Training
The Committee will
encourage and enable the integration of the training of the whole people of God
and to this end will seek to influence the philosophy and methodology of
learning; the core content of courses; and the development of resources. It
gives direct support to, and acts in partnership with Doctrine, Prayer and
Worship; Life and Witness; Church and Society, and Youth and Children’s Work
Committees and synods and districts, as they respond to the needs of local
churches in training matters. It collaborates with Ministries Committee in the
training of ministers of Word and Sacraments, CRCWs and Lay Preachers. It also
supports all other committees and task groups, in particular the Ecumenical
Committee. It also gives advice to the YCWT programme.
Convener: Revd
John Humphreys (2007)
Secretary for
Training: Revd Roy Lowes
Mrs Susan Brown (2006),
Mrs Valerie Burnham (2007), Revd Dr John Campbell (2009), Revd Richard Church
(2008), Revd Sue Henderson (2006), Dr Ian Morrison (2007), Revd Malachie
Munyaneza (2006),
Revd Rachel Poolman
(2008), Mr John Saunders (2010)
(Readers wanting more
detail on some of the terms used in this report might refer to Training
Review Appendix One (page 113) that includes a list of Terms and Explanations)
1. The moving
tectonic plates of change
1.1 In the first five
years of this millennium the work of education and training in the main stream
churches has moved into creative, dynamic and yet difficult days. This is a
period of seismic change. In the 1990’s the Training Committee talked of and
made some moves towards integrated education for the equipping of all the
ministries of the church. It worried at the surplus capacity of places for the
initial training of Ministers of Word and Sacraments and made unsuccessful
proposals to change the institutions it uses. Then since the late 1990’s across
the denominations in England particularly there has arisen a serious movement to
realign training provisions to actually realise this goal of training that
brings learners together across a range of ministries. Resolution 51 of last
year’s Assembly, generated by the Training Committee, reinforced the United
Reformed Church’s intent. The committee now seeks to deal with where ministers
train initially as part of the developing strategies that flow from these
intentions and not just as a separate problem. The Church of England and
Methodist Church are larger players in these same processes and the United
Reformed Church has been influenced by and played its part in their work. But
the intentions are ones which these churches all share. The ‘Training Review’
(pages 109-119) expresses our proposals.
1.2 This time of review
and change is putting a huge amount of stress on staff and students of many
types. It’s not just that institutions which the United Reformed Church uses
have to cope with United Reformed Church changes and review. Because they all
work ecumenically they are also affected by policy developments in the other
denominations (the Church of England and Methodist Church most especially) with
whom they work closely. Those in higher education also have to cope with the
demands of the government’s quality assurance processes. Altogether these
produce real pressures.
1.3 In the meantime the
rest of the committee’s core work is not immune from change and review. Indeed
the committee wants to ensure that the changes on the larger scale spoken of in
its review are reflected in the rest of its life and work.
1.4 In light of that the
committee has:
-
worked at the
implementation of the immediate post ordination stage of ministerial
training (Education for Ministry 2) where Assembly staff member Elizabeth
Gray-King has been able to bring to the programme a consistency of
administration and support.
-
decided that the time
was right to review the rest of ministerial training formerly called
Continuing Ministerial Education and now Education for Ministry 3. The
conclusions are referred to below in 7.4.
-
concluded that the
way students for stipendiary ministry are financially supported needs
attention – see paragraph 9.
-
overseen the period
in which Training for Learning and Serving has undergone a significant
period of transition and is now moving into a new chapter of its life.
-
continued to run
Refresher Courses, the two ‘Ethos and History’ courses, the Summer School
for Ordinands on Courses and the New Ministers’ School.
-
engaged ecumenically
in partner denominations’ discussions and shared in the ecumenical
validation and inspection of our higher education institutions.
What follows is a summary
of some of that work.
