Calvin Theological Seminary : 1999 Seminar
Project Report
I. Context and Issue
Calvin Theological Seminary has been owned and operated by the Christian Reformed Church in North America since 1976. In addition to the Master of Divinity degree, Calvin offers Master of Arts degrees in missions and educational ministry, a Master of Theological Studies degree, Master of Theology degrees in all areas of the curriculum, and the Doctor of Philosophy degree. The seminary serves a total enrollment of 274 (222 FTE) students with a full-time faculty of twenty plus twenty-three part-time instructors. The Seminary shares a campus with Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Since its beginning, Calvin has played a crucial role in the education of people seeking ordination to the ministry of the Word in the Christian Reformed Church. The church order of the Christian Reformed Church requires “The completion of a satisfactory theological training . . . for admission to the ministry of the Word” (article 6. a). The approved route to candidacy for the office of minister of the Word passes through the Board of Trustees of Calvin Theological Seminary. Graduates of seminaries other than Calvin who desire candidacy must complete the appropriate Special Program for Ministerial Candidacy, usually one year of study plus field education, at Calvin in addition to their M.Div. study elsewhere. Thus, the Seminary functions formally as a gatekeeper to the ministry of the Word in the Christian Reformed Church. In a less formal way faculty self-understanding includes a gatekeeping function as well. Although individual faculty members may offer significantly difference nuances, the faculty has a history of seeing itself as a keeper of the Reformed confessional heritage. This informal function is understood in distinction from people in the Christian Reformed Church who have embraced more broadly Evangelical understandings of the Christian faith and of the ministry of the Word.
For the Lexington Seminar, the Calvin faculty chose to address an issue stated in the following question:
How can Calvin refine a classical, confessionally Reformed theological curriculum to provide more effective professional training for contemporary pastors in the Christian Reformed Church?
A good part of the issue was set over against the concern that the seminary remain confessionally Reformed, as opposed to becoming broadly Evangelical. This issue has been identified earlier by the faculty and included in the Seminary’s strategic plan (Strategic Plan Key Result Area two: Common Center for Faculty/Administration). The context for the issue had been explicated in a book written by Calvin faculty member John Bolt for an earlier faculty development project funded by the Lilly Endowment, Inc.: Stewards of the Word: Challenges in Reformed Theological Education Today (Grand Rapids, MI: Calvin Theological Seminary, 1998).
The issue has been made more urgent for us because of calls within the Christian Reformed Church for alternate routes to the ministry of the Word in the Christian Reformed Church (see the “Alternate Routes Being Used to Enter the Ordained Ministry in the CRC” report to synod of 2000) and in the seminary’s pool of student prospects. May of these prospects want to be sold on Calvin before they will enroll. Both of these factors call into question the Seminary’s gatekeeping position, or at least make it difficult to sustain it.
II. Project Design and Implementation
The Calvin project included three components.
A. First, we constructed a survey process and instrument by which to gain regular feedback from our alums at designated intervals.
We realized that we did not know enough about our graduates to make judgments about the quality of a Calvin education. Other than anecdotally and individually, we knew little about how Calvin graduates in ministry valued their education. We wanted to learn from some of our alums how well they judge that our curriculum (courses, field education, interaction with faculty) prepared them for effective ministry. This learning was intended to be done by means of a longitudinal study that will be designed and have its first set of events within the life time of the Lexington Project. We lacked vehicles for regular feedback from our alums. Such scheduled, systematic feedback would be very helpful to us in enabling us to fulfill our mission more effectively. Therefore, we designed and implement a survey intended for M.Div. and M.A. alums who had been graduated two years and five years previously.
The purpose of the survey was to learn the judgment of our graduates about the extent that Calvin was and is achieving intended outcomes in the following areas:
For M.Div. and M.A. Graduates
1. Drawing students of the Word through a classical theological curriculum toward culturally effective ministry in the contemporary world?
