Part 3: “RE-PACKING OUR LUGGAGE” - The Journey ahead.

What is the best way for us to construct a curriculum package for

theological education?

When the time comes to re-assemble our “luggage” for the journey ahead, the first question,
surprisingly, is not: “what shall we include?” but rather: “how can we achieve a good balance in our
selection of course subjects?” We have to resist the temptation to try and include everything that
seems immediately desirable.

POSSIBLE APPROACHES to CURRICULUM CONSTRUCTION

Over the years there have been many different approaches to the construction of a theological
curriculum, including the evolutionary method of simply allowing a curriculum to grow unplanned
as it accumulates subjects offered by each new addition to the teaching body. In this latter process
“weaker” offerings die a natural death as they are replaced by more vigorous courses. But even the
strong courses are liable to be neglected and ultimately omitted altogether when their custodian who
first developed them moves on.

Some approaches to curriculum administration are more planned. They include the following, each
with its own strengths and weaknesses:

A) The Pragmatic (“jig-saw”) Approach: (dear to the heart of administrators!)

The aim here is to fit into the students’ period of residence as conveniently as possible all the
subjects which their teachers wish to teach them. This approach is primarily teacher orientated,
and starts with the pragmatic problem of “who is available to teach our students now?” The
administration lists those subjects thought worthy of being taught and that appeal to the teachers’
interests. A selection is then made from the curriculum CLASSIFICATION list (or something like
it) to find out what might match the concerns of the faculty. Everyone is happy because the
students presume that they have the most motivated teachers for the subjects chosen in this way.
But how balanced is the resulting curriculum?

B) The Structural (“menu”) Approach: (beloved by academics!)

This approach aims to fit into the timetable as much of a comprehensive curriculum as time will
allow. Inevitably priorities have to be agreed as it is never possible to include every desirable
topic. This approach shifts the attention onto the subjects to be taught. Again the
CLASSIFICATION list provides a useful basis for selection, but this time extra care is taken to
make a balanced selection from each major division. The approach is truly subject orientated (not
teacher orientated) and is more balanced in its approach. It can, however, become degree driven,
rather than task related. .

C) The Functional (“tools for the job”) Approach: (the assumption of the average church
member)
Here the emphasis is on the needs of the work to which the student is called. “What is it that the
student must be able to do after completing this course?” is the first question asked before any subject
is “packed” into the curriculum “luggage”. This approach is thus task orientated and, for seminary
students, the assumption is that they are being trained to provide a service for the church and meet the
requirements of a congregation in terms of skills and knowledge.
D) The Individual Development (“promising material”) Approach: (sometimes the hope of
the student’s tutor!)
The purpose here is the development of the student as a disciple of Christ. Thus the formation of a
Christ-like character is sought foremost. But also important is the development of other areas of
full potential (natural abilities, gifts and interests) in order to make him / her as creative, productive
and influential for good as is possible in the area of ministry to which (s)he is called.
E) The Educational (“learning bricks”) Approach: (advocated by educationists aware of
student learning problems)
This is a sub-objective of individual development where it is realised that all learning must be
appropriate to the educational level and experience of the student, rather than related to the
academic level of the teacher. The approach here starts at the base of the student’s learning
pyramid and builds on that foundation only as fast as the student can manage to cope with each
new learning “block”, be it in the cognitive, functional, affective or sapiential domain. Specific
consideration is given to the mastery of all the basic learning skills of grammar, comprehension,
basic logic and study methods, rather than to the accumulation of content (“banking”
information!).
F) The Contextualised (“here and now”) Agenda: (popular in the Western theological circles
and now catching on in the two-thirds world churches also)
This approach emphasises preparation for the world. Its aim is to teach every subject in the context
of the world we live in now, in order to train students to think in terms of the relevance of what
they are absorbing. Thus all subjects should be taught in their wider contexts to prepare students to
face social issues that they will likely meet in society, as well as to train them in how to teach
members of their congregations to tackle these issues effectively themselves.
G) The Integrative (“web”) Approach: (pioneered by educationists in secular fields in the
West)
The word “integrated” is used here to suggest that CONTENT, DOMAIN, MODE and LEVEL are
all brought into consideration as those ideas, fields and methods are inter-woven at appropriate
levels in a way that will be most effective in achieving the desired objectives of the programme. It
also refers to the integration of diverse subjects. It is thus the complete opposite of the academic
departmentalisation that has for so long characterised Western academic institutions. One version
of this approach aims also to make all such integrative learning relevant to contemporary living.
(See Integrative Theology: Gordon Lewis / B. Demarest)
This is precisely what is needed in theological curriculum construction. The disciple-student needs
a balanced blend of doctrine, experience and practice in his / her training that will enable that
student to develop - long after formal training has been completed - what has already been learnt.
(S)he needs to be trained in the four domains of knowing, doing, being and understanding, in such
a way that the process will continue throughout his / her ministry, and a variety of methods will
enhance this learning.
DISCUSSION
Which of the above approaches do you recognise as best describing your institution?
Which would be both feasible and worth adopting for your programme? Why?
Could you combine aspects of several of them to make a curriculum that is more appropriate for your situation?
List below the elements you would wish to include.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We now consider three models of curriculum construction currently in practice in the West.
CURRICULUM CONSTRUCTION : Three Current Models
A. Traditional “Oxbridge”

