Doctor of Ministry Handbook

Transcription

1 Revised May 14, 2009 Doctor of Ministry Handbook Bangor Theological Seminary Two College Circle PO Box 411 Bangor, Maine (207) (800) (207) (fax) 159 State Street Portland, Maine (207) (800) (207) (fax) Bangor

2 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook Notice This guide represents the current curriculum, educational plans, offerings, and requirements which may be altered from time to time to carry out the purposes and objectives of the Seminary. Neither the provisions of this guide, nor acceptance of candidates through registration and enrollment in the Seminary, constitute a contract or an offer of a contract. The Seminary reserves the right to change any provisions, offering, requirement or fee at any time within the candidate's period of study at the Seminary. The Seminary further reserves the right to require a candidate to withdraw from the Seminary for cause at any time.

3 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook TABLE of CONTENTS DOCTOR OF MINISTRY PROGRAM IN THE RENEWAL OF CHURCH AND COMMUNITY MINISTRIES Nature and Purpose of the Program... 4 The Educational Experience... 4 D.Min. Program Goals... 5 D.Min. Program Schedule... 5 Principles of Learning... 6 Adult Learning... 6 Competitive and Collaborative Learning... 6 Biblical and Theological Reflection/Foundations.. 7 Development of Knowledge and Skills... 9 D.Min. Program Evaluation... 9 D.Min. Journal and Minutes... 9 The Site/Insight Team Faculty Advisors The Technical Advisor D.Min. Committee.. 11 DOCTOR OF MINISTRY PROJECT Major Components Process Outline Project Proposal Project Report Calendar for Project Report Technical Guidelines THE SEMINARY LIBRARIES Library Services PLANNING AND EVALUATION 16 ACADEMIC POLICIES Classification of Candidates. 20 Registration.. 21 Academic Workload.. 21 Satisfactory Academic Progress 21 Attendance 21 Grades for Evaluation of D.Min. Work 21 Grievance Procedure Concerning Grades. 21 Dismissal Policy 21 Incompletes in the D.Min. Program.. 22 Extension of Time. 22 Candidacy to Receive Degree 23 PROJECT REPORT TITLE PAGE (Sample)... D.MIN. PROJECT APPROVAL FORM (Sample)... D.MIN. PROJECT DISCLOSURE FORM (Sample)... Appendix I Appendix II Appendix II

4 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook DOCTOR OF MINISTRY IN THE RENEWAL OF CHURCH AND COMMUNITY MINISTRIES Nature and Purpose of the Program Bangor Theological Seminary offers a three-year Doctor of Ministry program for experienced practitioners in a variety of ministry settings. This advanced professional degree, designed to emphasize a collegial model of practical inquiry and theological reflection with both Seminary faculty and professional peers, seeks to foster the renewal of both congregational and community ministries. The D.Min. program also aims at renewing theological dialogue between the candidate and both local and global academic contexts, as well as integrating theological insight gained through active engagement in practice. Special attention is also given to the arts of biblical exegesis, the study of theology, and contemporary ethical perspectives. In addition to on-campus seminars, Doctor of Ministry candidates engage in study and theological reflection with a team of diverse lay leaders in their ministry context (the Team). The candidate and his or her Team together develop a project in shared ministry. In the third year the candidate and the Team implement the project, which then becomes the focus of the candidate's Doctor of Ministry Report. Religious institutions in the United States and Canada are in the midst of fundamental cultural shifts. This Doctor of Ministry program invites religious leaders in diverse contexts to revisit their calling, take time for disciplined study of recent developments in theology, ministry and cultural studies, enhance their leadership skills, and enjoy a sustained opportunity to work with and learn from colleagues in ministry. Doctor of Ministry candidates are also encouraged to honor their own wisdom as practical theologians, to examine critically their social, cultural and ministry contexts, and to explore new forms of theological education for congregations and communities. The Educational Experience The Seminary seeks to provide a variety of educational experiences which accommodate different teaching and learning styles, including seminars, text studies, lectures, workshops and electronic learning. One advantage of the Doctor of Ministry structure is the colleague group. Candidates work together in seminars to explore each other s ministries, learn from recent developments in a variety of academic fields, and work individually with faculty members. The colleague group meets with faculty over a twoyear period; the third year is devoted to the ministry project. The program begins with a week-long Intensive Session on the Bangor campus during August, which includes an orientation to the program. It continues with four two-day sessions per semester either on campus or in a regional location during the academic year, culminating in another week-long Intensive Session during June. The same pattern is followed during the second year. The monthly sessions meet over two days for approximately twenty-four hours. These sessions allow learning to occur both inside and outside formal classroom time. Faculty and candidates can air issues in depth without interruption. Candidates have a place where they can form lasting friendships, deepen their worship life, share common meals, and serve as teachers for one another.

