Online vs No Seminary

[erickinho1bra]

I have heard that online seminary (even if joined with service in a local church) is not good enough to really train someone to be a pastor and does not grant the student the opportunity to develop relationships with students and professors. I can agree with the latter point but I'm not sure if I agree with the first.

Can you seminary grads/pastors/professors let me know what you think? Would it be better to do online seminary or not do seminary at all until I can commit to going in person?

I'm not in a place in life where I can or even would like to move for school since I don't feel an urgent need to go into ministry. I simply would like to do an online program at a very slow pace (about 1-2 classes per semester) so that in the future, I could have the academic qualifications to pastor or teach.

Any wisdom from you guys would be wonderful!

 

[Blood-Bought Pilgrim]

I would strongly disagree with the first point, as both a pastor and a current distance seminary student. If you want to go into academia, you should definitely go in-person, but I think it is simple snobbery that makes people act as though a distance program is not adequate for the needs of a pastor. The primary thing you need from seminary is growth in knowledge, and while there may be things you miss online you can certainly get quite a bit if you apply yourself. When you pair it with service in the local church, it can be a great tool.

The key is finding a good distance program. Some schools have hybrid programs, which require travel to the campus a handful of times throughout the program, but allow the rest of the work to be done online. I think this model is ideal, as you can build some relationships in the seminary community which then leads to better communication when you are online.

 

[iainduguid]

As someone who serves as the Dean of our Online program here at Westminster, and currently teaches the same classes in both residential and online format, I have a unique position to evaluate what is actually happening over a range of students. I can't speak for other people's residential and online programs, which range from excellent to terrible, though I have taught at other institutions over the past 30 years. It's pretty clear that there are distinct advantages and disadvantages to each mode of learning that should be taken into account. But the TL;DR is this: anyone can learn through a quality program, no matter the modality.

In my online classes, I am able to deliver more high quality lecture material than I do in my residential classes. Each video is tailor made in length for the topic covered and designed for typical learning spans, which don't cover 2 hour blocks. There are no digressions, sidetracks, questions from students that may not interest you, snow days, sick days, substitute professors because I'm on sabbatical, first year professors who are just getting their feet wet, and so on. We never get to the end of the semester and have to say, "Well, we're out of time so I won't be able to cover...". Just a pure form of the considered lectures of the best professors we have. You can watch speeded up, slowed down, or with subtitles, rewinding and fast forwarding, ideal for students for whom English is not their first language. For that reason I actually use some video lectures as part of my residential courses, since the in-person time is better spent doing other things.

In my residential sections, sometimes the digressions are the best part. The "war stories" of thirty years of pastoral ministry alongside teaching can be valuable. Sometimes students ask great questions, and the interaction is pure gold. We analyze texts from Hebrew translation to the point where we ask, "Now how would you preach Christ from that passage?" It is a fully interactive learning experience. Our students have lunch with me and the other professors from time to time; we meet and pray weekly. They build close relationships with one another.

On the other hand, our distance students spend 90 minutes with me every other week, so they get some of that. They don't have to break up the rich relationships they may already have in their home context. They continue to serve in their home churches, where they may be a youth pastor or ruling elder, without having to compete with twenty other seminary students at the best church near the seminary.

Our residential students have access to a great theological library. On the other hand, I have a distance student who lives in Princeton, with access to a far bigger one! And all the academic journals are now accessible online, along with a vast and growing number of ebooks. Course reading materials are almost all available online.

Our students are different: generally our residential students are younger, single or newly married, or with small kids; our online students are on average ten years older. That changes the educational experience too. A thirty five year old brings more life experience to the course; the questions he asks are different questions, less theoretical and more practical. On the other hand, a younger student may have the freedom to invest himself fully in the opportunities residential seminary life brings - bonding with other students and professors in friendships that will last a lifetime, playing ping pong and basketball with other students (don't tell their wives), and having a life-transforming time.

