The Future of Religions

There is an absolutely fascinating article produced by the Pew Research Center on world religions. It is worth your time, I promise.

According to the Pew Research Center, the religious profile of the world is changing; this change is driven primarily by differences in fertility rates and the size of youth populations among the world’s major religions. Interestingly, it is also driven by people switching faiths. Keep these things in your mind as you read the statistics below.

Over the next four decades, Christianity will remain the largest religious group, but Islam will grow at a faster rate than any other major religion during that time. If current trends continue, the following can be expected by 2050 …

• The number of Muslims will nearly equal the number of Christians around the world.
• Atheists, agnostics and other people who do not affiliate with any religion – though increasing in countries such as the United States and France – will make up a declining share of the world’s total population.
• The global Buddhist population will be about the same size it was in 2010, while the Hindu and Jewish populations will be larger than they are today.
• In Europe, Muslims will make up 10% of the overall population.
• India will retain a Hindu majority but also will have the largest Muslim population of any country in the world, surpassing Indonesia.
• In the United States, Christians will decline from more than three-quarters of the population in 2010 to two-thirds in 2050, and Judaism will no longer be the largest non-Christian religion. Muslims will be more numerous in the U.S. than people who identify as Jewish on the basis of religion.
• Four out of every 10 Christians in the world will live in sub-Saharan Africa.

According to the Pew Research projections, by the year 2050, there will be as many Muslims (2.8 billion, or 30% of the population) as Christians (2.9 billion, or 31%) in the world. However, the religiously unaffiliated segment of population is projected to shrink as a percentage of the global population. In 2010, censuses and surveys indicate, there were about 1.1 billion atheists, agnostics and people who do not identify themselves by any religious affiliation. By 2050, this unaffiliated segment is projected to exceed 1.2 billion, but, as a percentage of world population, that is a decline from 16% in 2010 to 13% by the middle of this century.

From where does population growth come, and how does it affect religions? Pew Research Center states the following regarding growth rate:

Globally, Muslims have the highest fertility rate, an average of 3.1 children per woman – well above replacement level (2.1), the minimum typically needed to maintain a stable population. Christians are second, at 2.7 children per woman. Hindu fertility (2.4) is similar to the global average (2.5). Worldwide, Jewish fertility (2.3 children per woman) also is above replacement level. All the other groups have fertility levels too low to sustain their populations: folk religions (1.8 children per woman), other religions (1.7), the unaffiliated (1.7) and Buddhists (1.6).

According to the Pew Research Center, the number of youth within each religion also has a drastic effect of growth. Pew Research Center stated,

In 2010, more than a quarter of the world’s total population (27%) was under the age of 15. But an even higher percentage of Muslims (34%) and Hindus (30%) were younger than 15, while the share of Christians under 15 matched the global average (27%). These bulging youth populations are among the reasons that Muslims are projected to grow faster than the world’s overall population and that Hindus and Christians are projected to roughly keep pace with worldwide population growth.

Fascinating statistics regarding religion. Again, the entire article is well worth your time.

Sudden Change

 

This is Pripyat, Ukraine; it has been deserted since the nuclear accident of April, 1986. The entire population was evacuated in two days, and with radiation remaining too high for human habitation people have never returned. It's empty streets and buildings sit as monuments of a once proud city and as reminders to the world on how quickly things can change.

 

Pripyat was found in 1970 as a nuclear city and served as home to those who worked at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. The city began as strictly support for the plant, but it quickly grew to become a rail and cargo port for the Ukraine province (it was once part of the Soviet Union). At the time of the disaster, Pripyat was home to almost 50,000 residents. There were 15 primary schools, 5 secondary schools and 1 professional school. The average age of a Pripyat resident in 1986 was just 26 years old, and in one day, everything changed.

 

In the early 90s, I visited Kiev, Ukraine for two weeks in the summer. Pripyat and the Chernobyl disaster were still fresh on the minds and hearts of the people of Kiev. I do not believe many outside of Ukraine know the true account of that day, at least that is my impression from those I encountered in Kiev that summer. 

 

The Ukrainian people are a humble selfless hard-working people. It is very easy to like these people.They are gregarious and so gracious, giving up their beds, tables and even food to a stranger like me. Their country has been conquered and overrun by many over the centuries, therefore, they are familiar with tragedy and heartache. This disaster was just another sudden tragic change that they would have to live through, and they would live through it with a resolution worthy of admiration.