2. Expressing the unity of the church by offering alert hospitality to men and women of various races and cultures?
3. Promoting the holiness of the church by encouraging spiritual health within seminary life?
Using money provided by the Lexington Seminar, the Seminary contracted with the Social Science Research Center of Calvin College for design of a survey, preparation of an instrument, and then the first printing, distribution and analysis of the survey. The cost of future, annual distribution and analyses of the survey to alums two and five years after graduation will have to be included in the annual instructional portion of the Seminary’s budget. The survey, its analysis and discussion of that analysis will become part of the seminary’s comprehensive evaluation process.
During August and September 2000, questionnaires were sent to the 186 graduates of Calvin Theological Seminary for the years 1997 and 1998 (2-3 years out), and 1994 and 1995 (5-6 years out). One hundred fifteen people completed and returned questionnaires for a response rate of 62%. Two-thirds of those who responded indicated that they were part of the M.Div. program. A little more than two of five respondents indicated that they were graduated in 1997 or 1998; almost three of five respondents indicated that they had been graduated in 1994 or 1995. Initial results of the survey were presented and discussed at the annual faculty retreat in fall 2000. It is intended that in subsequent years discussion of future results of what will be an annual survey will occur either at the faculty retreat on an occasion devoted to the topic. This occasion may be the annual board-faculty conversation in February, or a planning and evaluation session either very early in the academic year or after the close of the year (September or June)
B. Second, we sought to foster conversation within the faculty about our calling in theological education. The fall 2000 faculty retreat devoted to discussion of the survey formed part of this process. However, over the next two years the faculty shared lunch and conversation on at least seven occasions. Most of these gatherings were structured around conversation with a guest of the seminary.
C. Third, we sought to contract with a coach in the area of curriculum and instruction to help the faculty understand the teaching-learning process at Calvin; to help us think through the implications of the feedback from our alums; to help us arrive at intended alterations to the teaching-learning process; and then to help us make those intended alterations happen in our actual teaching and our students’ actual learning. In outline form, this person was intended to help the faculty:
1) To do an educational audit of the M.Div. curriculum.
2) To help us to interpret the feedback from our alums.
3) To help us think through ways of making the teaching-learning process at Calvin more effective in preparing students for ministry. 4) To become better teachers through individual and group coaching.
In a previous project the faculty employed the services of a retired education professor from Calvin College. This person had died by the time that the Lexington Seminar began. From the faculty’s perspective, a person like him would be extraordinarily helpful in helping us see what happens in the teaching-learning process at Calvin and how the outcomes of that process fits the realities of ministry today; determining intended alterations to that process; and making those intended alterations actually happen in our classrooms, offices and field education settings. Finding such a person proved to be more difficult than anticipated. Therefore, this part of the project has not been completed. The money to fund it is being held in anticipation of making what we still think was a good idea happen.
Money from the Seminar account was used bring Dr. Richard S. Ascough, Assistant Professor of New Testament and Greet at Queen’s Theological College in Ontario to the 2002 faculty retreat. He addressed the topic, “Enhancing Student Learning by Design.” Although this presentation was not part of the original design, it address issues in teaching and learning that were inherent in the project.
III. Recourses Used in Developing and Implementing the Project
A. As mentioned above, a book by John Bolt written for a previous faculty development project served as intellectual background for Calvin’s participation in the Lexington Seminar: Stewards of the Word: Challenges in Reformed Theological Education Today.
B. A second key resource was the expertise resident in the Calvin Social Science Research Center. The social scientists there provided to be not only expert in the design and implementation of a sample survey, but also to be very knowledgeable about and committed to the mission of Calvin Theological Seminary.
C. The major product of the Lexington Seminar is the Survey of Calvin Theological Seminary Graduates (summer 2000) by the Calvin Social Research Center.
IV. Project results: what we learned – or at least realized in fresh ways
The list below of conclusions was developed at the first meeting of the project group in Maine in June 1999, refined at the annual faculty retreat in October 1999, and refined further since then.