College
Examples:
Raison
d’etre “By the terms of Queen Margaret’s Charter, this
(Justification >>>> Chair was established for the teaching of
for its Divinity in the University of C ….”
existence)
“The Purpose of this College is to Prepare men and
v women for the Ministry of the Church of E…...”
v
v Requirements: 3 years’ residence under tutors
v for the study of chosen subjects:
Subject:
Definitions:
Professor: the principal teacher in a field of learning at a
DIVINITY university or college, in charge of his department
and usually occupying a “chair”.
Content: Fellow: a member of the teaching faculty of a university
A. Scripture college.
B. Doctrine Dean: a college fellow with responsibility for undergrad-
C. History uate discipline.
D. Pastoralia Reader: a lecturer in a university.
Lecture: (the text of) a discourse on a particular subject
v given or read to an audience.
Tutor: a member of staff responsible for the teaching and
v supervision of a certain number of students.
v (Derivation: a “caring for” > to” watch over”.)

Professorships / Lectureships
1. Subject “A” Professor “X”

2. Subject “B” Professor “Y”

3. Subject “C” Lecturer “Z”

v
Course Subjects
Autumn Term (Usually 3 terms to each academic year)
1.
2. etc
Tutors
v Supervise the written work of students
Bibliography
Essays
Reading Lists
On Topics in the Field of Study

Annual (or bi-annual) Examinations

On all the Course subjects taught
Notice in this model the emphasis on:
community living (the requirement for so many years’ residence),
the importance given to the role of the teacher (a hierarchy of teaching staff), including
the mentoring of the students, often in a one-to-one relationship, and
the close relationship between the teacher and his subject (the “chair”* established for a
famous teacher to be able to teach a particular subject).

Analysed in this way, it may seem that this traditional approach gives too much emphasis to the
teacher and the subject he teaches. However, the almost “guru” quality of this form of university
education has stood the test of the time and has produced many remarkable scholars and has been the
back-bone of the intelligentsia for many generations. **.

This traditional model is orientated towards a concept of education as an art. Before we look at an
example of a model orientated towards the complementary concept of education as a science, we shall
consider a more pragmatic model that is orientated towards education considered more as a service
agency for both the individual and the community.

B. Contemporary British

College
Clientele >>>>> Questionnaire
[sent to churches, former students, church leaders, etc]
V
V What? – How? – Why? – Where? – When? – Who? etc
V
V +
V
V
V Projection of future Needs
V
V Q: In 10 years time what will be the world scenario?
V
V

NEEDS to be met by the Programme

1.
2.
3. etc
Course Subjects
1.
2.
3. etc
* The concept of a university “chair” derives from the Muslim practice of giving religious teaching at
the foot of one of the main columns in a mosque. The Ulema would sit on a small stool (his “chair”)
and teach to his students gathered around him. Perhaps this in turn derived from the Jewish practice of
teaching similarly in the synagogue. Thus the apostle Paul once sat at the feet of Rabbi Gamaliel.

