Issuu

tcaretnI A service of Interaction International Vol. 14 No. 1 Sept. 2020

Contents — Restarting the Engines — One Source, Two Streams — Flow of Care Revisited — MK Education: Then and Now — Conversations on Care — MK Research: Foundations — Closing the Loop

September Issue

Letter from the Editor

Mission Statement: Interact is a forum for dialogue and the exchange of ideas on current issues in MK/TCK care and education in order to promote a greater flow of care for MKs/TCKs by all those whose actions impact their lives. Article Submission: Authors may submit articles electronically or by mail to Interact. Please inquire about topics/issues/research that may be of interest for upcoming issues of Interact as well as formatting information. The views expressed in Interact do not necessarily reflect the views of Interact or of Interaction International.

If this is the first issue of Interact that you’ve read, welcome! If you’ve been reading Interact for a long time, welcome back! Interact is returning from a long hiatus. Over these years, I’ve often been asked about the possibility of Interact returning. Well, I’m pleased to say, “It’s back!”; this is the issue that relaunches it! Interact will discuss important issues, provide relevant information, promote global conversations, and provide solutions and strategies as well as share resources and research. It will equip you to act on behalf of today’s MKs/TCKs and better serve the MK/TCK community. Whatever your role, each issue of Interact will have something for you. Check out the Index of Articles on the Interaction website (interactionintl.org) to see the topics Interact has covered in the past.

In this first issue, we look at where we’ve been, where we are, and start the conversation about where we need to go. We will look at foundational issues such as who MKs, TCKs, and CCKs are (Van Reken), at the need for a global flow of care (David and Michael Pollock) at trends in MK education (George and David Durance), at issues and resources for MK caregivers, and at the important role of MK research in shaping our actions (Wickstrom and Blomberg). This issue will be longer than future issues, but this length was needed to lay a foundation on important issues. I hope this issue brings you up to speed on the discussions that have been going on and better equips you to add your voice to the global conversation. We hope that you feel welcome and included. We welcome your feedback, ideas and your article submissions as well as your sharing resources you value or research that you’ve done. I welcome you to this global conversation through the pages of Interact. I hope you will be equipped, empowered, and encouraged to make a difference in the lives of MKs/TCKs for their good and God’s glory. Blessings,

Feedback and Input: Interact welcomes feedback concerning articles as well as ideas for the magazine. Please send it to interact@interactionintl.org. Interact reserves the right to edit and publish these letters/emails for space and clarity. Reprinting Material: You must have permission before reproducing information published in Interact. Back Issues: an index of previous articles published in Interact is available on the Interaction website (www.interactionintl.org). Physical copies of back issues of Interact can be purchased. Contact Interact for details at interact@interactionintl.org Publisher: Interaction International Editor: Janet Blomberg (janetblomberg@interactionintl.org) Design and Layout or Graphic Designer: Kelly Pickering Consultant: Irma Henderson Copyright 2020 INTERACT a digital publication Interact is published quarterly (March, June, September, and December) by Interaction International. Correspondence for Interact should be sent to: P. O. Box 863, Wheaton, IL 60189, Phone: 630.653.4156, Email: interact@interactionintl.org

Restarting the Engines Ruth E. Van Reken

I live in Indianapolis, home of the famous Indy 500 motor car race. Each year (except this one due to COVID-19!), 250,000 people gather and wait with great anticipation to hear the iconic words blare from the loud speaker, “Gentlemen and lady (or ladies depending on the year), start your engines!” At that command, the sound of roaring engines fills the air, the racers follow the pace car for one lap and then zoom away. No one knows how the race will turn out, but one thing is certain: every car that begins will need time in the pits where a team changes the tires, refills the gas tank, and tweaks whatever settings need adjustment to make the car run even better than before. Without these moments of refilling and recalibration, the car will never make it to victory lane. Pit stops aren’t a sign of weakness but wisdom. They don’t mean that the original design or strategies were wrong, but racing teams know that resting on past success alone is not enough to ensure a successful future. There is always more to learn and refine for the journey ahead. After the tune-up, the driver restarts the engine and returns

to the active racing lanes with one goal in mind: to see the checkered flag come down as he or she crosses the finish line knowing the race is successfully done.

Time for MK Care Recalibration? If we think of the work we do with MK care as another type of race, we can see this time of Interact being relaunched as a good time for our own pit stop. In order to continue running the race before us with endurance as Hebrews 12:1 admonishes us, let’s take a moment to see the strengths of our race so far. Then, let’s consider what new obstacles or opportunities might be ahead and what adjustments or recalibrations we might need to make to run an even stronger race to the finish line in the future.

MK Care Phase One: Where We've Been Looking back, it is right to feel thankful. Before the first International Conference on Missionary Kids (ICMK) held in Manila in October 1984, no mission organization that I know of had any type of formal September 2020

MK care programs. Before then, many in missions didn’t believe that MKs had any particular issues that might relate to their globally mobile lifestyle. In fact, most discussions or articles on this topic presumed that the privileges of their lives were many (which they are) and, if MKs focused on them, these privileges would overshadow any perceived challenges. After ICMK Quito (1987) and ICMK Nairobi (1989) which followed the initial conference in Manila, perspectives began to change. While the main focus of ICMK Manila centered on considering new options for MK education, the conferences in Quito and Nairobi created more awareness of the wider arenas of care needed to give meaningful, holistic care to MKs. At this point, many mission organizations created new positions so MK care providers could begin to find ways to meet some of the identified needs. Interact magazine began in 1991 to continue developing new understanding and awareness of the gifts and challenges that often come with the MK experience. With Janet Blomberg as editor, this publication became a “pace car” for our community as many previously unexplored topics came to light through the ground-breaking articles published there. Go to https://interactionintl.org/wpcontent/uploads/2019/01/Interact-Article-Index-bySubject.pdf and check out the back issues.

Basically, it seems the race that is MK care has completed Phase One. This includes:

Then something akin to a flat tire happened. Soon after David Pollock, one of the pioneers in the MK Care movement, died in 2004, the voice of Interact also became silent. It looked like the final pit stop for this important pace car, even though other vehicles continued rounding the track and running as well as they could.

Now, as Interact prepares to restart its engine and rejoin the race, it’s time to consider more closely the changes happening in missions and what adjustments we may need to make in order to better complete MK Care Phase Two. God gives each generation something fresh to do that builds on the past while accomplishing his purposes for the present and preparing for the future. This is a good time to stop and listen to some of what might be God’s new vision for MK Care personnel to consider. While the previous generation (mine!) is moving off the stage, God will use the next generation taking our place (many of you!) to provide new authors, new articles, new ideas, and new thinking to accomplish his purposes for what is still ahead.

Where We Are Thankfully, the pit crew has found a way to fix the flat tire and Interact is rejoining the race. As with any pit stop, these silent years have not negated the past but many new aspects have been developing in the field of MK Care that will now enable our pace car to guide us more clearly in the future. 3

Interact

Awareness of the topic and the issues involved has turned into action. Organizations and international schools have developed helpful programs. Families have been educated in how to make wise decisions regarding education and transitions for their children.

Discoveries During Our Pit Stop As the world in general has dramatically changed in the last few decades, so has the world of missions. When ICMK began in 1984, most missionaries were Westerners and MKs generally went to some type of MK school where virtually all students were MKs. Often, these were also boarding schools. Mother and father usually carried passports from the same country, they frequently served a lifetime in one country overseas, and most went out under clearly defined mission agencies. Think of what has happened since then. One of the most significant changes in these intervening years is that now we have international Christian workers coming from all over the world as well as going all over the world. John Barclay has done an amazing amount of research and writing on the exploding number of missionaries and MKs who are coming from New Sending Countries (NSCs) such as India, Korea, Singapore, Nigeria, etc. and how they may soon outnumber (or already outnumber) those coming from the more traditional Old Sending Countries (OSCs) such as England, the United States, Canada, and Europe. When we look at what were our traditional Westernbased MK schools, we see that many have become some form of an “international Christian school” or simply another international school. A lower percentage of the students in these schools are MKs than before while local or expat children from other sectors fill the seats. Educators and staff who were once all expats now include local staff as well. Homeschooling, internet classes, and local schools have all reshaped the MK educational options across the board for these MKs from OSC. On the other hand, for MKs from NSCs, the challenges of receiving basic education in ways that encourage family stability as well as academic learning are still great. Online courses or homeschooling may not be offered in their language. Many NSC MKs attend poorly funded boarding schools in their home countries while parents serve in remote areas. Michael Pollock and others organized a pre-conference workshop

called “The Shepherd’s Table” before the recent Synergy conference for MK Care providers and educators in September 2019. The purpose was to discuss what could be done for the larger community of MKs now in the tent. That is a major, positive recalibration of MK care occurring in our current pit stop. There are also changes in many family demographics. Increasingly, mom and dad may not carry passports from the same country. Others may share a passport but have different racial heritages. Instead of a lifetime in one host country, many missionaries now have shorter careers in general and often live in more than one host country. Some go to foreign lands for the sake of Jesus, but they go either independently or in some other nontraditional way with no formal title but with similar hearts and sense of calling.

“For anyone to impact the world, they must first navigate their own individuality, but those who grow up traversing different different cultural worlds often lack language to undertake such exploration.” Christopher O’Shaughnessy (Arrivals, Departures and the Adventures In-Between, 2014) These changes mean that today’s MKs represent countless nationalities and come from vastly different home cultures. There is no longer one national or racial prototype for who is an MK. What new challenges and opportunities do these things make for our community? To have a meaningful discussion about all of these matters, it’s important we begin by clarifying and enlarging our language and concepts so they more accurately reflect these changing realities. Without this, our discussions can only be confusing or not include all who need our care. A few questions to start us off.

September 2020

Who are MKs? It seems almost a ‘no brainer’ to ask for a definition of what it means to be an MK since those initials stand for “missionary kid”. Doesn’t the term alone define MK as being a child of a missionary? you wonder. Perhaps, but perhaps not. A prior question might be, “In today’s world, who is counted as a missionary?” Do we include only children whose parents go our under official mission agencies or as independents specifically for the purpose of ‘sharing the gospel of Jesus’? If so, what about children of those who do not go overtly as missionaries yet pursue international business or other international career because they seek to follow the Great Commission and go into all the world as salt and light for Christ into places traditional missionaries are not allowed? Where and how do children in these families and circumstances fit into our discussions on MK care? In addition to this population, I have met young people whose parents are officially missionaries who say to me, “You know, I’m not a real MK.” I ask, “You’re not? Why?” They reply, “Because we never left our passport country.” Are they right? When MKs say things like this to me, I tell them they are wrong. In my thinking, if their parents are 'official' missionaries of any kind, they are MKs. This includes those whose parents work with different local ethnic communities or even work in the organization’s headquarters for their entire career. But then, when telling that story to others working in MK care, they have disagreed with me. They say these children are correct that they aren’t MKs if they never went outside their country! So, who is right? Are MKs defined by parental roles or geography?

Interact

This is a critically important question if we are to think holistically about our global community. John Barclay states that India has more MKs than almost any other country, including OSC countries. However, because they have so many different subcultures and languages all within the large expanse of the country of India, many Indian MKs never leave their passport country yet change cultures as radically within the borders of India as do MKs who go to totally different countries.

