Transparent heart icon with white outline and + sign.

Life's busy, read it when you're ready!

Create a free account to save articles for later, keep track of past articles you’ve read, and receive exclusive access to all RP resources.

White magnifying glass.

Search thousands of RP articles

Articles, news, and reviews that celebrate God's truth.

Open envelope icon with @ symbol

Get Articles Delivered!

Articles, news, and reviews that celebrate God's truth. delivered direct to your Inbox!



Education

Helping students overcome a fear of failure

The goal of genuine learning isn’t to pass tests

*****

Among the most common mental attitudes hindering the pursuit of a genuine education by young people is fear of failure. When the focus of the student’s attention turns away from the subject matter of a course and how well it is understood and applied, concern will be directed rather to formal considerations like:

• “How much has to be done in order to pass this test?”
• “How many pages must be written for this report?”
• “What will the final grade be on my report card?”

Whether or not one can use algebraic formulas successfully, can write a clear and grammatical sentence, can appreciate the literary merits of Shakespeare, or see the fallacy in materialistic philosophy – all these and similar, educational concerns are lost in the scramble to make sure that one has enough points to pass the course. The worst thing that could happen, in the mentality of many students, is that they would receive an F for a course, rather than that they would have failed to understand a course.

It stands to reason, then, that parents and teachers who want students to receive a genuine, intellectually maturing, personally enriching education – and not simply formal marks on a report card filed away – will aim to overcome the student’s obstructive fear of failure.

Why do students have such fears? Generally because they have not developed successful habits of study (inside and outside the classroom) and are aware of their lacking. They are just not sure how to tackle the challenge of new work, new concepts, and stiff assignments.

How can parents and teachers help students to overcome fear of failure? There are things that can be done. There is no need to throw our hands up in despair, imagining that it is somehow a fortuitous matter of “chance” (fate, luck) that some students do well and others do poorly in schoolwork. Every student of normal ability (i.e., every student who is free of physical or mental handicaps) can do well in schoolwork. As blunt or even as harsh as it may seem at first, we will eventually have to face up to the grim truth that there is no such thing as a (normal) student who cannot do passing work. There are simply some students who will not (choose not) to do passing work. Now they may very well desire to have at the outcome of the course a passing mark. They want that end – BUT without being willing to pursue the means to that end.

The age in which people commonly believed in magic has not passed. It has simply taken on a more sophisticated front. Parents and teachers who believe that (or operate as though) the difference between successful and unsuccessful students is a mystery beyond our control assign good schoolwork, in effect, to magic or chance – beyond any cause-effect explanation. Students who want a passing grade at the end of the course, but who ignore or refuse the means to that end, are hoping for a magical deliverance. We live in a universe where events (effects) have their corresponding causes. There are appropriate causes of good performance in school. This is bad news and good news. The bad news is that students who fail cannot “cop-out” and blame their failure on something beyond their control. The good news is that something can indeed be done to improve a student’s work in school. There is hope because there exist proven methods of achieving success as a student.

What help can we offer them? What are some principles of educational success?

1. Don’t leave things at the Ramada Inn

The first piece of advice which we can give students who fear failure is not to leave things at the Ramada Inn. Let me explain that remark. This last summer my family took a vacation, traveling up the coast to Monterey and San Francisco, then across to Sacramento and Reno. In Monterey we stayed at the Ramada Inn. Imagine that when we left the Ramada Inn we inadvertently left behind the overnight case, only to realize that fact an hour and a half on the way to San Francisco. What a painful discovery that would be! We certainly needed the items in the overnight case, and yet to get the case we would be forced to backtrack an hour and a half on the road.

If this had actually happened to us, what do you suppose we should have done? Well, one thing we could have done is to continue traveling up the road, bemoaning the fact that we were going to be inconvenienced. We could have complained that the Ramada Inn was an hour and a half (now an hour and three quarters) drive back to Monterey. We could have driven on and on, hoping against reasonable hope, that the overnight case which was an hour and half (now two hours) behind us might miraculously catch up with us before we stopped that night. But when all the murmuring and imagination had been indulged, the fact would have been that we knew we had to go back to the Ramada Inn. The trip could not successfully continue until we went back and picked up what had been left behind. The sooner we realized that hard fact, the better for the continuation of the vacation.

