RESEARCH NOTE

To Educate, Equip, and Empower: Black ChurchSponsorship of Tutoring or Literary Programs

Sandra L. Barnes

Received: 7 March 2013 / Accepted: 28 May 2014

� Religious Research Association, Inc. 2014

Abstract The Black Church has a long history of sponsoring youth educational

programs. Yet Black students continue to lag behind their White counterparts in

academic outcomes. This research note examines; (1) sponsorship of tutoring or

literacy programs based on a national sample of 1,863 Black churches across seven

denominations and (2) the forms of congregational cultural capital that influence

such efforts. Results show denominational differences. Moreover, larger churches as

well as those with formally educated leaders and members are more likely to

sponsor tutorial or literacy programs. Churches that provide religious and religious-

education programs, include gospel rap music during worship, and strive to increase

members’ awareness of racial, social, and political issues are also more likely to

sponsor these programs. Lastly, although the influence of spiritual dictates varies,

churches that more frequently expose members to sermons about personal spiritual

growth are also more apt to offer these youth educational programs. Best practices

are provided to identify and harness the various forms of church capital found in

Black congregations to improve educational outcomes for Black students.

Keywords Black church � Youth � Education � Tutoring � Literacy programs

Introduction

The historic Black Church1 has a long tradition of sponsoring youth educational

programs (DuBois 1903[2003]; Lincoln and Mamiya 1990). For example, the Bible was

S. L. Barnes (&)

Department of Human and Organizational Development, Divinity School, Vanderbilt University,

Nashville, TN, USA

e-mail: Sandra.l.barnes@vanderbilt.edu

1 Black Church is used to represent the institution as a collective and ‘‘Black church’’ for specific

congregations.

123

Rev Relig Res

DOI 10.1007/s13644-014-0173-2

inspirational and instructional as slaves and freedpersons used it to learn to read.

Literacy, tutoring, and mentoring programs are still common, particularly among

churches that have the human and financial resources and the vision to sponsor them

(Barnes 2010; Hallinan 2001; Tucker-Worgs 2002). Yet Black youth continue to lag

behind their White peers educationally. High school graduation rates for Blacks lag

10 % points behind those of Whites; 20 % points separate their college graduation rates

(Davis 2004; Journal of Blacks in Higher Education 2010). Given these educational

challenges, I examine youth literacy/tutoring program sponsorship for a national

sample of 1,863 Black churches across seven denominations. This research note is

theoretically informed by studies on Black Church cultural capital (Barnes 2004, 2005,

2010; Barrett 2010b; Pattillo-McCoy 1998) as well as bivariate and logistic regression

analyses to answer two research questions; (1) Are Black churches sponsoring tutoring/

literacy programs? (2) Are certain churches more likely than others to sponsor such

programs based on dynamics such as church and clergy profiles, denomination, or

congregational capital? Findings may have academic and applied import by illuming

church features needed to enhance youth educational programs in light of decreased

public school funding and debates about charter schools (Archbald 2004; Callan 2002;

Franklin et al. 1991: Orfield et al. 2013; Siddle-Walker 1996).

The Black Church and Education

Research confirms both the importance of education in the Black community and

the Black Church history of sponsoring educational programs in response to

structural inequities and to foster racial uplift (Billingsley 1992; Hallinan 2001;

Lincoln and Mamiya 1990; Mays and Nicholson 1933). According to Billingsley

(1992), Blacks realized that an education was necessary for upward mobility, to

combat inequality, and to improve their quality of life; ‘‘education is the traditional

opportunity through which Black families find their places in life’’ (p. 174). Lincoln

and Mamiya (1990) echo these sentiments and its connection to churches;

After emancipation, the newly freed people of all ages swamped the

schools…Sunday schools were often the first places where Black people

made contact with the educational process, first hearing, then memorizing, and

finally learning to read Bible stories… the molding of young minds in the

crucible of education would become determinative of the future options and

economic opportunities for Blacks. (Pp. 251-2)

Even after public education was touted as the means to create a more meritocratic

society, inequities persisted (Archbald 2004; Franklin et al. 1991). Many Black

churches responded; ‘‘Black communities tried to provide at least some access to

education through the creation of Sabbath schools, night schools, and informal

learning centers’’ (Hallinan 2001: 51).

Recent research describes Black Church educational initiatives that include:

charter schools; Head-Start programs; GED courses; SAT preparatory classes; and,

life-skills classes. Germane to this analysis, these large churches are lead by

formally educated clergy, sponsor a variety of religious programs, are more

Rev Relig Res

123

politically active, and tend to be attended by formally educated Blacks (Barnes

2010). Yet the small sample suggests the need to examine the subject on a larger

scale. Several other studies based on larger samples corroborate this pattern (Rubin

et al. 1994; Taylor et al. 2000; Tucker-Worgs 2002). According to Barrett (2010b),

Black churches possess the requisite ideology and leadership to champion youth

educational success by providing role models and programs to resocialize youth to

achieve—despite historic neglect from public schools and society. McCray et al.

(2010) illumine educational initiatives that rely on existing, often untapped

strengths found among Black youth to foster positive educational outcomes. And

Al-Fadhli and Kersen (2010) confirm the importance of synergy between Black

churches and families to increase educational ambitions among Black youth.

It is imperative that Black students receive solid educations as one mechanism to

combat societal inequities (Collins 2009; Hallinan 2001; Siddle-Walker 1996).

Groups and institutions—like the Black Church—may be called upon to facilitate

the process. It also appears that members of the Black community are increasingly

more prudent in policing the quality of youth education and seeking outside sources

for help (Barnes 2010; Barrett 2010b; Collins 2009; Davis 2004; Franklin et al.

1991). Thus it is important to consider how Black churches are responding in terms

of efforts such as tutoring and literacy programs.

Black Church Cultural Capital and Educational Programs

Black Church cultural capital is broadly defined here as tangible and intangible

congregational assets that position it as a potential bridge between inadequate and

improved academic outcomes for Black students. Literature provides examples of

Black Church cultural capital that is religious, political, and social in nature. This

analysis considers several aspects of this cultural capital in addition to social capital

that takes the form of education and economic resources. Child-centeredness is

considered an important dimension of Black Church cultural capital. This tradition

of protectiveness, unconditional acceptance, and socialization is: reflective of a

broader family-centered edict; an extension of African ‘‘village’’ child-rearing

practices; and, in response to the legacy of slavery and continued racial oppression

(Barnes 2010; Billingsley 1992; Wimberly et al. 2013). According to Lincoln and

Mamiya (1990); ‘‘in the interaction between…family and church, there has always

existed a historical tradition of special caring for young children’’ (pp. 310). Child-

centeredness places the onus on Black churches to provide spiritual and temporal

youth programs as exemplified by Christ’s concern for children (Hale 2001; Johnson

2006; Wimberly et al. 2013). Per Woodson (1933[2005]), ‘‘the Negro church has

taken the lead in education in the schools of the race’’ (p. 34). Child-centeredness

means Black churches provide programs that promote positive racial socialization,

self-love, and self-efficacy.