5 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook The Seminary is committed to a program that enables all members of a class to finish the program on a reasonable schedule. In addition, the faculty has found that candidates benefit from the experience of a community of peers who work together long enough to know each other s strengths and weaknesses, as well as challenges and opportunities. Such communities of common inquiry are more often effective for adult learners than the more traditional classroom setting. D.Min. Program Goals 1. To encourage a shift in ministry from preoccupation with institutional survival to reviving faithful leadership for the transformation of church and society. 2. To foster a shift from highly clericalized to more collaborative models of ministry. 3. To nurture leadership skills, spiritual integrity, and collegial learning among reflective practitioners in diverse ministry settings. D.Min. Program Schedule: August 6-10, 2007 Intensive Session 5 days, Monday - Friday The initial session begins with orientation to the program, the Seminary s Bangor campus, and library resources and sets the stage for the first seminar. (2 credits) Unit I: Vocation and Context (Fall 2007) The opening seminar provides an opportunity for candidates to reflect critically on the meaning of vocation and ministry within the context of contemporary North American culture. It also prepares candidates for gathering their Teams. (4 credits) Unit II: Resources for Sustenance and Renewal (Spring 2008) This seminar explores theological, biblical and historical resources for the renewal of ministry, in light of the analysis of vocation and context completed in Unit I. (4 credits) June 2-6, 2008 Intensive Session 5 days, Monday - Friday The session continues issues raised in the second seminar. It also prepares candidates for working with their Teams and developing a project in shared ministry. (2 credits) August 2008 Intensive Session 5 days, Monday - Friday The third intensive session sets the stage for the third seminar. (2 credits) Unit III: Values, Conflict and Visions (Fall 2008) This seminar offers a theological, ethical and pastoral examination of selected conflicts in North American culture and how these may be constructively addressed in churches, synagogues, and other ministry contexts. (4 credits) Unit IV: Renewing the Art of Ministry (Spring 2009) The seminar invites a careful re-examination of ministry as an art as well as a set of skills, as candidates revisit a variety of issues in ministry and leadership, including spiritual life, worship, preaching, pastoral counseling, and social witness. (4 credits) June 2009 Intensive Session 5 days, Monday - Friday This session permits careful review of the proposed projects and addresses issues proposed by candidates as they move into the ministry project. (2 credits) Units V and VI: Project in Ministry (Fall 2009 and Spring 2010) The third or project year is the capstone of the program. During this year, candidates carry out

6 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook a specific project in ministry and prepare a report on the results of their work. Candidates work closely with the Team and a faculty advisor during this year. (6 credits) Principles of Learning The Doctor of Ministry program is based on an adult educational paradigm which assumes that both teachers and learners bring significant knowledge to the learning context. Our study and reflection is centered in the ministry locations of degree candidates and involves them and faculty in the process of defining questions and developing responses. Most of the formal educational processes in which faculty and candidates have engaged, from kindergarten through seminary and graduate school, have split this process of knowledge creation and acquisition into two parts. Teachers and professors have been understood as those who create, possess, and transmit the significant knowledge while learners are seen as the essentially passive receivers of already existing knowledge. Our intention in the Doctor of Ministry program is to shift the paradigm. We intend to structure the educational process so that candidates, Team members, and faculty are all seen as creators and receivers, as transmitters and possessors of significant knowledge about the nature of life in faithful community. Faculty, candidates and Teams work together to create new understandings of the contexts in which we live and work and the meaning of faithfulness in those contexts. Adult Learning Every person engaged in the Doctor of Ministry process whether faculty, candidate or Team member is an adult learner. Thus, we share what Sharon Merriam and Rosemary Caffarella describe as four characteristics of adult learners: 1. Self-direction or autonomy. Many adults learn best when they are directly involved in determining the course and structure of their learning. Adults engage in structured learning on a voluntary basis. They are not required to be in class; they have chosen to be there, and can choose to leave. 2. Breadth and depth of life experience as the trigger of learning. Adults bring a large pool of experience to new learning situations. They are not clean slates: new information which is directly connected to older learning patterns and structures is received most easily. 3. Reflection or self-conscious monitoring of the changes taking place. Adults regularly engage in reflective analysis of their life situation and of their learning. Teaching formats in the D.Min. program allow time for this process work. 4. Action or some other expression of the learning taking place. Some adults desire to learn out of sheer curiosity. Others are seeking concrete expression of the changes which are taking place in their self-understanding or of their new awareness of the world in which they live. Candidates in D.Min. programs often seek specific useable information for their ministry sites, and the seminars and intensives are structured with this in mind. Competitive and Collaborative Learning Most adults in the United States have developed a competitive style of learning in groups. Grades encourage competition, and the larger social and economic contexts of North American society reward competition between individuals and groups. Clergy and other religious leaders have often found placement in their current position through a competitive

