The fourth goal was to increase both the knowledge and the practice of intentional disciple-making of CRBC members. There were 14 participants who completed the pre-implementation survey and 10 that completed the survey after the project implementation. As I stated earlier of these 10 participants, there was an overall increase in the knowledge and practices of the participants. Their knowledge of disciple- making increased by an average of 8.73 percent and their practices increased by an average of 9.05 percent. Nine out of 10 participants increased in their knowledge and all 10 participants increased in their practices of disciple-making. While these are
encouraging results, it is important to verify that these results were statistically significant.
t-Test of knowledge and practice questions. The 6-week sermon series and
10-week teaching curriculum of the 10 participants made a statistically-significant difference resulting in the increase of their knowledge and practices of intentional disciple-making as (t (9) = 6.078, p < .0001). Since the t stat -6.078 (or the absolute value of 6.078) is larger than the t critical two tail value (2.262), then I can state that the teaching intervention made a difference and since the p value is 0.0001 and is less than p
=.05, we can say that the difference was not by chance and that the teaching on intentional disciple-making made a significant difference. The results are displayed below.
Table 4. t-Test of knowledge and practice, questions 6–50 t-Test of Knowledge & Practice: Questions 6–50
Before After
Mean 203.7 227.8
Variance 327.5666667 278.4
Observations 10 10
Pearson Correlation 0.743011227
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
df 9
t Stat -6.078206127
P(T<=t) one-tail 9.20267E-05 t Critical one-tail 1.833112933 P(T<=t) two-tail 0.000184053 t Critical two-tail 2.262157163
t-Test of knowledge questions. More specifically I found the increase of the participant’s knowledge of intentional disciple-making to be (t (9) = 4.713, p < .001).
Since the t stat -4.713 (or the absolute value of 4.713) is larger than the t critical two tail value (2.262), then I can state that the teaching intervention made a difference; and since the p value is 0.001 and is less than p =.05, I can say that the difference was not by chance and that the teaching on intentional disciple-making made a significant difference.
The results are displayed below.
Table 5. t-Test of knowledge only, questions 6–22 t-Test of Knowledge Only: Questions 6–22
Pre-Survey Post-Survey
Mean 83.1 92
Variance 39.21111111 20.66666667
Observations 10 10
Pearson Correlation 0.425445757
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
df 9
t Stat -4.71331432
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.000549688 t Critical one-tail 1.833112933 P(T<=t) two-tail 0.001099375
t Critical two-tail 2.262157163
t-Test of practices questions. Specifically related to the participants’ practices of intentional disciple-making, I found the increase to be (t (9) = 5.467, p < .0004). Since the t stat -5.467 (or the absolute value of 5.467) is larger than the t critical two tail value (2.262), then I can state that the teaching intervention made a difference; and since the p value is 0.0004 and is less than p =.05, I can say that the difference was not by chance and that the teaching on intentional disciple-making made a significant difference. The results are displayed below.
The t-Test results are exceptional. When tested individually and together as a whole, each one had a positive result. All tests revealed that the sermon series and curriculum on intentional disciple-making had a significant impact and that it was not by chance.
In addition to the t-Tests, I stated in goal 4 that it would be exceptional success to see at least five members (20 percent of membership) intentionally discipling at least one person. Question 25 can help explain the findings. It states, “I am currently discipling another believer.” The pre-implementation survey had an average of 2.4 points out of the possible 6, with only two participants scoring a 4 or above.
Table 6. t-Test of practices only, questions 23–50 t-Test of Practices Only: Questions 23–50
Pre-Survey Post-Survey
Mean 120.6 135.8
Variance 182.0444444 234.6222222
Observations 10 10
Pearson Correlation 0.821069877
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
df 9
t Stat -5.46745297
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.000198284
t Critical one-tail 1.833112933 P(T<=t) two-tail 0.000396568
t Critical two-tail 2.262157163
This same question on the post-implementation survey had an average score of 3.1 points, with five participants scoring a 4 or above. Based on this information, it is uncertain how many disciple-making relationships are happening. However, five participants scoring a 4 or higher on this question supports the idea that more disciple- making relationships are happening.
Strengths of the Project
One of the greatest strengths of this project was that its central goals and teaching were derived directly from Scripture. The 6-week sermon series was not created from my thoughts. The sermons were an exposition of God’s Word that were either directly tied to disciple-making or could be applied directly to the task of disciple- making. The 10-week teaching curriculum was also derived from biblical topics
associated with disciple-making. Additional books and materials supported the sermons and curriculum, but all were faithful to the Scriptures.
Another strength of this project was the size of the participant group. The group of 10 participants ended up being a strength of the project. Even though I would have desired that more participate, the smaller class allowed for more interaction. With
the smaller group, individuals seemed to open up and be more vulnerable. They asked a lot of questions and talked about the situations they were dealing with related to making disciples. I believe that this had an important effect on the participants’ knowledge and practices associated with disciple-making.
Weaknesses of the Project
A weakness of the project was the small size of the participant group. This was a strength of the project, but it was also a weakness. Even though I spent a lot of time promoting the project, only 10 participants completed both the DKPS before and after implementation. It was not a weakness of the project’s effectiveness, but of the project’s breadth of influence. This is especially true since the project was statistically successful. I would have liked for more people to be impacted. However, Jesus’ disciple-making was open to the crowds, but always seemed to be most effective for the few.