Several studies specifically examine Swidler’s (1986, 1995) notion of cultural

capital for Black churches. Examples of such capital include; prayer, gospel music,

Liberation theology, self-help, and call-and-response (Cone 1995; Costen 1993;

Drake and Cayton 1940; Lincoln and Mamiya 1990). For example, a national study

on Black churches found a direct relationship between prayer groups and gospel

Rev Relig Res

123

music and providing social programs such as youth initiatives, food pantries, and

prison ministries (Barnes 2005). In another analysis, Black churches considered

ideologically prophetic tended to offer more community services. However, their

more priestly counterparts that focused on religious programs were similarly

motivated to offer such programs (Barnes 2004). This more recent finding that

‘‘other-worldly’’ church cultural tools such as religious programs can effectively

engender community service parallels earlier work (Harris 1987). Pattillo-McCoy

(1998) also illustrated the influence of Black Church cultural capital as churches

framed community action using congregational cultural tools such as prayer,

singing, and religious rhetoric. Other scholars show how cultural capital such as

music, preaching, and political challenges via the pulpit foster community action

and social programs (Cavendish 2001; Wilmore 1995).

Church cultural capital and Black youth educational outcomes are also correlated.

McCray et al. (2010) present pedagogy of self-development based on Black youth

traits (i.e., aspirational, linguistic, familial, social, navigational, and resistant capital)

that can be harnessed for their educational success. Barrett (2010b) contends that

Black churches can apply and generate social and cultural capital to educate and

empower Black youth. Barnett’s ethnography centers a church and pastor that uses

church strengths and assets to teach youth to expect and celebrate educational

achievement. Moreover, Al-Fadhli and Kersen (2010) find a positive relationship

between familial capital (i.e., social capital via education) and church cultural capital

(via church involvement) among Black families and college aspirations and goals for

Black youth. Additionally, Black churches are increasingly incorporating gospel rap

music during worship to attract and retain Black youth (Allwood 2006; Barnes 2009).

As expected, human and economic resources reflect social capital that influences

program sponsorship. Black churches that are larger in size, have paid and formally

educated pastors, and that sponsor a variety of programs in general are more likely

to also provide social programs (Barnes 2005; Billingsley 1992; Lincoln and

Mamiya 1990; Rubin et al. 1994; Taylor et al. 2000). Youth education programs are

also common among churches that attract college educated parishioners, particu-

larly persons with children (Barnes 2010; Gilkes 1998; Tucker-Worgs 2002). Lastly,

although education was generally emphasized among Black churches historically,

traditions such as African Methodists Episcopals and Presbyterians that tended to

attract more economically stable, educated persons were often at the forefront of

educational initiatives (Lincoln and Mamiya 1990). Yet other studies describe

impressive educational programs among Baptist and non-denominational Black

churches (Barnes 2010; Barrett 2010b). The above list is not exhaustive, but rather

suggests Black Church cultural capital, coupled with a child-centered tradition, that

has been used to cultivate, promote, and sustain youth programs.

Research Hypotheses and Summary Justifications

This study examines sponsorship of tutoring/literacy programs and the type of Black

Church cultural capital that shapes such decisions. I control for the following five

variables that represent church capital and predict a positive relationship between

them and such programs: church size as measured by regular attendance during

Rev Relig Res

123

Sunday worship services2; number of youth who attend church; percentage of

college educated members; and, the presence of college educated and paid pastors

(Lincoln and Mamiya 1990; Rubin et al. 1994; Taylor et al. 2000). I also test eight

hypotheses focused on Black Church cultural capital found in existing research.

Cultural and Social Capital: Denomination

H1 Sponsorship of educational programs will vary by denomination. Specifically,

Presbyterian churches will be more likely to sponsor tutorial/literacy programs than

non-Presbyterian churches.

Hypotheses 1 is supported by studies that describe somewhat more educational

program sponsorship among Black churches linked to denominations with more

formally educated members (Lincoln and Mamiya 1990). However, because

literature is inconsistent about how denomination affects educational initiatives for

these churches (Rubin et al. 1994), this hypothesis is largely exploratory. Non-

Presbyterian congregations include Baptist, Church of God in Christ (COGIC),

Christian Methodist Episcopal (CME), African Methodist Episcopal (AME),

African Methodist Episcopal Zion (AMEZ), and United Methodist (UM) churches.

Cultural Capital: Religious and Religious-Education Programs

H2 Regardless of denomination, churches that sponsor more religious and

religious education programs will be more likely to sponsor tutorial/literacy

programs than their counterparts that sponsor fewer religious and religious

education programs.

Hypothesis 2 is informed by studies that suggest that religious instruction can be

a precursor for non-religious programs to meet church and community needs

(Barnes 2005; Billingsley 1992; Cavendish 2001; Lincoln and Mamiya 1990).

Cultural Capital: Contemporary Music

H3 Churches that include gospel rap music more frequently during worship

services will be more likely to sponsor tutorial/literacy programs than churches that

include gospel rap music less frequently during worship services.

Hypothesis 3 is informed by studies on strategies used by Black churches such as

rap music to attract youth (Allwood 2006; Barnes 2009). Churches that include this

music are expected to be more responsive to the educational needs of youth.3

2 Average Sunday attendance is used rather than church roll as a measure of church size because inactive

members are often maintained on roll and can unduly inflate the membership roster. The former variable

captures involvement more consistently and represents a more conservative estimate of membership

(Schaller 1990).3 It may also be possible that educational programs attract youth who are then retained via use of gospel

rap music.

Rev Relig Res

123

Cultural Capital: Sermons and Views

H4 Churches that are more frequently exposed to racial issues during sermons will

be more likely to sponsor tutorial/literacy programs than churches that are less

frequently exposed to racial issues during sermons.

