MSU

 

 

 

RETURNING MATERIALS:
P1ace in book drop to
remove this checkout from

 

LIBRARIES .
W your record. FINES W1”
be charged if book is
returned after the date
stamped below.
Jfi-N ’2’ [($1.93
? ? F;+{ '
2 7 {via-i
- [W
(3.32:? 3 1%
t") ~41:

Va

"“1 1772 22:2

.-.

 

 

 

MORAL DEVELOPMENT AS A COMPONENT

OF THE EDUCATION OF PROTESTANT MINISTERS

BY

Klaus Dieter Issler

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Administration and Curriculum

1984

Copyright°l984 Klaus D. Issler
927 S. Mancos P1.
Anaheim, CA 92806

ABSTRACT

MORAL DEVELOPMENT AS A COMPONENT
OF THE EDUCATION OF PROTESTANT MINISTERS

BY

Klaus Dieter Issler

The purpose of the study is to describe the educational
emphasis placed on the moral development of ministerial
students in the curriculum of Protestant seminaries. Three
research questions guided the inquiry focusing on educational
tasks, faculty-student interactions and institutional influ-
ences. Five aspects of moral development, identified from the
literature, were employed in the study: moral knowledge, moral
thinking, moral sensitivity, personal values and will power.

Personal interviews were conducted with four faculty
members from each of 6 mid-western Protestant, denomina-
tional, graduate, theological seminaries (23 male and 1
female). The following demographic information was compiled
from the professors: mean age=53 years, mean years of teach-
ing experience=20 years, and 13 professors had previous full-
time pastoral experience (mean=9 years).

The study identified six major themes of factors which
faculty perceived as influencing students' moral development:
1) field education ministry and life experiences, 2) faculty-
student relationships, 3) one's relationship with God and
related worship experiences, 4) discussion of moral issues, 5)

peer interaction and group work and 6) institutional

Klaus Dieter Issler
structures. Each of the themes incorporates factors which
either facilitate or hinder development toward moral maturity.

One of the interview items requested faculty to rate
students' degree of moral learning at the seminary in five
categories. Classical disciplines faculty tended to rate
students' degree of learning in moral thinking and personal
values higher than ministry-related disciplines faculty.
Almost all of the professors rated students' degree of.
learning in moral knowledge as high. A good majority of
professors rated students' degree of learning in moral
sensitivity and will power as fair or little.

Due to the ever-present socialization process, the
students' moral maturity is continually being affected by
aspects of seminary education. Theological educators are
encouraged to shift from a passive-unconscious involvement
in the moral development of seminary students to a more

active-conscious posture of deliberate educational planning.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Though undertaken and composed by a single author, a
dissertation is made possible by the motivating encouragement
and shared resources of a number of people. Due to the
limited amount of space, only a few of these fellow workers
can be identified below.

The substance of the study was made available through
the cooperation of the six participating seminaries. The
presidents or deans of the seminaries, and the faculty
members generously gave of their time, and candidly presented
their insights and mature reflections of theological
education. -

Members of the doctoral guidance committee provided
assistance for differing aspects of the project. Professor
Norm Bell guided my study of the procedures of educational
research and responded to questions about word processing
hardware and software. Professor Charles Blackman directed my
attention to the "person factor” in curriculum development
and innovation and helped me to appreciate the importance of
an andragogical (adult education) orientation to the change
process. Professor Richard Prawat provided additional
resources in my study of cognitive, social and moral develop-

ment theory and research and ably assisted me in the design

ii

of the interview protocol.

Special mention is reserved for Professor Ted Ward,
chairperson of my guidance committee, advisor, mentor and
friend. Professor Ward offered his expertise in moral
development theory, as past director of M.S.U.'s Values
Education Project, and his expertise in theological
education, as a much in demand consultant and speaker within
theological circles. Despite his various responsibilities and
travel schedule, Professor Ward generously offered his time,
insights and encouragement throughout the whole project.

Many special friends and family members have helped
also--too many to personally identify--but many of them live
either near Cleveland, Ohio: Anaheim, California or Lansing,
Michigan. In addition to these friends, special funding of
the doctoral studies was generously made available through
the faculty graduate education program at the International
School of Theology, San Bernardino, California. A special
thanks to Alan Parks, who assisted me in the statistical
analysis of my data and to fellow doctoral student, Don
Moore, for encouraging me to purchase a word-processor.

Three of my colleagues and their wives offered their
moral support during our time in East Lansing. We looked
forward to those long-distance phone calls with J. P. and
Hope Moreland, Bill and Patty Roth and Don and Lois Weaver.

My father and mother, Bill and Ruth Issler, have both
consistently modeled lives of moral excellence--a rich
heritage for my own character development and they have

iii

generously given of themselves. My children, Daniel (5 yrs.)
and Ruth (2-1/2 yrs.) brought the joy only children can give
amidst the constant pressure of completing the doctorate. .

Beth, my wife, companion and partner in this project
ably guided our little two-ring circus and household while I
was preoccupied with studies. Through our experiences in
East Lansing we have both added to our maturity and have
grown closer together. Our joint commitment to each other
and to the project made the completion of this dissertation
possible.

My own interest in the study of moral character was
prompted by One who exemplified best the moral life while on
earth. He was not interested in pious platitudes, but in a
lifestyle which was consistently moral, in both thought and
deed. How ought we to treat others? He said, "A new command-
ment I give to you, that you love one another: as I have
loved you, that you also love one another" and again, ”Love
your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who

curse you, and pray for those who spitefully use you.”

iv

Chapter
1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

IDENTIFYING THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . . . . .

Purpose of the Research . . . . . . . . . .
Importance of the Research . . . . . . . . .
Statement of the Problem Situation . . . . .
Background of the Problem . . . . . . . . . .
Statement of the Research Questions . . . . .
Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Population and Sample . . . . . . . . . . . .
Delimitations and Generalizability . . . . .
Overview of the Dissertation . . . . . . . .

PRECEDENTS IN THE LITERATURE . . . . . . . .

Curriculum Analyses of Theological Education
Theoretical-Practical Tensions in
Ministerial Education . . . . . . . . . .
.Theoretical-Practical Balance in
Ministerial Education . . . . . . . . . .
A Focus on Personal Development . . . . .
The Role of the Seminary in Personal
Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of the Literature on Curriculum
Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Empirical Studies in Theological Education .
Investigations of Theological Education . .
Precedents in Theological Education . . . .
Precedents in the Parish Ministry . . . . .
Precedents with Other Professional Students
Precedents with Faculty in Higher Education
Precedents with Teachers in Public Education
Summary of the Findings from Empirical
Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

61

67
70

Chapter

RESEARCH DESIGN AND PROCEDURES . . . . . .

Research Design . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Population and Sample . . . . . . . . . .
Instrument Development . . . . . . . . .
Data Collection Procedures . . . . . . . .
Data Analysis Procedures . . . . . . . . .
Limitations of the Study . . . . . . . . .
Methodological Assumptions . . . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

FINDINGS: EDUCATIONAL TASKS IN PROMOTING
MORAL DEVELOPMENT . . . . . . . . . . . .

Overview of the Findings Chapters . . . . .
Research Question 1 . . . . . . . . . . .
Research Question 2 . . . . . . . . . . .
Research Question 3 . . . . . . . . . . .

Overview of the Data Analysis Procedures
Data Reduction: Identifying the Basic

Unit of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . .
Data Display: Clustering Response Units

Analysis: Educational Tasks in Promoting

Moral Development . . . . . . . . . . . .

Estimated Degree of Student Moral Learning

Helpful Learning Experiences . . . . . .
Purpose of Moral Discussions . . . . . .
Knowledge of Kohlberg's Moral Development
Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Developing Moral Sensitivity . . . . . .
Hindering Moral Development . . . . . . .
Suggested Changes at the Seminary . . . .
Common Student Character Faults . . . . .
Means of Dealing with Character Faults .
Moral Influence During Own Seminary
Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Qualitative Observations . . . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

FINDINGS: FACULTY-STUDENT INTERACTIONS IN
RELATION TO MORAL DEVELOPMENT . . . . . .

Overview of the Interview Questions . . .
What Students Should Remember About Faculty
Agenda for Student Encounters . . . . . . .
Dealing with Academic Dishonesty . . . . .
Taking the Initiative to Counsel Students .
Qualitative Observations . . . . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

vi

Page
72

72
73
84
91
92
95
96
97

101

101
102
103
103
104

104
107

110
111
116
122

127
129
133
137
137
144

147
151
152

156

156
157
161
165
175
180
182

Chapter
6

APPENDIX

APPENDIX

APPENDIX

FINDINGS: INSTITUTIONALIZED INFLUENCES ON
MORAL DEVELOPMENT . . . . . . . . . . .

Overview of the Interview Questions
Colonial Theological Seminary . .
Cornerstone Theological Seminary

Foundational Theological Seminary
Heritage Theological Seminary . .
Historical Theological Seminary
Memorial Theological Seminary .
Qualitative Observations . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . .

CONCLUSIONS I O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Factors Influencing Students' Moral
Development . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Field Education Ministry and Life

Experiences . . . . . . . . . .
Faculty-Student Relationships . .
One's Relationship with God . . .
The Discussion of Moral Issues .
Peer Interaction and Group Work .
Institutional Programs and Structures .

Educational Emphasis on Moral Development

Qualitative Observations . . . . . . . .

Recommendations for Curriculum Improvement

Recommendations for Further Research . .

A Interview Protocol . . . . . . . .

B Information Presented During the
Interview . . . . . . . . . . .

C Letter of Invitation to Participate

in Study 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0

APPENDIX D Families of Denominations . . . .

BIBLIWRAPHY O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

vii

Page

185

186
187
194
198
203
210
215
220
220

222

223

223
225

.226

227
228
228
230
231
232
238

240

244

250
251
253

Table
2-1
2-2
4-1
4-2

4-3

4-7

4-8

4-9

4-10

4-11
4-12
4-13

4-14

LIST OF TABLES

Mean DIT Scores in Lawrence Study
Student Scores in Smith and Westerhoff Study
Estimated Degree of Student Moral Learning

Estimated Degree of Student Learning:
Moral Thinking

Estimated Degree of Student Learning:
Personal Values

Campus Experiences Influencing Students'
Moral Development

Off-campus Experiences Influencing Students'
Moral Development

Professors' Purposes in Discussing Moral
Issues

Factors Related to the Discussion of Moral
Issues

Knowledge of Kohlberg's Moral Devlopment
Theory

Ways to Help Students Develop Moral
Sensitivity

Aspects which May Hinder Students' Moral
Development

Suggested Changes in the Seminary Program
Common Student Character Faults

Means of Dealing with Student Character
Faults

What Influenced Professors During Their
Seminary Education

viii

Page
47
53

112

114

115

117

120

123

126

128

130

134
138
141

145

148

Table Page

5-1 What Students Should Remember About Faculty 158

5-2 What Professors Enjoy Doing with Students 163
5-3 Professors' Purposes in Student Encounters 164
5-4 Professors' Orientation About a Case of

Plagiarism 166
5-5 How Professors Confront a Case of Plagiarism 169
5-6 Academic Consequences for a Case of

Plagiarism 171
5-7 Factors in Making a Decision about

Consequences 172
5-8 Helping to Prevent Academic Dishonesty 172
5-9 Factors Considered in Referring a Case of

Academic Honesty to the Administration 174
5-10 Taking the Initiative to Counsel Students 176
5-11 Ways of Initiating Student Counseling 177
6-1 Courses Influencing Moral Development at

Colonial Seminary 188
6-2 Suggestive Listing of Courses Influencing

Moral Development at Cornerstone Seminary 195
6-3 Courses Influencing Moral Development at

Foundational Seminary 199
6-4 Courses Influencing Moral Development at

Heritage Seminary 204
6-5 Courses Influencing Moral Development at

Historical Seminary 211
6-6 Courses Influencing Moral Development at

Memorial Seminary 216

ix

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page
4-1 Illustrative Analysis of Response Comments 106
4-2 Illustrative Listing of Response Comments 108
4-3 Illustrative Clustering of Response Comments 109

Chapter 1

IDENTIFYING THE PROBLEM

Even though pastoral candidates feel they have a divine
calling, in most cases, undertaking some formal education is
a necessary prerequisite for being invited or appointed to a
pastoral role in a parish. Because of their prominent
leadership responsibility for this religious community,
ministers are usually expected to be persons of stability
and maturity--leaders who are of exemplary moral character.
Currently, completing a course of study in a seminary
provides the prospective minister with the basic require-
ments for entrance into a Protestant parish. Thus, formal
pastoral education is expected to play an important function

in preparing candidates for the demanding role of a pastor.

Purpose of the Research

 

The purpose of the research is to describe the
educational emphasis placed on the moral development of
ministerial students within the curriculum of Protestant
seminaries, as perceived by its faculty. These findings
provide a basis for recommendations regarding further

curriculum research as well as the improvement of

theological education.

Importance of the Research

 

The pastoral ministry has long been regarded as one of
the learned professions, along with such vocations as
medicine and law. The professions have usually been
considered a field of service distinct from other vocational
endeavors, such as those occupations comprised of technical
workers and clerks. A greater burden of responsibility and
decision-making is placed on the professional. In his
book-length treatment on the subject of the professions,
Moore suggests that there are at least six clusters which
constitute a set or scale of defining characteristics
(1970): a) full-time practice, b) commitment to a calling,
c) formal organization with a set of peers apart from the
laity, d) specialized training or education, e) service
orientation, and, f) autonomy restrained by responsibility
(pp. 5-6).

As an aspect of their autonomy, professionals are those
who have, what sociologist Herrick calls, "guilty knowledge“
--know1edge of things dangerous to know which can involve
guilt (cited in Reeck, 1982, p. 17). The surgeon decides
whether an organ needs removal; the psychologist can shape
the mind; the minister can determine God's will. The impact
of these kinds of decisions on people may be beneficial or
they may be harmful.

Because of the dangers connected with their work,
professionals are expected to undergo highly controlled

3

training and to adhere to high ethical standards (Reeck,
1982: pp. 17-18).

Where and when do professionals learn or acquire such
high ethical standards? For example, a high expectation of
trustworthiness is placed on lawyers. "All states require
good moral character as one of the prerequisites for the
practice of law" (Mackert, 1970, p. 472). Yet, where and
when does this "moral character" appear? In recent years, an
emerging concern for ethical or moral education is growing
among professional educators. In 1977, the Hastings Center
(New York), funded by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the
Carnegie Corporation of New York, began an extended study of
the teaching of ethics in American higher education,
including such fields as bioethics, engineering, social
sciences and journalism.

One Hastings report focuses on legal education (Kelly,
1980). The report begins with a citation from Schwartz,
former dean and now Professor of Law at UCLA. Schwartz
paints a bleak picture regarding the role of the American
law school in the moral development of law students. An
inhospitable environment for ethical inquiry is created by
the following factors:

extraordinarily high faculty-student ratios that
establish a distance between students and faculty;

lack of a significant affective component in legal
education other than intense emphasis on intellectual
performance:

faculty skeptical of their ability to affect the moral
standards of students, in part because of a belief
those standards are largely fixed by the time
students reach law school;

4
faculties largely comprised of nonpractitioners or
expractitioners teaching as a result of their
distaste for the ethics of practice;

willingness of law schools to delay the socialization

(i.e., basic professional formation) of lawyers to
apprenticeship following the three years of legal
education; and

the "permissiveness" of the dominant set of ethical

rules for lawyers in our country, the American Bar
Association's Code of Professional Responsibility
(cited in Kelly, 1980, p. 1).

To what extent are the above factors a commentary on
professional education at large? And, more specifically,
what role does theological education have in affecting the
moral development of ministerial students? The few studies
which have dealt with this issue (cited in Chapter 2) have
focused on the individual seminary student, or, in two
cases, the effects of a course related to moral development
or Christian ethics. The present study attempts to take into
consideration the broader context of seminary education and

gives attention to the role of faculty and other school-wide

influences on the moral development of future ministers.

Statement of the Problem Situation
Since ministers assume a prominent leadership role
within their religious community, there must be a concern in
the seminaries for an appropriate professional preparation
of ministers. The heart of the pastor's role is that of

ministry or service.

Ministry to people

A commitment to ministry and servanthood as the proper
leadership style for a pastor is typically expressed by
Protestant church leaders (Richards & Hoeldtke, 1980, chap.
7; Torrance, 1979: Ferris, 1982). In the words of Jesus
Christ, from the Gospel according to Matthew, chapter 20,
verses 25-28 (Note 1),

You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over

them, and their great men exercise authority over them.

It is not so among you, but whoever wishes to become

great among you shall be your servant, and whoever

wishes to be first among you shall be your slave; just
as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to
serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.

A focus on serving others has much in common with the
human service functions of other helping professions such as
counseling, health care and social work. "The helping
professions. . .are concerned with service to people. Their
special responsibility is human welfare, a ministry to human
beings" (Combs, Avila & Purkey, 1978, p. 5).

With a ministry focus, pastoral education requires
information about the object of that ministry--people: the
nature and development of human beings. To be sure, within
each religious community there are differing perspectives of
what specific theological message ministers ought to
communicate to their people, but all ministers give that
message to people--a common element across all pastoral
ministries. Thus, curriculum content and learning experi-

ences of pastoral education must reflect some understanding

of the nature of mankind and human development, and more

6
specifically, the nature and process of moral development.

At the pragmatic level, most Protestant parishes today,
both denominational and independent, require seminary
training of pastoral candidates before these individuals can
assume an official pastoral role in a parish. This suggests,
among other things, that parish members believe that
pastoral education is what provides a "readiness for
professional practice" for prospective ministers (Menges,
1975).

Thus, it is assumed that what the pastoral student
learns as a result of the pastoral education curriculum will
actually make a difference in the lives of the people to
whom the pastoral student will eventually minister. In the
first place, the character of the pastor's life will present
an example of how to live morally. Second, the pastor's
knowledge and conception of the nature and process of moral
development will affect his or her perceptions in assessing
and analyzing the needs of parishioners. Finally, because
the process of socialization continues during the seminary
years, ministers will tend to use the same methods of moral
education with their congregations as were used by the
seminary faculty with them.

The research focuses on how seminaries conceive of and
practice their task of contributing to the moral development

of pastoral students.

7

Background of the Problem

 

Some measure of confusion is evident in discussing the
topic of moral development within the realm of theological
education. Most seminary catalogs make it clear that one of
the seminary's aims is to contribute to the spiritual
development or formation of its students. The confusion
concerns the relationship between moral development and
spiritual development.

An elaborate discussion of the issue is beyond the
scope of the chapter. Suffice it to say that the study
assumes there are both natural and supernatural (or
spiritual) developmental dimensions for each of the various
domains of human development. Thus, there are both natural
and spiritual facets to the moral domain of human develop-
ment. It is further assumed that the development of moral
aspects of spiritual growth is dependent, to some extent, on
prior or concurrent development within the natural dimension
of moral development.

The spiritual practice of the presence of Christ, it

has been well said, is bound up with the moral practice

of the presence of man (Task Force on Spiritual

Development, 1972, p. 21).

'Matters of the spirit (both divine and human), though
affecting the natural realm, are not, in themselves,
amenable to empirical research. In the New Testament
literature, whenever there is a discussion of spiritual
realities, the writers typically employ natural analogies to
convey the intended information of the supernatural. For

example:

8

The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound

of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it

is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit

(Jesus--John 3:8)

Like newborn babes, long for the pure milk of the word,

that by it you may grow in respect to salvation

(Peter--I Peter 2:2).

And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual

men, but as to men of flesh, as to babes in Christ. I

gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were

not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are
not yet able . . . (Paul--I Corinthians 3:1-2).
Spiritual development

According to the New Testament literature, spiritual
development is affected by and affects the whole of human
development and is not just some separate religious
dimension of mankind. There are cognitive, psycho-emotional,
social and moral aspects of spiritual development (Ward,
1982). Representative examples from the New Testament
literature are given for each domain:

(1) cognitive-- "We have not ceased to pray for you and
to ask that you may be filled with the knowledge
of His will in all spiritual wisdom and
understanding" (Colossians 1:9).

(2) psycho-emotional--"The fruit of the Spirit is love,
joy, peace, patience. . .” (Galatians 5:22).

(3) socia1--"But if we walk in the light as He Himself
is in the light, we have fellowship with one
another. . ." (I John 1:7a).

(4) mora1-—"But solid food is for the mature, who
because of practice have their senses trained to
discern good and evil" (Hebrews 5:14).

Since the pastoral ministry involves promoting spiritual

growth, then ministers must be concerned with the whole of

human development.

Human development

A growing body of information is being accumulated from
research efforts studying aspects and processes of human
development in a variety of areas (e.g. neurochemistry,
cognitive psychology: sociology: etc.). It is apparent that
a host of complex elements, both internal and external to an
individual, influence the developmental process.

Several considerations are basic to any theoretical

‘formulation of the processes of human psychological

development. A biopsychosocial model is required, in

which the influence of the biological, the psychologi-
cal, and the social are all given sufficient emphasis.

Further, these three factors cannot be considered in

isolation from each other. The mutually interactional

influences of the biological, the psychological, and
the social at all age-stage levels of development must

be appreciated. (Thomas, 1981, p. 581)

Although a host of factors interact to influence human
development, for the purposes of conceptualization and
manageability in research, there is a need to divide the
numerous factors into broad categories, despite the diffi-
culty in making sharp distinctions. Current research efforts
may be classified into these broad domains of human
development: (1) physical, (2) cognitive or intellectual
(including language development), (3) personality,
self-concept and emotional, (4) social, and (5) moral
(Elkind & Weiner, 1978; Ward, 1982). A brief discussion of
each domain (excluding physical development) follows.

Cognitive development. The pioneering efforts of Piaget
have spawned most of the research interest in the field.

Much of the psychological research intensity is being given

to this domain (e.g. Flavell, 1977; Forman & Sigel, 1979).

10
In general, there are three main research paradigms: (a)
structural types influenced by Piaget, (b) functional types
within a behavioristic, social learning, and cognitive-
behavioral tradition, and (c) those that take a process
approach (e.g. information processing) (Sigel, 1981).
Research in cognitive development has yielded concepts such
as equilibration, stages of operation, discrimination
learning and concept development.

Personality (self) and emotional development. Through-
out the history of psychology, the main focus has been to
explain the person or the self, and, as a result, a
multitude of theories has been created (Corsini, 1977;
Cartwright, 1979). Main streams of theories include (a)
trait, in which the units of personality are analyzed--e.g.
Cattell, (b) psychodynamic, in which conscious or uncon-
scious motivational forces compel most or all of social
behavior--e.g. Freud, (c) behavioristic or environmental, in
which overt behavior is measured based on a classical
learning mode1--e.g. Skinner, or a social learning model--
e.g. Bandura, and (d) humanistic or phenomenological, in
which the focus is on a person's experience--e.g. Rogers
(Draguns, 1982). Some of the important concepts arising from
these theories are motivation, self-concept, and locus of
control (Staub, 1980).

Emotions may be considered a subset or major concept of
personality development. Other terms are also used in the

literature to describe emotions such as "affect" and

11
"feelings" (Giblin, 1981). Some concepts surfacing from this
literature are aggression, empathy and attachment (Ciccheti
& Hesse, 1982; Lewis & Rosenblum, 1978).

Social development. For a long time, the field of

 

social development was the exclusive domain of behaviorists/
environmentalists. Now more attention is being given to this
domain from a cognitive-developmental perspective. In this
domain, a focus is placed on understanding the socialization
process and the development of social awareness. Concepts
coming from this field of inquiry include role/perspective-
taking or social cognition, social attachment, social
deprivation, and peer-group influence (Bandura, 1977;
Shaffer, 1979, Damon, 1983: Overton, 1983).

Moral development (Prosocial development). Increasing
research attention is being given the subject of moral
development. Though it has common ties with affective
development (Krathwohl, et al., 1964), cognitive development
(Rest, 1983), and social development (Damon, 1983), moral
development is recognized in the literature as a distinct
focus of research (Bridgeman, 1983; Kohlberg, Levine &
Hewer, 1983; Rest, 1983; Weinreich-Haste, 1983: Kurtines &
Gewirtz, 1984: Staub, Bar-Tal, Karylowski & Reykowski,
1984). Concepts relevant to this field include moral
reasoning in which a distinction is made between the
structure and content of a moral decision, moral norms as
distinct from social conventional norms, modeling and

rule-generation, and the identification of environments

12
which are more conducive to promoting moral development
(e.g. a ”just" environment or a mildly pluralistic
environment).-
Morality and moral education are also becoming popular
topics across our nation, especially in the aftermath of
Watergate. Whole issues of educational journals have been

devoted to discussing the topic (e.g. Journal of Educational

 

Thought, Vol. 1, 1981: "Moral education"; Phi Delta Kappan,
March 1981: "Moral education: An emerging consensus"; New
Directions for Higher Education, Vol. 33, 1981: "Professional
ethics in university administration" and Journal of Higher
Education Vol. 3, 1982: "Ethics and the Academic Profession").
The subjects of morality and character development are also of
great interest to the Church, since members are exhorted to
holy living, and high expectations are placed on pastors to
_lead exemplary moral lives.

Thus, moral development is seen as comprising one of
the domains of human development.
Moral development and the pastoral ministry

The study gives primary attention to the domain of
moral development, although the ministry of the pastor can
influence other domains of the human development of
parishioners. What attention is directed toward the moral
development of pastoral students during their years at the
seminary? How is the construct of moral development

perceived and implemented in the curriculum?

13
Statement of the Research Questions

The inquiry is guided by three research questions.
These questions can best be understood in relation to the
various concerns of the research.

The first research question arises from a concern about
how seminary faculty understand the nature and process of
moral development. What practices of the professor, and what
learning experiences are seen as contributing to the moral
growth of the student?

Research question 1: How do faculty understand the

educational tasks in relation to promoting the moral

development of pastoral students?

How faculty members relate to students can, in various
ways, influence students' development toward moral maturity.
What kind of interaction emerges between faculty and
students?

Research question 2: How do faculty interact with

students concerning matters which may affect the

students moral development, both in and out of the
classroom?

The final question gives attention to some of the program
elements and structured aspects of the seminary which affect
the students' growth toward moral maturity.

Research question 3: As perceived by the seminary

faculty, what aspects of the seminary program are

intended to influence or have influenced the students'
moral development?

14

Definition of Terms

 

The following three terms are significant to the study
and require further clarification.

Moral development. The term "moral" is commonly used
within three distinct realms of thought bringing some
confusion into any discussion of the matter: (1) moral
(civic) vs. religious, (2) moral vs. immoral (evaluative),
and (3) moral vs. amoral or non-moral (descriptive)
(Straughan, 1982). The study uses the third category--the
descriptive sense. The focus of the research is on the moral
area, as opposed to amoral areas. Moral concerns involve
such issues as war, civil disobedience and divorce, and
probably would not include such matters as the flavor of ice
cream and music.

In a very general sense, the concept of morality issues
from a distinctive aspect of social relationships--the pgghp
of dealing with others. More formally, then, issues of the
moral area or domain relate to how one ought to treat others
and the degree to which one takes into consideration how
one's actions will affect the welfare of others. In sum,
moral development is concerned with the development of
morality, over the life-span, relating to perceptions of
situations and feeling empathy with those involved,
reasoning and decision-making skills, one's values and
motivation to act, and the ability (ego controls) to

implement a plan of action (Rest, 1983).

15

Learning experiences in the seminary program. The term

 

refers to the explicit, planned program of studies and
extra-curricular programs and activities that are offered
at, or are under the jurisdiction of, the seminary as
published in the catalog and other official statements.
Included is the coursework as well as activities such as the
chapel service, field education and student organizations.
Also, it may involve implicit aspects of the program which
are not formally stated but are known by the faculty and
students (Eisner, 1979).

Seminary or pastoral education. The theological and
professional education of ministers refers to a two- or
three-year post-graduate course of study leading to a
master's degree (usually, the Master of Divinity degree,
M.Div.). This course of study is undertaken at a seminary,

also known as a graduate school of theology.

Population and Sample

 

The population for the research is composed of faculty
of Protestant, denominational, graduate schools of theology
in the United States. The sample consisted of 24 seminary
faculty from a cross-section of six denominationally diverse
seminaries in the midwest. Four faculty participated from

each school.

16

Delimitations and Generalizability

 

The research is limited to the description of the
perceptions of faculty members regarding the seminaries'
practice of moral education. Faculty responses to the
personal interviews were taken at face value and were
assumed to be accurate representations of thought and
practice. The study did not include the perceptions of
seminary students.

The following major factors affect the generalizability
of the study: (1) the selection of the interview sites
(seminaries) from a specific geographical region, (2) the
inclusion of seminaries in the study based on willingness to
participate, (3) the participation of many respondents who
were either recommended by the administration or volunteered
to participate in the study, and (4) the investigation of a
small sample size. Data acquired from the interviews and the
conclusions drawn may indicate some trends relevant to other
Protestant seminary faculty in the country. In addition, the
research may have applicability for other contexts of
professional education such as medicine, law, and teacher

education.

Overview of the Dissertation
Chapter 1 has presented the focus of the study, the
problem of educational attention to the moral development of
seminary students. This problem was placed within the larger

context of the professions--the distinct responsibilities of

17

professionals and the emphasis of professional education
(such as legal education) on moral development. The three
research questions were described in relation to the
concerns of the research. In addition, important terms, the
population and sample, and the delimitations and generaliz-
ability of the study were clarified.

Chapter 2 reviews the precedent research of the study.
The first section describes various curriculum analyses of
theological education. The analyses involve attempts to
improve and unify the curriculum. One neglected issue in the
curriculum is identified: the personal development of
seminary students. The second section of the chapter
describes the empirical precedents for the study. Studies
are cited which focus on perceptions of seminary faculty,
the moral development of seminary students and other
graduate professional students, and other relevant studies
from higher education and public education concerning the
perceptions of teachers in matters of moral development.

Chapter 3 describes the research design and methods of
the study. A discussion of the following procedures is
provided: the selection of the sample, the development of
the interview schedule, the collection of the data and the
analysis of the data. Finally, the limitations and
methodological assumptions of the study are identified.

The findings of the study are presented in chapters 4,
5 and 6. Each chapter treats responses related to one of the

research questions. Chapter 4 discusses the findings based

18
on the first research question: educational tasks and moral
development. Chapter 5 presents data related to the second
research question: faculty-student interactions and moral
development. Chapter 6 deals with the third research
question: the seminary program and moral development.

Chapter 7 presents the conclusion of the study. Follow-
ing a brief review of the earlier chapters, the conclusions
of the study are presented: six major themes of factors
which faculty perceived as influencing students' moral
development. A section on qualitative observations is
included. Finally, recommendations for curriculum improve-
ment are identified as well as recommendations for further
research.

In summary, the study examined the educational emphasis
placed on the moral development of ministerial students
within the curriculum of six Protestant seminaries, as
perceived by its faculty. Attention was directed at
professors' understanding of the nature and process of moral-
development, professors' interactions with students
regarding matters which may influence students' growth
toward moral maturity, and programmatic elements of the
seminary intended to influence the moral development of
students. The findings described current conceptions and
practices of moral education at the six seminaries, with
indications of possible trends in other Protestant

seminaries.

19

End Note

 

1. References to the New Testament literature are taken from
the New American Standard Bible. Lockman Foundation,
1963.

 

Chapter 2

PRECEDENTS IN THE LITERATURE

The chapter clarifies the conceptual and empirical
framework of the study. The purpose of the study is to
describe the educational emphasis placed on the moral
development of ministerial students within the curriculum of
Protestant seminaries. The first half of the chapter
recounts various curriculum analyses of theological
education. The analyses involve attempts to improve and
unify the curriculum. One neglected element in the
curriculum is identified: the personal development of
seminary students. Four factors from the literature
affecting the personal and moral development of the students
are discussed: 1) classroom teaching approaches, 2)
admissions criteria, 3) faculty relationships with students,
and 4) campus climate or culture.

The latter half of the chapter identifies the empirical
precedents for the study. First, a description is provided
of research which focused on perceptions of seminary faculty
regarding different issues. Next, studies focusing on the
moral development of seminary students are discussed.

Similarly, there is a treatment of research on the moral

20

21
development of graduate students from other professions.
Finally, relevant studies are cited which investigated
perceptions of faculty concerning matters of moral
development and moral education from the fields of higher

education and public education.

Curriculum Analyses of Theological Education

Along with law and medicine, the Protestant religious
ministry constituted one of the three oldest learned
professions of America (Moore, 1970). Certain similarities
are evident when comparing the development of preparation for
entering these professions. Generally speaking, until the
latter half of the nineteenth century, the self-study or
apprenticeship model was the predominant method of preparing
American young men to enter these professions. Students would
be apprenticed to some preceptor--a practicing professional:
minister, lawyer or physician. The actual training would
require students to read various divinity, law, or medical
textbooks (usually limited to the preceptor's own library),
as well as attend the preceptor in his practice. They could
not directly work with the clients/parishioners. Students
were limited to observing the "treatment/ministry” and
performing various menial errands for the preceptor (Kaufman,
1976; Winkleman, 1975).

Other means of "reading divinity" were available to
ministerial candidates. A few students could remain at the

college for additional study with the president (or professor

22
of divinity), a variation on the self-study method mentioned
above. Another version was devised due to the need of the new
western frontier. Since colleges were far away and expensive,
some churches decided to educate their own pastoral
candidates. A local group of church leaders (e.g. the
presbyteries) would administer both the program of reading
divinity and the ordination examination (Lynn, 1981).

Though seminaries emerged in America in the latter half
of the eighteenth century, as did the professional schools
of medicine and law (Note 1), little similarity marked the
purposes and contexts of these schools (Winkleman, 1975).
Most of the early medical and law schools were proprietary
institutions. Then, during the twentieth century, these
professional schools became associated with universities.
Theological seminaries have always been and continue to be
the church's schools and as such are in the service of the
church. A second difference concerns the fact that the vast
majority of seminaries are currently not associated with a
university.

Theological education. . .is the only major

professional field largely separated from an organic

and living relationship to the graduate facilities of

great universities (Waggoner, 1966, p. 92).
(Departments of religious studies exist in many graduate
schools, yet their focus is the academic study of religion
rather than the preparation of practicing ministers.) Thus,
ministerial education is unique among the older professions

in that it is highly responsive to its constituency, the

church, and it is largely isolated from the mainstream of

23
professional education associated with the university

(Brubacher & Willis, 1968, pp. 209-210)..

Theoretical-Practical Tension in Ministerial Education

 

Contemporary Protestant ministerial education largely
reflects two distinct theoretical approaches (traditional
and professional) which influence how the seminary tends to
understand its mission and role.

The great debate (one of the great debates) raging

today within and among seminaries is whether a seminary

is (should be) a professional training school, or a

graduate school for education in theology, or some

mixture of both (Task Force on Spiritual Development,

1972, p. 8).

Theoretical emphasis: Traditional Model

 

The traditional approach to theological education seeks
to conserve and advance the knowledge of the Christian
message which emphasizes academic study and the pursuit of
scholarship.

The content of theological education is a biblically

and theologically founded scheme of studies which is

objective, tightly structured, logically organized,
discipline-centered, and focused on the intellectual

growth of the student (Harter, 1980, p. 335).

This style of curriculum dominated theological education for
most of its history, and it remains alive and healthy today.
But as graduates moved out from the schools to serve in
parishes, demands were placed upon them for which they had
not been trained (e.g. skills of administration and
counseling). Alumni raised their voices that the seminary

curriculum was not relevant to the functions of the

ministry, and thus the professional model came into being.

24
Practical emphasis: Professional Model

The aims are typically focused in the church and the

functions of the minister within its corporate life,

i.e. to train and prepare persons for the professional

leadership of the church (Harter, 1980, p. 336).

In 1956, Niebuhr coined the term "pastoral director" to
convey the imagery of this conception of ministry.

This more competency-based approach to professional
readiness has precedents in other professions (e.g. teacher
education). Research directed by the Association of
Theological Schools has tended toward this professional
model. The "Readiness for Ministry" project (Schuller,
Strommen & Brekke, 1980) identified 444 criterion statements
of ministry function. These statements have been grouped
into 64 core clusters. The purpose of the project was to
devise ”a taxonomy of criteria for which assessment
instruments will be developed" (Schuller, Brekke, &
Strommen, 1975, p. vi).

The two models of theological education and ministry
point to the crux of a continuing debate in ministerial
education.

Over a relatively short history, theology within most

theological seminaries in the United States has changed

from divinity, a unified enterprise into a fourfold
quasi-independent division of scholarly disciplines and

a twofold division of theory and practice (Westerhoff,

1982).

Brought over from Europe in the nineteenth century, the
traditional four-fold division of the curriculum (Biblical

Studies, Dogmatics/Systematic Theology: Church History/

Historical Theology, and Pastoral Theology), still remains

25

with us today (Lynn, 1981). Some change has taken place in
that additional sub-divisions are now accepted (e.g Biblical
Studies is divided into Old Testament and New Testament
Studies). Despite efforts of redirection (see the following
discussion), the seminary ship remains on its steady course.
With the increasing specialization of training and
departments, the debate is not only theoretical, but is also

very political (Hough, 1981).

Theoretical-Practical Balance in Ministerial Education

Serious attempts have been made to design a curriculum
which would provide a balance between the theoretical and
the practical. A major example of this was the "Theological
Curriculum for the 1970's" project (Curriculum Task Force,
1968). It was organized by the American Association of
Theological Schools "for the purpose of designing an
innovative curricular model that would better train people
for ministry than do our present models" (p. 669).

According to The Association of Seminary Professors in
the Practical Fields, the proposed model did not quite
accomplish the proper balance.

The model of education adopted by the proposal writers

apparently was an attempt to resolve the perennial

issue of academic vs. professional education. But
instead of resolving the issue, the model results in
equivocation, with the scales tipped finally in favor

of the academic side (Lapsley et al., 1969).

Batson and Wyckoff (1973) offered an alternative model which

also involved a major revision of seminary education.

Rather than the research orientation of academic

26
doctorates, it suggests graduate study toward a
specialized competence in a particular academic area
and its relation to professional ministry (p. 111).
Unifying the curriculum of ministerial education
appears to be a continuing concern. Hayes outlined a variety
of ways to reduce the polarities between scholarship and

functional competency:

(l) recruit faculty who demonstrate a balance in
ministry:

(2) remain accountable to the profession of ministry:

(3) develop forums for interaction between recognized
scholars and outstanding practitioners;

(4) View theological schooling as ”ongoing," rather
than terminal;

(5) break down false labels of "practical" versus
"theoretical,” and "tough-minded" versus ”soft";

(6) allow for diversity of course content and
evaluation (various types of subject matter call
for different testing procedures): and

(7) encourage theological faculty members using
sabbaticals in pastoral and other forms of parish
ministry (Hayes, 1978, p. 45)

In a similar vein, Hough (1981) suggested that "the
first priority for reform in theological education is
attention to pedagogical style" (p. 159). He asserted that
our social structure must evidence and affirm unity and that
"our pedagogy becomes a sign of the unity of our corporate
task" (p. 159). Courses should be designed which focus on
major global issues facing the church. Also, courses could
be clustered around selected thematic centers in order to

overcome a rigid theory-practice distinction. Team teaching

would be another example of uniting together in the work of

27
the school, especially when faculty members of the practical
and the theoretical teach side-by-side.

