I think we do a good job with traditional metrics: [1] graduating student questionnaire, [2] course evaluations, [3] PCUSA ord exams, and [4] annual reviews. At least some of us additionally engage in informal discussions with colleagues about how to improve things like teaching. Some of these matters could be improved. For example, could we all share all of our course evaluations? When we only see how we as individuals are doing year-to-year, we don't have a touchstone about how we're doing in terms of student experiences across the board.
I also want to stress that we could really improve in terms of the big picture:
1] How are we doing in achieving the robust vision set forth in the New Day Dawning?
2] What parts of the New Day Dawning have not panned out as we hoped? In those cases, where do we need to let things go, and where do we need to try new things?
Some things in particular that I would like us to spend more time discussing:
1] Three times, NDD calls us to become "The best theological on-line program in the world." Where are we in achieving that goal? What hinders us from pulling it off? What would allow us to fully realize that goal?
2] NDD calls for a vigorous lay academy and Christian Leadership Program. I think we're doing excellent work with lay ministers in the PCUSA. I'd love for us to talk about how we can help other denominations, as well as laity not interested in serving pastoral roles.
3] NDD calls for us to have an International Academy. Last semester, however, UD had difficulty finding funds to cover the costs of two international students taking one class each. Do we need to say that the International Academy is something we'll return to at another point when UD's financial picture has improved? Are there other options?
4] With the death of our YAMS program, what do we say about NDD's commitment to ministering to younger adults? Is it something we should still try to do? Or, do we say that it's being realized in our Theology program?
5] NDD talks of "perfecting a 'flipped classroom.'" Is a flipped classroom the best pedagogical method in all of our classes, or have we leaned heavily into it less for pedagogical reasons and more to try to keep a residential program afloat? What do we do in classes where a flipped classroom may not be the best means of achieving learning outcomes? How do we reconcile the fact that a really good flipped classroom requires a tremendous amount of planning time--but ends up benefitting only a sliver of our total student body?
6] The following paragraph from NDD is worth quoting:
Unless they are a well-disciplined organization, the mistake most educational institutions make in adapting to their changing environment is not to go big enough. By that I mean, most educational organizations will nibble around the edges rather than dramatically alter their delivery and educational offering. In this case, nibbling often takes the form of modest budget cuts, slight increases in responsibility whether that takes the form of teaching loads or additional administrative workload, delays in faculty or staff appointments, cuts in retirement contributions, etc. For a period of time, these adjustments can be seen as prudent financial management, but when nibbling becomes a perpetual part of the organization’s culture, it’s difficult not to walk away feeling as if one is part of a dying organization. Perpetual budget cuts are demoralizing to the organization’s culture; a death by 1,000 cuts. Increased administrative workloads and delays in hiring, though virtuous, are not sustainable for the long run. They prop up structures that, ultimately, are no longer useful for serving the present and future opportunity. Most leaders in theological education choose to announce dramatic change while effectively nibbling away at the edges. The Transformation taught us that “nibbling” is not the way forward to organizational health and missional vitality.
In what ways are we failing to go big enough? What nibbling needs to end? What is demoralizing and not sustainable? How have we announced dramatic change while only nibbling at the edges?
7] The NDD was filled with financial information that showed why change was absolutely necessary. Where are we currently financially? Can we see numbers as they relate to specific programs? Can we hold each other accountable to teaching enough to cover our salaries?