naturally Speaking speech

recognition software with poor results. The attempt at correction provided the opportunity to

listen to the earlier interviews while conducting later interviews. The recordings were sent to a

commercial transcription service on November 28, 2011. The ideal would be to code each

transcription between interviews (Saldaña, 2011, p. 90).

89
4.4.2 Research Question

What are the information literacy skills of pastoral graduates from Evangelical Bible colleges

and seminaries demonstrated by their preparation of a sermon?

4.4.3 Interview Questions

4.4.3.1 Demographics How much preaching experience do you have?

The initial purpose of the first three questions was to provide demographic information.

They also served to build rapport by allowing the pastors to talk about themselves and a major

part of their life’s work.

2. Could you please tell me about your academic preparation for becoming a pastor?

This was for demographic information. A follow-up question was used to specify the

actual institution(s) attended when that was not proffered.

3. What would you consider your most significant preparation, outside of formal
education, for becoming a pastor?

This was a presupposition question intended to reinforce to the pastors that they have

important information (Patton, 2002, p. 369).

4.4.3.2 Training The following questions relate to the study of the biblical languages.

The study of the biblical languages has been an important component within Evangelical

theological education. Biblical languages are used because both Hebrew and Greek are taught in

seminaries and pastors may have different levels of interest and proficiency. The languages are

important for the level of exegesis that may be done. The lack of ability in the languages would

limit the use of commentaries. The pastor that could not use the languages would be limited in

evaluating certain exegetical works and finer distinctions within theology. Although the

languages are important for exegesis, pastors do not always attain or maintain a high level of

proficiency.

90
 a. How many years of the biblical languages did you take in your formal education?

Some Evangelical pastors have not studied Greek or Hebrew while in Bible college or

seminary. It would be more unusual for an MDiv graduate of an Evangelical seminary who did

not take the languages. The answer to this question affected the three following questions.

b. What level of proficiency have you maintained in the biblical languages?

c. What is your attitude towards using the biblical languages in exegesis?

d. How do the results of study in the biblical languages affect your sermon?

5. In your opinion, how well did your theological education prepare you for your
preaching ministry?

This question explicitly sought an opinion on their formal preparation (Patton, 2002, p.

350). Question 3 was about preparation outside of school. The question preceded more in depth

questions that probed the extent of their preparation that would fit within the category of

information literacy. It reinforced that they do have information to share and that the purpose of

the research was to improve theological education.

6. Could you describe the instruction you received on the use of information
resources?

7. What, if any, training did you receive in school in the use of resources such as
commentaries, magazines and journals, encyclopedias and dictionaries?
The question was intended to find whether they had received information literacy

instruction. From a librarian’s perspective, finding and using resources are usually the focus.

Question 12 sought their use of specific resources. Question 18 seeks their opinion on being able

to find resources that they need in the context of their personal library. The suggested list of

resources began with commentaries because it was expected to be the resource used the most

frequently.

91
4.4.3.3 Use of Information in Sermon Preparation Could you describe the last sermon that

you preached?

The purpose of this question was to orient the subject to the specifics of the last sermon.

Questions 8-10 asked for the general process. Questions 11-12 referred specifically to the last

sermon. There was also a question asked concerning whether this sermon was typical. This

question was followed up with a statement to refer to the Sunday morning sermon where the

pastor preached both Sunday morning and evening. The evening service may be less formal or

have a different purpose that would not be typical to compare with other respondents.

9. What are your normal steps used in the preparation of a sermon?

10. How is a sermon topic chosen?

The order of questions 9 and 10 may present a problem depending upon the type of

sermon. A preacher developing a topical sermon starts with a topic and then finds a biblical

passage(s) that addresses the issue. A preacher developing an expository sermon starts with a

biblical passage and draws the topic from that passage.

11. What process is used to choose a biblical passage?

12. How did you develop an outline for your last sermon?

13. We have been discussing your process to develop a sermon. Now I would like to
ask you about specific resources that were used in studying the biblical passage chosen
for your last sermon.

This statement is a prefatory statement intended to transition to the preacher’s use of

different types of information resources.

a. What role did commentaries have in the study for your last sermon?

b. Commentaries may have emphases such as devotional, homiletical, exegetical,

expository, etc. Could you describe the types of commentaries that you used?

92
 c. How did you use exegetical tools such as lexicons, concordances, and grammars?

Some proficiency in the biblical languages were necessary to use these tools in the past.

Computer programs now make it possible to use these resources with little or no knowledge of

the languages. A knowledge of the languages is required to critically evaluate the data provided

by the programs.

d. What magazines or journal articles were used as a resource?

Previous studies had asked pastors about reading of journals or magazines (Huseman,

1970; Lancour, 1944; Porcella, 1973; Tanner, 1994; Wicks, 1997). The studies by Gaba (2008,

2009) found MDiv students preferred using books instead of periodicals. Pastors may have been

limited to the periodicals that they could afford but as more titles become available online, access

should increase, if they have the desire to search for them. Question 25 asked about access to

full text theological journals available through ATLASerials® database.

e. What role do resources from the Internet have in your study and sermon
preparation?

The previous studies had shown an increase in the use of computers and the Internet

(Phillips, 1992; Smith & Smith, 2001b; Troxel, 1987; Wicks, 1997). Even the popular computer

program for pastors, Logos®, has moved to an Internet based resource. The concern in this

question was on the types of resources used and the evaluation of the content. Pastors who

graduated before the Internet was widely available may not have had the opportunity for formal

training on evaluation of this medium. They may be more suspicious of content since

Evangelicals were concerned with pornography over the Internet ("Christian leaders target

cyberporn," 1997; J. W. Kennedy, 1998; "Religious leaders join in fighting cyberporn," 1997;

Zipperer, 1994).

14. If you consider your normal practice, what did you do differently in preparing
your last sermon?
93
4.4.3.4 Critical thinking and evaluation What is your most important consideration in

preparing a sermon on a difficult topic or biblical passage?

The question does pose several presuppositions. A pastor may avoid preaching a sermon

on a difficult topic or biblical passage. The expected answer from an Evangelical pastor would

be fidelity to the biblical text. If the potential sermon is a difficult topic or sermon, there is more

than one major viewpoint and the congregation needs to hear it. Briscoe (2005, p. 662) stated

that preaching on controversial topics can make Christianity relevant. This question attempted to

draw out a latent response that recognized critical thinking skills in preparing the sermon and

those listening to it. The following question explicitly asked about critical thinking.

16. When a sermon covers a subject with competing viewpoints, even among those in
your church, you are placed in a position where difficult choices need to be made.

This prefatory statement is intended to orient the interviewee to the problem of

controversial issues. Controversial issues are a likely place where critical thinking skills

would be exercised. The two questions sought to determine whether the pastor intentionally

uses critical thinking in sermon preparation. They also were intended to determine a balance

between the critical thinking of a theologically trained professional and that of a hearer of a

sermon. Some pastors described cases where the hearers were discouraged from thinking

critically and encouraged to accept the view presented as the truth. If there were to be a

hypothesis, it would be that the more conservative the pastor, the greater would be the critical

thinking displayed in both the preparation and sermon presentation.

a. What choices do you take in presenting the competing viewpoints in your

sermon?

The first question is directed towards the presentation during the sermon which answers

the question whether the pastor desired to model the process of critical thinking for the church.

94
In a covert fashion it may provide the process that is actually used. Some pastors did indicate

favoring positions within their theological worldview which correlated with the findings of

Wicks (1997, pp. 93-94).

b. What is your process to determine the best view?

The pastor may use proper critical thinking skills to determine a position but choose not

to develop this argument in a sermon. The potential is for the pastor to describe what should be

the process instead of what was used.

4.4.3.5 Knowledge base 17. What affect did the preparation of your last sermon have on
you?

The definition of expository preaching by Haddon Robinson included application “to the

personality and experience of the preacher” before the message could be applied “to the hearers”

(2001, p. 21). The sermon should not only increase the knowledge base of the preacher but

needs to have personal application to the preacher. The sermon that affects the preacher has a

greater affect on the hearers (Anderson, 2005, pp. 550-551; H. W. Robinson, 2001, pp. 25-30).

4.4.3.6 Extent of information 18. How do you determine that you have enough information to

prepare a sermon?

Previous studies of pastors have noted the time restraints that they operate under every

day. Hospital visitation, funerals, and numerous other unscheduled events may disrupt a

schedule. A pastor who preaches weekly must begin preparation for the next week’s sermon. A

preacher does not have the luxury of seeking an extension. The preacher must preach at the

appointed time even if the preparation is below personal standards (Gregory, 2005).

95
4.4.3.7 Access Information Effectively and Efficiently 19. When you need to know

something, how confident are you that you can find the answer?

This question sought the opinion of the pastor on their level of research skills (Patton,

2002, p. 350). The following questions sought a response that could be compared to the opinion.

20. If you did not find the answer in your personal library resources, describe the
steps you would use to fill this need.

The normal application of this information literacy skill is related to the resources of the

library in the context of formal education. Previous studies have found that institutional libraries

are a lesser used resource for pastors seeking information (Brockway, 1974; Lancour, 1944;

Tanner, 1994). The literature has shown that pastors depend upon their personal libraries for

most of their resources. A later series of questions considers the subject of the personal library.

4.4.3.8 Self-Evaluation 21. Please describe the process that you use to evaluate yourself after

delivering a sermon.

Self-assessment is not one of the competency areas within the ACRL standards. It is

included as a final step in guidelines from the Middle States Commission on Higher Education

(Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools. Commission on Higher Education., 2003, p.

73). In the academic setting, the student is assessed by the instructor but in the church setting,

the pastor may be assessed by the church board and may receive feedback after each sermon.

The preacher needs to take the initiative to do self-evaluation and to seek it from others in an

unbiased manner (see H. W. Robinson & Larson, 2005).

96
4.4.3.9 Personal resources 22. The following are three questions on the process you use to

develop and maintain your personal library and other information resources.

Previous studies have shown that pastors consider the personal library as their most

important source of information. There are a few publications that discuss the development of a

pastor’s library (Barber, 1974, 1989; Barber & MacArthur, 1987; Carson, 2007; Longman, 2007;

Moyer, 1944, 1953; Shaddix, 2005; Stitzinger, 1992). If this is true, pastors are assuming the

role of the information specialist albeit for their personal library. It is important to understand

how they have developed, organized, retrieved materials from it.

a. Could you describe the instruction you received concerning building your
personal library?

This question assumed that the pastors had received some instruction on building a

personal library. It could be considered background/demographic information (Patton, 2002, p.

351) but for a pastor, it would have a major impact on the development of a personal collection.

b. Could you describe your plan for developing your personal library resources?

Although the topic of a collection development policy is normally one considered by

information professionals for an institutional library, one work on expository preaching does

include a chapter on how to develop a personal library for preaching (Stitzinger, 1992). Planning

is essential when most pastors have limited financial resources that necessitate wise expenditures

and the central role that the personal library has for the pastor. This question has not been asked

of pastors in the previous studies, although Tanner (1994, pp. 142-143) did record an interview

where a pastor described the process used to build a personal library of over 10,000 volumes.

c. How do you organize your personal library?

Organization should facilitate the finding of materials when needed. Questions 21 c and

21 d are important because the pastor must function as librarian to the personal library.

97
 d. How do you find materials in your personal library?

23. Do you use any electronic libraries such as Logos®, Accordance®, BibleWorks,
etc.?

4.4.3.10 Questions Linking Previous Research 24. What role does an institutional

library (public or academic) have in your sermon preparation?

a. When was the last time that you used the resources of an institutional library for
sermon preparation?

b. What other role would an institutional library have in your life?

25. What journals or magazines do you subscribe to for personal or professional

reading?

26. The American Theological Library Association provides a database of theological

titles in electronic full text. This is a copy of the periodical titles (see Appendix K).

a. How would access to these titles help you in sermon preparation and ministry?

b. Some Bible colleges and seminaries provide free access to the database for
alumni. Do you know whether your school provides access (see Appendix L)?

c. If your school does not provide free access, would you be willing to pay $150 per
year for a personal subscription? Why?

27. In what other ways than you already have mentioned do you use the Internet for
sermon preparation and ministry?

98
 4.5 DATA ANALYSIS

4.5.1 Coding

The personal identifying information of the interviewees was made anonymous in the interview

transcripts. If a person’s name was mentioned, the name of a pseudonym was substituted and

marked with square brackets. Initial codes were created using the heading categories of the

questionnaire. Additional codes were inductively derived from information found in the

interviews during the coding process. Verification of the codes was made by extensive rereading

of the relevant sections in the transcripts while analysis was being performed. The transcripts

were coded using the ATLAS.ti qualitative research program with the following codes:

Access-colleagues Personal libraries-electronic

Access-confidence Personal library-access-find
Access-internet Personal library-instruction
Access-research process Personal library-organization
ATLAS®-alumni access Personal library plan
ATLAS®-sermon prep Pietistic
ATLAS® personal subscription Reading
Biblical languages-proficiency Self evaluation
Biblical languages-word studies Self evaluation-other
Biblical languages-word studies = exegesis Self evaluation-wife
Critical thinking Sermon-Process
Critical thinking-Concern Sermon prep-Application
Critical thinking-presentation Sermon prep-Biblical passage
Critical thinking-process to determine best Sermon prep-Big idea
view Sermon prep-Exegesis
Demographics Sermon prep-Illustrations
Demographics-experience preaching Sermon prep-Outline
Demographics-formal education Sermon prep-topical
Extent of info-enough Topic selection
Illustrations Training-biblical languages
Institutional library-distance Training-Information Literacy
Institutional library-other personal role Training-Preparation
Institutional library-sermon prep Use-choosing topic/passage
Institutional library-use for sermon prep Use-Commentaries
Internet Use-electronic libraries
Internet-miscellaneous Use-internet
Knowledge-affect on pastor Use-Organization
Periodical subscriptions Use-periodicals
99
Use-plagiarism Use-Tools

4.5.2 Assessment Tool

An analysis of the coded data was formed following the grouping of the interview questions. It

was after this analysis that the decision was made to adopt the information literacy assessment

rubric for higher education by the Association of College and Research Libraries (2000). The

ACRL outcomes assessment criteria (2000, p. 6) provided a progression from lower to higher

skills based upon keywords from Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives.

The ACRL instrument was adapted to assess the information literacy skills of pastors

during the preparation of a sermon (Appendix S). The word “student” was replaced with

“pastor” to differentiate the group being assessed. Performance indicators were changed to

indicate the context of a church where appropriate. Where knowledge of a foreign language

appeared in a performance indicator it was changed to specify the original biblical languages of

Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Adaptations were not made to assess pastors in the role of an

administrator or caregiver. Performance indicators that did not apply to the present research

were retained as they could be necessary for the other pastoral roles. The research questions

focused upon the first three of the five standards although interview responses occasionally

related to the latter two standards. The interviews using the research questions were conducted

before the criteria were adopted as an instrument for analysis. The interview questions were not

designed to provide data for every performance indicator under the first three standards. The

pattern for the adaptations followed that of one regional accrediting body and published

adaptations for several other disciplines.

The Middle States Commission on Higher Education published an adaptation of the

ACRL standards to be used as an example by their accredited schools (Bulaong, Hoch, &

Matthews, 2003, pp. 69-73). They ranked the skills as Novice, Developing, Proficient,
100
Accomplished, and Not Applicable. The last category is significant as ACRL also noted that not

all criteria are used in different disciplines.

Adaptations of the standards have been developed for science and engineering

technology ("Information literacy standards for science and engineering/technology," 2006),

anthropology and sociology ("Information literacy standards for anthropology and sociology,"

2008), teacher education ("Information literacy standards for teacher education," 2011), and

journalism students and journalists ("Information literacy competency standards for journalism

students and professionals," 2012).

A parallel exists with the journalism information literacy standard created for students

and professionals ("Information literacy competency standards for journalism students and

professionals," 2012). It recognized deadlines at different phases of the research process which a

pastor must also meet. The outcomes and examples were oriented towards the intended product

at each step or performance indicator.

An information literacy competency standard for theological disciplines has not been

created. Ideally, it would have separate standards for those in practical ministry and students

who have access to an academic library and databases that a pastor would not. The pastor may

be limited to free Internet resources and a personal library. The collection, organization, and

access are limited to the skills and financial resources of the pastor as librarian and funder.

The pastor is working under deadlines like the journalist. The ACRL standards include

steps to re-evaluate the need, research strategy, and results of research. The experienced pastor

does this while studying. The pastor does not have the luxury of time to answer all questions and

must proceed to complete the sermon with the information at hand.

While preparing and delivering a sermon, different pastors may employ specific skills

from the information literacy checklist by training, choice, or neglect. Evangelical pastors may
101
reject a category because of theological reasons such as presenting views considered heretical.

The areas of the standards where a pastor downplayed or negated an information literacy

standard or performance indicator were highlighted. If a pastor presented a practice that was by

training or choice it was noted. The interview questions focused on the research process to

prepare sermons covered by ACRL Standards 1-3. The project did not examine the actual

sermons which would be evaluated under Standards 4-5.

4.5.3 Descriptive Summaries

A summary of the data was created for each research question. The data were then analyzed for

each pastor separately under ACRL Standards 1-3, for each performance indicator, and then for

each outcome indicator. This process was done because the research questions were not

designed to assess the ACRL Standards per se.

4.6 CONFIDENTIALITY

Confidentiality was maintained for the respondents who were interviewed. They were always

identified as Pastor Amos, etc. when cited in the research. If an informant identified institutions

or other people, they received a coded name placed in brackets in the same sequential format

with the first word identifying a relationship such as institution or professor. If different

informants referred to the same school or person, the code was reused. If an informant referred

to an author, this was not made anonymous. The names of churches and locations were given

anonymous names using the same format.

102
 4.7 CREDIBILITY

The validity or credibility of the study was maintained through several processes.

1. The informants were randomly selected from a homogeneous sample that meets

the research criteria.

2. The process for the selection of informants was transparent.

3. The same research questions were asked of all informants who were interviewed.

4. The interviews were recorded and submitted with the dissertation to the

institutional repository for external review, if necessary.

5. Written transcripts of the interviews were included as appendixes.

6. The interview questions and analysis were connected to previous research.

7. The researcher included observations collected before, during, and after each

interview.

8. The data were analyzed in a systematic manner.

9. The data were presented distinct from the analysis.

10. The researcher has an insider status with the informants as one who has the same

theological training and has frequently preached sermons. The researcher has been a

theological librarian for twenty-four years but has never been a pastor of a church.

4.8 PILOT STUDY

An adjunct professor at Lancaster Bible College, who is also a pastor, was willing to be

interviewed as an initial test of the questions and recording procedures. He was already familiar

with the focus of the research from previous discussions. A number of changes to the questions

103
were made to produce those used in the pilot study. The Dragon Naturally Speaking speech

recognition program produced a transcript that would have been useable with sufficient editing.

A pilot study was conducted to test the procedures of the design. The sample was drawn

from the population of alumni of Lancaster Bible College. An e-mail (Appendix N) was sent by

the alumni office. Alumni expressing interest in participating were sent the screening e-mail

(Appendix I). It was expected that comparatively more alumni from Lancaster Bible College

would be willing to be interviewed. The design protocol limited the study to a maximum of

three graduates of any one school.

Three alumni were chosen using the same “purposive sample” (Gorman, Clayton, Shep,

& Clayton, 2005, p. 128) criteria as given in the research process. A sample from different

decades could have shown a difference in information literacy or bibliographic instruction

received as students. The pastors were of similar age but the last graduation date was from

different decades. The alumni in the pilot phase had not received instruction in the formal

information literacy program which was begun in the early 1990s at Lancaster Bible College

The pilot interviews did disclose a need to adjust the interview questions. Their answers

about prior information literacy instruction were not clear and question six was added to

specifically ask about it. Question 26c was adjusted by moving it to the last question about

electronic full text periodicals from the American Theological Library Association because the

personal cost biased their answers to 26a. A malfunction during the second interview caused

part of the recording to be lost.

104
 5.0 DATA ANALYSIS

5.1 INTRODUCTION

The ACRL Information Literacy Competency Standards were promulgated for students doing

research papers. Some of the performance indicators and outcomes do not apply to the sermon

preparation process. Students have access to an academic library whereas most pastors are

reliant upon their personal library resources. All of the pastors investigated the sermon topic

using the Bible as a primary document before turning to secondary sources. The proportion of

exegetical work in the Bible opposed to research in secondary sources differed. The pastors

varied widely in the purpose for which they sought secondary sources and the type of library

where those existed. Some of the pastors did access the resources of an institutional library. All

of the pastors had developed a personal library collection, which in most cases included one of

the computer programs that either contained a theological library collection or exegetical

research tools.

The older pastors began college in the late 1960s. Each of the pastors had continued

graduate or doctoral education after entering the ministry. Every decade of theological higher

education since the 1960s was represented in the sample. Individuals in the sample experienced

the range in information literacy instruction from its rudimentary informal era to having

specialized classes in research.

105
5.1.1 Information Literacy Instruction

The type of information literacy instruction received by the pastors is provided in Table 7. The

only pastor who had received extensive instruction in information literacy was Benjamin. His

master’s program required a research class to prepare students to write a thesis. He attributed

success in his doctoral program to skills learned in this class (Appendix B, paragraphs 29-30). It

also influenced his sermon preparation as he prepared his sermons like a research paper.

Benjamin was heavily dependent upon secondary sources from institutional libraries. Pastors

David and Felix shared a trait of reliance on secondary sources but ones from their personal and

electronic libraries.

Table 7: Commonalities and Differences

Instruction
Literacy
or Information
Bibliographic

Library
Personal
Size of
Document
Primary
Used Bible as

Sources
Secondary
Use of
Scripture
Exegesis of
Original

Database
ATLAS
Value of

Libraries
Theological
Use of
Amos 1 Medium Yes Check Yes Maybe 1
Exegesis
Benjamin 1,2,4 Small Yes Heavy No Definitely 3
Caleb 2 Medium Yes Varies Yes Maybe 1
David 2 Medium Yes Varies Yes Maybe 0
Ethan 1 Large Yes Varies Yes Maybe 1
Felix 2 Medium Yes Heavy Little Maybe 1
Gideon 1 Unknown Yes Used Yes Useful 2
Hosea 4 Large Yes Varies Yes Maybe 2
Level of Information Literacy Instruction Use of Theological Libraries
1 = Minimal (basic or forgotten) 0 = Never
2 = Oneshot or Orientation 1 = Rare/Very Little
3 = Course Integrated 2 = Occasionally
4 = Information Literacy/Resource Course 3 = Often

The interview with Pastor Gideon was conducted in a conference

room and the size of his library was not observed.

106
 5.2 ANALYSIS OF INFORMATION LITERACY COMPETENCIES

The information literacy competency standards of the ACRL were used to assess the

competencies of the pastors preparing sermons (Association of College and Research Libraries,

2000). The standards were prepared for higher education institutions to develop information

literacy skills in students. A stated objective is “developing lifelong learners” (Association of

College and Research Libraries, 2000, p. 4). However, a standard does not exist for assessing

lifelong learning competencies of individuals after graduation who are serving in ministry. The

adoption and adaptation of the standards was done after the interviews and initial analysis had

been performed as described in Section 4.5.2. The interview questions did not address every

performance indicator in the first three standards. Certain performance indicators may not apply

to a pastor preparing a sermon. When a performance indicator was not addressed by a question

or it was doubtful that it applied to the narrow focus of a pastor’s preparation of a sermon, it was

noted in the analysis. The basic standards and performance indicators were adapted by replacing

each reference to student with pastor. The performance indicators and outcomes were adapted as

required by the unique information behavior of a pastor in the performance of ministry. The

following table provides the adapted standards of the ACRL model of information literacy.

107
 Table 8: Adapted ACRL Standards

Information literacy competency standards for higher education

©2000 Association of College and Research Libraries. Chicago, Ill.:
Information literacy competency standards adapted for pastors
by Gerald E Lincoln,
permission requested March 13, 2012

Standard One:
The information literate pastor determines the nature and extent of the information
needed.
Standard Two
The information literate pastor accesses needed information effectively and efficiently.
Standard Three
The information literate pastor evaluates information and its sources critically and
incorporates selected information into his or her knowledge base and value system.
Standard Four
The information literate pastor, individually or as a member of a group, uses information
effectively to accomplish a specific purpose.
Standard Five
The information literate pastor understands many of the economic, legal, and social
issues surrounding the use of information and accesses and uses information ethically and
legally.

5.2.1 Standard One--Determines Extent of the Information Need

The information literate pastor determines the nature and extent of the information needed.

5.2.1.1 Performance Indicator 1:

The information literate pastor defines and articulates the need for information.

Students recognize an information need because they have been assigned to do a research

project as a course requirement. They are usually given some limiting parameters on the topic

and must choose within that scope. Instead of students, this research was conducted with

preachers as subjects and with sermons instead of research projects as the information literacy

activity. The preacher has little or no external limitation on the subject of a sermon.

The first step in the preparation of a sermon is the selection of a topic. The subject of

108
Roland’s (2008, p. 96) research used a lectionary that provided four biblical passages for the

pastor to choose for a sermon. His subject did not see it as a limit but as a help “to focus

sermons on accepted themes of Christian living and to avoid using the sermon to ‘grind a

personal axe’” (p. 138). Roland called for further research in how a pastor chooses the topic of

the sermon. “Further research is needed to determine what other connectivities clergy might use

for Scripture text selection or even if that is the first step in sermon preparation for all clergy

members” (p. 138). His subject questioned whether other pastors might choose a theme and then

find Scriptures to support the theme.

Several introductory questions were asked of each pastor for demographic purposes and

to develop an open rapport for the latter questions. The order of the questions did not follow that

of the ACRL Standards. The pastors were asked two questions concerning the selection of the

theme of their sermons in order to find this answer. The three main factors in determining the

sermon topic are given in Table 9.

10. How is a sermon topic chosen?

11. What process is used to choose a biblical passage?

Table 9: Sermon Topic Selection

Prayer Spiritual Need Biblical Passage Assigned

Pastor Amos X X
Pastor Benjamin X X
Pastor Caleb X
Pastor David X X
Pastor Ethan X X X
Pastor Felix X X
Pastor Gideon X X X
Pastor Hosea X X X

109
 Every pastor in the study planned sermon series for a few months to a year in advance.

The pattern was to alternate between a series on a section of Scripture or a topic. Preplanned

series eliminated the need to find a sermon topic as the time to preach drew near. The pastors

went about the planning process in various ways but selection could still be a struggle. Pastor

Ethan was one who struggled planning the topic of a series.

Goodness, I don’t know how I make those choices. You know I don’t get them from the
local newspaper. It’s always hard for me when I come to the end of something. I know
pastors who kind of plan things out six months in advance and I have never been able to
do that. (Appendix E, paragraph 31)

Pastor Hosea described his approach as “I’m generally drawn to either a topic or a

biblical book that I think would have relevance” (Appendix H, paragraph 27). The issue of

relevance was a spiritual dynamic of seeking direction from the Holy Spirit to recognize a need

in the congregation. He had chosen to preach “through First Peter, which is a letter for believers

who are hurting, that were facing persecution and other hardships and so we’ve been working

verse by verse through Peter this year” (Appendix H, paragraph 27). The need arose because a

young man in the church had committed suicide in the prior year.

Pastor Amos chose his sermon topics by perceived spiritual needs of the congregation.

He listened to requests but he differentiated between an expressed want and a need. “I look at

their real and felt need. As a shepherd I have to look where the sheep are and determine . . . they

probably need to go in this direction” (Appendix A, paragraph 32). Amos created an annual plan

of sermon topics each November or December. He did not use a lectionary or church calendar

prepared by someone else but in effect created his own to address local needs.

The annual plan for Pastor Amos consisted of a variety of sermon types, each of which

required a different approach and therefore a different preaching style. He shifted between

expository book studies, topical sermons, and special sermons. His description was, “I tried to

110
have some variety in the preaching that I’m not just doing book studies but I’m also doing

doctrinal studies . . . justification . . . sanctification . . . the doctrine of Holy Spirit and . . .

character studies of David, Moses . . . and occasionally I’ll do a communion series” (Appendix

A, paragraph 32).

Pastor Caleb chose to preach series of topical sermons or biblical books. He believed the

individual sermon topic should be that of the biblical passage. “Well if I’m preaching through a

book, I’d like to think that it’s chosen because that’s the point of the particular paragraph or the

section that I’m using, you know. If I’m doing a series—a topical series then the topic is often

suggested by the, you know, the series but I try hard to let the point of the text be the point of the

message” (Appendix C, paragraph 31).