The same principle applies to schoolwork. As a course progresses through a semester, more and more new material and new concepts (or skills) are set forth to the student. Later material presupposes the foundation laid by earlier material. Growth in understanding is cumulative. Consequently, when a student does not understand something which has been taught, does not do the necessary homework which has been assigned, does not complete the reading which goes with a unit of teaching and yet continues on in the course, that student is set up to fail the later portions of the course. Understanding the later material depends on a previous understanding or exposure to the earlier material. When something has been left behind, the trip cannot successfully continue.

Students are sometimes funny – unrealistic, really. They figure that they can tune out part of a lecture, omit a reading assignment, or not bother to ask for help when they do not understand something in a course, and then tune in and begin understanding at some later point. But as with vacation travel, so also with schooling. The sooner we realize that we must go back to the Ramada Inn (or to the material, which has not been read or understood), the better it will be for us. Students simply must keep abreast of what is being taught in the course, not hoping to go back later and fill in the gaps in their understanding. And if they do fall behind, then it is important to go back and pick up what as omitted, and so the sooner we do so, the better.

2. Learn how to read

A second rule to be observed for achieving success in school is that students must learn how to read. A shocking suggestion, perhaps, because the assumption commonly held is that high school students already know how to read. But that is held because we erroneously think that reading is merely a matter of knowing how to sound out words, recognize punctuation, and understand basic vocabulary. That is, we are often satisfied simply with the mechanics of reading – getting the encoded message on the page through the eyeballs, into the (reasonably alert) brain. I do not doubt that most (if not all) of our high school students can do this. Reading mechanics – the basics – have been mastered.

But reading has not.

Once the basics have been learned, students need to learn how to tackle a reading assignment in such a way that they understand its meaning, point, and structure. They need to master skills of comprehension and retention. In a word, they need to learn how to analyze and interpret – not simply translate – the message encoded on the page(s) of their assignment.
Let me suggest a proven method of reading. Never plan to read an assignment only once; good readers will read at least twice and usually three times.

1. Read
The first time through should be a quick and casual reading to familiarize yourself with the material and find out the main point(s) the author intended to communicate.

2. Write
The second time through you should take notes for yourself, attempting to outline (roughly) the material presented so that the way in which the author gets to his conclusion is made clear; also write out important lists which may appear in the reading, along with key sentences which express important insights or necessary declarations (as far as the author is concerned).

3. Highlight
Only after these two steps have been accomplished should you go through the assignment again the third time and underline (or highlight) the words, phrases, or sentences which will help you to review and recall the material later. Keep these underlinings to a minimum, for too many such markings will simply force you later to reread most of the assignment again – which defeats the purpose of underlining. By the time these three steps have been completed, the reading assignment will be clearly recorded in the mind.

The reading notes, along with underlinings, will facilitate quick and effective review of the material, which should be accomplished once a week until the end of the term. This method of reading may appear to consume more time initially than the less rigorous style practiced by most students, but in the long run it saves not only time (for instance, rereading the entire assignment every time a quiz is possible) but also emotional energy which is lost over the fear of failure at exam time.

This article was first in two parts in the September and December 1981 issues of The Conqueror under the titles “On Not Leaving Things at the Ramada Inn” and “Learning How to Read in High School.” They are reprinted with permission of Covenant Media Foundation, which hosts and sells many other Dr. Bahnsen resources on their website.



News

Saturday Selections – Mar. 1, 2025

Why we can't focus (12 min)

This fellow is worried that moving from a text-based culture to a video-based one is leaving us all stupider – "we are amusing ourselves to death." He's not trying to make a Christian point, but as "people of the Word," we know there is a pressing need for us to not only be able to read, but be able to concentrate on a passage long enough to understand it.

Tariffs – an entrepreneur’s perspective

What should you do when your neighbor gives you lemons? Christian businessman (and CHPer) Dave Bylsma encourages us to start thinking lemonade – explore the opportunities, rather than fixate on a problem that we really can't do anything about. The biblical basis for such an opportunity-mindset is the assurance "that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose" (Romans 8:28). We didn't seek this hardship, but God is acting on us, and could be acting through us if we rise to this challenge.

"The harm is staggering..."

Jonathan Haidt on how smartphones and social media are fuelling the youth mental health crisis. He shares their four harms.

Could this be the year’s most ridiculous idea about how life originated?

Life may have started in space? They found some amino acids on the Bennu asteroid (at a cost of nearly $1 billion) so, the speculation has begun. Count the could haves and other fudge words in the paragraph below and ask yourself, if the prospect is so unlikely, why is this even getting covered? Well, because this level of rampant speculation is among the best prospects they have...