** A book published by Oxford University Press to commemorate Pakistan’s 50 years of

Independence reviewed many aspects of life in Pakistan today. Of the 18 writers who contributed
articles, 5 were associated with Cambridge University, a remarkable testimony to the contribution
made by this famous example of traditional university education in Europe.
C. North American

School
Goals >>>>>>>>
Categories of Student Development
v
1.
v
v 2.
v
3.
Year Programme
1 3 Year Programme 4 Year Programme
or: 4. or: or:
Diploma Programme Bachelor Master’s
5. Programme Programme
Programme 6.
Objectives: Programme Objectives: Programme Objectives:
7. 1. 1.
1.
2. 2.

2. 3. 3.
4. 4.

5.

Designing a Curriculum

to achieve (or support the accomplishment of) the above objectives

Course Subjects
[Preliminary listing]
1.
2. etc

Note: Every COURSE has its own written objectives describing which “piece of the pie” (i.e.
the over-all objectives of the programme) is to be accomplished within the course.
Example:
800 Pastoral Theology 3 Credit Hour
Course
Autumn 2000 [3 x 12 = 36 class “hours”]

Course Description
2 – 3 line summary of content. [This will be included in the institution’s Catalogue.]
e.g. The call to…duties of… skills needed…difficulties faced in the pastor’s live, etc.

Course Texts
1.
2.
3. etc
 Course Objectives

1. In this course the student will learn this content…. [Know]

e.g. the duties expected of a congregational pastor
a)
b) etc

2. By the end of this course, the student will be able to perform…

e.g. a celebration of the Lord’s Supper Do]
a)
b) etc

3. By the end of this course the student will understand….

e.g. the nature of a sacrament Understand]
a)
b) etc

4. By the end of this course the student will have developed his / her…
e.g. standard of personal preparedness before leading
worship [Be]
a)
b) etc.
Course Outline

Tues Sept 15th Introduction / Assignments

Thur Sept 17th Definitions

Sat Sept 19 The Call to Ministry

etc

Course Assignments

1. Reading
2. Written Assignment (Essay)
3. Projects – interview 3 pastors about Topic A

Course Grading

1. End of term Exam

2. Term Paper
MISSION STATEMENTS

The need to be very clear about what we are trying to achieve over-all is now recognised by the secular world as

well as by Christian organisations. Nowadays banks and even CocaCola have their own mission statement which

they share with employee and customer alike.

Actually this is not really a new discovery. European Universities had it before the Reformation. (See
the examples of a College Raison d’etre at the beginning of Section A: Traditional “Oxbridge”.) They
just did not call it their “Mission Statement”!

What is the function of such a statement? What does it set out to do? And what are its characteristics?

The purpose of a Mission Statement is to make clear what is the reason for the existence of the
organisation or institution. For what purpose was it founded? It sets out to state in clear language what
it is trying to achieve. It does not try to describe each and every aspect of its work, nor does it try to
convey its particular ethos or way of doing things. That should be done somewhere else, in an
advertisement, a constitution or a prospectus. The Mission Statement simply states the essential
mission of the organisation.

