Pug, Jimmy, Or? on Golden State School of Theology

Hi posters: The last post that really related directly to GSST was either Pug's post that began "It sounds to me..." or Bill's "A 20 page paper...". Can the rest of this thread be reconstituted as a new thread on DL pedagogy (with the consent of the posters), while leaving the GSST thread open?

 

===

Thanks. I agree. It is not the norm. I'm not trying to say that it is traditional for one type of school and not for another. I am saying that research indicates that student learning is enhanced when teacher s probe student responses whether these student responses are short verbals in a classroom or written papers of some length. I am saying that I can demonstrate that truth on just about any Theological paper by a measure of the learning occasioned by such probes. If that research is correct, then an opportunity is being missed. If that is a better way to teach, then IMO Christian schools should adopt the better way. But how prideful of me to think that since all I've done is teach for 35 years, including a bit in two Bible colleges, and experience myself both sorts of learning in in a number of schools. However, I do recall that TRACS dinged ACCS on this very issue!

So, as I'm getting nowhere really, and as it apparently has no relevance to this thread and GSST's possible improvement, let's forget I brought it up.

 

Hi Bill: I'm not in any way quarrelling with what you have brought up. I thought it was important enough, and distinct enough from GSST-specific stuff, to merit its own thread.

 

===

Unk I posted in response to Pug before I saw yours. No prob. Thanks.

 

there's an article by Laurie Schriner on some ways to have excellence in Christian colleges.

www.cccu.org/resourcecenter

go to resource center/pedagogy


Among many other points , it makes these which are cognate to what I've trying to say: profs teaching students HOW to think, not what to think, asking questions, posing problems, encouraging debate, teaching students to think like professionals, teaching how to collect evidence, giving students feedback on initial writing assignments which is THEN incorporated into new writing. And, the article further makes what should be an obvious point : simply writing a lot is not learning. But rethinking with the guidance of the prof and rewriting is what causes learning.

I'm wondering Pug, Barry, and Mike if your GSST experiences are reflective of these comments. If your experiences indeed are, then that is a good sign.

 

Bill,
I love your comment here. There are plenty of people in the world who don't seem to mind telling me what to think, I really don't need to spend thousands of dollars to find another "volunteer". That said, I have never experieced that at GSST, though outside of published researched guides and guidance on topics/sources, I have not been given additional instruction on how to improve my research.

Maybe my papers are perfect

To answer your question: I can honestly say that I have NOT had that level of interaction at GSST. I would love to be challenged on my conclusions and guided to explore other thoughts, but that has not happened (but I can only speak for my experience).

To reiterate, comments are provided for every research paper and assignment, but I don't recall ever being challenged on a point or issue nor being asked to expand on a particular issue.

However (and just to make sure I understand), it sounds like limited interaction is fairly common with DL independent of UA, NA, or RA. (Though "just because everyone else does it" is not a proper justification).

Hope I answered your question,
In Christ,
Mike

 

Bill,

My experience with GSST has been similar to Mike's. The mentors have always provided comment after every paper, after each assignment, etc. If you get "stuck" and need a little direction or inspiration, the mentors have always been ready to step in and provide guidance. But I don't recall ever being challenged on an issue.

Regarding Mike's comment: "However (and just to make sure I understand), it sounds like limited interaction is fairly common with DL independent of UA, NA, or RA. (Though "just because everyone else does it" is not a proper justification)."

I agree with Mike's comment here as well. I don't think anyone is debating the that the deep interaction you describe between student and teacher isn't a very effective method of instruction, it's just not frequently done anywhere, either via DL or in a classroon.

Bill, to respond to another portion of your post I started a new thread called TEACHING METHODOLOGY.

Pug

 

Mike/Pug

Thanks.

I certainly agree that if the type of interaction described in the article were the common experience of students at Christian colleges, then the article perhaps would not have been written. There would have been, then, little need. Since the article was written and aimed at instruction in Christian colleges and posted by that organization of Christian colleges, it would seem to mean that improvement in these areas is being encouraged.

But, if you read the article you saw that much said on these points was by students at these colleges who were describing their experiences with the more efficient profs. Therefore, at least some profs in some schools do it that way. It can and is being done!

I think it should also be noted that this article was about classroom college level instruction . It would seem to me that the need for this sort of interaction is increased in graduate theological studies done by DL. It would be sad if graduate and doc work in theology only culminated in creating one who could just regurgitate the bland diet fed him and was not enabled to serve up his own platter of scholarly, critical, and even divergent thinking .

But such student abilities will not likely result unless the student experiences interaction of the sort and at the level this article defines .

 

Here's an interesting expert in ufology(alien abductions-go to the Logos Church info) and exorcism who says he graduated from GSST. I assume his specialties were not particularly gained from his GSST training:

Chris Ward-The Exorcist Files

 

he also raises the dead

 

Woooooooo. Woooooooo.
This fellow was actually a Catholic an' took communion and ever'thang.
An' he's a west sider too.
Woooooooo. Woooooooo.

