Tightening up... and Creswell is fantastic

I have been reading through Creswell's Research design (3rd Edition). I only wish I had read it sooner. It is clear, concise and easy-to-read - and, it has me reconsidering many elements of my PhD project. For example, I am toying with the idea of changing my research question from...

To what extent, if any, are students of theological education at a distance disadvantaged in terms of spiritual formation?

...to a different format made up of title and explanation:

The formation of theological education students at a distance: Is there a disadvantage?

My study investigates the formational experiences of students who have successfully completed undergraduate degrees in theological education. It will compare the formational experiences of distance students with those of on-campus students (part-time and full-time) in order to determine whether, as literature assumes, distance students are at a disadvantage.

I am also considering changing the structure of my mixed-mode methodology, from quantitative then qualitative, to qualitative then quantitative for reasons of instrument development.

I have a nice pile of formation in theological education readings assembled for the next stage of my thesis work... for now (and for the next two and a half months!) my focus is on methodology and the requirements of instrumentation. Slow, but definite, progress...

Back on track!

This blog has been rather quiet for a few months, but I have good excuses:

1. I have completed the various projects I have been involved with for Ako Aotearoa, including the last in the E-Primer series and another project looking at distance education retention for Laidlaw College.
   
2. I presented two webinars based on some of my E-Primer work (you can watch one of the archives).
   
3. I completed and submitted my formal PhD proposal (yes!) I need to add here that Zotero was just brilliant.
   

I still have some other commitments to take care of (an invited session at this year's ASCILITE for example), but I am now firmly back on my PhD track. And, this time, I'm going to start saying 'no' to those additional projects beyond those I've already committed myself to!

Seriously, it is very hard to focus when so many other opportunities present themselves. I am learning to prioritise... but this, surely, must dog ALL part-time PhD candidates.

I have five months' study leave starting in January, and have just drafted my plan for that time. I am aiming to complete the literature review, gain ethics approval for the primary stage of my study, AND complete the methodology chapter... my supervisors both think these are realistic goals, given the scope and level of detail in my proposal.

I also aim to have a two-part journal article defending distance education in theological settings sent for peer review by the end of that period as well, drawing together my understanding of the critique of distance education and providing a theoretical basis for its validity. By the time the articles are drafted I hope to have some initial survey responses and some interviews lined up... hopefully these will lead to further publications. The generation of the survey instrument could provide yet more opportunity for publication, as I am aiming to produce an instrument that can be used to measure formational development during formal theological education (and, insodoing, promote comparison studies across an area of formal theological education largely taken for granted).

So, I'm back. My activity now (for the next two months!) is very much on research methodologies and instrument development. I am enrolled in a methodologies paper (at a distance, of course) starting in late February/early March 2010, but my need for a thorough overview of method is more pressing. My next deadline is a draft ethics application, due 25 January 2010.

So, my journey now turns from an exploration of literature and the ideas of other theorists to a consideration of research methodologies and drawing on others' experiences. In some ways this feels like a diversion from the main action, but I know that the lessons I will learn will feed into my capacity to investigate my thesis and - ultimately - get me that "Dr" prefix!

My immediate reading - Creswell's Research design and Czaja & Blair's Designing surveys. I'll also be reviewing Saris and Gallhofer's Design, evaluation, and analysis of questionnaires for survey research. Following these I will be exploring qualitative methods in more depth from Denzin & Lincoln's work (x2 books - one, two) and Patton's Qualitative research & evaluation methods. I've read Punch's Introduction to social research from cover to cover and recommend it as a great introduction... The others I will read/skim as required.

Here goes...

On-campus, or in-community?

Is the 'on-campus' vs 'distance' or 'online' debate sadly misframed? Is it just a classic, unhelpful dichotomy? I am starting to think so. 'Hybrid learning', a middle ground, is not the only way of navigating the potential of on-campus 'real-life' and the reach and flexibility of distance and online approaches. How about reframing the debate completely: 'on-campus' vs 'in-community'? The terms 'distance' and 'online' imply an isolation and separation that need not be real. The reframing asks the question, is the student studying residentially within a campus community, or within their local church community?

