The role of the Internet in the sermon preparation task

Author: Martin Patrick Title: The role of the internet in the sermon preparation task Semester: Spring Year: 2014 Advisor: Dr. Donald Wicks

ABSTRACT

Human information behavior is an oft-studied area of research within the domain of library and information science. While methods exist to study the information behavior of professional knowledge workers, clergy have been infrequently studied. Most studies have happened within the past 15 years, yet most of these studies have not focused on how the internet is shaping the professional tasks of clergy, specifically the task of sermon preparation. Like humanists, clergy may rely on the invisible college, primary sources, personal collections, and solitary research. As will be seen in the literature, clergy have also been shown to rely on the Bible, the Holy Spirit, and prayer. This study explores the Internet as an information channel that is used by professionals (clergy) in a work-related task (sermon preparation). Clergy lack dedicated specialized libraries that cater to their information needs. Once graduated from seminary, they may have access to electronic resources or distance (by mail) lending privileges. This is far cry from the situation for medical practitioners or lawyers, for instance, for whom special libraries are highly developed and accessible. Thus in some ways, the rise of the Internet could be a boon to clergy seeking information beyond their main sources of information according to previous literature: their personal collection of material and their network of colleagues. Do clergy take advantage of the Internet in preparing their weekly sermon material, and if so, how do they do so? Does the Internet compliment their personal collection and the role of colleagues?

THE ROLE OF THE INTERNET IN THE SERMON PREPARATION TASK

A Masters Research Paper submitted to the

Kent State University School of Library And Information Science

In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree Master of Library and Information Science

By

Martin Patrick

May 2014

Masters Research Paper by

Martin Patrick

M.A., Luther Seminary, 2010

B.A., Valparaiso University, 2006

Approved by

Advisor______________________________________________________Date_____________

ii

Contents

Chapter 1 ............................................................................................................................. 1

Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1

Chapter 2 ............................................................................................................................. 2

Literature Review............................................................................................................ 2

Information Behavior of Professionals ........................................................................... 2

Information Behavior of Humanists ............................................................................... 5

Information Behavior of Theologians and Clergy .......................................................... 7

Summary Discussion .................................................................................................... 10

Chapter 3 ........................................................................................................................... 12

Methodology ................................................................................................................. 12

Chapter 4 ........................................................................................................................... 14

Findings......................................................................................................................... 14

The Task of Sermon Preparation .................................................................................. 14

Use of Resources........................................................................................................... 16

Internet Resources ..................................................................................................... 17

Openness to resources ............................................................................................... 18

Prayer and the Holy Spirit......................................................................................... 19

A Sermon Preparation Model ................................................................................... 19

Chapter 5 ........................................................................................................................... 20

Conclusions ................................................................................................................... 20

References ......................................................................................................................... 23

Appendix A ....................................................................................................................... 26

Appendix B ....................................................................................................................... 27

ROLE OF THE INTERNET IN SERMON PREPARATION 1

Chapter 1

Introduction

Research into human information behavior (HIB) is quite prevalent. Indeed, half a

decade ago a prominent thinker suggested that there may be at least 10,000 published pieces on

the topic (Case, 2007). In response to the massive volume of studies, another prominent thinking

has suggested that small studies of specific user groups should be replaced by large-scale studies

of human information behavior geared towards business and governmental policy because

investigators [will] discover that there is little new that can be said (Wilson, 2010). While it

may be true that some groups have been over analyzed, Penner's (2009) recently published

literature review has revealed the lack of studies that focus on professional theologians. Penner

has shown that there is room for growth in the realm of practitioners of theology.

This study situates itself primarily under that broad umbrella of information behavior as it

relates to the study and use of theology. More specifically, it explores the needs of clergy and

how they use modern tools like the Internet to prepare sermons. While the literature on

professional theologians may be sparse, this study also draws on studies of human information

behavior in several other contexts. Studies outside the direct realm of theology can, as Penner

argues, provide helpful guidance for research design and serve as a sounding board for result

comparisons. These include studies of humanities scholars and other humanists as well as other

professionals. The information use environment of the population under investigation here

suggests a foundation of the overlap and interplay of those broader populations, which have

generally been studied in isolation of each other.


Chapter 2

Literature Review

Information Behavior of Professionals

Human information behavior has been the subject of inquiry for a very long time. Over

time, inquiry shifted as information technology shifted, and eventually settled into two camps in

the 1980s: the system-centered approach and the user-centered approach. An important concept

that appears today in both systems-centered (such as deep log analysis) and user-centered

approaches is that of the context or the environment in which the user or users under study work

or live. As I will explore, within each environment are roles that have tasks that prompt

information behavior to occur.

