Curriculum Manual 13

Part 2: “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 15

Educational:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 17

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)
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?”