This free survey is powered by QUESTIONPRO.COM
  1. Surveys
  2. 2013
  3. October
  4. A
  5. ATS Self Study - Faculty Survey

ATS Self Study - Faculty Survey

Faculty Input Survey for Duke Divinity School ATS Accreditation Self-Study
 
 
Please review the following possible evaluative statements and indicate your assessment of the claims made. You are encouraged to add specific comments or examples in each case to enlarge upon your assessment. All responses are anonymous.
 
 
Mission Statement of Duke Divinity School

Duke Divinity School’s mission is to engage in spiritually disciplined and academically rigorous education in service and witness to the Triune God in the midst of the church, the academy, and the world. We strive to cultivate a vibrant community through theological education on Scripture, engagement with the living Christian tradition, and attention to and reflection on contemporary contexts in order to form leaders for faithful Christian ministries.
 
Evaluation of Mission Statement
Disagree strongly Unsure if I agree Agree generally Agree strongly
The mission of Duke Divinity School is appropriate for our identity as a church-related, university-based, professional and graduate School of Divinity.
 
Evaluation of General Curricular Goals and Assumptions
Disagree strongly Unsure if I agree Agree generally Agree strongly
The paradigm of courses in the M.Div. curriculum reflects well the mission of the school and the needs of persons preparing for the range of Christian ministry.
The paradigm of courses in the MTS curriculum reflects well the mission of the school and the needs of persons pursuing advanced study in Christian scripture, history, and doctrine/ethics.
The paradigm of courses in the MACP curriculum reflects well the mission of the school and the needs of persons pursuing focused training in Christian ministry.
The paradigm of courses in the MACS curriculum reflects well the mission of the school and the goal of providing introductory graduate study in Christian scripture, history, and doctrine/ethics.
The flexible design of the Th.M. curriculum reflects well the mission of the school and the goal of enabling advanced study in any area of divinity.
The structure and courses in the D.Min. program reflect well the mission of the school and the needs of persons pursuing advanced training for Christian ministry.
The interdisciplinary structure of the Th.D. program reflects well the mission of the school and the goal of preparing scholars/teachers in the range of Christian divinity.
The requirement in the M.Div. curriculum of a World Christianity course and a Black Church Studies course have been helpful avenues for increasing knowledge, discussion, and awareness of worldwide and local settings, as well as cross-cultural concerns.
The overall workload expected of our students is reasonable, and faculty generally limit the amount of work that they assign to appropriate levels for individual courses.
There is a shared sense among the faculty of the distinction between the various levels of courses (700, 800, 900), and a corresponding distinction in the amount of reading assigned at each level.
 
Evaluation of Divisional Aspects of the Curriculum
Disagree strongly Unsure if I agree Agree generally Agree strongly
The process for creating new courses is clear, and includes consideration of their contribution to the larger learning goals of our divisional and school curriculum.
The processes of choosing or assigning the courses that faculty offer are equitable and take into account the strengths and research interests of the faculty, as well as the needs of students.
There is adequate faculty staffing for the crucial subject areas within each division of the school.
 
Evaluation of Individual Faculty Instruction
Disagree strongly Unsure if I agree Agree generally Agree strongly
Faculty are encouraged to teach in ways that take into account the diverse backgrounds and learning styles of our students.
Faculty are encouraged to attend in their courses and teaching to cultural and ecclesial diversity in both worldwide and local settings.
Faculty generally attend not only to excellence in their area of specialization but also to encouraging and modeling the integrative work of theological education.
Faculty generally embrace and use appropriately new technologies to enrich their teaching and student learning.
Student advising (both within courses and in terms of selecting courses) is valued by the faculty, and equitably distributed among the faculty.
 
Evaluation of Support for Teaching / Learning
Disagree strongly Unsure if I agree Agree generally Agree strongly
The Divinity School library provides an outstanding collection of both printed and electronic resources, as well as library instruction, to support the scope of our teaching and student research/learning.
The classrooms and other teaching settings of the Divinity School are professional in appearance and well equipped with technological resources for our teaching / learning.
The field education program is an integral aspect of our M.Div program, serving as a focal point of integration within the program.
The various Centers and Initiatives that have been launched in the past ten years are consistent with our mission and enrich both student learning and our work in continuing education of ministers.
The Office of Black Church Studies, Anglican and Episcopal House of Studies, Baptist House of Studies, Hispanic House of Studies, and Methodist House are vital parts of supporting those students preparing for ministry and enriching the learning experience of all students.
The Chapel program, routine of morning prayers, and routine structures for spiritual formation are central to our mission and address well the formation of faculty and students alike.
The overall ecology of faculty, preceptors, students, and staff is consistent with and conducive to our mission of teaching/learning.
 
Evaluation of the Resonance of Teaching and Scholarship
Disagree strongly Unsure if I agree Agree generally Agree strongly
Teaching expectations of faculty (number of courses, independent studies, thesis supervision, etc.) are appropriate in relation to expectations of scholarly productivity and institutional service.
Faculty are encouraged to offer courses in areas of their current scholarship and to pursue scholarly questions that will enrich their teaching.
 
Evaluation of Support for Scholarship
Disagree strongly Unsure if I agree Agree generally Agree strongly
The school provides significant support for faculty scholarship, both in terms of time and research/travel budget.
The school encourages and supports collaboration (within the school and the larger university) among faculty in their scholarly work.
The school encourages and supports scholarship that recognizes and engages the diverse publics within the academy and the broader world.
 
Evaluation of Faculty Recruitment and Development
Disagree strongly Unsure if I agree Agree generally Agree strongly
The processes for initiating new faculty searches, conducting these searches, and gaining input from the faculty on potential hires are clear and collegial.
Appropriate attention is given in faculty searches to building a faculty with both scholarly strength and broad diversity.
The school has adequate and consistent practices for mentoring younger faculty in negotiating the overall balance of their work, developing their scholarly trajectory, and preparing for renewal reviews.
The school provides adequate continuing attention to faculty development for Associate and Full Professors.
The current approach to Faculty Colloquia contributes well to gaining an appreciation for each other’s scholarly work, encouraging greater integration in our teaching, and general faculty development.
 
Evaluation of Faculty Review
Disagree strongly Unsure if I agree Agree generally Agree strongly
The processes for and criteria of tenure track faculty review are both clear and consistent with our nature as a divinity school in a research-based university.
The processes for and criteria of non-tenure track faculty review are both clear and consistent with our nature as a divinity school in a research-based university.
 
Evaluation of Faculty Input in Governance
Disagree strongly Unsure if I agree Agree generally Agree strongly
The general procedures of faculty governance (i.e, divisional representation on the Committee on Faculty; various standing faculty committees; and plenary faculty meetings) allow faculty appropriate participation in the overall decision-making of the school.
 
 
Please identify your present type of position and rank. This information will be used only to track possible convergences or trends among cohorts of the faculty.
 
Tenure track – Assistant
 
Tenured – Associate and Full
 
Non-tenure track – Assistant
 
Non-tenure track – Associate and Full
Survey Software Powered by QuestionPro Survey Software