Educational Effectiveness
The Educational Effectiveness of the Graduate Programs in Theology and Ministry is demonstrated best by the intentional education and formation of lay ecclesial ministers prepared to contribute fruitfully to their communities of faith through theological reflection, praxis, and leadership. The Doctor of Ministry program cultivates this preparation by fostering in our students the learning objectives/competencies delineated at each level of study which advance the mission of each program.
Doctor Of Ministry Program
Student-Centered Learning Objectives/Competencies
- Objective 1: DMin students demonstrate an advanced integration of theology and ministry in relation to various disciplines. (F.2.1.1/Intellectual)*
- Objective 2: DMin students formulate comprehensive and critical methods of ministry in which theory and practice interactively inform and enhance each other. (F.2.1.2/Ministerial)
- Objective 3: DMin students manifest the skills and competencies, including methods of research in practical theology, required for ministerial leadership at its most mature and effective level. (F.2.1.3/Personal/Ministerial)
- Objective 4: DMin students contribute new knowledge to the understanding and practice of ministry through the completion of a doctoral-level thesis project. (F.2.1.4/Intellectual/Ministerial)
- Objective 5: DMin students exhibit spiritual, professional, and vocational competencies that witness to the development of ethical values in diverse contexts. (F.2.1.5/Spiritual/Pastoral)
- Objective 6: DMin students engage the realities of diverse cultural, religious, and linguistic contexts of ministry. (F.2.1.6/Global)
*These objectives correlate with the standards of the Association for Theological Schools and the USCCB document Co-Workers in the Vineyard.
These objectives are specifically integrated and assessed in the following core courses:
Course/Objective Assessment Map
Learning Objectives/Competencies | 638 | 800A | 800 | 802 Units A, B, C |
---|---|---|---|---|
Objective 1: F.2.1.1/Intellectual | X | X | ||
Objective 2: F.2.1.2/Ministerial | X | X | X | X |
Objective 3: F.2.1.3/Personal/Ministerial | X | X | X | X |
Objective 4: F.2.1.4/Intellectual/Ministerial | X | |||
Objective 5: F.2.1.5/Spiritual/Pastoral | X | |||
Objective 6: F.2.1.6/Global | X | X | X | X |
A variety of course requirements and assignments are used to assess these learning outcomes in the core courses of the curriculum. These assessments are scored through an extensive rubric.
Course Embedded Assessment (CEA): The rationale for the use of course embedded assessment to evaluate competency in each of the Student Objectives is threefold. First, CEA makes explicit and practical connections among the DMin Program Goals, the DMin Core Curriculum, and the specific Student Learning Outcomes that the effective ministerial leadership demands. Second, CEA requires that course content and assignments explicitly address and reinforce the Objectives designed to advance students’ theological and ministerial competency. Third, CEA ensures that these Objectives are assessed multiple times at different intervals during the student’s course of study in order to monitor progress in developing each of the Objectives and remediate as needed. The following describes the explicit connection in the course(s) between the assignments and the objectives assessed.
