Home | Chapters | Chapter 3 Contact  

3

Methodology

How do young people acquire a body of sacred song?


The significance of sacred song and its relationship to liturgy as a whole has been discussed (Chapter 1). How, then, do young people gain access to this body of song that is both the teacher and perpetuator of the Christian faith? And how does one go about finding out?

This project can primarily be described in terms of practitioner action research, one element of which includes participant observation. As a practitioner I am in the fortunate position of having a wealth of experience working in both schools (as a specialist music teacher) and churches (as a liturgist, musician, youth leader and Sunday School teacher). The project will necessitate some level of collaboration with colleagues working in both settings, allowing accepted norms to be examined and challenged, and current practice to be re-evaluated. The implications of various bodies of knowledge - theory, research, English law, Church law and established practice - will be drawn together for examination and critical analysis.

This study is based upon a theory that has not been proven - firstly that there is a low level of sung participation amongst the young people attending Sunday worship, and secondly that this low level of sung participation can be partly attributed to the differences between the repertoire that is sung in churches and schools.

The practical research elements of this project set out to answer two main questions -

  1. Are young people attending Sunday worship joining in with the singing?
  2. Does the repertoire used in schools collective worship adequately prepare young people to participate in the sung worship of their church?

Part A:
Quantifying the level of sung participation of young people attending church


To quantify the level of sung participation amongst young people attending Sunday worship, a team of researchers undertook a series of participant observations. After a pilot observation to test the method, the research team visited ten churches to observe the normal Sunday service 1 to examine how young people respond to the hymns and songs they meet in the ordinary worshipping life of their church.2 Using standardised observation classification criteria, each of the team members observed a section of the congregation, and recorded their findings on a record sheet.3 After the service, the research team used a questionnaire to interview as many young people as possible.


The sample of churches observed
The chosen sample forms a natural group of village churches that are already working together as mission partners involved in the Great Missenden Lighthouse Christian Holiday Week.4 As a former main-stage presenter at Lighthouse I am well known to a large number of adults and children attending these churches. This was a key factor in choosing the sample because the success of any research involving participant observation relies on the acceptance of the observer(s) by those being observed. The sample provided a wide denominational spread 5, including churches with and without attached church schools 6, and the locality of this small focus area greatly reduced distortions in the data likely to be caused by variations in geographical location, local tradition/custom, socio-economic climate etc..


Arranging the observation visits
The ministers of the twelve churches in the chosen sample group were approached in the first instance by letter 7 outlining the proposed research and requesting permission to observe their congregation. This was followed up by a telephone call to book an appointment to observe. This part of the project held unforeseen difficulties. Finding appropriate contact details for some of the churches was not straightforward, and catching busy clergy on the telephone as a non-urgent caller took some perseverance. Consequently, the observations took a great deal longer to arrange than anticipated. The response, however, was largely positive, with the majority of clergy supportive of the study and keen to help.

Only two churches (both Baptist) declined to participate in the study. One of these churches, Holmer Green Baptist, was without a current pastor. The deacons felt that the presence of the research team would be 'a little intrusive and rather daunting for the children.' There was also concern that 'with so very few children attending regularly on a Sunday morning' the 'visit would provide very little information' (letter from Pauline Wallace, App.p43). The minister of the other church, Great Missenden Baptist, was the only fierce gatekeeper. When I did eventually get to speak to him (he has no telephone answering service) he told me I was wasting my time and his. I tried to ask him whether he was concerned that a small number of children attending the service would invalidate the study (as a number of clergy had been similarly worried) and asked him roughly how many young people usually attended. He said this was 'private information' and curtly ended the call.

Therefore a total of ten observation visits were duly arranged to take place between June and October 2005.


Informing the congregation.
The congregations were informed prior to the observations (either by announcement, or news sheet 8, or both) that the research team would be visiting to observe the service. The exact nature of the observation was not disclosed, however, so as not to unduly influence the behaviour of the young people. These announcements were made to serve the twofold purpose of fulfilling any ethical responsibility and raising the number of respondents to the questionnaire proffered after the service. Further information about the project was freely available to all members of the congregation on the day of the observation 9.

