Symposium Critique Guidelines

The following is the critique guidelines I gave my students when arranging for a peer-level symposium. The aim was for the students to get together and in a “safe” environment critique. In the Indian context, we need to encourage our students to critique others (usually it’s polite not to say anything). These particular guidelines were given for the first of the symposiums, particularly looking at the outline of student dissertations. I think these guidelines were helpful as a starter.

The goal of this Symposium is to give the presenters opportunities to clarify their thesis-related thinking. Our job, as participants is to aid in this process by asking important questions that may expose weaknesses in thought or reveal new directions to pursue. Primarily, as participants, we hope to encourage the presenter by being positive and constructive in our evaluation.

Symposium Format:

1. Read the paper thoroughly in advance. Please do read it!
2. Author will present his/her paper.
3. The participants can ask for clarification of the paper.
4. After clarification, the participants will then proceed to critique along the suggested lines (“Things to look out for in the paper” below).
5. After the critique, the author can then express any difficulties in the thesis-writing process he/she is currently facing.
6. The participants will then attempt to address the difficulties by providing any positive perspective or guidance.
7. Finally, we close with prayer for the presenter.

Things to look out for in the paper

After reading this draft, do you get a clear sense of what the author is trying to say?

- Is the problem statement clear? Is there a clear academic problem?
- Is the thesis statement clear? Does the thesis statement address the problem?
- Does the author look like they understand the methodological issues of their topic?
- Are you convinced by the methodology adopted by the author?
- Looking at the outline, do you think the chapter structures help support the thesis statement adequately?
- Does the outline have too many chapters? Should the author simplify?
- Is the outline missing any chapter? Should the author restructure?
- Finally, in terms of format, does the researcher display any explicit language errors?
- Are the errors in the paper carelessness or language flaws?

Some Suggestions

Always look to encourage the presenter. Be constructive in your comments. However don’t hold back on your critique. By not saying anything, you are not helping the author.

Regarding Spelling and Grammatical errors, perhaps it is more helpful to identify error patterns (like “you usually misspell this word” etc) that the presenter can then look to correct.

Mentor Guidelines (for MTh/MPhil dissertations)

I was looking on the web for helpful mentor guidelines for my own institution, but couldn’t find something I was looking for. So I devised my own. These mentor guidelines is what I gave external mentors for my students’  MTh dissertation. It may be relevant to you. May be.

***

MTh Mentor Guidelines
Theology Department, April, 2007

 Thank you for agreeing to mentor an MTh student. The following is a guideline for mentors for the MTh thesis supervision. This document is not binding, and mainly functions as a tool to give you an idea of what is expected from mentors. Feel free to interact with the Head of Department, for further clarification and/or procedural modifications.

Purpose of MTh thesis

According to our Prospectus, the purpose and procedure of an MTh Thesis is as follows:

The thesis is designed to demonstrate the student’s competence in his or her area of specialisation. It should deal with the topic in a way comparable with a paper published in an academic journal. It should fulfil all the requirements and procedures outlined in College thesis manual, such as format, style, footnotes, bibliography and length of the thesis. The thesis is to be of 100-120 pages, including footnotes, of double spaced computer print-out. The thesis must be submitted by the end of November during the second year. The student’s mentor as well as an external reader competent in the field will examine the thesis. The final grade of a thesis will be the average of the mentor’s and the external reader’s grades.

Role of a mentor

The relationship between the mentor and student is central in the procedure for development and completion of an MTh Thesis. The Head of Department usually assigns a mentor and from then on, the entire thesis supervision is taken over by the mentor. Only in special cases, when the mentor requires it, the Head of Department or another faculty, is approached by the mentor for further help on the subject. Thus, the student is primarily accountable to the mentor, and will be assigned a grade by the mentor at the end of the process as well.
 

Meeting Procedure

Typically, a mentor meets a student at least twice a month; once, in an informal-pastoral way where the Mentor sees how the student is faring. This time is also typically when the student submits his/her chapter. The other time is when the student receives and reviews mentor comments. This time is also typically when the mentor sets new chapter submission deadlines. The college encourages more meetings depending on the availability of the mentor and the needs of the student (especially in the early stages of the thesis). The mentor is free to manage their own students’ visits.  Our students have also been informed that meetings with the mentor must be by appointment only.

Additional assignment/s

Typically, there is no need to give any extra assignment to the student apart from the actual research work. However, in special circumstances, the mentor can assign additional reading or writing that will aid the student in development and completion of their MTh thesis. Such extra work could be assigned in the first month or if needing in the beginning of a difficult chapter in a later month.  Thus, if a student is struggling with her chapter three, the mentor can assign a short thought paper to help collect all her thoughts on the subject. Such assignments are neither compulsory, nor graded, and are assigned only at the discretion of the mentor in view of the students need for their thesis. The Mentor can take special care not to overload the student in this regard.
 

