# How Rigorous is PRTS?



## Hamalas (Mar 6, 2015)

Hi all,

As you probably know, I've been strongly leaning towards pursuing a degree with PRTS when the time comes for me to head off to seminary in a few years. I had the chance to visit for the annual August conference a few years back and really loved it. I have great respect for the professors (one of them actually taught me in college) and I'm so thankful for the wonderful service they are rendering to the church. I have no doubt that this is a good school that is producing faithful men.

My question, however, is this. For those of you who have close connections to the seminary or who have attended: how rigorous is PRTS? When I've mentioned to different ministers and academics that I'm thinking of going there none of them have anything bad to say about the piety or purposes of the school, but I've gotten the distinct impression that some people think it isn't as academically rigorous as some of the other Reformed seminaries out there. I haven't pressed for details so I don't know exactly what they had in mind.

My purpose is not in any way to speak bad about any seminary; I'm simply seeking first-hand information from those who might know best. If you'd rather not type something in public here feel free to send me a Private Message. I would really love to hear from some of you as I continue to pray about the right direction to go. Thanks!


----------



## Dearly Bought (Mar 6, 2015)

I don't know where that notion would come from. Sending you a PM.


----------



## JOwen (Mar 6, 2015)

This is a hard question to answer, simply because it would require an experiment across several seminaries with a sampling of students who have matriculated, course for course. PRTS was recently accredited by ATS, which should provide a baseline for the degree of rigor expected of such an accredited school. I'm not sure how many credits other seminaries require, but I do know that PRTS just *lowered* their total M.Div. credit number to fall in line with other major seminaries. As a current Th.M student my assessment is it is plenty rigorous. My current course, English Puritan Theology, has somewhere around 40 hours of lectures, 120 hours of reading, 30-40 page term paper, 10 page book review, and comprehensive exam ([for M.Div]- Th.M are exempt because our paper is longer). Drop out rate at PRTS is about average in the M.Div program. Generally, a college grad with a 3.7 GPA can expect to drop to a 3.2 at seminary (But this is not always the case). 
I am also a member of the Theological Education Committee of the Free Reformed Churches of North America. We are one of the partnering denominations at PRTS. I and was recently sent as a 2015's delegate to assess the school on behalf of the FRC. Our findings were such that our report includes the phrase, "high academic standards". Also, if you are particularly gifted, you could take on a larger than normal course load. We have a few students who have done this, though it is not recommended. In the FRC one full year of Greek is mandatory _before _you are permitted to attend. That should give some indication as to the language demands at PRTS. The FRC requires 124 credit hours to become illegible for candidacy. 
Hope this helps somewhat.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Mar 6, 2015)

It depends what one means by "rigorous." If by rigorous one means "doing a lot of work," then PRTS is clearly with the best of them. In fact, when I was doing ThM coursework with them, I had friends in two different PhD programs tell me that I was doing more "work" than they were. 

Of course, just because one does more work does not mean that one is learning more. For instance, when I was in grade school I was in the TAG program. I thought it was an honor until I learned that we were learning the same things as the regular students, just doing more work. (They'd have 20 math problems, we'd do 30. That's what you get for being "talented and gifted!") At Southern, for my class in soteriology I had to write a 20 page paper. At PRTS, for essentially the same class, I had to write a 35 page paper. Did those extra 15 pages reflect more comprehension? I don't know. But I do know that telling people I had to write a 35 page paper sure does make me sound smarter!

Whether the MDiv program is rigorous in the sense of teaching you to think and interact with various alternative views, I don't know. But I can almost guarantee that you won't do more work anywhere else.


----------



## Edward (Mar 7, 2015)

JOwen said:


> The FRC requires 124 credit hours to become illegible for candidacy.


----------



## JOwen (Mar 7, 2015)

Edward said:


> JOwen said:
> 
> 
> > The FRC requires 124 credit hours to become illegible for candidacy.



Freudian slip....


----------



## psycheives (Mar 7, 2015)

Hamalas said:


> My question, however, is this. For those of you who have close connections to the seminary or who have attended: how rigorous is PRTS? When I've mentioned to different ministers and academics that I'm thinking of going there none of them have anything bad to say about the piety or purposes of the school, but I've gotten the distinct impression that some people think it isn't as academically rigorous as some of the other Reformed seminaries out there. I haven't pressed for details so I don't know exactly what they had in mind.



I would strongly caution against choosing or not choosing a seminary based on "academically rigorous" reputation without knowing exactly what that entails. If you are actually learning more, this may be a good reason to choose one seminary. But many times this is not the case.

Difficulty for the sake of difficulty is actually detrimental and not beneficial. Let me give a few examples of "academically rigorous" practices that don't necessarily result in a better education but actually a worse one.