“ … these non-internationally mobile MKs, including ones in far distant places from many of us, have too often been a hidden community. With their growing number, however, we can no longer afford to ignore them.” Ruth Van Reken Sadly, these non-internationally mobile MKs, including ones in far distant places from many of us, have too often been a hidden community. With their growing number, however, we can no longer afford to ignore them. We need to consider with more intentionality how being a “domestic MK” compares and contrasts with "international MKs,” including any particular challenges or opportunities they may have in this context.

If, on the other hand, we agree with those who say these children aren’t MKs if they have not traveled to another country, then do we have a name for them? Again, what about the children of those whose parents work in non-traditional mission roles? How do we include all of these in our MK care vision or do we simply agree with those who tell me that they don’t belong at all?

first attempt to identify commonalities as well as distinctives between TCK sectors looked like in MK Care Phase One.

Who Are TCKs? By the early 1980s, Dave Pollock began using sociologist Ruth Useem’s term third-culture kid as another way to look at MKs. In her writings, Dr. Useem refers to TCKs as “children who accompany their parents into another culture.” In 1986, Dave wrote his now classic TCK definition “A Third Culture Kid (TCK) is a person who has spent a significant part of his or her developmental years outside the parents’ culture …” Before the TCK term became part of our language, each sector or group whose members were raising children overseas thought they were the only ones who had particular realities to deal with, such as questions of “Where is home?” and “Where do I belong?” Families in the military thought it was somehow related to their kids being “military brats.” The foreign service called themselves “foreign service kids.” Missions called our kids “missionary kids” or “MKs.” Those in the corporate world often called themselves a name connected to their parents’ career such as “Aramco Brats.” Once it became clear that all of these groups shared the experience of going into another culture with their parents, it became easier for people like Ruth Useem and Dave Pollock to look for common themes. This is how Dave’s classic TCK Profile of the common benefits and challenges from this experience developed. Once these common characteristics were identified, each sector could also look to see what was specific to their group. For example, one additional challenge in the missions community is that no matter how humanly successful MKs are, if they have given up their faith, that ‘failure’ often negates any other sense of success in a way that isn’t an issue for other sectors. At any rate, this is what our

Unfortunately, in those early days of looking at this population, neither Useem or Pollock included in their definitions that the reason parents were going into other cultures related to a career choice they had made rather than for some other reasons such as permanent immigration. In addition, they didn’t mention that this other culture was also in another country. In those early days of intercultural awareness, likely both were assumed. In today’s world, as more families and children are globally or culturally mobile for many different reasons, this has led to endless discussions of who can be counted as “true TCKs.” Does Dave Pollock’s classic TCK Profile relate equally to children of refugees as to the child of an ambassador? Does it apply to children of minorities who go to school in another culture other than the one they return to at home each evening? Maybe. Maybe not. How do factors such as choice, power, privilege, or economic status impact those who have experienced what Donnyale Ambrosine calls a ‘culturally fluid’ childhood? September 2020

Over time, the term third-culture kid has begun to lose its original meaning in the general public. In many places, it has become a catchall phrase for all children who grow up or grew up with any sort of international or cross-cultural background during childhood. Some researchers have begun to challenge the concept of TCK itself as the concepts of culture are changing. They say that the number of variables of those claiming to be TCKs have become too numerous for the type of research that needs to be done. These discussions are fair and necessary, but for now this is where we have been and are.

Are MK and TCK Completely Interchangeable Terms? While I am all for MKs realizing their story is part of a greater whole, clarity in how we use these terms is important. If we agree that anyone who is the child of a missionary is an MK, then “domestic MKs” (those who are children of home missionaries) are not necessarily traditional TCKs if their parents didn’t go to another culture.... Ironically, those whose parents serve in some form of international tentmaking ministry may not identify at all with the MK term, but fully embrace the TCK language. We must also remember that all traditional TCKs are not MKs. Children of diplomats, international business, and military are also bona fide TCKs. It’s getting complicated! While some may feel such a discussion is nit-picking, it is important so that we do not inadvertently create a dialog that essentially excludes domestic MKs by presuming that the TCK Profile in its entirety applies to all MKs. Conversely, since all TCKs are not MKs, we need to be sure that what we are calling ‘TCK’ characteristics in our MKs are common to traditional TCKs of all sectors rather than sector specific to us as a missionary community. Full disclosure: As we begin to look towards recalibrating MK Care for the future, I am presuming that MKs raised in any context mentioned above—internationally, domestically, invisibly—are included. The question then is “How do we take better care of all MKs no matter the context in which they live it?”

Interact

MK Care Phase Two: Where Do We Need to Go? Having assessed the past and present in our pit stop, the question remains, “How do we prepare to continue running an even stronger race going forward than we have run to this point? How do we remain active drivers in the car as we have been instead of fans in the stands?”

“ … God gave this type of internationally mobile childhood to missions to think about and study long before most of the world at large knew it was happening…. The point being that those in our community need to continue to think, study, and share what we have learned as well as to learn from others. We must not abdicate our voice or place in the larger world even as we care for our own MKs.” Ruth Van Reken That is an important question if we consider that God gave this type of internationally mobile childhood to missions to think about and study long before most of the world at large knew it was happening? The earliest writing I have seen on this topic came from Allen Parker who was then the principal of Woodstock School in India. In 1936, he wrote his dissertation for his master’s degree at the University of Chicago on “An Analysis of the Factors in the Personality Development of Children of Missionaries.” In this paper, Parker mentions many characteristics of what is now part of the TCK Profile. TCK pioneer, Dave Pollock, went to Kenya and worked as a dorm parent at Rift Valley Academy where his interest in studying the TCK experience blossomed. The point being that those in our

community need to continue to think, study, and share what we have learned as well as to learn from others. We must not abdicate our voice or place in the larger world and conversation even as we care for our own MKs. The first recalibration we need to do is to tweak the TCK definition so that it more properly reflects those initially studied. By clarifying that term, we then have meaningful language to look at some of the questions we raised in MK Care Phase One regarding MKs per se. In time, it can help us compare and contrast the TCK part of our experience with others who have other types of cross-cultural childhoods. Hopefully, this will begin to move the conversation from the question, ‘Am I a real TCK or not?’ to seeing what universal issues might be for all children among many cultural communities. In a world where questions of identity are becoming endemic, perhaps we can help answer the ‘But why is this such a global happening?’ as we share lessons learned from our particular story and studies. For all these reasons, Michael Pollock and I suggested the following update in the third edition of the Third Culture Kids book: “A traditional thirdculture kid (TCK) is a person who has spent a significant part of his or her first eighteen years of life accompanying parents into a country, or countries, outside either/both parents' passport country(ies) due to the parent’s choice of work or advanced training.” Academic researcher Anastasia Lijadi clarified the definition for a research project and has defined TCKs for the Oxford Bibliography this way. “Third culture kids (TCK) are individuals who follow their parents on their overseas assignment, relocating to one (or more) countries for a period of time with an option to either repatriate or stay abroad if permitted.” We realize some you just passed out as it seems we are messing with the holy grail to make any changes here! Some have called our TCK book ‘The TCK Bible,’ but I guarantee you it is neither infallible nor unchangeable! Take heart in what Ruth Useem

September 2020

herself said when Dave Pollock and I tweaked some ways she had described things for our first edition and sent that portion of our writing to her to ask if she was okay with our changes. Dr. Useem replied, “I am a social scientist and I realize that over time ideas change. Go ahead.” And so we have!

“ … we must also accept that in today’s world, while the terms MK and TCK are useful to our discussions, they are no longer enough. We need to enlarge the tents of our language to include others who are also trying to define and normalize their experiences, often wondering if they are or are not ‘true TCKs.’" Ruth Van Reken Once we have even reluctantly allowed a refinement to be made to our most beloved definitions, we must also accept that in today’s world, while the terms MK and TCK are useful to our discussions, perhaps they are no longer enough. We need to enlarge the tents of our language to include others who are also trying to define and normalize their experiences, often wondering if they are or are not “true TCKs.”

Who are CCKs? Since 2002, I have been using another model in the larger community of TCKs where I most often circulate. For years, people had been telling me they related to the characteristics of the TCK Profile, particularly in terms of questions of identity, but they had had quite a different life experience than what I described for TCKs. They wanted to know if they were TCKs or not? In response, I asked them to tell me their story. Always there was some cross-cultural component to it, even if they did not grow up in another country or have parents with an international career. Perhaps their grandparents were immigrants, or parents were bi-national, even though they had grown up primarily in one country. I never knew exactly how to answer them about their feelings of “TCKness” because I didn’t want to exclude people. However, how could we study all of these things under one name when there were so many variables? The tipping point of feeling ‘I have to do something to try and figure out a way to look at this more holistically’ came after one came after one frustrating day at a local Indianapolis school. Educators there wanted to tout their “diversity” program as multicultural but seemed to disdain the topic of TCKs. They felt TCKs had nothing to do with diversity or multiculturalism since the TCKs at their school were primarily white. How could they be “diverse”? When I returned to their school the next day, I explained I wanted to re-frame our ongoing discussion through a different model and language than either of us was using. Perhaps then we could look at the topics of multiculturalism/diversity and third culture kids through a common and fresh lens instead of presupposing we already knew what we were talking about. And so was born the concept of cross-cultural kids (CCKs)—children who interact meaningfully with different cultural worlds for any reason during their first 18 developmental years of life. An adult CCK (ACCK) is one who grew up in any type of cross-cultural experience.

Interact

Here is an expanded model of what I first scratched out in 2002. Certainly, it is not exhaustive for defining all cross-cultural childhoods but perhaps a beginning point.

In this model, the cross-cultural aspect is not defined by geography but by experience. What is the reason for their cross-cultural interactions? In many ways, this is simply an expansion of how the TCK model itself grew. In addition, as you can see from the above sample, each of these larger circles have subsets which can also be studied individually. In the end, these findings can help us compare and contrast different experiences within each particular type of experience as well as adding more understanding to the whole. My hope is that, with continuing discussion, we will find what is shared across these cross-cultural experiences and what is more specific to each type so that, again, we can have a more efficient and effective conversation about what is going on in our world.

A most unexpected thing happened when I initially started to use this model in my presentations. First, many listeners found themselves invited to the conversation personally whereas before they could only be observers. On the first day I used it in that Indianapolis school, one of the educators listening came up with that “Aha!” look of excitement on his face. He talked about how difficult his move from Boston to Indianapolis had been for him and his children, but they didn’t know why it had been worse than they expected. Now he could see his children were domestic TCKs and could understand some of the reasons it had been so hard for them as Boston had a very different culture than Indianapolis. The second time I used this model was for the diversity program of a large international corporation. During the Q&A period, a woman asked if someone could be in more than one circle? Since I hadn’t considered that possibility before, I asked her to explain the question. She told us that she and her husband were both Indian but from two different areas of the country. Neither spoke the other’s first language so English was their language at home. They immigrated to the U.S. where they became not only immigrants but part of a minority community. In time, they went to Europe for the husband’s job with an international corporation. When her children went to school in the U.S., it was an entirely different culture than the world they met at home each night. Where were her kids in this model? Unbelievably (to me at least), they were experientially in five, possibly six, circles: children of cross-cultural parents, potentially domestic TCKs before moving to the States, then they became immigrants, third culture kids, minorities, and educational CCKs. Thus, I began to see not only new ways of naming experiences but the growing cultural complexity so many children face, including our MKs of all backgrounds. It also gives us a model to look at the growing cultural complexity of many of the MKs and other TCKs in our community of faith.