Caleb had concluded a sermon series the previous Sunday during which pastors from six

churches agreed to preach sermons on the identical topic and biblical passage in each church. He

had a problem because he did not believe the topic of the biblical passage matched the assigned

topic for some sermons (Appendix C, paragraph 31). He did not identify who selected the

passages or topics. This series was more restrictive than a lectionary because both the passage

and topic for each sermon were supplied.

Pastor Ethan had difficulty deciding sometimes until near the end of a series what should

come next (Appendix E, paragraph 31). His explanation was based upon a spiritual dynamic.

“If I am doing a topical series, I can't tell you how I choose those; I don’t know, just whatever

the Lord impresses on my mind, whatever I am drawn to” (Appendix E, paragraph 27). He also

prayed for direction before making a choice. “I guess I pray about it and just ask God to guide

me” (Appendix E, paragraph 31).

111
 Pastor Benjamin planned his schedule of sermons six months in advance. “So I’ll pray

I’ll think about where we are as a church, I’ll think about what we need, I’ll go back over my file

and I’ll just—what seems right, that’s where we go” (Appendix B, paragraph 48).

Pastor Gideon called himself a senior pastor and part of a team of two co-pastors

(Appendix G, paragraph 3). They choose sermon topics by perceived need. “Sermon topics are

chosen, generally speaking, based on perceived prayerfully discerned need in our congregation”

(Appendix G, paragraph 34). They preach in series on either a book or topics. They agree

together the sermons each will preach.

Pastor Gideon and his co-pastor designed sermons to provide discipleship in the church

(Appendix G, paragraph 34). They consciously considered questions related to the need. “And

so when we go after discipling people, we ask ourselves ‘What are the things that are missing?’”

(Appendix G, paragraph 34).

Neither Pastor David nor Pastor Felix was the senior pastor at their respective churches.

The head pastor at Pastor David’s church chose sermon topics for a preaching series. The three

pastors at his church would decide among themselves who would be the best preacher for each

sermon.

Sermon series at Pastor Felix’s church were four to eight weeks long (Appendix F,

paragraph 29). Pastor Felix knew the sermon series for months in advance in order to prepare but

did not state who selected them.

Pastor Amos focused on a biblical passage, whether he was preaching an expository

series on a book of the Bible or on a topic. The actual sermon topic was developed inductively

from the theme of the biblical passage. He prayed to discern what should be the major emphasis

of the sermon. The major emphasis of the biblical passage was presented as the big idea of the

sermon with its supporting sub-points.

112
 I go to the text and then from the text I devise an outline approach of this. I don’t
necessarily go verse by verse. It’s more section by section, although essentially it works
enough to be verse by verse but I’m giving them a big idea and partly other the sub points
are supporting that big idea of that major premise. (Appendix A, paragraph 30)

When Pastor Amos preached a topical sermon, he started with a presupposition and

developed the sermon using a deductive approach. He had a specific agenda when creating

topical sermons. He attempted to find a significant biblical passage on the topic to prepare the

sermon. “My preference is if I can be teaching a doctrinal section, if I can find a major passage

of scripture that deals with that doctrine, I choose to do that and do straight exegesis of that

passage” (Appendix A, paragraph 34). He preferred exposition of a book over topical sermons

because he feared having a topical sermon violate the meaning of a biblical text.

Pastor Caleb chose a biblical passage and then narrowed the extent of the passage so that

the sermon topic was manageable. “[T]he first step is to select the text and then kind of select

how much of the text—whether I’m going to work from a paragraph or from a verse or even

from a chapter” (Appendix C, paragraph 26). He then sought to identify key ideas. “I usually

make a hard copy of it and work through it with pencil and paper in terms of underlining

keywords, key phrases, trying to get a sense for the structure and the ultimate idea is trying to

come up with the main idea of the text” (Appendix C, paragraph 27).

Pastor Benjamin considered the series topic as a basic theme. “I would say I haven’t dug

in the passage so I have to have like a theme or an idea where I’m starting from” (Appendix B,

paragraph 39). The theme was developed during his study.

Data Analysis Evangelical pastors generally have freedom to determine the topic and content

of their sermons. The fear of Roland’s (2008) subject—that pastors would preach with a

personal agenda without a lectionary—was not realized among this group of Evangelical pastors.

They sought to meet a need that they perceived in their own churches. One pastor differentiated
113
between individual requests and the need of the church by praying with the expectation of

guidance from God.

There were three other points raised in the selection of a topic. Variety was needed in the

type of messages delivered. Discipleship or spiritual change should be expected in the

congregants from hearing the sermon. The sermon theme should be supported by the biblical

passage whether a sermon was topical or expository.

The ACRL Information Literacy Standards conceived of the selection of a topic at the

lowest levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy. The pastors did more than define and articulate a need.

They utilized critical thinking skills to analyze the needs of their congregations. They evaluated

different options such as “want versus need” and sought guidance from the Holy Spirit before

they formulated a plan. The result was a basic list that identified in general terms a series of

topics.

The pastors refined the general topic from the plan into a specific topic to make it

manageable in a sermon. The narrowing was done during the study of the biblical passage where

key ideas were identified. The pastors chose the topic based upon prior knowledge in contrast to

students who would were expected by the Standards to explore general information sources

because they had little knowledge.

5.2.1.2 Performance Indicator 2:

The information literate pastor identifies a variety of types and formats of potential sources for
information.

The data for this section were derived from answers of the pastors about actual sources

rather than potential sources used in preparation of a sermon. They had developed a normal

process that they followed for potential sources of information. Questions 13 and 14 were asked

to seek this information.

114
 13. We have been discussing your process to develop a sermon. Now I would like to ask you
about specific resources that were used in studying the biblical passage chosen for your last
sermon.
a. What role did commentaries have in the study for your last sermon?
b. Commentaries may have emphases such as devotional, homiletical, exegetical,
expository, etc. Could you describe the types of commentaries that you used?
c. How did you use exegetical tools such as lexicons, concordances, and grammars?
d. What magazines or journal articles were used as a resource?
e. What role do resources from the Internet have in your study and sermon
preparation?
14. If you consider your normal practice, what did you do differently in preparing your last
sermon?

Pastor Caleb recognized the different types of commentaries and their different purposes.

He used J. C. Ryle for expository questions and John Stott for interpretation and exposition

(Appendix C, paragraph 41). “I go to a commentary, depending on what I need, you know, what

I would have questions about” (Appendix C, paragraph 42).

Pastor Gideon, probably the youngest of the pastors interviewed, used web resources

widely. As a seminary student he had started using the free website, blueletterbible.org. “It’s

probably not the best resource out there but it was free when I was in seminary and I was poor”

(Appendix G, paragraph 100). Free access to information is ubiquitous. Gideon insisted that a

pastor should be checking Wikipedia to be aware of things. “People12 are going to find better

things than you’ve thought about if you haven’t thought about what Wikipedia says about

anything” (Appendix G, paragraph 121). He would also do a Google search to look for popular

views so that he was prepared to address them within or outside the sermon, depending upon the

need (Appendix G, paragraph 122).

Pastor Gideon drew from a variety of commentaries in sermon preparation. He preferred

exegetical commentaries but used what he called the “Parker’s People Commentary”13 because

12
After the interview he related having parishioners using Wikipedia to fact check during his sermon.
13
The correct title is Peoples Bible by Joseph Parker.
115
of the Wesleyan doctrine (Appendix G, paragraph 44). For the current series on Ephesians, he

was using a homiletical commentary and one he called “moral spiritualistic” (Appendix G,

paragraph 47). He also used Matthew Henry which he called old but he liked it.

The sermon Pastor Ethan had preached the previous Sunday was on the Ten

Commandments. He did not use commentaries in his normal manner. “I was not doing a lot of

heavy exegesis for this so you know I didn’t consult Keil and Delitsch for instance” (Appendix

E, paragraph 35). He did consult Calvin’s commentary, which he called not devotional but

theological (Appendix E, paragraph 39). The Internet was searched for illustrations and

“occasionally to check facts but very little for exegesis” (Appendix E, paragraph 47). Sometimes

a journal article that he could use was found while searching Google.

Commentaries were the major source of information for Pastor Hosea. He recognized the

different types and purposes of commentaries. “I do like the exegetical commentaries just to be

able to discern the meaning of different passages but I also like the homiletical commentaries

from time to time just to see how other pastors and scholars have taken the meaning of a biblical

passage and found relevant application for today” (Appendix H, paragraph 37).

There were several free websites that Pastor Hosea liked to use for biblical studies. “I do

really like Blue Letter Bible® because of the Greek and the Hebrew tools that are available on

that” (Appendix H, paragraph 43). This site also had some commentaries. There were two other

free websites, Biblos and studylight.org, with online commentaries that he checked.

Pastor Felix used books in physical and electronic format, journals, and sometimes the

Internet. He provided authors for his favorite commentaries but did not distinguish the purpose

or audience for which they were written (Appendix F, paragraphs 43, 45). Several authors were

pastors and the commentaries were derived from their sermons. Another commentary was a

two-volume set written by seminary professors for pastors and students. Pastor Felix claimed
116
that the lay training he had received at his church in use of commentaries was sufficient and

formal training was neither received nor necessary. “I cannot remember a time; no, I don’t know

that was necessary that they walk me through on how to use a specific commentary” (Appendix

F, paragraph 23). Pastor Felix was blind to his major weaknesses in the critical evaluation of

commentaries.

Pastor David listed the authors of commentaries he had used for his sermon previous to

the interview. “I think I used kind of a wide range on that one because I went to places like

Swindoll’s, McArthur’s, a lot of times. I will spend some time with J. Vernon McGee for his

simplicity and kind of down-to-earth ways” (Appendix D, paragraph 41). All three of these

authors have been pastors with nationwide radio programs broadcasting their sermons. The

commentaries are revised sermons.

Pastor Benjamin attributed skills learned in a graduate research class as an influence on

his education (Appendix B, paragraphs 29-30). He continued to use those skills in sermon

preparation. He read materials from other disciplines and provided the philosopher, Charles

Taylor, as an example. Taylor’s writings led to a sermon series touching on subjects such as

sports and science. He differentiated commentaries as being “academically rigorous or popular”

and usually preferred the scholarly ones (Appendix B, paragraph 62). He sought out sources

outside of his own theological perspective. He attributed to Haddon Robinson the advice to

“start with personally interacting with the text and getting an idea before you get to other

resources or you end up just giving a book report on other resources” (Appendix B, paragraph

40). Benjamin described a process where he was heavily dependent on secondary sources after

determining his topic from the primary source, the Bible (Appendix B, paragraphs 41-44).

Pastor Benjamin utilized a wide range of resources from listening to sermons, to articles from

Google and listening to online seminary lectures just for the information.
117
 Now primarily, it is either articles or because I’m a bit of a nerd, I’m always looking.
You know last week, I just, I found some theology lecture series at Fuller that they have
available online and when I was just doing other stuff, I’m just listening to it. Didn’t
have to do with what I’m preaching with but that stuff gets in there and it just comes out
later. (Appendix B, paragraph 72)

Pastor Amos had two approaches to sources of information outside of the biblical

passage. One approach actively sought secondary sources. He collected secondary materials for

an extended period before beginning preparation of a sermon on a controversial topic. The

second approach to information sources was more limited. He used lexicons, grammars,

concordances, and the computer program BibleWorks in his study of the biblical text. These

tools enabled him to analyze the Bible as a primary source. The secondary sources had a very

limited role. “Commentaries are usually my last source and that’s for verification of conclusion”

(Appendix A, paragraph 39).

Biblical commentaries are written with different purposes. Each pastor was provided

devotional, homiletical, exegetical, and expository as types of commentaries in a question. Two

pastors were not able to identify correctly the commentaries they used as to the type. Table 10

shows that neither pastor had studied a biblical language while in school.

118
 Table 10: Recognition of Commentaries

Biblical Language Study Recognized Type of Earned Graduate Degree

(years) Commentaries
Amos 3 Greek Yes M
1 Hebrew
Benjamin 1 Greek Yes D
Caleb 1.5 Greek Yes D
1 Hebrew
David None No M
Ethan 4 Greek Yes D
2 Hebrew
Felix None No M
Gideon 0.5 Greek Yes M
2.5 Hebrew
Hosea 2.5 Greek Yes D
.5 Hebrew
.5 Aramaic

Data analysis Evangelical pastors recognize the Bible as a primary document in the technical

sense. Although each pastor started sermon preparation with study or exegesis of the Bible, they

varied at when and to what extent they used secondary sources.

The normal practice for the use of secondary sources is presented in the works of Gordon

Fee who authored two exegesis and hermeneutics textbooks widely used in Evangelical schools.

He taught that commentaries were a last step. “You go to the commentary after you have done

your work; the reason you eventually consult a commentary is to find answers to the content

questions that have arisen in your study” (Fee & Stuart, 2003, p. 267). This limited role can be

seen in his 194-page textbook, New Testament Exegesis (1993), which contained four pages near

the end on commentaries and other secondary sources. Fee wove exegetical tools and sources

for backgrounds into exegetical practice but not secondary sources such as commentaries.

119
 Pastor Amos used secondary sources for sermons on controversial topics. For his normal

expository sermons, they were used for verification only and not to add information. For this

sample of pastors, he was an outlier in this regard.

Pastors David and Felix did not recognize the purpose or intended audience of the

commentaries they used. Pastor Felix dismissed the necessity of being taught the use of

commentaries. From the information literacy side, there has been a failure in training for both

pastors. There has also been a failure on the theological side. Critical evaluation of secondary

sources is a byproduct of biblical language study, which both pastors lacked.

All of the pastors used websites and various electronic resources. They all had either

purchased or considered one of the Bible computer programs. The electronic resources were

used to research ministry needs and information for sermons.

Only Pastor Gideon used Google and Wikipedia to prepare for listener responses from his

audience. He expected listeners to fact check details during the sermon. He wanted to be aware

of popular views that the audience may find on the Internet. This was an innovative approach

more advanced than the Standards could foresee when they were written in 2000.

5.2.1.3 Performance Indicator 3:

The information literate student considers the costs and benefits of acquiring the needed
information.

Two questions were asked of the pastors concerning information literacy outcomes under
this performance indicator.

4. The following questions relate to the study of the biblical languages.

a. How many years of the biblical languages did you take in your formal education?
b. What level of proficiency have you maintained in the biblical languages?
c. What is your attitude towards using the biblical languages in exegesis?
d. How do the results of study in the biblical languages affect your sermon?
24. What role does an institutional library (public or academic) have in your sermon
preparation?

120
 a. When was the last time that you used the resources of an institutional library for
sermon preparation?
b. What other role would an institutional library have in your life?

Biblical Language Study Pastors Benjamin, David, and Felix shared a common lack of

proficiency in the biblical languages. Pastor Benjamin had studied Greek for one year. Biblical

language skills were not important to him. “So, I never—honestly I never feel like, wow. . . . I

just wish I knew the languages better” (Appendix B, paragraph 17).

Neither Pastor David nor Felix had studied Greek or Hebrew even though Pastor David

understood the value of using the languages in biblical studies. “I think it’s an absolute necessity

to understand as, close as I can, the original languages, what was going on. So, that’s always a

part of my studies” (Appendix D, paragraph 12). Pastor Felix considered languages a difficult

field of study which he avoided. “Once again, I’m glad that this is confidential [laughs] but I just

don’t have strength in that; languages are not my strength and because of that and the ease of

wanting to take the easier route, I would avoid those tracks” (Appendix F, paragraph 9). He

chose a non-traditional MDiv program that did not require study of the biblical languages.

Both Pastor David and Felix used Logos® language tools for sermon preparation to

“unpack keywords” (Appendix D, paragraph 17) or “figure out the root meanings of words”

(Appendix F, paragraph 11). Pastors Amos, Caleb, and Ethan used the BibleWorks program,

which is designed for exegesis with the biblical languages but also provides general reference

works (Appendix A, paragraph 95, Appendix C, paragraph 84, Appendix E, paragraph 77).

Pastor Felix was not literate enough in the biblical languages to recognize the need to

evaluate resources. He considered the resources in Logos® as authoritative. “I mean the

computer is a huge help to me, Logos®. I’ve become very proficient in using experts in the

languages that help me define, you know, the meanings of words and things like that” (Appendix

121
F, paragraph 9). He articulated in several answers that the role of the biblical languages in

exegesis was to do word studies (Appendix F, paragraphs 9, 11, 13, 15). He had expectations

that his word studies would provide the understanding of the text. “I could determine, well it

gives me a clear understanding to the text, the context of the text and therefore, hopefully, I can

accurately articulate the context, the original intent of the writers” (Appendix F, paragraph 17).

Role of Institutional Libraries Five of the pastors did not use materials from an institutional

library in sermon preparation or could not recall having done it (Appendix A, paragraph 99,

Appendix C, paragraph 88, Appendix D, paragraph 79, Appendix E, paragraph 79, Appendix F,

paragraph 90). A common excuse for not using an institutional library was distance. Pastor

Amos said, “If I were closer, I would probably be more in that library” (Appendix A, paragraph

97). There was a reliance on their personal library resources.

Only one pastor used the resources of an institutional library heavily. Three pastors used

a library infrequently, which shows the wide disparity. Pastor Benjamin was an outlier in his

heavy use of institutional libraries. He traveled to academic libraries even when it would be an

all-day trip (Appendix B, paragraph 104). A seminary library was about 30 minutes distant and

he used that library almost weekly (Appendix B, paragraph 59).

Pastors Gideon and Hosea used an institutional library less frequently for sermon

preparation. Pastor Hosea had used a library a month before the interview. Pastor Gideon had

used one several months before during the summer. Only Pastor Benjamin continued to use

libraries weekly.

Pastor Caleb believed there was a legitimate philosophical basis for not using library

resources in sermon preparation. He did not consider seminary library materials appropriate for

122
use in a sermon. “[F]rankly, if I’m going to say something from a text that I needed to find out

from a seminary library, I probably ought not to be saying it” (Appendix C, paragraph 90).

There may also be a pedagogical basis in their theological training on the use or non-use

of library materials in sermon preparation. Since all eight pastors had continued graduate

theological education after entering ministry, five did not make a connection between sermon

preparation and library resources while a student.

Pastor Felix was currently enrolled in a DMin program, which gave him access to online

databases. He retrieved information “for writing papers; that’s what I do because that’s what I’m

used to doing” but did not use them for sermon preparation (Appendix F, paragraph 103). The

question about ATLAS® made him consider the possibility of using it to find journal articles for

sermons because “it’d be very beneficial, which is not just something I opt to do” (Appendix F,

paragraph 103).

Data Analysis Pastor Ethan studied the biblical languages and maintained proficiencies in

order to read the Bible in the original languages. Five pastors had lost the proficiency to read the

text but had retained enough to understand and follow the arguments in the exegetical

commentaries. Pastor Benjamin had taken one year of Greek and through his own study was

able to follow the exegetical commentaries. He was philosophically opposed to the need for the

biblical languages.

Pastors David and Felix expressed a belief that there was value that came from the

languages. However, the value was not for exegesis or understanding arguments in

commentaries but for doing word studies. The word studies were made possible by the tools

provided in Logos®. The pastors seemed to confuse exegesis with doing word studies. Exegesis

is normally taught in the language classes, which they had not taken.

123
 The research questions concerning the biblical languages assumed that knowledge of

them was necessary to use certain commentaries (4.4.3.2). Lack of knowledge of the languages

hinders the evaluation of finer distinctions in theology. This assumption was confirmed as the

two pastors, who had not studied the languages, misused them and were unable to evaluate some

theological concepts.

The language programs can provide access to the language data but they cannot provide

analysis. There are situations in Greek and Hebrew where the analysis is dependent upon lexical

and grammatical usage within the context. This knowledge only comes from actual study of the

languages. The potential exists for superficial or false understanding of the biblical text resulting

from the results from the programs substituting for knowledge of the biblical languages.

Every one of the pastors had been enrolled in graduate level theological education while

engaged in pastoral ministry. All eight pastors mentioned using the library for class papers and

research projects (Appendix A, paragraph 26, Appendix B, paragraphs 29-30, Appendix C,

paragraphs 20, 86, Appendix D, paragraph 21, Appendix E, paragraph 21, Appendix F,

paragraph 95, Appendix G, paragraph 22, Appendix H, paragraph 85). However, five pastors did

not use library resources in sermon preparation even when they were simultaneously students

with institutional library access. This would question the validity of attempts to increase library

usage among pastors as Brockway (1974) sought. The provision of free access for alumni to the

ATLASerials® database is a current attempt to increase resource usage. The response among

most of these pastors was only that it could be helpful.

Theological students who are also involved in ministry sometimes avoid using the library

resources for sermon preparation. This raises questions about the relationship between

academics and ministry. This problem correlates with the observation of one theological

124
professor who protested that seminary students were taught to do academic research not practical

research for ministry (Wenderoth, 2007).

The preference for personal resources over library resources was consistent with Gaba’s

(2009) study of theological students and Wenderoth’s (2008) of theologians. Pastor Hosea had

increased his use of libraries because of teaching as an adjunct professor at two schools but was

still dependent upon his personal library for ministry. This lack of institutional library use

confirms little change from Phillips (1992) findings that pastors continue to be infrequent users.

Gaba (2008) claimed that students who received information literacy instruction were

more aware of library resources. Pastor Benjamin had received a semester-length class in

research. His model of sermon preparation would closely follow the template of information

literacy instruction. The question mark in his methodology was the abbreviated study in the

primary document of the Bible.

There is a question why pastors, who presumably are attending classes on campus, would

not avail themselves of library resources for sermon preparation? It could be assumed that most

of the library books and journals they might purchase for their personal libraries were already in

the library. Valid reasons could be a desire to mark up and take notes in their personal copies or

even convenience (Connaway, Dickey, & Radford, 2011). The computer libraries such as

Logos® and BibleWorks may be a possible reason today. Further research needs to be conducted

in this area.

5.2.1.4 Performance Indicator 4:

The information literate pastor reevaluates the nature and extent of the information need.

None of the research questions was directed at this performance indicator and the pastors

did not provide data to assess it. The pastors were working under deadlines that did not permit
125
them to restart the research process. The closest may have been Pastor Caleb’s apropos

description of the deadline. “If it’s Saturday morning, then I’ve already got enough information.

Regardless I just have to get to work with working it into some kind of shape, some kind of an

outline and just put aside all of the preparation” (Appendix C, paragraph 68).

Data Analysis This area may be discarded as inapplicable for a pastoral information literacy

standard.

5.2.2 Standard Two--Accesses Information

The information literate pastor accesses needed information effectively and efficiently.

5.2.2.1 Performance Indicator 1:

The information literate pastor selects the most appropriate investigative methods or information
retrieval systems for accessing the needed information.

In multiple responses, all of the pastors recognized the authority of Scripture. All of the

pastors started their investigation with a study of the core Bible passage or passages. Their

repeated objective was to present the key idea of the chosen passage in their sermon.

The pastors in the sample demonstrated two methodologies for the study of the Bible.

Five pastors called their approach exegesis. One pastor performed exegesis on the text in the

original language of Greek or Hebrew. The other four performed exegesis on the English text

and consulted the original language where they deemed it necessary. At varying points they

would turn to the secondary literature. The second methodology was to read the biblical passage

in English. Three pastors used this method noting key concepts and ideas for further study, then

proceeded to the secondary literature.

The utilization of secondary sources differed among the pastors in the study. These

sources were normally retrieved from their personal libraries. Pastor Benjamin, as noted, used
126
libraries and his minimal personal library. Five pastors retrieved information from BibleWorks

or the Logos® computer program. Pastor Amos used the secondary sources to check validity but

not to provide content for his sermon.

Pastor Ethan performed exegesis of the original text as the primary method of accessing

information, followed by reading in commentaries. He used his BibleWorks program every day.

“In fact I am just, you know, in the process of updating to BibleWorks 9, I had BibleWorks 5 and

I said when they come out with the critical apparatus for Greek, then I will buy a new version

and they finally did and I have a little money in my expense account at the end of the year so I

bought it” (Appendix E, paragraph 77). The use of the critical apparatus for the Greek New

Testament indicates that he is evaluating textual variants as part of the exegetical process, which

requires a higher skill level in the language and exegesis.

The primary investigative method that Pastor Amos used was exegesis of the biblical text

in English. He preferred this method even when the sermon was topical. He described the study

method for last sermon before the interview as atypical but it was a form of exegesis where he

used BibleWorks to find every instance of the phrase “in Christ.” He categorized the usages into

groups and organized his sermon around the groups. Although Pastor Amos expressed an

interest in using ATLAS® to find theological journal articles, he then questioned whether it was

needed. “How much do you depend upon outside resources versus looking at the text, etc?”

(Appendix A, paragraph 113).

The initial investigative method for Pastor Hosea was exegesis in English and consulting

the Greek. He then would use commentaries from his personal library. At one time he had

software that had the church fathers. He had also used the free Online Bible. He investigated

using newer programs but could not afford them (Appendix H, paragraph 77). He had recently

127
discovered Google Books. He continued to look for retrieval systems that could provide free or

low cost information.

Exegesis was the initial method of investigation for Pastor Gideon. “I begin with a

significant amount of prayer, reading the Scripture in English first, not Greek or Hebrew and

then I go backwards from there” (Appendix G, paragraph 31). He started taking notes as he read.

Pastor Caleb studied the biblical text in English. “I usually make a hard copy of it and

work through it with pencil and paper in terms of underlining keywords, key phrases, trying to

get a sense for the structure and the ultimate idea is trying to come up with the main idea”

(Appendix C, paragraph 27). To understand problems, he would access BibleWorks for

exegetical tools and commentaries.

There were two steps in Pastor David’s investigative method. He studied the biblical text

and then secondary sources. He described his normal method in terms of a product. “I spend

time myself kind of writing my own commentary based on whatever I’m studying” (Appendix

D, paragraph 37). It was not clear that his “commentary” was a product of exegesis although he

used the Bible as a primary document.

The primary investigative method of Pastor Benjamin was to read the chosen biblical

passage several times to select the topic and then to search for resources in secondary literature.

He knew how to use library databases and considered himself to be proficient in the use of

Google. “[M]y education taught me how to research so I know what kind of books to look at, I

know how to look through the sources they reference to know what are the key ones are needed

to check out” (Appendix B, paragraph 88).

Data Analysis The pastors chose appropriate methods to access information. The retrieval

systems were based within their personal libraries and no data were provided to measure that.

128
Exegesis of the biblical text is a second method of accessing information. The “big idea” school

of homiletics propounded by Haddon Robinson places emphasis on finding the theme or major

focus of a passage. Exegesis was discussed early in the process but the emphasis was on finding

that preachable big idea around which the sermon is developed. The seeming minimization of

exegesis and a quick jump to sermon development was an unexpected development in this

research. Further research is needed on the role of accessing primary sources and secondary for

sermon preparation.

5.2.2.2 Performance Indicator 2:

The information literate pastor constructs and implements effectively designed search strategies.

The model for the information literacy standards was designed for students conducting

research on library databases. Pastor Benjamin was the only frequent user of libraries. He

followed this information seeking pattern at libraries on a weekly basis. His training and

experience increased his proficiency. “I would either go to the seminary library or Google

searches and like I said, the more you preach, the more you have a theological education. You

kind of know what the keywords to search and what’s going to take you where you want to go”

(Appendix B, paragraph 90).

Pastors David’s and Felix’s search strategies were constructed around the capability of

their Logos® program. Pastor Felix used the example of forgiveness as a keyword search for his

last sermon. “If I’m talking about forgiveness, I’m going to look up—use my Bible program—

look up forgiveness, pull out the verses dealing with that” (Appendix F, paragraph 33). They

both used it to do word studies. They searched Logos® to find keywords in commentaries and

other works.

129
Data Analysis Pastors Benjamin, David, and Felix spoke of their research strategies. Pastor

Benjamin presumably was using multiple systems because he visited several libraries regularly.

Pastors David and Felix use Logos® to find most of their information. No questions targeted this

aspect of research and the few data presented do not reveal enough to evaluate proficiency and

efficiency. This performance indicator is more appropriate for a student than a pastor without

regular use of library databases.

5.2.2.3 Performance Indicator 3:

The information literate pastor retrieves information online or in person using a variety of
methods.
An outcome under this indicator speaks of accessing information in person and at specific

sites. It would appear to be the best place to locate the discussion of the development and use of

the personal library, which is the main source of information for pastors.

Typically, pastors start building a collection of books while they are students. If they had

received any instruction in building a library, it was informal recommendations from professors.

Today, pastors are changing the way they are building a personal library. Six of the eight pastors

interviewed were decreasing the purchase of books and adding e-books in Logos® and

BibleWorks which are marketed to and widely used by Evangelical pastors.

Pastor Benjamin may have presented a myopic view of personal libraries since he

depended upon institutional libraries for his research materials and ministered in proximity to

several. He spoke of a philosophical belief that a large personal library was no longer needed.