The information behavior of professionals (those who are trained and have a large body

of knowledge to master in order to provide service) can be generalized into a basic model, an

idea that stands out in the research on professional theologians (i.e., clergy). Since students

enrolled in seminary education are seeking to become, in some way, practicing theologians, it is

important to understand the information behavior of professional theologians so that it can be

seen if seminary students engage in information behavior in the same way. Seminary students

enrolled in online programs also have roles and tasks that overlap with graduate students, online

and distance students, and humanities researchers (hereafter, humanists) in general.

Taylor (1991) proposed the idea of information use environments (IUE) that affect the

flow and use of information and that determine the judgment criteria to which the value of

information is judged. Within each IUE there are sets of people, typical structures of problems,

typical settings in which information is sought, and typical resolutions to those problems. Thus,


each IUE is unique and has within it a developed set of problems and a developed way to solve

those problems. Taylor argues that by focusing on such issues, one can better compare one user

with another from a different IUE. Or to put it another way, a doctors information use

environment leads to information behavior that is different from that of a lawyers that is

different from that of, for my paper, a clergy member.

Leckie, Pettigrew, & Sylvain (1996) published work that analyzed information seeking

behavior of professionals with an eye towards developing a generalized model. Their work,

using previous studies on engineers, health care professionals, and lawyers identified the idea of

each professional environment having various and complex work roles, with every work role

having a set of tasks associated with it. Work roles can be grouped across professions as service

providers, administrator, researcher, educator, and learner. Any of these tasks can prompt the

professional to engage in information behavior, which is subject to variables that intervene to

help or hinder the process on its way to becoming an outcome. At the outcome stage of the

model, the research can either be satisfied and finished, or can feel more information need and

re-enter the loop.

Two important factors that influence information behavior of professionals are sources of

information and awareness of information. Sources can be internal, such as previous knowledge

and experience, or external, such as journal articles, books, etc. Awareness of information

broadly means that the professional knows where to find information and has ascribed certain

factors such as trust, ease, cost, and quality to it. Professionals will consult a source of

information if they are familiar with it and if it is convenient, an idea often called the principle of

least effort (or, in behavioral terms, satisficing) over another source of information that they

are not familiar with.


Bystrm & Hansen (2005) sought to better define task, since they have found that

previous literature uses the term for both an abstract concept and as a concrete set of actions.

Work tasks are performed in fulfillment of a job, or profession, and it is guided by the norms of

that organization or profession; its information use environment. Further, tasks are readily

broken into sub-tasks that must be accomplished in order to reach the desired outcome. Thus

information-seeking tasks are sub-tasks that are intimately connected to the task of the user and

not independent tasks that can be studied in isolation of the information use environment. They

also have found that people will tend to rely more on sources they are already familiar with.

More recent inquiries into the information lives of professionals has tended to focus on

health care professionals. Like clergy, doctors and nurses have many work roles that overlap

each other and that overlap with other professionals work roles. Recognizing the yes and the no

of the metaphor, in some ways sitting down with a patient to discuss a diagnosis is akin to a

sermon. In other important ways, as we will see however, clergy are unique in that they do not

have access to specialized libraries dedicated to their information needs. In fact, in medicine, the

National Network of Libraries of Medicine have published guidelines for accrediting hospital

libraries, and have recently updated those guidelines to account for the role of the Internet in

health professionals information needs (Bandy et al., 2008, p. 200). Yet perhaps because of the

solitary nature of clergys professional roles and tasks, there are no such guidelines for providing

library services to clergy apart from affiliation possibilities through the seminary from which

they graduated.

The information use environment of the individual is the foundation to a proper

explanation of their information behavior. Any IUE has a set of norms that guide how

individuals seek and use information, and those actions are actually sub-tasks of a broader work-


related task or goal. Professionals information behavior is related to the task upon which they

are focusing at any given time. Using Leckie, Pettigrew, and Sylvains delineations, the sermon

preparation task can be seen encompassing the research and the education roles of the

professional. The information behavior the clergy engage in to prepare a sermon are sub-tasks of

sermon preparation, as it also involves writing and speaking, and not just information gathering

and assimilation. Another key finding from these studies is that users will tend to prefer

information that they are already familiar with because this information presents little obstacle to

incorporate it into the individuals desired outcome.

Information Behavior of Humanists

Most clergy members, particularly in the mainline denominations in the United States

(Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Roman Catholic Church, Episcopal Church, etc.),

attended seminary before receiving a call and ordination into the practice of theology as clergy

members. Seminary in the United States functions as graduate-level training, granting the

Master of Divinity degree (MDiv) upon its graduates. Most mainline denominations require

clergy to have earned this degree, or an equivalent. Thus it is not unreasonable to assume that

clergy prepared with graduate-level training in the humanities discipline of theology would share

characteristic behavior with others who have received graduate-level training in a humanities

discipline. It is to the behavior of humanities scholars and researchers that we now turn.