September 2020

Think of it. Everyone we have already mentioned can be included. Domestic MKs are right there with other domestic TCKs who, for whatever reason, interact with different cultural worlds around them without leaving their country. Internationally mobile MKs are part of the traditional TCK group. For international MKs, their cultural voyage takes place between cultures in different countries. For domestic MKs, they may also go to different cultures in their country as the Indian MKs do, or they may navigate between the missionary subculture their parents are part of at the home office and the larger dominant culture surrounding them. For the “secret MKs,” they can simply rest in the traditional TCK circle or any other they would like to claim. In addition, we look at this model and realize we can no longer think of our MKs in one- or two- dimensional levels. Many now come from multicultural families or are of mixed racial heritage. Other MKs may also be international adoptees. In some countries, MKs are not only obvious minorities but may be bullied or experience extreme racism, that I, as a white child in Nigeria, did not face in the same way. This means as we work with our MKs, we need to take time to hear their entire story. Children who have been adopted may have significant attachment issues which multiple cycles of separation and loss (often inherent in the MK experience) may exacerbate. Are there ways to create more physical and emotional stability for those MKs? What about our MKs who go to school in a Westernbased educational environment but return to a much different environment at home? What about MKs who may face racism in their host countries or, in some cases, may blend into their host culture by appearance and be shocked to face racism in their home country if they happen to be a minority there? How well do we support mixed racial heritage couples and their children not only in our community, but when they may face challenges in the surrounding culture? I also believe by using this larger model we can encourage MKs of all backgrounds to realize they belong to a bigger whole. Often, they feel like “my 11

Interact

situation is so unique, no one can possibly understand me.” Instead, they can begin to see that their lives were designed and given by God to prepare them to live fully and well in a globalizing world, for God’s sake and their joy. If we help them see that being made in the image of God as relational, emotional, creative, intellectual, volitional, and spiritual beings is their primary identity rather than their experience of being an MK, they can understand how much they do share in common with others and realize what they have learned in their specific story has application for others even if the contexts are different.

Looking Farther Ahead But stay tuned! As I indicated above, this emerging discussion is not yet complete. Even as I write, some researchers are suggesting that it’s important to recognize the generic roots of this third culture term as a way of life formed when people of different cultures relate one to another and form an interstitial, or third culture, space. If that happens, the TCK definition itself needs to be updated to include all who grow up navigating different cultural worlds. That, of course, would include all I now list as CCKs. Others suggest keeping the TCK term more “pure” in a way that reflects its historical roots and then using other language such as CCK or a new term to recognize all who grow up cross-culturally— including traditional TCKs. Time will tell how these new discussions play out, but either way, we can see the reality of the huge cultural changes in our world and how/why we need to stay involved in the discussions. It’s important to help us keep giving the best MK care we can, but also as those called to go into all the world, what we are learning for ourselves has increasing relevance for many of the people with whom we work. What we must never do as a community in these most interesting and energizing (to me at least!) conversations is be caught in defending the past of, for me, a term I made up. There are going to be further pit stops ahead where we can keep growing and, again, we want to be part of moving forward not

getting stuck on the track! What is important is that by staying involved in these global discussions, we can continue to see more clearly the changes that will continue to go on for our MKs and their care.

“I have come to appreciate that TCKs and CCKs may have more to offer the world than we probably realize…. We’re not the answer to all the world’s problems…. But we do benefit … from growing up ahead of our time. ‘Ultimately a cross-cultural childhood is becoming the new normal across our globe … rather than something that only affects globally mobile kids.” The issues TCKs face are now, and will increasingly be, faced by everyone. TCKs are really previews of coming attractions.” Christopher O’Shaughnessy (Arrivals, Departures and the Adventures In-Between, 2014) Meanwhile, during this current pit stop, members from our community have added other adjustments for the race ahead. Those at the Shepherd’s Table meeting formed an association called Global Third Culture Hub: Care, Advocacy, Resources, Equipping. You will hear more from and about their plans for how to care for all MKs the world over through future editions of Interact. Groups like Daraja are seeking to find new ways to help disciple MKs and other Christian TCKs and help them develop the gifts of this lifestyle for fulfilling their place in God’s kingdom. Still others are out in the wider world, looking for MKs who may have been wounded or gotten lost in their journeys.

engines, as they keep the finish line in mind … that day when they, like those who have gone before, hear, “Well done, good and faithful servant. Enter into the joy of your Lord.”

Ruth E. Van Reken Ruth Van Reken is a second generation third-culture kid (TCK) and mother of three now adult TCKs. She is co-author of Third Culture Kids: Growing Up Among Worlds (third edition), and author of Letters Never Sent, her personal journaling seeking to understand the long-term impact of her cross-cultural childhood. For more than thirty years Ruth has traveled extensively speaking about issues related to the impact of global mobility on individuals, families, and societies. She is the co-founder and past chairperson of Families in Global Transition. In addition to her two books and many articles, she has written a chapter in other books including Strangers at Home, Unrooted Childhoods, and Writing Out of Limbo and co-authored Life in Motion, a study of how people in the Bible experienced transitions. In 2019, she received an honorary degree (Doctor of Letters) from Wheaton College for her life's work . Have a look at Ruth E. Van Reken's books:

Yes, there is a race still to be run. Thankfully, God has gifted and called so many creative, committed people to continue driving the cars and refilling the September 2020

One Source, Two Streams Dr. David C. Pollock

(Adapted from an article in Interact)

Recently, I watched a spring bubbling from the ground along a footpath in the woods. It formed a small pool and flowed out into two streams that tumbled down a hill. In the natural scheme of things, the two would ultimately meet each other. In their flowing and growing they would nourish, refresh, cleanse, sustain, and, overall, give life. Springs and rivulets give me a significant metaphor for my life as an individual and for the Body of Christ. One source and two streams: these blend into one flow to give life.

Interact

One Source The Apostle Paul captures the focal point of eternity and time as he writes, “Christ is the image of God”—Creator, Sustainer, Head of the Body, Reconciler and Perfecter (Col. 1: 15-23). Thinking Christianly begins and ends with a comprehensive view of Christ. It is this view of recognizing who He is that is key to fulfilling Peter’s directive to be “clear-minded” (1 Peter 4:7). Peter did this in responding to Jesus’ question in Matthew 16:15, “Who do you say that I am?” The answer to that key question lays the foundation for the remainder of Peter’s admonition to “those scattered abroad … Be clearminded, self-controlled so that you can pray and love one another deeply.” The progression is from thinking and believing rightly to choosing, acting and loving rightly. James captures the concept of thinking rightly with his admonition to seek godly wisdom (James 1:5). The key issue in that wisdom is clearly perceiving this person, Jesus. Once established, the reasonable conclusion is that we become doers and not hearers only. He pushes us to recognize that sin is not only doing the wrong, but it is knowing what is good and not doing it (James 4:17). John, in his first letter, indicates that the identity of a believer is determined by observing if he thinks (believes) rightly about Jesus, chooses right and loves right. He builds his criteria on the basis of the person of Christ

Himself who is Light, Life and Love. John’s introduction to this book (1 John 1:3) states, “We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard (clear-minded) so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with His Son, Jesus Christ.” Jesus is the Spring, the Source of whom His Father said, “This is my Beloved Son … Listen to Him” (Luke 9:35). We must listen to Jesus when He prays (in John 17:21-23), “Father, just as you are in Me and I am in You, may they also be in Us so that the world may believe that you have sent Me. I have given them the glory that You gave me, that they may be one as We are One … I in them and You in Me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know You sent Me.” Could it be that this unity is how we think, how we choose, and how we love? He is the Source and sets the flow of the two streams. Listen to His commands.

believer on behalf of another person for the other’s good. It is the demonstration of God’s character in the people He has reconciled to Himself and to each other. Love is the stuff His people are made of.

“It has been my conviction over the last four decades of my work in missions that member care is by its very nature the tangible expression of the love of Christ for us and of our love for Him. It is not simply a program or a plan; it is the product of who we are because of our relationship to Him.” Dave Pollock

Stream One “A new commandment I give to you that you love one another. By this will all men know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” “If you love Me you will obey what I command.” “This is My command: Love each other” (John 13:34-5; 14:15 and 15:17). The irrefutable evidence of God’s supernatural intervention in human affairs confronts a lost mankind through the action of one

September 2020

Stream Two “As the Father has sent Me, I am sending you” (John 20:21). “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me. Therefore, go (and as you are going) make disciples of all nations… teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you” (Matt. 28:18-20). The two streams, the Great Commandment and the Great Commission, are inseparable. Sometimes in our zeal to be responsive to one we ignore or minimize the other. The Great Commission cannot be fulfilled without obedience to the Great Commandment. The evidence to the watching world is the fulfillment of His Command. Is it possible that the Great Commission is more easily obeyed than the Great Commandment? Defining love as action on behalf of another, even an enemy, may be a sticking point for all of us. The good Samaritan was faced with

Interact

expenditure of time and money, inconvenience, readjusting priorities, and perhaps even disdain from the one he rescued. Would it be easier, less demanding, to be a priest or Levite slipping by to do some teaching or preaching or to perform some act of worship in the synagogue? Our struggle in the mission’s community may not be dissimilar from that of the travellers from Jerusalem to Jericho. Perhaps it related to their religious position. Perhaps they had religious tasks to perform that could not be ignored. Perhaps they had a great commission to obey and could not allow themselves to be sidetracked. Jesus’ evaluation shakes me to my roots. I can recall too many times when a task I perceived as obedience to the Great Commission preempted obedience to the Great Commandment.

Failure to respond to the Great Commandment removes the most convincing piece of divinely appointed evidence that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, and that we are His disciples. Dave Pollock Failure to respond to the Great Commandment removes the most convincing piece of divinely appointed evidence that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, and that we are His disciples. But there’s more. It leaves a weaker brother or sister open to discouragement, failure, and brokenness. It makes lonely coworkers vulnerable to attack. It undermines relationships and diminishes effectiveness. In missions, much of the attrition with its waste of people and resources is readily traceable to our failure to intervene appropriately at the right places in the life of the missionary, the family as a whole, and with the children. It is important to remember that obedience to the Great Commandment in the mission’s context is not simply a matter of pragmatism and damage control. It is obedience to His command.

How do we navigate both streams? The starting point is full-hearted acknowledgement of the biblical mandate and unreserved obedience to the Source. Thinking rightly leads to choosing rightly and flows readily to acting rightly. The Samaritan immediately evaluated the situation and took action to correct the problem. The action was both immediate and long-term in view of both rescue and recovery. Had he been there sooner, he might have intervened to be preventive and saved everyone grief and pain. Love is preventive as well as therapeutic. We start by identifying the points where intervention can be preventive, recognize the places where care and comfort are required, and plan for the therapeutic when required.

