Brick and Morter Seminaries v. Distance Ed Seminaries

I think the reason that this debate will never really be settled is because it is entirely too subjective. For some DE has huge advantages, and for others there is no substitute for Brick & Mortar. So who is to say which one is better? There are no definitive studies on the issue (that I know about). Only those who did DE who swear by DE and others who did B & M, and swear by it and some who did both and say that both have merits.

It is probably more useful to acknowledge the pros and cons of each, and then consider how each option suits a particular student's strengths, weaknesses and needs. I did my undergrad in B & M (in biblical studies) and loved it. I am doing my grad work mostly through DE and loving it thoroughly. Good theological DE should not be disparaged, and neither should B & M, of course. Below is my summation, based on 4 years of B & M experience (but mine was undergrad) and 4 years of DE.

Advantages of DE
- Cost
- Flexibility
- The ability to stay in one's ministry context and/or home church.
- The discipline developed by having to keep up with coursework, readings and papers with less direct accountability (though there is accountability with DE, of course) and often completed directly in the ministry setting, which complicates the process exponentially (in my experience). Good DE is tough work, all things considered, and this has great habit-forming potential. I am not sure, but this is possibly less the case in B & M because one eventually leaves B & M, and it is tempting to leave the B & M demands of study there too. In fact, one of my B & M profs told me that I should enjoy the reading time now, because there won't be time for it in a busy ministry. Doing DE in the context of ministry has helped me see that a little discipline goes a long way to keeping up with reading and study and ministry all at the same time.

Disadvantages of DE
- DE can become a hobby instead of a concentrated educational effort.
- This is just a fact: it is easier to cheat (and/or more tempting to cheat), especially when the prof does not require proctored exams.
- Languages are more challenging to study this way, though not impossible.
- Easier to give up (as compared to B & M), since you haven't moved the family to a campus where more is at stake and giving up seems more clearly a failure.
- Less peer to peer (scholarly level) interaction, and far less professor - student interaction.

Advantages of B & M
- Strong accountability, both in and out of the classroom (especially if you live on campus). Nothing spurs me to work hard as knowing I'll have to defend my work with a professor looking me right in the eye.
- For most, the classroom is the best format for language study.
- There is something to be said about those front porch theological discussions which occur in the B & M setting.
- Arguably more time for readings, since most of us who engage in DE also have ministries going on at full throttle (not to mention families).

Disadvantages of B & M
- Costs
- Having to relocate for three years.
- The separation from the assembly (possible disadvantage - especially for us monk types).
- Some leave the habits they formed in the context of B & M when they graduate. I have seen several departing seminarians sell their exegetical books and tools to new students, even though they were headed into a pulpit ministry.
- Develop a snootiness towards DE (possibly) See Pastor Larry's comment on page 2 of this thread.

 

If I were looking to hire a self-starter - with my knowledge of what it takes to complete a DE program - a candidate that did a BA program via DE in four years through a good, accredited school would not be looked upon unfavorably for it.

 

I didn't actually suggest that. There are many B+M seminaries that aren't giving legitimate educations. I am saying pay the price to get a legitimate education.

 

I am not sure God gives such a call.

 

I would disagree here. I think the lack of personal interaction is a problem for virtually all people. Many simply don't know it. You will never gain from an email or even a phone chat what you will gain by sitting across the desk from a professor and interacting with him. Email and bulletin boards simply cannot fulfill that role. A email can't teach you how to interact with a church member who just learned they have cancer. It can't teach what tone of voice to use when you are standing over the casket of a child who has just died. An email can't weep with you and put a hand on your shoulder when your life is falling apart. Out of all the relationships in my life, my most cherished ones, apart from my family, are the ones I have with those I went to seminary with, particularly seminary professors.

I don't think I have perpetuated that myth at all. But let's face it, it's not the same.

I didn't suggest that either. There are many B+M schools that are not giving legitimate educations.