One of the things I noticed teaching residentially, before we had our online program, was that there were broadly two kinds of students: those with the freedom to pursue an optimum residential experience and those who were gritting their way through - working at UPS, as a part time youth worker, and raising a family, always on the edge of a crisis, who had no time to benefit from the residential perks. One of the reasons I noticed that was that in my own MDiv, I was both of those students: my first two years my wife worked and I studied. When we had our first child, she stayed home and I worked full time and studied full time. I read all the reading before class began, and did little other than study, work and spend time with my family.

Over the past year, I noticed that the latter group is now all online, even if they live locally. It just fits their lifestyle needs better; I would have loved to have had that option - indeed, I arranged some directed study courses that functioned in that way. But we have top students in both modalities. The requirements for the classes are broadly the same: the best students write just as good papers and other assignments. As Andrew noted, right now people who want to get into a PhD program should probably go residentially (though that may change over the years). But you won't necessarily get a "better" educational experience, just a "different" one. Which one is "better" for you depends on your life situation. Graduating debt free while retaining your sanity may make an online program look a lot better! And of course, not all online programs are created equal, any more than residential ones. Some online programs focus on churning through as many students as possible and are little more than diploma mills. But there are some pretty poor residential programs too. Do your due diligence to find out what the program you are considering is actually like. Talk to current students about their experiences. Or PM me if you want to know more about our program.

 

[TheMantis]

As someone who serves as the Dean of our Online program here at Westminster, and currently teaches the same classes in both residential and online format, I have a unique position to evaluate what is actually happening over a range of students. I can't speak for other people's residential and online programs, which range from excellent to terrible, though I have taught at other institutions over the past 30 years. It's pretty clear that there are distinct advantages and disadvantages to each mode of learning that should be taken into account. But the TL;DR is this: anyone can learn through a quality program, no matter the modality.

In my online classes, I am able to deliver more high quality lecture material than I do in my residential classes. Each video is tailor made in length for the topic covered and designed for typical learning spans, which don't cover 2 hour blocks. There are no digressions, sidetracks, questions from students that may not interest you, snow days, sick days, substitute professors because I'm on sabbatical, first year professors who are just getting their feet wet, and so on. We never get to the end of the semester and have to say, "Well, we're out of time so I won't be able to cover...". Just a pure form of the considered lectures of the best professors we have. You can watch speeded up, slowed down, or with subtitles, rewinding and fast forwarding, ideal for students for whom English is not their first language. For that reason I actually use some video lectures as part of my residential courses, since the in-person time is better spent doing other things.

In my residential sections, sometimes the digressions are the best part. The "war stories" of thirty years of pastoral ministry alongside teaching can be valuable. Sometimes students ask great questions, and the interaction is pure gold. We analyze texts from Hebrew translation to the point where we ask, "Now how would you preach Christ from that passage?" It is a fully interactive learning experience. Our students have lunch with me and the other professors from time to time; we meet and pray weekly. They build close relationships with one another.

On the other hand, our distance students spend 90 minutes with me every other week, so they get some of that. They don't have to break up the rich relationships they may already have in their home context. They continue to serve in their home churches, where they may be a youth pastor or ruling elder, without having to compete with twenty other seminary students at the best church near the seminary.

Our residential students have access to a great theological library. On the other hand, I have a distance student who lives in Princeton, with access to a far bigger one! And all the academic journals are now accessible online, along with a vast and growing number of ebooks. Course reading materials are almost all available online.

Our students are different: generally our residential students are younger, single or newly married, or with small kids; our online students are on average ten years older. That changes the educational experience too. A thirty five year old brings more life experience to the course; the questions he asks are different questions, less theoretical and more practical. On the other hand, a younger student may have the freedom to invest himself fully in the opportunities residential seminary life brings - bonding with other students and professors in friendships that will last a lifetime, playing ping pong and basketball with other students (don't tell their wives), and having a life-transforming time.