Assessment Rubric For Dmin Student Objective
5 | 3 | 1 |
---|---|---|
Objective 1: F.2.1.1/Intellectual | ||
Integrates theological and cognate research into the formulation and analysis of ministerial methods, issues, and praxes; demonstrates depth of reflection on the interplay between theory and praxis in this project. | Demonstrates awareness of the implications of theological and cognate research in relation to ministerial issues/praxes; gives some evidence of reflection on the relation between theory and praxis for this project. | Exhibits minimal evidence of relating theological or cognate research to ministerial issues/ praxes; reflects little awareness of the relation between theory and praxis. |
Objective 2: F.2.1.2/Ministerial | ||
Identifies, assesses, and applies theory and methods of research in theology as resources in ministry with accuracy, intentionality, and effectiveness. | Identifies connections between theological theory and methods and ministerial life and praxis. | Deems theological theory and method as of little or no value in his/her ministerial life and praxis. |
Objective 3: F.2.1.3/Personal/Ministerial | ||
Demonstrates commitment to and develops skills for sound theological reflection and research leading to personal, communal, and ecclesial transformation | Exhibits a willingness to engage in theological reflection and research; recognizes the capacity of such engagement to promote personal, communal, and ecclesial transformation | Resists opportunities/invitations to theological reflection or research; demonstrates lack of movement toward personal, communal, or ecclesial transformation |
Discerns and applies wisdom and insights derived from theological reflection and research in ways that enhance ministerial effectiveness | Recognizes that insights derived from theological reflection and research can enhance ministerial effectiveness | Dismisses the value of theological reflection or research for ministerial effectiveness |
Affirms and espouses the integrity and legitimacy of diverse theological methods, symbols, and rituals to articulate and stimulate personal, communal, and ecclesial faith | Acknowledges that diverse theological methods, symbols, and rituals have the capacity to articulate personal, communal, and ecclesial faith | Denies the validity of theological methods, symbols, and rituals beyond one’s religious tradition to articulate personal, communal, and ecclesial faith |
Objective 4: F.2.1.4/Intellectual/Ministerial | ||
The thesis clearly describes the ministerial issue/praxis that stimulated interest in the research topic. Explicitly defines the parameters of the project and the research goals. Demonstrates keen awareness of underlying theological issues. | The thesis presents general information concerning the issue/praxis to be addressed in the paper. Sets basic pattern for the unfolding of the project. Expresses the fundamental theological issues explored in the research. | The thesis contains minimal exposition of the issue/praxis guiding the paper. Boundaries of project ill-defined. Uncertain of theological issues involved. |
The thesis project explores, conducts, and integrates effective empirical research in ministry that both affirms and challenges claims made regarding the ministerial issue/praxis in question. | The thesis project includes empirical research in ministry that relates to the ministerial issue/praxis in question. | The thesis project includes empirical research in ministry that is tangential or unrelated to the ministerial issue/praxis in question. |
Research selection represents breadth of recent theological scholarship on topic. Research selections clearly address issue at hand. Research clearly incorporates diverse theological viewpoints/ approaches. Referenced consistently formatted in Turabian style. Minimal unsubstantiated rhetoric. | Research selection shows an awareness of recent theological scholarship on the topic. Research choices are generally on point. Research includes some evidence of diverse theological views/approaches. References inconsistently and/or incorrectly formatted. Noticeable unsubstantiated rhetoric. | Research selection shows lack of engagement with recent theological scholarship. Choices minimally address topic of paper. Research gives one-sided perspective. No recognizable format for research reference. Significant unsubstantiated rhetoric. |
Research applied clearly and insightfully to the ministerial issue/praxis in question. Implications of the research explored in relation to ministerial situation. Conclusions demonstrate depth of reflection on the interplay between theory and praxis in this project. Shows creative thought and expression. | Research accurately applied to the ministerial issue/praxis in question. Implications of research noted in relation to project. Conclusions give some evidence of reflection on the relation between theory and praxis for this project. | Research minimally or inaccurately applied to the issue/praxis in question. Minimal evidence of how the research relates to the issue/ praxis in question. Little evidence of reflection on relation between theory and praxis. |
