A Model of Online Education Effecting Ho

A MODEL OF ONLINE EDUCATION EFFECTING HOLISTIC
STUDENT FORMATION APPROPRIATE FOR GLOBAL

CROSS-CULTURAL CONTEXTS
By
Ronald Geoffrey Hannaford
A Dissertation Presented to the
Faculty of the School of Intercultural Studies
FULLER THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy in Intercultural Studies
February, 2012
ABSTRACT
Hannaford, Ronald Geoffrey. 2012. “A Model of Online Education Effecting Holistic

Student Formation Appropriate for Global Cross-Cultural Contexts.” Fuller
Theological Seminary, School of Intercultural Studies. Ph.D. in Intercultural
Studies. 301 pp.
Factors associated with globalization and unprecedented technological
advancement have facilitated the opportunity to take education beyond the boundaries of
the physical classroom and geographical borders to serve a global context. While this
exponential growth has resulted in more convenient access to learning, increased
possibilities for potential consumers, and new and lucrative opportunities for providers,
many traditional educators and institutions pose valid questions and concerns about
online education. An individualistic culture, if coupled with a geographically and
pedagogically isolating learning environment, threatens students with greater levels of
individualism and social alienation, which pose detrimental consequences beyond
personal well-being to the broader society. Therefore, a model of online education is
needed that facilitates, supports, and achieves outcomes not only desirable for education
but also congruent with healthy human development fostering a formative process within
a community of committed adult learners.
This research is bifocal. It firstly assesses an online masters degree that uses a
cohort design to effect students’ formation and then examines this program referenced to
historical communities and contemporary collaborative learning theories, transformative
learning theory, and cultural factors. Secondly, this assessment provides a platform for a
guiding teleology upon which a model of online education can be proposed that is
ii
appropriate to serve culturally diverse students in a globalized world effecting a holistic
formative “process of becoming.”
Mentor: Wilbert R. Shenk, Ph.D.

Word Count 217
iii
DEDICATION
This comprehensive research is dedicated to my wife Deborah Lynne Hannaford,
and to the many people around the world who search – as we did 13 years ago – for
holistic, formative, and transformative adult education in order to be better equipped and
trained for work, ministry, and service in our world. Deb has faithfully encouraged me
throughout this long journey and believed in the importance of this work. She has
tirelessly supported me at every stage. The grace, love, and commitment she has extended
to me are unfathomable. We share a deep belief in the transcendent presence of the One
who attends the transformative nature of reciprocal, meaningful relationships found in
dynamic, interrelated communities. Our lives bear witness to this reality.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
It is with gratitude that I acknowledge the active support of several key faculty
members both at Fuller Theological Seminary and Biola University. To Robert Freeman
and C. Douglas McConnell at Fuller Seminary and Michael Anthony and Frederick
Cardoza from Biola University, who encouraged me and allowed me space in the midst
of a busy work schedule to complete this research, I am sincerely grateful and indebted.
My deep appreciation is also extended to the members of my doctoral committee,
Wilbert Shenk and Edmond Gibbs who along with Viggo Søgaard, a senior faculty
member in the School of Intercultural Studies at Fuller Seminary, have generously shared
their wisdom, grace, and belief in me.
I want to acknowledge the moral and prayerful support of our wonderful close
friends in Australia and our diverse group of friends here in the United States. Their
interest in this work and engagement with me and my family have provided joy and
strength at critical moments, enabling me to press on and accomplish this milestone. I am
especially thankful for our children Joshua, Luke, and Amy, who journeyed with us
across the world on a “faith trip of a lifetime.” They, too, believed God gave me the
burden for achieving this goal, one that has come at a personal cost to our family as each
one returned to Australia and we remained here to finish the work. I am humbled to have
been supported by these very special people whom I love dearly and for whom I am truly
grateful.
Lastly, I am indebted to my wife Deb as without her support this goal may never
have been realized.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................ ii
DEDICATION ................................................................................................................... iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................v
TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. xi
LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... xii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................xv
INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1
CHAPTER 1 THE RESEARCH FOCUS ...........................................................................8

Purpose of the Research ....................................................................................... 8
Goals .................................................................................................................... 9
Central Research Issue ....................................................................................... 10
Program Design ................................................................................................. 10
Delimitations of the Research ............................................................................ 10
Limitations ......................................................................................................... 13
Definitions.......................................................................................................... 13
Assumptions....................................................................................................... 15
Significance of the Research .............................................................................. 16
Reasons for Methodologies................................................................................ 17
Summary .............................................................................................................18
PART I THE CONTEMPORARY LEARNING ENVIRONMENT .............................. 19
CHAPTER 2 FACTORS OF GLOBALIZATION: RESEARCHING A SAMPLE

POPULATION ........................................................................................................ 21
Research Undertaken ......................................................................................... 24
Assessment of Student Reports – Factors Associated with Globalization ........ 26
Student Demographics and Their Contexts ...............................................26
vi
Methods Used in Assessing the Student Papers ........................................27
Categorization ................................................................................27
Methods of Analysis ......................................................................29
Reclassification ..............................................................................31
Findings Relevant to this Research ............................................................33
Overview ........................................................................................34
Church and Leadership Issues .......................................................34
Identity ...........................................................................................37
Societal Issues ................................................................................40
Analysis of the Data ............................................................................................41
Church Issues ..........................................................................................42
Church - Highest Priority Issues by Gender ..................................42
Church - Highest Priority Issues by Context .................................44
Identity ....................................................................................................46
Identity - Highest Priority Issues by Gender..................................46
Identity - Highest Priority Issues by Context.................................47
Societal Issues .........................................................................................48
Societal - Highest Priority Issues by Gender .................................49
Societal - Highest Priority Issues by Context ................................49
Summary .............................................................................................................52
Concluding Comments........................................................................................53
CHAPTER 3 THE CULTURAL VALUE OF INDIVIDUALISM AND ITS

DEVELOPMENT IN THE USA: A BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE AND THE
IMPLICATIONS FOR ONLINE EDUCATION .....................................................54
The Western Cultural Value of Individualism ....................................................57
The Human Cost of Extreme Individualism: Loneliness ....................................64
Concluding Comments........................................................................................67
CHAPTER 4 STUDENT SURVEY ON LONELINESS AND EXTREME

INDIVIDUALISM....................................................................................................69
Online Student Demographics ............................................................................70
Delimitations of the SurveyResults for Analysis ................................................72
Data Analysis - Validity and Reliability .............................................................73
Survey Results ....................................................................................................75
Outcomes for Individualism Questions Statistically Cross-Referenced .............75
Changes in Relationship to Others..........................................................76
Relationships with Family Members ......................................................82
Personal Relationships with Student's Faith Community .......................89
Relationships with People Outside Family and Faith Community .........96
Student Decision-Making Processes .....................................................104
An Initial Framework for Understanding the Results .......................................109
Concluding Comments......................................................................................111
vii
PART II LEARNING STRUCTURES, THEORIES, AND PHILOSOPHIES..............114
CHAPTER 5 FORMATION IN HISTORIC SPIRITUAL COMMUNITIES ...............115

Celtic Community ............................................................................................116
Benedictine Community ..................................................................................123
Dominican Community ....................................................................................125
Jesuit Community ............................................................................................127
General Christian Community Formation Principles and Practices .................129
Comments .........................................................................................................132
Juxtaposition of Historic Practices of Christian Formation in Community with
the Online MAGL Program ..............................................................................132
To Seek God and His Will ....................................................................135
Preach and Evangelize ..........................................................................136
Personal Spiritual Growth and Transformation ....................................137
Formation of a Community Rule ..........................................................139
The Soul Friend – Mentoring Relationships .........................................140
Small Groups within the Community ...................................................142
A Model of Authenticity .......................................................................143
CHAPTER 6 STUDENT FORMATION .......................................................................147

Contemporary Spiritual Formation Theories ....................................................147
Formation in Community......................................................................148
Whole Person Formation ......................................................................149
Engagement in a Faith Community ......................................................149
Formation is Multicontextual................................................................150
Reciprocal Relationships ......................................................................151
Online Formation ..................................................................................153
Spiritual Assessment ........................................................................................156
Assessment of Student Formation in the MAGL..................................159
ATS Standards for Student Formation .............................................................160
CHAPTER 7 COLLABORATIVE LEARNING ...........................................................166

Holistic “Communities of Practice” for Online Education ...............................166
Community Charter (Rule, Code of Practice, or Team Charter) ..........167
Relationship Formation, Community, and Isolation/Cohesion.............168
Accountability and Self-Direction ........................................................170
Identity Formation ................................................................................172
Imagination, Creativity, and Group Dynamics .....................................174
Cultural Challenges...............................................................................175
Paradoxes of Groups .............................................................................179
Exit/Termination Strategies ..................................................................180
viii
The MAGL Cohort “Communities of Practice” ...............................................181
CHAPTER 8 TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING THEORY .......................................185

An Outline of Transformative Learning Theory ...............................................185
Stages of Human Development and Disorienting Dilemmas ...............189
Other Ways of Knowing .......................................................................192
Metaphors and Imagination ..................................................................196
The MAGL Program and Transformative Learning Theory ............................197
CHAPTER 9 A MODEL OF ONLINE EDUCATION EFFECTING HOLISTIC

STUDENT FORMATION APPROPRIATE FOR A GLOBAL OR CROSS-
CULTURAL CONTEXT........................................................................................199
Overview of the Model .....................................................................................199
Program Instructional Design ...........................................................................202
A Cohort Model ....................................................................................203
A Blended Online Program...................................................................204
Community Rule of Practice.................................................................205
Transformative Learning Theory ..........................................................205
Cross-cultural ........................................................................................206
Spiritual Formation ...............................................................................207
Asynchronous Design ...........................................................................208
An Exit Strategy....................................................................................209
CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................210
APPENDIX A ALL TREE NODES REPORT ............................................................. 214
APPENDIX B GRAPHS OF RAW DATA – GLOBALIZATION ISSUES FROM