Yet Hough agreed that serious attention must also be
given to the lifestyle of the person. "One of the most
serious deficiencies. . .has been the lack of attention to
the whole area of spiritual discipline" (1981, p. 162).

It appears that some discussion of corporate
exercises in the practice of the "holy life" might
be entertained as a necessary part of theological
educational reform. This could be another unifying
experience for the whole community (p. 162).

Westerhoff also affirmed such an emphasis on the person of
the pastor as a critical focus for reform.

The status of the clergy, I suggest, lies not in the
fact that they are professionals like any other
professionals, but that they are extraordinary persons.
A professional minister may be best defined as someone
who has acquired a body of knowledge and developed
particular skills; an ordained priest is best defined
as a sacramental person. The function of the seminary
is first of all the formation of priestly character and
then secondarily ministerial knowledge and skills
(1982, p. 163)

A Focus on Personal Development

The "Readiness for Ministry" Project attempted to
identify what Protestant church members and ministers expect
of ministers (Schuller et al., 1980). One of the eleven
major areas of ministry identified was that of
”disqualifying personal and behavioral characteristics".

The theme states by negation the expectation that

ministers and priests be whole and healthy persons.

They are expected to be people whose security is not

based on a self-image propped up by the ministerial

role or others' conditional acceptance of his or her

views, of the trappings of material success. The theme
thus suggests an expectation that, just as ministers

28

and priests should abide by an accepted moral code,

they should also exhibit characteristics many would

associate with psychological health (Aleshire, 1980,

pp. 49-50).

Two major curricular emphases have already been
presented as the predominant rallying points of ministerial
education: the traditional and the professional. Both
emphases make their contribution to the preparation of
ministerial candidates. Since the traditional curriculum has
a theoretical emphasis, it contributes primarily to the
student's intellectual development. In the professional
approach, there is an emphasis on the development of
professional skills and competence. Lloyd suggested that, in
addition to these two important goals, "the development of
the man himself as a person" is yet a third critical goal in
ministerial preparation (1969, p. 420).

While seminaries feel they place high priority upon the

personal quality of their graduates, they have been far

more effective in furthering the [first] goal of
intellectual and academic development than they have in

the second [professional] and third [personal] educational

goals (Lloyd, 1969, p. 421)

In the article, Lloyd raised two relevant questions:

(a) What personal qualities, what personal capacities,
what personal values are needed in today's
professional, ordained minister; and

(b) What in the total preparation for the active
ministry will raise up that kind of men: what
elements in the total educational and training mix
are needed to foster those requisite personal
qualities and capacities? (p. 420).

In relation to the first question, the present study focused

specifically on the moral development of the ministerial

candidate. The remaining portion of this section deals with

29
the second question, i.e. what educational elements could
foster these capacities. Four factors were identified in the
literature which have had prominent roles in affecting the
personal and moral development of seminary students: (1)
classroom teaching approaches, (2) admissions selection
criteria, (3) relationships with faculty and (4) campus
climate or culture.

Classroom teaching approach

 

Since seminaries have generally followed the
traditional approach, the emphasis has been on transmitting
content, most usually accomplished by the lecture method. In
theological circles, an increasing awareness is being
manifested concerning how students learn and how to
facilitate personal development.

The greatest defect in theological education today is

that it is too much an affair of piecemeal transmission

of knowledge and skills, and that, in consequence, it
offers too little challenge to the student to develop
his own resources and to become an independent,
lifelong inquirer, growing constantly while he is

engaged in the work of the ministry (Niebuhr, 1957, p.

209).

We talk too much about what we are trying to teach and

pay too little attention to how students learn

(Feilding, 1966, p. 19).

A concern for integrating personal and professional
identity is seen as one necessary agenda item of seminary
education (Batson & Wyckoff, 1973). This identity involves a
degree of awareness of oneself in relation to the various
tasks of the ministry, and an openness to expand beyond

one's present horizons. In reviewing published expectations

of professionals in general and of the helping professions

30
in particular, Paravonian concluded that one of the main
categories of goals for pre-service education should be
developing a

self-concept congruent with the demands of the

profession. This goal includes the development of a

professional identity involving personal-social

responsibility, ethical standards, and commitment to

professional expectations (1981, p. 277).

Attention should be given to the critical learning
process of "perceptual-conceptual restructuring" instead of
simply transmitting a certain body of content. This type of
learning involves

shifts within the perceptual sets or cognitive

structures of the individual so that he "sees" himself

and his world in a new way, his reality changes. Such
learning, learning of who one is and what he values,
involves changes in the basic structures of one's
conceptual reality rather than simply the addition of
information or concepts within the existing conceptual

and perceptual structures (Batson & Wyckoff, 1973, p.
105-6). .

This is supported by some past studies which have
indicated that effectiveness in the helping relationship is
a function of the perceptual frame of the helper (Combs,
1969, pp. 70-75). Research was conducted with counselors,
school teachers, college professors, student nurses and
Episcopal priests as subjects. The specific effective
factors that were identified involved the helper's general
perceptual frame, the helper's perceptions of people, the
helper's perceptions of self, and the helper's perceptions
of the helping task.

With a focus on "perceptual-conceptual restructuring",

the context for learning would be organized to support and

31

prompt personal development. A forum could be provided in
which students expressed themselves. Also, students would
require a conceptual framework within which they could
interpret their own development.
Admissions selection criteria

Despite the kinds of efforts mentioned above, altering
basic orientations and personality structure is a difficult
and time-consuming undertaking. Attention should also be
directed at what kind of students are matriculated into the
seminary program. From studies based on counselor training
programs, Carkhuff asserted that "the best index of a future
criterion is a previous index of that criterion" (1969, p.
85). More explicit selection criteria and better means of
evaluating applicants against the particular goals of the
seminary could help seminaries admit students who are better
prepared to achieve the seminary goals.

A similar principle has relevance from organizational
theory.

Thus, the degree to which an organization selects its

participants affects its control needs in terms of the

amount of resources and effort it must invest to

maintain the level of control considered adequate in

view of its goal (Etzioni, 1964, p. 69).
For an educational institution, the application of the
principle is seen in a different perspective. With more
selectivity in admitting students, on the one hand, a lesser
amount of resources (both human and educational) would be

required for the same degree of student development, or on

the other hand, the same amount of existing resources would

32
be available to facilitate greater development than what is
currently achieved.

Increasingly, various assessment measures (e.g.
Theological School Inventory, Minnesota Multiphasic
Personality inventory-MMPI) are being employed by seminaries
to gain a better image of students for screening of
admissions and for guiding students through the program
(McConahay, 1971), though these instruments must be used
with caution (Menges, 1975, p. 192). Also, more efforts
could be directed at guiding applicants in pre-seminary
learning experiences to help them meet selection criteria
levels prior to being matriculated into the program.
Faculty modeling and relationships with students

Students usually have a few unforgetable teachers who
have significantly influenced their lives (e.g. Epstein,
1981). In contributing to the personal and moral development
of the student, the example and guidance of a teacher is a
critical factor.

We see the need for the assistance of the faculty in

the growth process of the student as substantive and

immediate. A young person who comes to a theological
school as part of the preparation for ministry, finds
only a partial preparation in the classwork, chapel
exercises, and field education. Personal preparation is
also necessary, and this can only come with the help
and leadership of those who are more mature, more
secure in the faith, more personally integrated in the
life of prayer, who can be seen as committed

Christians, caught in the act of loving the Lord and

their fellow men (Task Force on Spiritual Development,

1972, p. 44-45).

Often a professor's contribution to the personal and

professional formation of the student is constituted by what

33
the professor is observed doing rather than by the
information he or she transmits (Feilding, 1966, p. 101).
For example, when faculty regularly attend the seminary's
chapel services (instead of missing them), a value is
conveyed of the chapel's importance in the lives of the
faculty. But there are also more active modes in which
faculty can influence their students, both in and out of the
classroom.
However, if the task of a theological school is
preparation for the ministry, then the faculty, beyond
the classroom situation but not divorced from it, must
involve themselves in the personal preparation of the
candidate. They must make sure that the institution is
providing all the means for personal growth and for
spiritual development that are possible within its
framework (Task Force on Spiritual Development, 1972,
p. 11).
Faculty must take the initiative in pursuing some form of
relationship with students since ”the key to personal
development. . .1ies in the quality of relationships in
which people participate” (Lloyd, 1969, p. 427).
Campus environment and atmosphere
As McLuhan has stated, often ”the medium is the
message." The campus environment includes such items as the
interactions with administrative and support personnel,
extra-classroom activities, the form of student government
and the architecture and facilities. The perspectives,
attitudes and values held in common by the total social
organization making up the school is what Lloyd labels the

"campus culture" (1969, p. 430).

These factors, though often unnoticed (and thus referred

34
to as the "hidden curriculum") have a significant shaping
effect on the personal and moral development of students. For
example, competition among students is often used as a prime
motivator, yet it will be skills of cooperation and
compromise that must be drawn upon in the ministry. Likewise,
because of the seminary's tendency toward a transmissive
educational mode, some seminaries actually encourage or
reinforce passive personalities and high dependency needs in

their students (Feilding, 1966, p. 163).

The Role of the Seminary in Personal Development

 

Certain faculty think that educational goals directed
at the personal life of students are outside the domain of
the seminary's purview. This perspective may stem from a
serious respect for the integrity and responsibility of the
student in this matter (Feilding, 1966, p. 168).

This is not due to any lack of appreciation of the

importance of the religious life. Rather it is due to

the assumption that those who come to the seminary are
already so grounded in their religious experience,
that. . .they can be trusted to look after matters for

themselves (Brown, 1934, p. 155).

Or it may issue from an understanding that the
student's intellectual development is the exclusive concern
of seminary--even to the neglect and detriment of other
aspects of personal development (Solanky, 1978, p. 127).
Thus, for some seminaries, the only concern for the personal

development of the student is expressed in a "brief

idealistic paragraph in the seminary catalogue" (Task Force

on Spiritual Development, 1972, p. 35).

35

Summary of the Literature on Curriculum Analyses

 

Protestant theological seminaries continue today much
as they have since the mid-nineteenth century. The
relationship with the church is a close one. But the
seminary, an institution of professional education, remains
largely independent of the university system, unlike other
professional schools. The curriculum retains a tension
between the theoretical and practical, between the
traditional and professional models of education. Attempts
have been offered as bases for unifying the curriculum, yet
these have been implemented by only a few seminaries. In
many cases, attention directed toward the personal
development of students is meager at best--possibly due to
the uncertainty regarding its inclusion as a legitimate and

realistic educational goal.

Empirical Studies in Theological Education

This section is devoted to describing the empirical
precedents for the study (primarily dissertation studies). A
brief review of major studies of seminary education prepares
the way for a treatment of research involving seminary
faculty and studies related to the moral development of
seminary students. Then, research outside of the realm of
theological education is utilized to support the study. A
few of the reports deal with the moral development of
professional students. The rest of the research cited here

investigates perceptions of higher and public education

36
faculty concerning matters of moral development. Each study
is presented with its findings and then a final section

summarizes what can be gleaned from these empirical studies.

Investigations of Theological Education

The twentieth century marked the period in which "the
study of theology" was itself seriously studied. A signifi-
cant precedent for investigating professional education was
set in 1910 by Flexner in his famous report on medical
education. This report had such an impact on the reform of
medical education that the Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching, sponsor of the Flexner report,
implemented a plan to evaluate other professional fields:
legal education (Redlich, 1914: Reed, 1928), engineering
education (Mann, 1918), teacher education (Learned & Bagley,
1920) and dental education (Geis, 1926). Theological educa-
tion only received slight notice in 1911 with a few pages of
comment in one annual report (Pritchett, 1911, pp. 94-99).

National reports on theological education

 

The task of examining seminary education was largely
taken up by a group of concerned theological educators. In
1918, the Conference on Theological Education was organized
and began consultation work with various seminaries. This
group was the foundation of what was to become the accredit-
ing association for theological education, the Association
of Theological Schools (ATS). Though only informally

involved in the first study in 1924 (Kelly), ATS has

37
directed the four other major studies of theological
education: Brown & May, 1934; Niebuhr, Williams and
Gustafson, 1957: Feilding, 1966, and Schuller, Strommen and
Brekke, 1980. An additional study investigated the
pre-seminary education of seminary students (Bridston &
Culver, 1964).

Denominational reports on theological education

 

The concern for evaluating theological education was
eventually shared by various church bodies. For example, the
following denominations authorized and conducted surveys of
their own seminaries: the American Baptists (Northern
Baptists) (Hartshorne & Froyd, 1944-1945), the Episcopal
Church (Pussey & Taylor, 1967), the United Church of Christ
(Fukuyama, 1972), and the Christian Church--Disciples of
Christ (Cotten, 1973). The Mennonite Church (Bender, 1971)
and the United Methodists (McCulloh, 1980) suggested new
models for ministerial training. Even the nondenominational
university-based seminaries had their own report (Lindbeck,
1976).

Dissertation studies on theological education

Additional information about theological education is
also becoming available through dissertation studies. These
have treated a wide range of assorted topics: admissions
practices (Sandusky, 1964), field education (Barrick, 1975),
psychological measurement instruments for use with students
(Johnson, 1976; Cardwell, 1978), seminary education's effect

on students' attitudes (Pierson, 1976) and leadership

38
orientation (Buzzell, 1983), factors related to three
categories of theological orthodoxy (Beam, 1982), the
socialization process at the seminary which affects the
ministerial role learned by students (Kornfield, 1980),
career data of seminary graduates (Elmer, 1981), the process
of seminary curriculum development (Rowen, 1982), the nature
and role of seminary trustees (Solanki, 1982), sex-role
preferences of faculty and students (Wetherbe, 1983), and
approaches to integrating psychology and theology (Eliason,
1983). It is evident that there is an increasing interest
and emphasis on the investigation and evaluation of

theological education.

Precedents in Theological Education
The following section describes a total of ten studies
involving either the perceptions of seminary faculty members
or the moral development of seminary students.

Perceptions of seminary faculty

 

Perceptions of seminary faculty members were investi-
gated in four projects. (Two related studies involving the
perceptions of non-seminary adult educators are also
included.)

Shannon (1975). The purpose of the study was to
investigate the faculty's perception of its role regarding
12 areas of governance in the seminaries of the United
Presbyterian Church of the U.S.A. All faculty in four of the

seven seminaries received the questionnaire. The seminaries

39
included in the study were San Francisco, McCormick,
Princeton and Pittsburgh, of which Shannon was the dean.
Responses were indicated on a Likert-type scale across the
three variables for each area of governance--perceptions of
what is: 1) actually true, 2) desirable, and 3) probable in
light of the current situation.

Faculty perceived that they had much influence in
decision-making related to workload, screening of faculty,
tenure, promotion, admission of students, degree require-
ments, and instructional procedures. They felt their
influence in these critical areas was both desirable and
probable. Faculty perceived that they had moderate to little
influence in decision-making related to financial resources
(e.g. for personnel, instructional program and research),
physical plant utilization, appointment of President and
dean(s), disciplinary life of students and tuition/financial
aid. Although, faculty desired a greater influence in the
allocation of resources (for personnel, programs, and
research), plant utilization, and tuition, they did not
think more input in these areas was probable.

An interesting finding was the faculty's perception
that they had moderate to little influence in student life
and discipline. Though they did not desire to have a greater
influence, they thought it probable that their influence in
this area would be greater.

Sweeny (1979). Sweeny investigated the ministerial

 

expectations of seminary faculty, church lay leaders and

40
seminary seniors of two Conservative Baptist seminaries. A
review of the literature suggested that, in general, a
serious gap existed between clergy and laity concerning the
expectations placed on ministers. One conclusion of the
study was that faculty perceptions of the pastoral ministry
were highly homogeneous. Divisions along lines of practical
pastoral experience and teaching fields were not supported
by the data.

Grubbs (1981). Seminary faculty and students responded

 

to a questionnaire seeking to identify whether their educa-
tional orientation was more andragogical or pedagogical.
Data were collected from 16 midwestern seminaries: 122
faculty members and 332 students. The mean score of all
faculty members' perceptions of seminary students was
slightly beyond the midpoint of the continuum, thus
indicating a tendency toward the andragogical pole. Yet, the
students tended to rate the faculty's educational orienta-
tion toward the pedagogical pole.

A significant difference was found among faculty on the
basis of teaching area. Pastoral ministries and religious
education faculty tended toward more of an andragogical
orientation than faculty members in other teaching areas.
The findings did not support differences based on age,
professional rank, type of institution granting the highest
degree, highest degree attained, and length of teaching
service. There was a significant difference found between

male and female faculty. Female faculty tended to be more

41
andragogical in orientation. This finding was statistically
significant, but was based on 112 male respondents and only
7 female respondents.

The Educational Orientation Questionnaire used by
Grubbs was developed by Hadley (1975) for his dissertation
study under the supervision of Malcolm Knowles. Hadley's
purpose was to develop an instrument which could assess
adult educators' orientation with respect to constructs of
andragogy and pedagogy. The instrument demonstrated that it
was able to detect differences in orientation among these
variables: sex, subject matter or specialty, level of
position and type of organization. Level of formal education
showed slight differences, but no significant differences
were associated with the age of adult educators.

Another study employed Hadley's questionnaire at
Oklahoma State University (Jones, 1982). The research found
that there was an overall significant difference among
departments, and a significant difference on one of the six
subscales in relation to degrees earned, sex, percents of
teaching load, amount of time spent off campus working on
extension or service projects, and number of years
experience teaching in higher education.

Ferris (1982). The study investigated the emphasis on
servant leadership in the curriculum of four Reformed
seminaries. A questionnaire survey of faculty and students
identified a lack of agreement regarding which curriculum

elements were intended to develop servanthood leadership

42
styles. Informal curriculum elements were cited as examples
of demonstrated servant minister qualities more often than
formal elements. For example, the data indicated that
faculty modeled these qualities. In relation to admissions
practices, little or no attention was given to the qualities
of a servant minister in selection criteria. The preferred
teaching methods among the faculty were lecture, reading or
research, and discussion of lecture or research. Finally,
the seminary programs did provide adequate training in the
traditional disciplines.

Moral development of seminary students

 

The following six studies were the only ones identified
which treated matters of moral development in relation to
seminary students (three studies resulted from doctoral
dissertations, and three studies were available in journals).
The first study looks at the helping behavior of seminary
students. The other five studies focus on levels of moral
reasoning as measured by the particular researcher's written ’
adaptation of Kohlberg's Moral Judgment Interview or as
measured by Rest's Defining Issues Test. Three of the five
studies make an assessment of the level of moral reasoning
for purposes of comparing the scores with other groups, or in
comparison with other variables. In the final two studies,
students participated in an experimental workshop or course
and pre- and post-test scores were compared for differences

due to the treatment.

43

Darley and Batson (1973). The researchers were
interested in studying the influence of situation and
personality variables on helping behavior. On the campus of
Princeton seminary, they re-enacted the parable of the Good
Samaritan with 47 seminary students. Situational variables
included the content of one's thinking and the amount of
"hurry" in one's journey. Students were told that the study
was investigating vocational careers of seminary students.

Various measures related to the personality variable of
types of religiosity were adminstered in the first part of
the study. Then each student was told to prepare a brief
three to five minute extemporaneous message on one of these
topics: (a) job opportunities for seminary students, or (b)
the parable of the Good Samaritan. Students were instructed
to report to another building where the message would be
taped. In addition, students were assigned one of three
"hurry" orientations for proceeding to the next building:
(a) high hurry- "Oh you're late. . . l”: (b) intermediate
hurry- "The assistant is ready for you so please go over
right now"; or (c) low hurry- "It'll be a few minutes before
they're ready for you. . . ."

A victim (confederate) was positioned in the alley way
between the two buildings in the place where the students
would pass. The victim was slumped over on the ground, with
eyes closed and did not move. As each student passed by, the
victim would cough twice and groan. The victim was prompted

to discourage attempts to be helped when offered by any

44
students. Students were rated by the victim and were also
evaluated on a helping behavior questionnaire administered
in the next building (e.g. "When was the last time you saw a
person to be in need of help?").

The most important factor for predicting helping
behavior was the hurry variable, so that subjects in a hurry
were not as likely to help as much as those who were in less
of a hurry. One interpretation of the data indicated that,
in the minds of some students, there was a conflict whether
to give help to the experimenter and complete the assigned
task, or to help the victim. Thus the issue was not purely
insensitivity, but a conflict of options and priorities, as
is typical of life situations. The results also indicated
that the three types of religiosity (as means, as ends, or
as quest) did not yield significant results.

The "message-content of thinking" variable did not
predict helping behavior, even when a student was preparing
to give a message on the Good Samaritan. A reanalysis of the
data leading to Darley and Batsons' no-effect conclusion
concerning the Good Samaritan message was done by Greenwald
(1975). Using a Bayesian analysis procedure rather than
significance testing, Greenwald concluded that

Since the results were (a) actually more favorable to

an alternate hypothesis of at least moderate effect [of

the Good Samaritan message], but (b) not very strongly
so, it is most appropriate to reserve judgment

regarding the message effect until more data are
collected (p. 583).

45

Rest, Cooper, Coder, Masanz and Anderson (1974); Rest,
Davidson, and Robbins (1978). In validating his new Defining
Issues Test (DIT), Rest included a group of seminary
students for purposes of comparison. The DIT "P score"
represents a measure of principled thinking at stages 5 and
6 of Kohlberg's hierarchy. The DIT is an objective test
employing six moral dilemmas and twelve multiple choice
questions for each dilemma. The P score is based on the
subject's rating of the four most important statements
related to the dilemma. Doctoral students in moral philos-
ophy and political science at the University of Minnesota
were identified by Rest prior to the study as the "expert
panel” on providing accurate responses to the DIT. Their
scores would then be contrasted with scores of the other
groups included in the study.

Participants included 73 ninth graders, 40 twelfth
graders, 40 juniors and seniors in the College of Education,
25 seminary students, and the 15 doctoral students
previously mentioned. The seminary students attended a
"liberal Protestant seminary” in the St. Paul/Minneapolis
area. The seminary students and doctoral students were
grouped together as 40 graduate students, though some
separate measures were reported for the seminary students.

2 Comparisons were made on two counts, P scores and the
percentage of subjects predominantly using principled
thinking (those having P scores above 50%). The results

follow: ninth graders-30.3 (25%), twelfth graders 33.8

46
(7.5%), college students 50.4 (45%), seminarians 55.5 (60%),
and doctoral students 65.2 (93%).

Lawrence (1979). Lawrence was a member of Rest's
research group at the University of Minnesota and attempted
to develop a taxonomy of component procedures of moral
judgment-making using similar groups of comparison as in the
Rest study. Three groups were compared on different measures:
ninth graders, seminarians, and graduate philosophy students.
Concerning the seminarians, Lawrence concluded that (a)
seminary students did not understand high-staged items as
well as the graduate philosophy students, and that (b)
seminarians gave the high-staged items or principled items
lower objective ratings and rankings than ninth graders.
Since Lawrence's second conclusion regarding seminary
students was so disconcerting, the study was given a more
detailed inspection.

The scores on which the conclusion was based are
reproduced in Table 2-1. The two scores include the mean P
scores, a ranking of principled items related to stage 5 and
stage 6 thinking and a D score, a weighted ranking of all
stage responses. Seminarians scored lower than ninth graders
on the P score (22.47), but scored between ninth graders and
graduate philosophy students on the D score (24.89).

A closer analysis of Lawrence's study reveals four
issues which may have affected the scores of the seminar-
ians' level of moral reasoning: (1) sample size, (2)

reliability of the P score in comparison to the D score,

47

Table 2-1

Mean DIT Scores in Lawrence Study

P Score
Graduate philosophy
students (n=30) 56.78
Seminary students
(n=16) 22.47
Ninth graders
(n=29) 30.75

D Score

32.23

24.89

18.9

Note: From ”The component procedures of moral judgment-
making” by J. Lawrence, 1979, Doctoral dissertation,

 

University of Minnesota, p. 44.

48

(3) different perceptual frames of the groups, and (4) the
concept of "obedience" in Kohlberg's theory and Rest's DIT.
Each of the issues will be treated below.

1. The sample was composed of 30 graduate philosophy
students, 29 ninth graders and 16 seminary students.

The seminarians were chosen from an extreme

fundamentalist theological college attached to a

close-knit conservative Baptist community (pp. 14-15).

It was expected that the seminarians would represent a

group of adults with high educational levels but low

moral judgment levels (p. 15).
Of the 16 "seminarians", 7 were enrolled in a B.A. program,
3 were currently enrolled in both B.A. and Master's level
courses, and only 6 students were solely in a Master's
degree program. What particular master's program the
students were enrolled in (e.g. a three-year M.Div. program
or a one-year music degree) was not stated. Thus, only 6
graduate seminarians were actually included in the study,
yielding a disproportionate number of cases in comparison to
the other groups.

2. Regarding the reliability of the P score in
comparison to the D score, Rest himself has admitted that,

Davison's index [the D score] is more sensitive to

change because of its better reliability and because it

uses information from all items, not just stage-5 and

stage-6 items as the P index does (Rest et al., 1978).
Thus, if attention were given to the D score (Table 2-1) the
comparison between scores of the three groups is closer to
what would be expected.

3. On the matter of perceptual frames, Lawrence

indicated that the seminary students may have interpreted

49
the dilemmas differently than the philosophy students. "It
seems the seminarians were attending to a different task,
religious problem-solving" (p. 104). If this was the case,
then it would be more difficult to make comparisons between
groups on Lawrence's taxonomy of components since the other
two groups rarely cited religious criteria in their
deliberations about the dilemmas.

4. Finally, an issue beyond the scepe of Lawrence's
study concerns the concept of obedience. For Christians,
obedience to God is an ultimate goal. For Kohlberg, obedience
is either rated as stage 1 thinking (obedience to fixed
rules) or stage 4 thinking (law and order, rule-oriented).
Since Jesus, who was supremely obedient to God, is sometimes
offered as an example of stage 6 thinking, there is a
critical conceptual problem on the matter. No resolution is
attempted here. Suffice it to say, responses by those who
believe in obedience to a divine authority tend to be rated
around the stage 4 level in conventional thinking and not
principled thinking. This may also explain why seminarians
did not rate high on the P score.

One conclusion which seems justifiable from the study is
that philosophy students utilized more complex cognitive
processes and more complete problem-solving skills than
seminary students. Seminarians in the study tended to use
simple reasoning and approached the dilemmas with pre-packaged
solutions. Lawrence suggested that "the tenets of the

seminarians' conservative belief system pre-empted cognitive

50
processing" (p. 103).

Lindskoog (1973). The author hypothesized that
differences in religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
of seminary students as well as religiously neutral factors
would vary systematically with their self-actualization
scores. Self-actualization was measured by the Personal
Orientation Inventory (POI) developed by Shostrom in 1964.
Data for the study included 164 responses from students
attending a seminary in the southwest. On the basis of the
scores, three samples of 15 students were chosen to
represent high, average and very low self-actualization.
Life history information, obtained by indepth interviews
(conducted blind as to group membership), provided the
variables of comparison. Religiously neutral factors were
considered to be political-social attitudes, family
structure, demographic data and levels of moral development.
A self-report adaptation of Kohlberg's interview (based on a
1963 journal article) was used by the researcher. Three
graduate students in psychology scored the responses.

Data specifically related to seminarians' self-actuali-
zation and levels of moral development proved inconclusive.
Methodological problems may have contributed to this result.
Scorers were given only two and a half pages of instructions
for rating responses (in comparison to Kohlberg's current
scoring manual containing over 300 pages). Judges 1 and 3
rated responses around stage 4 and judge 2 gave scores

between stage 3 and 4. The author stated that the similar

51
ratings may have resulted from concepts which were not
sufficiently operational, or from the judges' incomprehen-
sion of the concepts.

Grant (1975). Discussions of moral dilemmas (1-1/2

 

hours) over 10 weeks were used in an experimental design to
explore the effects on the moral orientation of 27 Clinical
Pastoral Education (CPE) students at Andover Newton
Theological School. The study was based on Kohlberg's
earlier model of moral education (Kohlberg, 1981). Assess-
ments were made using a written abridged version of
Kohlberg's interview. Some differences in moral orientation
between the groups were found. Extraneous variables may have
contributed to the differences. The control group (n=23)
viewed the taking of pre- and post-tests as an intrusion.
Shorter answers were given to the post-test, making it
difficult to score. While no significant changes were found
in the Moral Maturity Scores (MMS), there were some changes
within each group: the experimental group tended to increase
in the MMS, and the control group tended to decrease in the
MMS.

Smith and Westerhoff (1980). The study attempted to
investigate whether the moral reasoning of seminary students
was influenced during participation in a required ethics
course at Duke Divinity School. A 50-minute written version
of Kohlberg's interview was used as a pre- and post-test to
measure levels of moral reasoning. No mention of Kohlberg's

work was made in the course. The study was conducted over a

52
three year period and included students' scores from each of
the three times the course was offered. The teaching method
essentially remained the same, but the content of the course
was revised for the second and third offerings. Comparisons
were made for each year. Table 2-2 presents the data of the
study. Each succeeding year more students had post-test
scores in the stage 5 range and a greater percentage of
students used theological categories in post-test responses.
The authors concluded that the course content is just as
important as the teaching method. A concern was also
registered since most of the students were still in the

conventional range of moral thinking (stages 3 and 4).

Precedents in the Parish Ministry

 

The following two investigations focused on the level
of moral reasoning of lay parishioners.

Coder (1975)

 

Coder conducted a six-week experimental study of moral
education with members of two churches attending adult
education courses: a suburban Catholic church (A group,
n=33) and an urban Congregational church (B group, n=13). A
control group (C, n=13) consisted of subjects enrolled in
church seminars. Originally, more people had participated in
the study (N=87), but 28 total persons from the three groups
did not return post-tests. Ages ranged from 25 to 55 with
the average age being 35. Group A experienced a series of

two-hour weekly discussions of moral dilemmas. Group B

53

Table 2-2

Student Scores in Smith and Westerhoff Study

Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5 % usage

1975-76 (n=20)

Pre-test 15 5 0 18%

Post-test 10 6 4 70%
1976-77 (n=23)

Pre-test l7 6 0 20%

Post-test 5 11 7 80%
1977-78 (n=22)

Pre-test 13 8 l 19%

Post-test 4 10 8 92%

% indicates percentage of all students who used theological
categories in their responses.

Note: From "Teaching moral theology" by H. L. Smith and J.
Westerhoff, March 1982, Duke Divinipy School Review, 45, pp.
55, 56 & 58.

 

54
received one-hour weekly lectures, with questions, but no
discussions were involved. The following assessments were
made for each participant: level of moral judgment (the
DIT), moral comprehension, law and order orientation,
intelligence, and liberalism. The study was included in
Rest's efforts to validate the DIT (Rest et al., 1974).

Results on the DIT (using an earlier four-dilemma
version) showed no significant differences between any of
the three groups on the pre-test, and no difference between
the two experimental groups on the post-test, though these
two groups differed with the control group. The author
suggested that the study gave evidence to disconfirm
assumptions that moral dilemma discussions are more
effective means of facilitating the development of moral
judgment. Factors affecting the conclusion include: the
motivation to be in the experimental group, the small sample
size, and the delay in returning mailed post-tests by some
of the subjects--from two weeks to nine months. The DIT
predicted moral-political stance more often than other
variables.

Ernsberger (1977)

Another study revealed the importance of factors
related to the religious milieu for the moral development of
adults. Measures of moral judgment and religious orientation
were given to 169 adult members of four churches. Of the
four churches, two churches included principled-level moral

teachings in their official doctrines and the other two

55
churches included only conventional-level teachings. Among
the two "principled" churches, the importance given to
morally-principled considerations was positively correlated
with members having either (a) been teachers of religious
classes with youth or adults, or (b) been church committee
members who had to deal with the social-ethical aspects of
religious commitment. In addition, the considerations of one
of these two churches was positively correlated with the
degree of intrinsic religious identification. Finally, the’
preference for principled-level considerations was higher
for intrinsically religious members of morally "principled"
congregations than for intrinsically religious members of
morally "conventional" congregations. This study suggested
that specific qualities of congregational life, involvement
and doctrine may be more conducive to facilitating adult

moral development.

Precedents with Other Professional Students
As with theological education, there is a growing
concern for personal and moral development among other
professions. The following section highlights moral develop-
ment studies in legal, nursing and dental education.

Law students

 

Two different assessment were made in Willging and
Dunn's (1981) study. First, an attempt was made to assess
the effects of the first year of law school on the moral

development of 139 students at the University of Toledo.

56
Pre- and post-tests on the DIT were taken at the beginning
and end of the school year. Since post-tests were to be
taken home and returned, only 63 valid responses were
received. Pre-test scores for those who did not return the
test (mean P score = 50.57) were comparable to the mean P
score for the 63 who did return the test (49.54). The post-
test score (52.13) was not statistically significant at the
.05 level.

Students in their final year are required by the law
school to take a course on "Legal ethics and professional
responsibility.” A total of 41 students took the course
during one year. A pre-test was taken on the DIT (mean P
score = 52.22) as well as a background questionnaire. The
post-test (mean P score = 52.78) was, again, not statisti-
cally significant at the .05 level. A confounding factor
included the resentment of a good number of the students for
having to take the course. Attendance and participation was
sporadic. Students were preoccupied with finding a job and
taking the bar exam. The authors suggested that an elective
course in the first year of studies may be more effective.
Nursing students

Eberhardy (1983) presented two real-life nursing ethical
dilemmas to two groups of nurses (all female): 13 masters'
level nursing students with at least five years of
professional nursing experience (average age = 32.9 years)
and 13 undergraduate nursing students with no prior

professional nursing experience (average age = 21 years). In

57

addition, 14 masters' students from the public health field
were interviewed (average age = 29.5 years) to provide a
basis for comparisons between educational level and specific
professional experience in nursing. Responses were analyzed
for the assumption of personal responsibility to resolve the
dilemmas and the identification and application of moral
rights of the individuals involved in the dilemmas. Nursing
students at the masters' level (with professional experience)
did take personal responsibility and applied moral rights to
their decision choices, at a significant level, more often
than either undergraduate nursing students or masters'
candidates in public health. Thus, professional experience
was considered a critical factor.
Dental education

Students from all four years of dental school (N = 483)
were given a written moral judgment measure (Green, 1981).
From a review of the literature "the weight of evidence
indicates that dental schools do affect negatively the
values of their students” (p. 137). The instrument employed
was developed by the author and resembled the DIT: the
dilemmas were specifically designed for dental students.
Significant differences in P scores were found between the
first and second year students. Green suggested that,

Since the biggest differences occured in the first two

years, perhaps it was not the clinical experience that

affected students the most, but rather the stress of

competition for grades: the teacher-centered, authori-

tarian environment: and the perfectionistic demands in
pre-clinical courses (p. 140).

58

Precedents with Faculty in Higher Education

 

The following three studies investigated faculty
perceptions of matters related to the moral development of
students.

Renaud (1979). The author was interested in understand-
ing how 66 faculty and 740 students from the colleges of
Business, Natural Science and Social Science at Michigan
State University defined academic dishonesty. Part I of the
questionnaire was designed to measure how faculty and
students perceived 33 selected behaviors in relation to what
they personally considered an appropriate standard for
academic work. Part II included 10 behaviors governed by
University regulations on scholarship and grades: engaging
in any one of these behaviors was considered an act of
dishonesty. Faculty were specifically asked whether they had
discovered any of the behaviors over the past academic year
and, if so, on how many occasions and what action was taken.

Overall, faculty perceived the behaviors, at a
significant level, more seriously than both undergraduate
and graduate students. Regarding individual behaviors,
faculty perceived the following actions as more serious than
students: 1) letting a friend copy a paper, 2) submitting a
paper for two courses changing only the title, 3) not
accurately reporting lab experiment findings, 4) critiquing
a take-home final for classmates when the class was

instructed to do their own work, 5) failing to use quotation

59
marks with material copied verbatim, 6) signaling answers
during an exam, and 7) faking footnotes (pp. 74-75).
Concerning student dishonesty, the action taken most often
by faculty was warning the students (42), next was
penalizing the student's grade on the assignment (37) and
then, no action was taken (24). Occasionally the student
would have to repeat the assignment (13), the course grade
would be penalized (9) or the student would be referred for
University disciplinary action (3) (p. 127).

Coles (1973). A similar study was conducted in a
church-related college of the Seventh-day Adventist Church
regarding the student behaviors of general conduct, drug
use, mischief, sex offenses, drinking, cheating and theft.
The purpose was to discover what degree of difference of
opinion was evident among 128 faculty, 355 students and_300
parents concerning these behaviors. Of the three groups, the
faculty were the most conservative in opinions about
cheating. Parents were most conservative in six other
categories of behavior. Significant differences of opinion
were evident among all three groups in relation to seven
areas of student conduct.

Wixom (1982). Personal interviews were taken with 161
faculty, freshmen and seniors from three institutions of
higher education: the University of Utah, a state
institution, Brigham Young University, a large church-
related institution, and Westminster College, a small

private liberal arts college. The faculty and students were

60
presented with four distinct models for dealing with values
in the college classroom: 1) factual-intellectual--facts but
no values are taught or discussed: 2) value-neutrality--both
facts and values are discussed, but professors do not
disclose their own values (associated with Kohlberg's
earlier position); 3) value-advocacy--both facts and values
are discussed and professors advocate their point of view
but avoid encouraging students to agree or disagree with
them: 4) authoritarian--facts and values are taught as
absolutes: professors advocate their views and encourage
students to agree, and discourage students to disagree. The
factual-intellectual and authoritarian models were consid-
ered the two extremes of the continuum and the other two
models were located on the continuum.

Responses were very similar among the respondents in
that students and faculty were satisfied with the particular
level at which values were taught at all three institutions
and there was a congruence between what was taking place and
what they believed ought to be taking place. The majority of
repondents from each institution preferred the value-
advocacy model of the teaching of values. No statistically
significant differences were related to demographic or
academic factors, including affiliation with the regionally

dominant Mormon Church.

61
Precedents with Teachers in Public Education

In the following section, seven studies are cited. The
first four studies investigated teachers' thinking about
moral eduation and their role and practice in moral educa-
tion. The final three studies take a broader perspective and
look at factors related to classroom atmosphere and
organizational factors of schools.