7 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook process, and continue to compete in both subtle and obvious ways. For example, some clergy may compete over the size of church budgets and personal salaries, over attendance at worship, and numbers of new members received. Indirect competition can be seen as well in conversations about who has the ear of the Bishop, who sits on regional or national committees, or even who has the least or the greatest faith struggles. In contrast, collaborative learning expects faculty, candidates, and Team members to function as partners in a learning process in which different knowledges interact to produce a stronger and deeper understanding. In seminars, intensives, and Team meetings, candidates and Team members along with faculty are encouraged to ask: Whose knowledge is valued? For what purpose? Whose opinion and experience counts in what contexts? Whose authority is respected, and who has the power to make and enforce which decisions? Do one or more people dominate the conversation, with the authority to create or destroy communication? Are there right answers? Who has them? By what authority? Just as faculty members are seeking to shift the paradigm from simple transmission of information to a more complex mutual engagement, so candidates are encouraged to examine their learning, teaching and leadership styles in their ministry site, as well as in the colleague group. The issue of collaborative learning affects not only Doctor of Ministry colleagues in the program, but members of the ministry site, as well. The style of mutual engagement developed in the seminars and intensives is a model which candidates are encouraged to adopt in their ministries. Biblical and Theological Reflection/Foundations Effective ministry is necessarily attuned to the nuances and needs of its context, but faithful ministry never comes to that context empty-handed. Indeed, the prior beliefs and commitments undergirding ministry are what motivate it to action, while informing its work in foundational, constructive and critical ways. In Christian ministry, these beliefs and commitments are grounded in the Bible, which the Church, in continuing and faithful openness to the guidance of God s Spirit, has reflected and acted upon through the centuries. In each successive generation, ministry should join in this reflection and action: rooted in the scriptural witness and making use of the theological tradition in constructive and critical ways to guide and clarify its thinking, in order to be responsive to the particular tasks to which God calls the faithful in each time and place. In ministry done out of other faith traditions, these prior beliefs and commitments will be grounded in their own sacred literature and heritage, yet the ministerial dynamic will likely be similar: certain foundational assumptions and values will be brought into constructive and critical engagement with the contextual task at hand. If all this is true for ministry in general, it is likewise the case when discerning and implementing D.Min. projects. When a Team begins its discernment process, it will often begin with questions: What should we do? How should we go about it? Who should we be serving? Why should we be doing this? In part, these are questions seeking to understand the particular needs of the Team s context. But they are also and perhaps more significantly for the purposes of a ministry project questions seeking to understand what a particular faith community is called to do as a faith community. For instance, the Team could clarify its discernment by asking itself, What do we have to offer that is unique, when compared to the work done by, say, the Rotary or Lion s Club? How are we called to address these needs in ways that a purely secular service

8 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook agency would or could not? Who are we called to care for that others may have neglected? Why might we feel obligated to do this project rather than another one? These questions are not derived from the context so much as they are from the theological and ethical commitments laid upon the Team members by the faith community on whose behalf they are working. Having biblical and theological reflection serve an integral and constitutive role in discerning, implementing and reporting upon a D.Min. project means, quite simply, that the project would make no sense without it. This does not mean that one occasionally includes a scripture citation or inserts some broad theological categories or themes in a project that could otherwise stand on its own. Rather, it means that the Team s consideration of context and biblical/theological reflection are so pervasive and intertwined that the project would collapse if one of the two were removed. Consider some possible examples: Team A discerns the need for a hospice program in its community. What are some of the biblical and theological beliefs and commitments it would bring to this project? A partial list would include the belief in the fundamental dignity of each person as created in the image of God (imago dei); that we are created for community, not isolation; that God calls us to care especially for the sick and dying; that death is not just a physical but a spiritual matter, so that issues of personal guilt, judgment, forgiveness, reconciliation and the life everlasting will need to be considered as much as palliative care. Team B discerns the need for a youth center, to offer teenagers a safe haven to counter the effects of an otherwise destructive surrounding environment. What are some of the biblical and theological beliefs and commitments it would bring to this project? Again, a partial list would include some already mentioned (the inherent dignity of each person, that we are called to community and to care for one another), but it might also address issues of forming and maintaining a counter-cultural identity on both a communal and individual level. This might draw on the biblical theme of the people of God being a holy nation, a royal priesthood or how one is to be faithful as a people in exile in an alien land. It could develop Jesus notion of being in the world, but not of the world (a perennial issue in ecclesiology, the theological consideration of what it means to be church ). It might include consideration of classic understandings of spiritual disciplines and how they could be applied in a modern context. And it might develop the notion that even as a safe haven, those coming together in this new community may nevertheless be called back out into the surrounding community to serve. So what might it look like for the biblical and theological foundations to be taken seriously and given their due over the course of the D.Min. Program? In the discernment and implementation of a particular project, contextual concerns and biblical/theological reflection will likely unfold together, in a mutual interplay of giveand-take that becomes clearer and deeper over time. That this process will be rather haphazard and feel disorganized is only natural. If one were to give a running account of the process it would likely be a rather rambling, sometimes messy narrative with various starts, stops, dead ends and re-starts. Because of its jumbled nature, candidates may find it very helpful to keep a journal or notebook recording the key milestones in the process