Wiberley & Jones (2000) published their findings of a decade-long study on how

humanists interact with electronic information sources. Their research uncovered that for

humanists the use of technology in information behavior was governed by time: the anticipated

start-up time, the actual start-up time, and the use time. Additionally, they found that the time of

life in the researcher was a significant factor in the usage of electronic resources. They also note


that humanities researchers and teachers are more likely than those in the natural or social

sciences to work alone, even though they do frequently consult with colleagues and assistants.

This is a major factor in the importance of time to the information behavior of humanists. Thus,

the limitations of time limit the amount and the kind of research that the scholar engages in,

emphasizing why the principle of least effort (or terms like convenience and accessibility) is so

frequently an influence of information behavior.

Ellis & Oldman (2005) studied how English literature researchers information behavior

may have changed as a result of the electronic information revolution. They found that for

English literature researchers, the ability to use e-mail to communicate and collaborate with

scholars around the world has led to more coauthorship of material. At the time, the scholars

studied were not comfortable publishing in electronic journals nor did they hold electronic

journals in high esteem. The scholars expressed skepticism about electronic, or digital, libraries

because they were concerned they would lose the ability to browse the material in familiar ways,

and because to them the object under study is not just the content, but the carrier of the content as

well. Thus they are comfortable using the Internet for communication and collaboration, as well

as in a limited way finding material, but ultimately in 2005, this group of humanist scholars held

electronic resources in low esteem.

Five years later, at least one generation in the life of the Internet Ge (2010) studied 30

social science and humanities scholars interaction with electronic resources in their information

lives . While the web was considered the most important single tool by the researchers (with

96.7% using it, and 48% using it at least daily), problems encountered included overload and

issues of authority and validity. Second to the web in importance were subject databases, which

created self-perceived problems of inadequate search skills and lack of awareness of appropriate


databases. Electronic journals were the third most-used resource due to the ability to browse the

table of contents much like a print journal, though researchers were concerned about the age of

the material available. Ge then compared print and electronic journal usage, and found that for

scholars in history, literature, and philosophy, only 30-40% of their needs were satisfied by

electronic journals. Ge also found that the more experienced the researcher, interestingly, the

more likely that print and electronic journals would share equally in fulfilling the information

need, while less experienced researchers tended to prefer print. The preference by a more

experienced scholar for electronic resources was based on accessibility, when accessibility is not

an issue.

Thus if humanists have time constraints, and will use the information resources most

readily available to them, it is no surprise that clergy will rely on their local colleagues and their

personal libraries to fulfill their needs, as we will see in the literature. Since they lack dedicated

libraries conveniently accessible in person or even online, those are the two most accessible

resources, beyond prior knowledge.

Information Behavior of Theologians and Clergy

At least as far back as 1944, researchers were interested in clergy as a group to study for

information habits, although most of the early attempts were focused simply on reading habits

(Lancour, 1944). The published record, however, is scant prior to Wicks (1999). A study

undertaken in 1990 sought to understand the role of libraries and computers in the information

lives of clergy (Gorman, 1990) however this study happened before the emergence of what we

know as the Internet.

Wicks paper focused on the work roles of clergy as those roles interacted with their

work world. Wicks identified three roles, preacher, caregiver, and administrator; perhaps (in


order), educator, service provider, and administrator, as Leckie et al.s model suggests. The

three worlds of the pastor are theological, denominational, and congregational. Wicks

proposition is that there are instances in which a member of the clergy closes the information

behavior off to persons who groups who are part of one or more of the clergy members worlds.

The results suggest that the more extreme a theological position, the more likely the pastor is to

operate closed off to all resources except those from within the theological world while engaged

in information behavior for the role of preacher. For the roles of caregiver and administrator, the

results suggest a stronger hesitancy to openness across the theological spectrum. The effect of

the denominational world was generally mixed for the three roles, and the congregational world

was generally open across the three roles.

Michels has undertaken several studies in this area in the last decade (2005, 2009, 2011,

2012). In 2005 he explored the role of people as information sources for biblical studies

researchers. The kind of information sought and received tended towards affirmation and

evaluation from colleagues. In 2009 he published on how a pastor used the Internet as a

response to an article cautioning about how the Internet could negatively impact this task.

Michels respondent articulated two modes of information behavior: the personal, which was

termed devotional, and the work task-related, which was termed intentional. For sermon

preparation, this respondent began with the Bible, and then turns to colleagues, bookstores, and

online sources to locate relevant material. The respondent noted that the Internet afforded the

ability to find hundreds of unique commentaries on a given passage instantly, though he also

noted the importance of time on any research. The respondent also used social network sites,

such as Facebook, to engage with colleagues. As for determining the validity of a resource, the

respondent judged a resource by its orthodoxy, or as the respondent said, its theological


perimeters.