One of the things I noticed teaching residentially, before we had our online program, was that there were broadly two kinds of students: those with the freedom to pursue an optimum residential experience and those who were gritting their way through - working at UPS, as a part time youth worker, and raising a family, always on the edge of a crisis, who had no time to benefit from the residential perks. One of the reasons I noticed that was that in my own MDiv, I was both of those students: my first two years my wife worked and I studied. When we had our first child, she stayed home and I worked full time and studied full time. I read all the reading before class began, and did little other than study, work and spend time with my family.

Over the past year, I noticed that the latter group is now all online, even if they live locally. It just fits their lifestyle needs better; I would have loved to have had that option - indeed, I arranged some directed study courses that functioned in that way. But we have top students in both modalities. The requirements for the classes are broadly the same: the best students write just as good papers and other assignments. As Andrew noted, right now people who want to get into a PhD program should probably go residentially (though that may change over the years). But you won't necessarily get a "better" educational experience, just a "different" one. Which one is "better" for you depends on your life situation. Graduating debt free while retaining your sanity may make an online program look a lot better! And of course, not all online programs are created equal, any more than residential ones. Some online programs focus on churning through as many students as possible and are little more than diploma mills. But there are some pretty poor residential programs too. Do your due diligence to find out what the program you are considering is actually like. Talk to current students about their experiences. Or PM me if you want to know more about our program.

If you had your choice, would you do in-person or online school? Do you have a preference?

 

[iainduguid]

If you had your choice, would you do in-person or online school? Do you have a preference?

It would depend entirely on my situation. If I'd had the chance when I did my MDiv, I would have done it online remotely from Scotland. That might have made my career path into ministry in the UK easier (though I would still have found it hard to be accepted by any of the Scottish Presbyterian denominations in 1989). But doing my MDiv in person gave me the chance to spend three months living in Tim & Kathy Keller's basement, before we bought a house down the street from them. I wouldn't have got to know them in the same way through online classes; any conversation with either of them was like a seminary class in itself. I also got to know a number of faculty (esp in OT) pretty well through taking small elective classes with them in person. I learned a lot through the crosscultural experience of attending church in a foreign country, for better or worse. Some of my presuppositions about church were challenged in a way that they wouldn't have been at home. And the Lord provided remarkably for the financial needs we had, in ways that weren't necessarily predictable. But I was definitely regarded as somewhat "tainted" and "foreign" by those in the church when I returned to the UK. That works differently in different countries, for sure.

On the other hand, if I were still working as an engineer in the oil industry and about 35 with four kids at home somewhere not near Philadelphia, I'd definitely at least start online. The pros would likely outweigh the cons, especially if I weren't in a tearing rush to finish. Even though seminaries are working hard to scholarship residential tuition down to a minimum, student debt (often acquired before people come to seminary) is an ever increasing problem.

 

[ZackF]

It would depend entirely on my situation. If I'd had the chance when I did my MDiv, I would have done it online remotely from Scotland. That might have made my career path into ministry in the UK easier (though I would still have found it hard to be accepted by any of the Scottish Presbyterian denominations in 1989). But doing my MDiv in person gave me the chance to spend three months living in Tim & Kathy Keller's basement, before we bought a house down the street from them. I wouldn't have got to know them in the same way through online classes; any conversation with either of them was like a seminary class in itself. I also got to know a number of faculty (esp in OT) pretty well through taking small elective classes with them in person. I learned a lot through the crosscultural experience of attending church in a foreign country, for better or worse. Some of my presuppositions about church were challenged in a way that they wouldn't have been at home. And the Lord provided remarkably for the financial needs we had, in ways that weren't necessarily predictable. But I was definitely regarded as somewhat "tainted" and "foreign" by those in the church when I returned to the UK. That works differently in different countries, for sure.

On the other hand, if I were still working as an engineer in the oil industry and about 35 with four kids at home somewhere not near Philadelphia, I'd definitely at least start online. The pros would likely outweigh the cons, especially if I weren't in a tearing rush to finish. Even though seminaries are working hard to scholarship residential tuition down to a minimum, student debt (often acquired before people come to seminary) is an ever increasing problem.

A great, informed summary. Thank you.

 

[MatthewBall]

Brother,

Professor Duguid's comments were incredibly helpful.