STUDENT PAPERS.............................................................................................. 219
APPENDIX C MAGL STUDENT SURVEY – ONLINE ............................................ 225
APPENDIX D EMAIL TO STUDENTS SEEKING SURVEY PARTICIPATION .... 231
APPENDIX E MAGL STUDENT SURVEY – RESULTS (Raw Data) ...................... 232
APPENDIX F COMMUNITY RULES OF PRACTICE – COHORTS 6-12 ............... 263
APPENDIX G PEER ASSESSMENT REPORT – BETHEL SEMINARY ..................271
REFERENCES CITED....................................................................................................277
CURRICULUM VITAE ..................................................................................................288
ix
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 2.1 CHURCH ISSUES – COMPARISON BY GENDER..................................43
TABLE 2.2 CHURCH ISSUES – COMPARISON BY CONTEXT ...............................45
TABLE 2.3 IDENTITY ISSUES – COMPARISON BY GENDER................................46
TABLE 2.4 IDENTITY ISSUES – COMPARISON BY CONTEXT .............................48
TABLE 2.5 SOCIETAL ISSUES – COMPARISON BY GENDER ...............................49
TABLE 2.6 SOCIETAL ISSUES – COMPARISON BY CONTEXT ............................51
TABLE 4.1 CHANGES IN RELATIONSHIP TO OTHERS ..........................................77
TABLE 4.2 RELATIONSHIP WITH FAMILY MEMBERS..........................................83
TABLE 4.3 RELATIONSHIPS WITH FAITH COMMUNITY .....................................89
TABLE 4.4 RELATIONSHIPS WITH OUTSIDE COMMUNITY ................................98
TABLE 4.5 STUDENT DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES ......................................105
x
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1.1 RESEARCH DESIGN – RELATIONSHIP OF VARIABLES ..................11
FIGURE 2.1 ATTRIBUTE CATEGORIES .....................................................................28
FIGURE 2.2 METHOD OF ANALYSIS .........................................................................30
FIGURE 2.3 ALL NODES REGROUPING ....................................................................33
FIGURE 2.4 CHURCH ISSUES – COMPARISON BY GENDER ................................44
FIGURE 2.5 CHURCH ISSUES – COMPARISON BY CONTEXT..............................45
FIGURE 2.6 IDENTITY ISSUES – COMPARISON BY GENDER ..............................47
FIGURE 2.7 IDENTITY ISSUES – COMPARISON BY CONTEXT............................48
FIGURE 2.8 SOCIETAL ISSUES – COMPARISON BY GENDER .............................50
FIGURE 2.9 SOCIETAL ISSUES – COMPARISON BY CONTEXT ...........................51
FIGURE 4.1 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHERS CROSS-REFERENCED TO FEEL

LOVED ......................................................................................................78
FIGURE 4.2 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHERS CROSS-REFERENCED TO SOCIAL

ALIENATION ...........................................................................................78
FIGURE 4.3 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHERS CROSS-REFERENCED TO

LONELINESS ...........................................................................................79
FIGURE 4.4 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHERS CROSS-REFERENCED TO CLOSE,

ACCOUNTABLE RELATIONSHIPS ......................................................79
FIGURE 4.5 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHERS CROSS-REFERENCED TO

GENDER ...................................................................................................80
FIGURE 4.6 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHERS CROSS-REFERENCED TO AGE .........80
xi
FIGURE 4.7 RELATIONSHIP WITH FAMILY CROSS-REFERENCED TO FEEL
LOVED ......................................................................................................84
FIGURE 4.8 RELATIONSHIP WITH FAMILY CROSS-REFERENCED TO

SOCIAL ALIENATION............................................................................84

LONELINESS ...........................................................................................85

CLOSE, ACCOUNTABLE RELATIONSHIPS .......................................85

GENDER ...................................................................................................86
FIGURE 4.12 RELATIONSHIP WITH FAMILY CROSS-REFERENCED TO AGE ..86
FIGURE 4.13 RELATIONSHIPS WITH FAITH COMMUNITY CROSS-

REFERENCED TO FEEL LOVED ..........................................................91

REFERENCED TO SOCIAL ALIENATION...........................................91

REFERENCED TO LONELINESS ..........................................................92

REFERENCED TO CLOSE, ACCOUNTABLE RELATIONSHIPS ......92

REFERENCED TO GENDER ..................................................................93

REFERENCED TO AGE ..........................................................................93
FIGURE 4.19 RELATIONSHIPS WITH OUTSIDE COMMUNITY CROSS-

REFERENCED TO FEELING LOVED ...................................................98

REFERENCED TO SOCIAL ALIENATION...........................................99

REFERENCED TO LONELINESS ..........................................................99

REFERENCED TO CLOSE, ACCOUNTABLE RELATIONSHIPS ....100
xii
REFERENCED TO GENDER ................................................................100

REFERENCED TO AGE ........................................................................101
FIGURE 4.25 STUDENT DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES CROSS-

REFERENCED TO CLOSE, ACCOUNTABLE RELATIONSHIPS ....107

REFERENCED TO GENDER ................................................................108

REFERENCED TO AGE ........................................................................108
FIGURE 8.1 EXPRESSIVE KNOWING IS A PATHWAY .........................................195
FIGURE 9.1 HOLISTIC SPIRITUAL FORMATION...................................................200
FIGURE 9.2 LEARNING FOR STUDENT TRANSFORMATION .............................201
FIGURE 9.3 SPIRITUAL AND LEARNING TRANSFORMATION..........................203
xiii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ATS Association of Theological Schools
CRP Community Rule of Practice
MAGL Master of Arts in Global Leadership
SAI Spiritual Assessment Inventory
SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
US United States of America
WASC Western Association of Schools and Colleges
xiv
INTRODUCTION
How do people best grow in meaningful ways within their context to reach what
they perceive as their calling, or their goals and purpose in life? And what constitutes an
optimal environment for a deeper discovery of God, self, and others that heightens a
holistic and healthy learning process that positively impacts not only the person but also
his or her spheres of influence? Prior to my role as a departmental director and an
administrator of distance education programs at two Christian institutions over the past
11 years, I was a pastor of a local church in Australia. In both fields of work and service
over a 23-year period, these two questions continued to emerge and, in my mind at least,
begged to be answered.
Firsthand experience as an online and distance education student, and later
observing students as an instructor and program designer served to motivate me towards
wrestling with these questions specifically in the context of online education. The Master
of Arts in Global Leadership (MAGL), a cohort-model, online masters-level degree

program offered by Fuller Theological Seminary’s School of Intercultural Studies
(formerly School of World Mission) provided an ideal context for this research and a
launching platform for further research and development.
In assessing a collaborative learning model of online education for its formative
effectiveness in students, data was collected and analyzed from a survey completed by
MAGL students who had finished their studies in the cohort program. Cognitive,
affective, and behavioral aspects of formation within students as a result of their study in
this program will be reported. Further, consideration will be given to the ways in which
1
2
the MAGL incorporated various learning theories and applied these to the design and
implementation of specific pedagogical practices. These two assessments combined
provide a comprehensive evaluation of the MAGL program to determine the capacity of
this model of online education to effect formative and transformative change in diverse
students located in globalized contexts. From there this research will propose further
strategic design, development, and application of grounded theory to pedagogical
practice. It will also consider cultural realities for learners with the goal to strengthen the
effectiveness of online education in Christian educational institutions in the United States
(US) and beyond. The focus of this dissertation therefore is explicitly two-fold,
incorporating firstly an evaluation of the MAGL program and secondly a proposal for an
integration of theory and practice supporting a new model for online education.
At this juncture it is appropriate to provide a background on the MAGL program,
those who conceived, developed, and implemented it, and the reasons for this model, the
first of its kind in Christian education in the US. Robert E. (Bob) Freeman, EdD, then the
Associate Provost of the Horner Center for Lifelong Learning at Fuller Theological
Seminary and a specialist in adult education, proposed his dream for a cohort model and
became the driving force behind the seminary adopting this “pilot project” with the goal
of obtaining accreditation approval. The aim was to deliver education incorporating
student formation that would serve the church and mission organizations around the
world by equipping “more and better” leaders. With the support of Sherwood
Lingenfelter, then the Dean of the School of World Mission, the work to build this new
model began. The Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) approved the
MAGL program in September 2001, and a revised proposal was submitted to the
Association of Theological Schools (ATS) in November 2001. Fuller indicated to ATS
the need for a program of this nature, stating:

3
Many Christian leaders serve in settings where they cannot, because of

family and ministry needs, engage in a full-time or residential educational
program. These leaders are currently serving in a range of ministries--
some have biblical and theological foundations such as evangelists and
church planting missionaries. However, some leaders may have had little
formal missiological/theological education. Many of these people are
already leading, whether they are small group leaders, missionaries,
pastors or international denominational leaders, and they seek to upgrade
their effectiveness in cross-cultural ministry leadership. In fact, some of
the fastest growing parts of Christ’s church are currently being led by
people without missiological/theological education. They often meet the
educational and ministry prerequisites of a graduate level degree program.
These existing leaders of the emerging church will comprise the primary
group for whom this program is designed…
The need for this particular distance learning degree has been documented
by the assessment of current students revealing that 62% have no previous
professional ministry experience. When the SWM [then the School of
World Mission, now School of Intercultural Studies]1 was founded, all
students had this experience. This is clear evidence that world leaders
cannot or will not interrupt their ministry to come to Pasadena to study. In
addition to the assessment of current students, our admissions and distance
learning offices report over 200 inquiries annually for a program that can
be done without relocating (Fuller Theological Seminary 2002, 3, 6).
Subsequently in a letter dated February 14, 2002, ATS granted preliminary
approval of the MAGL program with the proviso that after three cohorts of students had
progressed through several sections of their cohort study program, further assessment
would be conducted. A Focused Visit from an ATS review committee was conducted at
Fuller Seminary from October 30 to November 1, 2003, where the delegates met with
students and faculty. As a result ATS granted further preliminary approval to the program
until additional assessment could be given after students had graduated. In 2008, an ATS
Peer Review of the MAGL program was conducted, resulting in ATS granting continuing
approval for the program, details of which will be presented and expanded upon in
Chapter 6.
1 Inserted by the author of this research for reader clarification and understanding.
4
As director of the Distance Learning department from 2002 through 2009, I had
the privilege of working in a team initially with Freeman and Ryan Bolger, a faculty
member at Fuller Seminary to create the MAGL degree curriculum and instructional
design once the original preliminary approval was granted by ATS. Later as the program
grew, other faculty joined the team. J. Robert (Bobby) Clinton, Mark Hopkins, Donna
Downes, and Wilmer Villacorta added their expertise and suggested adjustments,
modifications, and further development to the program, ensuring learning goals were
accomplished. Effective student formation remained a focus. Beyond this central
committee was a dedicated team of administrative staff who also “caught the vision” and
served both the students and the team with tireless dedication.
It is also important to understand the historic stage onto which online education,
in any given institution, has been ushered. Research indicates that the burgeoning use of
social media, Facebook and the like, together with instant communication technologies
such as Twitter, instant messaging, texting, and mobile phones, are having an impact
upon relationships within Western societal context. Danah Boyd addresses the issues with
poignancy, noting that the open access to people’s information and personal life
experiences is creating a need to mask the true meaning of what is being communicated
so that “access to meaning is separate from access to content” (Boyd 2011).2 Preliminary
research indicates that heavy use of social media like Facebook is reducing the amount of
self disclosure people contribute within the social media communities (Ledbetter et al.
2011, 46-48). People have countless numbers of “friends” on Facebook. They can appear
sociable, yet hide their personal feelings and be detached from the circumstances of the
2 Boyd refers to this as “social steganography,” the art of writing hidden messages in such a way
that no one, apart from the sender and intended recipient, understands the existence of the message. She
comments that teenagers presently do this on Facebook when attempting to communicate with certain
groups of peers while not wanting others (e.g., parents) knowing what the communication really means or
is saying.
5
moment. This serves to shield people from others and their “burdens” or problems, as
well as shield others from themselves and their personal “burdens” (Bauman 2000, 95).3
While technology is clearly providing the means for connection, it is not necessarily
providing meaningful connections.
Are we to see this “stage” as simply a result of technological advancement to
which most people have adapted, or can we perceive the story being told through it? Is
there something more to understand? Two “defining characteristics of our species” say
John Cacioppo and William Patrick, “is the need for meaningful social connection and
the pain we feel without it” (2009, 7). They indicate:
In 1985, when researchers asked a cross section of American people,