A. Calvin has a relationship with its sponsoring denomination that is almost unique in North American theological education: the seminary board and faculty act as gatekeepers to ordination for the ministry of the Word in the Christian Reformed Church. This position places tremendous responsibility on board and faculty. It has also enabled board and faculty to make decisions based on theological and educational sense with far less attention to marketing concerns than at many other theological schools.
B. We picked an issue of great importance to us. Through the Lexington Seminar we learned about the commonality of concerns, interests, and even plans of action with the Lexington Seminar group. We could well have picked an issue that is easier to tackle. In Maine, before Maine, after Maine and at the October faculty retreat it has been and is clear to us that the issue originally chosen for this project is important, interesting and urgent for us to address. We have figured out some things about how to educate people for ministry. We received good affirmation as to the strength and values of our curriculum, faculty, and entire program from colleagues at the other institutions represented.
C. We picked the right issue. We have figured out some things about how to educate people for ministry. We received good affirmation as to the strength and values of our curriculum, faculty, and entire program from colleagues at the other institutions represented.
D. We learned about the commonality of concerns, interests, and even plans of action with the Lexington Seminary group. A passion for excellence in ministry and in the education of ministers was a value shared across the entire group.
E. We learned the value of conversation among faculty members. The Lexington Seminar was constructed as a non-competitive group. As one of the participants said after the first gathering in Maine, “No person or institution was harpooned.” Calvin faculty who had the privilege of being in Maine with colleagues from other institutions learned the value of structured conversation with colleagues as committed to the mission of their institution as we are to that of Calvin.
F. We do well to pay attention to what our graduates and others in the church tell us. We enjoy a broad and deep community of voices that cares deeply about the ministry of the gospel, the Christian Reformed Church and Calvin Theological Seminary. We hope to find new ways to collaborate with our graduates in developing and providing more effective theological education.
G. We have considerable capacity for dialogue, although we have all too few opportunities to engage in sustained conversation. The Lexington Seminar provided opportunity for sustained conversation in Maine, but also in team conversations before and after the event. It also provided the occasion for an important faculty conversation at the annual faculty retreat on October 19, 1999. We have a history of conversation within the faculty and between board and faculty; however, opportunities for sustained discussion, as our Lexington group enjoyed in Maine, are few.
H. We learned much about our alums’ views of their seminary experience from the survey. Just two of the findings of the survey, as presented by the Social Research Center staff, appear below:
· Most graduates judged that CTS teaches Reformed theology and a Reformed world and life view in an adequate way.
· About half of CTS graduates say its accomplishment of promoting the holiness of the church by encouraging spiritual health within seminary life is inadequate. Note: this item response was significant in supporting the seminary’s addition of its first full-time dean of students.
I. We learned that valuable conversation with colleagues at other institutions can happen, particularly in a non-competitive setting. As someone from another seminary remarked at the first meeting in Maine, “No person or institution was harpooned,” even though tough questions were asked. The opportunity to visit with colleagues in a relaxed, elegant setting was a delight.
V. Sharing of Insights Gained
At the last session of the second gathering of our Lexington Seminar group in Maine, Garth Rosell of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary offered reflections about the Seminar as a whole and about the presentations of the schools present. He stated that, despite their small size, theological schools have surpassingly complex natures. He spoke as well of the reality of change: change in the composition of the faculty, building programs, leaderships, and reviews of curricula.
Over the course of the Lexington Seminar Calvin experienced all of the changes identified by Rosell. A major building program was completed that provided the Seminary with vastly improved space for students to study, converse and in the words of one faculty member “simply to be.” The building program also enhanced the Seminary’s capacity for technologically assisted teaching and learning, and addressed various long-standing deficiencies in the building. Second, at the end of the 2000-2001 academic year, the Seminary’s president and academic dean, both of whom had been involved in the design and implementation of the Lexington Seminar resigned. Third, Calvin is in the middle of a major review of the M.Div. curriculum with reviews of the curricula of the other degree programs to follow. Teaching and learning in any institution occur in a dynamic context. They do not occur in isolation from events in the learning institution nor from events in the wider social context.