Wallace (1980)

The Moral Education Attitudinal Survey (MEAS) was
administered to 334 teachers in Suffolk County, NY. The
instrument was developed by the researcher and content
validity was verified by an expert panel of experienced
researchers. The MEAS consisted of 52 statements organized
into three parts. The second part included 32 statements
regarding six teacher approaches to moral education: 1) role
modeling (to provide moral exemplars), 2) rationalistic (to
provide opportunities to discuss moral issues), 3) holistic
(to establish a just community as a learning environment),
4) activistic (to encourage students to become active in
social projects), 5) humanistic (to develop sensitivity for
others), and 6) conventional (to provide rules and behavior
codes and to enforce them). The teachers considered that
each of these six types involved appropriate means of moral
education. The only statement teachers considered an
inappropriate action was the item suggesting that teachers
tell students what is right and wrong (though, in practice,

implicit messages of right and wrong cannot be avoided).

62
Moeller (1982)

The author interviewed (via tape recorder) 24 Wisconsin
home economics teachers to identify teachers' implicit
theory of moral education. Two major variables were used in
the analysis: DIT scores, measuring the percentage of
principled moral reasoning, and participation in in-service
education on family-focused home economics. Teachers
identified 280 different ways to engage in moral education.
The most predominant form of moral education was the
discussion of moral issues. Since the public school must
relate to students of diverse cultural perspectives,
teachers sometimes felt frustrated that their own belief
systems were not appropriate for this pluralistic setting.
Three particular moral education models were identified:
character development (6), moral analysis approach (7),
avoidance of moral education (4) and a combination of the
three models (7)

Silver (1982)

Teachers (N = 25) from a midwestern, independent,
secondary school participated in a moral education program
based on Kohlbergian research. The program involved meeting
weekly for 30 to 45 minutes over a period of two school
years. Following this program, teachers were interviewed to
investigate the differences in their thinking about moral
education and acts of teaching. Many of the teachers, though
indicating that they (1) thought more about moral education,

(2) had experienced a shift in thinking and (3) had accepted

63

parts of the program, reported limited practice of moral
education. Other teachers did not report changes in their
thinking or teaching of moral education, though they had
considered the possibility of the program. A few teachers
reported changes both in thinking and in teaching while two
teachers indicated that there was no change at all. Silver
suggested that,‘

In fact the school structure remains unscathed, the

academic program is inviolable, and moral education has

become an add-on extra-curriculum program (p. 162).
One factor probably affecting the teachers' receptivity to
the program was the institution of the program from a
decision by an administrator. Little attention was given to

teacher participation in the process of implementation.

Lubomudrov (1982)

 

Another study focused on the relationship among
teachers' level of moral reasoning, their understanding of
educational issues and the teaching practices they adopt.
Case studies were developed for eight elementary teachers
from the same school district in Salt Lake City. Each
teacher had at least five years of teaching experience: ages
were from 28 to 37 years. Four teachers had DIT scores below
25, and four teachers had DIT scores above 34. Participants
were selected from a pool of 27 teachers who had taken the
DIT. Data were collected through interviews, videotapes,
observations and analyses of teachers' written assignments.

Differences were evident in "teaching perspectives”

between the two groups on the following variables:

64
1) understanding of rules, 2) the roles of a teacher, 3)
expectations concerning the interaction of students in the
classroom, and 4) general orientation toward educational
issues. For each teacher, the teaching perspective that was
held consistently reflected cohesive attitudes and practices
about educational issues. In addition, environmental factors
(e.g. relationship with principals, "grading" requirements,
district policy) also affected teachers' understanding and
their teaching behavior.
Gerety,(1980)

As in the previous study, Gerety tested 30 secondary
school teachers (from one junior high and one senior high
school) with the DIT. Students from one of these teachers'
classes took a Classroom Environment Scale (CES), intended
to measure the social climate of a classroom. From the 30
teachers, one teacher was randomly selected from each
quartile level of moral judgment, based on the DIT scores.
Then, 25% of the students from one of these teachers'
high-level academic classrooms were randomly selected to be
interviewed using the Classroom Moral Atmosphere Interview
(CMAI) developed by the researcher. DIT scores were compared
with subscales of the CES and scores on the CMAI.

Results indicated that DIT scores related at a
significant level with the CES subscales of innovation and
teacher support. No correlation was found between the CMAI
and teacher level of moral judgment, as measured by the DIT.

Scores on the CMAI did indicate a statistical difference

65
among the four classes and the differences among the four
classes corresponded to the level of moral judgment of the
teacher.
Bayer (1980)

The author examined 20 organizational and instructional
practices (such as attendance policies, grading, required
courses) of a public school to investigate teacher and
parent perceptions on: 1) what is being taught by each
practice, 2) what should be learned to be an effective
citizen or to be self-controlled, and 3) at what Kohlberg
stage of moral judgment is each practice aimed. The study
was undertaken in a white, middle class school district in
Michigan. Nine junior high schools were included in the
study, involving 18 teachers and 76 parents. Based on
responses to the author's Citizenship Education Survey,
parents and teachers did agree on the hidden curriculum
nature of school practices, but they differed in their
identification of what each practice actually taught.
Regarding practices which related to behavior, parents and
teachers agreed on the particular stage of moral judgment
being taught. Hidden curriculum practices were frequently
identified as necessary for controlling and educating for
effective citizenship.

Powers (1980)

The Cambridge Cluster School (a mini-school within

Cambridge High School in Boston) was the site of one of the

experiments in Kohlberg's "just community" approach to moral

66
education. Powers provided an analysis of the four-year
longitudinal project. The purpose of the project was to
investigate the development of the school's moral atmosphere
and the students' moral judgment. Over the four years, 60
students were assessed by Kohlberg's Moral Judgment
Interview, and about 20 students were interviewed on the
moral atmosphere interview. This instrument was designed to
describe the moral characteristics of the school's social
atmosphere by assessing the collective norms and values
(based on responses from the students interviewed) in terms
of Kohlberg's moral stages and the seven phases of the
development of the collective norm (Kohlberg et al., 1983,
p. 56). Additional data came from transcripts of weekly
community meetings and informal interviews with staff and
students following the meetings.

In each year of the four years, there was evidence of
the development of the collective norm. Also, the average
moral judgment stage increase was 15 moral maturity points.
As one example, though stealing was commonplace at the high
school, during the second year of the Cluster project a norm
against stealing developed and there were no further
instances of stealing during the next three years. On the
other hand, a collective norm against the use of drugs never
did develop. The findings suggested that a just community
approach can facilitate the development of a higher stage
and phase of moral atmosphere which can have effects on the

ways in which students treat each other--thus turning

67
aspects of the hidden curriculum into an intentional process

of moral education.

Summary of the Findings from Empirical Studies

 

Theological education is receiving more serious
research attention. Yet, few studies have been specifically
concerned about the moral development of seminary students.
Theological education

Though seminary faculty, overall, perceived themselves
as andragogically oriented, students perceived faculty as
more pedagogically oriented (Grubbs, 1981). Faculty in
non-ministry related disciplines tend to be more pedagog-
ically oriented. Seminary faculty, as a group, have a highly
homogeneous perception of the expectations placed on
ministers (Sweeny, 1981).

The seminary program provides adequate training in the
traditional disciplines, yet the informal (hidden curriculum)
elements are most often cited as examples demonstrating
servant-leader qualities (Ferris, 1982). Seminary faculty
have moderate to little influence in decisions relating to
student life and discipline and yet they do not desire more
influence (Shannon, 1975).

Seminarians who are in a hurry to perform a task are
less likely to help out a victim, as those who are in less
of a hurry (Darley & Batson, 1973). A course in theological
ethics can help stimulate students' level of moral reasoning

in an upward direction (Smith and Westerhoff, 1980).

68

Seminarians manifest (as measured by the DIT) a level
of moral reasoning that is a little higher than college
juniors and seniors but much lower than doctoral students in
moral philosophy and political science (Rest, et al., 1974:
Rest, et al. 1978). A majority of seminary students evidence
(as measured by an abridged, written version of Kohlberg's
interview) a conventional level of moral reasoning (stages 3
and 4) (Smith & Westerhoff, 1980). Lawrence's (1979) study
indicates that seminary students tend to interpret moral
dilemmas more simplistically than do graduate philosophy
students.
Parish‘ministry

Moral dilemma discussions may not be a more effective
means of facilitating moral development than class lectures
(Coder, 1975). It is possible that church doctrines may only
include moral teachings at a conventional level of moral
reasoning (Ernsberger, 1977).
Professional students

Nursing students with previous professional experience
assumed personal responsibility in moral dilemmas and
applied the moral rights of the victims in their choices
more often than did students without professional experience
(Eberhardy, 1983). First-year dental students had signifi-
cantly higher P scores (DIT) than second-year students

(Green, 1981).

 

69

Faculty in higher education

Faculty hold a high view of academic honesty (Coles
1973), yet in the face of student infractions, faculty tend
to give out only warnings (Renaud, 1979). The value-advocacy
model of teaching values is the preferred ideal among
faculty of a variety of institutions of higher education
(state, church-related and private), though another teaching
model may prevail in practice (Wixom, 1982).
Teachers in public education

Public teachers working with younger children indicate
that a variety of teacher roles are appropriate for
promoting moral growth and good citizenship (Wallace, 1980:
Moeller, 1982). Teachers at varying levels of moral judgment
tend to view educational issues differently (Silver, 1982)
and this may have different effects on the moral atmosphere
of the classroom (Gerety, 1980). The level of teachers'
moral reasoning may be an important factor in the classroom,
but an equally significant factor is the educational context
which may constrain moral education activities (Silver,
1982: Lubomudrov, 1982). Hidden curriculum practices are
often identified as necessary for classroom control and the
training for effective citizenship (Bayer, 1980). When an
intensive effort is made to encourage a ”just community",
development of higher collective norms can follow as well as
specific influences on the moral behavior of students

(Powers, 1980).

70
Conclusion

The chapter presented the conceptual and empirical
grounding of the study. A review of various analyses of
theological education surfaced a concern regarding one
neglected element of the curriculum: the personal development
of seminary students. Empirical research in theological
education, though sparse in previous periods, is evidently on
the increase. Seminary faculty have been queried on a number
of issues. A few studies have been directed at investigating
the moral development of seminary students. The precedent for
interviewing faculty concerning matters of moral development
and moral education primarily comes from studies in higher
education and public education. Sufficient work has been done
in these arenas to provide a foundation on which to ground

similar studies within theological education.

71

End Note

 

l. The first medical college was established in Philadelphia
1765 (Kaufman, 1976) and the first law school was
established either in 1782 or 1784 in Litchfield,
Connecticut (Reed, 1928). The first seminary was
established in New York in 1784 as the Seminary of the
Dutch Reformed Church (it is now called the New Brunswick
Theological Seminary in New Jersey) (Winkleman, 1975, p.
68).

Chapter 3

RESEARCH DESIGN AND PROCEDURES

In order to describe the educational emphasis placed on
the moral development of students at Protestant seminaries,
the study employed the personal interview as the primary
means of collecting data. This chapter describes the
research design, the population and sample, and the
procedures of instrument development, data collection and
data analysis. A statement of the limitations and
methodological assumptions of the study completes the

chapter.

Research Design
The study can best be identified as descriptive
research. Isaac and Michael (1981) affirm the contribution
that descriptive studies can make to the advancement of
knowledge. They present a four-fold purpose for this type of
research (p. 46):

(a) to collect detailed factual information that
describes existing phenomenon,

(b) to identify problems or justify current conditions
and practices,

(c) to make comparisons and evaluations, and

72

73
(d) to determine what others are doing with similar
problems or situations and benefit from their
experiences in making future plans and decisions.
Though the primary intent of the study was to fulfill
the first purpose of describing information about existing
phenomenon, the other purposes did receive some attention in
the final chapter. A series of personal interviews was
arranged to collect most of the data. In addition, selected
official documents were secured from the schools.

The study proceeded in four general phases:

1. Selection of institutional sites and faculty
informants

2. Development of an interview instrument
3. Collection of data through personal interviews

4. Analysis and synthesis of the findings.

Population and Sample

The following section provides a description of the
population of the study, and lists the procedures which were
employed in selecting the institutional interview sites and
the sample of faculty informants.
Description of the population

The population of the study consisted of faculty
members teaching in Protestant, denominational, graduate
schools of theology. This section explains the exclusion of
non-Protestant seminaries and nondenominational seminaries

as institutional sites for the population.

74

Protestant vs. non-Protestant seminaries. The

 

population of the study was limited to faculty persons in
Protestant seminaries in order to focus on a more comparable
grouping of professors. The professional education for
religious ministry comprises a wide spectrum of religious
communities. The Association for Theological Schools (ATS),
the recognized accrediting body for theological education in
the United States, includes a total voluntary association of
196 American theological schools: 165 full members, 11
schools which are in the candidate status, and 20 schools
which are associate members (Taylor, 1984). Though, ATS
accredits seminaries from diverse religious sectors
(Protestant, Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Jewish),
most of its membership is Protestant.

The seminary faculty and the parish ministries of these
various religious communities comprise too diverse a
population for one study. For example, the Jewish rabbis
regard the Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament) as the only
authoritative religious document, whereas the Christian
faiths venerate, to various degrees, both Old and New
Testaments. All Roman Catholic priests and all Eastern
Orthodox bishops are unmarried, whereas almost all
Protestant ministers are married. Also, the Roman Catholic,
Eastern Orthodox and Jewish educational systems for the
preparation of priests or rabbis are significantly different
from the professional preparation of Protestant ministers.

Protestant seminaries and their faculty are much more

75
homogeneous in nature. The formal aspects of the seminary
program are very comparable. Despite some ecclesiastical and
denominational differences, the curriculum is fairly similar
across Protestant seminaries. The most common degree awarded
to first-level graduate practitioners is the Master of
Divinity degree (M.Div.), a standard program offering at all
graduate seminaries. This degree program requires a
bachelor's degree, generally involves three years of study
and covers approximately the same required subject matter.
Faculty are organized in similar academic departments and
perform similar administrative and teaching functions at the
seminary.

In light of this comparability, the population was
composed of faculty teaching in Protestant graduate schools
of theology. In the United States, there are approximately
150 Protestant seminaries--all offering the Master of
Divinity degree (Jacquet, 1983). The number of faculty
teaching at each seminary varies and may range from less
than 10 to more than 50.

Denominational vs. nondenominational seminaries.
Protestant seminaries can generallly be divided into four
main types (Fletcher, 1981), though additional categories
may be needed (M. J. Taylor, personal communication, May 16,
1984):

1. denominational seminaries which are regionally

organized and supported (such as seminaries of the
Episopal Church and Lutheran Church in America),

76

2. denominational seminaries which are nationally
organized and supported (such as seminaries of the
Southern Baptist Convention and Lutheran Church-
Missouri Synod),

3. free-standing interdenominational seminaries (such
as Union--N.Y., Fuller, and Dallas seminaries),
and

4. university-based divinity schools (such as at
Harvard, Yale, and Chicago).

The number of seminaries in the last two categories is very
small (less than 30). The vast majority of Protestant
seminaries are denominationally related.

Seminaries related to a denomination must be responsive
to the value system of their constituency. In most cases,
clergymen of the denomination are members of the board of
trustees or directors of the seminary. Also, a part of the
seminary budget is underwritten by the member churches of
the denomination (the specific percentage of support varies
among the denominations ranging from small to significant
amounts). Nondenominational seminaries are independent in
that they are not regulated by the values of a specific
denomination.

Thus, it was determined to focus the study on
denominational seminaries due to their similarity, their
direct responsiveness to the values of the parish ministry,
and to their greater number.

Selection of sample interview sites

The sites from which the sample was drawn came from

seminaries located in the midwest: northern Illinois,

northern Indiana, and western Michigan. Significant clusters

77
of Protestant seminaries are located in the vicinity of some
major U.S. cities (Note 1). The largest cluster is located
near Chicago. Also, this particular grouping of seminaries
represents 10 of the 12 major American Protestant
denominational families which were identified in ATS's
"Readiness for Ministry" project (Schuller, et al., 1980,
pp. 57-58: Notes 2, 3 and 4).

Within this geographical area a total of 17 Protestant,
denominational, graduate, theological seminaries were
identified (Note 5). These 17 schools enrolled between 65
and 500 M.Div. students (mean = 179), total number of
students between 80 and 1,000 (mean = 317), and employed
from 9 to 38 full-time faculty members (mean = 20). The
interview sites were drawn from this list of 17 seminaries.
Soliciting participation in the study

Due to the denominational breadth of this particular
grouping of seminaries, and due to the possibility that some
schools would probably decline involvement in the study, it
was decided to initially approach all of the 17 seminaries
regarding participation in the interview study. In January
1984, contact was made with the president (or dean) of each
seminary, briefly explaining the project and inviting
participation (see Appendix C). Shortly thereafter, calls
were made to request responses to the invitation to
participate in the study.

As a result, six seminaries responded positively to the

invitation and participated in the project (Note 6). In each

78
school four faculty members were interviewed thus providing
24 total interviews from which data were collected and
analyzed. For the purpose of formally testing the interview
protocol, the interviews conducted at two of the six
seminaries were designated as the pilot study. In order to
maximize the utility of all interviews, where comparable,
pilot study data were folded in and reported in the findings
along with data collected using the final form of the
interview protocol at the other four seminaries.
Description of participating institutions

The following six Protestant graduate schools of
theology participated in the study (Note 7).

Calvin Theological Seminary. Founded in 1876, Calvin
Seminary is located in Grand Rapids, Michigan, on a campus
shared with Calvin College. The seminary is accredited by
ATS and is supported by the Christian Reformed Church in
North America, a denomination comprising 634 churches and
215,411 members. There are 133 students enrolled in the
M.Div. program (240 total students), and the seminary
employs 16 faculty members.

Concordia Theological Seminary. Founded in 1846,

 

Concordia Seminary is located in Fort Wayne, Indiana, and is
accredited by the North Central Association of Colleges and
Schools (NCACS) and ATS. The seminary is affiliated with The
Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod which comprises 5,710
churches and 2.63 million members. There are 340 students

enrolled in the M.Div. program (539 total students) and the

79
seminary employs 35 faculty members.

Grace Theological Seminary. Founded in 1937, Grace
Seminary is located in Winona Lake, Indiana (about 40 miles
west of Fort Wayne), and is the graduate training
institution for the Fellowship of Grace Brethern Churches
which includes 284 churches and 42,023 members. The seminary
is accredited by the NCACS, has 273 M.Div. students (427
total students), and employs 17 faculty members. An
additional seven faculty members are adjunct members who
teach at the adjacent Grace College.

Grand Rapids Baptist Seminary. Tracing its history to
1949, Baptist Seminary is located in Grand Rapids, Michigan,
sharing a campus with the Grand Rapids Baptist College. The
seminary is accredited by the NCACS and is the graduate
training institution of the General Association of Regular
Baptists, comprising 1,571 churches and 300,000 members.
There are 132 M.Div. students currently enrolled (277 total
students) and 12 faculty are employed by the seminary.

Northern Baptist Theological Seminary. Founded in 1913,
Northern Baptist Seminary is located in Lombard, Illinois
(just west of Chicago). The seminary is accredited by the
NCACS and ATS, and is affiliated with the American Baptist
Churches/USA, which includes 5,817 churches and 1.61 million
members. There are 110 M.Div. students enrolled in the
program (235 total students) and 14 faculty members are

employed.

80

Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. Through mergers of
previously existing institutes and seminaries, Trinity was
founded in 1959 and is located in Deerfield, Illinois (just
north of Chicago). Trinity is accredited by the NCACS and
ATS and is affiliated with the Evangelical Free Church which
comprises 805 churches and 103,900 members. There are 491
M.Div. students enrolled (966 total students) and there are
38 faculty members on the teaching staff.
Selection of the faculty respondents

In each seminary, four faculty were interviewed: one of
the chief administrative officers (either the president or
dean) and three other faculty members. For the purposes of
the study, those interviewed were required to have a good
understanding of their seminary program and the seminary
environment. Thus seminary faculty were defined as those who
had regular full-time appointments (excluding part-time and
visiting faculty) and who had taught at the seminary for at
least the past two academic years. This length of service
criteria was waived in one case where the dean had recently
come to the school. Also, one visiting instructor
participated in the study. The instructor had just received
a full-time appointment for the next academic year.

Representation of departmental affiliation. For each
school, it was attempted to solicit faculty members
representing both the "classical" disciplines and the
”ministry-related" disciplines in order to collect data from

different perspectives. As mentioned in chapter 2, a

81
continuing tension remains between the "theoretical" and
"practical" aspects of seminary education. It was deemed
important to incorporate these two emphases in selecting
individual faculty members.

The traditional seminary departments include Biblical
studies, Dogmatics, Historical Theology and Practical
Theology. Further sub-disciplines are currently evident
(adapted from Ferris, 1982, p. 46):

Biblical Studies

Biblical introduction

Biblical languages

Hermeneutics

Biblical history

Biblical theology
Dogmatics

Systematic theology

Christian ethics

Apologetics

Philosophical theology

Historical Theology
Church history

Practical Theology
Homiletics
Evangelism
Christian education
Pastoral care and counseling
Church administration
Church planting and church growth
Missions
In general the "theoretical" emphasis is associated
with the first three departments (Biblical Studies,
Dogmatics and Historical Theology). The "practical” emphasis
is usually associated with the last department, Practical
Theology. The labels of ”theoretical" and "practical" are
too ambiguous for purposes of identifying these two

educational clusters. Instead, the terms "classical"

82
disciplines (for the theoretical emphasis) and "ministry-
related" disciplines (for the practical emphasis) were used.

Selection bias. For the purpose of including sufficient

 

numbers of ministry-related faculty in the study, an equal
representation of the two disciplines was selected from each
seminary: two faculty members from the classical
disciplines, and two faculty members from the ministry-
related disciplines. This 50% distribution does not typify
most seminaries. Usually the classical disciplines faculty
make up around 75% to 90% of the total faculty, and the
ministry-related faculty constititute about 25% to 10% of
the total faculty.

Selection process. Initial correspondence with each

 

seminary was directed through the office of the president or
dean. In three of the seminaries, the researcher was
permitted to randomly select the individual faculty members
from each seminary. Seminary catalogs supplied a directory
of currently employed faculty. From each of these
seminaries, faculty rosters of those teaching in the
classical disciplines and ministry-related disciplines were
made (of those fulfilling the length of service criterion).
For each of these two listings of disciplines, faculty
names were placed in alphabetical order. Numbers were then
serially assigned and a table of random numbers was employed
to select three faculty from each list--the third selected
was designated as an alternate. In four cases, alternates

had to be included in the study where those originally

83
contacted could not be interviewed due to a sabbatical leave
or time constraints.

In the other three schools, the president or dean
recommended the names of four faculty members (which had
been selected on the criteria mentioned above). These
faculty members were contacted and appointments made. In two
cases, other names had to be recommended and these faculty
members were interviewed.

Demographic information

 

Of the total 24 faculty members who were interviewed,
12 were affiliated with the "classical disciplines" and 12
faculty were affiliated with the "ministry-related"
disciplines. The classical discipline respondents included
faculty from the following departments: Systematic Theology
(5), Old Testament (3), New Testament (2) and Church History
(2). The ministry-related discipline respondents included
faculty from these departments: Christian Education (8),
Practical Theology (2), and Missions (2). I

Ages of the faculty members ranged from 40 to 65 years
(mean = 53 years), and total seminary teaching experience
ranged from 5 to 35 years (mean = 20 years). For those
faculty having previous full-time pastoral ministries (n =
13), experience ranged from 2 to 17 years (mean = 9 years).

One female respondent participated in the study (Note 8).

84

Instrument Development

 

An interview schedule was designed for use in the study
(see Appendix A). As suggested by Borg and Gall (1979, p.
292), the questions were designed to meet specific
objectives--issues related to the three research questions
of the study:

1. How do faculty understand the educational tasks in
relation to promoting the moral development of
students?

2. How do faculty interact with students in matters
which may affect the students' moral development,
both in and out of the classroom?

3. As perceived by the faculty, what aspects of the
seminary program are intended to influence or have
influenced the students' moral development?

Guidelines for question construction

Due to the nature of the subject matter and the current
state of information about this topic in the context of
theological education, it was decided to employ a more
qualitative means of data collection: the open-ended
interview. Gorden (1980) suggests five advantages of the
interview:

1. The interview provides more opportunity to motivate
the respondent to supply accurate and complete

information immediately.

2. The interview provides more opportunity to guide the
respondent in his interpretation of the questions.

3. The interview allows a greater flexibility in
questioning the respondent.

4. The interview allows greater control over the
interview situation.

85
5. The interview provides a greater opportunity to
evaluate the validity of the information by
observing the respondent's nonverbal manifestations

of his attitude toward supplying the information
(pp. 62-63). '

The three basic approaches of open-ended interviews are
(l) the informal conversational interview, (2) the general
interview guide approach, and (3) the standardized open-ended
interview (Patton, 1980, p. 197). The latter approach was
used since it provided: (a) greater comparability of
responses, (b) more efficient use of limited time through a
highly focused format, and (c) minimizing of interviewer
effects (Patton, 1980, pp. 202-203).

Specific reference. Guidelines suggested by the
literature were taken into consideration in the formulation
of the interview protocol. Though the general nature of the
protocol was open-ended, attempts were made to sufficiently
direct the responses to a particular frame of reference
(Payne, 1951, pp. 229-230). One means of accomplishing such
a focus was by framing questions with a more personal and
concrete reference (Lortie, 1975).

I favor four criteria in assessing different kinds of

data on sentiments: (l) indirect versus direct

questions, (2) personal versus impersonal referents,

(3) concrete versus abstract referents, and.(4)

cathetected versus low-affect issues . . . . If a

question stimulates evaluative comments which

indirectly reveal the respondent's objectives, the
chances of evoking ideological statements are reduced.

Respondents are better able to provide details on

personal experiences and, if well interviewed, will be

more spontaneous than in discussing general matters (p.
110).

86

Word choice. Selection of words was also an important

 

consideration (Payne, 1951, Chap. 9 & 10). The particular
words chosen for each question were required to be clearly
understood, without being too simplistic. "If the wording is
too simple, it will insult respondents; if it is too
complicated, the question is likely to be misunderstood"
(DeLamater, 1982, p. 22).

Question order. Another concern dealt with the

 

particular order of questions. It is generally agreed that
questions should follow some sort of psychological order
(Sheatsley, 1983, p. 221). Since the opening question is
very important in that it sets the tone for the interview
and also contributes to the rapport being established, this
initial question was designed to be very general in nature,
and non-threatening. Responses to the question were not
analyzed. The more difficult and sensitive questions were
asked at a place where the interview was well underway.

Questions related to one area were grouped together. In
this regard, one should be aware that this common strategy
also tends to encourage context effects on the responses
(Schuman & Presser, 1981, p. 75). Despite the research on
question order effects, these particular effects are not
easy to predict and it is not known that separating the
items would eliminate the order effects (pp. 75-76). When
the interview moved to another topic, it was helpful to

prepare the respondent with some transitional statement.

87

Varying respondent tasks. To help alleviate respondent

 

fatigue and boredom, the format of questions was varied,
providing a timely change of pace. With a few questions,
respondents were referred to a sheet of paper or card
(Gorden, 1980, p. 264; Sheatsley, 1983, p. 221). This
provided a visual focus which aided memory; it also involved
a physical task and a different form of contact between
interviewer and respondent.

Evaluation of the interview. A final series of questions

 

requested information about the interview itself. Respondents
were asked if they could remember any of the questions which
seemed ambiguous to them (question 20). Only one response was
given, and it was in reference to interview question 11. One
means of identifying questions which are more sensitive or
threatening in nature was to ask a specific question to that
effect (e.g. "Do you happen to remember which questions you
think most people would consider difficult to answer?";
question 21) (Sudman & Bradburn, 1982, pp. 56, 72). Less than
five professors responded affirmatively to the question.
References were made to either interview question 4 or 9.
Question 4 was probably difficult to answer because there was
no real objective basis on which to make a judgment. For
some, question 9 was difficult probably because they really
had not thought about the matter, as was apparent in their
answers. A final question allowed respondents to suggest
topics which they felt were salient to the interview, but

were not covered (question 22; Payne, 1951, p. 36).

88

Source of qgestions. Sudman and Bradburn (1982) state

 

that "most questionnaires consist of some questions that have
been used before and some new questions, although even the
new questions may be adapted from earlier ones " (p. 14).
Likewise in this case, some questions were adapted from
existing sources (such as Lortie, 1975; Bussis, Chittendon &
Amarel, 1976, Prawat, in press, and relevant dissertation
studies cited in Chapter 2).

Types of interview items. A few questions were
reducible to a closed format through preliminary testing of
open-response questions. Due to the exploratory nature of
the study, most of the questions were retained as open-
response items. For some of these questions, the initial
response was followed with semi-structured probes.

Summary of use of responses. Responses to the interview
questions were used in the following ways.

# 1. Responses were not used; this was an introductory,
non-threatening question.

# 2-18. Responses were analyzed and are presented in
the findings chapters.

# 19. Responses were grouped with responses to other
interview questions; this was a catch-all
question.

# 20-21. Responses were previously discussed in the
Instrument Development section under "Evaluation
of the interview."

# 22. Responses are incorporated in the section on
recommendations for future research in the final
chapter.

89
Information presented to respondents

During the pilot study, it became apparent that the
faculty members and interviewer would need a common basis of
understanding regarding the concepts of "moral" and "moral
development." Three pieces of information about these
concepts were presented to the respondents at different
points during the first half of the interview (see Appendix
B). Before interview question 4 was read, a brief
explanation was given regarding the moral domain. A 4 x 6
card was handed to the respondent on which was printed a
general definition of the term "moral".

Following this, the interviewer presented a list of
five aspects of moral development: moral knowledge, moral
thinking, moral sensitivity, personal values and will power.
These general categories arose from a consideration of the
themes of research in the field. The definition of each
aspect, as given to the respondent, is provided below. Also,
a particular researcher who could be identified with
concepts related to the general category was enclosed in
parentheses.

Moral knowledge:

the information and comprehension one has of (a)

Biblical precepts and moral principles as well as (b)
specific moral issues: (Hogan, 1973).

 

Moral thinking:

the capability to analyze the relevant factors of a
moral issue or situation, and to make a decision or
judgment based on some logical rationale: (Kohlberg,
1981).

 

90

Moral sensitivity:

the capability to empathize with others concerning
their needs and rights with a sense of compassion,
justice, and responsibility: a sensitivity to one's
conscience and the Holy Spirit; (empathy-Hoffman, 1982:
caring and responsibility-Gilligan, 1982).

Personal values:

the particular moral convictions, beliefs, and
responsibilities to which one is committed by conscious
choice or those values adhered to by unconscious
practice; (valuing process-Raths, Harmin & Simon, 1966:
affective taxonomy, levels 3, 4, and S-Krathwohl, Bloom
& Masia, 1964).

Will power:

the resolve and capability to act on one's moral
convictions in the face of countervailing forces; the
capability to resist temptation; (executing a plan,
Rest, 1983).

 

The five-aspect sheet was handed to the respondent. The
interviewer read through the list and included an example to
clarify each of the five aspects (see Appendix B).

Before reading interview question 7, the interviewer
presented a sample list of moral issues which are discussed
in seminary classrooms. The list was developed from
responses received during the pilot study (see Appendix B).

These pieces of information provided a general framework
of understanding for respondents. During the first interviews
of the pilot study, some faculty respondents expressed some
frustration in attempting to understand the questions. When
this information was used in subsequent interviews, it seemed
that faculty had a clearer understanding of the subject

matter. One of the faculty members who was interviewed toward

the end of the project expressed that the information was

very helpful for the interview.

91

Information about respondents

Though the data were collected in face-to-face
interviews, confidentiality of responses was maintained by
assigning codes to respondents and fictitious names to each
institution. Due to the nature of the selection process some
demographic information was already known regarding the
department and institution in which faculty taught.
Additional information was solicited relating to age (i.e.
month and year born), total years of teaching service at the
institution, and the number of years, if any, they had
served in the pastoral ministry before beginning their
teaching career. This information was collected on a form
filled out by the respondent at the beginning of the
interview (while the researcher set up the tape recorder and
microphone: see Appendix B).

Preliminary testing of the interview schedule

 

At various points during the period of instrument
development, several practice interviews were undertaken and
the questions (and their order) were continually revised. A
more formal testing was conducted in the pilot study with two
of the six seminaries. Some minor modifications were made,
and a final form was developed and used in the interviews at

the four remaining seminaries (see Appendix A).

Data Collection Procedures

 

Personal interviews (averaging from 45 minutes to 1 hour

and 30 minutes in length) were conducted with 24 faculty

92

members over a period of seven weeks, beginning near the end
of February. Handwritten notes were taken and recorded
directly on the interview form. In taking notes of responses,
attempts were made to be telegraphic but to use words of the
respondents. Except for one case, the interview was also
recorded on cassette tape, providing a corroboration of
handwritten notes. In addition, the appropriate official
documents were secured (i.e. catalogs, and application forms)

to identify information requested for an applicant.

Data Analysis Procedures
Handwritten interview notes, transcribed interview
responses and the appropriate seminary documents were
analyzed in a manner similar to two of the procedures
identified by Miles and Huberman (1984): data reduction and
data display.
Data reduction: Data reduction refers to the process of
selecting, focusing, simplifying, abstracting, and
tranSforming the ”raw" data that appear in written-up
field notes (Miles & Huberman, 1984, p. 21).
An example of the process of identifying units of responses
is presented in Chapter 4.
Data display: We define "display” as an organized
assembly of information that permits conclusion drawing
and action taking (Miles & Huberman, 1984, p. 21).
The units of responses were analyzed for recurring themes.
From these themes, general categories were empirically
derived. The categories were used in the organization and

presentation of data. An example of the process is given in

Chapter 4.

93
Variables related to differences in resppnse

A corrollary purpose of the study was to identify
variables which might be related to signficant differences
in responses. It was assumed that differences in responses
were most apt to be related to the following two variables:
(a) primary discipline of the faculty member (classical or
ministry-related disciplines) and (b) years of full-time
pastoral experience.

Responses to ten of the interview questions were
amenable to division into mutually exclusive categories and
were tabulated in frequencies (questions 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10,
11, l3, l7 and 18). These nominal data were cross-tabulated
with the two variables of interest and placed in contingency
tables. (Responses to questions 10 and 18 were excluded from
this analysis since the number of cases in most of the cells
fell below five). Data in the contingency tables were
submitted to statistical tests of significance.

Statistical treatment

Three general categories of tests were utilized to
measure association at the nominal level: (a) three
chi-squared related measures: chi-square (or Fisher's Exact
test for the 2 X 2 matrix), phi-squared and the contingency
coefficient C, (b) an odds ratio measure: Yule's Q, and (c) a
proportional-reduction-in-error measure (PRE): Goodman and
Kruskal's lambda (Reynolds, 1977). Except for the chi-square
and Fisher exact test, all of the above measures yield

results between 0 and the absolute value of 1. These measures

94
provide an indication of the strength of association,
something the chi-sqare test does not give. On a continuum of
scores, Yule's Q tends to yield higher results while Goodman
and Kruskal's lambda tends to be a more a conservative
measure and the others produce results somewhere between the
two.

One cautionary note should be mentioned concerning the
use of the chi-square distribution. Though the chi-square
test is commonly used in social science research, there is a
controversy regarding its utility with small samples (e.g.
Bradley, McGrath & Cutcomb, 1979). Chi-square is based on a
continuous distribution. With very small samples there is
only a limited number of possible outcomes, the resulting
sampling distribution is described by a series of discrete
plotting points. Lutz suggests that,

as a guide for the proper use of the chi-square test,

it now seems that it can be used with samples as small

as 8 when there are only two measurement categories and

20 when there are more categories, provided that the

sample's distribution is not highly skewed (overwhelm-

ingly concentrated in only a few of the available

categories)" (1983, p. 324).

In light of this caution, nominal data fitting a 2 X 2
contingency table were tested by the Fisher Exact test, an
alternate to the chi-square, which provides an exact
statistic rather than a correction as in Yates' formula. The
Exact test is recommended for contingency tables with one
degree of freedom when the expected cell frequencies are

very small (Lutz, 1983, 338). Two of the measures, Yule's Q

and the contingency coefficient C, are limited to use on 2 X

95
2 matrices. The conventional alpha level of .05 was used to
indicate statistical significance.

Document analysis

 

The official documents and statements concerning
admissions practices were analyzed for content related to
moral development. Categories of specific requirements were

derived and tabulated.

Limitations of the Study

The study was confined to personal interviews with
full-time faculty teaching at Protestant, denominational,
graduate, theological seminaries. Faculty who participated
in the study were employed by seminaries which were selected
from a regional grouping of representative seminaries. This
regional grouping of seminaries, from which the interview
sites were drawn, represented much of the diversity in size,
educational mission and theological heritage which is
characteristic of most American Protestant seminaries.

An attempt was also made to include one element of
diversity among faculty: departmental affiliation.
Identifying only one element does not preclude the existence
of several significant bases of difference among professors
of seminaries.

No claim is made regarding the complete generalizability
of findings and conclusions, since the sample is small and

was not randomly selected. The findings indicate the current

situation among these and related seminaries and provide some

96

direction for further investigation.

Methodological Assumptions

Any method of data collection brings with it inherent
assumptions. The personal interview is a complex interaction
involving a host of variables which may affect the responses
recorded. Dijkstra and Van der Zouwen (1982) identify three
basic "disturbing components" in their model of the
interview process: question-variables, interviewer-variables
and respondent-variables. Another factor, structural task-
characteristics (e.g. particular method of administration,
instructions for response behavior) is seen as conditioning
the relationships between these three variables and the
response (p. 10).

Attempting to deal with these reponse-effects involves
another assumption.

A first general approach to improve the quality of the

data gathered is to try to eliminate the effects of

these disturbing variables as much as possible. For

this approach it is not necessary to know how responses

are affected by these variables: it is only assumed

that responses are affected, and that response effects

will diminish, as far as conditions can be created in

which these variables are expected not to exert their

influence (Dijkstra & van der Zouwen, 1982, p. 5)
The following plan was designed as means of providing a
context which sought to diminish these effects.
Question variables

The purpose was to design questions that were valid and

reliable. Both formal and content-related characteristics

were taken into consideration in question development. An

97
attempt was made to apply the guidelines developed by major
authorities on questioning--guidelines previously mentioned
in the section on Instrument Development.

Interviewer variables

 

The aim was to minimize response effects due to the
variation of interviewer behaviors across all interviews. A
pattern of standardized interviewer behavior was developed
and followed, for the most part, in the actual interviews.
(This procedure dealt with some of the factors within the
control of the interviewer--other variables such as age
could not be controlled.

Respondent variables

The objective was to encourage honesty on the part of
the respondent and to discourage responses motivated solely
to please the interviewer or to present the respondent in a
favorable light. Care was taken to guarantee anonymity of
responses. Also, suggestions related to asking potentially
threatening questions were followed in construction of
questions and in the ordering of questions (Sudman &

Bradburn, 1982).