“How many confidants do you have?” the most common response to the
question was three. In 2004, when researchers asked again, the most
common response–made by twenty-five percent of the respondents–as
none. One-quarter of these twenty-first century Americans said they have
no one at all with whom to talk openly and intimately (2009, 247).4
They point out that while “Physical pain, protects the individual from physical dangers.
Social pain, also known as loneliness, evolved for a similar reason: because it protected
the individual from the danger of remaining isolated….loneliness developed as a stimulus
to get humans to pay more attention to their social connections, and to reach out toward
others, to renew frayed bonds” (Cacioppo and Patrick 2009, 7). It would appear that our
current “stage” is fraught with activity where the actors are responding to stimuli in the
face of imminent danger and survival is paramount. Staying connected is the response to
this social pain we call loneliness. But, is the connection prevalent today really
meaningful?
In a strongly individualistic society, divorcing the essentially socially-oriented
core of the nature of human development, or how people “learn best” for that matter, not
3 Bauman quotes from Sennett’s work (Sennett 1978, 264).

4 Cacioppo references research reported by McPherson, Smith-Lovin, and Brashears (2006).
6
only does people a disservice, it defies what it means to “be human.” The MAGL
program provided, and continues to provide, a dynamic educational model that achieved
the goal of synergizing a community of students within cohorts where theological
education purposefully fostered an interdependent community of student learners and
practitioners who developed meaningful connection. Like others have done in Christian
traditions throughout history, they developed and committed to a “Community Rule of
Practice.” By developing and implementing this, group interaction became reciprocity
with respect, and a socially and spiritually oriented learning “process of becoming”
emerged.
Clearly, it is a complex “stage” on which we find ourselves, one that requires ears
and eyes attentive to its present needs yet cognizant of the history that informs its
narrative. I argue that the extent to which those afforded a voice in directing this “play”
can keep this meta-narrative perspective, yet remain focused on and committed to a
guiding teleology that embraces these theological, developmental, pedagogical, and
anthropological perspectives, will be the extent to which online educational programs are
successful in facilitating outcomes espoused in this research.
This research is poised to challenge and assist current educational paradigms
regarding developing online education appropriate for a global constituency offered by
Western Christian institutions. It proposes online instructional design that embraces a
pedagogy informed by theology and anthropology that fosters “a process of becoming”
within a diverse community of adult learners and practitioners. I would argue that
interrelationality lifts the individual beyond what the individual is capable of learning by
him or herself, and therefore this challenges some of the models currently used in online
education.
7
Based upon the findings of the research presented, I commend this online model
of education as one that will potentially yield formative and transformative results for
students. It will extend the educational effectiveness of Christian institutions far beyond
the boundaries of a physical campus and thereby more effectively partner with the church
in its mission to impact in the world for Christ and His kingdom.
CHAPTER 1
THE RESEARCH FOCUS
This chapter details the research undertaken, the goals and design of the research
processes, and its significance. Further, the delimitations, limitations, and assumptions
used for analysis of the data are indicated.
Purpose of the Research
The purpose of this research is two-fold. Firstly, it is to assess the effectiveness of
the MAGL online degree program and its instructional design to effect change in
students. Secondly, the purpose is to develop a model of online education appropriate for
a global world that:
1. Provides an optimal learning environment facilitating:
a. Meaningful human connection,
b. Learning within a community,
c. A challenge and change process to existing paradigms within a “safe
space,” and,
d. Student formation.
2. Is contextually appropriate (can be offered across culturally diverse contexts with
anthropological insight and cultural sensitivity), and,
3. Missionally responds to the God-given nature and desire of each human person to
function in, and be transformed through, developed relationships within a
spiritually formative and transformative process.
8
9
The specific goals to direct the research steps and accomplish the purpose are detailed in
the following pages.
Goals
The goals of each particular section of the research are as follows:
1. In light of a review of precedent literature, to examine documentation on factors
of globalization reported as issues of concern in everyday life to ministry leaders
who were students in an online masters-level degree program located in various
countries around the world.
2. To understand the Western cultural value of individualism and the outcomes of
extreme individualism in the US context.
3. To empirically measure in a two-part survey if student engagement in the Master
of Arts in Global Leadership (MAGL), an online degree program, resulted in
changes in students’ lives. In the first part of the survey, students were asked to
respond to questions assessing changes specifically with regard to relationships,
lifestyle, and leadership practices. In the second part, students reported on their
personally perceived sense of loneliness.
4. To discover the experience of spiritual formation in selected historic Christian
communities and the theological and biblical practices and principles guiding
them, assessing for any applicability to an online educational model.
5. To juxtapose historic spiritual formation principles discovered with the spiritual
formation practices incorporated in the MAGL online degree program.
6. To consider contemporary spiritual formation theories and the requirements of the
Association of Theological Schools (ATS) with outcomes of the formation
practices utilized in the online MAGL program.

10
7. To examine current research on formative learning theories and collaborative
learning practices suitable for online education that incorporate cross-cultural
understandings to effect holistic education for students.
8. To consider the various components of transformative learning theory referenced
to online learning with a view to incorporating these into degree program design.
9. Based on the empirical findings from the survey and historical and contemporary
reviews, to present an alternate holistic model of online collaborative learning that
can foster a “process of becoming” within an intentional relational community to
effect student transformation, spiritual formation, and cultural awareness.
Central Research Issue
The central research issue of this study, therefore, is to indentify an alternate
model of online education appropriate for Western Christian educational institutions that
serve a culturally diverse student body in a globalized world.
Program Design
The structure, essential elements, and variables of this research project are
detailed in Figure 1.1.
Delimitations of the Research
1. Globalization is a complex reality with both benefits and drawbacks. This
research is focused on and limited to considering issues of globalization affecting
a diverse sample population, their relationships, communities, and places of
service.
11
Central Research Issue –

Identify an Alternate
Model of Online
Education for a Key factors for learning and student
Globalized World serving spiritual formation – online student
a Culturally Diverse formation researched
Student Body
Collaborative Christian Spiritual

Learning Theory Formation in
& Cultural Community – Historical
Awareness & Contemporary
Core components for

Essential elements of student whole of life
learning in community to transformation with
bring student spiritual formation
transformation Transformative Learning
Theory
Context – Education in US interfacing

with a globalized world
FIGURE 1.1
RESEARCH DESIGN – RELATIONSHIP OF VARIABLES
2. Similarly, individualism in Western culture yields both positive and negative
outcomes. This research seeks to examine the relational impact of extreme
individualism and the liability this poses in the context of online education.
12
3. Negative outcomes of extreme individualism include, but are not limited to, social
alienation and the lack of meaning-making contexts, which create a “perceived
sense of loneliness.” This will be assessed in a sample population on the basis of
“self report” and will be examined in a general sense rather than from a
psychological perspective.
4. The primary goal for this research is to examine theological and educational
theories and propose an appropriate model for online education. It does not
address the specific technology used in delivery of that educational model.
Rather, it addresses the important issues of philosophy, pedagogy, and the
essential elements necessary to accomplish holistic formation in adult students.
The technology utilized to accomplish these objectives can be determined by
informed instructional designers.
5. The research on collaborative learning practices incorporates the “best” practices
from many models of learning communities with quite different reasons for their
existence and purpose such as “communities of practice,” “collaborative inquiry,”
“cooperative learning,” and “virtual communities.” The purpose is not to compare
or contrast one theoretical method or approach of community over and above
another but rather to discern the principles within each that make them effective
in order to seek a more comprehensive and integrated approach.
6. Rather than critiquing the theory of transformative learning, an assessment of its
development and applicability to online cross-cultural education will be
undertaken.
7. Rather than critiquing the theory of transformative learning, an assessment of its
development and applicability to online cross-cultural education will be
undertaken.
13
Limitations
1. The report on students’ response to their study of globalization factors, while
drawn primarily from precedent literature, is limited to the views expressed by the
sample group of 74 MAGL students living and working around the world.
2. Data collected from the survey assessing personal changes in the lives of 105
online students after the completion of their cohort study program is a self-
assessment and by its very nature involves factors within the students’
environment. The results could not be objectively assessed since the questions
sought to assess for levels of loneliness, which is a personally perceived feeling.
3. In the survey, when the variable “loneliness” was self-assessed, reported, and
analyzed, the students’ personality types (for example, being introverted or
extraverted) were not considered.
Definitions
In the context of this particular research and for the purpose of clarification, key
terms are defined in alphabetical order below:
1. Asynchronous: This is non-synchronous, two-way communication and interaction
in which there is a delay between student-to-student, and student-to-instructor in
the learning process. This allows students to participate according to their
schedule and be geographically separate from their instructor. This design uses
weekly schedules to guide groups of students through the learning process
together while not requiring them to be present on their computers at exactly the
same time. While some institutions advocate for and have adopted using
asynchronous classes as independent study for students, the asynchronous class
design referenced in this research advocates and pertains only to the group model
described above. This is distinctly different to synchronous class design

14
conducted online in real time requiring students to be together in attendance all at
the same set times.
2. Extreme individualism: People in the West are generally shaped by a culture that
values an ideology of individualism. An individualistic culture can empower
people to prefer others and to choose appropriately for themselves. However, the
more extreme individualism becomes, the more people tend to become isolated,
self-centered, and self-reliant.
3. Globalization: Most definitions speak to issues of economics, politics, free trade
and greater exchange across national borders. However, the term as used in this
research reflects the more social and ideological perspective that is: “A social
process in which the constraints of geography on economic, political, social and
cultural arrangements recede, in which people become increasingly aware that
they are receding and in which people act accordingly” (Waters 2001, 5).
4. Loneliness: This is a subjective experience of social pain felt as the result of
alienation and a lack of meaningful social connections. It can be described as the
absence of identification, understanding, or compassion and is personally
perceived. It is not the same as being alone.
5. Ministering holistically: Holistic ministry is based on the value that people were
created for relationship – with God, him/herself, and with one another. It
considers the five areas of basic human needs as physical, mental, spiritual, social,
and psychological/emotional needs. The Bible is holistic in that it deals with all
aspects of life. The Scriptures make it clear that ministry will be holistic when it
considers the following three aspects. It takes into account the whole person – as
Jesus did as recorded in the Gospels and also the laws of the Old Testament and
teaching of the prophets. Secondly, there is a balance between the practical