“[S]ome of that is obsolete now with the Internet, with electronic resources, with simple things,

like my public library, interlibrary loan; they have no limit” (Appendix B, paragraph 94). He

had reduced the size of his personal library when he moved to his house. He had not organized

his personal collection and it could take time to find a book (Appendix B, paragraphs 98, 100).

130
 There were no other pastors at the church who could share resources with Pastor

Benjamin. He did not have an interest in purchasing any of the biblical study programs

(Appendix B, paragraph 102). He dismissed them as designed for exegetical work. He did not

place a high value on exegesis.

I mean I care but it’s more of what’s the connotation? What’s the history? What’s the
culture? What’s—how did second temple Judaism use that word? How did the
Hellenistic culture use that word? How was it used rhetorically? . . . Most of that, I don’t
think you get through the software. (Appendix B, paragraph 102)

Pastor Amos’ major source of information was his personal library. He organized books

in his library by grouping them by subject. “I want a book on family, I’ll go to a particular

section of my book case and that’s where my family section’s going to be” (Appendix A,

paragraph 93).

Pastor Ethan had developed a personal library collection with a “fair number of books

that cover a lot of things” (Appendix E, paragraph 63). In his view it was not a large personal

library. He had devised his own call number system to group his books by subject and created a

card catalog by author (Appendix E, paragraph 73).

Pastor Caleb was confident that he could find the information he would need. “I’ve

developed a fairly decent library I think over the years and of course the resources online now

are pretty extensive” (Appendix C, paragraph 70). He had attempted to organize his library but

had given up and relied on his memory (Appendix C, paragraph 82). If he could not find the

information in his personal library, he searched it in Google. If he could not find the information

in Google, he ended his searching (Appendix C, paragraph 72). He used his BibleWorks

program for its exegetical tools but refrained from purchasing Logos® because he preferred

physical books over e-books (Appendix C, paragraph 84). The ATLASerials® database was

available free as an alumnus of his seminary. He saw potential in ATLAS®. “Obviously, there’s

131
a lot of stuff here that wouldn’t come into play but yeah I could imagine myself using something

like that if it was pretty accessible” (Appendix C, paragraph 96). The ability to search by topic

and to have full text access was important to him.

Pastor Hosea searched online databases at an institution where he taught as an adjunct

(Appendix H, paragraphs 19, 99). He had retrieved journal articles and listened to audio books

while he was commuting (Appendix H, paragraph 71). He was familiar with ATLAS® but did

not realize the potential for research (Appendix H, paragraph 99). His personal library was the

main source of information which he considered large. The books were shelved in sections by

themes to make it easy to find.

Pastor Gideon was accessing ATLAS® through the account of a seminary student in his

church. He was pleased to learn that he had legitimate access as an alumnus of his own seminary

(Appendix G, paragraph 119). Pastor Gideon regularly used lexicons, grammars, and

concordances for exegesis in sermon preparation. “I don’t think I ever preached a sermon

without them” (Appendix G, paragraph 49). He used Logos® and even had it on his iPhone®

(Appendix G, paragraph 100). He grouped books in his personal library by major categories. He

would use new sermon series as an “excuse” to buy a book in that subject area (Appendix G,

paragraph 93).

Pastor David used a very limited variety of methods to retrieve information. He studied

his biblical passage to get a basic understanding. Logos® was the next source searched. He still

had physical books but he had shifted to an electronic library as his personal library. “I’m not

probably going to spend a whole lot of money actually anymore on paper because things are so

readily available electronically” (Appendix D, paragraph 71). He had used information from a

magazine for his last sermon but considered that to be a rare event. “In my last sermon I did find

132
some stuff in Christianity Today that I was looking at but the magazine side of things I just don’t

spend much time in magazines” (Appendix D, paragraph 45).

Pastor Felix was enrolled in a DMin program which gave him access to online databases

from which he retrieved information for papers but not for sermon preparation (Appendix F,

paragraph 103). He knew he would not use library resources for sermon preparation once he

finished school. The question about ATLAS® made him consider re-evaluating the possibility of

using it to find journal articles for sermons.

Earlier in his ministry, Pastor Felix had visited a Christian bookstore to find books to

purchase for new sermon series. When he began in ministry, he had used the QuickVerse®

program but had shifted to Logos® (Appendix F, paragraph 87). He was in the process of

changing from a library of physical books to Logos® e-books. His personal library was

disorganized and some of it was in a storage room (Appendix F, paragraph 81). He had begun to

purchase e-books because they were cheaper but then printed pages to mark up and take notes.

“I have a commentary and it’s on the computer and once again if I bought the book through

Logos® just to save money, I will print out the whole chapter I want and literally I will print out

30 to 40 pages for that week. . . . I won’t read it on the screen because I can’t highlight, encircle,

and make my notes on the screen” (Appendix F, paragraph 83).

Data Analysis The pastors in the study entered ministry over a period of four decades. When

they are grouped by the first two decades and the last two for beginning ministry, several

patterns appear as seen in Table 11. Pastors Amos, Caleb, Ethan, and Hosea entered ministry in

the 1970s and 1980s. They had developed fair sized physical libraries. These four pastors and

Pastor Gideon were concerned with exegesis and the original languages and maintained some

proficiency in the biblical languages. Pastors Amos, Ethan, and Caleb were all users of

133
BibleWorks, which is oriented to exegesis and the original languages. Pastor Hosea stated that

he could not afford a program. Pastor Gideon was a user of the Logos® program.

Pastors Gideon, Benjamin, David, and Felix had entered ministry in the 1990s or 2000s.

They had made a choice to not develop a large physical library. Pastors Benjamin, David, and

Felix did not possess proficiencies in the biblical languages. Pastors Gideon, David, and Felix

were users of Logos®, which has more commentaries and critical works and fewer language

tools. Pastor Benjamin considered the development of a physical library obsolete due to the

movement to electronic resources. He did not have an interest in purchasing any electronic

libraries. Logos® may not have been acceptable to him because of the emphasis on Evangelical

content and BibleWorks because of the biblical language and exegetical emphasis. He admitted

that an inability to afford a program was also a factor.

Table 11: Personal Libraries and Ministry Experience

Began Began Some BibleWorks Logos® Larger

in in Biblical Personal
Ministry Ministry Language Libraries
1970s- 1990s- Proficiency
1980s 2000s
Amos X X X X

Caleb X X X X

Ethan X X X X

Hosea X X X

Gideon X X X

Benjamin X

David X X

Felix X X

134
 The role of pastor as personal librarian is changing in the electronic environment. Pastors

function as their own personal librarian in collecting, organizing, and accessing resources. They

have options to purchase individual titles or collections that may contain unneeded works which

could waste scarce financial resources. The issue of organizing personal resources is reduced

when more materials are in electronic format. The electronic libraries come with an internal

organization that only requires skills in searching to access the resources. The pastors in the

study had not been given formal instruction on personal libraries during their academic training.

Pastoral information literacy competencies could be strengthened by including the development

and use of personal libraries. Theological librarians should be proactive in personal library

development as an area of information literacy instruction.

5.2.2.4 Performance Indicator 4:

The information literate pastor refines the search strategy if necessary.

The pastors in the study were not asked specific questions concerning this performance

indicator. The pastors sought information weekly and learned quickly when they had the needed

information. They usually did not have the luxury of refining the search strategy late in the

research. They did provide three points where the search needs to stop.

Pastor Benjamin did not provide examples but was confident in his ability to find what

was needed, if the information was available, and he was willing to accept not having an answer.

“So if there’s any, if there’s anyone who in my estimation is orthodox enough and academic

enough that has in my estimation the best angle or insight on something, I feel like I can find it.

But sometimes, you know, we all end up in a ‘I don’t know’” (Appendix B, paragraph 88).

There were two factors that Pastor Caleb recognized as limiting the refinement of the

search strategy. The first was the approaching deadline by which he must create the sermon with
135
the information found. The second factor was the quantity of information is or must be sufficient

at the deadline. “I have enough information whereas if I do any more research, I won’t have

enough time to do the rest of the stuff” (Appendix C, paragraph 68). The “stuff” may relate in

context only to the sermon preparation.

Data Analysis This performance indicator appears more relevant to researchers in an academic

setting where time may be available to prepare a project. Pastors have a short deadline between

sermons where any refinement in the research strategy takes place at the initial research phase.

5.2.2.5 Performance Indicator 5:

The information literate pastor extracts, records, and manages the information and its sources.

Research questions were not directed at this performance indicator. It was not the focus

of this research. The pastors did use their personal libraries, Bible programs, and the Internet to

extract information. The Bible programs provides a level of management for information

including the ability to add personal notes. Pastor Felix used the program to find information but

still preferred to print the information in order to write notes on the copy (Appendix F, paragraph

43).

5.2.3 Standard Three--Evaluates Information

The information literate pastor evaluates information and its sources critically and incorporates
selected information into his or her knowledge base and value system.

5.2.3.1 Performance Indicator 1:

The information literate pastor summarizes the main ideas to be extracted from the information
gathered.

136
 Research questions were not directed at this performance indicator. The pastors in the

study mentioned taking notes in order to develop the sermon but most did not provide significant

detail.

Pastor Gideon considered taking notes while reading the biblical text as the beginning act

of sermon preparation. The last sermon before the interview was on Ephesians 4-5, where he

“took apart the passage exegetically” (Appendix G, paragraph 42). The passage uses language of

taking-off and putting-on, which Gideon rephrased into “walking away from” and “walk into”

the new. He then related these concepts to issues within the cultural context which “includes

references to sexual immorality, greed, deception, stealing—all sorts of various specifics”

(Appendix G, paragraph 42).

Pastor Benjamin read the biblical text first to arrive at an idea for the sermon before

researching secondary sources. He derived this process from the homiletical method of Haddon

Robinson (Appendix B, paragraph 40). Benjamin read commentaries and other sources and

recorded ideas. His sermon research typically generated 7-10 pages of ideas from which he

selected the best ideas to include in the sermon. (Appendix B, paragraph 43). He spent Friday

night and Saturdays editing, cutting, and rewording ideas for the sermon. This immersion in

ideas was his method of interacting with content. Benjamin did not want to preach “a book

report on other resources” (Appendix B, paragraph 40). He did not speak of quoting any of his

sources.

While Pastor David studied the biblical text, he recorded notes (Appendix D, paragraph

49). When he read secondary sources, he only noted the source when he intended to quote it

(Appendix D, paragraph 41).

137
Data Analysis The three outcomes under this indicator are “reads the text and selects main

ideas” to use, “restates concepts,” and “identifies verbatim information” to quote (Association of

College and Research Libraries, 2000, p. 11). These are functions at the lowest three levels of

Bloom’s Taxonomy. Pastor Benjamin provided a detailed description of his process in this area.

He read the biblical text to understand the major concept instead of performing exegesis. He then

read profusely in the secondary literature, collecting ideas that were culled, combined, and

restated to create his sermon. He immersed himself into the ideas by prayer and meditation in

order to personalize the sermon otherwise it was created much like an academic paper. A

dependence upon secondary sources rather than the biblical text would not be consistent with

Evangelical traditions of sermon preparation although Benjamin was cognizant of his movement

away from Evangelicalism in other areas (Appendix B, paragraph 88). Pastor David was not

concerned with the recording of a source except when he intended to quote it.

5.2.3.2 Performance Indicator 2:

The information literate pastor articulates and applies initial criteria for evaluating both the
information and its sources.

Pastor Benjamin sought sources from multiple viewpoints. He had purchased and would

read from the New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary because it gave a more liberal perspective

than his conservative theological training (Appendix B, paragraph 58). “I try to do a broad thing,

you know, so I’ll purposely grab someone who wrote from a seminary—from Union Seminary

and someone from Dallas. And you know somebody is Presbyterian and someone who might be

Anabaptist because I’m looking for more of the, the broader a little bit” (Appendix B, paragraph

63). He attributed some of the theological differences to personalities of the authors. “It’s not

simply radically different views of God; part of it comes from who they are” (Appendix B,

paragraph 19).
138
 Pastor Benjamin judged the validity of sources by whether it fit the “purpose or vision”

of the biblical text. It had “to be consistent with my understanding of historic Christian

orthodoxy” (Appendix B, paragraph 76). His interest in the perspective of historical theology

helped judge sources (Appendix B, paragraph 60). His concern for culture and historical context

was the reason for not purchasing computer Bible programs. He believed they could not provide

the information he wanted.

What’s the connotation? What’s the history? What’s the culture? . . . How did second
temple Judaism use that word? How did the Hellenistic culture use that word? How was
it used rhetorically? (Appendix B, paragraph 102)

Pastor David did not apply the same standard to sources in Logos® as on the Internet.

The Logos® program provided him with the ability to examine and compare many sources. “I

scanned through different commentaries doing word searches on Abraham or the Covenant or

key phrases so, when I’m reading through those, they’re pulled up and listed multiple books at a

time and unless really I’m quoting or using something specific, at times I may not even really

know which commentary I was reading through because there was so many” (Appendix D,

paragraph 41). He recalled reading some authors such as Chuck Swindoll, John McArthur, and

J. Vernon McGee. He did not take care to know the source in order to evaluate Logos® sources.

Pastor David was concerned with the reliability and validity of Internet resources. He

used a website called Gotquestions.com to seek some information from the Internet. “I don’t

spend much time on the Internet; mainly I’m a little leery sometimes of where things come from

and if I’m not sure I just—I really don’t even use them because I don’t want to go down that

alley of not knowing where my information’s coming” (Appendix D, paragraph 47).

Pastor Felix considered authors of commentaries as experts. He recognized that he did

not have the skills to evaluate the logic or arguments. He seemed to defer to the judgment of

experts in the languages and in commentaries. “I want to say I have one go-to commentary,
139
definitely seeking out what others or the experts. How they interpret the scripture is extremely

important and necessary for me” (Appendix F, paragraph 41).

Pastor Gideon differentiated between information, right information, and evaluation of

information. "Thinking well about those pieces of information is a whole other question and that

is where the community and the Spirit of God come in a big way” (Appendix G, paragraph 84).

He recognized the gap between the culture context of Scripture when it was written and present

time when it is interpreted. Communicating across that gap was important to him. He believed

that the ancient Hebrew text was artistic which made a bridge to communicate to this century

where people are artistic (Appendix G, paragraph 17).

Data Analysis Pastor Benjamin was on the polar opposite side of Pastors David and Felix

when it came to evaluation of sources. He sought information from different perspectives

because they would have a bias. Validity was determined by subjective agreement with his

theological perspective and his view of the biblical text. He sought knowledge of the context

when Scripture was written.

Pastors David and Felix did not appear to evaluate sources in Logos®. They operated as

if any source in Logos® was inherently trustworthy. Pastor David was concerned with the

validity and reliability of Internet sources. Pastor Benjamin and Gideon performed at high levels

for evaluation.

An alternative interpretation of Pastor David looking at information in Logos® would be

the concept of browsing in Ellis’s model (2005). This interpretation would align with David’s

concern with the validity of Internet resources. Pastors Benjamin and Gideon included spiritual

discernment as a criterion to judge information. The information needed to fit within their belief

140
systems. A belief system describes an activity in the affective domain instead of the cognitive

domain.

5.2.3.3 Performance Indicator 3:

The information literate pastor synthesizes main ideas to construct new concepts.

Research questions were not directed at this performance indicator; however, some

pastors did provide data in their responses to other questions.

An example where Pastor Amos synthesized the material into a different concept was a

second sermon on the same passage. He held a theological view that there could only be one

correct interpretation of a biblical passage but many applications. “I go back and I look at what I

had done in the past and I think, ‘well, that was an interesting conclusion. . . . That’s not where I

am headed this time,’ not that it’s, it’s violating the text but it’s using a different application,

using the adage that there’s one interpretation but many applications” (Appendix A, paragraph

40). Amos’ new application resulted from the synthesis of a new exegesis of the same text and

the different needs of the congregation at that time.

Pastor Gideon and his co-pastor taught a series on Ephesians during which they

synthesized a different approach to the issues. They would normally do straight exegesis to

teach a passage. In this case, they combined ideas in Ephesians to meet a need to understand the

spiritual life of the church (Appendix G, paragraph 42). “Well, right now we’re going through

Ephesians and so it really is a book study but with a certain slant; the slant whereon is defining

church, what is church?” (Appendix G, paragraph 36).

The sermon preparation process of Pastor Benjamin was to gather ideas and synthesize

them into supporting concepts for the main idea of his sermon. This idea or sermon topic was

derived from the initial reading and meditation on the biblical passage (Appendix B, paragraph
141
40). The biblical text remained the standard used to judge the ideas. He called his methodology

“intuitive” (Appendix B, paragraphs 19, 47, 77) although the methodology was somewhat a

mystery.

Data Analysis All of the pastors described the process of creating new sermons for each

message. Pastor Amos was able to produce an example where his synthesis had changed in time.

Pastor Gideon used minor themes in a biblical passage and interconnected them so that important

truths were taught. The sermon preparation method of Pastor Benjamin was to collect ideas in

order to synthesize new ideas and create new concepts.

The examples from the pastors are activity in the affective domain. Pastor Amos

questioned his earlier application but also excused it as possibly the spiritual need of the church

was responsible for the change and his own spiritual growth. The synthesis for Pastor Gideon

was intended to produce a change in belief or attitude. Pastor Benjamin’s intuition was based

upon prayer with the intent to create a new framework that people will care about. The ACRL

Standards were designed for students in a secular academic setting. The research model for

pastors must include the affective domain (see Figure 6).

5.2.3.4 Performance Indicator 4:

The information literate pastor compares new knowledge with prior knowledge to determine the
value added, contradictions, or other unique characteristics of the information.

Research questions were not directed at this performance indicator.

142
5.2.3.5 Performance Indicator 5:

The information literate pastor determines whether the new knowledge has an impact on
the individual’s value system and takes steps to reconcile differences.

Questions 15 and 16 were asked of the pastors. The questions were intended to evaluate

their critical thinking skills and the way they lead their congregations in this area. One outcome

under this indicator was accepting or rejecting viewpoints. The responses to Question 17

indicated changes in spiritual values not necessarily in ideas.

15. What is your most important consideration in preparing a sermon on a difficult topic or
biblical passage?
16. When a sermon covers a subject with competing viewpoints, even among those in your
church, you are placed in a position where difficult choices need to be made.
a. What choices do you take in presenting the competing viewpoints in your
sermon?
b. What is your process to determine the best view?
17. What affect did the preparation of your last sermon have on you?

Decision Process Pastor Ethan was concerned with fidelity to Scripture. “The most important

is to be true to the passage or the topic biblically” (Appendix E, paragraph 53). The way to

evaluate viewpoints was to study in order to understand them. He raised the issue of the age of

the earth and evolution as controversial topics. He held to an old earth view but did not support

all of the evolutionary viewpoint. “No need to talk about what I do think but, I read stuff; I read

a couple of books by Richard Dawkins so I know what he says and I am a little irritated by

people who pontificate on these subjects and apparently have never read anything by an

opposing viewpoint” (Appendix E, paragraph 57).

Pastor Hosea became confused on the different views during his study of a difficult

passage in 1 Peter and described his resolution. “I looked at all the different options of

interpreting that passage and just had to take some time to reflect and meditate on it and say,

‘Lord, I don’t know, I really don’t know what the right answer is here; I don’t really know what

143
Peter was trying to communicate,’ and so out of that reflection and meditation I was able to

synthesize the various views that were, and I shared the different views” (Appendix H, paragraph

49). He used reflection, meditation and prayer to understand the conflicting views.

For Pastor David the major concern with differing viewpoints was the level of support in

Scripture (Appendix D, paragraph 51). He presented the viewpoints but also made clear the

official creedal viewpoint of the church.

Pastor Felix took an authoritarian approach to differing viewpoints. He studied the

viewpoints and presented the view he thought was correct. “Once again that’s where all that

study comes in and say, ‘hey, this is what I believe God’s word is saying here’” (Appendix F,

paragraph 61). He said he might mention differing viewpoints but considered they would take

him off message. He would invite discussion one-on-one with someone that disagreed with his

viewpoint (Appendix F, paragraph 63).

Communication with Others Pastor Gideon consulted with the church elders for advice on

controversial topics. He searched websites to help decide an approach. Respected authority

figures were checked to see what their views were. He also checked what was being written in

Christianity Today (Appendix G, paragraph 75). Before preaching a controversial sermon,

Gideon spoke with individuals that he thought might disagree. He would consider whether the

issue was a essential theme in Scripture or not, before compromising. “You know if it’s a major

issue that God is, I think, pretty clear about in the Scriptures, I would stand with the scriptures as

opposed to compromising with the people” (Appendix G, paragraph 72).

Presentation Pastor Caleb tried to acknowledge differing viewpoints in the introduction to his

sermons.

144
 I try to be honest with it. I think if there’s a controversial interpretation, I try to be honest
about that and say that there is some controversy on it. . . . I’m actually as I’m sitting here
thinking, I can’t remember the last time I preached a text where I knew there were a wide
range of opinions on the text. (Appendix C, paragraph 61)

He approached every text with the view that it needed to be applied, explained, or proved. “[I]f

it’s a truth that is controversial and I need to prove it and I‘ll do that and I’ll prove that either you

know biblically . . . or from sort of some reason that Wesleyan quadrangle of scripture, reason,

experience and, you know, tradition I keep those things in mind as I try to figure out the truth of

a particular text or controversial text” (Appendix C, paragraph 63). Pastor Amos believed people

hearing a sermon where a viewpoint was not mentioned would assume it was left out because the

pastor could not disprove it (Appendix A, paragraph 55). Pastor Caleb laughed about presenting

different views and said he would then “tell them the right one” (Appendix C, paragraph 61).

Pastors Amos and Caleb were most concerned that they present a viewpoint that was faithful to

the biblical text.

The church where Pastor Gideon ministered was from the more ecumenical and socially

liberal side of evangelicalism. He and his co-pastor preached a series on sexuality that they

knew would be controversial in the church. He believed the tone or spirit of the sermon

presentation was important. “So the very important consideration would be the tone of the

sermon and making sure the tone has the whole biblical picture for whatever the topic the

passage is talking about” (Appendix G, paragraph 63).

Change in Values or Views An objective of preaching is more than the communication of

knowledge but a change in personal value systems. Pastor Amos valued this change enough to

seek it. “I believe every week the sermon has an imprint upon me. One of the things I try to do .

. . as I’m preparing . . . I believe I have to prepare my heart before I even get involved in the

145
teaching of Scripture” (Appendix A, paragraph 65). His emphasis on applications in the sermon

showed that he wanted to change the values of his congregation.

Pastor David related how his sermon preparation caused him to incorporate what he

learned into his own life. “It affected me in such a way that on a few mornings in the middle of

my deep preparation I was very broken and very humbled and to see the depth of what was there

is a hard thing” (Appendix D, paragraph 59).

It was difficult for Pastor Ethan to explain the effect his last sermon had on him. It may

have been different for other sermons as “sometimes there are specific things that I can point to”

(Appendix E, paragraph 59). The delivery of the sermon and watching the effect on people

affected him.

Pastor Felix considered it a blessing to learn new knowledge and to have it change his

value system. “I have been changed more than the people I have been talking to. . . . That is one

of the true blessings of this position as I get the privilege of putting all the study into preparing a

sermon” (Appendix F, paragraph 67). He then considered it a privilege to communicate those

changes in his sermon.

Pastor Gideon believed sermon preparation and delivery should affect both him and the

church. “And if you don’t focus the scriptures on yourself before you preach, you really are

missing the point” (Appendix G, paragraph 78). In his last sermon before the interview, he

shared with the congregation an area where he struggled. He intentionally used pronouns in the

first person plural to include himself with the church. “We’re not directing the Scriptures at

them. The passage is focused at us as a church, not them as a congregation” (Appendix G,

paragraph 79).

Pastor Amos believed that although it was his responsibility to present the message, the

listeners were responsible for what they had heard. “Then if I’ve taken them into the text, I’ve
146
carefully revealed or exposed the text then they have to come to in their mind. They have to

determine what they are going to do with what they heard. They have to wrestle with the text

themselves” (Appendix A, paragraph 59).

Data Analysis The outcomes for this performance indicator anticipate an investigation of

differing viewpoints and a decision whether to accept or reject them. Theology is replete with

differing viewpoints although the significance can range from minimal to controversial. The

research questions pushed the respondents by referring to controversial viewpoints. It was

intended to force the pastors to describe how they investigate differing viewpoints. The way

they incorporate differing viewpoints into their sermons did provide an understanding of their

true beliefs in presenting contentious issues.

The major concern that pastors had in relationship to controversial issues was fidelity to

Scripture in whatever position they accepted. They investigated and studied differing viewpoints

in the literature. Pastor Hosea raised the spiritual dynamic of prayer, reflection, and meditation,

seeking understanding from God. Pastor Gideon sought the opinions of people in authority or

who he suspected might be offended.

Although most of the other pastors did not take an authoritarian view, Pastors David and

Felix did. When Pastor David’s church had an official position on a controversial topic, he

would present the viewpoints in a sermon but emphasize the official position. When Pastor Felix

arrived at a position on a controversial viewpoint, he might present other views but would preach

the view he believed was biblically correct. Pastors David and Felix have been recognized as

lacking skills in evaluation (See Section 5.2.1.2). Neither pastor appeared to lead the

congregants through the process of evaluating viewpoints and arriving at their own conclusions.

147
 Incorporating or rejecting viewpoints is the second outcome under this performance

indicator. It presumes evaluation or action at the highest level in Bloom’s taxonomy. In the

context of a pastor and sermon preparation, evaluation is more than the intellectual acceptance of

a viewpoint. A change in viewpoint should be followed by a change in action or spiritual life of

the Christian. The sermon usually calls for this change in an application.

Accepting or rejecting viewpoints was valued by the pastors. They recognized that their

own viewpoints needed to be corrected and recounted instances where application resulted in

change in their own lives. The pastors took different approaches in presenting controversial

viewpoints. This was expected in the design of the questions (Section 4.4.2.4). Pastors David

and Felix appeared to discourage critical thinking in the congregation and did not display it in

their own research processes. Pastor Amos presented a model of his own critical thinking

process by presenting views and using Scripture to argue for one as the best and left the

congregation responsible to choose. Pastor Caleb described his critical thinking process in terms

of one who was professionally trained in theology and interpretation. He could not remember

preaching a sermon where there were a number of viewpoints. It could imply that he avoided

this type of sermon topic.

Question 17 specifically requested a response in the affective domain. The pastors used

terms such as convicted, changed, humbled, broken, blessed, failure, own struggle to describe the

sermons affect. The sermon may have been prepared to have a response by the listeners in the

affective domain but it also had it in the preachers.

5.2.3.6 Performance Indicator 6:

The information literate pastor validates understanding and interpretation of the information
through discourse with other individuals, subject-area experts, and/or practitioners.

148
 Research questions were not directed at this performance indicator; however, some

pastors did provide data in their responses to other questions.

The Logos® Bible program with its commentaries was the first place Pastor Felix went to

seek help. He considered his senior pastor as a mature and knowledgeable expert. The order

would be Logos®, Google (Appendix F, paragraph 73) “and then also through the senior pastor

and other pastors I know, that I would feel comfortable calling up, that have been pastoring for

longer, for 30-40 years” (Appendix F, paragraph 71).

Pastor David was confident that he could use his resources to find needed information. “I

guess that I don’t see myself as a very good scholar but I feel like I have the tools to go find my

answers that I need when I have questions” (Appendix D, paragraph 63). When his resources

failed to provide an answer, he sought out his pastoral colleagues for help in finding resources or

handling issues (Appendix D, paragraph 65).

Data Analysis Seeking help from others is commendable. Although this action does not map

to Bloom’s Taxonomy, it is listed as the highest level of outcome under this indicator.

5.2.3.7 Performance Indicator 7:

The information literate pastor determines whether the initial query should be revised.

Research questions were not directed at this performance indicator. One pastor may have

provided data in his responses to other questions.

Pastor Ethan stated that satisfying the information need was not a problem. “There is

always too much; the problem sometimes is that I have to just stop studying and start writing the

sermon” (Appendix E, paragraph 61). He liked to investigate interesting issues but a deadline

required an end to finding more information.

149
Data Analysis Performance Indicator 7 may be eliminated in a pastoral standard. The same

concept of reviewing and revising the search for information has been discussed earlier

(Performance Indicator 2 Outcome 4, Performance Indicator 3 Outcome 4). Pastors are working

on a tight deadline and to reinitiate research is too late in the cycle.

5.2.4 Standard Four--Uses Information

The information literate pastor, individually or as a member of a group, uses information

effectively to accomplish a specific purpose.

