Expanding and Enhancing Pathways for Pastoral Formation

The Duke University Divinity School Pathways for Tomorrow Phase 2 project, Expanding and Enhancing Pathways for Pastoral Formation, aims to create adaptable learning pathways that cater to a diverse range of degree-seeking and non-degree student populations. Through a new hybrid Master of Divinity (MDiv-H) and digital, non-credit learning platform (Divinity+), the initiative ensures that theological education remains accessible regardless of geographical location, socioeconomic background, or vocational goals.

Katherine Smith, project director, shares the project’s progress and emphasizes the diverse deliverable platforms designed that serve the needs of students in its flagship Master of Divinity program.

Briefly describe the project.

The Duke Divinity Pathways project is intended to strengthen the school’s capacity to deliver flexible, affordable education to populations previously underserved by the school. That’s included two efforts: a hybrid MDiv, where students come to campus three weeks a year while completing the remainder of their studies remotely. And Divinity+, a non-credit online learning platform.

So far, both programs have seen strong enrollment, and we’ve already graduated our first cohort of the MDiv program, which included transfer students. The MDiv was the first hybrid program of this type and now many other schools are coming into that space. That’s a sign it’s addressing a need.

What have you learned so far?

Some grants function as operating support, which can lead to a dependency on an institution. We’ve been excited that this grant, for us, has fulfilled its intended purpose: to seed capacity building. That’s enabled us to try to learn how to build sustainably and be creative in ensuring that our efforts remain mission-driven.

We’ve learned to be creative and patient when dealing with factors beyond our control. As an embedded institution, our ability to build sustainably is contingent on our ability to align with the institution requiring us to cooperate. This involves aspects like broader IT resources, security concerns, and student support – all of which help to build a stronger, more durable program, even if they don’t always align with our expected timelines.

Developing an effective CRM (customer relationship management) program is crucial for any school undertaking this kind of work. For us, it was important to work cooperatively within the broader Duke setting. They are asking similar questions about our direction, who our learners are, and how can best support them. That means not moving autonomously. What is the adage? “If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.”

It benefits all of our institutions when we’re open-handed and sharing what we’re learning. There’s an instinct for institutions to be cautious because – especially when they see each other as competitors – reaching out to peers to share successes or seek advice when challenges arise is invaluable. Leaning into the kind of resources the In Trust Center and others offer helps smooth the way.

What has surprised you along the way?

On the Divinity+ side, we’ve done minimal advertising so far; most of our growth has been organic. It was important for us to build a strong foundation and to practice and assess the template before scaling up. The response has been surprising; for example, the number of students registering from Africa shows there’s a strong hunger for this kind of program. We now offer a specialization in Church Administration, a skill not typically taught in seminary. We’re also getting ready to offer Transformational Preaching in multiple languages. While we initially imagined Divinity+ domestically, the global interest has been encouraging.

Another surprise – on the MDiv side – is faculty must remain connected to their vocation while reimagining how to fulfill it for different student populations. Serving a hybrid, remote student cohorts exercise different muscles. You can’t simply transfer what you’ve learned from one population to another. It’s important to acknowledge the added demands on faculty and recognize that this approach does increase their workload. It isn’t teaching the same course in two different formats; it’s essentially teaching different courses, even if the learning outcomes are similar. Acknowledge this and provide comprehensive support for faculty so they don’t feel they have to carry this burden alone. This includes offering expertise and training in digital learning; providing intentional care in advising and supporting students, especially for students not physically on campus all the time; and creating faculty peer groups to connect with faculty who have experience building courses in that space.

For spiritual formation, especially for students who are not physically together in the community, they must be able to find other ways to connect. Finding that sense of community is a lifeline for many hybrid students as they are navigating their educational experience.

What have been a few of your successes?

Duke’s hybrid MDiv has seen a strong enrollment, marking it as a success. I’m also pleased that this format has made the MDiv accessible for students who couldn’t be here otherwise. On average, hybrid MDiv students are a decade older and more likely to have families or commitments that prevent them from being able to relocate. Many are already working in ministry. This approach provides a way for students, who wouldn’t otherwise be able to enroll, to have access to theological education.

On the Divinity+ side, we’ve successfully created a sandbox to experiment with courses that many students don’t have the opportunity to take while in seminary, but which are essential for flourishing in ministry. For instance, courses on church management. Our graduates will benefit from non-profit leadership certification and church administration certification, providing skills that complement the theological education they receive in seminary. These experimental sandboxes enable us to offer comprehensive support for our students.

What are you hopeful about?

This initiative is allowing us to develop new skills and strengths. The grant provides a safe and contained space to experiment in areas we think are important for learning.

For example, we’re doing a pilot with a company specializing in AI work for education. We need to understand how AI will impact theological education while safeguarding the integrity of our degree programs. Divinity+ gives us the space to experiment and ask questions about how AI affects both the student and faculty experiences. We can interact with tools that are already in use, not just on the horizon.

Through market research, we’re learning that this is not an “If you build it, they will come” approach. Instead, how do we build to serve a need that’s been articulated? It’s reassuring to build something that people have requested rather than pursuing a dream that may or may not fit a need. This approach also supports sustainably, helping us avoid long-term dependence on grants.

What are you learning that could help other schools?

The innovative work that is helping to chart a path for the future inevitably creates anxiety in a system. Being intentional about bringing the whole community along, while not allowing that to atrophy the creative change that’s happening, is a real leadership challenge. We’re learning the right pace, rhythm, and practices that foster commitment to allow the institution to move in the direction that is needed for the future.

What works for one school might not work for another, so we need to be sensitive to our unique context. This contextual awareness will create diversity that will make the ecology function. It’s exciting.