I. Context and Issue
Calvin Theological Seminary has been owned and operated by the Christian Reformed Church in North America since 1976. In addition to the Master of Divinity degree, Calvin offers Master of Arts degrees in missions and educational ministry, a Master of Theological Studies degree, Master of Theology degrees in all areas of the curriculum, and the Doctor of Philosophy degree. The seminary serves a total enrollment of 274 (222 FTE) students with a full-time faculty of twenty plus twenty-three part-time instructors. The Seminary shares a campus with Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Since its beginning, Calvin has played a crucial role in the education of people seeking ordination to the ministry of the Word in the Christian Reformed Church. The church order of the Christian Reformed Church requires “The completion of a satisfactory theological training . . . for admission to the ministry of the Word” (article 6. a). The approved route to candidacy for the office of minister of the Word passes through the Board of Trustees of Calvin Theological Seminary. Graduates of seminaries other than Calvin who desire candidacy must complete the appropriate Special Program for Ministerial Candidacy, usually one year of study plus field education, at Calvin in addition to their M.Div. study elsewhere. Thus, the Seminary functions formally as a gatekeeper to the ministry of the Word in the Christian Reformed Church. In a less formal way faculty self-understanding includes a gatekeeping function as well. Although individual faculty members may offer significantly difference nuances, the faculty has a history of seeing itself as a keeper of the Reformed confessional heritage. This informal function is understood in distinction from people in the Christian Reformed Church who have embraced more broadly Evangelical understandings of the Christian faith and of the ministry of the Word.
For the Lexington Seminar, the Calvin faculty chose to address an issue stated in the following question:
How can Calvin refine a classical, confessionally Reformed theological curriculum to provide more effective professional training for contemporary pastors in the Christian Reformed Church?
A good part of the issue was set over against the concern that the seminary remain confessionally Reformed, as opposed to becoming broadly Evangelical. This issue has been identified earlier by the faculty and included in the Seminary’s strategic plan (Strategic Plan Key Result Area two: Common Center for Faculty/Administration). The context for the issue had been explicated in a book written by Calvin faculty member John Bolt for an earlier faculty development project funded by the Lilly Endowment, Inc.: Stewards of the Word: Challenges in Reformed Theological Education Today (Grand Rapids, MI: Calvin Theological Seminary, 1998).
The issue has been made more urgent for us because of calls within the Christian Reformed Church for alternate routes to the ministry of the Word in the Christian Reformed Church (see the “Alternate Routes Being Used to Enter the Ordained Ministry in the CRC” report to synod of 2000) and in the seminary’s pool of student prospects. May of these prospects want to be sold on Calvin before they will enroll. Both of these factors call into question the Seminary’s gatekeeping position, or at least make it difficult to sustain it.
II. Project Design and Implementation
The Calvin project included three components.
A. First, we constructed a survey process and instrument by which to gain regular feedback from our alums at designated intervals.
We realized that we did not know enough about our graduates to make judgments about the quality of a Calvin education. Other than anecdotally and individually, we knew little about how Calvin graduates in ministry valued their education. We wanted to learn from some of our alums how well they judge that our curriculum (courses, field education, interaction with faculty) prepared them for effective ministry. This learning was intended to be done by means of a longitudinal study that will be designed and have its first set of events within the life time of the Lexington Project. We lacked vehicles for regular feedback from our alums. Such scheduled, systematic feedback would be very helpful to us in enabling us to fulfill our mission more effectively. Therefore, we designed and implement a survey intended for M.Div. and M.A. alums who had been graduated two years and five years previously.
The purpose of the survey was to learn the judgment of our graduates about the extent that Calvin was and is achieving intended outcomes in the following areas:
For M.Div. and M.A. Graduates
1. Drawing students of the Word through a classical theological curriculum toward culturally effective ministry in the contemporary world?