H5 Churches that approve of expressing views on day-to-day social and political

issues will be more likely to sponsor tutorial/literacy programs than churches that do

not approve of expressing views on day-to-day social and political issues.

The above two hypotheses are based on research that connects social activism

with efforts to respond to social problems, in this instance, youth educational

challenges (Barnes 2005, 2010; Barrett 2010b; Lincoln and Mamiya 1990; Tucker-

Worgs 2002).

Cultural Capital: Overall Environment, Sermons, Worship and Teaching

H6 Churches with overall environments characterized as spiritually alive or that

emphasize deepening one’s relationship with God will be less likely to sponsor

tutorial/literacy programs than churches whose overall environments are not

characterized as spiritually alive or that do not emphasize deepening one’s

relationship with God.

H7 Churches that are more frequently exposed to sermons about personal spiritual

growth will be less likely to sponsor tutorial/literacy programs than churches that

are less frequently exposed to sermons about personal spiritual growth.

H8 Churches that believe it is more important to focus on the Holy Spirit during

worship and teaching will be less likely to sponsor tutorial/literacy programs than

churches that believe a focus on the Holy Spirit during worship and teaching is less

important.

The final three hypotheses focus on the possible impact of spiritual dictates; I test

four indicators to consider overall church environment and the type of cultural

capital tied to sermons and teaching. The expected patterns are informed by research

that suggests an inverse relationship between more priestly church traits and the

ability to meet the needs of youth (Allwood 2006; Barnes 2009). Such studies

contend that churches that are more focused on personal piety often ignore social

issues (Lincoln and Mamiya 1990). However, several studies suggest that a priestly

focus can foster social action (Barnes 2004; Cavendish 2001). Thus it is possible

that church features associated with spiritual dictates may fuel the educational

programs studied here.

Data and Methodology

This study is based on a national secondary database of Black churches from the

Faith Factor 2000 Project, a joint venture between the Lilly Foundation and the

Interdenominational Theological Center (ITC) in Atlanta, Georgia. The project

Rev Relig Res

123

focused on Black churches in the United States and was led by the ITC with

assistance from Gallup, Inc. The sample4 included 1,863 churches from the

following five historically Black denominations; Baptist [502 churches], COGIC

[503], CME [295], AME [257], and AMEZ [110].5 Predominately Black churches

from the historically White UM [95] and Presbyterian [101] denominations were

also included for a total of seven denominations.6 Gallup conducted telephone

surveys with clergy and senior lay leaders from February 22, 2000, through May 11,

2000. Thirty-seven (37) questions were asked and each interview averaged about

16 min. Church leaders provided demographic information about their churches and

answered questions on topics such as worship and identity, spirituality, economic

health, church climate, community involvement, and organizational dynamics.7

4 Identifying the sampling frame and selecting the sample occurred in several steps. Lists of all the

churches in the AME, AMEZ, CME, COGIC, Presbyterian, and UM denominations were initially

provided by deans or denominational heads from the various seminaries at the ITC. The decentralized

nature of the Baptist tradition precluded such a list. To create the sampling frame for Baptists, ITC

solicited information from Tri-Media, an organization that retains lists of all churches nationwide that

purchase Sunday school supplies. Tri-Media data were used to identify the population of Baptist churches

affiliated with the three largest historically Black Baptist denominations (National Baptist Convention,

USA, National Baptist Convention of America, and the Progressive National Baptist Convention). Tri-

Media data were also used to augment the lists from the six other denominations; churches found on

either source were included on the composite list for that denomination and duplicate churches were only

included once. Unlike the six other denominations, the sampling frame for Baptist churches is an

approximation with several limitations (Baptist churches that purchase Sunday school items at venues not

listed with Tri-Media or those that do but that are not affiliated with any of the three conferences would

not be included in the sampling frame). Thus the Baptist list is a lower bound of the number of Black

Baptist churches nationwide, but it is a systematic attempt to identify these churches despite their lack of

a national hierarchy. After the seven lists were compiled, a random sample was selected by Gallup from

each denomination to meet the desired sub-sample sizes.5 Imputation is an option to respond to the missing cases here. Scholars provide some of the pros (i.e.,

simplifies presentation, reduces bias due to differential item nonresponse, eliminates database attrition,

and allows more effective weighting options) and cons (i.e., can distort relationships among items, can

generate inconsistent data, and can artificially reduce variance of survey estimates) of this approach

(Fahimi et al 2011). Given the decision is largely researcher-based, I chose not to impute.6 The research team included Black churches that have historically been affiliated with predominately

White denominations and that are typically included in research on the Black church (i.e., UM and

Presbyterians). Blacks have historically been involved with the UMs and Presbyterians, but many

churches and conferences were racially segregated as late as the mid-1900s. The Black Presbyterian

churches were selected from the Presbyterian Church (USA) which, since 1983, includes the following

two largest American Presbyterian denominations—United Presbyterian Church in the USA and

Presbyterian Church in the US. Survey screening questions to identify whether the pastor was Black/

African American and whether the congregation was predominately Black/African American were used

to identify predominately Black churches from the lists of UM and Presbyterian churches (both criteria

had to be met for inclusion). Focus on these seven denominations excludes Black churches affiliated with

other White denominations and Black, non-denominationally affiliated churches. The sampling process is

representative for non-Baptist denominations and provides a conservative, systematic attempt to

approximate Black Baptists in light of the associated challenges. The use of these seven Black

denominations is common in research on the subject and provides a comparative benchmark.7 Chaves et al. (1999) discuss the validity and reliability of relying on a single key informant to report

church features. They are likely to over-estimate the extent to which their views correspond to their

congregation’s views. Thus these data can be considered a best case scenario. However, the vast majority

of respondents are senior pastors. Research shows that Black pastors tend to have a greater degree of

influence over their churches than their White peers and thus greater possible influence over church

programs (Billingsley 1999; McRoberts 1999).

Rev Relig Res

123

Initial screening was used to gain pastoral cooperation and to confirm denomination.

If the pastor was unavailable, an assistant pastor or senior lay leader was

interviewed. Seventy-seven percent of the interviews were conducted with pastors.

The remaining interviews were conducted with assistant pastors or senior lay

leaders. These church leaders were used because they would be expected to be the

most knowledgeable about their respective congregations.8

The response and cooperation rates by denomination are as follows; Baptist (.22,

.49), COGIC (.19, .51), AME (.25, .52), CME (.40, .66), AMEZ (.24, .55), UM (.46,

.69), and Black Presbyterian (.37, .65). The overall sample rates were .24, and .54,

respectively. Low response rates were due to disconnected telephones or relocation

which counts against the response rate (referrals were used to locate many such

churches). Although this is a national sample, low response rates preclude

generalizing these results. Thus interpretations are limited to the sample of

churches. Yet findings may prove valuable for understanding the study topic.