Objective 5: F.2.1.5/Spiritual/Pastoral | ||
Demonstrates reflective and attentive communication with others in a consistent manner | Maintains attention to the communication of others and generally responds in a reflective manner | Formulates his/her opinion or argument rather than hearing or responding to that of others |
Exhibits a moral conscience and social responsibility based on the teachings of the Gospel and tradition | Brings moral and Gospel considerations to bear on most issues and practices | Lacks moral sensibilities that cohere with scripture or tradition |
Sets appropriate boundaries for ministerial and personal interactions and demonstrates respect for those of others | Exhibits some interactions which transgress one’s own personal or ministerial boundaries of or those of another | Exhibits considerable confusion about personal and ministerial boundaries and fails to recognize or respect those of others |
Listens reflectively, suspends judgment, and speaks intentionally with respect for the equality and dignity of all persons. | Exhibits some tendency to judge or misconstrue the contributions of others; displays an inclination to value particular perspectives over others. | Responds inappropriately and/or judgmentally to the insights of others; display clear biases against particular perspectives. |
Objective 6: F.2.1.6/Global | ||
Demonstrates capacity for sound theological engagement with diverse cultural and religious traditions through the effective and insightful application of critical and constructive theological and ministerial knowledge in discussion, research, and reflection. | Engages diverse cultural and religious traditions with theological interest; satisfactorily applies insights to theological and ministerial issues. | Exhibits reluctance to engage diverse cultural and religious traditions; fails to discern connection between such diversity and theological or ministerial issues. |
Course Embedded Assessment
Assessment Instrument | Data Collection/Frequency (assessment cycle) | Objectives Assessed | Criterion Score |
---|---|---|---|
Research/Application Paper | DMin students in THE 638 (Theology of Ministry) submit a 20-25 page research paper that focuses in greater depth on ONE issue in the theology of ministry. The paper includes:
| 1, 2, 3, 6 | 70% of students score 4 or more per Objective assessed on a 5-point rubric. |
Course Embedded Assessment Results | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Year | Enrolled | Objective 1 | Objective 2 | Objective 3 | Objective 6 |
2014 | 5 | 80% | 60% | 60% | 100% |
2017 | 4 | 75% | 50% | 50% | 75% |
Theological Reflection | DMin students in THE 800A (Fundamentals of Practical Theology) write a 5-7 page theological reflection on a ministerial situation using one of the seven methods of practical theology studied in this course with a rationale for choosing a particular method. The reflection is reviewed and critiqued by a peer from a cultural or religious context other than that of the student. When the critique has been returned, the student incorporates the critique and submits a copy to each instructor, along with the peer critique. In the reflection the students:
This course is offered annually in the Winter Residency and is taken by students in the first year of their program. | 1, 2, 3, 6 | 70% of students score 4 or more per Objective assessed on a 5-point rubric. |
Course Embedded Assessment Results | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Year | Enrolled | Objective 1 | Objective 2 | Objective 3 | Objective 6 |
2013 | 6 | 50% | 67% | 83% | 50% |
2015 | 4 | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |
2016 | 2 | 50% | 100% | 50% | 100% |
2017 | 5 | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |
2018 | 2 | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |
Thesis Project Proposal | DMin students in THE 800 (Integrative Seminar) prepare a Thesis-Project Proposal to demonstrate the development of an advanced understanding of the nature and purposes of ministry and a mastery of practical theology methodology. It must be correlated to the students’ ministry and to their ecclesial ministerial tradition. The Thesis-Project Proposal should be a simple text of no more than ten (10) pages, double-spaced, which states the ministry, purpose, method, and evaluation intended for the thesis-project. As a practical theology methodology, the proposal must reflect a praxis-theory-praxis-movement. The proposal follows this methodology by critically (i.e., hermeneutically) engaging a ministerial practice, its cultural context, and a religious tradition in a critical conversation to renew, reclaim, or reform that practice and the religious tradition. Approval of the Thesis-Project Proposal is accomplished through Thesis-Project Proposal Defense before a community of scholars and peers. The defense of the thesis-project incorporates the subject matter and the use of practical theology inclusive of a theological discipline(s) in the development of the thesis-project. The process is as follows:
After successful defense of the Thesis Proposal, the Candidate prepares and submit the Protocol for Research with Human Subjects with the Institutional review Board of Barry University. Studies involving human subjects as research participants through discussion groups, or as subjects of research, must meet all the requirements of Barry University's policies regarding research with human subjects and must be approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) before research begins. The candidate is responsible for following the research protocols of the IRB, published in "Guidelines for Submitting Research Protocols.” This course is offered annually in the Summer Residency. Students may register for THE 800 after successfully completing no fewer than 21 credit hours in the program. | 2, 3, 4, 6 | 80% of students score 4 or more per Objective assessed on a 5-point rubric. |
Course Embedded Assessment Results | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Year | Enrolled | Objective 1 | Objective 2 | Objective 3 | Objective 6 |
2014 | 9 | 55% | 55% | 55% | 55% |
2015 | 4 | 75% | 100% | 75% | 100% |
2016 | 2 | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |
2018 | 2 | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |
Case Study Analysis/Integrative Paper | DMin students in THE 802 A/B (Ministerial Formation) complete a formative experience designed to equip students for competent leadership in diverse communities of faith through the completion of the following courses: THE 802A: Doctoral Ministerial Formation and Pastoral Skills (3 credits) THE 802B: Doctoral Ministerial Formation and Professional Ethics (3 credits) | 2, 3, 5, 6 | 80% of students score 4 or more per Objective assessed on a 5-point rubric. |
Course Embedded Assessment Results | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Year | Enrolled | Objective 1 | Objective 2 | Objective 3 | Objective 6 |
2016 (B) | 5 | 80% | 100% | 80% | 100% |
2017 (A) | 6 | 82% | 100% | 82% | 82% |
2018 (B) | 2 | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |
2019 (A) | 3 |
Capstone Process: THE 801A/B: DMin Thesis in Ministry | DMin students in THE 801 complete the Thesis in Ministry. The thesis-project represents the candidate’s ability to integrate both the theoretical and practical dimensions of theological research. The thesis-project should demonstrate competent application of appropriate theological research methods and ethical guidelines in the investigation of the ministerial praxis. This research needs to be correlated to the candidate’s ministry under the guidance and supervision of the candidate’s thesis-project mentor and the committee, which guides the thesis-project. Style: The thesis-project must be written in scholarly English. The student will follow the current edition of Kate L. Turabian A Manual for Writers. Arrangement of the Manuscript: The general arrangement is as follows:
The Thesis Project in Ministry is evaluated by the thesis mentor, a faculty reader, a peer reader, and the Director of the Doctor of Ministry program. The thesis is then printed and bound for the Barry University Library and the Department of Theology and Philosophy and submitted to UMI for publication. Upon approval of the thesis-project and presentation of a summary of the thesis project at the Commissioning Ceremony before a community of peers, the student has fulfilled the requirements of the Doctor of Ministry degree and may participate in the University commencement. This is accomplished through the following two courses: THE 801A: DMin Thesis in Ministry I (4 credits) THE 801B: DMin Thesis in Ministry II (4 credits) | 1,2,3,4,5 | 80% of students successfully complete the Thesis Project within the 7-year time limit allotted for degree completion |
Capstone/Doctoral Thesis Assessment Results
Registration for THE 801 (semester/year) | Students Registered | % Graduated within 7-year Limit | Met the Criterion of 80% |
---|---|---|---|
2006 | 2 | 50% | 50% |
2007 | 4 | 75% | No |
2008 | 3 | 33% | No |
2009 | 4 | 100% | Yes |
2010 | 9 | 78% | No |
2011 | 2 | 50% | No |
2012 | 2 | 100% | Yes |
2013 | 6 | 33% | No |
2014 | 2 | 100% | Yes |
2015 | 2 | 50% | No |
Registration for THE 801A | Students Registered | ||
Spring 2016 | Spring 2016 | ||
Spring 2016 | 1 | ||
Fall 2016 | 2 | ||
Spring 2017 | 1 | ||
Fall 2017 | 2 | ||
Fall 2018 | 5 | ||
Registration for THE 801B | Students Registered | % Graduated within 7-year Limit | Met the Criterion of 80% |
Spring 2017 | 3 | 100% | Yes |
Spring 2018 | 2 | 0 | No |
Fall 2018 | 1 | 100% | Yes |
Spring 2019 | 4 | 75% | No |