Michels next turned to the role of prayer in information seeking by clergy (2011). He

found prayer to function for clergy as a means of both information gathering and

interpretation/discernment; or refinement. The individuals studied believed prayer to be an

important information resource, even though Michels respondent from 2009 noted that the

Internet had somewhat undermined his reliance on prayer for sermon preparation due to the time

saved using the Internet to gather information. Taken together, Michels work reveals that clergy

significantly rely on the invisible college, and that prayer is accepted as an information source.

This reinforces the unique information environment that practicing theologians work within.

Roland (2008), studying the sermon preparation task, argues that even within a

denominational context, individuals are unique and thus the same biblical text in the same

denomination can give rise to myriad sermons. Roland finds that his informant engages in

sermon preparation in collaboration with the Holy Spirit, echoing the idea of the invisible college

and presaging Michels finding that prayer is a significant information source for people of faith

when engaging in information behavior.

In a reassessment of Wicks, Roland (2012) argues that Wicks results regarding the

influence of the congregational world were misleading. Roland found that clergy do not go

outside the congregational world for information where the congregational world and the

preaching role intersect. Roland also argues strongly for an interview-centric methodology over

the survey approach employed by Wicks and others.

Curran and Burns (2011) articulate seven roles of the Catholic clergy member in his

decision making process, rather than his information seeking process with a specific eye towards

the role of librarians for clergy. One of the constants in the literature is the lack of role of the


library in the information behavior of practicing theologians. Catholic clergy use print resources

frequently, specifically their own, and rely on the invisible college and the Internet. They found

no respondent mentioning the word library as a component of their information behavior in their

professional decision making. Curran and Burns raise the idea that seminary librarians and

faculty can benefit from understanding how clergy go about their information behavior in order

to design better courses and systems.

For clergy, there are overlaps with humanists and other professionals. The issue of time

constraint is apparent in the literature, as is the ease with which tasks can be theoretically defined

in the professional capacity of the clergy member. Like humanists, clergy make strong use of the

invisible college as part of their information behavior. Unlike those outside of practicing clergy,

however, there is a reliance on prayer and the prominent focus on a single resource, the Bible.

When studied in terms of their engagement with the Internet, clergy have been seen to use it the

way humanists use the Internet: for networking and for locating resources, although this appears

to often only happen within the theological perimeters of the denomination. Michels 2009

study uncovered that his respondent sought out commentaries from other theologians on the

Internet, creating a new kind of network of colleagues.

Summary Discussion

One of the predominant findings in the study of professionals and humanists is the idea of

least effort. People engaged in information behavior will gravitate towards sources or resources

that require the least amount of effort to use. These include sources that the individual already

knows, trusts, and values. In the case of clergy, this means their personal collection as well as

the confines of a particular tradition. A second common finding across professionals and clergy

is using colleagues and other individuals as the invisible college to help refine and shape


information needs. Also important, according to the literature, are the unique variables of the

Holy Spirit and prayer in the information use environment of individuals of faith.


Chapter 3

Methodology

Eight members of the clergy were contacted and listened to explanations of the project,

and five clergy agreed to participate in the study. These five clergy were all from different

denominational backgrounds. One came from the Roman Catholic (RCC), one from the

Episcopal (EC), one from the Lutheran (ELCA), one from the Evangelical Free Church in

America (EFCA), and one from the Assembly of God tradition (AG). All five clergy are

currently serving a congregation. Clergy averaged 26.6 years of experience (most experience 36

years, least experience 7 years), and four of the five were men. After obtaining a signature on

the consent form (Appendix A), four interviews took place in person, and one took place over the

phone, lasting between 30 and 55 minutes each. Conversations were not recorded, and notes

were taken on a legal pad. Immediately following the interviews, the notes were transcribed into

a text file stored locally on a flash drive, and some data were entered into a spreadsheet, also

stored on the same flash drive.

The mix of questions (Appendix B) was designed to answer several broad questions: do

clergy use the Internet more than print-based resources, has the Internet changed sermon

preparation for clergy who have been serving since before the Internet, and are clergy aware of

the resources available to them online or through their seminary alma maters. Additionally, I

was able to develop a rudimentary model of sermon preparation in the age of the Internet based

on the conversations. While it was not asked, I listened very closely for mentions by the clergy

of relying on prayer and/or the Holy Spirit (Michels, 2009) as either part of the sermon

preparation task or even as an information resource. I first turn to report how pastors talk about

preparing sermons, because their preparation approaches form the basis for what resources they


use and how they use those resources.


Chapter 4

Findings

The Task of Sermon Preparation

All five clergy interviewed agree on one thing the basis of any sermon is a text from the

Bible. For the clergy aligned with what I call a mainstream denomination (Roman Catholic,

Episcopal, and Lutheran (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America), following the Revised

Common Lectionary formed the basis of sermon preparation work. The Revised Common

Lectionary provides a three-year series of readings divided up by seasons of the calendar year

(Christmas, Lent, Easter, etc.). Each Sunday, readings from the prose sections of the Old

Testament, from the Psalms, from a non-Gospel New Testament reading, and from a Gospel

reading are pre-selected. The Roman Catholic, the Lutheran, and the Episcopal clergy then

choose either an individual reading from these texts, or find a theme that connects the readings

together. This passage or theme forms the basis for the sermon preparation.