Although the data are somewhat dated, they represent one of the more compre-

hensive databases on the Black Church experience and youth programs and may

thus provide insight here and for future studies. Lastly, exclusion of less time

sensitive variables such as income also supports use of these data.

Dependent and Independent Variables

The dependent variable, Tutoring/Literary Programs is based on the question; ‘‘In

the past 12 months, did your congregation provide or cooperate in providing for any

of these social services or community outreach programs? tutoring or literary

programs for children and teens’’. Values of ‘‘0’’ correspond to ‘‘no’’ and ‘‘1’’

corresponds to ‘‘yes’’. Program examples include traditional tutoring for children

and youth, as well as GED and vocational programs. Several comments about this

indicator are in order. The single dependent variable includes both tutorial and

literacy programs together. It would be best to consider the two programs

separately. Use of secondary data prevents this. Because both programs focus on

formal educational efforts, examining them together still provides a straightforward

approach to assess one possible way Black churches are attempting to help youth

academically. Secondly, the dependent variable does not capture program quality.

Thus a church that sponsors comprehensive tutoring and/or literary programs (i.e.,

GED, math and science, or foreign language programs) would be included with

churches that marginally or sporadically do so. Despite these two data constraints,

the variable provides direct insight into specific educational initiatives.

Readers should also note how denomination is tested. Studies are unclear about

denominational effects on educational involvement for Black churches and thus

preclude a definitive selection of the reference group to be used during modeling.

Presbyterians are selected as the reference group here because they have a long

8 Cooperation rate can be used as a reasonable proxy. The figures represent the CASRO Standard

calculation for the response rate and the cooperation rate reflects the percent of churches that participated

once contact was made. The data were weighted during model to reflect the current denominational

estimates to correct for the disproportionate sub-sample sizes (Billingsley 1992; Lincoln and Mamiya

1990). Sample margin of error was ±2.3.

Rev Relig Res

123

history of emphasizing education (Lincoln and Mamiya 1990); data patterns also

show that they have the highest percentage of churches in the sample that sponsor

tutorial/literacy programs. Although theoretically and empirically sound, several

other acceptable selections could be used (for example, COGICs as the group with

the lowest rate and a less recognized history of educational initiatives). Regardless

of the selected reference group, the modeling process will determine the relative

importance of the six remaining denominations as compared to the reference

denomination. In addition to the denominational variables and controls, I examine

the effects of the eight variables described in the previous hypotheses. A total of

nineteen (19) independent variables are included in the modeling process. Variable

definitions and survey questions are provided in the ‘‘Appendix’’.

Methodology

In the first phase of the analysis, bivariate descriptive statistics for the study

variables are reported based on whether or not the sample churches offer the two

educational programs (Table 1). Chi square or t tests are used to identify statistically

significant differences. In phase two, Tutoring/Literary Programs is tested using

nested binary logistic regression models because the dependent variable considers a

0–1 outcome (i.e., whether or not Black churches sponsor tutorial/literacy

programs). In each step, the dependent variable is regressed on: the five control

and six denomination variables (Model 1); two variables that identify religious and

religious-education programs and rap music usage (Model 2); two variables that

assess exposure to racial social, and political issues (Model 3); and, all nineteen

indicators simultaneously, including the four variables that gauge features

associated with spirituality (Model 4). Modeling results are provided in Table 2.

Bivariate correlations and other diagnostics are available upon request.9

Findings

What Kinds of Black Churches are More Likely to Sponsor Tutorial/Literacy

Programs?

Do Black churches that sponsor tutorial/literacy programs tend to possess church

cultural and social capital that their counterparts do not? Findings suggest

denominational differences and the greatest relative rate of sponsorship by

Presbyterians (79.80 %) following by UMs (70.53 %). In contrast, COGIC

9 The causal order for most of the variables is evident. For example, denomination, pastor’s education,

and stances on social/political issues are most likely in place before tutorial/literacy programs are

sponsored. Yet it is possible that offering educational programs result in increased church size or

children’s attendance. Gospel rap music use could take place before or after educational programs are

begun. I cannot confirm causal ordering relative to use of rap music, yet literature suggests that church

size, stance, pastor’s profile, and sponsoring religious programs tend to shape other program offerings

(Billingsley 1999; Cavendish 2001; Lincoln and Mamiya 1990). While conceding other potential causal

alternatives, existing research generally supports the causal ordering used in this analysis.

Rev Relig Res

123

Table 1 Black church capital and tutoring/literacy program sponsorship

Variable and categories Do churches sponsor tutorial/literacy programs?

% Yes % No

Denomination

AME 67.45 32.55

AMEZ 66.06 33.94

Baptist 68.20 31.80

COGIC 59.24 40.76

CME 60.75 39.25

Presbyterian 79.80 20.20

UM 70.53 29.47

Sunday attendance (mean, SD) 1,190 (268) 636 (124)

Attending children (mean, SD) 1,147 (93) 615 (38)

Percent college educated members 35.46 % 23.58 %

Pastor’s education

None 41.08 58.92

Post Dr. Ministry/PhD 76.91 23.09

Paid pastor

Paid 67.91 32.09

Volunteer 53.45 46.55

Religious programs

0 18.18 81.82

2 50.20 49.80

4 75.40 24.60

Use gospel rap music

% Never 57.69 42.31

% Always 73.08 26.92

Sermons: racial issues

% Never 32.69 67.31

% Always 71.80 21.18

Express social/political views

% St. disapprove 43.75 56.25

% St. approve 68.73 31.27

Church environment: spiritually alive

% Not at all 69.23 30.77

% Very well 67.22 32.78

Church environment: Deepen Rel. W/God

% Not at all 66.67 33.38

% Very well 66.16 33.84

Sermons: personal spiritual growth

% Never 0.00 0.00

% Always 67.82 32.18

Worship focus: holy spirit

Rev Relig Res

123

(59.24 %) churches have the lowest rate of sponsorship (Table 1). As expected,

sample churches that have more Sunday worshipers (1,190 as compared to 636

persons) on average as well as those with more children in attendance (1,147 as

compared to 615 young persons) on average also tend to sponsor tutorial/literacy

programs. A similar pattern is apparent when percentage of college educated

members is assessed. As expected, a direct relationship is evident between pastor’s

profile (i.e., education and whether or not she or he is paid) and whether churches

sponsor such youth educational programs. And 75.40 % of churches that sponsor

four religious or religious-education programs also sponsor tutorial/literacy

programs. Furthermore, 73.08 % of the sample churches that always include gospel

rap music in worship also offer tutorial/literacy programs. When I consider

membership exposure to racial and social, and/or political issues, findings show that

affirmative responses (71.89 and 68.73 %, respectively) are positively related to the

dependent variable. Lastly, a review of the four spiritual indicators shows that over

65.00 % of the sample churches strongly affirm them; however, contradictory

patterns are apparent for the two variables associated with overall church

environment. Will these same patterns bear out when the variables are examined

simultaneously?