The objectives of this research were not to assess the pastoral skills in Standard 4 as the

first three standards address issues pertinent to library and information science. The assessment

of Standard Four would require reviewing the notes of pastors as they develop sermons. The

product is the oral delivery of a sermon which would require listening to the sermon to ascertain

that the process described was actually completed. Roland (2008) is an example of studying the

process of developing the sermon.

5.2.5 Standard Five--Legal and Ethical Issues of Information

The information literate pastor understands many of the economic, legal, and social issues
surrounding the use of information and accesses and uses information ethically and legally.

Although there was no intent to assess skills in Standard 5, the pastors did reference

issues under one of the performance indicators.

5.2.5.1 Performance Indicator 2

The information literate pastor follows laws, regulations, church policies, and etiquette related to
the access and use of information resources.

In response to the question concerning the potential access to the ATLAS database,

Pastor Gideon admitted that he improperly used the account of a theological student to gain

access to restricted information from a theological library.

150
 Well, I think I do have access to this but you’re not going to like how I found access. We
have a seminary student in our church who has given me his library’s password so I have
the ability to go online and check out the stuff at his library. He says that it’s not
unethical. I have no idea. (Appendix G, paragraph 117)
Pastor Amos was aware of ethical issues and attempted not to fail in the area of

plagiarism or use of other peoples materials.

I’ve heard of guys sort of just wiped out on ministry because all of the sudden they
succumb to the temptation of just using somebody else’s research, not lying or whatever.
And I’ve actually been in audiences where that’s happened and I know the outline and I
know it’s not theirs and it’s never a reference to the persons who were using it. And it
bothers me quite a bit and in fact on occasion I’ve actually challenged the person on it.
(Appendix A, paragraph 50)

Data Analysis Pastor Gideon recognized that his access to password restricted resources was

unethical. He admitted that this researcher would not like his method. The desire to access

information sources overrode his judgment. He shirked his responsibility as a spiritual leader by

accepting the rationale of the student-parishioner. He further refused to take personal

responsibility for his own action by claiming not to know whether it was unethical. There was

some relief because he could have legal access as an alumnus of his seminary.

The issue of plagiarism of sermons was briefly discussed in the literature review as a

problem occurring more frequently (4.3.4.2). The dissertation committee recommended not

pursuing this aspect. Pastor Amos, in contrast to Pastor Gideon, accepted his ethical

responsibilities as a spiritual leader. He recognized the potential temptation and guarded himself

against a lapse in the use of resources. He had experienced listening to sermons that had been

created by different preacher than the one preaching. He recognized that the preacher should

have properly credited the source of the sermon which he said was not done. Pastor Amos took

the further step to confront pastors who had committed the ethical lapse of plagiarism. His

action as pastor admonishing pastor was the opposite of Pastor Gideon where the pastor did not

admonish a future pastor. Experience may be a factor as Pastor Amos was near retirement and

151
Pastor Gideon was near the beginning of his ministry. Pastor Gideon may also reflect a

generation with a more relaxed attitude towards access to information.

The plagiarism of whole sermons indicates that more information literacy instruction is

needed. The attribution of sources within needs more elucidation in future information literacy

standards. A sermon presents peculiar difficulties when ideas are presented. There is a need to

balance proper acknowledgement of sources with it becoming a distraction from the purpose of

the sermon. A reference to a source is expected when it is quoted (R. J. Allen, 2005; Graves,

2005) as Pastor David was careful to record (Section 5.2.3). More research on current practice in

attribution during sermons is needed. The further development of a theological information

literacy standard will need to address the issue.

152
 6.0 CONCLUSION

6.1 PURPOSE

This project attempted to assess the information literacy competencies of Evangelical pastors.

The research question it sought to answer limited the study to the preparation of a sermon. The

question asked, “What are the information literacy skills of pastoral graduates from Evangelical

Bible colleges and seminaries demonstrated by their preparation of a sermon?” The limitation to

preparation of a sermon is where the research skills of interest to library and information science

would reside. It was expected to identify areas where theological higher education should focus

for improvement.

6.1.1 Research Sample

The broad sample of individuals was first obtained by contacting alumni of Evangelical Bible

colleges and seminaries. The sample of respondents was further delimited by those who had

studied homiletics and were involved in regular preaching. The sample was narrowed by the

core Evangelical belief in salvation as defined by George Barna (The Barna Group, 2007). The

remainder was broken into groups by the year of graduation. The pastors were randomly chosen

from each of the four decades represented among the potential respondents.

The sample of eight pastors who were interviewed came from a diverse group of

theological schools. They had graduated from sixteen different Evangelical Christian liberal arts

colleges, Bible colleges, or seminaries (Table 3). Only one pastor had attended one school.
153
They possessed a wide spectrum of experience and training in the biblical languages. All had a

graduate theological degree and four held doctorates (Table 4). Several mentioned that their

churches were part of a denomination although which one was not known. It was not determined

if any were part of the Fundamentalist side of Evangelicalism or were Pentecostal or

Charismatic.

6.1.2 Research Methodology in Hindsight

Hindsight provides many opportunities to consider what would have been done differently.

More testing with the Dragon Naturally Speaking program might have shown that it was

inadequate to transcribe the interviews, requiring the recordings be sent to a commercial service.

The interviews were conducted under an external deadline and were compressed into too short a

period to do adequate analysis between them. The approval level from the Institutional Review

Board did not permit later follow-up with the pastors. If the design would have permitted a

second interview, important clarifications could have been made that would have strengthened

the conclusions. The adoption and adaptation of the ACRL information literacy standards in the

proposal stage of the methodology could have helped shape the specificity of the interview

questions.

The assessment criteria for the ACRL standards were designed for measuring

compliance. The subject either would pass or fail to meet the objective. The goal of a grounded

methodology is to create a new theory. Other models of information seeking behavior would

have been helpful. Kuhlthau’s (2005) Information Search Process expects issues in the affective

domain and limitations that pastors work under such as time constraints. Ellis’s (2005) Model of

Information-Seeking behavior was designed for searchers on computer systems. The extent of

the use of electronic personal libraries by the pastors was unexpected. Activities in these models

154
better described the search methodologies of the pastors. Wilson (2000) proposed a model that

combined features of both Ellis and Kuhlthau, which would be worthy of consideration.

The analysis of the data could have been made easier by creating tables for each of the

codes that were assigned. The codes and quotations were grouped within the reporting feature of

ATLAS.TI but would have been easier to use within tables.

6.2 SIGNIFICANCE FOR THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION

6.2.1 ACRL Standards

The ACRL standards for information literacy along with its performance indicators and

outcomes were used in the analysis. The research was not intended to be a comprehensive

assessment using the Standards. The research questions were broadly worded and open-ended.

The questions were broken into the major categories or headings from the ACRL Standards.

Mapping the answers to the Standards provided outcomes assessment criteria for analysis. The

questions allowed for the broadest of answers wherever the pastors desired to go.

The ACRL standards for information literacy are inadequate to assess the skills of pastors

and others in ministry. The foci of the standards are not subject-discipline specific and are

limited to the process within the higher education context and with the assumption of access to

an academic library. The population in the study had graduated and no longer had use of

academic libraries for research. ACRL intended them as a framework for assessment that

needed to be adapted for individual institutions and disciplines (American Library Association,

2006).

The examples of physicians, archaeologists, astronomers, mathematicians, chemists, and

physicists were used to show that information literacy skills needed to be adapted to the research
155
methodologies for various professions (American Library Association, 2006, p. 5). Several

disciplines have adapted them with revised criteria specific to their needs. The stated goal of

information literacy is that students would develop skills to become self-directed lifelong

learners (2006). Absent from the discussion is the assessment of information literacy skills after

graduation for these and other professions. This research found that some indicators and

outcomes did not apply to a pastor in the preparation of a sermon.

The creation of an information literacy standard for theological students and those in

ministry was not an original objective of the dissertation. When an attempt was made to use the

ACRL standards to assess the information literacy skills of pastors, the inadequacy quickly

became apparent. The examples from other disciplines were followed to adapt Standards 1-3 to

assess pastors in the preparation of a sermon (Section 4.5.2). This adaptation is incomplete as it

did not address Standards 4-5 in the preaching role nor did it address the other pastoral roles of

administrator and caregiver. Personal work will continue to complete the information literacy

standards for all three roles as it is needed at Lancaster Bible College and other theological

institutions. The information seeking model presented in steps in Figures 1-6 will help with the

process of developing new standards and a model of information literacy instruction for

theological education.

6.2.1.1 Adaptation of ACRL Standards A complete adaptation for theological education and

ministry is needed. New subject specific standards are being published ("Information literacy

competency standards for journalism students and professionals," 2012; "Information literacy

standards for anthropology and sociology," 2008; "Information literacy standards for science and

engineering/technology," 2006; "Information literacy standards for teacher education," 2011).

156
Necessary competencies are changing because of development of Web 2.0 and research based

upon the Cycle of Knowledge Generation (Uribe Tirado & Castaño Muñoz, 2012).

This study only reviewed information literacy skills of the pastor as preacher and did not

look at the pastor as administrator or caregiver. A comprehensive information literacy standard

for pastors would include all three roles with targeted performance indicators and outcomes for

measurement. It should also be informed by the information seeking behaviors of those in

ministry in consultation with theological faculty. A beginning adaptation is presented in

Appendix S. The proper place for a thorough adaptation would be the two associations for

theological librarians14 cooperating with the two main theological accreditors.15

6.2.2 Information Literacy Instruction

The pastors in the study received the full spectrum of types of information literacy training. One

described a course-integrated information literacy program. Another pastor received an all-day

“one shot” class on using the library. Another took a required non-credit research class at the

beginning of seminary before the advent of electronic databases. The other pastors received little

or no bibliographic or information literacy instruction even to the point of not recalling that it

happened.

The pastor who received a separate research class at the graduate level transferred the

skills he developed for academic research to the preparation of sermons. He replaced biblical

exegesis with research in secondary sources. His research skills were impressive from an

information literacy viewpoint. His replacement of exegesis with study of secondary sources

would raise questions from an Evangelical viewpoint. The possibility of unintended

consequences should be considered when providing information literacy instruction.

14
Association of Christian Librarians and the American Theological Library Association.
15
Association for Biblical Higher Education and Association of Theological Schools.
157
 6.3 SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS: ACRL STANDARDS ONE TO THREE

The analysis in Chapter 4 followed the order of the slightly revised standards in Appendix S.

Several performance indicators were noted there as either unobserved or possibly inapplicable

for the pastor as preacher. The interview questions were categorized under broad headings

which compose different aspects of information literacy. This summary of conclusions follows

the headings used in the interview questions.

6.3.1 Standard One--Determines Extent of the Information Need

Recognizing an information need is the starting point for information literacy. In nearly all of

the cases, they were in control of deciding the sermon topics. One pastor was assigned the topic

from the senior pastor. This instance is often the case in the workplace where the need is

dictated by someone else (Lloyd, 2011). Since the sermon was a recurring need each week, it

was common practice to develop a macroscopic planning process to identify needs of the

congregation.

This research confirms previous studies that pastors seek to preach sermons that meet

needs of the congregation (Roland, 2008; Tanner, 1994). Ellis (1997, p. 390) found that

engineers started research by generating ideas that would solve a problem. The preacher must

identify the spiritual problem before generating ideas. The ideas are analogous to the sermon

topics.

The process of choosing sermon topics can be used to develop a model of the initial stage

of pastoral information seeking behavior. The pastors used input from observation, parishioner

requests, and spiritual knowledge along with prayer to identify spiritual problems. The need was

expressed in the form of a series either of general sermon topics or a portion of Scripture to

preach. The sermon topic was refined to conform to the biblical passages being preached.

158
 Machlup (1962, p. 21) proposed five types of knowledge relating what is known to the

“what for” or purpose of knowing. The five types are “practical,” “intellectual,” “small-talk and

pastime,” “spiritual,” and “unwanted knowledge” (pp. 21-22). The spiritual problems and ideas

expressed as sermon topics would be categorized under professional knowledge because of the

practical use of it in sermon topics. The same knowledge to another person may be intellectual

or unwanted because the instrumental purpose of it differs.

The instrumental purpose of knowledge becomes the filter which focuses the information

behaviors of pastors. The current or future sermon topics are a filter for the preacher. The

pastors without biblical language training rejected exegetical commentaries for homiletic or

popular ones because they could not derive instrumental knowledge from them. They could not

surmount the barrier of intellectual access to the content (Bronstein & Baruchson-Arbib, 2008;

Culnan, 1985).

The institutional library as a source of information was judged through the filter of

professional knowledge of preaching and teaching in the church. The pastor who rejected books

from a seminary library did so on the basis that the material would not be appropriate for his

congregation. A pastor currently enrolled in a DMin program used the seminary library for

course work but not sermons. The information sources of the institutional library were not

perceived as fitting the professional knowledge needs for sermons. An institutional library was

used as a quiet place for study and recreational reading. The limited use of an institutional

library confirms the findings of Tanner where a significant number were “just not interested in

going there” (1994, p. 186). The disinterest in institutional libraries was paralleled in a study of

engineers who did not find a need for a library even when it was in the firm’s offices (Du Preez,

2008). The pastor and engineer are applying professional knowledge and processing skills as a

major part of their work.

159
 The concept of professional knowledge versus intellectual knowledge is a factor that

should influence theological information literacy. A workplace model for pastors would only

show practice and not best practice. There is a need for further research on how knowledge

taught in seminary is perceived as professional, intellectual, or unwanted. It is at that point when

the overall curriculum could be reoriented for lifelong learning.

6.3.1.1 Evangelical Pastor Model: Information Need--Step One The pastors received input

from multiple sources as they planned the topics they would preach which are illustrated in

Figure 1. They spoke of prayer in terms of a source of information. They expected God or the

Holy Spirit to answer which would direct them in the choice of topics.

160
 Start

God / Holy
Spirit

Individual
Requests or
Suggestions
Preacher

Church
Board

Assessment Sermon Topic

of Church Plan or Schedule
Need

Figure 1: Sermon Topic Planning

One criterion of the respondents in the study was that they did not use a lectionary to

choose the biblical passage for a sermon. This was a recommendation for further research from

Roland (2008, p. 99). A lectionary provides a plan with a limited choice of biblical passages and

the pastor chose from them to create a specific sermon. The trepidation from his informant was

that pastors would preach messages on personal agendas. This fear was not recognized in any of

the respondents’ selection of sermon topics. The pastors developed plans for preaching of

161
varying lengths of time. They analyzed the spiritual needs of the congregation. They spent time

in prayer seeking guidance.

6.3.1.2 Evangelical Pastor Model: Information Need--Step Two The pastors’ sermon plans or

schedules were general in nature. They refined the general sermon topic to a more specific one

through the process of reading and exegesis of the Bible as illustrated in Figure 2. Prayer

continued to be a process used. Their goal was a topic that met the perceived need.

Planned Topic

Prayer Reading

Bible
Preacher

Exegesis

Refined Sermon Topic

Figure 2: Individual Sermon Topic

6.3.2 Standard Two--Accesses Information

The starting point for the Evangelical pastors was the Bible when preparing a sermon. The

sermon topic and a concept of what information was needed already had been formed. The

162
methods that the pastors used varied slightly amongst themselves. Five of the eight pastors

called their study of Scripture exegesis. The other pastors studied the Bible by reading it and

taking notes. If they did move on to secondary source materials those materials were in most

cases held in their personal libraries. This confirms the results from previous studies where

pastors (Brockway, 1974; Tanner, 1994), theological professors (Wenderoth, 2008), and

theological students (Gaba & Ganski, 2011; Penner, 2009a) preferred to use their personal

library. One pastor used commentaries or secondary sources as part of the ending process for

verification of his own interpretation. Ellis (1993) found a similar process of verification among

chemists.

The method of searching for a secondary source varied by the type of information the

pastors were searching for in their personal libraries. If the need was for a book, they would

browse in that topical section. A trend that was visible among the pastors was that those who

had larger personal libraries were older and also had had more biblical language study. The

pastors that had greater proficiency in the Biblical languages also leaned towards the BibleWorks

program. BibleWorks is specially designed for working with the biblical languages. The

younger pastors leaned towards the Logos program. Logos does have language tools but also has

more commentaries and secondary sources which can substitute for a traditional personal library.

The trend towards e-books was more pronounced in the pastors than was found for

theological students and professors. Lincoln (2013) found theological students and professors

moving towards use of electronic content. Age was a factor with the younger more readily

accepting it although age was not a factor in the pastors. In contrast younger theological students

preferred reading materials in paper (Gaba & Ganski, 2011). One of the younger pastors

preferred purchasing e-books but would print sections needed for sermon study in order to take

notes.
163
 The personal electronic library programs provide various search methodologies to find

materials. What the Evangelical pastors described was the ability to perform a keyword search.

One pastor specifically described performing a keyword search and then browsing through the

results without critically examining the author or theological viewpoint. This was categorized as

a failure in critical thinking but is a clear example of browsing as defined by Ellis (2005).

Electronic personal libraries have the capability of other types of searching strategies.

The programs could provide data on Greek and Hebrew words. This feature was commonly

mentioned although the search strategy was not identified.

The use of the Internet varied among the pastors to both extremes. In one extreme a

pastor did not trust anything on the Internet and refused to use it in sermon preparation. Another

pastor depended upon Internet sources very heavily. This pastor was forced to downsize his

personal library collection when he started his current ministry. He depended upon theological

libraries that he could travel to and the Internet sources. Other pastors used the Internet for

verification and looking for sermon illustrations. None of the pastors mentioned using the

Internet for denominational purposes in contrast to the findings of Smith and Smith (2001a). The

churches of four of the pastors were connected to denominations but only one mentioned it

during the interview.

The ACRL standards speak of refining the search strategy. This area was not especially

significant for the pastors in the workplace setting. They were confident that they would be able

to find information that they needed. They were also limited in the amount of time that they

could search for material. It was more common for the preacher to speak of having too much

information for preparing the sermon.

The ACRL standards are not an affective model to assess the skills of pastors searching

for information. They were designed for higher education and not the workplace. The
164
information seeking behavior of the pastor in the workplace is different than that of a student.

The pastor brings a narrow focus of a topic and conception of what material is acceptable. The

main source of information is the personal library of the pastor. The standards need to be revised

to meet the needs of the future pastor in the workplace.

6.3.2.1 Evangelical Pastor Model: Accesses Information The sources of information for the

pastors is illustrated in Figure 3. Prayer and the Bible are the two main sources for sermon

preparation for all of the Evangelical pastors. The personal library includes their collection of

books, reference tools, electronic library, files, and journals and magazines. The Internet and

institutional libraries were lesser sources.

Refined Sermon Topic

Personal Prayer
Library
Preacher
Bible
Internet

Institutional
Libraries
Sermon

Figure 3: Information Sources Overview

A more detailed illustration of the information resources used in sermon preparation is

illustrated in Figure 4. Prayer and the Bible are considered primary sources.

165
 Start
Secondary Sources Primary Sources

Prayer

Exegetical English
Commentaries Bible

Popular
Commentaries

Topical Language
Works Reference
Tools

Internet
Websites Electronic Language
Preacher
Reference Tools

Homiletical
Commentaries

Journals

Greek or
Recorded Hebrew
Sermons Bible
Sermon Content

Colleagues

Figure 4: Information Sources

166
6.3.2.2 Personal Libraries The information behaviors and personal libraries of pastors have

been the subject of numerous research projects mostly by theological librarians. Past attempts to

increase pastoral access to the resources of theological libraries have been unsuccessful. Pastors

have been found to be dependent upon the resources in their personal libraries for research. The

personal library resources of Evangelical pastors is undergoing a transformation from a physical

library to an electronic one as illustrated in Figure 5. The pastors with an electronic library were

maintaining both systems but shrinking the physical library.

Physical Manual
Library Resources Organization
and Retrieval

Preacher

Electronic Electronic
Personal Retrieval
Library

Figure 5: Personal Libraries

The libraries of pastors contained materials personally selected and organized. The

retrieval of resources was dependent upon the method and quality of organization. The

electronic libraries start with a base collection with the ability to purchase individual titles. The

electronic libraries search engines similar to library databases but with additional capabilities

specific to biblical studies and the full text.

167
6.3.2.3 Personal Resources The personal libraries of pastors have been the main source of

information in previous studies (Brockway, 1974; Huseman, 1970; Phillips, 1992; Tanner, 1994).

Question 6 was worded with the assumption that the pastors had received instruction in building

a personal library. The pastors did not report intentional training on building a personal library.

It is recommended that pastoral information literacy objectives include components on the

development and use of personal libraries. Pastoral libraries are moving to a mixture between

paper and e-books (Table 5). Pastors are presented collection development choices between

multi-book packages and individual titles. There are many old public domain titles included.

Students and pastors may not be aware of this dated material. The creation of a personal

collection development policy as part of practical theology classes could enhance the resources

of pastors.

The pastors described different methods to organize their libraries so they could find

materials. The electronic theological libraries eliminate physical organization but require

searching skills. The ACRL Standards assume students who are accessing library automation

systems and databases. The standard access points for personal library system are still available.

These collections also make it possible to search the full text content of the books. An

understanding of combining standard access points with natural language searching may improve

access to materials.

6.3.2.4 Theological Library Resources and Concurrent Ministry One of the unexpected

results from this study was the special context within which the pastors failed to use academic

libraries for sermon preparation. Previous studies had noted that pastors did not use theological

libraries for ministry research and were dependent upon personal libraries (Phillips, 1992;

Tanner, 1994). The difference between the subjects of previous studies and this study is a dual

168
role these respondents had. All eight pastors had been enrolled in graduate theological education

while they were serving in ministry. Presumably, they had access to the academic library as a

student. Only one pastor reported using the library regularly for sermon preparation.

6.3.3 Standard Three--Evaluates Information

6.3.3.1 Differentiation of Commentaries It was assumed in the interview questions that pastors

would be cognizant of categories which group commentaries by intended audiences and

purposes. It was expected that they would use a different type for different purposes and would

have a preference for exegetical commentaries. Pastors David and Felix could not distinguish

the categories and misidentified commentaries that were published revisions of sermons as

exegetical. A third recognized the category of exegetical commentaries but preferred using

“academic” and “popular.” All three pastors shared a demographic distinction. Two had not

studied a biblical language and the third had one year but rejected using biblical languages in

Bible study. The pastors who had studied at least one of the languages recognized intended

purposes and audiences of commentaries even though they may not have retained proficiencies.

The recognition of the intended purpose and audience of secondary literature is an important

information literacy skill.

6.3.3.2 Critical Thinking and Evaluation Six of the eight pastors had thought through the

process of critical thinking and evaluation both in study and presentation. Two pastors

evidenced weak skills in this skill. Titles in Logos® were accepted as trustworthy. One of the

pastors questioned Internet sources but preferred to avoid them because they required critical

evaluation.

The two pastors with weak critical thinking skills presented material in an authoritarian

manner. One resorted to the creedal viewpoint of the church as the standard for truth although he

169
would present opposing sides. The second placed his understanding based upon study as the

standard and did not present competing viewpoints.

A pastor presenting an issue from an authoritarian viewpoint is not astonishing.

Evangelicals generally hold to the Reformation doctrine of sola scriptura. The surprise is a

willingness to forego critical evaluation of titles in a commercial collection from many doctrinal

viewpoints although it has an Evangelical bias. The majority of the language tools are not

necessarily Evangelical but were still accepted. The complete opposite is Pastor Amos who

subjected his own previous studies to critical evaluation.

It was assumed in this study that critical thinking skills would be developed in language

study. The two pastors who were weak in critical thinking and evaluation supported this

assumption as they had not studied a biblical language.

6.3.3.3 Study of the Biblical Languages A historical trend over the last 140 years has been the

decline in biblical language requirements in theological education. Some students try to avoid

the languages. Theological institutions are replacing language courses with tools courses. The

tools in the computer programs have made it easy to do word studies without any knowledge of

the biblical languages. A working knowledge of the languages is needed in the technical areas of

exegesis such as differentiating grammatical constructions and in textual criticism. Retention of

proficiency would be preferred but awareness of the language would enable understanding of

secondary source arguments. The two pastors, who had not studied a biblical language, seemed

to confuse word studies with exegesis. There was no comprehension of the relationship and

complexity of word studies in the exegetical process.

6.3.3.4 Exegesis and Sermon Preparation A tension was noted connecting the biblical

exegesis using the original languages and with sermon preparation (2.2.3.1). Homileticians

170
Perry16(1961) and Winegarden (1951) preferred to lessen the connection between exegesis and

sermon preparation. Biblical scholar, Kaiser (1981), wanted a connection between exegesis and

the sermon to be taught in theological education. Robinson (2001), a contemporary homiletician

and popularizer of “big idea” preaching, encouraged the use of the languages in biblical study.

The older pastors were performing exegesis on the biblical text before moving to the

sermon preparation phase. Several of the pastors described a process of reading the biblical text

to understand the “big idea” and then proceeding to the sermon preparation. This change was

especially evident among the younger pastors.

For two of the younger pastors, David and Felix, it was questionable whether exegesis

even in English was occurring. A third pastor, Benjamin, rejected detailed exegesis of the

biblical text. Ideas gleaned from secondary literature became the content of their sermons. This

approach is acceptable from an information literacy perspective but departs from traditional

Evangelical biblical preaching. The practice of doing little or no biblical exegesis before

preparing a sermon was a surprise. It is possible this is a result of sampling bias. The three

pastors may have done more Bible study than they described.

Pastors Benjamin, David, and Felix did share demographic characteristics. They either

had not studied a biblical language or rejected the use of detailed exegesis with or without the

languages. They used the “big idea” method of sermon preparation although forgoing biblical

exegesis is not a part of this method. They did share the belief along with the other pastors that it

was important to maintain fidelity to the teachings of the biblical text in their sermons (Section

5.2.2).

16
Perry authored several books on biblical preaching and guides to studying Scripture. His opposition was to the
link between biblical language study and sermon preparation.
171
6.3.3.5 Model of Information Use Behavior The model which maps how the preacher accesses

and evaluates information is illustrated in Figure 6. This may be generalizable to other ministry

situations and roles.

Start

Cognitive Process

Prayer

Extra-biblical
Information Preacher

Bible

Affective Process

Sermon Content

Figure 6: Information Evaluation Model

Prayer is an activity but the pastors were directing it to God whom they believed would

provide an answer. They did not expect an audible answer but an assurance of a direction. The

Bible is a written document but it was viewed as both a source of information and a means for

God to communicate with man. It stands as a source in both the affective and cognitive domains.

The pastors changed from the cognitive domain in seeking information to the affective

domain in the choice and evaluation of that information. The pastors shared a value system of

172
being Evangelical but different denominations were represented. They consciously chose

information that conformed to their personal belief systems and with the expected

communication. Pastor Ethan (Appendix E, paragraph 57) started to raise an evolutionary view

that may have been opposed by many Evangelicals and stopped by saying his personal view was

unimportant to the point he was making.

Their choice of information confirms the results of Wicks on the role of adopting a closed

system for information used in preaching (Wicks, 1997, pp. 93-98). The information source in a

closed system may be a document such as The Book of Concord was for Roland’s informant

(Roland, 2012) or a church doctrinal statement (Appendix D, paragraph 55).

In contrast to the closed system defined by Wicks (1997), the information sources did not

necessarily conform to their belief system. The process of extracting information (Ellis, 2005;

Meho & Tibbo, 2003) was filtered by a personal affective domain for the sermonic intent. The

sermon intent is a combination of Machlup’s (1962) professional and religious knowledge

categories including prayer, biblical study, and the transformation expected in the congregation.

The general nature of a source may expect it to be classified as closed but specific ideas may be

considered valid or true and contribute to the sermon. The existence of this filter is consistent

with how pastors extracted information in Tanner (1994).

6.3.3.6 Theory of Pastoral Information Seeking Behavior My theory of the information

seeking behavior of Evangelical pastors is derived from the data as provided by the informants

during structured interviews concerning sermon preparation.

1. The perceived spiritual need of the congregation becomes the common variable

which controls pastoral information seeking behavior.

173
 2. The pastor discerns the spiritual need of the congregation through personal

observation, input from people, prayer (God) and the Bible (Figure 1). The spiritual need is

expressed as a sermon topic series or preaching schedule.

3. The pastor refines individual sermon topics through prayer and the Bible to meet

the spiritual need of the congregation (Figure 2).

4. The pastor limits the sources to those expected to be able to supply useful

information to satisfy the spiritual need. The pastor starts with primary sources and may shift to

secondary sources until the information need is met or time limit arrives (Figure 4).

5. The pastor seeks information through a cognitive process affected by the spiritual

need of the congregation (Figure 6).

