Case Studies in Christian Education: Lipscomb Academy

Navigating Student Expression, Leadership Pressure, and Mission Integrity

A Note to Readers

Each case study in this series is presented for reflection and professional dialogue among Christian school leaders. We do not claim to have all the facts or full context surrounding these events. The details summarized here come from publicly available news reports and are used solely to explore lessons, implications, and opportunities for growth in Christian education.

The Situation

Lipscomb Academy, a K–12 school in Nashville, Tennessee, affiliated with Lipscomb University and the Churches of Christ, enrolls roughly 1,400–1,500 students. Annual tuition for grades 9–12 is $23,255.

In September 2025, the school found itself at the center of national attention after a symbolic gesture by students honoring Charlie Kirk sparked controversy.

On September 12, between 12–15 students wore red ties with their school uniforms to honor Kirk after his assassination. Administrator Jesse Savage enforced the dress code and asked students to remove the ties. No disciplinary action was taken, but the request led to parent complaints and public backlash.

According to a September 26 statement from Lipscomb, school leaders met with the students the following Monday, September 15, to hear their perspectives. Together they decided to plan a future chapel service focused on being “bold and impactful in their faith.” The school later apologized for how the situation was handled.

However, tensions grew when Savage was soon transitioned into a new role as Director of Academics for the Upper School. Though the school clarified that this move had been planned for over a year, some parents viewed the timing as a reaction to the controversy, further fueling distrust.

Photo by Feliphe Schiarolli on Unsplash

What Would You Do?

The story at Lipscomb isn’t just about policy or optics—it’s about formation. Every school culture is constantly teaching something, even when it doesn’t mean to. In this case, a dress-code decision became a moment of cultural revelation.

Policies aren’t neutral; they embody what a school values most. Enforcing the dress code may have been technically correct, but in a discipleship community, “correct” doesn’t always mean “complete.” Initially, this was a classic “this is our policy” decision, perhaps without considering the phenomenon of the event that took place. Technically, the school is correct for upholding its policies.

So if you choose to hold the line on dress code, what else could you do to engage your passionate student body? What other options could you have negotiated? Students, especially in formative years, want to express themselves. The question becomes: What’s the most reasonable and mission-aligned way to do this? It appears Lipscomb did make a strong effort on the following Monday to brainstorm ideas.

Lipscomb’s later decision to meet with students and invite them to plan a chapel was wise. It modeled reconciliation and relationship over reaction. But the leadership shift that followed—however pre-planned—showed how fragile institutional trust can be when communication lags behind perception.

Final Word

Engage with the situation as early as you can, make a plan, and then execute it. There’s no “right way” to honor the assassination of Charlie Kirk, but to disregard a moment tied to an influential Christian leader creates difficult optics. At the same time, schools must be sensitive to the realities of loud outside voices, especially those who may try to steer or politicize a situation before the full story unfolds. Wise leadership resists both public pressure and private defensiveness, choosing instead to respond through prayer, discernment, and mission clarity.

Leadership must also guard against making personnel decisions in response to public pressure. Employee evaluations should focus on documented behaviors, outcomes, and mission alignment, not influential individuals and outside noise. When schools allow external voices to shape internal decisions, they risk undermining the very credibility they hope to protect.

Formation is rarely clean or convenient. It happens in the awkward middle, where conviction meets conversation and policy meets people. Lipscomb’s response wasn’t perfect, but it points to something hopeful: a community willing to listen, learn, and try again. That humility is what separates schools that merely teach a biblical worldview from those that actually embody it.

“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.”
— Colossians 4:6 (NIV)