So a Mission Statement should be short – not more than 4 dozen words, clear – not complicated by
technical language, and memorable. It should also of-course win the approval of all those involved in
the organisation. When Gujranwala Theological Seminary held a Strategic Planning exercise to plan
for the next 5 years, the 20 or so Board members, Faculty and Students involved began by formulating
in groups of five a suitable Mission Statement for the Seminary. When eventually the four working
groups collated and agreed the final Statement there was spontaneous applause as all present together
recognised the essential nature of their Seminary’s work. The wording went as follows:

The mission of Gujranwala Theological Seminary

is to train, develop and equip men and women
called by God
for ordained and other ministries
DISCUSSION
What do you find attractive and compelling about the above Mission Statement?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What are the various components of this Statement?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXERCISE:
1. Write your own Mission Statement for your institution or organisation. (Either do this in small
groups or individually.) Remember to make it brief, clear and memorable.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Now bring your various drafts together and compile an agreed Statement.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Before we consider next the construction of objectives, let us first compare our thinking with the aims
and ethos of some North American colleges, as expressed in their recruiting advertisements.
Note: These are not Mission Statements, but rather statements of ethos and general approach. They
have the purpose of attracting attention. All the same, they tell us a lot about the institutions
concerned!
SEMINARY PROFILES
Below are extracts of advertisements for various American Seminaries. Taken from a recent issue of
Christianity Today, they illustrate differing emphases in Seminary training. Not all portray an ethos we
necessarily would wish to share, but some could nudge us to further thought about our own goals.

Columbia Biblical Seminary

Dedicated professors who will push you academically,
lead you spiritually,
and give you a rock-solid grounding in God’s Word.
You need to develop the spiritual character that comes
from applying what you learn to your life,
and by being held accountable to a body of believers
through personal discipleship and the highest standards of conduct.
So if you want to have an impact in the world,
choose the seminary that can have the greatest impact on you.

Fuller Theological Seminary

Our professors not only excel in the classroom, but are out there in the world, pastoring
churches, engaging in mission, practising psychology
e.g. Minister of a big church + chaplain to a high school football team. Subject: NT
Work among the poor: Subject: urban mission.
i.e. equally active on campus and in the community.
We practice what we teach.

Wheaton College Graduate School

An educational experience that challenges students
to integrate personal faith with academic disciple.
Providing students with the knowledge and skills
to help build the church,
confront social problems,
and bring a Christian perspective to any endeavour, anywhere in the world.

Beeson Divinity School

We pledge to nurture one another toward full maturity in Christ.
We believe the missionary mandate
should inform every aspect of a theological education.
We commit ourselves to a pattern of theological training which emphasises
The disciplines of the Christian faith,
a life of prayer and worship,
witness and discipleship,
and social compassion with justice and peace.

Denver Seminary
Emphasis on hands-on learning directed by experienced mentors.
Innovative approach to knowing, being and doing.
We borrowed it from the best!

DISCUSSION
Make a List of points in these advertisements (above and on the other side) that appeal to you.
How you could adapt them to your programme? Write a “profile” advertisement for your institution.
PTO
 Haggard Graduate School of Theology
Doctor of Ministry
with an emphasis in spiritual formation.
Start a “change reaction” in your church! – with Richard Foster.
By design, the program allows for new ideas and perspectives.
It takes into account how very individualised ministry can be.
Growth and learning are always reciprocal
- rooted in a solid scriptural foundation,
- tirelessly seeking truth and understanding.

Western Seminary Seattle

Reading is fundamental.
We teach out students to “read” on three levels:
the Bible,
the human soul
and today’s culture.

International School of Theology

You will be personally mentored by faculty.
Helping students apply what they are learning
to their own intimate relationship to God
as well as their current and future ministries
has been a passion of Dr Alan Scholes’ throughout his career.

The Master’s Seminary

‘A young seminary student once asked me what the secret is to a great sermon.
My answer wasn’t what he expected. “Stay in your chair until the hard work is done.”
I stand by that. There’s nothing magical about being an effective student and
communicator of the Bible. Its’ a skill you learn, cultivate, then put to work. God’s
Word deserves nothing less, God’s people need nothing more.’ - John Macarthur
The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary
Most seminaries will have you read good books.
But here at Southern Seminary, you’ll sit in classes taught by the authors.
That’s because professors in our School of Theology are writing
the texts that are setting the pace in theological education.