I am married, work full-time, we have one child and one on the way. I did extensive research into both residential and remote programs and found Puritan Reformed's Church Embedded MDiv program to be a tremendous option (I am beginning that program this fall). It mandates mentorship and service within your local church while also allowing you to take however many courses you are able to at a time from a distance.

 

[Alan D. Strange]

I, too, though at another seminary, appreciate Iain's reply. Let me add a few additional thoughts.

Our seminary has chosen to remain residential for many reasons, some of which Iain cites as the strength of residential programs. I should note that we allow a limited amount of distance learning before the student arrives, or can arrive, on campus, and if he cannot quite finish in person and needs only a course or two.

One of the reasons that we offer chiefly a residential program is that it takes quite a bit of institutional resources to do an online program well in addition to a residential one, including rather high tuition costs. We prefer to focus our resources on students coming here to learn. The bottom line is that most good online programs, like those at WTS, are costly. Schools that offer considerably cheaper online programs often do not offer quality programs as well.

We offer an excellent in-person program for quite a reasonable cost (thanks to the generosity of our donors!). For instance, not one of our recent graduates had increased his debt during his time with us due to student aid, scholarships, large-hearted donors, and the support of his local church. We think that a residential program, together with our Ministerial Apprenticeship Program, in which you are fully involved with a local church (as well as your church back home), including a local ministerial supervisor with whom you are fully engaged as he is with the seminary, gives the best preparation for gospel ministry. Taking seminary in the three or four (sometimes five or six) years much more fully anticipates ministry and its demands than a seminary spread out over 8-10 years or more.

If a man is called to gospel ministry, he is called to a life of sacrifice, rightly so, and in many ways. That sacrifice needs to begin in his preparation for ministry, not with what is easiest, but with what is best suited for ministerial preparation. We think that we offer, in our residential program, all the elements best calculated to prepare called and gifted men for a lifetime of service in Christ's church. One that starts out, it should be noted, not with the new graduate reduced to penury, but able to enter the ministry not unduly encumbered, seeking instead to unencumber his flock as he calls them to come to the One who is our great burden bearer.

Peace,
Alan

 

[JD]

If a man is called to gospel ministry, he is called to a life of sacrifice, rightly so, and in many ways. That sacrifice needs to begin in his preparation for ministry, not with what is easiest, but with what is best suited for ministerial preparation. We think that we offer, in our residential program, all the elements best calculated to prepare called and gifted men for a lifetime of service in Christ's church.

I am the least among the brothers that have responded in this thread, but whenever this topic comes up in discussion I am reminded of this haunting passage from The Brothers Karamazov:

"It must be added that, he was indeed a member of our younger generation, which means that he was honest; that he believed in, demanded, and searched for truth and that, because he believed in it he yearned to serve it and give his whole strength. He was spoiling for immediate action: was prepared to sacrifice everything - his life itself - in an act of supreme devotion. Though these young men unhappily fail to understand that the sacrifice of life is, in many cases, the easiest of all sacrifices, and that to sacrifice, for instance, five or six years of their seething youth to hard and tedious study, if only to multiply
tenfold their powers of serving the truth and the cause they have set before them as their goal--such a sacrifice is utterly beyond the strength of many of them."

I'm making no real argument. Just a thought which often convicts me personally.

 

[KMK]

I am currently working on a Masters Degree at an accredited online seminary. In the past I have also worked on a Masters of Education at a brick and mortar university. The online format is soooo much better for me. I think it comes down to your personality. Extroverts benefit from the interaction of in person instruction, while introverts find that same interaction distracting and exhausting.

 

[chicagophil]

As someone who serves as the Dean of our Online program here at Westminster, and currently teaches the same classes in both residential and online format, I have a unique position to evaluate what is actually happening over a range of students. I can't speak for other people's residential and online programs, which range from excellent to terrible, though I have taught at other institutions over the past 30 years. It's pretty clear that there are distinct advantages and disadvantages to each mode of learning that should be taken into account. But the TL;DR is this: anyone can learn through a quality program, no matter the modality.