15
expressions of care and compassion and the teaching of spiritual truths contained
in the Bible. Thirdly, ministry is considered holistic when each of these, practical
care and teaching spiritual truths, is done with the awareness of the total person
and his/her needs in mind. Spiritual needs are met in the context of the whole
person, and his or her material, emotional, and social needs will affect the way we
teach about issues of faith. Similarly, material needs are best addressed in the
context of the whole person being made in the image of God as one who also has
a spiritual need. (N.B. In some contexts the same word used is wholistic)
(Smallbones 2008).
6. Online education: This is teaching that uses technology capable of delivering
education as classes, courses, and programs to any location in the world where the
Internet is available. It involves student learning that usually occurs without face-
to-face, in-class instruction although recent developments in blended distance
programs provide for a course or two of face-to-face seminars.
7. Spiritual formation: Christians throughout the ages have understood this in terms
of a lifelong process of becoming more like Christ. Historically, it has involved
God’s divine interventions in the midst of His people. The process of measuring
spiritual formation is therefore challenging. It is not only a matter of biblical
knowledge, performing pious spiritual practices and disciplines, or the ability to
understand and communicate Christian apologetics and cannot be presented in
rote formulae. In biblical times, this process mostly took place in the context of
communities of faith.
Assumptions
The foundational assumptions that will apply to the research and findings
associated with this study will be:

16
1. Globalization, while not readily able to affect cultures at the level of deeply held
values, does affect people, cultures, sub-cultures, social structures, and practices.
2. Education, as a socially constructed institution, is therefore capable of having
impact on students in a globalized world. The more “dominant” the culture is, as
the providing source, the greater is the potential impact on students from other
cultures.
3. As a result of this reality, Christian educational institutions are therefore morally
responsible to assess the role of culture, power structures, and practices in the
developing and offering online programs to students in the global context.
4. Two separate research projects undertaken involved two groups of graduate
students, 179 in all. They represented diverse perspectives, organizations,
countries of origin and service, ethnic backgrounds, gender, and age. Their
diversity provided broad perspectives and was invaluable in informing and
developing the research and the model to be presented.
Significance of the Research
Within Western society, most educational models currently utilized in Christian
institutions – seminaries, universities, and colleges – focus on individual learning,
achievement, and growth. Assessments of student formation are also performed on an
individual basis. Since people usually teach the way they are taught, continuing to teach
along these lines replicates and reinforces the “individual.” It impacts how people
function in the church, mission, business, professionally, and with their families. This
cultural value of individualism shaping institutional social construction fails to
acknowledge the very nature, need, and nurture of human learning as a socially oriented
process of “becoming.” This research is significant in that it provides an alternative,
holistic model of online education for Christian institutions to equip, educate, and train
17
students in a countercultural, transformative process within the context of authentic
relationships and a dynamic learning community.
Reasons for Methodologies
In 2004 I undertook a comprehensive literature review on globalization. Concerns
and questions arose from this particularly pertaining to online learning and the impacts of
globalization on our students who were scattered around the world. How did our
programs speak to these issues? Later the opportunity became available to assess
students’ papers during their participation in an online class on globalization. Due to the
nature and scope of the research conducted on the 74 student research papers, grounded
theory was utilized to discover students’ experience of, or concerns regarding, the effects
of globalization on them and the people with whom they lived and worked. The results of
this assessment were processed and refined in accordance with the guidelines and
procedures appropriate for qualitative data as published by Lyn Richards in Handling
Qualitative Data (2005a).
Later a survey was designed, which was completed by 105 graduate student
volunteer participants who had finished their cohort study in an online degree program,
the MAGL. The online service, Survey Monkey, was used to distribute the survey, collect
the data, and tabulate and cross-reference responses. Later, comprehensive data analysis
was undertaken using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) program.1
Cronbach’s alpha was used to measure the data results for internal consistency, and the
Pearson correlation between the variables was determined. Further research in historic
communities of faith and contemporary learning theories provided added platforms for
interpreting the results.
1 SPSS is a computer program used for survey data mining, text analytics, statistical analysis, and
collaboration and deployment (batch and automated scoring services).
18
Summary
This research is poised to challenge current educational paradigms regarding
developing online education appropriate for a global constituency offered by Western
Christian institutions. It proposes online instructional design that embraces a pedagogy
informed by theology and anthropology fostering “a process of becoming” within a
community of adult learners and practitioners. My hypothesis is that implementation of
this model, incorporating both the process and the principles expounded, holds yet
untapped potential for the future effectiveness and quality of online education serving a
global constituency.
PART I
THE CONTEMPORARY LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
Educational models that seek to foster optimal adult student learning and
transformation in a multi-cultural setting require awareness and intentional consideration
of culture. Embarking on this topic is both daring and daunting as it calls for a critique of
the prevailing cultural context, in this case the US. It requires asking questions we might
not normally ask in the process of educational program development. For instance, in
what ways do primary values within our cultural context serve a diverse student body
well, and in what ways might these values detract from or impede the outcomes being
sought, particularly in online education?
Chapter 2 distills poignant concerns gained from a literature review of leading
authors who studied the nature, factors, and impact of globalization upon national
cultures and people within these cultures. This literature review was completed prior to
undertaking the research being presented here. Key points from this will be considered in
a brief overview and will be supplemented by findings gleaned from analyses of MAGL
student research papers reporting on the impact of globalization students observed within
their local, social contexts.
This “dyadic process” gave rise to various social concerns mentioned in both the
review and the student paper analyses. One of these concerns in particular had to do with
the value of individualism central to many of the national cultures, which perhaps stand
to benefit the most from globalization in an economic sense. Furthermore, where
individualism is so highly valued that it becomes extreme, social alienation becomes a
19
20
risk factor within people groups, and this in turn will be shown to lead to personally
perceived feelings of loneliness. In the light of this commentary and the obviously
geographically alienating nature of online learning, it behooved the researcher to consider
loneliness and extreme individualism and the potential impact of these for this modality
of learning and the goals being sought in this research.
From there, Chapter 3 will examine results of a survey on the changes effected in
students’ lives through study in the MAGL cohort model of online education offered
since 2003 by Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California. The program serves a
growing global constituency.
The results from Part I of the research will then be referenced to Part II of this
dissertation, which will examine historic communities of faith and learning as well as
contemporary learning structures, theories, and philosophies. These two parts together
provide the research and the platform for a new model of education appropriate for online
learners in a global context.

CHAPTER 2
GLOBALIZATION FACTORS:
RESEARCHING A SAMPLE POPULATION
Those involved in education in the West today, particularly in Christian higher
educational institutions, face a unique and perhaps perplexing dilemma. It will be argued
that the dilemma we face arises primarily from the prevailing Western cultural value of
individualism and the contemporary realities of globalization, technological
advancement, and social media. As will be overviewed in the following pages, this
contextual “cocktail” serves unique pressures and boundless possibilities, palatable to
some and not to others. At our best, we seek to listen, to engage, to question, and to
evaluate changing trends while remaining appropriately committed to time-honored
principles, objectives, and goals for achieving excellence in education. Conversely, we
may be tempted to turn a blind eye to emerging changes, choose not to engage in a
dialogue of critique, or perhaps hope that what has worked in the past will continue to do
so. Failure to take part in shaping a sound pedagogical philosophy from an informed
position, cognizant of contextual and cultural ramifications, would be a golden
opportunity missed for the future of online education.
As online education continues to gain momentum and delivery systems facilitate
education beyond the physical campus to other parts of the country and the world, many
valid questions and concerns arise. Putting aside the all-important issues of fiscal
viability and capacity we must ask: What constitutes success in this type of learning in
this context and how can it best be measured? What protective factors are in place to
21
22
promote an appropriate outcome for adult learners? As Christian colleges and universities
in the US develop student learning outcomes, spiritual formation objectives and goals are
integrated into degree programs. Official assessment bodies regularly review and
measure these and other outcomes in the process of the institutions’ continued
accreditation.
The research presented here reflects the value held within historical tradition in
Christian education and training wherein teaching facilitates a process where students
embrace a transformative process that impacts and changes them in tangible ways, which
in turn affects their community, and their work, and service. That said, it is appropriate to
acknowledge that this outcome is a vision commonly shared by educators spanning
across many disciplines in most educational systems and institutions where education is
seen as an experiential and socially-oriented “process of becoming” (Wenger 1998). It is
this process of becoming that will remain a central focus throughout the presentation of
this research.
Scholars who explore the effects of globalization on people, marketplace, power,
and economy hold various opinions, but none would deny that globalization is having an
impact on the world and its people. As our world becomes increasingly interconnected,
Geert Hofstede, Gert Jan Hofstede, and Michael Minkov (2010) would argue that the
differences in value systems actually become more apparent. These rapid changes, they
argue, may have quickly impacted cultures at the visible level of practice. However,
change is in fact slow at the level of cultural values. Roland Robertson says,
“Globalization as a concept refers both to the compression of the world and the
intensification of consciousness of the world as a whole…both concrete global
interdependence and consciousness of the global whole” (Robertson 1992, 8). Anthony
23
Giddens’ definition incorporates global and local contexts, social relations, connotated
meanings, and the issues of time and space. He says:
Globalisation can…be defined as the intensification of world-wide social relations

which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by
events occurring many miles away and vice versa. This is a dialectic process
because such local happenings may move in an obverse direction from the very
distanciated relations that shape them. Local transformation is as much a part of
globalisation as the lateral extension of social connections across time and space
(Giddens 1990, 64).
Globalization implies the existence of what is termed “localization,” and Malcolm Waters
says that “Localization implies a reflexive reconstruction of community in the face of the
dehumanizing implications of rationalizing and commodifying” (Waters 2001, 4-5). He
goes on to indicate that in his opinion the basic theory (maybe even philosophy) that lies
behind these global and local issues as part of globalization is that: “material exchanges
localize; political exchanges internationalize; and symbolic exchanges globalize”
(Waters 2001, 20).1
Traditions, which are the property of groups, communities, or collectives are
perpetuated and maintained through ritual and repetition. Speaking about the ways these
relate to individuals, Giddens says, “Individuals may follow traditions and customs, but
traditions are not a quality of individual behaviour the way habits are” (Giddens 2003,
59). Globalization is having an impact on tradition in two main ways: (1) Public
institutions and everyday life are becoming loosed from the hold of tradition, and (2)
other more traditional societies are becoming detraditionalized (Giddens 2003). Yet
according to Giddens, traditions, including religious traditions, will only survive when
they are compared to the values and ways of being and doing of other traditions (Giddens
2003, 63). People come to see the benefits of their own traditions or the values of the new
1 Waters give this emphasis.