It is impossible to know whether anybody chose not to attend a service because they knew it was going to be observed, but the warm reception and enthusiastic response that the research team encountered at every church indicated that the congregations felt they were adequately informed and were comfortable with the way the research was being carried out.


The research team.
To guarantee the successful and discreet observation of the entire congregation, a team of five research assistants was hired 10, funded by a generous grant from Culham Educational Foundation 11. I was the sixth (and the only unpaid) member of the team. The team 12 was carefully chosen, conforming to the following requirements:

  1. suitability to work with children
  2. availability to work regularly as part of the team
  3. experience of participating in Christian worship
  4. understanding and support of the project
  5. ability to observe and record discreetly, accurately and consistently
  6. good interpersonal skills
  7. local people, similarly active and well-known in the community as myself, so as to have similar 'insider status'
The aims of the project and the research tools themselves were discussed at length with each of the research assistants, and the days on which they would be required to observe agreed 13. As the project involved a large time commitment, all at anti-social hours, the team hired and trained was deliberately larger than required for any one visit to allow some flexibility. Eight churches were observed by a team of four. At two churches a team of five researchers observed the service. This enabled the accuracy of results to be tested by having two of the researchers observe the same section of the congregation from different viewpoints, doubling for control purposes 14. These controls showed no discrepancies.

As lead researcher, I kept in touch with the team members between observations, offering ongoing support and evaluation of their work and ensuring that any seeming irregularities in the records they produced were clarified.


The church observations
The aim at every church observation was the same - to faithfully record the young people's response to the sung elements of the service in as unobtrusive a manner as possible. To this end, the research team arrived thirty minutes before the start of the service, enabling them to discuss their positioning in a near-empty church. Owing to the variations in architecture and seating arrangements, no two churches observed were the same and each required a fresh discussion as to who should sit where and which pews each would be responsible for observing 15. Special care was taken to place researchers in the best position to observe the pews where it was known there would be a concentration of young people (in many churches the children returning from Sunday School all sit together). Once in position, the team took full part in the service as worshipping members of the congregation, recording their observations during the singing.

Due to the relatively low numbers of children in attendance 16 it was not difficult to observe and classify the young people's responses to each song. There were very few times when the researcher was unable to see their subject well enough to classify their response. The only difficulty the team faced was that of observing the children stood directly behind them, where in some cases the young people became self-conscious when they realised that they were being watched. This situation did not arise very often, however, due to careful positioning of the research team.

In the three churches where there were larger numbers of children, only one proved difficult to observe. At Church Three, though there were thirty young people in attendance, they were only present for one hymn, and twenty of them sat at the back drinking juice. At Church Six it was easy to observe the thirty-nine young people present, thanks to the U-shaped gallery that afforded excellent sightlines. The church that was hardest to accurately observe was Church Four. Not only were there almost triple the usual number of children (forty-three), but the majority of the young people were present throughout the service, and the service had the highest number of songs of all the services observed (thirteen). There were a large number of young children present, and a good deal of movement. Some of the children repeatedly wandered out of the worship space into the narthex or the Lady Chapel and back again, or from one area of the church to another (often out of one researcher's area and into another's). Consequently, the figures on the results summary sheet show an unusual fluctuation in the number of young people present. The sheer numbers involved also made it harder to classify the young people's level of response. Were this part of the study to be repeated in any way, a larger team of researchers would be desirable to observe churches where there are similarly large numbers of young people present.


Observing the norm.
It was impressed upon the ministers of participating churches that, for the results of the study to be valid, the research team needed to observe that which is the norm, rather than an orchestrated performance and that the aim was to gain a true picture of how the young people in the congregation respond to the sung elements of worship. There was no evidence to suggest that any of the churches had 'put on a show' for the observation, nor any cause to suspect that the young people were making any special effort to impress the research team. The only church where the service was not a normal Sunday service was Church Nine, who, unbeknown to the team, had scheduled their Harvest Festival for the day of their observation. Consequently, contrary to the norm, there was no Sunday School that morning and the children remained in church throughout an exemplary all-age service.

