(rev) Manual Pt 2-1 Contrasting Curriculum Models

Curriculum Manual

Part 2:

13

“WEIGHING OUR LUGGAGE” - Models to evaluate. What is really needed (rather than is thought necessary)?

In the English language there is a subtle difference of emphasis between “necessary” and “needed”. While “necessary” has the idea of some thing being indispensable or unavoidable, “needed” refers to a lack that is felt or experienced by some person(s). Thus Jesus had “need” of a donkey, but it was “necessary” for the Scriptures to be fulfilled. We should keep this distinction in mind as we ask ourselves: “What do our students really need to prepare them for their future ministries?”

CONTRASTING CURRICULUM MODELS As we turn now to “weighing our luggage” - to evaluate all the subjects our curriculum has been “carrying” to date - it will help to look first at two very different models of theological education that demonstrate a divergent range of concerns and priorities. The first presents a minimal approach that seeks only to introduce basic information to a general clientele within a short time. The second, a specialist approach, is geared to fulfilling the aspirations of a particular student. As we shall see, both models have their strengths, but, equally, each has its own particular limitations.

1. The Minimal Model: A three-day Briefing. A small missionary society, operating on a slender budget, wanted to prepare its missionaries for evangelism in Muslim countries. It carefully vetted its candidates. Those selected attended a short training conference, conducted by a former missionary who provided lectures on various subjects deemed appropriate. This “briefing” lasted three days.* When the time eventually came for the missionary lecturer to retire, it was decided to ask him to record all his talks on video so that the “preparation” he offered at each briefing could be carried on after he had gone. One is left wondering whether such training left any opportunity for asking questions or for the discussion of issues raised by the lecturer’s talks. * By way of contrast, the four terms of missionary training given to the present writer amounted to over 46 weeks. Both training experiences were offered in the same city in Britain to people going to work in the same institution in the same foreign country in the same period! Approach varies, it seems, not according to the job to be done, but rather according to the ethos of the sending agency.

DISCUSSION What are the advantages of the “minimal” approach to training? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What are some of the disadvantages? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Curriculum Manual

13

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Observation: Theological Curriculum is not about CONTENT only. It is about ENQUIRY and INTER-ACTION also.

Curriculum Manual

14

2. The Specialist Consumer Model: Studying for a Doctorate. The following advertisement appeared in an American theological journal: DOCTOR OF MINISTRY: World Christianity Track for Missionaries at -------------- SEMINARY Provides Flexibility in Scheduling. We also offer a separate track for pastors. M. Div. or equivalent required. What does this suggest about the model of theological curriculum on offer here? First, it suggests that we have entered the world of the racecourse. There is a stiff course (called a “track”) to be followed by those taking part; Perhaps there is also an element of competition hinted at - which participants will complete their “track” first? Certainly there are entrance hurdles to be passed before the course can even be attempted (e.g. that essential M. Div.!). And no doubt some form of academic training for the big event is probably advisable before attempting to write the doctorate. But are there not also some serious limitations? Consider first the implied priorities of the advertisement. It appears to be concerned foremost with the needs of those expected to take part. What this model provides is “Flexibility in Scheduling”. Might we not have first expected some indication of the field of studies to be covered by the course? Instead we can only deduce the course subject from the labels attached: “Ministry…World Christianity”. And which is the aspect most important to the prospective candidate? Undoubtedly it is the doctorate! (“DOCTOR OF MINISTRY” - printed as the heading in bold capitals!) We note also that the composers of the advertisement also seem interested in certain internal caste distinctions (“missionaries” versus “pastors”, and the hierarchy of Doctor of Ministry over Master of Divinity). No indication is given, however, of the relevance of the “track” to the contribution that their graduates might be expected to make to the world outside! Let’s reflect again on the implications of this approach:

DISCUSSION Degrees are offered as evidence of a person having undertaken satisfactorily a particular course of study. What are the advantages of such a system? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What are the disadvantages? (There are other ways of learning!) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Curriculum Manual

14

So do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Observation: Theological Curriculum is not only about COURSES of STUDY. It is also about PURPOSE and RELEVANCE.