Modeling Black Church Sponsorship of Tutoring/Literacy Programs

Logistic regression modeling results are provided in Table 2. Model 1 focuses on

church and clergy features. When denomination is considered, both AME and

Baptist churches are less likely to sponsor tutorial/literacy programs than

Presbyterians, respectively. Yet Presbyterian churches are no more or less likely

to sponsor such programs than AMEZ, CME, UM, or COGIC churches,

respectively. Both the number of Sunday attendees and number of children increase

the likelihood of tutorial/literacy program sponsorship. Black churches with more

formally educated pastors are more apt to offer such programs than their

counterparts with less formally educated pastors. A similar pattern is evident for

Table 1 continued

Variable and categories Do churches sponsor tutorial/literacy programs?

% Yes % No

% Little/no importance 0.00 0.00

% Extremely important 65.92 34.08

Key: Sunday att. (0–6,000?): attending children (0–6,700?): percent college grad. (0–100 %): pastor’s

ed. (1 = none, 6 = Post Dr. Ministry/PhD.): paid pastor (0 = volunteer, 1 = paid): religious and reli-

gious-education programs beyond sunday school (0–4): use gospel rap music during worship (1 = never,

5 = always): racial issues during sermons or spiritual growth (1 = never, 5 = always): express social/

political issues (1 = strongly disapprove, 4 = strongly approve): spiritual environment (1 = not at all,

5 = very well): worship focus (1 = little/no imp., 4 = extremely imp.): significance tests are v2 or

t tests: each difference across the two categories is significant for each variable at p \ .05 or greater.

Source: ITC Faith Factor 2000 Project: N = 1,863

Rev Relig Res

123

Ta

ble

2L

og

isti

cre

gre

ssio

nn

este

dm

od

els

for

tuto

rin

g/l

iter

acy

pro

gra

msp

onso

rsh

ip(N

=1

,863

)

Mo

del

1C

hu

rch

feat

ure

s

Mo

del

2P

rog

ram

s

and

mu

sic

Mo

del

3S

tan

ceM

odel

4S

pir

itu

alit

y

all

var

iab

les

Chu

rch

cult

ura

lan

dso

cial

cap

ital

AM

E(1

=y

es)

.51

(.2

7–

.96

)*.4

3(.

22

–.8

5)*

.45

(.2

2–

.89

)*.4

5(.

22

–.9

1)*

AM

EZ

(1=

yes

).5

8(.

29

–1

.16

).4

3(.

21

–.8

9)*

.45

(.2

1–

.95

)*.4

6(.

22

–.9

8)*

Bap

tist

(1=

yes

).4

6(.

24

–.8

9)*

.37

(.1

9–

.73

)**

.41

(.2

0–

.81

)**

.43

(.2

2–

.86

)*

CM

E(1

=y

es)

.62

(.3

3–

1.1

7)

.52

(.2

6–

1.0

1)*

.53

(.2

7–

1.0

5)

.52

(.2

6–

1.0

2)

CO

GIC

(1=

yes

).7

3(.

38

–1

.41

).5

7(.

29

–1

.14

).6

6(.

33

–1

.34

).7

2(.

35

–1

.47

)

UM

(1=

yes

).5

2(.

25

–1

.08

).4

7(.

21

–1

.02

).4

8(.

22

–1

.05

).4

6(.

20

–1

.02

)

Su

nd

ayat

ten

dan

ce(0

–6

,00

0?

)1

.00

(.9

9–

1.1

0)*

1.0

0(.

99

–1

.02

)*1

.00

(.9

9–

1.0

1)*

1.0

0(.

99

–1

.01

)*

Att

end

ing

chil

dre

n(0

–6

,70

0?

)1

.01

(.9

9–

1.1

1)*

1.0

0(.

99

–1

.01

)1

.00

(.9

9–

1.0

1)

1.0

0(.

99

–1

.01

)

Co

lleg

eg

rad

uat

es(0

–1

00

%)

1.0

1(1

.01

–1

.02)*

**

1.0

1(1

.01

–1

.02)*

**

1.0

1(1

.00

–1

.02)*

**

1.0

1(1

.01

–1

.02)*

**

Pas

tors

W/P

ost

Dr.

(1=

no

ne,

6=

Po

stD

r.)

1.2

1(1

.10

–1

.33)*

**

1.2

0(1

.09

–1

.32)*

**

1.1

9(1

.01

–1

.32)*

**

1.1

9(1

.08

–1

.31)*

**

Pai

dp

asto

rs(1

=Y

es)

1.0

4(.

73

–1

.47

).9

3(.

65

–1

.34

).9

3(.

65

–1

.33

).9

5(.

66

–1

.36

)

Rel

igio

us

pro

gra

ms

(0–

4)

1.6

0(1

.34

–1

.91)*

**

1.5

5(1

.29

–1

.86)*

**

1.5

7(1

.31

–1

.89)*

**

Go

spel

rap

musi

c(1

=n

ever

,5

=al

way

s)1.2

4(1

.06–1.4

5)*

*1.2

0(1

.02–1.4

1)*

1.2

4(1

.05–1.4

6)*

*

Ser

mo

n:

raci

alis

sues

(1=

nev

er,

5=

alw

ays)

1.2

1(1

.04–1.4

1)*

1.2

0(1

.02–1.4

0)*

So

cial

and

po

liti

cal

issu

es(1

=st

r.d

isap

pro

ve,

5=

str.

app

rov

e)1

.24

(1.0

0–

1.5

4)*

1.2

5(1

.01

–1

.56)*

Ch

urc

hen

vir

on

men

t:sp

irit

ual

lyal

ive

(1=

no

tat

all,

5=

ver

yw

ell)

.99

(.8

0–

1.2

2)

Ch

urc

hen

vir

on

men

t:D

eep

enR

el.