For the two clergy from smaller denominations, Assembly of God (AG) and the

Evangelical Free Church in America (EFCA), readings and passages are chosen by the pastor.

The EFCA member preached in series that were thematic or were explorations of Biblical books.

AG preferred self-described loose themes that allowed the pastor to respond to situations in the

church and the world as those things happened, rather than plotting out a more formal series of

sermons that build upon one another. In both cases, developing the series took place well in

advance, even though work on any given sermon did not begin in earnest until the week before

the sermon was to be preached.


The next step for all pastors was what RC referred to as percolation while EC called it

sitting with the text. This is the stage during which clergy seek out information resources. All

clergy sit with the text during the week before the sermon is to be preached, regardless of

whether they plan a series or follow the Revised Common Lectionary. It is during the

percolation stage that some clergy specifically mention prayer or the Holy Spirit as a primary

resource for the task of sermon preparation. Three out of the five (EC, ELCA, EFCA) pastors

mentioned one or both of these.

The intended outcome of the sermon also affects the sermon preparation task. RCC

described a blow-up clown with sand in its feet to weight it down, which when punched would

rock back-and-forth until finally settling into a stable position. Thus RCC liked to give a little

punch with the sermon and hoped that parishioners would think about it and go back-and-forth

until finally settling into what it means. EC mentioned a partial desire for a pedagogical

outcome, while EFCA, ELCA, and AG expressed desire to move parishioners into

understanding how the text of the sermon was important in their lives. All five pastors agreed

with the general premise, as stated by RCC, that sermons are not lectures.

Another key factor in preparing a sermon that affects resources used is the audience. AG

made clear that a church made up of rural farmers is not impressed by material that might be

found in scholarly journals. EC, on the other hand, felt that the congregation of a small,

Midwestern college town is more interested in the technical nuances of any given Biblical text.

RCC, EC, and EFCA all agreed that being in a town full of students and professors meant that

they had to be more careful with what they said, what sources they used to support their sermon,

and the accuracy of any factual information they might use. AG and ELCA do not believe that

their churches have people who are as concerned that way.


Generalizing towards a model of the sermon preparation task from these responses,

pastors know well in advance what the basis for each weeks sermon is going to be. The week

before the sermon they spend much of the time in the percolation stage, which is a stage of

exploring ideas and verifying or refining those ideas through resources. To borrow from

Kuhlthaus work, this is the exploration zone; during which clergy read widely and spend time

reflecting (Kuhlthau, 1994). As will be seen, when those resources are Internet-based, they tend

to be used quickly to fact-check. When the clergy desires deeper engagement, the clergy turns to

print resources.

Use of Resources

The clergy interviewed for this project expressed similar preferences for resources. In

general, these clergy preferred print resources, except for ELCA who expressed a 60%-40% split

in favor of Internet-based resources. When clergy turn to the Internet, it is usually either to

verify information or to find a nugget of inspiration. Clergy mentioned wanting to look up the

correct attribution of a quote, for example. Clergy also use the Internet to find inspiration for

their sermons through prominent preachers who have posted sermons or ideas online. The bulk

of the sermon preparation task happens offline through the percolation stage and the writing

out of notes and manuscripts to prepare the sermon. Internet usage consists of quick hits and

searches, and except for ELCA the clergy struggled to name sites that might have relevant

resources for their sermon preparation.

Clergy preferred print-based resources on the whole and continue to rely on their own

libraries, either stored at the church or housed at home, and their own purchases. Clergy still

make no use of libraries for sermon preparation, even if services are available to them, such as

databases through the public library or lending by mail or database access through their


seminarys library. ELCA and EFCA were open to library-based resources in the preparation of

Bible study material, however.

When it comes to deciding whether or not a resource is appropriate, all five clergy

explicitly mentioned the author of the work as the single most important factor. If the author is

unknown, they may consider the publisher of a printed work, or they will scan the resource. As

ELCA said, I can tell within two paragraphs if its something I want to use. RCC expressed

the most openness, mentioning explicitly Jewish resources. All clergy, however, indicated that

they wished they were more open to resources outside of their denomation.

Internet Resources

Clergy make use of general tools to help in the sermon preparation task. Searching

Google and using a tool like Evernote to capture ideas are the most frequently cited uses of the

Internet. When asked about what sites clergy might use that have a potential role in sermon

preparation, RCC, AG, and ELCA had several resources they regularly used online. EC and

EFCA struggled to name any websites, blogs, or email newsletters they used regularly or that

might be relevant. No pastor could name a single library-provided database, such as

ATLASerials or something more general like Academic Search Complete. The Internet-based

resources explicitly named include: Blue Letter Bible, TextWeek.com, SermonCentral.com, and

TorahFax. Clergy also named people responsible for certain blogs or websites by name, rather

than the name of the website.