6. The pastor uses the spiritual need as an affective domain filter to discern what

information may contribute to the desired outcome of spiritual change in those who hear the

sermon (Figure 6). The affective domain filter does not eliminate opposing views but

acknowledges those which would contribute to the desired outcome.

6.4 AREAS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

6.4.1 Pastoral Use of Academic Library Resources

Further research is needed to investigate why pastors would not use academic library resources

for sermon preparation even when they are readily available. This could be an issue of that could

be solved by information literacy instruction or could be a deeper problem within the curriculum

of theological education. Do students learn to become dependent upon personal libraries for

practical study before entering ministry as Gaba found (2008, 2009)? Do class assignments

require research using library resources?

174
 Theological education contains a mixture between academic and practical subjects.

Further research is required to answer several curricular questions. Does the curriculum require

the same level of research between academic areas and practical theology? Is it a pedagogical

issue with faculty expectations? Is the research issue a symptom of theological education

following specialized theological disciplines that have little practical value? Is there a failure to

link subjects like biblical languages to their practical use in ministry?

6.4.2 Biblical Language Study

6.4.2.1 Value of Language Study The role of biblical language study in the theological

curriculum has been evolving for more than a century. Learning the languages requires a

considerable investment in time, effort, and resources for students. It is well recognized that

many pastors do not maintain proficiencies once they enter ministry. Theological institutions

have responded by changing the requirements. There has been a steady decline in the

requirements in both mainline and Evangelical seminaries. A few seminaries have required

courses in both Hebrew and Greek. Others have lowered it to one language or a basic

introduction to the language tools, if it has not been eliminated altogether.

The pastors who were interviewed varied from only one who had maintained language

proficiencies to others who had never studied the languages. The gap in competencies between

pastors, who had studied a language and those who had not, was significant. There appears to be

a residual effect of language study even when proficiencies are not maintained. Further research

is needed concerning the model of language study and the subsequent abilities in ministry.

6.4.2.2 Pastoral Use of Commentaries and Language Study Critical evaluation of

interpretations is a normal component of exegesis in the original languages. Further research

needs to be conducted on the correlation of biblical language study and the types of secondary

175
sources consulted. Question 13a asked about their use of devotional, homiletical, exegetical, and

expository commentaries. Each type of commentary has a different purpose and audience.

Those pastors who had not studied the languages misidentified homiletical commentaries as

exegetical. This could indicate a level of theological sophistication or possibly an open or closed

approach to the known authors (Wicks, 1997). Sample pages of different types of commentaries

could be used to assess whether the pastors could identify the purpose and intended audience of

each work. They could also identify which commentaries they would or would not use and the

reason why.

6.4.2.3 Critical Thinking and Language Study Further research needs to be done on the tools

in the language programs substituting for knowledge of the biblical languages in exegesis. The

ability to do a word study fits a paradigm where that is the only benefit from knowing a biblical

language. Knowledge of the languages enables exegesis at a deeper level. It provides the tools

to recognize truth from error in commentaries.

Further research may be necessary to determine whether there is a correlation between

critical thinking skills and biblical language study. Since only one pastor maintained proficiency

in language usage, is there a residual effect of language study itself that equips the pastor in

multiple areas?

6.4.3 Computer Tools and Sermon Preparation

Theological students are taught to prepare sermons based upon exegesis of the biblical text. The

level of exegesis conducted by these pastors varied from the traditional emphasis to a

questionable one in preparation of their sermons. Exegesis is a research methodology in

theological studies that should be viewed as an information literacy process by librarians and

professors. Morris (2006) tried to justify Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary’s library

176
teaching the use of BibleWorks as a contribution to information literacy. BibleWorks is a

program created for biblical exegesis especially with the biblical languages (J. B. Tucker, 2012).

The other widely used biblical studies program, Logos®, has a smaller number of exegetical

works but much more in the secondary literature. These programs share the major search engine

options of library catalogs but with specialized capabilities for biblical and theological research.

The need to transfer information literacy skills on library systems to the Bible programs is an

obvious area for moving from student to practitioner. Further research needs to be conducted on

the influence of the biblical programs on the preparation of sermons.

6.4.4 Exegesis and “Big Idea” Homiletics

Evangelicals have placed a higher value in sermon preparation on exegesis of the biblical text

than accessing secondary sources. Several pastors seemed to jump from a cursory study of a

biblical passage to ascertain a “big idea” for the sermon. This became the theme or research idea

within the secondary sources. This is an information literacy issue for both access and use of the

secondary sources. Further research needs to be conducted on actual sermons in order to

correlate the big idea sermon method with the results of exegesis to ascertain the fidelity to the

biblical text. Fidelity to the biblical text was important to each pastor interviewed.

6.4.5 Information Seeking Model of Evangelical Pastors and Information Literacy

An information seeking theory and model for Evangelical pastors has been proposed. They need

to be tested on other pastors for verification. The development and composition of the affective

domain filter may be considered a part of spiritual formation in theological education if it is

intentionally developed. The model would need to be reviewed by professors in the different

fields of theological education. Current workplace practice may not be best practice but it would

force faculty to review the practical nature of subjects that are conceived only as intellectual

177
knowledge. It is at that point an institution may start the development of an information literacy

program.

The use of an affective domain filter may not be limited to religious ministry only.

Public discourse in numerous fields is subjected to this filter often without the inclusion of the

Bible and prayer but the outcome is held as deeply as religious faith. This filter could be tested

in public discourse in politics, economics, and even controversial issues in the sciences.

6.5 FINAL CONCLUSIONS

A beginning step in developing an information literacy competency standard for pastors was

made in this study. It was only for the pastor in the role of preacher and then in the areas

pertinent to library and information science. A full standard is needed for theological students

and for pastors in the roles of preacher, administrator, and caregiver. The standard should take

into account the model used in the ministry workplace. Theological educators should review the

workplace model for flaws that could contribute to improved outcomes for graduates. The

recognition of differences between the information seeking behaviors of practitioners and

professors could contribute to information literacy instruction and preparation for ministry.

Pastors are shifting from predominately physical libraries to electronic resources. A

personal electronic library has changed the approach to access and use of materials. This change

needs to be incorporated into the theological curriculum.

All of the pastors completed graduate theological programs while concurrently serving in

ministry. Only one used the academic library resources in sermon preparation. This gulf

between the academic and practical should be a concern for those in theological education.

178
 The lack of study of the biblical languages had ramifications in critical thinking, use of

resources, and exegesis or Bible study in the preparation of a sermon. This was not an issue of

retained proficiency but a philosophical approach that has decreased language requirements. The

change in requirements is a trend that may have unintended consequences for the Evangelical

tradition. This should be a concern as Evangelicals could move from the Bible as the primary

source and authority.

179
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allen, O. W., Jr. (2006). Liar, liar, pulpit on fire: Homiletical ethics and plagiarism. Lexington
Theological Quarterly, 41(2), 65-85.

Allen, R. J. (2005). A code of ethics for preachers. Encounter, 66(4), 343-348.

American Library Association. (2006). Information literacy competency standards for higher
education Retrieved from
http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/standards/standards.pdf

Anderson, G. (2005). Preparing the messenger. In H. W. Robinson & C. B. Larson (Eds.), The
art and craft of biblical preaching: A comprehensive resource for today's communicators
(pp. 550-551). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Association for Biblical Higher Education. (2005). ABHE manual: Standards & policies,
constitution & bylaws. Orlando, FL: Association for Biblical Higher Education.

Association for Biblical Higher Education. (2009). Comprehensive integrated standards for
institutional accreditation. Orlando, FL: Association for Biblical Higher Education.

Association of College and Research Libraries. (2000). Information literacy competency

standards for higher education. Chicago, Ill.: Association of College and Research
Libraries.

Association of Theological Schools in the United States and Canada. (2007). Fact book on
theological education: 2006-2007. C. A. Meinzer & N. Merrill (Eds.), Retrieved from
http://www.ats.edu/Resources/Publications/Documents/FactBook/2006-07.pdf

Babcock, K. (1913). Bibliographical instruction in college. Library Journal, 38, 133-136.

Badke, W. B. (2005). Can't get no respect: Helping faculty to understand the educational power
of information literacy. Reference Librarian(89-90), 63-80.

Badke, W. B. (2009). Professors and personal information literacy. Online, 33(1), 47-49.

Badke, W. B. (2011). Res 500 a (research strategies). Syllabus. Associated Canadian

Theological Schools. Retrieved from
http://acts.twu.ca/Library/RES%20500%20A%20Fall%202011.pdf

Bailey, R. H. (1989). Ethics in preaching. Review & Expositor, 86(4), 533-546.

Barber, C. J. (1974). The minister's library. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.

Barber, C. J. (1982). Introduction to theological research: Moody Press, IL.

180
Barber, C. J. (1989). The minister's library. Volume 3, 1986-1987. Chicago: Moody Press, IL.

Barber, C. J., & M., K. R. (2000). An introduction to theological research : A guide for college
and seminary students (2nd rev. and expanded ed.). Lanham, MD: University Press of
America.

Barber, C. J., & Macarthur, J. (1987). The minister's library : Volume 2, 1971-1985. Chicago:
Moody Press, IL.

Baruchson‐Arbib, S., & Bronstein, J. (2007). Humanists as information users in the digital age:
The case of jewish studies scholars in israel. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology, 58(14), 2269-2279.

Baumann, J. D. (1967). Preaching within the evangelical free church of america. (ThD
Dissertation), Boston University.

Beckelhymer, P. H. (1974). No posturing in borrowed plumes. Christian Century, 91(5), 138-

142.

Bishop, W. W. (1912). Training in the use of books. The Sewanee Review, 20(3), 265-281.

Bolich, G. G. (1986). The christian scholar : An introduction to theological research. Lanham,

MD: University Press of America.

Bollier, J. A. (1979). The literature of theology : A guide for students and pastors (1st ed.).
Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press.

Bollier, J. A. (1980). Interpretative services of theological libraries. American Theological

Library Association Summary of Proceedings, 34, 88-90.

Boon, H. W. (1950). The development of the bible college or institute in the united states and
canada since 1880 and its relationship to the field of theological education in america.
(PhD dissertation), New York University.

Boon, S., Johnston, B., & Webber, S. (2007). A phenomenographic study of english faculty's
conceptions of information literacy. Journal of Documentation, 63(2), 204-228.

Braga, J. (1969). How to prepare bible messages; a manual on homiletics for bible students.
Portland, OR: Multnomah Press.

Breckenridge, J., & Jones, D. (2009). Demystifying theoretical sampling in grounded theory
research. Grounded Theory Review, 8(2), 113-126.

Brereton, V. L. (1990). Training god's army : The american bible school, 1880-1940.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

181
Briscoe, S. (2005). You had to bring it up. In H. W. Robinson & C. B. Larson (Eds.), The art and
craft of biblical preaching : A comprehensive resource for today's communicators (pp.
658-662). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Brockway, D. (1974). Reading and library habits of connecticut pastors. American Theological
Library Association Summary of Proceedings, 28, 125-127.

Bronstein, J. (2007). The role of the research phase in information seeking behaviour of jewish
studies scholars: A modification of ellis's behavioural characteristics. Information
Research, 12(3), 12-13.

Bronstein, J., & Baruchson-Arbib, S. (2008). The application of cost-benefit and least effort
theories in studies of information seeking behavior of humanities scholars: The case of
jewish studies scholars in israel. Journal of Information Science, 34(2), 131-144. doi:
10.1177/0165551507079733

Brown, L. S. (2000). The design of an information literacy program at a non-traditional

seminary. Journal of Religious & Theological Information, 3(1), 39-83.

Bruce, C. S. (1997). The seven faces of information literacy. Adelaide, Australia: Auslib Press.

Bruce, C. S. (1999). Workplace experiences of information literacy. International journal of

information management, 19(1), 33-47.

Bruce, C. S. (2003). Seven faces of information literacy: Towards inviting students into new
experiences. Paper presented at the Higher Colleges of Technology, United Arab
Emirates 2003 Annual Conference, 30 August 2003.

Bruce, C. S. (2011). Information literacy programs and research: Reflections on information

literacy programs and research. Australian Library Journal, 60(4), 334-338.

Bruce, C. S., Edwards, S., & Lupton, M. (2006). Six frames for information literacy education: A
conceptual framework for interpreting the relationships between theory and practice.
Innovation in Teaching and Learning in Information and Computer Sciences, 5(1), 1-18.

Brunton, C. (2005). The effects of library user-education programmes on the information-

seeking behaviour of brisbane college of theology students: An australian case study.
Journal of Religious & Theological Information, 7(2), 55-73.

Buchanan, J. M. (2007). Repeat performance. Christian Century, 124(8), 3.

Bulaong, G., Hoch, H., & Matthews, R. J. (2003). Criteria for information literacy competency
Developing research & communication skills: Guidelines for information literacy in the
curriculum (pp. 69-73). Philadelphia, PA: Middle States Commission on Higher
Education

182
Carson, D. A. (2007). New testament commentary survey (6th ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker
Academic.

Charmaz, K. (2005). Grounded theory in the 21st century. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln
(Eds.), The sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 507-535). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Christian leaders target cyberporn. (1997). Christianity Today, 41(1), 59-318.

Connaway, L. S., Dickey, T. J., & Radford, M. L. (2011). “If it is too inconvenient i'm not going
after it:” convenience as a critical factor in information-seeking behaviors. Library &
Information Science Research, 33(3), 179-190. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2010.12.002

Council for Higher Education Accreditation. (2012). Summary of recognition status, the
association of theological schools: Commision on accrediting (ATS) [Press release].
Retrieved from http://www.chea.org/pdf/Recognition/Summaries_2013/ATS.pdf

Culnan, M. J. (1985). The dimensions of perceived accessibility to information: Implications for

the delivery of information systems and services. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science, 36(5), 302-308.

Davies, R. A. (1974). Educating library users in the senior high school. In J. Lubans (Ed.),
Educating the library user (pp. 39-52). New York, NY: R.R. Bowker Co.

Davis, R. C. (1886). Teaching bibliography in colleges. Library Journal, 11, 289-294.

De Klerk, P. (1968). A study of reading interests of ministers of the christian reformed church.
(M. Ln.), Emory University. Available from OCLC WorldCat database.

Delivuk, J. A., & Edward, W. M. (1985). How to find information in the seminary library :
Reference guides for students of theology. St. Louis, MO: Concordia Seminary Library.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative
research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The sage handbook of qualitative
research (3rd ed., pp. 1-32). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Dervin, B. (1998). Sense-making theory and practice: An overview of user interests in

knowledge seeking and use. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2(2). doi:
10.1108/13673279810249369

Dervin, B. (1999). On studying information seeking methodologically: The implications of

connecting metatheory to method. Information Processing & Management, 35(6), 727-
750. doi: 10.1016/s0306-4573(99)00023-0

183
Dervin, B. (2003). Chaos, order, and sense-making: A proposed theory for information design. In
B. Dervin, L. Foreman-Wernet & E. Lauterbach (Eds.), Sense-making methodologies
reader: Selected writings of Brenda Dervin (pp. 325-340). Creskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Dervin, B. (2010). Clear . . . Unclear? Accurate . . . Inaccurate? Objective . . . Subjective?

Research . . . Practice? Why polarities impede the research, practice and design of
information systems and how sense-making methodology attempts to bridge the gaps.
Part 1. Journal Of Evaluation In Clinical Practice, 16(5), 994-997.

Du Preez, M. (2008). Information needs and information-seeking behaviour of consulting

engineers: A qualitative investigation. (M.Inf. 0669032), University of South Africa
(South Africa), South Africa.

Dugan, R. P. (1977). The theory of education within the bible institute movement at selected
critical times. (Ph. D.), New York University. Retrieved from
http://firstsearch.oclc.org/DirectLocalHoldings?autho=100250479&standardNumberType
=OCLC&standardNumber=8769698&date=1386906416622&hc=b197676677a16c225f5
7e3d19ce3b348 local ownership info

Eisenberg, M., & Berkowitz, R. E. (1990). Information problem-solving : The big six skills
approach to library & information skills instruction. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Eisenberg, M. B. (2010). Information literacy: Essential skills for the information age.
DESIDOC: Journal of Library & Information Technology, 28(2), 39-47.

Ellis, D. (1984a). The effectiveness of information retrieval systems: The need for improved
explanatory frameworks. Social Science Information Studies, 4(4), 261-272. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0143-6236(84)90002-4

Ellis, D. (1984b). Theory and explanation in information retrieval research. Journal of

Information Science, 8(1), 25-38. doi: 10.1177/016555158400800105

Ellis, D. (1987). The derivation of a behavioural model for information retrieval system design.
(PhD), University of Sheffield. Available from OCLC

Ellis, D. (1989). A behavioural model for information retrieval system design. Journal of
Information Science, 15(4-5), 237-247. doi: 10.1177/016555158901500406

Ellis, D. (1993). Modeling the information-seeking patterns of academic researchers: A grounded

theory approach. The Library Quarterly, 63(4), 469-486.

Ellis, D. (1997). Modelling the information seeking patterns of engineers and research scientists
in an industrial environment. Journal of Documentation, 53(4), 384-403.

Ellis, D. (2005). Ellis's model of information-seeking behavior. In K. E. Fisher, S. Erdelez & L.

McKechnie (Eds.), Theories of information behavior (pp. 138-142). Medford, NJ:
Information Today.
184
Erdel, T. P. (1978). The reading habits of evangelical mennonite ministers. (MA), University of
Chicago.

Erdel, T. P. (1982). Bring also the books : Studies of ministers as readers. Reformed Review,
35(3), 136-151.

Erickson, M. J. (2003). Evangelical theological scholarship in the twenty-first century. Journal

of the Evangelical Theological Society, 46(1), 5-27.

Fafeita, J., & Lloyd, A. (2012). Plating up information literacy as a social practice: A slice of the
literature. Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 43(2), 92-101.

Falciani-White, N. (2008). Running with perseverance: The theological library’s challenge of

keeping pace with changing students. Theological Librarianship: An Online Journal of
the American Theological Library Association, 1(2), 16-26.

Falla, B. (2007). Working with faculty to create an information literacy program for a small
seminary: An evolutionary process. American Theological Library Association Summary
of Proceedings, 61, 160-162.

Fee, G. D. (1993). New testament exegesis : A handbook for students and pastors (Rev. ed.).
Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press.

Fee, G. D., & Stuart, D. K. (2003). How to read the bible for all its worth (3rd ed.). Grand
Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Foreman-Wernet, L. (2003). Rethinking communication: Introducing the sense-making

methodology. In B. Dervin, L. Foreman-Wernet & E. Lauterbach (Eds.), Sense-making
methodology reader: Selected writings of Brenda Dervin (pp. 1-16). Cresskill, N.J.:
Hampton Press.

Foster, E. (1952). 6,000 sermon illustrations : An omnibus of classic sermon illustrations. Grand
Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.

Fraser, J. W. (1988). Schooling the preachers : The development of protestant theological

education in the united states, 1740-1875. Lanham: University Press of America.

Gaba, R. (2008). Reading researching and writing of mdiv students: A preliminary report.
American Theological Library Association Summary of Proceedings, 62, 288-292.

Gaba, R. (2009). Research habits of mdiv students: The tools they use and what they value in a
text. American Theological Library Association Summary of Proceedings, 63, 73-78.

Gaba, R., & Ganski, K. L. (2011). The catla study: Reading, researching, and writing habits of
master of divinity students and the role the library plays in these processes: A study of

185
 methods and environment. American Theological Library Association Summary of
Proceedings, 65, 122-152.

Gibson, S. M. (2008). Should we use someone else's sermon?: Preaching in a cut-and-paste

world. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity : Advances in the methodology of grounded theory.

Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. G. (2009). The novice gt researcher. Grounded Theory Review : an International

Journal, 8(2).

Glaser, B. G. (2012). Constructivist grounded theory? Grounded Theory Review, 11(1), 28-38.

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.

Gorman, G. E. (1990). Patterns of information seeking and library use by theologians in seven
adelaide theological colleges. Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 21, 137-156.

Gorman, G. E., Clayton, P., Shep, S. J., & Clayton, A. (2005). Qualitative research for the
information professional : A practical handbook (2nd ed.). London, England: Facet.

Gragg, D. L. (2005). Information literacy instruction at candler school of theology, 2004-2005:

An "across-the-curriculum" model. American Theological Library Association Summary
of Proceedings, 59, 168-171.

Graham, D. W. (2010). Pulpit plagiarism. (DMin), Reformed Theological Seminary.

Granger, C. F. (2010). Seminaries, congregations, and clergy: Lifelong partners in theological

education. Theological Education, 46(1), 87-99.

Graves, M. (2004). Preaching and plagiarizing. Clergy Journal, 80(9), 18-19.

Graves, M. (2005). Attribution and contribution: Two ways to avoid plagiarism in preaching.
Encounter, 66(4), 323-330.

Gregory, S. (2005). When is a sermon good enough? In H. W. Robinson & C. B. Larson (Eds.),
The art and craft of biblical preaching : A comprehensive resource for today's
communicators (pp. 571-572). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Hackett, C., & Lindsay, D. M. (2008). Measuring evangelicalism: Consequences of different

operationalization strategies. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 47(3), 499-514.
doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5906.2008.00423.x

Hawkins, M. (1954). An investigation of the reading interests and habits of students and
graduates of the school of medicine and candler school of theology of emory university.
(MA), Emory University.
186
Hernandez, C. A. (2009). Theoretical coding in grounded theory methodology. Grounded Theory
Review : an International Journal, 8(3).

Holton, J. A. (2010). The coding process and its challenges. Grounded Theory Review : an
International Journal, 9(1).

Hopkins, F. L. (1982). A century of bibliographic instruction: The historical claim to

professional and academic legitimacy. College and Research Libraries, 43(3), 192-198.

How much do ministers read. (1961, April 24, 1961). Christianity Today.

Huseman, D. A. (1970). Books, periodicals, and the pastor. Drexel library Quarterly, 6(January),
4-26.

Indermark, J. (2007). Ethics and the use of sermon resources: Shifting lines in plagiarism and
preaching. Clergy Journal, 84(1), 29-30.

Information literacy competency standards for journalism students and professionals. (2012).
College & Research Libraries News, 73(5), 274-285.

Information literacy standards for anthropology and sociology. (2008). College & Research
Libraries News, 69(6), 342-349.

Information literacy standards for science and engineering/technology. (2006). College &
Research Libraries News, 67(10), 634-641.

Information literacy standards for teacher education. (2011). College & Research Libraries
News, 72(7), 420-436.

Janvier, G. E. (2000). How to write a theological research thesis. Kaduna, Kaduna State,
Nigeria: Baraka Press.

Järvelin, K., & Wilson, T. D. (2003). On conceptual models for information seeking and retrieval
research. Information Research, 9(1).

Jencks, C., & Riesman, D. (1968). The academic revolution (1st ed.). Garden City, N.Y.:
Doubleday.

Jeter, J. R. (2005a). "Posturing in borrowed plumes": An introduction to preaching and

plagiarism. Encounter, 66(4), 293-300.

Jeter, J. R. (2005b). "The strange case of dr jekyll and [rev] hyde": Preaching and the internet.
Encounter, 66(4), 317-322.

Johnson, A. M., Sproles, C., & Detmering, R. (2011). Library instruction and information
literacy 2010. Reference Services Review, 39(4), 551-627.
187
Johnson, A. M., Sproles, C., Detmering, R., & English, J. (2012). Library instruction and
information literacy 2011. Reference Services Review, 40(4), 601-703.

Kaiser, W. C. (1981). Toward an exegetical theology : Biblical exegesis for preaching and
teaching. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House.

Kansfield, N. J. (1970). The origins of protestant theological seminary libraries in the united
states. (MA MA thesis), University of Chicago.

Keefer, M. (2005). News you can use : 101 sermon illustrations. Loveland, CO: Group.

Kelly, R. L. (1924). Theological education in america : A study of 161 theological schools in the
united states and canada. New York, NY: Doran.

Kennedy, J. R. (1974). Library research guide to religion and theology : Illustrated search
strategy and sources. Ann Arbor, MI: Pierian Press.

Kennedy, J. R. (1984). Library research guide to religion and theology : Illustrated search
strategy and sources (2nd , rev. ed.). Ann Arbor, MI: Pierian Press.

Kennedy, J. W. (1998). Profamily groups demand more cyberporn prosecutions. Christianity

Today, 42(2), 84-85.

Kepple, R. J. (1981). Reference works for theological research : An annotated selective

bibliographical guide (2nd ed.). Washington, D.C.: University Press of America.

Kling, D. W. (1997). New divinty schools of the prophets, 1750-1825: A case study in
ministerial ecuation. History of Education Quarterly, 37(2), 185-206.

Koller, C. W. (1962). Expository preaching without notes plus sermons preached without notes.
Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.

Krupp, R. A. (1989). A primer on theological research tools. Lanham, MD: University Press of
America.

Krupp, R. A. (1990). A primer on theological research tools. Lanham, MD: University Press of
America.

Kuhlthau, C. C. (2005). Kuhlthau's information search process. In K. E. Fisher, S. Erdelez & L.

McKechnie (Eds.), Theories of information behavior (pp. 230-234). Meford, NJ:
Information today.

Kuhlthau, C. C. (2007). Reflections on the development of the model of the information search
process (isp): Excerpts from the lazerow lecture, university of kentucky, april 2, 2007.
Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 33(5), 32-37.

188
Lancour, H. (1944). The reading interests and habits of the graduates of the union theological
seminary. The Library Quarterly, 14(1), 28-35.

Lectionary. (2011). In Cambridge Dictionary of Christian Theology. Retrieved from

www.credoreference.com/entry/cupdct/lectionary

Limpitlaw, A. (2007). A first step in reaching out to faculty. American Theological Library
Association Summary of Proceedings, 61, 153-159.

Lincoln, T. D. (2001). Bibliography today: User training in three theological libraries. American
Theological Library Association Summary of Proceedings, 55, 187-204.

Lincoln, T. D. (2013). Reading and e-reading for academic work: Patterns and preferences in
theological studies and religion. Theological librarianship, 6(2), 34-52.

Lipton, S. (2005). Imbedding information literacy into the religious studies curriculum.
American Theological Library Association Summary of Proceedings, 59, 165-167.

Lloyd, A. (2007). Recasting information literacy as sociocultural practice: Implications for

library and information science researchers. Information Research, 12, 1-13.

Lloyd, A. (2009). Informing practice: Information experiences of ambulance officers in training

and on-road practice. Journal of Documentation, 65(3), 396-419.

Lloyd, A. (2011). Trapped between a rock and a hard place: What counts as information literacy
in the workplace and how is it conceptualized? Library Trends, 60(2), 277-296.

Lloyd, A., & Somerville, M. (2006). Working information. Journal of Workplace Learning,
18(3), 186-198.

Lombaard, C. (2003). Some ethical dimensions to teaching theology via the internet. Journal of
Theology for Southern Africa(115), 43-61.

Long, T. G. (2007). Stolen goods: Tempted to plagiarize. Christian Century, 124(8), 18-21.

Longman, T. (2007). Old testament commentary survey (4th ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker
Academic.

Lonsway, F. A. (2003). A call to growth: The potential of the profiles of ministry program.
Theological Education, 39(2), 65-74.

Lonsway, F. A. (2006). Profiles of ministry: History and current research. Theological

Education, 41(2), 111-125.

Lonsway, F. A. (2007). What's in an instrument? The answer from the profiles of ministry
program. Theological Education, 42(2), 141-154.

189
Lorenzen, M. (2001). A brief history of library instruction in the united states of america. Illinois
Libraries, 83(1).

Lowe, C. A., & Eisenberg, M. B. (2005). Big6 skills for information literacy. In K. Fisher, S.
Erdelez & L. McKechnie (Eds.), Theories of information behavior (pp. 63-68). Medford,
NJ: Information Today.

Lu, C. S. (2009). The information behavior of theologians and social epistemology: Toward a
collectivistic approach in information behavior. American Theological Library
Association Summary of Proceedings, 63, 149-163.

Macarthur, J. (1992). The spirit of god and expository preaching. In J. MacArthur (Ed.),
Rediscovering expository preaching (pp. 102-115). Dallas, Tex.: Word.

Machlup, F. (1962). The production and distribution of knowledge in the united states /by fritz
machlup. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

Makri, S., Blandford, A., & Cox, A. L. (2008). Investigating the information-seeking behaviour
of academic lawyers: From ellis’s model to design. Information Processing &
Management, 44(2), 613-634. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2007.05.001

Malcheski, J. (2004). Assessing library performance in a new landscape, or "how did we do

today?". Theological Education, 40(1), 113-126.

May, M. A., Brown, W. A., & Shuttleworth, F. K. (1934). The education of american ministers.
New York: Institute of Social and Religious Research.

