Covenant Theological Seminary celebrated its fiftieth anniversary in 2006. As part of that remembrance, the board, faculty, and staff of the Seminary recommitted themselves to its mission: “Covenant Theological Seminary trains servants of the Triune God to walk with God, interpret and communicate God’s Word, and lead God’s people.” While this mission statement has been reflected in a variety of ways, as manifested in this self-study report, perhaps the clearest evidence of our commitment to our mission might be found in the Seminary faculty’s anniversary volume, All for Jesus. In essay after essay, the faculty reflected the Seminary’s commitment to training its students and ministerial candidates to walk with the God who has revealed himself in Jesus by the Spirit, motivated by the gracious Gospel; to interpret and communicate God’s Word convinced of its inspiration and inerrancy; and to lead God’s people in a relational manner, focused on the expansion of God’s Kingdom through the work of the church. We are eager to demonstrate this continued commitment to our mission through this self- study report and the subsequent site visit by the joint team from the Higher Learning

Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools (NCA) and the

Association of Theological Schools (ATS).

History

Covenant Theological Seminary started in 1956 as the theological school of the Bible

Presbyterian Church (Columbus Synod). The Seminary was originally related to Covenant

College, which had started the year before. Both schools were located on the Conway Road 2

campus in Creve Coeur, Missouri, occupying twenty-one acres previously leased as a Roman

Catholic retreat center. The two schools shared the property until 1964, when the College

purchased a mountain-top hotel in Lookout Mountain, Georgia, and relocated there.

The original Seminary faculty was led by the founding President, Robert G. Rayburn,

who guided the school as its parent denomination went through name changes and mergers,

being known as the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (1961) and later as the Reformed

Presbyterian Church, Evangelical Synod (1966). The final denominational affiliation,

accomplished in 1982 through the process of joining and receiving, resulted in Covenant

Seminary becoming the denominational seminary of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA).

By 2005, the PCA was the second-largest Presbyterian denomination in the United States with over 330,000 total members and 1,300 congregations.

Since 1994, Dr. Bryan Chapell has served as the institution’s fourth president. During

Chapell’s tenure, the Seminary has experienced an expansion of the student body, an increase in its overall budget, significant growth through two major capital campaigns (one completed in

2001 and another in 2007), and enlargement of the faculty. Covenant Seminary is increasingly

recognized as a leader in theological education; for example, the Seminary has partnered with the

Lilly Endowment Inc. on two major grants, placed administrators on ATS committees and site

teams, provided seminar speakers at ATS and Lilly Endowment functions, and has led the

Institute for Theological Studies’ Dean Council and the Fellowship of Evangelical Seminary

Presidents. In addition, our faculty members participate as speakers and leaders at academic

conferences such as the Society of Biblical Literature, the American Society of Oriental

Research, and the American Society of Church History. Our faculty members publish books with

mainstream religious, academic, and university presses, and serve on church judicatories, 3 committees, and boards. Never before has Covenant Seminary exercised as much influence for the good of the church and the advancement of Christ’s Kingdom.

The Seminary’s continued growth during this period can be viewed by looking at our faculty and our student body. Since 1997, we have added twelve new faculty members, including the institution’s first two minority faculty members, as well as a faculty member focused on globalization and world mission issues:

• J. Nelson Jennings, Associate Professor of World Mission (1999) • Zack Eswine, Assistant Professor of Homiletics (2001) • David Chapman, Assistant Professor of New Testament & Biblical Archaeology (2001) • Jay Sklar, Associate Professor of Old Testament (2002) • Greg Perry, Assistant Professor of Biblical Studies (2005) • Sean Lucas, Assistant Professor of Church History (2005) • Mark Dalbey, Assistant Professor of Practical Theology (2005) • Anthony Bradley, Assistant Professor of Systematic Theology (2005) • Daniel Kim, Assistant Professor of Hebrew and Educational Ministries (2006) • W. Brian Aucker, Assistant Professor of Old Testament (2007) • Robert Burns, Associate Professor of Educational Ministries (2007) • Clarence Dewitt (“Jimmy”) Agan, III, Associate Professor of New Testament (2007)

From 1997 to 2006, the Seminary’s

Faculty Head Count faculty grew from sixteen members 55 50 (with an FTE of fourteen), two 45 40 35 emeritus members, and thirty-three t 30 25 Head Coun adjunct faculty to twenty-one 20 15 members (with an FTE of 23.95), 10 5 0 four emeritus members, and thirty- 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Fiscal Year three adjunct faculty (with an FTE of Prof's Assoc. prof's Asst. prof's Adj. prof's Vist. Instr. Emerit

8.29). 4

Not only has the faculty experienced growth since the last accreditation visit, but the student body has continued to grow as well. As the chart on this page displays well, the

Seminary’s enrollment has increased by every measure, save for a downturn in FY 2006-07:

CTS Enrollment: Credit between 1997 and 2006, headcount 950

850 increased from around 675 to over 900

750

650 and FTE from just over 350 to 450;

550 s similar trends can be found in the

St udent 450

350 Seminary’s bell-weather program, the

250

150 Master of Divnity (MDiv). This increase

50 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 in growth of the student body and faculty Fiscal Year

CTS HC CTS FTE MDiv HC MDiv FTE has brought the institution into a new era of leadership and responsibility not only within the PCA, but also within evangelical

Protestantism and the religious academy.

Accreditation

Covenant Seminary was initially accredited by the NCA in 1973 and by ATS in 1983.

Since then the institution has gone through two major reaccreditation reviews. The first, in 1987, addressed a number of concerns that were fairly unique to the institution’s life in its history; both our study in 1987 and subsequent reports addressed the issues raised at that point. We had further accreditation actions in 1989, when the Seminary successfully petitioned ATS for approval to grant a Master of Arts in Counseling (MAC); in 1990, when a joint NCA/ATS focused visit led to the formal approval of the Seminary’s pilot program of Seminary Extension Training; and in 5

1995, when ATS permitted initiation of a pilot program with up to twenty-four students at three extension sites to award a Master of Arts (MA) degree entirely by extension.

During our second reaccreditation review in 1997, we participated in the initial cohort of the ATS Pilot Schools project as they implemented new standards, developed the previous year.

Out of that process, reaccreditation was reaffirmed until spring 2008, approval was granted to our various degree programs, and approval was granted to offer the MA (General Theological

Studies) at extension sites in Memphis and Nashville, Tennessee, and in Naperville, Illinois. The

ATS Commission on Accrediting noted four major areas of concern that required attention:

• “The number of faculty, administration, and staff members needs to be increased.”

• “The library needs seminary-wide attention.”

• “The Seminary needs to give continued attention to racial-ethnic minority representation in the Seminary community and the needs of women students for models, mentors, and guidance in expressions of ministry, appropriate to the Seminary’s confessional constraints.”

• “The Seminary needs to give continued attention to coordinating and learning from its various evaluative efforts.”

The Seminary responded in March 2002 by filing a report with ATS on the four areas of concern cited in 1998 by the joint NCA/ATS site visit team. At that time, the Seminary also filed requested reports on extension learning and evaluation of data showing student use of Seminary resources by distance education students. These reports were accepted by the ATS Commission on Accrediting, but the Seminary has remained mindful that these areas needed continued attention. We are expectant that the visiting team for the current self-study period will notice major advances in these areas of concern.

Since 2002, we have had other interactions with ATS. In June 2003, when the ATS

Commission on Accrediting approved Covenant Seminary’s 2001 comprehensive distance 6

learning program evaluation and extended its authorization of our program’s exception to the

residency requirement to the 2006 ATS Biennium, the Commission requested that we petition for

a change in the standards at the 2006 Biennium based on a comprehensive assessment of our

program at that point. In April 2006, we petitioned the Commission to allow us to roll this

comprehensive assessment into our 2007 self-study report. The Commission granted this request

at their 2006 Biennium.

In 2003, Covenant Seminary notified the Commission of its intention to begin a new

degree program. After filing the appropriate paper with them, the Commission granted

preliminary approval for the Seminary’s Master of Arts in Educational Ministries (MAEM)

degree program. It requested that the Seminary produce a report in advance of the January 2008

meeting of the Commission that might support a petition for “ongoing approval” of that degree

program. In August 2007 correspondence with the Commission’s secretary, it was agreed that

information in this self-study report could serve as the Seminary’s report and support such a

petition.

The Seminary also petitioned the Commission in 2006 to allow us to reduce the Master of

Arts (Theological Studies) (MATS) from 60 hours to 48 hours. In June 2006, the Commission

requested that “the Seminary prepare a more detailed request for a 20% reduction in the number

of hours required for its MA (Theological Studies), offering clear academic reasoning for the

proposed reduction and clarifying how the reduction would distinguish the MA (Theological

Studies) from the MDiv.” The Seminary decided to utilize this self-study process in order to provide the “more detailed request” and to petition the Commission to redress this issue as part of its 2008 response to our various requests.

Self-study Process

While the Seminary had been preparing for our self-study and reaccreditation process as early as 2004–05, the project began in earnest in spring 2006 when Dr. Sean Lucas, Dean of

Faculty, was formally appointed director of the self-study. During the summer, after consulting with various stakeholders and approval by the President’s Cabinet, Lucas appointed an executive committee to oversee the self-study process:1

Self-Study Executive Committee Sean Lucas (chair) Vice President for Academics and Dean of Faculty; Assistant Professor of Church History Donald Guthrie Associate Dean of Educational Ministries; Associate Professor of Educational Ministries Diane Preston Associate Dean of Academic Services Tasha Chapman Coordinator of Instructional Effectiveness; Adjunct Professor of Educational Ministries Paul Rawlins Director of Institutional Research; Seminary alumnus Jim Pakala Director of the Seminary Library Jean Lehmkuhl Controller

This executive committee represented each major division of the Seminary, as well as to achieve a gender balance and to include some alumnus perspective.

The executive committee first convened in August 2006. Our initial task was to orient ourselves to the work at hand, establish a timeline of how the self-study process would unfold, describe the way in which the self-study report would be organized and produced, and brainstorm about the membership of the various subcommittees that would do the initial work on the self-study. Once we established a slate of subcommittee members—drawn from every

1 All titles throughout the self-study report reflect the Seminary’s organizational structure when the initial draft was completed in April 2007. 8 division of the Seminary, with a strong representation of faculty members and appropriate gender and ethnic minority representation—we officially recommended the slate to the President’s

Cabinet at its annual August retreat; the Cabinet approved our choices. We organized our subcommittees around the ten major ATS standards:

Self-Study Subcommittees ATS Standard Subcommittee Purpose, Planning, and Sean Lucas (chair), Vice President for Academics and Evaluation Dean of Faculty; Assistant Professor of Church History Diane Preston, Associate Dean of Academic Services Donald Guthrie, Associate Dean of Educational Ministries; Associate Professor of Educational Ministries Institutional Integrity Mark Dalbey (chair), Vice President for Student Affairs Anthony Bradley, Assistant Professor of Systematic Theology and Apologetics Melinda Conn, Director of Financial Aid Learning, Teaching, and Michael Williams (chair), Professor of Systematic Research Theology Joel Hathaway, Director of Church and Alumni Relations Diane Preston, Associate Dean of Academic Services Theological Curriculum Donald Guthrie (chair), Associate Dean of Educational Ministries C. John (Jack) Collins, Professor of Old Testament Dan Zink, Associate Professor of Practical Theology Library and Information Jay Sklar (chair), Associate Professor of Old Testament Resources Rick Matt, Associate Director of Public Relations Jim Pakala, Director of the Seminary Library Faculty Robert Burns (co-chair), Director of the Center for Ministry Leadership and the Doctor of Ministry program; Associate Professor of Educational Ministries Tasha Chapman (co-chair), Coordinator of Instructional Effectiveness; Adjunct Professor of Educational Ministries Hans Bayer, Professor of New Testament Daniel Kim, Assistant Professor of Hebrew and Educational Ministries Student Recruitment, Zack Eswine (chair), Associate Dean of Ministry Admission, Services, Formation; Assistant Professor of Homiletics and Placement Brad Anderson, Senior Director of Enrollment Luke Bobo, Director of the Francis Schaeffer Institute and 9

Director of Field Education Ellie Brown, Registrar Authority and Phil Douglass (chair), Associate Professor of Practical Governance Theology Bryan Chapell, President; Professor of Practical Theology Bill French, Vice-chairman of the Seminary Board of Trustees Institutional Resources Paul Rawlins (chair), Director of Institutional Research Larry Abeln, Director of Facilities and Operations Jean Lehmkuhl, Controller Richard Winter, Professor of Practical Theology Multiple Locations and Greg Perry (chair), Director of ACCESS and Covenant Distance Education Worldwide; Assistant Professor of Biblical Studies Stacey Fitzgerald, Director of Public Relations Nelson Jennings, Associate Professor of World Mission Richard Hiers, Director for Information Technology Services

Lucas called a meeting of the subcommittees in September 2006, assigning their tasks, distributing appropriate sections of the ATS standards (as well as the questions suggested in the

ATS Commission on Accrediting’s Handbook of Accreditation, Section Five), describing what form the subcommittees’ reports should take, and outlining the timetable that the self-study process would follow. The subcommittees were also encouraged to think broadly about the

Seminary’s effectiveness in the respective areas on which they would be reporting. Above all, each subcommittee was charged to focus on demonstrating in their responses to each of the standards how the Seminary accomplishes its mission and embodies its core values by pointing to relevant evidence and findings. We discouraged new surveys, encouraging the subcommittees to use data already available and collected; any new means of data gathering had to be both simple and sustainable beyond the self-study process.

Throughout the fall of 2006, the subcommittees did their work and gave monthly updates to Lucas as requested. Lucas reported weekly to the President and his Cabinet about the self- study’s progress. He also reported to the Seminary Board of Trustees about the self-study’s 10

progress at the September 2006 and January 2007 board meetings. After the initial drafts of the

subcommittee reports were submitted to Lucas by the end of January 2007, he then worked on

each chapter, cross-walking the ATS standards with the NCA 2005 Criteria for Accreditation,

revising and clarifying language, supplying missing materials, ensuring that the supporting

documents were in order, and supplementing the subcommittees’ recommendations. When

questions or concerns were raised during the review process, Lucas communicated directly with

the subcommittee chairpersons to ensure accurate information and continued interaction on key

matters. Once Lucas reworked the various sections, he sent each for review by the executive

committee. After the executive committee approved the section drafts, these sections were circulated to the President’s Cabinet.

At the April 2007 board meeting, Lucas made a presentation of the self-study findings

and recommendations to the full Seminary Board of Trustees. This was presented as part of the

Seminary’s strategic planning process (covered in chapter one of this report), providing the

Board members with the information needed as they prepared to work at the September 2007

board meeting on a new strategic plan for the years 2007–2012. A similar presentation was made

to the faculty during a regular faculty meeting toward the end of the spring 2007 semester.

During those presentations, the key stakeholders all approved of the study’s findings and

recommendations. An initial draft was presented to the Seminary’s ATS representatives in May

2007. During the summer 2007, copies were placed in prominent locations in the Seminary’s

Buswell Library, Administration Building, Faculty Lounge, and Community Center with

response forms, sent to the representatives on the Student Council, and uploaded onto the

faculty-staff intranet portal in PDF format. In addition, we posted notice on the Seminary’s 11

website and in the Seminary’s Covenant Magazine that we were in a self-study process and solicited input from our various publics.

Once feedback from the appropriate institutional stakeholders and our ATS

representatives was received, the Self-Study Executive Committee and the President’s Cabinet

reviewed these findings and approved changes to the self-study report draft. This final report was

sent to the Seminary’s Board of Trustees Executive Committee, who approved it at a called

meeting on August 29, 2007. It was then submitted to our accrediting bodies on September 4,

2007, in advance of our prospective site visit on October 21–24, 2007.

Purpose

As the Seminary began its self-study process, Lucas reminded the various stakeholders

that one important discipline of the Christian life is self-examination. Drawing from biblical texts

such as 1 Corinthians 11:28, 2 Corinthians 13:5, and 2 Timothy 2:15, the self-study

subcommittees were encouraged to see this work as both a time for reflection on the changes that

have occurred in our institutional life over the past ten years as well as an opportunity to see

where God might be leading us in the future. In addition, there was a great hope that this self-

study project would continue our process of becoming even more intentional in the ways we

think about institutional research and assessment and demonstrating student outcomes—not only

as requirements properly placed upon us by our accrediting bodies, but also as necessary and

encouraging parts of accomplishing our distinctive mission in theological education.

Of course, the ultimate purpose of this report is to support Covenant Theological

Seminary’s request that our accreditation by the Higher Learning Commission of the North

Central Association of Colleges and Schools and the Association of Theological Schools 12

Commission on Accrediting would be reaffirmed for another ten years (i.e., through spring

2018). In addition, we desire for this report to serve as a basis for further petitions to ATS for their ruling by the 2008 ATS Biennium:

1. That the ATS Commission on Accrediting would receive the information outlined

in chapter four of this report regarding the Master of Arts in Educational Ministries

(MAEM) program as satisfying their request for an assessment report on the

program due for the January 2008 meeting of the Commission; and further, that the

Commission would grant on-going approval of this program.

2. That the ATS Commission on Accrediting would grant our request, outlined in

chapter four of this report, to reduce the number of hours in our Master of Arts

(Theological Studies) (MATS) program from 60 to 48 hours.

3. That the ATS Commission on Accrediting would receive this self-study report, and

especially the material in chapter ten, as satisfying the Commission’s 2003 request

for a comprehensive assessment of our distance education program; and further,

that the Commission would grant a continuance to the Seminary’s exception to the

residency requirements for the Master of Arts (Theological Studies) until our next

reaccreditation process in 2018.

Organization 13

Because of their more specific application to theological schools, the ATS Standards for

Accreditation served as the organizational outline for the self-study report, as well as the organizing principles for our entire process. However, both the subcommittees and the self-study executive committee were very mindful of the 2005 NCA Criteria for Accreditation throughout the process; a detailed appendix to this report demonstrates thoroughly how the Seminary’s structures, processes, and programs satisfy the NCA criteria with appropriate evidence and page numbers.

In addition, in order to facilitate the Seminary’s demonstration of the ways in which we meet the various accrediting criteria and standards, the report has followed the ATS Standards very closely—in each chapter, we have listed the ATS Standard, responded to that standard, and provided evidence for our responses. While this approach may not have produced “deathless prose,” the hope has been to facilitate our site team’s visit by helping them to recognize areas of both strength and weakness and to assist us in future responses to ATS and NCA.

CHAPTER ONE

PURPOSE, PLANNING, AND EVALUATION

Theological schools are communities of faith and learning guided by a theological vision. Schools related to the Commission on Accrediting of The Association of Theological Schools conduct post-baccalaureate programs for ministerial leadership and in theological disciplines. Their educational programs should continue the heritage of theological scholarship, attend to the religious constituencies served, and respond to the global context of religious service and theological education.

Covenant Theological Seminary operates from a very clear sense of heritage, mission,

and core values. From its beginning in 1956, the Seminary has sought to train ministers for its sponsoring denomination with an emphasis upon character and competent skills. Known

throughout its denomination as the school students should attend if they desire to serve as

pastors, Covenant Seminary’s reputation for theological scholarship and for a global vision of

religious service has grown steadily. These growth areas have been the result of conscious

planning and assessment by the Seminary’s faculty and administration, who, out of their strategic

planning processes, have developed and continue to move toward a more intentionally global

vision of theological education.

1.1. Purpose

1.1.1 Each member school shall have a formally adopted statement of institutional purpose. The statement of institutional purpose should articulate the mission to which the school believes it is called and define its particular identity and values. When confessional commitments are central to the identity of a school, they shall be clearly articulated in the statement of purpose. The initiation, development, authorization, and regular review of this statement are the responsibility of the appropriate governing body, 16

and the development should involve all appropriate constituencies (e.g., trustees, faculty, administration, staff, students, and ecclesiastical bodies).1

1.1.3 Purpose statements should be enabling and defining documents, and should be realistic and accurate. The adequacy of the purpose statement and the institution’s ability to fulfill its mission are critical elements to the institution’s integrity.

Covenant Theological Seminary’s mission statement is “to train servants of the triune

God to walk with God, to interpret and communicate God’s Word, and to lead God’s people.”

This statement is a clear, public, and appropriate description of the Seminary’s institutional purpose, identity, and values. It regularly guides the institution in evaluation, planning, and decision making. Although this statement was developed by the president and board of trustees through a broadly participatory process shortly before our 1987 comprehensive visit, it expresses the unchanged purpose of the Seminary since its founding. The statement is reviewed regularly by our board, as required by the Seminary’s bylaws, most recently during the September 2006 board of trustees meeting.

The Seminary’s statement of core values and competencies was developed during a major evaluation of the institution’s purposes and goals that stretched over a four-year period between

1993 and 1997. Upon subsequent review in 2000, it was determined that one more core value should be added to the list to better express the Seminary’s global vision; hence, the addition of the core value on “kingdom perspective.” We are now finding that this particular core value is driving much of the planning that is being done for our next five-year (2007–2012) strategic plan; we expect that Covenant Seminary will become even more engaged in the globalization of theological education with appropriate impacts and outcomes for our on-campus students.

1 Note that standard 1.1.2 is not applicable to Covenant Seminary. 17

Mission Statement

The purpose of Covenant Theological Seminary is to train servants of the triune God to walk with God, to interpret and communicate God’s Word, and to lead God’s people.

Core Values

The following core values amplify, clarify and protect the Seminary’s understanding of its purpose:

1. Christ-centered ministry: We believe that a seminary education is successful only

if—at its end—the student knows Jesus Christ more intimately than at its beginning.

2. Biblical authority: We believe that the Bible is the Word of God and thus it is our

only infallible rule of faith and practice. We believe in the plenary, verbal inspiration

of the Scriptures by the Holy Spirit and, thus, we affirm the inerrancy of the original

manuscripts whose objective truth it is our responsibility to interpret in accord with

the principles of Scripture and to proclaim in accord with the imperatives of the

Gospel.

3. Grace foundation: We believe that the foundation for all that we do must be the

gospel of grace—our absolute confidence in God’s acceptance provided through His

redemptive work as the supreme motivation and enablement for love and holiness.

4. Relational emphasis: We believe that the relationship between students and

professors must take a meaningful place alongside teaching content, so that we may

affect the entire character of the student for ministry. Therefore, we seek to develop a

faculty of pastor-scholars and a staff which both individually and as a community

effectively model what it means to walk with God, interpret and communicate God’s

Word, and lead God’s people.

5. Pastoral training: We believe that our primary task is to train students for pastoral

ministry. This task requires development of a faculty of pastor-scholars experienced

in ministry (as understood by our denominational standards and institutional history).

At the same time, we recognize that this task requires development of special

resources that can be effectively utilized by other students and by the larger Christian

community, and we seek to make these resources available toward these other

constituencies to the extent that we can do so without hindering training for pastoral

ministry.

6. Leadership and outreach: We believe that, as the seminary of the Presbyterian

Church in America (PCA), it is our responsibility to provide intellectual training and

models that are true to the Westminster Standards and the historic distinctives of

Presbyterian orthodoxy, while equipping the next generation of Christian servants for

effective church leadership and outreach in a changing world. At the same time,

because we recognize that a seminary alone can never fully equip students for these

tasks, we seek to work in partnership with local churches to accomplish our purpose. 19

7. Kingdom perspective: We believe that God’s purpose is the gathering of His people

from every nation and the renewal of all things. He calls His church to active

involvement with the world’s people and cultures, carrying out the mission of

bringing the Gospel to those who do not believe and expressing Christ’s lordship in

every area of life. In order to train students to make disciples of the nations, our

faculty, staff, and students must increasingly reflect the ethnic and cultural richness of

God’s worldwide Church.

Objectives

The following specific objectives relate the Seminary’s purpose to its programs.

1. Covenant Seminary seeks to fulfill its purpose primarily by preparing students for

pastoral ministry in accordance with the standards of the PCA. As the seminary of the

PCA, Covenant seeks particularly to prepare students for pastoral ministry within that

denomination. At the same time, Covenant Seminary actively seeks to serve students

preparing for ministry in a variety of other denominational and non-denominational

contexts. The Master of Divinity (MDiv) program is the first professional degree

preparing students for pastoral ministry. The Master of Theology (ThM) and Doctor

of Ministry (DMin) degrees provide additional academic and practical training for

students already holding the MDiv degree.

2. Covenant Seminary seeks to fulfill its purpose by preparing students for other non-

vocational and vocational roles in churches and other Christian ministries. The 20

Master of Arts in Educational Ministries (MAEM) is a professional degree designed

to train students for non-ordained ministry positions in such areas as children’s,

women’s, youth, collegiate, and other educational ministries. The Master of Arts

(Theological Studies) (MATS) and the Graduate Certificate (GC) provide biblical and

theological training that equips lay people to bring an informed Christian perspective

to a variety of secular occupations and non-ordained ministries. The Master of Arts

(Exegetical Theology) (MAET) is an academic and research degree which prepares

students pursuing academic leadership for advanced study at the doctoral level. The

Master of Arts in Counseling (MAC) prepares students to work as counselors,

primarily in church-related settings, as well as for further advanced study.

3. Covenant Seminary seeks to fulfill its purpose by providing a variety of lifelong

learning opportunities for individuals and churches, including adult continuing

education classes, seminars and publications for churches and individuals, and by

providing theological leadership for the Presbyterian Church in America and the

Christian community through faculty publications, service on denominational and

professional committees, speaking opportunities, etc.

Competencies

In fulfilling this purpose, Covenant seeks to develop the following competencies in its graduates.

We believe that each of these competencies is intimately and necessarily related to the others.

Effective ministry requires spiritually sensitive application and integration of all of these competencies. 21

. . . to train servants of the . . . to interpret and communicate . . . and to lead God’s people. triune God to walk with God . . . God’s Word . . . 1. Grace: Understands and is 4. Knowledge: Understands and 8. Relational skills: Relates to personally committed to the clearly explains key biblical and others with evident concern, gospel of grace as understood theological facts and concepts respect, and sensitivity, even in our standards. in historical perspective. when there are differences of culture, belief, or values. 2. Lifestyle: Exhibits spiritual 5. Theological skills: maturity and Christ-like Demonstrates ability to interpret 9. Leadership: Assists others in character growing out of the and thoughtfully apply the Bible growing spiritually as love of Christ. (in the original languages where appropriate (i.e., with individuals appropriate) to issues of or groups; by teaching, 3. Servanthood: Demonstrates a doctrine, life, and ministry. counseling, evangelizing, etc.; heart to serve God and others in with or without formal leadership one’s family, church, and world. 6. Conviction: Holds and ar- responsibilities). ticulates a coherent Christian theology and worldview 10. Christ’s lordship: Seeks to informed by our doctrinal bring Christ’s lordship to bear in standards, and interacts all areas of life and culture— critically and respectfully with individual and corporate, private other approaches. and public.

7. Communication: 11. Vision: Seeks to advance the Communicates effectively both cause of Christ among diverse orally and in writing. peoples and cultures within North America and throughout the world.

The Seminary’s purpose and mission statement are well-publicized. The mission statement is available in the Seminary’s catalog and on its Web site, and is regularly utilized in promotional materials. The statement is also overviewed in our new student orientation program each semester, reviewed regularly in faculty and staff meetings, figures prominently in materials produced for the current capital campaign, and is present in the Seminary’s annual report to the

General Assembly of the PCA.

We know that our mission is clear as we hear this statement (or the values implied in it) invoked. We hear it from students who respond to the pastor-scholar model of our faculty and who consistently affirm that the relational emphasis of the Seminary is a key reason for their retention. We hear it from board members who spell out our core values in informal conversations as part of the institutional DNA. And we hear it from peers at other theological 22

institutions and pastors in the field, who know Covenant Seminary for its Christ-centered

approach to ministry and preaching. We even heard it in the recently-published, faculty-authored

50th anniversary celebration volume, in which the institutional core values came through in

nearly every essay.

1.2 Planning

1.2.1 The purpose statement shall guide the institution in its comprehensive institutional planning and evaluation procedures, and in making decisions regarding programs, allocation of resources, constituencies served, relationships with ecclesiastical bodies, global concerns, and other comparable matters.

In all of its institutional planning and assessment, Covenant Seminary is guided by its

institutional mission statement and core values. Since our last self-study report in 1997, the

Seminary has been through two major strategic planning cycles. The first, in 1999, was the result

of a two-year planning process, spurred on by findings from the 1997 self-study. The resulting

long-range plan served as the basis for a second round of strategic planning that eventuated in a revised set of core values (adding “kingdom perspective”) and competencies (adding “Christ’s lordship” and “vision”) as well as a 2002 strategic plan.

The 2002 strategic plan served as a landmark for the institution. It has guided the current

capital campaign as well as a number of the accomplishments of the Seminary during the past

five years. Flowing out of our seven core values, the strategic plan identified five major

objectives for the institution: (1) initial pastoral training; (2) on-going pastoral training; (3)

specialized ministry training; (4) non-vocational lay ministry training; and (5) global/seminary-

wide support objectives. Some of the specific short- and mid-range (2002–2007) goals included:

• Curriculum revision and pastoral involvement in ministry training 23

• Begin construction of classroom/office building • Café/student center (community center) • Hire minority faculty • Revise the MATS curriculum • Consider modular ThM • Purchase land adjacent to Seminary • Apply for “pastoral excellence” grant from Lilly Endowment Inc. • 50th anniversary activities • Hire Director of Institutional Research and Assessment

Not only did the Seminary accomplish all of these goals, but also many more. In fact, one of the results of this self-study process has been the recognition that in the past five years, we accomplished or put in process 90% of our short-term institutional goals (0–2 years); 77% of our mid-range goals (2–5 years); and 63% of our long-term goals (5–20 years) from the 2002 strategic plan.

We have come to see our planning cycle in terms of a five-year movement from strategic

planning to execution of the plan to intentional assessment back to strategic planning. As a

result, we moved from the assessment period of our 1997 self-study into a two-staged long- range/strategic plan that resulted in the 2002 strategic plan. While the administration assessed the plan regularly throughout this period, and annually with the board of trustees, Covenant

Seminary views this 2007 self-study report as an opportunity to examine, evaluate, and assess critically what we have learned from this period. And as a result of the findings contained in this report, we are moving toward a new round of strategic planning that will eventuate in a major strategic plan draft to be completed by spring 2008 in advance of our fall 2008 board meeting.

To that end, we began working with various stakeholders to move toward a new strategic plan. We began with the Seminary’s board of trustees in September 2006, working through issues related to the Seminary’s bylaws, mission statement, and core values. In January 2007, we 24 engaged the board on vision-casting, focusing on the question of what “big idea” made Covenant

Seminary unique, not merely in its past but for its future. At the April 2007 board meeting, we presented the findings of the current self-study in terms of what we discovered from assessing our 2002 strategic plan. And in September 2007, we will begin brainstorming with the board about strategic goals in the light of our five main objectives, which flow naturally from our institutional mission.

Starting in February 2007, we began working with key institutional stakeholders— including both faculty and administrators from the four major divisions—as a group we call “the

President’s Advisory Council.” The goal of this group was to begin developing institutional priorities for our next strategic plan. This council will eventually expand to include students

(especially minority and women students as well as those across degree programs) and other faculty members and administrators. Once the drafts of these priorities are written, the entire faculty, administration, and board will engage in conversation about the institution’s future. Our goal is to have a new Seminary board-approved strategic plan by the September 2008 board meeting.

1.2.2 Evaluation is a critical element in support of integrity in educational efforts, institutional renewal, and individual professional development. Evaluation is a process that includes: (1) the identification of desired goals or outcomes for an educational program, or institutional service, or personnel performance; (2) a system of gathering quantitative or qualitative information related to the desired goals; (3) the assessment of the performance of the program, service, or person based on this information; and (4) the establishment of revised goals or activities based on the assessment. Institutions shall develop and implement ongoing evaluation procedures for employees, students, educational programs, and institutional activities.

1.2.3 A comprehensive evaluation process is the primary resource an institution uses to determine the extent to which it is accomplishing its purpose. The various institutional and educational evaluation procedures shall be analyzed, coordinated, and employed in comprehensive institutional planning. 25

Covenant Theological Seminary has developed and implemented ongoing evaluation

procedures in ways that meet ATS and NCA requirements. This process is initiated and overseen

by the Seminary’s president. As part of our 1997 self-study process, we developed an assessment plan that was formally adopted in February 1998. This plan was revised in 1999 and again in

2003; the key components of this comprehensive assessment plan continue to guide the way the

Seminary evaluates and assesses effective accomplishment of its mission.

At one point, the Seminary attempted to produce annual “mini-self-studies,” assessing the

institution against key components of the ATS standards. We produced two separate reports in

2002 and 2003 that utilized this process; however, we discovered that these types of assessments

tended to collect dust and not to be well-integrated into the institution’s planning processes. As a

result, we have moved toward a two-tiered assessment process.

The first tier is an annual assessment and planning process. The process begins with a

thorough institutional research report produced in August; moves on to goal setting in August

and September, utilizing “Indicators of Success” (a Seminary-developed self-evaluation system;

see the section on “Institutional Evaluation” later in this chapter for more details) and other

similar forms; then on to periodic data collection and evaluation through the year within and

outside the administrative structures; and culminates in summative reviews at the end of the

academic year. This process, coupled together with the faculty, staff, and administrator reviews,

assists the institution in assessing whether the institutional mission, core values, and objectives

are being met.

To this end, the Seminary hired a full-time director of institutional research, Paul

Rawlins, in 2006. Working together with the president, Rawlins has developed a major 26 spreadsheet of key institutional statistics from across the Seminary going back to 1998; this spreadsheet replaced a key statistical indicators chart that had been maintained going back to

1990. Each August, Rawlins prepares an updated Institutional Research Report for the president and his cabinet to review at their annual all-day retreat. This research then serves as the basis for evaluating the institution’s long-term comprehensive plan and setting new goals in their

Indicators of Success for the coming year. Rawlins also works closely with the vice president for business administration in preparing various institutional reports to IPEDS (Integrated

Postsecondary Education Data System) and ATS as well as to key endowments, foundations, and granting agencies. In addition, Rawlins compares key statistics with three sets of ATS peer profile data as well as other data collections from ATS, Auburn Seminary’s Center for the Study of Theological Education, and evangelical seminary meetings. His research is vital to the planning processes of the Seminary; in fact, the real question is whether this position should be expanded and centered in the President’s Office so that institutional effectiveness receives the prioritization and authorization needed to determine missional outcomes.

The second tier of our assessment process, described earlier in this chapter, is a major five-year assessment period. Tied to our cycle of strategic planning, we have moved through self-study assessment in 1997 to two stages of strategic planning in 1999 and 2002. We now are in a period of self-study assessment in 2006–07 to discover the level of success in accomplishing our plan as well as what we have learned from this process. And out of this period of self-study, we are beginning a new round of strategic planning that will result in a Seminary board-approved strategic plan by September 2008. We expect that we will engage in a major self-study review of this plan during FY2012–13 in order to prepare for a new round of strategic planning.

Faculty and Staff Evaluation

The Seminary continues to evaluate and assess faculty, administration, and staff for job

effectiveness. While we have not explicitly tied those annual evaluations in every instance to the

individual’s effectiveness in accomplishing the institutional mission and core values, there are a

number of key employees who are evaluated in this light. For example, our student evaluations

of faculty teaching focus on how faculty members do in communicating the institution’s major

core values and competencies. These student evaluations are then read by the vice president for

academics and the Seminary president; they are also shared and discussed with faculty members

during annual reviews. Faculty members are also asked to reflect on findings from these

evaluations and to develop possible goals for teaching development; they are later asked how

they have done in accomplishing their goals. This cycle of evaluation of teaching and learning,

tied to our mission, is a key component in our faculty’s advancement in rank.

The administration continues to engage in self-evaluation as well as supervisor evaluation. In 2000, the Seminary brought in Dr. Karen Cates, a member of the Organization

Behavior Department at the Kellogg Graduate School of Management, Northwestern University, to study organizational structures and administrative practice. In the light of Cates’s report, the administration made a number of significant changes to its upper management structures and worked on management development plans for key staff members.

One finding from this process of self-study is whether it might be good to rethink staff

evaluation processes to better reflect our institutional mission and core values. As staff and

administration job descriptions and evaluations are more closely tied to missional outcomes,

perhaps the Seminary would demonstrate more clearly its adherence to its purpose throughout 28 the institution. As it stands now, the faculty, staff, and administration demonstrate a remarkable adherence to and ownership of the institutional mission.

Student Evaluation

The Seminary continues to evaluate and assess students based on the eleven competencies which flow out of our mission and core values. In 2003, the Academics division, in cooperation with its faculty-administration Curriculum Committee, focused a great deal of attention on making sure that these eleven competencies were reflected and assessed throughout the curriculum. This report discusses this process in great detail in chapter four.

While our 1998 assessment plan indicated that students’ summative projects were being collected, evaluated, and fed back into curricular revision, we discovered that this process was an unwieldy and unworkable approach to including student feedback into the curriculum planning process. Increasingly, we are moving toward capstone courses and experiences that draw together student learning in meaningful ways. For example, the MAEM consummates with a unique capstone experience that requires students at the end of their studies to review and integrate their work in light of the whole degree program and in light of the institutional mission rubric of learning outcomes. The purposeful collection of assignments and re-visiting work on those assignments provides both the students and the faculty with longitudinal assessment of learning during the course of the degree program. The portfolio work largely consists of the creation of an annotated bibliography of resources gathered during the degree program and judged by the student to be useful for future ministry; the collecting and re-visiting of select course assignments in which the student adds new work to the assignment with reflection, integration, self-assessment, peer assessment, and/or additional faculty assessment; and the writing of a weekly reflective log during the course of the portfolio work. 29

For the past two years, the Seminary’s Curriculum Committee has considered changes in our MDiv core curriculum that would create a capstone experience for this program as well. It currently appears that our proposal, which will come to the faculty in fall 2007, will root the capstone experience in the continuing relationships between faculty mentors and their Covenant

Groups (small groups of students who meet for prayer, guidance, and accountability under the leadership of a faculty member) as well as in the core course Ministry Leadership. Students will work during their time at the Seminary to develop portfolios that reflect intentionally on their practice of ministry as experienced in seminary and as they expect to experience it upon graduation. In connection with the Ministry Leadership course, students will then have an opportunity to glean feedback from faculty members and peers on their summative findings. We discuss this at more length in chapter four of this self-study.

We expect that this capstone experience will be informed by the findings of our Lilly

Endowment Inc.-funded Center for Ministry Leadership (CML). The work of the CML has

uncovered five major areas for sustaining pastoral excellence: self-development; spiritual

formation; emotional intelligence; marriage and family; and leadership and management. The

capstone design will take into account these major areas, enabling students to assess themselves

in these areas as well as to reflect on how their theological education has enabled their growth in

these ways.

In addition, the design of the capstone experience will include cohort groups, which are

established during the first-year Covenant Theology course. We currently intend for each student to remain with his student cohort and faculty mentor during his middle year(s), engaging with that faculty member on his field education experiences and with his peers on the theological education process. By his senior year, the student will be expected to assess himself in and 30 through his cohort experience in order to reflect on his future ministry calling and practice. They will also receive assessment and feedback from the faculty mentor and from peers. In this way, the Seminary will be able to gauge educational outcomes in areas specified by our mission, core values, and competencies in a summative and integrative fashion.

This practice of capstone experiences or summative projects is not new to Covenant

Seminary. Several of our other degree programs continue to have summative projects that facilitate evaluation and assessment of our programs:

• Our distance learning MATS students go through a capstone experience. This

experience is tied to a 20- to 25-page capstone project that is presented to peers,

faculty, and distance learning staff.

• The MAEM program culminates with a capstone project in which students reflect

on the practice of educational ministry in the life of the church. This project is

evaluated by educational ministry faculty members as well as the associate dean of

educational ministries.

• Many of our MAET students prepare a written thesis that is evaluated by faculty

members using a standard evaluation form. Readers’ comments are periodically

summarized and evaluated by the director of the MAET program and other key

stakeholders.

• Many of our ThM students prepare a written thesis that is evaluated by faculty

members using a standard evaluation form. Readers’ comments are periodically

summarized and evaluated by the director of the ThM program and the ThM

committee.

• DMin students complete a ministry project which includes a dissertation that is

evaluated by faculty members using a standard evaluation form. Readers’

comments are periodically summarized and evaluated by the director of the DMin

program, the DMin committee, and other curricular stakeholders.

In each of these programs, we ensure that there is a feedback loop between student work and curricular evaluation and assessment.

The faculty and staff also annually evaluate MDiv students’ readiness for ministry. Each spring, in faculty meetings, the vice president for student services distributes prepared assessment devices that enable faculty and other key administrators to provide needed input on individual students’ maturity, behavior, or relational skills that may make effective ministry difficult. If concerns are raised concerning a particular student’s readiness for ministry, the vice president for student services schedules time with the student, followed up in writing, in order to identify the difficulties and discuss strategies for improvement. Students whose maturity, behavior, or skills continue to be problematic will be advised that the Seminary may not recommend them for placement upon graduation. In addition, the counseling faculty, with other faculty and staff, assess MAC students’ potential for effective counseling ministry as part of the 32

students’ application for candidacy. Concerns are expressed to the student with a view toward

helping the student grow.

Area pastors, who serve as field education supervisors, likewise play an important role in

assessing whether a student is prepared for ministry. Each semester, field education supervisors

fill out evaluation forms that are signed both by the supervisor and the student in order to provide

significant learning to the student. These assessments provide important feedback to the

Seminary as well about the effectiveness of student learning in the context of concrete ministry

experience.

Students participate in a process of self-assessment in several key MDiv core courses.

Each student in the first-year course Spiritual and Ministry Formation prepares an “Identity

Statement,” which includes indicators of the student’s temperament, strengths, struggles, talents, spiritual gifts, personal convictions, and ministry skills. The course instructor then spends an

hour with single students and two hours with married students and their spouses to discuss what

their “divine design” might mean for future ministry opportunities. This “divine design”

statement is revisited in the final-year Ministry Leadership course, where students intentionally

reflect on what their unique personalities and gift-mixes means for their philosophies of ministry.

In addition, in the final-year Pastoral Theology course, students write on an aspect of their understanding, personality, or character which may be problematic for future ministry. They are then required to write a biblical response to and develop a plan for implementing this biblical approach to the particular issue.

For our MAC students, internships and field work are important parts of the evaluation

process. Students serve these internships in a variety of ministry contexts within the greater St.

Louis metro area, and they receive feedback from supervisors and counselees throughout the 33

course of their work. They also process their work in internship groups, which are run on campus

by experienced and licensed counselors, who in turn assist these students in reflecting on the

meaning of their field experience and how they might progress in their practice of ministry.

A final form of student evaluation is the Seminary’s record on placement and retention in

ministry. As will be detailed in chapter seven, the Seminary enjoys a remarkably high placement

rate (440 out of 446 Seminary-recommended MDiv students using our placement system since

1998). In addition, our students remain in ministry at a notably high rate; or, to put it another

way, our “ministry drop-out rate” is significantly lower than that of the graduates of peer

institutions. In studying the classes which graduated between 1998 and 2001, we discovered that only 6.8% of our graduates left congregational ministry within the first five years.

Institutional Evaluation

As will be described to a greater degree throughout this self-study report, Covenant

Seminary regularly evaluates and assesses its academic, co-curricular, business, and advancement activities. There is a regular pattern of goal setting, data collection, and findings assessment and use in every department of the Seminary. In 2005, the Seminary moved toward a simple form for establishing this pattern in departments, which we call “Indicators of Success”

(IOS). The IOS forms focus each division and department on the Seminary’s mission and its own

unique role in supporting that mission. In addition, the forms require that each department

identify its goals or objectives, the means by which it collects data and who is responsible for

this assessment, the findings themselves, and the use the department intends to make of that data.

These forms and processes are becoming an increasingly integral part of our institutional culture. 34

Even without these forms, it is clear that the Seminary follows the process of evaluation

as described in the ATS standards. For example, one of our institutional goals from our 2002

strategic plan was to hire minority faculty; the person charged with hiring faculty was the vice

president for academics, and he engaged in a lengthy search that resulted in hiring two minority

faculty members in 2005 and 2006. Another institutional goal has been to increase the ethnic

diversity of our student body, which has hovered around 80% white over the past ten years. In

2000, we began the Ethnic Minority Scholarship Fund specifically for this purpose. However, we

have found this scholarship program has not affected the racial make-up of our school to any

great extent; we are waiting to determine whether having minority faculty members will make a

difference in attracting black, Hispanic, and Asian students.

Not only do we engage in this process with regard to major institutional goals, but we

also engage in an evaluative process in confronting institutional challenges. One of the trends

that we have noted over the past 12–18 months has been our attrition rate, which revealed that over 40% of our incoming MDiv students leave the institution without graduating. Unsure of the

M.Div Attrition reasons for this, we have hired an

100% outside firm to contact and 90% 80% interview these students; we have 70% 60% 50% also gathered financial and other 40% 30% 20% information in order to determine 10 % 0% FY '96 FY '97 FY '98 FY '99 FY '00 FY '01 FY '02 FY '03 FY '04 FY '05 possible reasons for this attrition. In

Incoming Class Fiscal Year response, we are making a Earned any degree Still active Withdrew concerted effort to help students 35

manage life issues that seem to lead them to leave seminary. We are looking forward to assessing

our response in the future.

Probably the most obvious place where evaluation and assessment plays out is in the

allocation of financial and human resources. A number of examples of this process are discussed in chapter nine, but to highlight one recent example: enrollment and institutional growth over the past ten years has made space on campus a premium commodity, whether it is office space, classroom space, or parking space. In line with our institutional mission to train servants of the triune God, we determined that we would not limit the number of God-sent servants which we would train, but would instead increase our capacity to serve them. This led to our 1999–2001 capital campaign, which produced an expanded library, two major classrooms, and faculty office space. We discovered quickly that this expansion was not sufficient to relieve fully our space issues. We produced a 2003 campus master plan, in which we expressed our plans to acquire

property to the south and west of the campus, expand parking and develop a campus road that

would move traffic on the perimeter of our campus instead of through its middle, and build a

major academic and administration building to accommodate increasing enrollments. By 2008,

we will have accomplished all of these goals, allowing us the opportunity to evaluate how the

allocation of financial and human resources has met our student and work space capacity needs.

These are just a few examples of how the process of evaluation and assessment described

in the ATS Standards plays out in intentional ways on our campus. Over the past five years, we

have become increasingly conscious of our need to evaluate, assess, and “close the loop.” In

order to facilitate this process, the Seminary is considering redefining the role of the director of

institutional research so that he might operate out of the President’s Office with authority to 36 encourage and even mandate that departments evaluate and assess how each part of the institution is contributing to the accomplishment of our mission.

Summary

1.1 Covenant Seminary has a clear statement of purpose that guides the institution. The

Seminary has appropriate means for reviewing this statement through its

administration and board.

1.2 Covenant Seminary demonstrates an institutional culture of evaluation and

assessment. The Seminary has taken appropriate steps to ensure that it evaluates

faculty and staff, students, programs, and the institution as a whole.

Recommendations

1. Covenant Seminary should consider expanding and empowering the role of the

director of institutional research to include institutional evaluation and assessment.

2. The Seminary should review its staff evaluation processes and procedures in order to

better tie individual staff members’ job descriptions and assessments to the

institutional mission.

3. The Seminary should work with even greater intentionality to evaluate and assess

student outcomes in ways that are appropriate, manageable, and sustainable.

CHAPTER TWO

INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY

Institutional integrity is demonstrated by the consistency of a theological school’s actions with commitments it has expressed in its formally adopted statement of purpose, with agreements it assumes with accrediting and governmental agencies, with covenants it establishes with ecclesiastical bodies, and with ethical guidelines for dealing with students, employees, and constituencies.

Covenant Seminary demonstrates integrity in its legal, financial, and public information practices, and its relationships within and outside the Seminary community. The Seminary views ethical integrity as an essential part of its mission. As an institution, we train students as servants of the triune God to walk with God; those who walk with God must obey the God who abounds in love and faithfulness and whose Word is Truth. The Seminary also trains students to interpret and communicate God’s Word; that Word teaches honesty and integrity as vital character qualities of those who have put on Christ. And we also train students to lead God’s people, a task which is impossible without love, faithfulness, and truth in word and deed.

Integrity in Interactions with Proper Authorities

2.1 Schools accredited by the Commission on Accrediting shall carry out their educational programs and institutional activities according to the standards and procedures established by the Commission and its Board of Commissioners, communicate honestly and forthrightly with the Board, comply with requests for information, and cooperate with the Board in preparation for and conduct of visits.

2.2 With regard to state, provincial, and federal authorities, schools shall conduct their operations in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.

Covenant Seminary carries out its educational programs and institutional activities in

compliance with the standards and procedures established by its various accrediting and

licensing bodies. The Seminary is incorporated under the laws of the state of Missouri as a not-

for-profit educational institution. During the period in which the Seminary offered classes in

states other than Missouri (1998–2004), the school maintained current business licenses and educational authorizations for those states. To insure its integrity in these areas, the Seminary submits to external review of its affairs.

In addition, during the period since our last self-study report, the Seminary has engaged in two major building programs: the renovation and expansion of Buswell Library (completed in

2000) and the current construction of the new Founders Hall. In each project, we have cooperated with local authorities in obtaining building permits, meeting zoning requirements, and doing business as an ethical organization. We have encountered few difficulties and find that our reputation in the community is high.

The Seminary conducts its legal affairs with integrity. Our vice president for business

administration also serves as the chief compliance and liability officer for the Seminary; he

coordinates the Seminary’s response to legal issues. Given the increasing complexities of

operating an institution of higher learning, the Seminary has broadened its use of legal experts in various specialties. For example, a nationally known expert in the formation and operation of foundations was instrumental in the formation of the Covenant Theological Seminary

Foundation in 1998. Our campus is now located in two adjacent municipalities, so we have used a specialist in real estate law to help us plan for future zoning applications that will be necessary as we look to expand our facilities. We have also sought out specialists in labor law to help us with the complexities of employment practices and policies.

The Seminary has been directly involved in one legal challenge in the last ten years. A

student applicant who was not accepted for admission filed a discrimination complaint based on

age and race with the United States Department of Education. This action was quickly dismissed

due to lack of merit. As an agency of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), there were

attempts to include the Seminary in two suits against the denomination. One involved a sexual

harassment case in one of the churches, and the other involved a suit by a pastor who was dismissed by his church. The PCA has been dismissed from both suits by the courts. The

Seminary shared in the legal costs of defending the denomination in these suits. As of April 2007 there are no other legal actions pending, that we know of, that would involve the Seminary.

Likewise, the Seminary has not been involved in a United States Department of Education Title

IV Program Review since 1996.

The Seminary conducts its financial affairs with integrity as well. We follow the

principles and procedures generally accepted for institutional accounting established by the

National Association of College and University Business Officers. In addition, the Seminary

maintains membership in the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability (ECFA). In our

April 2006 evaluation by ECFA, the group noted that “Covenant Theological Seminary has

faithfully demonstrated its continued compliance with the ECFA Standards of Responsible

Stewardship.” Our financial operations are also audited annually by Humes and Barrington, LLP,

an external and independent auditing firm. These audits are reviewed by the Seminary’s Board of

Trustees Finance Committee, which serves as the internal Audit Committee as outlined by the

Covenant Theological Seminary Bylaws (XI.6.2).

Integrity in Communications and Promotions

2.3 The school shall ensure that all published materials, including catalogs, academic calendars, and promotional literature, accurately represent the institution to its various constituencies and publics, including students and prospective students. All charges and fees, including refund policies, should be fully disclosed. Schools should exercise care in advertising to portray the institution fairly and honestly to the public. Wherever appropriate, published institutional documents shall employ gender inclusive language with reference to persons.

Covenant Seminary strives to present the information about the school accurately and

with integrity to the constituencies and publics with which we deal. One key move that we have

made in this regard was the appointment of a director for institutional research, whose role is to

ensure that cross-departmental statistics are reported accurately to accrediting agencies and other

publics. We have also made an increased and sustained effort to unify responsibility for

Seminary publications under the Public Relations Department. This department bears ultimately

responsibility for coordinating the efforts and input of various institutional stakeholders in the

production of the Seminary catalogue and other promotional materials. In addition, academic

calendars and fee schedules are checked by multiple departments in order to assure accuracy.

And, the Seminary’s style guide for publications utilizes gender inclusive language where

appropriate, recognizing that a substantial portion of our students are female.

Financial information is disseminated widely and through various media to our

constituencies. Early in each spring semester, a tuition memo is distributed to the entire student

body, alerting them to any projected tuition increase for the following year. In addition, a

housing memo is produced in the spring semester to notify those living in Seminary-owned

housing about any projected increases in rent or other expenses. At the end of the spring

semester, a separate financial information memo is published for the entire student body which details the charges for tuition, fees, and housing for the upcoming school year. It also explains

the financial policies of the Seminary, giving details relating to the requirements for qualifying

for a deferred payment plan, the refund schedule for classes, and other financial matters. We also

post this document to the Seminary’s Web site and it is available both to current and prospective

students in the easily accessible PDF format. Finally, much of this information, in an abbreviated

form, is provided to each student in his or her registration packet for the fall and spring semester

registrations.

In order to assess whether the Seminary accurately represents itself to its publics, the vice

president for student services conducts exit interviews with groups of graduating students. As

part of that interview, he asks whether the Seminary’s actual operations are consistent with the

way in which it presents itself. Data collected from such interviews over the past five years

overwhelmingly affirms that the Seminary’s students believe that the school represents itself

accurately.

Integrity in Treatment of Faculty, Staff, and Students

2.4 The institution shall seek to treat students, faculty, administrators, employees, and the publics to which it relates in ethical ways. Such treatment includes, among other concerns, an equitable policy of student tuition refunds; non-discriminatory practices in employment, insofar as such practices do not conflict with doctrine or ecclesiastical polity; clearly defined processes for addressing faculty, employee, and student grievances; and integrity in financial management.

Covenant Seminary practices integrity in its relationships with those within the Seminary

community. Student, faculty, and staff handbooks, as well as the Seminary bylaws, clearly define rights and responsibilities. Each handbook outlines grounds for termination of the relationship with the Seminary and provides for formal and fair grievance procedures. Each includes the

Seminary’s sexual conduct policy (including policies on sexual harassment).

The Seminary’s discipline and grievance procedures are built on Jesus’ words in

Matthew 18:15ff:

If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. . . .

We find that when individuals first attempt seriously to work out problems together, few grievances go further. On the rare occasions when matters have not been settled privately, resolution has been achieved with the assistance of a supervisor, co-worker, or fellow student. In this way, we model for students the biblical approach to problem resolution that they must follow in ministry. Peacemaking is a high commitment at the seminary— a natural outgrowth of our core value of relational emphasis. We are happy to report that we currently have no formal student, staff, or faculty grievances on file.

The Seminary adheres strictly to its policy on non-discrimination as found in the

Seminary’s bylaws (XVI):

Covenant Theological Seminary does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national or ethnic origin, or physical handicap in its educational programs or activities, including admission and employment. Covenant Seminary does not discriminate on the basis of sex in the educational programs or activities it operates, including admission and employment, except as required by the ordination policies of the Presbyterian Church in America (a corporation).

This policy not only governs issues related to student admissions, but also practices related to hiring and employment. As part of this policy, gender inclusive language is employed in publications and on campus where appropriate.

Integrity in Racial, Ethnic, and Cultural Diversity Issues

2.5 Integrity in theological education includes institutional and educational practices that promote awareness of the diversity of race, ethnicity, and culture widely present in North America. Schools shall seek to enhance participation of persons of racial/ethnic

minorities in institutional life. According to its stated purpose, the school shall seek to address the concerns of women and to increase their participation in theological education. In all cases, schools shall seek to assist students in gaining the particular knowledge, appreciation, and openness needed to live and practice ministry effectively in changing cultural and racially diverse settings.

The Seminary continues to seek the participation and address the concerns of women and racial/ethnic minorities. This is further evidence of our adherence to our policy on non- discrimination. The Seminary continues to strive toward greater racial diversity; however, we have not recognized marked differences in our ten-year trends. As the accompanying chart on

“student ethnicity” shows, the Student Ethnicity student body has remained slightly 18 %

16 % over 80% white, non-Hispanic since 14 %

12 % our last self-study report. This is the 10 % case even though the Seminary and 8%

6% its parent denomination have 4% focused intentionally on recruiting 2% 0% 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 non-white students and leadership. Fiscal year

All Degrees MDiv Program Currently, nearly 13% of MDiv Other Degree Programs students are non-white; a little more than 16% of students in other programs are non-white.

Overall, for the entire student body, 15% is non-white. These statistics cohere with our ten-year trends.

The Seminary continues to embrace gender diversity within its confessional and

denominational commitments. The ten-year trend since our last self-study report demonstrates

that the Seminary continues to see between 24% and 28% of its student body comprised of

women. With regard to our MA Ge nde r Divers ity (All programs) programs, which include our 100%

Missouri-licensed counseling (for 80%

program as well as our MATS, 60%

MAEM, and MAET programs, we credit) 40%

20% find that women have historically 0% made up the majority of students in Percentage ofhead count 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Fiscal Year these programs over the past ten Males Females

years; only in FY2007 was there a parity between women and men in our MA programs.

Because of this reality—that women are preparing beside men for significant arenas of ministry

within and outside the local church context—the Seminary works hard to educate its student

body about the importance of women in the life of the church as well as to model the ways in

which women and men can work together in Christ’s body within the context of the PCA’s

unique confessional and denominational heritage.

Although our percentages of gender and ethnicity mix have remained flat, total headcount

of women and minorities has increased since 1997 because our total enrollment has increased.

We do take some comfort in the fact that, though we recognize that we can do more institutionally to encourage women and minority students, we have made some strides over the past ten years.

Integrity in Financial Assistance Programs

2.6 Institutions participating in U.S. federally guaranteed student financial assistance programs shall comply with prevailing governmental guidelines regulating these programs. Default rates on student loans above the federal threshold, or failure to comply with federal guidelines, is cause for review of an institution’s overall conformity to the standards of accreditation of the Commission.

Covenant Theological Seminary is a participant in the Federal Stafford Student Loan program. As a result, we are required to meet the standards set forth for member schools by the

United States Department of Education. To ensure that we are aware of these laws and regulations, the Seminary’s staff members hold memberships in organizations that provide training and access to state and federal personnel as well as opportunities to learn from peers. At least one member of the Financial Aid Department has attended the Missouri Association of

Student Financial Aid Professionals (MASFAP) conferences in the fall and spring for many years. In addition, at least one staff member has attended the United States Department of

Education’s annual Federal Student Aid Conference in three of the last four years. The staff has attended other such training as well. The information gleaned through these training opportunities has been used to examine our own policies and procedures to ensure that we are following federal guidelines. The Seminary’s Financial Aid Policy and Procedure Manual is reviewed annually and updated as needed to ensure that our policies and procedures comply with current law and regulations. As part of this review, the Seminary is quick to amend policy when we discover that we may be out of step with new state or federal regulations.

The Financial Aid Office, as well as the Seminary as a whole, undergoes an annual audit each summer. These audits are conducted in accordance with the standards applicable to financial audits contained in the Government Auditing Standards. Our auditors have given us excellent reports. All audits from 1998 to 2006 have been unqualified, i.e., no areas of material

46 weakness have been found. Our cohort default rate has remained well below the 10% threshold, allowing us to remain as a “low-risk program” for Federal Student Aid for the last nine years.

Many years we have no students going into default. Since the last self-study was done, our cohort default rates have been as follows:

Fiscal Cohort default rates Number of Students in Year in percentage Default 1998 0.0% 0 1999 0.0% 0 2000 0.0% 0 2001 0.0% 0 2002 2.0% 1 2003 0.0% 0 2004 0.0% 0 2005 0.0% 0 2006 2.0% 1

The Seminary continues to evidence the institutional integrity required in areas of financial aid and compliance with all government regulations.

Summary Evaluation

2.1 Covenant Seminary consistently complies with all accreditation standards and

communicates with the ATS Commission on Accrediting and its board in ways

that are appropriate.

2.2 Covenant Seminary consistently conducts its operations in compliance with all

applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations.

2.3 Covenant Seminary communicates with its publics with integrity, ensuring to the

best of its ability that all published materials accurately represent the institution.

2.4 Covenant Seminary continues to treat its various constituencies in ways that are

ethical, equitable, and appropriate.

2.5 Within the limits of its confessional tradition and stated purpose, Covenant

Seminary works hard to welcome diversity of race, ethnicity, and gender and to

enhance participation of these persons.

2.6 Covenant Seminary demonstrates a long history of compliance with governmental

guidelines for U.S. federal guaranteed student financial assistant programs. We

demonstrate a remarkably low default record in these programs.

Recommendations

The Seminary should continue to develop creative means for increasing opportunities

and participation for racial, ethnic, and gender minorities.

CHAPTER THREE

LEARNING, TEACHING, AND RESEARCH: THEOLOGICAL SCHOLARSHIP

A theological school is a community of faith and learning that cultivates habits of theological reflection, nurtures wise and skilled ministerial practice, and contributes to the formation of spiritual awareness and moral sensitivity. Within this context, the task of theological scholarship is central. It includes the interrelated activities of learning, teaching, and research.

In keeping with its mission statement and institutional standards, Covenant Theological

Seminary calls its faculty and students to a life of theological reflection exhibited through

personal, scholastic, and ministerial practice. This practice is cultivated through building strong

academic skills and integrating them with personal formation and ministerial training. Covenant

Seminary deeply desires that its students build these skills within the framework of a Kingdom perspective that desires to see God’s work carried throughout various cultures, people groups, and geographical areas. To strengthen these practices, Covenant Seminary also stresses continuing contact with its alumni, offering on-going opportunities to refresh or build additional skills in these areas. Additionally, Covenant Seminary continues to partner with other constituencies and institutions in the teaching of the Gospel worldwide.

3.1 Activities of Theological Scholarship: Learning, Teaching, and Research

3.1.0 Learning and teaching occur in the classroom and through experiences outside the classroom; the responsibilities of teaching and learning rest with both students and faculty; the collaborative nature of theological scholarship requires that people teach and learn from one another in communal settings; and research is integral to the quality of both learning and teaching. 50

3.1.1 Learning

3.1.1.1 Learning in a theological school should reflect the goals of the total curriculum and be appropriate to post-baccalaureate education.