9 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook and noting important ideas, themes and/or conclusions as they emerge. When discussing the biblical and theological foundations in the Project Report, however, the task is not to repeat this running account of the process, but to offer a synthesis and summary of the key points and the internal logic of the Project overall. The Report gives each candidate the opportunity to step back and offer a constructive and critical analysis of what was actually accomplished, and how biblical and theological reflections grounded and informed the Project overall. Development of Knowledge and Skills The Doctor of Ministry program is designed to develop knowledge and skills in ministerial leadership so that candidates will be able to: 1. Reflect critically on vocation and ministry within the context of contemporary North American culture. 2. Explore theological, biblical, and historical resources for the renewal of ministry in light of the analysis of vocation and context. 3. Examine selected conflicts in North American culture and how to address these constructively in diverse ministry settings. 4. Examine the renewal of ministry as an art and set of skills and revisit a variety of issues, including spiritual life, worship, preaching, pastoral counseling, and social witness. 5. Design and implement a specific project in ministry and offer a critical theological assessment of its significance for the renewal of ministry in the candidate's context. Candidates demonstrate their capacities in each area through their work in intensives and seminars and through the development, implementation, and evaluation of the D.Min. Project. D.Min. Program Evaluation Candidates and Teams are invited to evaluate the work of the program as a whole within the first two years of completion. Candidates and faculty members evaluate seminars and intensives at the end of each unit. One candidate from the Doctor of Ministry group serves on the Doctor of Ministry Committee, which regularly evaluates the program's progress and reports to the Faculty. The Faculty as a whole evaluates the program every two to three years, measuring it against the Seminary s Mission Statement, the D.Min. Program Goals, and the knowledge and skills statements outlined above. D.Min. Journal and Minutes Each candidate is encouraged to maintain a D.Min. journal throughout the program in which data will be kept regarding the development of the Team, insights from the seminars and intensives, summaries of learnings about the ministry site, including minutes from Site Team meetings, and new biblical/theological perspectives. The journal is designed to be useful in developing the Project, reconstructing the history of the Team for the final Project Report, and providing for the biblical/theological grounding of the project. The Site/Insight Team Purpose The Site/Insight Team is a gathered group with whom the candidate works to define, develop and (normally) implement the Doctor of Ministry Project. Team members are colleagues in ministry who serve within the ministry site and larger community. Composition Teams are to be formally authorized and recognized by the appropriate body within the life of

10 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook the ministering community and to be composed of representatives of the various sections of the body. Members of the community s official and unofficial power groups, men and women, younger and older individuals, members of various racial and ethnic groups, newer and more experienced members, friends and friendly critics of the candidate, and members of the wider community are all significant for a Team. Teams work much better if they are not solely or primarily composed of a pre-existing committee. The group normally meets once a month during the initial stages of project development although at later stages the teams sometimes meet more often. Authorization Ordinarily, the Team and the Project shall be explicitly authorized by the appropriate ecclesiastical judicatory, such as a Church Council, Session, or other Board, or by the person or persons who employ the candidate to perform professional ministry. In the event that no such official body or person representing the ministry site can be located for a particular Team or Project in Ministry, the Doctor of Ministry Committee may waive the requirement for formal approval. Responsibilities With the candidate, the Team will a. discuss understandings of vocation and calling b. engage in social analysis of the context of ministry c. reflect theologically and biblically on the nature and mission of the church or ministering community d. appraise the life of the church/ministry community and its present minister, seeking to find areas of strength and needed change, and e. develop, implement, and evaluate the Doctor of Ministry project. Expected Date of Team Formation Candidates are expected to have formed an authorized Team before the end of the first semester of the Program. Faculty Advisors Each D.Min. candidate will be assigned a faculty advisor who will serve as a contact with the Seminary and ordinarily meet with the candidate at least once during the candidate s first semester. During the second year, candidates will be offered the option of selecting a new faculty advisor with whom to develop their project. Candidates will indicate a first and second choice to the D.Min. Committee, and the Committee will then make the assignment. Faculty advisors will normally work with no more than three to four advisees. The faculty advisor will work with the candidate and the Team to develop a project proposal which arises out of the context of the candidate's ministry site. This joint work may involve visitation to the candidate s ministry site, assisting with theological, biblical and other resources for Team work, and reviewing several drafts of a proposal. Candidates are encouraged to invite their advisor to visit their ministry site during the second, third, or fourth semester of the program. After the Project Proposal has been approved by the D.Min. Committee, the faculty advisor will monitor the progress of the project and provide support, counsel, and resources as necessary.

