Virtual Seminaries
Just wanting to put this out there for discussion and thought (and something that can lead to a post that is a bit more researched and thought out).
- To those of you who are in, have done, or are looking towards going to seminary, does the ability to go mobile with some aspects of your learning appeal to you?
- To those who have done seminary, are there ares which would have been better served with a more flexible virtual setting than the classroom/set-schedule one that you had?
- And if you are one that doesn't see a need for seminary; why?
Thanks in advance for your responses.
Labels: flexibility, mobility, schedule, seminary, tech
posted by Antoine @ 6/13/2008 10:00:00 AM
6 comments
6 Comments:
The more analytical classes like Greek and Hebrew would be fine in distance learning. The survey courses like Church History and Theology and Intro to OT/NT would be fine in a distance learning situation. Most of the time I was in a class so large that there was little interaction in those basic level courses.
Classes like leadership, missions, evangelism, and the like could be a combination of distance and shared time. What I mean is a prof could assign reading and collect papers and other written work via the Internet. But there needs to be interaction on these subjects to really learn it. But does that interaction have to be in a classroom/seminar room? No. It could be that the professor is using a web cam and something like Ustream or Stickam. And the students are logged in and chatting. When questions need to be asked of the professor, one could virtually raise your hand by skyping the professor and even doing video chat live. Others could see this person's camera with the right setup.
As for preaching, that has to be done in person to really matter. And I feel there needs to be an internship in a church or other ministry setting (if the student is not going into staff ministry).
Look for a more detail response at my blog soon. kevinpurcellDOTorg
I would agree with most of what Kevin's comment here. I got an MDiv at a local Bible school, and most of the learning portion would be possible with online learning programs if they were directed by a remote professor and not simply a learning cd/web page.
At least when I looked for myself, one problem in finding an online program is there are few that are accredited by a legit accreditation authority. At the time, the ATS for example, didn't accredit any online programs. It's also not especially inexpensive, even online, but certainly cheaper than most full-time seminaries.
One denomination I know of, already has pastoral training programs that are essentially mail-based programs for ordination training but with experience requirements and of course live people guiding and mentoring. That seems to work well.
I think the bottom line is not whether online training can work, but whether or not are the specific programs offered mature and well-executed enough to do the job, and whether or not it's a good fit for the student's goals. There will always be pluses and minuses for online vs offline, and the same old differences in theology, standards, heart-issues/academic-issues balance, etc etc.
I believe, though, that it's a great option to develop and a nice part of the "training portfolio" for ministers of all types, many of which would not be able to attend a local seminary. It just may not be quite ready (in most cases) to take on the challenge in its current form.
I've done both - bricks and mortar at New Orleans Baptist (with some CIV), and now online at Rockbridge where I'll finish this fall. The technology is there now for online high quality training.
I like the online better, but that might be a function of the curriculum and the more up to date and practical nature of that school versus the more theological and scholarly bent of NOBTS.
Just depends on what you want and can afford. Burns me up to have to do 30 on campus hours in a 67 hours MACE just to satisfy ATS, when some students are sitting at extensions watching the same course on compressed interactive video and not having to pay travel and lodging costs.
The seminaries need to move into the 21st century.
What is so important about accreditation other than to transfer the degree. If every there was an area that did not need accreditation it is theological education. If you and your denomination feel it is a quality program who cares what some bean counters and egg heads from somewhere else think.
First and foremost - Seminaries need to Move into the 21st Century Education Models.
I earned an MDIVBL from SWBTS in Fort Worth. I started at an extension site in Houston. Later my career took my to Dallas-FtWorth and I was able to complete it locally. However, I did get to take some online courses and interactive video.
I was amazed and ashamed at the level of importance so many seminarians took toward the online classes -and these were the students who were 30yrs and under. So I do not think all students are ready for an online rigorous education that seminary should be.
Concerning accreditation - the US Department of Education does not accredit seminaries. However, groups like ATS do and there is strategic importance. It is not about denominational differences, but quality education. I have had friends who have graduated from bible schools and seminaries that did not have accreditation. Some received quality education, but most of them did not (not to mention paying the same or more than I did). For example one well known seminary was placed on suspension after offering PhD and DMins, but did not have enough PhDs and DMins teaching those classes. They have since beefed up their staffing.
Also, Kevin, you are wrong that accreditation is only important in transferring the degree. You need it if you want to transfer to another school, or continue on your education for a doctorate. In many cases, I know several seminarians (I myself am considering this) that are attempting advanced degrees outside seminary (for me a PhD in Educational Technology). For those without accredited degrees, that advanced degree means earning another masters degree or leaving that dream behind. Accreditation is important for the student, as much as it is for the seminary.
It all depends on your concept of ministry. If it's a professional ladder in which what's on the wall is important, then certainly the ability to go on after the established entry competency would matter. You'd need ATS to bless your program so you could pursue a doctorate.
But very, very, very, very few people need a doctorate for work in the local church (average size 150). Most get one to move up the ladder faster.
So given that an insignificant number move on to PhDs, why structure in a way biased to that? The SBC in particular should adjust to favor the local church's needs.
As for online seminaries and diploma mills, that's been going on forever. The example of the one seminary called to task is simply an example of the system working as it should. ATS has been called in to investigate bricks and mortar schools as well, including SWBTS if I recall correctly.
Several seminaries now offer accredited online programs and more will follow as they work through the process that ATS and others have laid out.
The programs need to be accessible. So a distributed system, with training that is rigorous and applicable, biased toward the work of the local church, should be the goal.
Post a Comment
<< Home