2. Training for
Learning and Serving
2.1 Stanley Jackson has
been Co-ordinator of Training for Learning and Serving (TLS) since September
2004 and was introduced to Assembly in that year. Working with other key members
of staff, under the guidance of the Training for Learning and Serving Management
Group, he has introduced new developments. Training for Learning and Serving
organisation has devolved more authority out from the ‘centre’, has changed its
ethos with a movement from the programmatic to the experiential. It has evolved
a new ‘strap line:’ “Not so much a programme, more an experience”. Its
appearance has moved from solid and static to liquid and dynamic which the new
livery expresses. In strategy it has moved from church maintenance to
discipleship. We warmly welcome Stanley’s energy and innovation.
2.2 It seems clear that
while the majority of students still have lay preaching as their stated area of
service, an increasing number are looking for TLS to equip them for more
effective discipleship within the context of the world, not primarily the
church.
2.3 An area which, with
further attention, Training for Learning and Serving staff believe would pay
dividends is giving encouragement to the churches to make proper use of those
who complete Training for Learning and Serving. This is especially so for those
gaining a certificate from the process. It is in service that the learning bears
fruit and reaches its fulfillment.
2.4 There is also
discussion about the ways local churches need to be prepared for the way in
which TLS becomes more a spiritual journey than a training course. It can be a
journey that changes the student in ways not shared by other members of the
congregation. Positive acceptance by the home church is important not just for
those who become lay preachers, but for those who take Training for Learning and
Serving units such as that on pastoral care. In this way too the learning of the
student stimulates the learning of the whole church.
2.5 Training for Learning
and Serving is currently well advanced in developing a new community work
one-year course in both full TLS and LITE formats and has begun the process of
developing a one-year evangelism module.
2.6 Training for Learning
and Serving LITE enrolled 271 students on LITE courses during 2005, of which 64
did the Leading Worship course. A large proportion of these were progressions
from those who had studied other LITE courses in 2004. A small revision of the
material was undertaken in 2005 and more recently the administration of LITE has
been reviewed. It is clear that LITE is appreciated and a significant learning
tool for those with no prior or recent formal learning. But arrangements are in
hand to make the accessibility of the material much easier through the summer of
2006. LITE was called for to provide some initial education especially (but not
only) for those who wanted to train as preachers (without Assembly
accreditation) but who did not want to undertake the full Training for Learning
and Serving programme. LITE seems to have led to some reduction in the number of
those doing TLS Foundation and one-year courses. However it has provided formal
theological education for many who might not otherwise have undertaken it and
evidence is now emerging that it is also provides a stimulating taster following
which people are moving into the Foundation course.
2.7 The interrelation of
the Training for Learning and Serving Management Group and the University of
Wales, Bangor, its validating University, has been strengthened and clarified in
the last two years. The Training for Learning and Serving’s Standards Board has
been reconfigured as a Board of Studies.
2.8 TLS Management
Committee Convener Carole Ellefson-Jones came to the end of her period of
service in the summer of 2005. She had overseen the transition from a highly
successful organisation and training provider dependent largely on the skills
and capacity of David A L Jenkins, its first coordinator, to an organisation
with an infrastructure now capable of taking on new leadership and new
leadership dynamics. She has been warmly thanked for her careful and skilful
work
2.8.1 The committee is
pleased to say that her successor as of the summer of 2006 will be (another!)
David Jenkins, recently retired from ministry in Wilmslow. We look forward with
much enthusiasm to David’s service on Training for Learning and Serving where
his vast experience (which includes being a trainer and Synod moderator) will be
most welcome.
2.8.2 The committee is
very grateful to Janet Tollington who in the interim between these two
appointments has been holding the fort and steering Training for Learning and
Serving wisely and carefully.
3. Inspection and
validation processes
3.1 An important part of
the Committee’s responsibility is receiving ecumenical validation and inspection
reports on training institutions used by the United Reformed Church for
Education for Ministry 1. In the past two years the committee has ensured United
Reformed Church representation on a range of inspections/validations. It has
studied and agreed to accept the reports and recommendations of
Inspections/Validations for:
-
the Oxford
Partnership for Theological Education and Training (OPTET) including
Mansfield College and what was then the St Albans an Oxford Ministry
Training Scheme,
-
the Cambridge
Federation including Westminster College and the Eastern Region Ministry
Course (formerly the East Anglian Ministerial Training Course),
-
the South East
Institute for Theological Education and
-
the North East
Ecumenical Course.