Mayhue, R. L. (1992). Introductions, illustrations, and conclusions. In J. MacArthur (Ed.),

Rediscovering expository preaching (pp. 242-254). Dallas, TX: Word.

Mccarter, N. D., & Little, S. (1976). Readiness for ministry and curriculum design. Theological
Education, 12(3), 151-157.

Mcguinness, C. (2006). What faculty think: Exploring the barriers to information literacy
development in undergraduate education. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 32(6), 573-
582.

Mckay, J. R. (2003). No copyright on sermons? Expository Times, 115(3), 108-318.

Mckinney, L. J. (1997). Equipping for service : A historical account of the bible college
movement in north america. Fayetteville, AR: Accrediting Association of Bible Colleges.

Meho, L. I., & Tibbo, H. R. (2003). Modeling the information‐seeking behavior of social
scientists: Ellis's study revisited. Journal of the American society for Information Science
and Technology, 54(6), 570-587.

190
Michels, D. H. (2001). How biblical studies researchers find their answers: The use of people as
information sources in biblical studies. (M.L.I.S.), Dalhousie University (Canada),
Canada.

Michels, D. H. (2005). The use of people as information sources in biblical studies research.
Canadian Journal of Information & Library Sciences, 29, 91-109.

Michels, D. H. (2009). Dipping into a shallow pool or beginning a deeper conversation: A case
study of a minister's engagement with the internet for preaching. Journal of Religious &
Theological Information, 8(3-4), 164-178.

Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools. Commission on Higher Education. (1994).
Characteristics of excellence in higher education : Standards for accreditation (Rev.
ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Commission on Higher Education, Middle States Association of
Colleges and Schools.

Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools. Commission on Higher Education. (2003).
Developing research & communication skills : Guidelines for information literacy in the
curriculum. Philadelphia, PA: Middle States Commission on Higher Education.

Milas, T. P. (2008). Patterns of information behavior in theological research: A bibliometric

analysis of acknowledgements in theological dissertations. American Theological Library
Association Summary of Proceedings, 62, 292-299.

Miller, G., Dingwall, R., & Murphy, E. (2004). Using qualitative data and analysis: Reflections
on organizational research. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative research : Theory, method
and practice (2nd ed., pp. 325-341). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.

Miller, J., & Glassner, B. (2004). The 'inside' and the 'outside:' Finding realities in interviews. In
D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative research : Theory, method and practice (2nd ed., pp.
125-139). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.

Morris, A. (2006). Bibleworks and information literacy: One paradigm. American Theological
Library Association Summary of Proceedings, 60, 241-242.

Moyer, E. S. (1944). Building a minister's library. Chicago, IL: Moody Press.

Moyer, E. S. (1953). The pastor and his library. Chicago, IL: Moody Press.

Mulligan, M. A. (2005). Helping listeners trust the word of the preacher. Encounter, 66(4), 331-
342.

Munroe, W. B. (1997). On ethics and the internet : The brewing crisis in pulpit ministry. Journal
for Preachers, 21(1), 48-49.

Oxford English Dictionary. "Hermeneutics, n.": Oxford University Press.

191
Oxford English Dictionary. (2011a). "Hermeneutics n." Retrieved from http://www.oed.com/

Oxford English Dictionary. (2011b). "Homiletics n." Retrieved from http://www.oed.com/

Oxford English Dictionary. (2011c). "Sermon, n." Retrieved from http://www.oed.com/

Park, E. (2006). Preaching, proclamation, and pedagogy: An experiment in integrated

assessment. Theological Education, 41(2), 65-78.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.

Penner, K. (2009a). Information behaviour of theologians: A literature review. Theological

librarianship, 2(1), 67-82.

Penner, K. (2009b). Information needs and behaviours of theology students at the international
baptist theological seminary. Theological librarianship, 2(2).

Perry, L. M. (1961). Trends and emphases in the philosophy, materials, and methodology of
american protestant homiletical education as established by a study of selected trade and
textbooks published between 1834 and 1954. (PhD), Northwestern University.

Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. (2007). U.S. Religious landscape survey. from
http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/affiliations-all-traditions.pdf

Phillips, R. (1992). The relationship between work roles and information-seeking behaviors
among selected protestant ministers in tarrant county, texas. (Ph.D.), University of North
Texas.

Phillips, R. (2000). Bibliographic instruction and distance education. Journal of Religious &
Theological Information, 3(1), 3--4.

Phillips, R. (2001). Bibliographic instruction and lifelong learning. Journal of Religious &
Theological Information, 4(1), 5-7.

Phillips, R. (2002). Plagiarism and theological education. Journal of Religious & Theological
Information, 5(2), 3-12.

Porcella, B. (1973). The information gathering habits of the protestant ministers in cedar rapids,
iowa. (PhD), University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign.

Potts, D. B. (1988). Baptist colleges in the development of american society : 1812-1861. New
York u.a.: Garland.

Rader, H. B. (2002). Information literacy 1973-2002: A selected literature review. Library

Trends, 51(2), 242.

192
Rebeck, V. A. (1997). Sharing--or stealing?--sermons. Christian Ministry, 28(1), 14-25.

Religious leaders join in fighting cyberporn. (1997). Christian Century, 114(1), 7-8.

Resner, A. (2010). No preacher left behind: A new prerequisite for the introductory preaching
course. Teaching Theology & Religion, 13(4), 339-349.

Reynhout, H. (1947). A comparative study of bible institute curriculums. Providence, R.I.:

Providence Bible Institute.

Rice, G. W. (1979). The reading patterns of nazarene pastors, as compared to a normal

standard necessary for effective ministry in today's world. (D.Min.), Nazarene
Theological Seminary.

Robinson, H. W. (2001). Biblical preaching : The development and delivery of expository

messages (2nd ed.). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic.

Robinson, H. W., & Gibson, S. M. (1999). Making a difference in preaching : Haddon robinson
on biblical preaching. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

Robinson, H. W., & Larson, C. B. (2005). The art and craft of biblical preaching : A
comprehensive resource for today's communicators. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan.

Robinson, O. H. (1880). Rochester university library--adminstration and use Circulars of

information of the bureau of education. Washington: Govt. Print. Off.

Roland, D. R. (2008). Interpreting scripture in contemporary times: A study of a clergy

member's sense-making behavior in preparing the sunday sermon. (Ph.D.), Emporia State
University.

Roland, D. R. (2012). The information behavior of clergy members engaged in the sermon
preparation task: Wicks revisited. Journal of Religious & Theological Information, 11(1-
2), 1-15.

Rudolph, F. (1962). The american college and university, a history (1st ed.). New York, NY:
Knopf.

Rudolph, F., & Carnegie Council on Policy Studies in Higher Education. (1977). Curriculum : A
history of the american undergraduate course of study since 1636 (1st ed.). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Saldaña, J. (2011). Fundamentals of qualitative research Understanding qualitative research

(pp. 1 online resource (191 p.)). Retrieved from http://www.netLibrary.com

Salmon, L. M. (1913). Instruction in the use of a college library. ALA Bulletin, 7, 301-309.
193
Salony, M. F. (1995). The history of bibliographic instruction: Changing trends from books to
the electronic world Reference Librarian, 24(51), 31-51.

Sataline, S. (2006). That sermon you heard on sunday may be from the web. Wall Street Journal
- Eastern Edition, 248(116), A1-A14.

Sayre, J. L., & Roberta, H. (1973). Theological bibliography and research. Enid, Okla.:
Graduate Seminary, Phillips University.

Schneider, J. (1912). A college course in bibliography. Catholic educational review, 3, 215-222.

Schuller, D. S. (1973). Readiness for ministry. Theological Education, 9(3), 221-223.

Schuller, D. S. (1976). Readiness for ministry : Implementation in church and seminary.

Theological Education, 12(3), 143-150.

Schuller, D. S., Brekke, M., Strommen, M. P., & Association of Theological Schools in the
United States and Canada. (1975). Readiness for ministry. Vandalia, OH: Association of
Theological Schools in the United States and Canada.

Schuller, D. S., Strommen, M. P., & Brekke, M. L. (1973). Assessment of readiness for the
practice of professional ministry : Rationale and research method. Theological Education,
10(1), 50-65.

Shaddix, J. (2005). How to build a first rate library. In H. W. Robinson & C. B. Larson (Eds.),
The art and craft of biblical preaching : A comprehensive resource for today's
communicators (pp. 575-577). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Shelley, C. (2002). Preaching and plagiarism: A guide for introduction to preaching students.
Homiletic, 27(2), 1-13.

Shelley, C. (2005). "Stolen words": A brief history and analysis of preaching and plagiarism.
Encounter, 66(4), 301-316.

Smith, K. L., & Smith, V. L. (2001a). The impact of the internet on parish ministry. Journal of
Religious & Theological Information, 4(1), 9-24. doi: 10.1300/J112v04n01_04

Smith, K. L., & Smith, V. L. (2001b). The impact of the internet on parish ministry -- a survey
and annotated list of web resources. Journal of Religious & Theological Information,
4(1), 9 - 24.

Spiritual shortcuts: The cheating epidemic reveals a deeper issue. (2005). Christianity Today,
49(1), 27-318.

194
Spitzer, K. L., Eisenberg, M. B., Lowe, C. A., & Doyle, C. S. (1998). Information literacy:
Essential skills for the information age. Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on
Information & Technology, Syracuse University.

Sproles, C., Detmering, R., & Johnson, A. M. (2013). Trends in the literature on library
instruction and information literacy, 2001-2010. Reference Services Review, 41(3), 395-
412.

Stitzinger, J. F. (1992). Study tools for expository preaching. In J. MacArthur (Ed.),

Rediscovering expository preaching (pp. 177-208). Dallas, TX: Word.

Sweet, W. W. (1937). The rise of theological schools in america. Church History, 6(3), 260-273.

Tan, P. L. (1979). Encyclopedia of 7,700 illustrations : Signs of the times. Rockville, MD:
Assurance Publishers.

Tanner, T. M. (1993). "Bring the books" : Results of a national survey on ministerial reading
habits. Journal of Religious & Theological Information, 1(2), 53-76.

Tanner, T. M. (1994). What ministers know : A qualitative study of pastors as information

professionals. Metuchen, NJ: American Theological Library Association and Scarecrow
Press.

Teske, B. (2002). Introducing acrl information literacy competency standards to graduate schools
of theology. Journal of Religious & Theological Information, 5(3-4), 29-57.

The Barna Group. (2007). Survey explores who qualifies as an evangelical Retrieved August 1,
2011, from http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/13-culture/111-survey-explores-
who-qualifies-as-an-evangelical

The Commission on Accrediting of the Association of Theological Schools. (2007). Standards of

accreditation Retrieved from
http://www.ats.edu/Accrediting/Documents/DegreeProgramStandards.pdf

The Commission on Accrediting of the Association of Theological Schools. (2010). General

institutional standards Retrieved from
http://www.ats.edu/Accrediting/Documents/GeneralInstitutionalStandards.pdf

Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools. (2009). Accreditation manual.

Retrieved August 21, 2009, from www.tracs.org

Travis, T. A. (2008). Librarians as agents of change: Working with curriculum committees using
change agency theory New Directions for Teaching & Learning (Vol. 2008, pp. 17-33).

Troxel, A. B. (1987). Personal computer applications for the pastor. (Thesis (D Min )), Dallas
Theological Seminary, 1987.

195
Tucker, D. C. (1989). Finding religion (in the library) : A student manual of information
retrieval and utilization skills. Bristol, IN: Wyndham Hall Press.

Tucker, G. L. (1956). The enrichment of the ministry through the pastor's reading of literature.
(ThM), Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary.

Tucker, J. B. (2012). Bibleworks 9 [computer software]: Software for biblical exegesis and
research. Criswell Theological Review, 9(2), 109-110.

Uribe Tirado, A., & Castaño Muñoz, W. (2012). Information literacy competency standards for
higher education and their correlation with the cycle of knowledge generation. Liber
Quarterly: The Journal of European Research Libraries, 22(3), 213.

Verberkmoes, J. F. (2006). Student outcomes assessment: A study of the organizational factors

that foster or inhibit progress in establishing a culture of assessment within graduate
theological schools., Michigan State University.

Voigt, G. P. (1954). Preacher and his reading. Lutheran Quarterly, 6(1), 23-29.

Wallis, C. L. (1975). 1010 sermon illustrations from the bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book
House.

Wenderoth, C. (2007). Research behaviors of theological educators and students: The known and
unknown: Introduction. American Theological Library Association Summary of
Proceedings, 61, 178-183.

Wenderoth, C. (2008). Research behaviors of theological educators. Currents in Theology and

Mission, 35(4), 287-292.

When pastors plagiarize. (2002). Christianity Today, 46(13), 29.

Wicks, D. A. (1997). The information-seeking behaviour of pastoral clergy: A study of the

interaction of their work worlds and work roles. (PhD), The University of Western
Ontario, Canada.

Wicks, D. A. (1999). The information seeking behavior of pastoral clergy: A study of the
interaction of their work worlds and work roles. Library & Information Science
Research, 21(2), 205-226.

Willimon, W. H. (1997). Borrowed thoughts on sermonic borrowing. Christian Ministry, 28(1),

14-16.

Wilson, T. D. (2000). Human information behavior. Informing science, 3(2), 49-56.

Winegarden, N. A. (1951). A historical survey of homiletical education in the united states.

(ThD), Northern Baptist Theological Seminary.

196
Winsor, J. (1880). College libraries as aids to instruction Circulars of information of the bureau
of education (pp. 7-14). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

Woodruff, E. H. (1886). University libraries and seminary methods of instruction. Library

Journal, 11, 219-224.

Woodruff, M., & Moore, S. G. W. (2003). An honest sermon: Plagiarism, the pulpit, and how to
appropriate others' ideas appropriately. Leadership, 24(1), 32-34.

Younger, T. (1994). Why i use other people's stuff : A case for borrowing great sermon material.
Leadership, 15(1), 66-67.

Zemek, G. J. (1992). Grammatical analysis and expository preaching. In J. MacArthur (Ed.),

Rediscovering expository preaching (pp. 154-176). Dallas, Tex.: Word.

Zipperer, J. (1994). The naked city : "Cyberporn" invades the american home. Christianity
Today, 38(10), 42-43.

Zurkowski, P. G. (1974). The information service environment relationships and priorities.

Related paper no. 5. Washington, DC: National Commission on Libraries and
Information Science.

197
198
 APPENDIX A

PASTOR AMOS TRANSCRIPT

Transcript of a structured interview with Pastor Amos: An interview conducted on November 16,

2011

INTERVIEWER: This is the recording of an interview with Pastor Amos on

Wednesday, November 16, 2011 at 1 p.m. The interview was conducted in Pastor

Amos’s church office.

INTERVIEWER: How much preaching experience do you have?

INTERVIEWEE: I’ve been preaching for about 46 years. Some of it was as a lay

person, but I’ve – I have been in a three churches where I’ve served and done preaching

and that would be around 43 years.

INTERVIEWER: Could you tell me about your academic preparation for

becoming a pastor?

INTERVIEWEE: I attended a Bible college and then I attended a seminary and

then I went back and attended a Bible college again, to get another masters. And well,

199
that’s been basically the training, haven’t done training outside of that. [Nazareth]

Seminary in [City, State].

INTERVIEWER: In which of the three?

INTERVIEWEE: It was – no, I just I did Old Testament’s studies, so I was there

for 32 hours.

INTERVIEWER: What would you consider your most significant preparation

outside of formal education for becoming a pastor?

INTERVIEWEE: I think probably the greatest preparation was to actually while

a student to be involved in actually preaching, putting in those kinds of experiences

because what it made me aware of is what I needed to learn and so when I was in Bible

college in particular, I for two years preached quite often at breakfast, Sunday Breakfast

Association, mission agencies, young people’s meetings and things like that and it made

me literally hungry that to learn because it uncovered what I didn’t know.

INTERVIEWER: The following questions relate to the study of the Biblical

languages?

INTERVIEWEE: Okay.

INTERVIEWER: How many years of Biblical languages did you take in your

formal education?

INTERVIEWEE: I had three years of the Greek and a year of Hebrew that was

essentially it other than I took some of correspondence courses additionally for Greek

which would amount to another six hours.

INTERVIEWER: What level of proficiency have you maintained in the Biblical

languages?

200
 INTERVIEWEE: Maintained? I have a working knowledge of the tools and I

don’t use my Biblical languages for diversions as I had and been instructed to do. I can –

in Greek, I could probably pick up a Greek text that has no notes in it and read through

maybe at 25 percent of the vocabulary. Hebrew would be extremely less, I only had one

year of that.

INTERVIEWER: What is your attitude towards using the biblical languages in

exegesis?

INTERVIEWEE: Oddly enough even though I don’t read it. I use it every time. I

actually work from electronic sources to use it. Before that, before the electronic tools

were available, I was using interlinears, I was using all sorts of tools and analyticals, all

of those tools in addition to that the commentaries. I always had stayed away from my

purchases of devotional commentaries and usually used more that we’re stressing the

languages because I felt, it really to know about languages in order to do that. But my

feeling is if you’re not using them every day, it has a – for me at least it has a quick

decline just as you – when you use other languages beyond using yours.

INTERVIEWER: How did results of study in the book of languages affect your

sermon?

INTERVIEWEE: I think there is a significant difference because I try to when

I’m sharing with people, to point out some of the nuances without trying well them with

the actual languages particularly like saying like this is – I’ll say it’s an imperative to

command but I won’t say it’s first class or any of that. But I will point out what that

means, I’ll mention what it means and say, this is why it’s significant to people especially

in terms of commands and I’ve been noting the verbs, those are important and then I do –

I would say, at least once or twice a month in the actual Sunday morning services, I
201
would do a word study on a particular word that had a value to the understanding of the

text.

INTERVIEWER: In your opinion, how well did your theological education

prepare you for your preaching ministry?

INTERVIEWEE: I felt that my preparation particularly in the undergraduate

level was extremely helpful. I was in that era that what happened in seminary was not all

that different from what was coming out of Bible colleges. Seminaries weren’t really

equipped. I guess that’s the best word to put it to deal with people that had come from

Bible colleges at that point. A lot of my courses that I had in Bible College was probably

taken from the minutes right out of the professors when they went to seminary. So, that

was good I had three outstanding great teachers and that’s the reason that I chose to go to

[Nazareth] Seminary because at that time [Nazareth] Seminary was the Old Testament

school, Dallas was the New Testament school that was how the students look at their

schools and I felt that I needed, I didn’t have a proficiency that I wanted to be able to

handle the scriptures as a pastor in the Old Testament.

So that’s why I want – I didn’t feel like I could use the tools properly until I had a

better handle of the Old Testament languages and so I do feel that the undergraduate

prepared me very well. It wasn’t just the fact the professors were outstanding but it was

also they required more than 1 year of the language you had to have 2 years of it. I don’t

know that that’s the level of what’s required now.

INTERVIEWER: What, if any, training did you receive in school in the use of

resources such as commentaries, magazines and journals, encyclopedias and dictionaries?

INTERVIEWEE: We had in undergraduate level we had a very strong emphasis.

We had several courses that were Bible study methods, hermeneutics, courses such as
202
this and the assignments were designed to have us use those tools that was part of the –

what we had to do and turn in and all of those classes at that time we had a term paper

that was due at the end of the semester and that term paper had to reflect how we used

those tools. How we would footnote them etcetera which was saying how we were

drawing out of that. In seminary they want a step further, they would actually have us

work through some of the commentaries and they would ask us what they could call

problem questions they would pose questions and we had to come up with four possible

answers citing the references where they were coming from, from different kinds of tools.

So I felt that there was a large emphasis upon using any languages but also using

commentaries. They tended in both seminary and college to pretty much minimize or

speak not very highly of what they called ABC, Already Been Chewed materials they

called them devotional commentaries. We were always instructed to use commentaries

that were heavily influenced from the languages and explaining the languages, context,

etcetera.

INTERVIEWER: What training did you receive on using library resources?

INTERVIEWEE: I had training only by I guess would say the testifier because

we had to do the assignments, we got went in there used it of course at that time it was

the Dewey Decimal System and you know and it was all very mechanical. When I was in

doing the second, my second study which was a masters in leadership at another Bible

college in that instance I had a better, we actually had a course that took us through the

library and helped us explain what was available. So that was a better introduction.

INTERVIEWER: Could you describe the last sermon that you preached?

INTERVIEWEE: Describe the last sermon I preached. It was a topical one,

actually it had to do with what it means to be in Christ and we were emphasizing

203
different aspects, actually did a word study and took them through the Pauline Epistles of

where that phrase in Christ was used and that was the major part of it. That’s not

typically what I do I tend to go through books of the Bible and or characters of the Bible.

I try to integrate different levels of things for variety in the preaching stage. I use book

study, I use a doctrinal study then I use a character study and I use a Christian life study

and I cycle that way in the series that I do.

INTERVIEWER: What are your normal steps you used in preparation of the

sermon.

INTERVIEWEE: Normal step it depends upon what style preaching I’m doing

whether if it’s topical, obviously I’m coming with a presupposition. I’m coming with a

theme that I’m looking to do and then I go in to the tools that I have and I try to together

all the materials I have on that particular theme that I’m doing and then I do a deductive

study from that where I’m deducing from the material and context in culture and etcetera

and then plugging it in to how would answer the premise that I was going for. If I’m

doing a book study or character study or something like that as a different approach, there

I highly used grammatical historical cultural emphasis. I always go to the text first after

I’ve done the background study and have that material already presented to the

congregation. I usually hand that kind of information out to them in printed form and

then I go back and build on that. I provide sermon notes for them to use. The sermon

notes for the last couple of years had been set aside now because I used PowerPoint® and

which is something that people can use but I go to the text and then from the text I devise

an outline approach of this. I don’t necessarily go verse by verse, it’s more section by

section, although essentially it works enough to be verse by verse but I’m giving them a

big idea and partly other the sub points are supporting that big idea of that major premise.
204
 INTERVIEWER: How is a sermon topic chosen?

INTERVIEWEE: The sermon topic for me for me is chosen I try to that every

November, December for the coming year. I look at the needs within the congregation

that is one thing but then I use the pattern and I discussed where I tried to have some

variety in the preaching that I’m not just doing book studies but I’m also doing doctrinal

studies. I.e., justification, you know sanctification, etc. or the doctrine of Holy Spirit and

then I’ve done character studies of David, Moses, Jonah all of those and occasionally I’ll

do a communion series which once a month I go to a totally separate theme just for

communion. I don’t do that all the time but I’d say maybe on the last 30+ years I’ve done

it maybe five times and that can go as long as 26 weeks, there are 26 months I should say

where I just once month I pull out this series and go unto something new. I do a couple

of seasonal series but not always. It depends for example I may do a Christmas series. I

may do a sermon on Veterans day or something like that but usually it’s because I’m

going in between a series and it provides an opportunity to do that but I look at the

congregation I look at their real and felt needs there’s a thing that they say that they really

want to hear but the other thing I have to do as being a pastor as a shepherd I have to look

where the sheep are and determine you know that’s what they say in me but they

probably need to go in this direction and needs some more teaching in this area so that

would be how it happens. I don’t use any church calendar or something like that.

INTERVIEWER: What process is used to choose the biblical passage?

INTERVIEWEE: Well the process I used is depending upon again the type of

study if it is a book study that’s not very difficult to do because that’s already sort of

subscribed to and I tried to teach the sections that are there but if it’s a topical study I

normally try to lay out how I would approach that particular topic you know whether it’s
205
going to be six or seven or eight weeks on a particular topic or then I go back to a

passage. My preference is if I can be teaching a doctrinal section if I can find a major

passage of scripture that deals with that doctrine I choose to do that and do straight

exegesis of that passage; however I will do topical things. Topical preaching is not my

favorite preaching but I do do it. I prefer to do straight; I mean there is expositional-

topical, I understand that.

INTERVIEWEE: But I would prefer to do exposition of a book. I think you have

less opportunity of violating the text by ripping it out of context.

INTERVIEWER: How did you develop an outline for your last sermon?

INTERVIEWEE: The last sermon is not typical but the last sermon I had a

theme, I was going to be preaching and so therefore, I – I had a topic in mind and then

from that particular topic I searched, actually used electronic tools, I did a word search on

in Christ then found where that was located then went back and look at the particular

verses, checked them in context, then I categorized them into a groupings and then from

that develop the theme, around each one of those groupings to describe what it means to

be in Christ but as I said that would be atypical, you know that’s not normally how I do

that.

INTERVIEWER: We’ve been discussing your process to develop a sermon, I

would like to ask you about specific resources that were used in studying the biblical

passage chosen for your last sermon. What role did commentaries have in the study for

your last sermon?

INTERVIEWEE: Commentaries are usually my last source and that’s for

verification of conclusion, in other words if I’ve been doing inductive Bible study which

is what I primarily do. Then sometimes if go and I verify by looking at commentaries

206
just to see what’s somebody else says has already concluded about – I have used the, I

used commentaries the last time, particularly I was using commentaries from – because

of the theme being in Christ used a lot of in Ephesians because that was a primary

emphasis of where I was going, spent a good chunk of the time there because that’s key a

phrase in that book.

But yes, I use commentaries quite a bit but usually it’s, it’s, I use those to check.

Don’t often quote a lot of commentaries if I do, do a quote it’s three or four sentences

maximum. Like I do, you know try to make sure that it is something that, you know this

– the Spirit of God is teaching me to look at the text rather than just, you know something

the Lord taught somebody else. And since I’ve been here so long, there have been times

that we’ve already done a book study in something. And I go back and I look at what I

had done in the past and I think well that was an interesting conclusion that’s not what

I’m – that’s not where I am headed this time, not that it’s, it’s violating the text but it’s

using a different application using the adage that there’s one interpretation but many

applications. And many times it’s not only what God is doing within the congregation

but what God is doing within me that has an influence upon the text because as it’s being

taught.

INTERVIEWER: Commentaries may have emphases such as devotional,

homiletical, exegetical, expository, etc. Could you describe the types of commentaries

that you used?

INTERVIEWEE: Most of the commentaries I used are the exegetical

commentaries. In fact, you’re sitting in a office now that’s just it’s being emptied and the

commentaries that are left most of them are devotional. The ones I’m keeping are the

ones that are exegetical. It’s not saying that what’s somebody has said devotionally isn’t
207
of value but there certain, certain values to me especially now that I have got to sort

through what I might – what’s most important for me to keep because I have limited

space to keep it, you know. I’m holding on to the exegetical ones because that’s what I

use the most.

INTERVIEWER: How did you use exegetical tools such as lexicons,

concordances, and grammars?

INTERVIEWEE: I used the concordance just, you know, quite a bit. The

grammars, I used that to – especially in Greek areas where that they – the use of the verbs

is more critical. I used the concordances more for instance in Hebrew because, you

know, Hebrew’s may drop us as upon the words, and the nuances of the words. I used

them pretty extensively. I like Strong’s concordance obviously but if I’m out of the

country speaking somewhere, if I can get it in to my bag I’ll throw the old Cruden’s in

there, simply because it, you know I do personal study, personal worship every day and

so there’s many times of verse that’s running around on my mind but I’m trying to, I

can’t’ remember the address. So I take Cruden’s to help me get to that point but a lot of

times I find in study that, you know, it’s the principal correlation. You know as I’m

studying another verse of scripture comes to mind and then I want to correlate but if I

want to do that I want to make sure it’s done in context. So I use, even at simple tools

Cruden’s just to give me in the end of the context, in case I can’t remember the particular

address.

INTERVIEWER: What magazines or journal articles were used as a resource?

INTERVIEWEE: In this last sermon, actually I probably didn’t use any particular

journals. I don’t use a whole of that, sometimes I’ll use a article from a current periodical

or something like that for an illustration but I don’t use a lot of journals, for that kind of
208
study. I must it’s – to be more of an illustrative and approach, I used to use occasionally

an illustration book I’m [Indiscernible] [00:21:41], in fact all of their being given away.

You know, I – it’s just that, right now with electronic tools you can go in and you

can get you know, something its current. Our cultures is pretty interesting, they would

rather have an illustration that comes from where they are today, rather than what took

place many years ago. I will use an illustration from the past but I prefer to in this

instances they need to be classic, you know, versus this, and recording something that

something happened back in. I’ll carry that in all.

INTERVIEWER: What role do resources from the internet have in your study in

your sermon preparation?

INTERVIEWEE: I, I don’t use the internet a lot for the actual study, sometimes I

use – my study method is I start on Saturday for the next week, you know, that it’s to

refine it that I’ve already laid out the plan and say what I’m doing in a series. But what

I’ll do is as I’m finishing off the sermon on Thursday, I usually then go back and open up

maybe a particular location to see maybe if there’s something that what somebody else

did or how they handled a particular passage.