W/G

od

(1=

no

tat

all,

5=

ver

y

wel

l)

.77

(.6

2–

.96

)*

Ser

mo

n:

per

son

alsp

irit

ual

Gro

wth

(1=

nev

er,

5=

alw

ays)

1.2

7(1

.00

–1

.62)*

Wo

rsh

ipfo

cus:

on

ho

lysp

irit

(1=

litt

le/n

oim

p.,

4=

extr

emel

yim

p.)

.94

(.7

1–

1.2

4)

Rev Relig Res

123

Ta

ble

2co

nti

nu

ed

Mo

del

1C

hu

rch

feat

ure

s

Mo

del

2P

rog

ram

s

and

mu

sic

Mo

del

3S

tan

ceM

odel

4S

pir

itu

alit

y

all

var

iab

les

X2

97

.37

14

3.1

81

63

.74

16

8.8

1

Pse

ud

oR

2.1

2.1

4.1

5.1

6

N1

,59

21

,57

91

,56

31

,553

Od

ds

rati

os

firs

t:9

5%

con

fid

ence

inte

rval

sin

par

enth

eses

:*

**

p\

.00

1,

**

p\

.01

,*

p\

.05

.S

ou

rce:

ITC

Fai

thF

acto

r2

00

0P

roje

ct

Rev Relig Res

123

churches with more college educated members. Model 2 considers the above

variables, religious programs, and use of gospel rap music. Including these two

additional variables substantially improves the model’s explanatory ability. Sample

Black churches that provide religious events beyond Sunday school such as bible

studies, theological or doctrinal study, prayer or mediation groups, or spiritual

retreats are more likely to also provide tutorial/literacy programs than their peers

that do not offer these types of religious programs. Those churches that include

gospel rap music during worship service more frequently are also more apt to

sponsor these youth programs. Presbyterian churches continue to be more likely to

sponsor tutorial/literacy programs. However, once I consider variables that identify

religious programs and rap music use, the indicator that gauges the number of

children is no longer predictive. Yet pastoral and member education continue to be

important predictors.

In Model 3, I consider two indicators that measure church cultural capital. Both

variables are significant and suggest that churches that are more frequently exposed

to sermonic references to racial situations are also more apt to offer tutorial/literacy

programs for youth than churches that are less frequently exposed to such sermons.

Churches that approve of expressing views on day-to-day social and political issues

are also more likely to provide such educational initiatives. The same church and

clergy features continue to be important. The two variables associated with

religiosity also continue to be positively influential. Denominational differences are

still evident and AME, AMEZ, and Baptist churches, respectively, are less likely to

provide such educational programs than Presbyterians. The final model includes all

the study variables (Model 4) as well as the possible effects of indicators associated

with more spiritual dynamics. Similar patterns exist in terms of denomination, adult

attendance, pastoral profile, religious programs, use of gospel rap music, and

exposure to racial and political issues. The addition of these four variables increases

the model’s predictive ability and provides insight into spiritual influences. First,

churches with overall environments that can be described as spiritually alive and

those that focus on the Holy Spirit during worship and teaching are no more likely

to provide tutoring/literacy programs than their peers that do not exhibit these

spiritual traits (or do so less frequently). Yet churches that emphasize deepening

one’s relationship with God are actually less apt to offer these educational

programs. Yet Black churches that are exposed to sermons about personal spiritual

growth more frequently are more likely to offer tutorial/literacy programs than

churches that are less frequently exposed to such sermons.

Discussion

Do the Black churches in this study offer tutorial/literacy programs? What types of

Black Church cultural and social capital seem to foster such efforts? First, these

findings show that over 62 % of the Black churches in this national sample sponsor

tutorial/literacy programs. This figure bodes well for continued involvement by

Black churches. Bivariate results (Table 1) also suggest differences in cultural

capital for Black churches that offer tutorial/literacy programs as compared to those

Rev Relig Res

123

that do not. The type of capital (for example, social capital via educational

attainment) and the amount (for example, more members and more religious

programs) reflect churches with the requisite resources to sponsor youth programs

(Billingsley 1992). Moreover, cultural capital via exposure to spiritual, racial,

political, and social issues suggests child-centeredness that provides: godly

validation of adherents to believe such programs can be accomplished; motivation

to act on behalf of youth; the desire to provide relevant youth initiatives; and,

religious support during the process (Barnes 2004, 2005; Tucker-Worgs 2002).

Logistic regression modeling provides additional insight. Hypothesis 1 is

generally confirmed; at least two of the six denominational variables are significant

in each model and show that Presbyterian churches are more likely than non-

Presbyterians to sponsor such programs. This finding may illustrate the added

benefit of nationally organized denominations that also have more formally

educated members (Lincoln and Mamiya 1990; Rubin et al. 1994; Taylor et al.

2000). However, because denominational effects vary here, additional research is

needed to examine whether the distinctions found here are apparent for other

samples (Barnes 2010). Hypothesis 2 is also supported and suggests that religious

and religious-education program sponsorship may provide a springboard for

educational program sponsorship. Results also substantiate Hypothesis 3 because

the churches here that include gospel rap music more frequently during worship

services are also more likely to sponsor such efforts. Although use of this music

form has been debated, it may prove important to attract youth who could benefit

from tutoring/literacy programs (Allwood 2006; Barnes 2009).

The next two hypotheses are corroborated by my findings and illustrate the role

of exposure to racial, social, political issues beyond their typical import (Barrett

2010b). A less expected finding is the consistent importance of religious and

religious-education programs; this supports studies that suggest that ‘‘other-

worldly’’ church features can promote social action (Cavendish 2001; Lincoln

and Mamiya 1990) and that Black Church culture can be beneficial in varied ways

(Barnes 2005). Furthermore, churches that have the human and economic resources

to provide spiritual retreats, theological study groups, or prayer groups may be

better positioned to sponsor endeavors such as tutorial/literacy programs (Barnes

2010; Rubin et al. 1994; Tucker-Worgs 2002). Although tangible priestly efforts

(i.e., religious programs) increased the likelihood of educational program sponsor-

ship, intangible ‘‘this-worldly’’ attitudes and words (for example, via sermons) that

expose members to racial, social, and political issues also had beneficence. The final

three hypotheses provide mixed, nuanced results about the effects of church capital

and suggest that the process by which spiritual related information is provided is

most influential in identifying those sample Black churches most apt to provide

tutorial/literacy programs. Moreover, they suggest that strategically provided

spiritual exposure can foster educational programs. For some readers, these latter

findings may seem counter-intuitive. However, the negative impact of a generally

spiritual church environment parallels studies that suggest that churches that seem to

over-emphasize spiritual/religious dictates may do so at the expense of youth

concerns (Allwood 2006). Yet presenting spiritual matters via sermons may actually

have a positive effect on such program sponsorship (Barnes 2005; Cavendish 2001).