“In the missions’ community, care of personnel is the fulfillment of our mandate and the natural expression of our fellowship. It is … more than just protection against financial loss or safeguarding our investments. Such care is not an event, nor is it necessarily automatic. Rather, it is an intentional, planned, and ongoing flow which occurs throughout a missionary’s life….” Dave Pollock

The Flow of Care If we listen to the needs and issues expressed by experienced personnel, the details of the flow of care will increase, be refined and, in the process of change, will be modified and customized. The menu below gives a starting point.

Prefield: Recruitment - “honesty in advertising” is important. We don’t know all that these new missionaries will face, but the known factors, sacrifices, etc. should be identified and considered. Screening - careful evaluation of the person, of his/her preparation, of the family/its dynamics, etc. Orientation - time and money are usually the enemies of proper prefield orientation which should include personal issues, interpersonal skills, cross-cultural skills, constructing a learning framework and specialized issues for parents, educators, shorttermers, etc. Placement - giftedness (placing people where they and their gifts fit) and consideration of the family/seasons in the life of the family are important preventive moves.

On-Site: Orientation - should be directly tied to previous orientations/training and include reviewing transition and cultural adjustment as well as culture and living specifics. Placement - giftedness and “the seasons of the family” are still issues that must be consistently considered even when placement changes on the field. Support - developing a caring community to mentor/encourage, provide access to counselors, and provide help/resources for culture/language acquisition, professional development and predeparture preparation.

Re-entry (Entry for some TCKs): Agency - making key personnel available, coordinating reception and career counseling for those leaving. Others (family, friends, and churches) - assisting them in developing expectations and providing for their initial living needs. Reentry/transition seminars - for those who are returning and exit interviews for everyone (whether or not they are returning overseas).

Continuing Follow-up Care: Providing support groups, materials and personnel / services.

September 2020

“Care is defined … as the actions of one person intentionally responding to conscious or unconscious needs of another for their well-being, protection or enhancement. Care may be proactive, preventive, or remedial; it may be direct or indirect. “Care” is a broader concept that “counseling” or “therapy.” Glenn Taylor (Enhancing Missionary Vitality, 2002)

The concept of the flow of care was the theme of the first International Conference on Missionary Kids in 1984. It was adopted by the Family Liaison Office of the State Department and the Foreign Service Youth Foundation soon after. Many in the international business community are interested as well. They want to improve their bottom line by increasing efficiency, effectiveness and minimizing unnecessary attrition. For us who flow on the crest of two streams from the same Source, there should be no question about our enthusiastic participation. The Great Commission and Great Commandment are inseparable. To develop a flow of care requires cooperation among administrators, boards of directors, support personnel and organizations at significant points of intervention. A “managed care” approach in order to facilitate the “flow of care” is not a far-fetched concept when we realize how much is at stake and see how responsive it is to the basic issues of the will of God. “Father I pray … that they may be one as We are One.” “A new command I give, love one another …” “By this shall all know you are my disciples … ” “And as you go … make disciples … teach them to obey all I commanded you ... I am with you always.” Do it!

Author

Dr. David C. Pollock Dr. David C. Pollock founded Interaction and served as its Executive Director of Interaction until his death in 2004. He traveled extensively as a passionate advocate and speaker on behalf of MKs/TCKs as well as an author and consultant addressing the needs and care of MKs/TCKs and missionary families. In addition, he served on the faculty of Houghton College in New York. He co-authored the book Third Culture Kids: Growing Up Among Worlds (third edition) with Ruth Van Reken. He was the cofounder of the three International Conferences on MKs held in the 1980s (Manila, Quito and Nairobi). Previously, Dave and his family served at Rift Valley Academy in Kijabe, Kenya with Africa Inland Mission.

Interact

Flow of Care Revisited Michael Pollock

Historically, the idea of the Flow of Care (FoC) stemmed from the vision of the single Source of wisdom, justice, righteousness, and love in the person of Jesus Christ, out of whom flowed the Great Commission and the Great Commandment as you can read in Dave Pollock’s original article. My father spoke and thought from an ordained pastor’s perspective and his vision included Peter’s letters to the Jewish diaspora. After the Judean War of AD 66 dispersed the early followers of Jesus, Peter was writing from Rome to those who had fled from Jerusalem to what is modern-day Turkey. This third-culture community was very much in the process of “relating their societies or parts thereof” 1 to people of multiple cultures. Peter calls on them to care for each other in a variety of ways, stressing the values of humility, generosity, unity, patience, fearlessness, peace, compassion, hospitality, and love (I Peter 3:8-14, 4:8, and 5:14, and II Peter 3:14-15).

Additions To this conversation I would add that the term Flow of Care also has a strong root in what some people term the Great Compassion found in Matthew’s gospel (Matthew 25:31-46). Jesus gets excruciatingly specific when he talks about what love for one another looks like: feeding the hungry, giving a drink to the thirsty, clothing those without, sheltering the homeless stranger, looking after the sick, and visiting the ones in prison. He promised when we do those things for the least of his brothers and sisters, we do them for Him. Jesus modeled whole person care; meeting spiritual, physical, emotional, mental, and social needs in the Kingdom among us until the perfection of the renewed world is manifest. I remember walking in the woods with my father shortly before leaving for China in 2003. Many times, we had spoken of Christ’s words, “whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.” However, this time the conversation was in the context of my father releasing his son, daughter-in-law and two grandchildren to cross the globe to where SARS was still active. My wife Kristen and I hoped to live out Christ-like care for teachers, students, and families in the international school context. As a good father, he wondered, “Who will care for you and for the grandkids?” His concern was at the heart of the flow of care concept. Showing a father’s love, he encouraged us to serve others and to participate in the kind of community that seeks and values God’s care for us, self-care, and communal care. He encouraged us to be part of a community that addresses the needs of the most vulnerable equally with those with the most power and resources. It is imperative that the “least of these” includes the children of those who cross cultures in response to the call of Christ if we are to be consistent with news that is truly good.

September 2020

A Target A flow of care for third-culture kids, adults and families is less an exact model as it is a commitment to provide hands on, practical care for the whole person, throughout his whole life journey that demonstrates and points to the love of Christ. This is what Francis Schaeffer was referring to in his classic book, The Mark of the Christian. That is not to say that there are no models for this care, as several have been developed. Dave Pollock worked with Kelly and Michele O’Donnell to create a member care model that in its newest iteration describes seven spheres of member care. Master care is essentially God’s care for us; then, the model moves outward from Master Care to Self- and Mutual-Care, Sender Care, Special Care, Network Care, Sector Care, and Humanity Care 2 (see model on page 20). In considering the scope of a flow of care, it is reasonable for various entities and persons to have an area of focus and expertise. However, we must remember that a flow of care is not only for other Christians. If Christians have an ethos of loving even our enemies, then it is consistent that we look out for the interests of every person. Consider the UN report that said in 2019 there were 272,000 people currently residing outside of their passport countries 3. In the spirit of my father’s question in 2003, who will care for these people and their children? With a broad scope in mind, a flow of care addresses whole person, whole life care for cross cultural and mobile populations. When individuals and organizations provide intentional, practical and personalized care to themselves, their families and team members, what is created spills over into multiple venues and can be reinforced through networks. This effect can be observed with the original FoC concept in the mission’s community. It has worked its way into the State Department, international business HR departments, international schools, and care-groups for the military. When Ruth Van Reken and I were working on the third edition of the TCK book, Third Culture Kids: Growing Up Among Worlds, we heard from all kinds of people who had adapted ideas for the TCK flow of care into various communities, including the hearing-able children of deaf parents.

Interact

Dave’s original flow of care4 for third-culture families walked through the full transition process from recruitment to retirement. A sequence for thinking through the fundamental features of the FoC is included in Dave Pollock’s original article and works off of the Transition Model popularized and now revised in the TCK book, Growing Up Among Worlds 3rd Edition.As families and individuals adjust, they move through the stages of Involvement, Leaving, Transit, Entering, and Re- involvement. The core elements in the FoC include detailed attention to Recruitment, Screening, Preparation/Pre-departure, Departure, Arrival, Field Life, Pre-departure, Reentry (or entry for some TCKs), and Ongoing Support 5. ICMK Manilla (International Conference on Missionary Kids) provided an initial, key focus on the flow of care. Up until Dave’s death in 2004, he promoted the outworking of these concepts and concrete approaches, including promoting ongoing conversations with experienced crosscultural workers and care providers in third-culture communities. So why are we still discussing what needs to be done?

Four Barriers A seamless flow of care is not easy to achieve nor to maintain, but there are several trends which are working against current progress: false sense that “all is well” and that all that needs 1. Adoing has been done or is being done by “someone else.” Shifting expectations between those sent, the sending organization, churches and support organizations leave gaps that no one is filling. of the evolving needs and challenges in the 2. Ignorance third-culture experience. With globalization, there can be a sense that transitions are “not a big deal” and that moving between cultures, countries and continents is fairly simple. Complicated politics and resulting conflicts, shifting centers of sending countries, and global issues like rising sea-levels and pandemics create new strains on resources, planning and contingencies. One of the changes in field life is an increase in the back and forth nature of international work, with families and individuals choosing to do more frequent travels between “home” and “work” cultures. To my knowledge, research has not caught up with the impact of this on children who experience increased mobility. There are many other examples of holes in our knowledge base.

that expresses itself in exhausted care 3. Care-fatigue personnel, reduced executive planning, and under budgeting. I recently heard a church leader lamenting the loss of commitment among missionaries, considering that some missionaries used to pack for the field in their coffins. That kind of one-way-planning may have been lauded in the past and might simplify a member care scenario (yes, that is tongue in cheek) but surely does not free us from the injunction to love one another. Supporting member care personnel and HR departments adequately is not a luxury; it is best practice and simply the right thing to do. steep increase in churches as sending 4. The organizations along with the high turnover in mission member care departments means that there are often willing, caring people with little training and preparation for the task. Developing a vision and understanding of the elements of the flow of care task takes time, training, study, and experience which also involves the budgeting of time, personnel, and funds. The foresight of member care succession planning is also critical as good care will have a strong relational component and needs time to develop during a handover process.

Achilles Heel In 2015, Cigna Life Insurance Company surveyed over 2,700 employees of Fortune 500 companies working in over 150 countries. The weakest point of the transition process was identified as pre-departure from international assignments and support in the reentry process. Barely half of the companies had a repatriation program and only 20% of the companies tracked their employees after they had returned to their passport countries.6

Hopeful Signs There is a growing sense that this is a Kairos time in which new relationships are being forged between third-culture care providers locally, nationally and globally. Leaders of care-based organizations for cross-cultural workers are looking for new ways to partner and collaborate with one another to close the gaps and increase the quality of care in the third culture. Groups like Safe Passage Across Networks (SPAN) have developed best practices in international schools and are developing certifications for those who will be trained. In September of 2019, a group of MK/TCK care providers gathered in Pennsylvania representing TCK care organizations across Europe, Asia, India, Korea, South America, the US, and Canada along with two organizations with workers from â€œeverywhere to everywhereâ€? on the planet. Our task was to consider forming a community of care providers who would work together on TCK care, advocacy, resources, and equipping. At the end of three days, the Global Third Culture Hub was birthed and continues to move forward together through the challenges and restrictions of Covid-19. Since September, the group added two more members representing crosscultural workers from China and West Africa. Multiple conferences such as MKCS, MKES, SHARE, Global Member Care, EuroTCK, FIGT, and AERC gather cross-cultural workers, care providers, and TCKs to share experiences, expertise, and best practice. While Covid-19 currently challenges efforts to gather in person, the shift to online meeting may actually enhance ongoing communication and collaboration.