24
ones. Survival will not simply occur because “this is the way we have always done
things.” In the light of these comments, online learning may be seen as just one way in
which the process of “loosening of tradition” is occurring within both contexts.
Education as a socially constructed institution is just one of the visible reflections
of a culture’s deeply embedded, hidden cultural values. One can, therefore, expect that
any challenge towards philosophical or pedagogical paradigm shifts in this area might be
met with great caution, suspicion, and even resistance. However, as Terry Matz (2010)
reminds us, those things that are “part of history to us now, were once a bold, risky step
into the future.” As will be seen, the story, the “stage,” the actors, and the audience are
bidding us to take this step and implement change. Given the discourse thus far and the
physically “isolated” nature of online learning and distance education, bold steps require
developing an appropriate pedagogy, strategic design, and protective barriers against the
detrimental effects of globalization. Therefore, research in these areas is essential.
Research Undertaken
As a result of a literature review undertaken on globalization, curiosity was
heightened in regard to key factors impacting people involved in online education. This
spawned the concept of researching the perspectives held by the student practitioners and
leaders within the MAGL at Fuller Theological Seminary. Where online education serves
a global constituency, it seems appropriate for those who design courses and programs to
listen to students and understand the nature of their needs and their contexts in order to
serve them well. Were students impacted by the effects of globalization and, if so, in
what ways and to what extent?

25
Students were required to write 3,000-word papers as part of a seminar course,
“ML582: Global Leadership in Context.” Along with the required reading for the course,2
this paper was intended for the benefit of expanding student learning, reflection, and
identifying issues related to globalization and how this impacted the students within their
specific contexts. Seventy-six students in cohorts 1 through 5 (2003-2005) were invited
to submit their papers as part of the research project knowing that the aim of the research
was to identify how and to what extent this sample population and their communities
were impacted by the effects of globalization.
It should be noted that research for this dissertation began after the students wrote
their papers. Therefore they, nor I at that time, were aware that the papers being written
or the findings reported would be used as a part of this research. None of the students
approached in regard to the submission of their papers had ever been students in my
classes, and request for their participation was on an entirely voluntary basis.
This research, while comprehensive across the group, is not exhaustive in the
sense that the students were not experts in the area of globalization but were learners
reflecting on scholarly material and subjective experience. There was no doubt, however,
that globalization was having an impact on them and the people within their spheres of
influence. As will be seen in the following pages, the results of this assessment from an
unbiased, diverse, mature-aged group of global leaders were very informative.
2 Budde, Mike.1997. The (Magic) Kingdom of God: Christianity and the Global Culture Industries.
Westview Press.
Christian, Jayakumar. 1999. God of the Empty Handed: Power, Poverty, and the Kingdom of God. MARC.
Sider, Ronald, Philip N. Olson, and Heidi Rolland Unruh. 2002. Churches that Make a Difference: Reaching
Your Community with Good News and Good Works, Baker.
Snyder, Howard A., ed. 2001. Global Good News: Mission in a New Context. Abingdon Press.
Taylor, William David, ed. 2001. Global Missiology for the 21st Century: Reflections from the Iguassu
Dialogue. Baker.
Volf, Miroslav.1996. Exclusion and Embrace: A Theological Exploration of Identity, Otherness, and
Reconciliation. Abingdon.
26
Assessment of Student Reports – Factors Associated with Globalization
The following sections examine the context and scope of the research papers
analyzed. Student demographics and the methods of assessment of the papers will also be
explained.
Student Demographics and Their Contexts
The number of papers written across the five cohorts totaled 76. Of this number,
74 students granted permission for their course papers to be researched (97.4% of the
sample population). The sample group represented was ethnically diverse and worked
and served in various geographic locations.
American – 60 (48 in the US, 12 in developing countries):

Bangladesh, Cyprus, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia,
Kenya, Mexico [2], Rwanda, South Africa, and Turkey,
and 2 in developed countries: Japan and The
Netherlands.
The ethnic background of these 60 students was:

– 51 Caucasians, 1 Latin American, 1 Egyptian American,
1 African American, 4 Asian American, 1 Native
American, 1 Hawaiian
Australian – 2 (1 in China, 1 in the United Kingdom)

Austrian – 1 (in Switzerland)
Chinese – 3 (2 in Hong Kong, 1 in Taiwan)
Dutch –2
Jamaicans – 2 (1 in Florida, 1 working in South and Central America)
Korean – 1 (in Kenya)
Mexican – 1 (in the US)
South Africans – 2 (1 in South Africa, 1 in the United Kingdom)
Of the sample, there were 21 females and 53 males, representing a gender ratio of
28.4% female and 71.6% male.

27
Methods Used in Assessing the Student Reports
In order to assess the variety of concerns reflected in student papers these were
categorized and analyzed using NVivo. This enabled a reclassification into appropriate
sections and from there results could be interpreted. This process is explained in detail
below.
Categorization
The researcher proposed to undertake assessment and analysis of the MAGL
student papers with the assistance of the NVivo2 computer program.3 This program
provided the opportunity for the source material, the student papers, to be examined
digitally.
To begin the project the issues raised were electronically coded and assigned to
one of three designated categories considered suitable for assessment. The categories
initially created correlated to those covered in a literature review on globalization
(conducted in 2004), which assessed key factors associated with globalization. The three
categories were: (1) Individualism, (2) Communication, and (3) Consumption. For the
purpose of understanding the diverse nature of the reports, the categories were then
modified and became five groups under which topics (issues) were assigned. These were:
(1) Church, (2) Identity, (3) Economic Factors, (4) Society, and (5) Consumption.
Additionally, attributes and values were assigned to each student’s paper in order to run
reports and conduct electronic searches of the student’s papers using the NVivo2
computer program (Richards 2005b). After the new attributes were created, each file was
reassigned.
3 This program is produced by QSR International and is designed specifically to aid the analysis
of qualitative research data.
28
A category named “Context” was created first, and three attributes were assigned
to distinguish the context of the countries within which the authors worked; “USA,”
“Other Western,” and “Developing.” Another category, “Cohorts,” was created to
distinguish each of the five cohort study groups to which students belonged. However the
cohort attribute was not used to later assess the data. Thirdly, an additional group
denoting “Gender” divided the categories accordingly. These categories are depicted in
Figure 2.1.
Student Papers
C ohort
C ontex t
G ender
P ioneer
Team T hirs t
Third J ourney
S tronghort
C ontex t = U S A C ontex t = D ev eloping

G2
C ontex t = O ther W es tern M ale
F emale
FIGURE 2.1
ATTRIBUTE CATEGORIES
29
Assigning all students and their research papers into groups within the three
newly created main categories allowed for comparative studies to be undertaken. In this
way, similarities and differences on the issues of globalization affecting people, their
communities, and the church could be examined more comprehensively. This re-
categorization also assisted with identifying the similarities and differences in the
importance of issues from students relative to their new groupings. It also distinguished
differing approaches proposed for addressing or countering significant negative impacts
of globalization.
Methods of Analysis
Using the NVivo2 program ensured comprehensive grouping of the issues and
provided for the students’ papers to be grouped and assessed according to their
geographic location, the cultural context in which students lived and ministered, and their
gender, as well as identifying the MAGL study group to which they belonged as outlined
above.
Each research paper was uploaded electronically into the NVivo2 program, and
the coding of topics (issues raised) was undertaken manually with each topic being
inserted as a “node” in the computer program to facilitate electronic assessment (Richards
2005a, 85). In order to code the topics, each paper was read, and when topics were
discovered that were of concern to the student, the words, sentence, or paragraph were
coded. The passages sometimes addressed several pertinent issues at once, and this
required several nodes to be inserted to capture each. While creating the list of nodes, it
became apparent that they could be grouped into broadly related categories for analysis.
See a flowchart of this process in Figure 2.2.
After coding more than half the documents, very few new nodes were added to
the already comprehensive list as most issues related to existing nodes. At this stage of
30
the project, possibly due to the students’ processing of required texts, a concise range of
primary issues emerged. Despite the observation that some students clearly had a more
comprehensive grasp on globalization than others, it was clear that all issues raised were
important to these practitioner leaders in their ministry context. At the completion of the
coding, a “Node List report” was run in NVivo2, which revealed there were 223 nodes
created during the coding process.
Tutorial Research Sequence
Digitize all 74 Student Papers
Read and Code each Paper
Organize Nodes / Codes into Trees
Discover Themes and Groups of Themes
FIGURE 2.2
METHOD OF ANALYSIS
To assist with the electronic search of the MAGL student papers, it was necessary
to create a new document “set” in the NVivo2 program called “Researched Papers.” This
allowed for clear differentiation between student papers and all other documents
31
contained in the NVivo system such as memos, the research log, and other files (Richards
2005a, 74). This assured accuracy in the search results.
A comprehensive “All Nodes Report” in alphabetical order was created. This
report provided a means of identifying any duplication in the coding of similar issues.
After editing the list, 214 nodes were listed. It became apparent that the overall number
of nodes was still far too large to allow for concise assessment of the data.
Reclassification
Further careful examination of the data revealed that the nodes could be more
easily understood if they were regrouped into four new main categories, and these were:
(1) Church, (2) Identity Issues, (3) Economic Factors, and (4) Society (Richards 2005a,
82). Additionally, sub-categories were identified for each major group and were created.
However, the sub-category “Church Reform” was still considered too large and was
further divided (Richards 2005a, 111). The final sub-categorizations adopted for
assessment of the data in the project are listed below (see also Figure 2.3) (Richards
2005a, 169).
(1) Church
1. Missional Issues
2. Holistic Ministry
3. Discipleship Issues
4. Church Reform
i. Community Issues
ii. Model of Church Issues
iii. Leadership Issues
iv. Discipleship Issues
(2) Identity Issues
1. Individual Identity
2. Values
3. Self Issues
4. Connectedness Issues
(3) Economic Factors