This distinction is somewhat related to the line of thought in my previous post. If theological education is dependent on community for the purposes of spiritual formation, then wouldn't a logical and defensible place to site study be within a learner's genuine church community? This is not to suggest that students would not benefit from highly qualified faculty (through distance and online learning methods), or that they have only their fellow parishioners to talk to (through collaborative and online discussion). It is to suggest that formal theological education can - and should - seek ways of integrating student learning within local church contexts. This might be done through deliberate assignments requiring students to engage with their local church community (at times from a critically constructive perspective), their social habitat, and their close relationships with fellow-believers and local leaders.

Yes, this assumes a sympathetic local church leadership... but how unusual is this, really?

I'm a little overwhelmed with reading at the moment, and my formal proposal is due in four weeks... I intend to explore these themes more formally as opportunity presents!

'Embodiment'. From whose perspective?

This occured to me the other day. The lack of 'embodiment' is frequently mentioned as a criticism of theological education. But is distance education somehow 'disembodied'?

The student remains embodied. The teacher or tutor remains embodied. At all stages of the process.

Of course, it is the interaction taking place between student and teacher where 'disembodiment' is apparent... but is that interaction most critical? I would argue, based on my previous post ("Slow learner..."), that a Christian studying theology at a distance is embodied in terms of Christian education, even if their theological study is 'disembodied'. So, why the big fuss? Do we assume that a student's Christian education context is somehow irrelevant to their theological study? If so, then it is theological education itself that is disembodied.

In my use of 'embodiment' here I'm assuming connection to the body of Christ in meaningful ways. With this perspective in mind, theological education at a distance that makes use of church-connected models (such as Rockbridge, mentioned below) are actually more embodied in everyday contexts than are on-campus theological education settings (see the contrast in the "Slow learner" post between Christian education and theological education).

I am amazed at how often 'disembodiment' is raised as a criticism of distance education. Do distance learners suddenly enter a vacuum devoid of human experience when they enrol for theological study at a distance? Do on-campus learners suddenly enter an authentic, deep community when they enrol on-campus? This is not to deny the value of the on-campus experience, but we must be careful not to enshrine the campus with more status than it deserves.

...and, they're already doing it!

Exciting to add Rockbridge Seminary online to a very small but growing list of international Colleges taking distance educaiton exceptionally seriously (that is, more than just a 'tag on' to a predominantly on-campus based institution. Yes, my criteria here are subjective!)

What really grabs me abnout Rockbridge at first sight is their insistence that all admittants must be in an active ministry role in a church (a lay volunteer is sufficient). This sort of theological education/church involvement is the sort of mix I believe in.

SATS, the South African Theological Seminary, is also on the list. I am in contact with both institutions in the hope of learning more about how their courses work and what the future holds. Both make extensive use of online learning... but, of course, it is the 'distance' part that inspires me!

Slow learner... theological education and Christian education

I finished reading Estep et al's A theology of Christian education last week when it hit me:

Christian education and theological education are not the same thing.

Now, no doubt this is common knowledge. "Well, d'uh!" I suspect you're thinking. But hear me out.

I'm not claiming any new discovery here. But, for me, differentiating between these is key to a rich avenue of thought. You see, I have wrestled with theological education's ability to provide a rounded, holistic Christian experience. Of course, it can't... the difference between academic knowledge and everyday knowledge is far too great. I have also read many scathing critiques of spiritual formation in theological education contexts - yes, even on-campus ones.

The significance of this newly-owned difference between Christian education and theological education is this: It goes toward validating my thesis (see question to the right of this text). Part of what I have been struggling with is the assumption that theological education is Christian education, with all of its holistic implications. Of course this was wrong. But here's the nub: distance education is frequently considered inferior to the on-campus experience. The on-campus experience is normative. But, on-campus education itself is highly questionable as an expression of Christian education - particularly if it is facilitated in such a way that the learner's church context is assumed, rather than integrated.

My thoughts on this are too early to expand on here, too raw and untested. For now, here are the contrasts I drafted between Christian education and theological education... of course, I present these as polar opposites in the knowledge that reality exists in the 'broken middle'...

Christian education:

• Emphasis on discipleship and apprenticeship
• Community as venue
• 'Teachable moment' or life as curriculum
• 'One another' as teacher
• Church as context
• Long-term, life-long
• Gemeinschaft, intergenerational, family
• Education as implicit
• Integrated ontologically
• Tacit
• Assimilation into the body of Christ; transformation as socialisation
  

Theological education:

• Emphasis on learning
• Classroom or study space as venue
• Programme as curriculum, cognitive emphasis
• Lecturer or professor as teacher
• Campus as context
• Fixed duration; programme-based
• Gesselschaft, cohort, transactional membership
• Education as explicit
• Integrated artificially
• Transparent and expressed
• Transcendance of thought; transformation as cognitive shift
  

Of course both of these are important. But in many ways that's the point - both of these are important. Christian education cannot 'replace' theological education in the same way that 'theological education' cannot subsume Christian education. Much of my thinking has been 'distance' as opposed to 'on-campus'. Now, my playground is that much bigger.