But I try not to do –well, not I try, I don’t use it earlier because I’ve heard of guys

sort of just wiped out on ministry because all of the sudden they succumb to the

temptation of just using somebody else’s research, not lying or whatever. And I’ve

actually been in audiences where that’s happened and I know the outline and I know it’s

not theirs and it’s never a reference to the persons who were using it. And it bothers me

quite a bit and in fact on occasion I’ve actually challenged the person on it.

INTERVIEWER: If you consider your normal practice, what did you do

differently in preparing your last sermon?

209
 INTERVIEWEE: I think, I’ve said it probably several times, I did a topical, a

doctrinal topical which is –it’s doctrinal topical expositional so what I guess the formal

title over this, that’s pretty unusual for me. It’s not even in my comfort zone but I think

it’s good for me to do it that way because it causes to me stay fresh, not always doing the

same thing.

When I first started in ministry, I was using an approach that was barely, I guess it

wasn’t a common approach; I was using, what they call propositional preaching. I think

that – the comparable thing today would be the big idea preaching, and that’s fine, it used

to be that you know, the preacher is going to get up and say “Well, this last week we’re

on verse eight. This week will be, start at verse nine.” It didn’t necessarily have any

connection but what I’ve have learned is that we have a culture where people’s

attendance is very different than it used to be. So I try to make every sermon literally a

standalone realizing that they may not be back the next week or they may not been here

the previous week and so therefore the take away has to be there this week. And so I

tried to as I’m preaching you know, I say I pray and I ask the Lord, you know what is the

major emphasis of what I ought to be preaching out of this text, not, not in terms of the

interpretation of it because as I said I believe that there’s really only one interpretation

but where, where should this go, what part of life should it touch? And so that’s a

different but that’s why I’m do and I find it easier not to do in a topical.

INTERVIEWER: What’s your most important consideration in preparing a

sermon on a difficult topic or passage?

INTERVIEWEE: A difficult topic is that I’d try to – I know it’s coming so I’ll be

researching that not just for during that week but I’ll be – researching that probably for

several months and I’ll start and I usually get a file of its separate and I start putting
210
things into that file. As I’m going along, yes, an example would be, if I would be

teaching a difficult topic like divorce or remarriage where that topic would be obviously

seen from a number of perspectives within the church, I would want to – I usually look at

all the positions of people have. I present all those positions in the best way I can to

fairly represent their positions and then I would build the cases to why I hold one

particular – one of those positions. My feeling is people a lot of times if you teach only

one position assume that what is unknown is true because you know it’s something

you’re keeping from them and I would rather just lay it all out there and then go along

and say this is what I believe the scripture teaches on this topic and here is why and then

build the case there.

Try not to do what I call philosophical Straw Men in other words I build, you

know, saying this is what these people believe. I try to represent them fairly because I’ve

been in some of my positions have been over the years I’ve been represented by people

who are building Straw Men and it’s not really what I believe. And so I don’t feel it’s

fair for me to do some of them to someone else.

INTERVIEWER: Next question, you’ve actually answered some of this already.

When a sermon covers a subject with competing viewpoints, even among those in your

church, you are placed in a positional where difficult choices need to be made. What

choices do you take in presenting the competing viewpoints in your sermon?

INTERVIEWEE: As I alluded I do present as fairly as I can, the major positions

that people have. Well obviously, you know, even if you’re looking at, there’s always

let’s say different nuances that are in every major position so I would stick with just the

major things. Here are the three major views with these are four major views and try to

represent them that way and I don’t necessarily go into them deeply because frankly,
211
sometimes I don’t want to be teaching heresy. But I want to be saying that is what is held

but then I would come back and I try to be very frank and say, “You know, I know that

there is differences of opinion on this. But this is what I believe, the scripture teaches

and here’s why and they have to deal with the text then.

Then if I’ve taken them into the text, I’ve carefully revealed or exposed the text

then they have to come to in their mind, they have to determine what they are going to do

with what they heard. They have to wrestle with the text themselves. So but I certainly

don’t walk away from it and say, “Well, you know, I hear all the positions, you figure out

what you want. I don’t feel that’s fair for a pastor, I don’t think that’s what a shepherd

does.

A shepherd says, well generally we want to get you into the quiet waters and here

some ways to go. Yes, I think the shepherd has to say, “You know, maybe there’s

different ways to get the quiet water. This is the way I believe, we ought to go and so,

you know, follow me there.

INTERVIEWER: What is your process to determine the best view?

INTERVIEWEE: My process to determine the best view is what, what in my

understanding of scripture is the closest position to the context; you know the culture, the

grammar taking all of those things into consideration, what is the best. I don’t

necessarily believe that it’s based upon church tradition, you know, because you can

always go back and find somebody in church tradition that has a whacked out view and

so if you want to build it on that you can always find some church father to quote. I don’t

know that’s the best, I think you go back to the text and let the text be the determining

factor and sometimes frankly I think you have to come to the point to say, you know, this

is not clear to a lot of people. And you know, I can understand other positions you know,
212
to me this – the position I’m teaching here is the one I’m embracing because of the

following and then as I try to get – but I’m taking them back to the text and usually do

not quote other people.

It’s not, well so and so says, my point is but he is a person, he is fallible. So you

try to take them back to as much as you can to something as infallible that’s not saying I

am saying that I have, I’ve nailed this thing down and what I’m saying it’s right so

therefore it’s my way or the high way. I don’t approach it that way but they know that

I’m trying to get them to understand the text as best they can and derive a position or an

understanding of the truth, laid against the scripture. And I believe that scripture

interprets scripture, you know that old hermeneutical principle and so therefore taking the

scripture and let them debate with that.

INTERVIEWER: What affect did the preparation of your last sermon have on

you?

INTERVIEWEE: I believe every week the sermon has an imprint upon me. One

of the things I try to do is you know as I’m preparing my – I believe I have to prepare my

heart before I even get involved in the teaching of scripture. And one of the ways I do

that is I have, I want to keep my relationship with the Lord fresh every day. I spend

personal worship time every day just wanting to get to know God. I think that, that’s

why as I said earlier sometimes I go back and look at sermon that was preached 30 years

ago and I’m saying what was I thinking, well I wasn’t the same person I am now. I’m a

person whose been having the chance of seeing victories and seeing defeats in my life

with Christ over those times and I’ve matured, hopefully I’m not still person who’s

involved in the milk of the word as Hebrews says but now really desiring a hunger for

meat and I think that is a fact as I prepare, I try to prepare my heart. And as I do that I’m
213
amazed that you know things that I’ve gone through sometimes that week that God has

allowed me to through because it, you know, it help me to understand the text.

Sometimes better from life experience and I tried to preach out of overflow in other

words it’s – I try not to make this mechanical but that this is something that I’m excited

about and this is something I really believe people need to know and need to hear. And

something that has touched my life and sometimes I’ll confess, you know the Lord has

really done a job on me in terms of conviction. I have to sometimes confess I’m not, I’m

preaching where I’m not at right now. But that’s the aspect of conviction, you know, so

sometimes the Lord works in me in terms of conviction sometimes it’s – he works in me

just from sheer excitement.

One of the things that always happen is I, I’m always amazed how much I

discover and I believe that since it is the living word, I don’t want to be misunderstood.

I’m not saying the scripture changes but I do believe that the Holy Spirit of God who’s

the illuminator let us see things something maybe that we haven’t seen before. And to

me that’s exciting when I come with that. Sometimes I come up with this idea and I’m

thinking , you know I can’t believe I never saw that before, where I didn’t come, this

morning in my personal worship time. I’m, you know, there is just sometimes that Spirit

of God impresses upon you like I never even thought of that before. And it happened

today I just, I just served something well, that’s interesting and never thought that would

be that you know in Hebrews 11 where they’re talks about the children of God by faith

moved into the Red Sea and then it says right after that the Pharaoh went into the Red

Sea. But they both went in to the Red Sea. Then the difference that struck me as one

went in by faith and the other went in there because maybe they were following what

214
somebody else did but it wasn’t, it wasn’t faith in God. So, you know, but that kind of

thing excites me and I love to share that excitement with somebody else.

INTERVIEWER: How you determine that you have enough information to

prepare a sermon?

INTERVIEWEE: That’s tough because I’m – usually what I do is I have to stop

myself, I just to, just to have because I would be out of tendency to maybe over study and

have way too much information. And then to synthesize it down to something that is

something people can take away because one my goals in preaching is to not becomes so

cerebral that you know, I’m taking people into the heavenlies and getting them lost. But I

try to be, you know, have because I want people to think but I want to put it on as well

one of my early professors said, “Put the cookies low enough where people can get a hold

of them.” And when I try to figure out how do I do that, how do I take something’s

pretty difficult to understand, how do I get it there. And, so therefore I set a time where

my research has to be done in a week and either a particular day and beyond that I don’t

keep going back and doing more and more research. Then I spent the time saying,

“Okay, how is this going to be presented in such a way that people are going to able take

this away and what do I want them to take away.” So that’s, yes, I definitely have the

problem with the over –

INTERVIEWER: When you need to know something how confident are you that

you can find the answer?

INTERVIEWEE: Well, I think I don’t know whether I would use the word

confidence but I have faith that if we lack wisdom we can ask of God as it says in James

and a difficult passage, a real problem passage, you know, I walk away and I will spend,

I’m not trying to miss on some time. I walk out the office and go somewhere, I’ll pray
215
for a while. You say, “I don’t get this” and I also believe in the doctrine of the Holy

Spirit for illumination where he opens up our minds and turn the spotlight on.

I guess I’d say I’m still amazed because every time with this happens I’m saying,

“Wow it’s pretty interesting.” The different way I’ve looking at this thing when I first

walked away from it but I do, you know, if I’m stuck I will then, you know, use other

resources to see what did so-and-so say about this. You know and sometimes these

people I have confidence in and sometimes these people I don’t have confidence in. You

know, for instance I have a series over there if I – I don’t agree with Lenksi’s and his

doctrinal perspective but I do appreciate his insights into grammar in the New Testament.

So I would, I’m not afraid to use somebody that I don’t agree with but I then try

to pull as much as I can to see if there is anything else I agree with or that’s a better

perspective I didn’t see. And I would then be probably using those tools a little bit more

to try and help me process it.

INTERVIEWER: If you did not find the answer in your personal library

resources, describe the steps that you would use to fill that need.

INTERVIEWEE: Right now, because we’re not you know, we are not in close

proximity to library, we are a half hour approximately from a library that you could use,

theological library. So I do go onto internet resources and I’ll use some of those

resources. I have – some of my assistants have materials that I don’t have and so I will

use theirs. And you know, not sure what’s going to happen when they’re not around. I

have to – I’m going to be going for other places to get resources but I will check them.

Sometimes, I’ll even ask them if they know of a material that they will recommend for

me to look at.

216
 And all of the pastors that we have at the church, we look for it carefully, the

Biblical literacy that you know, are they men of study, are they men that really search the

scriptures do they have that kind of spirit.

INTERVIEWER: Please describe the process that you use to evaluate yourself

after delivering a sermon?

INTERVIEWEE: I do – I do several things. First of all, I ask my wife and I’d

say, “Did you get what I was driving at?” And she’s pretty honest, she’s a Bible college

graduate and is pretty perceptive. She’s also good – I have two elders that you know are

– have the freedom to say anything that they want to say about a sermon and they report

to me.

I also have staff, sometimes I’ll just ask them point blank, you know, was this

clear and that laid across. I listen periodically; I had stopped doing what I used to do to

listen to a tape or a CD. Partially, because I find it, for me that isn’t for everybody. I

could do much more critical and much more aware of mistakes and therefore – but I do

listen, I – well particularly I’m asking of the least important, it’s not just PowerPoint® a

one person of staff who is art background and I ask them to evaluate whether the visuals

were contributing or distracting to the – it might be my own PowerPoint®.

INTERVIEWER: The following are questions on the process you use, that you

use to develop and maintain your personal library and other information resources. Can

you describe the instruction you received concerning building your personal library?

INTERVIEWEE: I just got rid of those books actually in the last couple of days.

When I was in Bible college and in seminary, there were books that are being printed that

time recommending materials that were worthy [Inaudible] [00:41:22] about to use this. I

also went to the professors that I respected the most in Bible department and I asked them
217
to give me a list of books that they would recommend. All of the classes that I have, we

have very extensive bibliography. It was attached for the courses and you know, they

actually, particularly in the Bible college I attended, they had what they call the top 10

asterisks realizing we guys had a limited means. So that’s how I did it in the past.

INTERVIEWER: Yes.

INTERVIEWEE: In the present when I do as I read book reviews, so and then

also recommendations you know, from back in terms of their scholarship and what

they’re today you want to get this book, this is the book for you know, but I’ve been

disappointed sometimes because I read it and it maybe something that I’ve read that time

didn’t interest me.

I really in the last number of years because of the realizing I was kind of become

to a period transition, I borrowed more books than I bought particularly a lot of books

that have written today. As you can see these shelves, most for the books that are going

are books that are outdated. A lot of materials are you know go out of date pretty

quickly. What are some materials to read once then put them into the library.

INTERVIEWER: Could you describe your plan for developing your personal

library resources.

INTERVIEWEE: Well, at this point of transition, my plan is you know, we need

– is weeding rather than adding and but [Indiscernible] [0:43:06] was been the – I’ve

been there for the last 40 years. A person who always studies so I probably will continue

to purchase books. I have an allowance at the church and with that I’m allowed to use for

ministry expenses. And purchase a lot of my books in that way, there are other books

that I buy and then I just read it. A lot of those I tried to borrow but I try not just to read

218
religious books, sacred books, whatever you want to call those terms. I do read a lot of

non-religious books as well.

And not always a cerebral, you know, how do you do ministry a lot like that,

sometimes I just want to see what the unsaved world is saying about Christians or I want

to see what the unsaved world is saying about life. And so since that day I borrow only at

the library, I don’t buy.

[INTERVIEWER: How do you organize your personal library?]

Okay, I organize in a very specific way different way, I’ll just too it home that

way so I can read quickly. I have Old Testament section, New Testament section and

Bible and Theology; I have a Christian life section and another tools and grammars. I’m

have them arranged just like my concordance, my tools, my languages are the ones that

are within easiest reach.

On my shelf, I have some sets that give me a little bit of good things. I have a

couple of commentaries that are whole Bible commentaries, I keep those close by. And

then the others I – the other books I had are in more what I consider in my reference

section, not as close by they are in another place in the house where I have to get up and

look for them. So you know, I organize my notes, these things are of general reading

section in our house, It’s a whole different, it’s another room and book cases were in

there. I just – things like should say, Louis L’Amour, you know I’ll think I ask Denisse, I

‘d like to – some of the books that I know are popular and I usually end up reading

probably 3 or 4 books a year out of the top 10 sellers in United States. Not trashy ones

but just the kind of books that I know people are reading.

[INTERVIEWER: How do you find materials in your personal library?]

INTERVIEWEE: find them?

219
 INTERVIEWER: Yes.

INTERVIEWEE: I don’t use a Dewey Decimal System, that’s for sure. I

basically have them arranged in those sections that I mentioned to you and then turns it

into Old Testament I just do it by the books of Bible. If it’s theology, I group them

according to the systematic theology groupings, bibliology, soteriology, Christology,

hamartiology. I just do it that way for that. Christian life I tended to break up into their

groupings. In short, I keep, I do it more by themes, I don’t do it by author. I want a book

on family, I’ll go to a particular section of my book case and that’s where my family

sections going to be. If I am looking for something on Corinthians I know that is going

to be over here in that section.

INTERVIEWER: Do you use any electronic library such as Logos®,

Accordance®, BibleWorks, etc?

INTERVIEWEE: Yes, I use – the one I’m using is BibleWorks. I use that

primarily as my electronic one, I use some free ones that are on online – probably

BibleWorks is the one I use the most.

INTERVIEWER: What role does an institutional library, public or an academic

library have in your sermon preparation?

INTERVIEWEE: If probably has to do with the – I’m going to start for instance I

will go to a local of Bible college library, usually in November instead looking at

resources that they have and that to do lot of preaching schedule. And I’ve seen what

references they have in their resources and then I determine not speed read, you know,

glance through them to see if that’s maybe a book I would like to have simply because 30

minutes away; sometimes I go ahead and purchase it. But I think I’m going to use it in a

study. But I – if I were closer, I would probably be more in that library, I’m actually
220
when I was in another church where I worked closer I did. I was in to read some

periodicals that I don’t subscribe to that I don’t get because they might as well take the

subscription cost rather than me because I read them and pass them for what I want and

that’s enough.

INTERVIEWER: When was last time that you used the resource of an

institutional library for sermon preparation?

INTERVIEWEE: For sermon preparation, I would say it’s probably

[unintelligible].

INTERVIEWER: [What other] role would an institutional library have in your

life?

INTERVIEWEE: As a role I forget it’s very helpful to find out what new books

are returned because even though I say I get things like Christianity Today and book

summaries and things like that. I see sometimes what I’m going to – sometimes it’s in

the bookstore, I look at new arrivals for to see anything else I go to the Bible college I’ll

look to see what the new arrivals are. That’s what I’d used the library for the last time. I

used it three months ago, actually it wasn’t it was a month ago. I was looking for new

arrivals and we grabbed sermon tools, some of those things. I like to know that and then

as I said if that I’m going to do series I’d like to find out what tools might be available.

INTERVIEWER: [What journals or magazine do you subscribe to for personal]

or professional reading?

INTERVIEWEE: I subscribed to some that you probably wouldn’t think that

would be used through operations. I used Leadership Today it’s one of the journals that

we use. I just stop getting last year and I’ve got it all the way through my ministry,

BibSac, I had not that because I’m going to be I just can’t collect anymore and driven
221
into another. I used a lot of secular materials, the Wall Street Journal every day I use this

because, oh Readers Digest all of these are really rich with sermon illustrations.

INTERVIEWER: The American Theological Library Association provides a

database of theological journal titles. And the copy of the periodical titles that are there

that are electronic full text. How would access to these titles help you in sermon

preparation and ministry?

INTERVIEWEE: Some of them are ones that I – I had gotten, BibSac, and

Christianity Today some of them would be helpful to use because then we don’t have to

buy them. And since now I’ve been cutting back it would be nice to have access to

something like this. What would really be particularly of value that you probably can’t

do is to be able to access this – that would be great because again it, with travel issues,

some things could be helpful.

INTERVIEWER: Some Bible colleges and seminaries provide free access to the

database for alumni. Do you know whether your school provides access or your schools

that you graduated from provide access?

INTERVIEWEE: I don’t know.

INTERVIEWEE: You probably do and I don’t know it.

INTERVIEWER: And here is a list of the schools.

INTERVIEWEE: Okay, I’ll tell you very quickly, there’s one that does, I didn’t

know that the one that does.

INTERVIEWEE: I have one, one of my schools that I – they haven’t done a very

good job, letting us know as alumni. As a matter of fact I’ll check about that

[Indiscernible] [00:51:41].

222
 INTERVIEWER: Okay, all right. If your school, if your school does not provide

free access, will you be willing to pay $150 per year for a personal subscription?

INTERVIEWEE: Not sure, particularly because I’d put out, you know, some of

the ones that I talked that we talked about there was list there I already have so. And then

the question comes back to a question you asked earlier to what extent, how much

research do you do? How much do you depend upon outside resources versus looking at

the text etc. I’d probably would maybe try it to see how much I would get. I’m not sure

whether I’d stay in it but I guess I would try it to see if that was a value. No, that –

obviously I haven’t missed it because one of my schools that I’ve attended has it and I

didn’t know it and you miss it. That’s not a bad a price but I’m not sure I would –

INTERVIEWER: You have already answered why you –

INTERVIEWER: In what other ways than you already have mentioned do you

use the internet for sermon [preparation and ministry?]

INTERVIEWEE: I would say that in a lot of times I use it for, you know,

[Inaudible] sometimes it’s trying to recall a segment of a – to verify a source for instance

I remember a quote but I don’t remember who said it, I use it for verification, sometimes

I’ll use it as I said as point of comparison, you know there are – a number of websites that

are free resources that I can tap into and I don’t use a lot of them. I almost used pretty

frequent I just Google something, I just go to Google and put it in the part of the quote

that I remember, you know to pick it up rather than going, you know from a, to a primary

source and let them find it for me, so I do use it that pretty heavily.

223
 APPENDICES B--H

PASTORAL INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPTS

At the request of the dissertation committee the transcripts of the interviews were

removed due to the length of this section. The citations for the transcripts are coded by the first

letter of the name of the pastor correlating with the original appendix. Pastor Benjamin would

correspond with Appendix B and is cited as (Appendix B, paragraph number). The transcripts

are available for review upon request to the author.

224
 APPENDIX I

SCREENING QUESTIONS

1. Did you graduate from a Bible college or seminary? Yes No What school(s)?
________________________________________________________________
2. What year did you graduate with your highest theological degree? ____________
3. Did you take a course on homiletics while in school? Yes No
4. Would you consider yourself to be an Evangelical Christian according to this nine point
definition by The Barna Group? Yes No

“Born again Christians" are defined as people who said they have made a personal

commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in their life today and who also indicated

they believe that when they die they will go to Heaven because they had confessed their sins

and had accepted Jesus Christ as their savior."

“Evangelicals" meet the born again criteria (described above) plus seven other conditions.

Those include saying their faith is very important in their life today; believing they have a

personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs about Christ with non-Christians;

believing that Satan exists; believing that eternal salvation is possible only through grace, not

works; believing that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth; asserting that the Bible is

225

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
accurate in all that it teaches; and describing God as the all-knowing, all-powerful, perfect

deity who created the universe and still rules it today”.

5. Do you regularly preach in a church ministry? Yes No

6. Do you use a lectionary for choosing your sermon topics? Yes No
7. In what city and state do you minister? _____________________

226

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
 APPENDIX J

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Demographics
1. How much preaching experience do you have?
2. Could you please tell me about your academic preparation for becoming a pastor?
3. What would you consider your most significant preparation, outside of formal
education, for becoming a pastor?
Training
4. The following questions relate to the study of the biblical languages.
a. How many years of the biblical languages did you take in your formal
education?
b. What level of proficiency have you maintained in the biblical languages?
c. What is your attitude towards using the biblical languages in exegesis?
d. How do the results of study in the biblical languages affect your sermon?
5. In your opinion, how well did your theological education prepare you for your
preaching ministry?
6. Could you describe the instruction you received on the use of information
resources?
7. What, if any, training did you receive in school in the use of resources such as
commentaries, magazines and journals, encyclopedias and dictionaries?
Use of Information in Sermon Preparation
8. Could you describe the last sermon that you preached?
9. What are your normal steps used in the preparation of a sermon?
10. How is a sermon topic chosen?
11. What process is used to choose a biblical passage?
12. How did you develop an outline for your last sermon?
13. We have been discussing your process to develop a sermon. Now I would like to
ask you about specific resources that were used in studying the biblical passage chosen
for your last sermon.
a. What role did commentaries have in the study for your last sermon?
227

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
 b. Commentaries may have emphases such as devotional, homiletical,
exegetical, expository, etc. Could you describe the types of commentaries that
you used?
c. How did you use exegetical tools such as lexicons, concordances, and
grammars?
d. What magazines or journal articles were used as a resource?
e. What role do resources from the Internet have in your study and sermon
preparation?
14. If you consider your normal practice, what did you do differently in preparing
your last sermon?
Critical thinking and evaluation
15. What is your most important consideration in preparing a sermon on a difficult
topic or biblical passage?
16. When a sermon covers a subject with competing viewpoints, even among those in
your church, you are placed in a position where difficult choices need to be made.
a. What choices do you take in presenting the competing viewpoints in your
sermon?
b. What is your process to determine the best view?
Knowledge base
17. What affect did the preparation of your last sermon have on you?
Extent of information
18. How do you determine that you have enough information to prepare a sermon?
Access Information Effectively and Efficiently
19. When you need to know something, how confident are you that you can find the
answer?
20. If you did not find the answer in your personal library resources, describe the
steps you would use to fill this need.
Self-Evaluation
21. Please describe the process that you use to evaluate yourself after delivering a
sermon?
Personal resources
22. The following are three questions on the process you use to develop and maintain
your personal library and other information resources.
a. Could you describe the instruction you received concerning building your
personal library?
b. Could you describe your plan for developing your personal library
resources?
c. How do you organize your personal library?
d. How do you find materials in your personal library?
23. Do you use any electronic libraries such as Logos®, Accordance®, BibleWorks,
etc.?
Questions Linking Previous Research
24. What role does an institutional library (public or academic) have in your sermon
preparation?

228

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
 a. When was the last time that you used the resources of an institutional
library for sermon preparation?
b. What other role would an institutional library have in your life?
25. What journals or magazines do you subscribe to for personal or professional
reading?
26. The American Theological Library Association provides a database of theological
titles in electronic full text. This is a copy of the periodical titles (Appendix K).
a. How would access to these titles help you in sermon preparation and
ministry?
b. Some Bible colleges and seminaries provide free access to the database for
alumni. Do you know whether your school provides access? Appendix L
c. If your school does not provide free access would you be willing to pay
$150 per year for a personal subscription? Why?
27. In what other ways than you already have mentioned do you use the Internet for
sermon preparation and ministry?