1. Work Issues
32
2. Economic Issues
3. Marketing Issues
(4) Society
1. Community Issues
2. Relationship Issues
3. Social Issues
4. Cultural Issues
The nodes were reassigned in the NVivo2 program accordingly.
Subsequent reports were run, and several nodes contained information on issues
closely related to one another within each main sub-categorization. For example, under
the sub-category “Church,” “discipleship” and “disciple making,” were identified and
combined into one node – “Discipleship Issues.” Also, under the “Missional Issues” sub-
category, “missional,” “missional vision,” “missional responses” contained similar
material and thus were combined. Nodes containing similar information were identified
in other sub-categories as well and were also combined. However, to ensure the students’
intent was preserved in context when they wrote about the issues, coded passages were
re-read for accuracy, ensuring that the issues coded did in fact relate to the other nodes
with which they were assigned, thus preserving the robust nature of the assessment
maintained the validity of the data. These changes were all noted in the “Log” document
used by the researcher to record all detailed steps undertaken in processing the data
(Richards 2005a, 102).
The final number of listed nodes was reduced through this process to 178. When
these were assigned to their topic areas (sub-groups), new reports were run on the
frequency of each node, and the most important issues became apparent. A further “All
Tree Nodes Report” was produced with the nodes listed alphabetically under the new
categorizations to create a new set of frequency tables. These nodes were again arranged
in descending order according to the most number of documents coded for each node and
33
also according to the most number of paragraphs coded (see Appendix A). The data was
then ready for detailed analysis.
FIGURE 2.3
ALL NODES REGROUPING
Findings Relevant to this Research
A detailed examination of the research findings for the three main categories
“Church Issues,” “Identity,” and “Societal Issues” is presented in this section. The
34
significance of those concerns more frequently mentioned is worth noting and contributes
to the further work of this research.
Overview
The reclassification of the nodes greatly facilitated easy identification of the main
issues presented by the MAGL students and highlighted the students’ primary concerns.
For the purpose of this research project, value assigned to each issue was based upon the
frequency and prominence of each related issue reported by students. As mentioned, the
primary issues coded were relevant to student perception of the effects of globalization on
them, their church, and communities. These became the primary contexts for interpretation
and assessment of the data. The overall data is presented in the All Tree Node Report and
lists the number of student papers coded for each issue and the number of papers coded as a
percentage of all student papers. Graphs of the findings from the primary data are presented
in Appendix B. The written report of the findings is detailed below.
Church and Leadership Issues
There were a number of significant issues raised in these categories. However,
those clearly most significant, related to leadership and church life, are noted below.
Issue 1: Holistic Ministry
There were 19 major issues listed under this sub-category; however, eight topics
were very important. The most important issue was that of “Ministering Holistically,”4 as
77.0% of papers surveyed mentioned this issue in 192 paragraphs. Students in various
global cultural contexts, including Elbert Watson in South Africa, Geertruyt Kramer in
Holland, and Shalea Adams in the US expressed their thoughts on this issue:
4 See the definition “Holistic ministry” in Chapter 1.

35
If Kingston Christian Fellowship (KCF) is going to be salt and light to the

young people of Kingston, then the church must be committed to holistic
ministry…. Based upon the model of Jesus, proclaiming the reign of God
entails holistic ministry, ministry to the whole person, meeting needs at
every level of human existence (Watson 2005, 34).
There is a genuine hunger for spiritual things in the New Age community,
which approaches people in a more holistic way than most churches do, as
it pays more attention to the wholeness of people: body, mind and spirit…
These things were an integral part of Jesus’ life and are now being
counterfeited in New Age. We need to remember that Jesus is the ultimate
spiritual being… (Kramer 2005, 9).
The holistic church model emphasizes a dedication to the wholeness of the

individual, church, and the world… The holistic aspect of this model
envisions the church intentionally building community within the church
while it also reaches out to bring unity and wholeness in the body of Christ
in the local context (Adams 2005, 12, 14).
The second most important issue was “Reconciliation,” the church being an agent
of reconciliation both within and beyond the church. This was mentioned in almost
64.9% of the papers in 96 paragraphs. Then, the next four issues were very close to one
another in importance, and they were “The Church Must be Relational” 37.8%, “Social
Responsibility” 35.1%, “Incarnational Ministry and Service” 33.8%, and “Servant
Evangelism” 29.7% of papers. Clearly these issues need to be considered in developing
training programs for church leaders.
Issue 2: Discipleship Issues
While there were six major issues listed under this sub-category, three main issues
of significance emerged. “Belief Issues” was raised in 60.8% of papers and 111
paragraphs, and “Transformation Needed” appeared in 59.5% of papers and 107
paragraphs. These were closely followed by the issue of “Discipleship Needed”
mentioned in 48.6% of papers and 74 paragraphs. In some papers, students expressed this
concern by indicating there was a lack of discipleship. Therefore, when “Discipleship

36
Lack” was found in 18.9% of papers and 18 paragraphs and was combined with
“Discipleship Needed,” this issue was mentioned as a concern in 67.5% of student
papers. In reflection, these two categories could have been merged in the process of data
analysis. Students’ concern for discipleship, for example, were expressed by Watson and
Adams and also Cheri Hashimoto in Hawaii, who indicated:
Making disciples is not about running good church programmes or Bible

classes. Discipleship is a relational process that takes place in the context
of biblical community and facilitates growth in the knowledge and
application of God’s word, Christian character, relationship with God and
people, fruitfulness in ministry, and the pursuit of God’s purposes (Watson
2005, 39).
…the process of creating and making disciples is much more

complicated…, it takes time, commitment, and relationship (Adams 2005,
8).
We must see to it that our churches are formed around making disciples
and not just producing casual converts. The challenge to us as a church is
to effectively witness to a people who are inundated with many aspects of
globalism and bring them to a place of radical surrender unto Jesus
Christ…In focusing and modeling a discipleship-centered church, we must
be willing, able, and trained to invest into the lives of our students, helping
them to walk-out their salvation and helping them to realize that
discipleship is a process (Hashimoto 2005, 3-4, 11).
Discipleship along with “Holistic Ministry” clearly emerged as areas of church
life requiring attention at a leadership level. This would seem to indicate a need for
leadership training programs that address these issues, which will ultimately impact not
only church leaders but also church communities in general.
Issue 3: Leadership Issues
When considering the necessary church reforms required to address globalization
three main issues emerged. The most significant topic raised was “Church Leadership
Issues,” which was mentioned in 27.0% of the papers in 48 paragraphs. “Church

37
Leadership Issues,” included “Ministering Holistically” (77% as previously reported),
which indicates that issues involving the style and structure of church leadership were
very significant to a large percentage of the students.
Identity
The 36 identity-related issues presented by the MAGL students were examined,
and it was discovered that they fitted within four sub-categories. The findings of each
category are detailed in the sections below.
Issue 1: Individual Identity
Of the 14 issues listed under this sub-category, four featured prominently. The
most important issue was “Individuality/Individualism.” Of the 74 total papers surveyed,
87.8% mentioned this in 160 passages. This is equal to the highest percentage of all codes
in this research project as the other with 87.8% was the issue of helping the “Poor”
mentioned in the “Social Issues” section. Individualism was, therefore, identified as a
significant factor requiring further assessment. “Identity” was the next most important
issue with 66.2% of papers mentioning it.
Students, writing about their concerns over individualism and identity from
various cultural contexts where they live and work expressed the following:
The pressures of modernity and post-modernity already discussed –

fragmentation of identity, individualism, inequitable power relationships
and globalization – have worked together to produce deep alienation,
hopelessness and deviancy in Jamaica (Fleming 2005, 12).
Kingston’s young people are products of their changing culture and

increasingly dysfunctional family backgrounds. Because family
dysfunction and fragmentation have become the norm, issues of identity
and self-worth plague this generation (Watson 2005, 12).
38
…the organizational culture in the [church]5 model must aim to create AN

environment which facilitates communal cohesion while it combats the
compartmentalization and fragmentation of identity (Adams 2005, 21).
Lastly, “Powerlessness” was mentioned in 44.6% of papers and “Fragmentation”
in 21.6%.
Issue 2: Self Issues
“Self issues” were mentioned comparatively less frequently. Of the six issues
noted, only two, “Self-Worth” mentioned in 21.6% of the papers and “Self-Centered”
16.2%, were notable. “Self-Identity” with 6.8% may have been low due to the possible
misinterpretation of this topic referenced to “Identity,”6 which ranked highly in the
previous section.
Issue 3: Values
There were nine issues listed under this sub-category. However, while seven of
the nine were considered a high priority, the first four topics were clearly more important
to the MAGL students. The two most important issues were “Materialism,” mentioned in
56.8% of papers in 154 paragraphs and “Meaning” mentioned in 54.1% of papers in 105
paragraphs. While these may initially seem unrelated fields, in consumer-driven societies
the correlation makes sense, in that, meaning in life could be sought through possession
of “goods.” A further observation was that “Pluralism” and “Lifestyle Issues” were not
far behind “Meaning” in importance, being mentioned in 45.9% and 44.6% of papers
respectively. It appears that these were also very significant issues for the students.
5 The author wrote “HMO model” as she was presenting a new model of church based upon the
HMO medical model for holistic ministry. In order to clarify this “HMO” was removed and “church”
inserted to bring consistency to the concerns expressed by the MAGL students.
6 Most issues mentioned by the students related to “identity crises” or “identity issues” in general.
However, in a few cases “self identity” was specifically mentioned, and while there may be some degree of
overlap with the “identity” node, when considering “self” issues the researcher thought it best to create a
separate node in order to properly assess the issue.
39
“Pleasure” and “Choice,” while identified as values resulting from globalization, did not
rate as high as the others in the category, being mentioned in 31.1% and 27.0% percent of
papers respectively.
Issue 4: Connectedness Issues
There were seven items listed under this sub-category. The problem of loneliness
certainly featured prominently for the MAGL students when reviewing the related topics
listed in a cumulative sense, namely abandonment, connectedness, alienation, and
belonging, which potentially may all contribute to perceived feelings of loneliness. Here
are some excerpts that reflect students’ thoughts in the matter:
Jamaica:
If there is one word that seems to capture the essence of life in Jamaica’s
beleaguered ghettos it is anomie – which is defined as “A state of
separation between persons and groups” and a “personal state of isolation
and anxiety resulting from a lack of social control and regulation.” Such
alienation is frequently experienced by a person or class as a result of the
“erosion of standards and values” (Fleming 2005, 12-13).
US:
The individual today is probably more powerful in a variety of ways than
ever in history, more knowledgeable about more things than at any time in
history, yet he or she may feel more disconnected to society, more lonely,
more purposeless than individuals ever have before (Smiley 2005, 13-14).
South Africa:
Relating directly to relevance, missional ministry to Kingston’s young
people must also be relational. Trapped in a fragmented, lonely world and
starved for intimacy, love, and acceptance, postmodern young people
respond well to relational ministry. However, “youth meetings” alone do
not meet this need; it requires the formation of genuine Christian
community (Watson 2005, 41).
Holland:
People are lonely in post-modern culture, they are looking to belong and
connect with others in an authentic and meaningful way… The only way
that the church can break this mindset and offer a biblical alternative is to
model community, real community (Aerts 2005, 12).
40
US:
Modernity has destroyed our foundation and those born into such an
inhospitable environment are broken, desperate, lonely. And humanity has
woken up to find that none of the dreams were real and we are ill equipped
to replace the oppressive and dehumanizing metanarrative of modernity.
Our culture is looking for something genuine in a world riddled with
misleading ad slogans and cheap promises of fulfillment (Adams 2005, 7).
Societal Issues
There were 31 issues presented by the MAGL students that could be classified
under the category of “Societal.” As these were examined, it was discovered that they
fitted within four sub-categories, which were considered to be adequate for assessment.
The findings of each group in this category are detailed in the following sections.
Issue 1: Community Issues
There were five issues listed under this sub-category; however only two were
mentioned in any significant number of papers. They were “Community Sought” in
35.1% papers and 36 passages and “Eroding Community” (caused by globalization)
mentioned in 23.0% of the papers in 29 passages. If these two factors are combined, the
results are significant – 58.1%.
Issue 2: Relationship Issues
There were four issues listed under this sub-category, and only one was
considered to be very important. “Relationships” in a societal context were mentioned in