While missionary-sending communities seem to do better with reentry/TCK entry on the basis of anecdotal evidence, many MKs/TCKs speak of a lack of support in transition or during separation from their families during college. There is often a huge support gap as these MKs/TCKs leave university or post high school training and move into adult life. I have also heard many crosscultural workers talk about a lack of support in reentry, debriefing, and re-involvement /retirement in their passport countries.

Kelly Oâ€™Donnell, Global Member Care Model Seven Spheres (2016)

September 2020

Questions to Answer As we consider how the flow of care must change and adapt in 2020 and beyond, I think care providers need to answer some important questions:

How does the flow of care address larger societal issues such as abuse that has not been dealt with (particularly but not exclusively sexual abuse) as well as racial injustice and discrimination in third-culture communities?

Whose voices are missing from the discussion table around the flow of care? What perspectives are needed for a truly global conversation and collaboration?

How do we bring greater parity in care between those with greater experience and resources and those with less experience and fewer resources? Whose needs are “slipping between the cracks”?

How might we better engage experienced crosscultural workers and TCKs themselves as the bridges “between worlds” in the third-culture, care community?

Conclusion

“Member care is important not because missionaries necessarily have more or unique stress, but rather because missionaries are strategic. They are key sources of blessing … Member care is also important because it embodies the biblical command to love one another. Such love is a cornerstone for mission strategy. As we love, people will know that we are His disciples.” Kelly O’Donnell (Doing Member Care Well, 2002)

Interact

Jesus said the Kingdom is at hand, within and among you. That Kingdom is not political, militaristic or wealth dependent; it is based on love, the kind that makes a person willing to lay down his/her life for others. Peter, writing to a rag-tag group of essentially war-refugees, reminded them that they don’t belong to this world, that they are resident aliens in exile, and that they are to continue caring for each other—loving one another deeply. Like them, he reminds us that this is our powerful testimony to those who do not have an obedient faith in Christ. The early church looked out for each other’s needs, spiritually, yes, but also mentally, emotionally, relationally, and materially. If we are going to be true students and followers of The Way, we must press on to do the same. Our current global pandemic crisis has increased the layers of stress and challenges facing cross-cultural, global workers and their families. It is also an opportunity for us to re-engage with the concept of the flow of care, cultivating new growth out of powerful roots that will produce nourishing fruit that will last.

Michael V. Pollock Michael V. Pollock serves as the Executive Director of Interaction International Inc. He is an international educator, author, presenter, consultant, and coach. He founded Odyssey in China and Daraja in the U.S. which focus on young adult TCK care, equipping and advocacy. He is currently working with other TCK care leaders to establish a global third-culture resource, training, and advocacy hub. An ATCK himself (U.S. and Kenya), he worked in China for nine years as an international school principal and student development director. He has presented globally on cross-cultural education, parenting, and transition. Through coauthoring Third Culture Kids: Growing up Among Worlds (the third edition), Michael promotes a thriving life for people moving and living cross-culturally. Have a look at the book Michael Pollock co-authored with Ruth Van Reken.

1. Dr. Ruth Useem’s description of the third culture: “we began to use the term ‘third culture’ as a generic term to cover the styles of life created, shared, and learned by persons who are in the process of relating their societies, or sections thereof, to each other. The term ‘Third Culture Kids’ or TCKs was coined to refer to the children who accompany their parents into another society.” TCK World (http://www.tckworld.com/) 2. O’Donnell, Kelly and Michèle Lewis [2016, December]. MultiSectoral Member Care: Engaging Our World as Global Integrators. Journal of Psychology and Theology, Volume 44, (No. 4), pp. 303–314.

4. Pollock, David C. [1997, October]. Developing a Flow of Care. Interact, (Vol. 7/No 1). 5. Pollock, David C. [2002, September-October]. Developing a Flow of Care and Caregivers, Mission Frontiers, “From Surviving to Thriving.” 6. 2015 Global Mobility Trends Survey: Cigna Global Health Benefits® (CGHB) and the National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC) https://www.cigna.com/assets/docs/newsroom/886091-globalmobility-trends-study-brochure-final11215.pdf

3. UN website: Migration. https://www.un.org/en/sections/issuesdepth/migration/index.html#:~:text=In%202019%2C%20the%20n umber%20of,world%20population%20has%20also%20risen.

September 2020

MK Education: Then and Now George Durance and David Durance

Last month, Pope Francis appointed the son of evangelical missionaries (an MK) to the position of Vice-Prefect of the Vatican Library (Vatican, 2020). Born to Canadian-American parents, raised in Germany, graduate of a well-known MK school near Basel, Switzerland, married cross-culturally to an Indian, fluent in many languages, a noted scholar and academic with credentials from the world’s leading universities, he continues to leverage his MK advantages of linguistic fluency, cultural adaptability, and personal resilience. Reflecting on several decades of involvement with MKs, it would be easy to write at length of former students who have gone on to succeed in every sphere of life. Is their commendable record a statistically significant correlate

of their heritage and more specifically of the education and care they received from a community that supports and resources the mission’s movement? It is an interesting question, but a more urgent one is at hand: “How can the Christian community best support the education of MKs in the years which lie ahead?” One thing is certain: the education the new viceprefect received at his MK school would not serve him or the MK population well today. Times have changed and the rate of change is increasing. Considering this, what opportunities and challenges lie ahead for those engaged in MK education?

September 2020

Assumption #1: Crises Accelerate Trends Crises are inevitable and a reminder to us that we live in a redemption-longing world. COVID-19’s impact on education is the subject of much discussion, and rightly so. The numbers (as of May 10, 2020) indicate that the pandemic is impacting approximately 1.3 billion students in 177 countries, which is about 90% of the world’s student population (UNICEF in Wikipedia, 2020). It will be years before we are able to assess adequately the social and economic cost of this disruption. If the current crisis continues and closures remain into the autumn and beyond, it is hard to see how hardwon resources can be preserved without some long-term damage to the existing infrastructure. However, this article assumes the primary impact of COVID-19, like so many other crises, is that of an accelerator. Trends which were already underway will gain momentum as the pandemic imposes changes that would otherwise have been implemented incrementally. It is therefore critical that the missionary community re-envision MK education, not to cope with COVID-19, but to adapt to long-term trends whose horizons are now months away rather than years.

Interact

Assumption #2: Global Disciple-making Remains a Pressing Mandate The means and methods of global mission are changing dramatically (cf., Blöcher, 2020; Joshua Project, 2019; Knight, 2017). Nevertheless, two constants remain. The first is that churches will continue to commission and send Holy Spiritempowered disciple-makers to the nations. The second is that these missionaries will continue to have children who need support and care. A hundred years ago more than half the world was unevangelized. Today, it is less than 30%, but the absolute number has grown to more than two billion people. During this period, the number of missionaries has increased eight-fold from a little over 62,000 in 1900 to over 420,000 today (cf., Knight, 2017; Joshua Project, 2019). While the growth rate of international workers has plateaued in recent years (due in part to the emergence of strong national churches), missiologists continue to project a modest increase in international workers through 2050. As long as the church embraces Christ’s commission to take the Gospel to the ends of the earth, there will be a need for MK education and care. The challenge today is to employ a continuous revisioning process, and COVID-19 has heightened the challenge by accelerating trends which were already causing concern.

Assumption #3: Families are Most Important in Determining Educational Outcomes It is well known that socioeconomic factors are highly correlated with student achievement across the world (cf., Machebe, et al. 2017; Reardon, et al. 2019). Anna Chmielewski (2019) analyzed 30 large scale assessments over 50 years covering 100 countries and 5.8 million students. She found that the “socioeconomic achievement gap” is increasing even as the world becomes wealthier and education spreads to the less financially able. Given the well-documented correlation between wealth and achievement, how is it that MKs, raised in modest socioeconomic circumstances, attain academic levels associated with children of more privileged backgrounds (e.g., Durance, 1996)? Research indicates the answer lies in the family’s attitudes and values. When researching the impact of class in England, Williams (2010) found that “parents’ attitudes were most important [for success], making more of a difference than schools themselves.” She found that upwardly- mobile parents had a high regard for education and were consequently involved in their children’s educational activities. In other words, there is a return on investment. Behavior, motivation, and test scores all improve as the student senses “the people who love me the most care.” All types and all ages of students do better when parents are involved and the more involved, the greater the benefit. Christine Jax, quoting Harvard professor William H. Jeynes, reports that “... parental expectations have the largest effect on student academic achievement.” Professor Douglas B. Downey of Ohio State University agrees, claiming that expectations are particularly effective “when parents combine responsiveness and warmth with their high expectations” (quoted in Jax, 2013; cf., Waterford, 2020).

the real cause of the achievement. MKs have done well because their parents valued education, even to the point where dearly loved children were permitted to attend a boarding school at serious financial and emotional cost. Nurturing love, high expectations, investments of time, and prioritizations in the limited budget all contributed to ensuring the missionary child was “privileged” and motivated to achieve in ways not predicted by their parents’ socioeconomic status. The “ministry first” and “ministry at the expense of my marriage and children” scenarios remain a problem in the missionary home, just as the focus on job or vocation remains a problem in the church and society at large. However, if it was a disproportionate feature of these families in the past, in our experience it no longer is today. In addition to this, it is hard to imagine any other group of children receiving more prayer and more expressions of community concern than the MK. While MKs do not always welcome this attention, it reinforces in their mind that education is important and that people, even God Himself, care about the learning process and results. We remain optimistic about the educational success of MKs going forward because we remain optimistic about their parents and the on-going support of a wider community. Anecdotal evidence suggests that missionary families have more children, lower divorce rates, and a higher percentage of children who graduate from college. The most encouraging fact about the role of parents in the success of the child is that the value choices they make to support the child do not require more income, more resources, or more options. Involvement, interest, investiture of time, and expressions of love, concern, and hope are not derivatives of socioeconomic status.

Therefore, while achievement is associated with higher socioeconomic status, wealth is itself a correlate and consequence, while value choices are

September 2020

Trend #1: Modern Missions and Therefore Modern MKs are Ethnically and Culturally Diverse The assumption is that the number of international Christian workers serving cross-culturally will grow modestly over the next two decades. As a result, there will be at least as many MKs needing educational services thirty years from now as there are today. However, the single most remarkable fact about the ongoing missionary community is not its growth, but its diversity. This distinguishing feature demonstrates itself in three ways: where missionaries call “home,” where they serve, and what service they provide.