3.2 This ecumenical
inspection process covers the institutions that we use in England and Wales. The
committee has now agreed that, as it is over five years since Union, an
inspection of the Scottish College is appropriate. To that end preparation is
being made to define the nature of inspection for this particular institution,
given its particular context.
4. Church of England
‘Formation for Ministry within a Learning Church’ – the Hind report
4.1 The Church of
England’s process has continued since the committee’s report of 2004. A brief
summary of the nature of the process is given in the Training Review’s Appendix
One (p 113). In the summer of 2005 the General Synod of the Church of England
agreed to continue the developments to form Regional Training Partnerships (RTP)
across England. They are now working on the details of the nature of these
partnerships and each is proceeding at a pace determined by local or regional
factors and the approach of the diocesan bishops. The centre of gravity within
the process has certainly moved from the centralised, formative stage to the
embryo Regional Training Partnerships themselves. As these all work on an
individual basis it is inevitable that considerable variations will appear.
4.2 A key element in the
proposals is the attempt to make a more integrated whole of the delivery of the
curriculum both sides of ordination (i.e. in Church of England terms initial
training and curacy). Learning outcomes had been agreed ecumenically for this
whole period with the result that RTP curricula will be structured to achieve
them. Nevertheless, there are problems in relating the United Reformed Church
structure for the training and ordination of ministers to that within the now
accepted agreed learning outcomes for the RTP’s. This concern stimulated the
need for the United Reformed Church curriculum consultation referred to briefly
under the Education for Ministry 2/3 committee section below. This has clarified
the United Reformed Church position though not erased the potential difficulties
in practice. What has been highlighted is that, whilst the United Reformed
Church agrees with the required learning outcomes, its students need to achieve
these by the time of ordination. The Church of England and the Church in Wales
and Methodists need them to be achieved by the time students take up posts of
responsibility, which could be two or three years after ordination.
Accommodating these different patterns and expectations is one of the difficult
tasks facing the RTPs and the parent denominations supporting them.
4.3 The Training
Committee has been represented on the Hind Steering Group and on the
implementation groups for various parts of the process. It has submitted a
document prior to the General Synod of 2005 reflecting on the process. The
Training Committee called a meeting in September 2005 of United Reformed Church
English synod representatives (Wales and Scotland sent observers) involved in
the formation of the RTP’s. Its aim was to strengthen their hands and enable
some coordination across United Reformed Church synodical approaches. It is
planned that this should be an annual consultation.
4.4 One consequence of
the formation of Regional Training Partnerships with each one including a part
time training course provision has been the need to realign some part time
Courses. This has particularly affected the St Albans and Oxford Course, which
has effectively spilt into two. Half of it has joined with what was the East
Anglian Ministerial Training Course which has been renamed the Eastern Region
Ministry Course.
4.5 A further piece of
‘Hind’ work currently underway (and on which the Training Committee is
represented) is consideration of the Quality Assurance processes that will best
serve the Churches and the Regional Training Partnership’s. This seeks to
identify the Inspection/Validation processes most suited to the emerging
ecumenical training scene. It appears at the time of writing that the inspection
process will change to embrace a system that encourages internal audit.
5. Counseling Service
for Students
5.1 The Committee has
worked with others to ensure that since the autumn of 2004 ministerial students
and their families have access to the Churches Ministerial Counseling
Service. We seek to regularly inform students and their families of this.