Covenant Theological Seminary is dedicated to the melding of curricular and co- curricular material for the well-rounded formation of the student for ministry. The institution’s mission (“to train servants of the triune God to walk with God, to interpret and communicate

God’s word and to lead God’s people”) is threaded through the content of its courses, from church history (which teaches students to walk with God through an understanding of ecclesiastical history, leading to discernment and sound patterns of behavior) to educational ministries (focusing on building critical thinking skills to bring the mind under the lordship of

Christ in ministry practice) to biblical studies to counseling. Each curriculum has its own discrete learning goals, which reflect the institutional mission and core values; these learning goals are appropriate to graduate theological education and to equipping ministers and lay leaders for lifetime service in their ministerial vocations.1

3.1.1.2 Learning should cultivate scholarly discourse and result in the ability to think critically and constructively, conduct research, use library resources, and engage in the practice of ministry.

Over the past five years, the faculty of Covenant Theological Seminary has spent a great deal of time, both inside and outside faculty meetings, discussing Bloom’s taxonomy and ways to improve classroom discourse to encourage critical thinking. As a result, professors adjusted

1 This chapter relies heavily on course descriptions and syllabi collected between 1998 and 2006. These remain on file in the office of the vice president for academics and will be made available to the visiting team in October 2007. 51

objectives, goals, expectations, and/or assignments in a number of courses to challenge students

to progress from mere knowledge and comprehension of material to the ability to analyze,

synthesize, and evaluate that material in light of potential ministry applications. These changes surfaced in such areas as exegesis, contemporary culture, church history, women’s ministry, and educational ministries. Other courses devoted time to teaching students scholarly skills, particularly the use of library resources and research methods. Finally, the faculty ensures that each professional degree includes courses which focus on the practice of ministry, supplemented by the requirement for field education hours in the MDiv (300 hours) and MAEM (150 hours) degrees and the internship in the MAC degree.

3.1.1.3 Learning should foster, in addition to the acquisition of knowledge, the capacity to understand and assess one’s tradition and identity, and to integrate materials from various theological disciplines and modes of instructional engagement in ways that enhance ministry and cultivate emotional and spiritual maturity.

As part of the on-going discussion on Bloom’s taxonomy, faculty members have revised

both their methodology and their course expectations to lead students in moving from mastery of

content to integration of theological beliefs into the practice of ministry. This involves learning

the basic tradition of which the Seminary is a part (see such courses as CH310 Ancient and

Medieval Church History and CH320 Reformation and Modern Church History; the entire

systematic theology curriculum; the exegetical curriculum; etc.). Every degree program, except

for the MAC, requires basic courses in church history; the focus is on developing an

understanding of our religious heritage and fostering a critical engagement with that heritage.

This forms the basis of ministry practice in such areas as preaching, counseling, and pastoral

leadership. Projects such as the thesis in the MAET and the ThM, the capstone in the distance

learning version of the MATS, the capstone project in the MAEM, and the dissertation in the 52

DMin degree are all designed for students to exhibit the integration of the material they have learned into their philosophy and practice of ministry.

The Seminary’s emphasis on the combination of curricular and co-curricular areas is designed to focus on the spiritual formation of students. While the academic curriculum covers the doctrines and practices of Covenant Seminary’s denominational affiliation, the Seminary also models those traditions in its chapel services, ministry lunches, and other programs, giving students many opportunities to create and participate in ministry. The class schedule has also been changed to leave Monday mornings and Friday afternoons free so that students have time for increased ministry participation. Faculty members exhibit the Seminary’s core belief in the centrality of Scripture as they begin each class with prayer. They also illustrate the Seminary’s deeply held belief in the grace of Jesus Christ as they work with students in and out of the classroom, answering questions and encouraging students to delve deeper into the truths of

Scripture. Specific courses are designed to challenge students to greater spiritual maturity.

Community life at Covenant Seminary also gives students an opportunity to exhibit spiritual growth and maturity, or where necessary, challenges them to greater maturity.

Three of the Seminary’s degrees (the MDiv, MAEM, and MAC) require students to complete field education work. Most of this work is done through local churches or ministries

(counseling also includes a number of non-ministry settings). As the Field Education Handbook demonstrates, Covenant Seminary works closely with the women and men at those field service sites to partner in the shepherding of students. This service is also designed to help students integrate the material they have learned in class into the practice of ministry.

3.1.2 Teaching

3.1.2.1 Teaching should involve faculty, librarians, and students working together in an environment of mutual learning, respect, and engagement.

Covenant Seminary draws on the resources of its faculty, library, and student body to teach its students. At least one faculty member (and sometimes a team of faculty members) are responsible for each course. Additionally, certain courses at strategic points in the various curricula include degree-specific tutoring from library staff in the best use of the library resources.

In this environment, students and faculty learn from one another. Faculty members encourage student involvement through peer review, student presentation of material in various seminar courses, and modeling humility. Some faculty members also collaborate with students in research projects designed to lead to materials for publication. Presbyterion, Covenant

Seminary’s academic journal, occasionally includes material produced by students and/or alumni which the faculty has found to be helpful and of good quality.

3.1.2.2 Instructional methods should use the diversity of life experiences represented by the students, by faith communities, and by the larger cultural context. Instructional methods and the use of technology should be sensitive to the diversity of student populations, different learning styles of students, the importance of communities of learning, and the instructional goals.

Led by its Educational Ministries department, the faculty has been exploring and expanding instructional methods to increase both the attractiveness and the effectiveness of classroom presentations. As part of its emphasis on Bloom’s taxonomy (driving toward the deeper goals of analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of material), faculty members have begun to 54

team-teach a number of courses, utilizing strategically and in a cross-disciplinary fashion the

varied expertise of individual professors to assist students in integrating the curriculum.

Additionally, faculty members from particular disciplines also team-teach to give students the

maximum benefit of their expertise, appeal to the diversity of learning styles within our student

population, and to emphasize the importance of learning in community.

One further piece of evidence of the faculty’s on-going discussion of Bloom’s taxonomy

has been the deliberate move to vary the nature of course assignments. Faculty members have

incorporated a number of group projects to help students build the people skills necessary for

ministry. Faculty members also have required the use of interviews, logs/journals, reflection

papers, timelines, self-reflection, individual presentations, and portfolios in addition to the usual

examinations and quizzes.

Covenant Seminary’s faculty also has incorporated the use of technology in its teaching.

Led by the Institutional Technology Services department, the Seminary’s classrooms have

experienced a marked upgrade of educational technology during the last several years. In addition, faculty members receive excellent support from the Audio-Visual Department, through training that enables faculty members to use these tools to teach students how to draw on cultural materials for the application of the theology and ideas taught in the classroom. These tools also appeal to students of various learning styles (visual, audio, kinetic), making the classroom material more accessible to all students. In addition, the Seminary has begun to explore how to use the educational technology at our disposal more effectively to create “hybrid” courses that could better develop communities of learning and create more flexible learning opportunities.

3.1.2.3 Courses are a central place of interaction between teachers and learners. The way the instructor arranges the work and structures the class should encourage 55

theological conversation. Courses and programs of study should reflect an awareness of the diversity of worldwide and local settings. In the development of new courses and the review of syllabi, faculty should interact with one another, with librarians, with their students, with the church, and with the developing fields of knowledge. Course development and review best occur in the context of the goals of the entire curriculum.

Although Covenant Seminary’s primary goal is to train ministers for the Presbyterian

Church in America, the institution believes that students must be aware of the broader

theological diversity of the worldwide church. To build that understanding, faculty members

routinely model interaction with each other, library staff (see the comments on team teaching in

sections 3.1.2.1 and 3.1.2.2), and the larger theological community. Initially, this is done through the exploration of viewpoints outside of Covenant Seminary’s tradition. The faculty also participates in and encourages students to attend theological conversations with diverse theological institutions within the St. Louis area.

Throughout the student’s seminary career, co-curricular activities such as lectures, often

offered through the Seminary’s Francis A. Schaeffer Institute and World Mission office, offer

opportunities to hear and/or present ideas from the broader theological community. These offices

partner with faculty members to bring in practitioners from urban ministry, ethnic ministry, and other diverse geographic ministries. The Field Education office provides students with ministry

opportunities in the broader theological community.

3.1.3 Research

3.1.3.1 Research is an essential component of theological scholarship and should be evident in the work of both teachers and students. Theological research is both an individual and a communal enterprise, and is properly undertaken in constructive relationship with the academy, with the church, and with the wider public.

Engagement in research takes many forms at Covenant Theological Seminary, ranging

from original faculty research for publications to research which leads to a deeper understanding

of existing theological work. Faculty members lead students in an exploration of the underlying

assumptions in theological work and the critical thinking skills necessary to understand it

properly. Mastery of basic research skills provides the foundation for numerous major paper

assignments, but students are also asked to do original research in the form of interviewing

practitioners and/or ministry constituents.

Faculty members themselves are encouraged to remain actively involved in research.

Library personnel routinely present new research techniques and resources to the faculty in faculty meetings. Additionally, the faculty is strongly encouraged to produce new publications; research and writing goals are discussed during annual reviews with the vice president for academics. In order to support this research, the Seminary offers a generous sabbatical policy and funds conference attendance and paper presentations. As part of the institution’s support for research interests, faculty members are encouraged to teach electives in those areas on which they are writing, helping to involve students in the publication of new material and the advancement of theological scholarship.

3.1.3.2 As a function of learning, research involves the skills needed both to discover information and to integrate new information with established understandings. As a function of teaching, research assimilates sources of information, constructs patterns of understanding, and uncovers new information in order to strengthen classroom experiences.

The faculty at Covenant Theological Seminary has been working very hard to establish

numerous points in the curriculum at which students are encouraged/required to synthesize the

material they have learned with ministry practice. The basic research skill of information 57

discovery must be married to the skill of critical thinking to provide good application in the

practice of ministry. This pattern is emphasized over and over again to build this life-long habit

in the student.

3.1.4 Efforts to Ensure Quality of Teaching, Learning, and Research

3.1.4 An institution shall demonstrate its ongoing efforts to ensure the quality of teaching, learning, and research within the context of its purpose, and as understood by the relevant scholarly and ecclesial communities.

In order to ensure teaching quality, especially of instructors new to Covenant Seminary

and to academic instruction, the Seminary’s administration developed and implemented a faculty

mentoring plan in August 2005. The purpose of the plan was to orient new faculty members to

the mission, core values, and ethos of the Seminary as well as to assist in developing certain basic teaching skills and to think through the purposes of theological education. In order to make sure that new faculty members understand the importance of their participation with the administration in successfully accomplishing this plan, the faculty adopted the plan as part of the

Faculty Manual and approved the requirement of a successful mentoring process as part of advancement in rank.

Moreover, the Seminary’s administration works diligently on matters of ongoing faculty

development, drawing on its resident experts in educational theory and practice, combined with

the strategic introduction of outside thinkers who can expand the faculty’s exposure to

theological scholarship, to create a series of faculty training sessions. These sessions normally occur in the context of faculty meetings or retreats. and help to shape the continuing faculty discussion on improved pedagogy. Additionally, the Seminary regularly asks faculty members who are returning from sabbaticals to share their experiences and research with the entire faculty. 58

This creates an ongoing dynamic of good academic practice which translates to improved teaching, learning, and research at the institution.

One particularly key time for the professional development of our faculty occurred during the summer of 2006. Funded by the Seminary’s Center for Ministry Leadership, the vice president for academics distributed copies of Ken Bain’s What the Best College Teachers Do

(2004) to every faculty member to read during the summer break. At our fall 2006 faculty- administration retreat, faculty members spent two hours discussing with each other in small groups and as a whole how insights from Bain’s work could improve their own teaching. The response to this interaction was so good that this book has become a regular part of our faculty mentoring plan.

Additionally, each class and each professor is evaluated by students at the end of each semester. These evaluations are sent to the professor of record, the vice president for academics, and the Seminary’s president. During their annual reviews with the vice president for academics, faculty members are asked what findings they received from the course evaluations and what changes they made in response to those evaluations. Faculty members who struggle to utilize the evaluations in an effective manner are encouraged to reflect more intentionally on how student perceptions may reflect on actual teaching effectiveness. These evaluations provide a significant part of the review process for future teaching contracts.

3.2 Characteristics of Theological Scholarship

3.2.0 Patterns of collaboration, freedom of inquiry, relationships with diverse publics, and a global awareness are important characteristics of theological scholarship.

3.2.1 Scholarly Collaboration

3.2.1.1 The activities of theological scholarship—teaching, learning, and research—are collaborative efforts among faculty, librarians, and students, and foster a lifelong commitment to learning and reflection.

In its 2005–2006 catalog, Covenant Theological Seminary states its commitment to life-

long learning:

Covenant Seminary seeks to fulfill its purpose by providing a variety of lifelong learning opportunities for individuals and churches, including adult continuing education classes, seminars, publications and media resources, as well as by providing theological leadership for the PCA and the Christian community through such means as faculty publications, service on denominational and professional committees and speaking opportunities. (p. 83)

By opening of intensive courses to alumni and community members (through the rubric

of our Lifetime of Ministry series, which these individuals may attend for a very reduced fee),

sponsoring conferences and lectureships (e.g., our annual Connect Conference is designed to

provide spiritual renewal and refreshment for ministry practitioners), and posting chapel

messages and selected course lectures on the Web, Covenant Seminary strongly encourages its

constituency to continue a pattern of lifelong learning and reflection. Covenant Seminary has

also provides numerous teaching sessions annually at the denominational General Assembly. To

strengthen the message of collaborative, lifelong learning, numerous courses require that

students talk with ministry practitioners and participate in both the delivery and reception of

material in class.

The Seminary’s commitment to lifelong learning is also evidenced in the creation of the

Center for Ministry Leadership (CML). Funded by a grant from the Lilly Endowment Inc.’s

Sustaining Pastoral Excellence program, CML gathers information on what makes for “excellent

pastors” by hosting Pastors’ Summit retreats and Intersect forums. (The Pastors’ Summit brings

together seasoned pastors to share experiences and wisdom gained through years of pastoral 60

ministry, and the Intersect forum brings pastors together with ruling elders who are small

business owners to share leadership insights and develop “best practices” strategies to benefit the

church.) But the CML also serves as the nerve center for the Seminary’s continuing education

efforts; in fall 2007, the Seminary re-located its DMin program under the Center’s oversight to

make plain our commitment to continuing education. Findings from the various programs are

funneled back into the DMin and other curricula and serve to challenge the Seminary’s faculty

about what is required for fruitful, lifelong ministry.

3.2.1.2 Scholarship occurs in a variety of contexts in the theological school. These include courses, independent study, the library, student and faculty interaction, congregational and field settings, and courses in universities and other graduate level institutions. In each of these settings, mutual respect among scholarly inquirers characterizes theological scholarship.

Covenant Theological Seminary offers students the opportunity to use a variety of

academic tools in pursuit of their education. Those tools include but are not limited to formal

classroom instruction, four forms of independent study (additional readings in Greek and

Hebrew, taking courses on tape or digital video disk, ministry practicum, regular independent

study), the research materials provided in the library, tutorials, ministry lunches, meeting time

with faculty members, field education, and chapel services. Students are strongly encouraged to

use all of these tools.

Covenant Theological Seminary deeply believes that co-curricular and curricular activities must occur in tandem to properly train men and women for ministry as outlined above.

The integration of field education into the professional degrees creates a collaboration of

learning between the Seminary and the local churches/ministries involved. Additionally, the

Seminary uses a number of local ministry practitioners as adjunct professors, particularly in 61 practical theology areas. Since the Seminary requires that professors have ministry experience themselves, most instruction is framed by ministry practice. Professors continue to be involved with the church at the local, national, and international levels. This marriage of curricular and co- curricular areas is also designed to illustrate the Seminary’s belief that the academy and the church working together provide the strongest witness for the Gospel, modeling for students a healthy lifelong mix of study and practice.

3.2.1.3 Collaboration and communication extends beyond the theological school’s immediate environment to relate it to the wider community of the church, the academy, and the society. Theological scholarship is enhanced by active engagement with the diversity and global extent of those wider publics, and it requires a consciousness of racial, ethnic, gender, and global diversities. In accordance with the school’s purpose and constituencies, insofar as possible, the members of the school’s own community of learning should also represent diversity in race, age, ethnic origin, and gender.

Covenant Seminary’s belief in the broad appeal of the Gospel is clearly stated in both our

“kingdom perspective” core value and our “vision” competency found in our mission statement.

The Seminary has worked hard to expand its faculty and student body in order to influence racial, ethnic, and global peoples. Within the last three years, the Seminary has rejoiced to hire faculty members from the African-American and Asian-American communities. A number of adjunct faculty members also represent these and other groups. At the same time, Covenant

Seminary’s admissions staff seeks opportunities to recruit students from various racial, ethnic, and global peoples. While progress has been slower than we would like, we are encouraged that we are making some progress in this area.

In the classroom, Covenant Seminary also stresses the global reach of the Gospel and encourages students to think in that manner. Guest speakers in co-curricular events represent various people groups both within and outside of the continental United States. Faculty members 62 challenge students in class to consider viewpoints from a variety of backgrounds. While attaining ongoing, on-campus representation from these constituencies can be a slow process (given

Covenant Seminary’s commitment to hiring qualified pastor-scholars from within its denominational framework), the Seminary remains committed to increasing the presence of these constituencies on campus.

3.2.2 Freedom of Inquiry

3.2.2.0 Both in an institution’s internal life and in its relationship with its publics, freedom of inquiry is indispensable for good theological education. This freedom, while variously understood, has both religious roots and an established value in North American higher education. Theological schools have a responsibility to maintain their institutional purpose, which for many schools includes confessional commitments and specific responsibilities for faculty as stipulated by these commitments. Schools shall uphold the freedom of inquiry necessary for genuine and faithful scholarship, articulate their understanding of that freedom, formally adopt policies to implement that understanding and ensure procedural fairness, and carefully adhere to those policies.

As stated in Covenant Theological Seminary’s Faculty Manual,

Academic freedom exists at Covenant Seminary in a context of responsibility clearly outlined in the Seminary’s Statement of Purpose. The faculty member in seeking truth wherever it is found will remember that the Seminary is an agency of the Presbyterian Church in America, which has a creedal commitment set forth in the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms, and that faculty members are responsible to promote the doctrine and standards of that denomination. (p. I-7)

Within that understanding, faculty members hold diverging views on many issues and are free to present these views to students and other members of the faculty to stimulate discussion and the pursuit of truth.

Students at Covenant Theological Seminary are not bound by the Seminary’s commitment to the Westminster Standards. Consequently, they are free to challenge teaching within the bounds of Scripture and moral and ethical behavior. The faculty as a whole welcomes 63

students’ questions and comments, requiring students to defend their views from the Bible. This

complements the formal training in which faculty members clearly state the biblical basis of their

teaching. As stated in the Faculty Manual, “Covenant’s objective is not the production of

external conformity, or even intellectual assent to a creedal statement, but rather a personal commitment from each student to Jesus Christ and His teachings as they are presented in the

Scriptures.” (p. I-8)

3.2.3 Involvement with Diverse Publics

3.2.3.1 Theological scholarship requires engagement with a diverse and manifold set of publics. Although the particular purpose of a school will influence the balance and forms of this engagement, schools shall assume responsibility for relating to the church, the academic community, and the broader public.

Faculty members at Covenant Theological Seminary lead students in the exploration of a biblical worldview and the impact that worldview has on understanding culture. In numerous courses, students are required to read and interact with theological perspectives outside their own commitments. Some students involved in counseling internships are placed in social agencies or local hospitals. Ministry field education often includes components of interaction with the broader culture, whether that is meeting students in schools or other public places, leading discussions in public forums (notably local coffee and book shops), or visitation in health care facilities. Students and faculty are encouraged to participate in discussion with the broader academic community through participation in the local Day of Theological Discussion. Faculty members routinely present papers at various academic conferences to stimulate discussion and further scholarship. Faculty members also preach and teach in churches throughout the local area 64 and the denomination (at the request of those churches), giving professors closer ties to the local church which can then be shared with students in the classroom.

From 1998 through 2002, ATS sponsored the Public Character of Theological Education project. Covenant Seminary’s Professor David Jones served as chair of the Evangelical Study

Group for the project. In the fall of 2000, the Seminary received an ATS grant to develop

“demonstration models” that addressed the issues raised during the project’s study and discussion phase. The Seminary used the grant funds to establish a special chapel program that focused on the theme of vocational discipleship. Throughout 2001 and 2002, we invited persons with significant experience in various vocational fields to offer personal testimony about how they seek to connect their faith and work as well as what aspiring ministry leaders need to know in order to minister effectively with people like themselves.

In 2002, we hosted a vocational ministry conference sponsored by the Francis A.

Schaeffer Institute entitled Yearning for Glory: Reflecting God’s Truth in All of Life. As with the chapel series, conference speakers addressed the relationship between faith and faithfulness in the workplace. We received a very positive response from our students and community participants to this project and decided to continue the chapel series with occasional guests.

Conference speakers and chapel speakers since the inception of the program have included a

Mayo Clinic pathologist, an attorney, a U.S. Department of Education Director, a national recording artist, a business consultant, an educator, an environmentalist, a U.S. Senator’s Chief of Staff, a public policy analyst, a nurse, and a social ethicist.

3.2.3.2 Theological scholarship informs and enriches the reflective life of the church. The school should demonstrate awareness of the diverse manifestations of religious community encompassed by the term church: congregations, denominations, parachurch organizations, broad confessional traditions, and the church catholic. Library 65

collections, courses, and degree programs should represent the historical breadth, cultural difference, confessional diversity, and global scope of Christian life and thought.

Covenant Theological Seminary’s denominational roots tie it closely to the church, both

in its local manifestation and as a denominational whole. Covenant Seminary’s full-time faculty members all participate in the church, either as ruling or teaching elders. They routinely provide pulpit supply and teaching to local churches of several denominations and serve on local and national judicatories and study committees. Additionally, they are asked to speak to various parachurch organizations, particularly where Seminary alumni are serving. Many have also been asked to lecture at various seminaries and colleges both inside and outside the United States.

This exposure to the broader church then translates to the classroom through professors’ teaching. They encourage students to participate in the church in similar ways, coaching students and often recommending students when opportunities to teach arise. Faculty members have taken students with them to teach in church settings around the globe, such as Ghana, Mexico, Latvia, and other areas. Students have also participated with faculty in an archaeological dig in Jordan.

All of these experiences are designed to open students to the broader manifestations of the church worldwide. In the classroom, a number of courses point the student to the broader church.

Additionally the Seminary participates in networks of the greater church, bringing those participants on campus to meet with students and offering the theological perspective of the

Seminary in the work of those networks.

3.2.3.3 The theological faculty contributes to the advancement of learning within theological education and, more broadly, in the academic community, by contributions to the scholarly study of religion and its role in higher education.

In addition to involvement in the local Day of Theological Conversation mentioned above, the Covenant Seminary faculty contributes to the advancement of learning through

articles and publications. As an institution, Covenant Seminary publishes Presbyterion, an

academic journal edited by a faculty committee, to which faculty members contribute regularly.

Additionally, faculty members have taught at a number of international institutions/churches at the request of those institutions/churches (see Supplemental Materials). In one particular case, our faculty has been instrumental in establishing a dialog with Muslim scholars in Iran; we plan on hosting members from the Iranian Institute for Interreligious Dialogue in September 2007.

At home, Covenant Seminary recently has hosted a scholar in residence and a writer in

residence, offering these individuals a semester of access to the library, class, and campus

resources. In exchange, these individuals have met with faculty, staff, and students to share their

experiences and concerns about the application of theology to a broader worldview.

Above all, the faculty has been heavily engaged in publication since 1998 (see

Supplemental Materials). Faculty members have published books with religious publishers such as Intervarsity Press, Baker Books, P&R Publishing, Christian Focus Publishers, and Zondervan; they have also published books and essays with academic publishers such as Sheffield Phoenix,

Brill, J. C. B. Mohr, and the University of Alabama Press. Peer-reviewed essays have appeared in a range of academic journals. A fuller list of publications can be found in chapter six of this report as well as in the files of the vice president for academics.

Our faculty has been notable not only by means of publication, but also through

leadership in educational circles. For example, one faculty-administrator currently serves on the

editorial board of ATS’ journal Theological Education; another serves as chair of the Fellowship

of Evangelical Seminary Presidents. Faculty members have been active on ATS visiting teams 67

and on the ITS Evangelical Seminary Dean’s Council. In all of these ways, our faculty has

participated in the scholarly study of religion and contributed to both church and academy.

3.2.3.4 Theological scholarship contributes to the articulation of religion’s role and influence in the public sphere. The faculty and administration should take responsibility for the appropriate exercise of this public interpretive role to enrich the life of a culturally and religiously diverse society. The Association adopted a policy statement on “Academic Freedom and Tenure,” which appears in the Policy Statements section of this publication.

Due to the diverse interests of Covenant Theological Seminary’s faculty, the institution

has engaged in a dialog with a number of disciplines in the broader community on the

contribution of theological thought to society as a whole. This engagement occurs primarily

through the work of various faculty members. For example, Dr. Jack Collins (whose background

includes a master’s degree from Massachusetts Institute of Technology prior to his divinity work) has authored a work on science and the Christian faith which opened a dialog with the scientific community. This resulted in a course on campus on this topic and invitations for Dr.

Collins to address various scientific groups hosted at universities and colleges (Ohio State

University; Covenant College; scientific groups at Las Cruces, New Mexico). Similarly, Dr.

Richard Winter authored books on cultural boredom and personal perfectionism. These books

opened dialogs with churches, other universities (Washington University in St. Louis, the

University of Minnesota, the University of Virginia, and others), medical societies (Christian

Medical Fellowship, Mayo Clinic), and even interviews on various radio stations. Professor

Anthony Bradley came to Covenant Seminary from the Acton Institute and, through his

connections there, has had the opportunity to speak to multiple business and governmental

bodies, including the Congressional Black Caucus. 68

In addition to faculty work in the larger community, the Seminary brings that community

on campus through a variety of events. Covenant Seminary sponsors a men’s Bible study (taught

by various faculty members) every other Tuesday morning, drawing a large group of business

men from the local community. The Francis A. Schaeffer Lecture Series, which addresses

diverse cultural issues from a Christian perspective, is widely publicized in the community and

draws a variety of people, believers and non-believers alike, depending on the topic under

discussion. Likewise, the counseling department has sponsored a number of events (on topics

such as eating disorders, domestic violence, sexual abuse, etc.) which have been broadly

publicized and draw people involved in health care, government, and social work. Finally,

Covenant Theological Seminary teaches classes which draw from the broader community and lead students into interaction with the community.

3.2.4 Globalization

3.2.4.1 Theological teaching, learning, and research require patterns of institutional and educational practice that contribute to an awareness and appreciation of global interconnectedness and interdependence, particularly as they relate to the mission of the church. These patterns are intended to enhance the ways institutions participate in the ecumenical, dialogical, evangelistic, and justice efforts of the church. The term globalization has been used to identify these patterns and practices collectively.

In its mission statement and core values, Covenant Theological Seminary emphasizes its

commitment to a kingdom perspective of the Gospel. This commitment leads the institution to

participate in the global church by sending faculty members and students to participate in the

work of the church nationally and internationally and welcoming visitors from other countries to

campus. As part of this commitment, in 2006, Covenant Theological Seminary began an

initiative called Covenant Worldwide, the core of which involved posting the audio versions of 69 twenty core MA courses on the Internet. Anyone who wishes to listen to this teaching may do so by downloading the MP3 versions of these courses without charge. The Seminary decided to make this resource available as part of its commitment to training the global church. With a grant from the McClellan Foundation, the Seminary is also partnering with a missions organization to translate these materials into four major global languages. Written versions of those translations are being posted on the Web site as they are finished. Since this material became available, the

Seminary has received e-mails of gratitude from church leaders around the world who have found and used these resources. In fact, during the first 18 months that Covenant Worldwide has been online, these materials have been used to train more than 350,000 leaders in house churches all over the globe.

Each spring, Covenant Seminary hosts a missions conference on campus. This conference features a speaker experienced in mission-related ministry (in the past the speakers have come from Africa, Asia, South America, and other areas) and hosts a number of mission agencies that work around the globe in activities ranging from church planting, chaplaincy, and

Bible translation to AIDS relief and international justice issues. During the rest of the year, representatives from a number of ministries visit campus to engage and recruit students for ministry involvement. The Seminary encourages these visitors, always seeking ways to partner globally for the ministry of the Gospel.

Covenant Seminary currently has alumni serving the church around the globe. Through its close association with Presbyterian Mission International, the Seminary maintains close contact with a number of the works in which alumni are engaged and has led students on mission trips to these locations to teach and serve. The Seminary is also seeking funding for a proposed 70

program to sponsor international students (in conjunction with their home denominations) to

study at Covenant Theological Seminary.

In addition, the Seminary is privileged to participate in a number of international

partnerships. These partnerships have resulted in faculty visitation among the institutions and,

occasionally, student visitation among the institutions. The Seminary is currently investigating the possibility of a further educational partnership in Ireland. Additionally, Covenant Seminary hosted a group of five pastors from Mexico in January 2005, and a group of eight seminary students from Japan in January 2007. Both groups observed a class (with simultaneous interpretation for those whose English was inadequate) and shared meals with various students.

Students in Covenant Seminary’s distance learning program come from Latvia, Czechoslovakia,

Mexico, Micronesia, and other locations. Those students must visit campus for three residencies during the course of their study, giving them an opportunity to partake of on-campus life and giving campus students the opportunity to interact with them. On-campus courses regularly urge students to think bigger and broader than their personal cultural context. In every possible venue, the Seminary urges students to think of the global church, no matter what their role in that church may ultimately be.

3.2.4.2 Globalization is cultivated by curricular attention to cross-cultural issues as well as the study of other major religions; by opportunities for cross-cultural experiences; by the composition of the faculty, governing board, and student body; by professional development of faculty members; and by the design of community activities and worship.

3.2.4.3 Schools shall develop practices of teaching, learning, and research (comprehensively understood as theological scholarship) that encourage global awareness and responsiveness.

In its curriculum, Covenant Theological Seminary introduces students to a broad range of

cross-cultural issues in line with our “kingdom perspective” core value. That being said, we are

discovering as a faculty an increasing interest in and burden for cross-cultural issues. As we enter

a new phase of strategic planning, the Seminary desires to discover how this core value could be fleshed out even more intentionally. In order to further that process, the faculty will be reading over the summer of 2007 two or three essays on globalizing theology and theological education to prepare for our August 2007 faculty-administration retreat.

Key in raising these issues for us was the hiring of Dr. J. Nelson Jennings as associate

professor of world mission in 1999, our first dedicated missions professor in ten years. Not only

did this accomplish one of our recommendations from our 1997 self-study report, but it also was

vital for moving the institution forward on issues related to globalization. Jennings, a student of

noted world mission historian Andrew Walls at the University of Edinburgh and a former

denominational missionary to Japan, has raised the consciousness of faculty members and

students on issues related to globalization and cross-cultural engagement and communication.

His leadership on the faculty, as current president of the board for Presbyterian Missions

International, and as the head of our World Mission office has been indispensable in helping us

continue to flesh out what globalization means for our institution.

Jennings offers a wide range of classes that develop global consciousness among our

students. For example, in spring 2007, under his leadership, the Seminary offered courses in

Muslim-Christian Relations, World Missions in Global Issues, God’s World Mission I and II,

and World Religions. We are also planning on transitioning Jennings into our introductory

course, Covenant Theology I and II, so that students will become even more aware how God’s mission is global, encompassing every tribe, language, and people group. In addition, in courses 72 such as Ancient and Medieval Church History and Reformation and Modern Church History, students are taught about the global expansion of Christianity and are challenged to consider what areas of partnership might result as our particular religious heritage (i.e., Presbyterian and

Reformed) engages a world in which Pentecostalism is the predominant form of Protestantism and in which other world religions exercise significant cultural and political presence.

Likewise, faculty members are encouraged to participate in the global church, which has resulted in over two-thirds of the faculty teaching abroad in various settings. Additionally, five faculty members actually grew up outside the United States. These faculty members regularly challenge their fellows to think outside of the Western, American framework in teaching the truths of Scripture to students. In conjunction with this effort, chapel services are planned to occasionally include music from various parts of the world, and students are encouraged to pray in their native tongues during corporate prayer times. Visiting alumni who serve overseas are featured in ministry lunches, giving students more time to interact with and learn from those individuals.

Importantly, the Seminary’s board of trustees continues to set the pace for us in conversations on globalization. At our January 2007 board meeting, as we began our first conversations toward our next strategic plan, the board repeatedly came back to the issues of kingdom perspective, cross-cultural ministry, and the worldwide church. As the board, faculty, staff, and students work together in our strategic planning process, we expect to find that God will be pushing us more and more toward the world in order to deliver theological education and pastoral reflection for a global church.

Summary Evaluation

3.1 Covenant Seminary has done an excellent job over the past ten years at emphasizing

the collaborative nature of theological scholarship. The processes of learning,

teaching, and research are well integrated and produce students who are thoughtful,

critical, reflective, and well prepared for pastoral practice.

3.2 Covenant Seminary’s approach to theological scholarship reflects patterns of

collaboration, freedom of inquiry, involvement with diverse publics, and global

awareness. The Seminary has especially made great strides over the past ten years

in the area of globalization.

Recommendations

1. The Seminary should continue to discover creative ways to integrate learning,

teaching, and research through a better utilization of educational technology.

2. The Seminary should continue to investigate intentionally how to stress its core

value of “kingdom perspective” so that the various curricula produce this outcome

in its students.

3. The Seminary should work toward more formal, strategic, and intentional

partnerships with like-minded international theological schools in order to receive

mutual benefit and to foster global awareness. 75

CHAPTER FOUR

THEOLOGICAL CURRICULUM

The theological curriculum is the means by which teaching and learning are formally ordered to educational goals.

Since our last self-study process in 1997, Covenant Seminary has spent a great amount of

time focused on our theological curriculum. Under the leadership of the previous vice president

for academics, Dr. Donald Guthrie, the Seminary’s faculty has focused on developing degree

program goals, ensuring that competencies are well-charted throughout each specific degree

program, and working toward assessing degree program outcomes. While some work is still

needed, we are confident that the Seminary’s teaching and learning are formally ordered to

appropriate educational goals which fulfill our mission.

4.1 Goals of the Theological Curriculum

4.1.1 In a theological school, the over-arching goal is the development of theological understanding, that is, aptitude for theological reflection and wisdom pertaining to responsible life in faith. Comprehended in this overarching goal are others such as deepening spiritual awareness, growing in moral sensibility and character, gaining an intellectual grasp of the tradition of a faith community, and acquiring the abilities requisite to the exercise of ministry in that community. These goals, and the processes and practices leading to their attainment, are normally intimately interwoven and should not be separated from one another.

The purpose statement of Covenant Theological Seminary lays out the institution’s

overarching goals in ways that are consonant with this standard: “Covenant Theological

Seminary trains servants of the triune God to walk with God, interpret and communicate God’s 76

Word, and lead God’s people.” This statement has at its core developing a deepening spiritual

awareness and character, an intellectual grasp of our faith community, and a sure exercise of ministry skills. In order to accomplish this mission, the Seminary employs a robust program of curricular and co-curricular activities that enable us to participate in God’s ministry of forming students into the likeness of Jesus Christ. This endeavor is dependent on and in response to

God’s gracious presence and leadership in our midst. Throughout our curriculum and co-

curriculum, we seek to develop in our students the intellectual, spiritual, moral, and vocational or

professional capacities that are necessary for God’s ministry.

4.1.2 The emphasis placed on particular goals and their configuration will vary, both from school to school (depending on the understanding of institutional purpose), and within each school (depending on the variety of educational programs offered). The ordering of teaching and learning toward particular sets of goals is embodied in the degree programs of the school and in the specific curricula followed in those programs. The theological curriculum, comprehensively understood, embraces all those activities and experiences provided by the school to enable students to achieve the intended goals. More narrowly understood, the curriculum is the array of specific activities (e.g., courses, practica, supervised ministry, spiritual formation experiences, theses) explicitly required in a degree program. In both the more comprehensive and the more narrow sense, the entire curriculum should be seen as a set of practices with a formative aim— the development of intellectual, spiritual, moral, and vocational or professional capacities—and careful attention must be given to the coherence and mutual enhancement of its various elements.

We seek to flesh out our comprehensive mission, core values, and program goals in and

through each of our degree programs. Courses within degree programs reflect the program goals

of each degree. Through our curriculum mapping project, which has been a significant part of

our overall curricular review process begun in 2001, the Curriculum Committee identified and/or

confirmed those courses that are desirable for cross-degree offering and those that are degree

specific. 77

The Curriculum Committee also reviewed MA programs to identify and/or confirm those

courses that are MA-specific across all MA programs. This process caused us to retire, refine, or

create courses in order to realign particular courses with program goals and our overall mission.

For example, we created a new church history course for MA programs so that MA students

were exposed to the whole of church history rather than requiring them to choose one or the

other of our existing core courses covering particular periods of time.

Globalization is embedded throughout our curricular and co-curricular activities. Faculty

members have extensive experience and ongoing relationships with organizations around the

world. The faculty seeks to communicate this personal and cumulative experience to students in

order to develop knowledge, ministry skills, and Christ-like character. Our current student body

does not reflect fully our desire to enjoy a multi-ethnic and multi-national community of

learners. Currently 15% of our students are non-white or international students. This percentage

represents a relatively constant number since our last re-accreditation visit. We are not satisfied

with this percentage but are taking steps to increase it.

Dr. Donald Guthrie, the vice president for academics at the time, initiated a broad

curricular assessment and evaluation in early 2001. He hired a curriculum assessment coordinator, Heather Laughlin, to conduct research, assemble data, consult with faculty, and disseminate findings to our stakeholders. From 2001 through 2004, Ms. Laughlin’s work included creating, distributing, and reporting the results of an online alumni survey; summarizing new student orientation programs by polling seventeen seminaries; reviewing the clarity of course objectives in relationship to the Seminary’s mission, program goals, and best practice; interviewing department chairs regarding departmental core objectives and learning goals; regularly reviewing the literature and disseminating key findings; and conducting faculty in- 78

service workshops on: a) matching course goals with student learning objectives, b) writing

effective course objectives, and c) writing an effective syllabus.

To complement the general curricular and pedagogical review, Dr. Guthrie hired Rev.

Barry Gaeddert in 2000–01 to do doctoral research on a relatively new evaluation method known

as Classroom Assessment Techniques (CATS). For his dissertation research, Gaeddert studied

faculty attitudes toward using CATS as a means to receive timely, rapid feedback from students

regarding classroom content delivery. The faculty perceived CATS in a generally positive light

and several faculty members have continued to use these techniques as formative assessment

tools in addition to more traditional summative assessment tools like tests, papers, and

presentations.

Ms. Laughlin’s early work coincided with a 2001–02 ATS study on “character and

assessment of learning for religious vocation.” Covenant Seminary participated in the study by

conducting full faculty discussions and focus group discussions on this vital topic and its

relationship to our mission. These discussions prompted the faculty to begin the process of identifying program goals and levels of competency (or a competency rubric) within each program. We realized that although we enjoyed the benefits of a clear mission statement, core values and general competencies, we lacked the specificity of focused competencies that could be articulated in program goals, course objectives, pedagogical practice, and student evaluation

(refer to the section on “Levels of Competence” at the end of chapter four).

In 2001 and 2002, Dr. Guthrie and Jim Meek, then associate academic dean, worked with

the Curriculum Committee through a discovery process that included focused discussion,

benchmarking, accreditation standard examination, and stakeholder assessment to identify

program goals through a competency rubric. The faculty received and approved the program 79

goals and competency rubric in spring 2002. Since its inception, the rubric has served as a

helpful guide to faculty members as they prepare course syllabi. However, we have also found

that we need to offer annual reviews of the “big picture” in order to maximize its usefulness.

The rubric highlights the differentiated layers of understanding, skill development, and

character formation to be found among the degree programs. The Curriculum Committee

designated Level III as our MDiv benchmark and related all other degrees to this level. The

rubric illustrates our desire to relate the specific competencies to the broad elements of the

mission statement. Whether one begins with a broad mission statement element like “to interpret

and communicate God’s Word” or a specific competency statement like “Level III: Theological

Skills–Interprets the Scriptures using the original languages and evidences self-conscious effort

to think in a thoroughly biblical way,” one can identify the relationship between the general and

the specific.

With the competency rubric in place, we turned next to evaluating the “container” into

which our curriculum was poured, namely, our schedule. During the 2002–03 academic year, we

conducted a student survey, polled other seminaries, and discussed how we might deliver our

curriculum in a way that best aligned with our mission. The cumulative findings led us to create

a schedule wherein classes would begin Monday after lunch and conclude at lunchtime on

Fridays. We also decided to have chapel services twice per week rather than three times per week. We increased the occasions for ministry lunches. Thus the complementary ministry lunches and chapel services worked together to fulfill our mission and overall goals. We also incorporated Covenant Groups into a re-designed core MDiv class, Covenant Theology (we previously had general, career, or other interest-focused Covenant Groups, but now we intentionalized these groups into our curricular process). 80

The re-design of this class allowed us to apply our accumulated research from students

and other seminaries as well as experiment with best practice pedagogical methods. The new design included a team of four faculty members from the New Testament, Old Testament,

Systematic Theology, and Practical Theology departments that created a course outline, readings, assignments, and evaluation tools. The committee decided to expand the course to a full year and incorporate elements of a previous hermeneutics course into the content. This blending met our goal to further integrate course material from various disciplines into a more cohesive presentation.

The vice president for student services helped guide the incorporation of Covenant

Groups into the design. The plan called for a faculty member and a senior MDiv student to meet

with small groups of ten to twelve students for course debriefing, fellowship, prayer, and support

throughout both semesters of the course. The vice president for student services assembled the

Covenant Group roster by including a diverse mix of students according to gender, age, race,

geographical home state, ministry experience, and family status.

As of May 2007, four iterations of the re-designed Covenant Theology have been

completed. Throughout the process, we have polled students and faculty members each year to

ascertain strengths and weaknesses of the course. We plan to incorporate a specific question into

our alumni survey about the new course now that we have a sufficient number of graduates from

whom to elicit feedback on its contribution to ministry preparation.

From fall 2005 through spring 2007, the faculty has been engaged in a curricular

mapping process. One of our primary goals was to examine the current differentiation among

program courses. We also hoped to discover ways in which we could more intentionally

integrate program courses together into a cohesive, complementary structure. We began with the 81

MDiv program because it is our core degree program. We heard presentations from each faculty member who teaches a core class in the MDiv program. Each faculty member presented the particular course goals, methods, and assessment strategies; in addition, faculty members articulated how their particular course contributes to the Seminary’s mission. Following the presentations, faculty members asked questions and offered observations on how their courses related to the course under discussion in light of the Seminary mission and denominational and wider church needs. The faculty has found this to be an extremely profitable exercise that will allow us to further map out curriculum content and establish the various ways in which the faculty accomplishes the institution’s mission through our teaching in other degree programs.

Throughout this process, we have been excited to discover how God has blessed

Covenant Seminary with personnel and material resources that advance our mission. We have

been animated by questions such as:

• What are our greatest institutional strengths that we must not lose?

• What are our greatest institutional gaps that we must address?

• How will we assess and evaluate our work in order to maximize planning toward mission accomplishment?

• How do we harness our resources and secure those resources we do not have in order to advance our pedagogical skills?

• How do we relate our courses in a coherent way within and among departments and programs in order to advance our mission?

It has been a rich and fruitful discussion and one that promises to continue with God’s help and

vigorous, ongoing attention.

4.2 Degree Programs

4.2.0 Degree programs approved by the Board of Commissioners are post-baccalaureate and fall into several groups. It should be noted that these categories are not mutually exclusive and that there is some natural overlapping among them. Programs at the level of the first graduate theological degree are of two main kinds: (1) some are oriented primarily toward ministerial leadership and (2) some toward general theological studies. Programs at the advanced level, normally presupposing a first theological degree, are of two main kinds: (1) those that focus upon advanced ministerial leadership and (2) those directed primarily toward theological research and teaching.

4.2.0.1 When Commission institutions offer more than one degree program, they shall articulate the distinctions among the degrees with regard to their educational and vocational intent. Institutions shall articulate the goals and objectives of each degree program they offer and assure that the design of its curriculum is in accordance with institutional purpose and the accreditation standards of the Commission.

Covenant Seminary has been working on making clear distinctions between its degree programs that are oriented primarily toward ministerial leadership (especially the MDiv) and those focused on general theological studies. In 2006–7, the vice president for academics led a task team (including the associate deans of academic services and educational ministries) to focus attention on what the “core” of our MA programs is—that cluster of courses that the MA programs have in common. Part of the rationale behind this effort was to propose curricular changes in various MA programs, both to distinguish these programs from the MDiv curriculum with regard to their educational and vocational intent as well as to cross-pollinate MA students who may have various foci (i.e., educational ministries, counseling, and general theological studies). This task team proposed curricular changes to the Curriculum Committee and faculty in spring 2007 and intends to suggest others in fall 2007 to take effect for the 2008–09 school year.

These proposals flowed from a longer-standing curricular review process. Beginning in

2001, the Curriculum Committee studied the various MA programs in the light of the MDiv program, in order to identify and confirm those courses that are desirable for cross-degree 83

offering and those that are degree specific. The development of the competency rubric and

program goals advanced our efforts to articulate the differences among the degrees. One can

observe and trace the deepening expectation through the levels of competence and their

relationship to degree program goals. For example, in the Level I: Theological Skills

competency, the student “reliably interprets the Bible.” In the Level II: Theological Skills

competency, the student “thoughtfully applies biblical teaching to doctrine and life.” In the Level

III: Theological Skills competency, the student “interprets the Scriptures using the original

languages and evidences self-conscious effort to think in a thoroughly biblical way.” When this

deepening expectation is applied to degree programs, the differences between, for example, the

Graduate Certificate (Level I) and the MDiv (Level III) may be readily observed. Faculty

members interpretively insert these specific competencies into course objectives and course

activities in order to further the goals of each program via specific courses.

4.2.0.2 The number of students enrolled in any degree program shall be sufficient to provide a community of learning in that degree program.

4.2.0.3 Schools shall follow the recommended nomenclature for all Board-approved degree programs. In cases where governmental licensing, charter requirements, or institutional federation agreements preclude use of recommended nomenclature, the Board will consider alternate degree nomenclature. In cases where the standards provide alternate nomenclature for the same kind of degree program (e.g., MRE or MA in Religious Education, ThM or STM, PhD, or ThD), the nomenclature employed reflects the history or policies of the schools offering the degree programs.

4.2.0.4 Degree programs shall be approved by the Board according to the Commission’s formally adopted procedures (cf. Procedures).

Covenant Seminary’s current degree programs, all approved by NCA and ATS, include:

the Master of Divinity (MDiv), the Master of Arts (Theological Studies) (MATS), the Master of

Arts (Exegetical Theology) (MAET), the Master of Arts in Educational Ministries (MAEM), the 84

Master of Arts in Counseling (MAC), the Master of Theology (ThM), and the Doctor of Ministry

(DMin). All of these programs follow ATS nomenclature. Each degree program has a sufficient

number of students enrolled to Enrollment FTE: For Credit (Fall) provide a community of learners 500 450 except for the MAET and, to a lesser 400 350 extent, the ThM. As evidenced by 300 250 the accompanying “Enrollment 200 150 FTE” chart, the ThM represents a 100 50 very small (4 FTE) portion of the 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 student body. While we report all of M.Div. Fiscal YearM.A. M.A.C. D.Min. our MA programs to ATS in an Th.M. Graduates Certificates MAEM aggregate, the MAET has similar numbers. As part of the Seminary’s strategic planning process, the vice president for academics will lead a cross-divisional task team to evaluate these programs in the light of institutional mission and resources and determine their long-term viability.

4.2.1 Basic Programs Oriented Toward Ministerial Leadership

4.2.1.1 Curricula for programs oriented toward ministerial leadership have certain closely integrated, common features. First, they provide a structured opportunity to develop a thorough, discriminating understanding and personal appropriation of the heritage of the community of faith (e.g., its Scripture, tradition, doctrines, and practices) in its historical and contemporary expressions. Second, they assist students in understanding the cultural realities and social settings within which religious communities live and carry out their missions, as well as the institutional life of those communities themselves. The insights of cognate disciplines such as the social sciences, the natural sciences, philosophy, and the arts enable a knowledge and appreciation of the broader context of the religious tradition, including cross-cultural and global aspects. Third, they provide opportunities for formational experiences through which students may grow in those personal qualities essential for the practice of ministry, namely, 85

emotional maturity, personal faith, moral integrity, and social concern. Fourth, they assist students to gain the capacities for entry into and growth in the practice of the particular form of ministry to which the program is oriented. Instruction in these various areas of theological study should be so conducted as to demonstrate their interdependence, their theological character, and their common orientation toward the goals of the degree program. The educational program in all its dimensions should be designed and carried out in such a way as to enable students to function constructively as ministerial leaders in the particular communities in which they intend to work, and to foster an awareness of the need for continuing education.

4.2.1.2 The following degree nomenclature is included among these kinds of curricular programs: Master of Divinity; Master of Arts in Religious Education/Master of Religious Education; Master of Arts in _____ (e.g., Counseling); Master of Sacred Music/Master of Church Music.

Covenant Seminary offers three degree programs oriented toward ministerial leadership:

the MDiv, the MAEM, and the MAC. Each program contains the four general features for this

category of degree offering. The MDiv program consists of 103 credits, while the MAEM and

MAC consist of 50 and 60 credits respectively. Each program is detailed in the Degree Program

Standards section of this report (4.3). Religious heritage, spiritual formation, the understanding

of cultural context, and developing ministry capacities receive extensive attention throughout all

the degree programs.

Students in each of these programs take specific courses in spiritual formation and

receive consistent exposure to and instruction in deepening their personal walk with God. They also receive curricular and co-curricular training in how to disciple others toward maturity in

Christ. Additionally, a host of co-curricular events contributes to building and furthering the

spiritual lives of the entire campus community through chapel services, ministry lunches, small

groups, personal counseling with faculty members, and cooperative church-based programs.

Course assignments consistently seek to apply a ministry perspective to course content. 86

Each program includes significant exposure to and engagement with the understanding of

cultural context. Students in each program take specific courses in cultural apologetics and world mission. Many other courses include material and assignments that incorporate significant local and global cultural analysis and engagement.

Each program includes significant opportunities for students to develop their capacities

for servant leadership. The MDiv and MAEM programs require 300 and 150 hours of field

education respectively. The MAC program requires a year-long internship that takes place in a

professional counseling context. These experiences afford students excellent opportunities to

investigate the relationship between course content and ministry contexts and vice versa. Course

assignments also provide students with opportunities to reflect on and practice ministry skills in

the context of on- and off-campus preaching, teaching, and counseling practica. These practical,

iterative opportunities include coaching and modeling from experienced pastors, teachers, and

counselors.

The Seminary also consistently emphasizes its distinctive religious heritage in the MDiv,

MAEM, and MAC programs. Students in all of these programs receive significant opportunities

to understand and appropriate personally our tradition’s perspectives while also examining and

valuing the perspectives of other traditions. While students in the MDiv program receive specific

instruction in denominational ministerial preparation from our tradition’s perspective, those in the MAEM and MAC programs address these perspectives through a common core of classes designed for such purposes.

Assignments throughout the curriculum seek to address the four features in a way that

moves the student toward a higher level of understanding, application, and ability to

communicate. The faculty’s attention to applying increased understanding from in-service 87

training events such as “Bloom’s Taxonomy and Course Assignments” and “Writing Effective

Course Objectives” significantly advances this goal (for more on in-service training for faculty,

see chapter six).

4.2.2 Basic Programs Oriented Toward General Theological Studies

4.2.2.1 First graduate theological degrees in basic programs oriented toward general theological studies have in common the purpose of providing understanding in theological disciplines. These programs may be designed for general knowledge of theology or for background in specific disciplines, or for interdisciplinary studies. They are intended as the basis for further graduate study or for other educational purposes. Nomenclature may differ according to the history of its use in the particular school. The curricula for these degrees should be developed in relation to the institution’s distinctive goals for the programs. A scholarly investigation of Scripture, tradition, and theology is essential for all of the programs, while some may also emphasize research methods, teaching skills, or competence in specific theological disciplines. Depending on the intention of the degree, appropriate formational experiences are to be provided that will develop the qualities essential for the application of the degree. Adequate faculty and instructional resources must be available, with special attention given to particular areas of focus within the programs.

4.2.2.2 Degrees of this kind are offered with the following nomenclature: Master of Arts; Master of Arts (Religion); Master of Theological Studies.

Covenant Seminary offers two degrees in this category: the MATS and MAET. The

MATS provides biblical and theological training that equips lay people to bring an informed

Christian perspective to a variety of callings and non-ordained ministries (e.g., Bible study group

leaders, Christian school teachers, and church and parachurch staff workers). The program curriculum may be completed in as little as two 30-credit hour years, although students in the

evening or distance education programs may pursue the degree part-time. Students may pursue a

concentration in one of several areas: Educational Ministries, Christianity and Contemporary

Culture, Counseling, World Mission, and Youth Ministry. The current MATS program is 60 credits. However, after examining the program over the past two years, we have come to the 88 conclusion that a program of 48 credits would better serve our students while still accomplishing our mission. (Please refer to section 4.3 and Degree Program Standard E for a more detailed analysis of and proposal for this degree.)

The MAET prepares students pursuing academic leadership for advanced study at the doctoral level and is a 60-credit hour degree. The program requires at least two years of full-time study and generally includes a thesis. In the program design, MAET students take 300-level biblical, theological, and historical courses as a means of preparing them for their first theological degree; in this regard, it is similar to other institutions’ Masters of Arts in Religion degree. Faculty members are deeply involved with students in both programs and serve as course and thesis advisors.

4.2.3 Advanced Programs Oriented Toward Ministerial Leadership

4.2.3.1 Advanced programs in ministerial leadership presuppose a basic theological degree. All are designed to deepen the basic knowledge and skill in ministry so that students may engage in ministry with increasing professional, intellectual, and spiritual integrity. Emphasis is upon the practice of ministry informed by analytic and ministerial research skills. Certain curricular features are common to the advanced programs in this category. Each degree program emphasizes the mastery of advanced knowledge informing the understanding of the nature and purposes of ministry, the competencies gained through advanced study, and the integration of the many dimensions of ministry. Each degree program includes the completion of a final culminating written project/report or dissertation. Schools offering any of these advanced degrees are expected to make explicit the criteria by which the doctoral level of studies is identified, implemented, and assessed.

4.2.3.2 Degrees offered in this broad category have the following nomenclature: Doctor of Ministry, Doctor of Educational Ministry, Doctor of Education, Doctor of Missiology, Doctor of Musical Arts.

Covenant Seminary offers the DMin in this program category. The DMin is a 30-credit hour program that provides additional advanced professional training for those who hold the 89

MDiv and are usually active in ordained ministry. The curriculum is designed to help students

draw upon biblical, historical, and theological resources and attain a higher degree of

competence in their practice of ministry. Students take intensive one-week courses and complete

an extensive ministry project dissertation while continuing their present ministries. Students may

choose to pursue a concentration in Preaching, Counseling, or Church Planting, Growth, and

Renewal.

A faculty member manages the general administration of the program in partnership with

a faculty-administration committee which oversees the project dissertations of each student. Each

course seeks to address the professional, intellectual, and spiritual dimensions of ministry so that

our students may deepen their awareness of and ability to harness resources for effective

ministry. The courses also pay special attention to each student’s spiritual life and disciplines so

that students may grow in their relationship to God and in fellowship with one another. The

program concludes with a 2-credit hour course on project dissertation research and skill

development. This intensive course prepares the student to complete a five-chapter project

dissertation that includes articulating a specific issue from a ministry context; presenting an

extensive literature review; describing a methodology that will unearth insight on the issue at

hand, reporting findings from the research; and providing biblical, theological, and contextual

analysis and evaluation of the project’s outcomes. Students work with a faculty advisor

throughout the project’s development and defend their project’s findings to a faculty committee at the conclusion of the process.

In 2007, the Seminary moved the administration of the DMin program under the oversight of its Center for Ministry Leadership (CML). Funded by a Lilly Endowment Inc. grant for the Sustaining Pastoral Excellence (SPE) program, the CML has already conducted three 90 years of research on pastoral excellence; the Center’s work has been recognized as superior by the SPE administrators and published twice in the SPE newsletter centered at Duke Divinity

School. The findings from the CML research will be funneled back into the DMin program especially; currently a task team has begun to study a major revamping of the DMin curriculum around the competencies surfaced during the SPE program. We expect that this new DMin curriculum will go into active use in spring 2009.

4.2.4 Advanced Programs Primarily Oriented Toward Theological Research and Teaching

4.2.4.1 These programs oriented toward theological research and teaching presuppose a basic post-baccalaureate theological degree and permit students to concentrate in one or more of the theological disciplines. They equip students for teaching and research in theological schools, colleges, and universities, or for the scholarly enhancement of ministerial practice, or for other scholarly activities. They provide for both specialization and breadth in education and training; they provide instruction in research methods and procedures relevant to the area of specialization; and normally they provide training in teaching methods and skills, or in other scholarly tasks. Curricula for these programs provide, first of all, a structured opportunity to develop an advanced critical understanding and appreciation of a specific area of theological studies or in interdisciplinary relationships and cognate studies. Second, they assist students in understanding cultural realities and social settings within which religious communities and institutions of theological or religious education exist and carry out their missions, as well as the institutional life of these communities and institutions themselves. Third, they assist students to grow in those personal and spiritual qualities essential for the practice of scholarly ministry in theological environments. Fourth, they allow students to gain the capacities for teaching, writing, and conducting advanced research.

4.2.4.2 The nomenclature for advanced masters’ degrees includes the Master of Theology and Master of Sacred Theology. The nomenclature for doctoral degrees oriented to research and teaching includes the Doctor of Philosophy and Doctor of Theology.

Covenant Seminary offers the ThM in this category of programs. The ThM degree provides advanced training for students already holding the MDiv degree and is a 30-credit hour degree. There are two major tracks for the ThM degree: the ThM in Exegetical Theology helps pastors, missionaries, and teachers sharpen exegetical skills, as well as develop research skills 91

and test a calling to further study; it requires a thesis. The ThM in Biblical and Pastoral Theology

is a more flexible and pastorally-oriented program including course work in both the biblical and practical disciplines; a thesis is not a part of this program.

In spring 2006, the faculty approved a curricular change to the ThM program, allowing for up to 12 hours to be taken through independent studies or in a modular format. In part, this move was deemed necessary because the program does not have a large enough enrollment to

sustain a community of learners. As already mentioned, during our strategic planning process we will be investigating the long-term sustainability of the ThM program.

4.3 Degree Program Standards

4.3.0 To provide for a common public recognition of theological degrees, to assure quality, and to enhance evaluative efforts, the Commission establishes standards for each degree program. Each degree program should reflect the characteristics of the theological curriculum (see 4.1–4.2). The degree standards articulate the following requirements: purpose of the degree; primary goals of the program; program content, location, and duration; admission and resource requirements; and educational evaluation. The degree programs offered by Board-accredited institutions shall conform to these standards.

These overviews and assessments discuss degree purpose; primary goals of the program;

program content; location and duration; admission and resource requirements; and educational

evaluation per ATS accreditation metrics.

Degree Standard A: Master of Divinity (MDiv)

A.1 Purpose of the Degree. Since its founding, Covenant Seminary has focused its ministry on training pastors and missionaries through its Master of Divinity (MDiv) program.

While our core values note that, in addition to pastors, we train other ministry leaders and hence have other degree programs for that purpose, the MDiv is the Seminary’s bellwether program. As 92 a result, it serves as the most direct reflection of the faculty and administration’s determination to train servants of the Triune God to walk with God, to interpret and communicate God’s Word, and to lead God’s people. While the MDiv has two separate tracks—an ordination track and a specialized ministry (non-ordination) track—the majority of our MDiv students prepare for ordained pastoral and religious leadership responsibilities in local congregations and other ministry settings.

A.2 Primary goals of the program. The MDiv degree shares the eleven major competency goals outlined for all our programs, which flow from our commitment to our mission statement and core values. The difference comes in the level of competency expected from a MDiv student. The MDiv student operates as the level of accomplished and leading competency such as required for ministerial and public leadership.

In the area of walking with God, the Seminary expects MDiv students not only to understand grace or be motivated by grace to serve others; we also expect them to demonstrate grace in dealing with others. In expecting our MDiv students to demonstrate spiritual maturity in their lifestyle, we aim for an exemplary, winsome and Christ-like character, clearly motivated by the love of Christ. As we focus on a lifelong walk with God in the students, we desire for them to model lifelong learning and stimulate in others a passion for learning and spiritual growth. In each of these areas, we expect to see a growth in spiritual depth and moral integrity in our MDiv students as well as an expanding capacity for significant moral leadership.

The Seminary desires for MDiv students to experience several outcomes as they interpret and communicate God’s Word. We expect students to possess a substantial and detailed knowledge of the Bible, theology, and church history. We are especially keen that they know not only our own religious heritage, but the Christian inheritance across denominational and regional 93 boundaries. This entails our students understanding the world in which we live in the breadth of its ethnic, religious, political, and social diversity. We also desire for students to be able to interpret the Scriptures using the original languages; we direct a large amount of curricular and faculty resources to ensuring that students are able to understand and utilize Greek and Hebrew.

The Seminary sees the pay off in the relationship between biblical text and religious heritage as

MDiv students communicate God’s Word in preaching, teaching and writing, through which we gauge students’ capacities to serve as public ministerial leaders.

Finally, the Seminary focuses on developing MDiv students’ leadership skills. We want students to inspire trust and confidence from others by relating to them with evident respect and sensitivity. As they demonstrate these relational skills, we encourage students to articulate vision in such a way to inspire confidence and nurture followers as disciples of Jesus, modeling the lordship of Christ in every area of life. We hope that this will lead students to exercise ministerial leadership within a worldwide church, seeing God’s Kingdom throughout the world in various cultures and socio-economic levels, bringing love and justice to the peoples.

A.3 Program Content, Location, and Duration.

A.3.1 Content. Covenant Seminary’s MDiv program provides a breadth of exposure to the theological disciplines as well as a depth of understanding within those disciplines. Our

MDiv program currently requires 103 credit hours, which divides within the major theological disciplines this way:

Biblical studies 39 hours Theological, historical, and mission studies 25 hours Practical theology and apologetics (including preaching, 28 hours counseling, and educational ministries) Free electives 11 hours Total 103 hours 94

As a result, the Seminary demonstrates its commitment to educate students for a comprehensive

range of pastoral responsibilities and especially for acquiring a detailed knowledge of the

classical theological disciplines, devoting over 60% of the entire MDiv curriculum to these areas.

At the same time, because our focus is on developing pastors, we spend a great deal of curricular

time to issues related to preaching (9 hours), counseling (5 hours), educational ministry and

worship (6 hours), pastoral leadership and spiritual formation (6 hours). Hence, we also provide

for a deepening understanding of the church’s life, for ongoing intellectual and ministerial

formation, and for exercising ministerial arts.