Alliance Theological Seminary

Students focus on three areas of development.
The Person Phase causes students to establish skills
in understanding the biblical text
and authentically apply it to their lives.
The Church phase gives students a clearer picture
of the nature and mission of the church they are callled to serve.
The Ministry Phase allows student to apply these new perspectives
to specific issues and needs in ministry.
CONSTRUCTING OBJECTIVES
Suppose we take the over-all purpose of Theological Education to be: “the educational
furtherance of God’s Kingdom”. Upon this basic statement of general intent we could construct more
measurable objectives for each domain.
Cognitive: To be able to list and explain the significance of…
e.g. “10 major tenets of the Christian Faith”;
“4 key teachings of Scripture concerning the Kingdom of God”.
Functional: To be able to perform (in the field)…
e.g. “the preaching to a rural congregation of a sermon on God’s grace that is both
Biblical and contextual.”
“the leading of evening worship in a busti (poor street community).”
Affective: To be able to demonstrate (by behaviour and attitude)…
e.g. “godly concern for a bereaved church member whose unbelieving son
is killed in a road accident and offer counsel with integrity.”
Sapiential: To be able to…
e.g. “in a case of congregational schism (split), interpret Scripture with relevancy
and insight into the purposes of God for his Church.”
“counsel a husband whose wife has recently left him about how to cope with
infidelity in the light of God’s will for his people in marriage.”
A Nursing Example for Course Construction
As an example of how this four-fold approach might be applied to a course, let us look at
some examples of learning objectives in a training course for nursing sisters:
Cognitive domain: Listing and being able to explain aspects of the anatomy, physiology
and medical conditions of a patient.
Functional domain: Enabling junior staff to work well with supervised practice.
Affective domain: Demonstrating care for the self-esteem and morale of the patient.
(Note: in this area the modelling given by the tutor is very significant.)
Sapiential domain: Understanding the patient / doctors / colleagues / maids / superiors;
the nature of the illness and its effects upon the patient.
DISCUSSION
What is the pre-determined goal of our whole training programme?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What are the main objectives in each learning domain that will, if achieved, enable our students
to reach this end?

Cognitive -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Functional -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Affective --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sapiential ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXERCISES - for selection during an introductory work-shop, etc
At this point an all-day workshop to review and apply the principles discussed so far is recommended.
The following exercises could be carried out. (A relevant Bible Study is included in Appendix J.)

A) What expectations do I bring with me to this retreat / conference / seminar / work-shop?

B) Compare 3 construction models (Modern, Traditional European, N. American), noting

the strengths and weaknesses of each.
C) Imagine…(This exercise is about the essentials of a minimum curriculum. It should be
done in pairs.)
Project yourself 10 years hence into the following fanciful “nightmare” situation:
The institution has been taken over by “baddies” and the property sold; 100 of the
most useful Library books were rescued, but nothing else.
A new Taliban government has expelled all missionaries; most went to Central Asia.
The Church leadership is in crisis and new leaders are urgently needed
for a persecuted church community dispersed into small groups.
All the teaching faculty have dispersed.
You and one colleague have got together to start a programme of training for 5 or 6
young Christians who show promise as potential local church leaders.
What would you plan to teach them and in what order?
D) You are asked to “unpack” your curriculum as it is at present and “declare” what it
contains. Do this first for the total curriculum programme (as far as you are aware of it).
Then do it again for your own subject / field of study.
Both times ask yourself these questions:
i. What kind of content does it cover? (e.g. mainly information?)
ii. Where is the training focused? (e.g. on preaching? Church roles?)
iii. What is excluded from our vision? (e.g. social issues, cultural hindrances?)
E) To what pre-determined end do we plan our teaching? What are we aiming to achieve by
our training?
F) Reflect on the benefits of studying in your field or subject. Now choose any 3 areas of
study shown on the sheet: “PURPOSEFUL STUDY: Why Study this Course?”
List in order of importance the three greatest benefits of studying these subjects.
G) Choose a level of leadership in church life, e.g. village padre, town SS superintendent,
etc).
List some qualities of this properly trained church “leader” under the headings:
i. What (s)he would know:
ii. What (s)he could do:
iii. What (s)he would see (understand clearly, have insight into, be wise about):
iv. What character qualities (s)he would be showing in her life-style:
H) Apply the learning domains pyramid (knowing, doing, being, seeing) to your own
particular field + one other field of your choice.
I) How should we define or understand “curriculum construction”?
J) Looking at curriculum construction as meeting needs, whose needs might we try to meet?
Whose requirements and whose constraints need we also to consider and in what
order?
Write down some specific needs under each of the headings you have made.