11 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook When the Project has been completed, the faculty advisor will support the candidate in preparing the written project report in accordance with the report guidelines and in conformity with the technical guidelines. The faculty advisor will serve as first reader for the completed project report and will sign the final approved document. The faculty advisor may also accompany the candidate to any meeting with the D.Min. Committee. The Technical Advisor A candidate and Team may develop a project for which a technical advisor is required. The technical advisor will normally be a member of the larger community in which the project is undertaken and will serve with the Team and the candidate in designing, implementing, and evaluating the project. Technical Advisors serve without charge to the candidate or Seminary. D.Min. Committee The purpose of the D.Min. Committee will be to: 1. Supervise and coordinate the recruitment, advisement and support of D.Min. candidates throughout the program including, where necessary, site visits. 2. Develop, review, and evaluate the D.Min. curriculum and staffing, coordinating with the Dean on faculty assignments and making recommendations to the faculty for necessary changes. 3. Foster coordination between all faculty teaching in any given D.Min. program, including the recruitment of adjunct faculty where necessary. 4. Foster the development and approval of D.Min. projects, including necessary work with advisors and candidates during the fourth semester. 5. Maintain and distribute the D.Min. Handbook. 6. Conduct other work as necessary. 7. Meet as it deems necessary. 8. Include a representative from current D.Min. group.

12 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook DOCTOR OF MINISTRY PROJECT The Project is designed to incorporate the following goals of the Doctor of Ministry program: 1. To encourage a shift in ministry from preoccupation with institutional survival to reviving faithful leadership for the transformation of church and society. 2. To foster a shift from highly clericalized to more collaborative models of ministry. 3. To nurture leadership skills, spiritual integrity, and collegial learning among reflective practitioners in diverse ministry settings. Major Components in Developing the Project 1. A Team gathered from within the church or ministry site and community served by the candidate with whom the candidate will engage in social analysis of the context of ministry; reflect theologically and biblically on the nature and mission of the church or ministry site; and develop, implement, and evaluate the Doctor of Ministry project. 2. D.Min. colleagues will help the candidate reflect on the proposed project and evaluate the completed project. 3. A faculty (and if necessary a technical) advisor will work with the candidate and the Team in the preparation, implementation, and evaluation of the project. Process Outline Semester I (Fall 2007) The candidate will gather a group within the ministry site (and community) they serve currently. The Site/Insight Team will be composed of a cross-section of the congregation or community, be appropriately acknowledged by the church or ministry site, and meet on a regular basis with the candidate. Semesters II and III (Spring 2008 and Fall 2008) The candidate and the Team will share personal and theological understandings of vocation and calling, engage in regular biblical and theological reflection on the nature of the church or ministry site, and appraise the life of the church or ministry site and its present leadership, seeking to find areas of both strength and needed change. Such appraisal may grow out of on-going reflective work within the ministry site; develop a community analysis; and begin to formulate possible projects. Semester IV (Spring 2009) The candidate and Team will develop a project proposal which is grounded in the life of the present community, reflective of the biblical witness, and faithful to the traditions of the church or ministry site while drawing from learnings from the D.Min. seminars. The candidate will develop a survey of the literature pertinent to the proposed project. The candidate will present the project proposal to the D.Min. colleagues for suggestions, reflection, and development. The candidate will also present the project proposal to the D. Min faculty advisor (and technical advisor if appropriate) for suggestion, reflection, and development. The candidate and the Team will revise the project in light of the comments by colleagues and advisor(s). The candidate will develop a Project Proposal to present to the D.Min. Committee for review and approval. Semester V (Fall 2009) The candidate and the Team, through the life of the congregation or ministry site and community, will engage in carrying out the project, with the advice and counsel of D.Min.

13 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook colleagues and advisor(s). The candidate may serve as director of the project or as resource for others who direct the project. Semester VI (Spring 2010) The candidate and the Team will engage in critical reflection on the results and findings of the project. The candidate will document (in the Project Report) the findings of the Team, along with conclusions and suggestions for further study, which will be shared with the Team, D.Min. colleagues and advisor(s). Project Proposal (due late Spring 2009) During Seminar IV candidates and Teams will develop a Project Proposal which will include the following items: Proposed Title of the Project Team Membership Proposed Project Description Brief literature review Theological, biblical and practical grounding Proposed means of assessment/evaluation Proposed schedule of completion Bibliography and resources The Project Proposal will ordinarily be pages and should be submitted to the D.Min. Committee no later than its late April or early May 2009 meeting. If the Proposal is returned by the Committee for revision, the Candidate and Team will continue to work with the Advisor to develop a more adequate statement, and return the Proposal to the Committee for approval. Project Report The project report is typically, 50+ pages in length. For formatting and style, consult Kate L. Turabian, A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations, seventh edition (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2007). The Report will have these components although some of the order may vary: 1. Title Page (see sample page attached) 2. Approval Sheet (see sample page attached) 3. Table of Contents (see Turabian) 4. Introduction a. Brief description (1-2 paragraphs) of the project and its context b. Road map of the project report to follow c. Acknowledgements/gratitudes 5. Statement of the issue/naming the project in ministry, including the ministry/community context, origins of the project, and resources for the project, including analysis of pertinent literature and discussion of other resources. 6. Theological/biblical grounding and reflection. This material may be found at the beginning of the report, intentionally interwoven with the project description or in a reflective component at the end, but it must be evident and intentional rather than haphazard.