Rev Relig Res

123

Conclusion

The adage ‘‘each one, teach one’’ may represent a more critical challenge for Black

churches based on the educational needs facing growing numbers of Black students

today (Collins 2009; Journal of Blacks in Higher Education 2010). These results

illustrate some of the types of church cultural capital that may undergird child-

centered spaces among Black churches. However, because culture influences the

process by which strategies of action are developed and necessarily dictate their

ends, church capital does not automatically foster the educational programs studied

here (Swidler 1986, 1995). Overall, these findings illumine some of the church

assets, broader church processes, and church foci that can engender tutorial/literacy

programs; they also parallel other studies that link Black Church cultural capital to

youth educational outcomes (Barnes 2010; 2010a, b; Rubin et al. 1994; Taylor et al.

2000; Wimberly et al. 2013). As noted earlier, low response rates mean these

findings are not generalizable. Yet the results are suggestive concerning factors to

consider that may foster two educational programs historically offered by Black

churches. They also suggest other important queries such as—How can and should

Black churches adapt their current educational initiatives in light of tightening fiscal

funds? What other strategies of action can smaller Black churches use to respond to

the educational needs of students? Future studies should consider these issues.

Given that these data are dated, it is important to also study whether

contemporary Black churches are offering tutorial/literacy program as well as

initiatives such as Adopt-a-School programs and Afro-centric academies as well as

non-traditional educational programs that focus on: construction and landscaping;

cosmetology and barbering; culinary arts; conflict management; and, combating

bullying. Finally, Black churches that do not offer tutorial/literacy programs should

consider building alliances with other churches that offer: Day Schools; college

preparatory classes for the PSAT, SAT, and ACT; and, courses for tests such as the

LSAT, GMAT, and GRA (Barnes 2010; Billingsley 1992; Rubin et al. 1994;

Tucker-Worgs 2002). This study has uncovered links between tutorial/literacy

programs for students and: (1) what Black churches do in terms of religious and

religious-education programs; (2) what they believe in terms of socio-political and

racial stance; and, (3) what they have in terms of human and organizational

resources. These results inform us about some of the positive effects of tangible and

intangible church capital found among Black congregations that can affect positive

change in the educational outcomes of Black youth.

Appendix: Survey Questions and Variable Definitions

Control Variables (5 Variables)

1. Sunday Attendance (continuous, 0–6,000?): Q: What is the total attendance for

all services on a typical Sunday?

2. Attending Children (continuous, 0–6,700?): Q: Of those associated with your

congregation, what is the number of children under 18 years of age?

Rev Relig Res

123

3. College Graduates (continuous, 0–100): Q: Of your total number of regularly

participating adults, what total percent would you estimate are college graduates?

4. Pastor’s Education (1 = none, 6 = post Dr. Ministry/PhD.): Q: What is the

highest level of (your/your pastor’s) ministerial education? None, apprenticeship

with senior pastor, certificate or correspondence program, Bible college or some

seminary, seminary degree, post-minister of Divinity Work or degree.

5. Paid Pastor (0 = volunteer, 1 = paid): Q: Are you/is your pastor paid or a

volunteer?

Denomination (6 Variables)

6.–11. Denomination (coded into seven 0–1 dummy variables, Presbyterian is the

reference category):

Q: What is your church denomination? Baptist, Church of God in Christ

(COGIC), United Methodist (UM), Christian Methodist Episcopal (CME),

African Methodist Episcopal (AME), African Methodist Episcopal Zion

(AMEZ), Presbyterian.

Religious and Religious-Education Programs (1 Variable)

Q: During the past 12 months, did your congregation participate in any of the

following programs or activities in addition to your regular Sunday School?

12. Bible study other than Sunday school, theological or doctrinal study, prayer

or mediation groups, or spiritual retreats (sums total number of programs, values

0–4).

Contemporary Efforts (1 Variable)

Q: During your congregation’s regular worship services, how often is rap music

included as part of the service? Use a scale from 1 to 5 where ‘‘5’’ means always

and ‘‘1’’ means never.

13. Gospel rap music.

Church Racial, Political, Social Capital (2 Variables)

Q: How well does each of the following statements describe the sermon focus?

Use a scale from 1 to 5 where ‘‘5’’ means always and ‘‘1’’ means never.

14. References to the racial situation in society.

Q: For each one, please say whether you strongly disapprove, somewhat

disapprove, somewhat approve, or strongly approve (coded such that ‘‘1’’ means

strongly disapprove and ‘‘4’’ means strongly approve).

15. Churches expressing their views on day-to-day social and political issues.

Rev Relig Res

123

Church Spiritual Capital (4 Variables)

Q: How well does the following statement describe your church? Use a scale

from 1 to 5 where ‘‘5’’ means very well and ‘‘1’’ means not at all well.

16. Your congregation is spiritually vital and ‘‘alive’’.

17. Your congregation helps members deepen their relationship with God.

Q: How well does of the following statement describe the sermon focus? Use a

scale from 1 to 5 where ‘‘5’’ means always and ‘‘1’’ means never.

18. Personal spiritual growth.

Q: How important are the following in the worship and teaching of your church?

Use a scale from 1 to 4 where ‘‘4’’ means extremely important and ‘‘1’’ means

little or no importance.

19. The presence of the Holy Spirit.

References

Al-Fadhli, Hussain, and Thomas Kersen. 2010. How religious, social, and cultural capital factors

influence educational aspirations of African American adolescents. The Journal of Negro Education

79(3): 380–389.

Allwood, Mark. 2006. Hip-hop churches reach out to young people. Columbia News Service. Retrieved

Feb 28, 2006 from http://jscms.jrn.columbia.edu/cns/2006-02-28/allwood-hiphopchurches.

Archbald, Douglas. 2004. School choice, magnet schools, and the liberation model: An empirical study.

Sociology of Education 77(4): 283–310.

Barnes, Sandra. 2010. Black megachurch culture: Models for education and empowerment. New York:

Peter Lang Press.