Social media usage in the task of sermon preparation was little to nonexistent. At its best,

for RCC it serves as a means of feedback after the sermon has been delivered. For ELCA, there

might be illustrations from time-to-time that are discovered on a Facebook wall. For the

remaining clergy, there is almost no usage of a social media network in the sermon task. The


offline version of a social network, the homiletic or sermon preparation group was also not

something most of these clergy made use of. ELCA attends weekly, and RCC had been involved

in such a group, but EFCA, EC, and AG had never been involved much.

There were two general perspectives on the Internet. The first, espoused especially by

EC, is that the Internet is full of material that is too shallow or difficult to verify. AG also

expressed the sentiment that its too easy to get distracted by the hyperlinked nature of resources

on the Internet. However, AG also stated that the Internet has changed everything and that all

the content in books that AG has purchased and used over the years is almost entirely available

online now. ELCA also said that the Internet played an important role as a clearinghouse of

information because its all there and expressed the idea that if you cant find it on

textweek.com, its probably not out there.

Openness to resources

All five clergy expressed openness to resources. When asked, the clergy indicated that as

long as they felt the resource met their need for illustrations or ideas, and was in line with their

goals and theological predisposition, they were open to any publisher or author. RCC explicitly

talked about going outside of Christendom and relying on Jewish resources for helping to

prepare a sermon that went along with RCCs churchs Passover seder. Most clergy however

interpreted, and answered, the question along the lines of, for instance, whether the resource was

from within their denomination or not. In that sense, clergy were open to resources from

extradenominational resources, such as ELCA who was open to resources from other

denominations even when it was apparent to ELCA that those resources were not from the

Lutheran tradition. The Lutheran tradition is an interesting case, as there are three predominant

strands of Lutheranism in the United States: the ELCA, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod,


and the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod. ELCA mentioned being open to LCMS

material but did not mention WELS.

Prayer and the Holy Spirit

EC, EFCA, and ELCA all mentioned the role of prayer or the Holy Spirit in the sermon

preparation task, specifically during the percolation stage. RCC and AG did not mention either

of these things when talking about how they prepare a sermon or when asked about primary

resources for sermon preparation help. AG expressed the idea that there is a myth of the pastor

moved by the Spirit immediately prior to the sermon, but that AG has discovered that there is

always a significant amount of work involved in preparing notes, outlines, or manuscripts to be

delivered as sermons.

A Sermon Preparation Model

After interviewing five clergy from different denominations, there is an opportunity to

propose a model of sermon preparation from this data. All clergy are aware well in advance

what the Bible texts for each Sunday will be. For those who follow the Revised Common

Lectionary, this information is known years in advance. For those who plan their own series,

this information is known at least several months in advance. Clergy begin preparing the sermon

about one week before preaching it, usually beginning on Monday and have the bulk of the

sermon in place, either in writing or as notes, by Thursday of that week. The first step is to read

the texts themselves. The biggest phase of the process is the 'percolation' stage in which the

pastor reflects on the material and gathers information resources, either from books, the Internet,

or prayer. This stage usually takes between two and four days, with only one pastor letting it

continue until the day before the sermon is to be preached.


Chapter 5

Conclusions

Along the way to findings related to the role of the Internet, this study confirmed some

previous findings. The most common finding in the study of pastors has been the lack of library

usage. None of the pastors interviewed currently make use of any library provided resources in

their sermon preparation, including any databases such as ATLA Serials. This includes public

libraries, local academic libraries, and alma mater seminary libraries who may in fact offer

services to their alumni.

The pastors from the mainline denominations, RCC, EC, and ELCA, all were aware of

sermon preparation groups and RCC and ELCA had participated in them in the past. However,

only ELCA participates currently, and EFCA and AG were not aware of local groups nor had

ever participated in such groups. This subtly confirms previous findings about the importance of

the 'invisible college,' but its importance seems to be waning in the present age. Social media,

perhaps the modern invisible college, usage for sermon preparation related activities was non-

existent. RCC commented that Facebook provided a feedback mechanism, but otherwise no

pastor used Facebook, Twitter, Google+ or any other such service in any meaningful way in

sermon preparation.

In line with Michels' 2009 study, several pastors independently asserted the role of prayer

and/or the Holy Spirit. EC, ELCA, and EFCA all mentioned the significance of these in

preparing a sermon without any prompting. All three spoke about this topic in terms of a

resource like most of the resources they spoke of on the Internet. The Holy Spirit functions as an

inspiration and as a refiner of ideas. This happens during the percolation stage most often, but as

ELCA humorously put it, if there are no ideas by Saturday then prayer becomes the primary


information resource.