K) What Expectations am I taking away with me? (At the end of the workshop)
CURRICULUM CONSTRUCTION
based on EXTERNAL NEEDS and
REQUIREMENTS

Once the principles upon which the curriculum should be constructed have been
agreed, and the approach decided, the next stage is to work through the following steps to
produce a working timetable. This should provide a weekly framework for teaching all that
needs to be learnt while truly reflecting the ethos, or principles, of the curriculum. This
process involves the following general stages:

STAGE 1. Listing the needs and requirements to be met by the training programme,
and its constraints.
STAGE 2. Identifying the subjects to be taught that will relate to these needs.
Reference to the Classification list may help here as menu from which to select
topics, but it should not be considered as a model of what ought to be included.

STAGE 3. Evolving a timetable to provide a structured framework for teaching.

This includes first allocating credit hours (i.e. an appropriate weight to each subject)
in order to achieve a balance in the over-all teaching or training.)

These stages may be reached by taking the following steps:

(STAGE 1)
STEP 1. Make a list of as many “interested parties” as come to mind when you ask yourself:
“For whose benefit is this curriculum being created?”
Consider whose needs and what kind of requirements you are trying to meet,
and whether there are any groups involved that would place constraints on
what you are might be able to teach.
STEP 2. Now list all the needs, requirements or constraints of each of these groups.

These two steps combined might result in something like this:

God’s
Student’s
Requirement
Needs World’s s
Church’s 1. Faculty’s
Needs 1.
2. 2.
Needs 1. Constrai
3. etc 3. etc
1. 2. nts
2. 3. etc 1.
3. etc
2.
STEP 3. Place these groups in order of priority. 3. etc

STEP 4. The next step attempts to sort out what is appropriate to teach at various educational
levels –
Certificate (facts, examples),
Diploma (interpretations of a text, Biblical studies),
Degree (concepts, theories, evaluations)
Identify for each “need” the appropriate level of learning.
STEP 5. List, under the headings of the four learning domains, the learning objectives that
may be expected to meet each of the needs listed above. This is a brain-
storming exercise where the following key questions should be answered:

• What information needs to be “known”?

• What skills need to be learnt? (how to “do” things)
• What attitudes need to be adopted? (how to “be” a better person)
• What insights need to be gained? (for greater “understanding” of design
and purpose)
i.e.

To meet this need, (e.g. God’s R. No. 1) what does the student need to KNOW?
1.
2. To meet this need, what does the student need to be able to DO?
3. etc
1.
2. To meet this need, what does the student need to BE? (Character,
3. etc attitude)
1. To meet this need, what does the student need to SEE? (Understand)
2. 1.
3. etc 2.
(STAGE 2) 3. etc

STEP 6. Identify the subjects or topics to be taught in order to achieve these objectives.
Add in any additional subjects suggested by scanning the CLASSIFICATION list.
Consider why they should be added. (What needs do they meet?)
Check whether or not each of the four learning domains is represented adequately.
Finally ask: is anything missed out that is significant or important for a balanced
coverage of this area of learning?

STEP 7. Decide the method to be used to teach each subject.

For each subject that is listed, it is necessary to decide upon
either:
A course subject under which this learning objective can be achieved
through classes or personal study.
or:
A practical work assignment where training can be provided.

Either: Course Subject Or: Practical Work

to be studied / taught to provide experience / training
by means of……… through doing…
(lectures, (field-work in…,
reading, project, etc)
research, .
etc)
Note the need to decide the method of learning as well as the content.
STEP 8. Group all subjects, with their learning objectives attached, under Course
headings.