Barnes, Sandra. 2009. Religion and rap music: An analysis of Black church usage. Review of Religious

Research 49(3): 319–338.

Barnes, Sandra. 2005. Black church culture and community action. Social Forces 84(2): 967–994.

Barnes, Sandra. 2004. Priestly and prophetic influences on Black church social services. Social Problems

51(2): 202–221.

Barrett, Brian. 2010a. Religion and habitus: Exploring the relationship between religious involvement and

educational outcomes and orientations among urban African American students. Urban Education

45: 448–479.

Barrett, Brian. 2010b. Faith in the inner city: The urban Black church and students’ educational outcomes.

The Journal of Negro Education 79(3): 249–262.

Billingsley, Andrew. 1992. Climbing Jacob’s ladder: The enduring legacy of African-American families.

New York: A Touchstone Book.

Billingsley, Andrew. 1999. Mighty Like a River: The Black Church and Social Reform. New York:

Oxford University Press.

Callan, Patrick. 2002. Coping with recession: Public policy, economic downturns, and higher education.

National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. Retrieved March 2, 2013 from http://

www.highereducation.org.

Cavendish, James. 2001. To March or not to March: Clergy mobilization strategies and grassroots

antidrug activism. In Christian clergy in American politics, ed. Sue S. Crawford, and Laura R.

Olson, 203–223. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Chaves, Mark, Mary Ellen Konieczny, Kraig Beyerlien, and Emily Barman. 1999. The National

Congregations Study: Background, Methods, and Selected Results. Journal for the Scientific Study

of Religion 38(4): 458–476.

Collins, Pat Hill. 2009. Another kind of public education: Race, schools, the media and democratic

possibilities. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Cone, James H. 1995. Black theology as liberation theology. In African American religious studies: An

interdisciplinary anthology, ed. Gayraud Wilmore, 177–207. Durham: Duke University Press.

Costen, Melva Wilson. 1993. African-American Christian worship. Nashville: Abingdon Press.

Rev Relig Res

123

Davis, Donna. 2004. Merry-go-round: A return to segregation and the implications for creating

democratic schools. Urban Education 39(4): 394–407.

Drake, St. Clair and Horace R. Cayton. 1940. Churches and voluntary associations in the Chicago negro

community. Chicago: Works Projects Administration District 3.

DuBois, W.E.B. 1903[2003]. The negro church. Walnut Creek, CA: Altimira Press.

Fahimi, Mansour and Darryl Creel. 2011. Dealing with missing survey data: A short course in practical

applications of imputation. American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR). Retrieved

Dec. 15, 2013 at http://www.m-s-g.com/CMS/ServerGallery/MSGWebNew/Documents/GENESYS/

whitepapers/Imputation_AAPOR_2011.pdf.

Franklin, V.P., Lynn Gordon, Maxine Schwartz, and Paula Fass. 1991. Understanding American

education in the twentieth century. History of Education Quarterly 31(1): 47–65.

Gilkes, Cheryl Townsend. 1998. Plenty good room: Adaptation in a changing Black church. Annals of the

American Academy of Political and Social Science 558: 101–121.

Hale, Janice. 2001. Learning while black: Creating educational excellence for African American

children. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Hallinan, Maureen. 2001. Sociological perspectives on black–white inequalities in American schooling.

Sociology of Education 74: 50–70.

Harris, James H. 1987. Black ministers and laity in the urban church: An analysis of political and social

expectations. New York: University Press of America.

Johnson, Charles. 2006. Growing up in the black belt: Negro youth in the rural south. New York:

American Council of Learned Societies.

Lincoln, C.Eric, and Lawvrence H. Mamiya. 1990. The Black church in the African-American experience.

Durham: Duke University Press.

Mays, Benjamin, and Joseph Nicholson. 1933. The Negro’s church. New York: Institute of Social and

Religious Research.

McCray, Carlos, Cosette M. Grant, and Floyd D. Beachum. 2010. Pedagogy of self-development: The

role the Black church can have on African American students. The Journal of Negro Education

79(3): 233–248.

McRoberts, Omar M. 1999. Understanding the ‘new’ black pentecostal activism: Lessons from

ecumenical urban ministries in Boston. Sociology of Religion 60(1): 47–70.

Orfield, Gary, Daniel Losen, Johanna Wald, and Christopher Swanson. 2013. How Minority youth are

being left behind by the graduation rate crisis. Urban Institute. Retrieved March 2, 2013 from http://

www.urban.org/publications/410936.html.

Pattillo-McCoy, Mary. 1998. Church culture as a strategy of action in the black community. American

Sociological Review 63: 767–784.

Rubin, Roger H., Andrew Billingsley, and Cleopatra Howard Caldwell. 1994. The role of the Black

church in working with black adolescents. Adolescence 29(114): 251–266.

Schaller, Lyle. 1990. Megachurch! Christianity Today 34(4): 20–24.

Siddle-Walker, E.V. 1996. Can institutions care? Evidence from the segregated schooling of African

American children. In Beyond desegregation: The politics of quality in African American schooling,

ed. M.J. Shujaa, 211–226. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Swidler, Ann. 1995. Cultural power and social movements. In Social movements and culture, vol. 4,

social movements, protest, and contention, ed. H. Johnston, and B. Klandermans, 25–40.

Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Swidler, Ann. 1986. Culture in action: Symbols and strategies. American Sociological Review 51: 273–286.

Taylor, Robert, Christopher Ellison, Linda Chatters, Jeffrey Levin, and Karen Lincoln. 2000. Mental health

services in faith communities: The role of clergy in Black churches. Social Work 45(1): 73–87.

The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education. 2010. College graduation rates: Where black students do the

best and where they fare poorly compared to their white peers. Retrieved March 1, 2013 from http://

www.jbhe.com/features/65_gradrates.html.

Tucker-Worgs, Tamelyn. 2002. Geton board, little children, there’s room for many more:The blackmegachurch

phenomenon. The Journal of the Interdenominational Theological Center XXIX 1–2: 177–203.

Wilmore, Gayraud S. ed. 1995. African-American Religious Studies: An Interdisciplinary Anthology.

Durham: Duke University Press.

Wimberly, Anne Streaty, Sandra Barnes, and Karma Johnson. 2013. Youth ministry in the Black church:

Centered in hope. Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press.

Woodson, Carter G. (1933[2005]). The mid-education of the negro. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications,

Inc.

Rev Relig Res

123