6. Research
6.1 Though the Training
Committee has ceased to judge it affordable to continue to offer a research
bursary to ministers it notes with pleasure that by various means research is
being engaged with and some of it supported directly or indirectly by the
Training Committee. Some ministers have used their £700 Education for Ministry
2/3 allocation towards part time research at masters or doctorate level. The
last minister to benefit from a Training Committee bursary has yet to complete
the doctorate but the study achieved has already been of benefit to that
person’s ministry and to the wider church. The committee is aware that church
members other than ministers undertake research and is glad to note that a Youth
and Children’s Work Training and Development Officer has gained a doctorate in
the last two years. Two student ministers are completing doctorates partly
sponsored by the Training Committee and another minister has completed a
doctorate supported by the Congregational and General Millennium Bursary Trust.
The committee is delighted that a further such bursary has become available.
This has been advertised in April’s Reform. The Training Committee continues to
monitor the use of and application of these bursaries.
7. Education for
Ministry 2/3 Committee
(formerly Continuing
Ministerial Education)
7.1 In 2004 the review of
the Education for Ministry 2 phase of ministerial training (for the first three
years after ordination) was reported and agreed by Assembly. The part time EM2
staff member, Elizabeth Gray King, who was appointed in the immediate aftermath
of that review, has since then pressed on with the review’s implementation. She
has especially sought to improve the quality of provision in the residential
weekend element of the EM2 programme and clarify the new flexibility within its
provision. There is evidence to suggest that her work is much appreciated.
7.2 She has also been
able, after consultation with the sub committee and within the bounds of
confidentiality and anonymity, to relay to Ministries Committee and Moderators
concern at the levels of stress which EM2 ministers have indicated that they
experience.
7.3 Education for
Ministry 3 Review: in 2005 the sub committee decided that it was an opportune
time to review Education for Ministry 3, (formerly Continuing Ministerial
Education) which had never been reviewed as an entity. The review aimed to
establish whether the Church was receiving value for the investment it has made
since 1998, and which it continues to make.
7.4 The Education for
Ministry 3 Review’s context included these sub committee understandings:
That the learning for
discipleship of the whole people of God is vital
That the demands on
contemporary ministry require fresh understanding, skill and flexibility
That there is growing
recognition of the connection between reflection and planning about ministry and
about the process of learning
That there is a desire to
be a more purposeful, intentional church
That there now exist more
prevalent notions of accountability.
7.5 The review’s
principle conclusions, which require no change to Assembly policy,
1. affirm the programme
as a whole “as a valuable and necessary contribution to the life and mission of
the church and the prospering of its ministry” and note the evidence of
significant levels of satisfaction, both of the programme as a whole and the
learning that participants have accessed as a result.
2. welcome the contribution of self-appraisal scheme developments to integrate
learning with broader processes of development, both personal and
organisational.
3. note that there remain significant numbers of ministers outside recognised
continuing education, and encourage continuing efforts to extend participation.
4. recognise that there is considerable diversity in the education undertaken by
participants. While the scope of the scheme is ‘education for ministry’, we
affirm a broad understanding of this. We affirm the importance of the individual
participant taking, in consultation with others, informed decisions about their
learning plans.
5. note the evidence that ministers themselves feel that their learning through
the programme has positive impact on the effectiveness of their ministry. We
propose that grant proposal forms should incorporate some comment on how the
planned learning will impact on ministry and might be shared with others.
6. retain the annual nature of the scheme but encourage participants and those
who support them in their learning planning to look beyond the single, next
learning experience and to build coherence across their learning.
7. seek new ways of encouraging participants to follow a systematic process in
planning and reflecting upon their learning.
8. maintain General Assembly provision of refresher courses and support for
synod schools and note that the General Assembly also makes other provision,
e.g. courses for ministers nearing retirement.
9. affirm the educational value of a range of learning activities, and not
merely formal course provision, and encourage greater use of these often more
experiential learning opportunities.
10. note that though current budgetary provision has been adequate to meet
demand, that the promotion of the scheme and its adoption as a more normal
pattern within ministry life may increase demand.
11. revise the administration processes to support informed decision making
about learning, to gather and collate information more efficiently and, where
possible, by means of IT and to ensure that data is used more effectively.