 

As I walked the streets of Kiev that summer, I was amazed at what I saw. Every older Ukrainian face that returned my gaze did so with an unidentifiable ambiguity, at least that is what I thought. They would nod and politely offer a silent guarded hello with their eyes. It was not hostile, but it was not welcoming either; it was... suspicious. As each face looked back at me, each was missing something, something I could not quite comprehend. 

 

I ended up becoming fairly good friends with two of our translators who responded to my question late one night. What I was missed noticing were the missing smile lines. Ukrainians, they explained to me, at least the older generations, did not have smile lines because, quite simply, their lives have been filled with heartache and sadness.They are a guarded people who have been betrayed many times by others. And, now Chernobyl sits as a reminder of another betrayal, and how quickly sudden change can come to something that was to bring such prosperity. Ukrainians are not use to prosperity; they are almost afraid of it because prosperity has always been fleeting to the Ukrainian people.

My two friends spoke that night about the young Ukrainians and a new generation. Both of my friends had smile lines and smiles to go with those lines, and the main reason those smiles were producing those smile lines... both of them knew Jesus as Savior and Lord. I was young in the faith at that time, and their testimony was a testimony to me. They had given their time, given up their home, their food and their things for me and my comfort. They had so little, but, yet, they had so much. They knew Jesus in a way that I had not seen, and their lives were spent living for Him and not for this world. The world and its troubles did not trouble them. They had little compared to me, but that did not matter to them because they had Jesus, and He was their world.

 

This past Sunday, I heard a wonderful sermon regarding God and his omnipresence. He is far and near, all at the same time. He knows you and your secrets as if they are all out in open. In Amos 5, God commands us to seek good and not evil that we may live. We live, not for what is here now, but for what awaits us in heaven. We live, not for the applause of men, but for the approval of our Savior. We live, believing that God is at work, even in Pripyat; it is all part of His amazing plan. He is our trust, our beliefs, our friend, our Savior and our all; when sudden change comes, as it always will, those who know the Savior will rest in the Savior and persevere for one reason... they will live for Him and not for men.

     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Can We Really Change the World?

There is a lot of conversation today about changing the world. There are books, articles and even videos about the subject, but can it really be done? Where is the proof that this whole "changing the world" thing is even real? I mean, come on, changing the whole world... can't be done? Right? Wrong!

Eric Metaxas has an excellent article on this very subject entitled, Cultural Elites: The Next Unreached People Group. Click HERE to read the article in its entirety. Be sure to start at the beginning as there are five pages. Metaxas not only believes emphatically that this process of changing the world can be done, but he has proof in the person of Willliam Wilberforce. Apparently, he did some world changing back in his day.

Metaxas, in his excellent article, provides us a blueprint for how it is done, and apparently, this process, well, it turns out that we all have it already. It is found in that book we all should be reading day and night. You know the one, that book God gave all of us called the Bible. That is where Wilberforce and his group the Clapham Circle went for their inspiration. Okay, you want me just answer the question. So, you're thinking, do I have to read all of Metaxas's article to find out how to change the world? Well, I would recommend it, but for those of you lacking the time to read an author who presents history in a well-written novel-like narrative, I will give you a little help. I hope this tantalizes your curiosity a bit, and I hope this will lead you to read the entire article. Contained in the passage below is a reference to the answer you seek.

"As we have said, the first aspect of their success has to do with their theological view that one must prove one’s faith though one’s works, that the two cannot be separated. Wilberforce and his friends lived at a time when there was no false division between faith and works, or between evangelism and social outreach. These were simply two sides of the coin that was the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The great 17th century evangelist George Whitfield spent as much time establishing orphanages as preaching – and he preached 18,000 sermons. Caring for widows and orphans, feeding the hungry, and helping the poor were all explicitly and exclusively Christian ideas, so atheists, agnostics, and nominal Christians were neither involved in them, nor in abolition. The idea of a social conscience simply didn’t exist in that culture, except among serious Christians, who were scorned by the wider culture as “Methodists”, because many had been converted through the “Methodist” movement of Charles and John Wesley." 

Well, does that wet your appetite for more? I hope it does. Can we really change the world? Read Metaxas's article about William Wilberforce and you will have your answer. Blessings!