A.3.1.1 Religious Heritage. As already noted, the Seminary’s MDiv curriculum focuses over half of its time and

resources on developing students’ critical articulation and appreciation of their religious heritage.

Specifically, once students achieve a certain level of mastery in the original languages, their

MDiv curriculum takes them through every major section of the Bible in exegesis-oriented

classes. In fact, one of our major curricular revisions for 2007-08 was to create a new, two-hour

Pentateuch course that redressed a major lacuna in our approach to the Biblical text. After

students complete Beginning Greek and Greek in Exegesis, they take Gospels, Acts and Paul,

and Pastoral and General Epistles. In addition, once students have taken Hebrew and Hebrew in

Exegesis, they take OT courses in Pentateuch, Historical Books, Psalms and Wisdom Literature,

and OT Prophets.

Students also have the opportunity to pay attention to the historical and contemporary

development of the doctrinal and theological tradition, both of the Presbyterian and Reformed tradition as well as the broader Christian traditions, in our systematic theology and church

history courses. Students take five major systematic theology courses: Covenant Theology (a five-hour, two-semester course), God and Humanity, Christ and Salvation, Ecclesiology and 95

Eschatology, and Christian Ethics. Each of these courses pays attention both to classic traditional

dogmatic formulations as well as contemporary theological questions. Students take a two- semester church history sequence, Ancient and Medieval Church History and Reformation and

Modern Church History. The focus here is on the development of Christianity identity through the history of the church; as believers develop beliefs and practices which shape their identities, students explore how these stories serve to shape their own personal and ecclesial identities.

There has been an increasing focus within our institution on doing more cross- disciplinary teaching. Perhaps the best example of this is our two-semester Covenant Theology course, which is team taught by two biblical studies professors, a systematic theologian, and a practical theology professor. All four professors attend every class meeting and engage each other in dialogue and conversation throughout the class period, bringing insights on reading the

Bible and applying it to life and ministry. Increasingly we see this type of cross-fertilization

occurring and we continue to seek ways of fostering such collaboration. The faculty has noted

that students demonstrate increased integrative knowledge in assignments and final exams as a

result of this cross-disciplinary approach compared to the previous one-professor approach.

A.3.1.2 Cultural Context. We have several places within the MDiv curriculum where students have the opportunity

to develop an understanding of American and global cultures and the place of mission within

those structures. In the first year, students take Apologetics and Outreach, which focuses as

much on the need to listen carefully to one’s own cultural moment in order to incarnate the

Gospel meaningfully. Students also think through these issues in Covenant Theology, where

issues related to post-modernity and its impact on hermeneutics is explored. In the two semester

church history classes, students are required to develop a fairly nuanced view of cultural systems

as a confluence of signs and symbols that provide meaning for the world; this enables students 96

not only to see cultural realities and structures in the past, but especially to critique such realities

in the present. A third place where students explore cultural context and especially the global character of the church is in God’s World Mission. As these themes are stressed in the opening semesters in Covenant Theology (a major theme being the unfolding of God’s story of redemption for the nations), God’s World Mission serves as a summative course in the three-year sequence, consolidating student thought concerning God’s global church and North Americans’ place in it. We are finding that increasingly our faculty and students are exploring issues related to globalization, its effect on the church and on theological education.

A.3.1.3 Personal and Spiritual Formation. Covenant Seminary’s MDiv program has a number of opportunities for students to grow

in personal faith, emotional maturity, moral integrity and public witness. In the very first

semester, all students are required to take Spiritual and Ministry Formation. In this course,

students work through their Myers-Briggs Personality profile and then sit down with the instructor for up to two hours to discuss how their “divine design” could relate to their future ministries. In addition, students also work through spiritual formation issues in this class, developing regular habits of prayer and Bible study. Further, in their required first-year Covenant

Groups, students receive mentoring from faculty members in the habits of prayer and meditation, as well as develop greater emotional intelligence through mutual accountability and community building.

Another place in the curriculum where we deal with issues of personal and spiritual

formation is Pastoral Theology. The instructor has students write him a letter, which is shared

with no one else, about their sin patterns that could potentially take them out of the ministry and

the biblical responses that they should and will take. This intense opportunity to examine one’s

heart in preparation for public leadership has proven fruitful for many students. It is also in this 97 class where students are taught that pastoral leadership means serving a people as a shepherd, not

“lording” it over people, but rather serving them in tangible ways of love. Pastoral Theology connects with the course Ministry Leadership in our curriculum, providing an opportunity to reflect on the wide range of responsibilities ministers exercise in the life of a congregation.

We also emphasize the role of chapel attendance as part of the overall spiritual formation process. As a community that worships together in the presence of God, we find ourselves being drawn out of ourselves and confronted with the Gospel of judgment and mercy. Covenant

Seminary enjoys strong relationships with many local churches. These churches provide more than just a place in which to complete field education. They serve as incubators for spiritual growth as students enjoy supportive relationships and express their gifts. In their exit interviews, students remark on how important such corporate worship opportunities on and off campus are to their overall seminary experience.

A.3.1.4 Capacity for Ministerial and Public Leadership. In our MDiv curriculum, we do provide opportunity for theological reflection on and education for the practice of ministry. The most obvious place is in our preaching courses. We have a four-class sequence to equip MDiv ordination track students in the task of preaching:

Preparation and Delivery of Sermons; Elementary Homiletics; Christ-centered Preaching; and

Advanced Homiletics. In these courses, not only do students receive the nuts and bolts of preaching, but they also are taught about how preaching fits into the overall rhythms of pastoral practice and how preaching should reflect both a devotional and redemptive-historical approach to the Bible. As a result, ministerial leadership should point the congregation to Jesus Christ, the true hero of the Bible and the only one who can truly deliver his people from sin, suffering, and injustice. 98

We also provide two courses in pastoral counseling. In the three-year MDiv sequence, students take Introduction to Counseling in the first year, first semester; they take Marriage and

Family Counseling in the final semester of their course. In these courses, students are shown how biblical and psychological categories are not mutually exclusive, but actually cohere with each other. In addition, students receive instruction in basic family systems theory in order to provide a framework for pastoral care in the midst of family crisis.

One new feature of our curriculum beginning in 2007-08 is a course in Educational

Ministry in the Church. One of the things we discovered was that many of our students receive

their first call to congregational ministry in

MDiv Placement assistant/associate pastor roles with 100% Market responsibility for the church’s education 90% Grad School 80% program; however, we were not preparing our Non-Ordination 70% Other Ministry students to deal with this ministry leadership 60% Missions 50% role. As a result, we decided to discontinue Campus Ministry 40% Church Plant one four-credit hour course in order to fit a 30% 20% Youth Pastor new two-hour educational ministries course in 10% Head Pastor the curriculum. In the course, students will 0% Associate Pastor 2004 2005 2006 receive instruction in general educational theory—issues related to teaching and learning—as well as practical instruction on how to set up educational ministries in the local church context. We expect that this course will better prepare students for their future ministry leadership. This feedback loop demonstrates how the Seminary gathers data, which feeds planning and action leading to renewed evaluation and assessment. 99

Another part of our MDiv curriculum that assists students with ministerial leadership is our field education program. Supervised field education experience is required of all MDiv students, regardless of track. Through the requirement, we seek to help students growing in walking with God and leading God’s people; integrate learning in the classroom with the practice of ministry; confirm or clarify students’ gifts and calling; and identify ministry-related strengths and weaknesses. Students must complete 300 hours of supervised field education experience prior to graduation. While we discuss our field education program at great length in chapter seven in this self-study, it would be good to note that we are in the process of evaluating our field education program and expect to make major changes in the program for the 2009-2010 school year.

A.3.2 Location. Currently, the Covenant Seminary MDiv program is only offered on its main St. Louis campus. However, we do offer opportunities for distance learning courses to funnel into the residential MDiv program. Students who begin their studies as distance learning students may apply a maximum of 30 semester hours to the MDiv degree. Further, students who begin their studies on the main campus may apply a maximum of 12 hours of distance learning courses to their MDiv degree. The office of the vice president for academics works closely with the Registrar and associate dean for academic services to ensure that these provisions are not abused. We believe for the development of a community of learning that cohorts of students in regular on-campus classes provide the best opportunity for accomplishing our degree goals and mission statement.

A.3.3 Duration. Covenant Seminary’s MDiv program requires a minimum of three years of full-time study. As a result of work, family, and church responsibilities, students often spend four years in the MDiv program. 100

A.4 Admission and Resource Requirements. As noted in chapter seven, Covenant

Seminary recognizes that the MDiv is a post-baccalaureate degree and observes all the admission requirements set forth by ATS. As part of the application process, students must submit a completed application form, testimony, personal references and transcripts from all undergraduate or graduate institutions previously attended. Students for whom English is a second language must submit TOEFL scores. A bachelor’s degree or its educational equivalent is normally required for admission.

The Seminary has identified throughout the body of this self-study report the range of

resources we provide in order to sustain theological education. At the heart of the Seminary’s

resources is the life-giving community which sustains students in their fellowship with God and

his people as well as challenges students to reflect upon the meaning of their faith as they

prepare for ministry. The Seminary also relies heavily on area churches to shape and form these

future ministers as well. We enjoy a close working relationship with the churches of Missouri

Presbytery, the local judicatory of our sponsoring denomination (PCA). Many of our students

attend these churches and finding mentoring relationships with area pastors and elders as well as

lay leaders. We also work hard to develop ties with churches outside our denominational context;

we partner with churches from Missionary Baptist contexts as well as Evangelical Free and

Southern Baptist backgrounds.

Our faculty members also bring the resources of their ministerial backgrounds upon the

subjects and the method of instruction. The large majority of our faculty members are ordained

ministers in the Presbyterian Church in America; several have significant pastoral ministry

experience. In addition, during their connection with the Seminary, a number of these faculty

members have served on local church pastoral staffs, interim senior pastorates, and stated supply. 101

Of course, our faculty members also do an impressive amount of regular supply preaching in a

wide-range of churches across North America and the world. One of our counseling faculty

members was also heavily involved in starting a local counseling center, New Hope Counseling

Center, connected with Chesterfield Presbyterian Church. We involve ministry practitioners as adjunct and visiting faculty members. All of these faculty resources are brought to bear on our

MDiv program, in order to prepare our students to walk with God, interpret and communicate

God’s Word and lead God’s people not in the abstract, but in concrete ministry situations.

A.5 Educational Evaluation. Since our last self-study in 1997, the Seminary has spent a

great deal of time evaluating and developing our MDiv program. As noted earlier in chapter four,

we began in 2001 to evaluate our MDiv curriculum in the light of ATS study on “character and

assessment of learning for religious vocation.” As part of our internal study, we brought in an

outside consultant to assist us in identifying curricular goals and competency rubrics within each

program, including the MDiv program. From there, we took these curricular goals and

competency rubrics and began working them into each course, developing course goals and

objectives that reflected the larger curricular goals and competency rubrics which we had

developed. In order to assess how well we were doing in implementing mission, core values,

curricular goals and competency rubrics, the faculty went through a MDiv curriculum review,

which lasted for over three semesters (end of fall 2005 to spring 2007).

In addition, we moved to redesign our course schedule and calendar as well as several key classes, including the creation of new or redesigned courses such as Covenant Theology,

Pentateuch, and Educational Ministry in the Church. We implemented Covenant Groups as a required part of our MDiv experience and paired groups with faculty mentors who would work to develop core value emphases in the lives of our students. And we continued to assess in a 102

variety of ways (as highlighted in chapters one and six) whether these particular courses and the

MDiv program as a whole was accomplishing our course goals and competency rubrics. We now

include direct observations of student competency level progress in many of our core courses and

plan to increase these evaluative activities even more in the near term.

The findings of our 2005-07 curriculum mapping project have us moving forward with

new proposals for the 2007-08 school year: developing a summative MDiv capstone experience;

expanding the Covenant Groups to run through the entire MDiv program; relating Covenant

Groups to a revisioned field education program where students will process ministry success and

failure with a faculty mentor; incorporating context-based feedback from graduates, ministry

supervisors and other in-ministry colleagues into curriculum planning; incorporating findings from our Center for Ministry Leadership’s work with pastors into curriculum planning. Each of these proposals reflects our own on-going evaluative and assessment processes and represent examples of the way we are attempting to implement direct measures of our desired outcomes.

Degree Standard B: Master of Arts in Educational Ministries (MAEM)

B.1 Purpose of the Degree. The Master of Arts in Educational Ministries (MAEM) trains

students to serve in churches and other ministries as theologically and educationally equipped

leadership staff members. Given that many of our students already serve as ministry

practitioners, we seek to provide integrated biblical, theological, and educational instruction in

the context of ministry. These ministry contexts, often intergenerational and/or cross-cultural,

include working with children, youth, women, men, college students, adults, choir members, small group members, and senior adults. We have observed that an increasing number of support 103

staff positions in our denomination combine ministry with and to these people groups as they

create job descriptions that reflect the changing face of ministry.

B.2 Primary Goals of the Program. The primary goals of the MAEM flow out of the

mission of the Seminary, i.e., “to train servants of the triune God to walk with God, to interpret

and communicate God’s Word, and to lead God’s people.” The MAEM’s focus on educational

ministry training moves the expression of its program goals toward those that shape a pedagogically and theologically informed graduate (see accompanying Competency Goal Chart at the end of the chapter). Throughout the curriculum and in the specific core courses

Educational Foundations, Teaching and Learning, and Educational Leadership and

Administration, students are given opportunities to build their capacities to reflect theologically on the content and processes of educational ministry.

Course content also examines, critiques, and utilizes a wide array of educational, social,

and behavioral science literature and practice. This inquiry strengthens students’ ability to

understand the relationships between faith and life, between creational and Scriptural revelation,

and between their own knowledge and the accumulated wisdom of the ages. It also aids students

in their ability to identify and account for the diverse contexts in which educational ministry is

planned, conducted, and evaluated.

MAEM students are required to take the course Spiritual and Ministry Formation. In addition to offering a thorough examination of the biblical, theological, and historical grounds

for ministry, this course provides opportunities for students to examine their call to and

giftedness for ministry. The faculty has designed the curriculum to foster self-examination and

maturity in Christ even as it trains students to disciple fellow Christians to embody these

characteristics. Recognizing that spiritual growth takes place within the community of believers 104

even as each believer exercises his or her gifts for the sake of the body, course assignments often

include team projects in which students have opportunities to demonstrate Christ’s love toward

one another. These experiences simulate the cooperation and forbearance that is necessary in

everyday ministry and therefore these assignments include critical reflection on the team process

in addition to the project outcomes.

Students receive many opportunities to develop their skill in teaching in several courses

and during their field education. For example, in Teaching and Learning, students present mini-

lectures, write and facilitate the use of case studies, develop media critiques, lead small group

discussions, and present team project findings during an extended teaching time in class. For the

degree Capstone project, students present their portfolios to a panel of fellow students and

faculty members. This practical skill building is grounded in the students’ biblical, theological,

and social science reflection that is captured in their emerging philosophy of educational

ministry, included in their Capstone portfolios. Students also have many opportunities to observe

and interact with practitioners as the students explore the design, administration, and

programming elements of educational ministry.

B.3 Program Content, Location, and Duration. The MAEM curriculum includes a wide

range of theological and other disciplines, including Old and New Testament studies, systematic theology, historical theology, Christian ethics, world mission, counseling, and cultural analysis and apologetics. The curriculum addresses a host of educational topics through its core and elective courses. Course descriptions and content flow out of the program goals and seek to integrate theory and practice with theological reflection. This integration is most acutely observed in the Capstone project but is evidenced throughout the curriculum. 105

The curriculum provides basic instruction in Old and New Testaments, church history,

and theology at the Program Goals Level II level. Students are grounded in a biblical framework in these courses and are challenged to deepen their understanding and explore the implications of

a biblical world and life view throughout the curriculum.

The curriculum provides many opportunities to understand the congregational context of

ministry through course assignments and field education. Core educational ministries faculty

teach from a “redemptive developmentalist” approach. This provides opportunities for students

to reflect on the theological and sociological implications of programmatic and interpersonal

ministry in class and assignments. We also examine course material in light of cultural

contextual influences throughout the educational ministry courses as well as the world mission

and contemporary culture courses.

All MAEM students take PT 310 Spiritual and Ministry Formation. This anchor course

serves as a valuable way for the students to assess their own giftedness for ministry, further

develop a philosophy of ministry, and examine how vigorous biblical and theological study

grounds the spiritual formation of those among whom they minister.

The curriculum addresses the history and philosophy of education, teaching and learning,

theories and methodologies, administration, and the behavioral and social sciences throughout its

content coverage and course assignments. All students must complete 150 hours of field

education in order to graduate. The field education director orients first-time field education

supervisors to program goals and supervision expectations according to general program goals

and the Seminary’s mission. We do not have a stated policy and procedure to evaluate and

terminate supervised ministry settings. This is due to the fact that, so far, our small numbers of 106

students have chosen field placements at settings that are already approved field education sites.

We plan to develop and implement such a policy by the 2008–09 academic year.

For resident students, the program may be completed in two years of full-time academic study. Students in the cooperative ministry track may complete one academic year of full-time study on campus and complete the remaining courses via our distance learning delivery system.

Students participate in a cohort study group throughout their program in order to experience and contribute to a community of learners. In either track, our students experience one year of full- time academic study on campus.

The degree program requires 50 credit hours and is designed to take roughly two years of

full-time academic work.

B.4 Admission and Resource Requirements. Applicants must hold an undergraduate

degree from an accredited institution. They must also provide a signed application form, a

personal essay including testimony and perceived giftedness for ministry, personal references,

and transcripts from all undergraduate and graduate institutions previously attended.

One full-time regular faculty member, one half-time adjunct faculty member, one half-

time regular faculty member, and one quarter-time administrative faculty member teach in the

educational ministries department. Three of these faculty members have earned doctorates in

education while the fourth minored in educational ministry in his Old Testament doctoral

program. These four faculty members teach or team-teach the three core courses in the program

in addition to offering regular electives. They also provide the majority of student course and

placement advising. In addition to these four faculty members, we utilize 4–6 adjunct faculty

members per academic year to teach specific courses in which they are uniquely qualified. 107

In the first year of the program, the Seminary used a $50,000 grant from the Chatlos

Foundation to purchase books and dedicated resources, such as serials and databases, for the

MAEM program. While most of the acquisitions relate to educational ministry, some of the

resources represent other fields in which students take courses included in the program.

According to our library director, the grant enabled us to expand the collection by nearly 1,000

books. The grant also enabled us to create a Curriculum Resource Center in the library. This

center houses curriculum, study guides, teaching kits, and other ministry resources that students

and the community may use for research, class projects, and reviews.

Students must complete 150 hours of field education in order to graduate from the

program. The field education program mirrors our MDiv program in that students must complete

these hours in a variety of ministry areas so that they experience some breadth of ministry

experience. Further, they reflect on and write about their integrated ministry experience when

reporting field education hours. Field education supervisors submit a report based on

observations and interactions with the student. The Capstone professor uses this data during

Capstone cohort gatherings to help students formatively reflect on course work, ministry

application, and their developing philosophies of educational ministry.

B.5 Educational Evaluation. All MAEM students are required to complete and present a

Capstone project that gives them the opportunity to synthesize biblical and educational reflection with ministry application under faculty supervision. Students meet together as a Capstone cohort throughout their second year as part of the Capstone experience prior to presenting completed portfolios to one another and a faculty panel. The evaluation grid for these presentations reflects the program goals. 108

During the first two years of the program’s existence, ten students graduated from the

program. We anticipate seven more graduates in May 2007. We gathered a focus group of nine

people to evaluate the first two years of the MAEM program on November 13, 2006. Participants

included primary faculty members, two graduates, three anticipated 2007 graduates, and one

local pastor who serves as a field education supervisor. The group identified several strengths of the program, including its theory and practice focus and integration, capstone experience, student

diversity, core course foundation coverage, field education practice, group practice pedagogy,

and ministry context attention. The areas for suggested improvement included more focus on or

perhaps a course in inductive study and teaching of the Bible and hermeneutics, a heightened

educational ministry perspective among the non-education courses and assignments, further differentiation between EM 502 Teaching and Learning and the existing elective class CM300

Communicating the Gospel, and increased exposure to and training in curriculum development.

In 2007, the educational ministry core faculty members, the Curriculum Committee, and

the vice president for academics discussed the focus group findings in light of the program goals.

In an attempt to close the planning and evaluation loop, core educational ministry faculty

members were encouraged to continue teaching toward maximizing the strengths of the program.

They were also encouraged to consider program changes in light of the program’s stated

weaknesses.

As such, core faculty implemented a module on teaching the Bible in EM 502 Teaching

and Learning during the 2007 spring semester. Faculty will assess usefulness of this module

toward student learning according to program and course goals and report back to the vice

president for academics in fall 2007. The Curriculum Committee is weighing the need for a

specific elective in Bible and hermeneutics instruction for the 2008–09 academic year. The vice 109

president for academics has requested that educational ministry faculty submit a proposal that

addresses how non-EM faculty members could strengthen their “EM perspective” throughout their teaching, assignments, and student evaluation. The vice president for academics has also requested that the EM 502 faculty work with the CM 300 faculty member to harmonize, complement, and differentiate the two courses for the 2007–08 academic year. In light of the curriculum coverage suggestion, the EM faculty members will continue to include curriculum modules in existing courses and encourage students to take EM 508 Curriculum Analysis and

Development as an EM elective.

At this early stage of the program, we are very pleased that 100% of the students who have entered the program since its inception in 2005 have graduated and secured placement appropriate to their vocational intentions. As the program grows, we will track graduates and placement rates through informal networks and the alumni database. We plan to conduct graduate/practitioner and field education supervisor focus groups every other year to assess ongoing program effectiveness in the lives and ministries of our graduates.

Degree Standard C: Master of Arts in Counseling (MAC)

C.1 Purpose. The Master of Arts in Counseling program (MAC) prepares graduates to

serve as pastoral counselors, licensed professional counselors, or in other human services work.

The educational intent of the program is to develop in each student sound foundations theologically and theoretically, as well as a clear conceptual framework to guide counseling practice. The MAC at Covenant Seminary is distinctive because of its Reformed theological foundations that lead to students’ growing clarity in their world and life view. This guides students as they evaluate various counseling theories and are encouraged in the context of a close 110

mentoring relationship to apprehend a biblically and theologically informed, and theoretically

clear, personal approach to counseling practice. Along the way, attention is paid to the growth of

the person, as he or she develops as a counselor.

C.2 Primary Goals. From its beginning in fall 1993, the MAC program has pursued the

primary goal of developing effective practitioners for the church and community who are

competent both theologically and theoretically. The program strives to nurture counselors whose

theory is shaped by their theology, while their theology is aimed toward practice. The earliest

expression of this goal declared that graduates should acquire a sound foundation and framework

for practice through their educational experience in the MAC program. These goals have been

refined over time, with the fullest expression coming as part of the Seminary’s development of a

Degree Program Goals rubric for all degree programs at Covenant Seminary (see the

accompanying Degree Program Goals chart for the goals for the MAC program). This expression

of goals, while consistent with the long established and expressed goals of the program, now

expresses these goals with greater specificity, and clearly connects the MAC goals to the overall

mission of the Seminary. Historically, 63% of graduates’ first jobs are in Christian agencies,

churches, or other ministry settings, while the remaining 37% of graduates are placed in non- church settings. Feedback we receive from graduates and their employers indicates that our students are well prepared for professional practice, whether that practice is in a church or a non-

church setting. This is an indicator that the educational goals of the MAC program are

appropriate and meet the educational needs of the students.

In the 14 years that the MAC program has been in operation, the need for counselors both

in and outside the church has continued to grow. While the number of graduates from the

program has grown steadily over the years, the percentage of graduates seeking counseling jobs 111

that are placed within six months of graduation has remained high. Our current placement rate for MAC graduates is 95%. It appears that as the need for counselors in the religious communities in which our students minister continues to grow, these communities recognize our students as being prepared to fill leadership roles in providing for those counseling needs. This is an indication that the educational goals of the MAC effectively match the leadership needs of the settings in which our students serve.

Feedback indicates that these goals are substantially met in most MAC students.

Feedback from internship supervisors is received in various forms at various times and is

consistently positive.

One source of feedback is the kickoff luncheon to which the MAC program invites all

internship supervisors each fall. During this time, not only are the goals for the program and

internship reviewed, but also comments about students and the program are elicited. Comments from supervisors about the students with whom they have worked are very positive. The students have made good contributions to the work of the agencies or churches where they have been placed. It is apparent that students have not only done good work, but also have been a positive presence. Supervisors regularly comment on students’ quality of character. It is instructive that

the vast majority of supervisors agree to take a new student intern year after year. Many of these

supervisors no longer do competitive interviews to choose from among a group of potential

interns; instead, most simply trust that a Covenant Seminary MAC student will be of high quality

and they accept whomever the program suggests as an intern.

In another form of feedback, supervisors complete an evaluation form on interns each

semester. Again, these evaluations are generally very positive. Students are viewed as well

prepared and functioning well in the counseling they are doing in their internships. Another 112

positive message regarding our students from intern supervisors is the fact that many supervisors

will hire their interns after graduation to work in their particular ministry setting. Up to 25% of

an internship class may be hired for work after graduation at their internship sites. Additionally,

when graduates move on to other jobs, supervisors will contact the program faculty in search of

the next new employee. One large agency’s human resources person makes on-campus visits in

the spring to facilitate the hiring of the Seminary’s MAC students. This agency has hired more

than 15 of our graduates in recent years, and wants to hire more because that agency has been so

pleased with the quality of these employees.

C.3 Program Content, Location, Duration. The MAC curriculum balances coursework

on counseling theory and practice with coursework on biblical and theological instruction. This

is in keeping with the Seminary’s mission not only to educate, but to train people for specific

ministry roles, attending to personal development and biblical and professional learning, as well

as skill acquisition.

The MAC provides adequate exposure to the content areas appropriate to this program of study. One indicator of this is that the program meets the educational requirement for the State of

Missouri’s Licensed Professional Counselor credential. The MAC program director interacts with the state regularly to monitor changes in state requirements. The state will evaluate the

Seminary’s MAC curriculum, including specific course requirements, to assure training received through the MAC program is current and continues to meet the prescribed standards of the state for the training of counselors. In addition to introductory counseling courses the Seminary’s counseling curriculum includes courses addressing human development, abnormal psychology, assessment, group counseling, research methods, career counseling, theories and techniques of counseling, counseling ethics, and other professional issues. MAC students are familiar with the 113

major counseling theories and major psychological theories. Students are prepared to take the

national counselor’s test used for national certification and state licensure. Almost all of

Covenant Seminary’s MAC students pass this test on the first attempt.

The counseling internship is a full nine-month experience in which each student works as

a counselor serving a case load of five to ten clients in about twelve hours of work per week at an

internship site in the community. These sites include church and non-church contexts, other

Christian settings, or specialized settings like residential treatment centers, schools, or large

mental health care providers. Students are matched to sites according to their interests for

learning and future service. Many interns will also see additional clients on the Seminary campus in counseling rooms provided by the school. (These counseling rooms include the

capacity to produce both audio- and videotape records of intern-client sessions for confidential review and critique by faculty supervisors.) The interns are divided into small groups of seven or eight students and assigned to a faculty supervisor for the internship year. Currently, we have four internship groups, two led by the full-time counseling faculty, and two led by adjunct faculty who are therapists in the community and who think about and approach counseling in ways consistent with the program faculty. This internship experience provides opportunities to put into practice what the student has been learning in the classroom. Each group supervisor takes a mentor role with his or her interns. The internship becomes thus both a learning and a molding process in which the personality, thinking, and practice of the student counselors are tried and tested, stretched and shaped.

Interns also are required to take one course per semester in which their only other

classmates are counseling interns. This adds to the sense that interns are moving through the

programs as a cohort. Since the MAC program is intentionally kept small enough for faculty 114

members to supervise interns directly, the size of the program contributes to the development of a community of learning.

The program also sponsors a student chapter of a professional organization, the

American Association of Christian Counseling. The activities of this on-campus group contribute

to the development of this learning community by facilitating relational connections between

students who entered the program in different years and between students who started in the same year. The group’s activities also facilitate preparation for the internship year and for professional service. Each spring, the student chapter sponsors a panel of current interns who discuss their internship experiences and answer questions for students who will be entering internships in the coming year. Also in the spring, the student chapter will honor graduates with gifts and a send-off activity.

The MAC is a 60-credit hour program that balances counseling theory and practice with

biblical and theological instruction. The program can be completed in two academic years,

including two courses during the summer between these two years. Many students elect to

complete the program in two and one half or three years. This approach allows for further

personal growth and absorption of material in the course of the academic program. The Seminary

is flexible and allows students to determine a schedule for completion that is best for them.

While the majority of MAC students will complete the program in two to three years, some will complete the program on a part-time basis, sometimes taking four, five, and on rare occasions, six or more years. Students must complete the program within nine years.

C.4 Admission and Resource Requirements. The MAC program has consistently had

high quality students. In recent years, we have had increased interest from potential counseling 115 students. As a result, the admissions process for this degree has become more selective, further supporting our contention that only the best students are admitted into the MAC program.

In addition to standard Seminary admissions requirements, the admissions process for the

MAC includes an interview with a MAC faculty member and an essay specific to the counseling program. The faculty interview adds the opportunity for a direct assessment of each applicant by the faculty. This assessment includes discussion and discernment of the applicant’s own personal issues to assure that each student admitted to the program possesses the necessary maturity and has worked through his or her own challenges sufficiently to be able to provide helpful service to those struggling with life issues. The MAC student is required to maintain a 3.0 grade point average throughout the program. This same high standard is expected in applicants’ undergraduate work. Applicants who are close to but below this standard may be admitted on academic probation. Maintaining such high expectations further contributes to the quality of the students in the MAC program.

The Seminary’s resources are adequate to support the MAC program. The amount of classroom space is appropriate and having dedicated counseling rooms available for student use is a valuable asset. The MAC program’s two full-time faculty create an unusual but highly effective team: Dr. Richard Winter is a psychiatrist with ministry experience; Dr. Dan Zink is a social worker and marriage and family therapist with ministry experience. They agree on foundational thinking about counseling while bringing distinct training and specialties to the program. Because the course content of the program is very broad, it is necessary for some courses to be taught by adjunct faculty. These courses include Research Methods, Group

Counseling, Career Counseling, Psychological and Educational Measurements, and

Psychological Disorders. The presence of the MAC program brings to the Seminary faculty 116

members who have a higher understanding of professional counseling than is usual on many

seminary campuses. This adds a beneficial academic resource to students in other degree

programs. In addition, the seminary community also benefits as the counseling faculty provides

counseling services to students on campus; in addition, the program offers free counseling to

people in the surrounding community through students under faculty supervision.

C.5 Educational Evaluation. The counseling faculty knows that more must be done than

teaching counseling content. The task before us is to grow and develop mature counselors. The

program has been shaped as a way of challenging and stretching the personal growth of each

counseling student. The faculty understands that the most effective counselors are effective more

because of who they are than because of what they know. While growth in knowledge of

counseling theory is essential in the MAC experience, that knowledge will be best put in play

with clients by counselors who know themselves well and are skilled in building and working

through relationships with an integrity and clarity that only the most mature can risk. Through

this full-orbed formational experience, MAC students grow toward professional readiness; they are prepared both to perform in and continue to learn through the post-graduate professional

counseling experiences. We are satisfied that the MAC program provides a strong training

process with well-balanced results that are consistent with the mission of the Seminary.

Several strengths exist in the MAC curriculum. As stated above, there is a good balance

of biblical and theological reflection, psychological theory, and counseling practice instruction

through the various courses required in these areas throughout the program. Additionally, the

courses Introduction to Counseling, Marriage and Family Counseling, Theories and Techniques

of Counseling, and Ethics in Counseling address the relationship between biblical concepts and

the theory of counseling in a very intentional manner. 117

Various assignments throughout the course of the program address the student’s personal development and knowledge of life issues, as well as approaches to counseling practice. The courses Introduction to Counseling and Marriage and Family Counseling, taken during the first fall semester of the program, include personal reflection papers. Crisis and Transition, taken in the spring of the first year, includes a reflection paper on a personal crisis. In the fall of the internship year, each student shares his or her family history with an internship group using the family genogram reflection paper written in the fall of the first year. In the spring of the internship year, students write a personal philosophy of counseling. In this way, assignments work along with course content to facilitate students’ growth not only in knowledge, but also personally and in their conceptual framework for counseling practice.

During the internship year, students periodically submit tapes of counseling sessions to their internship supervisor. In this way, supervisors are able to evaluate, make suggestions, and assist in the students’ growth in actual counseling practice. This enhances the mentor-student relationship because the supervisor is able to hear the student at work and to discuss client cases with the student directly on a regular basis.

The MAC experience culminates in the Capstone project consisting of a Personal

Philosophy of Counseling paper and a tape of an actual counseling session conducted by the student (see accompanying sample exhibits). The paper is the student’s opportunity to craft a statement of his or her own counseling philosophy that takes into account his or her own personal story, perspective, and personality, and combines these with a clear expression of the theory or theories that will guide his or her thinking and practice as counselor. The tape is evidence that each student is competent to counsel and ready to begin professional practice. Both the paper and the session tape are evaluated by the internship supervisor. 118

The faculty recognizes that there are two areas that could be strengthened in the MAC

curriculum. Cross-cultural counseling, for instance, is currently addressed in the Understanding

Contemporary Culture course, and as a part of Crisis and Transition. While the state of Missouri

considers this treatment to be sufficient for state licensure, program faculty would like to

improve this area with a more thorough treatment. Adjustments have been discussed and will

continue to be pursued.

A second area to be strengthened is in acquiring and maintaining quality adjunct professors. This requires careful recruiting and hiring, as well as regular assessment of classroom performance. The department strives to maintain active relationships with adjunct professors through an annual dinner at the beginning of the year, as well as through regular conversations in the course of the academic year. Adjunct faculty members also receive course evaluations and course planning communications. Yet, more could done in this area in order to maintain the high quality of the program.

Degree Standard E: Master of Arts (Theological Studies) (MATS) and the Master of Arts

(Exegetical Theology)

E.1 Purposes of the Degrees. The Master of Arts (Theological Studies) (MATS)

provides basic biblical and theological training that equips lay people to bring an informed

Christian perspective to a variety of secular occupations and non-ordained ministries. Those benefiting from the program include Bible study group leaders, Christian day-school teachers,

church and parachurch staff workers, ministers seeking continuing education, and others who

desire a more informed perspective on faith and life. The MATS is not designed to qualify

students for additional advanced study in theology or employment in ordained ministry. 119

The Master of Arts (Exegetical Theology) (MAET) is an academic and research degree that prepares students pursuing academic leadership for advanced study at the doctoral level, normally in biblical studies. As constructed right now, it is not designed for those who are seeking to serve in pastoral ministry.

E.2 Primary Goals of the Program. The MATS degree seeks to provide a proficient and influencing level of competency in several goal areas which flow from the Seminary’s mission statement. In particular, the students are expected to develop a proficient level of competency in their walk with God as they understand the Gospel of grace and live with spiritual maturity in service to God and others; in their ability to interpret and communicate God’s Word for themselves and others; and in the way they lead others with respect for their gifts and callings under the Lordship of Christ (see the program goal and levels of competencies chart at the end of the chapter).

The MAET shares similar competency goals with the MATS. The major difference is that it seeks to develop an accomplished and leadership level of competency in the area of biblical interpretation, informed by systematic and historical-theological understanding.

E.3 Program Content, Duration, and Location. In our process of evaluation of this degree program, we have come to recognize that the current curriculum is too long and too diffuse to accomplish our missional goals. This section will not only describe what we are currently doing, but will provide an educational rationale to ATS for reducing our MATS degree program from 60 to 48 credit hours. This rationale will serve to support our request, made in the introduction of this report, to allow Covenant Seminary to make this change effective with the

2008–09 academic term. 120

Over the past ten years, Covenant Seminary has strategically sought to differentiate our

MATS from our MDiv degree program. Recognizing that the MATS degree does not lead to

professional ministry vocation or further graduate study, the degree program does not require the

study of original languages nor do the biblical studies classes rely on the Hebrew and Greek texts

which stand behind our English translations. Rather, the focus of the program is on a wide range

of graduate theological studies that are based on the English translation of the Bible and on

translated source materials in other fields.

Currently, the 60 credit hours are distributed as follows:

Biblical studies 15 hours Theological and historical studies 18 hours Practical theology and apologetics 13 hours Free electives 14 hours Total 60 hours

What this demonstrates is that almost 25% of the degree program is taken up with free electives

that are geared toward various degree concentrations: bioethics, Christian education, Christianity and contemporary culture, counseling, music and worship, urban ministry, world mission, and youth ministry. However, several of these degree concentrations are also represented in a different MA program (e.g., the MAEM); further, we believe that we can still accomplish the 9- hour degree concentrations even when reducing the total number of hours in the program. In addition, such a reduction will allow us to sharpen the focus of the degree program and furthering our attempt to distinguish the program from the MDiv and other MA programs. 121

We believe that the following sequence could adequately accomplish the primary goals of the MATS program while still allowing students to accomplish concentrations in areas of interest.

Proposed Reduced Credit Hours MATS Sequence First year Fall Spring CM300 Communicating the Gospel 3 OT200 OT History and Theology 3 ST200 God and his Word 3 PTXXX PT elective 3 CC210 Outreach to Contemporary Culture 3 NT200 NT History and Theology 3 ST220 Man, Christ, and Redemption 3 Elective 3 12 12

Second year Fall Spring CH200 Story of Christianity 3 OT2XX OT elective 3 ST240 Spirit, Church, and Last Things 3 Elective 3 NT2XX NT elective 3 STXXX ST elective 3 Electives 6 12 12

This sequence has three new courses that would be tailored specifically for the MA-level programs—OT200, NT200, and CH200 (indicated in italics in the chart above)—all of which would be one-semester survey courses introducing students to the basic content of the respective disciplines and enabling them to begin to appreciate the riches of our theological tradition. The sequence removes ST360 Christian Ethics, a required MDiv course, in order to differentiate the 122

degree programs more successfully, while still allowing students to take a systematic theology

elective from the wide range offered in the curriculum. In addition, this sequence preserves the

ability for students to develop their own interests; the distribution of hours would now be:

Biblical studies 12 hours Theological and historical studies 15 hours Practical theology and apologetics 9 hours Free electives 12 hours Total 48 hours

Because our degree concentrations require 9 credit hours, the student could still use free elective

hours to accomplish any desired concentration of his or her interest, again in keeping with the primary goals of the degree program. The proposed reduced-hours sequence continues to enable

our students to accomplish the program goals derived from our mission statement at a level II

competency level.

Another reason that we are requesting this allowance to reduce the number of hours in

our MATS program is that we have M.A. Attrition found that many of our MATS students 100% s 90% are not in fact completing a 60-hour 80% 70% degree. As the accompanying chart on 60% 50% MA attrition demonstrates, around 30% 40%

30%

20% of MA students actually complete their

10% % of incoming M.A. clas 0% degrees; nearly 70% of MA students FY '98 FY '99 FY '00 FY '01 FY '02 FY '03 FY '04 FY '05 Incoming Class Fiscal Year who entered the Seminary in 1998– Earned any degree Still active Withdrew 123

2000 withdrew from the program. The majority of these students are student spouses or laypeople from the community who are taking this degree through evening courses. As a result,

the majority of our MATS students will not complete the current degree program in two-years of

study, if at all. Further, we believe that the proposed 12-credit hours per semester sequence

represents a full-time load as well; it is consonant with our four-year MDiv sequence, which

averages about 12credit hours per semester. This proposal will still allow many students to

qualify for financial aid because they are maintaining full-time status. Moreover, because the

MATS is the degree program that our Access students can receive entirely by distance education

methods, this reduction makes the degree more attainable for them as well.

Currently, we offer the MATS degree program on our main campus and through distance

learning. As noted in the introduction, we have received an exception from ATS to the residency requirements for the MATS; we are petitioning for the ATS Commission on Accrediting to grant

a continuance to this exception until our next reaccreditation process in 2018. The rationale for

that request is found in chapter 10.

The MAET is a 60-credit hour program. The program content for the MAET consists

almost entirely of exegetical and theological courses. Because the degree assumes biblical

language usage, students must demonstrate proficiency in both Hebrew and Greek. Students may

take the language courses at Covenant or may take placement examinations if they have

previously studied the languages. All students in the program must complete a thesis that

demonstrates the use of appropriate research methods and treatment of selected subject matter.

The core biblical studies and systematic theology courses are the same ones taken by MDiv

studies. Required exegetical electives also serve MDiv and ThM students. A thesis is required. 124

All courses are taken with resident faculty on our St. Louis campus, utilizing the community of learners that we have here.

E.4 Admission and Resource Requirements. Applicants to the MATS program must hold an undergraduate degree from an accredited institution. They are required in the application process to demonstrate the interests, aptitudes, and personal qualities necessary for theological education. This is demonstrated through a personal essay, which includes the student’s Christian testimony, transcripts from undergraduate and other graduate schools, and personal references.

The MATS curriculum is taught primarily by residential, full-time faculty members. The core biblical and theological studies courses are taught by residential faculty members whose credentials are detailed elsewhere in this report. The concentration electives are often taught by subject matter experts whose knowledge in the given field is well-known in our denomination and larger ecclesial circles. The library services, described in chapter five, are in place to support the distinctive concentrations—youth ministry, world missions, Christian education, counseling,

Christianity and contemporary culture—that the degree offers. Further, MATS students receive the same advisement services as MDiv students and have all the opportunities for self- enrichment as other students.

Likewise, the MAET students share the same community and admissions benefits as our

MDiv and other MA students. The program has generally struggled with enrollment issues. It is hard to track exactly how many students are in the program, since we report those numbers with our MATS numbers, but historically we have maintained between 5 and 15 students in this degree program. The Seminary needs to evaluate where there is a sufficient community of learners for this program. 125

E.5 Educational Evaluation. Currently, our MATS students who study and receive the

degree through distance learning have a summative experience at the end of their program. This

Capstone experience has proven very effective in enabling students to work through the

implications of their theological studies. The Capstone also assists faculty members in assessing

whether students have demonstrated the expected outcomes of the program. This Capstone

experience is described at great length in chapter ten of this report. As we continue to evaluate

the MATS, we recognize that the lack of a summative experience in our residential MATS is a

major weakness in that version of the program; we will be working over the next two years to

establish some sort of summative experience for these students. In order to do this, however, we

may need to develop a program director who can oversee and implement such a summative

requirement.

The foregoing discussion demonstrates that the institution regularly evaluates the MATS

program. Our request for reducing the number of hours in the degree program stems from this

repeated analysis and evaluation. As we have tracked attrition rates and discussed the reasons for

this with our departing students, as we have evaluated the program in the light of the degree

goals and determined that the program is too diffuse, and as we have sought to consider how to

better differentiate the MATS from the MDiv programs, it should be clear that the Seminary is

serious about continually evaluating the MATS program in order to ensure that it accomplishes

its stated goals.

Dr. David Chapman serves as the Director of the MAET. Historically, we have had few

students in this program although during the past three years, we have observed a modest increase in the number of students in the program. After consulting with biblical studies faculty members, Dr. Chapman proposed, and the Curriculum Committee and faculty approved, that the 126 faculty require the MAET candidate to take Ancient and Medieval Church History and

Reformation and Modern Church History. The faculty’s rationale for this change is to correct a curricular oversight wherein a student in an exegetical theology program could graduate with no direct church history exposure. Given the stated intentions of students in the program toward further graduate study, the faculty felt that this correction will deepen student appreciation for historical elements of theological inquiry and preparation for further study. In addition, in spring

2007, the faculty voted to bring the MAET into line with the MDiv program by discontinuing

Biblical Introduction and adding the new Pentateuch course.

Degree Standard F: Doctor of Ministry (DMin)

F.1 Purpose of the degree. Covenant Seminary’s DMin program is designed in order to enhance the practice of ministry of those who have been or who are currently engaged in ordained ministerial leadership. Focused on those who hold the MDiv degree and who have been in ministry for at least three years, the program integrates biblical, historical, theological, and ministerial resources for a full-orbed opportunity to reflect meaningfully on current and future ministry. As our DMin Handbook states, we hope that the DMin program produces “reflective practitioners” who take their self-improvement seriously for the good of the church.

F.2 Primary goals of the program. The DMin program’s main goal is for students to draw upon a wide range of resources in order to attain a higher degree of professional competency in the practice of ministry. In order to assist students, the program’s specific goals flow from our mission statement and core values. While not looking for the level of academic competency in our main advanced theological scholarship degree (the ThM degree), the

Seminary does desire a deepened pursuit of theological and communication skills as well as a 127 more thorough engagement on issues of leadership than for our MDiv students. The end result is a more contextualized and educationally appropriate accomplishment of “walking with God, interpreting and communicating God’s Word, and leading God’s people.”

In fleshing out these specific goals, the DMin curriculum encourages students to reflect at an advanced level concerning the nature and purposes of ministry. The curriculum is tailored so that students are to chart their own course in area of interests, while still providing an opportunity to reflect meaningful on the nature of their current, particular ministries as well as the general nature of ministry. The Seminary also offers opportunities through the Francis A.

Schaeffer Institute, the World Mission program, and the Counseling office for students to continue to reflect about their place in God’s global kingdom, even as they reflect on their own specific place in congregational leadership.

F.3 Program content, location, and duration. Currently, our DMin program requires 30- credit hours. The DMin curriculum focuses on four foundational courses, of which the students must take two. Theology of Ministry and Biblical Theology and Preaching are the two courses that most students take. These courses offer and advanced understanding and integration of ministry, in which theory and practice interactively inform and enhance each other. In particular, the preaching course, taught by Dr. Bryan Chapell, extends the insights of the Seminary’s MDiv preaching curriculum to ensure that our core values of grace foundation, pastoral training, and biblical authority are appropriate integrated in the preaching of our graduates. Once students have taken two foundational courses, they then are able to choose two of three core courses in the areas of worship, counseling, and ministry renewal. From there, they flesh out their program through elective courses in the areas of educational ministry, preaching, counseling, discipleship, 128

and missions. The curriculum concludes with a doctoral-level dissertation project that emphases

a qualitative research approach applied to an area of ministry practice or intellectual interest.

Our DMin program offers extensive opportunity for peer-to-peer learning as well as self- directed learning experiences. We purposefully keep our DMin courses small—no more than 12 to 15 in a class. We discover that this provides an optimum number of students for thoughtful engagement with peers and faculty. In addition, students have access to the Seminary library for research and personal enrichment during their residency periods.

The capstone of the DMin program is the doctoral project, which entails writing a

dissertation. The doctoral project demonstrates the student's ability to build an adequate bridge

between theology and practice and to address a significant pastoral concern in a creative and

meaningful way. The dissertation must be sufficient in length to demonstrate an ability to

integrate exegetical and theological insight with understanding of the practice of ministry in

contemporary social contexts. In order to assist students with their projects, all DMin students

take the DMin Ministry Project/Dissertation Seminar, where the DMin director walks them

through expectation, goals, and process for the project phase of their program. Particularly

important in this process is our DMin Handbook, which carefully and thoroughly lays out the

dissertation projection process. All projects are maintained in the Seminary library and are

available through OCLC WorldCat and dissertation abstracts.

In evaluating the effectiveness of our program, especially in the light of the findings from

our Lilly Endowment Inc.-sponsored Center for Ministry Leadership (CML), we are becoming

increasingly convinced that our current DMin program needs to be significantly reworked. Both

in terms of the content of the program and in the way the program is delivered, we believe that

our program goals and ultimately our mission can be accomplished by moving toward a “cohort 129

model,” allowing students to forge even more meaningful peer-to-peer relationships as well as

greater agency in charting their course of ministerial reflection and integration while still

maintaining appropriate educational accountability and direction. Our experience with peer groups in connection with the Lilly Endowment Inc. Sustaining Pastoral Excellence program has convinced us that congregational leaders need extended peer relationships in order to foster the type of transformative reflection needed for personal, congregational and ecclesial health.

To this end, under the direction of Dr. Bob Burns, associate professor of educational

ministries and director of the CML and DMin programs, the Seminary has had a cross-divisional

task team working since January 2007, exploring findings from student evaluation of our

program, relevant literature, and current best practices from other programs (drawn from field

visits to three other institutions). We are working with a timeline that would have us present

findings to the faculty-administration DMin and curriculum committees by late fall 2007 with a

potential announcement to our various publics by summer 2008 with implementation to begin

January 2009.

Currently, our DMin students take all their course work on the Covenant Seminary

campus. As part of their intensive residency time on campus, the Seminary works hard to

provide sustained interaction with resident faculty and subject matter experts, further

conversation with other ministry leaders and peers, access to academic resources and advising through our DMin director and staff, and opportunity for reflection on students’ practice of

ministry.

In 1992, the ATS Commission on Accrediting was notified of Covenant Seminary’s

intention to offer DMin courses in Baltimore, Maryland; the following year, the Commission

heard plans to offer similar courses in Birmingham, Alabama. For a number of years, both of 130

these sites were successful, drawing a solid number of students and developing good

communities of learners. Eventually, we discovered that students were not as interested in

coming to extension sites and would rather come to St. Louis in order to utilize the resources that

we have with our faculty, campus, and library. In 2001-02, we offered our last classes in

Baltimore; in 2005-06, we taught our last DMin class in Birmingham. We allowed our

permission to operate as a non-resident program in the state of Alabama to lapse as of May 2007.

In 2006, we began conversations with a cohort of Presbyterian ministers in northern

Ireland, who were interested in participating in our DMin program but who desired to do at least

part of their program in Ireland. Under the direction of Dr. Bob Burns, we have been developing

a pilot program that would allow us to explore the feasibility of both our “cohort” model for

DMin studies and an international DMin program. In our current version of this proposal, the

cohort from Ireland would come to the Covenant Seminary campus for over a third of their course work beginning in January 2008. This cohort would complete the program by 2011; our assessment process will allow us to determine whether international DMin cohorts would provide a viable approach to delivering continuing education tied to a degree program in the future.

This program requires the equivalent of one full year of academic study. Of the 30-credit

hours in the DMin program, 24 hours are taken in class work while an additional 6 hours are

devoted to the dissertation project. Because of the intensive format in which the DMin program

is offered, it requires at least three years to sustain all the classes and the dissertation project. We

generally urge students to complete their program in six years; the faculty does extend students’

deadline on a case-by-case basis in consultation with the DMin director and admissions staff. As

part of our continued study of our program, we are considering making the six-year limit hard 131 and fast and offering a certificate of continued ministerial education to those who are unable or unwilling to complete the program.

F.4 Admission and Resource Requirements. Covenant Seminary generally requires an

MDiv degree or its educational equivalent (normally including Hebrew and Greek) from an

ATS-accredited seminary for admittance into the DMin program. In addition, we require applicants to have at least three years of ministerial experience subsequent to their first graduate theological degree. In this ministry experience, applicants must produce testimony to above- average preaching ability and/or communication skills appropriate for ministry; an understanding of today's culture and appreciation of how to minister to various segments of contemporary society; sensitivity to and concern for individual needs, including an ability to counsel skillfully; and administrative competence in a local church or church-related organization.

Covenant Seminary utilizes a wide-range of resources in its DMin program. Not only do we bring our own faculty members, with their own extensive ministry experience, to bear on the program, but we also utilize adjunct faculty whose expertise and longevity in ministry is unquestioned. As we work through future course offerings, we assign these classes in our regular course planning process as part of regular faculty load; we also determine whether we need to utilize subject matter experts in order to accomplish degree goals and competencies. The program is overseen by a director and a faculty-administration committee, which has responsibility for admitting students to the program, reading through dissertation proposals, and serving as the first pool of dissertation advisors and second readers. The program is also supported by our library resources and staff (see chapter five) as well as registrar’s office services. 132

F.5 Educational evaluation. There are several levels of outcomes assessment and

program evaluation for the DMin program. Perhaps the key direct measure for outcomes assessment is the student’s dissertation project. As a summative project, the students’ dissertation project brings together biblical, theological, historical, and cultural resources to assist students in sustained reflection on the practice of ministry. At least two faculty members, in addition to the

DMin director and Seminary librarian, work with the student to evaluate the project in the light of the program goals. In addition, during the oral defense of the project, faculty members fill out a form that assesses how the student performs in the light of our stated competency-outcomes. Of course, each discrete class in the curriculum provides an opportunity for faculty to evaluate students in the light of program competencies and goals.

Students provide evaluative assessment through the course evaluations and the

dissertation project process. As they interact with their faculty mentors, students provide

feedback to the DMin program about the quality of instruction and program. This information is

fed back to the DMin director and vice president for academics in order to evaluate the program

in substantive ways. In addition, course evaluations are regularly used to assess the performance

of faculty members and discrete courses in the DMin curriculum. The vice president for

academics reviews these evaluations with faculty members during the regular course of annual

faculty review.

Covenant Seminary does track the percentage of students who enroll, withdraw, and

complete the DMin program. In FY2005 and 2006, we had 30 completions total, our highest

two-year graduating number in the history of the DMin program. During that same period, we

had 26 students withdraw from the program. Our total enrollment headcount in the DMin program for FY2007 was 98 with an FTE of 33. These numbers represent the lowest levels of 133

enrollment in the program since 1999. Even more troubling is during the period between FY2004

and 2007, we only admitted 15 new DMin students into the program.

In the light of declining enrollment, the new DMin director, Dr. Bob Burns, has been

leading a task team drawn from a number of Seminary departments in an in-depth study and

evaluation of our current program. Utilizing student evaluation, focus groups, and field work, we

are seeking best practices as we think through how to improve this program and better

implement our mission in the lives of our DMin students. In addition, we are considering how

formal programs, such as the DMin, working together with informal programs and opportunities

in order to sustain pastors and ministry leaders in lifelong learning. As we work on our 2007-

2012 strategic plan, the role of continuing education, and in that light the DMin program, will be

a major focus of our conversations.

Degree Standard K: Master of Theology (ThM)

K.1 Purpose of the Degree. Covenant Seminary offers one degree program focused on

advanced theological study to train students for “further graduate study at the doctoral level,

preparation for some forms of teaching, scholarly enhancement of ministerial practice, or disciplined reflection on a specialized function in ministry” (from ATS Degree Program

Standard K). This is the Master of Theology (ThM) degree.

K.2 Primary Goals of the Program. The ThM degree provides advanced training for

students already holding the MDiv degree (the Seminary does accept a few exceptional students

who hold a non-MDiv graduate degree in biblical and theological studies or its equivalent). The

ThM in Exegetical Theology helps pastors, chaplains, missionaries, and teachers sharpen

exegetical skills as well as develop research skills and test a calling to further study; it often 134

requires a thesis. The ThM in Biblical and Pastoral Theology is a more flexible and pastorally

oriented program that includes course work in both the biblical and practical disciplines; a thesis

is not a part of this program. Faculty members are deeply involved with students in both program

tracks and serve as course and thesis advisors.

K.3 Program Content, Location, and Duration. The ThM degree consists of 30 credit

hours for both the Biblical and Pastoral Theology and Exegetical Theology concentrations. All

course work, whether done through independent study or regular classes, is supervised by a

faculty member. A minimum of half of all course work is designed specifically to meet the

particular needs and goals of students in this advanced program. Students who do not possess the

MDiv degree are required to demonstrate proficiency in the biblical languages of Greek and

Hebrew. In addition, students are required to demonstrate proficiency in a modern language by

the time they have completed 12 credit hours in the program. Students in the Exegetical

Theology concentration are required to complete a thesis or the comprehensive examination,

whereas students in the Biblical and Pastoral Theology concentration are required to complete a

major ministry research project or the comprehensive examination.

All ThM courses are taught on the campus of Covenant Theological Seminary in an

intensive modular format during the January and summer terms. The program can be completed

in one year of full-time study.

K.4 Admission and Resource Requirements. Admission to the ThM program requires

the MDiv degree or its equivalent. Additionally, applicants to the program must submit the application form, a statement of personal testimony, personal references, and transcripts from all

undergraduate and graduate institutions previously attended. 135

The faculty who teach in the ThM program are themselves actively engaged in

theological research. Faculty members represent the fields of biblical studies, systematic

theology, historical theology, and practical theology. The current and previous ThM directors

have advanced exegetical degrees and have published advanced exegetical and theological

resources. They and other faculty members serve as models of effective theological research and

application in service of the church.

According to annual reviews of library holdings and usage, the library has and can drawn

on sufficient resources to support research in the ThM program.

K.5 Educational Evaluation. During the recent reviews of the ThM program, the

program director and faculty determined that students who complete the ThM degree have “a

comprehensive and critical understanding of the disciplines that have been the focus of their

study and appropriate scholarly research skills” (from ATS Degree Program Standard K).

Graduates of the ThM program have received consistently excellent reviews on their respective theses, major ministry projects, and/or comprehensive examinations from faculty examiners.

Recent graduates also have been accepted into a variety of excellent graduate programs, including Duke Divinity School, the University of Aberdeen, Wheaton Graduate School and

Trinity Evangelical Divinity School.

Since the 1997 self-study, previous ThM director Dr. Hans Bayer instituted the following

changes to the program with faculty approval:

1. In a agreement worked out with Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, a ThM in

Exegetical Theology from Covenant Seminary gives PhD candidates at Trinity a

possible advance standing of 10 credits toward their PhD coursework requirements. 136

2. Twelve ThM-level credits from the German Theological Seminary in Giessen,

Germany, can be applied towards the ThM at Covenant Seminary. (This option has

been used by three German students thus far).

3. Current Covenant Seminary MDiv students can enroll concurrently in the ThM

program with the proviso that they successfully complete the MDiv before their

accumulated ThM credits can be applied definitively towards the ThM degree.

Dr. Jay Sklar followed Dr. Bayer as director of the ThM program in 2004. Since that time, there has only been one significant change in the program: four of the core courses for the

ThM in Exegetical Theology have been moved to one-week intensive sessions (with work required ahead of time as well as after the fact). This provides greater flexibility in the program, allowing students to work on the degree even if they are at a distance from the Seminary.

The rationale for this change was that many of those who are interested in pursuing a

ThM are already actively involved in ministry. Thus, it is difficult for them to move to campus, often from very far away, to complete another graduate degree. By moving the four core courses of the ThM in Exegetical Theology to one-week sessions, we have been able to open the door for many of these students to continue in their ministries as well as to take ThM classes.

4.4 Other Instructional Programs

4.4.0 In addition to their degree programs, theological schools contribute to their various publics through other programs of learning and teaching. Although these programs do not culminate in degrees, they should be compatible with the institution’s primary purpose of graduate theological education. 137

Covenant Seminary’s Graduate Certificate program provides biblical and theological

training that equips lay people to bring an informed Christian perspective to a variety of callings

and non-ordained ministries. This option offers students the opportunity to pursue graduate

theological study without commitment to a full degree program. Students may obtain a Graduate

Certificate in one of four main areas: Biblical and Theological Studies, Bioethics, Christianity and Contemporary Culture, or World Mission.

4.4.1 Characteristics

4.4.1.1 Programs that do not lead to degrees should remain appropriate to institutional purpose and will differ according to their student audience: for example, continuing education for clergy, programs for racial/ethnic or linguistic minority groups, or programs for enrichment.

4.4.1.2 Such programs should be conducted with the proper administrative and faculty oversight, including design, approval, staffing, financing, and evaluation.

4.4.1.3 Faculty who teach in such programs should be appropriately qualified. Normally, qualification will be demonstrated by the possession of an appropriate graduate theological degree and by significant experience in the field in which one is teaching. Students in these programs should have appropriate access to the instructor and to learning resources commensurate with the level and purpose of the program.

4.4.2 Types of programs

4.4.2.1 Schools may offer programs of study consisting either of courses for which graduate academic credit is granted or educational events without such credit.

4.4.2.2 Programs of study that grant graduate credit are appropriate for enrichment, personal growth, the development of lay leaders, or special, non-degree emphasis for vocational ministerial leaders. Such programs require students to have a baccalaureate degree, or its educational equivalent, for admission and to complete a program comprising courses appropriate for graduate credit. Completion of the program of study results in some formal recognition, but not a degree. Credits earned toward these programs may subsequently be transferred into a graduate degree program.

138

4.4.2.3 Programs of study that do not carry academic credit may include courses, workshops, lectures, and other types of educational experiences on topics related to the theological curriculum or to the mission and ministry of the church. These programs and events may be designed for continuing education of ministers, for basic theological education, for personal enrichment, or for other purposes consistent with the character of the school. Because no academic credit is offered, those enrolled need not hold the baccalaureate degree. Requirements for admission to particular programs or events are at the discretion of the institution.

In addition to the Graduate Certificate, Covenant Seminary is home to several centers and

institutes whose programs facilitate clergy continuing education or provide opportunities for

interested lay persons to enhance their knowledge of the Bible, theology, and related topics.

While pastors are a primary audience for many of these programs, we offer a variety of public

lectures, seminars, and conferences as well.

The W. Harold Mare Institute for Biblical and Archaeological Studies began in 1984. The

Mare Institute hosts two lectures each year on topics of wide interest to archeologists as well

students and the general public. The Institute also serves as the primary repository and museum

for artifacts from the Abila site in Jordan. Dr. Mare began excavating the site in the mid-1980s

and revisited it almost every year until his death in 2004. Dr. David Chapman, assistant professor

of New Testament and biblical archaeology, has served as curator of the Mare Institute since

2002. Dr. Chapman offers elective courses in New Testament backgrounds, serves as faculty

sponsor of the Archaeology Club, works with students and other professional colleagues on the

ongoing Abila cataloging and reporting work, leads excavation teams to Abila, and oversees the

general operations of the Institute.

Launched in 1989, the Francis A. Schaeffer Institute’s (FSI) mission is to train God’s

servants to demonstrate compassionately and defend reasonably the claims of Christ upon the whole of life. Starting in July 2007, FSI came under the oversight of Dr. Donald Guthrie,

associate dean of educational ministries and associate professor of educational ministries. The 139

Schaeffer Institute’s ministry includes a regular slate of core and elective courses taught by Prof.

Jerram Barrs, resident scholar of FSI and professor of apologetics and contemporary culture, as

well as other faculty members. The Institute ordinarily sponsors up to two lectures per year on

topics that range from environmental stewardship to Christian hospitality to examining musical

genres with the mind of Christ. The Institute employs a part-time arts curator who hosts several

art shows each year to showcase the work of thoughtful Christian artists from around the world.

These artists offer a vision for their work at an opening reception that is attended by a wide

variety of interested people from the local and regional arts community and the general public.