"If a vast swarm of briny little worlds produced biological precursors, it could have mixed them together as they crashed into one another. The heat of the impacts could have fueled more chemistry, giving rise to even more complex molecules in their interiors, and perhaps even living cells. 'Could life have started there?' Dr. Rennó asked. 'I’m open to it. I like crazy ideas.'”

Resisting gender ideology indoctrination in Canada’s public schools

"Imagine that a religious cult had mysteriously swayed Canada’s schools to teach children that they are spirit-beings trapped in their physical bodies as some kind of curse. Imagine further that special staff were dedicated to ensuring schools were 'safe spaces' for kids to discover their true spirit-selves. Imagine special 'student clubs' to guide students in this self-discovery, with help from zealous adult believers from outside the school. Imagine students adopting new cultic names for themselves at school, which everyone else was required to use. And imagine at last schools keeping their kids’ new cultic identities secret from parents because 'children don’t need parents’ permission to be who they are,' to paraphrase Justin Trudeau.

"I think Canadians would be appalled at this. And many would intuit that there was something legally suspect about it. But swap in 'gender identity' and this is what’s happening in Canada. A quasi-religious gender ideology is permeating our public schools, and most Canadian families have no opt-out..."

Voddie Baucham's thoughts on voting as a Christian

He's speaking in the context of the US, but there is crossover...


Today's Devotional

March 6 - Steadfastness in faith

“… you know that the testing of your faith produces steadfastness.” - James 1:3 

Scripture reading: I Peter 1:3-9

God the Father promises in our baptism that He will provide us with all good and avert all evil, or turn it to our profit. God doesn’t promise to avert all evil, period. He promises to avert all evil, or turn it to our profit. >

Today's Manna Podcast

Manna Podcast banner: Manna Daily Scripture Meditations and open Bible with jar logo

God is at work: Ruth

Serving #773 of Manna, prepared by Dr. Jeff Temple, is called "God is at work" (Ruth).



