Defining Moments

Life is full of defining moments. Those moments that define us, if you keep count, tend to come in groups. They come in groups for one simple reason - defining moments of life are such monumental parts of our life that they themselves trigger other moments by their shear magnitude.

A dear friend dies, a tragic car accident occurs, a promotion is received, marriage, children... these are all defining moments of life that most likely prompted some other defining moment of life for one reason... defining moments are triggers that lead to other defining moments.They are changes that occur in our lives, shifting us from one path onto another.

Defining moments in life are rarely our actions alone. They usually require actions outside of self. These actions can be decisions by others, acts of God, circumstances, recognition, and the list could go on, but the important point is this: they are all decisions involving you about you usually made outside of you. Ultimately, it is my belief that they are all acts of God for I believe He is in complete control. There are those who would disagree and present the issue of evil in the world as an example of why God can not be in control, but then I present the issue of defining moments as a counter example of why God is in control.

A good person trying to do good will not always make every decision that results in good. Does that mean he or she does not have "good" motives in their attempt to do good? How about situations where to do good requires a painful decision? To save the whole body, a limb must be amputated. The amputations will result in much pain, years of discomfort and a change in lifestyle, but in order to save a life - the ultimate good goal - a limb must die. God is very much the same way. He sees the ultimate good and has to allow actions that we deem bad to happen, and sometimes, they must happen to us. How haughty of us to judge God by what is taking place in our life when there is a whole world out there hanging in the balance. Do we really think we are that important that the events of our life merit attention over the billions of other people or the starts in the sky or the energy in the universe? These are our perceptions, and they are rooted in who we are. This issue of perceptions is one that I would like to address in more detail.

We humans perceive everything through our own selfish senses, and today, we perceive more through our eyes than any other sense. This has occurred as a direct result of the shift of culture towards social media. Everything is directed at the eyes today, and the eyes are the most selfish sense of all the senses. What? Think about which sense requires no other contribution. We can hear and feel, and we can smell and taste, but we see in isolation as there is no other sense that can enhance our sight. You can see and hear, but sound does not travel as fast as light. Even thought it is a fraction of a second faster, light is still faster. We have become overly dependent on our eyes, but our eyes our not to be totally trusted. The picture above is an optical illusion. I can ask a question about that picture and you can answer correctly if your perception of that picture is the same as mine. But, if I see a face and your see a person walking we will have two totally different answers and both be right.What will matter most regarding right and wrong is who is asking the question.

Too many of us rush to judgment because of one perception, and never give our other senses time to confirm our one perception. As defining moments happen to us, we will immediately label them and file them.  The older we get the more of these moments we will experience; we must allow time and our other senses an opportunity to make sense of the issue in front of us. Failure to do that will result in an altered perception of your life and a lack of understanding regarding what God is doing in your life. Defining moments do happen in groups. They are life changing triggers leading to a change in life. They are also opportunities afforded us to change. We need not miss any of those opportunities. They will be painful and challenging, but since when is anything worth anything not? Blessings!

A Discourse on Change

Most of us like things to stay the same. Sure, we can tolerate a little change here and there, but any major change is considered a threat, especially change that challenges our thoughts and deep seated beliefs.

Over the next several paragraphs, I will have an open discourse on the subject of change. My thoughts are my own; I am not presenting them as right thoughts or correct thoughts, only as my own thoughts free to be challenged. My only goal is for these thoughts to prompt your thoughts on these thoughts. These are random thoughts of mine and should not be read as a formal thesis. So, here I go, talking out loud about change.

I will start our conversation with one reference, Hegel's definition of social change. He defines social change as a dialectic model of change that is based on the interaction of opposing forces. Hegel believes change starts from the point of momentary stasis, Thesis, then countered by Antithesis yields conflict, then it subsequently results in a new Synthesis which is change. Change tends to come primarily from two sources, the random and the systematic. This is change according to Hegel and will serve as the foundation for my discussion.

Change is about the future, and a moving away from things of the past, if you will. The past will lose its power and cease to be what it was in time. The problem with the past, especially those elements of the past that do not embrace change, is this: they are in the past and were created as part of the past to address issues of the past. They have not moved forward and will not adapt unless they change. Therefore, each day that goes by they become less relevant, less efficient and more mediocre. Yet, we cling to them like they are life itself because they are familiar and comfortable; yet, we do change. Have you switched cell phones recently? It was not easy, but you did it. Why? Everyone else did. Can you imagine if you still had one of the first cell phones made? You changed because everyone (group mentality) else did; remember this point. Culture and life have changed; failure to keep up with that change will have severe consequences, yet we fight this change all the time while embracing other change, like our cell phone. Why?