The Institute began its innovative and frequently imitated Friday Nights @ the Institute

program in 1998. A Seminary-chosen lecturer provides a public lecture in a setting such as a

local bookstore or coffeehouse. The lecturer seeks to offer an informed, winsome perspective on

a topic of current social interest followed by a period of questions and answers. The intent is to

offer a Christian perspective on these topics and foster discussion between believers and non-

believers on subjects that affect contemporary culture. The Institute also hosts contemporary

issue and movie discussion nights for students and the public throughout the year. The Schaeffer

Institute’s activities are meant to serve as a training ground for our students, offering forums in

which they can reflect on and engage with the increasing pluralism of our North American

culture in light of the biblical and theological foundations they are learning at the Seminary.

The Youth in Ministry Institute (YIMI) began its ministry in 1999 after the Seminary

received a generous grant from Lilly Endowment Inc. The intention of the grant was to empower

seminaries to conduct direct ministry to youth in hopes that with such direct exposure, youth

might consider vocational ministry. Covenant Seminary enjoyed very successful ministry through YIMI as we trained our own students and youth pastors from across the United States 140 through the organization’s diverse offerings. The Seminary has successfully transitioned the original focus of YIMI’s ministry from youth ministry events to broader curricular offerings. In fact, the MAEM degree is a direct result of experiences learned through YIMI. We believe that by housing YIMI’s ongoing ministry within the MAEM program we will be ensuring its sustainability for our students and our denomination.

Also begun with a generous grant from Lilly Endowment Inc., the Center for Ministry

Leadership (CML) began in 2004. Per Lilly Endowment’s original intent, the Center’s primary purpose is to contribute to “sustaining pastoral excellence” by finding and promoting ways of

“pastoring pastors.” The Center currently has three active programs: the Pastors Summit, the

Intersect Forum, and the Pastor in Residence program. The Pastors Summit gathers pastor cohorts for personal renewal and theological reflection in cooperation with two other institutions,

Westminster and Reformed Theological Seminaries. Intersect Forum hosts pastors and family business owners as they explore reflective leadership for sustainable growth and change within the systems of the church and business. In the Pastor in Residence program, the Center hosts pastors at our retreat house on campus for periods of rest, renewal, study, and interaction with the Seminary community. From 2003-06, the Connect Conference was part of CML’s work and served as an annual gathering of ministry leaders who examine current ministry issues. The overall program and research themes of the Center, under the direction of Dr. Bob Burns, associate professor of educational ministries, are self-development, spiritual formation, emotional intelligence, leadership and management, and marriage and family.

Recently, Covenant Seminary began offering selected weekend or week-long courses to pastors and the public at a nominal fee under the rubric of “Lifetime of Ministry.” These courses 141

are intended to serve as renewal and ministry catalysts for local church leaders. The courses are

selected from scheduled electives each term.

Summary Evaluation

As outlined in this chapter, the evidence indicates that Covenant Seminary’s curricular

goals represent our mission well and satisfy the requirements of the Standards of Accreditation.

Our program goals are appropriate for the intended and hoped for outcomes of our graduate

competencies. The cohesion of the faculty emerges in the curriculum as a unified effort to train

our students through deepening their spiritual awareness and helping them grow in moral sensibility and character, gain an intellectual grasp of our tradition, and acquire the abilities requisite for ministry. Evaluation by and of our graduates in the field indicate that our curriculum is successfully preparing them for ministry. As we continue to evaluate and refine our curriculum, we pray for wisdom to equip our students in a manner that is worthy of the gospel of

Jesus Christ and will help them address our world in a way that furthers the Kingdom of God.

The findings of this chapter may be summarized as follows:

4.1 Covenant Theological Seminary’s theological curriculum meets the over-arching

goals set forward by the ATS Standards, namely, the development of theological

understanding. Each program is well thought out, including an array of specific

activities that form Christian and ministerial practice.

142

4.2 Each of Covenant Seminary’s degree programs is distinct with regard to

educational and vocational intent. There is a well-developed statement of goals,

objectives, and desired outcomes for each program.

4.3 The statement of degree program standards demonstrates both the ways in which

the Seminary meets the ATS standards and the process of evaluation and

assessment that goes into the organic development of these programs.

4.4 Covenant Seminary offers other instructional and co-curricular programs that are

appropriate to the institutional purpose. These represent varied and important

contributions to the well-rounded theological education provided by the

Seminary.

Recommendations

1. Covenant Seminary should petition ATS to grant “on-going approval” of its

MAEM degree program in the light of its assessment of the program found in 4.3

(Degree Standard B).

2. Covenant Seminary should petition ATS to approve its plan to reduce the MATS

from 60 to 48 hours in line with the proposal made in 4.3 (Degree Standard E).

143

3. Covenant Seminary should evaluate its MAET and ThM programs to determine

whether there is a large enough number of students to provide a community of

learning in each degree program.

4. Covenant Seminary should continue to evaluate and assess its MDiv program to

ensure that it remains responsible to student outcomes and placement realities.

Chief among future strategies should be a capstone course that will provide an

opportunity for student assessment and educational integration.

Levels of Competence

Level I: Level II: Level III: Level IV: Competent / Disciple Proficient / Influencing Accomplished / Leading Advanced (Certificate Level) (Master’s/Lay Ministry (MDiv Level) (Post MDiv Level) Level) A. … to walk with God … • Grace: Understands and is Understands grace. Has been captured by and is Demonstrates grace in dealing personally committed to the motivated by grace to serve with others. Gospel of grace as understood others. in our standards. • Lifestyle: Exhibits spiritual Exhibits personal and spiritual Exhibits Christlike character, Exhibits an exemplary, winsome maturity and Christ-like maturity. prompted by the love of and Christlike character, character growing out of the Christ. clearly motivated by the love of love of Christ. Christ. • Servanthood: Demonstrates a Demonstrates a desire to Takes initiative to serve God and Characteristically serves God and heart to serve God and others serve others. others. others. in one’s family, church, and world. • (Learning: Pursues lifelong Exhibits teachability and a Takes initiative in learning and Models lifelong learning and growth in walking with God, desire to learn. spiritual growth. stimulates in others a passion knowing God’s Word and for learning and spiritual serving God’s people.) growth. B. … to interpret and communicate God’s Word … • Knowledge: Understands and Has a general familiarity with Possesses a foundational Possesses a substantial and Possesses an advanced clearly explains key biblical biblical and theological knowledge of the Bible and detailed knowledge of the knowledge of the Bible and theological facts and topics. theology. Bible, theology and church and theology. concepts in historical history. perspective. • Theological skills: Reliably interprets the Bible. Thoughtfully applies biblical Interprets the Scriptures using the Evidences a high level of Demonstrates ability to teaching to doctrine and life. original languages and biblical and theological interpret and thoughtfully apply evidencing self-conscious reflection on the practice the Bible (in the original effort to think in a thoroughly of ministry. biblical way. languages where appropriate) Demonstrates advanced Thoughtfully applies biblical and research skills. to issues of doctrine, life, and theological insights to the ministry. practice of ministry.

Levels of Competence (cont.) • Conviction: Holds and Holds and expresses essential Holds and expresses a coherent, Cultivates in others a coherent, articulates a coherent Christian elements of a biblical biblical worldview informed by biblical worldview informed by theology and worldview worldview informed by our our doctrinal standards. our doctrinal standards. informed by our doctrinal doctrinal standards. Models critical and respectful Leads others in informed and standards, and interacts Engages critically and engagement with other gracious evaluation of and respectfully with other perspectives, religions and interaction with other critically and respectfully with perspectives and worldviews. perspectives, religions and other approaches. worldviews. worldviews. • Communication: Communicates competently Communicates effectively both Preaches (and/or teaches) and Clearly and helpfully Communicates effectively both both orally and in writing. orally and in writing. writes clearly and effectively. articulates results of orally and in writing. research for a wider audience. C. … and to lead God’s people. • Relational skills: Relates to Demonstrates respect and Models respect and sensitivity in Inspires trust and confidence from others with evident respect, sensitivity in dealing with dealing with others. others by relating to them with sensitivity, and concern to others. evident respect and sensitivity. serve, even when there are Deals wisely and graciously with differences of culture, belief, or those who are difficult. values. • Leadership: Leads others in Seeks to encourage others in Actively assists others in walking Articulates vision, inspires Demonstrates advanced walking with God in walking with God (as with God (as appropriate to confidence, and nurtures ministry understanding accordance with gifts and appropriate to each each person’s calling and followers as disciples of Christ and skills in a variety of callings (e.g., preaching, person’s calling and gifts). gifts). and equips them in the work of areas. ministry. teaching, counseling, Completes a thoughtful, evangelizing, mercy well-researched ministry ministry)—modeling Christ’s project of value to the student, the student’s courage, love and humility. own ministry, and the church at large. • Christ’s Lordship: Seeks to Seeks to live under the Influences others to live under Models and effectively assists bring Christ’s lordship to bear Lordship of Christ in every the Lordship of Christ in every others in living under the in all areas of life and culture— area of life. area of life. Lordship of Christ in every area individual and corporate, of life. private and public. • World Vision: Seeks to advance Demonstrates a commitment Models a commitment to the Leads others to share a the cause of Christ among to the Church and to the Church and to the worldwide commitment to the Church and diverse peoples and cultures worldwide expansion of expansion of Christ’s to the worldwide expansion of within North America and Christ’s kingdom. kingdom. Christ’s kingdom. throughout the world. Is receptive to relationships Develops relationships with Seeks to share the Gospel with with people from other people from other and to disciple people from backgrounds and cultures. backgrounds and cultures, other backgrounds and and seeks to engage them cultures. with the Gospel of grace.

Levels of Competence (cont.)

Degree Program Goals Certificate MATS MAET MAC MDiv ThM (Exegetical) ThM DMin (Biblical/Pastoral) A. … to walk with God … • Grace: Understands Level I Level Level II Level III Level III Level II Level II Level III and is personally II committed to the Gospel of grace as understood in our standards. • Lifestyle: Exhibits Level I Level Level II Level II Level III Level II Level II Level III spiritual maturity and II Christ-like character growing out of the love of Christ. • Servanthood: Level I Level Level II Is motivated from a Level III Level III Level III Level III Demonstrates a II sincere desire to serve heart to serve God God and others to help and others in one’s others break free from family, church, and the effects of sin. (Level world. III) • (Learning: Pursues Level I Level Level II Pursues lifelong growth Level III Level III Level III Level III lifelong growth in II in walking with God, walking with God, knowledge of God’s knowing God’s Word Word, and caring for and serving God’s God’s people. (Level III) people.) B. … to interpret and communicate God’s Word … • Knowledge: Level I Level Possesses a Articulates a sound Level III Level IV Level IV Level III Understands and II substantial knowledge of the Bible clearly explains key knowledge of and theology, biblical and the Bible, particularly the doctrine theological facts and informed by of sanctification in light concepts in historical theology and of the consequences of perspective. church history. sin and the fall. (Level II) (Level III)

Degree Program Goals (cont.)

• Theological skills: Level I Level Constructively Thoughtfully applies the Level III Conducts careful Level III Level IV Demonstrates ability II relates the Bible and a coherent research into the to interpret and substance of theology and worldview meaning of the thoughtfully apply the exegetical and (informed by our Scriptures, using Bible (in the original theological doctrinal standards) to the original languages where study to other the practice of languages and appropriate) to academic counseling. (Level III) self-consciously issues of doctrine, disciplines. aiming to think in life, and ministry. (Level III) a thoroughly biblical way. (Level III) Constructively relates the substance of exegetical and theological study to other academic disciplines. (Level III)

• Conviction: Holds and Level I Level Level II.a. and Articulates a well- Level III Level III Level III Level III articulates a II … informed understanding coherent Christian Constructively of the relationship theology and relates the between psychology and worldview informed substance of theology and by our doctrinal exegetical and thoughtfully evaluates standards, and theological and adapts theories and interacts critically study to other techniques of various and respectfully with academic counseling approaches other approaches. disciplines. in light of theological (Level II) commitments. (Level II) • Communication: Level I Level Level II Communicates Level III Effectively Effectively Level IV Communicates II effectively in manner, communicates the communicates the effectively both orally speech and writing, results of one’s results of one’s and in writing. particularly in a research both research both orally counseling context. orally and in and in writing. (Level (Level III) writing. (Level III) III)

Degree Program Goals (cont.)

C. … and to lead God’s people. • Relational skills: Level I Level Level II Inspires trust and Level III Level II Level II Level III Relates to others II confidence from others with evident respect, and deals sensitivity, and compassionately and concern to serve, patiently with people even when there are needing counseling. differences of (Level III) culture, belief, or values. • Leadership: Leads Level I Level Level II Understands and leads Level III Assists and Assists and Level IV others in walking with II others into a greater encourages encourages others in God in accordance appreciation of their others in walking walking with God, in with gifts and callings dignity and calling before with God, in accordance with gifts (e.g., preaching, God. (Level III) accordance with and calling, especially teaching, counseling, Demonstrates gifts and calling, as a pastor or evangelizing, mercy competent level of especially as a teacher. (Level II) ministry)—modeling counseling skills. (Level pastor or teacher. Christ’s courage, III) (Level II) love and humility. • Christ’s Lordship: Level I Level Level II Level III Level III Level III Level III Level III Seeks to bring II Christ’s lordship to bear in all areas of life and culture— individual and corporate, private and public. • World Vision: Seeks Level I Level Level II Level II Level III Level II Level II Level III to advance the cause II of Christ among diverse peoples and cultures within North America and throughout the world.

MAEM COMPETENCY CHART

Master of Arts in MAEM Specific Evidences Master of Divinity Educational Ministries A. … to walk with God …

• Grace: Understands & is Has been captured by & is Acknowledges appropriately personal ignorance Demonstrates grace in dealing personally committed to the motivated by grace to Models learning from mistakes & failures with others. Gospel of grace as serve others. Provides a psychologically safe environment for understood in our standards. Demonstrates grace in learner experimentation & failure dealing with others. Grants forgiveness to others biblically

• Lifestyle: Exhibits spiritual Exhibits Christlike character, Provides evident spiritual growth in personal faith & in Exhibits an exemplary, maturity & Christ-like prompted by the love of emotional maturity in journals & reflective course winsome & Christlike character growing out of the Christ, modeling winsome work character, clearly love of Christ. & exemplary behavior to Demonstrates moral integrity motivated by the love of others. Christ. • Servanthood: Demonstrates Regularly initiatives to serve Works productively as a project team member. Characteristically serves God a heart to serve God & God & others. Provides constructive assessment & help to peers on & others. others in one’s family, their course work. church, & world.

• Learning: Pursues lifelong Models lifelong learning & Attempts new methodologies, programs, creative Models lifelong learning & growth in walking with God, spiritual growth which learning activities and/or curriculums stimulates in others a knowing God’s Word & encourages others to do Intentionally identifies, & assists learners with, barriers passion for learning & serving God’s people. likewise. to change & growth spiritual growth. Shares enthusiasm for growth, change & learning with others, appropriately using self disclosure Demonstrates the humility, creativity, & resource awareness of a motivated learner Collaborates with others in the community, seeking formative evaluation & input from peers & faculty on course work & ministry issues

MAEM COMPETENCY CHART

B. … to interpret & communicate God’s Word …

• Knowledge: Understands & Possesses a foundational Uses basic research skills to access & critically Possesses a substantial & clearly explains key biblical & knowledge of the Bible & evaluate information about God’s world detailed knowledge of the theological facts & concepts theology. Applies Scripture & biblical principles throughout Bible, theology & church in historical perspective. course work history. Accesses multiple, relevant resources; including books, periodicals, web cites, interviews, observations, media Demonstrates abilities in critical & thoughtful reading through the integration of the social sciences & theology

• Theological skills: Thoughtfully applies biblical Communicates & demonstrates a personal philosophy Interprets the Scriptures using Demonstrates ability to teaching to doctrine & of education containing: the original languages & interpret & thoughtfully apply life. • Personal education framework for practice evidencing self-conscious the Bible (in the original Makes self-conscious effort effort to think in a Christian worldview languages where appropriate) to apply biblical & • thoroughly biblical way. to issues of doctrine, life, & theological insights to • Theological critique of the social sciences Thoughtfully applies biblical & ministry. the practice of • Biblical citations theological insights to the educational ministry. practice of ministry. • Historical references

MAEM COMPETENCY CHART

• Conviction: Holds & articulates Holds, expresses, & Demonstrates critical thinking skills through critical Cultivates in others a coherent, a coherent Christian theology cultivates in others a reflections in journaling & evaluating biblical worldview informed & worldview informed by our coherent, biblical Demonstrates professional decision making & by our doctrinal standards. doctrinal standards, & worldview informed by judgment: Leads others in informed & interacts critically & our doctrinal standards. • In relevance of chosen topics & projects gracious evaluation of & respectfully with other Models & leads others in interaction with other approaches. critical & respectful • In decisions & evaluations made during perspectives, religions & engagement with other coursework worldviews. perspectives, religions & • In journal reflections on: worldviews. - why they did what they did - what the consequences were of their actions - other possible solution possibilities - their own learning & growth as an educator

• Communication: Teaches & communicates Models good listening skills Preaches (and/or teaches) & Communicates effectively clearly, creatively & Demonstrates the ability to ask good questions in writes clearly & effectively. both orally & in writing. effectively. interviewing & learning discussions Writes concisely, coherently, & convincingly Substantiates arguments in written work & lectures Speaks publicly with confidence & appropriate body language

C. … & to lead God’s people.

• Relational skills: Relates to Models respect & sensitivity Assesses learner needs accurately Inspires trust & confidence others with evident respect, in dealing with others, Accounts for educational context (cultural sensitivity, from others by relating to sensitivity, & concern to inspiring trust & freedom assessment of cultural context, developmental them with evident respect serve, even when there are from fear in order to issues, family influence, creates emotionally & & sensitivity. differences of culture, belief, learn deeply. physically safe environment) Deals wisely & graciously with or values. those who are difficult.

MAEM COMPETENCY CHART

• Leadership: Leads others in Actively assists others in Demonstrates leadership & facilitation skills in Articulates vision, inspires walking with God in walking with God (as educational activities through mature & professional confidence, & nurtures accordance with gifts & appropriate to each interpersonal skills & problem solving followers as disciples of callings (e.g., preaching, person’s calling & gifts) Demonstrates teaching skills through: Christ & equips them in the teaching, counseling, & helps equip them in work of ministry. evangelizing, mercy the work of ministry. • curriculum development, evaluation & use ministry)—modeling Christ’s • teaching performance in an educational courage, love & humility. ministry • effective use of multiple methodologies • effective use of technology Applies knowledge of education theory & theology throughout coursework

• Christ’s Lordship: Seeks to Models & influences others Encourages higher order thinking (analysis, synthesis, Models & effectively assists bring Christ’s lordship to bear to live under the application) & critical thinking in others under the others in living under the in all areas of life & culture— Lordship of Christ in authority of Christ, with the aim of obedience to Him Lordship of Christ in every individual & corporate, private every area of life. area of life. & public. • World Vision: Seeks to Models & leads others to Teaches & designs programs and curriculum with the Leads others to share a advance the cause of Christ share a commitment to purpose of encouraging growth in spiritual maturity commitment to the Church among diverse peoples & the Church & to the in others & of encouraging the use of spiritual gifts & to the worldwide cultures within North America worldwide expansion of in the service of the church expansion of Christ’s & throughout the world. Christ’s kingdom. kingdom. Develops relationships with Seeks to share the Gospel with people from other & to disciple people from backgrounds & cultures, other backgrounds & & seeks to engage them cultures. with the Gospel of grace.

155

CHAPTER FIVE

LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICES

The library is a central resource for theological scholarship and the theological curriculum. It is integral to the purpose of the school through its contribution to teaching, learning, and research, and it functions as a partner in curriculum development and implementation. The library’s educational effectiveness depends both on the quality of its collections and information resources and on the vision and organization of its administration. To accomplish its task, the library requires appropriate collections, effective information technology, and sufficient human and physical resources.

Covenant Theological Seminary’s J. Oliver Buswell Jr. Library makes a vital

contribution as it seeks to carry out the institution’s mission. Not only does it provide academic

resources that enable teaching, learning, and research, but it also provides information services

and research practices to equip students for a lifetime of ministry. In so doing, Buswell Library houses adequate and appropriate collections, effective information technology, and superior

human and physical resources.

5.1 Library Collections

5.1.1 Theological study requires extensive encounter with historical and contemporary texts. While theological education is informed by many resources, the textual tradition is central to theological inquiry. Texts provide a point of entry to theological subject matter as well as a place of encounter with it. Theological libraries serve the church by preserving its textual tradition both in print and in electronic forms, for the current educational needs of faculty and students, and for the future.

As an integral component of Covenant Theological Seminary, the mission of the Buswell

Library is to support the Seminary’s mission by providing resources for training servants of the

triune God to walk with God, to interpret and communicate God’s Word, and to lead God’s

people. This mission is accomplished primarily through the provision of materials and services,

156 including their intellectual, technical, and physical organization, together with their ongoing

management, interpretation, and preservation. These materials and services are provided in

accord with the research, teaching, and ministry needs of the various constituencies of the

Library. From the standpoint of these constituencies, the purpose of resources and ease of their

use serve to guide the Library’s pursuit of its mission.

Support of Pastoral Ministry Training and Academic Research

The primary focus of the Library’s collections is to support the curriculum and

research needs of students who are training to be pastors through the Seminary’s Master of

Divinity (MDiv) program. Directly related to this is the Library’s support of the Seminary faculty’s teaching and academic research needs. Thus, the majority of materials in the collection fall into general categories reflective of this emphasis, including Bible and biblical interpretation, systematic and doctrinal theology, homiletics, church history, practical theology, contemporary issues facing the church, apologetics and evangelism, and missions.

Since our last self-study report in 1997, the Library’s holdings in the broad area of

“Bible” have increased 32.7%. Central to this collection development has been the

acquisition of a wide array of resources in various types and formats to support the study of

Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, biblical exegesis, and hermeneutics. Other areas of strength in the

Library’s collection include the history and practice of the Presbyterian tradition, historical

theology and church history more generally, and world religions, including Judaism, Islam,

and other non-Christian traditions.

Support of Other Degree Programs

A secondary focus is to support the curricula and research needs of students in the

Seminary’s other degree programs. Every effort is made to support these programs as much as

157 possible, but particular emphasis is given to the Master of Arts in Counseling (MAC) and the

Master of Arts in Educational Ministries (MAEM) degrees. Over the last several years, the

Library staff has made a concerted effort to supplement the specialized resource needs of these

degrees by growing our collection in the areas of the social sciences, counseling, and education.

Since 1997, book and audio-visual holdings in psychology and other areas supporting the MAC degree have increased 75%.

Supported by a $50,000 grant, the Library supplemented materials available for the

MAEM partly through the creation of a Curriculum Resource Center that, as of December 2006,

contains 32 curriculum packets, 23 kits with realia and the like, 260 books and audio-visuals

apart from those within packets or kits, and other resources designed to achieve educational ends.

The cataloging of the Center’s materials yielded 228 bibliographic records comprising 821 items.

At the same time, the regular book, serials, database, and audio-visual collections grew by the addition of numerous items that support the MAEM and, in addition, enrich support for other degree programs and our service to congregations.

Additional Resources

Miscellaneous but important categories within the Buswell Library’s holdings grew from

2.6% of the collection in 1997 to 4.6% in 2006. They include religious and other bibliographies that open doors to further research, materials on the recent dialog between science and religion, the textual traditions embodied in the church’s music, and a small but growing number of works classed in anthropology, law, medicine, and other fields that increasingly pertain to the work of today’s pastors, counselors, teachers, leaders of special needs ministries, and other graduates.

The Library’s participation in a variety of interlibrary agreements, its membership in

diverse consortia that share expertise and resources, and the increasing help of online options

158 provide our students and faculty with ease of access to materials supporting all programs,

whether directly or less directly. All of this can maximize Buswell Library’s ability to steward its

budget and space allocations prudently.

5.1.2 To ensure effective growth of the collection, schools shall have an appropriate collection development policy. Collections in a theological school shall hold materials of importance for theological study and the practice of ministry that represent the historical breadth and confessional diversity of Christian thought and life. The collection shall include relevant materials from cognate disciplines and basic texts from other religious traditions, and demonstrate sensitivity to issues of diversity, inclusiveness, and globalization to ensure that theological learners and researchers have access to the variety of voices that speak to theological subjects.

Collection Growth: Philosophy and Practice

Besides the curricula of the various degree programs, patterns of use, and interlibrary

collaboration, collection development is driven more broadly by current and projected scholarly trends, denominational needs, institutional planning and commitments, faculty recommendations and research needs, diverse local interests, and developments in library and publishing technology. Our collection development policy attempts to take into account the needs of our various constituencies—students and faculty primarily, but also the Seminary staff, alumni, and the ecclesial community, including clergy and laity of the PCA, as well as many others who make use of the Buswell Library.

The Library’s circulating collection has grown steadily since the institution’s 1997 self-

study. The total number of book holdings alone (not counting categories such as Reference or

Rare) has risen from 47,371 in 1997 to 60,540 in June 2006—an increase of 27.8% (or a 32%

increase if we had not weeded 2,055 volumes over those ten years). We added 113 databases, but

the ten-year growth was from 3 to 74, owing to database cessations, consolidations, etc.

159

Media Type Units Held Units Held % Increase in 1997 in 2006 1997–2006 Circulating books 47,371 60,540 27.8% (Excludes categories such as Reference and Rare, except that results of “weeding” and “unaccounted for” do include Reference—albeit relatively minimal) Periodicals (volumes) 11,172 13,520 21% Microforms 1,811 1,451 -19.9% (Loss reflects items deleted from collection due to damage from 1970s/80s label adhesive that over time bled through envelopes and faded some fiche.) Audio (cassettes + CDs) 2,153 3,082 43.1%

Video (cassettes + DVDs) 93 416 347.3%

Online subscribed databases 3 74 2366.7% (3 free databases also are featured.)

Other (realia/kits, CD-ROMs, etc.) 0 438 438%

Integral to this policy is the Library’s commitment to extending the reach of its collection electronically as well as physically through membership in various regional and national consortia. Especially significant in this regard has been the development of the Missouri

Bibliographic Information User System (MOBIUS). In 1998, Covenant Seminary became a founding member of MOBIUS; the chief benefit is the shared Common Library Platform, which

comprises servers supporting twelve clusters of libraries and their individual members. Clusters are defined technically by a common server, but Bridges (the cluster to which Covenant

Seminary belongs) also features geographic proximity among member libraries and has the largest number thereof among the MOBIUS clusters. MOBIUS as a whole represents total holdings of over 20 million units as of October 2006; our students and faculty can access any circulating book in the system in a matter of two or three days.

160 The Collection Development Process

Collection development is done through ongoing self-study that considers the strengths

and weaknesses as they relate to support of the Library’s mission. Planning and budgeting, done

in conjunction with Seminary administrators, helps integrate the Library’s function more fully

into the institution’s overall goals and planning processes.

Selection decisions are made ultimately by the Library’s director based on input from

faculty, students, and staff, as well as from course syllabi, publishers’ and dealers’ catalogs,

reviews in journals and online sources, standard works cited in bibliographies at the end of

encyclopedia entries, phone and e-mail notifications, conference displays, lists of festschrifts and other polygraphs indexed by ATLA, and citations in books, articles, and our students’ own theses and dissertations. Faculty involvement in the collection development process is essential. The staff systematically elicits feedback regarding acquisition of newly published titles, new editions, and reprints, as well as migrated formats and the like. The faculty- administration Library Committee advises the Library director on the collection as well as on other matters of Library policy and operation. The Committee always has professors representing a spectrum of disciplines.

Once materials are selected, cataloged, and processed, they are publicly presented via a

dynamic procedure for display as well as through monthly online acquisitions lists posted on the

Seminary’s Web site for six months, announced on the Seminary’s intranet, and also made

available in print versions (including a year’s retrospect) in three faculty/student lounges on

campus.

The Library views preservation, replacement, digitization, and other processes as part of

the sound management of the existing collection. Building design elements are an important part

of preservation. These elements include: placement of windows away from sensitive material but

161 convenient for people who like natural light (and, the largest study table windows face north);

use of blinds; use of ultraviolet-filtration sleeves for fluorescent lighting tubes; routine flagging

of books and other items needing repair; stocking of polyurethane to cover shelving in certain

emergencies; staff attendance at library conservation workshops; and monitoring of discussions

on rare book management, media refreshing, and timely migration of technology to prevent

unnecessary stages or expense on the one hand, or being marooned with obsolescence on the

other.

Depth and Diversity of Collection Due in large part to the success of its development policy and practice, including

collaboration, the Library has a collection that is in-depth enough to support the Seminary’s

primary purposes (pastoral training), but also diverse and varied enough to meet our

secondary goal of providing good support for other degree programs as well as access to

information and materials across a wider range.

In addition, the Library subscribes to a significant number of periodicals pertaining to our main areas of institutional emphasis and related fields. The total number of subscriptions is 356.

The total number of periodical volumes has risen from 11,172 in 1997 to 13,520 in 2006, an increase of 21%. Subscriptions are added and weeded in consultation with the faculty to ensure that the collection contains both a representation of general and diverse religious periodicals as well as those most directly pertinent to accomplishing the institutional mission. The full text of many periodical articles is available through subscribed databases and free Web resources.

Student and faculty assessments through both formal surveys and informal conversations

indicate much satisfaction with the Library collection, especially as it is now enormously

expanded, in effect, through the Bridges and MOBIUS catalogs and the rapid sharing of resources. Growing enrollment and more classes have greatly increased demand for materials,

162 and we try to monitor this demand so as to obtain additional copies of high-demand items,

provide material electronically, beef up holdings for Reference and Reserve, encourage use of

MOBIUS and other consortia, and take other measures to address any needs or deficiencies that

appear.

Library Circulating Book Collection by Main Subject Areas (Excluding Reference books, Serials, Rare books, and non-book Media)

Holdings % of Total Holdings % of Total % Increase in Collection Subject Area in Collection 1997-2006 1997 1997 2006 2006 9,580 20.2 Bible 12,716 21.0% 32.7%

5,650 11.9 Ethics & Doctrinal Theology 7,005 11.6% 24.0%

4,140 8.7 Christianity & Church History 5,240 8.7% 26.6%

7,139 15.1 Church (East & West); Denominations 8,475 14.0% 18.7%

4,817 10.2 Ecclesiology; Worship; Practical 7,227 11.9% 50.0% Theology; Homiletics 2,339 4.9 Missions/Evangelism 2,235 3.7% -4.4% (shows a decline because weeding of ephemera offset new growth) 2,212 4.7 Religions—Non-Christian (incl. 2,836 4.7% 28.2% Judaism) 3,379 7.1 Psychology; Social Sciences & 4,440 7.3% 31.4% Economics; Sociology; Education; Medicine 3,085 6.5 History 3,442 5.7% 11.6%

2,372 5.0 Languages; Philology; Literatures 2,848 4.7% 20.1%

1,426 3.0 Philosophy; Logic; Aesthetics 1,605 2.7% 12.6%

1,232 2.6 General Works: 2,471 4.1% 100.6% Geography; Anthropology; Political Science; Law; Canon Law; Art & Music; Science; Bibliography & Library Science; Other 47,371 Total Book Holdings 60,540 27.8%

One challenge for us ten years ago was building the collection to support the Master of

Arts in Counseling (MAC) degree program. Student evaluations at that time indicated that

Buswell Library’s holdings then were not sufficient for the specialized research their program

163 sometimes requires. Joining the St. Louis Regional Library Network (SLRLN) with its Info-Pass

system immediately gave all our students library borrowing privileges at area universities and

many other libraries, such as the Missouri Institute of Mental Health. Many book and audio-

visual purchases across an array of disciplines also helped shore up our support of the MAC

program. Ariel, the fast means of getting articles from print journals, and especially the advent of

MOBIUS, have aided support of the MAC and all programs enormously.

5.1.3. Because libraries seek to preserve the textual tradition of the church, they may choose to build unique special collections, such as institutional, regional, or denominational archives.

Covenant Seminary is home to several significant special collections, some of which

focus on major aspects of the Seminary’s heritage, others on subjects related to its mission. Chief

among these is the Presbyterian Church in America Historical Center. Buswell Library maintains

a dynamic and mutually beneficial partnership with the PCA Historical Center, the official

archive for the Presbyterian Church in America, which is overseen and funded (except for space

and certain utilities provided by the Seminary) by the denomination’s Office of the Stated Clerk

in Atlanta, Georgia. The Center is on the Library’s lower level and currently contains 3,000

linear feet of denominational, institutional, and other historical documentation, including the

publications and personal papers of scores of individuals. From this foundation of collections,

the Center sees its larger task as one of preserving the story of conservative American

Presbyterianism. Together, the Library and the Historical Center share responsibility for the care

and presentation of these materials. This symbiosis extends to the fielding of reference and

research queries from students, alumni, congregations, scholars, church agencies, etc. Since the

appointment of Wayne Sparkman as the Historical Center’s director in 1998, and the Center’s

move into its new and much larger area in the expanded Library in 2000, the complementary

164 roles of the two institutions have continued to develop. This process has been strongly supported

by both the Seminary administration and the PCA Stated Clerk’s office.

Another valuable special collection is the Tait Rare Book Collection, which contains

1,199 works from as far back as 1540. The Reverend Ian Tait of the United Kingdom was

responsible for developing this asset for the Seminary over many years. The main focus of the

collection is English Puritan and Scottish Presbyterian works from the sixteenth century up to

1800. The collection is searchable through the Library’s catalog and is available for in-house use

by anyone with a legitimate research reason. Individual students or classes, outside groups, or

other interested parties occasionally schedule presentations of the collection, particularly by the

associate librarian for technical services, who cataloged it during 2003. The collection’s contents

are from centuries that loom large in the lineage from which the Seminary’s parent

denominations have their primary derivation. Seeing and, with librarians’ guidance, inspecting

tomes from these centuries can expand students’ appreciation of both historical and timeless

issues, various interpretations, personal struggles, etc., not to mention the physical and aesthetic

aspects of connection with the remote past.

A third special collection is the Wesley P. Walters Collection. For decades, the Rev.

Wesley P. Walters engaged in serious historical research and was a nationally recognized

collector of material about the personalities, history, doctrine, and practice of the Church of Jesus

Christ of Latter Day Saints and its “Reorganized” branch (now the Community of Christ), as well as the numerous but little known permutations and offshoots within Mormonism. Another seminary from which we acquired this collection described it to us as comprising 183 linear feet of books, 230 audio-visuals, and 210 microfilms. In addition, there were about 30 file drawers of material that went into the PCA Historical Center, both for archival purposes and because

Walters was a minister in the PCA.

165 A fourth special collection is the W. Harold Mare Institute for Biblical and

Archaeological Studies Collection. Housed in the W. Harold Mare Institute for Biblical and

Archaeological Studies building on the Seminary campus, this collection offers an extensive

library of materials on biblical archaeology and ancient cultures of the lands of the Bible.

Although most of these items have been available on campus for many years, the cataloging of

them as a discrete collection visible to the world via the Buswell Library’s catalog only began in

2006. These items are not loaned out, but use of them for research purposes is available to students and others by appointment.

5.1.4 In addition to print materials, collections shall include other media and electronic resources as appropriate to the curriculum, and ensure access to relevant remote databases.

With the rapid increase in the types and availability of electronic information resources over the last ten years, the Library has attempted to supplement its collection of print materials with resources available in audio and video formats, as well as by providing access to a variety of electronic databases and other sources of information. That being said, the Library has also been careful not to invest too heavily in technologies that experience challenges in portability.

For example, since the late 1990s the Library has avoided CD-ROM technology as often poorly done, quirky in licensing, slow, maintenance- and upgrade-intensive, and very non-standardized in training requirements. Some CD-ROM products have improved and retain value, especially for individual ownership or use, and we currently have many books with accompanying discs of various types. In a similar fashion, by 2002, when we sensed that students no longer preferred audiocassettes because their “equipment” (from walkman to computer and automobile) accommodated compact disc technology, we decided to acquire only CDs and DVDs unless this newer format was not yet available for a required acquisition. The Reference and Systems

166 Librarian monitors diverse technologies and, together with the Library Director, works especially

closely with our Advancement, Information Technology Services, and Media Departments.

The Library utilizes a wide range of Web-based resources. Perhaps the most significant

resource collection is represented by FirstSearch and EBSCO, which account for almost all of our databases and allow saving, printing, citation e-mailing, or direct student-initiated requests for interlibrary loan or document delivery in WorldCat, ATLA Religion, and many other index

databases. Each citation also makes it clear whether we own the desired title, even providing a

link to our local catalog record for it. Other subscriptions to index databases provide some

similar advantages. In addition, in September 2003 the Library began providing the TLG

(Thesaurus Linguae Graecae) Digital Library with its enormous canon of texts by Greek authors

ranging from the time of Homer to the fall of Byzantium in 1453. Further, the Library’s Web site

now links to a variety of resources such as the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL),

which is a textual goldmine for students and faculty looking for the works of Christian writers

and thinkers through the centuries.

Lastly, ATLAS (ATLA Serials) began in 2004. We became one of the initial subscribers

to provide students with online full-text content of scores of journals indexed in the ATLA

Religion database, which itself provides direct links to the full-text versions of an increasing number of journals as ATLA brings them online, affording wider access to complement the paper format. ATLAS for Alumni also has debuted and through it we extended online full-text access to our alumni. Indeed, this resource illustrates educational outcomes of students’ experience with the Buswell Library because alumni, including doctoral students overseas, already were asking how they could continue to use the resources that they had learned they

needed for more effective work. We immediately subscribed to ATLAS for Alumni to allow

those both near and across the world to access the same full-text journals already provided to

faculty and current students thanks to ATLA. Every quarter, several new journals are added. The

167 Seminary in 2005–07 is participating in an ATLA study that should yield data to facilitate

scholarship and ministry-enhancing expansion of online, full-text access to many religious

journals. Hopefully, congregations and their clergy, nationally and internationally, stand to

benefit significantly.

5.1.5 The library should promote coordinated collection development with other schools to provide stronger overall library collections.

Coordination of collection development with other schools has been a major emphasis of

the Buswell Library’s policy, especially since MOBIUS began full implementation seven years ago. MOBIUS and its Bridges Cluster catalogs afford excellent enrichment of local and statewide holdings by permitting librarians, faculty, students, potential donors, or anyone else to check at any time and from anywhere whether a particular work is owned and in what editions, how many copies and where they are located, and whether a copy is on order, is missing, is checked out, or is restricted to use at the owning library. Member libraries benefit in budgetary terms as well. For example, if a library budget allows purchase of either of two $95 books but not both, and there are five copies of one but none of the other within MOBIUS, all libraries are enriched by one of them adding the missing work.

We do coordinate informally with nine sister schools in the local Bridges Cluster,

including Eden and Kenrick Seminaries, in order to develop breadth and depth of aggregate

holdings. Consideration also extends to the statewide aggregate holdings of MOBIUS. Before adding to its collection, Buswell Library typically checks both donated titles and prospective purchases against our local cluster’s catalog (and if necessary, the full MOBIUS catalog) to determine whether the title (and specific edition, if applicable) is already present and, if so, in how many copies and at what locations.

168 Another example of cooperative collection development is ASE (ATLA Serials

Exchange), the free offering of duplicate or otherwise unneeded periodicals to assist in launching

runs or filling gaps at other ATLA libraries. ASE drastically improves coordination. ATLA

inaugurated ASE in 2001, and we immediately joined. The genius of this customized system,

uniquely a benefit of ATLA for its member libraries, lies in the efficient online listing,

requesting (with automatic un-listing), and inventory management that occurs continually,

together with the every-other-month posting of all additions so as to ensure equal opportunity to

claim. Even the oldest, largest, and/or wealthiest libraries can benefit, because lost or damaged

periodicals may be replaced, or gaps may be filled in newly emerging journals or those that a

particular library has been receiving intermittently or only recently began getting or had donated.

The Library recognizes that although technology is rendering coordinated collection

development and access more feasible than in the past, new and unforeseen challenges are also

arising. One example is the proliferation of e-books and e-journals that require different sets of

criteria in collection development. Legal restrictions tend to preclude the sharing of e-books. In the case of journal articles, many publishers embargo access to the online version for a year or more to maintain sales of the print version. Another dismaying phenomenon is the rapid increase of interlibrary loan request deflections. These often occur if the subscription at the owning library has switched from paper to electronic format or if the journal is only in electronic format.

Although legal or technical obstacles may be involved, deflection is a sweeping automatic option that even Buswell Library has had to adopt to prevent a barrage of requests for e-articles from hundreds of medical and other e-journals that we carry because they are free or part of a consortium package. The rationale is that people who desire to do so have, or presumably could get, access to the free e-journals, but those that are not free often are inaccessible to non- subscribers and therefore unavailable to have-not libraries and their needy patrons. Again, legal

169 obstacles may prevent sharing anyway, contributing to the irony of information implosion amid its explosion.

5.2 Contribution to Teaching, Learning, and Research

5.2.1. The library accomplishes its teaching responsibilities by meeting the bibliographic needs of the library’s patrons, offering appropriate reference services, providing assistance in using information technology, teaching theological bibliography and research methods that foster knowledge of the literature and enable students to locate resources, incorporating library research throughout the curriculum, and helping to serve the information needs of graduates, clergy, and the church.

5.2.2 The library promotes theological learning by providing programs that encourage patrons to develop independent research skills and by preparing them to engage in a lifelong learning process.

5.2.3 Theological research is supported through collection development and information technology and by helping faculty and students develop research skills.

In addition to providing access to appropriate collections of print and electronic resources, both in-house and via collaborations with other libraries and consortiums, the Buswell Library meets in diverse ways its responsibilities to users in the areas that standard 5.2 requires. The Library’s increasing circulation figures (see accompanying graph) reveal the dramatic outcomes of taking

60,000 E-Reserve steps such as joining Begins

50,000 MOBIUS and

launching library- 40,000

related instruction. 30,000 People heard about, Circulation Transactions 20,000 tried, and began

10,000 Limitless weekly renewals Data reflect longer check- Data reflect check-in appropriating new counted as circulation. out periods and two rather and check-out, and than limitless renewals. MOBIUS use.

0 tools and services 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Fiscal Year Ending designed to support

170 their studies. A dramatic increase in interlibrary loan activity (see accompanying graph) in the

last several years, especially since the Library’s membership in MOBIUS, indicates that students

are taking advantage of the opportunities the Library provides to make use of resources beyond

3,500 our own collection

3,000 through the

2,500 collaborative efforts

2,000 of which it is a part.

1,500

Number of Items of Number These figures Construction constricts services 1,000 also show a healthy

500 balance between

0 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 borrowing and Fiscal Year Ending ILL Borrowing ILL Lending lending, an indication

that our collection is not only meeting the needs of our own students, but also helping to meet the

needs of many other people through the diverse libraries that serve them. In fact, in recent years,

the number of items lent to other libraries has been higher than the number of items we borrowed

(see accompanying chart on next page).

These statistics indicate that Covenant Seminary tends to be balanced in total lending and

borrowing, primarily owing to heavy lending of books via traditional interlibrary loan to non-

MOBIUS libraries (534 loaned versus only 166 borrowed). On the other hand, the Seminary

borrows more non-returnables (articles, essays) from both in-state and out-of-state (386 total,

versus 250 lent). Within MOBIUS the Seminary is a significant net borrower of books within its

Bridges Cluster (1,335 borrowed versus 694 lent), but is a net lender at the statewide level (1,217 lent versus 765 borrowed). Reasons include the presence of Webster University and Eden and

Kenrick Seminaries in Bridges, where load balancing is not a factor, and the statewide spreading of the request load among all libraries (while buffering the heaviest net lenders). Another factor

171 is the number of titles that Covenant Seminary uniquely owns, or perhaps is unique in loaning, or that only one or two others also own (and loan).

Covenant Seminary Lending/Borrowing Activity via both MOBIUS and Regular Interlibrary Loan FY2006

LENDING Covenant Seminary Returnables (books; microforms) Intra-Cluster (Bridges) Lending 694 MOBIUS-wide Central Catalog Lending 1217 Traditional ILL Lending with MOBIUS Members 182 Other ILL Returnables Lending 534 Total Returnables Lending 2627 Non-Returnables (articles; essays) ILL Lending with MOBIUS Members 153 Other ILL Non-Returnables Lending 97 Total Non-Returnables Lending 250 Total Lending 2877

BORROWING

Returnables (books; microforms) Intra-Cluster (Bridges) Borrowing 1335 MOBIUS-wide Central Catalog Borrowing 765 Traditional ILL Borrowing with MOBIUS Members 69 Other ILL Returnables Borrowing 166 Total Returnables Borrowing 2335 Non-Returnables (articles; essays) ILL Borrowing with MOBIUS Members 243 Other ILL Non-Returnables Borrowing 143 Total Non-Returnables Borrowing 386 Total Borrowing 2721

The library also provides excellent reference services. Staff members answer questions in person and by e-mail, phone, fax, courier, letter, or whatever means best suits the needs of the individual inquiry. Time does not permit keeping records of the myriad questions that range from merely directional to in-depth research. Anecdotal evidence has long revealed that the reference

172 and systems librarian offers the broadest range of help, assisted by the circulation coordinator,

who handles a host of directional questions and requests for routine information or assistance.

The Library produces a variety of free resource materials for students in both paper and electronic formats. The paper versions are available in the Library; the electronic versions are

available through the Library’s section of the Seminary Web site. The fact that supplies of the

paper copies of these resources are constantly being replenished by Library staff indicates that

these tools are being used frequently by students, and this does not count use occurring via the

Web site. Educational outcomes include better use of more diverse sources and improved citing

and reviewing by students and alumni. Resources available include lists of the best commentaries

for both the Old and New Testaments; style guides for writing research papers; resource guides

providing lists of helpful materials in major topic areas such as biblical studies, church history,

counseling, ethics, Greek and Hebrew, philosophy, and theology; a guide for writing reviews;

and Web site links to a variety of online databases and research resources, including other

libraries.

A recent faculty survey (fall 2006) revealed that the Seminary faculty overwhelmingly

approves of both the Library staff and the resources that the Library either has or is able to get

when needed. A problem with this survey is that although for the regular faculty it amounted to a

census (none or virtually none lacking among the responses), the adjunct faculty members were

not surveyed. They include a range of people from those who teach every year to some who

teach once and do not return. Not a few fly in to teach “mini” or intensive courses that meet on

just a few weekends (Friday night and Saturday) during a semester. Owing to the specialties of many of these adjuncts and the frequently elective nature of their courses, some of their students register only for the one course. An ongoing challenge for the Library is to serve these adjuncts

and their students effectively.

173 A recent student survey (fall 2006) on the Library was done on two different classes, the results of which were very positive. The students represented various degree programs and were spread over a range of years (from first year on). Results reveal that students are very satisfied with the Library staff and resources. In particular, the large majority of students “agreed” or

“strongly agreed” with statements affirming the adequacy of the staff and the resources (a very small minority “disagreed” with some of the statements, but no one consistently “disagreed” and no one “strongly disagreed” with any of the statements). It is especially worthwhile to note that students pursuing MAC and MAEM degrees were as well satisfied with the resources of the

Library as the students in the MDiv and other programs.

The Library staff provides basic informal instruction in use of catalogs, databases, reference books, etc., as needed when questions arise or as students seem to need guidance. In addition, the staff provides more formal in-class instruction in library tools and research techniques for students in various degree programs. In 2007, self-paced library orientation and instructional tours began, thanks to the production of customized audios using iPod shuffles for on-demand use. The purpose is to offer basic and advanced library research audios, and also specialized audios for types of assignments (e.g., exegetical) or specific degree programs. All of these conveniently fit into each iPod, thereby increasing availability of the instruction.

5.2.4 The library should provide an environment conducive to learning and scholarly interaction.

Ironically, and for a variety of reasons, libraries as “places” in their communities are becoming more, not less, important as digitization increases, but library space needs to be more diversified and flexible than in the past. The Buswell Library’s prominent location, exterior and interior design features, and diversity of space are intended to create a pleasant environment in

174 which students, faculty, and staff may interact in ways that foster not only good learning in the

academic sense, but also the development of the kind of strong personal relationships that

encourage growth in grace to enhance overall ministry effectiveness.

The Library acquired its own building in 1975, but most of the lower level was reserved

for chapel services and other needs until Rayburn Chapel opened in 1979. As the Seminary’s

enrollment quadrupled in the decade prior to 1995 and continued to grow, expansion of the

Library’s space became imperative. Self-study by 1997 forcefully substantiated the need not only

for more space, but also for more types of space and better furniture and equipment.

Groundbreaking for the renovation and expansion of the Library took place in September 1999,

and by the fall of 2000 the original 12,500-square-foot building had been expanded to triple that

size and included classroom and academic office space.

Today, students can choose from among a variety of settings in which to study, read, or

converse—from cozy, tucked-away areas with little if any distraction to expansive ones with

plenty of windows, lamps, and space in which to spread out books, laptop computers, and other

materials. The Library offers students places to browse, conduct interviews, do small group

study, read in seclusion, catnap, work on personal computers, or use one of the 8 dedicated

library-research workstations or one of the 18 computer lab workstations reserved for personal needs such as e-mail, Web surfing, extended research, and word processing. Both hardwired ports and wireless access meet the increasing need for connectivity and diverse resource access.

Owing to the addition of wireless access in 2003, our 1999 decision to include fewer of the costly hardwired ports than originally planned for the new construction has proved to be a wise one. Inbound traffic (Web pages and other content requested from the Internet) for the student network across campus was 130.9 gigabytes (over 130 billion bytes) during November 2006.

A study of the use and occupancy of the Student Computer Lab reflects our sense of the

growing number of laptop computers as well as the definitely ongoing but, for many students,

175 less frequent preference for a lab workstation. This affirms as prudent our decision to afford 18

rather than more (or fewer) computer workstations in the lab. Some of the 8 public workstations

reserved for library database and catalog use were included with all the others that began

providing access to the Portal soon after it opened.

More than ten years ago, the implementation of a Suggestion Box turned up many good

ideas for improving the environment of the Library—as well as some complaints. All of these

received public responses (without the submitter’s name attached, if there was one) and either

were addressed quickly or, of necessity, put on hold until after the renovation and expansion.

Some of the improvements that have resulted from these suggestions include more and better

signage; more and better-located clocks; more three-position study chairs and comfortable sofas;

the addition of short-term storage lockers; photocopiers that are easy to use but that will perform

more complex tasks such as collating and enlarging/reducing, and also will accept coins, bills,

cards, and codes; diverse artwork throughout the building; and more diverse study spaces.

Many students, faculty, and staff can testify to the fact that the Library staff gives high

priority to keeping the building and its immediate environs as attractive and helpful as possible.

Evidence includes the displaying of original works of art throughout the building (most created

by students, alumni, or local church members), the addition of second towel dispensers in every

restroom, covers for the tower stairway sconces, a large globe lit from the inside, attractive table lamps, potted flowers on the front steps of the building, the provision of ice- and snow-melting coils in those same front steps, and daily personal efforts to police the building for messes or litter.

5.3 Partnership in Curriculum Development

5.3.1 The library collaborates in the school’s curriculum by providing collections and services that reflect the institution’s educational goals.

176 5.3.2 Teaching faculty should consult with library staff to ensure that the library supports the current curriculum and the research needs of faculty and students. Library staff should participate in long-range curriculum planning and anticipate future intellectual and technological developments that might affect the library.

Buswell Library plays a significant role in curricular development and institutional

planning. Although the Library director was frequently consulted during major curricular developments on an ad hoc basis, he officially became a member of the faculty-administration

Curriculum Committee in late 2006. This action will solidify the Library’s involvement in long- range curriculum planning. In addition, he meets regularly with the vice president for academics

on matters related to the Library. He apprises the faculty and administration on theological

librarianship and academic librarianship more generally. The Library staff consults with faculty

members with regard to proposed elective courses or new directions for core courses and

supports their research and writing.

The Library director regularly acts as an advocate for the needs of the Library. He

updates the vice president for academics with data to demonstrate the relative standing of

Buswell Library compared to peer institutions; is involved with budget planning and allocation;

and assists in long-range planning for curricular as well as Library staffing needs.

5.4 Administration and Leadership

5.4.1 In freestanding theological schools, the chief library administrator has overall responsibility for library administration, collection development, and effective educational collaboration. The chief administrator of the library should participate in the formation of institutional policy regarding long-range educational and financial planning, and should ordinarily be a voting member of the faculty. Normally, this person should possess graduate degrees in library science and in theological studies or another pertinent discipline.

The Library director has overall responsibility for Library administration and services,

collection development, and effective educational collaboration. Appropriate authority

177 accompanies that responsibility. The director works closely with other Seminary departments.

He hires Library staff, provides for their continuing education, and, in consultation with them,

determines the Library’s specific programs, systems, operational policies, and utilization of

financial and other resources.

The director has the BA, MDiv, STM, and MS (library & information science), as well as

additional graduate study and continuing education units. He served or serves on boards of the

American Theological Library Association (ATLA); the Missouri Library Association (MLA);

the Missouri Library Network Corporation (MLNC); the Missouri Bibliographic Information

User System (MOBIUS); the St. Louis Regional Library Network (SLRLN); and the Greater St.

Louis Library Club. The director also is active among the St. Louis Theological Consortium

librarians and is their host committee co-chair for the 2009 ATLA Conference in St. Louis.

Although the Library director is not a voting member of the faculty, he attends all faculty

meetings with the privilege of the floor, participates in academic ceremonies and faculty social

gatherings, chairs the Library Committee, and serves on the Seminary Journal Committee and

the Curriculum Committee. Throughout his tenure (since August 1991), the director has received

outstanding support from both the Seminary’s president and the entire administration and staff.

The Library director’s participation in long-range educational and financial planning is largely informal. Currently he meets with the Seminary’s vice president for academics each

November to review and make recommendations regarding the Library portion of the academic budget for the upcoming fiscal year. Further review and sometimes adjustments occur in succeeding weeks or months. And if necessary, the Library director can adjust expenditures among budget lines as the fiscal year progresses.

5.4.3 The library administrator should exercise responsibility for regular and ongoing evaluation of the collection, the patterns of use, services provided by the library, and library personnel.

178

The Library director oversees the evaluation of each of these areas, which is a complex and multi-faceted process. Often evaluation occurs through acquisitions-related interaction with faculty members, which continually yields insights; students’ needs and questions regularly reveal something fresh about onsite, online, and neighboring consortium member institutions’ resources. In addition, periodic interaction by phone or e-mail with colleagues at other institutions is invaluable for evaluating our own services and resources.

Innovative Interface’s Millennium system offers much by way of data extraction for assessment purposes. The system involves inter-institutional collaboration, greatly enhanced catalog and resource-sharing services, collection development and management, and certain unified routine operations. All of this yields administratively useful statistics for circulation, acquisitions, cataloging, and so on, both collectively and by individual institution.

The process of evaluating Library personnel involves a combination of such methods as discussions among supervisory staff, one-on-one meetings within the course of regular duties, selected occasions for affirming employees, and one or more styles of written evaluations.

5.4.4 Schools shall provide structured opportunities to theological librarians for professional development, appropriate to their role.

Professional development receives high priority. The librarians and other staff members, especially full-time staff, are eligible, encouraged, and in some cases required to attend workshops, conferences, consortium committee sessions, and the like. Grants and funding from the Library’s budget typically cover all costs for staff attendance at workshops or conferences.

Professional association membership dues and similar work-related expenses likewise are covered in most cases. If such membership, meeting attendance, etc., is required or strongly

179 recommended by the Library director, such expenses invariably are covered for the staff member.

Evidence of the Library’s support of staff development and its impact appears in diverse ways, not the least of which are consistently superior job performance and leadership opportunities in local, state, and national library-related organizations. Nine MOBIUS Bridges

Cluster library directors and their respective staff who serve as site coordinators chose one of our librarians to chair the Cluster task force that was charged with our implementation process.

Several area institutions—Fontbonne, Harris-Stowe, Lindenwood, and Missouri Baptist

Universities, as well as Logan College—have solicited the aid of Buswell Library’s associate librarian for technical services for training and related assistance for their personnel. In addition, staff have presented at a variety of local, regional, and national conferences.

5.5 Resources

5.5.1 Each school shall have the resources necessary for the operation of an adequate library program. These include human, financial, technological, and physical resources.

5.5.2 The professional and support staff shall be of such number and quality as are needed to provide the necessary services, commensurate with the size and character of the institution. Professional staff shall possess the skills necessary for information technology, collection development and maintenance, and public service. Insofar as possible, staff shall be appointed with a view toward diversity in race, ethnicity, and gender. Where appropriate, other qualified members of the professional staff may also have faculty status. Institutions shall affirm the freedom of inquiry necessary for the role of professional librarians in theological scholarship.

180 One of the greatest assets of any institution is its staff. The Buswell Library is no

exception. Both professional and support staff are highly trained and skilled in the various

aspects of their jobs, and the staff as a whole forms a cohesive, seamless team that works to

provide the best resources and services possible to the Seminary community. Besides the Library

Library Staff director, the staff currently 9.00

8.00 consists of two full-time

7.00

6.00 professional librarians, two

5.00 Student Staff Other Staff full-time para-professional FTE 4.00 Librarians

3.00 staff, three part-time staff and

2.00 seven student workers. Though 1.00

0.00 each of these staff members 1988 1993 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Fiscal Year Ending does not report directly to the

Library director, the director is ultimately responsible for oversight of staff activities, hiring, and evaluation.

The other Library positions follow provisions of the Staff Manual. The two librarians

who report to the director perform astute intellectual and technological tasks and also have supervisory responsibilities. They are eligible to attend faculty meetings. Opportunities to help librarians at other campuses within consortia, to lead professional committees, to do in-class presentations to students, and to move toward better compensation are signals of their value to the Seminary. In addition, the Library funds and in some cases requires staff attendance at professional conferences. The same is true for training workshops, many of which are essential to smooth library operations. The Library regularly secures grants to help support professional development; in 2006 over $1,500 was secured. Moreover, the Library funds tuition for full-time staff pursuing their library degrees if the director deems this education essential for them. Two are currently in the University of Missouri’s library and information science degree program.

181 Though skill level and general competence are the most important factors in hiring staff members, the Library strives to maintain a good measure of diversity among the staff in terms of gender and ethnicity: the full-time staff consists of two women and three men; the part-time staff consists of three women; the student staff consists of three women and four men. In terms of ethnicity, for many years the Library has had Native American and Latino representation on the staff, the former being regular staff and the latter being students primarily from Mexico. In fall

2006 a Canadian succeeded the most recent Mexican student staff member. Nationalities as diverse as Fijian, German, and Ghanan also have served within the past decade.

Freedom of inquiry for Library staff members is stipulated in each job description: “[The position] enjoys the freedom of inquiry necessary for the job. (The Seminary’s policy on academic freedom [Faculty Manual I.I.] applies with appropriate changes to Library staff, substituting ‘professional Library staff’ for ‘faculty’ and ‘their work’ for ‘teaching.’)” A challenge to this freedom never has arisen. Freedom of access to information for users of the

Library is protected by Supplemental Materials A of the Statement of Policies and Guidelines for

Library Collection Development and Provision of Resources, which is devoted to helping staff members know how to handle diverse objections from patrons to various library books, journals, or other resources. At least since 1991 only two or three challenges to this freedom have arisen, none was major, and each reached successful resolution.

5.5.3 An adequate portion of the annual institutional educational and general budget shall be devoted to the support of the library. Adequacy will be evaluated in comparison with other similar institutions, as well as by the library’s achievement of its own objectives as defined by its collection development policy.

182 Recognizing that the Library is an integral part of the overall mission of the Seminary,

the institution attempts to provide adequate financial resources for the operation and ongoing

development of the Library—both from the institution’s own budget and from a variety of other

Library Expenses sources. The projected FY2008

$450,000 budget for Buswell Library is

$400,000 $430,659; this constitutes 4.7% of $350,000 $300,000 the total institutional budget of $250,000 $9,220,000. $200,000 $150,000 Proof that adequate funding $100,000 $50,000 for the Library can come in creative

$0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 ways and from diverse sources is Fiscal Year demonstrated by the acquisition of Personnel Acquisitions Other Expenses grants from the Chatlos Foundation,

the Kresge Foundation, and the J. E. and L. E. Mabee Foundation totaling well over $1 million

toward the 1999–2000 building project; a $50,000 grant for the Library’s support of the Master

of Arts in Educational Ministries (MAEM) degree program; and a variety of ATLA and Missouri

State Library grants.

In the 1997 self-study, major concerns emerged regarding the need to update and expand

the Library’s services, resources, and facilities in various ways. Many of these concerns have been addressed since that time. Major renovation and a $4 million expansion of the Library building, completed in 2000, has resulted in a facility that is three times its original size, thus

allowing for expanded collections, more space for individual and group study, additional classroom space, and faculty offices. The Seminary’s current capital campaign will further help to address these needs as the construction of a new academic building may free up additional space in the Library for collections and services. In addition, the vice president for academics has

183 worked together with the Library director to move professional Library staff salaries toward the

ranges of ATLA librarians at peer institutions. The installation of highly sophisticated, top-of- the-line systems has enhanced our ability to manage and provide access to information and resources necessary to helping the Seminary fulfill its mission. Our efforts to expand and diversify library services have been very successful.

5.5.4 Adequate facilities include sufficient space for readers and staff, adequate shelving for the book collection, appropriate space for non-print media, adequate and flexible space for information technology, and climate control for all materials, especially rare books. Collections should be easily accessible and protected from deterioration.

The Library’s prominent location on the campus and its mixture of space for collections,

study, classrooms, and faculty offices has been consciously designed to create a pleasant

environment in which students, faculty, and staff may learn and grow both academically and

relationally. The physical arrangement of collections, and the ways in which the various

collections are managed and maintained contribute to this overall environment.

Between 1997 and 2002 the Library director and another full-time librarian heavily

influenced the planning, construction, and occupancy phases of the Library’s renovation and expansion project by writing a building program, attending all planning meetings, doing a daily walk-through of the facility, and taking part in the process in many other ways. The results of this participation are evident in the layout and atmosphere of the new building, despite the challenges of renovating the 1975 building while retaining significant occupancy of it, expanding outward and upward, and accommodating the differing access, use, and security needs of library and non-library spaces.

5.5.5 Adequacy of library collections may be attained through institutional self- sufficiency or cooperative arrangements. In the latter instance, fully adequate collections

184 or electronic resources are not required of individual member schools, but each school shall demonstrate contracted and reliable availability and actual use.

5.5.6 In its collaborative relationships with other institutions, a school remains accountable for the quality of library resources available to its students and faculty.

As noted previously, the Library strives to meet its users’ information needs by providing adequate access to collections and resources directly related to the various degree programs offered by the Seminary. A variety of technological means and collaborative relationships have been established to enable us to supplement the resources available in our own collections, augment those resources in areas where they are less strong, develop and evaluate all holdings collaboratively, and better assess outcomes.