Red heart icon with + sign.
Pornography

A church response is needed to stop the porn crisis

Parental controls are not enough ***** Over the past several years, I have spoken in dozens of Christian communities to thousands of students and parents on the issue of digital porn addiction. Ten years ago, many parents thought the warnings about the digital porn threat were well-intentioned, but exaggerated. These days, most people are aware that porn use is swiftly becoming a norm in Christian communities. Not a single Christian high school I have spoken at did not have a significant number of students struggling with pornography. Protecting your home doesn’t protect your kids So, how do parents take steps to effectively porn-proof their homes? Many parents try to do just that. They install internet filters. They monitor the devices their children have or have access to. They use Covenant Eyes, Qustodio, or other accountability software. But time and again, frustrated parents tell me that their children have been exposed to explicit content anyways, because the parents of the friends their children hang out with do not take these precautions. Additionally, parents who actively monitor the internet access of their children by not giving them a smartphone face constant fights with their children if they are among the few who do not have one. The reality is that if Christian communities are going to respond effectively to the crisis of porn addiction among the young, it will take a community response. Yes, it is essential that individual households ensure that internet access is both restricted and closely monitored. But this is clearly not enough. In fact, secular governments are for the most part ahead of church leaders in recognizing this reality, which is why American state legislatures, the UK government, and other governments across Europe are grappling with the problem of how to keep pornography away from children. They recognize that this is a social problem requiring a robust collective solution, and Christian communities must recognize this, as well. Christian communities are, for the most part, lagging behind secular leaders in recognizing this problem and considering collective solutions. This needs to be “all in” In a recent essay in First Things titled “Parents Can’t Fight Porn Alone,” in which they make the case for government restrictions on digital pornography, Clare Morell and Brad Littlejohn explain why communities need to work together: “Pornography’s addictive properties raise the stakes. Not only are children ill equipped to make rational choices about whether to consume a product, but their developing brains are more likely than adult brains to become hooked, with lifelong consequences. Adults may abuse alcohol, tobacco, and porn (indeed, for porn, there is no good “use,” but the law cannot suppress every vice), but they are less likely to become addicted if the first exposure occurs after age eighteen, when their brains are more fully developed. And the addictive qualities of porn make a mockery of parental controls: Once a child has encountered porn for the first time (perhaps through a friend, or on a parent’s device, or before the parents realized they needed to put controls on the child’s device), his or her brain will be programmed to hunt for it again and again, so that any and every loophole or glitch is an opening to ongoing porn consumption. “Too often, portals to porn come in the form of friends. For many American children, the dark journey with pornography begins on the school bus, at recess, or even at youth group. Even when parents set up content-filtering regimes for their own families, they cannot control what other families in their communities are doing. With 95 percent of teens carrying around mini-computers in their pockets, it is all too easy for a peer with an unfiltered smartphone to expose another child to pornography. An Oxford Internet Institute study thus estimated that for a single child to be shielded from online pornography in any given year, at least seventeen households in his or her network (and possibly as many as seventy-seven) would need to be employing filters.” Porn is looking for them Re-read that for a moment: At least seventeen households in the network of a single child need to be monitoring and restricting internet usage in order to protect him or her from online porn for a single year. And as I emphasize in my presentations, it doesn’t matter whether your kids are looking for porn – if they’re online, porn is looking for them. As Morell and Littlejohn put it: “Today, the average home has multiple internet-connected devices: smart TVs, laptops, iPads, gaming consoles, and smartphones for every member of the family, not to mention school-issued devices. Each of these ‘smart’ technologies may have hundreds of individual apps, many with their own in-app internet browsers, which means there may be thousands of points of entry to the internet in a single home. A minor using Snapchat, for instance, can reach Pornhub in just five clicks without ever leaving the app. “The abundance of portals requires several different parental control solutions, few of which are intuitive or wholly reliable. Apple’s Screen Time filter, one of the best, requires seventeen steps to set up properly, has been known to stop working without warning, and even when fully functional can be hacked by tech-savvy teens. Better-designed third-party parental control apps are barred from accessing and regulating many of the most popular – and dangerous – apps, such as Discord, Snapchat, and TikTok. And if a parent, recognizing that no one solution is comprehensive, tries to install more than one external control app on the same device, the apps will often conflict with one another. “Parents thus find themselves losing the arms race against Big Tech and Big Porn. This is dire, since children do not need to go looking for pornography; it finds them on social media. The porn industry has adopted the social media influencer model, with porn performers promoting their content on platforms such as TikTok, YouTube, X, Facebook, and Instagram, in order to entice users (many of them minors) to click through to their own sites.” Unsurprisingly, many parents despair. Plenty of parents eventually give up, worn down by the begging and badgering of their children and the lack of community support for their decisions about smartphones and internet-capable devices. If all the other kids have them, they can’t be that bad, right? Porn has been around forever, and most people turned out okay, didn’t they? If we are taking this problem more seriously than our community leadership, we’re probably being paranoid or going overboard, aren’t we? It is far easier to cave, cover our eyes, and hope for the best – but this invariably has devastating consequences, many of which I detail in a comprehensive chapter in my recent book How We Got Here: A Guide to Our Anti-Christian Culture. A growing problem If we are to protect our children from being exposed to explicit content and developing porn addictions – and again, I emphasize that this is a significant and growing problem in every Christian community I have visited – we will need to work together. Christian communities should treat pornography addiction with the same level of seriousness we would apply to a wave of addiction to other drugs. Pornography is more insidious because its effects, at first, are less visible – but they are no less destructive. They rewire and fundamentally transform the mind, alter our ability to relate to the opposite sex, and profoundly poison our ability to have healthy relationships. Thus, community leaders should address the pornography crisis head on. Yes, parents should ensure that every internet-capable device is locked down and monitored. But we must also work with other parents and ensure that the networks we are a part of are pulling in the same direction. (As the American psychologist Dr. Leonard Sax put it in a presentation I attended recently, it is the task of parents to find out if the household their child is visiting has unrestricted internet access.) Christian schools should develop and enforce rigid policies on smartphone use at school and, ideally, cultivate a community with a collective standard that recognizes the dangers of giving teenagers smartphones to begin with. We are all in this together, and we cannot protect our children from pornography if other parents are not willing to do the same. Time to catch up Again, secular experts are ahead of most Christian communities on this issue. Intellectuals such as Jonathan Haidt (The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness) are driving a new consensus: Giving a child (and that very much includes teenagers) a smartphone (or device with unfiltered internet access) is one of the most damaging decisions a parent can make. Morell and Littlejohn are right: Parents cannot do this alone. But they shouldn’t have to, either. Christian communities are lagging behind secular governments and experts on this issue. It is time we caught up. This is reprinted with permission from TheBridgehead.ca where it was first published under the title “Parental controls are not enough: A community response is needed to stop the porn crisis” and where Jonathon Van Maren blogs and also hosts a regular podcast....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Entertainment