We must begin with our own response to change. For the most part, our initial response to all change is negative. Why? Well, change is not easy because it often comes in response to... change. To embrace change, there must be something in it for us or else we will resist it. This feeds into the very reason we fight change (another important point to remember). For Americans, it is even harder. We, Americans, live our lives with a privilege that most do not enjoy. Most of us get up and go about our busy day never considering the privilege afforded to us by virtue of our birth in this country or by our race, gender and ethnicity. There are many reasons for this, but one to consider is the way we now live. We, in America, have moved past merely living to survive and have now risen to living for our own enjoyment. Many of us will never think about the idea of privilege unless confronted by it because it has melted into the ideas of contentment, comfort and enjoyment. This is the American life - happiness, is it not?

What does this do to us? In my opinion, living with a focus on our own enjoyment actually harms us because it makes us more self-centered and egocentric, which are two of the demons we battle daily. We become more entrenched in our own ways and our own ideas and less tolerant of others and their ways and ideas. We become less likely to help those in need, see things from a different perspective or tolerate those not like us. Our energy is spent trying to convince others to turn to our way of thinking because we know, the more who agree with our thoughts the more powerful our thoughts become. This produces groups and group behavior. The rejection of change manifests itself most noticeably in groups mainly because there is strength and comfort in numbers and all groups are greater than one. There are many studies on group behavior that will confirm this simple truth: people will do things in groups that they would not do as individuals. Groups tend to resist change more than individuals.

Resistance to change is more prevalent today than it has ever been; one of the main reasons for this recent development is that we, now, have the power to determine our own course of life. We no longer worry about if we will eat; we now worry about where we will eat. America is full of personal choices, and each one reinforces this resistance to change because each choice that we make reinforces the big lie - the choices that we make are ours to make. The facts are these: most choices that we make are already made for us. Most of our choices are not our original choices but the choice of the those before us. And, if we are in a room full of people who all make the same choice, the chances are that we, too, will make that same choice even if it is not our own choice, and we will make it because everyone else did. This resistance to change is found in everything we do. Here are just a few of the subtle ways we resist change without even realizing it.

We are a people who have worked to survive, and we now work to enjoy. This breeds more comfort and contentment. Once comfort and contentment have become part of us, we will do almost anything to avoid giving them up. We will sacrifice truth, service, friendship and even family just to continue this life of comfort and contentment. We will especially sacrifice change. We live in homes that are too big, drive cars that we do not need and carry debt that is not necessary, and we do it all to enjoy our lives because we think we deserve it. Comfort and contentment are old idols wrapped in new clothes, and most Americans worship them without even thinking about them anymore. We don't have to think negatively about them because every way that we turn culture is there to tell us that we deserve it. Change brings doubt and uncertainty and a risk of losing what we have worked so hard to achieve, and no one wants that.

Because we live to be comfortable and content, confrontation has disappeared. We, Americans, do not confront each other anymore. We would rather gossip, spread rumors, send emails or text, but a face-to-face confrontation has almost become extinct. And, if it should happen, it will be done, not in love, but in emotion. It will be done quickly in order to end it, and it will be done incorrectly. We do not confront because we do not really know each other. We talk in positives with little or no disagreement. This produces, what I call, paper mache relationships: we know each other on the surface, but down deep, where we all live, we know little about each other. And, we like it that way because we do not want to be bothered by other people and their problems which would cause us to change our plans, change our feelings or change who we are.

Thought, at least logical higher categorical thought, is disappearing too because thinking is... hard. We would rather be told what to do than to think logically about anything. We are content to let our politicians speak in lies and fallacies because, for the most part, that is the way we speak. Reporters do not check facts and tend to write their own opinions into their news stories; we know this but do not seem to care and allow it to happen with little consequences. We have bought into this idea that to think is to agree, and that one thought is better than another thought. Disagreement is rooted in the fallacies of today; each day we are confronted with fallacies: ad hominem, red herring, straw man, argumentum ad baculum, and of course, the most popular, argumentum ad populum. Doing what is right has all but disappeared because it will "get us involved" and disrupt our comfortable lives. And, it will bring about change, which is something we do not want.