STEP 9. [optional] Decide where subjects from different departments / domains could be
integrated. (See Appendix F)
Note: This is a big and important area of planning. It should only be attempted when there
is sufficient time, experience and commitment to do the work of integration
carefully.
Otherwise natural over-lapping of subjects may be a more practical option.

STEP 10. Decide what programmes leading to student accreditation to offer (e.g.
Diploma,
B.Th., M.Div., etc.).

(STAGE 3)
STEP 11. Allocate credit hours.
Note: A Credit Hour usually = 1 classroom period per week per 10- or 12- week
term,
I.e. 10 or 12 classroom “hours”
(Note: an “hour” sometimes means only 45 minutes!).

Decide A) how many credit hours would seem appropriate for each course in theory.
Evaluate the weighting given to each subject in the context of the total
curriculum being planned.
Decide where “balance” means equal proportion
and where appropriate proportion.
Ask: Is the time spent on each subject proportionate to its
significance?
B) how many credit hours in total to expect of each programme.

C) how, in practice, to allocate credit hours to each course.

STEP 12. Evolve a Timetable

Use the “Three Year Plan” curriculum chart to plot the curriculum so produced. (See
Appendix C.) If there is not enough room for everything in the timetable it may be
necessary to do some more pruning. The question then is: which are the subjects that
do least to further the objectives of this programme of training? These must go!

Read off from the “Three Year Plan” the subjects noted and plot them onto the
“Time-table sheet.

Revise the “Credit Hours” allocation to ensure that the number of classroom periods
is realistic for both student and teacher.

This raises the question: how many class periods should students be expected to sit
through?
30 x 45 minute periods per week? (Too “heavy”?)…

Or only 10 x 1 hour periods per week? (Too “light”?)

REFORM, NOT REVOLUTION!

Change is always threatening. New ideas introduced in a rush often fail, especially if they are
not properly absorbed and digested. Old ways generally contain some merit and they have the
advantage of being tried, familiar and understood! For these reasons it is best to progress
slowly rather than swiftly, allowing everyone time to reflect on what is happening during
change and to adjust at their own pace.

What has been set out in the preceding pages represents an approach that is closer to an ideal
than to what can be realistically achieved at a first attempt, given the pressures of time, the
probable lack of sufficient teachers and just the urgency of the need “to teach the next class”.

So at the first attempt at revising a Curriculum it may be best simply to select from many
possibilities (as shown on the CLASSIFICATION list) and then prioritise, selecting only the
most important subjects (see Appendix B). In making such a selection the four Learning
Domains should also be checked to assess what kind of balance is being achieved by the
suggested reforms.

Another way of developing a preliminary curriculum that is also subject-orientated is to

take one course subject at a time – take an essential subject – and construct from the
CLASSIFICATION “menu” a preliminary course made up of the elements you decide to
include from this list. Against each item you have selected write an educational objective.
(For an example taken from the section on Discipleship see Appendix E.) Bearing in mind the
limitations of a purely subject-orientated course, the resulting course must be thought of as
purely a preliminary start.

A later revision, say after three years of using the earlier attempt, might include additional
felt needs (identified through reflective research and expressed by formulating specific
measurable objectives) and again prioritise. In this selection more attention will be made to
the needs of the student, of the work for which (s)he is being trained, of the church, of the
community, of the nation, and even of the world (e.g. ecology).

Ultimately it may prove possible to construct a Curriculum that begins in each learning
domain with key objectives relating directly to the issues of Christ’s Kingdom. These
learning objectives would address first those issues that affect the honour of God’s name, and
then secondly the human needs of a fallen world, whether of the individual before redemption
or of the redeemed body of Christ visibly manifest in the Christian community. Such a
Curriculum would be need-related and integrated rather than degree-driven and
departmental.

In the meantime let us all, students, teachers and leaders alike, “run with resolution the race which
lies ahead of us, our eyes fixed on Jesus” who is our model, mentor and teacher in working out our
programmes in the complex but crucial process of Theological Education.