Evidence that the Library has adequate technology and interpretive services, including

staff, to use its information resources effectively to meet the needs of the school includes:

• Since 1997, the number of Library staff computer workstations increased from 7 to 11; the number of public-use computers from 11 to 26.

• Hardware upgrades occur on a three-year rotation.

• Wireless service as of 2003 for laptop computers is extremely popular and has eased the demand for hardwired ports and lab workstations.

• Since 2002 students have enjoyed new or improved services for printing, scanning, photocopying, collating, and downloading.

• Recognizing the unique value of the Library and its presence on the Web, the Seminary gives adequate Web site prominence to the Library and allows sufficient flexibility of design, functionality, and upgrading for site management.

• In the past few years, the Library has achieved seamless integration of diverse modes of interlibrary resource sharing for optimum service.

Through our participation in MOBIUS, Buswell Library went from a $5,000 catalog and

circulation system for its holdings to a much more wide-ranging and sophisticated system

typically costing upwards of $200,000. The system vendor that MOBIUS uses both continually

185 makes improvements based on feedback and devotes much attention to ongoing system

development and inter-operability (Library Journal in 2005 and 2006 noted the product

leadership among competitors). This system allows the Library a seamless trail of item status

information, providing for optimum tracking for everyone’s convenience, as well as workflow

efficiencies, such as during three-week rotations on the New Books shelf; the system also

provides online, secure viewing by all students and other patrons of their own accounts showing

items checked out, due dates, etc., and permits convenient online renewals. Integration of student data occurs regularly from our institutional computer system, CAMS (Comprehensive Academic

Management System), preventing needless duplication, reducing error, enhancing information security, and enabling fair and accurate circulation of books and other materials.

Summary Evaluation

5.1 Covenant Seminary’s Library demonstrates a thoughtful approach to collection

development, balancing print and electronic resources, involving faculty in the

process, and especially utilizing cooperative resources to expand the collection’s

reach and depth.

5.2 The Seminary’s Library accomplishes its teaching responsibilities and promotes

theological learning through its excellent reference and training services. In addition,

the recent renovation and expansion of the Library provides an excellent environment

for learning and scholarly interaction.

5.3 The Seminary’s Library collaborates well in the school’s curriculum planning and

development through its collection development and institutional input.

186

5.4 The Seminary’s Library director is a highly valued member of the institution and is

well-respected by his professional peers. He oversees the Library’s collections and

services in a professional manner and cares for and invests in the development of his

staff.

5.5 The Seminary allocates sufficient financial resources for the operation of an adequate

library program. The Library director does an excellent job supplementing those

resources through grant moneys and cooperative agreements.

Recommendations

1. The Seminary should develop a plan for increasing incrementally the Library’s

portion of the overall budget to bring it in-line with peer institutions.

2. The Seminary should investigate ways of implementing library-focused instruction in

various degree programs, especially the MDiv program.

3. The Seminary should continue to explore with Seminary administrators ways in

which to enhance the librarians’ role in institutional planning and decision-making

processes.

187

CHAPTER SIX

FACULTY

The members of the faculty of a theological school constitute a collaborative community of faith and learning, and are crucial to the scholarly activities of teaching, learning, and research. A theological school’s faculty normally comprises the full-time teachers, continuing part-time teachers, and teachers who are engaged occasionally or for one time. In order for faculty members to accomplish their purposes, theological schools should assure them appropriate structure, support, and opportunities.

As evidenced in the ATS Graduating Student Questionnaires, Covenant Seminary’s faculty is consistently viewed by students as the vital part of their theological education. Drawn from a wide background of educational preparation and ministry experience, and in accord with our religious heritage and denominational requirements, the members of this faculty represent a genuine collaborative community of faith. One of the consistent notes drawn from annual reviews and casual conversations is the harmony on the faculty, as various viewpoints are explored and meaningful dialogue occurs. The Seminary works to provide appropriate structure, support, and opportunities for the faculty to develop and flourish professionally.

6.1 Faculty Qualifications, Responsibilities, Development, and Employment

6.1.1 Faculty members shall possess the appropriate credentials for graduate theological education, normally demonstrated by the attainment of a research doctorate or, in certain cases, another earned doctoral degree. In addition to academic preparation, ministerial and ecclesial experience is an important qualification in the composition of the faculty.

Covenant Seminary’s faculty members are academically well-qualified. Faculty doctorates have been earned from a spectrum of respected schools, including the Universities of 188

Aberdeen, Cambridge, Edinburgh, Georgia, Gloucestershire, Liverpool, London, and Toronto, as well as Drew, Regent, St. Louis, and Southern Illinois Universities, and Concordia, Princeton, and Westminster Seminaries. Over half of the Seminary’s adjunct and emeritus faculty also hold

research doctorates from such institutions as the Universities of Aberdeen, Edinburgh,

Stellenbosch, Tennessee, and Virginia, as well as Vanderbilt, Temple, Dropsie, and Trinity

International Universities, and Westminster Theological Seminary.

In line with our core value on “pastoral training,” the Seminary’s faculty is also well-

qualified in ministry. The Seminary deliberately seeks faculty who not only have appropriate

scholarly qualifications, but also have a love for the church and the ministry, including actual

ministry experience. All of the faculty members have had vocational ministry experience,

ranging from internships to decades of congregational leadership as pastors. They participate

regularly in the ministries of the local church with varying leadership responsibilities. This

background and orientation strengthens the practical aspect of instruction across the curriculum

and enables faculty to model ministry in the Seminary and in the church. More importantly, the

pastoral demeanor that such pastor-scholars exhibit has a profound effect on the spiritual

development of students and creates a real sense of community among the faculty. In addition,

our faculty members continue to “practice what we teach.” Faculty members seek to be “hands-

on” in their respective disciplines, e.g., counselors counsel, homileticians preach regularly, and

exegetes are actively engaged in biblical research and writing. This encourages theological

learning by coupling “telling” (classroom teaching) with “doing” (modeling in the church and

the academy).

The composition of the faculty is clearly guided by the purpose of the institution: “to

train servants of the triune God to walk with God, to interpret and communicate God’s Word, 189

and to lead God’s people.” As the seminary of the Presbyterian Church in America, Covenant

Seminary is committed to hiring faculty who believe that the confessional standards of the

denomination adequately represent the system of doctrine taught in Scripture. The Seminary is further concerned that its faculty members, as pastor-scholars, themselves actively walk with

God, interpret and communicate God’s Word (in the church, the classroom, and the academy), and lead God’s people (in various ecclesial and academic settings). The Seminary has also sought to hire faculty who care for our sponsoring denomination and hold and promote

Reformed theology in a warm and winsome way.

The Seminary has deliberately sought to enhance training in the practice of ministry by

establishing the Center for Ministry Leadership (CML) and by utilizing talented ministry

practitioners in adjunct faculty roles. We are strengthening training in specialized ministries

(youth and children’s ministry, women’s ministries, campus ministry, single adult ministry,

music and worship, etc.) by regularly bringing gifted ministry practitioners to campus to teach an

increasing number of intensive courses in these areas. Still other practitioners guest lecture in

courses taught by regular faculty.

6.1.2 In the context of institutional purpose and the confessional commitments affirmed by a faculty member when appointed, faculty members shall be free to seek knowledge and communicate their findings.

The Seminary has a policy of academic freedom within the confessional and

denominational boundaries of the Presbyterian Church in America. The Faculty Manual clearly

presents the Seminary’s position on this topic: “Academic freedom exists at Covenant Seminary

in a context of responsibility clearly outlined in the Seminary’s Statement of Purpose. The

faculty member in seeking truth wherever it is found will remember that the Seminary is an 190

agency of the Presbyterian Church in America, which has a creedal commitment set forth in the

Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms” (p. I-7). Within these commitments of the

PCA and the Seminary’s purpose, the faculty has freedom to seek truth wherever it is found.

Diverse viewpoints are regarded as strengths, inasmuch as these “promote mental vitality and

stimulate the students to careful intellectual pursuits” (Faculty Manual, p. I-7).

The faculty’s academic freedom is evident in the role played by faculty members in

conceptualizing and crafting the courses they teach. In consultation with the vice president for

academics, the Curriculum Committee, other faculty committees, and the faculty as a whole,

individual faculty members exercise responsibility for course content, methods, evaluation, and

assessment. While the harmonious relationships enjoyed by the Seminary’s faculty lead to

considerable informal exchange of ideas regarding course content and pedagogical technique,

there remains considerable freedom for each faculty member to teach what best models and

represents the Seminary’s mission, provided the desired outcomes are achieved and the overall

purpose of the curriculum is being served.

6.1.3 Composition of the faculty should be guided by the purpose of the institution, and attention to this composition should be an integral component of long-range planning in the institution. Faculty should be of sufficient diversity and number to meet the multifaceted demands of teaching, learning, and research. Hiring practices should be attentive to the value of diversity in race, ethnicity, and gender. The faculty should also include members who have doctorates from different schools, and who exemplify various methods and points of view.

Covenant Seminary’s faculty members are sufficient in number to support the Seminary’s

educational commitments and other programs. At the same time, in order to maintain and strengthen the institution’s relational model of instruction, the Seminary is actively seeking

funding (through the current capital campaign) and candidates to fill additional faculty positions. 191

During the last ten years, the Seminary’s total faculty headcount has grown from 30 to 43 members; the overall faculty FTE has increased from 21.38 in 2000 to 27.68 in 2007. This increase is largely the result of a increase of adjunct and visiting faculty members. Full-time, voting faculty members (including faculty-administrators) have increased from 17 in 1998 to 23 in 2007. Even more importantly, Faculty since 2005, we have hired 8 55 50 45 voting faculty members (this 40 35 30 includes faculty-administrators). 25 20 They are, in order of hire date: 15 10 5 Greg Perry (assistant professor 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Fiscal Y ear of biblical studies), Sean Lucas Faculty FTE Faculty Head Count (assistant professor of church history and vice president for academics), Anthony Bradley (assistant professor of apologetics and systematic theology), Mark Dalbey (assistant professor of practical theology and vice

President for student services), Daniel Kim (assistant professor of Hebrew and educational ministries), Brian Aucker (assistant professor of Old Testament), Bob Burns (associate professor of educational ministries and director of the Center for Ministry Leadership), and Jimmy Agan

(associate professor of New Testament). Since our last self-study report in 1998, only two full- time faculty members have left the institution other than through retirement (one for another institution, the other for a local pastorate that allows him to continue teaching adjunctly); the longevity of our faculty is a significant strength. 192

One particular internal litmus test for gauging the institution’s care for faculty is student-

faculty ratio. In our 2002 strategic plan, we desired to hire more faculty members in order to

achieve a 16:1 student-faculty Student/Faculty Ratio (FTE)

ratio. In both 2006 and 2007, we 20 19 did achieve this ratio; however, we 18 believe that this is mainly the 17

result of our increased use of 16 Students per Faculty per Students adjunct and visiting faculty 15 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 members. We have been taking Fiscal Year

marked steps to balance our reliance on subject matter experts as adjunct faculty and our

development of full-time faculty members who more effectively enable us to accomplish the

communication of our core values (especially “relational emphasis” and “pastoral ministry”).

Because of Covenant Seminary’s doctrinal commitments and the conviction that faculty

members ought to be pastor-scholars who personally embody the institution’s purpose statement

“to walk with God, to interpret and communicate God’s Word, and to lead God’s people,” the field of potential faculty members is limited. Yet within these limitations, the faculty represents a wide variety of experiences, backgrounds, and ethnicity. One member of the faculty is of Jewish background, three are from Europe, one is African American, and another is of Asian descent.

The Seminary continues to pursue candidates from a variety of ethnicities and has also sought to encourage talented graduates (Latino, Asian, and African American) to pursue doctoral studies as possible faculty prospects; the vice president for academics maintains a database of potential faculty members, including some of these graduates. Because of our denominational doctrinal commitments that limit the ordination of pastors and elders to men, we do not have any full-time, 193

voting women faculty members. However, women do play a significant part in teaching,

providing 30% of the adjunct faculty.

6.1.4 The faculty who teach in a program on a continuing basis shall exercise responsibility for planning, design, and oversight of its curriculum.

The faculty plays a critical role in exercising responsibility for planning, design, and oversight of the program curriculum. The primary venue for this oversight responsibility is in the faculty-administration Curriculum Committee. Chaired by the vice president for academics, the

Curriculum Committee currently includes the associate dean of educational ministries, the director of the MAC program, the Library director, and professors of Old Testament, practical theology, world mission, and systematic theology. When the Committee considers changes to any program that will affect a standing course, we also invite the affected faculty member(s) to join the committee on an ad hoc basis.

All curricular changes to any program must first be considered by the Curriculum

Committee. Since our last self-study, the Curriculum Committee has overseen two major curricular changes affecting the MDiv program: the institution of the revised course Covenant

Theology I and II with accompanying mentoring groups in 2003 and the replacement of NT 310

Biblical Introduction with new Pentateuch and educational ministries courses in 2007. The committee carefully considered the proposals in each instance and agreed to forward each proposal to the full faculty for a vote. Likewise, the Curriculum Committee exercises oversight over the Master of Arts programs, vetting curricular changes on the MAET (twice since the last self-study report), the MATS (transforming it from the MAGTS in 2000), and the MAC. The committee also led in the development of the MAEM, approving its curricular design and program goals. 194

After changes are proposed to the Curriculum Committee, they still must be approved by

the entire faculty. Typically, our practice is to have two readings before a vote for a curricular

change. The vice president for academics presents the proposal on behalf of the committee in the

first reading and takes questions from the entire faculty. After a period of time for further questioning and examination outside of faculty meeting, the change is voted upon by the entire

faculty. In this way, the entire faculty exercises oversight over program goals, changes, and

development.

In addition, beginning in fall 2005 and ending in spring 2007, the faculty has been

engaged in a process of curricular review. In our faculty meetings, we have heard presentations

on the entire core MDiv curriculum. Each faculty member responsible has presented the

particular course goals, methods, and assessment strategies; in addition, that faculty member

shows how his particular course helps to accomplish the Seminary’s mission. The rest of the

faculty asks questions and offers observations on other contact points for the particular course

within the curriculum. We have found this to be an extremely profitable exercise that will allow

us to further map out curriculum content and establish the various ways by which the faculty

accomplishes the institution’s mission through teaching.

6.1.5 Each school shall articulate and demonstrate that it follows its policies concerning faculty members in such areas as faculty rights and responsibilities; freedom of inquiry; procedures for recruitment, appointment, retention, promotion, and dismissal; criteria for faculty evaluation; faculty compensation; research leaves; and other conditions of employment. Policies concerning these matters shall be published in an up-to-date faculty handbook.

6.1.6 Theological scholarship is enriched by continuity within a faculty and safeguards for the freedom of inquiry for individual members. Therefore, each school shall demonstrate effective procedures for the retention of a qualified community of scholars, through tenure or some other appropriate procedure.

195

6.1.7 The institution should support its faculty through such means as adequate salaries, suitable working conditions, and support services.

Covenant Seminary’s faculty employment policies are fairly and clearly defined in the

Faculty Manual, which was revised and approved by the Seminary’s Board of Trustees in

September 2006. These policies include faculty appointment, retention, advancement, compensation and benefits, and sabbatical leaves (Part I – Employment Policies). New faculty members are initially appointed to two one-year contracts; after a period of review, they receive their first three-year contract. Subsequent to their first two three-year contracts, there is an additional review period. After eight years of full-time teaching beyond the rank of instructor, faculty contracts are automatically renewed for three-year terms unless such renewal is precluded by retirement, physical disability, adequate cause for dismissal, financial exigency, or a change of institutional program. No later than the end of the seventh year of full-time teaching, the faculty member will be informed as to whether or not the administration intends retention according to the provisions of this section.

Covenant Seminary provides adequate and fair compensation for faculty. The vice president for academics annually reviews faculty salary levels in light of changes in the cost of living and salary levels at other institutions. We have historically sought to foster unity by minimizing the distance between pay grades, so that assistant professors at Covenant Seminary make more than many of their peers at other institutions, while full professors make slightly less.

Nevertheless, in comparison with peer institutions—whether taken broadly within ATS or more narrowly within the 35–40 schools represented within the Evangelical Seminary Dean’s

Council—we find that our salary levels are consistently in the top quartile. That being said, we recognize that faculty salaries remain significantly lower than those of many senior pastors, posing challenges both for faculty recruitment and retention. We also recognize that faculty 196

committed to private Christian education for their children and to funding their children’s college

expenses feel real financial pressure. While we have made special provisions at specific denominationally affiliated schools, we continue to study this important area.

The long-term commitment of our professors is noteworthy and an indicator of faculty

contentment. A significant provision that helps provide for faculty retention is the generous

sabbatical policy that supports our faculty’s keen interests and skills in academic research and

writing. Faculty who qualify under the provisions of the Faculty Manual apply for and are

granted full salary semester leaves, free from normal classroom duties, about every three years.

In addition, the Faculty Manual includes detailed and clear criteria and procedures for

advancement in rank and retirement and for compensation and benefits. These policies

encourage faculty retention because they allow for increased collegiality and unity of the faculty

by their straightforward fairness, regular review by the faculty, and minimization of differences

in pay among faculty members. The faculty mentoring plan is a third policy provision that aids

faculty satisfaction and unity, and thus, retention. Because of the unique “pastor-scholar” role

filled by the faculty, a mentoring plan was established in fall 2005 to support and encourage new

faculty members as they grow in their understanding of the character and ethos of the seminary

community. This plan includes meeting with a faculty mentor team, attending classes that

characterize the Covenant Seminary ethos, reading materials that communicate the history and

purpose of the Seminary, and engaging weekly with a group of students through a Covenant

Group.

The Seminary supports the faculty in a variety of ways. All faculty members are

equipped with laptop computers and private, furnished offices with high speed internet access

and printing/copying access. The provision of student assistants has increased faculty efficiency 197

and enables faculty members to carry their teaching loads while still pursuing research. The

faculty is supported by six administrative assistants, some of whom bear direct responsibility to one particular office or individual (e.g., the vice president for academic’s administrative assistant reports directly to him, but also supports the associate deans of academic administration and educational ministries). An energetic and capable Library director and gifted Library staff provides access to needed scholarly materials.

Facilities improvements have also assisted faculty. All classrooms are equipped with the

latest audio-visual equipment. When the new academic building is completed in summer 2008,

the faculty and administration will relocate there, freeing current space on the top floor of the

Library for further expansion as well as providing a 55% increase in classroom capacity. At this time office space is available for every faculty member. Finally, our Information Technology

Services department provides a high level of technical support to all Seminary faculty and staff.

6.1.8 The work load of faculty members in teaching and administration shall permit adequate attention to students, to scholarly pursuits, and to other ecclesial and institutional concerns.

The continued enrollment growth of Covenant Seminary has significantly affected faculty

work. A steady increase in the number of students has meant that faculty members teach larger

classes or sections of courses. The administration and faculty have tried to determine which

courses may be taught well in larger classes and which benefit most from sectioning for more

personal interaction. The faculty also offer tutorial sessions in larger classes for students needing

special help.

The normal faculty load required by the Faculty Manual is 15 to 18 semester hours. No

instructor is required to teach beyond contractual levels. In the past, many faculty members have 198

carried overloads because of their love for teaching and for students, because of scheduling

concerns (e.g., covering for another faculty member’s sabbatical), and because the additional

income is welcome. For the first time in a number of years, the vice president for academics

projects that no faculty member will be in overload for day classes in the upcoming fiscal year

(FY2007–08).

The administration supports the faculty by relieving them of many of the administrative

responsibilities often borne by faculty at other institutions; this allows them to focus on teaching

as their primary responsibility. The faculty meets as a whole for an hour and a half about ten

times each semester, while committee meetings vary in frequency from once a semester to once a

month; frequently committees are able to do their work via e-mail or phone consultation.

Admissions decisions (except for the ThM and DMin programs) are made by administrative staff

and most academic advising is done by the associate dean for academic services and the

registrar’s staff. While the faculty is regularly consulted on such matters as long-range planning,

budgets, and assessment, the data gathering and detailed work is done by administrative staff.

This division of labor has enabled the faculty to sustain a quality of teaching as enrollment has grown.

The Seminary places a high value on the relational ministry of its faculty. This begins by

the faculty effectively embodying the Seminary’s mission statement. This pastoral approach is

both a matter of attitude and of activities. Therefore, it is expected that faculty members will

build relationships with students and encourage them informally and through regular

participation in the worship and fellowship activities of the campus (e.g., chapel, Campus Day,

Day of Prayer, Covenant Groups, social events, etc.). This relational ministry is part of the

review process for faculty advancement in rank. 199

Covenant Seminary encourages its faculty to serve the broader church in a number of ways. First, faculty members are expected to be contributing regularly to a local congregation.

The present policy of the Board of Trustees requires three-fourths of the faculty to be members of the Presbyterian Church in America. Faculty members are also encouraged to provide expertise for the committees and agencies of the General Assembly and for presbyteries. The

Faculty Manual also has provision for those faculty members, gifted in preaching and teaching, who would engage in extramural activities to serve a local church as an interim or staff pastor.

Such activities normally require that requests be made in writing to the vice president for academics and submitted for approval by the Seminary president.

6.2 Faculty Role in Teaching

6.2.1 Teachers shall have freedom in the classroom to discuss the subjects in which they have competence.

Faculty members have full freedom, within the boundaries set by the Faculty Manual, to discuss matters in their courses in which they have academic competence. The Seminary works hard to honor both faculty expertise and interest by ensuring that these pastor-scholars teach across the curriculum in their respective departments. The recent increase in faculty headcount allows more freedom for faculty members to teach courses in area of sub-specialty, as they desire to do so.

6.2.2 Faculty should endeavor to include, within the teaching of their respective disciplines, theological reflection that enables students to integrate their learning from the various disciplines, field education, and personal formation.

The faculty is encouraged to be more intentionally integrative in its teaching. The 200

Seminary has worked on this issue in a number of ways. For example, the faculty developed an

MDiv prolegomena course entitled Covenant Theology I and II, in which four professors from

various disciplines team-teach. Introduced in fall 2003, this course integrated two required

courses into one two-semester course. This has proven to be a valuable addition to the

curriculum. The four professors, with emphases in Christian studies/contemporary culture, Old

Testament, systematic theology, and New Testament/biblical studies, are able to model

integration in the classroom in ways that a single professor would be unable to demonstrate. As a

result, the four professors who are present in every class interact with each other by asking questions and interjecting comments and ideas as well as teaching and leading the discussion for various lessons.

Another way the Seminary has encouraged integrative teaching in the classroom has been

through a curriculum review at faculty meetings, started in fall 2005. At each meeting at least

one faculty member presents the way he teaches an MDiv core course. Particularly noted during

this review are the goals, objectives, methods, content, and curricular touch-points. We also

discuss the ways in which each course accomplishes the Seminary’s mission and core values and

contributes to the overall ministry preparation of our students. This review process has also

proven valuable for the rest of the faculty, providing an opportunity to hear what others are doing

and prompting discussions on pedagogy, content, and assignments. Faculty members also visit

each others’ courses and serve as guest lecturers for each other. Students have often commented

that they note coherence among their courses and a harmony of similar messages from various

faculty members.

The recent modification of the student evaluations done in 1997–98 has offered the

administration and faculty more concrete evidence of whether integration has taken place in the 201

classroom. For example, the students are asked, on a scale of 1–5, whether a particular course

enhanced their ability to interpret and apply the Bible to issues of doctrine, life, and ministry.

Another question asks: has this course developed and deepened your theology and worldview, and enhanced your ability to interact critically with other views? As a representative sample, the averages of the answers to these two questions in evaluations done in spring 2004 were 4.39

(4.45 median) and 4.30 (4.25 median) respectively. Similarly, in spring 2006 evaluations, they were 4.34 (4.47 median) and 4.49 (4.52 median) respectively. We utilize these evaluations in continued assessment of how the curriculum accomplishes the Seminary’s mission.

6.2.3 Faculty should be afforded opportunities to enhance teaching skills as a regular component of faculty development.

The Seminary has spent significant time and effort in enhancing the teaching skills of the

faculty. Our associate dean of educational ministries, who has a doctorate in adult education, has led the faculty through various means toward improved teaching. A representative sample includes the syllabi revision project led by an outside consultant and conducted with individual faculty (2003–2004), preparatory reading followed by discussion of Ken Bain’s What the Best

College Teachers Do (2004), and in-house workshops such as “Asking Good Questions” (1998) and “Strategies for Engaging Large Classes” (2003) held for faculty largely during faculty meetings. Since 1998, we have had the following in-house faculty development workshops:

Faculty Development Workshops Date Topic of Workshop 1998–99 October 7, 1998 Asking Good Questions November 11, 1998 Global Issues in Theological Education December 2, 1998 Leading Productive Discussions 202

March 17, 1999 The Westminster Confession of Faith and the Public Reading of Scripture May 5, 1999 Instructional Design Basics for Course Planning 1999–2000 September 29, 1999 Grace and the Curriculum October 6, 1999 Learning Theory: Andragogy and Pedagogy Comparison April 5, 2000 Rembrandt and Theological Education May 3, 2000 Integrating Educational Perspectives in Systematic Courses 2000–2001 October 11, 2000 The Public Character of Theological Education December 6, 2000 The Benefits of Waiting for an Answer when Leading Discussions March 14, 2001 Guiding the Character Development of Students April 4 and 25, 2001 Classroom Assessment Techniques April 11, 2001 Improving Your Communication: Tips and Techniques 2001–2002 September 19, 2001 The Character and Assessment of Learning in the MDiv October 10, 2001 Getting Published October 17, 2001 Missiology and the Theological Curriculum November 7, 2001 Writing Clear Course Objectives February 27, 2002 What is Good Ministry? April 17, 2002 Reviewing Open Theism Theology April 24, 2002 Cultivating Harmonious Race Relations in Our Community May 1, 2002 Bloom’s Taxonomy and Course Assignments 2002–2003 October 9, 2002 Helping Students Think Critically about Middle East Conflicts April 23, 2003 Creative Approaches in the Classroom May 7, 2003 Strategies for Engaging Large Classes 2003–2004 November 12, 2003 Syllabus Writing: Writing Clearly and According to Our Mission February 25, 2004 Using the New Web-based Faculty Portal May 5, 2004 Helping Students: Walking in the Spirit 2004–2005 October 13, 2004 Jesus the Evangelist and Our Students November 3, 2004 Relationships and Ministry November 10, 2004 Bibliographic Instruction for Faculty and Students December 1, 2004 A Seminary Professor Turned Pastor: Report from the Field February 23, 2005 More than a Divinity School: On Pastoring Students March 16, 2005 Academic Writing and Teaching Theology March 23, 2005 An Evangelical-Reformed View of Biblical Inspiration in Comparison to an 203

Islamic View of Qu’ranic Inspiration April 27, 2005 Exploring Christian Perspective on Civic Responsibility 2005–2006 October 26, 2005 New Perspectives on Paul February 15, 2006 Bibleworks Workshop April 26, 2006 Student Assessment 2006–2007 October 4, 2006 The Peacemaking Pastor October 18, 2006 PowerPoint in the Classroom: Pitfalls and Opportunities March 7, 2007 Seminary: A Place to Prepare Pastors?

In addition to faculty teaching development workshops and lectures, the Seminary has

been the subject of two dissertations over the last ten years that focused on the faculty’s teaching.

Barry Gaeddert’s PhD dissertation for Saint Louis University, entitled, “Improving Graduate

Theological Instruction: A Qualitative Description of Professors’ Attitudes Toward the Use of

Classroom Assessment Techniques,” evaluated professors’ attitudes towards these techniques after trying them in their courses. The initial results of this research demonstrated the effectiveness of these teaching methods to such an extent that the seven participants now regularly use them for assessment purposes. Adjunct professor Tasha Chapman’s dissertation, entitled “The Emphasis on Professional Preparation in Student Assessment for the Master of

Divinity Degree,” completed for the PhD program at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, provided a case study analysis on how Covenant Seminary’s faculty assessed MDiv students.

Chapman provided an overview of her findings during a faculty meeting and continues to assist us in faculty development and student assessment planning.

6.2.4 Appropriate resources shall be available to facilitate the teaching task, including but not limited to, classroom space, office space, and access to scholarly materials, including library and other information resources.

204

The Seminary dedicates appropriate resources to facilitate the teaching task. The

expansion and remodeling of the Library along with significant remodeling of the chapel

basement added four more classrooms in the year 2000. In addition, it allowed the Seminary to

bring the previously scattered faculty offices together on the same floor of one building. Each

faculty member has his own office, equipped with a connection point to our high-speed Internet

network (the building also has wireless network access throughout). By summer 2008, when the

campus’s new academic building is completed, offices for faculty members, administrators, and

most other Seminary staff will be housed in that building along with five new classrooms.

Currently, the Seminary is hampered by the small number of classrooms we have; the new

academic building will alleviate this space squeeze, allowing us to section large classes and thus

reduce class size. In addition, all of our classrooms are equipped with adequate educational

technology, which is maintained and upgraded as needed (video projector, network connection, document camera, and VHS/DVD player); all classrooms also have wireless network access as well. In order to utilize that technology effectively, faculty members are provided with laptop computers, which are upgraded every three to four years; they also receive appropriate training for using our educational technology software and Portal.

In addition, the Seminary supports faculty members by providing teaching assistants, which has increased efficiency while allowing faculty members to pursue research.

Administrative assistance has kept pace with faculty growth. Our Library’s leadership has provided increased access to needed scholarly materials in particular through the subscriptions of

various electronic databases as well as increased interlibrary loan capabilities through MOBIUS

and OCLC’s WorldCat.

205

6.2.5 Schools shall develop and implement mechanisms for evaluating faculty performance, including teaching competence. These mechanisms should involve faculty members and students, as well as administrators.

The process of evaluating faculty performance has changed little since our last self-study.

Every semester, each instructor is evaluated in at least one course by the students, using a course

evaluation form. Both the quantitative and qualitative data from these forms are summarized by

the vice president for academics and made available to the faculty member. In their annual

reports, faculty members formulate goals for improvement of their teaching and learning based

on this information. Further evaluation takes place naturally through contact between professors

and students. The student evaluations have continued to reinforce the quality educational

experience in the classroom as demonstrated in a small sampling below of the numerical ratings

(rated 0 to 5, with 5 representing excellence).

Semester Method Content Overall Benefit (Rated 0–5) (Rated 0–5) (Rated 0–5) SP 2000 (average) 4.41 4.49 4.53 SP 2000 (median) 4.41 4.54 4.48 SP 2002 (average) 4.37 4.48 4.51 SP 2002 (median) 4.42 4.50 4.54 SP 2004 (average) 4.31 4.47 4.41 SP 2004 (median) 4.34 4.58 4.48 SP 2006 (average) 4.34 4.52 4.52 SP 2006 (median) 4.43 4.63 4.62

On the basis of an annual report prepared by each faculty member, student course evaluations, and other formal and informal observations, the vice president for academics conducts an annual review with each faculty member. Goals for the preceding year are reviewed

and the faculty member’s success in accomplishing these goals is assessed. Goals for the coming 206 year are also discussed. Evaluation in these interviews is two-way, with the vice president for academics seeking to determine how the administration can assist or encourage the faculty member. This process facilitates administrative oversight and also provides some sense of how the administration and students perceive the faculty member’s contribution to the life of the institution.

We recognize that the current course evaluation form has significant weaknesses; the administration has had a number of discussions about how to improve the form so that it might better reflect the qualitative information that would be most useful to the instructor. In addition, one weakness in our process is the turnaround time for returning a summary of the evaluations to the faculty member. We have explored the possibility of whether or not electronic evaluations might be appropriate and have tried to determination how these evaluations might be squared with FERPA regulations. We continue to study this matter and hope to implement a new evaluation form and process by 2008–09.

6.3 Faculty Role in Student Learning

The Covenant Seminary faculty plays a life-changing role in student learning through: 1) creative and engaging teaching methodologies and assignments, with an integrated focus on cognitive learning outcomes and character development towards Christian maturity and leadership; 2) regular designing of courses and curriculum, both individually and through the

Curriculum Committee; 3) pastoral modeling of grace-oriented attitudes, of collaborative community relationships, and of ministry leadership skills; and 4) scholarly modeling of theological and critical thinking approaches to knowledge.

207

6.3.1 Faculty shall be involved in evaluating the quality of student learning by identifying appropriate outcomes and assessing the extent to which the learning goals of individual courses and degree programs have been achieved.

Faculty members evaluate the quality of student learning by: (1) developing appropriate

course learning objectives and assignments, which are listed on every course syllabus; (2) re- visiting and referring to degree program goals, which are charted in rubric form against the institutional mission statement; and (3) assessing the extent to which students have achieved the course objectives, the degree goals, and, ultimately, the institutional mission.

Faculty members regularly redesign courses and student assignments to better facilitate

student learning and the assessment of that learning. For example, the 2005 Chapman case study research at the Seminary (for the dissertation entitled “The Emphasis on Professional Preparation in Student Assessment for the Master of Divinity Degree”) found that most faculty members regularly redesigned their MDiv course assignments in order to provide more specific evidences

and learning experiences designed for the intended learning outcomes. Between 2001 and 2004,

the whole faculty engaged in professional development work with specialist Heather Laughlin

concerning syllabus writing, with special focus on improving syllabus course objectives so that

the stated objectives better described assessable learning goals in line with the previously re-

designed and charted degree goals.

Faculty members have a uniquely unified vision for their work in agreement with the published institutional mission statement. Dissertation research data from interviews of all faculty members in the spring of 2005 demonstrates that the faculty views student degree learning outcomes, as well as their course assessments and objectives, in light of the institutional

mission statement. On written course evaluations, students regularly report that classes challenge 208

not only their minds, but also values, volition, and worldview, reflecting further consistency with

the institutional mission statement.

The faculty assesses the extent to which students have achieved course and degree

learning objectives through a wide variety of graded and non-graded assignments. For the MDiv

program, faculty members use over 40 varieties of written assignments that are intentionally

focused on providing particular evidences of intended course learning outcomes. Non-written assignments include oral presentations, projects, demonstrations, case studies, role plays, simulations, and actual live ministry experiences. Faculty also intentionally assess student learning, primarily in the area of character formation, apart from graded work. They do this life- growth assessment through discussions with students in and outside of class, and through involvement with students in the weekly Covenant Group meetings, seminary community events, and in individual meetings. Every year, during regular faculty meetings, the faculty and senior staff use evaluation forms to review all MDiv students generally and mark areas of concern. The vice president for student services follows up with any students receiving marks of concern.

6.3.2 To ensure the quality of learning, faculty should be appropriately involved in development of the library collection and other resources necessary for student learning.

The faculty, both individually and via a Faculty Library Committee, are involved in developing the Library collection and other resources necessary for student learning through ongoing and regular advisement and consultation with Library staff. Faculty members regularly request book purchases through e-mail communications and direct discussions with senior

Library staff, who are always represented at weekly faculty meetings. In addition, Library staff

members consult appropriate faculty members for recommendations and scholarly guidance on

acquisitions or changes in current resources. The Library holds all titles that the faculty list on 209

syllabi and on recommended reading lists, and carries as well every faculty member’s

dissertation and published monographs. The librarians provide the faculty with a list of new

acquisitions on a monthly basis. An example of this cooperative work is the curriculum lab

developed by the faculty and Library staff together in 2005 to support the new MAEM degree.

The Faculty Library Committee annually reviews the periodicals subscription list, the Library budget, and the policy on collection development.

6.3.3 Faculty should participate in practices and procedures that contribute to students’ learning, including opportunities for regular advising and interaction with students, and attentiveness to the learning needs of diverse student populations.

The faculty employs a wide diversity of methodologies in teaching and in giving student

assignments. This well provides for student diversity of learning style preferences and needs.

Faculty members often assign coursework for which students are given latitude for creativity and choice in determining assignments. Independent Study and Ministry Practicum courses also contribute to meeting the learning needs of a diverse student body because individual students develop this coursework in consultation with their chosen faculty member of record. In the

2005–2006 academic year, about 80 students participated in these courses, showing them to be well suited to meet the highly specialized learning needs of the student body.

Outside of formal courses, student learning is greatly enhanced by many opportunities for

faculty-student interaction. Faculty members provide at least five office hours per week for

individual student appointments. They also often share meals with students. Many faculty

members minister side by side and worship with students in local churches, thus providing

opportunities for course integration within the context of a specific congregation, including live

ministry events, challenges, and family life. Nearly all faculty members lead weekly Covenant 210

Groups (either connected to the Covenant Theology course or informal groups gathered around a

particular focus) in which they meet with eight to twelve students for support, course

discussions, and prayer. The faculty serve as advisors for several student organizations

(Women’s Student Fellowship, International Student Fellowship, Student Council, Archaeology

Club, International Women’s Fellowship, Student Mission Fellowship, The Sword and Thistle

writing group), providing for further faculty mentoring opportunities and side-by-side ministry

and leadership experiences.

Students and faculty also participate together in campus events, such as those hosted by the Francis A. Schaeffer Institute: art shows, movie viewings and discussions, and community outreach talks in local coffeehouses and bookstores. Numerous seminary community social events occur regularly throughout the calendar year and are well attended by the faculty. For example, picnics and socials continue during the summer, to which Seminary faculty, staff, and students are invited to worship and fellowship together. In addition, faculty-student participation in musical ensembles, sporting events, and mission trips furthers the integrative learning experience of the students.

6.3.4 Faculty should foster integration of the diverse learning objectives of the curriculum so that students may successfully accomplish the purposes of the stated degree programs.

Other ways in which the faculty foster integration of the curriculum towards students’

learning degree outcomes, apart from those listed above in 6.3.1 and 6.3.3, include the regular

manner in which the faculty references each other’s courses in class. The collegial culture and

unified vision of the faculty is demonstrated by their awareness of what other faculty members

teach and what assignments they give. Faculty members describe their courses at faculty 211

meetings, visit each other’s classes, provide guest lecturing in each other’s courses, and team

teach several courses.

Faculty members are highly concerned for integrative learning and theological thinking

and foster it through the variety of course assignments given and the manner in which they assess

those assignments. The 2005 dissertation research data describe the faculty’s intentional

instruction and the students’ assessment of the integration of course material with theology,

Scripture, ministry implications, actual ministry experiences, and the students’ personal lives.

Faculty also provide for integrated learning through the periodic redesign of degree

curriculum and courses. For example, a faculty team developed a new prolegomena course for

MDiv juniors. Introduced in fall 2003, this course integrated two courses, Hermeneutics and

Covenant Theology, into one year-long course team taught by four faculty members from different departments and requiring student participation in a weekly Covenant Group for course

debriefing, support, and prayer. In spring 2007, the faculty approved the redistribution of course

content from the previously required MDiv course, Biblical Introduction, to other OT and NT courses and to newly created courses that would enable the better integration of course material to meet learning goals.

6.4. Faculty Role in Theological Research

Although faculty members have had high teaching loads because of enrollment growth,

which limits their time for research, the sabbatical leave arrangement clearly facilitates their

research interests. Because of extraordinary academic gifts and deep commitment, the faculty

contributes considerably to the church and to society both nationally and internationally.

212

6.4.1 Faculty are expected to engage in research and each school shall articulate clearly its expectations and requirements for faculty research, and shall have explicit criteria and procedures for the evaluation of research that are congruent with the purpose of the school and with commonly accepted standards in higher education.

The expectations for the faculty to be engaged in research are clearly spelled out in the

Faculty Manual and commonly understood as part of the culture of the school. The Faculty

Manual states:

Faculty members are hired as full-time scholars to make a contribution in their field as well as teaching candidates for ministry. The delivery of scholarly papers, the giving of special lectures, and the writing of articles and books are appropriate ways of fulfilling this ideal. At the end of each calendar year, faculty members are asked to prepare a list of publications and major speaking engagements in the past year. (p. I-14)

6.4.2 Schools shall provide structured opportunities for faculty research and intellectual growth, such as regular research leaves and faculty colloquia.

Sabbatical leaves are well facilitated due to a generous sabbatical leave arrangement. The

purpose of the sabbatical leave is to allow faculty members to pursue deeper advanced study,

research and writing in their field or in any other acceptable program of experience or research,

or to make special contributions to the life of the church through a wider use of teaching gifts. In the Faculty Manual, the baseline sabbatical policy states that “a faculty member who has taught

at the Seminary for at least six years becomes eligible for a sabbatical leave of a half-year at full salary or of a full year at half-salary.” However, nearly all the faculty receive sabbaticals under

the “exceptions” policy that allows for a semester’s leave at full pay following six semesters of

full-time teaching when a faculty member is “under specific contract with a publisher for the

production of a book-length manuscript” (Faculty Manual, p. I-10). Among the currently

employed full-time, voting faculty members totaling twenty-three, two faculty were granted four 213

semesters of sabbatical leave in the past decade, five were granted three semesters, five more two

semesters, and another five one semester of sabbatical leave.

Faculty participation in scholarly societies and colloquia is well supported financially by

the Seminary. The institution pays the membership fees for a faculty member for two scholarly

societies. Transportation expenses for attendance at up to three scholarly society meetings per

year are also paid for by the Seminary. For those faculty members who participate in seminar or conference programs by reading papers, the housing and meal expenses are paid for as well.

During any given year, over 60% of the faculty attends scholarly society meetings, often giving papers. Their memberships in various societies document the wide spectrum of professional association of our faculty. Memberships include: the Evangelical Theological Society, the

Society of Biblical Literature, the Fellowship of Evangelical European Theologians, the Institute for Biblical Research, Tyndale Fellowship, the American Scientific Affiliation, the Royal

College of Psychiatrists, Christian Medical Fellowship, the American Association of Christian

Counselors, the Christian Association of Psychological Studies, the Presbyterian Historical

Society, Rutherford House Fellowship, the Japanese Evangelical Society, the Midwest

Fellowship of Missions Professors, the International Association of Mission Studies, Arbeitskreis

für evangelikale Theologie, the American Society of Missiology, the American Academy of

Religion, the American Society of Church History, the Conference on Faith and History, and the

Evangelical Homiletics Society.

The faculty regularly lectures on specialized topics in North America, Western and

Eastern Europe, Asia, Central and South America, and Africa. The following list offers a sample of faculty contributions, such as lectures or other presentations, at various venues, associations, and institutions: L’Abri conferences (in North America and abroad); InterVarsity Family camp; 214

Francis A. Schaeffer Lecture Series; Evangelical Theological Society; many different churches in various denominations; Ohio State University; Tokyo Christian University; Wheaton College;

Aberdeen University; Asuza Pacific University; Society of Biblical Literature; Alliance of

Confessing Evangelical Pastors conference; Evangelical Homiletics Society; European

Leadership Forum; Regent College; Inter-religious Dialogue, Tehran, Iran; Presbyterian Pastoral

Leadership Network; World Journalism Institute; African Institute for Christian Mission and

Research; Gordon-Conwell Seminary; Near Eastern Archaeological Society; Dallas Theological

Seminary; Campus Crusade staff in Germany; Reformed Presbyterian Theological Seminary;

Mayo Clinic; University of Virginia; St. Olaf College; Saint Louis University; Washington

University in St. Louis; Latvia University; Baltic Reformed Theological Seminary; Ukraine

Theological Seminary; German Theological Seminary; University of Arkansas; Baylor

University; the American Society of Church History winter and spring meetings.

6.4.3 In the context of its institutional purpose, each school shall ensure that faculty have freedom to pursue critical questions, to contribute to scholarly discussion, and to publish the findings of their research.

6.4.4 Faculty members should make available the results of their research through such means as scholarly publications, constructive participation in learned societies, and informed contributions to the intellectual life of church and society, as well as through their teaching.

An overview of lecture topics documents a wide spectrum of scholarly issues addressed by the faculty in line with the critical questions of their fields. These topics include lectures on various ethical and cultural issues (e.g., bioethics; just war theory), on global missions issues

(including dialogue with Muslim scholars in various parts of the world), on psychology and contemporary cultural issues, on political and social justice issues, on contemporary culture issues, on current issues in biblical scholarship such as the New Perspective on Paul, and on the 215 interface between science and theology. The faculty have a great deal of freedom to contribute to scholarly discussion and to publish the findings of their research; since 1997–98, some 50 monographs have been published by the current faculty, as well as many articles, essays, and contributions to professional journals and monographs, both stateside and abroad. One further example not mentioned above is the extensive involvement of the faculty in the translation and production of the English Standard Version Study Bible, to be published by Crossway Publishers in 2008.

Summary Evaluation

6.1 Covenant Seminary’s faculty is well qualified for the programs offered; the

Seminary’s core value of “pastoral training” is enhanced by the instruction of the

faculty and the sense of community among faculty members.

6.2 Covenant Seminary provides adequate support for its faculty so that instructors might

teach with freedom.

6.3 Covenant Seminary’s faculty is actively involved in evaluating the quality of student

learning and in providing support for academic resources that assist such learning.

6.4 Covenant Seminary’s faculty members are increasingly recognized as contributing

scholars, as evidenced in their publications, lectures, and research.

Recommendations 216

1. While the Seminary has made progress in the ethnic diversity on its faculty, it

should continue to search for and develop faculty members who represent a

greater variety of racial and ethnic backgrounds.

2. The Seminary should continue to explore avenues for lowering class sizes through

sectioning, hiring additional faculty members, and other means.

3. The Seminary should produce a new course evaluation form that provides better

qualitative information for instructor reflection as well as outcomes assessment.

In addition, the Seminary should determine ways to deliver this evaluation

information to faculty members in a more timely fashion. 217

CHAPTER SEVEN

STUDENT RECRUITMENT, ADMISSIONS, SERVICES, AND PLACEMENT

The students of a theological school are central to the educational activities of the institution. They are also a primary constituency served by the school’s curriculum and programs, and with the faculty, constitute a community of faith and learning. Schools are responsible for the quality of their policies and practices related to recruitment, admission, student support, and placement.

Students are central to the mission of Covenant Seminary; we exist to train servants of the triune God. If we do not have students, we have no reason for existence. As a result, our major focus is on ways to serve them by training them to walk with God and to lead God’s people. Part of the way in which this mission is accomplished is through the students’ various points of engagement with the Seminary’s administrative staff, from the beginning of recruitment through the commencing of placement. At each point in this process, we desire for several of our core values to come through to our students—Christ-centered ministry, grace foundation, and relational emphasis. In this way, we hope to train a generation of faithful, fruitful leaders for the Presbyterian Church in America and other denominational groups.

7.1 Recruitment

7.1.1 Schools shall be able to demonstrate that their policies and practices of student recruitment are consistent with the purpose of the institution.

The mission of the Enrollment Office of Covenant Theological Seminary is “to seek, through the development of Christ-centered, grace-focused relationships, to enroll, retain, and 218 graduate students who have a passion for God and His people, a maturity of Christian character, and a calling to pursue vocational ministry in order to meet or exceed enrollment goals.” This mission governs the recruitment process of the Seminary, and fits under the broader umbrella of the institution’s mission “to train servants of the triune God to walk with God, to interpret and communicate God’s Word, and to lead God’s people.”

As Covenant Seminary recruits students, the enrollment team focuses on developing spiritual vitality in potential and committed students. For this reason, the team provides counsel to prospective students regarding possibilities for their theological education—whether at

Covenant Seminary, another institution, or another avenue of vocation entirely. The goal is to ensure a good “fit” between prospective students and the institution, or, if necessary, to direct inquirers to other institutions that may be more appropriate to their educational needs. The enrollment team is increasingly active in encouraging and guiding prospective students in this way. Moreover, the team makes a very conscious effort to recruit those whom they believe will make effective communicators of Scripture to God’s people. We provide counsel to students about the appropriate baccalaureate background for theological education. As part of this preparation, we also urge prospective students to gain a solid background in English Bible to prepare for seminary. Finally, the Seminary’s enrollment team encourages potential students to develop leadership gifts in various ministry contexts. We deliberately seek students with clear gifting in this area.

In these intentional ways, the enrollment team’s approach reflects the Seminary’s mission statement. As part of this recruitment process, the enrollment team focuses on assisting students as they wrestle with their sense of calling, maintaining meaningful contact through phone calls, e-mails, and campus visits. We also hope to point these potential students to Covenant Seminary 219 by sending CDs containing samples of recent sermons by Seminary faculty to them; interacting with them at local churches, presbyteries, and conference venues; and through personal visits.

In addition to helping potential students focus on their sense of calling and discerning a fit with Covenant Seminary, the enrollment team also assists students in thinking through how best to finance their theological education. The team works closely with the director of financial aid, both to assess the potential impact that current and proposed student debt might have on future ministry as well as to ascertain how the student might be able to qualify for financial assistance. In each contact throughout the recruitment process, we hope to reflect the Seminary’s core value of “relational emphasis.”

7.1.2 In recruitment efforts, services, and publications, institutions shall accurately represent themselves as well as the vocational opportunities related to their degree programs.

The most significant time in the recruitment process is the potential student’s campus visit. Currently, campus visits are coordinated by members of the enrollment team, especially the campus visit coordinator and associate director of admissions. During the campus visit, the goal is to provide potential students a window into seminary life in three ways. First, the Seminary’s director of placement is available to provide information and answer questions regarding vocational opportunities. Second, many campus visits are scheduled to coincide with weekly

“Ministry Lunches,” in which ministry leaders share information and stories about their own ministries, recruit students for internships, and answer any questions. Meals are typically provided. Third, during campus visits, every effort is made to host potential students in classes and introduce them to Seminary faculty members. Enrollment team members try to connect prospective students with current students during this time as well. In each of these ways, the 220

enrollment team works to insure that prospective students receive an “accurate representation” of

Covenant Seminary.

The enrollment team also works closely with the Seminary’s Public Relations department

to ensure that all recruitment brochures, the Seminary catalog, and other publications accurately

reflect Seminary life and policy. An enrollment team member participates on the catalog committee. In addition, every effort is made to make sure the communication between the

Academics division and the enrollment team is seamless in order to accurately reflect the

Seminary to prospective students. Enrollment team members are invited to attend selected faculty meetings, especially during curricular review, and they come to these meetings to share how they are representing the Seminary as well.

7.2 Admission

7.2.1 In the development of admission policies and procedures, a theological school shall establish criteria appropriate for each degree program it offers. Admission criteria should give attention to applicants’ academic, personal, and spiritual qualifications, as well as their potential for making a contribution to church and society.

As part of the admission process, applicants are required to submit several pieces of

evidence to determine their qualifications. First, they are required to submit all relevant personal

information on their application form. In addition, we require that applicants submit transcripts

from all post-secondary schools attended, pastoral and academic references, and written

testimony of Christian and ministry experience. After the written portion of the application

process, the prospective student goes through a personal interview in which the following

questions are asked:

• Has the applicant articulated a credible profession of orthodox Christian faith? 221

• Has the applicant articulated a credible call to ministry or other valid reasons for pursuing graduate-level theological education?

• Has the applicant demonstrated a level of Christian maturity and integrity in life and ministry which is compatible with an understanding of the Gospel?

• Has the applicant demonstrated fruitful ministry through sustained involvement in ministry-related activities in his/her church/organization?

• Does the applicant have the recommendation of his/her home church to pursue ministerial training and theological education?

• Does the applicant have the endorsement of references to pursue ministerial training and theological education?

• Has the applicant considered the financial, emotional, and familial ramifications of attending seminary?

• Throughout Covenant Seminary’s interaction with the applicant, have there been indications of anything that would detract from or anything that would benefit the applicant’s preparation and ultimate participation in vocational ministry?

All these elements of the application process are then reviewed by the Admissions Committee to determine an applicant’s suitability for theological training and promise for future ministry.

7.2.2 Schools shall be able to demonstrate that they operate on a post-baccalaureate level, that the students they admit are capable of graduate-level studies, and that their standards and requirements for admission to all degree programs are clearly defined, fairly implemented, and appropriately related to the purpose of the institution.

7.2.3 Schools shall regularly review the quality of applicants admitted to each degree program and develop institutional strategies to maintain and enhance the overall quality of the student population.

The Seminary pays close attention to previous academic preparation. All applicants must hold the appropriate prerequisite degrees: an accredited undergraduate degree for application to a master’s degree program; a board-approved MDiv for either the ThM or DMin programs. In 222

addition, for the ThM program, applicants are required to demonstrate competency in Greek and

Hebrew; and for the DMin program, applicants must demonstrate competency in at least one of

these languages. Students lacking prerequisite degrees or with low grade point averages are

placed on academic probation for at least one semester and carefully advised concerning first

semester course selection.

The minimum required baccalaureate GPA for admittance to the master’s degree, shown

in the table below, is intended to indicate the appropriate academic achievement and aptitude

commensurate with that degree:

Degree Program GPA Master of Divinity (MDiv) 2.25/4.00 Master of Arts in Educational Ministries (MAEM) 2.25/4.00 Master of Arts in Counseling (MAC) 3.00/4.00 Master of Arts (Theological Studies) (MATS) 2.25/4.00 Master of Arts (Exegetical Theology) (MAET) 3.00/4.00

In addition, advanced degree programs require the successful completion of an MDiv

with the following GPA’s:

Degree Program GPA Master of Theology (ThM) 3.10/4.00 Doctor of Ministry (DMin) 3.10/4.00

The minimum required GPA for admittance to various programs leads both to successful

program completion as well as successful placement upon graduation. For example, the fact that

the MAC leads to state board licensure and that the MAET prepares for doctoral study means that the needed GPA for entrance into those programs is higher. 223

The MDiv degree, as the program which ordinarily prepares for vocational church leadership, requires not only academic preparation, but spiritual and vocational preparation as well. As a result, MDiv applicants are encouraged to experience significant participation in practical avenues of ministry prior to seminary entrance. We gauge this requirement through the admissions process.

7.2.4 Schools shall give evidence of efforts in admissions to encourage diversity in such areas as race, ethnicity, region, denomination, or gender.

The mission of Covenant Theological Seminary is “to train servants of the triune God,”

regardless of race, ethnicity, denomination, or gender. In order to accomplish this, the Seminary

seeks to develop diversity throughout the student body.

We demonstrate this intentionality through our financial aid program. While Covenant

Seminary works to assist financially all sorts of students who feel called to vocational ministry,

we make a concentrated effort to train pastors for an increasingly diverse church culture. For

example, in 2002, the Strategic Church Development Award was established because of a

growing desire for African-American, Hispanic, Asian, and other minorities to serve as pastors

and church planters in the PCA. This full-tuition, three-year scholarship, awarded annually,

provides pastoral training to a maximum of four minority students who are moving toward

vocational ministry. Another example of our intentionality is the Ethnic Minority Scholarship

Fund, established in 2000 through funds raised during the 1999–2001 Jewel of Grace, Fire for

Ministry Capital Campaign. This fund has generated $11,000 to $14,700 per year in scholarship funds for partial scholarships to as many as ten minority students. Of course, minority students may also apply for other financial aid programs administered by the Seminary as well. 224

While we have consciously sought to fund more minority students at the Seminary, we

have not yet seen a radical increase in the ethnic diversity of our student body. Since 1998, the

white, non-Hispanic portion of our student body continues to be over 80%. As the accompanying

chart on student ethnicity Student Ethnicity

amply demonstrates, while 18 %

16 % we have seen increases in 14 %

various particular 12 %

10 % ethnicities, especially Asian, 8%

we have been unsuccessful 6%

4% in radically diversifying the 2%

student body. Though 15% 0% 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Fiscal year of the 2007 student body All Degrees MDiv Program Other Degree Programs consists of minority races,

this number is actually fairly consonant with our ten-year trend. One question yet to be

determined is whether the recent hiring of our first two minority faculty members will influence

the types of students who will come to Covenant Seminary in the future.

Because students are required to give evidence of faith in Jesus Christ during the

admissions process, and because our mission statement points to the fact that we “train servants

of the triune God to walk with God,” we do restrict our student body based on “religion”: we

only admit to degree programs those who are “Christians.” (We do allow for special studies for

seekers who are not Christians as defined by the Apostles’ Creed.) Nevertheless, though we are the seminary for the Presbyterian Church in America, we welcome students from a wide range of

denominational backgrounds. Approximately 30% of our ministerial students come from other 225

Christian denominations, and approximately 50% of our total student body (including students in

our counseling, lay leader training, mission training, and other programs) comes from outside the

PCA. We gladly and regularly graduate students of non-PCA convictions from the MDiv degree program.

The Seminary welcomes both women and men into its degree programs. Although our

position as the seminary for the Presbyterian Church in America leads us to follow our denominational policy restricting the pastoral office to men, we continue to see gender diversity in our student body. As the accompanying chart on gender diversity in all programs demonstrates, the percentage of males across all programs has ranged between 72% and 77%, while the percentage of women in all degree programs has ranged between 23% and 28%. That being said, we continue to invest significantly in affirming women’s roles in non-ordained ministry. As the accompanying chart on gender diversity in all MA programs demonstrates, in

Ge nder Diversity 2007 women comprised 50% of (All MA programs) the MA student body. As these 100% 90% women prepare for counseling, 80% 70% non-ordained pastoral staff, and 60% 50%

credit) 40% other leadership roles, we are 30% 20% encouraged by their willingness 10% 0% Percentage of head count (for 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 to partner with us for their Fiscal Year Males Females theological education.

7.2.5 Schools shall encourage a broad baccalaureate preparation, for instance, studies in world history, philosophy, languages and literature, the natural sciences, the social sciences, music and other fine arts, and religion.

226

Following ATS standards, the Seminary ordinarily requires an accredited undergraduate degree in order to matriculate. The Admissions team helps students who are beginning college or in college and who are thinking about coming to seminary to ascertain the appropriate preparation for and timing of their arrival at seminary.

7.3 Student Services

7.3.1 Policies regarding students’ rights and responsibilities, as well as the institution’s code of discipline, shall be clearly identified and published.

The Seminary regularly updates and publishes a student handbook in multiple formats, both print and electronic. This student handbook sets forth policies for students’ rights and responsibilities as well as the institution’s code of discipline. In that handbook, students will also find outlined the Seminary’s student grievance procedure. A standing committee deals with the sometimes special concerns of international students; a separate faculty-administration committee exists to cover general student concerns. We believe the Seminary’s commitment to resolve problems on a personal level when possible minimizes the number of formal complaints.

There are currently no formal student grievances on file.

7.3.2 Schools shall regularly and systematically evaluate the appropriateness, adequacy, and use of student services for the purpose of strengthening the overall program.

Covenant Seminary regularly and systematically evaluates student services as part of the institution’s co-curricular program. One primary way by which we do this is through exit interviews, conducted in a focus group format with a cross-section of our students from different degree programs, life circumstances, and backgrounds. We conduct these interviews three times 227

a year: once in November for fall graduates and twice in April for spring graduates. This exit

interview material is collated and shared with the president’s cabinet and faculty, and can lead to

adjustments in Seminary practice. For example, student responses were a factor in our decision to move toward a new class scheduling, adopted in fall 2003. In the exit interviews, students

expressed a desire not to have classes on Monday morning and Friday afternoon to allow more time for work scheduling, family time, and weekend ministry.

Another method for evaluating student services is through periodic student surveys. For

example, we evaluate our chapel program every three years, the most recent evaluation being fall

2006. One of our findings from this survey, conducted during fall registration, was student

interest in personal testimonies during chapel services, a feature that was begun in fall 2006. In addition, every other year we survey those who participate in our family nurture program; one of the significant findings in this process has led to a family nurture curriculum, offered as a cycle of electives from year to year and focusing on grace-centered marriage, grace-centered parenting, and other topics. Moreover, in 2004–05, there was a major survey and study done in the area of placement services. One of the findings from this survey was the importance of networking in the placement process, which has led to more intentionality of bringing denominational agency coordinators and other stakeholders to campus in order to network with our students.

7.3.3 Students should receive reliable and accessible services wherever they are enrolled and however the educational programs are offered.

Student services are offered to all students, regardless of degree program or location. The

Student Services staff, led by the vice president for student services, oversees a number of 228

services, each with a specific focus for student life: assimilation for new students, campus

worship, on-campus student fellowship and interaction, and ministry to those who are struggling.

Services for New Students

The Student Services staff meets new students’ needs in a number of ways. From the time

a new student arrives on campus, intentional hospitality is offered. New families are met by a

crew of students (arranged by Student Services) to help them move into their apartments; in

addition, meals are provided to help with acclimation to a new place. During the summer,

picnics, ice-cream socials, orientations, and the President’s Welcome Dessert, all coordinated by

Student Services, afford students opportunity to orient and assimilate into the Covenant

Seminary community.

Students who come for intensive courses, such as DMin and distance learning students,

have their own relational emphasis services—meals provided by the Seminary, opportunities to

interact with faculty outside the classroom, and when possible living space on campus during

their stay. Each of these services enables our students who are not on campus in a regular fashion to participate in the community life of the Seminary.

A Community of Worship Average Chapel Attendance

An important part of Student Services’ 160 155 efforts is the coordination of weekly chapel 150 145 services. On Tuesday and Friday each week,

Students 140 voluntary chapel services are offered for 135 130 students, faculty, and staff. Along with faculty 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 229

and guest speakers, student leaders participate by using their gifts of music and planning. Since

our 1997–98 self-study report, we have found that chapel attendance has remained fairly

constant, ranging from an average of 142 to 158. In the current term (2006–07), a renewed focus

on chapel within our community, as well as support from administrators to allow their staff

members to attend chapel services “on the clock,” has made a significant difference in average

chapel attendance. During weeks when intensive classes for DMin and distance learning students

are being held (in the January term or during the summer), the Seminary generally hosts a chapel

service or daily devotionals led by faculty and administrators. In this way, the centrality of

worship for all our students is repeatedly affirmed as an institutional priority.

One day each semester, the Seminary cancels classes for a Day of Prayer. Faculty, staff,

and students meet together for an extended time of worship and sessions of individual prayer,

small group prayer for individual needs, and corporate prayer for the Covenant Seminary

community as a whole and for other needs around the world. All of this is followed by lunch

provided by the Seminary.

A Community of Fellowship

In order to assist the institution in developing community, Student Services coordinates

Covenant Groups. Led by faculty and/or staff members, these small groups of students meet each

week and are often focused on a particular topic or area of interest (world mission, church

planting, marriage and parenting); in fall 2006, Student Services organized eleven such groups.

In addition, Student Services is responsible for coordinating the first-year Covenant Theology

Groups, which serve as learning and community cohorts in the recent re-design of our first-year

Covenant Theology class. Students are required to participate in groups of ten to twelve students 230

under the oversight of a faculty mentor. In arranging these Covenant Groups, the vice president for student services intentionally makes the groups demographically diverse in order to assist students in relating to one another across the usual barriers of age, gender, ethnicity, region, and denomination.

In addition, Student Services offers many avenues for relational interaction and service

corresponding to individual student interests.