Summary
The study attempted to gather data related to the

educational emphasis placed on the moral development of
students in six Protestant seminaries. The design called for
personal interviews with four faculty members per school--

two respondents within the classical disciplines and two

’98
respondents within the ministry-related disciplines. A brief
sketch of participating institutions and a listing of
demographic information of respondents is included. In
addition, procedures of sampling and data analysis were

explained.

1.

99

End Notes

 

Significant clusters of Protestant, graduate

seminaries are located near Chicago, New York city,
Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, Berkeley (near San Francisco)
and Boston. The first number that appears represents the
number of seminaries within the greater metropolitan area of
the city. The second number indicates the number of
seminaries within an area bounded by 100 miles radius of the
city.

Chicago 10 14
New York City 5 13
Washington, D.C. 3 10
Los Angeles 0 8
Berkeley, CA 5 7
Boston 5 6

One listing of Protestant denominations identified 48
distinct groups (Eternity Magazine, May 1976). See
Appendix D for a complete listing of all 17 American and
Canadian denominational families.

Both the large Southern Baptist and Christian Church (not
Disciples) denominational families do not have a seminary
located within this particular grouping. The Christian
Church (Disciples of Christ) sponsors the Disciples
Divinity House, which is located near and affiliated with
the interdenominational Divinity School of the University
of Chicago. The House is primarily a residence hall and
the dean of the House (the only officer employed) is also
considered on the faculty of the Divinity School.

The first set of numbers listed below indicate the number
of denominational families represented in the particular
cluster of seminaries (for the metropolitan area first,
and then for the 100 mile radius). The second set of
numbers identifies the number of nondenominational
schools within the greater metropolitan area first, and

then the total number of nondenominational seminaries

within the 100 mile radius.

100

Denom. Families Nondenom. Schools

 

 

Chicago 9 9 1 1
New York City 3 6 2 3
Washington, D.C. l 8 2 2
Los Angeles 0 6 0 4
Berkeley, CA 3 5 2 2
Boston 4 4 2 3

One seminary was dropped from the list due to the small
number of M.Div. students, 13: total number of students,
34: and the small number of full-time faculty, 3. Another
listing was dropped since it was primarily a residence
hall, using the educational facilities of an interdenomi-
national seminary.

One additional seminary responded to the invitation while
the study was well under way. The school was not included
in the study due to the late response.

Descriptions were based on information from each
seminary's catalog, ATS's annual fact book (Taylor, 1984)
and the yearbook on American churches (Jacquet, 1983).

In those seminaries (including non-Protestant seminaries)
accredited by ATS, females comprise less than 11% of all
full-time faculty members (Taylor, 1984, p. 38).

Chapter 4

FINDINGS:

EDUCATIONAL TASKS IN PROMOTING MORAL DEVELOPMENT

Chapters 4, 5, and 6 present the findings of the study.
The purpoSe of the study is to describe the educational
emphasis placed on the moral development of ministerial
students in Protestant seminaries. Each chapter deals with
one of the three research questions, and includes the
responses to interview questions related to that particular
research question. Before the first research question is
discussed in the present chapter, an overview of the three
"findings" chapters and the procedures of data analysis are

presented.

Overview of the Findings Chapters
Each research qpestion is stated and accompanied by a
descriptive listing of the related interview questions.
During the development of the data gathering instrument, the
interview questions were designed to address the following

three research questions.

101

102
Research Question 1

How do faculty understand the educational tasks in
relation to promoting the moral development of students?

Interview questions were designed to elicit responses
which would identify a professor's conception of the nature
and process of moral development. A brief description of the
nine questions follows.

Question 4: . . .estimate of student learning in five

aspects of moral development (knowledge, thinking,
sensitivity, values, and will power)?

 

Question 6: . . .experiences students have reported as
being the most helpful to their moral growth?

 

Question 7: . . .purpose in raising moral issues in the
classroom?

 

Question 8: . . .familiarity with moral development
theory?

 

Question 9: . . .ways to help students develop more
sensitivity?

Question 13: . . .common student character faults which
particularly concern you? Follow up probe: . . .means
for dealing with this character fault?

 

Question 14: . . .seminary program aspects which may
' inadvertently hinder students' moral development?

 

Question 17: . . . moral influences during your own
experience of seminary as a student?

Question 18: . . .one change in the program you would
make to influence students' moral development?

A discussion of the findings from the nine questions is
presented in chapter 4. The chapter deals with each of the
interview questions and responses, and a final summary

section concludes the chapter.

103
Research Question 2

How do faculty interact with students in matters which

may affect the students' moral development, both in and

out of the classroom?

An inquiry was made into ways that faculty relate with
students (or how they intend to relate), assuming that such
interactions may influence students' growth toward moral

maturity. Four questions were directed at the issue.

Question 2: . . .how students should remember you 20
years from now?

Question 3: . . .when meeting with students out of the
class what do you enjoy doing?

Question 10: . . .how would you deal with a case of
plagiarism?

Question 11: . . .when a student has personal problems,
who should take the initiative to seek the other, the
student or professor?

The findings from the four questions are presented in

chapter 5 in a similar fashion as in chapter 4.

ResearchQuestion 3

As perceived by the faculty, what aspects of the
seminary program are intended to influence or have
influenced the students' moral development?

Five of the interview questions helped to focus the
professor's attention on some of the program elements and

structured aspects of the seminary.

Question 5: . . .what top 2 or 3 courses influence
students' moral development?

Question 8 (alternate): . . .theories covered, resources
used, expected student outcomes, time allotted,
percentage of student body taking course--[for courses
specifically treating the subject of moral development:
only asked of those professors who teach such a
course]?

104

Question 12: . . .avenues for student participation in
seminary governance?

Question 15: . . .what feedback do students receive
regarding their personal and moral development?

Question 16: . . .at faculty meetings, are matters related
to a student's personal and moral life discussed?

 

Chapter 6, in which these findings are reported, is
organized differently than both chapters 4 and 5. Professors'
responses from the same seminary are grouped together in
order to gain a composite picture of the total program. The
chapter concludes with a summary of the different programs of

the six seminaries.

Overview of Data Analysis Procedures

To clarify the procedures used to organize the interview
data, the overview describes the tasks involved and then
illustrates the use of these tasks with a sample of
professors' responses to one interview question. The illus- ,
tration which follows (Figures 4-1, 4-2 and 4-3) exhibits the
particular procedures which were used with each interview
question in analyzing the data. The procedures involved two
major aspects of content analsis: data reduction and data
display (Miles & Huberman, 1984: see Chapter 3, "Data

Analysis Procedures”).

Data Reduction:
Identifyingythe Basic Unit of Analysis

 

Each professor's response to a question was reduced to

a unit or units of comment which could then be grouped and

105
compared with other professors' responses to the same
question. The intent was to capture in the unit the
essential comment which directly answered the interview
question. The process involved bypassing tangential and
general remarks and selecting what was germane to the
question at hand. One or more units may result from a
professor's response to a question, depending on the number
of distinct ideas mentioned. Similar remarks were incorpo-
rated into one unit. A unit or “comment*, may be a word, a
phrase, or a complete sentence--some manageable and meaning-
ful unit of thought.

An example of such an analysis demonstrates the
application of the procedures. A sample of three complete
responses (a), (b), and (c) based on interview question 2
are cited and analyzed in Figure 4-1 (Note 1).

The initial task involved identifying the essential
answer to the interview question. The selection process was
initiated during the actual interview with the notes that
were recorded by the researcher. Later, response units to
the same question were identified and listed together. The
selection process was supplemented by listening to recorded
interview tapes and reading transcribed interview responses.

The underlined portions of the citations in Figure 4-1
indicate the essential units which were used from the
interview responses. In professor A's comment, two distinct
ideas emerged: (1) "having taught them a subject matter",

and (2) ”to think critically and carefully". For professor

106

Interview question #2: When you are remembered by your
students, say, 20 years from now, what would you most
like it to be for?

Sample interview responses

(a) Having not only taught them a subject matter, but also
having taught them to think critically and carefully
with their renewed minds <2115> (Note 1).

(b) A professor who really cares, out of the classroom as
well as in the classroom. (5128)

(c) Two things, I suppose, one, that I took my discipline
seriously enough and taught them in that area well, so
that they didn't feel that, when it was all over, that
they didn't put in a lot of hard work and a lot of
energy--that it wasn't to any real value. And, the
other, I suppose, that I give them, to the extent that
it is possible in a professor-student relationship, the
time spent, a model of pastoral sensitivity,
spirituality. But that when they thought back on it, it
wasn't negative modeling, but something positive. Maybe
through devotions that we have in class, or just Egg
way in which I treat people, and so forth. And, so, in
some ways, that they would find in it positive modeling
for their own pastoral work in the way they would
interact with others. <0415>

Figure 4-1

Illustrative Analysis of Response Comments

107
B, only one main idea was identified: "a professor who
really cares, out of the classroom as well as in the
classroom." And, for professor C, two essential ideas became
apparent: (1) "took my discipline seriously enough and
taught them in that area well”, and (2) "a model of pastoral
sensitivity.” The second comment by professor C, "a model of
pastoral sensitivity", could be further amplified with the
descriptive phrase, "the way in which I treat people.” The
briefest possible excerpt or mild paraphrase, was used for

analysis purposes.

Data Display:
Clustering Response Units

Empirically derived categories were created from
thematic clusters of response units. All of the professors'
response units to the same question were placed in a list
(Figure 4-2; additional response units were included from
other professors to demonstrate the procedure).

Categories were created from the clusters which emerged
from such a list, and were not known prior to the exercise.
The intent was to capture the recurrent themes in the
perceptions of seminary faculty. In any such listing, there
may be more comments than professors (N=24), since some
professors offered more than one idea. From all of the
responses to interview question 2 (in actuality, a total of
46 comments), three major clusters or categories emerged
from the data (Figure 4-3). Professors' comments focused on

themes emphasizing (1) student learning, (2), the professor

108

Responses from interview question 2

(a) ". . .taught them a subject matter." (2115)

(b) ". . .taught them to think critically and
carefully." (2115)

(c) ". . .a professor who really cares, out of the
classroom as well as in the classroom". (5128)

(d) ". . .took the discipline seriously enough and
taught them well in that area.” (0415)

(e) ”. . .a model of pastoral sensitivity. . .the way
. in which I treat people.“ (0415)

(f) ". . .to help develop their gifts." (9628)
(g) '. . .genuine knowledge of the subject matter." (2515)
(h) ". . .a model of a whole Christian person." (4625)
(i) ". . .assisted the students in understanding and
appreciating the history of the Church." (3416)
Figure 4-2

Illustrative Listing of Response Comments

109

Responses from interview question 2

(1) Focus on student learning:

(b) '. . .taught them to think critically and
carefully." (2115)

(f) ”. . .to help develop their gifts." (9628)

(i) ". . .assisted the students in understanding and
appreciating the history of the Church." (3416)

(2) Focus on the professor as person:

(c) ". . .a professor who really cares, out of the
classroom as well as in the classroom." (5128)
(e) '. . .a model of pastoral sensitivity. . .the
way in which I treat people.” (0415)
(h) '. . .a model of a whole, Christian person.” (4625)

(3) Focus on the professor as subject matter
specialist:

(a) ". . .taught them the subject matter." (2115)
(d) '. . .I took the discipline seriously enough and
taught them well in that area.” (0415)
(g) '. . .genuine knowledge of the subject matter.”
(2515)

Figure 4-3

Illustrative Clustering of Response Comments

110
as person, and (3) the professor as subject matter
specialist.

Sometimes, fine distinctions were made between cate-
gories. For example, though statements (a) and (i) are very
similar, it seemed that statement (a) placed more emphasis
on the subject matter whereas statement (i) placed more
emphasis on the student's learning of the subject. The
general categories that resulted should not be considered as
hard and fast, though the majority of comments within a
category evidenced a strong thematic relationship. When
categories included a number of comments, further subdivi-
sions became apparent and were identified. The creation of
the general clusters facilitated the process of bringing
organization and meaning to the data and indicated some

general trends in faculty perceptions.

Analysis: Educational Tasks
in Promoting Moral Development

In this chapter, the focus is on how faculty understood
the nature and process of moral growth, and how this process
could be influenced.

Research Qgestion 1: How do faculty understand the

educational tasks in relation to promoting the moral

development of students?
Nine of the interview questions are discussed, in this

order: 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, 18, 13 and 17. A summary of the

nine questions was provided earlier in the chapter.

111
Estimated Degree of Student Moral Learning

Interview question 4: Let's say that someone has taken

a poll of this year's senior students regarding their

degree of learning, at the seminary, in each of these

five aspects (refer to list: knowledge, thinking,
sensitivities, personal values, and will power). For
each of the five aspects, please identify what you
think students would indicate as their degree of

learning: high, fair amount, or low? Now, for a

seminary, I would think that learning would be high in

moral knowledge? (Wait for a response.) What about
moral reasoning? moral sensitivity? personal values?

will power? (Tables 4-1, 4-2 and 4-3)

Frequencies of professors' responses are displayed in
Table 4-1 (the ”fair amount" and "low degree" categories
were collapsed since almost all of the responses were in the
fair amount range). The definitions for each of these five
aspects are presented in brackets.

Moral knowledge

[the information and comprehension one has of (a)

biblical precepts and moral principles, as well as (b)

specific moral issues]

Almost all professors thought that students would have
a high degree of learning of moral knowledge. One professor
disagreed, making a distinction between courses in biblical
studies and principles and course in ethics. The professor
felt that knowledge of ethical areas was very minimal at the
seminary.

Moral thinking

[the capability to analyze the relevant factors of a

moral issue or situation, and to make a decision or

judgment based on some logical rationale]

Most of the professors did not feel students' develop
their moral thinking to a high degree, as a result of the

seminary training, but rather to a fair amount (Table 4-1).

112
Table 4-1

Estimated Degree of Student Moral Learning

Interview question 4: . . .degree of learning, at the
seminary, in each of these five aspects.

 

Aspect of Moral High degree of Fair amount Don't know
Development learning of learning

Moral knowledge 23 l 0
(n=24)

Moral thinking 10 13 l
(n=24)

Moral sensitivity 6 l4 2
(n=22)

Personal Values 12 ll 1
(n=24)

Will Power 3 l4 4
(n=21)

 

Note: The number of responses (n) varies on two of the items
due to the use of different versions of the interview
questions during the pilot study.

113
Those teaching in the classical disciplines may tend to rate
students higher in this area, than professors of the
ministry-related fields (Table 4-2). No correlational trends
surfaced in relation to the pastoral experience of
professors.
Moral sensitivity

[the capability to empathize with others concerning

their needs and rights with a sense of compassion,

justice, and responsibility: a sensitivity to one' s

conscience, and to the Holy Spirit]

The majority of professors felt students' development
of moral sensitivity was at a fair amount: fewer professors
put it at a high level of learning (Table 4-1). No correla-
tional trends were associated with professors' academic
discipline or with previous pastoral experience.

Personal values

[the particular moral convictions, beliefs, and

responsibilities to which one is committed by a

conscious choice, or those values adhered to by

unconscious practice]

Half of the professors rated students as developing
personal values to a high degree as a result of seminary and
about the same number rated student learning at a fair
amount (Table 4-1). As with moral thinking above, the
classical professors may tend to give students a higher
degree of value learning than those of the ministry-related

disciplines (Table 4-3). Previous pastoral experience was

not associated with response differences.

114
Table 4-2
Estimated Degree of Student Learning: Moral Thinking

Interview question 4

 

 

 

 

Number of Number of
Classical Ministry-related
Estimate: Professors Professors totals
High degree of
learning 7 3 10
Fair amount of
learning 4 9 l3
totals 11 12 23
Fisher Exact Test Strength of association:
p = .073 Q = .680
C = .362
G
95 = .156

A

.300

Table 4-3

115

Estimated Degree of Student Learning: Personal Values

Interview question 4

Estimate:

High degree of
learning

Fair amount of
learning

totals

Fisher Exact Test

p = .069

 

 

 

 

Number of Number of
Classical Ministry-related
Professors Professors totals
8 4 12
3 8 ll
11 12 23

Strength of association:
Q = .684
C = .366
¢‘= .155
A = .444

116
Will Power

[the resolve and ability to act on one's moral values

in the face of countervailing forces; the ability to

resist temptation]

A few more professors (n=4) were reluctant to respond
to this aspect because they felt there was no basis to make
a judgment (Table 4-l). For those professors who did rate
students' learning in the area of will power, the majority

felt it was either a fair amount or a low degree of learning

at the seminary.

Helpful Learning Experiences

Interview question 6: Either as a part of their course-
work, or as some part of their seminary experience,
students are often required to do certain activities or
projects which may contribute to their own moral
growth. Would you happen to remember which particular
activities or experiences, either in or out of the
classroom, students have reported as being the most
helpful to their own moral growth? (Tables 4-4 and 4-5)

A total of 50 comments were made by 22 professors.
Responses were organized into two classifications: on-campus
experiences (26 comments) and off-campus experiences (24
comments). Though the question requested the professor to
assume the perspective of the student, responses also
included items which were deemed helpful by professors (as
seen in the following remark).

Often, chapel is given to it [moral issues], I don't

think the students themselves would give a positive

response that chapel is a positive helpful thing in
their environment, but often chapel is given to moral

issues <2115>.

Campus experiences which influence students' moral

117

Table 4-4

Campus Experiences Influencing Students' Moral Development
(26 comments by 16 professors)

Interview question 6: . . .experiences. . .being the most
helpful to their [students's] own moral growth.

 

1. Classroom experiences (7 comments)

'. . .everyone who teaches theology also has overlapped
training in philosophy and ethics. . .I'm sure
discussion of moral issues intrudes in the classroom."
(5115)

'. . .here's the principle, and let me take you [students]
through the process that I've gone through." <0126>

". . .dramatization, simulation games I've found those
very effective.” <0326>

". . .sermon on marriage and family as [students'] first
[preaching] assignment." <3326>

”. . .working on teams, doing it together.” <1628>

'. . .I have them [students] plan a retreat [together in
groups, and the students ask] how am I going to grade
it? And a question of justice and 'It isn't fair' is
raised.” (0427)

“. . .three courses at the seminary that are led by
process-style teachers." <4626>

2. Seminary worship functions (6 comments)

'. . .often chapel is given to moral issues.” <2115>

'. . .we have had some chapels that have been very soul
searching in this area." <0128>

'. . .I've heard it mentioned very often is worship,
chapel attendance." <9318>

'. . .the chapel is helpful, a setting for those who go."
<6428>

'. . .Days of Prayer encourage them in their own values,
a time for reflection and confession." <1225>

". . .on Days of Prayer we meet together for united
prayer." (4218)

118

Table 4-4 (cont'd.).

3. Peer interaction (5 comments)

". . .when they get together in fellowship groups."
(0115)

". . .to get an upper class student to befriend new
students.” (1115)

”. . .student prayer groups voluntarily meet during the
week to pray for mission fields." (7218)

". . .contact with foreign students. . .they meet people
with different styles, different moral sensitivities,
and that's expanding." <2428>

“. . .certain specialized informal gatherings of
students." (0615)

4. Unclassified (8 comments)

". . .the fall and spring Bible conference helps their
knowledge." (7225)

'. . .the annual lecture series was established for this
very purpose to deal with moral issues." (4517)

'. . .we often [informally] debate after chapel,
discussion, interaction." (3115)

". . .the Wednesday [advisee-advisor] groups--I attempt to
make it a time for personal growth.’I <3517>

'. . .when they write out their verbatim for theological
reflection [concerning a recent ministry experience] and
reflect on the moral issues and the struggles
parishioners were having." (S416)

”. . .Elijah's Pantry for food needs, in which you can
contribute and take out. I don't see anyone taking
advantage of this.” (9218)

'. . .and there's worship of a less formal nature,
[personal] Bible reading." (7318)

”. . .what happens in a kind of communal setting [at the
seminary]? It relates to acceptance, it relates to
tolerance, it relates to love." (7428)

119
development include different classroom experiences and
assignments (7 comments), worship functions (6 comments),
peer interaction (5 comments) and various unclassified
responses (8 comments) (Table 4-4).

Most of the comments (17 of 24) relating to significant
off-campus experiences focused on the field education
ministry which students are required to fulfill (Table 4-5).
Professors stated that this kind of situation forces
. students to be confronted with living issues and real
problems and concerns, not usually faced in the classroom.
Specific reference was made to Clinical Pastoral Education
(CPE), a training program for dealing with hospital patients
and their families, and SCUPE (Seminary Consortium for Urban
Pastoral Care), a training program for ministry in the inner
city. Other comments (7 unclassified comments) spoke mostly
of situations in which students would be confronted with
making moral decisions.

A good number of professors (n=11) made comments
related to both on-campus and off-campus experiences. Eight
of the professors only referred to off-campus experiences
and three professors only spoke of on-campus experiences. No
correlational trends surfaced regarding responses by
professors in the first two categories.

In summary, an experience-oriented emphasis was evident
in most of the responses. Students are involved in activities
which encourage them to reflect on their own experiences

(including the more spiritual functions, such as chapel and

120
Table 4-5

Off-campus Experiences Influencing Students' Moral
Development (24 comments by 18 professors)

 

Interview question 6: . . .experiences. . .being the most
helpful to their [students'] own moral growth?

A. Field education ministry assignment (17 comments)

“. . .mainly the pastoral ministry experience. It
provides an opportunity to apply knowledge." (4225)

'. . .Christian Service requirements put them to the
test." (0218)

". . .outside activities in Christian Service,
opportunities to witness and preach." (3226)

'. . .the field work puts them in touch with family
problems. . .in the hospital with emergency room
situations, child abuse, alcoholism. They become more
sensitive to the dynamics." (5325)

”. . .ministry internships in another country.” (6428)

". . .an extended field experience." (2427)

'. . .their pastoral work where they are faced with moral
problems.” (1416)

'. . .working with people in the church, the field
education internships where they have to deal with real
issues--a deacon's divorce, injustice in the city."
(6526)

'. . .a teacher training workshop at a church. Students
were responsible to the church also, and it gave them
increased motivation." (9628)

'. . .situations in field work, when they disagree with
the church or pastor, when they see parishioners with
moral problems." (6617)

'. . .their field education has a significant influence,
facing a living context." (5615)

'. . .CPE [Clinical Pastoral Education] in the hospital
where they face critical decisions.“ (1626)

'. . .the CPE at a hospital has a formative influence on
some students." (5416)

". . .the peculiar needs of people trapped in the inner
city. We have a program here you may have heard of
called SCUPE [Seminary Consortium of Urban Pastoral
Care]. Here I feel, Klaus, is something that our
students can get involved in right now." (3517)

". . .SCUPE." <9528>

". . .SCUPE is an integrative experience." (4626)

”. . .SCUPE." (3615)

121

Table 4-5 (cont'd.).

B. Unclassified (7 comments)

”. . .they've [students] gotten into a situation where
they have to make a decision. . .at work, or it's
counseling, or it's in a church." (4117)

". . .I've seen them in a crisis situation and I've seen
them come through." (0128)

". . .that students. . .would have identified those
moments in their life as being significant ones where
they were really. . .challenged to make decisions.“
(5415)

". . .the most helpful experiences for them is the
requirement of the workplace or other secular community
contact. . .[those] who are required, by virtue of their
job or something else, to make choices, moral choices."
(4217)

”. . .to meet professors on different occasions and to
talk on a different level. . .in the home, or at a
missions fellowship supper.” (3428)

'. . .a number of our faculty members have taken
positions of leadership in the community as far as
fostering the whole emphasis on right-to-life. These
faculty members, in turn, have influenced quite a
number of students to take an active role." (8325)

'. . .class assignments that put them in contact with
other people. . .like spending some time with
teenagers.” (1528)

122
days of prayer), or to be exposed to the experiences of
others. In the seminary setting, there is an exposure to and
involvement with faculty and fellow students. Off campus,
students might be confronted with more contemporary experi—
ences in diverse settings such as their church ministry, a
ministry in the hospital or inner city, or even at their
place of employment. In these situations, students are either
confronted with someone else's experience, or the student is
faced with making a decision to act in light of the

situation.

Purpose of Moral Discussions

Interview question 7: Let's look more closely at the

aspect of moral thinking. One particular classroom

activity which is useful here is the discussion of
moral issues. For example, here is one list [see

Appendix B] of some of the major moral issues being

discussed in different seminaries. When you raise moral

issues in the classroom, what is your main purpose?

What do you primarily hope to accomplish? (Tables 4-6

and 4-7)

Professors' comments (total of 45) were arranged into
two broad categories: (a) the professors' purpose in
discussing moral issues (36 comments) and (b) factors
related to the discussion of moral issues (9 comments).
Professors' purpose in discussing moral issues (Table 4-6)

The more prominent themes in this section focused on
helping students to understand the diverse issues and
ambiguities involved in order to achieve some balance and

breadth in perspective and to be more sensitive to those

123
Table 4-6

Professors' Purposes in Discussing Moral Issues
(36 comments by 21 professors)

Interview question 7: When you raise moral issues in the
classroom, what is your main purpose?

 

A. To think through the issue (13 comments)

. .to learn how to think about them." (1528)

. .I want them to think it through." (9128)

. .to be aware of the problem." (8225)

. .to get beneath the superficial, apparent issues and
find out what really are the philosophic issues."
(1226)

". . .to learn how to do moral thinking.” (0427)

'. . .to do clear moral thinking so that they can't be
taken in easily." (6317)

'. . .the ability to make good decisions in bad
situations.“ (5217)

". . .to help understand the moral ambiguities involved."
(5416)

'. . .to help understand the differing perspectives, that
there are more than two sides of an issue." (3615)

". . .to try to broaden their perspective, that there is
more than one side to a Christian position. . .the
breadth of the complex issues, the number of options.“
(3626)

'. . .to try to accomplish a balance. . .to bring breadth
into the discussion." (6517)

'. . .to get the student to appreciate the integrity of
other positions." (8115)

”. . .to illuminate what does it mean to adopt a

position." (6617)

B. To find the biblical norm/universal principle (9 comments)

'. . .what principle is at stake. Is that the only one?
(7427)

'. . .to try and find the biblical principles that would
give us the ability to deal with the problem." (2126)

”. . .to show them the relevancy of Truth." (9117)

'. . .how do the Scriptures speak to those philosophic
issues?” (6226)

”. . .analyzing what the biblical claim was in the
particular situation and what that claim might be today
in the Christian era." (8415)

". . .to understand and reflect on the fundamental moral
principle, what ought to be applied and how does it
apply.” (8416)

124
Table 4-6 (cont'd.).

". . .to make them square it up with what Scripture
teaches, and that it's just not from my [the
professor's] heritage bag." (0526)

". . .to show that biblical thinking is moral thinking,
and not to commit the Pharisaic error in attending to
small details and neglect the larger issues." (1517)

". . .try to make some distinctions between the cultural
factors in human behavior and those that are really
moral." (0217)

To encourage students to take a position (8 comments)

'. . .to help articulate their own point of view, not to
state my [the professor's] point of View." (9626)

". . .and I'm trusting that they will begin to build,
perhaps, conviction about it." (1128)

'. . .to solidify their thinking.” (6225).

”. . .the goal is, thus, to be able and willing to act in
such a way." (7415)

'. . .that the student must begin to make commitments,
they must begin to formulate a position." (7615)

". . .that they have to make a decision. They've been
trained to hide behind the crowd. . .to know
themselves, to develop a conscious self-identity."
(3428)

'. . .to see themselves as existentially involved, the
nobility of action.” (3317)

”. . .I hope they will never say, 'Well Dr. so and so
said it', but rather, 'What is our responsibility to
this tragic situation?'" (9218)

Helping students in their future ministry (2 comments)

". . .that they can understand how to present the issues
to their congregations and people." (8318)

". . .as preventive communication through the pulpit. . .
to minister to the people." (1326)

Unclassified (4 comments)

". . .increasing their sensitivity about where people are
in the church, to not be so judgmental." (8628)

". . .on some issues, if I feel strongly about them, [to
encourage the students to] see them the way I do.”
(8528)

". . .to help them to be more sensitive to the fact they
are God's men--sensing a responsibility to meet those
[personal] requirements in the pastoral epistles.”
(1325)

". . .dealing with the problem in the twentieth century
of obeying the Bible vs. the countervailing laws."
(5515)

125
with differing viewpoints (13 comments); identifying the
biblical norms and principles which were relevant to the
issue (9 comments): encouraging students to articulate their
own positions as well as make decisions and commitments to
these positions (8 comments) and preparing students to
minister to their congregations (2 comments). An additional
four unclassified comments were offered.
Factors related to the discussion of moral issues (Table 4-7)

Professors made reference to the background, abilities
and interests of students which affect their moral develop-
ment (6 comments). To aid the discussion process, some
professors mentioned using actual or hypothetical case
studies (3 comments).

In summary, a variety of means are utilized to expose
students to the complexity of moral issues and to encourage
them to articulate and commit themselves to a position. Due
to the students' limited experience, and the more intellec-
tual nature of seminaries, students may tend to perceive
moral issues as merely academic--without the sense of
urgency and relevance which is characteristic of people who
are actually facing the issues in a life context. Most
seminary students are assumed to be already functioning at a
high level of moral reasoning and conviction. Some students
need to be weaned off a more limited norm-based conception

of morality.

126
Table 4-7

Factors Related to the Discussion of Moral Issues
(9 commments by 7 professors)

Interview question 7: When you raise moral issues in the
classroom, what is your main purpose?

 

A. Students' background, level of functioning and interest
(6 comments)

“. . .we get some students who have been raised in a very
legalistic home and that has to be unlearned before
they can really be ethical." (6117)

". . .I find that, mostly [the students] have their moral
prejudices well in place." (0126)

". . .maybe part of our problem. . .is that we are going
on some of these assumptions, that by the time they
reach graduate level in a theological seminary, many of
these steps [of moral development] they've already gone
through." (6226)

". . .we are at our level in the theology class,
assuming, presupposing the students have already
achieved a very high level of moral reasoning [and
convictions about some basic moral issues]." (2218)

'. . .the student here is more concerned with the
[theoretical] theological foundation, than he is the
particular [moral] issue because he's not dealing with
that [in his experience].' (7117)

'. .-.maybe our seminarians don't struggle enough with
the issues like abortion, or the moral implications of
what is happening on the TV. . .but I think our
seminarians are struggling more with issues in other
'areas, as it relates to ministry, like, 'Does the Bible
really teach that each church should have more than one
elder?" (8126)

B. Classroom instructional methods (3 comments)

'. . .the Old Testament is filled with narrative and
experience and personal relationships. . .and we're
able to look at people at almost every social level
. . .and try to analyze the decision-making process, on
moral as well as theological grounds.” (1217)

'. . .in a lot of our practical courses, we use case
studies as the final examination--to help students see
that. . .it's not so cut and dried.” (6325)

". . .I like to approach many things biographically, that
is, tell stories of what happened to great people,
either in the past or in the present. . .it's a
question of inspiration." (7317)

127
Knowledge of Kohlberg's Moral Development Theory

Interview question 8: This particular aspect of moral

thinking and reasoning has recently received some

research attention in the fields of psychology and
education. Now, I realize that this research may not be

a part of your own discipline. Do you happen to be

familiar with such psychological theories of moral

reasoning and thinking? (Table 4-8)

How familiar are seminary professors with theories of
moral development and moral reasoning, specifically, with
Kohlberg's theory? Ten of the professors (n=21) made
reference to Kohlberg in response to the question. Most of
these professors (eight) were affiliated with the Christian
or Religious education department of the seminary (Table
4-8). Two professors associated with the more classical
disciplines expressed some familiarity with Kohlberg's
theory. A classical professor offered this comment and
critique.

What I find attractive about it is that, contrary to

Margaret Mead and this sort of 1920's nonsense of total

cultural relativism, I find it interesting that somebody

now, with Dewey's mantle yet, should be saying that

there is something quite objective in cross-cultural,
transcultural [contexts] about moral stages. But the
thing that I find, then, difficult is the suggestion

that the higher stage has been reached only, apparently,
by Jesus, Gandhi and Kohlberg, himself--with some doubts
about the other two. That makes the thing a little less

convincing (6317).

A statistically significant correlational trend was found
concerning professors' academic discipline and knowledge of
Kohlberg's theory (Table 4-8). It stands to reason that
ministry-related professors, whose disciplines are more
closely aligned with the social sciences, would be more

familiar with moral development theory. Previous pastoral

128'
Table 4—8
Knowledge of Kohlberg's Moral Development Theory

Interview question 8

 

 

 

 

Number of Number of
Classical Ministry-related
Familiar: Professors Professors totals
Yes 2 8 10
No 8 3 ll
totals 10 ll 21
Fisher Exact Test Strength of association:
p = .026 Q = .829
C = .466
A“
= .278

A

.500

129

experience was not a predictor of such knowledge.

Developinngoral Sensitivity

 

Interview question 9: Let's look at the aspect of moral
sensitivity [see page 113 for a definition]. What do you
think is the most effective way to help students become

more mature in their moral sensitivity? (Table 4-9)

A total of 27 comments and suggestions were made by 16
professors regarding how to influence students' moral
sensitivity. Responses were divided into four general
categories. Seven comments focused_attention on life
situations in which students are confronted with different
moral options and where they are forced to make moral
choices. Experience-oriented classroom methods received a
mention in five comments, such as group work, movies and
dealing with case studies. Five comments indicated that
one's moral sensitivity is bound up with one's relationship
to God. An additional nine unclassified comments were made.

Recurrent themes with those in previous sections are
evident here. Development is primarily encouraged through
personal encounters, be it in self-reflection, in one's
relationship with God, or with others--in the classroom, on
campus, or off campus. For some seminaries, the cultural
background of the students is more diverse and the location
of the campus is within a metropolitan setting. Thus,
students have greater opportunities to face differing moral

sensitivities. Again, as mentioned in the section discussing

interview question 6, there may be an assumption that

130
Table 4-9

Ways to Help Students Develop Moral Sensitivity
(27 comments from 16 professors)

Interview question 9: . . .the most effective way to help
students become more mature in their moral sensitivity.

A. Personal encounters with others and life situations
(7 comments)
". . .I suppose confrontation with life situations."

(4416)

”. . .life in itself, and life in the Body of Christ can

only do it." (3317)

. . .the discussion process, the dialogical process is

very helpful. . .for example, to talk to business

people about how they handle moral issues." (5526)

". . .I suppose competent dialog with a moral position
other than the student's." (9615)

'. . .this is learned in the school of the Holy Spirit:
experience. And when you get out in the ministry, you
find a child dying, then you learn compassion a little
better than you do in the classroom when you talk about
theology.” (7318)

”. . .living and working with people of different
backgrounds, kind of mixed settings.” (4628)

". . .studying in a context with multi-racial students

where the students don't all view it from the same

perspective.” (6626)

. . .ultimately, you have to live the questions. You can

form an opinion on abortion, but you also have to

counsel somebody very close to you who has an unwanted

pregnancy and live that tension.” (7528)

131

Table 4-9 (cont'd.).

B. Experience-oriented methods in the classroom (5 comments)

“. . .I don't think you can do that just by lecturing. I
think you can help with better forms of communication
which stimulate feeling--I'm thinking of movies."
(4326)

". . .problem—solving in moral situations; do a case
study approach." (3626)

". . .personal encounter groups where they share personal
life histories and are involved in interaction and
self-disclosure." (7626)

". . .their human sensitivity, by and large, is
sufficiently developed, that, by the use of other
materials and telling them stories based on other
people's experience, they are able to enter in quite
well to the experience of others." (1416)

". . .I would have to create situations. I can do it with
simulation and role play, and such devices. I can do it
by showing them a movie and then debriefing them and
getting them to engage in kinds of reflection." (3427)

C. Personal relationship with God (5 comments)

'. . .moral sensitivities grow as we develop in our faith
life and in our own relationship to Jesus Christ. . . .
If we can help students to foster their own devotional
life--the Holy Spirit through the Word will give them
the power to demonstrate that same love that God has
shown them in Christ.” (0325)

'. . .from the Christian point of view and the pastor's
point of view, morality is not something detachable
from, it has a context in his liturgical, devotional
life with God." (9317) '

'. . .recognizing that the heart of human living is this
dynamic relationship or dialogue with the living God:
that we're either, say, answering Him, being
responsible before Him, moving toward Him, or we're
trying to evade Him or evade convictions that are part
of our life." (2428)

'. . .the first thing is to know the Lord Jesus better.
I'm a firm believer in the continual reading of the
Gospels—-thinking after [like] Christ." (8517)

". . .that they get back into the best sourcebook for any
moral or theological sensitivity, namely the
Scriptures." (5318)

132

Table 4-9 (cont'd.).

D. Unclassified (9 comments)

”. . .help them to learn what their responsibilities
might be--that's a revelation to some students. . .to
find out their spiritual responsibility from the
Scripture." (3515)

". . .that's an aspect that I can't control as a
teacher." (3528)

". . .I have a hunch that this [moral sensitivity] is the
kind of thing that you don't really teach--you talk
about it, but you don't really teach it. I think it can
be learned." (6427)

". . .there are things that people can be taught and
required to do that, as a matter of fact, do contribute
my thinking, that that would also be true in moral
development. But how and where?” (9415)

'. . .in classes, trying to be concrete, and holding to a
particular theory where there is a consistency with
your actions." (2617)

'. . .awareness is a good place to start. . .to raise the
knowledge level.” (9515)

'. . .seeing good servants of the Word, combined with the
personal life, that they don't just mouth cliches:
models. The models our children see on televsion are
idiots.“ (1317) '

‘. . .the most effective way, of course, is to be raised
in a family context where the sensitivity has been part
of one for many, many years." (2415)

'. . .I'm not so sure, quite frankly, how conscious I
have been of creating a morally sensitive person.
Within my own thinking, I guess, I have kind of
presupposed that, among the student body, as more of an
assumption." (5415)

133

students already possess a high degree of moral sensitivity.

Hindering Moral Development

 

Interview question 14: In your opinion, are there any
aspects of the seminary curriculum or program which may,
inadvertently, contribute to hindering the students'
growth toward moral maturity? (Table 4-10)

In this section, two general categories emerged from 23
comments made by 18 professors. Eleven comments related to
the educational orientation and academic requirements.
Another theme involved faculty modeling and availability
(four comments). Eight additional unclassified comments
covered a range of topics.

Many of the hindrances come from the educational
orientation assumed by the seminary which places a higher
emphasis on intellectual development than personal
development. Students are under the burden of fulfilling
academic requirements and reaching for high grade point
averages (GPA) and there may be a tendency to make these
ends the goal rather than preparing for ministry in the
church. Reversing these goals may contribute to an overly
competitive atmosphere apparent in many seminaries in which
students' self-concepts become identified with their GPA.