Tallying up the Internet-based resources designed for pastors that the five pastors

mentioned yields 10 websites or services. Intriguingly, each service received one mention by

one pastor; none of the pastors visit the same sites or get the same email newsletters. One pastor,

EC, could not name a single website, only the names of the people responsible it. ELCA also

named a few sites based on the responsible party rather than the name of the site or service itself.

RCC was the only pastor who named an emailed newsletter.

Pastors, all-in-all, use resources from people they trust. Whether that resource is a book,

online, or in person, if the pastor does not know and trust the author they will rely on other

factors like publisher, denominational affiliation of the author, and then possibly subjective

factors like the title of the book (ELCA). The converse also appears to be true: any resource by

an author that pastor trusts will be accessed or purchased and used, regardless of the medium.

The findings of this and other prior studies suggest the lack of a role libraries play in the

sermon preparation task. However, this study uncovered the relatively minor role that Internet-

based resources designed for pastors also play in sermon preparation. While it might seem like

the Internet can offer a replacement in some ways for a physical library, most pastors rely on

general services like Google or Wikipedia to find out or confirm information, and other services

like Evernote to store information for later use. The Internet is overall just another place to find

resources by authors the pastor trusts. There appears to be an almost bookstore mentality, in that

the pastor will browse for resources based on the author.

The Internet serves as a chief source of cheap information. One of the pastors mentioned

the unreliable nature of information on the Internet, but pastors appear to feel comfortable with

sources like Wikipedia as generally trustworthy. Several pastors did mention the quality of the


information on the Internet as part of their preference for physical carriers.

Seeking out and finding information resources is not a significant part of the sermon

preparation task according to this data. Of that subtask, the Internet plays a generative and

factual role for pastors. Pastors acknowledge sources, but the sermon preparation task is not

analogous to academic research, which is possibly how sermon creation is presented during

seminary when it is an academic class.

Seminary libraries should implement a form of information literacy that helps pastors

clarify their preferences for information resources of Internet based sites. Because pastors do not

have easy access to seminary libraries unless they live close to the seminary, pastors will make

little to no use of any library or library provided resources in their sermon preparation. This is

not simply a case of lack of awareness about resources being available. Most pastors are aware

or believe without knowing that their seminary library offers services to them, such as borrowing

by mail or ILL, or access to databases. But all five clergy indicated no interest in using academic

resources for sermon preparation, as all but one indicated no desire to use the sermon form to

teach.


References

Bandy, M., Doyle, J. D., Fladger, A., Frumento, K. S., Girouard, L., Hayes, S., & Rourke, D.

(2008). Standards for hospital libraries 2007. Journal of the Medical Library Association,

96(2), 162169. doi:10.3163/1536-5050.96.2.162

Bystrm, K., & Hansen, P. (2005). Conceptual framework for tasks in information studies.

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(10), 1050

1061. doi:10.1002/asi.20197

Case, D. O. (2007). Looking for information: a survey of research on information seeking, needs,

and behavior (2nd ed.). Amsterdam: Academic Press, Inc.

Curran, C. C., & Burns, K. (2011). A methodology for studying the information seeking

behavior of Catholic clergy. Advances in the Study of Information and Religion, 2011,

92108.

Ellis, D., & Oldman, H. (2005). The English literature researcher in the age of the Internet.

Journal of Information Science, 31(1), 2936. doi:10.1177/0165551505049256

Ge, X. (2010). Information-seeking behavior in the digital age: a multidisciplinary study of

academic researchers. College & Research Libraries, 71(5), 435455.

Gorman, G. E. (1990). Patterns of information seeking and library use by theologians in seven

Adelaide theological colleges. Australian Academic and Research Libraries, 21(3), 137

156.

Kuhlthau, C. C. (1994). Students and the information search process: Zones of intervention for

librarians. Advances in Librarianship, 18, 5772.

Lancour, H. (1944). The reading interests and habits of the graduates of the Union Theological

Seminary. The Library Quarterly, 14(1), 2835. doi:10.2307/4303174


Leckie, G. J., Pettigrew, K. E., & Sylvain, C. (1996). Modeling the information seeking of

professionals: a general model derived from research on engineers, health care

professionals, and lawyers. The Library Quarterly, 161193.

Michels, D. (2005). The use of people as information sources in Biblical studies research. The

Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 29(1), 91109.

Michels, D. (2009). Dipping into a shallow pool or beginning a deeper conversation: a case study

of a ministers engagement with the internet for preaching. Journal of Religious &

Theological Information, 8(3-4), 164178. doi:10.1080/10477845.2009.489814

Michels, D. (2011). Beyond belief: prayer as communication in religious information seeking

(SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 2133494). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research

Network. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2133494

Michels, D. (2012). Seeking gods will: the experience of information seeking by leaders of a

church in transition. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2134193

Penner, K. (2009). Information behaviour of theologians: a literature review. Theological

Librarianship, 2(1), 6782.