2. Expressing the unity of the church by offering alert hospitality to men and women of various races and cultures?
3. Promoting the holiness of the church by encouraging spiritual health within seminary life?
Using money provided by the Lexington Seminar, the Seminary contracted with the Social Science Research Center of Calvin College for design of a survey, preparation of an instrument, and then the first printing, distribution and analysis of the survey. The cost of future, annual distribution and analyses of the survey to alums two and five years after graduation will have to be included in the annual instructional portion of the Seminary’s budget. The survey, its analysis and discussion of that analysis will become part of the seminary’s comprehensive evaluation process.
During August and September 2000, questionnaires were sent to the 186 graduates of Calvin Theological Seminary for the years 1997 and 1998 (2-3 years out), and 1994 and 1995 (5-6 years out). One hundred fifteen people completed and returned questionnaires for a response rate of 62%. Two-thirds of those who responded indicated that they were part of the M.Div. program. A little more than two of five respondents indicated that they were graduated in 1997 or 1998; almost three of five respondents indicated that they had been graduated in 1994 or 1995. Initial results of the survey were presented and discussed at the annual faculty retreat in fall 2000. It is intended that in subsequent years discussion of future results of what will be an annual survey will occur either at the faculty retreat on an occasion devoted to the topic. This occasion may be the annual board-faculty conversation in February, or a planning and evaluation session either very early in the academic year or after the close of the year (September or June)
B. Second, we sought to foster conversation within the faculty about our calling in theological education. The fall 2000 faculty retreat devoted to discussion of the survey formed part of this process. However, over the next two years the faculty shared lunch and conversation on at least seven occasions. Most of these gatherings were structured around conversation with a guest of the seminary.
C. Third, we sought to contract with a coach in the area of curriculum and instruction to help the faculty understand the teaching-learning process at Calvin; to help us think through the implications of the feedback from our alums; to help us arrive at intended alterations to the teaching-learning process; and then to help us make those intended alterations happen in our actual teaching and our students’ actual learning. In outline form, this person was intended to help the faculty:
1) To do an educational audit of the M.Div. curriculum.
2) To help us to interpret the feedback from our alums.
3) To help us think through ways of making the teaching-learning process at Calvin more effective in preparing students for ministry. 4) To become better teachers through individual and group coaching.
In a previous project the faculty employed the services of a retired education professor from Calvin College. This person had died by the time that the Lexington Seminar began. From the faculty’s perspective, a person like him would be extraordinarily helpful in helping us see what happens in the teaching-learning process at Calvin and how the outcomes of that process fits the realities of ministry today; determining intended alterations to that process; and making those intended alterations actually happen in our classrooms, offices and field education settings. Finding such a person proved to be more difficult than anticipated. Therefore, this part of the project has not been completed. The money to fund it is being held in anticipation of making what we still think was a good idea happen.
Money from the Seminar account was used bring Dr. Richard S. Ascough, Assistant Professor of New Testament and Greet at Queen’s Theological College in Ontario to the 2002 faculty retreat. He addressed the topic, “Enhancing Student Learning by Design.” Although this presentation was not part of the original design, it address issues in teaching and learning that were inherent in the project.
III. Recourses Used in Developing and Implementing the Project
A. As mentioned above, a book by John Bolt written for a previous faculty development project served as intellectual background for Calvin’s participation in the Lexington Seminar: Stewards of the Word: Challenges in Reformed Theological Education Today.
B. A second key resource was the expertise resident in the Calvin Social Science Research Center. The social scientists there provided to be not only expert in the design and implementation of a sample survey, but also to be very knowledgeable about and committed to the mission of Calvin Theological Seminary.
C. The major product of the Lexington Seminar is the Survey of Calvin Theological Seminary Graduates (summer 2000) by the Calvin Social Research Center.
IV. Project results: what we learned – or at least realized in fresh ways
The list below of conclusions was developed at the first meeting of the project group in Maine in June 1999, refined at the annual faculty retreat in October 1999, and refined further since then.