• Student Council serves the student body as a representative voice to the Seminary Administration and organizes three major social events each year— the Fall and Spring Picnics and the Winter Banquet.

• Student Mission Fellowship (SMF) is open to all students, faculty, staff, and their spouses interested in promoting concern for, commitment to, and involvement in world missions.

• Women Students Fellowship (WSF) is open to all female students and meets regularly to enjoy informal times of fellowship and talks from special guest speakers.

• Archaeology Club offers excellent opportunities to better understand the importance of history and cultural background to the teaching of biblical truth. Club members often help out at the W. Harold Mare Institute for Biblical and Archaeological Studies located on the Seminary campus.

• Chaplaincy Fellowship serves all students who have interest or experience in chaplaincy. The group prays for chaplains and those whom they serve, and educates students about ministry in the military, hospitals, prisons, corporations, retirement centers, national parks, and other settings.

• The International Women's Group provides regular support and fellowship opportunities, primarily for women who come from outside North America.

• The Sword and Thistle is a student writer’s group that meets to read and discuss each other’s work and publishes an annual volume containing the best student essays, poetry, and short stories.

Student Services maintains gathering space and communication pieces in order to provide

information and opportunities for community. One of the major projects funded by our 2005–08 231

capital campaign was the creation of a Community Center in Edwards Hall. This space, which

had been used as a major lecture hall, was renovated with chairs, couches, free Wi-fi, and a

coffee shop. It has become a major part of campus life, a place for students and faculty to gather

as a community of learners. In addition, Student Services maintains bulletin boards listing

employment opportunities, up-to-date housing information, items for sale, and community notices, as well as signs announcing chapel speakers and other special events. The Courier, a

weekly publication, serves as a regular source of campus news, information, and upcoming

opportunities.

A Community of Service

In order to assist the Covenant Seminary community in serving each other and the larger

community, Student Services coordinates a number of service opportunities. One activity that has a long history in the life of the institution is Campus Day. One day each semester, classes are

suspended so that faculty, staff, and students might meet for a brief worship service and then

team up for various work projects around the campus. Another service is the campus Free Store, which provides access to second-hand clothing, children’s toys, and other items donated for use within the seminary community. Also, for those students who are struggling financially, the

Seminary has arrangements with the local St. Louis Bread Company store, which regularly donates and delivers bread to the student community.

Another way that Student Services sustains a community of service is through our Family

Nurture Program. We offer a variety of opportunities for support groups, fellowship, learning,

and general preparation for the joys and challenges of vocational ministry. We host regular

monthly activities and, until 2004, a yearly Family Nurture Conference that addresses relevant 232 topics for ministry families. We also provide childcare for selected classes as well as our

Mothers Morning Out and Parents Night Out programs.

For students who are struggling emotionally, Student Services works together with the

Counseling department to offer counseling services at no charge to the student body. Second- year MAC students offer counseling under the faculty’s supervision; confidentiality is assured during the process.

7.3.4 Schools shall maintain adequate student records regarding admission materials, course work attempted and completed, and in other areas as determined by the school’s policy. Appropriate backup files should be maintained and updated on a regular basis. The institution shall ensure the security of files from physical destruction or loss and from unauthorized access.

The Registrar’s Office works together with the Admissions Office and other departments in order to maintain student records. Together with the Office of Academic Advising, the

Registrar’s Office not only charts student work attempted and completed, but also audits degree programs to ensure sufficient academic progress toward graduation. Utilizing the Seminary’s integrated database, information is stored and backed up on a regular basis; older records are maintained on paper transcripts which have been microfiched with backup stored off-campus in a secured location. Beginning in 2005–06, the Seminary has been working on digitizing key student records in order to preserve them from physical destruction or loss. In addition, all government regulations, especially those put forth by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy

Act (FERPA), are zealously observed. Access to student records is guarded by the Registrar; students may access their records after submission of a written request to see their own personal file. Transcripts are issued only on receipt of a signed request for the student. Students and student spouses who work with student records sign a confidentiality statement. 233

7.3.5 Institutions shall demonstrate that program requirements, tuition, and fees are appropriate for the degree programs they offer.

The Seminary consciously monitors and seeks to maintain tuition at levels comparable

with ATS peer institutions. Each August, in the Institutional Research Report prepared for the

President’s Cabinet, peer institution tuition costs for the previous fiscal year are noted. This

information is gathered through partnerships with the Admissions Offices of peer institutions, the

use of ATS fact books, and information shared at the annual Evangelical Seminary Dean’s

Council meeting. For more information on how our tuition rates relate to other institutions,

please see chapter nine.

7.3.6 Institutions shall publish all requirements for degree programs, including courses, non-credit requirements, and grading and other academic policies.

Degree requirements, academic policies, and information on tuition and fees are all

available to students in the Seminary’s catalog in either print or electronic formats. We

frequently refer students to the Seminary Web site, where the most current version of policies

and fee schedules may be found in PDF documents. Policies for individual classes are detailed in

faculty course syllabi distributed at the beginning of each course; copies of these are also

available on the Seminary’s Portal and through the office of the vice President for academics.

Likewise, these policies are replicated in the Faculty Manual in order to alert faculty to the

general policy guidelines for the Seminary. If faculty members deviate from the standard grading

scale in a particular class, they alert students to this in their course syllabi, distributed at the beginning of the semester. 234

7.3.7 Student financial aid, when provided, should be distributed according to the guidelines detailed in “Student Financial Aid” (see Policy Statements, Bulletin, Part 1).

7.3.8 Senior administrators and financial aid officers shall review student educational debt and develop institutional strategies regarding students’ borrowing for theological education. Based on estimates of compensation graduates will receive, the school should provide financial counseling to students so as to minimize borrowing, explore alternative funding, and provide the fullest possible disclosure of the impact of loan repayment after graduation.

Covenant Seminary’s Financial Aid program seeks to assist as many students as possible

with the resources to help meet their financial need and to further the mission of the Seminary.

Seminary-administered scholarships and grants are awarded based on merit, ministry potential or

experience, financial need, and other aspects of the student’s profile. Since our last self-study

report, the Seminary has doubled its investment in student financial aid and scholarships,

increasing from $815,265 in FY1998 to $1,630,969 in FY2006.

The Seminary distributes student financial aid in a fair and equitable manner, according

to the guidelines detailed in the ATS policy statement on “Student Financial Aid.” The Policy

and Procedures Manual of the Financial Aid Office outlines awarding procedures for in-house

financial aid, as well as for government loans. These procedures are strictly followed in awarding

and distributing financial aid. Students are made aware of these policies and procedures through

the Scholarships and Financial Aid Handbook, available to all current students. Students are

required to reapply for financial aid by April 15 each year. The Seminary’s financial aid

programs undergo careful review. All awards are reviewed by the Financial Aid Committee and

these programs are annually reviewed by an external auditor.

In addition, the Seminary carefully reviews student educational debt. As part of the

process for determining each student’s loan eligibility, the Financial Aid Office reviews the 235

student’s aggregate debt. The office counsels students to minimize debt. If the student already

brings significant debt with him or her to the institution, the Seminary requires students to speak

with Financial Aid staff and explain how they expect to be able to repay their debt. Students are

also encouraged to explore all other options (e.g., reducing class load in order to work more) before taking on additional debt.

7.3.9 The institution shall have a process for responding to complaints raised by students in areas related to the accrediting standards of the Commission, and schools shall maintain a record of such formal student complaints for review by the Board.

The process for a student to raise a complaint in areas related to the accrediting standards

of the Commission is clearly laid out in the Seminary’s Student Handbook. The standard process

is summarized:

1. Should a grievance arise, first approach the other(s) involved to try to resolve the situation privately.

2. If no resolution is reached, discuss the situation with the Dean of Students in order to develop a plan to resolve the problem.

3. If there is still no resolution, or in the case of a formal complaint, the problem will be heard by either the Student Concerns Committee or International Student Concerns Committee.

The Seminary currently has no formal student complaints on file.

7.4 Placement

7.4.1 In keeping with institutional purpose and ecclesial context, and upon students’ successful completion of their degree programs, schools shall provide appropriate assistance to persons seeking employment relevant to their degrees.

7.4.2 Theological schools should monitor the placement of graduates in appropriate positions and review admissions policies in light of trends in placement. 236

As part of our Student Services department, the Seminary employs a part-time director of placement. Working in conjunction with the vice 2006 MDiv Placement president of student services, the Placement Office Youth Pastor 10% offers services such as career counseling, resume Associ ate Pastor 20% development, and networking in order to assist in

Other Mi ni str y 24% the placement process. In addition, students have Campus Mi ni str y 8%

the opportunity to take a one-hour course for credit Chur ch Pl ant 2%

on Candidating and Transitioning into Ministry, Non-Or di nati on 0% Gr ad School 8% Placement Mi ssi ons 6%

Mar ket 6% Head Pastor 16% 100%

80% which is taught by the vice president of 60% 40% student services and covers necessary

20% information on the placement process. % of graduates placed 0% 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 The Seminary’s placement rate is MAC MDiv MAEM excellent. Since 1998, 440 out of 446

(98.65%) of MDiv graduates seeking placement with Seminary recommendation have been placed. During the same period, 128 out of 133 MAC graduates (96.24%) seeking placement with Seminary recommendation have been placed. This track record makes Covenant Seminary attractive to potential students and assists current students as well.

The Seminary also monitors placement of graduates in appropriate positions and

regularly reviews admissions, other policies, and curricular requirements in light of current

trends in placement. One of the trends that we have noticed is that our graduates usually find

their first ministry call as an associate/assistant/youth pastor. For example, in 2006, 38% of our 237

students experienced their first vocational call in one of these positions; the rates for previous

years were actually higher. This information led the faculty to approve a curricular change in

spring 2007, adding a new Educational Ministries course into the MDiv curriculum. We

recognized that many of our MDiv graduates were entering into their first call without a basic understanding of educational ministry in the context of the local church; here was a case where placement practices guided curricular review and revision.

7.4.3 The institution should, in the context of its purpose and constituency, act as an advocate for students who are members of groups that have been disadvantaged in employment because of their race, ethnicity, and/or gender.

Advocacy for Women Students

We are in increasing contact with churches regarding our women students in the MAEM

program to establish internships and placement opportunities for them. This is done through the

Placement Office along with coordination provided by our associate deans of student services

and student life. In addition, we continue to educate our constituency on issues surrounding

women in non-ordained ministry. In both 2000 and 2001, the Francis A. Schaeffer Lectures

addressed gender issues: “Gender and Faith: an Examination of Women’s Roles in the Church”

and “Gender and Faith: An Examination of Women’s Roles in Society.” Also, the Francis A.

Schaeffer Institute (FSI) hosts a regular forum entitled Discussions @ the Institute, which

provides a venue for discussing topics such as race and gender. On campus during our fall 2006

Connect Conference, the Seminary conducted workshops which considered potential venues for

service by Hispanic and African-American women.

238

Advocacy for Minority Students

The Seminary attempts to network minority students with ministry leaders within our sponsoring denomination as well as in the larger religious world. One example of this is our relationship with Wy Plummer, the African-American Ministries Coordinator for the PCA. Wy has served on the Seminary’s board and meets with African-American students during board meeting weekends. We also have brought Carl Ellis, a noted African-American author and speaker, to campus to network with minority students. Further, Robert Smith, an African-

American homiletician from Beeson Divinity School, was our 2005 J. R. Wilson Preaching

Lecturer.

As already has been noted, we give Strategic Church Leadership Scholarships to minority students who have a strong aptitude for pastoral ministry. The focus of the scholarship is to develop African-American pastoral leadership within the PCA; as a result, PCA members receive first preference for the scholarship. Also, our Financial Aid Committee has tried to provide assistance when possible to minority pastors and others involved in ministry who have financial need even if they are only able to attend seminary part-time. Most scholarships require full-time attendance.

We also seek to educate our constituency about minority issues. For example, in spring

2003, we hosted Michael Emerson, co-author of Divided By Faith, for our Francis A. Schaeffer

Lecture Series. In addition, we use Black History Month as an opportunity to highlight issues of racial justice and equality as well as to provide an opportunity to advocate for minorities within the church. FSI also sponsors ministry lunches featuring Bryan Chapell, Jerram Barrs, Luke

Bobo, Carleton Caldwell, and others discussing issues related to the Gospel and race. 239

Finally, we seek to bring minority and female ministry practitioners to campus for

weekend one-credit-hour classes, chapel talks, and ministry lunch presentations for exposure and

the encouragement of our students. Examples include Michael Jones (pastor), Ron Potter

(speaker/author/professor), Carl Ellis (writer/speaker), Charlie Owens (instructor at John

Burroughs School in St. Louis), Michelle Pottebaum (therapist and licensed clinical social

worker), Lauren Winner (writer/author), Nancy Pearcey (Francis A. Schaeffer Scholar at the

World Journalism Institute), and Jennifer Lahl (founder and national director of the Center for

Bioethics and Culture Network in California).

Advocacy for International Students

Student Services provides networking opportunities for international students. The

Seminary has a part-time director of international women’s fellowship. This fellowship is comprised of American and international students and assists international students in making the transition to the Seminary’s community. This group meets regularly for prayer and encouragement. They also offer soup for student lunches during certain seasons of the school calendar. In addition, Dr. Nelson Jennings, associate professor of world mission (a former missionary to Japan), hosts a Japanese fellowship. Our Japanese students participate in this group with other Japanese in the community.

Summary Evaluation

7.1 The Seminary has a highly relational, professional, and effective recruiting and admission

process that successfully enrolls a qualified, diverse, and sufficiently large student

body.

240

7.2 The Seminary admits students who are qualified for post-baccalaureate studies and

encourages diversity within the student body.

7.3 The Seminary’s Student Services division provides for a real sense of community life for

faculty, staff, and students, helping the Seminary to live out its “relational emphasis”

core value. In addition, the Seminary provides substantial student financial aid and

works with students to minimize their debt loads.

7.4 The Seminary has an outstanding placement record and consistently advocates for

students from minority statuses.

Recommendations

1. The Seminary should focus even more on providing assistance for students working

through life issues, dedicating a staff member to ministry formation issues.

2. The Seminary should continue to improve efforts to recruit students from ethnic and

racial minorities, including better publicity of available minority scholarships.

3. The Seminary should continue to evaluate and assess how curricular and co-curricular

changes might assist students in ministry formation and preparation. 243

CHAPTER EIGHT

AUTHORITY AND GOVERNANCE

Governance is based on a bond of trust among boards, administration, faculty, students, and ecclesial bodies. Each institution should articulate its own theologically informed understanding of how this bond of trust becomes operational as a form of shared governance. Institutional stewardship is the responsibility of all, not just the governing board. Good institutional life requires that all institutional stewards know and carry out their responsibilities effectively, as well as encourage others to do the same. Governance occurs in a legal context, and its boundaries are set by formal relationships with ecclesiastical authority, with public authority as expressed in law and charter, and with private citizens and other legally constituted bodies in the form of contracts. The governance of a theological school, however, involves more than the legal relationships and bylaws that define patterns of responsibility and accountability. It is the structure by which participants in the governance process exercise faithful leadership on behalf of the purpose of the theological school.

Covenant Seminary is blessed with a bond of trust among its board, administration,

faculty, and students that is real and palpable. Seminary administrators look forward to board

meetings where they have the opportunity to work together with leaders who genuinely care for

our institution. Faculty members look forward to weekly faculty meetings where they are able to pray together for each other and for students as well as to deal with matters related to faculty development, curriculum, programs, and student evaluation. Administrators and students work together in creative ways to further the work of the institution. All of this occurs within a framework in which each party knows and carries out its particular governance responsibilities with a mindset of service. Because the Seminary stresses that the indicative of identity and relationship comes before the imperative of duty (our “grace foundation” core value), relationships of governance are handled with respect and admiration. 244

8.1 Authority

8.1.1 Authority is the exercise of rights, responsibilities, and powers accorded to a theological school by its charter, articles of incorporation and bylaws, and ecclesiastical and civil authorizations applicable to it or, the overall educational institution of which it is a part. A theological school derives from these mandates the legal and moral authority to establish educational programs; to confer certificates, diplomas, or degrees; to provide for personnel and facilities; and to assure institutional quality and integrity.

8.1.2 The structure and scope of the theological school’s authority are based on the patterns of its relationship to other institutions of higher education or ecclesiastical bodies. Some theological schools have full authority for all institutional and educational operations. Other schools, related to colleges, universities, or clusters of theological schools, may have limited authority for institutional operations, although they may have full authority over the educational programs. Still other schools are related to ecclesiastical bodies in particular ways, and authority is shared by the institution and the ecclesiastical body. All three kinds of schools have different patterns for the exercise of authority, and in some schools these patterns may be blended.

8.1.2.3 Schools with authority limited by their ecclesiastical relationships shall develop, in dialogue with their sponsoring church bodies, a formal statement concerning the operative structure of governance for the institution. This statement must make clear where the authority for maintaining the integrity and vitality of the school resides and how that authority is to be exercised in actual practice. In schools of this type, the authority of the governing board shall be clearly specified in appropriate ecclesiastical and institutional documents.

Covenant Theological Seminary rejoices in the oversight provided by the Presbyterian

Church in America (PCA) and is an agency of that judicatory as outlined in the PCA Rules of

Assembly Operations (4-3). The General Assembly of the PCA exercises ultimate oversight over the Seminary, which is the only seminary officially affiliated with this Presbyterian denomination, through the election of trustees. These trustees are required to be ordained elders

(either teaching or ruling) within the PCA and are elected in four equal classes, the term of each class being four years. In addition, these trustees are required to “subscribe by signature without 245

any mental reservations to the doctrinal standards” of the PCA; this generally happens annually

at the fall board meeting (Bylaws, Article V).

Authority for the governance of the Seminary is clearly vested in its Board of Trustees.

This authority (both legal and ecclesiastical) is clearly stated in the Seminary’s Articles of

Incorporation, its Bylaws (reviewed and revised as part of the board’s 2005–07 review of the

Seminary’s purpose and goals), and the Corporate Bylaws of the Presbyterian Church in America

(A Corporation).

In addition, the General Assembly of the PCA exercises oversight by reviewing the

actions of the Seminary board. The board’s minutes are reviewed annually by a committee of

commissioners elected by the presbyteries of the PCA (Rules of Assembly Operation 13-1, 5);

the board’s minutes, budget, and other recommendations are formally approved by the General

Assembly, though in recognition of the board’s fiduciary responsibility, this approval is for

“audit purposes only” (Rules of Assembly Operation 13-6; 4-11). Moreover, the Seminary’s

Bylaws contain provisions for the working relationship and due process between the Seminary

and the judicatories of the PCA (Seminary Bylaws, Article XIII). As a Presbyterian seminary, we believe that this oversight by and accountability to the church is important. Not only does this relationship reflect our core value of “church leadership,” but it also secures the doctrinal commitments of the Seminary and underscores the church’s essential role in theological education.

The Seminary not only has a grant of authority from the PCA as its denominational

seminary, but also is incorporated under the General Not-for-Profit Laws of Missouri as a public

benefit corporation. It has received its charter from the State of Missouri Board of Education to

grant its degrees and run its programs within the bounds of this state. From each of these sources 246 of authority, the Seminary has produced a set of Bylaws, approved by the General Assembly, which governs the Seminary’s programs and administration.

8.1.3 Governing boards delegate authority to the faculty and administration to fulfill their appropriate roles and responsibilities. Such authority shall be established and set forth in the institution’s official documents and carried out in governing practices.

The board delegates the administration of the Seminary to the president, administration, and the faculty. The Bylaws specify that “at all times there is to be a clear differentiation between the policy-making functions of the Board of Trustees and the delegation to the President of the Seminary the responsibility for administering these policies approved by the Board”

(Bylaws, IV.2.2). The president is responsible for administrative staff appointments; he reports these appointments to the board (Bylaws, IX). Likewise, the Bylaws state that while the Board oversees the establishment of policies and procedures regarding faculty matters and approves the final selection of all faculty members (Bylaws, IV.2.4; IX), the administration and faculty’s responsibility for governance is clearly defined in the Seminary Bylaws (Bylaws, XI.6.1) and its

Faculty Manual.

8.2 Governance

8.2.1 While final authority for an institution is vested in the governing board and defined by the institution’s official documents, each school shall articulate a structure and process of governance that appropriately reflects the collegial nature of theological education. The governance process should identify the school’s constituencies and publics, recognize the multiple lines of accountability, and balance competing accountabilities in a manner shaped by the institution’s charter, purpose, and particular theological and denominational commitments.

8.2.2 Shared governance follows from the collegial nature of theological education. Unique and overlapping roles and responsibilities of the governing board, faculty, administrators, students, and other identified delegated authorities should be defined in a 247

way that allows all partners to exercise their mandated or delegated leadership. Governance requires a carefully delineated process for the initiation, review, approval, implementation, and evaluation of governing policies, ensuring that all necessary policies and procedures are in place. Special attention should be given to policies regarding freedom of inquiry, board-administrator prerogatives, procedural fairness, sexual harassment, and discrimination.

8.2.3 The collaborative nature of governance provides for institutional learning and self- correction, constantly developing the theological school’s knowledge of specific tasks, and remaining alert to developments in other organizations and institutions.

The process for the initiation, review, approval, implementation, and evaluation of governing policies at the Seminary is clearly and carefully delineated. The Seminary’s Bylaws specify a process of review that originates from the regular review process of the Seminary board’s Executive Committee; any changes recommended must follow the process specified by the Bylaws (Bylaws, Article XIX). The process for amending the Faculty Manual generally originates with the vice president for academics, who reviews the document every three years.

He then submits proposed changes in writing to the faculty for two readings before a vote is taken. Any changes to part one of the Faculty Manual, which is the contract portion, also must be approved by the Board of Trustees (Bylaws, IV.4.2.5). Changes in student policies often originate from the Student Council, who then submits proposals to the President’s Cabinet through the vice president for student services. The relational emphasis that serves as a core value for the Seminary is nowhere more evident than in the process of establishing necessary policies and procedures.

The Faculty Manual establishes policies on freedom of inquiry, sexual conduct, and discipline processes. In addition, it covers the means for handling student concerns, the relationship between the Seminary and our parent denomination, and the way faculty meetings are conducted. The Seminary’s Bylaws also contain statements regarding discrimination, board- 248

administrator prerogatives, and the board’s role as a court of appeals in case of discipline and/or dismissal.

The faculty and administration participate in board meetings. Before each board meeting, the faculty appoints one of its members to attend the board’s academic affairs committee meeting and the full board discussions. In addition, the various vice presidents and key senior staff attend the board meetings and give input and counsel for the board’s deliberations. This shared approach to governance is one of the strengths of Covenant Seminary.

8.3 The Roles of the Governing Board, Administration, Faculty, and Students in Governance Processes

8.3.0 The various roles that the board, the administrative leadership, and the faculty play in the development of policy and the exercise of authority should be clearly articulated. Because of their different histories and patterns of governance and administration, the role of the governing board varies from institution to institution; and the role also varies dependent upon the authority vested in the governing board and upon the institution’s relationship to other educational and denominational structures.

8.3.1 The Governing Board

8.3.1.1 The governing board is responsible for the establishment and maintenance of the institution’s integrity and its freedom from inappropriate external and internal pressures, and from destructive interference or restraints. It shall attend to the well-being of the institution by exercising proper fiduciary responsibility, adequate financial oversight, proper delegation of authority to the institution’s administrative officers and faculty, and the maintenance of procedural fairness and freedom of inquiry.

The Seminary’s board attends to the well-being of the institution in a number of ways.

First, the board does so through its organizational and functional committees. In these

committees, the board meets with appropriate Seminary administrators to help establish policies

for the Board of Trustees; “however, these board policies should never be administered by the 249 board; they should be carried out by the President and his staff” (Bylaws, Article XI.6). There are four main functional committees for the board:

• Academic Committee: Has responsibility for oversight of faculty addition and oversight, curriculum development, academic resources, and other matters.

• Finance Committee: Has responsibility for the financial oversight and integrity as well as the legal compliance of the Seminary.

• Advancement Committee: Has responsibility for the Seminary’s public image, financial development, and enrollment policies and practices.

• Student Services Committee: Has responsibility for overseeing the spiritual formation of the students as well as for providing a venue for student concerns to be raised to the board.

In addition, the board has three organizational committees:

• The Executive Committee of the board consists of the chairman, vice chairman, secretary, treasurer, the functional committee chairmen, and one at-large trustee. The Executive Committee assists the chairman and president in their joint responsibility to help the board function well by establishing the next meeting agenda and assessing the board and its work.

• The Trustee Development Committee is responsible for developing a strategy for developing future board members as well as planning board orientation and training.

• The Nominating Committee serves to nominate board officers and one at-large trustee for the Executive Committee.

The Seminary Bylaws repeatedly notes that the board delegates authority for the administration of its policy to the president and his staff (Bylaws, IV.2.2; XI.6). The president serves as the chief educational and operating officer of the Seminary (Bylaws, VII.1). The president is responsible for the overall program and operation of the Seminary, its long-range plan, the organization of its faculty and nomination of prospective faculty, its financial and spiritual welfare, and all administrative staff appointments. The president is authorized to 250

delegate his authority for areas of responsibility to vice presidents and other administrative staff

(Bylaws, VII.3; IX).

8.3.1.2 The governing board shall be accountable for the institution’s adherence to requirements duly established by public authorities and to accreditation standards established by the Commission and by any other accrediting or certifying agencies to which the institution is formally related.

The board is fully aware of and accountable for the institution’s adherence to government

regulations and to the accreditation standards established by ATS and NCA. Throughout the

2005–07 self-study process, the board was regularly updated by the president and vice president

for academics about the process. In addition, the board, per its Bylaws (IV.2.1), reviewed and

reaffirmed the Seminary’s mission statement and core values (September 2006); reviewed its

2002 Strategic Plan and committed itself to a new strategic planning process (Bylaws, IV.3.2;

January 2007); heard a presentation on the initial draft of the self-study report and affirmed the

Seminary’s findings and recommendations (April 2007); and through its Executive Committee,

approved the final draft of the self-study report submitted to ATS and NCA (August 2007).

8.3.1.3 Members of the governing board shall possess the qualifications appropriate to the task they will undertake. In accordance with the school’s purpose and constituencies, the governing board’s membership should reflect diversity of race, ethnicity, and gender. As fiduciaries, they should commit themselves loyally to the institution, its purpose, and its overall well-being. They should lead by affirming the good that is done and by asking thoughtful questions and challenging problematic situations. New members of the board should be oriented to their responsibilities, and the structures and procedures the board uses to accomplish its tasks.

The Seminary’s board members are well-qualified to discharge their responsibilities. The

Bylaws require that trustees be ordained elders (either teaching or ruling), and this, together with the nominating process, means that all board members have substantial experience in and respect 251

from the church. In addition, ruling elders elected to the board typically have substantial

experience in business (e.g., finances, investments, management and personnel). In addition, the

2006–07 board includes six ministers (including three who serve churches with over 1,000

communicant members). By background, ethnicity, experience, church size and type, and geography, the trustees are a diverse group. Since 1998, the board has been committed to

diversifying its ethnic make-up to better reflect the face of the church and its target culture.

While membership on the board is limited to ordained officers based on our sponsoring

denomination’s polity, our Bylaws allow us to appoint an Advisory Board that could include

non-ordained men and/or women. Members of the Advisory Board must be communicant

members of the PCA and are to have “expertise, skills, and/or resources that can help the ministry of the Seminary.” These advisory board members serve terms which are at the pleasure of the board. Over the past ten years, the Seminary has had six women serve on the advisory

board and make important contributions to the work of the institution.

The board not only oversees the finances of the Seminary, but also demonstrates their care for the institution by contributing to those finances as well. Since 1998, board members have contributed at least $50,000 nearly every year; in 2000, in conjunction with the Jewel of

Grace, Fire for Ministry capital campaign, the board directly or indirectly contributed over $4

million. While we have not completed the current By His Grace, For His Glory capital

campaign, at the January 2007 board meeting, the campaign leaders reported 100% board

participation. In all these ways, the board supports the work of the Seminary financially.

Board members are oriented and trained for their responsibilities under the oversight of the Trustee Development Committee.

252

8.3.1.4 Subject to the terms of its charter and bylaws, the board chooses the chief administrative leadership, appoints faculty, confers degrees, enters into contracts, approves budgets, and manages the assets of the institution. If, in accordance with an institution’s specific character and traditions, certain of these powers are reserved to one or more other governing entities, the specific character of these restrictions shall be made clear.

The Seminary Bylaws are clear that the board’s responsibilities include selecting the

Seminary’s president and setting the conditions of his employment (IV.2.2), appointing faculty

(IV.2.5), granting and conferring degrees (IV.2.6), entering into contracts (IV.2.12), approving the annual budget (IV.2.7), and managing the assets of the institution (IV.2.9). The board’s minutes demonstrate that the board carries out these functions in line with the mandate of the

Bylaws.

8.3.1.5 The governing board shall require ongoing institutional planning and evaluation of outcomes to assure faithful implementation of the school’s purpose, priorities, and denominational and theological commitments.

The Seminary Bylaws required the board to ensure that there is a sound Seminary planning process led by the president, resulting in a written long-range plan. This plan is to be reviewed annually and updated as needed. As described in chapter one of this report, the

Seminary last engaged in a process of strategic planning in 2001, which resulted in an adopted strategic plan in fall 2002. This strategic plan was reviewed annually by the Executive

Committee of the board between 2002 and 2007; in addition, administrators’ reports to the board highlight completion of aspects of the strategic plan. A comprehensive review of the 2002 strategic plan occurred at the January 2007 board meeting in order to prepare the Board for the next round of strategic planning. In addition, the board heard a full report from the Self-Study 253

Executive Committee in April 2007 to assist in preparation for strategic planning to begin in fall

2007.

8.3.1.6 The governing board shall create and employ adequate structures for implementing and administering policy, and shall delegate to the school’s chief administrative leadership authority commensurate with such responsibilities. In turn, it requires from these officers adequate performance and accountability.

The board’s organizational structure facilitates effective action. The officers of the board

are its chairman, vice-chairman, secretary, and treasurer. The officers of the board are assisted by

its organizational and functional committees. This structure enables appropriate accountability

between the Seminary’s president and his chief administrative leadership and the board. A large

portion of each board meeting is dedicated to the functional committees meeting with Seminary

administration and then the entire board hearing from the Seminary administrators and the

committee chairmen. In this way, the board’s structures assist in implementing and administering

policy.

8.3.1.7 In its actions and processes, the board serves in relationship to a variety of constituencies, both internal (e.g., administration, faculty, students, staff) and external (e.g., graduates, denominations, congregations, etc.) and should seek creative initiatives from all of these constituencies. Individual board members, who are drawn from various constituencies, shall exercise their responsibility on the behalf of the institution as a whole.

8.3.1.8 The board shall exercise its authority only as a group. An individual member, unless authorized by the board, shall not commit the institution’s resources nor bind it to any course of action, nor intrude upon the administration of the institution.

The Seminary Bylaws state clearly that the main responsibilities of the board are only

exercised as a collective body in consultation with the Seminary president (IV.2). While

individual board members do have duties appropriate to their offices—financial support of the 254

institution, advocacy between church and Seminary, preparation for board meetings, and

professional development—it is clear that authority is exercised only as a group.

8.3.1.9 The board shall have a conflict of interest policy. Ordinarily, members should not be engaged in business relationships with the institution, nor should they derive any material benefit from serving on the board. In the event that conflicts of interest arise, a board member must recuse himself or herself from any vote or participation in the board’s decision on that issue.

The Seminary Bylaws set forth a conflict of interest statement (Article XV). Each board member signs the conflict of interest policy annually at the fall board meeting. If there is a case

in which an apparent conflict of interest occurs or a future conflict may occur, the board member

is required to report such to the Board of Trustees (or the Executive Committee in between board

meetings) prior to engaging in any conflict of interest action. The Seminary has consistently

followed this policy.

8.3.1.10 Governing boards should be structured to conduct their work effectively. Board membership should be large enough to reflect the institution’s significant constituencies but not so large as to be unwieldy in its decision-making. The frequency of board meetings should be determined by the number and complexity of the issues the board is called upon to address. An executive committee of the board may be given the authority to address issues between meetings of the full board.

The Seminary Bylaws structure the board to consist normally of not fewer than twelve

and not more than thirty-two trustees. Currently, the board is composed of four equal classes of

six, each class serving a term of four years; hence, the current composition of the board is

twenty-four members. The 2006–07 Board of Trustees represents the Seminary’s significant

constituencies, demonstrates regional, ethnic, and vocational diversity, and is a good mix of

ordained ruling (lay) and teaching (ministerial) elders. 255

As of this writing, the board meets three times a year in regular, stated meetings on the

Seminary’s campus. The spring meeting is on the last Friday of April and the succeeding

Saturday; the fall meeting is on the fourth Friday of September and the succeeding Saturday; and

the winter meeting is on the last Friday of January and the succeeding Saturday. These meetings

may be changed by the board chairman only if special notice is mailed at least twenty days

before the original or rescheduled meeting date. The Executive Committee of the board

ordinarily meets twice each year at mid-points between the three stated board meetings: the first

Fridays of March and December. The board may delegate to the Executive Committee any of the powers and authority of the board in the management of the business and affairs of the corporation.

8.3.1.11 The board has the responsibility to hold itself accountable for the overall performance of its duties, and shall evaluate the effectiveness of its own procedures. It should also seek to educate itself about the issues it faces and about procedures used by effective governing bodies in carrying out their work. The board shall evaluate its members on a regular basis.

The Executive Committee of the board bears the responsibility for assessing the overall

performance of the board. Each year, the Executive Committee engages in a process of

evaluation, filling out questionnaires to assess the professional development and effectiveness of

the Seminary’s board and administration. In addition, at the end of each stated board meeting, the

chairman asks for verbal evaluations of how the meeting went and suggestions for improvement.

The board has expressed its interest in attending board meetings of other theological institutions

in order to educate itself about procedures used by effective governing bodies. The Seminary

president also works together with the chairman of the board to educate the board about what

effective boards do. Part of that educational process has been participation in various ATS 256

functions on the role and development of boards as well as referring board members to items in

InTrust magazine.

8.3.2 The Administration

8.3.2.1 Under the governing board’s clearly stated policies and requisite authority, the chief administrative leadership is responsible for achieving the school’s purpose by developing and implementing institutional policies and administrative structures in collaboration with the governing board, faculty, students, administrative staff, and other key constituencies.

Under the authority of and subject to the evaluation of the Board of Trustees, the

Seminary president leads the administration in fulfilling the Seminary’s purpose and mission

statement. The Seminary’s administrative structure is clearly defined and well understood. As

shown on the Seminary’s organization chart (found in the Supplemental Materials) four division

heads report directly to the president: the vice president for academics; the vice president for advancement; the vice president for business administration; and the vice president for student services. Each is well qualified, with substantial background and training. Each has a written job description outlining both individual and departmental responsibilities; these responsibilities include evaluating and improving the effectiveness of their departments. These job descriptions serve as the basis for evaluation of both individual and departmental performance. While formal performance evaluations are made annually, review and goal-setting take place on an almost weekly basis in meetings with the president and in regular departmental reports to respective committees of the Board of Trustees. Each administrator, in turn, prepares job descriptions for and evaluates performance of departmental personnel.

These four administrative officers, with the president, make up the President’s Cabinet.

This cabinet meets weekly during the academic year and periodically during the summer to 257

provide administrative oversight for the overall program of the Seminary. The President’s

Cabinet drafts the proposed budget; bears primary responsibility for annual evaluation,

assessment, and goal-setting for the institution; and serves to implement the president’s vision and the board’s policy. Twice a semester, a larger group of administrators, along with key faculty

members, meets for a time of planning and vision casting. This group, the President’s Advisory

Council, includes the four vice presidents as well as the associate deans of educational ministries,

student services, and ministry formation; the directors of enrollment, public relations, and

institutional research; and selected faculty members. This body serves as an important sounding

board for the president and for other administrators, shares and assists in honing the president’s

vision and priorities for the institution, and supports its members in prayer both for work and

personal concerns.

8.3.2.2 Administrative leaders should implement the institution’s theological convictions and shared values in the way they manage the school’s financial, physical, and human resources; consult and communicate with constituencies; and ensure fairness in all evaluation and planning activities.

Administrative leaders regularly review the mission statement and core values at the

annual President’s Cabinet retreat, which occurs in August. During that time, the president leads

through a period of reflection on how the institution might more effectively implement its

mission in the coming year. The cabinet reviews information on key areas in each division from

the previous year, supplied by the director of institutional research, which enables the entire

group to evaluate and plan in ways that accomplish the mission of the institution fairly and

equitably. In addition, throughout the year, this mission statement and these core values serve as

a touchstone against which various institutional decisions are regularly assessed. It is not unusual 258 for an administrator to redirect a conversation about a particular pending action or decision back to issues related to the institutional mission and core values.

8.3.2.3 Administrative leaders and staff shall include, insofar as possible, individuals reflecting the institution’s constituencies, taking into account the desirability of diversity in race, ethnicity, and gender. They should be sufficient in number and ability to fulfill their responsibilities. They should have adequate resources and authority appropriate to their responsibilities.

8.3.2.4 The responsibilities and structures of accountability shall be clearly defined in appropriate documents.

The Seminary’s administration, faculty, and staff adequately reflect the institution’s constituencies and take into account the diversity in race, ethnicity, and gender. Over the past two years, the Seminary has added two minority members to its full-time faculty; they join other part-time African-American adjunct faculty members. From 2000-07, we had an African

American serve as director of the Francis A. Schaeffer Institute. In addition, we have two

African-American women who serve in the Business Office. We also have a number of women who serve in significant positions in the institution: senior director of advancement; associate deans of academic services and student life; controller; registrar; associate librarian for technical services; and director of financial aid.

Each staff member has a job description, understands his or her place in the institution’s organizational chart, and recognizes the role that his or her particular job plays in accomplishing the Seminary’s mission. Regular staff meetings in various departments, interdepartmental task groups, and full-staff meetings held each semester further inform and unify staff regarding roles and mission.

259

8.3.3 The Faculty

8.3.3.1 Within the overall structure of governance of the school, authority over certain functions shall be delegated to the faculty and structures devised by which this authority is exercised. Normally, the faculty should provide leadership in the development of academic policy, oversight of academic and curricular programs and decisions, establishment of admissions criteria, and recommendation of candidates for graduation. The faculty should participate in the processes concerning the appointment, retention, and promotion in rank of faculty members.

The faculty is generally responsible for leadership and oversight of the Seminary’s

academic and instructional programs. Under the authority of the president and the board, the

faculty concurs with the vice president for academics in establishing academic policies and

programs, oversees academic programs and curricula, concurs with the director of enrollment in

establishing admissions criteria, recommends to the president candidates for faculty appointment,

and governs its own internal affairs.

Specifically, as the faculty exercises oversight of the Seminary’s academic programs, it

utilizes its Curriculum Committee to evaluate and assess program competencies, goals, and

outcomes, and to make proposals for changes to various curricula. In addition, the faculty has spent considerable time in faculty meetings during 2005 to 2007 reviewing the MDiv core curriculum; each faculty member responsible for a particular part of that curriculum has presented his program goals and objectives, methods of instruction, and ways by which his class accomplishes the Seminary mission. These presentations will be used to enable the Curriculum

Committee to provide a scope, content, and sequence outline of the entire MDiv curriculum in an effort to evaluate and assess outcomes and competencies more effectively.

The faculty works together to assess whether the mission and goals of the Seminary are

being accomplished in the lives of students. The faculty spends three separate faculty meetings 260

evaluating all MDiv students in areas of spiritual formation (“to walk with God”), academic

development (“to interpret and communicate God’s Word”), and interpersonal skills (“to lead

God’s people”). In these ways, faculty members assess whether student outcomes are

forthcoming in ways that are not fully obvious in the classroom. These assessments form the

basis for the Seminary recommendations for placement of graduates as well as recommendations

for counsel with the vice president for student services. In addition, the faculty approves certain

student requests, such as changing degree programs, or unusual extensions of time to complete

course work for a degree program. Other degree programs, such as the ThM and DMin, are

overseen by voting faculty members who are assisted by faculty-administration committees

appointed for that purpose. All our programs and outreach institutes are currently overseen by

voting faculty members.

The Faculty Manual spells out well the role that faculty members play in the appointment

of new faculty members (I.A). The vice president for academics works closely with department chairmen and other faculty members to discuss promising candidates. These candidates are then

brought to campus in order to lecture in class, speak in chapel, and meet with students and

faculty. If parties feel comfortable with the process, then the candidate is interviewed by the

faculty screening committee; if sustained, the candidate is recommended to the faculty for an

interview by the entire faculty. Although the faculty does not have veto power in appointments,

the president seeks the approval of the faculty before recommending the candidate to the Board

of Trustees. Once the faculty approves, the candidate is interviewed and ultimately approved by

the Board of Trustees.

8.3.3.2 Beyond the matters specifically delegated to the faculty, the faculty should contribute to the overall decision-making as determined by the institution’s structure of 261

governance. Such involvement is particularly important in the development of the institution’s purpose statement and in institutional evaluation and planning.

The faculty played an important role in the development and affirmation of the institution’s mission statement. For the past two years, we have spent a great deal of time evaluating our curriculum in the light of our mission statement and core values. Likewise, over the past two years, faculty members have taken turns writing commentary on our seven core values for the Seminary’s magazine, Covenant. Faculty members were instrumental in helping the institution to add “kingdom perspective” as the seventh core value for the mission statement.

The faculty has also assisted in institutional evaluation and planning. The president regularly informs the faculty about discussions within the administration and board. The faculty typically hears the president’s annual report to the General Assembly, prepared on behalf of the board. The faculty is also involved in major policy and planning discussions, both in regularly scheduled processes, such as strategic planning in 2002 and again in 2007, and in “as-needed” discussions such as the launching of the 2005 By His Grace, For His Glory capital campaign.

Several faculty members are also part of the President’s Advisory Council, designed to give input into institutional direction and strategic planning; and three of the five members of the

President’s Cabinet hold faculty rank, providing a voice for faculty concerns in institutional evaluation and planning.

8.3.4 Students

8.3.4.0 Where students take part in the formal structures of governance, their roles and responsibilities should be clearly delineated.

The Student Council offers important insight to the faculty, staff, and administration about various student concerns and issues. Led by a president, vice president, secretary, 262

treasurer, and representatives from various degree programs, the Student Council works closely

with the vice president for student services to represent student concerns to institutional

stakeholders. Whether it is particular issues facing those who live in campus housing (e.g., the need for a new playground), or the financial pressures students face and a desire to speak into the budgeting process, the Student Council provides a formal structure through which students are able to communicate their concerns to the administration.

Summary Evaluation

8.1 Covenant Seminary receives authority from state and religious bodies and utilizes

that authority in ways that effectively accomplish its missions in the lives of its

students.

8.2 The various stakeholders in governing Covenant Seminary use their authority well

on behalf of the institution.

8.3 The Covenant Seminary board, administration, and faculty all work together

collegially to govern the institution so that the school accomplishes its mission

and core values in the lives of students.

8.4 Students have formal structures of leadership that enable them to speak into the

administration of the Seminary in appropriate ways.

Recommendations 263

1. Covenant Seminary should continue to work within the boundaries of its

sponsoring denomination and native constituency to increase the diversity of its

Board of Trustees and Advisory Board, so that the voices of ethnic minorities

and women continue to be heard.

2. Covenant Seminary should continue to develop effective structures whereby

administrators and staff share in the governance of the institution in ways

appropriate to their rank and job descriptions.

3. Covenant Seminary should continue to focus on means by which students are

empowered to share in the governance of the institution so that their

perspectives and concerns are brought to bear early in the strategic planning or

budgeting processes. 265

CHAPTER NINE

INSTITUTIONAL RESOURCES

In order to achieve their purposes, institutions need adequate human, financial, physical, and institutional data resources. Because of their theological character, Commission schools give particular attention to human resources and to the quality of the institutional environment in which they function. Good stewardship requires attention by each institution to the context, local and global, in which it deploys its resources and a commitment to develop appropriate patterns of cooperation with other institutions, which may at times lead to the formation of clusters.

As the primary steward of institutional resources at Covenant Theological Seminary, the

Business Services division “seeks to administer, from a distinctly Christ-centered perspective, the operational and business matters of the Seminary with concern for sound stewardship of all

Seminary resources, so its stated mission is adequately supported and serviced.” It is from this foundation that the Seminary administers its human, financial, physical and data resources.

9.1 Human Resources

9.1.1 The theological school should value and seek to enhance the quality of the human lives it touches. The human fabric of the institution is enriched by including a wide range of persons. The institution should devote adequate time and energy to the processes by which persons are recruited, enabled to participate in the institution, nurtured in their development, and prepared for their various tasks within the institution. Human resources include students, faculty, administrators, support personnel, trustees, friends, church and public constituencies, volunteers, and external support and consultatives appropriate to the mission of the school.

The Covenant Seminary community, including faculty, staff, student workers, trustees, and volunteers, is a group of individuals with diverse backgrounds united by a dedication to the 266

Seminary’s mission. As evidenced in the Seminary’s organizational chart (see Supplemental

Materials), the administration labors to organize and structure the staff in ways that best serve the

purposes of the Seminary. This structure also provides well-defined lines of authority and ensures that access to the president and other senior administration is adequate and appropriate.

The Business Office distributed a survey to employees and students in the fall of 2006 designed to determine satisfaction with the services of the Business Office. The results indicated that while the community was generally very satisfied with its services, there is a need for staff with a stronger focus upon human resources issues. The Seminary then analyzed its performance with respect to the traditional roles of the human resources function to determine how best to respond. It was determined that there were deficiencies in the areas of hiring (particularly screening of prospective employees) and staff training. The controller and Business Office staff had excellent systems in place for the daily administration of payroll and benefits and there was no need to move these functions from them. Likewise, the present vice president for business administration has a background as a senior financial officer in healthcare administration, with a proven record for negotiating excellent benefits contracts at low cost.

Consequently, we determined that instead of creating a traditional director of human

resources position, encompassing all of these functions, we would create a director of operations

and staff development position, to be filled during FY2008. This position will centralize the

recruiting function, develop and utilize appropriate screening tools to assess prospective

employees, and oversee the new training coordinator position established in 2006. The person

filling this position will also monitor and foster employee morale, and identify staff concerns that

should be addressed at the President’s Cabinet level. 267

The Seminary has begun using an assessment tool called Caliper for employee screening

for senior positions. Caliper’s approach begins with objective and accurate assessment

instruments, which provide data for measuring a person’s potential, personality characteristics,

individual motivations, likely behaviors, and job-related progress. A consultant then guides us

through interpretation of the assessment tool. The assessment report is tailored to the position

and our type of organization. In addition, in fall 2006, Information Technology Services staff

developed in-house a testing tool to be used to assess prospective employees’ proficiency with

word processing, spreadsheet, and database applications. This tool is presently in a testing phase

and should be fully implemented by June 2007.

New hires view an orientation presentation that covers information in the Employee

Handbook, which is available to all online. Representatives in the Business Office visit with new

hires to enroll them in various benefit packages. Hiring managers orient their new staff by

introducing them to faculty and staff, giving them a tour of the facilities, providing them with

computer, network, phone, and building access and providing job manuals and training. Hiring

managers utilize the rich pool of skills that students and their spouses bring to the community

whenever possible. Students work in many departments around campus in part-time positions

and we currently have seven student spouses in full-time positions.

9.1.2 Theological schools should support the quality of community through such means as policies regarding procedural fairness, discrimination, and sexual harassment.

As outlined in the Covenant Seminary Staff Handbook, the Seminary does not discriminate on the basis of race, national or ethnic origin, age, or physical handicap. The

Seminary does not discriminate on the basis of gender except as required by the ordination 268

policies of our sponsoring denomination, the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA). Sexual harassment violates the life of the community and conflicts with the Seminary’s purpose.

Allegations of sexual harassment are immediately and thoroughly investigated, and prompt and appropriate disciplinary actions are taken—up to and including termination of an employee and/or expulsion of a student found to be guilty of such behavior. The Staff Handbook includes a more detailed description of the Sexual Conduct Policy.

9.1.3 The theological school shall: (a) engage the numbers and the qualities of human resources needed to implement the programs of the school in keeping with its purpose; (b) develop appropriate personnel policies and procedures to be approved by the Board of Trustees and implemented by the administration; (c) ensure that these policies are clear and adequately published; include reference to job performance evaluation, termination, sexual harassment or misconduct; and conform to applicable requirements mandated by federal, state, or provincial jurisdictions; (d) provide for equitable patterns of compensation; (e) provide clear written job descriptions for all members of the staff; and (f) provide appropriate grievance procedures.

Covenant Seminary labors to engage the numbers and qualities of human resources it

needs to carry out its programs. Staffing levels are the responsibility of each administrator under

the oversight of the president and the vice president of business administration. With the growth

in the number of students that the Seminary has experienced over the last ten years, staff levels in

most departments have grown conservatively as technological efficiencies and automation have

minimized the number of needed additional resources. Some departments, including Financial

Aid, Admissions and Information Technology Services have grown significantly, while others

have remained the same or even decreased in personnel due to these efficiencies. For example,

by streamlining processes, the Business Office has been able to reduce staffing from five full-

time staff members to three. 269

Appropriate personnel policies and procedures have been developed and implemented by

the Administration and approved by the Board of Trustees. These policies are clear and

adequately published in the Staff Handbook, which is available online for all employees. Policies include those regarding job performance evaluation, termination, sexual harassment and misconduct, discrimination, and grievances, and conform to requirements mandated by applicable laws. Policies are communicated to new employees at the time of employment and changes or additions are communicated to all employees as they occur. There are no formal complaints on file.

Grievance procedures are outlined in the Staff Handbook and are based on the biblical

principles listed in Matthew 18:15–17, which instructs individuals to resolve matters directly

with the other party(s) whenever possible. If a grievance is unresolved, all parties involved

follow the normal chain of command in their area until the issue is resolved (there are exceptions

noted in our policy on sexual harassment). We are not aware of any unresolved grievances.

All positions have current and clearly written job descriptions. Changes to job

descriptions are updated by the hiring manager as necessary. Copies of job descriptions are kept

by the hiring manager and the employee.

The Seminary is working to establish and maintain equitable compensation for faculty

and staff members. Oversight for this falls to the vice president for business administration, who

uses data from ATS and CUPA (College and University Professional Association for Human

Resources) to benchmark compensation for faculty and senior staff members. Using that data,

the President’s Cabinet recently set salary ranges for vice presidents, senior directors, and

directors. A wage grid for hourly employees is now being developed. In 2004, a study was

conducted of all student pay rates across all departments. The vice president for business 270

administration then guided department heads in an effort to narrow the range of pay rates and to

compensate similar student jobs equitably. More recently, a salary grid has been designed to

establish general guidelines for hiring hourly and salaried workers.

9.2 Financial Resources

9.2.0 Because quality education and sound financial policies are intimately related, theological schools should be governed by the principles of good stewardship in the planning, development, and use of their financial resources. The financial resources should support the purpose of the school effectively and efficiently as well as enable it to achieve its goals. The financial resources of the school should be adequate to support the programs, personnel (faculty, staff, students), and physical plant/space both in the present and for the long term. The financial resources should allow the school to anticipate and respond to external changes in the economic, social, legal, and religious environment.

Adequate financial resources have been and continue to be essential to enabling the

Seminary to achieve its mission “to train servants of the triune God to walk with God, interpret and communicate God’s Word, and lead God’s people.” Governed by sound stewardship principles in planning, development, use of resources, and oversight from the Board of Trustees, the Seminary continues to generate the necessary financial resources to support its programs, personnel, physical plant/space, and data resource needs. The Seminary’s Long-Range Plan, adopted in 2002, along with annual goals, guides the use of these financial resources and illustrates our desire to provide the highest quality theological education and training.

The Seminary’s financial position has been strengthened during the last ten years by creating and maintaining stable and predictable sources of revenue, preserving the purchasing power of the Seminary’s financial assets, allocating major unrestricted gifts towards the

Seminary’s endowment or major capital projects, operating with a balanced budget, lowering the endowment spending rate, and adopting other prudent investment policies for the endowment. 271

9.2.1 The Financial Condition of the School

9.2.1.1 Theological schools should maintain the purchasing power of their financial assets and the integrity and useful life of their physical facilities. While year-to-year fluctuations are often unavoidable, schools should maintain economic equilibrium over three or more years, retain the ability to respond to financial emergencies and unforeseen circumstances, and show reasonable expectations of future financial viability and overall institutional improvement.

Since the last self study in 1997, the Seminary has maintained economic equilibrium.

From 1998 to 2006, the Seminary’s total revenues increased by 69%. Offset by inflation of about

25% , the Seminary experienced a Total Reveues and Expenses $10,000,000 considerable increase in buying

$9,000,000 power during this time period (see

$8,000,000 accompanying “Total Revenues and $7,000,000 Expenses” graph). $6,000,000

$5,000,000 Revenues increased every

$4,000,000 year except one, FY2004, when 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Fiscal Year there was a 6% decrease. This To t al Reveues Total Expenses Revenue need ed t o co ver inf lat io n downturn in revenue was primarily due to negative endowment returns and lower donor support caused by recessional factors present in the US economy. In addition, in FY2004 the Board of Trustees lowered the endowment spending rate from 7% to 5% for funds that can be used to support current operations. The lower rate was instituted in order to better safeguard the intergenerational equity of the endowment. 272

The use of the endowment’s earnings reserve (unrestricted funds available for various

financial needs), increases in tuition/fee revenue, and a 6% budget cut in FY2004 (the only

overall budget cut since 1997) enabled the Seminary to weather the unstable market conditions

of that period.

Reserve resources are in place to respond to external changes in the economic, social,

legal, and religious environments. The Seminary has a $500,000 operating line of credit from a

local bank to finance current Seminary operations and maintains funds in a quasi-endowment for

emergency purposes. The administration also operates with no debt for major construction

projects, leaving debt capacity available for emergency purposes. In addition, the Seminary owns

off-campus real estate that could be used as collateral and/or sold in an extreme financial

emergency. The Seminary employs King Maynord LLC and Thompson Coburn LLP as legal

counsel in matters regarding contracts, real estate transactions, the foundation, and other matters.

No major legal matters have transpired during the last ten years.

These strong indicators of past performance and planned emergency safeguards help us

form reasonable expectations of future financial viability and overall institutional improvement

of the Seminary. Sources of Revenue

% % % % % % % FY Tuition total Restricted total Gifts and total Student total Other total total Auxiliary total Total % Ending and Fees rev Income rev Grants rev Aid rev Income rev Transfers rev Income rev Revenue Δ 1998 $2,515,700 46% $181,791 3% $1,598,690 29% $136,103 2% $113,992 2% $513,649 9% $403,458 7% $5,463,383 -- 1999 $2,711,978 45% $209,124 3% $1,636,489 27% $146,050 2% $173,882 3% $771,800 13% $442,869 7% $6,092,192 12% 2000 $2,739,630 40% $443,848 6% $1,730,393 25% $199,501 3% $243,556 4% $1,068,000 16% $449,162 7% $6,874,090 13% 2001 $2,834,296 38% $711,412 9% $1,747,647 23% $201,916 3% $221,828 3% $1,336,296 18% $465,985 6% $7,519,380 9% 2002 $3,236,070 41% $679,683 9% $1,794,768 23% $202,259 3% $146,841 2% $1,276,170 16% $487,640 6% $7,823,431 4% 2003 $3,509,954 43% $881,761 11% $1,782,029 22% $212,058 3% $208,830 3% $1,127,075 14% $477,353 6% $8,199,060 5% 2004 $3,974,760 51% $701,954 9% $1,609,509 21% $192,703 2% $86,761 1% $671,820 9% $490,545 6% $7,728,052 -6% 2005 $4,318,471 50% $1,049,093 12% $1,759,529 20% $196,373 2% $161,929 2% $723,700 8% $475,468 5% $8,684,563 12% 2006 $4,497,060 49% $1,134,457 12% $1,763,186 19% $225,449 2% $138,119 1% $963,080 10% $530,269 6% $9,251,620 7%

273

9.2.1.2 A theological school shall have stable and predictable sources of revenue such that the current and anticipated total revenues are sufficient to maintain the educational quality of the institution. Projected increases in revenue, including gift income, should be realistic. The use of endowment return to fund expenditures budgets should be prudent and in accordance with applicable law.

The Seminary follows a planned course to increase predictable sources of income in

order to maintain the educational quality of the institution. As illustrated in the accompanying

“Major Sources of Revenue” graph, during the last ten years, most sources of income for the

Seminary have been reasonably stable, while others have significantly increased. From 1998 to

Major Sources of Revenue 2006, the Seminary experienced a $4,500,000 $4,000,000 significant increase in tuition/fee $3,500,000 $3,000,000 revenue (a 79% increase) that was $2,500,000

$2,000,000

$1,500,000 largely due to a mix of tuition increases

$1,000,000

$500,000 and student FTE growth. This increase

$0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Fiscal Year in tuition/fee revenue allowed the

Tuition/Fees Gif ts & Grants Restricted Income Auxiliary Income Seminary to reduce its dependence on

gifts and grants, lowering its contribution to overall revenues by 10% since 1998. During the same period, the Seminary experienced a significant increase in restricted income funds, now accounting for 12% of total revenue (up from 3% in 1998). Auxiliary income and student aid remained fairly steady, accounting for roughly 6% and 2% respectively of total revenue. 274

As mentioned, the significant increase in tuition/fee revenue was largely due to annual increases in tuition/fees as well as Tuition Rate Comparison- Peer Schools $4 50 consistent increases in student FTEs. From $4 00

$3 50 1998 to 2006, student FTEs (fall semester, $3 00 for credit) rose from 370 to 453, reflecting $2 50 a 22% increase in FTEs. From 1998 to $2 00

$150 2006, the tuition rate rose from $220 to $100 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 $340 per credit hour (a 55% increase). This Fiscal Y ear Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary Co venant Theolo gical Seminary increase in the tuition rate is consistent Westminster Theological Seminary Reformed Theological Seminary with tuition hikes at peer seminaries and reflects the increased cost of education during that period (see accompanying “Tuition Rate Comparison—Peer Schools” graph).

The “Major Revenue Streams (net of costs”) graph (see below) illustrates that endowment revenues peaked in FY2001 and then decreased by $700,000 or 43% during the next

three years. Endowment revenues for Major Revenue Streams (net of costs) operations then increased by 30% during $3,000,000

$2,750,000 $2,500,000 the following two years. In FY2005, the $2,250,000

$2,000,000 $1,750,000 Board of Trustees forgave a loan from $1,500,000

$1,250,000 $1,000,000 unrestricted endowment to the plant $750,000

$500,000 $250,000 fund in the amount of $1,946,000. This $0

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Fi scal Y ear loan had been granted to acquire 9.2

Net Tuit ion/ Fees Net Annual Fund Endowment distribut ions N acres of property contiguous to the

Seminary. The endowment revenue used for operations in FY2005 was approximately $1 million. 275

To further improve financial stability, the Seminary has sought to reduce its dependence upon annual gifts and endowment draw. Where the endowment contributed nearly 20% to operations in 2001, that source now accounts for less than 10% of revenues in 2006. While we continue to work to expand our donor base and endowment fund, we expect these sources to remain relatively flat as a percentage of operating funds (30-35%) and not return to the 2001 levels of 42%. As a result, tuition accounted for about 37% of operating revenues in 2001, and that allocation has grown to just over 55% in 2006.

We believe these tuition income projections are realistic in light of recent efforts to promote full-time student status to our prospective students and current student body. These efforts include offering on-campus housing and scholarship incentives solely to students at full- time status and informing prospects of historic high withdrawal rates for part-time students. We expect that these efforts will increase full-time, on-campus enrollment and graduation rates, reduce withdrawals, and ultimately improve the educational quality of the Seminary.

As outlined in the Endowment Management and Investment Policies Manual, the

Seminary’s endowment is an “aggregation of gifts provided by donors with the requirement they be held in perpetuity to generate earnings now and in future years to support the Seminary’s scholarships, chairs, and ministry programs.” The Seminary operates in accordance with requirements by allocating a maximum of 5% of the adjusted weighted average market value of the endowment during the preceding 12 calendar quarters towards operational expenditures.

Prior to establishing the 5% cap, the Board of Trustees set the rate on a year-by-year basis. After several years of rapid growth in endowment assets in the late 1990s, due to campaign gifts and double-digit returns, the Board of Trustees allowed the draw cap to go as high as 7.2% in 2000 and the years immediately following. Then, in the midst of three years of sub-par returns, the 276

Board of Trustees lowered the cap outlined in the Endowment Management and Investment

Policies Manual to establish greater financial equilibrium for the endowment, allow it to grow at

least equal to annual inflation, and enhance its intergenerational equity.

By seeking to preserve and increase the purchasing power of the endowment through

increased real total returns, prudent spending rates, and continued donor deposits, the

Endowment Investment Committee manages the endowment effectively and prudently in accordance with the provisions of the Missouri Prudent Investor Act (RSMo 456 and 473).

9.2.1.3 A theological school should normally balance budgeted revenues and expenditures while employing a prudent endowment spending rate. Deficits weaken the institution and therefore should prompt the administration and trustees to take corrective action. A theological school shall be able to demonstrate that it has operated without cumulative losses across the last three years. If deficits have been recorded or are projected, the school shall have a plan to eliminate present and future deficits that is realistic, understood, and approved by the governing Board of Trustees. When reducing expenditures, the theological school should be mindful of its purpose and attend to the quality and scope of the degree programs.

The Seminary has been mindful of its purpose through the wise use of its resources. By

following fiscally responsible budgetary practices every year, the Seminary has not had an

operating deficit since 1988–89, prior to the last self-study. This prudent balancing of revenues

and expenditures has allowed the Seminary to achieve its educational goals as it improves the quality and scope of its degree programs.