229

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
 APPENDIX K

ATLAS® TITLE LIST

Database: ATLASerials Updated: May 25, 2011

Journal Title Currently Full Text FT

Indexed (FT) Begin Most
Year Recent
Year
AFER: African Ecclesial Review Current 1965 2010
AJS Review Current 1976 1999
American Theological Inquiry: A Biannual
Journal of Theology, Culture, & History Current 2008 2010
American Theological Library Association
Summary of Proceedings Current 1948 2009
Anglican Theological Review Current 1918 2010
Anglican Theological Review.Supplement
Series 1973 1990
Anima: The Journal of Human Experience 1974 1994
Annual of the Society of Christian Ethics 1981 2001
ARTS: The Arts in Religious and
Theological Studies Current 1988 2010
Asian Ethnology Current 2008 2010
Asian Folklore Studies 1963 2007
Austin Seminary Bulletin (Faculty ed.) 1964 1990
Baptist History and Heritage Current 1965 2010
Baylor Journal of Theatre and Performance 2004 2007
Biblical Archaeologist 1938 1997
Biblical Interpretation Current 1993 2010

230

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
Biblical Research: Journal of the Chicago
Society of Biblical Research Current 1956 2007
Bibliotheca sacra Current 1934 2011
Black Theology: An International Journal Current 2003 2010
Brethren Life and Thought Current 1955 2009
Buddhist Studies Review: Journal of the UK
Association for Buddhist Studies Current 2003 2009
Bulletin - Council on the Study of Religion 1970 1985
Bulletin for the Study of Religion Current 2010 2010
Bulletin of the Evangelical Theological
Society 1958 1968
Calvin Theological Journal Current 1966 2010
Catholic Biblical Quarterly Current 1946 2010
Chaplaincy Today: The Journal of the
Association of Professional Chaplains Current 1998 2008
Christian Century Current 1946 2010
Christianity and Literature Current 1973 2010
Christianity Today Current 2001 2010
Church History: Studies in Christianity &
Culture Current 1932 2010
Communio viatorum Current 1958 2009
Comparative Islamic Studies Current 2005 2008
Concordia Journal Current 1975 2010
Concordia Theological Monthly 1960 1972
Concordia Theological Quarterly Current 1977 2010
Conference of Theological Librarians
Summary of Proceedings 1947 1947
Congregations: the Alban journal Current 2001 2010
Conrad Grebel Review Current 1983 2010
Contact: The Interdisciplinary Journal of
Pastoral Studies 2002 2007
Continuum (Chicago, Ill) 1963 1970
Continuum (St. Xavier College (Chicago,
Ill)) 1990 1994
Council of Societies for the Study of
Religion Bulletin 1988 2009
Criswell Theological Review Current 1986 2010
Cross Currents: The Journal of the
Association for Religion and Intellectual
Life Current 1950 2010
CTM 1973 1974
Cuadernos de teología 1970 2008
231

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
Currents in Theology and Mission Current 1974 2010
Daughters of Sarah 1984 1996
Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought Current 1966 2010
Dialogue & Alliance Current 1987 2010
Didaskalia (Otterburne, Man.): The Journal
of Providence Theological Seminary Current 1989 2009
Direction: A Mennonite Brethren Forum Current 1972 2010
Discipliana: The Quarterly Historical
Journal of the Disciples of Christ Historical
Society Current 2000 2010
Duke Divinity School Bulletin 1959 1963
Duke Divinity School Review 1964 1983
Eastern Buddhist Current 1967 2010
Ecotheology 2003 2006
Ecumenica: Journal of Theatre and
Performance Current 2008 2009
Ecumenical Review Current 1948 2006
Encounter Current 1956 2010
Ensaios e monografias 1992 2001
Estudios eclesiásticos: Revista trimestral de
investigación e información teológica Current 1942 2010
Ex auditu: An International Journal of
Theological Interpretation of Scripture Current 1985 2009
Exchange: Journal of Missiological and
Ecumenical Research Current 2001 2009
Family and community ministries:
empowering through faith 2007 2009
Fieldwork in Religion Current 2005 2009
First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion
and Public Life Current 1990 2011
Greek Orthodox Theological Review Current 1954 2005
Harvard Theological Review Current 1908 2006
Hebrew Union College Annual Current 1924 2002
Homiletic: A Review of Publications in
Religious Communication 1975 2008
Horizons: The Journal of the College
Theology Society Current 1974 2007
Iliff Review 1959 1988
International Bulletin of Missionary
Research Current 1981 2010
International Journal for the Psychology of
Religion Current 1991 2011

232

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
International Journal of Transpersonal
Studies Current 1998 2009
International Review of Mission Current 1950 2007
Interpretation: A Journal of Bible and
Theology Current 1947 2010
Japanese Journal of Religious Studies Current 1974 2010
Journal for Preachers Current 1977 2010
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion Current 1961 2000
Journal for the Study of Religion, Nature
and Culture Current 2007 2010
Journal for the Study of the New Testament Current 1978 2010
Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Current 1976 2010
Journal of Biblical Literature Current 1943 2010
Journal of Chinese Religions Current 1982 2008
Journal of Ecumenical Studies Current 1964 2010
Journal of Empirical Theology Current 2001 2008
Journal of Family Ministry 1987 2006
Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion Current 1985 2010
Journal of Latin American Theology:
Christian Reflections from the Latino South Current 2006 2010
Journal of Moravian History Current 2006 2010
Journal of Pastoral Care 1949 2001
Journal of Pastoral Care & Counseling 2002 2008
Journal of Pastoral Theology Current 1991 2010
Journal of Qur‘anic Studies Current 1999 2009
Journal of Religious Ethics Current 1973 2006
Journal of Religious Leadership Current 2002 2010
Journal of Religious Thought Current 1945 2007
Journal of Ritual Studies Current 1987 2009
Journal of the American Academy of
Religion Current 1967 2009
Journal of the Canadian Church Historical
Society Current 1950 2007
Journal of the Evangelical Theological
Society Current 1969 2009
Journal of the Interdenominational
Theological Center Current 1973 2008
Journal of the Society of Biblical Literature
and Exegesis, including the papers read and
abstract of proceedings for ... 1881 1888
Journal of the Society of Christian Ethics Current 2002 2010
Journal of Theology for Southern Africa Current 1972 2010
233

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
Journal of Unification Studies Current 1997 2010
Journal of Youth Ministry Current 2002 2009
Kairós: Revista publicada por el Seminario
Teológico Centroamericano Current 1994 2009
Latin American Indian Literatures Journal:
A Review of American Indian Texts and
Studies Current 1985 2009
Lexington Theological Quarterly 1966 2007
Liturgical Ministry Current 1992 2010
Living Pulpit 1992 2007
Lutheran Quarterly Current 1949 2010
Master's Seminary Journal Current 1990 2010
Mennonite Quarterly Review Current 1927 2008
Mid-America Journal of Theology Current 1985 2010
Mid-Stream: The Ecumenical Movement
Today 1962 2002
Missio apostolica Current 1993 2010
Missiology: An International Review Current 1973 2010
Mission Studies: Journal of the International
Association for Mission Studies Current 1984 2010
Modern Believing Current 1994 2011
Modern Churchman 1916 1993
Modern Theology Current 1984 2006
Muslim World Current 1978 2010
Near Eastern Archaeology Current 1998 2010
Newsletter of the Conference on
Christianity and Literature 1967 1972
Nova religio Current 1997 2010
Novum testamentum: An International
Quarterly for New Testament and Related
Studies Current 1956 2009
Numen: International Review for the
History of Religions Current 1954 2009
Occasional Bulletin of Missionary Research 1977 1980
Perkins Journal 1972 1990
Perkins School of Theology journal 1959 1972
Perspectives in Religious Studies Current 1974 2010
Pneuma: The Journal of the Society for
Pentecostal Studies Current 1979 2008
Political Theology Current 1999 2010
Pomegranate: The International Journal of
Pagan Studies Current 2005 2009
234

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
Practical Theology Current 2008 2010
Presbyterion: Covenant Seminary Review Current 1975 2010
Pro Ecclesia Current 1993 2010
Pure Land: Journal of Pure Land Buddhism Current 1984 2007
Pure Land: Journal of European Shin
Buddhism 1979 1983
Reconstructionist: A Journal of
Contemporary Jewish Thought & Practice 1937 2007
Reformation: the journal of the Tyndale
Society Current 1999 2009
Reformation & Renaissance Review Current 2000 2009
Reformed Journal 1981 1990
Religion and American Culture: A Journal
of Interpretation Current 1992 2010
Religion and Intellectual Life 1983 1990
Religion East & West: Journal of the
Institute for World Religions Current 2001 2009
Religion in the News Current 1998 2010
Religious Education Current 1926 2010
Religious Studies and Theology Current 1998 2010
Religious Studies Review Current 1975 2010
Restoration Quarterly Current 1957 2011
Review & Expositor Current 1947 2010
SA. Sociological Analysis: A Journal in the
Sociology of Religion 1973 1992
Scripta Theologica Current 1969 2010
Semeia: An Experimental Journal for
Biblical Criticism 1974 2002
Society for the Study of Chinese Religions
Bulletin 1977 1981
Sociological Analysis (Worcester, Mass.) 1968 1972
Sociology of Religion Current 1993 2009
Southwestern Journal of Theology Current 1958 2010
St Vladimir's Seminary Quarterly 1952 1968
St Vladimir's Theological Quarterly Current 1969 2010
Stone-Campbell Journal Current 1998 2010
Studies in World Christianity Current 1995 2010
Svensk missionstidskrift Current 1997 2010
Taoist Resources 1989 1997
Theological Education Current 1964 2010
Theological Educator: A Journal of
Theology and Ministry 1984 1998
235

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
Theological Studies Current 1940 2010
Theology Today Current 1944 2010
Tradition: A Journal of Orthodox Jewish
Thought Current 1992 2009
Trinity Journal Current 1980 2010
Tyndale Bulletin Current 1966 2008
Tyndale House Bulletin 1956 1965
Union Seminary Quarterly Review Current 1964 2009
Vetus testamentum Current 1951 2010
Vigiliae christianae: A Review of Early
Christian Life and Language Current 2001 2009
Westminster Theological Journal Current 1938 2010
Word & World: Theology for Christian
Ministry Current 1981 2011
Worship Current 1952 2011
Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science Current 1966 2006

236

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
 APPENDIX L

ATLAS® FOR ALUMNI SCHOOLS

Abilene Christian University

Alliance Theological Seminary
Ambrose Seminary
American Baptist Seminary of the West
Anderson University
Andover Newton Theological School
Andrews University
Aquinas Institute of Theology
Asbury Theological Seminary
Ashland Theological Seminary
Assemblies of God Theological Seminary
Associated Mennonite Biblical Seminary
Atlantic School of Theology Library
Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary
Avondale College Library
Bangor Theological Seminary
Baptist Missionary Association Theological Seminary
Barry University
Beeson Divinity School

237

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
Bethany Theological Seminary
Bethel Seminary
Biblical Theological Seminary Library
Biola University Library
Boston University School of Theology Library
Bridwell Library - Southern Methodist University
Brite Divinity School Library
Burke Library - Union Theological Seminary
Calvin Theological Seminary
Campbell University
Canadian Southern Baptist Seminary
Catholic Theological Union
Catholic University of America
Central Baptist Theological Seminary
Christian Theological Seminary
Church Divinity School of the Pacific
Claremont School of Theology
Columbia International University
Columbia Theological Seminary
Concordia Seminary (St. Louis, MO)
Concordia Theological Seminary (Fort Wayne, IN)
Cornerstone University & Grand Rapids Theological Seminary
Covenant Theological Seminary
Dallas Theological Seminary
Denver Seminary
Dominican School of Philosophy and Theology
Drew University
Duke University Divinity School
Earlham School of Religion
Eastern Mennonite University

238

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
Eden Theological Seminary
Episcopal Divinity School - Sherrill Library
Erskine College and Seminary
Florida Center for Theological Studies
Franciscan School of Theology
Fuller Theological Seminary
Gardner-Webb University
Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary
General Theological Seminary
George Fox Evangelical Seminary Library
Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary
Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary
Graduate Theological Union
Harding University Graduate School of Religion
Hartford Seminary
Harvard Divinity School
Hellenic College / Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology
Houston Graduate School of Theology
Iliff School of Theology
Jesuit School of Theology of Santa Clara University
JKM Library
John W. Graham Library, Trinity College & Wycliffe College
Kenrick / Glennon Seminary
Lancaster Theological Seminary
Lexington Theological Seminary
Liberty University
Lincoln Christian University - Seminary
Logsdon Seminary
Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary
Loyola Marymount University

239

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
Luther Seminary
Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago (LSTC)
Lutheran Theological Seminary at Gettysburg
Lutheran Theological Seminary at Philadelphia
Lutheran Theological Southern Seminary
Mars Hill Graduate School
Master's Seminary
McCormick Theological Seminary
Memphis Theological Seminary
Mercer University
Methodist Theological School in Ohio
Moravian Theological Seminary
Multnomah Biblical Seminary
Nashotah House
Nazarene Theological Seminary
New Brunswick Theological Seminary
New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary
North Park Theological Seminary
Oblate School of Theology
Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary
Pacific School of Religion
Palmer Theological Seminary
Philadelphia Biblical University
Phillips Theological Seminary
Pitts Theology Library
Pittsburgh Theological Seminary
Pontifical College Josephinum
Princeton Theological Seminary
Providence College & Seminary
Reformed Theological Seminary - Charlotte, NC

240

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
Regent College
Saint John's University
Saint Meinrad School of Theology
San Francisco Theological Seminary
Seabury-Western Theological Seminary
Seminary of the Immaculate Conception
Seminary of the Southwest, an Episcopal Seminary
Singapore Bible College
Sioux Falls Seminary
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Library
Southern Baptist Theological Seminary
Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary
SS. Cyril and Methodius Seminary
St. Charles Borromeo Seminary
St. Paul School of Theology
St. Paul Seminary - University of St. Thomas
St. Vladimir's Orthodox Theological Seminary
Starr King School for the Ministry
Theology and Ministry Library of Boston College
Trinity International University
Trinity Lutheran Seminary
Trinity School for Ministry (formerly Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry)
Tyndale University College & Seminary
Union Presbyterian Seminary (formerly Union Theological Seminary & P.S.C.E.)
United Library
United Theological Seminary (Ohio)
United Theological Seminary of the Twin Cities
University of Dubuque
University of St. Mary of the Lake
University of the South Library/School of Theology

241

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
Vanderbilt University
Victoria University
Virginia Theological Seminary
Wake Forest University
Wartburg Theological Seminary
Washington Theological Union
Wesley Theological Seminary
Western Seminary
Western Theological Seminary
Westminster Theological Seminary (California)
Westminster Theological Seminary (Philadelphia)
Yale University Divinity School Library

242

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
 APPENDIX M

TEAGUE LETTER TO OTHER PRESIDENTS

President of Lancaster Bible College, Dr. Peter Teague, letter to other presidents requesting institutional

participation

September 13, 2011

President XX

Institution

ADD

CSZ

Dear :

I am writing to request the cooperation of [Institution Name] in the dissertation research

of Mr. Gerald Lincoln, our library director. Mr. Lincoln is doing his doctoral work at the School

243

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
of Information Science of the University of Pittsburgh and his dissertation analyzes the

information literacy skills of graduates of theological schools.

The research will specifically look at the practices of pastors in the preparation and

delivery of a sermon. The study is being limited to evangelical pastors because the literature has

shown a niche where there is a need for further research.

My request is for you to allow Mr. Lincoln to contact a small group of [Institution Name]

alumni who serve in a preaching role and request interviews with them. No identifying personal

or institutional information will be revealed in the study, and alumni from other institutions will

be involved as well. If there is a significant discovery specific to your institution, that

information would be shared with you.

I appreciate anything you can do to pave the way for Mr. Lincoln’s research as I believe

it will be valuable to the cause of Christ and the advancement of the Gospel. Please email him at

glincoln@lbc.edu if you are willing to allow him to contact your alumni.

So thankful for you and the good work of [Institution Name]!

Cordially in Christ,

Peter W. Teague, EdD

President
244

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
 APPENDIX N

TEAGUE E-MAIL TO LBC ALUMNI

President of Lancaster Bible College, Dr. Peter Teague, e-mail to LBC alumni requesting participation

September 13, 2011

NAME

ADD

CSZ

Dear LBC Alumnus:

I am writing to request your participation in the dissertation research of Mr. Gerald

Lincoln, our library director. Mr. Lincoln is doing his doctoral work at the School of Information

245

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
Science of the University of Pittsburgh and his dissertation analyzes the information literacy

skills of graduates of theological schools.

The research will specifically look at the practices of pastors in the preparation and

delivery of a sermon. The study is being limited to evangelical pastors because the literature has

shown a niche where there is a need for further research.

My request is for you, as an LBC alumnus who serves in a preaching role, to consider

allowing Mr. Lincoln to interview you for his pilot study. No identifying personal or church

information will be revealed in the study, and alumni from other institutions will be involved as

well.

I appreciate your involvement in Mr. Lincoln’s research as I believe it will be valuable to

the cause of Christ and the advancement of the Gospel. Please email him at glincoln@lbc.edu if

you are willing to consider participating in the study.

So thankful for you and the ministry of [CHURCH Name]!

Cordially in Christ,

Peter W. Teague, EdD

President

246

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
 APPENDIX O

TEAGUE E-MAIL TO LBC LIST OF PASTORS

President of Lancaster Bible College, Dr. Peter Teague, to LBC compiled e-mail list of pastors requesting

participation

September 13, 2011

Pastor XX

Church

ADD

CSZ

Dear :

247

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
 I am writing to request your cooperation in the dissertation research of Mr. Gerald

Lincoln, our library director. Mr. Lincoln is doing his doctoral work at the School of Information

Science of the University of Pittsburgh and his dissertation analyzes the information literacy

skills of graduates of theological schools.

The research will specifically look at the practices of pastors in the preparation and

delivery of a sermon. The study is being limited to evangelical pastors because the literature has

shown a niche where there is a need for further research.

My request is for you to consider allowing Mr. Lincoln to interview you as part of his

research. No identifying personal or church information will be revealed in the study, and many

other pastors will be involved as well.

I appreciate anything you can do to pave the way for Mr. Lincoln’s research as I believe

it will be valuable to the cause of Christ and the advancement of the Gospel. Please email him at

glincoln@lbc.edu if you are willing to consider participating in the study.

So thankful for you and the ministry of [Church Name]!

Cordially in Christ,

Peter W. Teague, EdD

President
248

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
 APPENDIX P

EXPLANATION OF RESEARCH PROJECT

I am the director of the library at Lancaster Bible College. I am in the process of doing research

for my doctoral dissertation at the School of Information Science of the University of Pittsburgh.

I am researching the information literacy skills of graduates of theological schools.

Information literacy instruction is an area that our accrediting organizations have required

us to provide and assess. The concept is also linked with lifelong learning skills. We all would

like to see our graduates add to their knowledge from school and communicate it to the church.

The research will specifically look at the practice and training in research skills used by

pastors in the preparation and delivery of a sermon. The study is being limited to Evangelical

pastors because the literature has shown a niche where there is a need for further research. There

are aspects of information literacy that have been taught to theological students for generations

but there are also areas where we need to improve.

I plan to conduct interviews using open ended questions. I expect the interviews would

last for one or two hours. Personal identification information will not be revealed. The research

249

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
proposal and questions will have been approved by the Institutional Review Board of the

University of Pittsburgh and is being overseen by my doctoral committee.

I would like to conduct individual interviews with a small number of your alumni who

serve in a preaching role. Your school is recognized as meeting the theological criteria. The

study will also be conducted with alumni from several other institutions. Your institution’s name

will not be identified in the dissertation or any derivative work except in a pattern of Institution

A, etc.

I am asking that you e-mail the following message to your alumni requesting pastors to

participate in this research project.

250

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
 APPENDIX Q

E-MAIL TO PASTORS

E-mail to Pastors Requesting Participation

Subject: Improving Theological Education

Would you be willing to participate in a research project that potentially could improve

theological education? I am researching skills that you would have learned while you were in

Bible college or seminary. I am looking for pastors who would be willing to be interviewed for

one or two hours about their preparation and delivery of sermons.

If you are interested, please contact me by e-mail at glincoln@lbc.edu.

Gerald E Lincoln, MA, MDiv, ThM

Library Director
Lancaster Bible College
901 Eden Road
Lancaster, PA 17601
glincoln@lbc.edu
(717) 560-8200 X5362

251

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
 APPENDIX R

NOTIFICATION OF SUBJECTS RIGHTS

Notification of Subject’s Rights

TITLE: The Information Literacy Competencies of Evangelical Pastors

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Gerald Lincoln, PhD Student
901 Eden Road, Lancaster, PA 17601; Phone: 717.560.8200 x5362
e-mail: glincoln@lbc.edu

FACULTY MENTOR: Ellen Detlefsen, Ph.D., Associate Professor, School of Information

Sciences
University of Pittsburgh - Pittsburgh PA 15260; Phone: 412.624.9444
e-mail: ellen@sis.pitt.edu

The purpose of this research study is to examine the practice of pastors in the preparation of a
sermon. Approximately 15 Evangelical pastors, at least 18 years of age or older, will be invited to
participate in this research study. If you agree to participate, you will be asked to answer a series of
questions during an interview at your office about your preparation of sermons. After you answer
each question, you may be asked follow-up questions to clarify your answer. The interview will take
less than 2 hours to complete. There will be no further contact after the interview.
There is little risk involved in this study. The major potential risk is a breach of
confidentiality, but we will do everything possible to protect your privacy. Another potential risk
associated with your participation is if you were to disclose that you plagiarize sermons. This
information will be kept confidential and is not the subject of this research study. You are asked to
not to refer to yourself or your church by name during the interview so as to maintain anonymity. No
linkage of your name to the data will be kept.
There are no costs to you for participating in this study, and you will receive no direct benefit
from participating in this study.

252

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
 All records pertaining to your involvement in this study are kept strictly confidential and any
data that includes your identity will be stored in locked files, and will be retained by us for a
minimum of seven years. Your identity will not be revealed in any description or publication of this
research. Results will not be shared with your church or anyone else.
Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. You may refuse to take part in it, or
you may stop participating at any time. This study is being conducted by Gerald Lincoln through the
University of Pittsburgh. You may contact me at 717.560.8200 x5362 or glincoln@lbc.edu.

253

8/12/2011 5:10 PM
 APPENDIX S

ADAPTED ACRL STANDARDS, PERFORMANCE INDICATORS, AND OUTCOMES

Information literacy competency standards for higher education

©2000 Association of College and Research Libraries. Chicago, Ill.:
Information literacy competency standards, performance indicators,
and outcomes adapted for pastors
by Gerald E Lincoln,
(permission requested March 13, 2012)

Standard One:
The information literate pastor determines the nature and extent of the information
needed.
Performance Indicator Outcomes Include:
1. The information a. Confers with church members, church staff, and with God to
literate pastor identify sermon topics or other information needs
defines and b. Develops a sermon topic and formulates questions based on the
articulates the need information need
for information. c. Explores general information sources to increase familiarity with
the topic
d. Defines or modifies the information need to achieve a manageable
focus
e. Identifies key concepts and terms that describe the information
need
f. Recognizes that existing information can be combined with
original thought, experimentation, and/or analysis to produce new
information
2. The information a. Knows how information is formally and informally produced,
literate pastor organized, and disseminated
identifies a variety b. Recognizes that knowledge can be organized into disciplines that
of types and formats influence the way information is accessed
of potential sources c. Identifies the value and differences of potential resources in a
for information. variety of formats (e.g., multimedia, database, website, e-books)
254
 d. Identifies the purpose and audience of potential resources (e.g.,
popular vs. scholarly, current vs. historical, devotional vs.
exegetical vs. homiletical vs. expository)
e. Differentiates between primary and secondary sources,
recognizing how their use and importance vary within theological
perspectives
f. Realizes that information may need to be constructed with raw
data from primary sources (Bible)
3. The information a. Determines the availability of needed information and makes
literate pastor decisions on broadening the information seeking process beyond
considers the costs local resources (e.g., interlibrary loan; using resources at other
and benefits of locations; obtaining images, videos, text, or sound)
acquiring the b. Considers the feasibility of acquiring language skills (e.g.,
needed information. Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek) in order to gather needed information
and to understand its context
c. Develops a realistic plan to acquire the needed information in
Accordance® with deadlines
4. The information a. Reviews the initial information need to clarify, revise, or refine
literate pastor the sermon topic
reevaluates the
nature and extent of
the information
need.

Standard Two
The information literate pastor accesses needed information effectively and efficiently.
Performance Indicator Outcomes Include:
1. The information a. Identifies appropriate investigative methods (e.g., exegesis,
literate pastor literature review)
selects the most b. Investigates the scope, content, and organization of information
appropriate retrieval systems
investigative c. Selects efficient and effective approaches for accessing the
methods or information needed from the investigative method or information
information retrieval system
retrieval systems
for accessing the
needed information.
2. The information a. Develops a research plan appropriate to the investigative method
literate pastor b. Identifies keywords, synonyms and related terms for the
constructs and information needed
implements c. Selects controlled vocabulary specific to the discipline or
effectively information retrieval source, when applicable
designed search d. Constructs a search strategy using appropriate commands for the
strategies. information retrieval system selected, when applicable (e.g.,
Boolean operators, truncation, and proximity for search engines;
internal organizers such as indexes for books)
e. Implements the search strategy in various information retrieval
255
 systems using different user interfaces and search engines, with
different command languages, protocols, and search parameters,
when applicable
f. Implements the search using investigative protocols appropriate
to the discipline
3. The information a. Uses various search systems to retrieve information in a variety of
literate pastor formats
retrieves b. Uses various classification schemes and other systems (e.g., call
information online number systems or indexes) to locate information resources
or in person using a within the library or to identify specific sites for physical
variety of methods. exploration
c. Uses specialized online or in person services available at the
church to retrieve information needed (e.g., ATLAS®, Logos®,
BibleWorks, Accordance®, and practitioners)
4. The a. Assesses the quantity, quality, and relevance of the search results
information literate to determine whether alternative information retrieval systems or
pastor refines the investigative methods should be utilized
search strategy if b. Identifies gaps in the information retrieved and determines if the
necessary. search strategy should be revised
c. Repeats the search using the revised strategy as necessary
d. Decides when limit of searching is reached in Accordance® with
deadlines
5. The information a. Selects among various technologies the most appropriate one for
literate pastor the task of extracting the needed information (e.g., copy/paste
extracts, records, software functions, photocopier, scanner, or download)
and manages the b. Creates a system for organizing the information
information and its c. Differentiates between the types of sources cited and understands
sources. the correct method of citation for a sermon
d. Records all pertinent citation information for future reference
e. Uses various technologies to manage the information selected and
organized (personal bibliographic software)

Standard Three
The information literate pastor evaluates information and its sources critically and
incorporates selected information into his or her knowledge base and value system.
Performance Indicator Outcomes Include:
1. The information a. Reads the text and selects main ideas
literate pastor b. Restates textual concepts in his/her own words and selects data
summarizes the accurately
main ideas to be c. Identifies verbatim material that can be then appropriately quoted
extracted from the
information
gathered.
2. The information a. Examines and compares information from various sources in
literate pastor order to evaluate reliability, validity, accuracy, authority,
articulates and timeliness, and point of view or bias
applies initial b. Analyzes the structure and logic of supporting arguments or
256
 criteria for methods
evaluating both the c. Recognizes prejudice, deception, or manipulation
information and its d. Recognizes the cultural, physical, or other context within which
sources. the information was created and understands the impact of
context on interpreting the information
3. The information a. Recognizes interrelationships among concepts and combines them
literate pastor into potentially useful primary statements with supporting
synthesizes main evidence
ideas to construct b. Utilizes computer and other technologies (e.g. databases, Logos®,
new concepts. BibleWorks, or Accordance®) for studying the interaction of ideas
and other phenomena
4. The information a. Determines whether information satisfies the research or other
literate pastor information need
compares new b. Uses consciously selected criteria to determine whether the
knowledge with information contradicts or verifies information used from other
prior knowledge to sources
determine the value c. Draws conclusions based upon information gathered
added, d. Tests theories with discipline-appropriate techniques (e.g., logical
contradictions, or arguments, theology, grammar, word studies, historical and
other unique cultural backgrounds)
characteristics of e. Determines probable accuracy by questioning the source of the
the information. data, the limitations of the information gathering tools or
strategies, and the reasonableness of the conclusions
f. Integrates new information with previous information or
knowledge
g. Selects information that provides evidence for the topic
5. The information a. Investigates differing viewpoints encountered in the literature
literate pastor b. Determines whether to incorporate or reject viewpoints
determines whether encountered
the new knowledge
has an impact on
the individual’s
value system and
takes steps to
reconcile
differences.

257
6. The information a. Participates in church-sponsored electronic communication
literate pastor forums designed to encourage discourse on the topic
validates b. Seeks expert opinion through a variety of mechanisms
understanding and
interpretation of the
information
through discourse
with other
individuals,
subject-area
experts, and/or
practitioners.
7. The information a. Determines if original information need has been satisfied or if
literate pastor additional information may be obtained in Accordance® with
determines whether deadlines
the initial query b. Reviews search strategy and incorporates additional concepts as
should be revised. necessary
c. Reviews information retrieval sources used and expands to
include others as needed

Standard Four
The information literate pastor, individually or as a member of a group, uses information
effectively to accomplish a specific purpose.
Performance Indicator Outcomes Include:

1. The information a. Organizes the content in a manner that supports the purposes and
literate pastor format of the product or performance (e.g. outlines, drafts,
applies new and illustrations, applications)
prior information to b. Articulates knowledge and skills transferred from prior
the planning and experiences to planning and creating the product or performance
creation of a c. Integrates the new and prior information, including quotations
particular product and paraphrasings, in a manner that supports the purposes of the
or performance. product or performance
d. Manipulates digital text, images, and data, as needed, transferring
them from their original locations and formats to a new context
2. The information a. Maintains a journal or log of activities related to the information
literate pastor seeking, evaluating, and communicating process
revises the b. Reflects on past successes, failures, and alternative strategies
development
process for the
product or
performance.
3. The information a. Chooses a communication medium and format that best supports
literate pastor the purposes of the product or performance and the intended
communicates the audience
product or b. Uses a range of information technology applications in creating

258
 performance the product or performance
effectively to c. Incorporates principles of design and communication
others. d. Communicates clearly and with a style that supports the purposes
of the intended audience

Standard Five
The information literate pastor understands many of the economic, legal, and social
issues surrounding the use of information and accesses and uses information ethically and
legally.
Performance Indicator Outcomes Include:
1. The information a. Identifies and discusses issues related to privacy and security in
literate pastor both the print and electronic environments
understands many b. Identifies and discusses issues related to free vs. fee-based access
of the ethical, legal to information
and socio-economic c. Identifies and discusses issues related to censorship and freedom
issues surrounding of speech
information and d. Demonstrates an understanding of intellectual property,
information copyright, and fair use of copyrighted material
technology.
2. The information a. Participates in electronic discussions following accepted practices
literate pastor (e.g. “Netiquette”)
follows laws, b. Uses approved passwords and other forms of ID for access to
regulations, church information resources
policies, and c. Complies with church policies on access to information resources
etiquette related to d. Preserves the integrity of information resources, equipment,
the access and use systems and facilities
of information e. Legally obtains, stores, and disseminates text, data, images, or
resources. sounds
f. Demonstrates an understanding of what constitutes plagiarism
and does not represent work attributable to others as his/her own
g. Demonstrates an understanding of church policies related to
privileged communication
3. The information a. Selects an appropriate documentation style and uses it
literate pastor consistently to cite sources
acknowledges the b. Posts permission granted notices, as needed, for copyrighted
use of information material
sources in
communicating the
product or
performance.

259
 APPENDIX T

FLOWCHART SYMBOLS

Data in the form of books, journals, files, and other

documents.

Data stored and accessed in an electronic storage device.

Decision or decision maker.

Documents

Process intended to accomplish a task.

Manual process intended to accomplish a task.

260
Starting or ending point.

261