55.4% of papers in 158 passages.
Issue 3: Social Issues
There were 16 issues listed under this sub-category, and one stood out as the most
mentioned issue in the whole study. The issue of the effects of globalization on the “The
41
Poor” were mentioned in 87.8% of papers and the second highest number of passages,
219. The next three issues were also extremely important to the MAGL students in that
“Politics” was mentioned in 55.4% percent of papers, and “Stratification”7 and
“Education” were each mentioned in 50.0% of papers. The next most important concerns
to students were “Domination Issues” and “Justice,” which were mentioned in 40.5% and
39.2% of papers respectively. These two issues, although not identical, certainly would
seem to be co-related. The remaining nine issues, while not mentioned in more than
23.0% of papers, certainly were not as low overall as many other issues presented in the
papers.
Issue 4: Cultural Issues
In this, the last of the societal sub-categories, there were six issues that have been
assessed. The most frequently mentioned issue was “Cultural Values,” being in 28.4% of
papers in 74 passages. Perhaps not surprisingly, the issue of “Non-western” cultures
being affected by globalization was only mentioned in 12.2% of the papers. Possible
reasons for the low percentages reported on this topic will be explored in later chapters.
Analysis of the Data
The quantitative findings presented provide a “window” into the most important
issues for the MAGL leaders in their varying contexts. In order to ascertain the
significance of some of these topics, the data associated with the most prominent topics
was examined from the perspective of gender and context for each student author. In
determining a delimitation for analysis, the criterion established for the data to be eligible
for inclusion in this assessment was that the issue (topic) was mentioned in at least 36 or
7 “Stratification” within society, resulting from the processes of globalization, was a significant
issue to the MAGL students. The concern was that due to globalization an even greater gap between the
rich and poor resulted, and this was fueled by economic and structural factors.
42
more of the total 74 papers. This means they had to be mentioned in at least 48.6% or
more of the papers. An assessment of these topics helped to guide the researcher in
discerning an appropriate selection of issues for deeper study in a subsequent survey
instrument. The assessment was undertaken by conducting several reports using NVivo2
matrix searches in each of the main categories (Richards 2005a, 175). Results from each
search were compared for similarity and difference. The results are presented in the
following sections.
Church Issues
Although there were 67 issues coded under this category and spread among the
four main sub-categories, only eight of them were mentioned in the papers at or above the
48.6% requirement. These are listed below in accordance with the sequence in which
they appear in the “All Tree Node Tables,” not necessarily according to the highest-
mentioned issue:
• Missional Response/Engagement
• Ministering Holistically
• Reconciliation
• Belief Issues
• Transformation Required
• Discipleship Needed
• Religion/Religions
• Church Reform Required
Church: Highest Priority Issues, Comparison by Gender
When the results were broken down and compared by gender, the most important
discovery was that “ministering holistically”8 rated much more highly among the women
leaders than men (see Table 2.1 and Figure 2.4). The number of women who referred to
8 “Ministering holistically” can be defined as people being motivated by their love for God and
neighbors to serve and minister by inclusively caring for the spiritual, psychological, social, and physical
well-being of others.
43
this issue compared to the total number of women was 90.5%, while 71.7% of all men
mentioned it. Also, a higher percentage of women than men mentioned “Discipleship
TABLE 2.1
CHURCH ISSUES – COMPARISON BY GENDER
% of % of
Matrix Nodes Total Total
Males Females
Missional
Response/Engagement 84.9% 71.4%
Ministering Holistically 71.7% 90.5%
Reconciliation 67.9% 57.1%
Belief Issues 62.3% 57.1%
Transformation Required 58.5% 61.9%
Discipleship Needed 43.4% 61.9%
Religion/ Religions 64.2% 52.4%
Church Reform Required 52.8% 38.1%
44
FIGURE 2.4
CHURCH ISSUES – COMPARISON BY GENDER
Needed,” with 61.9% compared to 43.4% of all men. The other discoveries from these
figures were that “Church Reform Required” rated lowest for women with only 38.1%
writing about this compared to 52.8% of men.
The gender ratio between female and male has been noted as 28.4% female and
71.6% male. The following table and figure reflect the primary issues of concern to the
sample population according to gender. The first column represents the percentage of
female students who noted each concern, and the second column represents the
percentage of male students who also discussed each issue.
Church: Highest Priority Issues, Comparison by Context
In assessing these highly rated church issues by comparing the context of the
student authors, a similar result for the same issues of “Ministering Holistically” and
“Discipleship” was found; 100% of the students from other Western nations mentioned
“Ministering Holistically,” and 83.3% mentioned “Discipleship Needed.” Both of these
figures (percentage wise) in each category were the highest of any and indicate the
significance of these issues for people in Western contexts other than the US. However,
the surprise was that proportionately “Discipleship” was the lowest-rated among leaders
in developing nations with only 38.1% of them writing about this, leading the researcher
to wonder if discipleship is not optional but more an expectation in this context.
The other interesting discovery was that for students in developing nations, the
four issues of “Ministering Holistically,” “Reconciliation,” “Religion,” and “Church
Reform Required” rated higher proportionately than for the leaders in the US context.
The two highest, “Reconciliation” and “Religion,” were 17.7% and 23% percent higher
respectively (see Table 2.2 and Figure 2.5). The figures prioritize these issues for leaders
45
in developing countries. “Reconciliation” for US-based leaders was the lowest rated in
this assessment with only 25.5% writing about the issue.
TABLE 2.2
CHURCH ISSUES – COMPARISON BY CONTEXT
% of
Matrix Nodes % of Other % of
USA Western Developing
Missional
Response/Engagement 83.0% 66.7% 81.0%
Ministering Holistically 72.3% 100.0% 81.0%
Reconciliation 25.5% 33.3% 42.9%
Belief Issues 66.0% 66.7% 47.6%
Transformation Required 61.7% 50.0% 57.1%
Discipleship 48.9% 83.3% 38.1%
Religion/Religions 53.2% 66.7% 76.2%
Church Reform Required 48.9% 16.7% 57.1%
FIGURE 2.5
CHURCH ISSUES – COMPARISON BY CONTEXT

46
Identity
four main sub-categories, only five of them were mentioned in the papers at or above the
48.6% requirement. These are listed below in accordance with the sequence in which
they appear in the “All Tree Node Tables,” not listed according to the most often
mentioned:
• Individuality/Individualism
• Identity
• Materialism
• Meaning
• Loneliness
Identity: Highest Priority Issues, Comparison by Gender
When the results were broken down and compared by gender, the most important
discovery was that “Individuality/Individualism” was addressed in most papers for both
women and men, being mentioned 90.5% and 86.8% respectively. It was also interesting
to note that “Meaning” and “Loneliness” were mentioned by proportionately more
women than men. However, for “Identity” and “Materialism,” a higher percentage of the
men identified these issues (see Table 2.3 and Figure 2.6).
TABLE 2.3
IDENTITY ISSUES – COMPARISON BY GENDER
Matrix Nodes % of % of
Males Females
Individuality/Individualism 86.8% 90.5%
Identity 71.7% 52.4%
Materialism 60.4% 47.6%
Meaning 50.9% 61.9%
Loneliness 45.3% 61.9%
47
FIGURE 2.6
IDENTITY ISSUES – COMPARISON BY GENDER
Identity: Highest Priority Issues, Comparison by Context
The surprising results from the assessment of identity issues by context were that
100% of the students from the “Other Western” context mentioned both
“Individuality/Individualism” and “Meaning,” which was significantly higher
proportionately than the percentage of students from both “Developing” nations and
“US” contexts. Also, students in the “Other Western” category rated “Loneliness” higher
than students in the other contexts, but the percentage difference was not as marked.
Another fascinating discovery was that for each topic in this assessment
proportionately, leaders in developing countries responded more frequently to these
issues than did the US-context students (see Table 2.4 and Graph 2.7). The possible
reasons for this result will be considered later in this paper.

48
TABLE 2.4
IDENTITY ISSUES – COMPARISON BY CONTEXT
Matrix Nodes % of % of Other % of

Individuality/Individualism 85.1% 100.0% 90.5%
Identity 61.7% 50.0% 81.0%
Materialism 51.1% 33.3% 76.2%
Meaning 46.8% 100.0% 57.1%
Loneliness 42.6% 66.7% 61.9%
FIGURE 2.7
IDENTITY ISSUES – COMPARISON BY CONTEXT
Societal Issues
four main sub-categories, only five of this large number of issues were mentioned in the
papers at or above the 48.6% requirement. These are listed below in accordance with the
49
sequence in which they appear in the “All Tree Nodes Report” not according to the most
frequently mentioned:
• Relationships
• The Poor
• Politics
• Stratification
• Education
Societal: Highest Priority Issues, Comparison by Gender
When the results were broken down and compared by gender, it was interesting to
find that for the issues of “Relationships,” “The Poor,” and “Politics,” more men wrote
about these topics proportionately than women. The degree of separation between men
and women was similar for all three with approximately 10 percent (9.6% and 10.9%).
For “Stratification” and “Education,” the reverse was the case but with only a 3.3%
difference separating them on these two issues (see Table 2.5 and Figure 2.8).
TABLE 2.5
SOCIETAL ISSUES – COMPARISON BY GENDER
Matrix Nodes % of % of
Males Females
Relationships 90.6% 81.0%
The Poor 90.6% 81.0%
Politics 58.5% 47.6%
Stratification 49.1% 52.4%
Education 49.1% 52.4%
Societal: Highest Priority Issues, Comparison by Context
The assessment of societal issues by context revealed interesting results

concerning the significance of these issues. Proportionately the student leaders based in
50
FIGURE 2.8
SOCIETAL ISSUES – COMPARISON BY GENDER
the US context rated the issues of the “The Poor” and “Education” more highly than
those from any other context. A further surprise was the proportionately lower percentage
of leaders from developing nations who wrote about “Education” as an issue of concern.
While the gap is not large, there were 17.2% more US leaders who wrote about this issue
than those from developing nations. This seemed to indicate that there is a higher
awareness within the US cultural context of the “rights” of the individual to schooling
and having basic needs met, while people in other cultures view education more as a
privilege.
As far as leaders based in developing countries were concerned, the issues of
“Relationships,” “Politics,” and “Stratification” were all mentioned by proportionately
more of them than leaders from the US or other Western nations contexts. The most
important discovery regarding the findings in this section was that “Stratification”
represented by far the largest difference in the number of leaders proportionately than any
51
other topic. There were 33.6% more leaders in developing countries who wrote about this
than those based in the US and 59.5% more than the leaders from other Western contexts.
It is clear from these findings that one impact globalization is having on the developing
world is economic stratification.
TABLE 2.6
SOCIETAL ISSUES – COMPARISON BY CONTEXT
% of
Matrix Nodes % of Other % of
Relationships 85.1% 83.3% 95.2%
Poor 93.6% 50.0% 85.7%
Politics 48.9% 50.0% 71.4%
Stratification 42.6% 16.7% 76.2%
Education 55.3% 50.0% 38.1%
FIGURE 2.9
SOCIETAL ISSUES – COMPARISON BY CONTEXT