Curriculum Manual

15

CATEGORIES of RELEVANCE One way of looking at the relevancy of a course is to view it in terms of its Theological, Spiritual, Practical, Evangelistic and Educational relevance. Theologically we ask how a course informs the mind, not just to think about God, but also to encourage such an understanding of God’s nature, actions, character, person and “ways” generally that the student experiences and so truly knows God for him or herself. This leads to the second category, the spiritual dimension of what is being learned through the course. Here the heart must be warmed to increase a personal love for God, a devotion that can only be nurtured through the ministry of the Holy Spirit simply because this involves a spiritual dimension. The third category involves the will and concerns practical obedience to Jesus as Lord. This practical level of curriculum relevancy is about training students as disciples of Jesus and is not to be confused with meeting the expectations congregations may have concerning their ministers’ abilities to perform this or that function in the life of the congregation – the skills of performance. A course may also be evaluated according to how relevant it is to the evangelistic mission of the church. Does it equip people to witness to the gospel and ultimately make disciples of the nations? This evangelistic dimension asks: will you be able as a result of this course to share the Gospel with others more effectively (as distinct from serving the Church better)? Finally there is an educational relevance that needs to be considered. Will this course equip students to teach their congregations? Will they be able to expound God’s Word, bringing their hearers so in contact with God that they are compelled to respond to His call and will for their daily living rather than preach moral homilies, offer pious platitudes, deliver philosophical lectures, or simply provide word and background studies of a text? It is interesting to find a similar range of “categories of relevancy” in the Great Commission given by Jesus to his disciples: All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations [evangelistic], baptising them [spiritual? practical?] in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them [educational] to obey [practical] everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always [spiritual], to the every end of the age. (Matthew 28:18-20 NIV)

EXERCISE Construct a short curriculum for a group of your own choice that involves all five categories of relevancy. For each category list two or three subjects from the CLASSIFICATION table. Theological: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Spiritual: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Practical: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Evangelistic: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Curriculum Manual

Educational: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

15

Curriculum Manual

16

COURSE BENEFITS – Why Study This Course? The benefits of studying specific to each course Choose any 3 areas of study shown on the next two pages and suggest for each of the courses selected what are the three greatest benefits of studying these subjects. (Note: Church History is already done as an example.) List them in order of importance as you see them. Share with colleagues and fill in further fields.

Biblical Studies Background to the Bible, its History, Interpretation and Study. a) b) c) The Old Testament a) b) c) The New Testament a) b) c) Systematic Theology a) b) c) Philosophy a) b) c) Apologetics a) b) c) Contemporary Studies a) b) c) Islamics a) b) c) Communication a) b) c) Homiletics a) b) c) Missiology a) b) c)

Curriculum Manual

Church History a) See both God’s grace and His judgement at work in His people. b) Have models of belief and behaviour to compare with today’s church life. c) Realise your own Christian heritage and discover the roots of your own church.. Historical Theology a) b) c)

Practical Theology Discipleship a) b) c) Liturgical Theology / Worship a) b) c) Self-development a) b) c)

Christian Ethics Moral Theology a) b) c) Environmental Theology a) b) c) Social Theology a) b) c)

Education Study Methods a) b) c) Christian Education a) b) c)

Pastoral Theology Shepherding the sheep (as individuals) a) b) c) Leading the church (as a body) a) b) c)

17

Curriculum Manual

18

DEFINING “CURRICULUM” Some may argue that our “luggage” contains things that are not strictly “curriculum” subjects but are rather the more general concerns of a “training programme”: as such they may rightly appear on our educational agenda, but not as part of any curriculum list. During the conference that originated this paper, our family discussed this very point at home. My 17-year-old son informed us that by the word “curriculum” was meant “everything that went into a particular subject taught at school”. His mother responded: “That’s not right; the school curriculum is the list of all subjects taught at your school.” I then argued that “Curriculum” means all the activities that go on in a school, including the various courses taught in the classroom. To resolve our family argument we turned to Collins English Dictionary and read under “curriculum” the following definitions: “1. A course of study in one subject at school or college. 2. A list of all the courses of study offered by school or college. 3. Any programme or plan of activities.” Apparently we were all correct in our family! Now perhaps you should join in the discussion:

DISCUSSION What difference does it make to our training programme if we think of curriculum in terms of: Definition 1? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Definition 2? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Definition

3?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Observation: Theological Curriculum is not only about THEOLOGY. It is about TRAINING EXPERIENCES also. Knowing or Doing? The fundamental emphasis of many Western models of theological education is on knowing. The over-riding question asked of its curricula is:

Curriculum Manual

18

“What is really necessary for the students to know in order to complete this course and fulfil the expectations that such an academic programme creates?” But what is the purpose of Theological Education? Once those who have been trained reach graduation and all the trophies have been handed out, what will be the needs that these graduates have to meet in their congregation in particular and in the community in general? How well will our three or four year programme have prepared them for their work outside in the real world? The question now becomes: “What do the students need to be able to do in order to be able to fulfil their calling as ministers?”