Although the aim was to observe the 'norm', as with any participant observation, the very presence of the researchers subtly altered the dynamic of the service observed; this was unavoidable. The line between being 'insiders' and 'outsiders' shifted a little from church to church, as the various members of the research team were better known in some of the congregations observed than in others. The relatively high 'insider status' of the team in most of the churches meant that observation was not felt to be an event and the worship observed was as typical as one could expect. As predicted in the research proposal, many of the churches where I am well known were eager to do everything they could to help me. This was advantageous, in that I was able to impress upon them further that all was required was a normal service to observe. Some of the church musicians who know me in my professional capacity expressed some anxiety that their performance would be judged as inadequate, but these fears were allayed when I explained that the team was there to observe congregational singing, not the instrumentalists' performance.


The information recorded.
The observation record sheets (examples of which can be found on pages 37 and 38 of the Appendices) allowed the same information to be easily and clearly recorded on every observation visit. The team had to fill in the names of the songs as they arose, as it was quickly discovered that whilst hymn boards and service sheets are useful starting points, there is no way of knowing in advance what will be sung and in which order, especially in those churches where an element of improvisation is allowed 17. Everything that was sung by the congregation, including responses, was recorded. Where the researcher did not know the name of the song (some items were sung without printed words or prior announcement) the first line or the hymn number was used to identify it on the sheet.


Follow-up.
Immediately following each church observation, a letter of thanks was emailed to the appropriate minister. A 'thank you' item was also placed in the church news sheet to be published on the next Sunday:

    'Thanks from Elspeth Many thanks to all who were present at last week's 11.00am Mass for aiding me in my research. Particular thanks go to the young people who completed questionnaires. The project is ongoing and will be completed in January 2006, when I will be providing feedback to all the participating churches.'
After this project is written up and handed in, relevant feedback will be sent to all the participating churches and schools. This will include the principle findings of the research, a report on best practice as shown in part four of this dissertation and any details pertinent to the individual school or church (e.g. where a community school has stated that they would like to establish a link with their local church).


Research Team Conference
When the fieldwork was complete, a Research Team Conference was held to discuss and evaluate the research tools used in this part of the project. The report of the conference, and a minidisc recording of the entire proceedings, may be found in the appendices 18. The conference was concerned mainly with the reliability of the data collected. Whilst every effort was made to standardise the conditions of the observations, this study was affected by a certain amount of subjectivity on the part of the researchers (in classifying the young people's responses to sung worship) and by the influence exerted by the presence of the research team at all of the services observed. It is true, then, that reliability, as used in purely quantitative studies cannot be wholly achieved. Ethnographer, Eleanor Nesbitt writes,

    'What can be achieved is transparency, so that imperfections, compromises and variables beyond the researcher's control are made explicit. Adherence to this basic principle results in data which can be of value in constructing hypotheses for testing in larger scale studies' (Nesbitt in Lewis & Lindsay 2000 p142).
The principle of transparency has therefore been honoured throughout this study 19.



Part B:
Assessing the content and origin of the body of song of the young people attending the church services observed.


After each service observed, the research team used a brief questionnaire to interview as many young people as possible.


About the questionnaire
The questionnaire 20 asked mainly closed questions to enable the gathering of specific empirical data concerning young people's body of song in relation to their church and school. There were also two open questions where the respondents could offer their ideas as to what could be done to help young participate in sung worship and what they would like to sing in church.


How the questionnaire was used.
All but a very few of the questionnaires were completed by the research team 21, who asked the young people the questions on the questionnaire and wrote down their responses. The interviews were not prearranged. The subjects were approached, verbal consent 22 was sought from the child (and from the parent/guardian if the child was clearly too young to offer their own informed consent), and it was made clear that there was no obligation to participate whatsoever. The young people were interviewed either in the main body of the church or wherever the refreshments were being served - at no point was any member of the research team alone or away from the main centres of activity with a child. All the young people approached, including the few that declined to take part, were given a sticker to wear, serving the two-fold purpose of a token 'thank you' present, and a simple means of identifying those who had been approached, thus sparing them a second approach from another member of the research team and greatly reducing the possibility of duplicate interviews. In practice this system worked well and none of the young people were accidentally interviewed more than once.