From Where? Latin Americans, Asians and Africans have now joined Europeans and Anglo-Americans in the global mission’s cause. In 1900, Christians in Europe outnumbered the global Christian community 2 to 1. By 2017, there were more Christians living in both Africa and Latin America than there were in Europe. By 2025, there will be 1.25 billion Christians living in Africa (Earls, 2016). As economies strengthen in these areas of the world, it is only logical that the percentage of missionaries will continue to rebalance in favor of the east and the south. By one estimate there will be 700,000 global missionaries in 2050, up from 430,000 today. It follows logically that the largest contingents will come from Asia and Africa (cf., Knight, 2017). The impact on MK education is literally visible in the classrooms of our schools. In fact, MK educational programs are one of the best ways to obtain a visual representation of the changed ethnic landscape in modern missions. Schools continue to implement curricular and co-curricular changes to accommodate the needs of students from various parts of the world. The trend to ethnic diversity is now so well-established that it is misleading to speak of it as something “new.” While educational

Interact

providers have been stretched to adjust, the results are encouraging, even though most schools known to us are still clarifying ways to turn the challenges of diversity into opportunities which inspire and enhance the learning environment.

To Where? Thirty years ago, when the Iron Curtain fell, we wrote to over 40 sending agencies asking their leaders what impact the fall would have on the number and nature of MKs in our region of the world. About half responded with the comment that we could anticipate twice as many students needing service in about six years. Re-assignment and new deployment were the watchwords of the day. Our school immediately began a major campaign to expand physical resources and staffing. Almost exactly six years later, the number of MKs rose as the agencies predicted. It was a simple case of extrapolation: at least twice as many missionaries would be serving in the former Eastern Bloc region, so the school should anticipate twice as many MKs. The investment the school and the mission’s community made was a major step of faith. When we decided to raise funds and rebuild the campus to accommodate students whose parents had not yet been recruited, to say nothing about deployment, one board member wept saying, “I can see what an amazing blessing these new facilities will be to MKs in the future.” What are we as providers and supporters of MK education “seeing” by faith today? Opening new frontiers is a characteristic of the missions’ movement, not a passing fad. It is time once again for the MK supporting community to think prayerfully and carefully about what God is doing, and to act nimbly and boldly to gather and deploy the resources which will be needed. And where will they be needed? That raises another question: “To where are missionaries now being sent?” Until recently most missionaries, and therefore MKs, lived in “developed” and “reached” areas of the world. As Knight (2017) put it, “… there

are plenty of Christians to meet the world’s spiritual needs, enough money to meet the world’s physical needs, but it is all poorly allocated and not mobilized strategically in the hands of those to whom it has been allocated.” The future “base” of global mission will almost certainly be in large urban areas and especially those urban areas which are home to unreached people. The real jungle today is concrete: 55% of the global population resides in cities; by 2050 it will be 70%. By extrapolation, this is where our MKs will be and where MK educational services should be concentrated.

Doing What? Over the last two centuries the western church has focused on church planting as its primary method of fulfilling Christ’s commission to make disciples, and this continues to be an important missionary endeavor. However, with the emergence of a strong, vibrant, reproducing church in many countries, local churches have increasingly assumed responsibility for church planting. For cultural and linguistic reasons this makes sense. Today, the global church’s involvement in church planting is more frequently supportive in nature and related to teaching, consulting, mentoring, and advising. Will this shift impact the ethos of MK support services?

Trend #2: The International School Option While the missionary community has been expanding and becoming increasingly urban and ethnically diverse, the international non-missionary community has similarly changed. Two centuries ago, foreign service departments established schools for the children of embassy staff. A century later multinational companies expanded their operations to every region of the world. Like the diplomats, international businesspeople desired instruction for their children equivalent to the education they would have received in their passport country. By the end of the 20th century a series of economic and technological factors converged to create a period of intense globalization. The impact on the nature and provision of education was revolutionary. Twenty years ago, 1,000 English language international schools existed. Today 4.5 million students attend over 8,000 international school. The pre COVID-19 expectation was that there could be as many as 16,000 schools and 8.75 million students by 2030 (Wechsler, 2017). Wechsler reports that, “… more than 20 cities in the world have at least 50 English-speaking international schools each, such as Dubai (which has more than 250) and Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates; Beijing; Shanghai; Bangkok; Tokyo; Singapore; Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; and Madrid. Cost factors aside, these rapidly multiplying schools are a realistic option for families, particularly now when their sending agencies are increasingly deploying them to major cities.

September 2020

It is easy to see why these schools are an attractive option for MKs. Acting almost like a neighborhood school, they provide a type of education that aligns with what these parents desire for their children. It develops linguistic skills, a strong English-language core, and an international perspective. It provides globally-recognized leaving credentials, a broad, well-rounded curriculum (which includes music and athletics), and activities such as a Model UN. These schools offer state of the art labs for science and computer science, small class sizes, a problemsolving, student-focused pedagogy, engaged parents, and attractive facilities. These advantages are often enough to persuade missionaries to find creative solutions to the problems associated with finances and a (stridently) secular world view. For many missionaries today who are not involved in a local language intensive ministry, such as church planting, or who are not anticipating that their children will attend a local university and settle in the foreign country, the loss of local language fluency is an acceptable price to pay for all the other assets the school offers. And, just as the missionary finds the international school attractive, these schools in turn find MKs attractive because the students are typically fluent in English, â€œwellbehaved,â€? and likely to have parents who become involved in the life of the school.

Trend #3: The National School Option The 20th century is usually remembered as the century of monstrous social experiments like National Socialism and Communism. While both still cast a shadow over the world, another revolution took place which has had a greater, more enduring impact: it is the educational revolution that brought literacy to most of the world. In statistical terms, from 1950 to 2000 the percentage of children enrolled in school worldwide increased from less than 50% to more than 67% and the illiteracy rate for those 15 and older dropped from 44% to 20%. This impressive achievement is somewhat reduced by the fact that the population explosion during this period resulted in the absolute number of illiterate people increasing from 700 million to 860 million (Browning, 2019). Primary school enrollment grew from 200 million to 670 million during this 50-year period, secondary from 40 million to 400 million, and tertiary from 7 million to 90 million (Meyers, 2019). Added to this stunning achievement is the educational advances associated with informal education.

Interact

Out of this mĂŠlange emerged an educational initiative which represents another option for MKs. Those parents serving in Europe (post World War Two) always had a local school option for their children. However, until the global revolution began in earnest, local educational options for MKs did not exist. Today, they often do, and include private schools which cater to the needs and aspirations of businesspeople and professionals. These schools are of particular interest to MKs because these schools pursue international standards and provide a leaving credential that enables a student to attend a university abroad. This means that expatriate Christian workers living in large urban areas may very well be able to send their children to a national school, and in some cases, a Christian national (but private) school. TeachBeyond is currently working with local providers to foster the growth of this option and an attractive variant is discussed in greater detail below under Trend #5. Missionaries may be attracted to this type of school if their child is likely to live in the host country for many years. Exposure to a national school provides an unparalleled insight into the local culture. It is also typically inexpensive and likely to create pathways into the local community. MKs and these national-international schools are attracted to each other because of a shared desire to perfect English. While the facilities may not equal those found at international schools funded by embassies, they are often more than adequate, especially in Asia.

Trend #4: A Presuppositional Disconnect There are at least two, non-monetary reasons why missionary parents reject the international and national school options. One is that they prefer a strength-based education, which is described under Trend #5. The other is that the international and national school options typically operate from a philosophic position that the parents find unacceptable. The issue is not simply one of disagreement but rather a conviction that the nature of the secular option is seriously harmful. There is nothing new about Christians living in a philosophically hostile world. Christ warned His followers that opposition was inevitable, but they were to remain in the world and live as salt and light. In some countries, it is physically dangerous to live openly as a Christian. In others, the opposition is subtle and insidious and therefore even more dangerous (Mathew 10:28). Given this latter point, parents may feel that the national and international school options in their area are unacceptably risky. They may feel there is too high a probability that the compensatory strategies available to them are insufficient to counter the non-Biblical worldview which is consciously or unconsciously promoted at the school. Above we noted the dynamic role parents play in their childâ€™s academic achievement. There is no single decision more influential in childrenâ€™s lives than the school the parents choose for them.

September 2020

This is not the place for a Christian school apologetic. In fact, the authors of this article have attended secular schools, Christian national schools, an MK school, used homeschooling with their children, and attended a Christian boarding school as a boarder. We appreciated each one of these options and benefitted from them all. Nevertheless, times have changed, and it is important that parents not assume the modern school is the school of yesterday (e.g., ARC Foundation, 2019; Dueck, 2020). Given that children typically spend ten times as many hours in school as they do in church and given that the media to which they are unrelentingly exposed aligns its worldview with the state’s educational system, it is clear the stakes are high. If parents with all their training find it difficult to live as salt and light in a contrarian world, is it realistic to expect that their children, who live in the same environment, will be able to live as salt and light? As parents reflect on their educational options and the presuppositional disconnect that exists in at least two of the options, it would also be helpful for them to keep in mind the orienting purposes found in modern education.

Economic Utilitarianism The most frequently cited goal of education is to prepare students for employment. Because there is a strong correlation between knowledge, skills, and employment, governments promote education to gain a competitive economic advantage (Smith and Sandvik, 2012). Two years ago we investigated the possibility of working with a local Christian school in central Africa with the intent of helping it raise standards to an international level. The school head interrupted our presentation to remind us that 80% of the young people in the country were unemployed and the best thing we could do would be to help their graduating students get a job. Viewed this way, education is the handmaiden of opportunity (Hess, 2020) and a tool of the government to make its citizens economically more valuable.

Interact

Socialization Harvard law professor and Director of the Child Advocacy Program, Elizabeth Bartholet, recently wrote an article for the Arizona Law Review in which she advocated a ban on homeschooling. Even though homeschoolers represent an insignificant 3.4% of the student population in the United States, she felt homeschooling threatened to create a “parallel society” which would promote ideas contrary to the public good (Bauer, 2020). A teaching specialist on child welfare and reproductive technology, she argued that children were hurt by an overexposure to parents with “extreme ideological views” and an inability to make independent, “meaningful choices.” Bartholet, like many others, holds that education’s orienting purpose is to socialize children to a preferred culture. In this case, it is a progressive culture. Although the merits of her position on homeschooling are not relevant to this article, it is worth noting, as Fred Bauer did, that her approach is in “… real tension with the project of living in a pluralistic society, which means having a place for individuals and communities that dissent from the cultural mainstream …. Like adults, children are not just abstract agents whose teleological end is to maximize “choice’” (Bauer, 2020). While she is eager to have children abandon their parents’ worldview, she offers no corresponding option for those wishing to step away from her view. As long ago as Émile Durkheim, sociologists were advocating that the education system should be a vehicle for the transmission of values and a shared history, as well as for the learning of skills and knowledge which would create a moral society and a “social being.” With the disappearance of Sunday Schools, Boy Scouts, 4-H clubs and similar moralizing programs, schools have increasingly stepped in to provide the socialization society feels it needs (e.g., Browning, 2019).