The case against MMA, boxing, gladiatorial combat, cockfighting, bullbaiting and other blood sports

Violence might sometimes be necessary, but it should never be amusing ***** Under what circumstances are Christians permitted, in good conscience, to view adults deliberately inflicting violence on one another for the purposes of entertainment? This may seem like a strange question, but it isn’t. On social media, Christians regularly post commentary on the latest UFC match – most recently, several prominent accounts posted minute-by-minute updates on the fight between veteran boxer Mike Tyson and Jake Paul. The sight of two adult men inflicting violence on one another for the entertainment of others was enormously popular, which is why Tyson was paid a staggering $20 million, and Paul was paid $40 million. I’ve been thinking quite a bit about this issue recently. Last year, I was invited to participate in a long-form discussion on a range of cultural issues with Catholic podcaster Matt Fradd on his podcast Pints with Aquinas. One of the topics that came up was the acceptability for Christians of viewing violence – and combat sports – as entertainment. We both agreed that we found combat sports fascinating, and that we were attracted to them as feats of strength and skill. Yet, we both concluded that watching violence as entertainment should be avoided. Now, I am aware – after years writing on cultural issues – that nothing attracts a backlash like criticizing someone’s preferred entertainment. Tim Challies has observed the same trend, and I think the fierceness with which people defend their entertainment is evidence of how central it has become in so many of our lives. But when considered objectively, it is not difficult to conclude that inherently violent combat sports such as Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) are inappropriate entertainment for Christians. Entertained by what we shouldn’t do? Biblically, we are forbidden to do violence to others and to harm our own bodies outside of specifically justified circumstances, which would include a just war or law enforcement. I want to make clear that I am not making the case against learning or practicing skills such as boxing, mixed martial arts, or other forms of fighting and self-defence. My argument is that violence should not be entertainment, which is defined as “the action of providing or being provided with amusement or enjoyment.” I would apply a similar standard to films that glorify violence, which is distinct from depicting violence. A film about war or genocide that portrays reality would not, I hope we can agree, be “entertaining” as such. There is a distinction between learning to inflict violence in the context of a legitimate vocation (like soldier or police officer) or learning how to do so in self-defence, and watching violence to amuse ourselves. The early Christians were universal in their condemnation of gladiatorial combat, and the difference between gladiatorial battles and UFC fights is one of degree, not kind. We know what the physical effects of combat sports such as UFC and boxing are, and we cannot pretend that the fighters are not doing permanent damage to themselves and others. Violence is inherent to these sports, as the intent is to win by inflicting physical violence on the opponent until he or she is knocked out or submits. The research into the physical damage that fighters inflict on one another is extensive and conclusive. From that perspective, I suspect that we may one day come to see violence in sport the way we now view bullbaiting or cockfighting. Young men should not be sacrificing their bodies and their cognitive abilities for the entertainment of the masses. While it is true that other sports can also result in physical harm – hockey, basketball – violence is an aberration rather than an intrinsic part of these sports. Those who make this point are making a category error. For those who think violence as entertainment is acceptable, I would be interested in hearing their answer to this question: How is sport and entertainment a justifiable exception to the general Christian prohibition on violence? Two defences In order to claim that combat sports such as UFC are justifiable entertainment for Christians, you must defend this thesis: Human beings are morally permitted to inflict violence on one another for money and the entertainment of others. I have yet to see this thesis convincingly defended. In most discussions I have had on this subject, people are remarkably unwilling to apply Christian standards to entertainment combat fighting. Instead, one of two responses is usually offered: “You’re being legalistic” or “I really enjoy watching fights.” The first response is the lazy Christian’s preferred defence of many indefensible things (and misunderstands the term “legalistic” to boot); the second is irrelevant. Many violent combat sports – especially UFC – bring out profoundly unhealthy and unchristian attitudes in the spectators. The bursts of particularly savage violence are not incidental – they are a key reason many enjoy these sports so much. The sight of two men attacking one another and physically damaging one another sends crowds into a frenzy that in many instances can accurately be described as bloodlust. Skilled yes, but brutal still Many fans rightly note that professional fighters display enormous skill, and that fights resemble a game of enormous chess. But surely we can agree that the atmosphere at the fights as well as the attitude towards physical violence being cultivated by the spectator are profoundly unedifying. In short, I believe UFC is to human relations what pornography is to sex. Some lusts should not be stoked. Some things should not be entertaining. ...