14 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook Practical aspects of the Project: Design, implementation, and evaluation. What did the candidate and Team intend to do? Why? Include theological/biblical and contextual rationales. What method of evaluation was used? What criteria were used to determine completion/success or failure/incompletion of project? The criteria of evaluation should be concrete and measurable, as well as biblical/theological. How has this project affected the life of the local congregation/community? What are the implications of this project for the larger church/ministry site and/or the global church? 8. Candidate s reflections on the following: Community analysis, congregational history, theological/biblical/sociological grounding, practice of ministry in contemporary culture, next steps for further work and study, and the candidate s leadership in light of the project. 9. Reflections by members of the Site/Insight Team: Their learnings about the mission of the church/ministry site, the theological/biblical/ sociological grounding of the project, their participation in the project, and their assessment of the next step(s) in the life of this congregation/ministry site. 10. Footnotes/endnotes or parenthetical references throughout (see Turabian, 7 th edition, chapter 15 for form) 11. Complete bibliography of works consulted or reference list, depending on documentation system used. 12. Appendices, including list of team members, including the D.Min. candidate, with brief biographical sketch of each. Calendar for Winter/Spring 2010 February 1, 2010: First draft (two copies) due to advisor (first reader) and second reader February 22, 2010: Returned by advisor and second reader March 15, 2010: Second draft (one copy) due to advisor April 1, 2010: Returned by advisor May 7, 2010: Final draft due to advisor; advisor signs off, then candidate deposits two copies in Library two weeks prior to Commencement. Technical Guidelines for Project Report The completed Doctor of Ministry project report (50+ pages) is deposited in the library. The Library will charge a binding fee. One copy of the project report is placed in the Seminary s archives. The second copy is placed in the circulating stacks and, therefore, is accessible to the public (students, faculty, visiting scholars and examination and accreditation committees). Candidates whose project contains subject matter of a confidential nature may petition the Doctor of Ministry Committee in writing to restrict public access to their project. Such a petition should accompany the final draft of their project report. The Project Report represents not only the achievement of the degree candidate, but its

15 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook quality serves as a public indicator of the academic standards of both the Doctor of Ministry project advisor(s) and the Seminary as a whole. In order to ensure consistency, use the most recent edition of Kate L. Turabian, A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press) for form, footnoting, pagination, and bibliography. THE SEMINARY LIBRARIES Library Services The Seminary libraries exist for the purpose of providing books, journals, electronic resources and other materials needed by the Seminary community for study and research, as well as instruction in their access and use. Each center has a library facility with varying hours for services. Communication between libraries and patrons is offered by and telephone. Portland: Laurie McQuarrie, Librarian lmcquarrie@bts.edu Telephone: (In State and Out of State) Telephone: , ext , ext 203 Fax: Bangor: BTS Desk: Husson Desk: The Seminary libraries contain approximately 40,300 volumes with an emphasis in the fields of theology, religion, philosophy and church history. The online catalog, Minerva, is available at on any computer with Internet access. Search by title, author, subject or keyword. To search our collection only, be sure the location search box is set to Bangor Theological Seminary. Search results will show the location, call number, and availability of the item. Locations: BTS Husson Stacks (Sawyer Library, Husson College); BTS Husson Storage Stacks (Closed stacks directly beneath the Sawyer Library); BTS Portland Stacks (Portland Campus). A BTS library card is required to check out books. A library card may be obtained by completing an application form at either campus library or by contacting the Seminary librarian (contact information given above). Using your library barcode number you are able to access your patron record and renew your books online. For the URL, see above. To request an item: Locate the item in the online catalog. Click on the Request icon at the top of the page. You will be asked to enter your name (last name is sufficient) and library card barcode number. Click on Submit and your request will be sent electronically to the librarian. You will be notified when the requested item is ready for you. Requests from other institutions may be made through several search engines. a. Minerva Minerva includes the collections of over 50 libraries in the state of Maine. Using the URL for our online catalog, search by title, author, subject or keyword with the location box set to All Minerva Libraries.