Professors have a large amount of material to cover and
may tend to adopt a more pedagogical orientation rather than
an andragogical one in which students take on more

responsibility for their own learning. Due to their own busy

schedules, faculty may neglect or place a lower priority on

134

Table 4-10

Aspects Which May Hinder Students' Moral Development
(23 comments by 18 professors)

Interview question 14: . . .any aspects of the seminary
program which may inadvertently contribute to hindering
the student's growth toward moral maturity.

A. Educational orientation and academic requirements
(11 comments)

". . .I think we put too much emphasis on the cognitive
in some of our classes. . .the lack of attention, at
least in the past, to address personal issues of the
home. . .and the extreme pressures of exam schedules."
(4226)

'. . .and if it becomes that impersonal. . .that you just
go through a factory of academic requirements, if that
attitude is instilled, and that you judge people only
by a grade point average in those courses, then you
would be hindering it.” (5326)

". . .legalism is a deadly enemy for moral maturity,
namely, if you show up at chapel. . .read this number
of pages, and write this number of papers, you are
spiritually qualified to serve God." (9218)

'. . .the design of our curriculum at the seminary is
weighted toward classical theological education, so
that a student can get very few courses that will deal
with moral issues." (5528)

'. . .the high number of required hours and the high cost
of seminary education combine to make it very difficult
for the student to take the time to reflect spiritually
and morally." (4517)

'. . .we lack a sufficient emphasis on ethics as related
to Scripture. Students are not prepared well to think
through ethical problems." (2515)

'. . .we do not coordinate the reading program, so that
professors demand more than they should, and temptation
sets in for students [to falsify reading reports]
because they cannot physically do all the reading."
(2526)

'. . .the educational bureaucracy is so complex that it
frustrates the students. Maybe students ought to be
more mature to overcome it, but it does hinder growth."
(6615)

135

Table 4-10 (cont'd.).

". . .I think too much is competitive. In some courses I
think there's too much of an emphasis on information
acquisition and not enough on learning how to think,
how to find the information when you need it. . . . If
you get enough information in your brain, you get an A
on the exam." (0628)

”. . .we perpetuate, by our own pedagogical methods, a
longer period of adolescence than what is necessary
. . . . Maybe if we were willing to surrender a little
bit of our own authority, we would assume less
responsibility with regard to [covering] the subject
matter, we could, perhaps, produce a somewhat more
personally mature product." (8416)

. . .the program is structured so that they [students]
don't have to make judgments themselves, in some sense,
responsibility is taken out of their hands." (3428)

'. . .a tendency to treat the subject matter just as a
body of knowledge to be mastered so that the student
takes pride in getting high grades and maintainng a
high grade point, rather than helping students see the
relationship between all of this knowledge and
ministry--serving people.” (1325)

B. Faculty modeling and availability (4 comments)

'. . .our students would like more time with faculty. . .
whether it's our workload or [student-teacher] ratio, or
our own performance or attitudes, we're not social
enough with our students." (6326)

'. . .maybe the biggest deterent. . .is the attitude of
us faculty, who might give the impression to students
that we are overly concerned for our image--about being
seen by them as great intellectuals. . .and looking to
them just as, kind of, numbers in the grade book."
(7325)

'. . .our advisor-advisee system, which is a pastoral
type of function, does not function as well as it
really ought to. . .we've struggled with it for years
and it just doesn't seem to get that much better.”
(8318)

". . .all learning is a two-way street. . . . For good
learning, there has to be some opening on both sides.

I think if a professor doesn't risk something, the
classes are going to be dull. . .and, also, the student
has to risk something. . .to test ideas.” (8428)

136

Table 4-10 (cont'd.).

C. Unclassified (8 comments)

". . .the faculty have to wear at least three hats:
there's an ecclesiastical role, an academic role and a
personal role." (6427)

". . .there's a lack of interdisciplinary courses.”
(0617)

'. . .there's a failure of the seminary (in most
seminaries) of not doing all the right things. Maybe we
could spend more time making curriculum changes, to
have courage and take a risk." (4615)

". . .poor communication among employees.” (2615)

". . .the pressures from the outside are great, and I
don't think the schools and the church have coped with
this particularly successfully.” (1318)

". . .most of the students living off campus, which
hinders fellowship because it limits the opportunity
for one-to-one interaction." (8326)

'. . .to better coordinate the student's field
education.” (4526)

". . .the discipline committee is in danger of making too
many exceptions to accommodate students. It's an issue
of toughness. They tend to be pastoral in orientation
--every soul has a possibility of redemption.” (4626)

137
contacts with students outside of the classroom, thus
limiting opportunities for students to be exposed to faculty

models.

Suggested Changes at the Seminary

Interview question 18: If you, yourself, could change

one thing about the way the seminary currently influ-

ences students' growth toward moral maturity, what

would that be? (Table 4-11)

A total of 26 responses were made by the 24 professors
in which four main themes became apparent. One set of
statements made reference to providing a forum for discussing
and reflecting on moral issues (7 comments). Emphasis was
also placed on increasing the contact and interaction between
faculty and students (6 comments). Another set of comments
directed attention toward spiritual concerns, such as those
related to worship experiences (3 comments). Professors also
suggested that there be more of an integration between theory

and practice (3 comments). In addition, seven unclassified

comments were made.

Common Student Character Faults
Interview question 13a: In your exposure to the seminary
students over the past few years, have you noticed any
common character faults, attitudes, or problems among the
students which particularly concern you? (Table 4-12)
A total of 33 comments were offered by 22 professors.
Most of the responses were organized under two headings:

personal immaturity (16 comments) and student values and

priorities (13 comments). Additional responses mentioned the

138
Table 4-11

Suggested Changes in the Seminary Program
(26 comments by 24 professors)

Interview question 18: . . .change one thing about the way
the seminary currently influences students' growth toward
moral maturity.

A. Provide a forum for thinking about moral issues
(7 comments)

'. . .in an orientation setting with new students, to get
at this much earlier in their experience here. . . .
What we need to think seriously about is that kind of
overlap between logic, critical thinking and
application of it to morals and values." (5115)

”. . .we kind of owe it to our students today, to give
them an exposure to these issues. . . . But they should
have an understanding of the magnitude of the problem,
and. . .that they know what they believe and why they
believe it." (7416)

'. . .more courses in ethics." (7225)

'. . .to develop a course [specifically on moral
development] to help the students evaluate themselves,
where they are.” (6526)

". . .a required course on moral thinking. That may seem
like a stilted response, just a course, but it's a
place to start.” (0528)

'. . .to provide a forum for wrestling with ethical
problems, to know what is 'moral maturity', and to
answer the issue of how to g9 what is right.” (4515)

'. . .to encourage the students to take the course on
spiritual development. . . . One course can't do it
all, but it's one thing." (2325)

139

Table 4-11 (cont'd.).

B. Provide for more interaction between faculty and students
(6 comments)

". . .design a strategy that would put the students in
more personal contact with the individual professors
. . . . And what we've got to do is provide greater
opportunities for intense interpersonal relationships."
(5126)

'. . .I would like to change the student-teacher ratio
. . . . The sheer press of time, because of the
[present] teacher-student ratio, makes it impossible for
them to be friends, to be the counselors." (7226)

”. . .that there would be greater involvement and contact
between faculty and students. . . . I think a lot takes
place in those casual interactions." (1415)

”. . .if we could have more meaningful interaction,
faculty member with student." (9128)

". . .a greater sensitivity on the part of the faculty to
see students as persons, to relate on a personal level
as well as on a professor-student level." (2325)

'. . .more structured faculty-student dialogue,
communally, not on a one-to—one basis." (9428)

C. Provide more of a spiritual emphasis (3 comments)

”. . .it would be something measurable, like
worship--chapel attendance, and daily devotions."
(0318)

". . .to celebrate a weekly Eucharist: it has
implications for morality.” (6317)

”. . .there are daily things we can watch for. . .here's
something I'm trying in my own personal life. When a
student steps in my office here. . .and before he walks
away, ”Let's have prayer together." Don't make it
elaborate and lengthy, but let's just talk to God about
this. . . . In little ways like that." (6218)

D. Provide more of an integration of theory and practice
(3 comments)

'. . .to cut back more and make it less academic and more
experiential oriented." (1326)

'. . .more integrative type courses and experiences, like
the colloquy elective." (5617)

". . .that there would be more learning in the context of
ministry, with students and faculty alongside. . . .
The ministry is best taught in context.” (626)

140
Table 4-11 (cont'd.).

E. Unclassified (7 comments)

”. . .more communication. . .for the faculty to be more
aware [of matters related to moral issues and moral
development] and to make students aware of this as a
basic concern. . .just increasing awareness." (2517)

”. . .I think I'd, well, force them to make some more
decisions as to what they're going to study and not
study: take some more responsibilities for their own
education.” (0427)

”. . .more classes to the theology department. . . . What
will produce convictions is to be taught Biblical
theology." (5117)

". . .somehow to create in students a sense of intense
involvement in more things outside of the classroom
. . . regular conversations with faculty and students
. . .a climate of more involvement in those 5 aspects."
(4615)

”. . .This one isn't even feasible, I know, but at
another seminary, they don't even give letter grades.
[On a sheet of paper they give students] much more
evaluation of their gifts and strengths and suggestions
for improvement. . . . I think it pushes the professor
to know the student better." (4628)

". . .less competition and more student work in groups.”
(8628)

“. . .it would be the development and control of
off-campus experience. Some type of program that would
assure us that they have moral confrontations on a
variety of levels.” (1217)

141

Table 4-12

Common Student Character Faults
(33 comments by 22 professors)

 

Interview question 13a: . . .any common character faults,
attitudes, or problems among the students which
particularly concern you?

A. Personal immaturity (16 comments)

'. . .I find that the aspect of stick-to-it-tiveness is
missing to a great extent. You know they are so
conditioned to everything happening quickly, instantly."
(6126) .

”. . .avoidance of adult responsibility. . .I find some
students refusing to grow up." (0528)

'. . .carelessness on the part of the seminarian in terms
of meeting obligations: paying bills, attendance in
chapel, turning in ministry reports, turning in
assignments on time. . .breaking appointments.” (6117)

". . .books borrowed, perhaps with the best of
intentions, from the library, and not checked out, and
carried out in briefcases." (8225)

". . .sins of slothfulness, laziness.” (0318)

". . .many are not concerned about common courtesy."
(0615)

". . .it is naivette--they're very naive about certain
things and part of this comes from years of academic
cloistering. They are very naive about how people are
thinking in the real world and how they respond.”
(8217)

'. . .I get real concerned about the insensitivity of
students. . . . And I look at some men and I can see
that they are very emotionally and socially totally
insensitive to others by the way they speak, behave,
react, develop relationships and all the rest, and some
have no relationships.“ (4217)

". . .one of the big problems we face here is pride. Here
is a student who has problems. . . . So the guy keeps
it to himself, even though that problem could perhaps
be alleviated. . .but you see, he's going to be a
pastor and pastors don't have problems like that.”
(7128)

". . .is just horribly obnoxious, when you see a senior
who is cocky, and arrogant, you just tremble within.
That haughty spirit is just waiting for the fall. . .
and anything you can do to help them fall now, under
controlled conditions." (1218)

'. . .what I perceive to be a weakness is that we do
probably attract a little bit too large a percentage of
authoritarian types who tend to be somewhat rigid and
judgmental.” (9416)

142

Table 4-12 (cont'd.).

(Personal immaturity--cont'd)

". . .a moral fault fostered by some denominations. . .
the students will tell others what to do since they are
a rank above the people." (8517)

". . .I wonder how, on an independent-dependent scale, a
personality scale, I suspect they're [students] as a
group pretty dependent as compared with medical
doctors, attorneys--some other kind of professional
groups.“ (5427)

". . .in contrast to the sixties, now students have
generally been passive, more passive, immature, more
unsure of themselves, more desirous of spoon-feeding
than a few years back. . . . We don't see a certain
level of maturity in students that have graduated from
college.” (8428)

'. . .what really bothers me with a few students is lack
of spiritual growth, although they may grow a great
deal academically." (4117)

". . .students have a tendency to disdain the past; they
think not much can be gained from it." (0615)

B. Student values and priorities (13 comments)

'. . .the competition for grades, first of all.“ (5517)

'. . .the chief thing is that the students are
identifying who they are in terms of their grades; they
think their grades are an indication of who they are
before God, spiritually. . . . Students put too much
stock in grades.” (1515)

". . .students tend to live by an unconscious value
system, that they cannot and they do not bring their
values to an objective structure where they can
articulate them and manage and use them in a self-
conscious way.” (6115)

". . .the pressures of society, the problem of injustice--
as evangelicals we're quick to articulate a position,
but still not do something about it. We're just too
busy.” (1526)

'. . .the number of students, for example, who are in the
library, when the pressure is on before exams, etc.,
rather than in chapel. . .we need a higher priority on
chapel attendance. . .students skip chapel, yea, even
the faculty do." (4517)

”. . .the apathy of students, they don't take advantage
of the opportunities to learn to grow outside of the
classroom." (8615)

”. . .the privatism of this generation. They're more
concerned for personal achievement and success, and
less willing to give time for social causes.” (7626)

143

Table 4-12 (cont'd.).
(Student's values and priorities--cont'd)

”. . .the narcissistic attitude. Many students seem to be
in seminary to find themselves, you know, 'Because I
want to do this, I think I would enjoy the ministry,‘
rather than a sense of wanting to serve God and His
cause." (8528)

". . .there's been a change since the early seventies,
it's the 'me generation.'” (7617)

". . .they miss the vision of the greatness of the
vocation of the ministry, it's just another job. . .
they judge it by the mundane criteria of other
professions, for instance, the salary." (1326)

”. . .there's a lack of understanding of the servant
role. Students' are more concerned about what they gave
up [materially]--sometimes the concern is beyond the
normal bounds.” (6325)

'. . .the implications of materialism and so forth have
also affected--students come in at a much higher
standard of living. Some of our students at seminary
make more money than the seminary professors.” (3126)

'. . .there's a higher level of tolerance regarding
divergent lifestyles. There used to be an historic
statement regarding the use of alcohol and tobacco--now
it's not an issue.“ (4626)

C. Students' family life (3 comments)

". . .we are concerned about the domestic issue. . . . I
think the need is greater now--the moral climate of the
day, the ease of separation, divorce, even in the
Christian world. Those things disturb me, greatly."
(7226)

". . .this is becoming, increasingly, a concern to the
seminary, it's the student's attitude to and
relationship to his wife and children. . . . Too often
there's a strain and a stress created in the home, in
the family, that is a moral responsibility to the
student that he does not see." (4218)

'. . .it's a sad factor, not a vice, but a tragedy. Due
to the lack of funds, the marriages are not as happy as
it should be during the early stages of a marriage. The
woman has to work and she can't be a mother--it makes
it harder.” (6318)

D. Unclassified (1 comment)
". . .it's not directly relevant, but the cultural

deprivation manifested in a lack of a competent grasp
of the English language." (7317)

144
home situation (3 comments).

Professors faulted some students for their irresponsi-
bility in fulfilling tasks, their naivette about the people
to whom they will be ministering, their insensitivity toward
fellow students and seminary employees, their arrogant,
authoritarian and judgmental character, and their general
dependency on the seminary and faculty.

Some of the students' values and priorities have become
skewed as a result of societal values (materialism and a
focus on self) and as a result of seminary life where there
may be a tendency to overemphasize intellectual development
and grades. Pressures to fulfill academic requirements and

pay the bills can often affect the marriage relationship.

Means of Dealing with Character Faults

Interview question 13b (probe): What do you think the

seminary can specifically do to help deal with this

[the previously mentioned character fault]? (Table 4-13)

From those 17 professors who suggested some student
problems, twenty comments were offered. Responses regarding
how a professor would see himself or herself or the seminary
dealing with character faults is treated here because it
provides another indication of the professors' conception of
promoting moral development. These comments relate to a
diverse array of character problems which were discussed
above. Though the problems were varied, it was felt that the

means of dealing with these problems could be compared.

More than half of the professors (ten out of seventeen)

145

Table 4-13

Means of Dealing with Student Character Faults
(20 comments by 17 professors)

Interview question 13b: What do you think the seminary can
specifically do to help deal with this?

A. Through didactive-cognitive encouragement (10 comments)

'. . .I remind them of their responsibility to their own
wives and family.“ (1226)

". . .we stress it in the pastoral ministries department
and emphasize it to all of our classes by reminding our
men that they are servants, it's a privilege not a
burden to serve Jesus Christ." (0325)

". . .through personal dialogue, reminders in class, in
groups." (8615)

'. . .from the first day on campus they are confronted
with their family responsibilities.” (9218)

'. . .as an individual, I confront them in class and talk
about it individually with them and make appeals to see
it as a spiritual issue.“ (6528)

'. . .to the extent that I am able in class to pound the
pulpit, I try to make them aware of this, of
cultivating meaningful and perceptive sensitivities,
morally, so they're aware of other people, their needs,
their hurts." (1217)

'. . .that's difficult. I try to sensitize them, to raise
their level of consciousness. . .to get the point
across that they are servants, to convince them of the
truth value of this." (6326)

'. . .constant conversation--as openers in class, at the
beginning of the quarter, occasionally in chapel, in
Wednesday groups, individually--keep it [the issue of
competition for grades] as a topic of conversation,
keep an openness about it.“ (1517)

”. . .I personally encourage the students not to worry
about grades." (8317)

'. . .I give a spiel in class. . .I don't know what the
ultimate answer is [overemphasis on gradesl.” (0515)

146

Table 4-13 (cont'd.).

B. Through faculty modeling (3 comments)

”. . .through faculty models of the servant role. . .to
reflect the model of ministry they saw in the faculty."
(5325)

”. . .I think that it's good for students to see us in
action. . . . Even now, students see me in various
ministries. Some faculty who are not as involved in the
local church take students with them--when they go
preaching, they might take a student; when they go into
some seminary situation, take a student. This way
students can see us out in the field and their values
change a little bit, I think, for that." (517)

'. . .I can't fault the students, I see it in myself, the
professors don't model that kind of involvement [in
inner city ministriesl." (6526)

C. Unclassified (9 comments)

". . .in group work that the students engage in. . .in
ministry groups. . .other students are able to confront
them." (8416)

”. . .a forum is offered during the lunch hour with a
meal and is open to the campus. About 15-20 people
attend and issues are presented and discussed.“ (6626)

”. . .too many nipples are in the students' mouths. Maybe
we ought to be a little more European. . .'We're here
lecturing, our resources are here, at the end of the
line you have to pass comprehensive examinations; now
we don't care how you learn the stuff.'" (3427)

“. . .the chapel is a means of fostering in students a
relationship to Jesus Christ. . .to see themselves as
servants, and not lords of His people.” (8325)

'. . .more of a link between the academic and the field
work.” (2617)

”. . .there are opportunities for wives to audit classes.
. .and the seminary women's fellowship meets two times
a month." (4226)

". . .we wonder how much we've influenced them at this
stage of life, after they've stayed here either 3, 4, 5
years. In other words, we're not so naive anymore as to
how much we've changed people's minds or influenced
them. I guess we're much more modest today than maybe
we were 20 years ago.” (0428)

”. . .a long-term solution is in our recruitment and
selection of students [concerning the apathy of
students]. . .our recruting pattern." (6615)

”. . .[regarding the use of the English language] they
grow up that way, and we make repairs as we can.”
(9317)

147
would use a didactive-cognitive mode of encouraging more
mature conduct and character. These kinds of verbs were used
in their conversation: “remind", "confront”, "stress",
"talk", "make them aware", "raise their level of conscious-
ness", ”convince”, and "encourage." No correlational trends
were found which related a didactive— cognitive mode with
either academic discipline or previous pastoral experience.
Another theme focused on the example and model of faculty (3
comments). Additional responses were unclassified (9

coments).

Moral Influence During Own Seminary Education
Interview question #17: Now, please, think back to your
own experience of seminary as a student. What proved to
be the most influential in encouraging your moral
maturity? (Table 4-14)

This section was included in the chapter for purposes
of comparing influences professors remembered as a student,
and the influences emphasized by the professor in his or her
current teaching. (The question was adjusted slightly for
the few professors who had not attended a theological
graduate school. In that case, professors were asked to
reflect on their graduate education in the university
setting.)

Professors offered 34 comments. Sixteen of the professors
(n=22) indicated that a professor or a number of professors

had significantly affected their lives. The professor usually

took a personal interest in them, encouraged them in their

148

Table 4-14

What Influenced Professors During Their Seminary Education
(34 comments by 22 professors)

Interview question 17: . . .your own experience of seminary
as a student. What proved to be the most influential in
encouraging your moral maturity?

A. Influence of a professor (16 comments)

". . .the influence of Professor Jones, a particular
teacher who wedded for me the spiritual and the
academic.“ (5115) (Note 3)

". . .it was the way my better teachers could make the
Bible relevant, both academically and practically
. . . . I always looked for people who could
integrate." (0117)

”. . .the fact that there was two professors that took a
personal interest and I felt that I could go and talk
to them at anytime and that I would not be intruding."
(2128)

". . .probably the personal contacts with the professors
and having them relate to me the practicum of their
life--how they made their theology work, how they made
moral principles work in reality." (1217)

". . .sitting at the feet of one of the greatest
theologians. There's a fine line between idolizing a
person and modeling. . .other things were almost
peripheral to me to watching a man of God in action.“
(0218)

”. . .in other words, the personal life of the faculty,
and the model they set, was by far the most outstanding
factor in my remembrance of my seminary days. I got
theology and I got all these other subjects, but it's
not what I remember today.“ (6225)

'. . .a couple of seminary professors who were models of
ministry and Christian concern." (0325)

149
Table 4-14 (cont'd.).

(Influence of a professor--cont'd)

". . .the confidence the faculty had in me to give me
responsibility, to encourage me. . . . They've got
confidence in you--they introduce me to other people in
a positive way. . .I think that was a high motivating
factor." (7326)

". . .I probably wasn't conscious of this at the time,
but the moral modeling among the faculty.” (5415)

”. . .in grad school, my mentors. . . . I was the
personal valet of my advisor after he suffered a heart
attack." (4427)

". . .the treatment by a number of the professors of me
and other students. . .a kind of evaluation or esteem
for what contribution we could make to ministry. Some
of these are kind of subtle, how they handled us, how
they informed us of certain things, whether they took
us into their homes. . . . That affected us because we
saw another side of the man back of the desk.” (9428)

". . .the godly lives of the people really influenced
me.” (6526)

". . .my relationships with individual professors."
(0615)

". . .a few professors who took the time to relate on a
personal level. . .who were concerned for my total
development.” (2617)

". . .my perception of the faculty, of the moral
character of the faculty." (0626)

". . .in both grad school and seminary, the help in
developing self-esteem--the affirmation received."
(4628)

B. Interaction with fellow students (5 comments)

". . .the similarity of thought among peers and
discussion of issues.” (9415)

”. . .my personal experiences in a student club". (0416)

“. . .meeting international students.” (9517)

". . .interacting with other students of different
backgrounds.” (2528)

". . .my peers--a setting with different kinds of
people.” (8628)

150

Table 4-14 (cont'd.).

C. Seminary courses and chapel services (9 comments)

". . .a course in moral-philosophical theology." (7415)

". . .a course in basic Christian ethics. . .provided the
most formative influence. . .Dr. Jones did an excellent
job." (4416)

'. . .my homiletics classes were exceedingly helpful."
(7325)

". . .it was unstructured, for example the discussion led
into a controversy and some moral principle was
involved--it was the tangential things in class that I
remember." (9318)

”. . .for me it was the emphasis on moral knowledge. . .I
came to seminary with a high sense of moral
sensitivity." (5226)

'. . .more than anything, it was the study of Scripture."
(8325)

“. . .a deeper understanding of the biblical material.”
(4415)

”. . .the chapels were very important to me.” (1526)

'. . .and then the chapels at the seminary. I cherished
the chapels. I attended when I could. I appreciated the
worship at the seminary." (5517)

D. Off-campus experiences (4 comments)

'. . .my greatest spiritual growth was working as a
student volunteer with Inter-Varsity." (4517)

". . .my field work experiences." (7416)

'. . .giving me responsibility for ministry assignments."
(1326)

". . .probably being married and working with the YMCA.”
(5126)

151
work and modeled an exemplary life. No correlational trends
were associated with either academic discipline or previous
pastoral experience. Other significant influences included
interaction with fellow students (5 comments), seminary
courses and chapel services (9 comments) and certain

off-campus experiences (4 comments).

Qualitative Observations

Some of the responses in the chapter are worthy of
special attention. A few professors indicated that the
seminary assumed students were already morally mature,
especially in moral thinking and moral sensitivity. Thus, a
special focus on encouraging students' moral development is
not seen as necessary. However, a few professors suggested
that some students come to seminary with very narrow .
conceptions of morality and professors need to help students
broaden their perspectives.

Professors were able to identify a number of learning
experiences and factors which positively influence the
students' moral development. Yet, when asked how they or the
seminary would deal with a specific character fault of
students, the majority of professors stated they would adopt
a purely didactive-cognitive mode of reminding and exhorting
students to improve their action.

A divergence of opinion was evident among professors
regarding how well students develop their moral thinking

skills and personal values. The classical professors tended

152
to rate students' learning as high in these two areas,
whereas the ministry-related professors tended to rate

students more toward a fair amount of learning.

Summary

Professors tended to rate students' degree of learning
at the seminary in moral knowledge as high; they estimated a
fair amount of student learning in moral sensitivity, and a
little less learning in will power. A difference of opinion
was evident regarding student learning on moral thinking and
personal values.

A number of learning experiences were identified which
help students grow toward moral maturity. A general theme of
experience-oriented activities surfaced from the responses.
The largest category of comments related to field education
experiences. Other groupings made reference to situations in
which students are forced to make moral choices, experience-
oriented instructional methods in the classroom, worship
experiences and interaction with peers.

When professors raise moral issues in class, they
attempt to help students think through the issues, identify
the relevent biblical principles, and encourage students to
commit themselves to a position. An additional purpose is to
prepare students in how to present and deal with moral issues
in their future ministries. Professors assume that students
have mature moral thinking skills, yet some students come to

seminary with immature conceptions of morality. In most cases

153
ministry-related faculty are familiar with moral development
theory, such as Kohlberg's theory.

A variety of experiences can facilitate the development
of moral sensitivity, such as exposure to people with real
needs and those from differing backgrounds than the stu-
dent's. Some process-type methods can be used in the class
to simulate these kinds of situations. Professors also
indicated that moral sensitivity grows out of one's
relationship to God.

Factors which may hinder moral growth relate to the
academic requirements, the pressure for high grades and
a general lack of student responsibility of their own
learning at the seminary. In addition, faculty may be too
busy or preoccupied with their own responsibilities to
initiate personal contact with students.

Suggested changes at the seminary would include
providing a forum in which faculty and students could deal
with critical moral issues. Another group of responses was
directed toward increasing interaction between faculty and
students. Some professors would wish to give a greater
emphasis to matters of worship and one's relationship to
God. Other professors would like to see more integrative
courses and experiences, linking theory and practice.

Professors were concerned about students' immaturity
(insensitivity, irresponsibility, arrogance, dependency) and
distorted values and priorities (competition for grades,

unconscious value system, apathy, self-centeredness,

154
materialism). To deal with these faults, a majority of
professors would remind students of their responsibility and
raise students' level of consciousness about problem areas.
In addition, faculty could model the appropriate attitude
and behavior.

Finally, professors remember mostly their own seminary
teachers as most influential in their own moral development.
Seminary teachers provided encouragement, an example and
inspiration for their lives. Other influences included
fellow students, courses, greater understanding of the
Bible, chapels, work experience, marriage, and field

experiences.

155
End Notes

See Chapter 5 for a fuller treatment of responses to
interview question 2.

Numerical codes (located within angular brackets) have
been assigned to each professor's comment to maintain
anonymity.

Fictitious names have been substituted for real names.

 

Chapter 5

FINDINGS:

FACULTY-STUDENT INTERACTIONS
IN RELATION TO MORAL DEVELOPMENT

Chapter 5 presents the findings related to the second
research question.
Research question #2: How do faculty interact with

students in matters which may affect the students'
moral development both in and out of the classroom?

 

How faculty members relate to students can, in various ways,
influence the students' own development toward moral
maturity. A few topics had been selected to provide some
idea of faculty perceptions of their own ways of relating to
students. Responses to the interview questions were analyzed
following the same procedures which were described in

Chapter 4 and are presented in the same manner.

Overview of the Interview Questions
Four interview questions are treated in Chapter 5 (2,
3, 10, and 11). Interview questions 2 and 3 were general in
nature, making no specific reference to the issue of moral
development. Question 2 sought to discover what faculty
would like students to remember about them "20 years from

now." Question 3 looked at the particular outcomes or

156

157
purposes faculty have in mind when meeting with students
outside of class.

The other two questions (10 and 11) described for
faculty members a particular situation and then asked them
how they would deal with the student involved. Question 10
focused on a hypothetical case of academic dishonesty
(plagiarism) while question 11 had a more general reference

to a student experiencing some personal problems.

What Students Should Remember about Faculty

Interview question 2: When you are remembered by your
students, say, 20 years from now, what would you most
like it to be for? (Table 5-1)

 

Responses to the question were organized into three
categories: (a) focus on student learning (19 comments),
(b) focus on the professor as person (17 comments), and
(c) focus on the professor as subject matter specialist
(8 comments).

Focus on student learning

 

A total of 19 different comments from 18 professors
related to a focus on student learning. Responses solely to
this category were given by 6 faculty members. Professors
thought students would primarily remember them as helping
the students gain a comprehension of the particular subject
matter (9 comments) and develop essential skills
(7 comments). There were three unclassified comments. No

correlational trends were associated with professors'

158

Table 5-1

What Students Should Remember About Faculty
(46 comments by 24 professors)

Interview question 2: . . .remembered by your students 20
years from now?

A. Focus on student learning (19 comments)
Comprehension of the Subject Matter (9 comments)

". . .related theology to the Gospel they preached."
(3318)

". . .insight into the ways of God through Scripture."
(5517)

". . .opened windows, gave inspiration and excitement
to the subject matter." (1428)

”. . .opened a new appreciation of the saving gift of
God." (6317)

". . .assisted students in understanding and
appreciating the history of the Church.” (3416)

”. . .helped them understand the discipline, integration
of many fields." (6626)

". . .remember the principles and concepts: how they
apply to life." (4126)

". . .getting the material on a practical level so they
can use it." (2225)

”. . .getting a few ideas under their skin, kind of
praxis ideas--where theory and practice intersect.”
(5427)

Development of essential skills (7 comments)

'. . .to think critically and carefully." (2115)

”. . .making them think.” (8528)

”. . .recognize issues people are facing, a way of
wrestling, interacting." (0617)

”. . .to help develop their gifts.“ (9628)

". . .skills in the study of the Word, understanding,
teaching and to apply it to their lives." (1517)

'. . .students feel comfortable and competent in
the text [knowledge and skills].' (5217)

”. . .mastering the discipline of homiletics.” (9325)

Unclassified comments (3 comments)

". . .actually helped them grow." (6615)

". . .subject matter that was helpful to students."
(0515)

". . .being able to minister to them in the areas where
they have needs." (2117)

159

Table 5-1 (cont'd.).

B. Focus on the Professor as Person (17 comments)

Professor's example and personal influence (7 comments)

.a model of a whole, Christian person." (4626)

.a model, example." (5126)

.consistency, character." (1226)

.presented the Word humbly, honored Christ." (9218)
.through personal contact, students have grown in
the Lord." (0517)

.personal and formative influence on them.” (1416)
.an enabler who helped them.” (7628)

Professor's concern and empathy for the students (7 comments)

.cares about the students." (1526)

.a professor who really cares, out of the classroom
as well as in the classroom." (5128)

.caring, underneath, about students.” (3615)

.for being a caring teacher, an authentic person."
(4528)

.sensitive to their struggles, understand their
crises." (7325)

.someone to consult about their problems." (2326)
.model of pastoral sensitivity. . .the way in which
I treat people." (0415)

Professor's convictions (3 comments)

.an urgency, passion for the ministry." (3617)
.committed to the evangelical faith." (7515)
.committed to the Word and Jesus Christ." (2126)

160

Table 5-1 (cont'd.).

C. Focus on the Professor as Subject Matter Specialist
(10 comments)

Professor's knowledge of the discipline (5 comments)

". . .respect for your expertise, experience." (2326)
". . .aware of the field, mastered the skills
of the discipline." (6325)
". . .took the discipline seriously enough and taught
them in that area well.” (7415)
". . .genuine knowledge of the subject matter." (2515)
". . .knows the content of the field." (8526)

Professor's presentation of the subject matter (5 comments)

. .having taught them a subject matter." (2115)

. .presented the Word." (3218)

. .handled the material effectively." (7217)

. .responsible in teaching." (9615)

. .communicated the conviction that this is worth
their life and death attention.” (5428)

161
academic discipline or with previous pastoral ministry
experience.

Focus on the professor asgperson

 

A total of 17 comments, mentioned by 16 of the professors,

gave emphasis to the professor asyperson. Only two professors

 

gave responses which were assigned exclusively to this one
category. Professors mentioned that they would like students to
remember the example of their life (7 comments), that they had
expressed a genuine concern for the students (7 comments), and
that they had particular convictions or values (3 comments). No
significant correlational trends were found associated with
professors' academic discipline or with previous pastoral
ministry experience.
Focus on the professor as subject matter specialist

Only 10 professors made comments focused on the profes—
sor as subject matter specialist. No professor identified
remarks for this category exclusively. Professors felt that
what students would remember would be (1) their degree of
competence in the discipline and (2) their presentation of
the material in class. No correlational trends were
associated with professors' academic discipline or with

previous pastoral ministry experience.

Agenda for Student Encounters

Interview question 3: When you meet with students, that
is besides in the classroom, what one or two things do
you most enjoy doing with them? (Table 5-2)

162

Follow up probe: Is there anything you hope might

result from such meetings with students? Do you have

some purpose? (Table 5—3)

The intent of the first part of the question was to set
up a more specific reference for the second part of the
question. Primarily, professors like to converse with
students (n=22) about a variety of subjects (Table 5-2).
Topics of conversation may include: issues in the professor's
own discipline, assignments and field experiences, student
goals, aspirations and future plans for ministry, current
student needs and topics of interest, the issue of the day,
and sharing experiences. A few professors (n = 6) mentioned
that they also enjoy getting together with students on a more
social basis, such as joking with students, inviting students
to their home, playing in sports together (e.g. racquetball),
taking students on expeditions (a combination of educational
and social functions), and joining students in school
functions such as choir, and fellowship meals.

Most professors (n=15) have some purpose in mind in
their encounters with students outside of the classroom. A
few professors (N=5) have no real purpose or agenda in that
they like the students to set the agenda for the meeting.
Finally, two professors stated that sometimes they might
have a purpose, and at other times, they have none.

A variety of purposes were mentioned by the professors
(table 5-3). These purposes were grouped into two general
categories: (a) those concerned with helping the student (13

comments), and (b) those purposes in which professors want

163

Table 5-2

What Professors' Enjoy Doing with Students

Interview question 3: . . .when you meet with students, what
do you most enjoy doing?

1. Discussions with students (22 Professors)

a. Student's aspirations, life goals, vocational goals

(7 comments)
Discussion relating to the professor's discipline
(5 comments)
Difficulties in life, struggles, deeper issues
(4 comments)
Listening to and answering their questions, seeking
resources (3 comments)
Class assignments, field ministry reports, etc.
(2 comments)
Share experiences (2 comments)
Where they are, whatever they're thinking (2 comments)
The issue of the day (1 comment)

2. Social engagements (6 Professors)

a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

Athletics

Professor's home

Student functions (choir, meals)
Off campus activities (expeditions)
Fun, joking in the hallways

164

Table 5-3

Professors' Purposes in Student Encounters
(18 comments by 17 professors)

Interview question 3: . . .do you have some purpose?

A. Helping students (13 comments)

". . .encourage a move to the next step professionally."
(2626)

". . .encourage them in the Lord's leading.” (6225)

". . .clarify their sense of calling: to take away their
sense of Angst and burden about life and service.”
(7428)

". . .encourage them to publish." (8218)

”. . .instill certain ideas." (4515)

". . .importance of giving primary attention to their
family.“ (1226)

”. . .open their mind about a few more options.” (4526)

". . .use their time wisely, develop a time schedule."
(6326)

”. . .help them become mature Christians, discipleship."
(8528)

”. . .open to discuss their feelings, to analyze how
others see them and their ministry.” (0415)

". . .to become effective stewards.” (7317)

'. . .to become good theologians, good pastors." (4318)

". . .help deal with personal difficulties due to
academic pressures." (6617)

B. Developing personal relationships (5 comments)

'. . .develop personal relationships to get to know the
students." (6126)

”. . .to relate on a person-to—person level, and to take
time to listen." (1325)

”. . .building relationships with them, especially with
a view to discipleship.“ (9528)

". . .develop personal relationships with students, some
of my former students are close friends." (4615)

". . .develop an open relationship, to see me as someone
who is available.” (6628)

165

to develop more open personal relationships with students (5

comments). No correlational trends were associated with

professors' academic discipline or with previous pastoral

ministry experience.

Dealing with Academic Dishonesty

Interview question 10: Now, I'd like to present a
hypothetical situation involving a case of academic
dishonesty. Let's assume that a student has submitted a
term paper for one of your courses. After grading the
paper and checking your files, you notice that almost
half of this term paper is a verbatim copy of a paper
written by a former student three years ago. For the
sake of our discussion, let's assume two students have
done this: for one student, this was the first offense;
the other student has done similar things in a few
other classes. How would you tend to deal with these
situations? (Tables 5-4, 5-5, 5-6, 5-7, 5-8 and 5-9)

Probe: A. Would you handle the matter by yourself, or
refer it to someone else? B. What particular academic
consequences would you give to the student? C. In
talking with the student, what would you hope to
accomplish?

The variety of responSes to this question (65 comments

by the 24 professors) were organized into six general

categories: (a) professors' mind set (25 comments), (b)

confronting the student (16 comments), (c) academic

consequences (5 kinds of responses), (d) factors considered

in making a decision about the consequences (5 comments),

(e) helping to prevent cases of academic dishonesty (3

comments), and (f) referring the matter to someone else (16

comments).

166

Table 5-4

Professors' Orientation About a Case of Plagiarism
(25 comments by 20 professors)

Interview question 10

A. Affirm the student, despite the problem (9 comments)

". . .try to rescue the person." (7128)

" . .discipline, Biblically, is never to destroy the

person, but always to lift them up." (5126)

.don't want to destroy the student." (3628)

.deal with student in a redemptive way." (6617)

.I want to be redemptive." (0217)

.ideally, to reclaim the student." (3517)

.use the occasion for growth.” (5428)

.we'd be more gospel oriented, hoping we could

rehabilitate the student.” (2326)

". . .that he would have a genuine experience of
growth.” (7317)

B. Tension between the institution and the person
(6 comments)

". . .professor has two kinds of relationships, an
official one [as Dean student forfeits credit], and a
personal one [I want to help you]." (3226)

". . .there is forgiveness, but you can't escape the
[academic] consequences.“ (7325)

". . .what is at stake is that you're educating the
student, but you also must protect the integrity of
the program." (8427)

". . .a tension between the academic integrity at the
seminary, and the student who is a Christian and
dealing with him over the long run." (4528)

". . .to maintain the integrity of the institution; also
try to help the individual deal with the problem."
(9628)

". . .to reclaim the student: have him see what he's
done to the others--fairness to other students."
(8517)

167

Table 5-4 (cont'd.).