This idea of change is daunting and difficult, but it is necessary in our growth and survival. There is a famous quote about history that states, "those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it." While the quote is about history, it is also about change. Failure to change means we are doomed to repeat the cycles of the past over and over. Even good trends run their course. Change is inevitable and healthy.

Well, there you have it, some of my thoughts on change. They are today's thoughts, ever changing because I have learned that the more I learn the less I know. Thanks for reading! Blessings to all!

A Finnish Education

A Finnish education is the best education in the world, according to many. What makes it excellent? Dr. Pasi Sahlberg, a Finnish educator and author, has our answer for us in an article from Jenny Anderson in the New York Times.

"In his country, Dr. Sahlberg said later in an interview, teachers typically spend about four hours a day in the classroom, and are paid to spend two hours a week on professional development. At the University of Helsinki, where he teaches, 2,400 people competed last year for 120 slots in the (fully subsidized) master’s program for schoolteachers. “It’s more difficult getting into teacher education than law or medicine,” he said.
Dr. Sahlberg puts high-quality teachers at the heart of Finland’s education success story — which, as it happens, has become a personal success story of sorts, part of an American obsession with all things Finnish when it comes to schools."


Students from Finland outperform peers in 43 other nations and that includes the United States, Germany and Japan, and they do it in mathematics, science and reading skills. The performance of this small and remote European nation has a direct correlation to its educational policies enacted 40 years ago. A summary of those policies can be found in this article. In sum, here are a few of the ones I think are most important.

All kids start at the same level, regardless of their socio-economic background.

Teachers are highly respected and appreciated in Finland because all teachers need a master’s degree in order to qualify to teach in Finland.

Since the 1960s all political authorities, regardless of political affiliation, have seen education as the key to surviving and thriving in an increasingly competitive world.

The government takes care of all costs because of their commitment to free education for all.

Schools receive full autonomy in developing the daily delivery of education services. The ministry of education in Finland continues to believe that teachers, together with principals, parents and communities know best how to provide the best possible education for their children and youth.

As I close, I recommend the movie, Waiting for Superman, to all who want to get a glimpse of what is taking place in our public sector schools. Particularly noteworthy, is the two teacher unions and their responses, particularly to Michelle Rhee in our nation's capital. Education is our future, and yet, we have swallowed the lie. We believe "self" is more important than the child. If we are going to create an educational system in this country that properly prepares our students for the future, then "self" will have to take a back seat. Geoffrey Canada has a powerful quote in that film about adults being more important in a U.S. education than the child. Until we right that upside down equation, there will be little change in the majority of education choices we offer our children in this country. Blessings to all!

The Federal Debt

Read it and weep. This is what all the angry rhetoric has been about for the last week. It is not a pretty picture, and according to many, will not get any better looking anytime soon. I try to stay away from politics as much as possible, but this issue is too big, too important to ignore. I truly believe if Congress does not get this right you and I will experience the effects within two years and our country will have changed forever.

What is unsettling to me are comments by Harry Reid, D- Nevada and Chuck Schumer, D- New York regarding a balanced budget amendment. Both men think a balanced budget amendment is an outlandish request with Schumer actually referring to the idea as poison pills.

As I prepare to pay more taxes, higher interest rates and higher prices, one thing I am not prepared to do is give those who can not even think on the idea of a balanced budget more money. I think this is just one more example of how truly out of touch those in DC are. They share none of our burdens and will be exempt from most of the hardships we are about to endure.

A deal will get done; it will not be a deal America needs. It will not be a deal you and I need. It will be a deal that empowers those with power all the more. Will we forget come election time? I hope not because part of the responsibility for this lies at our feet. We have short term memories, easily forgetting those who said one thing and voted for another.

There is a plan that is rooted in this idea of a balanced budget; it is known as the "One Percent Spending Reduction Act or “The Mack Penny Plan.” Rep. Connie Mack explains:

“It’s a bill that says to Congress that you’ll have to cut 1 percent – or one penny – out of every federal dollar for six years,” he explained.

“At a time when so many in our nation are hurting financially, the federal government needs to do its part to cut spending,” added Mack. “The Penny Plan is a straightforward answer to our nation’s overspending problem that asks government to eliminate only one penny from every dollar it spends — a simple solution that all Americans can rally behind. Every time Washington spends more money, our freedom and security are in jeopardy. Voters have continually said ‘enough is enough’ when it comes to Washington’s appetite for spending, and it is time Congress listens."