As illustrated in the accompanying “Major Expense Areas” chart, the Seminary has

increased its expenditures in many key areas since FY1998, often far surpassing needed

inflationary adjustments. Three consecutive years of budget cuts to Institutional Support

provided much of the needed decrease in expenditures during the difficult economic period

between 2001 and 2004 as it helped maintain budgets in other key areas. 277

Major Expense Areas

Instruction and FY Institutional Academic Student Aid- Physical Ending Support % Δ Support % Δ Scholarships % Δ Plant % Δ

1998 $2,000,119 -- $1,709,852 -- $815,265 -- $567,646 -- 1999 $2,370,163 18.5% $1,858,101 8.7% $858,297 5.3% $624,026 10% 2000 $2,742,774 15.7% $2,131,254 14.7% $864,370 0.7% $689,326 10% 2001 $2,929,351 6.8% $2,629,309 23.4% $878,325 1.6% $768,636 12% 2002 $2,923,282 -0.2% $2,738,136 4.1% $969,747 10.4% $844,730 10% 2003 $2,864,350 -2.0% $2,876,950 5.1% $1,130,554 16.6% $861,152 2% 2004 $2,812,008 -1.8% $2,444,049 -15.0% $1,289,609 14.1% $873,728 1%

2005 $2,855,441 1.5% $2,935,587 20.1% $1,487,191 15.3% $901,034 3% 2006 $3,077,335 7.8% $3,115,069 6.1% $1,630,969 9.7% $1,063,685 18%

Budget increases in Instruction and Academic Support in all but one year and yearly increases in Student Scholarship expenditures reflect an effort to make seminary training more effective and affordable. The cut to Instruction and Academic Support in FY2004 was necessary due to the difficult economic and budget conditions that year and was followed by a 20% increase the next year. The Seminary also made necessary increases in Physical Plant to maintain and improve its physical resources, including those used in educational, residential, and work environments. These difficult budget decisions were made staying mindful of our mission to continually attend to the quality and scope of our degree programs.

The only major debt taken by the Seminary during the last ten years was in 2003 when

9.2 acres of property adjacent to the southwest section of the campus was purchased. $1 million was borrowed from a local bank and $1,946,000 was secured by way of loan from the

Seminary’s endowment. This funding process was approved by the Board of Trustees in order to secure the funds in a timely manner to purchase the property, which was seen as critical to the 278 growth of the Seminary and was a component of the long-range plan. A small, non-public capital campaign was initiated in order to pay back the bank-financed loan. Payments are being made on time as directed by the loan agreement, and the endowment loan was forgiven by the Board of

Trustees in 2005.

9.2.1.4 Endowments (including funds functioning as endowment) are frequently a major source of revenue for schools. A theological school (or the larger organization of which it is a part) should adopt a prudent endowment spending formula that contributes to the purpose of the institution while enhancing the stability of revenue for the school. A school shall demonstrate evidence of adequate plans to protect the long-term purchasing power of the endowment from erosion by inflation. The school (or university, diocese, order, or other larger organization of which it is a part) shall have formally adopted statements of investment policies and guidelines that set forth for trustees and investment managers the conditions governing the granting or withholding of investment discretion, investment goals of the institution, guidelines for long-term asset allocation, a description of authorized and prohibited transactions, and performance measurement criteria. Trustees should review these policies regularly.

The Seminary has formal Endowment Management and Investment Policies that comprehensively regulate the management of the endowment. This formally adopted policy was established to protect the long- Endowment (available for earnings) term purchasing power of the $22,000,000

$21,000,000 endowment and direct the $20,000,000 actions of the Board of Trustees $19,000,000

$18,000,000 and investment managers. More $17,000,000 specifically, it sets forth the $16,000,000

Seminary’s investment goals, $15,000,000

$14,000,000 long-term asset allocation 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Fiscal Year guidelines, authorized and 279

prohibited investment options, the endowment spending rate, and criteria for performance

measurement. This policy is reviewed regularly and was updated by the Board of Trustees in

January 2007.

As previously mentioned, the Board of Trustees lowered the endowment spending rate in

FY2004 to 5% in order to limit the consumption of endowment returns for current operations and

to be more consistent with the spending rates of other similar institutions (the 2006 Commonfund

Benchmarks Study for Educational Endowments and the 2005 NACUBO Endowment Study

reported the average spending rate for endowments of our size was 4.6% and 4.7% respectively

in FY 2005). This measure was necessary to protect the intergenerational equity of the

endowment from decreases in its long-term purchasing power due to inflation and overuse.

Despite lowering the endowment spending rate the Seminary has been able to meet its financial

obligations and increase the total value of the endowment by $5.7 million since 1998.

The accompanying “Endowment Return” graph illustrates rates of return for the years

1998–2006. It returned positive Endowment Return gains in every year but one 22% 20%

18 % (FY2002) and surpassed the 16 %

14 %

effects of inflation in every year 12 %

10 %

but two (FY2002 and 2003), 8%

6% when the securities market was 4% 2% experiencing the effects of a 0% 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 -2%

-4% recession. Fiscal Year

Endowment Return CPI / Inf lat ion 280

The effects of the U.S. En d o w m e n t V alu e recession and previously higher $32,000,000 $30,000,000

$28,000,000 spending cap are evident in the $26,000,000

$24,000,000 “Endowment Value” graph, with $22,000,000 $20,000,000 $18,000,000 the endowment market value $16,000,000 $14,000,000

$12,000,000 falling below the endowment real $10,000,000

$8,00 0,0 00

$6,00 0,0 00 value in FY 2001. The above 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Fiscal Year mentioned actions taken by the Endowment (M arket Value on 6/30) End o wment (Gif t V alue- Real) End o wment (Gif t V alue- No minal) Board of Trustees were implemented to address this.

9.2.2 Accounting, Audit, Budget, and Control

9.2.2.1 A theological school shall adopt internal accounting and reporting systems that are generally used in North American higher education. U.S. schools should follow the principles and procedures for institutional accounting published by the National Association of College and University Business Officers. Canadian schools should follow guidelines published by the Canadian Association of University Business Officers.

The Seminary follows the principles and procedures generally accepted for institutional accounting established by the National Association of College and University Business Officers

(NACUBO). Internally the Seminary uses a fund accounting method that allows us to compare operations with other seminaries. This method also easily translates into the Net Asset format required by generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). The Net Asset format is used to report our operations externally to our auditor and other membership organizations and 281

accreditors like the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability (ECFA), the Association of

Theological Schools (ATS), and the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools (NCA).

The Seminary’s accounting software, Great Plains Dynamics, is a Microsoft general

accounting system that includes add-ons for not-for-profits. Implemented in 1999, it replaced our

previous software, Quodata, which was less functional and difficult to use. Great Plains

Dynamics also integrates nicely with FRX reporting and the Seminary’s main database, CAMS

(Comprehensive Academic Management System), which is used by hundreds of other small to

mid-sized higher educational institutions. The secure and complex integration of these three

systems allows the Seminary to process, protect, and report its information with greater ease and

efficiency.

The Board of Trustees Finance Committee currently serves as the internal Audit

Committee as outlined in the Seminary’s Bylaws (XI.6.2). The financial operations of the

Seminary are reviewed by this committee and the Board of Trustees three times a year. The

Board of Trustees is currently reviewing the nature of the Audit Committee and considering restructuring it under a separate charter from the Finance Committee.

9.2.2.2 The institution shall be audited by an external, independent auditor in accordance with the generally accepted auditing standards for colleges and universities (not-for- profit organizations) as published by (for U.S. schools) the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants or (for Canadian schools) the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants. If an institution is not freestanding, the larger organization of which it is a part (such as a university or diocese) shall provide an audit of the consolidated entity.

The Seminary’s financial operations are audited annually by Humes and Barrington,

LLP, an external and independent auditing firm. Humes and Barrington’s certified public

accountants use auditing standards that are generally accepted in the United States for colleges 282

and universities (not-for-profit organizations) as established by the American Institute of

Certified Public Accountants. In their opinion, each year the Seminary’s financial statements

present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Covenant Theological Seminary.

9.2.2.3 The institution shall obtain from an auditor a management letter and shall demonstrate that it has appropriately addressed any recommendations contained in the management letter.

The Seminary annually receives from its auditor an Advisory Letter (Management Letter)

that includes comments, observations, and recommendations on the controls and procedures of

the Seminary. The letters include a section entitled “Resolution of Prior Year Management

Comments” that lists the actions taken by the administration to address the auditor’s

recommendations from the previous year. The Seminary generally receives very few recommendations and communicates to the auditors, in writing, actions taken to improve

deficiencies. All communications are reviewed and approved by the Board of Trustees’ Audit

Committee.

A recent recommendation included providing greater details concerning the purpose of

travel/entertainment expenditures. In response to this, the Business Office issued reminders to

those with budgetary responsibilities that participants in and purposes of travel/entertainment

expenditures need to be included on each receipt/reimbursement request. The Business Office

reviews these documents for appropriate detail and support.

9.2.2.4 A theological school shall ensure that revenues, expenditures, and capital projects are budgeted and submitted for review and approval to the governing Board of Trustees. Budgets should clearly reflect the directions established by the long-range plans of the school. Budgets should be developed in consultation with the administrators, 283

staff, and faculty who bear responsibility for managing the institution’s programs and who approve the disbursements.

The Seminary’s budget process takes several months and incorporates input from many

stakeholders, including staff, managers, directors, administrators, and the Board of Trustees. The

vice presidents for business administration (CFO) and advancement begin the budget process in

October for the coming fiscal year by projecting revenues for tuition, gifts, endowment returns,

and other revenue streams. Projections are made in consultation with the senior directors of

enrollment and development.

Administrators are then given several weeks to review budgets under their supervision,

consulting directors and managers about needed adjustments for the coming fiscal year in light of

revenue projections and the Long-Range Plan. Revised budget proposals are submitted and

reviewed by the CFO, who consults with the other administrators about making additional

adjustments if budget deficits or surpluses exist. Additional input is gathered from directors and

managers if needed. When the budget is balanced, it is submitted to the president for approval.

The Board of Trustees reviews the proposed budget in January and gives final approval if

no changes are requested. Though under the Seminary’s Bylaws (IV.1) the Board of Trustees has

the final authority to approve budget allocations, budget reports for the coming fiscal year are submitted to the PCA General Assembly for review. This process exists primarily for accountability and publication of requested annual support.

Major capital projects are planned by the President’s Cabinet and the Board of Trustees

in conjunction with the Seminary’s Long-Range Plan. Budgets are established by the President’s

Cabinet and approved by the Board of Trustees, which has final power and authority to authorize 284

the construction of new buildings or the renovation of existing buildings and the borrowing of

money on behalf of the Seminary.

Budget allocations fund directives specified in the Seminary’s Long-Range Plan. This is

best illustrated by fulfilled goals that include securing 9.2 acres of adjacent property, establishing

the Pastoral Retreat Center, creating a new Community Center in Edwards Hall, commencing a

capital campaign to build Founders Hall (a new academic and administrative building that

includes several new classrooms as well as space for faculty and staff offices), enhancing

existing community areas, endowing additional faculty chairs, adding more parking spaces,

increasing safety by redirecting automobile traffic away from pedestrian areas, adding three new

full-time faculty members, lowering the endowment spending rate to 5%, and creating a campus-

wide wireless computer network.

9.2.2.5 A system of budgetary control and reporting shall be maintained, providing regular and timely reports of revenues and expenditures to those persons with oversight responsibilities.

The Seminary’s system of budgetary control and reporting promotes accountability for

and stability to its financial resources by providing regular and timely reports of revenues and

expenditures to those with oversight responsibilities. Each month the Business Office provides

budget reports to administrators, directors, and faculty with oversight responsibilities that show

budget progress compared to projected targets in each department for the current period and year

to date. If needed, spending adjustments are made by the appropriate leaders to balance expense accounts. The CFO also monitors the Seminary’s cash flow on a monthly basis and addresses budget control issues when they arise. In addition, a comparative budget summary and

Endowment Performance Report is presented to the Finance Committee and Board of Trustees 285

for review three times a year. Each year the Board of Trustees receives a detailed explanation of

the budget outcome for the previous fiscal year as well as other key budget statistics that are used

to compare actual outcomes to targets.

9.2.2.6 While a theological school may depend upon an external agency or group (such as a denomination, diocese, order, foundation, association of congregations, or other private agency) for financial support, the school’s governing Board of Trustees should retain appropriate autonomy in budget allocations and the development of financial policies.

The Seminary’s Board of Trustees is granted authority under the institution’s Bylaws

(IV.1) to maintain appropriate autonomy in budget allocations and the development of financial

policies. Though the Board of Trustees maintains this authority, approved budget reports for the

coming fiscal year are submitted to the PCA General Assembly for review. This process exists

primarily for accountability and publication of requested annual support.

9.2.3 Business Management

9.2.3.0 The institution’s management responsibilities and organization of business affairs should be clearly defined, with specific assignment of responsibilities appropriately set forth. The financial management and organization as well as the system of reporting shall ensure the integrity of financial records, create appropriate control mechanisms, and provide the governing Board of Trustees, chief administrative leaders, and appropriate others with the information and reports needed for sound decision-making.

The Seminary’s management and organization of business operations are clearly defined

and include specifically assigned responsibilities. The vice president for business administration

(CFO) directs the financial and business operations of the Seminary. The controller reports to the

CFO and manages the accounting and other functions of the Business Office on a day-to-day basis. Reporting to the controller are two other full-time staff persons, the accounts payable clerk 286 and the accounting assistant, who assists with accounts receivable and other general administrative duties. These staff members have clearly defined job descriptions and understand the importance of their roles in maintaining secure, accurate, and useful business information.

Business Administration Staff Chart

Vice President for Business Administration (CFO)

Controller

Accounts Payable Clerk Accounting Assistant

The Seminary also has a system of financial management and reporting that helps ensure the integrity of financial records, includes appropriate control mechanisms, and provides the

Board of Trustees, administrators, and directors with information needed for sound decision- making.

The Business Office also employs a separation of duties and reconciliation process that enhances accountability and minimizes fraud. The processing of donor checks reflects these qualities. Mail is opened by the accounting assistant. Donor checks are totaled twice on calculator tape and compared. The checks are hand delivered to the development coordinator, who totals them, compares the total with the accounting assistant’s calculator tape, fills out the bank deposit slip, and returns the checks and deposit slip to the controller. A Development 287

Office report is also compared to the calculator tape after the donation amounts are entered into

Development’s database (CAMS). The controller deposits the checks and compares the bank receipt with the original tape. In all, three different employees process donor checks and compare results. Thus, this management system produces accurate and timely reports for the Seminary’s decision-makers and minimizes the risk of fraud and misrepresentation as evident by a history of clean, unqualified audits.

9.2.4 Institutional Development and Advancement

9.2.4.1 An institutional advancement program is essential to developing financial resources. The advancement program should be planned, organized, and implemented in ways congruent with the principles of the school. It should include annual giving, capital giving, and planned giving, and should be conducted in patterns consistent with relationships and agreements with the school’s supporting constituencies. Essential to the success of the institutional advancement program are the role played by the chief administrative leader in fundraising, the leadership and participation of the governing Board of Trustees, graduates’ participation, and involvement of faculty, staff, and volunteers. Advancement efforts shall be evaluated on a regular basis.

The Seminary’s advancement program seeks to build meaningful relationships with pastors, alumni, donors, churches, and other institutions that desire to invest in, intercede on behalf of, and/or influence others Unrestricted Annual Giving (Average/donor) for the sake of the Seminary’s $1,300 $1,200 geographical and generational $1,100 mission to train servants of the $1,000

$900 triune God. It is from this relational $800 foundation that the Seminary seeks $700 to raise resources for its mission. $600 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Fiscal Year 288

Flowing from the grace-oriented and relational emphasis of the overall mission of the

Seminary, the development program generates funds to support annual Seminary operations and

the long-range plan. Preferring more meaningful contact with a smaller number of constituents,

during the past decade the Development Office has implemented a more relational model of

fundraising in place of the direct-mail Cost to Raise a Dollar (all gifts) model of the past. As planned, this has $0.26 $0.24 resulted in a decrease in the overall $0.22 $0.20 number of donors. However, as $0.18 $0.16 resources have been re-allocated to $0.14 $0.12 more directly communicate the $0.10 $0.08 Seminary’s mission and foster strategic $0.06 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

partnerships with donors, the quality of Fiscal Year

relationships has significantly improved and the average gift size continues to increase.

Moreover, in FY2006, there were 135 donors with annual gifts in excess of $5,000. This was a

90% increase from a decade before when there were only 71 donors at that giving level. This

new relational model also helped reduced the cost of our development efforts while providing the needed funds for operation (see accompanying charts on “Unrestricted Annual Giving” and

“Costs to Raise a Dollar”).

Raising the awareness of the vital and strategic importance of training pastors for local

service in churches around the world and encouraging constituents to invest financially in this

mission has inspired generous response from our donors and returned greater unrestricted annual

gifts in seven out of the last nine years (see accompanying “Fundraising” chart).

289

Fundraising FY Unrestricted % Δ Total Gifts ending Annual Gifts Unrestricted Raised 1998 $1,600,456 2.3% $4,005,849 1999 $1,635,914 2.2% $5,107,174 2000 $1,730,484 5.8% $6,585,381 2001 $1,750,904 1.2% $4,505,868 2002 $1,793,687 2.4% $4,823,783 2003 $1,785,411 -0.5% $2,990,856 2004 $1,609,210 -9.9% $5,067,857 2005 $1,759,530 9.3% $2,877,682 2006 $1,763,186 0.2% $5,528,977

During the past decade, the Seminary has also had great success with two capital

campaigns. First, the Jewel of Grace, Fire for Ministry capital campaign of 1997–2000 successfully raised $14 million for the enhancement of the Seminary and the accommodation of both past and anticipated future growth. Second, at our April 2007 board meeting, we announced that we had fulfilled the initial $12.5 million phase of our current By His Grace, For His Glory

campaign. The campaign began in September 2005 and was scheduled to reach completion in

December 2008. Because of the campaign’s success and because of readjustment of campaign

goals, we have extended the campaign, hoping to receive an additional $1.5 to $3 million by the

end of the planned campaign period to allow the Seminary to fulfill components of its long-range

plans.

During the current capital campaign, the Development team leveraged many

opportunities to expand its use of volunteers, graduates, and faculty. At both regular church and

donor visits and special campaign visits, many presentations have been made by our Board of

Trustees, Advisory Board, faculty, staff, and graduates as they explain the impact Covenant

Seminary has made on their lives. Students have also been enlisted as part of the Founders and 290

Kern Scholarship programs to represent the institution at donor visits and conferences. This influx of volunteer support demonstrates the desire to enlist necessary human resources to accomplish the Seminary’s fundraising and branding goals.

Providing sound financial advice that equips our constituencies to manage their resources wisely is at the heart of our Planned Giving program. In addition to offering financial guidance in our quarterly publication, Covenant magazine, our director of planned giving offers free personal assistance with donors’ estate planning or other charitable giving needs. The Seminary also offers other financial and planned giving resources to our constituency through the

Covenant Theological Seminary Foundation. Moreover, the Seminary partners with the

Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) Foundation to support donors’ needs. Congruent with the mission of the Seminary, these financial tools and charitable giving resources provide an outlet for helping prepare future ministry leaders while securing current financial and tax benefits for the benefactors.

We are encouraged by the growing number of trusts administered by the Seminary and its

Foundation, the interest in planned giving, the number of donors who have indicated that they have included the Seminary in their estate plans, and the increasing number of contacts. In fact, during the last decade, the cumulative number of planned giving commitments and estimated value of those commitments has roughly doubled (see accompanying “Planned Giving” chart).

291

Planned Giving Estimated New Deferred FY ending Commitments Giving 1981– 1997 59 $14,942,600 1998 15 $10,268,092 1999 5 $1,472,700 2000 5 $624,700 2001 4 $3,022,800 2002 6 $258,900 2003 2 $400,000 2004 5 $223,700 2005 3 $21,700 2006 11 $3,126,700 Total 115 $34,361,892

Covenant Seminary has not only experienced success in its advancement efforts, but also has energized this success exponentially by utilizing a portion of this financial growth toward concomitant staff growth. The overall health and growth of the Seminary, due partly to the efforts of the Advancement team, is seen in the fact that each of the following positions within the Advancement team has been created in the past ten years:

• Senior Director of Advancement • Director of Church and Alumni Relations • Director of Public Relations • Associate Director of Public Relations • Special Events Coordinator

These strategic additions both addressed the need to be more effective in serving our constituencies and strengthened key areas of the overall advancement program, especially with 292

respect to our two capital campaigns. These additions have also reduced the stress on existing

Advancement staff.

9.2.4.2 The intention of donors with regard to the use of their gifts shall be respected. The school should also recognize donors and volunteers appropriately.

Covenant Seminary is committed to recognizing donors appropriately and to using their

gifts in a way that respects their intentions. This commitment flows out of our desire to honor

donors with our gratitude as well as to cultivate honest, respectful, and meaningful relationships

with those who share our vision. The Seminary recognizes and respects the intentions of donors

in various ways.

The Development staff strives to call each donor personally, whatever the size of the gift,

to thank them for their gift and to make sure we have registered the gift in accordance with the donor’s wishes. Development also follows up every gift with a receipt within seven business days. Receipts confirm the donor, date, amount, and the use of the gift. The Seminary also provides its donors a tax substantiation report at year end for their convenience. Sometimes personal visits or special thank you cards are made for our donors when appropriate. To protect donors’ privacy, the Seminary does not publicly list donor names or gift amounts.

To further protect the intention of donors with regard to the use of their gifts, the

Seminary accepts restricted and unrestricted gifts for both annual use and for endowment

purposes. Restricted accounts are maintained and managed by the Business Office using

principles of fund accounting to limit the use of these funds in accordance with activities or

objectives specified by the donor. These objectives and restrictions are listed in the Covenant

Theological Seminary Endowment, Annuity, and Unitrust Fund Restrictions document. The 293

Seminary’s external auditor monitors the use of these and other funds to ensure compliance.

Additionally, our annual membership in the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability

(ECFA) also illustrates our commitment to soliciting and stewarding financial resources responsibly.

9.2.4.3 When auxiliary organizations, such as foundations, have been established using the name and/or reputation of the institution, the school should be able to demonstrate that those organizations support institutional aspirations and are regularly audited by independent accountants.

The Covenant Theological Seminary Foundation was established as a corporation in 1998

under General Not-for-Profit Corporation Law of Missouri to promote biblical stewardship,

primarily through estate planning, among the constituents of Covenant Theological Seminary.

The Foundation’s bylaws outline other purposes that include accepting donations on behalf of the Seminary, promoting deferred and charitable giving plans, and providing a resource of expertise upon which the Seminary can draw in developing estate planning programs and other

charitable transfers. A Board of Trustees governs the Foundation but is responsible to report for

approval of its actions to the Board of Trustees of the Seminary. This line of authority and the

naming the Foundation after the Seminary clearly communicate its auxiliary support of the

Seminary’s mission and interests. By offering the Seminary’s constituency excellent and

professional financial planning products and services, the Foundation contributes to the name

and reputation of the Seminary as well.

The Covenant Theological Seminary Foundation is audited annually alongside Covenant

Seminary’s financial operations by Humes and Barrington, LLP, an external and independent

auditing firm. Humes and Barrington’s certified public accountants use generally accepted 294 auditing standards in the United States for colleges and universities (not-for-profit organizations) as established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. In their opinion, each year the Foundation’s financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Covenant Theological Seminary Foundation.

9.3 Physical Resources

9.3.1 The physical resources include space and equipment as well as buildings and grounds. A theological school shall demonstrate that the physical resources it uses are adequate and appropriate for its purpose and programs, and that adequate funds for maintenance and capital renewal are budgeted.

The Seminary has made major investments in its physical resources during the last ten years, including the expansion and renovation of the Buswell Library, the purchase of several

Total PPD Investment homes and 9.2 acres of adjacent property, $1,100,000 the addition of 165 new parking spaces, $1,000,000

$900,000 the addition and reconfiguration of

$800,000 . campus roads, and the renovation of

$700,000 Edwards Hall to house the new

$600,000 Community Center. In addition, the $500,000 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Seminary continues to increase its annual Fiscal Year

Total PPD Investment PPD budget needed t o cover inf lat ion investment in its Physical Plant

Department (PPD; see accompanying chart on “Total PPD Investment”).

Currently the Seminary campus has 25 buildings and is approximately 35 acres in size.

This includes approximately 13.5 acres adjacent to the existing campus acquired in the last ten years. Four homes purchased between 2002 and 2004 provide useable facilities to house the 295

Pastoral Retreat Center, offer land for future expansion and building, and serve as the new home

for the Seminary’s president. This land purchase increased the Seminary’s property by roughly

50%. The Retreat Center offers a place where pastors participate in special conferences and lecture series and stay for personal retreats, all components of the Seminary’s long-range plan.

Additionally, it provides an intimate setting to host small groups for a deeper study of God’s

truths.

Additional offices, work space, and classrooms totaling more than 25,000 square feet

were added in 2000 by the renovation and expansion of the Buswell Library. This expansion

provided separate offices for more than 18 faculty members, space for secretaries and student

workers, a copy workroom, kitchen, and meeting room. The expanded Library offered new space

for public study and research resources. Two new classrooms, the largest having the capacity to

seat 118 to 125, provided accommodations for large class sizes, as well the flexibility to convert

its space for special Seminary functions. These renovations also enhanced student, staff, and

faculty interaction by allowing the opportunity to meet one on one and in small group settings.

The Library renovations also created a pleasant outside space in front of the building with

a half-circle stone sitting wall area surrounded by flowers and shade trees. The sitting wall provides students, staff, and faculty an area where they can leisurely congregate before and after class. The same is true for the main lobby area. The lobby and the outside sitting area are utilized everyday for multifold purposes, all of which are an important aspect to the institution’s mission.

In addition to the faculty offices and workspaces, the Buswell Library Circulation Desk and offices were also expanded to accommodate a larger number of staff members to support the growing demands of book and online circulation system requests. Two new computer labs provide 18 work-stations for students. The Buswell Library has more than 80,000 holdings and 296

participates in book exchanges and resource loan programs with other theological institutions

and universities worldwide. See chapter 5 for detailed information on Library and information

resources.

As directed by the Campus Master Plan, the Seminary also addressed the demand for

students to have a closer, more intimate learning environment by renovating the Rayburn Chapel

sanctuary in 2002. The sanctuary’s appearance was enhanced by reconfiguring its seating and

adding a smaller eight-inch high platform stage situated at the same level as the seating. Results

from the renovation immediately gave the feeling of a classroom setting within a larger

auditorium. The flexibility of this new setting allows the Seminary to hold smaller size classes in

an otherwise larger auditorium setting.

The lower level of the Rayburn Chapel has five classrooms that can accommodate 8 to 83

students providing 164 total seats. In 2003, two of the largest classrooms (C-2 and C-3) were

renovated by the reconfiguration of seating to enhance the classroom environment and adding

“smart room” technology. In 2004 classroom C-1 in the chapel, a traditional lecture hall with raised seating levels, was renovated by installing wireless service and new stationary tables with swing-out seating. The extensive renovation enhanced students’ ability to spread out their work, making it more comfortable to take notes and use laptop computers.

Enrollment growth during the past ten years drives the Seminary’s need for adding safe

and secure parking. In continuation of the 2003 Campus Master Plan, the Seminary expanded the

inner road system and increased parking capacity by 66 spaces in 2005. The Parking Lot/Road

Expansion Project was directly related to providing greater access to the upper and lower campus

for the increasing number of students commuting to the Seminary. It also provided a separate

faculty parking lot adjacent to the Buswell Library. The nineteen additional faculty parking 297

spaces helped free up the number of spaces used daily for the students. Currently the Seminary

has 465 total parking spaces available at any given time, an increase of 165 spaces from the 1998

self-study. The Seminary has not built a revenue-generating parking lot/garage, one area not

addressed from the 2003 Campus Master Plan.

Although the Seminary has created more student parking space, some congestion still

occurs during peak class periods. The Classroom and Parking Capacity Analysis report completed in fall 2006 showed that we do not fully utilize the available classroom periods of the

week to lessen the parking demands. We found that classes are heavily stacked from Tuesday

through Thursday; we did this in order to promote community worship and learning, but found

that we were causing parking congestion during those days. By scheduling classes more evenly

throughout the week, parking availability would significantly improve for commuter students.

Despite these congestion periods, the Seminary’s roads and parking lots provide ease of access to the Seminary and generally offer parking that is in close proximity to all buildings and classrooms, making it convenient and less stressful for students, staff, and guests.

Our on-campus student housing includes 7 apartment buildings with 47 separate units,

and 3 houses along Conway Road. The maintenance cost for the apartment buildings was

endowed when they were built. Currently, the three houses along Conway road are used as single

dorms, housing up to 17 students. As an alternative to on-campus student housing, many students

enjoy a sense of community in groups of off-campus apartments. Currently the Seminary owns

Gulf Drive Apartments, which provide 44 units within a 20-minute commute from the Seminary.

Other students seek out apartments in the area with the landlords and managers of which the

Seminary has developed a working relationship.

298

9.3.2 Institutions shall make appropriate efforts to ensure that physical resources are safe, accessible, and free of known hazards. Insofar as possible, facilities should be used in ways that respect the natural environment.

The Facility and Operations Office maintains all security check lists and keeps a written

copy of the Emergency Response Manual which is updated as needed. All safety and health issues are reported to the appropriate Physical Plant director and follow-up is guided by the

Emergency Response Manual and/or other safety manuals. The Facilities and Operations

Department also provides safety training for all PPD staff. Training consists of several safety and

health topics, emphasizing areas to which staff are exposed on a daily bases. A needed area of

improvement is the annual practicing of established emergency procedures as listed in the

Emergency Response Manual. Annual practice would enable faculty and staff to experience crisis management by better knowing each others’ responsibilities in the event of a real life-

threatening situation.

Campus Security is staffed by Seminary students who work three separate time periods a

day. The first security round is scheduled to open classrooms and buildings in the mornings. The

last security round consists of checking all buildings a second time to make sure all occupants

are out of the building, lights turned off, windows closed, and exterior doors locked. There are

also weekend security personnel who open and close the Community Center on Saturdays.

Currently, all campus buildings are closed on Sundays. All buildings that are not being used for

normal classes or business are locked at 5 p.m. In recent years there have been no incidents that

required a full-time security guard. However, we recognize that as the Seminary continues to

grow, opportunities for incidents that require more security may increase. The presence of a

professional security guard could help make the campus more secure. 299

The Facilities and Operations Office updates twice a year a contact list for maintenance

and security issues. Procedures are in place to address various issues; all safety issues take top priority and are dealt with immediately to ensure the safety and well being of everyone involved.

In order for the Seminary to maintain the highest level of safety, all loss control and risk management are overseen by the director of facilities and operations. The Seminary campus is visited annually by the local fire marshall who thoroughly inspects each building to make sure all fire suppression devices are in working order. He also reviews all monthly inspection records along with checking to make sure that smoke detectors are working and that all fire extinguishers are charged and are in proper working condition.

The campus is also inspected annually by our risk management advisor, FM Global,

which performs additional on-site inspections beyond that of the Fire Marshal. FM Global looks

mostly at issues related to preserving a building and its contents in case of a fire. FM Global also

is concerned about life safety issues and makes recommendations to the Seminary on how to

improve on preventing loss and damage; these recommendations ultimately increase the safety of

all. During annual inspections, if any infractions are found, the PPD staff addresses the problem

within the approved time period given by the inspector. Once infractions are addressed, the

director of maintenance schedules a re-inspection, usually within two weeks of the initial visit.

All major buildings on campus have fire suppression systems or smoke sensors per the

local fire code, which stipulates that all new construction and/or renovations must meet the 1996

BOCA Fire Code requirements. All fire suppression systems on campus are monitored and any disruption in the monitoring of a system will immediately notify the local Fire Department.

Several buildings also include strobe lights that offer visual aid to those who have hearing

disabilities. All buildings have well-lit exit signs with battery and/or generator back-up lights to 300

ensure proper evacuation of the building in an emergency. All campus buildings are equipped

with readily accessible fire extinguishers. All fire extinguishers are checked once a month to

make sure they are fully charged and are inspected annually by our fire extinguisher vendor.

During monthly inspections, or in the event an extinguisher has been spent or lost its charge,

PPD supplies a temporary extinguisher until the permanent unit can be professionally recharged

and exchanged.

The Maintenance and Grounds departments maintain the Seminary’s physical resources

by performing regularly scheduled preventive maintenance to ensure the safety and well being of

the students, staff, and faculty. Both departments also complete special work orders and requests

that arise throughout the year. The Grounds department maintains campus property by mowing

the grass, mulching, raking leaves, trimming trees and bushes, repairing walls and sidewalks, etc.

In the winter season, all roads and sidewalks are kept clear of ice and snow.

Since 1998, the Seminary has expanded and improved sidewalks around campus and

added and upgraded existing site lighting. The additional site lighting brightened dark areas and illuminated the grounds so students could see better and feel safer while walking to and from classes from their respected living quarters. To add to their safety, all apartments and dorm homes have exterior lighting. In addition, the Seminary has made a continued effort to upgrade the campus and create safer accessibility for our students in these ways:

1. By replacing traditional round door handles with lever handles in many of its classroom buildings.

2. By building up heights of apartment porch stoops.

3. By making sidewalks and doorways more accessible for wheelchairs.

301

4. By adding handicapped parking spaces closer to buildings.

5. By renovating a ground-level, two-bedroom apartment into an ADA-accessible guestroom.

6. By closing off an inner campus road, thus reducing the volume of vehicles driving through a main pedestrian area of the campus.

7. By installing curb-cuts and extending the sidewalks from the North Outer Forty Road parking lot to the Covenant Seminary Bookstore and Community Center.

8. By adding a double-wide, full glass door and a panic bar for ADA accessibility into the new Community Center.

In all these expansions and renovation projects, care has been taken to minimize damage to the natural environment while trying to maximize the attractiveness and ease of use of the setting.

9.3.3 Faculty and staff members should have space that is adequate for the pursuit of their individual work as well as for meeting with students. Physical resources should enhance community interaction among faculty, staff, and students, and should be sufficiently flexible to meet the potentially changing demands faced by the school.

As a result of the capital investment made during the past decade, many faculty and staff have new or renovated offices and space that better serves and enables them to pursue their work. Since 2000, most faculty offices have been located in the Buswell Library where faculty have a larger and nicer meeting room and kitchen, easier access to library resources, and quicker access to classrooms and students than they had previously. In addition, due to staffing changes in FY2003, constraints on office space lightened and many staff members gained more administrative office space. 302

In fall 2008, when the new Founders Hall is completed, office space will improve again

and help the Seminary conform to goals of the 2003 Campus Master Plan by concentrating most

faculty and staff in one building. The building will be designed to integrate and position

departments in ways that will better serve staff, faculty, and students, so that cross-departmental

access will be greatly improved. In addition, the new building will house four new classrooms and a homiletics chapel. All designed for versatility, these classrooms will be useful for special events as well as daily instruction. Funded by a $12.5 million capital campaign completed in

April 2007, the new building will help facilitate an atmosphere of community as it further

integrates faculty, staff, and students.

To meet demands and provide better public places for visitors, students, and staff, during

summer 2005 two Edwards Hall classrooms (E-11 and E-12) were renovated and converted into

a new Community Center. The Center has been very well received and is used throughout the

day for study, visiting, and dining. It also provides a casual, relaxed atmosphere with large

wooden tables, several sofa chairs, a large area couch and several small two-person tables.

Offering wireless Internet service, the Center also includes space where students can interact

informally with one another and build lasting relationships with fellow students from North

America and around the world. The campus coffee shop, known as Rivendell, which had

previously been located elsewhere in Edwards Hall, was also moved into the Community Center

to enhance its appeal and provide a special place for students to congregate. To better serve and

communicate news and events on campus, all student mail boxes are located in the Center as

well. In addition, the planned flexibility of the Center’s space makes it useful for special

Seminary functions and student activities. The Community Center is an excellent example of 303

how the Seminary continues to develop flexible resources that adequately and creatively serve

the mission of the Seminary and meet the needs of students, faculty, and staff.

The Buswell Library and Rayburn Chapel each have classrooms that are used for various

academic demands and special functions, including Day of Prayer, Campus Day, Board of

Trustee meetings, the Connect conference, the Francis A. Schaeffer Lecture Series, and other

departmental events. In order to ensure that all campus facilities are used efficiently, the

Maintenance Department manages daily operations using Resource Scheduler. This vital tool

helps the Physical Plant department provide the support that is needed to make daily operations and special events successful.

9.3.4 The school should determine the rationale for its policies and practices with regard to student housing, and this rationale should be expressed in a clearly worded statement. Arrangements for student housing should reflect good stewardship of the financial and educational resources of the institution.

Student housing contributes to the Seminary’s mission by providing adequate and

affordable student housing that promotes strong community and provides fellowship between students and their families. The Seminary’s student housing policies are clearly defined in the

Housing Handbook and are designed to encourage the students in their academic pursuits and to

develop healthy and gracious relationships in community. Every year the Housing Handbook is

revised to make necessary changes and corrections. In addition, a yearly campus-wide housing

meeting is held in the fall semester to inform and remind students of the housing policies and

other important issues. 304

The Seminary promotes good stewardship of its student housing in several ways. First, the Seminary takes adequate steps to properly maintain and upgrade the facilities, keeping them safe and useful. Second, the Net Student Housing Revenues Seminary offers on-campus and $450,000 off-campus housing to its students $400,000 $350,000 at fair and reasonable prices, $300,000

$250,000 consistent with or below market $200,000 rates of the area. Lastly, student $150,000 $100,000 housing generates revenues for the $50,000

$0 Seminary that helps fund the 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Fiscal Year mission (see accompanying “Net

Student Housing Revenues” chart).

9.3.5 Facilities shall be maintained as appropriate so as to avoid problems of deferred maintenance. The institution should maintain a plan that provides a timetable for work and identifies needed financial resources.

The Seminary commissioned a formal facilities audit in 1991, which was funded by Lilly

Endowment Inc. All of the significant deferred maintenance items uncovered in that audit were completed by the end of FY1999. While there has been no formal facilities audit since that time, the Seminary maintains a master schedule for deferred and planned maintenance items, with cost projections. 305

Deferred maintenance is funded by transfers from the operating budget to the renewal and debt fund and by planned increases in the Maintenance Department budget. In addition, deferred maintenance for the student apartments is funded through an endowed reserve budget.

The Board of Trustees Building Maintenance Expenses recognizes that the significant $350,000 growth in campus facilities $300,000

$250,000 (particularly the acquisition of

$200,000 four older homes) over the last $150,000 decade requires a greater $100,000

commitment to the funding of $50,000 deferred maintenance. The $0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Fiscal Y ear Administration and the Board of Trustees are considering various funding mechanisms. Among these is an endowed maintenance fund for the general campus (excluding the apartments, which are already funded) in the amount of $3.5 million. This will be funded by the By His Grace, For His Glory capital campaign and future estate gifts.

9.4 Institutional Data Resources

9.4.0 For planning and evaluation, the school shall create and use various kinds of institutional data to determine the extent to which the institution is attaining its academic and institutional purposes and objectives. The school should provide for the financial costs of developing and maintaining this information. To the extent possible, it should use the most effective current technologies for creating, storing, and transmitting this information within the institution, and it should share appropriate information thus generated among institutions and organizations. The kinds of information and the means by which that information is gathered, stored, retrieved, and analyzed should be appropriate to the size and complexity of the institution.

306

The Seminary is committed to the implementation of new technologies to expand and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of fulfilling its mission. The vice president for business administration coordinates the budget process with various department heads to ensure that adequate funds are set aside for maintaining the Seminary’s technology needs. Starting in 2001 the Seminary increased its information technology (IT) investment by 38% over two years, beginning a planned effort to greatly improve its Total IT Investment implementation and use of informational technology. FY Total IT ending Investment % Δ Led by the chief information officer, a newly formed 2000 $581,228 -- position in 2001, this significant investment brought 2001 $771,550 33% 2002 $807,611 5% improvements in the area of instructional technology, 2003 $749,987 -7% 2004 $638,385 -15% database management, networking, and communication 2005 $633,901 -1% systems. These improvements in technological 2006 $655,782 3% efficiency allowed the Seminary to gain output with less labor.

The Seminary consistently tries to use data to evaluate long- and short-term institutional plans, monitor achievement, and make decisions. Important data from our Enrollment, Financial

Aid, Finance, Endowment, Development, Library, and Human Resources departments are collected annually and reported to our accreditors, the Association of Theological Schools (ATS) and the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools (NCA). Similar data are reported annually to the U.S. Department of Education in compliance with federal laws governing institutions that participate in federal financial assistance programs. These data are also analyzed by various directors and members of the President’s Cabinet and used to form policy and make other decisions. 307

In 2006, the Seminary created a new position, the director of institutional research, as a

means to improve the collection and use of institutional data necessary to guide the planning and

evaluation processes. The objectives of this new role include optimizing the quality and

availability of data; providing relevant, timely, and accurate institutional information to

Seminary administrators, directors, and external agencies; and assisting these leaders in

identifying and understanding emerging internal and external issues that constitute both opportunities and challenges to the Seminary. A new institutional research report was created to track the Seminary’s financial, budget, academic, human resources, and enrollment key indicators. This report is presented annually to the President’s Cabinet to assess the health and direction of the Seminary and to stimulate dialogue regarding needed action.

Institutional research is influencing change in various ways, including policy shifts

affecting financial aid, housing, and enrollment. In 2006, internal research indicated that full-

time students and students who use Seminary housing are more likely to graduate. As a result, financial aid awards and Seminary housing privileges are now weighted toward students who

enroll full-time. Likewise, Admissions representatives and Public Relations materials are

promoting full-time enrollment to prospective students more directly using these incentives as a

way to better increase graduation rates. The results of this shift in policy are not yet known, but the possibility of positive improvements to both degree completion and resource allocation is promising.

The Seminary uses current technologies to create, store, and transmit information.

Microsoft software is used for much of our daily operations, including word processing,

spreadsheet analysis, desktop publishing, e-mail, and Internet usage. The Seminary’s database

management software is the Enterprise version of Comprehensive Academic Management 308

System (CAMS), a Three Rivers Systems software product that is used by hundreds of other

small- to medium-sized higher education organizations. Three Rivers Systems releases service

updates to CAMS monthly to address software glitches and security concerns and to complete

scheduled and requested enhancements. A great benefit of CAMS is its modular design. CAMS

contains several separate modules which segment data from various departments in order to

improve security and allow special customization. Though the data is segmented, it is also

integrated, allowing for comprehensive analysis of our constituencies cross-departmentally. Each

module is equipped with strong reporting capabilities which enable all departments to obtain the

necessary data for current functions and future planning. Users are granted access to use database

tables, views, and screens according to their institutional roles. Some users access data across

multiple modules while others have very limited access to parts of a single module. Each module

has a variety of pre-set reports and ad hoc reporting capabilities.

Previous database management systems included Quodata and the Windows version of

CAMS. Migration out of these systems occurred in May 1999 and May 2002, respectively, in

order to continually upgrade and improve the management and utilization of Seminary data.

With each upgrade the Seminary experienced dramatic improvements in speed, user-friendliness,

and querying abilities.

The Seminary utilizes three Portals for disseminating certain information: a Student

Portal, a Faculty Portal, and a Staff Portal. All are secured by username and password encryption and contain community information. Students have special permissions that include access to course content, grades, class registration, and billing account. The faculty has access to class rosters and an online grade book, and has the ability to create course pages and tests and submit grades to the Registrar’s Office. Staff can access the employee manual as well as links to benefit 309 providers and personal vacation and sick time records. Enhancements to Portal offerings are being planned.

All of the Seminary’s academic buildings, as well as some of the student housing facilities, have wireless Internet access. All classrooms are equipped with LCD projectors, computers, and VHS & DVD players, as well as document cams. The student computer lab located in the Buswell Library has 18 networked desktop computers equipped with Microsoft

Office, Bible software, and Internet access. Future plans call for all Seminary housing to have broadband access.

The Seminary’s information systems are kept secure using comprehensive safeguards.

Preventative maintenance is completed regularly with automated updates, critical patch releases, and remote monitoring with “Servers Alive.” All desktops and laptops are password protected and all servers are in a secure and locked location. Full system backups are completed weekly and are supplemented with daily incremental backups, a subset of which are stored offsite. The

ITS department has a disaster recovery plan that includes generator backup for critical systems.

Multi-layered antivirus protection, spam mitigation, and firewalls/intrusion prevention devices are also utilized.

9.5 Institutional Environment

9.5.1 The internal institutional environment makes it possible for the institution to maximize the various strengths of its human, financial, physical, and information resources in pursuing its stated goals. An institution’s environment affects its resiliency and its ability to perform under duress. Accreditation evaluation will take into account the ways in which an institution uses its various resources in support of its institutional purpose.

9.5.2 The quality of institutional environment is cultivated and enhanced by promoting effective patterns of leadership and management, by providing effective exchange of information, and by ensuring that mechanisms are in place to address conflict. 310

We believe that good relationships are critical for institutional effectiveness and the

efforts we make to cultivate a gracious community of worship, family, and fellowship reflect and

strengthen our mission. The President’s Cabinet meets weekly for business and at least annually

for a team-building retreat. Long-range planning sessions occur throughout the year. In these

settings administrators not only discuss business but also pray together about departmental concerns and personal matters. Because each cabinet member shares a deep conviction about the

Seminary’s mission, “turf-building” efforts on the part of administrators are minimized or

worked through

From the top down, mutual cooperation, trust, and respect characterize relationships

between the different parts of the Seminary community, and overlapping leadership

responsibilities create collegiality. The vice president for student services attends President’s

Cabinet, faculty, and Student Council meetings. Other members of the President’s Cabinet,

including the president and vice president for academics, are also part of the weekly faculty

meetings that commence with a brief time of sharing and prayer for each others’ personal needs

and then proceed to discussion of administrative, student, or teaching concerns. The faculty also

meets for occasional social events and an annual retreat.

There is a creative tension in keeping channels of communication open between administrative teams. The aim of the President’s Cabinet is to obtain appropriate input for policy making and planning decisions without unduly burdening the faculty. This aspect of the

Seminary creates an unusual and much appreciated freedom that allows faculty to devote their energies to teaching and their time to students, research, and writing rather than engaging heavily in administrative matters. When administrative decisions are made, appropriate members of the 311

President’s Cabinet inform various stakeholders: the vice president for academics informs the

faculty, the vice president for student services informs students, and so forth.

There is a growing awareness of interdisciplinary dependency. The new Founders Hall is

designed to bring faculty and administrative offices in proximity to each other in order to

enhance both formal and informal relationships. At the present time, these offices are in different

buildings on campus.

Since our last accreditation study in 1997, a number of large projects have required an

extraordinary degree of cooperation between departments. Under the leadership of the

Information Technology Services department, the Seminary installed a new database that unites

virtually all departments in one system, making it possible to share up-to-date information

among departments as appropriate. This change also enabled the Seminary to offer students

online Portal and registration functionality. All of the departments worked together to resolve

conversion issues and make this happen. The Student Portal enhances access to course information and provides an alternative communication vehicle for students and faculty.

When issues of conflict arise within a department, these issues are addressed directly by managers using biblical principles and are generally resolved quickly and positively. As directed by the staff manual, when necessary, grievances can be made to administrators as a secondary effort to resolve conflict. The administration, in consultation with the Student Council, has also established procedures for resolving concerns or complaints that students may have with the

Seminary at a personal or administrative level.

Staff, students, and faculty gather twice a week for corporate worship and prayer in the

Rayburn Chapel. Faculty and staff are encouraged and enabled to leave their offices while “on

the clock” for what is seen as the core of our communal life. All are also encouraged to take part 312

in Campus Day once a year, a Day of Prayer each semester, and monthly summer picnics.

Campus Day is an all-day event involving corporate prayer and fellowship in the morning, small

group work projects on campus throughout the day, and a corporate lunch; the day not only

fosters the physical maintenance of the campus but also promotes healthy development of the

Seminary community. Designed to honor the Lord and unite the Seminary community in its

mission, the Day of Prayer includes corporate, small group, and individual worship and prayer

time. The summer picnics are delightful gatherings for food, music, fellowship, and fun!

Other events bring together the Seminary community and the local St. Louis community for teaching and social concerns. The Friday Nights @ the Institute series, held at various local coffee houses and attended by a wide spectrum of community people, offers regular engaging presentations and discussions on current cultural topics. The Francis A. Schaeffer Institute organizes these public discussions to inspire winsome dialogue on relevant issues. Speakers range from Seminary faculty, students, and alumni, to professionals in a variety of fields from

throughout the country. Also hosted by the Francis A. Schaeffer Institute is Art @ the Institute, which features art exhibits, discussions, and concerts that highlight artists and musicians from around the world to encourage creative reflection and to engage the Seminary and St. Louis area communities in a dialogue about issues of art and faith.

Recent renovation of the campus and the acquisition of neighboring property have enhanced the campus’s aesthetic environment with more green space, benches, and secluded garden corners for study or discussion. These changes and the development of the Community

Center in Edwards Hall have greatly enhanced the community atmosphere of the campus. 313

These efforts underscore the Seminary’s commitment to nurturing a rich community life

and help to align and maximize the various strengths of our human, financial, physical, and

information resources towards the Seminary’s mission.

9.6 Cooperative Use of Resources

9.6.1 The theological school should secure access to the resources it needs to fulfill its purpose, administer and allocate these resources wisely and effectively, and be attentive to opportunities for cooperation and sharing of resources with other institutions. Such sharing involves both drawing upon the resources of other institutions and contributing resources to other institutions.

9.6.2 Access to the required resources may be achieved either through ownership or through carefully formulated relationships with other schools or institutions. These relationships may include, for instance, cross-appointments of faculty, cross-registration of students, rental of facilities, and shared access to information required by administrators, faculty, and students in the pursuit of their tasks. Whatever their reason or scope, collaborative arrangements should be carefully designed with sufficient legal safeguards and provisions for review, and with a clear rationale for involvement in such arrangements.

The Seminary seeks to establish and maintain longstanding cooperative relationships with other schools and institutions through the use of needed resources as a means to fulfill our mission.

One example is the Seminary’s membership in the College and University Risk

Management Association (CURMA), a consortium of Missouri higher education institutions

providing low-cost property and liability insurance coverage for its members. The member

schools also cooperate and share the costs of risk management initiatives. A sister corporation,

the College and University Trust Association (CUTA), provides worker’s compensation insurance coverage for its members. Our vice president for business administration serves on the boards of both of these corporations and is a member of the Operations Committee for each. 314

Both of these corporations operate under bylaws and the board members of each are indemnified

with respect to their corporate actions.

The Seminary seeks to maximize its ability to provide a wide breadth of education to our

students through agreements with other local schools. Through its membership in the St. Louis

Theological Consortium, the Seminary adopted cross-registration agreements and interlibrary

borrowing privileges with Concordia Seminary, St. Louis University, Eden Theological

Seminary, Kenrick-Glennon Seminary, and the Aquinas Institute of Theology that still exist

today. Although the St. Louis Theological Consortium evolved as a President’s Council in 1977,

which included the same schools, cross-registration and interlibrary borrowing privileges were maintained and continue under the same agreements and procedures. Because of this arrangement, students are able to take classes offered at any of the other institutions and utilize

interlibrary borrowing privileges at each of these schools. By 1992, the library directors were all

new and, at the presidents’ request, began meeting. This interaction helps to continue and enrich

the members of the St. Louis Theological Consortium.

The Seminary continually expands its access to information resources useful for its

faculty, staff, and students through its membership in the Missouri Bibliographic Information

User System (MOBIUS), MLNC/Missouri Lending Agreement (MMLA), Libraries Very

Interested in Sharing (LVIS), and the St. Louis Regional Library Network (SLRLN). Our charter

membership with MOBIUS (May 1998), a consortium of accredited Missouri institutions of

higher education and the Missouri State Library, allows the Seminary to gain access to millions

of library resources and opens our collections to other participating schools. MOBIUS has a clear

purpose statement that includes providing students and faculty with the broadest array of

information resources in an easy, timely, and seamless manner regardless of geographical 315

location. It does this by providing and administering programs and activities, including computer hardware, system software, access services, training, and support staff. Bylaws offer legal safeguards and provisions for review and carefully govern the shared use of resources.

Our membership in LVIS also greatly expands the available resources to our faculty, staff, and students. LVIS is a no-charge, group access capability agreement with more than 2,000 members worldwide. Its purpose is to encourage and provide greater opportunities for no-charge resource sharing; member schools must sign and comply with the LVIS Participant Agreement.

Membership in the St. Louis Regional Library Network allows our students to utilize the

resources at hundreds of local libraries. This not-for-profit network is incorporated in the State of

Missouri and guided by its mission to serve the needs of the local library community. Its bylaws

govern the network and provide safeguards to each member.

In addition, the Seminary gains access to useful information resources through an

informal agreement with the PCA Historical Center. In 1983, the Seminary offered to house the

Center in its Library on campus as a gesture of support for the establishment of the Center and

for the convenient use of its resources. Home to important archives and manuscripts concerning

the formation and continuing ministry and growth of the Presbyterian Church in America, these

resources are accessible to our faculty, staff, student body, and the general public. Though the

Seminary’s Library has been home to the Center without issue since 1985, no formal written

documents govern the agreement. See Section 5, Library and Information Resources, in this

report for more details on this cooperative relationship.

The Seminary strengthened its existing partnerships with Reformed Theological

Seminary and Westminster Theological Seminary in 2004 by inviting them to participate in the activities of the newly formed Center for Ministry Leadership (CML). Largely funded by a $2 316

million grant from Lilly Endowment Inc., CML’s purpose is to nurture Reformed and

evangelical pastors toward ongoing ministry renewal by revitalizing their sense of call, enhancing their ministry skills, and fostering supportive relationships with spouse, family, elders,

church members, and colleagues. As partners in the Reformed evangelical tradition, the three

seminaries pool their financial, physical, administrative, and faculty resources to strengthen

pastoral ministry by organizing and offering regional and national pastoral renewal (Pastors

Summit) and vocational discipleship retreats (Intersect Forum); a national conference to renew,

sharpen, and encourage pastors and ministry leaders (Connect Conference); a Pastor-in-

Residence program that allows experienced pastors time to study on campus and interact with

students; and the production of leadership training modules for ruling and teaching elders. The

deans of students from each participating seminary gather periodically to discuss the findings of

the Center and discover ways to improve the formation of students for ministry. The grant

proposal includes evaluative components and guidelines that govern the use of the shared

resources.

Summary Evaluation

9.1 Covenant Seminary’s staff is capable, united, and committed to the institutional

mission. The school provides well for its employees and has appropriate human

resources policies in place.

9.2 Covenant Seminary has well-managed financial resources and a superlative track

record in the areas of auditing and budget control. It demonstrates a thoughtful 317

and successful approach to institutional development, completing two major

capital campaigns since the time of our last self-study report.

9.3 The Seminary has increasing physical resources that are adequate to meet its

educational needs. Provision for physical resources has been carried out in line

with the Seminary’s strategic plan.

9.4 The Seminary has excellent institutional data systems and utilizes information

gathered in its short- and long-term planning processes.

9.5 The Seminary demonstrates an excellent institutional environment as it cultivates

effective patterns of leadership and management.

9.6. The Seminary develops partnerships with other federal, state, and local

educational agencies in order to cooperate in sharing resources.

Recommendations

1. The Seminary should continue to address human resources concerns by

following through on its proposal to hire a director of operations and staff

development.

2. The Seminary should examine its revenue streams in order to determine how to

increase revenues through growing its annual fund and/or endowment. 318

3. The Seminary should continue to focus on long-term physical plant and

information technology costs, providing endowments to cover those expenses

when possible.

319

CHAPTER TEN:

MULITIPLE LOCATIONS AND DISTANCE EDUCATION

In order to meet the needs of their constituencies, theological schools may develop programs by which students may earn graduate credit for courses completed away from the institution’s primary location. Programs of this nature shall be offered in ways that ensure that courses that yield graduate credit maintain the educational integrity of post- baccalaureate study, that students receive academic support and essential services, that the formational components of theological education are effectively present, and that proper attention is given to the general institutional standards of the Commission and those for individual degree programs.

Covenant Theological Seminary has been a leader in distance learning. From its initial work in Seminary Extension Training to its continued Access Distance Education program, as well as its continued involvement with the Institute for Theological Studies, the Seminary has sought to provide access to quality theological education, both in North America and throughout the world. As we continue to explore new ways to bring globalizational thinking to theological education through distance learning, and as we continue to mainstream our distance learning program into our on-campus structures, the Seminary views distance learning as an important means for accomplishing its mission of training servants of the triune God.

10.1 Purpose

10.1.0 The purpose for extension education and distance education efforts shall be clearly defined and congruent with the institutional purpose, appropriate to the students and context being served by such programs, and adequate to fulfill the purposes of the degree programs for which credits are being earned.

320

Covenant Seminary began a program of extension studies, now called Access Distance

Education, in 1988. Groups of students gathered to view and discuss videotapes of actual

seminary classes, each under the direction of a qualified, faculty-approved student mentor. The

program, then called SET (Seminary Extension Training), provided substantial printed lecture

outlines to supplement the taped lectures, and all course assignments and exams were identical to

those required in the parallel courses on campus. Under the direction of the then vice president for enrollment and extension, the program enabled students to complete up to 30 credit hours toward the Master of Divinity (MDiv) or Master of Arts (Theological Studies) (MATS) degrees.

This amounted to approximately a year of study without requiring students to relocate to St.

Louis. In 1990, a focused visit from ATS found that “the Seminary is to be commended for the care and detail which has been exercised to date in formulating this program. . . . It is clear that comprehensive and mature reasoning have been invested in the SET program.”

Even as our original name for the program indicates, the distance-learning program has

always been understood to be an extension of Covenant Seminary’s mission “to train servants of

the triune God to walk with God, to interpret and communicate God’s Word, and to lead God’s

people.” Access exists to fulfill Covenant Seminary’s mission by providing students who are

unable to study on campus with access to quality theological training, support, accountability,

and participation in a grace-focused learning community.

10.2 Multiple Locations (Extension Sites)

As enrollment for the distance learning program grew, many students who started their

studies in this way then came to St Louis to complete their degrees. Many others, however,

found the costs of relocating for the remainder of their studies insurmountable and were not able

321

to complete their degrees. Accordingly, the Seminary requested and gained permission from

ATS in June 1995 to offer the MATS as a pilot program at three extension sites: Nashville and

Memphis, Tennessee, and Naperville, Illinois. Formal agreements were reached with local

university libraries, required state licenses were obtained and, following the 1997–98

comprehensive campus visit, ATS granted full approval to the extension site program. At its

height in 2000, over 100 students were enrolled at 9 different sites.

However, the extension site model still presented the same challenge of cost

considerations for many students. Therefore, in December 2000, under article 10.4.2 of the ATS

standards, the Seminary sought and received approval from ATS for a pilot program to make the

MATS available to individually mentored distance learning students, who could complete the

degree primarily by means of distance education. The limited residency requirement of 10

semester hours, accomplished through three on-campus residencies during the course of the

program, including the presentation of a final Capstone integration project, has proven to be a

better use of both student and Seminary resources for the non-professional degree (MATS).

As indicated in our reports to ATS on the extension sites and the pilot program, dated

March 28, 2002, the IMET (Individually Mentored Extension Training) program quickly became

a source of internal competition within the extension sites. The ebb and flow of enthusiasm

among site mentors and host facilities, the graduation of some key students, and, primarily, the

availability of the individually mentored program itself combined to reduce enrollment at the extension sites to six students.

Covenant Seminary’s comprehensive evaluation of the IMET program, provided to ATS

in April 2003, reflected the success of the pilot program as well as internal changes in

governance that worked to mainstreamed our distance education methods and integrate them

322

even more with other Seminary departments. The key move was taken in 2003 under Dr. Brad

Hough, then director of Access, when the oversight of our distance education program was

placed under the vice president of academics instead of the vice president of enrollment

(Admissions). Our mantra from that time has become “a student is a student is a student”; in other words, distance education is seen as one method of delivery of our educational programs rather than as a separate program in itself. Thus, not only do Access students receive the same quality instruction and fulfill the same assessment requirements as our on-campus students, they now interact with and are served by the Admissions Office, the Registrar’s Office, and the

Financial Aid Office in the same way as resident students. Access students are also encouraged to use the Seminary’s Portal through the Web, by which they may benefit from audio files of recent chapel messages and to stay informed about special lecture series and other events being held on campus.

In response to our comprehensive report of April 2003, ATS granted two more years of

approval for the IMET pilot program and asked us to report back in 2006. Last year, we

successfully petitioned ATS (in a letter dated April 7, 2006) to roll that report into this self-study

for 2007. In the meantime (in September 2004), the director of Access proposed to the

President’s Cabinet, on which he served, that all extension site students be assigned individual

mentors so that all Access students would participate in the IMET format. That proposal was

approved and announced to the Access staff on October 1, 2004. The Tennessee Higher

Education Commission was informed that, effective December 31, 2004, Covenant Seminary

would no longer operate extension education sites in that state or any other.

Today, all Access students are matched individually with a mentor for each course in

which they enroll, except for courses offered during the three required residencies. While on

323 campus, they receive personalized, one-to-one academic advising as well as many opportunities to interact with our faculty through their classes, group devotionals, and meals. For many students, residencies are such a highlight of their Access experience that they keep returning beyond the required three visits to St. Louis.

10.3 Distance Education

10.3.1 Definition

Distance education is defined, for the purpose of this standard, as a mode of education in which major components of the program, including course work, occur when students and instructors are not in the same location. Instruction may be synchronous or asynchronous and usually encompasses the use of a wide range of technologies.

10.3.2 Planning and Evaluation

10.3.2.1 The purposes for which an institution offers distance education programs shall guide its planning and evaluation procedures and its decisions regarding such programs.

10.3.2.2 Planning for distance education programs shall be fully integrated into the comprehensive institutional planning initiatives. Persons knowledgeable about and active in distance education should be involved in the institutional planning process.

10.3.2.3 Evaluation is a critical element in support of a program’s educational integrity and in revising and strengthening an institution’s distance education programs. Institutions shall develop and implement ongoing evaluation procedures for distance education programs that involve appropriate groups of people in the evaluation process. Evaluation of distance education programs is a process that includes (1) the identification of desired goals or outcomes for the program, (2) a system of gathering quantitative and/or qualitative information related to the desired goals, (3) assessment of the performance of the program, and (4) the establishment of revised goals or outcomes based on the assessment.

Institutional Evaluation and Planning

As is evident in our 2002 strategic planning document, the Seminary’s distance learning program factored heavily in our strategic planning process. Not only was the distance learning program expected to deliver students into the MATS program as well as to serve as a feeder for

324 the on-campus MDiv program, but it was also viewed as a means for expanding access to theological education without the need for students to relocate to St. Louis. We were able to accomplish successfully some of our short-term goals in relationship to our distance education program: as already noted, we established a new administrative and organizational structure for the distance learning program and we have worked to clarify faculty roles and administrative reporting structures. However, we were not able to accomplish a number of the other goals, especially those related to headcount, because since 2002 the focus of the program has shifted focus away from extension sites and group mentoring toward the IMET model.

As part of the institution’s attempt to simplify and regularize planning and evaluation,

Access implemented the Indicators of Success form as a means for demonstrating the four-step evaluation process that ATS and NCA desire. At the end of the 2005–06 academic year, these goals were identified by the Access staff and the faculty-administration committee for 2006–07:

Seminary Mission: Covenant Theological Seminary trains servants of the triune God to walk with God, to interpret and communicate God’s Word, and to lead God’s people.