16 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook Requests are made online as explained above and will be delivered to you at either the Husson or Portland campus. b. MaineCat - To search the collections of more libraries within the state, including the University of Maine system, Bowdoin, Bates and Colby, click on the Search MaineCat icon found in our online catalog. Requests are made in the same manner as above. c. FirstSearch WorldCat provides access to the collections of libraries throughout the world and is accessed through FirstSearch, found at Please check with Laurie McQuarrie for instructions on how to do this. Remember that there may be charges involved when requesting items from other libraries. The library subscribes to 108 periodical titles (24 in Portland, 84 in Bangor), primarily in religion. The library holds the most recent 5 years of the periodicals to which it subscribes. A title search of the online catalog will provide location and holdings for periodicals. Periodicals do not circulate, but a photocopier is available for candidates to copy articles. The cost of photocopying is 10 cents per page. The ATLA Religion Database, along with several other databases in health, history, philosophy, and the social sciences, is another resource available to all Seminary candidates through the FirstSearch service. This service is available in each library and may also be accessed remotely from any computer with an internet connection. Please contact Laurie McQuarrie for instructions. Candidates living some distance from either Seminary location may wish to check with their local library to see what the policies might be regarding interlibrary loans. Borrowing books from the Seminary through the local library would relieve the candidate of the responsibility of mailing back the books, although the local library might charge for postage. Direct any questions for specific help to the librarian by telephone, , cards or letters, or fax; we will make every effort to accommodate your needs by supplying materials, suggesting search strategies, and/or alternate approaches. PLANNING AND EVALUATION Source: Kathleen A. Cahalan, Projects That Matter: Successful Planning and Evaluation for Religious Organizations (The Alban Institute, 2003). Foreword: Craig Dykstra, VP for Religion, Lilly Endowment When people of faith start to imagine a new project or a program of some kind... it is almost always in order to do something that will make a difference in people s lives. It matters a lot that the projects and programs are done really well. And it makes a lot of sense for us to be asking all the way along whether what we are doing is really making that difference.

17 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook Program planning and evaluation are not matters of mere technique. Nor are they simply tasks to be undertaken. Instead,... they can be ways in which love of God and love of neighbor are embodied and expressed. Conclusion: Discerning and prudent stewards (pages 84-95) A. Discernment: A Virtue of Seeing (89-91) Planning and evaluation involve aspects of discernment. They call upon our ability to see and analyze well. Such discernment involves keen perception, a kind of seeing that allows us to make distinctions, to see what is obvious and obscure, and to judge what we see. (89) Of course, evaluation is a natural human act, and we do it all the time; the point is that stewards of organizations take the time to do it well. Christians describe the word discernment as a faithful inquiry into understanding what God is doing and what we are to do in response to God. B. Prudence: A Virtue of Taking Action (91-95) If discernment is a way of seeing, its close partner is prudence, a way of taking action. St. Augustine describes prudence as knowledge of what to seek and what to avoid. Prudence is choosing a course of action. Religious organizations cannot be all things to all people; choices must be made. Prudence helps guide our choices in discerning the right projects and the right size of those projects. Generally, prudence involves knowledge about two aspects of a situation: (1) the Christian tradition s basic principles and ideals for moral action, and (2) the particular conditions of a situation. Prudence strives to find the fitting course of action. Another aspect of prudence is shrewdness. Listen to yourself. The people closest to the realities of a project can and should trust what they know and see. PART ONE: Project Planning: Five Elements of a Project Design Good project designs articulate the organization s judgments about what to do, in what ways, and why. (28) A project responds to a set of conditions by gathering resources that support activities that produce results that have an impact on people, and a rationale explains why this is so. (1) Key points of project planning (29): o A project is an organization s response to a condition or set of conditions. o Conditions can be a need, a problem, an issue, a question, or an opportunity.

18 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook o Resources support the activities that respond to the condition; they consist of time, money, and people. o Activities are the actions taken to fulfill the project s objectives that produce a set of results. o Results are the products that eventuate from activities and have an impact on people. o Impact is the way people are changed from activities and results, which include new attitudes, knowledge, or skills. o A rationale explains why a project claims what it does about conditions, resources, activities, results, and impact, and why an organization claims the project. Element 1: Mission and capacities o Assess the organization s capacities for the project and the project s relationship to its mission. Element 2: Purpose of the project o Identify the project s purpose and its goals in relationship to a condition. Element 3: Explain the activities and resources Element 4: Anticipate the results o Define the results that the project hopes to accomplish and their impact on participants. Element 5: State the rationale o reasoned presentation showing why the project is necessary and why the organization believes it can successfully accomplish the tasks. PART TWO: Evaluation as collaborative inquiry Six steps to effective evaluation: Step 1: Focus the evaluation At first, it might seem obvious to say that the subject of the evaluation is the project, however projects have many components and all may not need to be evaluated, at least not at the same intensity or in the same timeframe. The evaluation may focus on particular activities, resources, results, or impact. To focus the evaluation, ask the following questions: o What is being evaluated? o For what purpose? o Who will learn and benefit from the evaluation? o What are the key questions to be explored? [See attached page 41: Examples of Key Questions ] o Who will conduct the evaluation? Step 2: Create an evaluation design Methods of evaluation o Analysis of project materials o Direct observation o Interviews and focus groups o Surveys and questionnaires o Tests