Do you think this plan will get consideration? I don't either because it makes too much sense. Join me in praying that Congress will do something different this time and think of the country first. If they don't and continue the same pattern I fear our lives will change forever. What we now take for granted... a gallon of gas for the lawn mower, a trip to the beach, a quiet weekend away will all be past memories of ours and distant memories of our children.

Remember the names in the news this weekend. Repeat them often and attach them to what is taking place because, come election time, we must not forget. If we do, we will only have ourselves to blame... again. Blessings!

The King's Chair

The picture in this post is off King Edward's chair. It is found in Westminster Abbey. The King's chair or throne, if you will, was reserved for only one... the king. As I was reading through my devotion this morning, I came upon an interesting quote about the church. The quote was,

"If we, as the “royal priesthood” (1 Peter 2:9), would step back into our place, and observe Jesus seated at the Father’s right hand, our church would be transformed into his Church."

As I reflect back on my walk with Jesus, I can see that there are times when I am sitting in a seat reserved for one... my Lord. Those are the times when I need Him in His seat the most yet, my pride rationalizes to the point of justifying my place in that seat.

Whether it be my throne or the church's throne, there is only one king and one throne reserved for that king... Jesus Christ. I wake each morning with a desire to rid myself of the sin that weighs me down and gets in my way, and truth be told, my first movement is not a stride forward. No, it is, instead, a move upward as I push myself to stand up from the throne and move aside so its rightful owner can sit.

My problem... our problem is that we want to be in control; we want to be king. We are sitting in a seat reserved for someone else. When we realize that our best movement is to stand up and move aside, then, and only then, will we make individual progress and collective progress against the sin that holds us prisoner. It is sin that prevents us from being what God created us to be... loving examples of Him. Sitting in the wrong chair puts us in the wrong seat and out of action. Once we get comfortable in that chair it will be hard to get up and back into action. May your first movement be up and not down. Blessings!

Education and Change

How does education, as a whole, handle change? Change does take place, and it does exercise influence, but maybe, not as you might think.

Change, defined by Webster's is always defined in terms of something occupying time and space. For our purposes today, we will look to the area of philosophy and view change through that lens.

Common definitions of change in the field of philosophy include the idea that change in something implies the passage of time. Aristotle argued that change is different than time because time passes at one consistent rate; change does not. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy,

"The obvious move to make when confronted with the fact that things change, is to say with Kant (1781) that they change in relation to time, which avoids the inconsistency. But then another problem emerges. In what sense can one thing persist through change? Identity across time and space is the mark of universals, but we also account particulars such as billiard balls and persons as having self-identity across time."

Now, let's take this concept of change, which is still up for debate as to how to measure it, and factor it in to education, and go forward. We know change exists, but we do not know how to measure it; do we ignore it? How do those in education factor change into the equation? We know students change. We know teachers change. School buildings change and books get old and change. Should change be part of the conversation in regards to the education process?

Education is an abstract idea, if you will, filled with concrete parts hoping to obtain an end product defined by more abstraction. There are universals in education... tests, quizzes, books, teachers and students, but some of these things define the process and some do not. And, each tangible part to this process has change factored into it in some way. We have depreciation costs for our buildings, book fees for our books, tuition for our schools and salaries for our teachers, but where is change addressed for the process of education as a whole?

Over the years, many have contributed to this process in positive and negative ways, but have those who contribute ever consider the power of change on the process? I believe when considering education issues this idea of change must be part of the process because it does weigh influence over the process. Change is a powerful affectation... too powerful to not consider.

The chart in this post identifies certain steps to behavioral change. Whether you agree with them or not matters little to the actual issue of change in regards to you. There is still a tangible element to the process of behavioral change - you- and, therefore, a way to measure change in this process, albeit not perfectly. You are the one that can identify whether the steps worked or did not work. Education does not have this advantage as the process itself has been open to discussion and debate since the beginning of time.

Like some of my past posts, I tend to create more questions than answers. I have no answer to our dilemma of measuring change inside the educational process, but I am making a suggestion that may warrant more discussion. Change must be considered in the educational conversations because it does exist and does weigh influence on the process. If we do not consider it we do a disservice to our children and the educational process as a whole. Stay tune for more thoughts on this subject as I do further reading. Blessings!