Personal Development On the other hand, not all educators are as concerned with society’s well-being as they are with the development of the student into all he or she wishes to be. The goal is self-actualization and selffulfillment. Although Christians who seek to love their neighbors as they love themselves view this educational objective with reservation or outright hostility, the goal simply stated is to see students happy, responsible, and on the pathway to prudential citizenship. This aligns with John Dewey’s belief that education was about the development of the child, which can occur if education is student-centered and characterized by experiential learning and critical thinking.

has in mind for them. This is a much more ambitious objective than Dewey’s child developmental aspiration because it takes all human development and then invites the Creator to extend the horizons and empower the process in accordance with His wisdom and power. It’s more exciting, more fulfilling, and more self-actualizing than any autonomous journey of self-discovery could ever be (Durance, 2019)

Transformation All the above orienting purposes have a dark as well as a bright side to them. We wholeheartedly agree that a quality education should prepare students for work and independent living, it should help them think deeply about their role and responsibility in society, it should leave them sharing a common communal bond, and it should encourage them to adopt a healthy commitment to societal values which correspond to Biblical teaching. The two school options noted above may operate with an orienting philosophic framework that enables a student to leave the school well prepared for life and without a confused or non-Biblical worldview. However, there is also a chance, even a likelihood, that this is not the case. Our goal at TeachBeyond is to support the development of more educational options for MKs and we feel strongly that local creativity and contextualization are required for a school to be effective for parents, students, and teachers. However, we also believe the unifying thread in global education should be a clear, strong focus on the Biblical goal of education. As advocates of a Christocentric education, we believe education is not just about students becoming all they can be, but about them becoming all that God their Creator

September 2020

Trend #5: The Evolution of Christian Educational Opportunities International schools and national schools with international standards are two of the four logical options available to MKs today. Both are undergoing change including, most notably, their emergence as a kind of “neighborhood” school in all the major urban areas of the world. A third option is to homeschool. Like international and national schools, this is at once a more attractive and a more feasible option than it was even ten years ago. Issues of socialization, access, and quality control are now generally addressed, which leaves issues of practicality, preference, learning style, and government regulation as the biggest remaining barriers. The concept of a “learning center” is not new, but it is new as a formal strategy and a replicable model for the provision of MK education. Its success stems from the collegial interface it creates between homeschoolers, national Christian schools, and an international/MK school or some variant thereof. It is particularly attractive in countries where legal exigencies make it difficult or impossible to establish a school. Furthermore, it welcomes the involvement of parents which is one of the strengths associated with homeschooling. Its flexibility and affordability, together with its strong commitment to a Christocentric learning environment make it an option that is likely to flourish in the intersection of the homeschooling and international Christian school movements. A fourth option is the International Christian School and the MK focused international Christian school. Both expressions of international education provide an attractive Christian alternative to the international and national schools. At the same time, they raise issues of affordability and parental engagement, if boarding is available. Like the other three options, international Christian and MK schools are more attractive today than they

Interact

were 30 years ago when the vice-prefect mentioned at the beginning of the article attended Black Forest Academy in south Germany. Academic standards have improved thanks in part to the work of the Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI) and its helpful accreditation process. Teachers and boarding home staff come better prepared and when they arrive, they are able to participate in professional development programs. Their performance is also regularly evaluated, as it would be in any quality school. Safeguarding practices are articulated, implemented, and monitored. Physical plants now feature proper labs, auditoriums, athletic facilities, and playgrounds. If schools do not have these features, they are raising funds to acquire them. TeachBeyond currently has capital campaigns in place or in draft form for schools in every region of the world. Programs, too, have been broadened to reflect the varying interests and abilities of the students. Noteworthy though these developments are, there are two non-programmatic, non-facility related characteristics associated with these schools that merit extended comment. International Christian schools have as their raison d'etre the provision of transformational Christian education. It is hard to

overestimate the importance of this in an age when the prevailing culture undercuts, rejects, or distains the Christian worldview and its concomitant educational goals. One of the hallmarks of the age in which we live is that it is no longer convenient to be a Christian. As a consequence, the nature and role of Christian education has become clearer. No longer are families interested in Christian education because it cultivates good behavior. Rather, they seek it out because it aligns with the Bible and complements teaching at home and in the church. This is not intended as a criticism of a previous generation which may have been more focused on behavior. Instead, it is referenced as a lesson we have learned and need to continue learning in light of the human tendency to focus on what can be seen and measured. These schools represent an antidote to a culture that is self-referential and obsessed with the pursuit of pleasure, rather than with service to others and a thoughtful pursuit of the “good life” (Psalm 1). In a world where cleverness and wit are confused with understanding and wisdom, these learning communities represent hope for something better, an oasis for young people to discover truth and embrace the pathway to a life that truly satisfies. A second factor stands out in the MK school as well as in international Christian schools which have a special track for MKs as a unique subset of ThirdCulture Kids (TCK). Because we accept that all students are equal in worth and made in God’s image, we hold that all are to be loved, all are special, and all are equally worthy of our care and concern. In this sense, MKs are not a privileged class. However, we also recognize that unique experiences create micro-cultures and MKs participate in such a culture, even though many of the more visible cultural traits are not shared across continents or from the concrete jungles of Kuala Lumpur to the rainforests of the Amazon.

focus are able to help MKs discover and develop their unique combination of gifts, talents, and abilities. There is a reason talented children study music at Juilliard School of Music and, there is a reason MKs come together for a short season of life to learn together in community. In recent years, MK schools and, to a lesser extent, international Christian schools, have had to face an array of pressures which COVID-19 has only increased. Existential threats exist because of government regulations, taxes, visa issues, training requirements, mandated salaries and an aggravating array of local rules and procedures. The greatest challenge remains rising costs and stable, even diminishing, revenue streams. These are tuition-reliant institutions, and the costs of emerging technology and the desire to remain competitive in the sense of modernizing with the times left some of these schools precariously positioned even before COVID-19 froze operations. The solution is not to find ways to cope with COVID19. Rather, it may be a time to add new services, reenvision old services, and replace inhibiting financial models. In some cases, it may also be time to move to a Learning Center approach or to a more flexible enrollment policy that permits an increase in non-MKs or non-Christians, with a public, affirmed declaration that founding principles are irrevocably embedded in the policies and ethos of the school. In other words, the challenge of COVID-19 needs to become the opportunity of COVID-19. Rather than reacting to a short term problem created by a virus, the preferred approach is to understand the trends which the virus accelerated and to use this unique occasion to introduce change that is anchored on a reality that transcends the immediate crisis.

MK focused education can provide a kind of “strength-based education.” By this we mean that MK schools or internationals schools with an MK

September 2020

Interact

Want to keep on reading? Purchase this issue now for $5. Or send an email to interactinfo@interactionintl.org and you will receive a code to read the rest for free.

We send out quarterly emails notifying readers when new issues are available. And you can request to be removed from the email list at any time.

CONVERSATIONS ON CARE

MK CAREGIVERS

Sheryl Oâ€™Bryan (SROB)

Pete Ammerman (PA)

Bret Taylor (BT)

Tammy Sharp (TS)

Lynda ShingledeckerWheeler (LSW)

Janet Blomberg (JB)

Janet Blomberg (JB) Thanks for sharing your experiences and perspectives as an MK caregiver. There are lots of things we could discuss or ways we could get started, but why don’t we go back to your start in MK care and let’s start with this question. “When you started working in MK/member care, what were the major issues that you faced?” Lynda Shingledecker-Wheeler (LSW): When I began working in MK care, one of my first challenges was finding out where the MKs were that I was responsible for. This was especially true if they were in college. Not only did I not know where they were, but it was hard to get contact information for them.

Apart from the difficulty in tracking down our MKs, another challenge I faced was deciphering what their top needs were and how the mission could resource them. One thing that made this more challenging were the limitations we faced both in budget and staffing. It seems that this is something we always face. Since MK care was so new to everyone, one of the challenges I faced was “selling” the value of it to our mission leadership and trying to figure out what care looked like. This was especially challenging for our organization because our personnel came from so many different sending countries and each had very different definitions of what care looked like. For example, twenty years ago in Latin American, member care was simply trying to get funds from the local church to the family on the field. Sheryl O’Bryan (SROB): I started working with MKs as a teacher at an MK boarding school. The major issues I saw on the school side of things were sending elementary students to boarding schools, providing special education programs for all of the students who needed them, any kind of differentiation in education, training for dorm staff, and perhaps limited educational choices. Of course, when I started there was no internet available. The preponderance of material available on the internet, available resources, and fast communication have changed some of that.

When I moved into the headquarters (HQ) member-care team over a decade later, some of those issues remained. However, from an office position, things took on a very different perspective. More educational options were available on a wider scale, but bringing up boarding school was touchy. Trying to advocate for recruiting teachers (special ed. or otherwise) was frustrating at times. Pete Ammerman (PA): I started serving in an MK care capacity in 2010 while my wife, Bree, and I were attending Bible school. At that point, I remember feeling really encouraged by what felt like a growing enthusiasm for MK care. This came from within the organization we were planning to serve with long term as well as from the other organizations we found ourselves rubbing shoulders with. Our vision, at that time, was to focus on the college-age MKs who were finding themselves back in the U.S. (often on their own) and were looking to adapt to the States, college, and even to an early career.

During that time, I remember there was some initial push back in the mission’s community saying, “Don’t make MKs feel different or separate them out.” That led to some controversy when it came to MK or TCK specific programs and clubs on college campuses. I remember understanding the root concerns, but I felt that it was a bit like throwing the baby out with the bath water not to build any programs specifically for them. I believed there was a balance that could be struck where MKs could have programs helpful in getting them the support they could really use, while also not building walls that made them feel different or better than their monocultural peers. Bret Taylor (BT): There are some real parallels between my experience and Pete’s. Back in 1999, the expat community was just becoming aware of the TCK terminology and related issues. While David Pollock, Ruth Van Reken and others were speaking increasingly globally, only the larger international schools seemed to be consistently investing in helping TCKs transition to their passport countries. The concept of MK/TCK care was still in its infancy in many home offices. Mission agencies were still slow in seeing that their responsibility to MKs was much more than making sure teachers and boarding home parents were recruited.

In 2000, after returning from Kenya, I began contacting mission organizations offering to come on their staff to help their MKs in transition and develop a Flow of Care.

September 2020

Over and over again, their response was "Yes, we'd love to have you be a teacher.â€? or "You would make a great boarding home parent." However, I would persist and begin to articulate a vision for helping their organization develop programs of care for their MKs in transition. In essence, I wanted to be a "youth pastor" for their MKs. Then, like a broken record, every recruiter would respond, "Our MKs could really use something like that, but we don't have a position for that." (Face Palm!) Tammy Sharp (TS): My experience was a lot like all of yours. When I first started in MK care, a major issue was that member care in general was relatively new for mission agencies. In fact, I started as the MK Coordinator before the Member Care Director was in place. Agencies were still trying to figure out what member care looked like and the specifics of MK care were lost in the midst of that. I was on my own to figure it out. Thankfully, there were a few MK caregivers that shared their wisdom with me, but there weren't many full-time MK care personnel then.

An issue I faced when I first started was convincing our parents that MK care personnel wanted to serve them and come alongside them as they parented their TCKs. Back in those days we had recruited very self-sufficient global workers who didn't see the need for member care much less MK care. Thankfully, after a parent survey, a few debriefing programs and some conferences, parents began to realize how beneficial MK care could be to their family.

JB: So, letâ€™s change the question a bit and focus on the MKs themselves. When you started working in MK/member care, what were the major issues that MKs faced? BT: What has changed over time is the nearly complete death of the stereotypical MK running barefoot in the wild. Globalization through high speed internet has brought about a more homogenous and culturally aware world. When David Pollock originally described TCKs as being global citizens so many years ago, it was unique to them. Increasingly though, monoculturals are better aware of the world and issues outside their immediate community. The gap is closing. I also find the high mobility of families returning to passport countries with increased frequency (often for shorter durations) is impacting previous stereotypes of TCKs.