It could also be that one professor requires you to read 20 books at Seminary A, while another professor requires only 5 books. Which is more effective? Maybe it is impossible to actually read 20 books and so you breeze through them so fast that you forget everything (this is sadly super common at seminaries). While, Seminary B allowes you the time to deeply digest the 5 books and you ended up with a better education in the long run. Now multiply this times say 5 classes per semester. That means you must read 100 books in one semester compared to reading 25 books. Since reading 100 books in a semester is actually physically impossible, the students from SeminaryA have no opportunity to deeply read the books and they forget nearly everything, skimming books as they go. Seminary B students carefully learn what they are reading and end up with a deep and lasting knowledge.

Another example is in grading. Seminary A professors are concerned about what they have termed "grade inflation" and so have a pre-determined notion that they WANT only 10% of the class to get A's, 20% to get Bs and 60% to get Cs. So they curve the class against (not for) students and push you into one of these pre-determined boxes. If your answer is CORRECT, you end up with a C because your answer was not "as good" as someone else's answer. I consider this a dishonest grading method but I am concerned that many professors employ it, not seeing an answer as "right" or "wrong" but as "better" vs "worse." Seminary B may grade based on whether you gave a correct answer. All "Correct" answers get an A. So Seminary B will be claimed to be "easier." But I believe Seminary B is grading fairly.

Another example is poor teaching. Seminary A may have teachers who do not know how to teach, teach above their students' heads, or issue out-of-this-world difficult tests. Seminary B may have the best teachers, who teach right at their students' levels and so the students end up with better grades. Therefore, people claim Seminary B is "less rigorous." But the students in Seminary B may end up with a better overall education.

Hope this helps


----------



## Hamalas (Mar 8, 2015)

This is very helpful everyone, thanks! What a blessing it is to have the wisdom of others in the midst of decision making. I'm feeling reassured in my leanings towards PRTS.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Mar 16, 2015)

Ben,this point occurred to me recently: if you are hoping to pursue gospel ministry in the UK (even if it is only a possibility) would you not be better attending WTS? There has been a history of ministers over here doing their training at WTS, so it might be a better "fit" for your needs.


----------



## jandrusk (Mar 16, 2015)

I would message Dr. David Murray on Google Plus since he teaches there and I think he would be able to point you in the right direction. 

https://plus.google.com/113070390211264624134/posts


----------



## Edward (Mar 16, 2015)

jandrusk said:


> I would message Dr. David Murray on Google Plus since he teaches there



He teaches on Google Plus?


----------



## Andrew P.C. (Mar 16, 2015)

Just a side note, when I was in Escondido I had the pleasure of meeting many seminarians and professors. Some seminaries tend to lean one way on a particular topic, and other seminaries will lean the other way. IT SEEMS that WSCal tends to be more "two-kingdom" approach, where as Mid-America seems to be more "one-kingdom". Now this is purely a subjective observation (which I would also suggest only effects those within the URCNA... mostly) but these are things to keep in mind. Where are their strengths and weaknesses (as Psyche has already pointed out).

Also, keep in mind that the spiritual health of the seminary is just as important (if not more) as the academic health. Controversies within seminaries and how they DEALT with them are important. Do some professors hold harsh feelings? Does this play into their teaching? Does it effect their students? I think seminary is important, but it's important to know your seminary as well.


----------



## psycheives (Mar 17, 2015)

Andrew P.C. said:


> Just a side note, when I was in Escondido I had the pleasure of meeting many seminarians and professors. Some seminaries tend to lean one way on a particular topic, and other seminaries will lean the other way. IT SEEMS that WSCal tends to be more "two-kingdom" approach, where as Mid-America seems to be more "one-kingdom". Now this is purely a subjective observation (which I would also suggest only effects those within the URCNA... mostly) but these are things to keep in mind. Where are their strengths and weaknesses (as Psyche has already pointed out).
> 
> Also, keep in mind that the spiritual health of the seminary is just as important (if not more) as the academic health. Controversies within seminaries and how they DEALT with them are important. Do some professors hold harsh feelings? Does this play into their teaching? Does it effect their students? I think seminary is important, but it's important to know your seminary as well.



Hi Andrew, missed you coming out here for a visit! Hope you had a nice time and got to sit in on a class or so?  Glad you mentioned this. Yes, spiritual health of a seminary is huge. At times, debates can get very heated among some individuals, sometimes leaving some students afraid to share their personal views if they differ. On the church-state view debates, I would guess the Neo-2k view may be strongest in our local OPC church (rather than URC), which makes sense considering Dr. VanDrunen is an member there; but perhaps it is different in other parts of the country.


----------