Here's the link.

http://www.cojoweb.com/host-chris_ward.html

Talk about DMin possession.



And here's the link re: the defunct Holy Ghost Seminary in Ypsi.

http://www.pittsfieldhistory.org/index.php?section=sites&content=holy_ghost_seminary

Note that this was a high school (in the older RC and Lutheran pattern), not to be confused with a grad level seminary a-tall.

 

Well, no, Bill (leaving our Vladica out of it).

I thought that the earlier establishment of Paul Graves' bona fides was sufficient to signalize the difference between an institution and the vagaries of any of its graduates.

This fellow just seemed a bit, um, and I was startled to see his RC upbringing spoken of in the kind of awed and titillated tones usually reserved for one's previous career as an ax murderer or foreign policy wonk.

 

Here is a another alumnus of GSST - Father AR Curley, 2003, ThD. I believe he authored the disseration we before saw. From MA to ThD w-out Mdiv/ThM---tricky!


see: Ronald D. Curleys background

 

Himself it is.

 

The GSST site says the prerequisite to enter the ThD is the 90 sem unit MDiv PLUS the ThM beyond the MDiv. No transfer work is allowed. So, I wonder how Curley went straight to the ThD with only the MA?

 

http://www.commstanth.org/

I'm hardly defending the caliber of this guy's work, but his vita claims an MMin from NW Nazarene and a master's in pastoral care from Gonzaga. Perhaps those taken together were equated with the normal prerequisites? Why not ask Dr Graves?

Abbot Curley now has his very own seminary.

Please bear in mind that he is neither a Roman Catholic nor a legitimate
Old Catholic of the Utrecht Union, but an episcopus vagans.

I hate to say this, Bill, but he's also a Point Loma grad.

 

More graduates

http://www.logoschristian.org/chris.html
http://www.lake.k12.fl.us/school-whm/webmaster.htm
http://www.alienresistance.org/watchertape.htm (same guy)
http://www.familybible.org/About/Shepherd.htm
http://www.internationalseminary.com/Faculty%20Listing.htm
http://curley.homily-service.net/backgr.htm
http://www.theaica.org/pop_profile.asp?mode=display&id=325
http://www.angelfire.com/rock/ananswermin/pastor.htm
http://www.nubeginnings.org/aboutourbishop/aboutourbishop.html
http://www.bethanycc.churchcms.com/default.aspx?mod=staff
http://www.secondbaptistofredding.org/pastor.htm
http://members.aol.com/aiim2/sbdlife.htm
http://www.revivalusa.net/PastorsPage.html
http://www.theherbdoc.net/sawyer/ancestors/rickandbarbara/d3.htm

 

===


And those two masters are no doubt good ones. I just wondered if a Ma in Min, which is the NW degree, ( and my MA from a Nazarene school was only 36 sem units), and a Master's in Pastoral care equals the 90 unit MDiv plus the ThM in volume ,then why an MA, MDiv, and ThM would not equal the ThD in volume? Oh, that's right, the ThD is a higher degree. It is more advanced and requires more rigor. It is not just more volume. But is not the ThM higher than a masters? That is what I read. If so, how would two MA sort of degrees =a ThM? Hmmm?

Then there is also the issue of how two masters in ministry and/or practics would qualify one to enter GSST ThD studies which according to the GSST catalogue course descrition is purely and specifically in Systematic not in Practical Theology. Hmmm.

Curley may be an episcopus vagans , but he claims to have seen the light which showed to him the darkness of the basic Reformation principle of sola Scriptura. He seemingly has forsaken Protestant particulars which raises the issues of why he would desire a ThD from a Protestant school and how these wide points of view could easily synthesize leading to the ThD award if students of GSST must adhere to the creed of GSST. Hmmm?

This is no attack by me on RC dogma or ecumenism as I've enjoyed interaction with a certain RC ,Dave, at Theology Review. In my own area of interest, Christology, IMO both RC formulas and most Protestant ones are deficit. However, if one looks at Curley's site one sees a devotion to Saints and Mary and other things which if not directly contradictory to the GSST belief statement seem at least not at all complementary to it. Hmmm?

Yes, Father Curley is a grad of my Point Loma. I understand that he was converted after his BA, MA degrees from Nazarene schools to his form of Catholicism. However his ThD was awarded from GSST in 2003. This was after that conversion.

Yes I could email Paul Graves again. But the last time I did asking how a Unitarian could graduate from GSST IF GSST students must adhere to GSST beliefs caused much uproar on another channel and that correspondence really was not very settling of the question anyway. So, I don't think I will again . I certainly don't want a GSST D.Min. grad who is an exorcist and a ufologist exorcising my demon or arranging my abduction by aliens from outer space. Nor do I want a GSST ThD grad ,Catholic priest, who is so close to the Mother of God and all the Saints to say bad things about me to them.

I'll have enough to answer for on that day already without having Mary mad at me ,and when I am raptured I wish it not to be by Martians.

 

===

Yes, thanks Barry. I had already referenced the first on your list. This grad of GSST raises the dead and teaches others how to do that.