Some of the young people interviewed could not answer the questions unaided. In these cases they were prompted -mostly by the researcher but sometimes by their parent. The researchers were careful not to offer ideas or suggestions as to what the child might say. For instance, if (in response to question 5a) a child said that they did not know any hymns/Christian songs that were not normally sung at their church, instead of saying, 'But don't you know I am a Lighthouse?' the researcher might say, 'Do you know any of the Lighthouse songs?' or, 'Have you learnt any hymns at school?' Some children then remembered that they did know songs from elsewhere, and sometimes even proceeded to offer suggestions as to what they would like to sing in church. Where a parent offered a suggestion this was noted as such.

It must be acknowledged that the interviews were conversations between adult researchers and young people; some were held in the direct presence of a parent, all were held in the close proximity of various adults of that child's church community. These contexts and power dynamics will have had some bearing on the answers that the young people gave. The power dynamics between adult researcher and child subject are such that the results of the interviews may not be entirely accurate. Some children will have given the answer they thought the researcher - or in some cases, the attendant parent - wanted to hear, and such an answer may not necessarily have been true. It is recognised, however, that 'if children meet the fieldworker on their home ground, in their churches… or religious classes, this can ease the relationship between interviewer and interviewee' (Nesbitt in Lewis & Lindsay 2000 p143).

There are also developmental issues involved in a child's own appraisal of their personal participation in sung worship. According to Pottebaum, Freeburg & Kelleher:

    'Even if the young child cannot read or follow music, parents can give the child a hymnal anyway because such "pretending" is, in the child's mind, full participation' (Pottebaum, Freeburg & Kelleher 1992 p28).
This then suggests that some children, who might have been observed as having never opened their mouths during the singing, will have, quite genuinely, responded positively when asked if they sang during the service.



Part C:
Analysing the repertoire employed in schools' collective worship


In order to examine the relationship between the corpus of song learnt in school and the young people's level of participation in sung worship in church it was necessary to gather some basic information from the schools most likely to be feeding the churches observed. To this end, a questionnaire was sent to all the maintained primary schools in the Lighthouse catchment area, as well as to the nearest Roman Catholic primary school - a total of eleven schools. A map showing the location of all the churches observed and all the schools to which a questionnaire was sent may be found in the appendices (App.p62).


Contacting the schools
The questionnaire was sent to the headteacher of each school, together with a covering letter and pre-paid return envelope 23. The six schools that had not responded by the return date (a month after they were mailed out) were sent a duplicate questionnaire, with an amended covering letter and pre-paid return envelope. The remaining three schools that had failed to respond a further month later were telephoned. Though messages were left, the calls were not returned, but one further response was yielded. A total of nine schools returned completed questionnaires 24. Unfortunately, one of the two schools that did not respond was Our Lady's Roman Catholic Primary School. This is particularly disappointing, as it is the only Roman Catholic School in the area. Consequently, a comparison between Catholic school music provision in collective worship and Church of England school music provision in collective worship, and the impact of the same on the respective worshipping communities, has not been possible.


About the school questionnaire
The questionnaire sought to build a comprehensive picture of the material being sung in the schools in the sample. The majority of the questions were multiple-choice; others required only yes/no or numerical answers (e.g. How many times a week does collective worship provide opportunities for singing?). There were also spaces for respondents to give more detailed information on any church link they might have.



Part D:
Evaluating current practice in churches and schools and identifying best practice in the light of the practical research findings


The data generated by the practical research vehicles was entered into spreadsheets to allow detailed analysis of the information gathered. Be aware, however, that as a researcher I have made selections and interpretations of the data, and that the interviews, as conversations between adult researchers and young people, were all affected in some way by power dynamics and context.

The findings of the practical enquiry are presented in chapter four. In the light of the related literature, these findings are then used as the basis for further discussion of the key topics (chapters five to nine), culminating in the recommendations outlined in Post-Script One.