Help

As a main goal for thesis writing is to engage critically and thoroughly with a subject to propose something meaningful and relevant for the student’s context, the mentor’s role is to help the student be focussed and clear in their work, and maintain consistency and quality. Usually, the mentor is free in the manner in which they help the student achieve these goals. Obviously the mentor encourages independent thinking, while acting as a guide who helps channel the student’s own ideas and creativity.
 

With regards to English, some mentors correct the grammar and spelling of the students, while others insist that the student get an external ‘editor’ for correcting basic grammar and spelling. Both are acceptable, keeping in mind that a student is expected to submit a fully corrected copy at the end.

 

Time Limitation

The typical time period for doing an MTh Thesis is from June to November, six months. The students’ thesis proposal has already been approved by March. The deadline for thesis submission this year is November 30, 2007.

A student can be given an extension only upon the recommendation of the mentor, and approval of the Head of Department. Such an extension may still result in grade reduction. It is up to the mentor to decide whether the grade reduction applies for the student or not. Typically, an extension should not extend beyond December 15, 2007.

 

Evaluation and Feedback

After thesis submission, the Mentor will submit a final letter grade to the Head of Department along with a written rationale for the grade, in report form. The assessment of the thesis will only be on the finished product and not on early drafts, student submissions or potential.
 

The thesis will also be given for evaluation to an external examiner. Mentors are encouraged to propose an external examiner to the Head of Department. However, the final decision for external examiner will be taken by the Head of Department, in discussion with the Faculty Council.  The final grade of the student thesis will be the average of mentor and external examiner’s grade. At present there is no viva for student defence of thesis.

 

To further strengthen the process of mutual learning, we will be encouraging the students to give a written feedback of the mentoring process (after the grade is submitted, but before the student finds out what grade s/he received). The student will be asked certain questions on how to better enrich the Mentor-student relationship. The Head of Department will communicate the results of the feedback of students to the mentors.

 
Payment

Details of the payment for your services will be given to you separately.

 
Finally…

As mentioned earlier, these are guidelines that will hopefully give you an idea of what supervision expectations are.  If you feel you need to adapt these to suit your purpose, please feel free to do so in consultation with the Head of Department. 

 
Thank you once again for taking time to participation with us in this way. May your involvement be a blessing to you and your student.

Bible College Survival Guide – Part 1 – Understanding Seminary Student Types

This long post is Part I of an extended work that I hope to write about how students can survive (and make the best of) in Bible Colleges. I have written this to help educators and students, and this post especially, to help us get started in understanding students and their specific needs in bible colleges.Having taught and interacted with students at SAIACS, a seminary that refers to itself as an institute for higher education, on various teaching and non-teaching levels, it’s pretty evident that students are not the same. In fact, they all enter with different motivations and desires that affect their expectations and efforts vary to the extent that it affects how they learn and what they take away. (For definitions of ‘what is a seminary’ click here, while ‘what is a Bible college’ is here But I use the terms interchangeably).

For teachers, this knowledge is crucial because it helps us address students according to their needs. But also for students, it is important to know what our motivations are; why are we here in a seminary?

I have divided students into five main categories. While my focus is on those students who come for the MA (Masters of Arts) level (like an MDiv/BD level), primarily as their ‘first’ theological degree. However, there are also subsidiary implications for those who come for their MTh (Masters in Theology, like an MPhil), who are coming after three or more years of theological training.

THE ‘SPIRITUAL’ STUDENT: The first, and most common type of student who comes into a Bible College/Seminary (even SAIACS), is the student who comes to get a deeper relationship with God and learn more about him. This kind of student is very common and usually is not even aware (initially, at the time of admission) of the ‘academic’ pursuits in the classroom.

Characteristic: Such a student will talk about how s/he hopes that academics will ‘equip’ them for their ministry, but also, talk about how good it was to devote time for the Lord… to devote time to focus on Bible study.

The conflict: Because these students have ‘spiritual’ goals that are not always compatible with educational institutions more ‘material’ goals of improving critical thinking skills etc. Such students are also deeply disappointed when they see non-Christian attributes in current students. They end up complaining against the lack of spirituality in the faculty/students and life at campus and blame their loss of vision/’fire’ on the lack of enthusiasm in the Christian institution.

The disappointment: As a result, most students who come for this goal tend to be disappointed on how their goals are not met, and how academics has nothing to do with ‘real’ (spiritual) life. They leave the campus, bitter and unfulfilled. Sometimes worse than when they started.

The hope: The only way this group can be ‘blessed’ by the teaching experience is if they realise that God is active not just in quiet times, but also in the classroom.. that God teaches not just from the pulpit, but also through lectures… and God is not just in churches, but also in libraries. Once this dichotomising (between academics and spiritual life) is addressed, students are then able to see that a richer academic life can help enrich their walk with the Lord.

‘DEGREE’ STUDENT: The other group of students, almost the opposite spectrum of the above, and also almost equally common, are those who want to upgrade themselves through the degree. This is more common in the MTh level, but MA students are not exempt from this category. Many students want the degree to then legitimize/enable their vocational pursuits.