Ah well. It is important to me!

Re-orientation and eating the elephant

I spent the day re-organising myself for PhD study. I prepared a three-page document to my supervisors to get things rolling again; the sections were progress to date, current thinking, proposed time line and issues and concerns.

I'm feeling extremely positive and organised, even though I know too well that much work awaits!

The following quesitons are guiding further reading from this point, and form the basis for my formal proposal (due in late September):

How is ‘distance education’ understood in theological education?

• What, if anything, is distinctive about distance education in the theological education context?
• What are the major themes of the literature in theological distance education?

What is the nature of theological education, that is, what is it attempting to bring about?

• What are the distinctive elements of theological education in contrast to non-sectarian education?
• What are the overall objectives for theological education? What are the implications for theological education at a distance?

What is Christian formation?

• How is formation portrayed in theological education contexts?
• What are the potential overlaps between everyday formation and formal education?

What does adult learning theory contribute to an understanding of spiritual formation?

• What does it mean to be ‘formed’ as an adult learner? How does this differ from being ‘formed’ as a Christian?
• What are the links between transformation as an adult learner, and formation as a Christian?

After an initial analysis for the formal proposal, I am considering whether a 'mini-essay' approach considering each of the questions above in, say 3,000 words might work to help get on top of the literature review. The best way to eat an elephant, I'm told, is one piece at a time! I've asked my supervisors for their thoughts in this approach. I am also considering enrolling in a post-graduate research methods paper next year at a distance. It has been recommended to me, and I know that it will be very useful for me later in the preparation of this thesis.

[Image "Elephant Bull 1" uploaded April 2, 2005 by Tambako the Jaguar]

Nearly back into it!

Well, it's nearly time to again pick up the books and journal articles... I have finished the draft for my last E-Primer and now await the peer review process.

I have already got an opportunity to speak to the upcoming NZATS event held at Laidlaw College next week, so that provides me with an excellent opportunity to familiarise myself again with the ley of the literature and get my juices flowing again. I've also been asked to contribute a paper relating to hybrid learning at Laidlaw College to the upcoming ATA conference in Malang, Indonesia (I am, regretfully, unable to attend). The connection is a good one though, as there is considerable interest in theological education at a distance within that group.

So, in the next few weeks this blog will again get traction... about time.

Distance education, surely, is the answer?

I have been enjoying Dr Geoff Pound's Theologians without borders and have been prompted to post on his latest entry relating to the Baptist International Conference on Theological Education (BICTE), held in Prague.

One issue raised is really one of simple economics:

• Supply outstrips demand in the West; seminaries are merging and closing.
  
• Demand outstrips supply in the Majority World; pastors go untrained.
  

The solution does seem rather simple... accessible distance education courses, perhaps facilitated through Western seminaries, coupled with a TEE-type model of delivery. Accessible media might include radio, print, fax, or Internet where it make sense. If a multi-national distance education seminary of excellent academic standard might be established, the benefits of centralised course production and maintenance, economies of scale and locally-nuanced delivery through local tutors would provide a high quality and cost-effective solution. It is possible to achieve, with careful planning and the right investment, the following in one neat institution:

• High-quality courses that consistently reflect the latest scholarship.
• A non-banking (Friere) distance education experience.
• A highly-qualified and tenured (committed) faculty,who are active researchers and contributing academics to course delivery.
• A constantly dynamic team of local tutors, well-supported and resourced.
• A flexible selection of media, chosen based on local conditions.
• Low (accessible) per course costs, based on economies of scale.
  

Such a BIG opportunity... part of the solution involves a visionary funding body, and the use of funds to develop an institution that does not rely on the charity or goodwill of busy academics so that longevity and consistency of service can be assured. Another part: overcoming the incredibly short-sighted and non-defensible notion that distance education is a second-rate option compared to the 'real thing'. Finally, partnerships with mission agencies - already well-represented globally - so that their work might be partnered with.

Any takers...?