In my online classes, I am able to deliver more high quality lecture material than I do in my residential classes. Each video is tailor made in length for the topic covered and designed for typical learning spans, which don't cover 2 hour blocks. There are no digressions, sidetracks, questions from students that may not interest you, snow days, sick days, substitute professors because I'm on sabbatical, first year professors who are just getting their feet wet, and so on. We never get to the end of the semester and have to say, "Well, we're out of time so I won't be able to cover...". Just a pure form of the considered lectures of the best professors we have. You can watch speeded up, slowed down, or with subtitles, rewinding and fast forwarding, ideal for students for whom English is not their first language. For that reason I actually use some video lectures as part of my residential courses, since the in-person time is better spent doing other things.

In my residential sections, sometimes the digressions are the best part. The "war stories" of thirty years of pastoral ministry alongside teaching can be valuable. Sometimes students ask great questions, and the interaction is pure gold. We analyze texts from Hebrew translation to the point where we ask, "Now how would you preach Christ from that passage?" It is a fully interactive learning experience. Our students have lunch with me and the other professors from time to time; we meet and pray weekly. They build close relationships with one another.

On the other hand, our distance students spend 90 minutes with me every other week, so they get some of that. They don't have to break up the rich relationships they may already have in their home context. They continue to serve in their home churches, where they may be a youth pastor or ruling elder, without having to compete with twenty other seminary students at the best church near the seminary.

Our residential students have access to a great theological library. On the other hand, I have a distance student who lives in Princeton, with access to a far bigger one! And all the academic journals are now accessible online, along with a vast and growing number of ebooks. Course reading materials are almost all available online.

Our students are different: generally our residential students are younger, single or newly married, or with small kids; our online students are on average ten years older. That changes the educational experience too. A thirty five year old brings more life experience to the course; the questions he asks are different questions, less theoretical and more practical. On the other hand, a younger student may have the freedom to invest himself fully in the opportunities residential seminary life brings - bonding with other students and professors in friendships that will last a lifetime, playing ping pong and basketball with other students (don't tell their wives), and having a life-transforming time.

One of the things I noticed teaching residentially, before we had our online program, was that there were broadly two kinds of students: those with the freedom to pursue an optimum residential experience and those who were gritting their way through - working at UPS, as a part time youth worker, and raising a family, always on the edge of a crisis, who had no time to benefit from the residential perks. One of the reasons I noticed that was that in my own MDiv, I was both of those students: my first two years my wife worked and I studied. When we had our first child, she stayed home and I worked full time and studied full time. I read all the reading before class began, and did little other than study, work and spend time with my family.

Over the past year, I noticed that the latter group is now all online, even if they live locally. It just fits their lifestyle needs better; I would have loved to have had that option - indeed, I arranged some directed study courses that functioned in that way. But we have top students in both modalities. The requirements for the classes are broadly the same: the best students write just as good papers and other assignments. As Andrew noted, right now people who want to get into a PhD program should probably go residentially (though that may change over the years). But you won't necessarily get a "better" educational experience, just a "different" one. Which one is "better" for you depends on your life situation. Graduating debt free while retaining your sanity may make an online program look a lot better! And of course, not all online programs are created equal, any more than residential ones. Some online programs focus on churning through as many students as possible and are little more than diploma mills. But there are some pretty poor residential programs too. Do your due diligence to find out what the program you are considering is actually like. Talk to current students about their experiences. Or PM me if you want to know more about our program.

Thanks for this. It's really great! I did two years at Trinity in the 80s (yeah, I'm an old guy) and have completed my first term online this Spring. I'd also like to hear your perspective on spiritual development of students and differences between online and residential. When I was at Trinity the spiritual development of students largely depended on the academic advisor one was assigned to. A couple of profs spent most of their time in the regular meetings with their student groups (I don't remember if we met weekly or every other week) focused on the students' spiritual development. Most just did more academia. I don't have enough experience yet with the online program to have an opinion about it.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

In-person learning is better but an online seminary is the lesser of two goods.