C. Unclassified (10 comments)

". . .deal with it on the basis of the spiritual
implications; it's a sin problem and he needs to
get right with the Lord.” (8225)

". . .he has to face up to the Lord, and to admit it to
the Lord." (7526)

". . .I identify with the hurt that's involved." (3128)

". . .try to be transparent as a professor, to admit my
own weaknesses." (6526)

". . .there's a high level of trust placed in our
students." (2416)

". . .the system assumes honesty, the student has
violated that trust." (3617)

". . .if the student is without conscience, I have an
obligation to prevent his entrance into the
ministry.” (5317)

". . .to what extent are we overburdening the student."
(6326)

”. . .a cheating pattern may indicate that he will tend
to cheat in his ministry." (1526)

". . .there are certain kinds of sins of such nature
that if you do it even once, you're not fit for the
ministry." (2318)

168
Professors' mind set (Table 5-4)

A total of 25 comments made by 20 professors alluded to
the essential orientation used in approaching the student
with such a problem. A number of professors (n=10) mentioned
that they would want to rescue and rehabilitate the
student-—to use the occasion as a means for helping the
student to mature.

Another group of six comments expressed the tension of
loyalties and responsibilities a professor faces in dealing
with the student and the offense. Faculty have an obligation
to the institution concerning earned credit and the
integrity of the educational program, as well as fairness to
other students who have legitimately completed the assign-
ments. On the other hand, the professor is dealing with an
individual who is a fellow Christian, a person who is in
need of forgiveness and assistance with a problem. An
additional ten comments were unclassified.

Confronting the student (Table 5-5)

A total of 16 comments were made by 12 professors
explaining what they would be doing when meeting with the
student. The majority of responses indicated that professors
would be looking for a favorable response of confession and
repentance and a willingness to talk about the problem. If
the student was resistant or denied the matter, then more
serious consequences might result.

Professors would also attempt to clarify for themselves

what actually happened and why it happened. They would want

Table 5-

169

5

How Professors' Confront a Case of Plagiarism
(16 comments by 12 professors)

Interview question 10

A. Look

for a favorable response (8 comments)

.genuine repentance, and not remorse--that he got
caught." (3128)

.open and honest and willing to talk it out." (9117)
.depending on a favorable response." (1225)

.hope he would admit readily to what he'd done."
(8427)

.confront to see the student's repentance [does he
confess, or is there resistancel." (7528)
.determine whether he's simply a rascal, or a
person with a moral dilemma.” (0317)

.to determine the degree of responsibility." (4617)
.to see the level of contrition: does he stonewall
it or deny it." (9626)

B. Ask for the student's meaning of the action (4 comments)

.I'm more interested in the reason why, than the
offense.” (3117)

.why did they do that, what mitigating
circumstances." (6217)

.what they thought they were doing." (2427)
.what he thought he was doing.” (1615)

C. Substantiate the facts (2 comments)

.I would want to substantiate the story.” (4126)
.to make sure I have the facts straight as they
view it." (8427)

D. Ask if the student understands the concept of plagiarism
(2 comments)

.were they confused about what plagiarism is?"
(5615)
.to see if they understand what plagiarism is."
(3515)

170
to substantiate the facts of the action (2 comments),
understand the meaning of the act of dishonesty--what was
the student's perspective on what was done (4 comments), and
what is the student's concept of plagiarism (2 comments).
Academic consequences (Table 5-6)

Most of the professors (n=10) would allow the student to
rewrite the paper. Some professors might give the student a
lower grade, while others would not. Students would fail the
course, according to four professors. These students would
forfeit their right to receive credit for the course. In two
cases, professors would just assign an "F" to the paper, but
the student would probably pass the course--just barely. A
few professors (n=3) did not specify a consequence, but made
reference to whatever the school policy would dictate. A
group of four professors gave multiple responses, since the
consequence depended on the seriousness of the dishonest
behavior.

Factors related to assigning consequences (Table 5-7)

A few factors on the matter were identified in the
responses of four professors. For some a decision would
relate to the weight of the paper or the year of the student.
Others have no blanket rule and judge each situation on a
case-by-case basis. Another professor would assign the same
penalty to a student, whether it was the student's first
offense or third offense. Fairness was the consideration
here. Finally, one professor would tend to assign a lower

grade because this grade would become a significant reminder

171

Table 5-6
Academic Consequences for a Case of Plagiarism (n=23)

Interview question 10

 

 

Consequence Number of Professors
Rewrite the paper 10
"F" on the paper 4
"F" on the course 2
What school policy states 3

Depends on situation (mixture
of consequences above) 4

172

Table 5-7
Factors in Making a Decision about Consequences (n=4)

Interview question 10

". . .give a lower grade, since the penalty is a permanent
brand, a reminder." (9427)

". . .it depends on the weight of the paper (major or
minor)." (5317)

". . .it depends on the year of the student.” (4226)

". . .I have no blanket rule; I judge each individual case."
(0428)

". . .penalize the same [whether first offense or a repeated
offense]: it doesn't make sense not to do the same."
(7427)

Table 5-8
Helping to Prevent Cases of Academic Dishonesty (n=3)

Interview question 10

". . .sometimes we facilitate cheating; I keep students'
papers, they can look at them in my office. I don't give
the same exam twice." (6626)

". . .is it partly my fault? Have I overburdened him?"
(9326)

". . .on reading reports, I make the student sign his name."
(7526)

173
to the student of the action.
Helping to prevent academic dishonesty (Table 5-8)

Some professors evidenced a concern to not inadvertently
contribute to the student's temptation to act dishonestly. A
professor commented that one colleague uses the same tests
year after year, thus inviting dishonesty. Reading reports
may be the easiest assignment to falsify. Students are
required to sign their name on the reports turned in to one
professor. Another professor keeps all student papers in the
office. Students may look at them in the office, but may not
take them.

Factors related to referring the matter elsewhere (Table 5-9)

 

This final section describes when faculty would
consider referring a case of academic dishonesty to someone
else or the appropriate faculty committee. A total of 17
comments were made by 13 professors. In some cases, faculty
would need to report or discuss the matter with an
administrative officer on the first offense. For others, if
a pattern of such behavior was developing, then the matter
would be referred. One professor stated that each case would
be reported to the faculty committee, so that there would be
consistent treatment of the matter. Another professor
mentioned that rarely would the matter be made known to the
administration. The professor was able to deal with these

kinds of situation individually.

174

Table 5-9

Factors Considered in Referring a Case of Academic
Dishonesty to the Administration
(16 comments by 13 professors)

Interview question 10

"On the very first offense, I report it or discuss it with
the. . .

President."(3415)

Dean." (7626)

Associate Dean.” (0615)

Registrar and Dean of students." (6326)

". . .if it is a major term paper." (226)

". . .only if I doubted the facts of the matter, or if
personal bias against the student might be involved.”
(2615)

". . .when the matter has implications for other faculty."
(0526)

". . .if the student was resistant.” (1528)

If a pattern of similar behavior was developing:

". . .would raise a question in a faculty meeting." (3117)

”. . .recommend to the appropriate committee to
discontinue student from the program." (8415)

". . .refer matter to the appropriate committee." (3517)

". . .refer matter to the appropriate committee, and put
the student on notice." (5526)

". . .the faculty would need to look at that." (2628)

". . .possibly be expelled.” (7226)

". . .for any offense, I would always refer it to the
committee for consistency of treatment." (3218)

". . .rarely would I ever have to take it to the
administration; I could take care of it on an individual
basis." (9225)

175

Taking the Initiative to Counsel Students

 

Interview question 11: Let's assume that a professor
knows that a particular student is experiencing some
personal problems, or say that the professor senses

that a student might need some personal advice. In most

cases, should professors (a) let students take the

initiative to seek out professors, or (b) should
professors take the initiative to seek out students?

(Table 5-10)

The majority of professors (n=l4) stated that, in most
cases, they should take the initiative to seek out students.
As one professor stated, "Everyone of us is a pastor to them"
(3318). A possible correlational trend may be associated with
those professors who did have previous pastoral experience
(table 5-10) (no association was apparent with professors'
academic discipline). The pastoral orientation of these
professors probably prompts this reaching out to students.
Many of the seven professors who would let the student take
the initiative were concerned to not take away the adult
responsibility of the student.

Yet almost all of the professors indicated that they
would, in some cases, reach out to the student in a time of
need. Table 5-11 outlines 48 comments from all the professors
regarding a situation of student need. These comments were
organized into 5 categories: (a) indirect initiatives toward
students (8 comments), (b) direct initiatives toward students
(17 comments), (c) school structures to facilitate dealing
with problems (7 comments), (d) why students may hesitate to
seek out to professors (4 comments), and (e) why faculty may

hesitate to seek out students (12 comments).

Professors may pray for the student, share some of their

176
Table 5-10
Taking the Initiative to Counsel Students

Interview question 11

 

 

 

 

Number of Number of
Professors with professors with
Who takes the no previous previous totals
initiative: pastoral pastoral
experience experience
Professors 4 10 14
should ’
Students 5 2 7
should
totals 9 12 21
Fisher Exact Test Strength of association:
p = .080 Q =-.724
C = .378
d1.
= .167

2 = .143

177

Table 5-11

Ways of Initiating Student Counseling
(48 comments by 24 professors)

Interview question 11: . . .a student is experiencing some
personal problems.

A. Indirect initiatives with students (8 comments)

.the first initiative should be prayer, that the
student would feel free to open up to me.” (3517)
.do a lot of praying." (2117)

.in weekly faculty prayer meetings we share with
each other an apparent problem with a student."
(6218)

.present materials, or discuss problems that would
precipitate him coming to see me." (7117)

.the professor might have been dealing with a
problem in class that strikes him at home: he'll go
to the professor with the problem.” (8225)

.be friendly to him: by making it easier for him to
come and see me.” (9117)

.try to provide an environment in which the student
can comfortably come to me; through little hints in
casual conversation; try to develop some level of
confidence.” (8217)

.in class, you can be transparent and share with
students the struggles you've been through; that
causes them to be more transparent with you.” (3126)

B. Direct approaches with students (17 comments)

.after class, take student aside and tell him I'm
aware of the problem, and praying for him, and he
can feel free to come and see me.” (1325)

.I can talk to you after class, or make an
appointment." (7528)

.I want you to know I'm available: if there's
anything I can do to help, please come and see me."
(2128)

.to know of my availability if there's anything I
can do.” (0226)

.say, I'm available: don't force yourself on the
student." (5628)

.I may invite the student to talk together over
coffee; ask leading questions.” (0517)

.be sensitive to the Spirit; watch for opportunities
to be alone with the student, to give a door he
could come through." (6526)

.seek a chance to talk to the student." (8615)

.I'd make sure they knew my door was open.” (3427)

178

Table 5-11 (cont'd.).

(Direct approaches with students--cont'd.)

.maybe the student is groping for help; sometimes a
step in his direction will be very helpful." (7217)
.if the teacher takes the initiative, in Christian
love, as a friend, he can help the student.” (2115)

.I wrote a long note on a student's paper: you

should talk to someone, if you would like, you could
talk to me." (3518)

.I wrote a note on a student's paper about controlling
his anger and the student responded positively.” (4428)
.when we call in students we tell them we're going

to be asked for recommendations for him down the

road; now you've got a problem in this area." (0225)
.personally, I encourage students to see the dean

who is responsible for student counseling, rather

than do it myself; he's qualified to do counseling."
(5218)

.I ask my colleagues if anything has been done.”
(6617)

.we routinely refer problem students for

professional career counseling.” (8626)

C. School structures to facilitate counseling students
comments)

(7

.we have an advisor-advisee system to keep track of
students having problems.“ (9626)

.we have a counseling-advisor system.” (0416)
.there's a faculty committee that periodically
reviews student records: if we see a problem, we
send a memo to the student's advisor.“ (2427)

.the vehicle we have is an advisor-advisee system."
(0318)

.we have a structured program where the Assistant
Dean is asked to interview such students.” (1218)
.there is a structure set up for that: the Assistant
Dean for Student Affairs gets many of these things
automatically." (4225)

.the Dean sends around a sheet every four weeks to
faculty to indicate students having difficulty in
class: names appearing more than once will be
contacted by the Associate Dean.“ (6115)

179

Table 5-11 (cont'd.).

D. Why students may hesitate to come to faculty (4 comments)

". . .student has too much at stake and avoids letting
professors know of the problem, especially those
professors who grade his papers or from whom he
needs recommendations for placement." (3115)

”. . .because students are timid in approaching a faculty
member.” (4325)

". . .he may be groping for help, doesn't know how to
make a decision, he's timid." (9217)

". . .or possibly he's unaware of problem.” (1217)

E. Why faculty may hesitate to seek out students (12 comments)

'. . .I wish I were more sensitive: not moving at such a
fast pace." (9126)

". . .we can't always do it because of the press of
time." (7226)

". . .because of the time schedule." (9326)

". . .depends on the relationship with the student, of
course." (3617)

". . .depends a lot on the students, if there's a
relationship so I can take the initiative." (2628)

". . .once in awhile, I'll be aggressive, depending on
the relationship, if the guy's got shock absorbers.“
(4526)

”. . .depends on the personality of the professor, it's
an individual matter, I would be reticent.” (5317)

”. . .depending on the energy level of the professor.”
(0515)

”. . .with an unprepared approach, all kinds of
psychological defense mechanisms may crop up."
(4217)

". . .the professor fears recrimmination by students
since the professor will be less popular.” (2326)

". . .the professor is fallible, it might involve a
personality clash." (1326)

". . .we worked here to encourage students to a kind of
self-determination; the students ought to also take
responsibility." (4415)

180
own struggles in class, and be friendly to students, hoping
that this would prompt a student to come to them. Many
professors would want the student to know that they are
available and willing to help the student. Most of the schools
have developed some structure to assist in identifying
students with needs and notifying the dean of students or the
students' advisor.

Some professors know that students may be very hesitant
to seek the aid of faculty in a time of need because it may
jeopardize their chances of receiving certification or degree
candidacy. Other reasons may include timidity, indecision or
ignorance of the problem itself.

But faculty are also human and experience their own
struggles and needs. Faculty may neglect or hesitate to seek
out a student for a number of reasons: busyness, insensitivity
to students' problems and relationships with students. Whether
a professor takes the initiative or not appears to be no
simple matter. A number of complex factors must be taken into

consideration.

Qualitative Observations
Some of the responses in the chapter deserve special
notice. With regard to question 10 and the case of plagiarism,
some faculty expressed the tension that existed in assuming
two roles. One role related to being a member of an academic
institution in upholding the integrity of the program.

Professors must be fair to other students who have earned

181
grades, and be faithful to the school policies regarding
consequences for infractions. The other role involves assuming
a pastoral orientation and seeking to counsel and encourage a
needy fellow believer--of coming alongside and sharing the
burden.

A similar tension was evident in some responses to
question 11. Who should take the initiative to bring student
and professor together when the student is experiencing a
personal problem: the professor or the student? On the one
hand, professors want to encourage adult responsibility and
wean students off of a dependency on the professor and
school structures. On the other hand, professors, with deep
pastoral feelings, want to reach out and seek the student to
provide assistance and comfort.

In dealing with the case of plagiarism (question 10),
there was a great diversity in what consequences would be
meted out to the student. A student might receive an F in
the course, or the student may be given an opportunity to do
another paper with no penalty. Most of the faculty would
refer the matter to another school official if a pattern of
plagiarism was observed. Yet one faculty member stated that
the matter would always be referred to the appropriate
committee to provide consistency of treatment, while another
faculty member would rarely refer the matter to the
administration and would rather deal with the student

personally.

182
Summary

Faculty would like to be remembered for how they helped
students to learn information and skills; for the kind of
person they were, for showing concern, for holding certain
convictions, and being an example; and for the capability
professors manifested in their own discipline.

In meeting with students outside of class, professors
mostly enjoy conversing with students on matters related to
the students' lives as well as issues related to their
discipline. A few professors attempt to get involved
socially with students. When they meet with students, many
professors have some purpose in mind to help and encourage
the student in specific ways. Some professors desire to
develop closer relationships with students. A few professors
have no real purpose in such encounters.

When professors discover a case of academic dishonesty,
they wish to help the student to arrive at some personal
resolution of the matter. A difficulty faced by some faculty
is the tension between upholding the integrity of the
academic program and meeting the personal needs of the
student in such a situation. Professors are watching for a
repentant attitude when confronted with the infraction and
professors wish to understand why the student would attempt
such an action--what meaning did the behavior have for the
student.

A great disparity exists in what penalty is assigned to

students (rewriting a paper with no penalty, a lower grade

183
on the rewritten paper, F on the paper or failing the whole
course) and at what point the professor would report or
refer the matter to the administration (always, rarely,
depending on the weight of the term paper, on the first
instance of wrongdoing, only if a pattern develops, etc.).
In addition, a few professors made comments about what they
do to help students avoid such temptations.

In most cases, when a professor learns that a student
has a personal need, the majority of professors would take
the initiative to seek out the student and offer assistance.
There may be a tendency for those professors with previous
pastoral experience to choose this option rather than let
the student take the initiative. All professors would take
the initiative if the situation was desperate. At first
professors would use indirect methods to pave the way for
the student to feel free to come to them (such as making
casual conversation in the hallway, sharing their own
problems in class, praying for them).

Professors also identified a number of factors which
may prevent students from seeking a professor's help (being
timid, afraid of not being recommended to graduate) and some
factors which may discourage professors from seeking out the
student (not a close relationship, too busy, a personality
clash with the student). Seminaries have devised structures
to assist faculty in monitoring such needs. One such
structure is the advisor-advisee framework in which a number

of students are placed in the care of a faculty member, or a

184
Dean of Students may be hired to focus attention on student

development and needs.

Chapter 6

FINDINGS:
INSTITUTIONALIZED INFLUENCES ON MORAL DEVELOPMENT

Chapter 6 presents the findings related to the third
research question.

Research question 3: As perceived by the faculty, what

aspects of the seminary program are intended to

influence or have influenced the students' moral
development?
The professors' attention was focused on some of the program
elements and structured aspects of the seminary program.
What curricular attention has been given to promoting
students' growth toward moral maturity?

Responses to the interview questions and information
from school documents were analyzed following the same
procedures which were described in Chapter 4. The presenta-
tion of the findings in the chapter is different from the
two previous chapters. Since the focus of the chapter is
institutional influences, a discussion of each seminary's
program constititutes the main outline sections of the
chapter. Responses from professors teaching at the same
institution are joined together to provide a composite

picture. In order to preserve anonymity, the following

fictitious school names were randomly assigned to each

185

186
seminary: Colonial, Cornerstone, Foundational, Heritage,
Historical and Memorial.
Overview of the Interview Questions

Five interview questions are treated in Chapter 6 (5,
8-alternate, 12, 15 and 16). Since the interview questions
are not listed in the body of the chapter because of the
different outline, the questions are cited below. (Question
8-alternate involved a series of six questions related to
the seminary course which specifically covers the topic of
moral development. This series of questions is cited in
Appendix A.)

Interview question (Ques.) 5. Let's assume that a
student is interested in further moral growth and has
asked you to recommend some courses at the seminary.
Now, I realize that probably all of the seminary
courses will have some implications for encouraging
moral growth. But, which top 2 or 3 courses would you
recommend that the student be sure to take before
he/she graduates?

ues. 12. When students wish to suggest changes in the
curriculum, academic policies, student life, and
related matters, what particular avenues at the
seminary are available to accomplish this?

Ques. 15. At any time during their seminary years, do
the students receive some form of feedback regarding
their own personal and moral development by someone or
some group from the seminary? (Probe for specific
procedures.)

Ques. 16. Think back to the faculty meetings this
school year. Do you happen to remember if matters
related to a student's personal or moral life were
discussed in any meetings? (Probe for frequency;
purpose of the discussion, what concerns were evident;
and what implications or action points resulted from
the discussion.)

In addition to these findings, data are presented about

two other matters. Since chapel services were frequently

187

mentioned as a means of moral development, some descriptive
information is given about the chapel (frequency and length
of services, whether student attendance is required or not,
and who or what committee is responsible for chapel). This
information was received through letters from each school.

Also, findings are presented regarding some admission
practices. Based on the application and reference forms of
each school, what specific information related to the

applicant's moral maturity is requested?

Colonial Theological Seminary

The following findings relate to the program at
Colonial.

Courses influencing students' moral development (Table 6-1)

Professors made reference to twelve different items. An
equal number of required and elective courses were mentioned
(six each). Nine of the courses are taught in the classical
departments, and three of the courses are taught in the
ministry-related departments. Two courses were mentioned by
all four faculty members.

In three seminary courses, the subject of moral develop-
ment is discussed; one course is required, and the others are
elective. The three courses are all taught by one professor,
the only faculty member teaching on moral development theory.
In the required course (Teaching Ministry of the Church), the

subject is only introduced very briefly.

188

Table 6-1

Courses Influencing Moral Development at Colonial Seminary

A. Courses mentioned more than once:

1.

2.

6.

Basic Christian Ethics (R, C, 3 cr, 4)
A study of the principles of Christian conduct.

Christian Social Ethics (R, C, 3 cr, 4)

A study of the structures and forces of social
existence and an address to current issues in social
morality.

Philosophy of Religion (R, C, 3 cr, 2)
A study of representative philosophical issues implicit
in religious existence.

A required elective course chosen from the department
of Moral and Philosophical Theology; it may or may not
be a course specifically dealing with ethics

(E, C, 3 cr, 3)

Pastoral Care (R, M, 3 cr, 2)

An introduction to the church's pastoral care of the
individual, the family, the congregation, and members
of the community. '

Courses in Church History (R, C, 2)

B. Courses mentioned only once:

1.

Fundamental Apologetics (R, C, 3 or)
A course in the principles of Christan Theism and in
the science of its defense.

Theology of the Social Gospel (E, C, 3 cr)

An examination and assessment of main doctrines, such
as those concerning God, Christ, humanity, and kingdom,
in the American "social Christianity” of 1865-1918.

The Apologetical Theology of C. S. Lewis (E, C, 3 or)
A study of the methods used by C. S. Lewis to
communicate and defend Christianity.

Studies in Spirituality (E, C: not listed in catalog)

189

Table 6-1 (cont'd.).

5.

6.

The Art of Cross-cultural Ministry (E, M, 3 cr)
Crucial areas of cross-cultural ministry are examined
in the light of principles of ecclesiology and
missiology and the data of social and cultural
anthropology. The course addresses such matters as:
understanding another culture or sub-culture, coping
with change and cultural differences, and preparing
oneself for ministry in another culture.

Courses in the History of Missions (E, M)

Courses covering the subject of moral development

1.

The Teaching Ministry of the Church (R, M, 3 cr)

A study of the biblical and theological foundations of
the teaching aspect of the church's ministry. Special
consideration is given to the catechizing of children
and youth. Perspectives from the social sciences are
included.

The Christian Nurture of Children (E, M, 3 cr)

A study of the moral, spiritual, emotional, and social
development of children from birth to adolescence, and
the implications for the teaching ministry of the
church. .

Youth Ministries (E, M, 3 cr)

A study of the moral, spiritual, emotional and social
aspects of adolescence, and their implications for the
church's various ministries to youth.

Legend:
R = Required course in the M.Div. program
E = Elective course
C = Course offered within the Classical departments
M = Course offered within the Ministry-related

departments

# cr = Number of hours or credits assigned to the
course, if listed in the catalog

# = Number of professors (n=4) who mentioned the course

Required course sequencing not listed in catalog.

190

In the two elective courses, about one-fifth of the
course is devoted to dealing with issues of moral development.
The purpose of teaching the material is to make the students
more aware of themselves than to learn the particular stages.
In both courses, students are required to do a small field
project, interviewing children or adolescents. Since the
students begin to realize that the child's reasoning is
limited, the professor hopes that, "it will be the last time
they [the students] give one of those dumb children's sermons."
Besides the Piagetian developmental theory which is covered,
the following moral development texts are used as major
resources:

Duska, R. & Wheelan, M. Moral Development: A Guide to
Piaget and Kohlberg. Paulist Press, 1975.

Dykstra, C. Vision and Character: A Christian Educator's
Alternative to Kohlberg. Paulist, 1981.

Wilcox, M. Developmental Journey: A Guide to the
Development of Logical andMoral Reasoning and Social
Perspective. Abingdon, 1979.

This professor also teaches a few sessions of the Family
Ministries course (an elective) where he uses the following
text:
Ward, T. Values Begin at Home. Victor, 1979.
Student participation in seminary governance

Students have various avenues of making their wishes
known. Student-directed vehicles include: course evaluations
(in which students themselves design the forms, compile and

report the results to each faculty member), the student

newspaper, and the student senate, which has its own

191
committees. Avenues to which students have access include: an
elected student observer at faculty meetings and elected
student representives on almost all faculty committees
(educational policies, curriculum revision, admissions and
standards, social functions, worship, and special functions).
At the beginning of each term the Dean calls together student
representatives of each class and some faculty members, and
they analyze the student workload and sequencing of exams for
the term. Students may also approach an individual faculty
member or they may make an appeal to the denominational
board.

Feedback on Students' Personal and Moral Development

 

Responses from faculty included three formal vehicles
for reviewing an individual student's development. The most
regular opportunity for personal feedback involves the
advisor or counselor-advisee relationship. Much of the
school's monitoring system is built around this system.
Approximately 12 students are assigned to the care of a
faculty member throughout the student's time at the
seminary. Weekly voluntary meetings together may include
times of Bible study, prayer and general discussion.

Some structured questionnaires and forms from ATS's
"Readiness for Ministry" project are used to assist in
reflecting on personal growth and readiness for ministry.
Also, first year students take a psychological test and the
faculty counselor discusses the results with the student.

During the second year the faculty counselor meets with the

192
student to go over a list of nine personal qualities and the
student's school record.

Following a field education ministry assigment, students
turn in a report on their experience and then undergo an
interview or ”talk down" with their faculty counselor regard-
ing the experience, the field supervisor's evaluation and the
student's own reflection on the ministry. Also, as a part of
their field education requirements, students are required to
write a paper in which they reflect on a particular ministry
experience in terms of their theology. Students meet in small
groups led by a faculty and present their papers and receive
criticism and suggestions from the group.

The Admissions and Standards committee regularly
reviews students' academic records (grades, late papers) to
monitor progress in the program and to watch for danger
signals. Sometimes, a memo will be sent to the student's
counselor for a follow-up interview to investigate difficul-
ties. One faculty member felt that the system involves a lot
of paper shuffling, hand holding, and prying into students'
lives. However, the counselor-advisee system does manifest a
concerted effort on the part of the seminary to retain a
personal focus on the student. Additional faculty comments
suggested that students receive some feedback through casual
counseling and talking in the hallways and after class.
Discussions at faculty meetings

Each spring, because of the seminary's responsibility

to the denomination, faculty must vote whether students are

193
recommended for the ministry and graduation. In preparation
for this, each faculty counselor must write a brief
evaluation of students in their charge. These evaluations
are distributed to all faculty members. At the faculty
meeting, a student's progress and potential for ministry is
discussed and, then by an affirmative vote, the student's
name is placed on a list of recommended candidates. The list
is submitted to the seminary's board of trustees for
approval.

Earlier in December and January, a sheet is passed
around for faculty to list any students they think may be
experiencing difficulties, whether academic or personal. For
those names that appear repeatedly on the list, the
Admissions and Standards committee will contact that faculty
counselor. The faculty counselor meets with the student and
will suggest possible avenues of dealing with the matter
(for example, an additional internship). Besides recommenda-
tion for candidacy, faculty may, on occasion discuss
personal matters, such as a student's moral development, or
the quality of a student's sermon, or how the student
relates to other persons. Smaller faculty committees have
been designed to take up such matters.

Chapel services

 

Colonial's chapel services are held on Monday and
Friday. (The Wednesday slot is set aside for faculty
counselors and their advisees to meet on a weekly basis.)

Services usually last about 30 to 40 minutes and attendance

194

is voluntary. Chapel services are the responsibility of the
chapel committee (members are elected each year) comprised
of two faculty members and two students.
Relevant application information requested

Only general references are made concerning the personal
life of the student. The student must write a one-page auto-
biography including information about childhood, education
and personal development. The student must also give a brief
statement about a personal Christian commitment. Reference
forms include requests for general information concerning
matters regarding Christian doctrine or life which should be
noted. In addition, a request is made from the student's
college counselor and major college professor for candid
statements about the student in matters related to, among
other things, the applicant's character, personality and
social sensitivity. A note in the school catalog provides

general guidelines for student conduct.

Cornerstone Theological Seminary

The following findings relate to the program at
Cornerstone.

Courses influencing moral development (Table 6-2)

This particular interview question was not asked of the
professors (the school was one of the sites of the pilot
study). To allow some kind of comparison with other schools,
a list has been compiled of possible courses from the catalog

which faculty might have suggested. Had the question been

195

Table 6-2

Suggestive Listing of Courses Influencing Moral Development

at Cornerstone Seminary

Pastoral Problems and Procedures (R-3rd yr, M, 3 cr)
This course devotes extensive consideration to the
problems faced in the pastoral ministry. The specific
curriculum is planned by student and instructor cooper-
ation. Laboratory techniques are used in addition to
lectures and class discussion. Student projects are
developed.

Christian Ethics (E, C, 2 cr)

[taught alternate summers by a visiting professor]

A study and evaluation of the major theories of
goodness, obligation, and motive; and the development of
a consistent Christian theory of value and obligation.

Seminar on Biblical Ethics and Contemporary Issues

(E, C, 2 cr; advanced students only)

This study evaluates the various philosophical systems
of ethics and emphasizes the Christian's personal
ethical responsibilities in the church and in society.
Includes a study of selected ethical problems in
contemporary culture.

The Philosophy of Ministry

[in planning stages, not listed in catalog]

It would deal with the character of the minister:
personal life, habits, consistency, servant attitude,
and development of character.

Legend:

Required course in the M.Div. program
Elective course

Course offered in Classical desciplines

Course offered in Ministry-related disciplines
Year when the required course is scheduled
Number of credits assigned to the course

*wzomw

0k} II II II II

r
r

196

asked of faculty, additional courses would have probably been
mentioned. At Cornerstone, there is no specific course which
deals with the topic of moral development.
Student participation in seminary governance

The student council is the chief vehicle for making
suggestions for the program, usually after they have polled
the student body. Recommendations are given to the dean, who
in turn submits them to the Academic Affairs committee (Dean
and department heads), which then submits the issue to the
whole faculty at a faculty meeting. The Assistant Dean of
Student Affairs sits on the council. There are student
representatives on three faculty committees: Bible Conference
(student body president), Missions Conference (president and
vice president of the World Missions Fellowship) and Library
and Learning Resources (two student representatives).
Feedback on students' moral and personal development

There is no structured format which assesses students'
development during their time at the seminary, besides what
is done for entrance to the program. When faculty become
aware that a student is experiencing problems, the student's
name is referred either to the Assistant Dean of Student
Affairs, or the Academic Affairs committee.
Discussion at faculty meetings

When matters are brought to the whole faculty, which is
infrequent, usually the purpose is to make faculty aware of
the situation and to pray for the student. A smaller group

of faculty, either the Admissions and Retention committee or

197
the Academic Affairs committee normally deals with such
matters.

Chapel services

 

Chapel services are held four times a week and last
about 40 minutes. Attendance is required of all students. A
faculty Chapel and Conference committee oversees the services
(student body chaplain, and three faculty members).

Relevant application information requested

Specific information is requested about personal habits
(the regular use of tobacco, alcoholic beverages or non-
medical drugs). The student must sign a statement which
includes a commitment to,

maintain the moral and spiritual ideals of the school,

live a life of separation from worldly amusements,

render due respect to the members of its faculty, and
fully conform to its social, academic and spiritual
regulations.
Among other written statements, students are requested to
submit a one-page account of their Christian experience.

The reference forms include, besides the usual open-
ended questions, a specific listing of 10 areas for which the
student must be evaluated: cooperation, emotions, initiative,
judgment and common sense, leadership, personality, reliabil-
ity, Christian character, communication skills, and writing.
For each item, one of six gradations must be checked, ranging
from an outstanding feature to not observed. The continuum
for "Christian character" (maturity, vitality and consistency

of life) includes these gradations: outstanding as a

Christian, consistently Christian, rather consistent as a

198
Christian, questionable at times, little or no evidence, and

not observed.

Foundational Theological Seminary

 

The following findings relate to the program at
Foundational.

Courses influencing moral development (Table 6-3)

Faculty suggested that ten courses (or series of courses)
have the most influence on students' moral development. Six of
those courses mentioned are required and four are elective.
Five of the courses are in the classical departments and the
other five courses are offered in the ministry—related
department. One required course treats the subject of moral
development on Parish Education (the professor teaches other
elective courses, but only mentioned this course since it was
a course all students must take). In dealing with the subject
in the course, the professor wishes students to break down the
"discrete" categories of cognitive and affective, and to see
the interrelationship of these domains. Another goal is to
prompt cognitive dissonance in the students--to expose
alternatives in ethical decision- making. The main texts used
for the course include:

Bloom's cognitive and Krathwohl's affective taxonomies.

Dykstra, C. Vision and Character: A Christian Educator's
Alternative to Kohlberg. Paulist, 1981.

Triandis, H. Attitude and Attitude Change. Wiley, 1971.

 

199

Table 6-3

Courses Influencing Moral Development at Foundational
Seminary

 

Courses mentioned more than once:

1.

3.

Required exegetical courses, in general

(R, C, lst & 2nd yr, 3 cr, 1)

Specifically, Romans [or Galatians]

(R, C, 2nd yr, 3 cr, 1)

Translation and interpretation of selected chapters of
the Epistle to the Romans. Special attention is given
to terminology and the argument and theology of the
epistle.

Required doctrinal courses, in general

(R, C, each year, 3 cr, 1)

Specifically, the confessions of the church
(R, C, 1st yr, 6 cr, 1)

Crisis Counseling (R, M, 3rd yr, 3 cr, 2)

The concept of crisis and how to intervene creatively
are treated in this course. The nature of crisis, its
signs, development and effect are given consideration.
The function of pastoral counseling as it relates to
specific crises in the lives of people is examined.

Courses mentioned only once:

1.

3.
4.

Christian Social Ethics (R, M, 3rd yr, 3 cr)

The course focuses on the role and function of Christian
ethics relative to social problems and issues that
concern and affect Christian social responsibility.
Special emphasis is given to abortion, birth control,
capital punishment, homosexuality, mental "illness,“ and
pollution problems.

Christian Faith and Life (R, C, 2nd yr, 3 cr)
Saving faith. Conversion. Justification by faith. The
Christian life. Perseverance in faith.

Required Preaching courses (R, M, each year, 3 cr)

Biblical Ethics: Contrast and Application (E, C, 3 cr)
Biblical ethics understood from a distinctly [denomi-
national] perspective, are contrasted with a variety of
contemporary thought systems. In the context of a
pluralistic society, the fundamental Biblical principles
which pertain to ethics are examined and applied.

200

Table 6-3 (cont'd.).

5. Modern Apologetics (E, C, 3 cr)
Focuses on how Biblical Christianity can and needs to
be defended in a secular, scientific era. . . .

6. New course on the spiritual or devotional life and
formation (E, M: not listed in catalog)

7. Marriage enrichment (E, M; not listed in catalog)

Course

covering the subject of Moral development

1. Parish Education (R, M, 2nd yr, 3 cr)

A

foundation course which examines the principles and

practice of Christian education at the parish level.
Special attention is given to a [denominational]
perspective of education, the psychology of learning,
the art of teaching, parish education at the adult
level, and support systems for parish education.

Legend:

***30MW

= Required course in the M.Div. program

= Elective course

Course offered in the Classical disciplines

Course offered in the Ministry-related disciplines
yr = Year when required course is scheduled

cr = Number of credits assigned to the course

= Number of professors (n=4) who mentioned the course

201

A unit of the course is devoted to the issue of moral
development.
Student participation in seminary governance

On the Academic Policies committee sit 6 faculty and 3
student representatives. Students can have an influence on
the decisions made, but they do not have a vote. The
effectiveness of these students depends to a large extent on
how well they represent the wishes and needs of the whole
student body. Besides this, there is a student legislature,
and individual students may take a matter to a faculty
member, officers of the school or the Board of Regents.
Feedback on students' moral development

The seminary also depends heavily on an advisor- advisee
system to maintain a focus on personal aspects of student
life (approximately 9 to 15 students are assigned to a
faculty member). As one professor commented, the effec-
tiveness of the system depends on each faculty: some do a
better job than others. The ATS "Readiness for ministry"
assessment program is used by the seminary and the advisors
as one structured means to aid them in monitoring students'
progress in academic, professional and personal development.
During the first year, advisor and student meet on three
occasions to discuss scores and evaluations resulting from
the assessment procedures. The seminary also has an Associate
Dean whose main responsibility is to encourage faculty
advisors to maintain close relationships with students. One

professor remarked that the system is not perfect, but it is

'202
much better than when he went to seminary.

During the students' extended internship ministry, the
supervising pastor provides the evaluation for the student.
Students also undergo two important interviews by the
placement department. One interview follows an extended term
of ministry internship and the other interview comes before
placement during the final year of studies. One final check-
point involves the Certification committee. Students must be
certified for the denomination and the committee makes
recommendations on each student during the last half of the
final year. Only in extreme cases are students' names
brought before the whole faculty for certification.

Discussions at faculty meetings

 

Matters related to student problems are normally taken
up by smaller faculty committees, or by the Dean and
Associate Dean. The faculty has given the Certification
committee the authority to certify students. This committee
then sends a list of certified students to the faculty for
approval. At that time, a discussion about a particular
student may ensue.

Chapel services

Each day of the week chapel services are held for about
25 minutes at Foundational seminary. Attendance is voluntary
and the Dean of the Chapel is responsible for the program.
Relevant application information requested

Both the application form and the reference form

identify five characteristics of a pastor (with appropriate

203
Scripture citations) on which the applicant is evaluated.
Four of these areas relate to personal qualities: (words are
used from the book of Titus) arrogant or quick-tempered:
drunkard or violent or greedy: hospitable, one who loves
what is good; and master of himself, upright, holy and
self-controlled. Under each item there are four statements:

A) With the assistance of God the Holy Spirit, these
behavior characteristics are not part of my
personality.