Pastoral ministry training, really discipleship, is a face to face endeavor. You can't disciple someone very well by email. There is a reason why face to face fellowship and teaching is so heavily emphasized in the Bible. It is not because they didn't have the internet. It is because ministry is a people thing.

I think we need a more rigorous view of this, and some more thought to go into it. I don't think everyone who does DE is taking the easy way out. But I do think that it is an inferior way to teach and be taught. And I think it should be avoided at almost all costs.

 

This idea that RE seminaries are too costly is not necessarily true. As a student at SBTS, I received grants that covered almost all my tuition many times. Yet providence did not permit me to finish.

Havensdad brought in the call of God as if God only calls people to DE or RE. Let's not go overboard with this, shall we? It's a knife that cuts both ways.

Siberian's list is a good start but misleading. RE students have families and ministries too, but there's more availability of reading since the library is right there. And I can't imagine learning basic homiletics, counseling, CPE or doing verbatims by email.

As I have stated before, we have to be careful about our dogmatic assertions based solely on narrow experiences. Pragmatism should not lead to dogmatism. I am thankful that I had RE before I ever had DE. Yet I am thankful that RE and DE are available. My perspective is to always recommend RE before I recommend DE. There are far too many options available and too few reasons not to go. However, providence does intervene and thus DE has its place, and that place should be embraced where appropriate. We should avoid the snobbery, whether it comes from Havensdad and his perspective or the RE loyalist who disdains all DE. There are good and bad in RE and DE. There are pros and cons to both. I would much rather be doing my future doctoral work RE, but providence will not allow it, so DE it is from a very good source. But I'd be a step behind if I did not have my RE under my belt.

 

Pastor Larry, God's mouthpiece.


Yes, God called me to do just that.

 

Not hardly.

How do you know that?

 

You are assuming a person in total isolation. A good distance education, at least for a seminary student, must be done under the tutelage of a local Pastor.

My pastor, for instance, has been wonderful. He helped me with sermon preparation, gave me pointers on different aspects, tone of voice, etc. He marked up problem areas with my manuscripts, and gave me ideas for improvement. He gave me books to read, videos on sermon preparation, etc. He prayed with me.

The deacons at my Church are also wonderfully supportive. One of the deacons, is my proctor. When I have a research paper to write, they suggest books, or just point me to scripture. They sit down and discuss the subjects with me.

My discipleship is coming, I think, from where it truly NEEDS to come from: my over shepherd and the leaders of my Church. I do not lack for personal interaction at all.

BUT: on top of that, I also have the DE resources for my classes. Message boards, chat rooms, etc. I do not have to worry about a bell ringing. I can, and have, spent all day discussing a particular topic/scripture.

The only time that DE would be inferior, is if a person did NOT have a good support structure through their church. Then I would understand your point of view. As it is, I believe it is just prejudice against advancement and technology.

 

I agree with this. Email just cannot train you to do those things. But honestly, what conversation across a desk with a professor could? Or what class for that matter. I am just not sure that is a brick and mortar vs. DE question at all, but one of the church and of experience.

The only part of my training that has helped me in those areas was my internship, where I worked with a pastor doing those things. Someone doing DE while serving in a church could possibly have very good training to engage in those areas of pastoral ministry.

 

Good point. Of course, RE students have families too. I only meant that the vast majority of B & M seminary students are not engaged in full-time ministry. Many do interim part time or serve in local churches in various capacities. Quite a few DE students are full-time pastors or church staff as well as full-time students (i.e., 9 credit hours or more a semester). But point taken - both RE and DE students are busy, to be sure.

And very good point about the library. That should be more prominent in this debate. No library is a big con for DE. This was a struggle for me in Siberia. I have a huge digital library through Logos, and electronic access to academic resources and journals online - but my papers took on a new depth when I moved back to the US and availed myself of RTS Orlando's Library.