12. affirm the importance of partnership within the scheme:
(a) at the local
level between minister and pastorate/ Church Related Community Worker and
project or equivalent relationships
(b) in the pivotal
role of synod training officers
(c) through
education and training partnerships, particularly involving recognised colleges
which are being encouraged to continue in extending their role beyond a focus on
initial ministerial education.
13 welcome the potential
of the RTP’s in England and ecumenical collaboration in Scotland and Wales to be
a resource for continuing education.
7.6 The sub committee
will work on implementing the review’s conclusions.
7.7 The committee has
been consulted by Ministries Committee about the inter-relationship of practical
ministry development and a mandatory appraisal, which will have implications for
EM3. It is happy that such a development will key in with its own conclusions
about the importance of learning and its relation to the practice of ministry.
7.8 Education for
Ministry 1/2 Curriculum consultation: the committee sponsored a consultation in
September 2005 to consider the interrelation of the learning undertaken by
ministers pre and post ordination. A key conclusion was that the distinction
between the two periods of learning lies in the new context of ministerial
service for learning post ordination.
8. Training in the
national Synods of Wales and Scotland
8.1 The Training
Committee continues to pay attention to the developments in Scotland and Wales
where those national synods carry particular responsibility for leading the
United Reformed Church’s training development and ecumenical engagement.
8.2 The English Hind
proposals have been noted in Wales with interest where similar proposals have
been discussed but not proceeded with. Informal discussions between the
denominations are to continue.
8.3 In Scotland an
ecumenical core Ministerial Formation Group to deal with initial ministerial
education had been established, and is being facilitated by Action for Churches
Together in Scotland.
8.4 The Scottish synod
has published ‘Managing to Change’ and a resource pack associated with the
bi-centenary of Hans Christian Anderson entitled ‘Once upon a Time’. Both are
available from the synod or through the United Reformed Church bookshop
8.5 In November 2005 the
United Reformed Church Secretary for Training, the Synod Education Officer and
Moderator met with key figures from the Church of Scotland to reflect on areas
of work and responsibility which might provide opportunities for cooperation in
Scotland. This was a particularly apt time for such a conversation given the
restructuring that has taken place in the Church of Scotland where new
‘councils’ have been adopted in place of its former departments and committees.
8.6 Conversations begun
in 2005 between the Scottish Episcopal Church, the Methodist Church and the
United Reformed Church have placed co-operation in training and theological
education on the agenda.
9. Finance
9.1 The Training Finance
sub committee has undertaken a review of the process by which students are
supported financially. Apart from the need to review processes on a regular
basis the varied patterns of training now emerging mean that a maintenance grant
system based on a small grant with additional payments for student dependents is
being swamped by a proliferation of ‘exceptional’ or ‘unusual’ cases. The
committee has been particularly concerned to ensure that any revised process has
simplicity in application and administration, and clarity in advocacy. It is
moving strongly in the directions of a higher allowance with a minimal top-up
element. It is envisaged that the new system will be discussed this autumn with
relevant financial officers of the institutions where full time students are
trained to ensure that all understand the system. The aim is to have it
operating for the 2007/2008 academic year. Particular care will be taken to
ensure that those involved in transition from one system to another are not
disadvantaged.
9.2 As well as its usual
business which includes receiving student hardship claims and reflection on the
Training Committee budget the sub committee has also devoted much time to
preparing papers to support the Training Committee’s review.
9.3 The sub committee is
grateful to the finance office for their support and the greater degree of
accessible financial information that is being made available.
10. Personnel
The committee is also
grateful for the wisdom and commitment of those who have served on it but left
since 2004, Kate Breeze, Sue Brown, Sue Henderson, Malachie Munyaneza and Craig
Jesson as the student representative. We are equally grateful for and delighted
at the energy, commitment and wisdom of those who have replaced them, Richard
Church, Rachel Poolman, John Campbell, John Saunders and Caroline Andrews as
student representative. We also note especially the work of Sue Henderson who
has acted as Convener of the Studies Panel and Nigel Watson who has brought much
skill and experience to bear as convener of the Finance sub committee. We also
note the end of service of Jack Dyce. Jack has been on the committee since
before 2000 and his wisdom, educational expertise and readiness to travel
significant distances to facilitate attendance at a range of meetings has been
remarkable. His presence has not only helped to develop the union of 2000 in key
areas of the church’s life but also brought to reality the contribution of the
Scottish Congregationalists to the new church.