A. Calvin has a relationship with its sponsoring denomination that is almost unique in North American theological education: the seminary board and faculty act as gatekeepers to ordination for the ministry of the Word in the Christian Reformed Church. This position places tremendous responsibility on board and faculty. It has also enabled board and faculty to make decisions based on theological and educational sense with far less attention to marketing concerns than at many other theological schools.
B. We picked an issue of great importance to us. Through the Lexington Seminar we learned about the commonality of concerns, interests, and even plans of action with the Lexington Seminar group. We could well have picked an issue that is easier to tackle. In Maine, before Maine, after Maine and at the October faculty retreat it has been and is clear to us that the issue originally chosen for this project is important, interesting and urgent for us to address. We have figured out some things about how to educate people for ministry. We received good affirmation as to the strength and values of our curriculum, faculty, and entire program from colleagues at the other institutions represented.
C. We picked the right issue. We have figured out some things about how to educate people for ministry. We received good affirmation as to the strength and values of our curriculum, faculty, and entire program from colleagues at the other institutions represented.
D. We learned about the commonality of concerns, interests, and even plans of action with the Lexington Seminary group. A passion for excellence in ministry and in the education of ministers was a value shared across the entire group.
E. We learned the value of conversation among faculty members. The Lexington Seminar was constructed as a non-competitive group. As one of the participants said after the first gathering in Maine, “No person or institution was harpooned.” Calvin faculty who had the privilege of being in Maine with colleagues from other institutions learned the value of structured conversation with colleagues as committed to the mission of their institution as we are to that of Calvin.
F. We do well to pay attention to what our graduates and others in the church tell us. We enjoy a broad and deep community of voices that cares deeply about the ministry of the gospel, the Christian Reformed Church and Calvin Theological Seminary. We hope to find new ways to collaborate with our graduates in developing and providing more effective theological education.
G. We have considerable capacity for dialogue, although we have all too few opportunities to engage in sustained conversation. The Lexington Seminar provided opportunity for sustained conversation in Maine, but also in team conversations before and after the event. It also provided the occasion for an important faculty conversation at the annual faculty retreat on October 19, 1999. We have a history of conversation within the faculty and between board and faculty; however, opportunities for sustained discussion, as our Lexington group enjoyed in Maine, are few.
H. We learned much about our alums’ views of their seminary experience from the survey. Just two of the findings of the survey, as presented by the Social Research Center staff, appear below:
· Most graduates judged that CTS teaches Reformed theology and a Reformed world and life view in an adequate way.
· About half of CTS graduates say its accomplishment of promoting the holiness of the church by encouraging spiritual health within seminary life is inadequate. Note: this item response was significant in supporting the seminary’s addition of its first full-time dean of students.
I. We learned that valuable conversation with colleagues at other institutions can happen, particularly in a non-competitive setting. As someone from another seminary remarked at the first meeting in Maine, “No person or institution was harpooned,” even though tough questions were asked. The opportunity to visit with colleagues in a relaxed, elegant setting was a delight.
V. Sharing of Insights Gained
At the last session of the second gathering of our Lexington Seminar group in Maine, Garth Rosell of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary offered reflections about the Seminar as a whole and about the presentations of the schools present. He stated that, despite their small size, theological schools have surpassingly complex natures. He spoke as well of the reality of change: change in the composition of the faculty, building programs, leaderships, and reviews of curricula.
Over the course of the Lexington Seminar Calvin experienced all of the changes identified by Rosell. A major building program was completed that provided the Seminary with vastly improved space for students to study, converse and in the words of one faculty member “simply to be.” The building program also enhanced the Seminary’s capacity for technologically assisted teaching and learning, and addressed various long-standing deficiencies in the building. Second, at the end of the 2000-2001 academic year, the Seminary’s president and academic dean, both of whom had been involved in the design and implementation of the Lexington Seminar resigned. Third, Calvin is in the middle of a major review of the M.Div. curriculum with reviews of the curricula of the other degree programs to follow. Teaching and learning in any institution occur in a dynamic context. They do not occur in isolation from events in the learning institution nor from events in the wider social context.