The decentralized model of theological education that
Central Baptist Theological Seminary is offering not only in Tennessee and
Wisconsin but through the Access Program depends on three things: contextualization, creativity, and
cooperation. This post addresses creativity.
In August 1967, Rita and I packed all of our worldly
goods into a station wagon and a trailer and left Alabama for a sojourn of
three years in Fort Worth, Texas. In
order to get a seminary degree in those days, a person needed to relocate (unless
fortunate enough to have a seminary in their backyard) in order to get an
education and a degree. This meant
finding a new job (for at least one family member), a place to live, and a new
church (where you would serve either as volunteer or paid staff). This also meant leaving behind family and
friends (although some people we knew had made the same trek) and a church
context that we were very familiar with and we deeply involved. Was it worth the effort? Yes. The
education and the friendships were valuable. Could it have been done another
way? Perhaps not then but now there are
alternatives. Through initiative like
the Tennessee center, we are taking a new look at the old paradigm and coming
up with creative alternatives.
One new approach is fully accredited centers like those
Central has established in Wisconsin and Tennessee. Other seminaries pioneered this approach and,
for those seminaries that want to survive, this will become more common in the
days ahead. Seminaries partner with
churches, judicatories, or other institutions to create these centers. Students can now stay where their extended
families, jobs, and places of ministry are located and still get a degree.
Another option available to students now is online study. At present, the Association of Theological
Schools allows students to take up to two-thirds of their course work for the Master of Divinity degree online. The remainder must be taken in
residence. The goal of Central is to
eventually offer all classes online although one-third of the classes still must be completed
onsite in Shawnee, Murfreesboro, or Milwaukee.
This provides students a great deal of flexibility in their schedule
planning. Are there some courses that
are more appropriately taught in a classroom setting rather than in a virtual
environment? That question is still open
for debate not only among theological educators but all educators who consider
this alternative pedagogical approach. I
will reserve my opinion for another time, but this creative approach is
certainly increasing the options for theological students.
Since many of the CBF-related seminaries are not large enough
to offer specializations in youth ministry, children’s ministry, worship and
similar areas, some theological institutions are offering certificate programs
that offer training in these areas. Some
are for credit and others are non-credit continuing education. They often combine classroom and online
components. Whether a person has a
theological degree or not, these special training opportunities are a creative
way to meet the needs of both ministers and the churches they serve.
Seminaries are also finding other ways to respond to the
need for continuing education or lifelong learning. The Doctor of Ministry degree, first offered
in the 1960s, is a structured approach to continuing education that requires
academic rigor while taking seriously the needs of a specific ministry setting. Central has recently launched such a program
hosted at the Shawnee campus. Central
also offers a Master of Arts in Missional Church Studies that builds on the
Master of Divinity degree. Other
seminaries offer degrees that seek to address the need to acquire specific
knowledge, techniques, and skills for a particular ministry. All of these may not necessarily be offered
in every place where a seminary has a teaching site and some may be unique to a
particular setting. For example, I would
love to see the Tennessee Center take advantage of area resources and one day
offer a Master’s program focused on entrepreneurial leadership.
Of course, seminaries like Central continue to offer
resources to lifelong learners through access to regular classes taught at the
main campus or centers but may also go to churches, universities, or other
settings to make these classes accessible.
Some of these ideas are new but others have been around
for years and have only adopted new delivery systems. Whether old or new, varied approaches increase
both the accessibility and the effectiveness of theological education. Those theological institutions that are not
afraid to try something new while maintaining quality instruction will not only
survive but prosper in the years ahead.
Comments