Roland, D. R. (2008). Clergy sense-making behavior and the sermon preparation task. The 2008

Proceedings of the ASSR-SW, 2330.

Roland, D. R. (2012). The information behavior of clergy members engaged in the sermon

preparation task: Wicks revisited. Journal of Religious & Theological Information, 11(1-

2), 115. doi:10.1080/10477845.2012.673112

Taylor, R. S. (1991). Information use environments. Progress in Communication Sciences,

10(217), 55.

Wiberley, S. E., & Jones, W. G. (2000). Time and technology: a decade-long look at humanists


use of electronic information technology. College & Research Libraries, 61(5), 421431.

Wicks, D. A. (1999). The information-seeking behavior of pastoral clergy: a study of the

interaction of their work worlds and work roles. Library & Information Science

Research, 21(2), 205226. doi:10.1016/S0740-8188(99)00003-1

Wilson, T. D. (2010). Fifty years of information behavior research. Bulletin of the American

Society for Information Science and Technology, 36(3), 2734.


Appendix A

The Role of the Internet in the Sermon Preparation Task Consent Form

This study involves a semi-structured, anonymous interview designed to understand the information behavior of clergy while preparing a sermon. Martin Patrick, a student in the Master of Library and Information Science program at Kent State University, is conducting the study along with Dr. Don Wicks, professor and director of the Center for the Study of Information and Religion at Kent State University. The Kent State University Institutional Review Board has approved this study. No deception is involved, and we do not believe the study involves more than minimal risk to participants (i.e., the level of risk encountered in daily life).

Participation in the study typically takes 30-60 minutes and is strictly anonymous. Participants and Co-PI Martin Patrick will engage in an interview in a setting of the participants choosing. These questions are both closed and open, and no question is absolutely required to be answered. No question is designed to reveal or explore any secret information. The Co-PI will take handwritten notes during the interview but your name or other information will appear on the notes. The notes will simply record the participant number, which will be in the form of C1-C5.

All responses are treated as confidential, and in no case will responses from individual participants be identified. Responses will be transcribed, coded, and analyzed by the Co-PI on his personal, password protected computer. Data will be published in aggregate for the most part, but when necessary, by using the markers C1, C2, C3, C4, or C5 to refer to an individuals response.

Participation is voluntary; refusal to take part in the study involves no penalty or loss of benefits to which participants are otherwise entitled, and participants may withdraw from or end the interview at any time without penalty or loss of benefits to which they are otherwise entitled.

If participants have further questions about this study or their rights, or if they wish to lodge a complaint or concern, they may contact the principal investigators, Martin Patrick, at (216)-533-8938 or [email protected] or Professor Donald Wicks, at 330-672-0011 or [email protected]; or the Kent State University Institutional Review Board, at (330) 672-2704.

If you are 18 years of age or older, understand the statements above, and freely consent to participate in the study, please sign below:

______________________________________________________________________________

Signature of participant Date signed


Appendix B

Interview Guidelines

1. Greetings, introductions, and overview of the project. Define information resources in the context the sermon preparation task.

2. Have participant sign consent form and secure the consent form in folder. 3. Get background information: degrees, years in ministry, previous career(s), and

denominational affiliation.

4. Can you describe your general process for preparing a sermon? 5. What are the various information resources that you used to complete your most recent

sermons, say over the past month? 6. What would you say is your primary source from which you gather information for

sermon preparation? a. Ask for more details about these resources.

7. How do you go about deciding if a particular resource is appropriate for your sermons, besides whether or not it claims to be about your sermon topic?

a. How much attention do you pay to the tradition of the publisher or author/creator of a resource in determining appropriateness?

b. What other criteria can you think that you use to judge the appropriateness of a resource?

8. How regularly would you say you use the web to gather information for your sermons? a. What are the tools you frequently use on the web? b. When did you start using the web to help you prepare sermons?

i. Would you say that the web has changed how you prepare sermons, if you began preaching before the web? How has it changed?

c. On a scale of 1-5, how important would you rate the web, compared to other resources as a tool for gathering information for sermons?

9. Do you use Internet-based tools like email and social networking sites to help prepare sermons?

a. What tools like these do you use for sermon preparation? b. How do these tools help you in this task?

10. Are you aware of your privileges for borrowing books or using databases and other tools that your seminary library offers you?

a. If so, what does this library offer to you? b. Do you ever use any of these tools for sermon preparation? c. Have you ever used resources provided by a public library to gather information

for sermon preparation? 11. Do you ever use online databases or electronic journals to find and use information?

a. Even if not, can you name any such databases or electronic journals that might be relevant?

b. Do you use any print journals as information resources? c. What percentage of information you review for sermon preparation would say

comes from electronic resources and from print resources?

Date post:	27-Sep-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	martin-patrick
View:	13 times
Download:	3 times

The role of the Internet in the sermon preparation task

Documents