11. Keeping the show
on the road
The concentration of time
and energy needed for work on the Training Review and to take the first steps
and decisions to begin implementing the principles agreed by Assembly in 2005
(along with illness) has meant that some of the ongoing work of training has
been placed ‘on the back burner’. Neither staff nor committee (despite its
‘extra’ meetings) has been able to respond as swiftly to all matters on its
agenda or brought to its attention, as it would like. Staff and the committee
are grateful for the understanding and patience they have received. They are
eager to progress the 2005 principles, as Assembly directs, as a vital
contribution to fostering a learning church as well as aiming to increase their
responsiveness to other matters.
Resolution 35
Regional Training Partnerships
General Assembly in
pursuance of the Training Committee’s report urges:
a) Training Committee
to continue promoting the development of partnerships in pursuit of Assembly’s
commitment to integrated and dispersed Christian education, nurture and training
for the whole people of God in line with the principles agreed by Assembly in
resolution 51 of 2005.
b) the Synods in
England to participate as proactively as possible in the development of the
ecumenical Regional Training Partnerships for the training and nurture of the
whole people of God in line with the policies agreed by General Assembly and
specifically resolution 35 of 2005.
Resolution 36
Resource Centres for learning
General Assembly in
line with the Training report, welcomes the commitment of the Northern, Scottish
and Westminster Colleges to act for the United Reformed Church in a new role as
resource centres for learning and to undertake dispersed, integrated training
and Christian education for the whole people of God. The Training Committee
agrees to keep its relationship with them under ongoing review and report to the
General Assembly of 2012.
Resolution 37
College based training
a) General Assembly
agrees that Northern, Westminster and the Scottish Colleges acting as resource
centres for learning, are to have sole responsibility for ensuring the delivery
of initial ministerial education (Education for Ministry 1). Northern College
will continue to have sole responsibility for initial training of Church Related
Community Workers. This will apply to all candidates recommended for training in
the 2006/7 candidating process and thereafter.
b) General Assembly
instructs the Training Committee to work with those Synods which have students
currently training in institutions affected by resolution 37a (including those
sent by the 2005/2006 candidating process) in order to secure their continuing
care and the satisfactory completion of their ordination (Education for Ministry
1) training.
Resolution 38
Westminster College Principal
In light of General
Assembly’s decisions about the Training Committee’s 2006 report it instructs the
Training Committee and the Governors of Westminster College to proceed with the
appointment of a Principal for Westminster College.
Resolution 39
Lewis & Gibson Scholarship Rule change
General Assembly
resolves to amend the Lewis and Gibson Scholarship Regulations, approved by
Resolution 40 of General Assembly 2000, by inserting a new regulation (vi) as
follows, and numbering (vi) to (x) as (vii) to (xi):
(vi) Scholars shall
be elected for one year at a time, and, subject to satisfactory reports on their
progress being received by the Electors, may be re-elected for a total period
not exceeding four years.
1.1 The original Will
provided for scholarships to be held for three years’ undergraduate study and
for three years at Westminster College. The Presbyterian Church of England
General Assembly used to specify ‘undergraduate scholarships’ when confirming
them, but the majority of scholarships have been held for up to three years at
Westminster College. For some time the standard length of the Westminster course
has been four years. Moreover, graduate study programmes (for M.Phil and PhD)
are now also typically four years. Thus the scholarships are not attractive to
overseas students unless a guarantee can be given that they may be held for four
years. The Electors and the Governors therefore consider that the period for
study at Westminster College should now be extended to four years, and recommend
General Assembly to change the regulations accordingly.
top |
