Answering the Call: How Clarifying Whom You Serve Can Transform a Christian School

In 1 Corinthians 9:22, the Apostle Paul writes, “To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.” Paul emphasizes his call to adapt and reach different audiences for the sake of the Gospel. Some Christian educators interpret this charge as a directive to serve all students equally well, but there’s a deeper, often overlooked truth: the most impactful Christian schools do not attempt to be everything to everyone. Instead, they discern whom they are uniquely called to serve and focus deeply on meeting the needs of that specific group.

This approach allows these schools to cultivate excellence and a depth of service that would be nearly impossible if they sought to meet every need for every possible prospective student. Rather than stretching their resources thin or diluting their mission, they concentrate on the students who are best aligned with their unique mission and educational strengths. In doing so, these schools become more effective in their mission, creating powerful and compelling learning experiences that are rooted in their distinctive identity.

A helpful analogy comes from the medical field. Doctors specialize because no single doctor can meet every health need for every patient. A podiatrist, for example, would not attempt to perform heart surgery. Instead, they focus on their specific expertise, foot health, while other doctors address heart conditions.. Just as each specialist serves a particular purpose within the larger healthcare system, Christian schools can focus on specific missions and strengths, contributing to the broader mission of Christian education.

Image(s) generated using DALL·E, an AI image-generation tool by OpenAI.

The Christian education system, taken as a whole, mirrors Paul’s concept of “becoming all things to all people.” Rather than each school attempting to serve every possible student equally, the collective body of Christian schools can, by God’s grace, fulfill this purpose. Each school, with its own distinct gifts, strengths, and mission, contributes to a larger educational ecosystem that provides diverse options for families and students. In this way, the Christian education system can indeed serve a wide range of students, but it does so through the unique contributions of each school, rather than through any single institution’s attempt to cover every base.

Of course, this may not be the case in your local community. There may well be unmet needs of students and families, and your school may well be positioned and called to adapt so that you can meet the needs of a broader array of students. If that is the case, wonderful—but do it with intentionality and honesty about your strengths and limitations.

While most Christian schools benefit from a focused mission, there can be exceptions. Some schools, particularly those with extensive resources, may be able to serve multiple groups of students effectively, provided they approach each group with Christ-centered excellence. In these cases, it is still important to clarify the different groups of students, understand their unique needs, and determine how best to serve them within the school’s mission. Without this clarity, schools risk compromising the quality of their offerings. A school with the resources to serve various groups well must still maintain a clear commitment to Christ-centered teaching and discipleship for each student, avoiding a “one-size-fits-all” approach.

Does clarifying your mission mean turning away certain students or families? Not necessarily…but it does mean being transparent about who you are, what you do best, and where your strengths reside. By clearly articulating your school’s mission, values, and areas of expertise, you help families understand whether your school is a good fit for their child. Rather than outright saying “no,” consider framing it as an invitation to engage families in an honest dialogue about the core beliefs, along with the unique strengths and limitations of your community.

When you communicate openly about the specific ways you serve students, families are better equipped to make informed decisions. This approach can also be an opportunity to explore areas where your school might grow or consider partnerships to address gaps. If a family’s expectations align with what you offer, then it’s a natural fit. If not, your honesty helps them find an environment that will best support their child’s growth in faith and academics. In this way, saying “no” isn’t necessarily closing doors—it’s about making sure you say “yes” to the students and families you can serve with a high level of Christ-centered excellence.

It is an invitation to revisit and clarify your mission, identify the students who can benefit most from what you offer, and focus on meeting their needs with excellence. If your school has felt stretched trying to reach every possible student, consider narrowing your focus to those whom God may be specifically calling you to serve. Ask yourself: Who are we uniquely positioned to serve? What do we do best? How can we faithfully live out our mission for the benefit of our students and community? By embracing a focused mission, your school can create a more impactful, cohesive, and Christ-centered learning environment.

In focusing on the students your school is uniquely positioned to serve, you help build a stronger, more intentional community where students can grow academically, spiritually, and personally. Embracing clarity in your mission ultimately strengthens your role within the larger Christian education system, helping the collective body of schools serve as many students as possible.

Of course, if you want to explore this further, I have an entire chapter dedicated to this topic in my forthcoming book on faithful and flourishing Christian schools. God willing, that will release in the summer of 2025. Until then, and even after, consider subscribing to this Faithful and Flourishing Christian Schools publication on Substack for ongoing and related articles.

Disclaimer: Do you use AI to write the articles on Substack? The ethical use of AI is an important topic. When new technologies emerge, they often evolve faster than our ability to make sense of the ethical implications. As such, I offer this disclaimer to provide a transparent picture of my own journey and approach. I’ve already made mistakes, even embarrassing ones, but I will strive to quickly learn from them and provide a transparent view of my present approach. As such, this disclaimer will be updated over time.

The full initial draft (in writing or as an audio dictation), words, and ideas for my Substack articles always come from me. From there, I often use AI for editing Substack articles. I regularly use Grammarly and/or Microsoft Word’s built-in Spellcheck or Grammar Check (both of which are a form of AI) to aid in proofreading and editing my work on Substack. In instances where I use AI for something other than background research or editing my original work, you can expect that I will cite or note it in the article.

I also regularly use DALL-E to generate the images for many articles. In addition, I sometimes use royalty free images. If credit is required by law, requested by the creator, or simply the courteous thing to do, you can expect to see the credits right below the image.

I continue to evolve in my experimentation with the use of ChatGPT, Grok, CoPilot (and various other ChatBot technologies) to serve as an editor for my Substack publications.

What does this mean? There are three common scenarios, though I hope to experiment with others in the future (and I will update this accordingly):

1. I write a full first draft in Word, Grammarly, or a word processor, and then submit it to the ChatBot, asking it to serve as an editor, akin to how I have one or more people edit almost anything that is published in my formal capacity. This is also similar to how editors review my manuscripts when they are submitted to a journal, newspaper, or book publisher. By the way, when I write for any of these partners, I never use AI beyond the basic spellcheck / grammar check available in Microsoft Word—not even to use and then cite it.

2. I record myself speaking on a topic and then place the recording in a ChatBot to transcribe, remove disfluencies, and provide a draft transcript that I can refine before publishing it. This is where I’ve made the most past mistakes. Because the ChatBot is transcribing, it adds its own grammatical interpretations and even takes liberty with sub-titles, organization, corrections, and adding clarifying language. As such, I’m still learning to use prompts that ensure my words, voice, style, and intent dominate—while also achieving a quality, personal, but streamlined approach to sharing ideas. Because this is an evolving practice for me, and also because it sometimes creates a final draft that can be flagged as AI-generated content, expect that when I use this approach, it will be noted at the beginning or end of the article.

3. I use ChatBots to conduct background research related to topics that I’m writing about, akin to an interactive and advanced search engine. If there are quotes or unique ideas that I include in the article, you can expect that I will give some sort of citation or in-text credit.