Department Mission: The distance-learning department exists to fulfill Covenant Theological Seminary’s mission of preparing students for Christ-centered ministry by providing those who are unable to study on campus with theological training, support, accountability, and participation in a grace-focused learning community.

Goals of Covenant Seminary’s Distance Education Progam

OBJECTIVES ASSESSMENT FINDINGS USE OF RESULTS 1. Deliver theological Develop new courses and Existing courses now Contact OT faculty for training at a distance. improve existing curricular being taught by newer including Psalms & materials. faculty need re-taping. Wisdom and OT History in their departmental New course development planning to be re-taped. must be coordinated with curricular goals, esp. Schedule re-taping of MAEM. Christian Worship for July residency, and coordinate processing with AV dept to make new course available by January 2007.

325

Explore innovative tools for Need to learn more about Read “Facilitating Online distance learning online learning Learning” and discuss with communities. Dr. Chapman to formulate recommendations to Access Committee by February 2007. 2. Provide support and Provide higher quality Reduce mentor to student Implement in budgeting accountability to mentors through better ratio from 1:25 to 1:15. and hiring process students at a distance. recruiting and more immediately in Fall 06. training. Provide ongoing mentor training & appreciation. Schedule lunches & training once each semester.

Embed student support Must coordinate and Scheduled multiple services for distant communicate better with meetings with Registrar, students in main campus affected seminary Financial Aid, the departments departments. Business Office and Student Services to implement new online registration and welcome packet process. 3. Maintain a grace- Enhance the residency Review residency planning Change hotel site to focused learning experience to provide more and execution for improve quality of community at a informal time with faculty redistribution of staff accommodations and distance and fellow students. responsibilities. shuttle services.

Design student evaluation forms for residency experience not just their course evaluations. Facilitate the development Inform students more fully Highlight Student Services of community online. and frequently of chapel information in new resources and on-campus welcome packet and in events. Access Orientation course at first residency. Review online discussion formats, monitoring, and protocols (also above).

The central locus for the program’s reporting, evaluation, and integrated planning with other Seminary departments is the Access sub-committee of Covenant Seminary’s faculty. The sub-committee’s membership is comprised of the Access director, five other faculty members, the vice president for academics, and the registrar. Regular meetings of the Access subcommittee are scheduled twice a year, once each in the fall and spring semesters.

326

A comprehensive array of proposals and reports come to the sub-committee’s attention

on both a scheduled and a need-driven basis. Certain aspects of the program are regularly

reviewed, particularly enrollment, finances, and reports on the planning and execution of the

winter and summer residencies. Other program elements such as course development, the

selection and oversight of mentors, the evaluation of program staff, grading assistants, and

suggested policy changes come before the sub-committee on an annual basis as a function of the annual program review and budgeting process.

Because the distance learning program comes under the oversight of the vice president

for academics, Access is represented in the annual budgetary and institutional planning process

through him. As we move into a new round of long-term strategic planning, the distance learning

program will come under the direct oversight of the associate dean of educational ministries,

who represents the program in the President’s Advisory Council, a group charged with the initial

conversations for the 2007–08 Strategic Plan.

Student Learning Evaluation

One of the chief ways we assess the outcomes of our distance learning program is

through the Access MATS Capstone process. The goal of the Capstone is for students to

demonstrate their ability to evaluate the opportunities and challenges presented by a specific area

of Christian life and service in the light of Scripture, and to deploy resources from their

theological studies in ways that both deepen their own discipleship and edify and equip the body

of Christ. The Capstone Project provides students a unique assignment at the end of their degree

experience that requires them to review and integrate their work in light of all their seminary

studies. Because the Capstone Project is carried out in a real-life ministry context, it challenges

327 students to be more self-aware about integrating their own callings, gifts, and skills within particular ministry settings and calls them to evaluate their ministry effectiveness in light of what they have learned from Scripture, their theological heritage, and the study of ministry models presented by their professors or other mentors with whom they have had contact. Thus, the

Capstone demonstrates the level at which the distance education student has accomplished the learning goals of the MATS degree.

The Capstone Project proceeds in three phases: introduction, supervision, and presentation. After completing approximately half of their required credit hours, students are introduced to the Capstone Project. No earlier than their second residency, students begin to identify an area of focus and define the scope of their project. During this residency, they utilize library and faculty resources to begin developing a reading list and a strategy for accomplishing the project. Ninety days after completing the Capstone Introduction course, students submit an annotated bibliography along with their project proposal to Access staff for faculty approval.

Students receive one credit hour and a passing grade by registering for and attending the

Capstone Introduction. Once a student submits a proposal and bibliography and receives faculty approval, he or she will be registered for Capstone Supervision and billed tuition for the remaining two credit hours. Credit for those hours and a final letter grade will be granted after the Capstone Presentation. Upon approval of the proposal and bibliography, students begin work on their Capstone.

The Access staff provides supervision as students attempt to narrow the scope of the project to focus on a single, clear purpose. A detailed flow chart and questions are provided as aids in the planning and execution of the Capstone Project. Progress is documented through regular status reports to Access staff (recommended monthly) and the student’s keeping of a

328

Capstone Journal. Residencies during the supervision phase can be scheduled to maximize opportunities for special lecture series and elective course offerings as well as to take advantage of library and staff resources to support the project. Residencies are not limited to the required number of three. Students are encouraged to complete their Capstones within eighteen months after taking the Capstone Introduction. A student demonstrates his or her completion of the

Capstone by submitting a 20- to 25-page document.

Finally, students present their Capstone Projects during their final residency (no earlier than their third) before their peers, faculty, and Access staff. While a variety of media may be used during the presentation, students must provide a written Capstone Summary of not more than two pages to all who attend. The Capstone Summary will state the project’s purpose and briefly describe its context, scope, method(s), and significance. After formal explanation of the project, the presenting student facilitates a time of questions and answers and discussion about his or her work.

Also, at the time of presentation, the student will deliver to the Access staff and the faculty four bound copies of the project. The faculty evaluators consider the total Capstone

Project as well as the Capstone Presentation before assigning assessment marks. Faculty members give particular attention to the manner in which the student has integrated course work into his or her ministry work and life. In this way, the faculty can well assess that the Access residency model is accomplishing the goals of the degree through the learning outcomes intended for the MATS students. The Seminary believes that this Capstone process demonstrates that the IMET model effectively accomplishes the MATS program goals.

10.3.3 Educational Qualities

329

10.3.3.1 Degree programs that include distance education shall seek to ensure that the learning goals of graduate education characterize the program, that teaching and learning contribute to the formation and knowledge of religious leaders, and that the school is utilizing its resources in ways that most effectively accomplish its purpose. Schools shall demonstrate how programs offered through the mode of distance education seek to meet the standards of learning, teaching, and research described in Standard 3; the goals of the theological curriculum addressed in Standard 4; requirements regarding library and information resources outlined in Standard 5; and the provisions for faculty control, involvement, and development described in Standard 6.

The primary degree program offered through Access is the MATS, a non-professional,

60-credit degree designed to provide foundational training in Christian ministry for individuals who are often involved as volunteers or program staff with their local church, parachurch organization, or educational ministry. Typically, the primary aim of these students is to deepen their theological knowledge and sharpen their ministry skills to support this work. Students earn the majority of their credit through classes that blend traditional (reading, lecture, note-taking) and innovative (MP3 and podcast delivery, DVD and CD formats, online discussion forums and assessments) distance learning methods. Of course, such resources are produced in partnership between the Seminary faculty and the Audio-Visual and Information Technology Departments as coordinated and prioritized by the Access director in consultation with them, the Access faculty subcommittee, and the vice president for academics.

Covenant Seminary believes that a quality theological education is not only about content, but also about the transforming impact of that biblical content on the full range of human relationships. Throughout their time in the distance education program, students are required to maintain regular contact with a personal mentor (once every two weeks) as well as dialogue with other students taking the same course through online discussion boards. Many students comment that although establishing these relationships is challenging at first, they are

330

the key to being a Covenant Seminary student and grasping fully the implications of seminary

studies.

To support online community formation, students participate in three required one-week

on-campus residencies. In these residencies, students are able to meet fellow Access students

face to face and often establish lasting friendships. Following residencies, students continue

these friendships through the use of online discussion forums. In addition to the initial training

students gain through the tutorials provided by the IT department and the Library for key

functions like online registration and data base searches, an Access Orientation course is required during the student’s first residency. This orientation provides specific instruction from both IT and Library staff in the use of the online Portal for everything from registration to posting discussion threads, to taking online assessments, to paying tuition online, etc. These Web-based tools allow students to continue and deepen relationships with those whom they met at residency.

Residencies have been so successful at building the Access learning community that many students attend more than the three required.

10.3.3.2 Schools using distance education shall be intentional in addressing matters of coherence, educational values, and patterns of interactions among all courses offered within the program. Institutions shall guard against allowing the accumulation of distance education courses to constitute a significant portion of a degree program that lacks coherence, intentionality, and curricular design and shall develop a system that monitors the number of distance education courses in a student’s program of studies.

The Access learning experience is designed from beginning to end as an outgrowth of the

Seminary’s mission, core values, and core competencies. From their first inquiry on the Web site

to their Access orientation, to the evaluation of their final Capstone integration project, Access

students are enfolded in a learning ethos that is Christ-centered, grace-focused, pastorally and

relationally engaged, and theologically sound.

331

Yet, though Access offers students many of the benefits of an on-campus seminary

education, its distance learning format makes it different in several ways from the regular on-

campus experience. Proper distinctions between distance education and on-campus degree

programs must be maintained since each program serves different purposes within God’s wider

mission. For example, Access students can begin an MDiv degree by distance education, taking

up to 30 hours or 1 year of credit in this manner. However, they must complete the balance of

their degree on campus because we are convinced that equipping pastors requires a greater depth and intensity of spiritual formation that can only be the product of deeper relationships and lengthy exposure to a formative community. On the course level, then, there are also appropriate distinctions. For example, if an Access student who has completed the MATS course The Life and Teachings of Jesus should later be accepted into the MDiv program, he or she would not be allowed full credit for the corresponding MDiv course on Gospels without completing the exegetical readings in the Greek New Testament that distinguishes the two courses.

10.3.3.3 Programs of distance education shall demonstrate the collaborative nature and research dimensions of theological scholarship that foster critical thinking skills. According to the degree program requirements, distance education programs shall seek to enhance personal and spiritual formation appropriate to the school’s mission and ecclesiastical tradition and identity, be sensitive to individual learning styles, and recognize diversity within the community of learners. Courses shall provide sufficient interaction between teachers and learners and among learners to ensure a community of learning and to promote global awareness and sensitivity to local settings.

Covenant Seminary’s focus on providing a quality education drives it to exchange ideas

with other institutions about how best to serve students. These exchanges are usually informal in

the context of distance education conferences or by responding to requests from other seminaries for information about how we plan and execute our program.

332

We believe that every interaction impacts a student’s education. When students

experience Christ-centered relationships in their contacts with faculty members, mentors, or even

in their informal interactions with Seminary staff, those relationships validate what students are

learning in their studies. As educators are want to say, “The co-curricular is the curricular.” In

their evaluations of courses, mentors, residencies, and of the program as a whole, students

consistently recognize the value of building in these “high-touch” elements of a “high-tech”

delivery system. The Access program is blessed to have students enrolled from 13 countries

outside the United States. While many of these “international students” are actually missionaries

serving overseas, indigenous leaders from countries like Ghana, Latvia, Poland, Belize, and

Mexico enrich our residencies dramatically. In July 2006, the influence of four Latvian students

and two students from Mexico, including one presenting her Capstone integration project, gave

the residency a pronounced international flavor.

10.3.3.4 The development and review of courses shall be a collaborative effort among faculty, librarians, technical support staff, and students, showing sensitivity to ministry settings and the goals of the entire curriculum.

The distance learning program’s courses are essentially the same courses that make up

our on-campus MATS program. As such, they come under the initial review and control of the faculty-administration Curriculum Committee. In addition, there is a separate faculty- administration Access Committee that includes technical support staff and maintains responsibility for program goals and delivery methods. Any suggested changes in policy, program, or curriculum that would entail major changes in the distance learning program come before the full faculty in a regularly scheduled faculty meeting.

333

10.3.4 Teaching, Learning, and Curriculum

10.3.4.1 Programs of study and course curricula for distance education programs shall be established, approved, and reviewed by the regular institutional policies and procedures regarding content, methods of instruction, new and emerging technologies, and standards and procedures of evaluation.

10.3.4.2 Requirements with regard to completion of degrees, curricular and instructional design, and outcomes shall reflect the expectations of the degree program standards to which the courses are credited. Residency requirements shall conform to those specified in the Commission standards for the degree programs to which distance education course work is credited.

All programs and policies for our distance learning program are established through regular institutional channels. One example of this: in April 2006, the Seminary’s faculty amended and approved a proposal from the faculty-administration Access Committee to change faculty responsibilities and remuneration. This renegotiation represents an organic development of the “mainstreaming” of the Access program in relation to all Seminary departments by incorporating Access course development, support, and evaluation into faculty departmental planning. Each department identifies a professor of record to oversee Access course work within that department with the support of faculty-approved teaching/grading assistants. Also, as before, these professors would meet with the coordinator of instructional effectiveness at least annually to offer and receive feedback on the teaching/learning process, including the use of pedagogical and technological methods.

10.3.4.3 Institutions shall ensure that distance education programs provide appropriate opportunity for collaboration, personal development, interaction among peers within a community of learning, and supervised field or internship opportunities when appropriate to the degree program.

Ken Bain writes, “Learning involves both personal and intellectual development. . . .

People can change, and those changes—not just the accumulation of information—represent true

334

learning” (What the Best College Teachers Do, [Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004],

83). Throughout their time in the Access program, students are required to maintain regular

contact with a personal mentor (once every two weeks) as well as dialogue with other students

taking the same course through online discussion boards. Many students comment that although

establishing these relationships is challenging at first, they are key to being a Covenant Seminary

student and to grasping fully the implications of seminary studies. Once a student registers, he or

she receives a mentor assignment by e-mail from the Access Office. Access mentors initiate

regular contact with the student by e-mail and phone at least bi-weekly. By maintaining a contact log, the mentor is able to track learning objectives with the student. Mentors are in monthly contact with the head mentor, who monitors the frequency of student contacts in keeping with our standards and offers both initiating and in-service training for mentors on pertinent issues.

Additionally, mentors gather as a group at least once a semester on campus and via conference call to report on how things are going, to receive in-service training, and to be appreciated through a shared meal. Since mentors are crucial to maintaining the quality of the Access program, we continually evaluate ways to improve our selection, hiring, and support of mentors.

One challenge we have consistently faced is cultivating discussion forums in “low

traffic” courses. In February 2007, the Access Committee approved a joint recommendation from the director of Access and the coordinator of instructional effectiveness to link discussion forums between some lower and higher traffic courses. The recommendation also included guidelines for discussion monitors (course mentor) to follow a “guide on the side” rather than “sage on the stage” approach to facilitating the discussion (see Collison, Elbaum, Haavind, and Tinker,

Facilitating Online Learning: Effective Strategies for Moderators [Madison, WI: Atwood

Publishing, 2000], 34–8).

335

As elaborated in section 10.3.3.1 of this report, online community formation is supported

strongly by the three required one-week on-campus residencies, during which students meet each

other face to face, and often establish lasting friendships. Often these friendships are formed as

students work together in groups, which are frequently required in residency courses.

Access has developed Elements of a Covenant Learning Community

several additional elements to Technology Use Low High enhance the student’s • Catalog • Web-based • Books, Class Information Readings • Online Chapels participation in Covenant • Letters • Online Day of Prayer • Video/Audio Content

Seminary’s learning • Residencies • Online Discussion • Study Groups Forums • Academic Advising • Online Mentor High Low community (see Figure 1). Interactivity • Mentors Communication • Local Church Ministry Audio files of the main campus • Admissions Counseling chapel messages (two times a

week) are available for students

to download shortly after the event, providing students with timely access to the spiritual center

of Covenant Seminary. All Access students receive a monthly e-mail newsletter, eNews, which

includes announcements of new courses, registration information, policy or procedure updates,

and student or staff profiles. When possible, the distance learning office facilitates the formation of study groups of Access students who live in close proximity to each other. Often a local pastor will meet with the students to facilitate and guide discussion. The chart “Elements of a Covenant

Learning Community” provides an overview of the many kinds of communication that play a part in the delivery of the Access program. We believe that a balanced blend of technology and

interaction is needed to best serve students and develop a learning community.

336

10.3.5 Library and Information Resources

10.3.5.1 Typically distance education programs combine access to campus libraries with electronic access to digital resources. Library and other information resources shall be available in such number and quality as needed to achieve the purposes of the curriculum, and the institution shall demonstrate that students are required to make appropriate use of these resources. Programs shall provide sufficient library and research capabilities for theological scholarship, access to professional research librarians by both faculty and learners, and instruction by library staff to ensure discerning evaluation by the students of resources available.

Library and other information resources are available to support the Access curriculum through Buswell Library's online catalog, searchable databases, and other means. Buswell

Library provides online resources to all Access students. These resources include the library catalog, the broader MOBIUS catalog (large collection of libraries in Missouri), and the

WorldCat catalog (every library in the US and some foreign countries). While Access students

are unable to acquire books directly through these catalogs, as research tools, the catalogs

provide the means to discover resources that can be acquired through interlibrary loan (ILL).

Access students receive instruction in how to use the ILL program. Article collections are also

accessible online via the ATLA Religion Database, among others. Many of the cataloged article

citations include full text for download or online perusal.

Access students are required to visit the campus for a week of intensive class work at least three times during the course of their degree program. During this time, they are able to acquire any of the Buswell Library holdings that are available to students residing in St. Louis.

Access students are allowed to take the books home when the residency is over and to mail them

back when they are no longer needed or when they come due. A major portion of the Access

Orientation, taken by all Access students during their first residency, orients them to the use

(local and remote) of all Library resources.

337

Resources are also provided to help Access students evaluate the resources that they discover. The Library provides resource guides at the Web site and through the online Portal that

are accessible by all registered students. These resources list helpful Old and New Testament

commentaries, writing style guides, free downloadable fonts, and a variety of other topically

arranged resources. In addition to the online resources and residency orientation, the Library

staff is always available for personal consultation via phone or e-mail.

All students are required to document appropriately the use of these resources by

including endnotes or footnotes and bibliographies in or throughout their assignments. Course

syllabi, the Seminary catalog, and the Student Handbook clearly articulate the Seminary’s academic honesty policy, which includes a clear description of and warning against plagiarism.

10.3.6 Technological and Support Services

10.3.6.1 Sufficient technical support services shall ensure that faculty are freed to focus upon their central tasks of teaching and facilitating learning. Support services shall create systems for faculty development and assistance to ensure consistent, effective, and timely support that includes course development, training, implementation of the programs, and troubleshooting.

Various levels of training are provided for the entire faculty depending on their needs and

technical competencies. This training is provided at faculty meetings by the ITS training

coordinator (ITTC) and one-on-one as needed by the Access office manager (AOM) and the

ITTC. The AOM is also responsible for the technical side of course creation (as opposed to course development), freeing the faculty to teach and mentor. Bug reports and feature requests are continually evaluated and addressed, to enable faculty to concentrate more fully on teaching and facilitating learning.

338

IT Services provides consistent, effective, and timely support for course development, training, and implementation of programs and troubleshooting. Course development is facilitated by technologies such as the Portal, which allows for simple creation of new courses and transfer of previous courses to new semesters. The Portal is continually in development to add stability and enhancements. Curriculum development of such support items as outlines and study guides utilizes even remote editors by providing efficient means of communication and data transfer through the Portal or technologies like SwissDisk. Training for these tools is available as needed in a one-on-one setting. Troubleshooting is always handled in a timely and professional manner.

Questions or problem reports typically go first to the AOM or faculty secretary (FS), each of whom is often capable of providing assistance if additional training is required. Technical issues are forwarded to the ITS Help Desk or directly to the programming staff depending on the severity of the problem. IT Services is adequately staffed to respond to all these requests.

Because the Seminary has such a well-trained support staff (AOM and FS, as well as

mentors and graders), the faculty is required to do little in the way of online course management

for the Access program. After the initial course content creation, faculty members oversee graders and teach at residencies. Ongoing course support is primarily a function of mentors, graders, and the AOM. The mentors manage the online discussion forums and serve as the primary student contacts. Access teaching assistants grade the majority of the assignments, although some faculty members prefer to do their own grading. Additional staff develops the study guides. Audio and video components of Access classes are recorded and produced by the

Audio/Visual Services (AVS) staff. Apart from minimal training as to what to do and not to do during filming/taping, very little is required of the faculty beyond their preparation and delivery of the course and their review and approval of the final product.

339

10.3.6.2 Timely technological support services include (1) staff with a sufficiently high level of technical skills to ensure student facility in handling software and the technological aspects of course offerings and (2) the systemic evaluation and upgrading of technological resources and services consistent with the learning goals of theological scholarship.

The AOM provides the first level of support for Access students with technical questions or problems. The majority of these calls or e-mails can be handled in the first day or two after they are received. Communications regarding bugs or more complex problems are forwarded to the ITS staff. Because of the Seminary’s high employee retention rate and regular continuing education, the ITS staff is fully capable of addressing these problems.

The Access Student Orientation packet, which is sent to each Access student along with his or her Admissions acceptance letter, includes instructions for accessing and using all of the

Portal offerings, such as logging on, online registration, online tests, and degree audits. Access students can also contact the ITTC for Portal log-in information. Feature requests and bug reports are communicated to ITS formally and informally. Bug reports are handled as they are made known; feature requests and Portal development are discussed in a formal way annually and informally as needed.

10.3.6.3 A technological and support services program shall include technological training from basic to advanced and from one-on-one assistance to group instruction and shall ensure an adequate ratio of support services personnel to faculty and students. The program shall also ensure that the educational objectives are not hindered by time delays in support services or the lack of capable personnel to ensure the several bridging functions between technology and theological education, between theological curriculum and delivery systems, between teachers and learners, and between the distance education program and the goals of the overall curriculum for the courses and degree program being offered.

340

Access students receive technological training through information provided in their

orientation packets. They also receive training in the Access Orientation course, taken during

their first residency. As specific questions arise, students can contact the AOM or investigate

help documents on the Portal. Faculty recently (fall 2006) received specific training from the

ITTC on the use of online assessments through the Portal, the development of their Portal

gradebooks, and how to submit grades to the Registrar’s Office via the portal. Advanced training is provided on an as-needed basis. All required support is provided in a timely fashion.

The Access program provides multiple delivery systems to distribute the Seminary's

theological curriculum effectively. Online actions begin with registration and instruction is

provided through the Portal, which also includes access to student discussion forums, document

delivery, student account maintenance, weekly chapel messages and campus schedules, and

many other resources. Lectures for Access courses are provided via several convenient formats:

CD and/or MP3 download (both audio) and DVD (video). Additionally, interaction is facilitated

by phone calls and e-mail.

10.3.7 Faculty

10.3.7.1 The variety and diversity of the faculty shall be appropriate to the specific program, and a sufficient number of full-time faculty shall be available to provide leadership.

10.3.7.2 Procedures that govern personnel for the total institution shall be used for selection of faculty in distance education. Faculty must possess requisite credentials, demonstrate competence appropriate to the specific purposes of these instructional programs, and benefit from institutional practices regarding scholarly development and support for faculty research. Institutions shall provide regular and formal procedures for evaluating faculty engaged in distance education.

10.3.7.3 The institution’s full-time faculty shall have significant participation in and responsibility for academic development, teaching, and oversight of distance education.

341

They shall ensure that the institution’s goals and ethos are evident, the program is rigorous, and the instruction is of a high quality.

10.3.7.4 Institutions shall offer faculty (including adjuncts) ample training in the use of technology, as well as tutelage in instructional design, e.g., developing new courses, revising current ones, and devising pedagogical strategies, and in modes of advisement appropriate to distance programs.

10.3.7.5 Institutions shall have a regular and formal procedure to monitor teaching and scholarly activities related to distance education programs, as well as faculty workloads.

10.3.7.6 Adjunct and part-time faculty should have appropriate access to the administrative structures of the employing institution. They should receive a thorough orientation to the purposes of the institution and to its particular distance education programs.

All courses in all degree programs taught through our distance education media are

taught by full-time faculty at Covenant Theological Seminary. Occasionally, such as during a

January term, electives that Access students may take for credit are taught by adjunct faculty.

This has occurred primarily in relation to the certificate offered in bioethics.

Since all Access faculty members are selected from the full-time or adjunct faculty of

Covenant Seminary, they are governed under the same standards detailed in Covenant

Seminary’s Faculty Manual (and in Standard 6 above). Furthermore, Access faculty members are required to participate in the same mentoring and orientation processes as other full-time faculty.

As elaborated in section 10.3.6 above, technological training and support is provided to all faculty members on both a regular and as-needed basis.

As summarized in section 10.3.2, five members of the permanent faculty serve annually

on the Access Committee (a faculty subcommittee), which is responsible for monitoring and

evaluating the effectiveness of the program and ensuring that the educational goals, ethos, and

standards of Covenant Seminary are being fulfilled.

342

As detailed in section 10.3.4, Access courses are developed, supported, and delivered by

the Seminary’s full-time faculty. In terms of ongoing course maintenance or support, Access

professors of record meet at least bi-weekly with Access course graders and are available to

course mentors on an as-needed basis. Mentors also serve as liaisons between their students and

faculty to set up phone appointments during regular faculty office hours. All new course

development arises from the regular curricular planning and monitoring process as the Access

director meets regularly with the vice president for academics and at least once per semester with

the Access Committee and AV director. The Access director makes recommendations for the committee’s approval based on Access program goals and consultations with the vice president for academics, the AV staff, and potential faculty. In keeping with the Faculty Manual and with the contract changes approved by the Faculty in April 2006, the development, support and delivery of Access courses is compensated in addition to a faculty member’s base salary and load. Nevertheless, these additional commitments are incorporated into the usual departmental planning process, well in advance.

10.3.8 Admissions and Student Services

10.3.8.1 In recruitment efforts, services, and publications, institutions shall accurately represent their distance education programs, including but not limited to, a description of the technology used and the technological ability, skill, and access needed to participate in the program satisfactorily.

Admissions standards and procedures are the same for distance education students as they are for students attending courses on campus in St. Louis. All applications, recruiting materials, degree program and course curriculum information, financial aid, and supplemental material required for each course are available through the Seminary Web site and via a secure, on-line

Student Portal once the applicant is accepted and registered in his or her course(s). Distance

343 education is promoted throughout the recruiting process as a program in which a student can complete his or her MATS degree, begin course work toward the MDiv and MAEM degrees, complete a transferable course as a student of another institution, or earn a Graduate Certificate without the expense of relocation or leaving an existing occupation or ministry placement.

Students are notified throughout the admissions process that Access courses are taken individually by students utilizing video and audio recordings, working directly with an assigned mentor, and interacting with other students via an on-line forum format. Course materials, including audio and/or video lectures, related study guides, and supplemental materials are available as needed through the Access Office, the secure Student Portal, and/or the Covenant

Seminary Bookstore from the time of registration. Online registration automatically activates a materials order to help ensure that needed materials are received within two weeks of registering.

The Bookstore maintains a current listing and available stock of each required textbook or publication. Covenant Seminary has developed several supplemental programs and Internet- based materials to help simulate the on-campus experience for the Access student. In addition to the standard Student Portal, the following publications and resources are available:

• A bi-annual orientation is conducted in January and July (or August).

• An Access Student Orientation Packet is given at each orientation and reviewed to ensure that Access students have been given all materials to help them achieve course requirements and academic objectives.

• Exams are available to be taken on-line and must be completed within the time limits set by the professor.

• An on-line “Frequently Asked Questions” section within the Distance Education portion of the Web site has been developed for prospective and current students, and is continually updated by the Access administrators and support staff.

• A monthly Access eNews newsletter is sent to each student, mentor, and other subscriber by e-mail (with the exception of December and August based on the

344

Academic Calendar). The eNews includes staff support information, study tips, residency schedules, information about events happening on campus, and student or staff personal interest stories.

• The Covenant Courier (an on-campus weekly event listing) is published through the Student Portal and weekly announcements are underscored to ensure that all Access students are aware of programs, chapel services, ministry lunches, guest speakers, and upcoming campus events.

• Access students receive all standard Seminary publications, including Covenant magazine and Francis A. Schaeffer Institute mailings.

10.3.8.2 Admission requirements for students in distance education programs shall conform to appropriate degree program standards of the Commission. The institution shall ensure effective admission procedures and appropriate control.

10.3.8.3 Admission requirements shall effectively inform students regarding the necessary skills and mastery of technology to participate fully in the distance education programs to which they are admitted.

10.3.8.4 Students in distance education programs shall have access to appropriate services including advisory and administrative support, technological support, program and vocational counseling, financial aid, academic records, and placement. The policies and procedures governing financial assistance shall be published and administered equitably.

Because the Access distance education program is under the supervision of Covenant

Seminary’s faculty, admissions standards and procedures are the same for distance education students as they are for students attending courses on campus in St. Louis. Faculty evaluation of assignments submitted by Access students and overall grade point averages (see accompanying figure) confirm that the quality of students admitted to Access is comparable to the quality of students admitted to on-campus programs.

In addition 3.85 MAC 3.57 Access Degree Resident GPA Program GPA 3.00 MAEM 3.21 to 3.11 MATS 3.30 comparable GPAs between on-campus and distance 3.10 MDiv 3.31

345

education students, our faculty reports consistently from residency to residency that Access

students are well-prepared, eager to learn, and accomplished. [Note that students who have an

Access GPA for the MDiv, MAC, and MAEM transferred distance education courses into those

residential programs.

The Seminary communicates academic expectations and requirements to distance

education students in a variety of ways. In addition to the Seminary’s catalog and the Access

Student Handbook (both available online), all Access students receive one-on-one academic

advising at each of their three required residencies. In the meantime, they have access to the same academic counseling services available to students on campus through the Registrar’s

Office. Access students may call the registrar on our toll-free number to discuss their progress

toward a degree. Furthermore, the AOM serves as a first-responder and is able to answer most

student questions regarding degree requirements. Academic advising is supported by degree

audit reports mailed to students once a year and degree audit is readily available to each student

through the secure portal. All Access permanent student files are maintained with other student

records in St. Louis.

Access students rarely need financial aid because they generally retain their regular employment and usually register for only one course at a time. A limited amount of financial aid is available on a case-by-case basis for those who demonstrate need. The financial aid policy is stated in the Student Handbook. The Spouse Tuition Supplement is available for spouses of

Access students.

Covenant Theological Seminary serves the technological needs and questions of Access students through its AV Services and IT Services departments, and the Library. The services, training, and support available to Access students are relayed to new students at the Access

346

Student Orientation. In addition, the Seminary maintains on-going Web-based resources that provide current course descriptions and academic information. A Student Portal has been developed and is maintained by IT Services staff and provides the ability for students to interact with one another via an online student forum. Regular use of this forum is encouraged through faculty and mentor involvement. The Portal also provides pertinent information about registration and other academic matters, as well as updates on current Seminary events and other information designed to engage distance education students in the community life of the

Seminary. The Library, through the ongoing support of the IT Services team, hosts online research databases and certain other tools that facilitate the research needs of Access students and the identification of materials for their assignments.

Since the inception of the distance education program, the Seminary has developed

several supplemental programs and Internet-based materials to help simulate the on-campus

experience for the Access student. If a student experiences technical difficulties, the Access

office and IT staff are available during Seminary operational hours. IT staff also maintain an on-

call schedule for support via a toll-free number or e-mail. All services available to Access

students are readily accessible via the main Seminary phone number, the Access office extension,

the Student Portal, and the Seminary Web site.

10.3.9 Administration, Governance, and Finance

10.3.9.1 Distance education programs shall have appropriate structures and administrative procedures that are well defined, published, and clearly understood by all units of the institution. The administration of such programs shall be fully integrated into the institution’s regular policies and procedures.

10.3.9.2 Institutions establishing distance education programs shall ensure that institutional authority and governance policies and procedures have been followed. The

347

collegial aspects of shared governance, including initiation, review, approval, implementation, and evaluation, shall be followed.

10.3.9.3 Institutions shall provide adequate financial resources to ensure the educational quality of distance education programs and shall maintain appropriate fiscal responsibility for the programs.

The Access director, who is also a full-time member of the Seminary faculty, administers

Covenant Seminary’s Access distance education program. All academic and budgetary aspects of

the program, though administered by the director, remain under the oversight of the vice

president for academics and the guidance of the Access faculty-administration committee. The

Access program has one full-time administrative staff person, the Access office manager, as well as several student assistants who work as faculty-approved graders and mentors.

The Seminary controls all aspects of its distance education program. All print or

electronic notices or advertisements are approved by the Advancement Department, as defined

by the greater organizational responsibilities upheld within the institution. The Seminary carefully monitors growth and activities of the program through its regular administrative oversight and review process. Access operates under its own departmental budget and is financially self-sustaining. In the 2005–06 fiscal and academic year, the program sold and delivered 1,062 course hours or 396 courses.

The Seminary’s Admissions, Financial Aid (as needed), and Registrar’s offices care for

each distance education prospect and/or student in accord with the same standards of service as

those prospects or students who live in or are moving to St. Louis. The same policies and

procedures apply. Online registration is now emphasized in Seminary communications for all

returning students. The Registrar’s Office has charge over all student recordkeeping on behalf of

the Seminary in compliance with FERPA and ATS accreditation standards. Once a student is

registered, the Access Office (through the director, office manager, and mentors) functions as the

348

front line of student support and services, including IT troubleshooting, as previously stated.

Organizational structures and administrative processes are clearly defined and well understood by staff.

As a result of the mainstreaming process (outlined in section 10.2 above) that made

Access a part of our Academics division instead of part of Enrollment (which it was formerly), the program relies fully on all other departments that support the teaching and learning process on campus. The appropriation of shared tasks across departmental support teams ensures that

Access student prospects, registrants, and graduates receive the same quality student services as

resident students. At Covenant Seminary, “a student is a student is a student” no matter what

program he or she may be enrolled in.

10.4 Approval Process

10.4.1 Multiple locations and distance education programs require the approval by the Board as outlined in “Procedures Related to Accreditation and Membership,” Section V.

10.4.2 While distance education requirements will normally conform to those identified in general standards and in specified degree program standards, the Board may approve modified requirements for programs that embody an educational design that ensures high standards of quality, congruence with the educational mission of the school, and coherence with the educational values and outcomes of theological education.

As has been outlined under sections 10.3.2–4 and 10.3.7 of this standard, the Access

program is administered and evaluated within a clearly defined mission and governance structure. In 1988 and 2000, our board, administration, and faculty approved significant changes to the way in which teaching and learning happen through the ministry of Covenant Theological

Seminary. In 1988, the Seminary Extension Training (SET) program was launched, and in 2000

the Independently Mentored Extension Training (IMET) pilot program was approved. At both of

these formative moments for Access, and consistently ever since then, the Access staff have been

349

blessed to understand their work as part of the Seminary’s larger mission “to train servants of the

triune God to walk with God, to interpret and communicate God’s Word and to lead God’s

people.”

Now, during this current season of self-study, we are again examining our educational goals and outcomes closely in relation to that mission. As we look ahead, we understand that technologies, cultures, and even the shape and makeup of the church in the world are changing more rapidly. We are seeing distance education less and less as a program in itself and more and more as a delivery system that can be developed further to support all our degree programs. We have been exploring the use of hybrid courses, expanding the residency time while mainstreaming the courses into our regular schedule of “intensive” classes for on-campus students, and focusing on delivering the MAEM through distance learning.

Because ATS has, in fact, approved modified requirements for our distance learning

program, we would petition the Commission on Accrediting to receive this chapter as fulfilling

the Commission’s 2003 request for a comprehensive assessment of our distance education program. In addition, we petition the Commission on Accrediting to grant a continuance on

Covenant Seminary’s exception to the residency requirement for the MATS program in the light of this report.

Summary Evaluation

10.1 Covenant Seminary’s distance learning program has a clearly defined purpose that is

congruent with the institutional purpose, student needs, and educational standards.

350

10.2 While Covenant Seminary maintained extension sites in the past, it determined that

these sites were not accomplishing the Seminary’s mission and discontinued them

by 2004.

10.3 Covenant Seminary’s distance learning program accomplishes its program goals and

desired outcomes in an appropriate fashion. Though delivered in an asynchronous

fashion, the Seminary maintains a high level of quality through its IMET process.

Recommendations

1. As the lines continue to blur between “traditional” and “non-traditional”

programs, the Seminary should continue to explore how the distance learning

program might be mainstreamed into already existing structures and processes.

2. The Seminary should continue to assess the long-term financial impacts of

distance learning, both in terms of costs and revenues, in order to determine

appropriate strategic planning goals. 351

APPENDIX

COVENANT THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY’S RESPONSE TO NCA CRITERIA FOR ACCREDITATION

Criterion One: Mission and Integrity Criterion Statement: The organization operates with integrity to ensure the fulfillment of its mission through structures and processes that involve the board, administration, faculty, staff, and students.

Core Component - 1a: The organization’s mission documents are clear and articulate publicly the organization’s commitments.

Covenant Seminary’s response:

• The Seminary’s board of trustees has adopted statements of mission, core values, competencies, and objectives that together clearly and broadly define its mission (pp. 15- 22, 250).

• The Seminary’s mission, core values, competencies, and objectives define the internal and external publics that we seek to serve as well as the general outcomes we desire in each graduate (pp. 15-22).

• The Seminary regularly evaluates and, when appropriate, revises the mission documents (pp. 16, 250, 259-61).

• The Seminary makes the mission documents available to the public, particularly to prospective and enrolled students (p. 21).

Core Component - 1b: In its mission documents, the organization recognizes the diversity of its learners, other constituencies, and the greater society it serves.

Covenant Seminary’s response:

• In the Seminary’s mission documents, it addresses diversity within the community values and common purposes it considers fundamental to its mission (pp. 15-22).

• The mission documents, especially in the core value “Kingdom Perspective,” present the Seminary’s function in a multicultural society (pp. 15-22).

• The mission documents, especially in the core value “Relational Emphasis,” affirm the Seminary’s commitment to honor the dignity and worth of individuals (pp. 15-22).

352

• The Seminary’s required codes of belief and expected behavior are congruent with its mission (pp. 15-22; 62-3; 189-90).

Core Component - 1c: Understanding of and support for the mission pervade the organization.

Covenant Seminary’s response:

• The board, administration, faculty, staff, and students understand and support the Seminary’s mission (pp. 21-2; 250; 259-61).

• The Seminary’s strategic decisions are mission-driven (pp. 22-4).

• The Seminary’s planning and budgeting priorities flow from and support the mission (pp. 22-6, 35, 256-8, 265, 270-6, 282-5)

• The goals of the administrative and academic subunits of the Seminary are congruent with the its mission (pp. 22-6)

Core Component - 1d: The organization’s governance and administrative structures promote effective leadership and support collaborative processes that enable the organization to fulfill its mission.

Covenant Seminary’s response:

• The Seminary’s board policies and practices document its focus on the Seminary’s mission (pp. 244-56).

• The Seminary’s board enables the chief administrative personnel to exercise effective leadership (pp. 246, 248-50, 253-4, 256-8).

• The distribution of responsibilities as defined in governance structures, processes, and activities is understood and is implemented through delegated authority (pp. 248-50, 253- 4, 256-8).

• People within the governance and administrative structures are committed to the mission and appropriately qualified to carry out their defined responsibilities (pp. 187-91, 207-8, 256-61).

• Faculty and other academic leaders share responsibility for the coherence of the curriculum and the integrity of academic processes (pp. 50-2, 193-4, 206-11).

• The Seminary evaluates its structures and processes regularly and strengthens them as needed (pp. 27-8).

353

Core Component - 1e: The organization upholds and protects its integrity.

Covenant Seminary’s response:

• The Seminary’s board exercises its responsibility to the public to ensure that it operates legally, responsibility, and with fiscal honesty (pp. 248-50).

• The Seminary understands and abides by local, state, and federal laws and regulations applicable to it (pp. 37-39, 45-6).

• The Seminary consistently implements clear and fair policies regarding the rights and responsibilities of each of its internal constituencies (pp. 41-2)

• The Seminary presents itself accurately and honestly to the public (pp. 40-1, 217-20, 232- 5).

• The Seminary documents timely response to complains and grievances, particularly those of students (pp. 41-2, 226, 235).

Criterion Two: Preparing for the Future Criterion Statement: The organization’s allocation of resources and its processes for evaluation and planning demonstrate its capacity to fulfill its mission, improve the quality of its education, and respond to future challenges and opportunities.

Core Component - 2a: The organization realistically prepares for a future shaped by multiple societal and economic trends.

Covenant Seminary’s Response:

• The Seminary’s planning documents reflect a sound understanding of its current capacity (pp. 33-6, 294-7, 304-5).

• The Seminary’s planning documents demonstrate that attention is being paid to emerging factors such as technology, demographic shifts, and globalization (pp. 24-6, 68-72, 305- 9).

• The Seminary’s planning and relational dynamics promote an effective internal institution environment (pp 309-13).

• The Seminary clearly identifies authority for decision making about organizational goals (pp. 256-7).

Core Component - 2b: The organization’s resource base supports its educational programs and its plans for maintaining and strengthening their quality in the future.

Covenant Seminary’s Response:

354

• The Seminary’s resources are adequate for achievement of the educational quality it claims to provide (pp. 270-94).

• Plans for resource development and allocation document the Seminary’s commitment to supporting and strengthening the quality of the education it provides (pp. 270-94).

• The Seminary uses its human resources effectively (pp. 265-70).

• The Seminary’s history of financial resource development and investment documents a forward-looking concern for ensuring educational quality (e.g., investments in faculty development, technology, learning support services, new or renovated facilities) (pp. 270- 94).

• The Seminary’s planning processes are flexible enough to respond to unanticipated needs for program reallocation, downsizing, or growth (pp. 24-6, 256-7).

• The Seminary has a history of achieving its planning goals (pp. 22-6, 33-6).

Core Component - 2c: The organization’s ongoing evaluation and assessment processes provide reliable evidence of institutional effectiveness that clearly informs strategies for continuous improvement.

Covenant Seminary’s Response:

• The Seminary demonstrates that its evaluation processes provide evidence that its performance meets its stated expectations for institutional effectiveness (pp. 22-36).

• The Seminary maintains effective systems for collecting, analyzing, and using organizational information (pp. 24-36, 305-9).

• Appropriate data and feedback loops are available and used throughout the Seminary to support continuous improvement (pp. 22-36, 256-7, 305-09).

• Periodic reviews of academic and administrative subunits contribute to improvement of the Seminary (pp. 22-36).

Core Component - 2d: All levels of planning align with the organization’s mission, thereby enhancing its capacity to fulfill that mission.

Covenant Seminary’s Response:

• Coordinated planning processes center on the mission documents that define mission, core values, competencies, and objectives for the Seminary (pp. 22-36).

• The Seminary’s planning processes link with its budgeting processes (pp. 22-36, 282-4).

• Long-range strategic planning processes allow for reprioritization of goals when necessary because of changing environments (pp. 22-36).

355

• Planning documents give evidence of the Seminary’s awareness of the relationships among educational quality, student learning, and the diverse, complex, global, and technological world in which the Seminary and its students exist (pp. 15-36, 203-4).

• Planning processes involve internal constituents and, where appropriate, external constituents (pp. 193-4, 250, 252-3, 259-62).

Criterion Three: Student Learning and Effective Teaching Criterion Statement: The organization provides evidence of student learning and teaching effectiveness that demonstrates it is fulfilling its educational mission.

Core Component - 3a: The organization’s goals for student learning outcomes are clearly stated for each educational program and make effective assessment possible.

Covenant Seminary’s Response:

• The Seminary clearly differentiates its learning goals for various graduate programs by identifying the expected learning outcomes for each (pp. 76-137 and esp.145-54).

• Assessment of student learning provides evidence at multiple levels: course, program, and institutional (pp. 28-33, 50-5, 82-3, 91-137, 205-11).

• Assessment of student learning includes multiple direct and indirect measures of student learning (pp. 28-33, 91-137, 205-11, 326-30).

• Results obtained through assessment of student learning are available to appropriate constituencies, including students themselves (pp. 28-33, 91-137, 205-11).

• The Seminary integrates into its assessment of student learning the data reported for purposes of external accountability (e.g., graduation rates, passage rates on licensing exams, placement rates, transfer rates) (pp. 28-33, 91-137, 205-11, 236-40).

• Faculty members are involved in defining expected student learning outcomes and creating the strategies to determine whether those outcomes are achieved (pp. 28-33, 91- 137, 205-11).

• Faculty and administrators routinely review the effectiveness and uses of the Seminary’s program to assess student learning (pp. 28-33, 91-137, 205-11).

Core Component - 3b: The organization values and supports effective teaching.

Covenant Seminary’s Response:

• Qualified faculty members determine curricular content and strategies for instruction (pp. (pp. 53-5, 76-81, 193-4).

• The Seminary supports professional development designed to facilitate teaching suited to varied learning environments (pp. 57-8, 196, 199-203).

356

• The Seminary evaluates teaching and recognizes effective teaching (pp. 27-28, 205-6).

• The Seminary demonstrates openness to innovative practices that enhance learning (pp. 206-11).

• The Seminary supports faculty in keeping abreast of the research on teaching and learning, and of technological advances that can positively affect student learning and the delivery of instruction (pp. 53-62; 201-3)

• Faculty members actively participate in professional organizations relevant to the disciplines they teach (pp. 211-5).

Core Component - 3c: The organization creates effective learning environments.

Covenant Seminary’s Response:

• Assessment results inform improvements in curriculum, pedagogy, instructional resources, and student services (pp. 24-36, 75-81, 91-137, 226-7).

• The Seminary provides an environment that supports all learners and respects the diversity they bring (pp. 42-44, 53-4, 223-5, 237-40).

• Student development programs support learning throughout the student’s experience regardless of the location of the student (pp. 226-35, 323-48).

• The Seminary employs, when appropriate, new technologies that enhance effective learning environments for students (pp. 195-7, 203-4).

• The Seminary’s systems of quality assurance include regular review of whether its educational strategies, activities, processes, and technologies enhance student learning (pp. 24-36, 75-81, 91-137, 226-7).

Core Component - 3d: The organization’s learning resources support student learning and effective teaching.

Covenant Seminary’s Response:

• The Seminary ensures access to the resources (e.g., libraries, clinical practice sites, field education sites) necessary to support learning and teaching (pp. 60-1, 96-7, 100-1, 114-6, 155-86).

• The Seminary evaluates the use and effectiveness of its learning resources to enhance student learning and effective teaching (pp. 155-86).

• The Seminary supports students, staff, and faculty in using technology effectively (pp. 226-7, 305-9).

• The Seminary provides effective staffing and support for its learning resources (pp. 155- 86).

357

• The Seminary’s systems and structures enable partnerships and innovations that enhance student learning and strengthen teaching effectiveness (pp. 89-90, 140, 158-9, 189, 313- 6).

Criterion Four: Acquisition, Discovery, and Application of Knowledge Criterion Statement: The organization promotes a life of learning for its faculty, administration, staff, and students by fostering and supporting inquiry, creativity, practice, and social responsibility in ways consistent with its mission.

Core Component - 4a: The organization demonstrates, through the actions of its board, administrators, students, faculty, and staff, that it values a life of learning.

Covenant Seminary’s Response:

• The board has approved and disseminated statements supporting freedom of inquiry for the Seminary’s students, faculty, and staff, and honors those statements in its practices (pp. 62-3, 181, 189-90, 199, 214-5, 246-8).

• The Seminary demonstrates its financial programmatic commitment to lifelong learning among its community in creative ways (pp. 58-60).

• The faculty and students, in keeping with the Seminary’s mission, produce scholarship and create knowledge through basic and applied research (pp. 50-7, 211-5).

Core Component - 4b: The organization demonstrates that acquisition of a breadth of knowledge and skills and the exercise of intellectual inquiry are integral to its educational programs.

Covenant Seminary’s Response:

• The Seminary demonstrates that an appropriate level of competency is the outcome of its various graduate degree programs (pp. 22-36, 97-136).

• Learning outcomes demonstrate effective preparation for continued learning (pp. 145- 54).

Core Component - 4c: The organization assesses the usefulness of its curricula to students who will live and work in a global, diverse, and technological society.

Covenant Seminary’s Response:

• Regular academic program reviews include attention to currency and relevance of courses and programs (pp. 16, 68-72, 82-3, 98, 101-2, 116-8, 119-26).

358

• In keeping with its mission, learning goals and outcomes include skills and professional competence essential to an effective ministry (pp. 145-54).

• Faculty members expect students to master the knowledge and skills necessary for ministry (pp. 206-11).

Core Component - 4d: The organization provides support to ensure that faculty, students, and staff acquire, discover, and apply knowledge responsibly.

Covenant Seminary’s Response:

• The Seminary’s academic and student support programs contribute to the development of student skills and attitudes fundamental to responsible use of knowledge (pp. 50-7, 91- 136, 206-11).

• The Seminary provides effective oversight and support services to ensure the integrity of research and practice conducted by its faculty and students (pp. 50-7, 206-11).

Criterion Five: Engagement and Service Criterion Statement: As called for by its mission, the organization identifies its constituencies and serves them in ways both value.

Core Component - 5a: The organization learns from the constituencies it serves and analyzes its capacity to serve their needs and expectations.

Covenant Seminary’s Response:

• The Seminary’s commitments are shaped by its mission and its capacity to support those commitments (pp. 15-22).

• The Seminary demonstrates attention to the diversity of the constituencies it serves (pp. 42-4, 61-2, 190-3, 223-5).

• The Seminary’s outreach programs respond to identified community needs (pp. 136-41).

• In responding to external constituencies, the Seminary is well-served by programs such as continuing education, outreach, customized training, and extension services (pp. 319- 49).

Core Component - 5b: The organization has the capacity and the commitment to engage with its identified constituencies and communities.

Covenant Seminary’s Response:

• The Seminary’s structures, processes, and programs provide value for its identified constituencies and communities (pp. 68-9, 136-41).

359

• The Seminary utilizes feedback from its identified constituencies and communities as part of its strategic planning, teaching, and learning (pp. 26-36)

Core Component - 5c: The organization demonstrates its responsiveness to those constituencies that depend on it for service.

Covenant Seminary’s Response:

• The Seminary’s transfer policies and practices create an environment supportive of the mobility of learners (pp. 41-2, 219-26).

• The Seminary’s programs of engagement give evidence of building effective bridges among diverse communities (pp. 136-41).

• The Seminary participates in partnerships focused on shared educational, economic, and social goals (pp. 313-6).

• The Seminary’s partnerships and contractual arrangements uphold its integrity (pp. 37-9).

Core Component - 5d: Internal and external constituencies value the services the organization provides.

Covenant Seminary’s Response:

• The Seminary’s outreach programs are valued by its internal and external constituencies (pp. 136-41).

• The Seminary’s success in placing its MAC interns in placement sites demonstrates the value the community places on its students (pp. 112-8).

• The Seminary’s outstanding placement record for its recommended graduates demonstrates the high value external constituencies place on the services it provides (pp. 236-7).

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS TO THE SELF-STUDY REPORT OF COVENANT THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY SAINT LOUIS, MISSOURI

Presented by the Self-Study Executive Committee

Chaired by Sean Michael Lucas, PhD Vice President for Academics and Dean of Faculty

4 September 2007

TRUSTEE ROSTER 2006-07

Executive Committee of the Board RE Walter Turner, chairman of the board, Pittsburgh Presbytery RE William French, vice chairman of the board, Missouri Presbytery RE Mark Ensio, secretary, Southwest Presbytery RE Craig Stephenson, treasurer; finance committee chairman, Eastern Carolina Presbytery TE David Sinclair, academics committee chairman, Palmetto Presbytery RE S. Fleetwood Maddox, Jr., development committee chairman, Central Georgia Presbytery TE Robert Flayhart, student services committee chairman, Evangel Presbytery RE John H. Kramer, at-large member, Missouri Presbytery

Elected Board Members RE Bruce Breeding, North Texas Presbytery RE R. P. Ellingsworth, Chesapeake Presbytery TE Donald Furuto, Evangel Presbytery RE Robert Hamby, Jr., Calvary Presbytery RE Carlo Hansen, Illiana Presbytery RE Robert B. Hayward, Jr., Susquehanna Valley Presbytery RE Ron McNalley, North Texas Presbytery TE Joseph Novenson, Tennessee Valley Presbytery TE Raymond C. Ortlund, Jr., Nashville Presbytery RE Jean Owens, Southwest Florida Presbytery TE Jonathan Seda, Heritage Presbytery TE William Spink, Jr., Covenant Presbytery RE Paul R. Stoll, Northern Illinois Presbytery TE Jung Kon Suh, Korean Central Presbytery RE Frank Wicks, Jr., Missouri Presbytery RE John Wood, Evangel Presbytery

Advisory Board Members RE Larry Catlett, Nashville Presbytery Mr. Benjamin Edwards, IV, St. Louis, Missouri Mrs. Lynette Evans, Birmingham, Alabama RE Samuel Graham, Covenant Presbytery Mrs. Susie Graham, St. Louis, Missouri RE Miles Gresham, Evangel Presbytery RE Edward Harris, Missouri Presbytery RE Robert Morrison, Potomac Presbytery TE Scott Parsons, Tennessee Valley Presbytery RE Vernon C. Pierce, Susquehanna Valley Presbytery TE Wynonie Plummer, Chesapeake Presbytery RE John B. Prentis, III, Missouri Presbytery RE John Reed, Missouri Presbytery Mrs. Susan Roper, Cape Girardeau, Missouri RE John Spencer, Evangel Presbytery RE Arthur Stoll, Northern Illinois Presbytery RE Steven Thompson, Orthodox Presbyterian Church Mr. Philip Vierling, Hastings, Minnesota

FACULTY ROSTER AUGUST 2007

Old Testament Department C. John (“Jack”) Collins, Professor, serving since 1993; department chairman Jason Sklar, Associate Professor, serving since 2001; director of the ThM program Daniel Kim, Assistant Professor of Hebrew and Educational Ministries, serving since 2006; associate dean for academic administration W. Brian Aucker, Assistant Professor, serving since 2007; director of field education R. Laird Harris, Professor Emeritus, served from 1956-1981 Robert I. Vasholz, Professor Emeritus, served from 1975-2007

New Testament Department Hans Bayer, Professor, serving since 1994; department chairman Clarence Dewitt (“Jimmy”) Agan, Associate Professor, serving since 2007 David Chapman, Assistant Professor, serving since 2001; director of the MAET program Gregory Perry, Assistant Professor of Biblical Studies, serving since 2005; director of Covenant Worldwide Wilbur Wallis, Professor Emeritus, served from 1956-1982

Systematic Theology Department Robert Peterson, Professor, serving since 1990; department chairman Michael Williams, Professor, serving since 1996 Anthony Bradley, Assistant Professor of Apologetics and Systematic Theology, serving since 2005 David Clyde Jones, Professor Emeritus, served from 1968-2007

Church History and World Mission Department David Calhoun, Professor of Church History, serving since 1978; department chairman Sean Michael Lucas, Assistant Professor of Church History, serving since 2005; Vice President for Academics and Dean of Faculty J. Nelson Jennings, Associate Professor of World Mission, serving since 1999

Practical Theology Department Counseling Richard Winter, Professor, serving since 1992; department chairman Daniel Zink, Associate Professor, serving since 1995; director of the MAC Evangelism and Church Planting Jerram Barrs, Professor of Christian Studies and Contemporary Culture, serving since 1989; resident fellow of Francis A. Schaeffer Institute Phil Douglass, Associate Professor, serving since 1987 Educational Ministries Donald C. Guthrie, Associate Professor, serving since 1998; department chairman and associate dean of educational ministries Bob Burns, Associate Professor, serving since 2007; director of the Center for Ministry Leadership and the DMin program Preaching Bryan Chapell, Professor, serving since 1986; President Zachary Eswine, Assistant Professor, serving since 2001

[note: service dates start from initial election to rank by Seminary’s board of trustees]

STAFF ROSTER AUGUST 2007

President’s Cabinet Bryan Chapell, President Wayne Copeland, Vice President for Business Administration and Chief Financial Officer Mark Dalbey, Vice President for Student Services and Dean of Students Sean Lucas, Vice President for Academics and Dean of Faculty David Wicker, Vice President for Advancement and Chief of Staff

President’s Office Bryan Chapell, President Kathy Woodard, Executive Assistant to the President

Academics Dean’s Office Sean Lucas, Vice President for Academics and Dean of Faculty Daniel Kim, Associate Dean of Academic Administration Patricia Lewis, Administrative Secretary for Academics Gerry Reimer, Faculty Secretary

Institutes, Centers and Ministries Donald Guthrie, Associate Dean of Educational Ministries and Senior Director of FSI Jerram Barrs, Resident Scholar of FSI Bob Burns, Director of the Center for Ministry Leadership and DMin program Gregory Perry, Director of Covenant Worldwide April Barber, FSI Administrative Assistant Jackie Becthel, Access Office Manger Denise Wichlan, Center for Ministry Leadership and DMin program Administrative Assistant

Library Jim Pakala, Library Director Denise Pakala, Associate Librarian for Technical Services Steve Jamison, Reference and Systems Librarian Joanna DeYoung, Library Serials Coordinator Kenny Gerlach, Circulation Services Coordinator Karen Hierendt, Library Office Manager Brady Shuman, Library Technical Services Specialist Janet Sparkman, Library Office Assistant

Student Services Dean of Students Office Mark Dalbey, Vice President for Student Services and Dean of Students Tasha Chapman, Associate Dean of Student Life Janet Wicker, Student Services Office Manager

Academic Services Diane Preston, Associate Dean for Academic Services Ellie Brown, Registrar Pam Mehlhouse, Assistant Registrar Pat Rouse, Academic Services Administrative Assistant

Audio/Visual Services Christopher Bryan, Director of AV Services Bailey Mohr, Assistant Director of AV Services

Business Administration Wayne Copeland, Vice President for Business Administration and Chief Financial Officer Betsy Gasoske, Director of Staff Development Paul Rawlins, Director of Institutional Research

Business Office Jean Lehmkuhl, Controller Donnetta Nunley, Accounting Assistant Merelyn Tolbert, Accounts Payable Clerk

Information Technology Services Richard Hiers, Director of Information Technology Services Ann Copeland, Webmaster/Developer Kristi Hill, Application Development Administrator Jerry McKittrick, Network Administrator

Physical Plant David Brown, Director of Facilities and Operations Joe Peterka, Facilities and Operations Manager Jason Robey, Facilities and Operations Manager Eric Kessels, Director of Grounds and Equipment Liz Kelley, Supervisor of Guest Services and Mail Chris Barclay, Supervisor of General Maintenance Tim Cole, Supervisor of Apartment Maintenance Al Graham, Maintenance Staff Matt Wicker, Grounds Staff

Advancement David Wicker, Vice President for Advancement and Chief of Staff

Enrollment, Admissions, and Financial Aid Brad Anderson, Senior Director of Enrollment Kent Needler, Associate Director of Enrollment Jeremy Kicklighter, Director of Admissions Melinda Conn, Director of Financial Aid Joel Hathaway, Director of Alumni Relations Emily Loveall, Admissions Administrator Jane Johnston, Financial Aid Administrator and International Student Advisor Carin Schindler, Admissions Data Coordinator Connie Uetrecht, Financial Aid Assistant Betty Bradley, Receptionist

Advancement and Public Relations Stacey Fitzgerald, Senior Director of Advancement John Ranheim, Director of Donor Relations John English, Associate Director of Development Rick Matt, Associate Director of Public Relations Brian Tiemeier, Associate Director of Donor Records Shirley Williams, Development Data Coordinator Jackie Fogas, Senior Copy Editor and Special Projects Coordinator Nicolle Olivastro, Public Relations and Events Coordinator Melissa Peach, Development Administrator

Capital Campaign James McCormack, Director of Capital Campaign Marvin Fornwalt, Director of Planned Giving Kit Blomquist, Capital Campaign Coordinator

COVENANT SEMINARY FACULTY INTERNATIONAL TEACHING, 1998-2007

Latin America Dr. Sklar 1. Bahamas Prof. Bradley 21. Netherlands Prof. Barrs 2. Belize Prof. Perry Dr. Bayer 3. Guatemala Prof. Bradley Dr. Calhoun 4. Mexico Prof. Bradley 22. Spain Prof. Bradley Dr. Dalbey 23. United Kingdom Prof. Barrs Dr. Jennings Dr. Bayer Dr. Jones Dr. Calhoun Prof. Perry Dr. Sklar Dr. Williams Dr. Winter 5. Panama Prof. Bradley 6. West Indies Dr. Calhoun Eastern Europe 24. Bulgaria Dr. Dalbey South America Dr. Guthrie 7. Brazil Dr. Bayer 25. Hungary Prof. Barrs Dr. Jennings Dr. Bayer 8. Chile Dr. Jones Dr. Calhoun 9. Peru Dr. Peterson Dr. Eswine Dr. Winter Africa 26. Latvia Prof. Barrs 10. Ghana Dr. D. Chapman Dr. Bayer Dr. Dalbey Dr. Jones Dr. Guthrie 27. Lithuania Dr. Bayer Dr. Jennings 28. Poland Prof. Barrs 11. Ivory Coast Dr. Chapell Dr. Chapman 12. Kenya Dr. Chapell Dr. Eswine Dr. Jennings 29. Russia Dr. Winter 13. Nigeria Dr. Jennings 30. Slovakia Prof. Barrs 14. Senegal Dr. Chapell Dr. Bayer 15. South Africa Prof. Barrs Dr. Winter Dr. Jennings 31. Ukraine Prof. Barrs 16. Uganda Dr. Jennings Dr. Bayer Dr. Peterson Dr. Eswine Dr. Jones Europe Dr. Winter 17. Austria Dr. Bayer Asia 18. France Dr. Bayer 32. India Dr. Winter Dr. Calhoun Dr. Jennings Dr. Sklar 33. Thailand Dr. Jennings 19. Germany Dr. Bayer Dr. Sklar Middle East 20. Italy Dr. Bayer 34. Iran Dr. Bayer Dr. Calhoun Dr. Jennings Dr. Dalbey 35. Jordan Dr. Chapman

Pacific Rim 36. Australia Prof. Barrs Prof. Perry 37. Japan Dr. Chapell Dr. Eswine Dr. Jennings 38. Korea Prof. Barrs Dr. Chapell Dr. Guthrie Dr. Jennings 39. Malaysia Dr. Jennings 40. Philippines Dr. Jennings 41. Singapore Prof. Barrs

Table of Contents