Interact

However, like someone who straddles a threshold, they are sometimes neither in nor out, and thus miss out on the benefits of committing to either. TS: For me, the main issues for MKs were often organizational. Initially, many MKs had a mistrust of their sending agency due to standardized policies. For example, all kids were required to attend boarding schools. Often, the needs of MKs weren't seen as a priority. In many cases, there was so much mistrust at first, and it led to suspicion of anyone caring about MKs and TCKs. They weren't used to that and didn't know what to think. I remember one girl in college who begrudgingly met me for coffee but didn't share much on my first encounter with her. The next year, she called me when I was in route to set up a time to meet and was very excited that I was coming to connect with her again. LSW: When I started, one of the basic, practical challenges was how expensive it was to connect and communicate with our MKs or with their parents on the field. This was important because it meant that often they didnâ€™t know what resources where available to them from our organization or from the wider community. The other

thing that was true for our MKs was that they were less aware of social norms and what was popular in their passport countries because there was less availability of internet, cell phones, etc. When it came to our MKs, in general they were also less aware of their MK/TCK identity as well as of the various themes that surrounded their lives such as grief, loss, belonging, and many others. Isolation intensified many things for them. If they struggled with something, they often felt like they were the only ones grappling with that and felt so isolated which intensified what they were going through. PA: As Lyn said, when I started working in MK care, the technology we use daily today was only beginning to penetrate the mission’s world overseas. Because of that, we were working with MKs who were still quite isolated from their passport culture. Upon reentry to the States, MKs needed to be very intentional about seeking support and help for the practical skills that they had little exposure to. It was not like the 50s-90s when MKs didn’t even know the clothing styles and media platforms. Yet, there was still a gap in exposure. I remember working with MKs who struggled with how different their American peers were when it came to using smart phones, media platforms, and materialism. We had many conversations about how to use Facebook appropriately and about watch the pit falls of the “comment” section of posts.

PA: There was also a lack of exposure to the cultural conversations that were happening in the States. I’ve talked with many MKs who felt blindsided by the conversations they faced in their college dorms about LBGTQ issues, abortion, and current politics. Their peers had been talking about these things since they were in middle school and already had strong opinions.

I also remember feeling like perfectionism had really saturated the MK community. There was a stark contrast from the typical conservative constructs of the missions’ community they grew up in versus that of the college students they came to call friends. There was a sense of “My parents would not be okay with me having these conversations or feelings.” “We don’t talk about these things in my family.” “I don’t want them to get mad, leave their work and come home because of me.” So, these MKs worked hard to put on a good face so their parents would be happy with them and also their parents’ supporters! This paints a bad picture of missionary parents in that time. The truth is most parents were not actually unloving or unwilling to dialogue about hard things with their kids. The problem with perfectionism is that it comes from lack of communication, assumptions and spiritual warfare as the enemy looks to disrupt their families. Often, the physical distance between the parents and child after high school also exacerbated that dynamic.

BT: I see MKs facing two unique challenges today and one relates to what Pete was just talking about. Sometimes MKs today have a false sense of confidence. The issue of false confidence ironically comes from information on TCKs/transition being more available and often sprinkled into their life over time. This seems like a good thing, but I've found (as is often the case), a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. Whether it is because TCK issues are being taught by inexperienced or untrained personnel, or it is because it’s being squeezed in and not given priority, MKs today are frequently are overly confident.

Here’s a case in point. Every seminar I teach, I now begin by asking "How many of you have heard of RAFT?" Usually eyes roll, there are a few groans, and nearly all hands go up. I follow that quickly with "How many of you know what the acronym RAFT stands for?” Immediately, the majority of hands waiver, bodies begin to shift uneasily, and typically less than 5-10% can answer that question. Then, I go in for the death stroke. "How many of you intentionally practiced the steps of RAFT to leave well?" It's rare that anyone still has their hand up, and those who do, their more successful process in transition is quickly evident.

September 2020

MK RESEARCH: FOUNDATIONS David L. Wickstrom, Phd

In the October 1994 issue of Evangelical Missions Quarterly (EMQ), this author had an article published in which he stated, “Missionary research is getting a bad name, especially as it relates to missionary kids (MKs). As one MK put it, ‘I believe that we are always sought out and used as a source of study since we are so easily targeted .... It seems that many books and articles written are only by those who have had bad experiences. This definitely affects those who have never been overseas.” The opinions of many MKs can be summarized in the statement: “We’re getting tired of being studied so much; we’re constantly getting surveys, and it makes us feel like we’re strange or something, like guinea pigs.” However, many MKs are saying just the opposite. As one said, “I’m so glad someone has stopped speculating and is actually doing some good solid research on MKs.’” During the years prior to 1994 and starting as early as 1977, some serious research studies had been conducted, three of them Doctoral dissertations. In 1977 C.B. Hermann wrote a dissertation titled “Foundational factors of trust and autonomy influencing the identity-formation of the multi-cultural life-styled MK.” D. J. Schipper completed a dissertation titled “Self-concept differences between early, late and non-boarding missionary children.” Both of these studies were published that year in Dissertation Abstracts International. A classmate of D.J. Schipper was the current author who, in 1978 wrote a Doctoral dissertation titled “Self-esteem and dependency in early,

Interact

late and non-boarding missionary children.” Research with MKs and related issues was gaining traction, especially after the International Conference for Missionary Kids (ICMK) was held in Manila, Philippines in 1984. At that first ICMK, participants shared their stories, and numerous individuals who worked with MKs shared their experiences. The atmosphere was one of inclusion and belonging, a feeling of “being at home” and of “not being strange.” This conference generated so much momentum that a second ICMK was held in1987 in Quito, Ecuador, and a third was held in 1989 in Nairobi, Kenya. At these ICMKs little empirical research described the MK experience. However, mission organizations were beginning to desire a more thorough and substantiated understanding of MKs. It was at this point that MK-CART/CORE was established. It was consortium of eventually 11 mission organizations (CART—Consultation and Research Team) and six researchers (CORE—Committee on Research and Endowment). The mandate for CART/CORE was for the missionary organizations and the researchers to design studies of mutual interest and concern to the missions, for the researchers to conduct the research, and for MKCART/CORE to meet annually to discuss the results of each study. The studies conducted by MK-CART/CORE and the findings/results that emerged laid the foundation for our understanding of MKs and their families as well as for the research that has followed.

“The research conducted by MKCART/CORE … represents a collaboration of several leading scholars … as well as a number of mission sending agencies…. By banding together, this consortium has been able to leverage their resources and produce high quality research that benefits missionaries and their families and helps inform those who work with them. MK-CART/CORE is a stellar example of collaborative research and should be held up as a model for others to follow.” Dale Hawley (Missions Resource Network, 2004) As was evident in the dissertations by Schipper and Wickstrom, the topic of MK education and especially personality trait development related to boarding school influences was a hot topic. Therefore, the first MKCART/CORE study involved researchers traveling to 20 different boarding schools in Asia, Africa, Europe and the Latin America to investigate the qualities boarding school personnel possessed and qualities they deemed ideal for staff members to have. Out of the total sample of 579 staff members, 54 were administrators, 337 were teachers, 107 were boarding home parents, and 81 were identified generally as support staff. For each of the personnel groups, five general traits or qualities were described as being desirable. First, each staff member should have the basic professional knowledge and skills necessary to fulfill the requirements of the position. Secondly, personnel needed to have a healthy and growing spiritual life. Thirdly, the effective staff member is one whose “walk matches his/her talk.” Fourthly, staff need a strong commitment to the community, expressed by their willingness to be available, to encourage balanced living, to be aware of the needs of

others, and to attempt to help when appropriate. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, a sense of call was viewed as crucial, not only to missionary work in general, but to boarding school ministry specifically. In the EMQ article, more specific qualities for each position were delineated. These qualities were discussed with the members of MK-CART who could pass the information on to the decision-makers in their mission organizations. As a result of this study, mission recruiters and assessors have been much more intentional in using the criteria specified to help them choose and deploy the most effective and committed boarding school staff they can find. These appointments have included extensive personal interviews as well as the use of standardized psychological and personality assessments. The result, at least from what this author has learned, is that boarding schools are functioning much more effectively and safely than before the study. In addition, many parents have decided not to send their children to boarding school but are homeschooling their children or using national or international schools where they live and work.

September 2020

Except for the ReMAP II project started in 2002 (about the time MK-CART/CORE completed its mandate), it appears that very little hard data have been generated, and no one has apparently picked up the mantle to conduct further data-based, statistically-significant studies having to do with missionaries and their families. This means that there are ample research opportunities for those who wish to contribute to the effectiveness, well-being and longevity of missionaries and organizations. Some opportunities and research questions that come to mind, and others mentioned in the will be enumerated below. of the significant changes in the education of 1. Because MKs from a primary emphasis on use of boarding schools to providing other options (homeschooling, national schools, international schools, roving educators to assess children and train parents on how best to teach their children), which methods seem to be working the best and why? types of resources are needed and how can they 2. What be provided (e.g. special education teachers, school psychologists, guidance counselors, mental health professionals, etc.) to help parents and children resolve marital issues, family problems, and learning challenges in children. How can these resources be recruited and placed where most needed?

Interact

agency systemic issues (eg. leadership style, 3. Which communication styles, on-field support, investigatory practices, conflict-resolution methods, ethos of the organization, etc.) contribute the most either to (a) ongoing effective missionary service and well-being of missionaries or to (b) discouragement, reduced performance, resentment and bitterness in missionaries? What can be done to improve these practices or address the systemic issues? assessment and training tools are being used or 4. Which could be used to improve the recruitment of missionary candidates and subsequent retention of healthy and effective workers? are the most common factors contributing to the 5. What success, spiritual growth and well-being of adult MKs, and what are the most common factors contributing to bitterness, leaving the faith, and dysfunctional personal and relational attitudes and behaviors? It has been the purpose of this writer, both as a psychologist and as an MK, to shed some light on some of the research that has been conducted and conclusions drawn in the past. In addition, it is my fervent hope that other MKs, missionaries, mental health practitioners, and educators will explore some of the research questions mentioned above so that the work of missionaries and the well-being of MKs are enhanced for the glory of God.

David L. Wickstrom, Phd Dr. David Wickstrom grew up as an MK in Nigeria. He graduated with a Bachelorâ€™s degree from Grace College in Indiana. He obtained his Masterâ€™s and PhD degrees from Rosemead School of Psychology in California. Since 1978, Dr. Wickstrom has been a psychotherapist and has specialized in pre-field psychological assessments of missionary candidates and in counseling missionaries, MKs and cross-cultural workers. For 15 years he was part of the MK CART/CORE research team that conducted studies with MKs and their families. In addition, he works in career assessment using the Highlands Ability Battery (both for missionaries and nonmissionary clients as well as with teens and adults). He meets regularly with people in the U.S. and overseas and serves several mission organizations. Dr. Wickstrom currently maintains a small private practice in North Carolina as a psychologist serving missions and missionaries based on sound psychological principles integrated with the truths of Scripture as found in the Bible.

Interact

Interact - September 2020 (Special Edition)