 

Some online programs provide interactive lectures via software such as Adobe Connect. It allows you to speak back and forth with the professor, and the professor can share files and digital presentations. In this case, some of the disadvantages of DE are eliminated, but the convenience of asynchronous classes is diminished.

I have taken seminary courses both on campus and via distance. The online courses were slightly more challenging, but I valued the interaction of campus-based classes. My graduate coursework in history on campus was also far more demanding than both of them. And, honestly, my undergraduate coursework in religion was more challenging than all except the history classes. I am currently taking some graduate online courses in accounting and business, and I have found that they are comparable in difficulty to the online and campus-based work in religion.

 

This is the overriding factor, I believe. What I think would be nice is for mainline institutions to offer more in the way of distance education, especially for the laity. I think they are missing out on this. An online MDiv may not serve their purposes, but having an online M.A. in Lay Ministry or an MAR might be helpful for individuals who cannot move to seminary (those not called to ordained ministry have far less justification to uproot their families). Of course ATS is a major hindrance here. I think, however, it would be nice to provide an except for lay-only degrees.

When I was pursuing the "ministerial" path (before I figured out that I was doing it for the wrong reasons), I took some online courses, but I eventually moved to seminary in order to pursue my degree as I realized that in many circles DE degrees are not as respected, whether right or wrong.

 

Last year I was on a search committee for a professor. While some of them had online degrees. They appeared good when we took a look at them. Some of the online degrees were from reputable institutions. One of the men had an online degree from the same institutioin as one of our faculty but it was clear that not one of them were as well prepared as those who did not have online degrees. I cannot come to any particular conclusion why, but it did seem that they lacked the benefits of the personal interaction of their points of view with others in a classroom setting. They did not seem to have their points of view tested in the waters of others who were already in that same field. I have seen those who have online degrees and can take tests very well and have been published but do not know the subject very weell in a practical sense when they are questioned by their peers.

A few days ago I had a student who brought up some things from his work experience which were very valuable which I had not thought about presenting to the class. I have experience in that area but had not given it any thought. It was a valuable part of the classroom experience for the other students. In a real sense he did a better job than I would have because he is closer to the students age. He is one of them. They also saw how I demonstrated what I teach about leadership. They saw how I responded to that student and how it made them feel by the way I responded to a younger person. So I did not only teach the subject matter but I engaged the students and taught leadership and management at the same time.

 

At the university where I teach there is a push to do more online education. I teach upper level classes and find that the students who have taken online lower level classes do not have the same level of education as those in the classroom. I know some of the faculty who teach classes both online and in the classroom and they are not poor teachers. The students who have had classes on campus benefit from the interaction in class and with other students who have experience in the field. While online education may sound great I have not seen as good of results as those who are on campus in the classroom.

There is a current push across the nation for online education and awarding AA degrees at universities. In reality it is an efffort to attract students and increase their dominance. It is also a financial decision to increasee their revenue. It is not for the benefit of a better education but other reasons. In one state I know about they offer a lot of scholarships to out of state students. By attracting students from other states they have found that 25% of the out of state students stay in the state.

Graduate education at the university level cost me nothing. In fact they paid me. I taught one class each semester and they paid me about 12,000 per year plus paid my tuition for an out of state student. If seminaries were connected to undergraduate schools they could do the same thing. In fact I taught labs at the university I was attending beginning in the second quarter of my sophomore year. Before that I had been a TA for three quarters. So it was a great opporuntiy for me to start small and grow.

 

Interestingly enough, God already has a plan for this ... It's called the local church. If the local church is doing it's job, the "laity" is getting this teaching on a weekly basis. Unfortunately, too many churches are not doing their jobs.

 

This is my point about personal interaction. There is no way an online degree can offer this.

This is heavily about dollars. By online teaching, they can get money from people they would not otherwise get it from. Plus there is less overhead because you don't have scheduling issues, classroom/building issues, and everything else that comes along with people on the physical property.