Back to Top | Chapter 4

  1. For the purposes of this study, the 'normal Sunday service' is defined as being the service that is most representative of that church's worship, the one that happens most frequently in the cycle of Sunday services. In the majority of cases, this was the Parish Eucharist or equivalent. Back to text
  2. Why not look at services designed to accommodate children?
    Many churches now offer pram services, family services (all-age worship) and contemporary styled youth services, aimed at nurturing the spiritual needs of young people of varying ages. Youth A Part recommends that the Church must 'encourage young people to make a range of contributions to a wide variety of service (not just the family service or Youth Sunday)' (Youth A Part 1996). Whilst the provision of these and other 'special' services is commendable, as special services they are not the norm, in fact their very existence has arisen from the recognition of young people's need worship in ways other than the norm. The main Sunday service (Parish Eucharist, Sunday Mass, etc.) is the central act of worship in any church, and the one from which all the others gain their relevance. It is also the service we hope our young people are going attend when they mature. It is a family celebration. If young people are to feel comfortable worshipping in this context when they are older they first need positive experience of it and singing is one way in which all members of the congregation can be both united and nurtured - if they are enabled. Here lies the main focus of this study. Back to text
  3. The Observation Classification Criteria and samples of completed record sheets can be found in the appendices, App.p35-36, and App.p37-38 respectively. Back to text
  4. Lighthouse is an annual week-long ecumenical event, catering for roughly 1,700 children, facilitated by around 500 adult and teenage helpers. Further information can be found at www.lighthousemissenden.org.uk. Back to text
  5. see chart showing the Denominational Spread of the Churches Observed, App.p39. Back to text
  6. see table showing How the Churches are linked to schools, App.p40. Back to text
  7. see Example of the observation request letter, App.p41-42. Back to text
  8. Here follows the standard text suggested to all the participating churches for use in the news sheet the week prior to the observations and also on the day of the observation itself (headed 'Today' rather than 'Next Sunday'):

    'Next Sunday Elspeth Chantler and her research team will be observing the 9.30am service as part of her dissertation project, 'Songs to Teach the Faith: Songs to Keep the Faith'. The service will proceed as normal, during which the research team will unobtrusively take notes. No audio or video recording will be made. All those under the age of 18 will be invited to complete a brief questionnaire after the service.' Back to text
  9. See A little information, App.p44. Back to text
  10. An explanation of the decision to hire research assistants to observe rather than using cameras to film the church services can be found in the Research Proposal (App.p7-9). Back to text
  11. See for App.p45-47 for details of the grant application. Back to text
  12. See Research Team Profiles, App.p48-49. Back to text
  13. See App.p50 for a chart detailing who observed where and when. Back to text
  14. This was originally intended to happen at three of the observations, but on one of the days where there had been a fifth researcher available, one of the team was ill. Back to text
  15. See Church Nine Observation Seating Plan and Church Ten Observation Seating Plan, App.p51 and p52 and An explanation of the observation seating plans, App.p53. Back to text
  16. Seven out the ten churches observed had sixteen or fewer young people in attendance. Back to text
  17. At Church Seven, for example, people would call out their hymn requests, or ask for a song to be sung all over again. Back to text
  18. See Research Team Conference Report and Research Team Conference Mini-disc Track Listing, App.p54-58 & App.p59 respectively. The mini-disc of the Research Team Conference may be found on the inside back cover of the appendices. Back to text
  19. To this end, the results of the church observations, the interviews with young people and the questionnaires sent to schools are reproduced in full in the appendices, App.p95-133. Back to text
  20. See Questionnaire for Churchgoers Under the Age of 18, App.p60-61. Back to text
  21. At two of the churches where there larger numbers of young people (Church Three and Church Four) a few of the older children were given questionnaires to complete unaided as the team was anxious to catch them before they left church and were struggling to interview all the young people quickly enough. This was not entirely satisfactory, however, as some of these questionnaires were returned incomplete. Back to text
  22. Written consent was not required, as the questionnaires were anonymous and held no sensitive personal data. Back to text
  23. A copy of the questionnaire, the initial and follow-up covering letters and a table detailing contact with the schools can be found in the appendices, App.p63-70. Back to text
  24. The second covering letter suggested that any school not wishing to take part in the study should return their questionnaire uncompleted (the questionnaire already bore the name of the school) to indicate that they did not wish to take part and thus eliminate any further contact on the matter. No such blank questionnaires were returned. Back to text
Copyright © 2006   |  Terms and Conditions