19 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook Characteristics of good evaluation design o A collaborative exercise on the part of project leaders, stakeholders, and evaluators o Firm, clear, and specific yet flexible o Realistic about what can be accomplished in the evaluation o A commitment to making a good project better Step 3: Collect and record data Most evaluations use multiple approaches to gather information. Methods can be quantitative or qualitative. Important to select data-collection methods that audiences will perceive as accurate, fair, and credible. A temptation to collect too much information. So, collect only the information that is going to be used, and use all the information that is collected! The place to begin is with the evaluation s key questions. See sample of a survey questionnaire [page 64] Step 4: Analyze and interpret information On interpreting findings: o Offer explanations for the key findings o Examine context and contributing factors o Identify surprises, contradictions, and missing pieces o Probe for guiding values and motives o Spell out some of the consequences if certain courses of action continue. o Affirm successes and strengths. o Raise questions and concerns and make recommendations. Step 5: Report and disseminate findings Written and/or oral reports. Elements of a formal report: 1. summary of the project goals, activities, resources, results, and rationale. 2. overview of evaluation design 3. answers to the key evaluation questions 4. summary of evaluation findings 5. insights resulting from the evaluators analysis 6. recommendations 7. executive summary Step 6: Revise the project s rationale Revising the rationale invites project leaders to use evaluation findings to strengthen the project s claims about conditions, activities, resources, results, and impact. Common mistaken attitudes about evaluation (33): 1. It consists of immediate feedback after an event.

20 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook It is extra work added on to an already full agenda. 3. It requires experts. 4. It s challenging or possibly dangerous. Evaluation is much more. I think of evaluation as a kind of collaborative inquiry that builds on three important dimensions of strong organizations: learning, leadership, and accountability. (33) Evaluation is indispensable for answering the questions: What have we learned from the project thus far? What s missing from what we are doing? And what need to change? (34) Evaluation is a way to provide comprehensive information to the project s stakeholders so that they see more clearly, understand more fully, and learn what is necessary to do the work effectively. (34) What evaluation is not: (82) It should not be extra work, but integral to what we do in a project. It should not be done solely by external consultants, but initiated and guided by organization and project leaders. It is not something to think about at the end of a project, but rather a part of the initial phases of executing a project. It is not about putting a final grade on a project, or identifying the mistakes or failures. And it should certainly not be done for purposes of institutional maintenance. What evaluation is: Evaluation builds reflective practices within a project and an organization that can keep people thinking about the conditions the project addresses, the various project components, and the rationale that holds it all together. (82) SEMINARY POLICIES The following policies relate specifically to Doctor of Ministry candidates. Policies applicable to all BTS students are found in the Student Guide, which is available on the website or from the Registrar s Office. Classification of Candidates in the D.Min. Program First Year. To be admitted to First Year standing in the D.Min. Program, a candidate must have a Master of Divinity degree from an institution accredited by the Association of Theological Schools, or the equivalent, and at least three years of post-m.div. experience in leadership in a community of faith. Second Year: To qualify as a Second Year candidate, a candidate must have completed 12 credit hours in the D.Min. Program. Project Year.

21 BTS Doctor of Ministry Handbook To qualify for the Project Year, a candidate must have completed 24 credit hours in the D.Min. Program. All D.Min. candidates who expect to complete a degree at Bangor Seminary must do so within seven years of their initial enrollment as a degree candidate. Registration Candidates must register each semester of the three year program with the Registrar. Academic Workload D.Min. candidates take one Intensive (2 credits) and one Seminar (4 credits) per semester for four semesters and the third year (semesters five and six) enrollment in the Project Seminar is for 12 credits at 6 credits per semester. D.Min. candidates are considered full-time students. Satisfactory Academic Progress for Federal Student Aid D.Min. candidates are considered to be making satisfactory progress when they are in good standing. Candidates are in good standing when they earn 12 credits per year. Attendance The Doctor of Ministry program is collegial in nature; attendance at each intensive and seminar meeting is expected by every candidate. If absence is necessary, courtesy to the instructor and colleagues calls for an explanation of the absence. The absentee is responsible for the assignments made and notices given. Grades for Evaluation of D.Min. Work P Pass R Rewrite F Failure I Incomplete W Withdrawal Grievance Procedure Concerning Grades In case of a question about graded work: 1. The candidate will first consult with the instructor to clarify the reasons for the grade given. 2. If the candidate is not satisfied, he or she may make a written request to the D.Min. Committee chair (with a copy to the instructor) that the chair consult with the instructor regarding the matter. 3. If, after such consultation, the candidate still is not satisfied, he or she may make a written request to the Academic Dean, with a copy going to the instructor, that a third party read the material in question and give an opinion. 4. Such a third party, named by the Academic Dean from the full-time Faculty, must be agreed upon as a reader by both the candidate and the instructor. The reader's familiarity, or willingness to become familiar, with the material is assumed. 5. The reader is to give a written opinion of the grade to the Academic Dean with a copy going to the candidate and to the instructor. 6. The Academic Dean will meet with the candidate and the instructor to discuss the findings, after which the instructor will determine the final grade. Dismissal Policy A candidate may be dismissed from Bangor Theological Seminary on academic grounds or for cause.