Characteristic: These students often talk about degree accreditation, they care about the scope of the degree, it’s value outside the world. They are also interested in marksheets/grades, transcripts etc. Positively, these students are focused on the idea that studies in a Seminary are not the be-all and end-all of life… they know clearly that life lies out of the campus and their sight/focus is there. A college to them is just a ladder that gives them an authenticity (even preparation) to effectively minister to God’s kingdom.

The conflict: While a student may actually be ‘spiritual’ within, his/her dealings with the college/seminary tend to be on an entirely material plane. They therefore get into a lot of conflict over the expectations of the college; and their own expectations (often unfulfilled) on the college.

The disappointment: Disappointed with the way the institution does not fill its expectations, either through the quality of teachings, grades etc.

The hope: The hope for this group, like the ‘spiritual’ student above, is also to avoid dichotomising between the material and spiritual goals of seminary. Even if a degree is a legitimate pursuit, it is also important for them to see God in and through the seminary structure.

THE ‘BACK-PACK’ STUDENT: The backpack student uses a tool oriented (functional) approach to theological education, where he/she enters a seminary with the hope that the college will increase effectiveness. The goal is to learn skills, and fill his/her backpack with knowledge, answers and skills so that the student will be better equipped to face the challenges that lie ahead. It does not help that many colleges also treat theological education like this, advertising back-pack oriented possibilities of their curriculum.

Characteristic: This kind of student tends to focus on the details of assignments and classes, with the hope to get something out of everything. They always look to get something from the chapel sermon, get something from the classes and even get something from the assignments. Positively, they are focussed on their ministry and also look to apply what they are learning. These kinds of students are also always collecting notes and assignments for the future, in the hope that they can use them in their later ministry.

The conflict: However, the conflict these students face is that not all knowledge in the seminary seems commonly useful; not all learning has immediate relevance. So, the student tends to get impatient with process development tasks and seeks only to get straight to output and learning. Another frustration for the student is wanting clear answers (clear notes) from teachers but not getting them. For instance, some seminary classes focus on hermeneutics though they don’t always tell what a passage means. A backpack student finds it difficult to understand and appreciate the process and only wants answers (what the text means) to put in their backpack.

The disappointment: Eventually the student can get disillusioned with theological education because when it does not all feel relevant, they feel it is entirely useless and a waste of time. They lose their excitement and look to get their answers elsewhere.

The hope: One of the things that can help these kinds of students is to help them see the relevance of theory, of process to overall learning. To show that learning takes time, and is not always a straight-direct road… can be not only helpful but relieving. Plus, the student can be encouraged to enjoy the moment, experience life for the day, rather than only look to the future. Overall, with an appreciation of the larger plan of learning as transformation will help the student to find value in learning for learning sake, rather than what they can get out of something.

THE AIMLESS STUDENT: This student joins Bible College (seminary) because he/she has nothing better to do. Even the secular world is filled with students doing higher studies because they do not have an idea for their future.

Characteristic: This kind of student is looking for, hoping for, some direction while in the bible college. Yet because there is no clear direction, at least immediately, they find the college difficult, irrelevant and not a place they enjoy being in.

The conflict: The particular conflicts these students face are the difficulties of staying motivated through tough assignments and tasks. Usually, the students withdraw from campus life and try to create their own path to ‘enlightenment’.

The disappointment: Ultimately, many of these students are branded as under-achievers, or failures, and fail to enjoy the college or the life around it.

The hope: The hope for these students first of all lies in knowing that it is ok not to know your future, even though God does know it. Many students therefore benefit with the leap of faith that they are in the Bible college because God directed/purposed their coming there (even if they didn’t want to come)… and look, therefore, to see why God allowed them (brought them) to come here.

THE JAILED STUDENT: This student is the one who is forced to attend Bible college because his family/parents have sent him/her there. This is more common than we’ve seen, as many parents see bible college as reform school, hoping that children will improve in character and vision.

Characteristic: Many students who are ‘jailed’ to the college are struggling with personal issues (some with strong addictions) and are hoping to get some personal/emotional help from the college.

The conflict: The problem is that most colleges are not reform schools and are not geared to focus entirely on emotional development. Hence, many colleges tend to be unsympathetic to and/or impatient with students struggling with addictions or in need of special emotional support.

The disappointment: Usually, these students tend to drop out or fade away to the background, trying to pass and finish their ‘term’. Even if they learn something, it never seems to be what they really need.

The hope: It is difficult to help a student who is forced to attend a bible college, but the hope for these students, like the ‘aimless student’ above, is to see God’s leading and plan in bringing them here. More particularly, these students benefit immensely from peer relationships/friendships/counsel and can actually grow immensely in the process.

Of course there are many more kind of students, but this list is a bit of a start-up to help educators, and perhaps even students, to see where/how they fit in to the Christian education scheme of things.