B) I recognize the troublesome nature of such behavior
and struggle against it, sometimes successfully and
sometimes not.

C) I have a problem with [area]. Specify:

D) Provide your own comments on a separate sheet of

paper if you consider them to be appropriate or
helpful.

Heritage Theological Seminary

The following findings relate to the program at
Heritage.

Courses influencing moral development (Table 6-4)

The faculty suggested that six courses (or areas) would
influence the students' growth toward moral maturity. One
course, Church and Society, was mentioned by all faculty. Of
the six courses, three were required and three were elective.
Four of the courses are taught in the classical departments,
one is offered in the ministry-related department, and the
other one is an interdisciplinary course.

Two professors at the seminary teach the subject of
moral development in their classes. One course is required

for all students, The Teaching Ministry of the Church. The

204

Table 6-4

Courses Influencing Moral Development at Heritage Seminary

A. Courses mentioned more than once:

1.

Church and Society (R, C, 2nd yr, 4)

This course considers theological presuppositions about
the relation-tension of Christian-world and Church—
society and analyzes the United States' socio-economic-
political-cultural situation as a reality in conflict.
Students engage in a contemporary reading of the Bible
from this perspective in order to develop paradigms for
the Church's life and mission.

Seminar in Human Development (E, M, 3)

This is a basic course which focuses on the character-
istics and interrelationships of developmental stages,
including stages of moral and faith development. It also
compares and critiques some of the major theories and
explores applications to Christian education.

Christ and Ethics: A Historical/Theological Approach

(E, C, 2)

In this course the typology developed in Christ and the
Moral Life by James M. Gustafson will be used to guide
source readings in various traditions. Students will be
encouraged to clarify and articulate their own under—
standing of this issue and relate it to the patterns
typical of their own theological and ecclesiastical
traditions.

B. Courses mentioned only once:

1.

Synoptic Gospels (R, C, lst yr)

This course has two foci: the context, development and
writing of the Synoptic Gospels, and their content, the
ministry of Jesus. The first half treats the Synoptic
problem and the question of Jesus and the Gospels. The
second half looks at the significant events and
teachings of Jesus' ministry from the standpoint of
source, form and redaction studies.

Assessment/Colloquium courses (R, C & M, each year)

I: The purpose of this assessment is (l) to confirm (or
not confirm) each student's potential for pursuing a
degree program at Heritage, and (2) to orient students
to the overall assessment process.

205

Table 6-4 (cont'd.).

3.

II. The principal function of this assessment is to
diagnose students' strengths and weaknesses in their
preparation for ministry, so that areas of strength
might be further affirmed and appropriate remedial
steps pursued in the area of weakness.

III. The primary purposes of this assessment are 1) to
evaluate the students' understanding of the Christian
faith, 2) to ascertain their ability to articulate that
faith and 3) to assist them in their preparation for
ordination.

any electives in ethics offered (E, C)

Courses covering the subject of moral development

1.

The Teaching Ministry of the Church (R, M, 2nd yr)

This course is a basic course which introduces the teach-
ing ministry of the church utilizing five contemporary
approaches to Christian religious education. Students
learn a basic instructional method and lead a peer group
in a learning experience.

Seminar in Human Development (E, M)
(cited above)

Ministry with Youth (E, M)

This course aims to develop the student's ministry
skills with youth including: teaching, prayer,
communion, advocacy and trouble making. Three settings
are used for leadership development including: 1)
interviews with high school students: 2) a weekend
retreat; and 3) seminar leadership on a selected topic.
Church and community approaches to youth will be
considered.

Legend:
R = Required course in the M.Div. program
E = Elective course
C = Course offered in the Classical disciplines
M = Course offered in the Ministry-related disciplines
# yr = Year when the required course is scheduled
# = Number of professors (n=4) who mentioned the course

Credit hours per course were not listed in catalog.

206
professor wishes students (a) to understand the developmental
process, of biological, psychological and social maturation;
(b) to understand that faith development is linked to
psychological and social development, and that, though it may
conform to a stage theory, development is not automatic: and
(c) to be able to communicate with all ages of people--to
communicate at the appropriate level of the person being
dealt with. The major text in the course (and the Ministry
with Youth elective course) is:

Goldman, R. Religious Thinking from Childhood to
Adolescence. Seabury, 1968.

The other two courses are both elective, one taught by
each of the professors. In the Ministry with Youth course,
students are required to interview high school students on a
weekly basis with a Kohlberg-type format. The professor
teaching the Seminar in Human Development attempts to help
students understand the theories by doing interviews them-
selves. Students should be able to critique the theories of
Kohlberg and others. Almost one-third of the course is
devoted to the subject. Major texts or readings include:

Dykstra, C. Vision and Character: A Christian Educator's
Alternative to Kohlberg. Paulist, 1981.

Fowler, J. some articles on Faith Development.

Gilligan, C. In a Different Voice. Harvard, 1982.

Joy, D. (Ed.) Moral Development Foundations: Judeo-
Christian Alternatives to Piaget/Kohlberg.Abingdon,
1983.

Kohlberg, L. some articles on moral reasoning.

Moran, G. some articles on religious education.

207

Student participation in seminary governance

 

A11 avenues are open to students at Heritage. Students
have had representatives on almost all faculty committees
since the 1960's, including the important Educational
Policies committee which meets weekly. Two student repre-
sentatives are elected to this committee, for two year terms
on a staggered basis. In addition, students pressured the
seminary for a representative on the Board of Trustees.
(This action prompted the faculty to follow suit.) One
committee, the Academic Council (comprising the Dean and
heads of the departments) has no student representative.

Students have other vehicles of expression such as the
student newspaper and student government. The student
government officers were recently voted out of office by the
student body over concerns that the government was not
responsive to the needs of all students. An ad hoc committee
was set up to deal with these concerns. A Due Process
committee, which has not needed to convene in two years, is
available to receive grievances and arbitrate matters.
Students may also approach individual faculty members or the
Dean's office.

Feedback on students' moral development

Two primary vehicles were cited by faculty. Heritage
also uses the ATS "Readiness for ministry” assessment tools.
Students take tests, write self-assessments and these are
reviewed periodically by a small committee of faculty and

the student. Each year the assessment has a different focus

208
(see Table 6-4 under Assessment/Colloquium). These tools
help a student know where he or she falls on a scale, but
they don't specifically provide moral guidance.

Another means of feedback relates to the field education
experience. While on the experience, evaluation is provided
by the supervising pastor. If a problem arises, the student
may then be called in to have a conference with the Field
Education director. Heritage also uses an advisor-advisee
system in which approximately 20 students are assigned to a
faculty member. In addition, a faculty committee annually
reviews of students' records to identify any problems. One
professor raised the question concerning which insititution
is ultimately responsible for evaluating the student's
professional and personal competency: is it the church, or is
it the seminary? There are also legal matters to consider.
Does the seminary have the right to deny a degree to a
student who has completed the academic requirements, but may
not fulfill expectations of personal and moral maturity?
Discussions at faculty meetings

On a few occasions, situations are mentioned to faculty
for their information. For example, at the end of the year,
faculty are notified regarding how many students will
continue in the program next year and how many were not
recommended to continue: no names are usually mentioned.
Usually it must be an outstanding case for the matter to be
brought before the whole faculty. The faculty are hesistant

to vote on dismissing a student without highly sophisticated

209
evidence. In the few cases when it has come to such propor-
tions, something has usually happened to intervene and
dissolve the problem (for instance, a student voluntarily
leaving). In most cases, the faculty discipline committee
deals with such matters.
Chapel services

Chapels are held two times a week and services last
approximately 40 to 45 minutes. Attendance is voluntary and
the faculty chairman of the Chapel committee is responsible
for organizing the program.

Relevant application information requested

The student is requested to complete a candid autobio-
graphical statement of 400 or more words. Six items should
be included in the statement which primarily focuses on the
student's sense of responsibility and commitment to the
vocational role of a pastor (two questions) and why the
student wants to go to seminary, specifically Heritage
Seminary (two questions). Students are also asked to discuss
their own Christian experience.

Reference forms request an evaluation of the applicant
concerning twelve items: health and physical condition, care
in financial matters, intellectual ability, initiative and
perseverance (ability to see things to do and diligence in
accomplishing tasks), intellectual creativity, social
acceptance, leadership (check more than one if applicable),
cooperation, emotional stability, Christian experience

(evaluate the applicant's spiritual maturity and Christian

210
witness), professional promise, and marital status (if
married, additional questions follow). From two to five
categories are available for checking with each item, in

addition to an open "comments" section.

Historical Theological Seminary

The following findings relate to the program at
Historical.

Courses influencing moral development (Table 6-5)

Professors suggested six different courses: two of the
courses are required and four are elective. Four of the
courses are offered in the classical departments and the
other two are offered in the ministry-related departments.

The two courses treating the subject of moral development
are taught by the same professor, though other professors are
knowledgeable of the theory and research in moral development.
Educational Ministry of the Church is a first year required
course and the topic of moral development is taken up in two
sessions. For the elective course, the subject is treated in
five sessions. The professor has three aims in dealing with
the subject, (1) students would be aware of the literature of
moral development research, (2) students would understand that
their church members may be listening to their teaching and
sermons at different levels of understanding, and (3) students
would know something about how to help the people develop and
grow toward moral maturity. Major readings for the courses

include:

211

Table 6-5

Courses Influencinngoral Development at Historical Seminary

 

A. Courses mentioned more than once:

1.

Christian Ethics (R, C, 3rd yr, 2 cr, 3)

Biblical perspectives on contemporary ethical issues
facing the church and the minister: divorce, abortion,
euthanasia, genetic control, sex, war, racism, ecology,
personal life style, and the church's social
responsibilities.

Personal Development for Ministry (E, M, 2 cr, 2)

A study encouraging self-assessment and the measuring
of gifts for careers in ministry and covering the
personal disciplines of piety, and of interpersonal
relationships in light of biblical materials designed
to focus on the leading of an exemplary Christian life
midst the pressures of school and parish life.

Old Testament Ethics (E, C, 2: not listed in catalog)

Psychological and Sociological Foundations of Learning
(E, M, 3 cr, 2)

Study of the changes in human behavior by which skills,
knowledge and attitudes are learned and a survey of the
schools of learning theory: contemporary sociological
problems in church developmental processes in the light
of the development of individuals in relation to their
socio-economic background.

B. Courses mentioned only once:

1.

Latter Prophets (R, C, 2nd yr, 4 cr)

An historical, hermeneutical and theological study of
the major and minor prophets against the background of
the times and the history of the divided monarchy.

Matthew (E, C, 3 cr) [or James: not listed in catalog]
Discussion of the fulfillment of the Old Testament in
the person and teachings of Jesus, the meaning of the
Sermon on the Mount, and the teachings of Jesus about
the Kingdom.

212

Table 6-5 (cont'd.).

Courses covering the subject of moral development

1. Educational Ministry of the Church (R-lst yr, M, 4 cr)
Introduction to local church administration and
teaching, focusing on the aims, principles, organization
and development of a local church educational program
and on the aims, methods, media, and evaluation of the
teaching process.

2. Psychological and Sociological Foundations of Learning
(E, M, 3 cr) (cited earlier)

Legend:

Required course in the M.Div. program

Elective course

Course offered in Classical desciplines

Course offered in Ministry-related disciplines

yr = Year when the required course is scheduled

cr = Number of credits assigned to the course

# = Number of professors (n=4) who mentioned the course

4:4H363m5fl
llllllll

213

Dykstra, C. Vision and Character: A Christian
Educator's Alternative to Kohlberg. Paulist, 1981.

Fowler, J. some articles on faith development.

Joy, D. (Ed.) Moral Development Foundations: Judeo-
Christian Alternatives to PiagepZKohlberg. Abingdon,
1983.

Kohlberg, L. The Philosophy of Moral Development: Moral
Stages and the Idea of Justice. Harper & Row, 1981.

Wolterstorff, N. Educating for Responsible Action.
Eerdmans, 1980.

,Student participation in seminary governance

Almost all faculty committees have two student repre-
sentatives, including the important Educational Policy
committee. Students are expected to represent the students
to the committees and to convey information back to the
students. Only the President's cabinet has no student repre-
sentatives. Other avenues include the student council, the
Dean or the Dean of Students.
Feedback on students' moral development

The school uses an advisor-advisee system to divide the
student body into smaller cells. On Wednesday, during the
normal chapel times, each of the groups meets for various
purposes such as fellowship, Bible study and prayer. As a
result of these meetings, faculty are able to develop
relationships with students. Also, for each term, a student
must seek the advisor's approval of the class schedule for
the next term. This can be an opportunity to discuss the
student's goals and related matters. '

Historical is in the process of finalizing the implemen-

tation of a Mid-program Assessment Process, establishing a new

214

structural vehicle for monitoring students' development. The
process is being built into the existing advisor-advisee
system, but is supervised by the Dean of Students. During
their second year, students would be recommended for continua-
tion and candidacy in the program, based on previous objective
and subjective measures.
Discussions at facultqueetings

Problems are usually dealt with by the Student Develop-
ment committee. The committee keeps the faculty appraised of
situations, but normally without identifying student names.
Faculty can then know enough about the matter to pray for
the student(s) involved.
Chapel services

Historical offers three chapel services a week. On
Tuesday and Friday chapels are 30 minutes in length and on
Thursday a service is 50 minutes in length. On Wednesday,
the time slot is given over to advisor-advisee support
groups. Attendance is voluntary and the Dean of Students is
responsible for organizing the chapel program.
Relevant application information requested

Students are requested to submit a one-page personal
statement discussing the student's past and present Christian
experience. In addition, the student must sign a statement in
which the student agrees "to comply with the rules and
regulations which may be in force during my enrollment at
Historical Theological Seminary.”

On the reference form, seven general areas are listed

215
on which the applicant should be evaluated: industry,
initiative, dependability, character, social acceptability,
sociability, and quality of work. Under each item, one of
five categories can be marked, ranging from an "outstanding
quality" to ”no opportunity to observe." The "character"
item lists these categories: high moral and spiritual
standards, shows growth and maturity, indifferent moral and
spiritual standards, inconsistent attitudes and practices,

and no opportunity to observe.

Memorial Theological Seminary

The following findings relate to the program at
Memorial.
Courses influencing moral development (Table 6-6)

Professors mentioned five courses which they thought
would influence the students' moral development. Two of the
courses are required and both are scheduled for the first
year. The other four courses are elective. All five of the
classes are offered in the classical departments. One course
was mentioned by all four faculty. One course at the
seminary was specifically identified as dealing with the
subject of moral development. The professor is concerned
with helping the students apply biblical principles in moral
decision-making.
Student participation in seminary governance

Since the size of the faculty is small, there are no

faculty committees. Thus far, the whole faculty is able to

216

Table 6-6

Courses Influencing Moral Development at Memorial Seminary

A. Courses mentioned more than once:

1.

Christian Life (R-lst yr, C, 3 cr, 4)

An investigation into the meaning of biblical
Christianity and its relationship to faith and
practice.

Christian Ethics (E, C, 3 cr, 2)

An examination of the basis and nature of Christian
conduct. Analysis of ethical systems and related
problems.

B. Courses mentioned only once:

1.

Systematic Theology I (R-lst yr, C, 3 cr)

A study of the nature, method, and rationale of
theology with particular attention to the doctrines of
God and the Scripture.

Christian World and Life View (E, C, 2 cr)

An elaboration of the Christian perspective upon all of
life and reality with emphasis upon basic matters such
as method, being, knowing, and doing.

Early Apologetic Literature (E, C, 3 cr)

A careful examination of Greek and Latin apologetics
material from Aristedes to Lactantius to familiarize
the student with the important heritage of the
Christian church as reflected in the apologetic
writings of the first four centuries.

217

Table 6-6 (cont'd.).

Course

covering the subject of moral development

1. Total Curriculum Planning (E, M, 2 cr)
Analysis of the total concept of curriculum dealing with
objectives, sequencing, and evaluation. Examination of
current concepts of curriculum development both in
education and Christian education. The student is
required to develop a total curriculum plan for a local
church consistent with a Christian philosophy of
education.

Legend:
R

E
C
M
#
#
#

= Required course in the M.Div. program

= Elective course

a Course offered in Classical disciplines

= Course offered in Ministry-related disciplines

yr = Year when the required course is scheduled

cr = Number of credits assigned to the course

= Number of professors (n=4) who mentioned the course

218
conduct the seminary business. Representative officers of
the student senate may schedule a time to bring a matter to
a faculty meeting. There is no regular student observer at
the faculty meetings. Students may individually approach
faculty members or the Dean regarding such matters.

Feedback on students' moral development

 

Students are assigned to a faculty advisor for their
period of study at the seminary. In past years, there has not
been a scheduled time set aside for advisees and advisors to
meet. Next year, some of the regular chapel times will be set
aside, periodically throughout the year, for this purpose.
Once a month, the dean sends around a sheet requesting
faculty to list the names of students who they feel are
experiencing some difficulty which is affecting their perfor-
mance. Names identified more than once are sent to the
Associate Dean to initiate a conference with the student.

One checkpoint for students is their application for
degree candidacy. Following the completion of 20 to 30
credits, the student submits a formal application for degree
candidacy. The application process involves a formal inter-
view with the faculty advisor in which all the student's
records (such as academic records, ministry reports, and
chapel attendance), are reviewed and discussed. Recommenda-
tions from the faculty advisor and the student's pastor are
submitted to the faculty. Then, in one of the faculty
meetings, the whole faculty will vote on whether to admit

each student to degree candidacy and allow the student to

219

continue in the program. On occasion, degree candidacy will
be postponed so that the student can deal with any problem
that has arisen. In a few cases, candidacy is denied.
Discussions at faculty meetings

For the most part, discussions about the students'
moral development at faculty meetings relate to students'
degree candidacy, as described above. In almost every
faculty meeting, faculty must vote on a few applications for
degree candidacy. Otherwise, only gross violations are
brought to the attention of the whole faculty. Usually the
Dean or the Associate Dean is consulted on such matters.
Chapel services

Chapel services are held each day of the week are about
30 to 40 minutes long. Attendance is required if students
have a class either immediately preceding or following the
chapel time. The Associate Dean of Students is in charge of
the program.
Relevant application information requested

In a section entitled, autobiographical information,
students are requested to fill in a few lines and identify,
among other things, (1) the experiences which have helped
them grow in their Christian life, and (2) their "personal
convictions and practices concerning such matters as the use
of alcohol, tobacco, illegal drugs, attendance to movies and
participation in social dancing." A lengthy statement of the
standards of conduct is printed on the final page of the

application form. Then, students are requested to sign a

220

statement in which they certify, among other things, ”that I
will honorably adhere to all the standards of the Seminary."

The personal reference forms list ten specific traits
for which the applicant is to be assessed: teachability,
dependability, judgment, initiative, accuracy, quality of
work, quantity of work, attitude toward work, attitude
toward peers, and attitude toward superiors. A continuum of
four labeled gradations is provided for each item. An
additional question asks whether the applicant has been

found to be consistently honest.

Qualitative Observations

A few of the responses in the chapter merit additional
comment. A diversity is apparent at seminaries in the
emphasis placed on instruction in ethics. One seminary has a
whole department devoted to philosophical and moral theology,
while another seminary has no required courses in ethics.
Though most schools have some procedure for monitoring
students' personal development, the main emphasis tends to be
that of identifying marginally problematic students, and not
in facilitating students' development toward greater levels

of moral maturity.

Summary

Most of the seminaries offer at least one course in
ethics and a course covering the subject of moral development.

In many seminaries, student representatives sit on almost all

221

faculty committees, permitting access to important information
and providing an avenue for suggesting changes. Seminaries
usually have some structure to monitor student progress. For
many, the advisor-advisee context is used as the center of the
system. Additional help is provided through assessment tools,
such as those from the ATS "Readiness for Ministry” project.
Generally, attention is given to academic criteria and "danger
signals" which may identify students experiencing problems.
Small committees are set up to deal with such problem
students. Thus faculty as a whole usually do not discuss such
matters.

Chapel services vary in frequency and last anywhere from
20 to 50 minutes in length. A few seminaries use one of the
chapel time slots to schedule meetings with advisees. Some
seminaries require chapel attendance, others make attendance
voluntary. A faculty member, school officer or faculty
committee supervises the chapel program. The information
requested on application and reference forms about students'
moral development is very general. Though some forms provide
an itemized checklist of traits to be evaluated, the brief
descriptions of the traits which could be related to moral
development are broad and ambiguous. Information is supplied
either through self-report or from references. Students now
have access to these files (a factor which may discourage

candid evaluations).

Chapter 7
CONCLUSIONS

The study examined the educational emphasis placed on
the moral development of ministerial students within the
curriculum of Protestant seminaries. In Chapter 1, the
problem was stated and three research questions were identi-
fied which guided the inquiry. Chapter 2 reviewed curriculum
analyses of theological education which gave attention to the
personal development of seminary students. In addition, the
empirical precedents for the study were cited from studies
investigating theological education and professional educa-
tion. Finally, research precedents were included which
focused on faculty perceptions in matters of moral develop-
ment from higher education and public education.

Methodology employed in the study was explained in
Chapter 3, including selection of the sample, instrument
development and the collection and analysis of the data.
Findings for the study based on personal interviews at six
seminaries were reported in Chapters 4, 5 and 6, each chapter
discussing the data related to one of the three research
questions. Chapter 4 treated the findings to the first

research question: educational tasks and moral development.

222

223
Chapter 5 discussed the data related to the second research
question: faculty-student interactions and moral development.
Chapter 6 dealt with the third research question: institu-
tional influences and moral development.

In the present chapter, the findings are stated as
conclusions regarding moral development as a component of
seminary education, based on the perceptions of seminary
faculty. In addition, a few qualitative observations from
the findings are offered. The chapter concludes with a
section on recommendations for curriculum improvement and a
section in which recommendations are presented for further

research.

Factors Influencing Students' Moral Development

The study identified six major themes of factors which
faculty perceived as influencing the students' moral growth:
(1) field education ministry and life experiences, (2)
faculty-student relationships, (3) one's relationship to God
and related worship experiences, (4) the discussion of moral
issues, (5) peer interaction and group work, and (6) institu-
tional program and structures. Each of these themes incorpo-
rates factors which facilitate or hinder the students'
development toward moral maturity.
Field education ministry and life experiences

The majority of comments made by professors referred to
the significant impact that field education ministries have

on students. In such a real-life context, students are

224
confronted by people with needs and problems, and are forced
to make decisions--moral decisions. Such situations may be
prompted by a counseling appointment at the church, or a
problem at work, or a crisis facing a patient and the family
at a hospital, or the oppressive injustice being experienced
in an inner city context. Here, theory becomes applied, and
conceptions and convictions are shaped and adjusted. In some
cases, experience-oriented instructional means may be used
in the classroom to provide simulated exposures to life:
role play, analysis of case studies and the use of films.
Students are faced with reality and with choices to make.

But some experiences are more challenging than others,
and some professors wish students could have more diverse
encounters. The geographical setting of the seminary limits
such opportunities, for surburban and rural situations, but
in the urban settings, a host of varied experiences are
possible. The diversity of cultural backgrounds (or lack of
such diversity) of the student body may provide additional
exposure to differing perspectives.

Experiences which are competently supervised and
evaluated often yield greater learning, than just the
experience itself. A difficulty with field education involves
receiving candid reports from field supervisors. In addition,
some seminaries provide more intense reflection on these
experiences when students return to seminary than others
(such as a follow-up interview with the field education

director, or a written assignment in which the student

225
reflects on a ministry experience in light of theological
perspectives).
Faculty-student relationships

An important emphasis was placed on the relationship
between faculty and students. Much of a students' time at
the seminary is spent in the company of the faculty, mostly
in a class context, but also in the office, hallway or the
faculty member's home. Many of the faculty in the study had
a significant number of years in the full-time pastorate
before they began a seminary teaching career. The professors
take on a significant mediatorial function--academically,
professionally and personally--in preparing seminarians for
their future role. The professors themselves remember the
encouragement and inspiration that their own seminary
teachers were to them.

Professors enjoy informal discussions with students on a
variety of topics relating to the students' lives or to the
particular discipline of the faculty member. Few professors
mentioned activities in which they do things together with
students (athletics, social engagements, ministry together).
Faculty responsibilities and busyness limits contacts with
students. Busyness leads to a preoccupation with the task at
hand and shifts attention and sensitivity from being directed
toward the student as a person. Most faculty would take the
initiative to seek out a student with a personal problem, but
if the faculty advisor is not aware of the problem due to

other factors, such efforts would not be forthcoming. In

226

cases of academic dishonesty, many faculty would use the
occasion as one for student growth and they would work with
the student to seek an appropriate solution to the matter.

Many schools have built their procedures for monitoring
student development around the advisor-advisee relationship.
The effectiveness of the procedures depends on individual
faculty ability and availablity. Some schools schedule weekly
meetings for advisees and other regular contacts between
advisors and advisees (for instance, approving the class
schedule each term), other schools have no such regular
meeting. An additional factor affecting students involves the
potential negative modeling of a faculty member as scholar
and intellectual rather than as pastor and servant.
One's relationship to God

Many comments indicated, that one's morality is grounded
in one's relationship to God. One's knowledge, thinking,
sensitivity, values and will power grow out of an intimate
devotional commitment to God. Seminaries do provide a regular
formal worship experience for students as one means of
fostering and nurturing such an intimacy. At some seminaries,
additional emphasis is given through days of prayer and the
celebration of the Eucharist. Communication with God through
prayer is manifested in various locations: the classroom, the
professors' office, and informal gatherings of students. This
element distinguishes the seminary from other schools of
professional education--its emphasis and reliance on the

supernatural.

227
Some factors mitigate against the spirit of worship. In
schools where chapel attendance is required, students may
tend to fulfill the obligation for an external rather than
an internal motive. For those schools in which chapel
attendance is voluntary, the academic pressures may lead
students to the library rather than the chapel.

The discussion of moral issues

 

Professors suggested three main purposes they hope to
accomplish when they raise moral issues in class. They want
students to think clearly, to understand the complexity of
moral issues, and to be aware of the various options which
one may choose. Students must also be able to identify the
relevant biblical principles and issues at stake--to be able
to separate the cultural from the universal. Finally,
professors encourage students to make a decision, to
articulate a position and to commit themselves to act
accordingly.

The promotion of the acquisition of knowledge and an
inattention to critical thinking skills may be precipitated by
the seminary's priority for the biblical content. Almost all
of the professors agreed that, of the five aspects of moral
development suggested to them, students would have a high
degree of learning in the area of moral knowledge. Few courses
genuinely encourage students to think for themselves. Faculty
teaching methods and the general classical educational system
are more in harmony with a pedagogical (child-training)

orientation than an andragogical (adult education) one.

228
Peer interaction andugroup work-

Both faculty and fellow students are the main persons
with whom seminarians interact on a daily basis at the
seminary. Probably more personal contact is made with fellow
students during the seminary years. Through various
experiences together--classes, group assignments, discussions
after class--students affect each other's development toward
moral maturity. This influence may be intensified when
relating to students of different cultural backgrounds. In
such a relationship, sharper distinctions may appear between,
on the one hand, what is truly biblical and moral, and, on
the other hand, what is part of the American culture and
one's family background.

Typical academic evaluation procedures tend to encourage
individual learning and achievement. Grades are assigned to
individuals: awards are given to those with the highest GPA.
Pressure is placed on the individual student to perform, yet
in the paStorate, it will take joint ventures and cooperative
initiatives to carry on the ministry.

Institutional programs and structures

Most of the seminaries require students to take at least
one course in ethics. Exposure to moral development theory is
very limited, if at all, since courses covering this material
in more detail are usually elective. Students may be intro-
duced to the theory in some more general required course, but
it may just be a passing acquaintance.

Many of the seminaries have student representatives on

229
almost all faculty committees. A few seminaries have no such
policy. For the most part, then, access is readily available
to present student opinions and suggestions for change. Some
student ideas may be too unrealistic, but many ideas have
great merit and are worthy of a hearing.

Procedures related to giving students feedback on their
development tend to focus primarily on academic criteria and,
when attention is given to personal matters, identifying the
marginal problem student is usually the main purpose. Little
attention is given to helping good students develop to higher
levels of morality. When monitoring procedures are more
informal, left to the individual faculty advisors, the
effectiveness of the system depends on the ability of the
faculty member, and the priority and energy devoted to
developing a relationship with the student.

Admissions forms are usually very general in nature and
do not highlight moral development factors, except for a
statement combining moral and Christian character. Since
much of the information is gleaned through self-report by
the applicant, emphasis may be given to strengths more than
weaknesses. Additional information is requested from
references. Since students can now have access to these
files, those providing references may not wish to be too
candid.

Professors' comments identified some institutional
factors as having an adverse affect on students' moral

development (for example, the academic requirements and the

230
general educational orientation inherent in any educational
institution). The pressure of requirements and the pursuit
of the high GPA may skew seminarians' values and affect

their self-concept and conduct.

Educational Emphasis on Moral Development

A confusion is apparent regarding the nature of moral
development. Moral development lies somewhere in the valley
between spiritual development, on the one hand, and academic
and professional development on the other hand. Moral
development is sometimes mistaken for spiritual development
and thus is encouraged through the chapel, spiritual exhor—
tation and the like. One's relationship to God is seen as a
personal matter--one may make resources available, but
should not meddle in such affairs.

On the other, academic and professional development are
given a greater priority over other areas, including spirit-
ual development and moral development. This greater emphasis
may be due to the assumption that graduate students of a
seminary have already attained a sophisticated level of
moral maturity, requiring no major maturing. Thus, moral
development, as a specifically conscious aspect of the
seminary curriculum is barely visible, or non-existent.

Yet, the processes which influence moral development
are evident at the seminary as mentioned previously: field
education experiences, faculty modeling and relationships,

worship experiences, improving moral thinking and developing

231
commitments, and interaction with fellow students. The
factors are evident, the influence is being made—-but the
process is not a consciously planned element of the seminary
program. Thus we may conclude that moral development i_ a
component of the education of ministerial students 32g moral
development is not a component of the education of ministe-

rial students.

Qualitative Observations

A number of anomolies were uncovered in the study and
are presented here to encourage attention to these matters.
The greatest aid to students' moral development is their
field education ministry and related off-campus experiences.
The greatest hindrance to students' moral growth is related
to pressures and values precipitated by some of the academic,
institutional structures of the seminary. Yet a higher value
is placed on academic performance than practical experience.

One reason that little attention is directed at encour-
aging students' moral development in the curriculum may be
due to an assumption that students are basically morally
mature.

Though professors can identify and articulate a number
of helpful learning experiences which do promote students'
moral growth, most professors tend to assume a didactive-
cognitive mode to help facilitate improvement with students'
character faults. This may result from the "preacher"

element resident in seminary faculty.

232
A majority of professors remember their own seminary
professors as being the most influential element in moral
growth during their days as a seminary student. Due to their
busyness and responsibilities, professors may tend to
neglect seeking out-of-class contacts with students and may

tend to view them just as students rather than as persons.

Recommendations for Curriculum Improvement

If only one recommendation could be made, the statement
would encourage theological educators to shift from a passive
involvement in moral education to a more active one, from an
unconscious participation to a more conscious participation
in the moral development of seminary students. Due to the
ever-present socialization process, the students' moral
maturity is continually being affected by aspects of seminary
education. The decision for theological educators is not
whether seminaries should be involved in the student's moral
development, but rather, the decision concerns what quality
of focused attention is to be directed toward this aspect of
student growth.

Pastors have a significant influence on parishioners'
perspectives, decisions, actions and general lifestyle. Thus,
pastoral candidates must become committed to principles of
professional ethics, and should be guided in developing and
growing toward greater personal maturity in matters of
individual and social morality, of matters relating to both

thought and conduct. Specific suggestions for theological

233
educators follow.

Educational orientation

 

A distinct difference in perspective was evident between
the classical disciplines faculty, as a group, and the
ministry-related disciplines faculty, as a group. The former
group of professors thought that students would achieve a
high degree of learning in their moral thinking and persOnal
values from the seminary curriculum. The ministry-related
faculty would only rate students' learning at a fair amount
for these two categories.

A resolution of the matter may be possible by under-
standing the educational orientation and framework of these
two groups. Results from a study (Grubbs, 1981) cited earlier
in Chapter 2 indicated that ministry-related faculty tend to
assume a more andragogical (adult education) mode of teach-
ing, where learning results from the mutual interaction and
participation of both student and teacher. The classical
faculty largely assume a more pedagogical (child training)
mode of teaching where learning is primarly directed by the
teacher toward the student. The pedagogical teacher tends to
evaluate education by what is presented and made available to
the student. The andragogical teacher tends to evaluate
education by the degree of student responsibility and
initiative. Thus, depending on whether one focuses on the
teacher's presentation, or the student's participation and
growth, evaluations of student learning will tend to differ

as was the case in the present study.

234

In light of the different educational orientations,
faculty, both individually and collectively, should reflect on
the predominant educational orientation which they adhere to,
as well what is evident in the seminary curriculum. Students
are mostly exposed to a pedagogical orientation, since both
the majority of classes they take and the majority of seminary
professors teaching at the seminary are associated with the
classical disciplines. Should seminary students be treated as
adolescent college students, or as graduate adult students? To
what degree should seminary students be involved in designing
their own education program or in participating in the gover-
nance of the seminary? Though such questions have no simple
answers, they must be addressed.

Educational perspectives also pervade the classroom. Is
the professor's purpose primarily to explain the biblical
material and teach for the ”right answers" or are students
involved in the process of thinking, inquiry and learning "how
to learn”? Are subjects treated in isolation by themselves
within historical categories, or are students challenged
toward integrative thinking by addressing contemporary issues
and complex case studies? These either-or dichotomies are only
used for the purpose of surfacing a few of the important
issues which need serious discussion.

Institutional "reward" structures

Professors' comments indicated that some institutional

structures adversely affect students' moral development.

”Environmental impact studies" are prepared in conjunction

235

with certain major construction projects. Seminary educators
may wish to study the ”student impact” that each facet of the
seminary has on the total life of the student--not just the
academic life, but the personal, social, moral and family
life, for example. Are grades and awards for high grade point
averages more of a help or are they more of a hindrance to
the goals of the seminary? Are the student reward structures
of the seminary weighted toward academic goals, or do they
also incorporate professional-ministry and personal develop-
ment goals? Are the faculty reward structures (promotion,
raise, awards, etc.) weighted toward scholarly publication
achievements and discipline expertise, or are other
activities honored as well, such as facilitating significant
student learning, or having a number of out-of—class contacts
with students? What is the impact of the present reward
structures?
Aspects of moral development

A review of the literature identified five aspects of
moral development: moral knowledge, moral thinking, moral
sensitivity, personal values and will power [definitions are
provided in Appendix B]. Professors highly rated students'
learning of moral knowledge. For the other four aspects,
professors either disagreed as to the degree of learning or
rated it at a fair amount. As an evaluative tool, each of
the five aspects could help focus attention to specifically
facilitate students' growth toward moral maturity in the

classroom, in field education ministries, in chapel and in

236
other seminary functions. Since much of traditional seminary
education is still classroom dependent, significant emphasis
should be given to the development of students' moral
thinking, as is already being done with students' moral
knowlege.

Student experience

 

Professors' comments highlighted the value of a
student's experiences as a positive factor in moral develop-
ment. But experience alone must not be glorified. Experiences
are more educative when they are competently supervised and
evaluated by others and when one reflects on and evaluates
one's own experience. Diverse settings more than homogeneous
ones can help confront the student with different and
challenging perspectives. Real life crises force students to
make moral decisions in light of previous learning and moral
commitments. Simulated encounters (through role play, for
example) can be transported to the classroom helping students
face dilemmas evident in the pastorate.

Faculty-student interaction

Most of the professors in the study identified their
own seminary professors as the most influential factor
affecting their moral development during their own seminary
education. Thus, the seminary should encourage faculty to
initiate out-of-class contacts with students (possibly by
reducing the workload, or realigning present reward struc-
tures). Faculty and students could work alongside each other

in ministry projects. Faculty could also invite students to

237

accompany or participate with them on ministry assignments.
The seminary schedule should include a regular, weekly
opportunity for students and faculty to meet in a casual
context, much like the 12 disciples experienced with Jesus.
Student assessment tools and structures

Many seminaries have instituted an advisor-advisee
system to divide the student body into smaller manageable
groups for the purposes of monitoring student learning and
[growth and providing feedback to students. As a part of a
faculty development program, faculty members could be
encouraged to improve their ability as advisors. Tools, such
as ATS's assessment procedures, should be used as objective
aids in helping students in their development toward profes-
sional and personal maturity. Thought could also be given
toward devising more effective ways of addressing students'
identified character faults. In addition, better assessment
procedures may be included in admissions practices to admit
those students with greater potential for moral development.
Students lacking sufficient moral maturity could be identi-
fied and then directed toward specific learning experiences
in order to meet admissions criteria at a later date.
Interaction of the supernatural and the natural

And finally, mention should be made of the students'
relationship with God. Within the Christian understanding of
reality, morality itself is grounded in the nature and being
of God. Though chapel is one seminary function given over to

emphasis on one's devotion and commitment to God, we should

238
not dichotomize faith and learning or draw a sharp distinc-
tion between the chapel and the classroom. A sensitivity to
the Holy Spirit and to one's conscience are essential
ingredients of moral maturity. Fostering such sensitivity
may involve giving sufficient attention to the affective and
inner dimensions of students. Also, a prolonged level of
immature ”natural" moral development (i.e. "the hardening of
the categories") may inhibit further natural and super-
natural development and maturing.

In sum, it is apparent that, in most instances, moral
development cannot be directly taught. Development toward
moral maturity is encouraged and facilitated in contexts
which manifest the appropriate combination of factors. The
study has suggested at least six general areas which may
influence the moral development of ministerial students. The
above recommendations illustrate guidelines and Concerns
which may result from discussions of deliberate educational
planning regarding the moral development of ministerial

students.

Recommendations for Further Research
Further work could be done using the framework outlined
in the study--six major areas affecting students' moral
development. Research could be undertaken in each area to
provide greater understanding of the specific factors,
within the six areas, which either facilitate or inhibit

moral development. A variety of research designs might aid

239
the process: more indepth investigations of a single seminary
by interviewing all of the faculty members; extensive mail-
questionnaire studies to include larger samples of seminary
faculty; surveys comparing the perceptions of administration,
faculty and students: actual assessments of the level of
moral reasoning of both faculty and students: intervention
and evaluation studies investigating the effect of introduc-
ing specific factors or modifications in the program: and
participant-observation studies which focus on the community
life of the seminary.

Studies could also be undertaken in similar settings,
such as professional graduate schools of (a) teacher
education, (b) medical education and (c) legal education.
Comparisons and contrasts could be made and more general-

izable conclusions might result.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

240

Moral Development Interview--Issler

1.

2.

3.

INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

Now and then, professors say they have a really good day of
teaching. Could you tell me what a good day is like for
you? What happens?

When you are remembered by your students, say, 20 years
from now, what would you most like it to be for?

When you meet with students, that is besides in the class-
room, what one or two things do you most enjoy doing with
them?

Probe: Is there anything that you hope might result from
such meetings with students? Do you have some purpose?

(Present information about the definition of "moral" and the
particular aspects of moral development.)

4.

Let's say that someone has taken a poll of this year's
senior students regarding their degree of learning, at the
seminary, in each of these 5 aspects (refer to list). For
each of the 5 aspects, please identify what you think stud-
ents would indicate as their degree of learning: high, fair
amount, or low? Now for a seminary, I would think that
learning would be high in moral knowledge? (Wait for a
response.) What about moral reasoning? moral sensitivity?
personal values? will power?

Let's assume that a student is interested in further moral
growth and has asked you to recommend some courses at the
seminary. Now, I realize that probably all of the seminary
courses will have some implications for encouraging moral
growth. But, which top 2 or 3 courses would you recommend
that this student be sure to take before he/she graduates?

Either as a part of their coursework, or as some part of
their seminary experience, students are often required to
do certain activities or projects which may contribute to
their own moral growth. Would you happen to remember which
particular activities or experiences, either in or out of
the classroom, students have reported as being the most
helpful to their own moral growth?

Let's look more closely at the aspect of moral thinking.
One particular classroom activity which is useful here is
the discussing of moral issues.

(Give list of moral issuesk For example, here is one list
of some of the major moral issues being discussed in
different seminaries.

241

Moral Development Interview--Issler

When you raise moral issues in the classroom, what is your
main purpose? What do you primarily hope to accomplish?

NOTE: Use alternate question 8 for professors who teach about

matters of human development.

8. This particular aspect of moral thinking and reasoning has

recently received some research attention in the fields of
psychology and education. Now, I realize that this research
may not be a part of your own discipline. Do you happen to
be familiar with such psychological theories of moral
reasoning and thinking?

(If so, probe for the name of a researcher or theory,
specifically listen for Kohlberg's name).

9. Let's look at the aspect of moral sensitivity. What do you

think is the most effective way to help students become
more mature in their moral sensitivity?

10. Now, I'd like to present a hypothetical situation involv-

ing a case of academic dishonesty. Let's assume that a
student has submitted a term paper for one of your courses.
After grading the paper and checking your files, you notice
that almost half of this term paper is a verbatim copy of a
paper written by a former student 3 years ago. For the sake
of our discussion, let's assume 2 different students do
this: for one student, this is the first such offense; the
other student has done similar things in a few other
classes. How would you tend to deal with these situations?

(Probe: A. Who would handle the matter? by self or would
refer matter: B. What particular academic consequences: C.
In talking to the student, what would you hope to
accomplish?)

11. Let's assume that a professor knows that a particular

student is experiencing some personal problems, or say that
the professor senses that a student might need some
personal advice. In most cases, should professors

(a) let students take the initiative to seek out profes—
sors, or (b) (professors) take the inititiative to seek out
students?

(Probe for A. reasons: and B. ways to take the initiative)

12. When students wish to suggest changes in curriculum,

academic policies, student life, and related matters, what
particular avenues at the seminary are available to
accomplish this?

242
Moral Development Interview-~Issler

13. In your exposure to the seminary students over the past
few years, have you noticed any common character faults,
attitudes, or problems among the students which
particularly concern you? If so, could you name a few?

(Pick one) What do you think the seminary can specifically
do to help deal with this?

14. In your opinion, are there any aspects of the seminary
curriculum or program which may inadvertently contribute to
hindering the students' growth toward moral maturity?

15. At any time during their seminary years, do the students
receive some form of feedback regarding their own personal
and moral development by someone or some group from the
seminary? (Probe for the specific procedures). ‘

16. Think back to the faculty meetings this school year. Do
you happen to remember if matters related to a student's
personal or moral life were discussed in any meetings?
(Probe for frequency: purpose of the discussion, what
concerns were evident; and what implications or action
points resulted from the discussion).

17. Now, please think back to your own experience of seminary
as a student. What proved to be the most influential in
encouraging your moral maturity?

18. If you, yourself, could change one thing about the way the
seminary currently influences students' growth toward moral
maturity, what would that be?

19. Concerning other aspects of the seminary program which may
have a strong influence on students' moral maturity, can
you think of any we have not covered yet?

Transition: Now that we are almost through with the interview,
I would like to get your impression of the questions.

20. Do you happen to remember which questions, if any, were
not stated clearly or were ambiguous?

21. Questions have different effects on people. Do you happen
to remember which questions you think most seminary faculty
would consider difficult to answer or too personal in
nature?

22. If the interview was repeated, what other questions or
important topics would you included?

° Klaus Issler

243

Moral Development Interview--Issler

For those teaching the subject of human development

ALTERNATE QUESTION 8

When you treat the subject of moral development in your
classes, which particular theorists or theories do you
cover?

What particular references are given to students, such as
books and articles, for class reading and further study?

What is your purpose in dealing with the subject of moral
development? What do you hope to accomplish?

How much time to you give in dealing with this subject in
your classes?

What percentage of the student population do you think
become acquainted with these theories through your classes?

Do you happen to know if any other faculty deal with this
subject in their classes?

APPENDIX B

INFORMATION PRESENTED DURING THE INTERVIEW

244

Moral Development Interview--Issler

INTERVIEW INTRODUCTION

Thank you for your time.

Before we begin, let me make a few comments about the
interview itself. The purpose is to gain a better under-
standing of how seminary education contributes to the
students' growth toward moral maturity. Since you've been
involved in theological education for a number of years,
you're in a position to describe what [insert name] seminary
does and how this affects the students. I'm interested in
your experiences with the program and your thoughts about
those experiences. Since one professor can't know everything
that is going on at the seminary, a total of four professors
from differing academic emphases will be interviewed and this
will provide a good representation of the total seminary
program.

As you know, all interview responses will be anonymous.
If you don't mind, I would like to tape record what you say
so that I don't have to just rely on my notes and miss
something. If there's a time you when you'd like to stop the
recorder, just turn off the switch on the microphone.

While I get set up, would you please fill out this sheet
for me?

[Set up recorder]

[Get sheet back; Turn on tape recorder]

As we go through the interview, if you have any
questions about why I'm asking something, please feel free to
ask. I'll start off with a few very general questions and
then move to some that have more of a specific focus.

Any questions or comments before we begin?

245

Moral Development Interview-~Issler Code:

 

Demographic Information

1. How many years have you been teaching at this
seminary in a full-time capacity?

2. In your career, how many total years have you
taught at the-seminary or college level in a
full-time capacity?

3. a. YES NO Did you happen to serve in the
full-time pastorate before
beginning your teaching career?

b. If yes: How many years?

4. What is your particular area of specialty?

5. In which month and year were
month year born?

Thank you.

246

Moral Development Interview--Issler

INTRODUCTION TO THE MORAL DOMAIN

[Following question 3]

For the next series of questions, I need to present two
pieces of information. The first relates to the word, ”moral.”
We need some common ground of understanding. I'm thinking of
the word, moral, in a very general sense as a category, as in
moral vs. amoral.

Regarding the particular content of the word, moral,
let's consider the two great commands: "to love God" and "to
love our neighbor". Sometimes we talk of this as the vertical
plane, to love God (motion with hand up and down), and the
horizontal plane, to love our neighbor (motion with hand
between respondent and interviewer). The interview is
particularly concerned with the horizontal plane, how we ought
to treat our neighbor.

Here (give definition card) is a general description of
the word, moral, that I would like to use as a basis for our
discussion. (Let respondent read card.) Do you have any
problems in using this description as a basis for our
discussion? (Wait for response.)

[The MORAL domain relates to how one ought to treat
others and the degree to which one takes into
consideration how one's actions will affect the welfare
of others.]

Next, we need to consider what actually grows or develops
as we grow toward moral maturity. I'm suggesting that there
are at least five major areas of growth. (Hand list to
respondent.) This is one listing of such matters. So, there
would be growth or change in the knowledge base, in thinking
about moral issues, in moral sensitivity, in personal values
and in will power. I would like to read the description of
each aspect since I'll be using these aspects as specific
reference points in the next series of questions. I also will
give an example for each one to help clarify what I mean.
(Read through the whole sheet.)

247

. Interviewer copy
ASPECTS OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT

MORAL KNOWLEDGE-~the information and comprehension one has of
(a) biblical precepts and moral principles, as well as
(b) specific moral issues

(e.g. A seminary student is aware of such principles as the
Golden Rule, Matt. 7:12; obeying the laws of the land, Rom.
13:1; and paying what is due, Rom. 13:7, and is aware of
factors related to certain moral issues such as war, civil
rights, and divorce.)

MORAL THINKING--the capability to analyze the relevant factors
of a moral issue or situation, and to make a decision or
judgment based on some logical rationale

(e.g. When the seminary student began working with the music
ministry at a small church, the student discovered that almost
all of the music sheets used by the choir were photocopies.
The student must decide what to do in this situation. Should
he/she continue this practice due to the small music budget,
or seek to establish a new policy of not photocopying music
sheets, or what?)

MORAL SENSITIVITY--the capability to empathize with others
concerning their needs and rights with a sense of compassion,
justice, and responsibility: a sensitivity to one's
conscience, and to the Holy Spirit

(e.g. The student is sensitive about the moral aspects of
photocopying certain documents, since the intention of the
copyright law is to protect the rights and royalties of
copyright owners. Photocopying documents may be legal or
illegal, depending on the document and its intended use.)

PERSONAL VALUES--the particular moral convictions, beliefs,
and responsibilities to which one is committed by a conscious
choice or those values adhered to be unconscious practice

(e.g. The student has a personal conviction that illegal
photocopying, such as photocopying music sheets, is something
he/she will not do.)

WILL POWER--the resolve and ability to act on one's moral
values in the face of countervailing forces: the ability to
resist temptation

(e.g. Despite the efforts of a few church leaders to dissuade
the student, the student begins working out a plan to convince
choir members and church leaders to establish a new policy of
not photocopying music sheets.)

° Klaus Issler

248

Respondent copy
ASPECTS OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT

(Moral as a domain, as in "moral issues")

MORAL KNOWLEDGE--the information and comprehension one has of
(a) biblical precepts and moral principles as well as
(b) specific moral issues

MORAL THINKING--the capability to analyze the relevant factors
of a moral issue or situation, and to make a decision or
judgment based on some logical rationale

MORAL SENSITIVITY--the capability to empathize with others
concerning their needs and rights with a sense of
compassion, justice, and responsibility; a sensitivity to
one's conscience, and the Holy Spirit

PERSONAL VALUES--the particular moral convictions, beliefs,
and responsibilities to which one is committed by
conscious choice or those values adhered to by
unconscious practice

WILL POWER--the resolve and capability to act on one's moral
convictions in the face of countervailing forces: the
capability to resist temptation

° Klaus Issler

249

Some Moral Issues Discussed in Seminary

WAR
INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS
SMUGGLING BIBLES
CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE
ABORTION
PARENTS' RIGHTS OVER CHILDRENS' EDUCATION
NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT
DIVORCE AND REMARRIAGE
PARTICULAR ISSUES OF CHRISTIAN LIBERTY

MATTERS RELATED TO A CHRISTIAN'S SOCIAL
RESPONSIBILITY TO SOCIETY

APPENDIX C

LETTER OF INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE IN STUDY

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY 25°

 

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION EAST LANSING ' MICHIGAN 0 48824-1034
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION AND CURRICULUM

ERICKSON HALL

January 10, 1984

President

Dear President

I seek your c00peration and that of your faculty in an interview study in
theological education. The study is to be a descriptive analysis of the ways
theological education contributes to the seminarian's understanding of moral
deve10pment. A cross-section of mid-western denominational seminaries
representing theologically diverse heritages is to be included in the study.

Interviews are needed with the president or academic dean of the seminary and
at least three other faculty members. Each interview will take approximately
two hours. Questions on the interview will cover such matters as the views
about how growth toward moral maturity takes place, the various means through
which the seminary deliberately attempts to promote moral and ethical
development in the students during their time at the seminary and whatever
educational attention is being directed toward their capability of working
with parishioners toward deepening moral commitment. For the sake of confiden-
tiality, interview responses will be identified in the findings by codes and
fictitious names; thus, results of the study will be reported without
reference to specific seminaries or specific professors.

This research is being directed by one of our doctoral students, Klaus Issler,
a professor on leave from the International School of Theology. I will be
serving as supervisor and consultant in his efforts. Mr. Issler will be
contacting you soon to learn of your interest in this research. We are haping
to conduct the interviews during the first part of April. Appointments for
interviews will be arranged with faculty members in early March. Upon
completion of the study, we will be happy to provide you with a synoptic
institutional report of the research.

If you have any questions, you can contact me at my office (517) 355-1737, or
you can contact Mr. Issler, phone: (517) 355-8085; home address: 933-J Cherry
Lane, East Lansing, MI 48823

Sincerely

Ted Ward
Professor of Administration
and Curriculum

TW:gs

APPENDIX D

FAMILIES OF DENOMINATIONS

PLEASE NOTE:

Copyrighted materials in this document
have not been filmed at the request of
the author. They are available for
consultation, however, in the author's
university library.

These consist of pages:

25]-252

 

 

 

 

Un’ .
Miagllms
lntemational

300 N. ZEEB 90.. ANN ARBOR, MI 48106 (313) 761-4700

7.

8.

251

Families of Denominations

 

Anglican—Episcopal Churches
Anglican Church of Canada
Episcopal Church

American-Canadian Baptist Family
American Baptist Churches/USA
Baptist Federation of Canada

Southern Baptists

Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)

Orthodox Churches
Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America
Orthodox Church in America

Evangelical B
Church of God (Anderson, Indiana)
Church of the Nazarene
Church of the New Jerusalem (Swedenborgian)
Churches of God (General Conference)
Evangelical Congregational Church
Evangelical Covenant Church of America
Seventh Day Adventist

Free Church Family
Brethren Church (Ashland, Ohio)
Church of the Brethren
General Conference Mennonite Church
Mennonite Brethren Churches in North America
Mennonite Church
Religious Society of Friends

Jewish and Unitarian
Union of American Hebrew Congregations (Reformed)
Unitarian-Universalist Association

252

9. Lutheran Churches
American Lutheran Church
Lutheran Church in America
Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod

10. United Methodist Church

11. Presbyterian-Reformed Family
African Methodist Episcopal Church
African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church
Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church (General Synod)
Christian Reformed Church
Cumberland Presbyterian Church
Moravian Church in America
Presbyterian Church in America
Presbyterian Church in the U.S.
Reformed Church in America
United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A.

12. Roman Catholic Church (Order)
13. Roman Catholic Church (Diocesan)
14. United Church of Christ

15. United Church of Canada

16. Evangelical A
Baptist General Conference
Baptist Missionary Association of America
Conservative Baptist Association of America
Evangelical Free Church of America
North American Baptist Conference

17. Christian Church (Not Disciples)
Christian Churches and Churches of Christ
North American Christian Convention

Note: From Ministry in America: A report and analysis, based
on an in-depth survey of 47 denominations in the United
States and Canada, with interpretations by 18 experts (pp.
57-58) by D. S. Schuller, M. L. Brekke and M. P. Strommen,
1980, New York: Harper 5 Row. Copyright 1980 by The
Association of Theological Schools of the United States and
Canada and Search Institute. Used by permission.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aleshire, D. (1980). Eleven major areas of ministry. In D.
S. Schuller, M. L. Brekke & M. P. Strommen (Eds.),
Ministryyin America. New York: Harper & Row.

 

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice—Hall.

Barrick, W. E. (1975). Field education in Protestant
theological seminaries in the United States: An
interpretation of major trends 1920 - 1970. (Doctoral
dissertation, Columbia University, 1975). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 36, 1341A.

 

 

‘Batson, C. D. & Wyckoff, D. C. (1973, Winter). An
alternative model for ministerial education. Theological
Education, 9(2), 100-111.

 

 

Bayer, G. (1980). The perceptions of parents and teachers
regarding school practices related to stages of moral
cognitive development (Doctoral dissertation, Wayne State
University, 1980). Dissertation Abstracts International,
41, 4263A.

Beam, R. (1982). A comparative study of three categories of
American protestant seminaries (Doctoral dissertation,
University of Kentucky, 1981). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 4;, 3091A.

Bender, R. (1971). Theypeople of God. Scottsdale, PA:
Herald.

 

Borg, W. R. & Gall, M. D. (1979). Educational research: An
introduction. (3rd ed.). New York: Longman.

 

Bradley, D. R., Bradley, T. D., McGrath, S. G. & Cutcomb, S.
D. (1979). Type I error rate of the Chi-square test of
independence in R X C tables that have small expected
frequencies. Psychological Bulletin, 86(6), 1290-1297.

 

Bridgeman, D. (Ed.). (1983). The nature of prosocial
development: Interdisciplinary theories and strategies.
New York: Academic.

Bridston, K. & Culver, D. (Eds.). (1964). The making of
ministers. Minneapolis: Augsburg.

 

 

253

254

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

 

Brown, W. A. (1934). Ministerial education in America:
Summary and interpretation. Vol. I, The education of
American ministers. New York: Institute of Social and
Religious Research.

 

 

Brown, W. A. & May, M. A. (1934). The education of American
ministers. 4 vol. New York: Institute of Social and
Religious Research.

 

Brubacher, J. & Willis, R. (1968). Higher education in
transition: A history of American colleges and
universities, 1636-1968. New York: Harper and Row.

 

 

Bussis, A. M., Chittendon, E. A. & Amarel, M. (1976). Beyond
surface curriculum: An interview study of teachers'
understandings. Boulder, CO: Westview.

 

Buzzell, S. (1983). Preparation for church leadership:
Trends in students' leadership orientation after one year
in Dallas Theological Seminary (Doctoral dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1983). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 66, 654A.

 

Cardwell, S. (1978). The development of persistence scales
using items of the Theological School Inventory (Doctoral
dissertation, Indiana University, 1978). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 33, 2987A. -

 

Carkhuff, R. R. (1969). Helping and human relations I:
Selection and training. New York: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston.

 

Cartwright, D. S. (1979). Theories and models of
personality. Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown.

 

 

Cicchetti, D. & Hesse, P. (Eds.). (1982). Emotional
development. (New directions for child development, Vol.
16). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

 

Coder, C. (1975). Moral judgment in adults (Doctoral
dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1975). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 36, 1402B.

 

Coles, D. (1973). An exploration of current specific morals,
values and beliefs of parents, students and faculty at a
church-related college (Doctoral dissertation, Oregon
State University, 1973). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 33, 6724A.

 

 

Combs, A. W. (1969). Florida studies in the helping
professions. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida Press.

 

 

255

Combs, A. W., Avila, D. L. & Purkey, W. W. (1978). Helping
relationships: Basic concepts for the helping professions.
2nd ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

 

Corsini, R. J. (Ed.). (1977). Current personality theories.
Itasca, IL: F. E. Peacock.

 

Cotten, C. C. (1973). The imperative leadership. St. Louis,
MO: Bethany.

Curriculum Task Force. (1968, Spring). Theological
curriculum for the 1970's. Theological Education, 6(3),
669-727.

 

Damon, W. (1983). Social and personality development. New
York: Norton.

 

Darley, J. M. & Batson, C. D. (1973). "From Jerusalem to
Jericho": A study of situational and dispositional
variables in helping behavior. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 31 (1), 100-108.

 

 

DeLamater, J. (1982). Response effects of questionnaire
content. In W. Dikjkstra & J. Van der Zouwen (Eds.).
Response behavior in the survey-interview. London:
Academic.

 

Dijkstra, W. & Van der Zouwen, J. (Eds.) (1982). Introduction.
In W. Dikjkstra & J. Van der Zouwen (Eds.). Response
behavior in the survey-interview. London: Academic.

 

Draguns, J. G. (1982). Personality theory. In H. E. Mitzel
(Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational research, 5th ed., Vol.
3. New York: Macmillan.

 

Eberhardy, J. (1983). An analysis of moral decision making
with nursing students facing professional problems
(Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1982).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 63, 3542A.

Eisner, E. (1979). The educational imagination: On the
design and evaluation of school programs. New York:
Macmillan.

 

Eliason, L. (1983). A critique of approaches to integrating
psychology and theology within selected evangelical
seminaries (Doctoral dissertation, Boston University
School of Theology, 1983). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 66, 1123A.

 

 

Elkind, D. & Weiner, B. (1978). Development of the child.
New York: Wiley.

 

256

Elmer, D. H. (1981). Career data as indicators for
curriculum development in theological education (Doctoral
dissertation, Michigan State University, 1980).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 63, 4955A.

 

Epstein, J. (Ed.). (1981). Masters: Portraits of great
teachers. New York: Basic.

 

Ernsberger, D. (1977). Intrinsic-extrinsic religious
identification and level of moral development (Doctoral
dissertation, University of Texas at Austin, 1976).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 31, 6302B.

 

Etzioni, A. (1964). Modern organizations. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.

 

Farley, E. (1981). The reform of theological education as a
theological task. Theological education, 31, 93-117.

 

Feilding, C. R. (1966). Education for ministry. Dayton, OH:
American Association of Theological Schools.

 

Ferris, R. W. (1983). The emphasis on leadership as
servanthood: An analysis of curriculum commitments
(Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1982).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 63, 3797A.

 

Flavell, J. (1977). Cognitive development. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.

 

Fletcher, J. C. (1981). The coming crisis for theological
seminaries. Ministerial Formation, 36, 24-28.

 

Flexner, A. (1910). Medical education in the United States
and Canada. Bulletin No. 4, New York: Carnegie Foundation
for the Advancement of Teaching.

 

 

Forman, G. E. & Sigel, I. E. (Ed.). (1979). Cognitive
development: A life span view. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

 

 

Fukuyama, Y. (1972). The ministry in transition: A case
study of theological education. University Park, PA:
Pennsylvania State University. ’

 

 

Geis, W. (1926). Dental education in the United States and
Canada. Bulletin No. 19, New York: Carnegie Foundation for
the Advancement of Teaching.

 

Gerety, M. (1980). A study of the relationship between the
moral judgment of the teacher and the moral atmosphere in
the classroom (Doctoral dissertation, Boston University
School of Education, 1980). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 33, 1952A.

 

 

257

Giblin, P. T. (1981). Affective development in children: An
equilibrium model. Genetic Psychological Monograph, 103,
3-30. _“

 

Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.

 

Gorden, R. L. (1980). Interviewing: StrategyLytechniques,
and tactics. Homewood, IL: Dorsey.

 

 

Grant, G. (1975). Some effects of moral discussion on
Clinical Pastoral Education students (Doctoral
dissertation, Boston University School of Education,
1975). Dissertation Abstracts International, 36, 1597A.

 

Green, T. G. (1981). Dental student responses to moral
dilemmas. Journal of Dental Education, 36(3), 137-140.

 

Greenwald, A. G. (1975). Does the Good Samaritan parable
increase helping? A comment on Darley and Batson's
no-effect conclusion. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 33(4), 578-583.

 

 

Grubbs, J. (1981). A study of faculty members and students
in selected midwestern schools of theology to determine
whether their educational orientation is andragogical or
pedagogical (Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University,
1981). Dissertation Abstracts International, 63, 55A.

 

Hadley, H. (1975). Development of an instrument to determine
adult educators' orientation: andragogical or pedagogical
(Doctoral dissertation, Boston University School of
Education, 1975). Dissertation Abstracts International,
2;, 7595A.

 

Harter, T. P. (1980). A critique of North American
Protestant theological education from the perspective of
Ivan Illich and Paulo Freire (Doctoral dissertation,
Boston University Graduate School, 1980). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 63, 2168A.

 

 

Hartshorne, H. & Froyd, M. C. (1944-1945). Theological
education in the Northern Baptist Convention: A survey.
Philadelphia: Judson.

 

Hayes, E. (1978, Autumn). Educational strategies in
theological education. Theological Education, 36(1),
33-47.

 

Hoffman, M. L. (1982) Development of prosocial motivation:
Empathy and guilt. In N. Eisenberg (Ed.), The development
of prosocial behavior. New York: Academic.

 

 

258

Hogan, R. (1973). Moral conduct and moral character: A
psychological perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 13(4),
217-232.

 

Hough, J. C. (1981, Spring). Reform in theological education
as political task. Theological Education, 11(2), 152-166.

 

Isaac, S. & Michael, W. B. (1981). Handbook in research and
evaluation. 2nd ed. San Diego: EdITS Publishers.

 

 

Jacquet, C. H. (1983). Yearbook of American and Canadian
churches. Fifty-first issue. Nashville: Abingdon.

 

Johnson, C. (1976). An analysis of the predictive value of
the Theological School Inventory at the Southern Baptist
Theological Seminary (Doctoral dissertation, Southern
Baptist Theological Seminary, 1975). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 36, 6155A.

 

 

Jones, G. (1983). An analysis of the andragogical-
pedagogical orientation of selected faculty at Oklahoma
State University (Doctoral dissertation, Oklahoma State
University, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International,
63, 2569A.

Kaufman, M. (1976). American medical education: The
formative years 1765-1910. Westport, CT: Greenwood.

 

Kelly, M. J. (1980). Legal ethics and legal education. New
York: Hastings Center. .

Kelly, R. L. (1924). Theological education in America. New
York: George H. Coran.

Kinsler, F. R. (1981). The extension movement in theological
education: A call to the renewal of the ministry. (Rev.
ed.). Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library.

Kohlberg, L. (1981) The philosophy of moral development:
Moral stages and the idea of justice. Vol. 1. San
Francisco: Harper & Row.

Kohlberg, L., Levine, C. & Hewer, A. (1983). Moral stages: A
current formulation and a response to critics. Basel,
Switzerland: Karger.

 

Kornfield, D. (1980). Socialization for professional
competency of Protestant seminarians in Latin America
(Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago, 1980).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 31, 186A.

259

Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S & Masia, B. B. (1964).
Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of
educational goals--Handbook II: Affective domain. New
York: David McKay.

 

 

Kurtines, W. & Gewirtz, J. (Eds.). (1984). Morality, moral
behavior and moral development. New York: Wiley.

 

 

Lapsley, J., Johnson, J., Moore, A. & Mills, L. (1969,
Winter). Theological curriculum for the 1970's: A
critique. Theological Education, 6(2), 99-102.

 

Lawrence, J. (1979). The component procedures of moral
judgment-making (Doctoral dissertation, University of
Minnesota, 1979). Dissertation Abstracts International,
66, 896B.

Learned, W. S. & Bagley, W. C. (1920). The professional
preparation of teachers for American public schools.
Bulletin No. 14; New York: Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching.

 

 

Lewis, M. & Rosenblum, L. A. (Eds.). (1978). The development
of affect. New York: Plenum.

 

 

Lickona, T. (Ed.). (1976). Moral development and behavior:
Theory, research and social issues. New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston.

 

Lindbeck, G. (1976). University divinity schools: A report
on ecclesiastically independent theological education. New
York: Rockefeller Foundation.

 

 

Lindskoog, D. (1973). Some life history, attitudinal, and
moral development correlates of self-actualization among
evangelical seminary students (Doctoral dissertation,
Baylor University, 1972). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 33, 4492A.

 

 

Lockman Foundation. (1960). The new American standard Bible.
La Habra, CA: Lockman Foundation.

 

Lortie, D. (1975) Schoolteacher: A sociological study.
Chicago: University of Chicago.

 

Lloyd, B. M. (1969, Summer). Key issues in the personal
preparation of clergy. Theological Education. Supplement
#1, 6(4), 420-435.

 

Lubomudrov, C. (1982). Case studies of relationships among
level of moral cognitive development, teachers'
understandings of educational issues and teaching
practices (Doctoral dissertation, University of Utah,
1982). Dissertation Abstracts International, 63, 1120A.

 

260

Lutz, G. (1983). Understanding social statistics. New York:
Macmillan.

 

Lynn, R. W. (1981, Spring). Notes toward a history:
Theological encyclopedia and the evolution of Protestant
seminary curriculum, 1808-1968. Theological Education,
11(2), 118-144.

Mackert, M. C. (1970). Bar examinations: Good moral
character and political inquiry. Wisconsin Law Review,
471-494.

Mann, C. R. (1918). A study of engineering education.
Bulletin No. 11; New York: Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching.

McConahay, J. (1971, Winter). Psychological testing in
evaluation and guidance of seminary students. Theological
Education, 1(2), 109-120.

 

 

McCulloh, G. O. (1980). Ministerial education in the
American Methodist movement. Nashville: United Methodist
Board of Higher Education and Ministry.

 

 

Menges, R. J. (1975) Assessing readiness for professional
practice. Review of Educational Research. 66, 173-207.

 

 

Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative data
analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. Beverly Hills:
Sage.

 

Moeller, J. (1983). Teachers' implicit theories on moral
education: An interview study (Doctoral dissertation,
University of Minnesota, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 63, 3527A.

 

 

Moore, W. (1970). The professions: Roles and rules. New
York: Russell Sage.

Niebuhr, H. R. (1956). The purpose of the Church and its
ministry. New York: Harper.

Niebuhr, H. R., Williams, D. D. & Gustafson, J. M. (1957).
The advancement of theological education. New York: Harper
& Brothers.

 

Overton, W. F- (Ed.). (1983). The relationship between
social and cognitive development. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

 

Paravonian, S. (1981, June). Evaluating and grading
pre-service counseling students. Counselor Education and
Supervision, 36(4), 276-284.

 

261

Patton, M. (1980). Qualitative evaluation methods. Beverly
Hills: Sage.

Payne, S. L. (1951). The art of asking questions. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press.

Pierson, R. (1976). A study of the effect of Protestant
seminary Christian education upon the attitudes of closed
mindedness, prejudice and intrinsic values (Doctoral
dissertation, Oklahoma State University, 1975).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 36, 6577A.

Powers, C. (1980). The moral atmosphere of a just community
high school: A four year longitudinal study (Doctoral
dissertation, Harvard University, 1979). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 61, 3017A.

 

Prawat, R. (in press) Teacher thinking about the affective
domain: An interview study.

Pritchett, H. S. (1911, October). 6th annual report of the
president. New York: Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching.

 

 

Pusey, N. & Taylor, C. (1967). Ministry for tomorrow: Report
of the Special Committee on Theological Education. New
York: Seabury.

Raths, L., Harmin, M. & Simon, S. (1966). Values and
teaching: Working with values in the classroom. Columbus,
OH: Charles E. Merrill.

 

Redlich, J. (1914). The common law and the case method in
American university law schools. Bulletin No. 8; New York:
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Reeck, D. (1982). Ethics for the professions: A Christian
perspective. Minneapolis: Augsburg.

 

Reed, A. F. (1928). Present-day law schools in the United
States and Canada. Bulletin No. 21; New York: Carnegie
Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

 

Renaud, R. (1979). Academic dishonesty as defined and
reported by students and faculty from selected colleges at
Michigan State University (Doctoral dissertation, Michigan
State University, 1979). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 66, 1306.

 

Rest, J. (1983). Morality. In J. H. Flavell & C. Markman
(Eds.). Cognitive development. Vol. 3, in P. H. Mussen
(Ed.), Handbook of childypsychology. New York: Wiley.

 

262

Rest, J., Cooper, D., Coder, R., Masanz, J. and Anderson, D.
(1974). Judging the important issues in moral dilemmas--An
objective measure of moral development. Developmental
Psychology, 16(4), 491-501.

 

 

Rest, J. R., Davison, M. L. & Robbins, S. (1978). Age trends
in judging moral issues: A review of cross-sectional,
longitudinal, and sequential studies of the Defining
Issues Test. Child Development, 66(2), 263-279.

 

Reynolds, H. T. (1977). Analysis of nominal data. Beverly
Hills: Sage.

 

Richards, L. O. (1975). A theology of Christian education.
Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Richards, L. O. & Hoeldtke, C. (1980). A theology of church
leadership. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

 

Richards, L. O. & Martin, G. (1981). A theology of personal
ministry. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Rogers, C. (1958). The characteristics of a helping
relationship. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 31(1), 6-16.

Rossi, P. H. & Wright, J. D. (1983). Handbook of survey
research. New York: Academic.

Rowen, S. F. (1982). Curriculum foundations, experiences and
outcomes: A participatory case study in theological
education (Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1981). Dissertation Abstracts International,
43, 655A.

 

Sandusky, F. (1964). The admissions practices and procedures
to the bachelor of divinity program of studies of the
accredited Protestant theological seminaries in the United
States (Doctoral dissertation, Duke University, 1964).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 36, 969.

Schuller, D. S., Brekke, M. L. & Strommen, M. P. (1975).
Readiness for ministry--Vol. 1: Criteria. Vandalia, OH:
The Association of Theological Schools.

Schuller, D. S., Brekke, M. L., Strommen, M. P. & Aleshire,
D. O. (1976). Readiness for ministry--Vol. 2: Assessment.
Vandalia, OH: The Association of Theological Schools.

Schuller, D. S., Strommen, M. P. & Brekke, M. (Eds.) (1980)
Ministryrin America: A report and analysis, based on an
in-depth survey of 47 denominations in the United States
and Canada, with interpretations by 18 experts. New York:
Harper & Row.

263

Schuman, H. & Presser, S. (1981). Questions and answers in
attitude surveys: Experiments on question form, wording
and content. New York: Academic.

 

Shaffer, D. R. (1979). Social and personality development.
Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Shannon, D. (1975). Faculty perception of governance of
serminaries of the United Presbyterian Church, U.S.A.,
1974-1975 (Doctoral dissertation, University of
Pittsburgh, 1975). Dissertation Abstracts International,
36, 3457A.

Sheatsley, P. (1983). Questionnaire construction and item
writing. In P. H. Rossi & J. D. Wright (Eds.). Handbook of
survey research. New York: Academic.

 

Sigel, I. E. (1981). Child development research in learning
and cognition in the 19803: Continuities and
discontinuities from the 19705. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly.
21, 347-371.

Silver, M. (1983). Moral education and teaching: An
interview study of teachers (Doctoral dissertation,
Washington University, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 63, 3804A.

 

Smith, H. L. & Westerhoff, J. (1980). Teaching moral
theology. Duke Divinity School Review, 66(3), 47-59.

Solanki, A. D. (1982). Nature and role of trustees in
theological institutions (Indiana, Michigan and Ohio)
(Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, 1982).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 63, 1381A.

Solanky, A. D. (1978). A critical evaluation of theological
education in residential training. Evangelical Review of

Theology, 3, 124-133.

Staub, E. (Ed.). (1980). Personality: Basic aspects and
current research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

 

Staub, E., Bar-Tal, D., Karylowski, J. & Reykowski, J.
(Eds.). (1984). Development and maintenance ofrprosocial
behavior. New York: Plenum.

Straughan, R. (1982). Can we teach children to be good?.
Londong: George Allen & Unwin.

Sudman, S. & Bradburn, N. M. (1982). Asking questions. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

264

Sweeney, J. (1979). Professional competencies for church
ministry as perceived by seminary faculties, church lay
leaders, and seminary seniors (Doctoral dissertation,
Oregon State University, 1979). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 36, 5298A.

Task Force on Spiritual Development. (1972). Voyage, vision,
venture. Dayton, OH: American Association of Theological

Schools.

Taylor, M. J. (Ed.) (1984). Fact book on theological
education: 1983-1984. Vandalia, OH: Association of
Theological Schools.

Thomas, A. (1981). Current trends in developmental theory.
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 61, 580-609.

Torrance, T. F. (1979). Service in Jesus Christ. In R. S.
Anderson (Ed.), Theological foundations for ministry.
Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

Waggoner, W. (1966). The seminary: Protestant and Catholic.
New York: Sheed and Ward.

Wallace, M. (1980). A survey of the attitudes of public high
school teachers regarding moral education in public high
schools (Doctoral dissertation, Temple University, 1980).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 61, 2547A.

Ward, T. (1982) Moral aspects of spiritual development,
(Summer course 8863). New Jersey: Princeton Theological
Seminary.

Weinreich-Haste, H. & Locke, D. (Eds.). (1983). Morality in
the making: Thought, action and social context. New York:
Wiley.

Westerhoff, J. H. (1982, March). Theological education and
models for minstry. St. Luke's Journal of Theology, 36,
153-169.

Wetherbe, L. (1982). Selected variables associated with sex
role perceptions of Protestant seminary students and
faculty (Doctoral dissertation, Northern Illinois
University, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International,
63, 1051A.

Willging, T. E. & Dunn, T. G. (1981). The moral development
of the law student: Theory and data on legal education.
Journal of Legal Education, 31(3-5), 306-358.

265

Winkleman, G. (1976). Polemics, prayers, and
professionalism: The American Protestant theological
seminaries from 1784 to 1929 (Doctoral dissertation, State
University of New York at Buffalo, 1975). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 36, 7249A.

 

Wixom, D. (1983). The teaching of values in the college
classroom: Faculty and student perceptions at three
contrasting institutions (Doctoral dissertation,
University of Utah, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 63, 2257A.

 

257

Gorden, R. L. (1980). Interviewing: Strategy, techniques,
and tactics. Homewood, IL: Dorsey.

 

Grant, G. (1975). Some effects of moral discussion on
Clinical Pastoral Education students (Doctoral
dissertation, Boston University School of Education,
1975). Dissertation Abstracts International, 36, 1597A.

 

Green, T. G. (1981). Dental student responses to moral
dilemmas. Journal of Dental Education, 66(3), 137-140.

Greenwald, A. G. (1975). Does the Good Samaritan parable
increase helping? A comment on Darley and Batson's
no-effect conclusion. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 33(4), 578-583.

Grubbs, J. (1981). A study of faculty members and students
in selected midwestern schools of theology to determine
whether their educational orientation is andragogical or
pedagogical (Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University,
1981). Dissertation Abstracts International, 63, 55A.

Hadley, H. (1975). Development of an instrument to determine
adult educators' orientation: andragogical or pedagogical
(Doctoral dissertation, Boston University School of
Education, 1975). Dissertation Abstracts International,
£0 7595A. ‘

Harter, T. P. (1980). A critique of North American
Protestant theological education from the perspective of
Ivan Illich and Paulo Freire (Doctoral dissertation,
Boston University Graduate School, 1980). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 61, 2168A.

Hartshorne, H. & Froyd, M. C. (1945). Theological education
in the Northern Baptist Convention: A survey.
Philadelphia: Judson.

Hayes, E. (1978, Autumn). Educational strategies in
theological education. Theological Education, 16(1),
33-47.

Hoffman, M. L. (1982) Development of prosocial motivation:
Empathy and guilt. In N. Eisenberg (Ed.), The development
of prosocial behavior. New York: Academic.

Hogan, R. (1973). Moral conduct and moral character: A
psychological perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 16(4),
217-232.

 

Hough, J. C. (1981, Spring). Reform in theological education
as political task. Theological Education, 11(2), 152-166.