52
Reflecting upon the low percentage of societal issues written about by students in
other Western nations in general, it would seem that due to the social welfare support and
social structures in other Western nations, these issues are not really perceived as
problem issues. Factors of social issues reflected a significant difference between the US
and other Western nations (see Table 2.6 and Figure 2.9).
Summary
In summary, while students writing assignments for specific classes can often
write to demonstrate that they have a solid understanding of the issues taught, this group
of students, who were completing the cohort studies and preparing for the challenges
ahead in leading their organizations in their contexts, articulated an honest assessment of
the challenges they face. With this in mind, many significant concerns were raised about
various church issues like “Ministering Holistically” mentioned by 77%, “Discipleship
Issues” 67.5%, and “Transformation Needed” 59.5%. The data considered most
important for further research in this project was limited to the following:
“Individuality/Individualism” raised by 87.8% of students and “Loneliness” by 50.0%.
The research would suggest that one helpful lens through which to understand the
similarities and differences expressed within and across groups is an anthropological
perspective considering values held by individualist Western cultures compared to
cultures where “the collective group” is the means by which the world is viewed.
Hofstede, Hofstede, and Minkov indicate that:
Research by us and by others has shown that in societies in which people

on average hold more individualist values, they also on average hold less
collectivist values. Individual persons may differ from this pattern, but
those who differ are fewer than those who conform to it. The institutions
of such societies reflect the fact that they evolved or were designed
primarily for catering to individuals (2010, 102).
53
Concluding Comments
Research findings presented identified key areas of concern relating to
globalization for students in the MAGL cohorts 1 through 5. The data analyzed showed
the extent to which these were experienced across the diverse sample group and revealed
relatively consistent differences between the groups and similarities within them
according to their cultural contexts and gender categorizations.
Since in the US and other Western countries highly value individualism and the
research is being undertaken in this context, the following chapter explores this value
system, its history, and the current challenges and implications this poses specifically for
online education in the US and offered beyond the nation’s borders. This, along with the
scholarly research of others in the field of formative education, served to fuel further
research and the subsequent development of a survey instrument used in the second phase
of the research project.

CHAPTER 3
THE CULTURAL VALUE OF INDIVIDUALISM AND ITS

DEVELOPMENT IN THE U.S.A.:
A BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE AND THE IMPLICATIONS FOR
ONLINE EDUCATION
High context, low context, collectivist, individualist, indirect, direct, whatever
way we say it, see it, feel it, or do it, as human beings our world-view is inescapably
shaped by our culture. While definitions on the topic of culture abound, William Dyrness
expresses it as “simply what people make of creation” (Dyrness 1997, 58). Kurt
Frederickson notes that according to Robert Schreiter, a missiologist and theologian,
culture represents a way of life—for a given time and place, replete with values, symbols
and meanings, reaching out with hopes and dreams, often struggling for a better world
(Fredrickson 2009, 11).1 His definition provides a helpful lens through which to view this
research in exploring a model of online education cognizant of the cultural value of
individualism and its effects on the nature of “human learning” from a theological,
developmental perspective. Rather than a comprehensive study of these factors, the
following chapter serves as a platform to enlighten, to provoke thought, to gain
perspective, and to ask further questions.
Mechanical engineer, social psychologist, anthropologist, and intercultural
consultant, Geert Hofstede also brings helpful insights in this process. He argues that
“people are we-versus-they creatures and that most people most of the time are busy
being good members of the groups to which they belong” (Hofstede, Hofstede, and
1 Fredrickson references Robert J. Schreiter (Schreiter 1985, 21).
54
55
Minkov 2010, 17). Hofstede, Hofstede, and Minkov contend that the core values of a
culture are learned at a young age and that while practices may be altered over time,
values alter little over time. Concerning the current influence of technology they say,
“there are many things in societies that technology and its products do not change” (2010,
19). They use the analogy of cultural values being implicit and invisible, forming a
group’s “mental programming” or “software of the mind.” Identity and institutions on the
other hand are explicit and can shift and change over a person’s lifetime. As this relates
to group and individual identity, the way we see ourselves, who we are, and how we fit in
our context, they say,
Identity is explicit: it can be expressed in words, such as “a woman,” “a

bicultural individual,” “an American citizen.” In fact the same person
could report being any of these three things, depending on the setting in
which you asked. The degree to which identities can be multiple depends
on culture. It relates to the individualism-collectivism distinction…
Individualistic environments such as modern cities, academia, and modern
business allow them to have several identities and to easily change their
identity portfolios. In collectivistic societies, in which most of the world’s
population still lives, one conceives of oneself much more as belonging to
a community, whether this be ethnic, regional, or national, and one’s sense
of identity derives mainly from that group affiliation (2010, 23).
Hofstede et al. note that studying differences in culture among groups and
societies presupposes a neutral vantage point, which they call a “position of cultural
relativism,” which does not imply a lack of norms for oneself, nor for one’s society. It
does call for suspending judgment when dealing with groups or societies different from
one’s own. They clarify the term “cultural relativism,” quoting the great French
anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss (1908-2009).
Cultural relativism affirms that one culture has no absolute criteria for
judging the activities of another culture as “low” or “noble.” However,
every culture can and should apply such judgment to its own activities,
because its members are actors as well as observers (Hofstede, Hofstede,
and Minkov 2010, 25).
56
Observing differences in cultural values is a necessary starting point to the topic
of this research because of the multicultural nature of the student constituency being
impacted by online learning programs. However, assumptions held and often expressed
by educators are that those students who make the decision to study online do so of their
own volition and therefore should understand that the course of study, if based in the US,
will be “Western” education. So, those students who make this choice ought to take
responsibility, accept the content and the ways in which it is delivered, and obey the
rules. We also assume they are invested in the stated objectives, goals, and outcomes
since credentials from US universities and colleges are highly sought after by foreign
students. These assumptions clearly place Western institutions in a position of power.
Dyrness notes that the Western tradition has bequeathed us many valuable tools to
study culture. However, he adds, “the normative implications of those tools have not been
adequately faced.” He begs the following questions and poses an anthropological
perspective of which the Apostle Paul may have been the originator.
How do we gain a perspective that allows us to evaluate our own

tradition? What mirror do we do we hold up in front of our own face? The
problem is not to have a perspective on another culture; we all naturally
form opinions and make judgments on others. Our problem is to find a
way of seeing the weaknesses in our own culture – to take the beam out of
our own eye before we address the speck in our neighbor’s. Nothing in our
“social conditions” gives us material for this kind of objectivity (Dyrness
1997, 67).
Gil Baillie, quoted by Dyrness, speaks of the experience of the Apostle Paul and that his
“anthropological insights began when he discovered, with a moral shudder, how
murderous he had become in the name of his own culture. Anthropology is simply the
57
study of culture by people who are no longer entirely contained within one” (Dyrness
1997, 67).2
As a foreign student, US resident for 13 years, educator, administrator, and a
Christian, I too, consider myself “no longer entirely contained” to a particular culture. It
is hoped that my own cross-cultural life experience provides some perspective as we
move forward to examine the cultural value of individualism, the historic development of
this, and the results of extreme individualism in present day US culture. The following
research will argue that if we dare to apply judgment as Dyrness mentioned, to our own
activities in assessing educational philosophy, pedagogy, instructional designs, and
ultimate goals, particularly in online education “reaching out with hopes and dreams and
struggling for a better world” in this area of academia, may reap fruitful rewards for
students and educators alike.
The Western Cultural Value of Individualism
Based upon research conducted in more than 70 countries over a 40-year span,
Geert Hofstede’s revolutionary IBM survey and Michael Minkov’s additional analysis of
data collected from the World Values Survey revealed the impact of national cultural
values and how they shape the way we think, feel, and act. Language, laws, religion, and
institutions are developed around these values. Their research shows that the United
States, closely followed by Australia, Great Britain, and Canada, ranked number one for
valuing individualism among 76 countries and regions surveyed. National cultures that
generally value the individual over the group are called individualist while those where
2 Dyrness quotes Gil Baillie (Baillie 1995, 38)

58
the interests of the group prevail over the individual are called collectivist.3 Hofstede,
Hofstede, and Minkov indicate that while individuals may vary within a national culture,
the majority will tend towards one or the other: individualism or collectivism. They note,
Individualism pertains to societies in which the ties between individuals

are loose: everyone is expected to look after him or herself and his or her
immediate family. Collectivism as its opposite pertains to societies in
which people from birth onward are integrated into strong, cohesive in-
groups, which throughout people’s lifetime continue to protect them in
exchange for unquestioning loyalty (2010, 92).
Relationship between the individual and the collective in human society is not only a
matter of ways of living together; it is intimately linked with societal norms and value
systems. It therefore affects the structure and functioning of many institutions:
educational, religious, political, and utilitarian. Hofstede concurs with Hazel Markus and
Shinobu Kitayama (1991) in that our cognition, emotion, and motivation all differ
depending on whether our culture has provided us with an independent or an
interdependent “self-construal.”
Historically the US “based its constitution and political philosophies on
something very important: It named and safeguarded the rights of many of the individuals
who populated the new territory.” Farrington believes that “As a nation we continue to
hold that dear and, when we are at our best, strive to protect the rights of all people.
Somewhere along the way, however, we went too far, and the individual became more
important than the whole” (Farrington 2000, 183). Waters noted that “individualization
involves the global redefinition of each person as a complete whole rather than as a
subordinate part of any localized collectivity” (Waters 2001, 183). Waters references
identity issues affected by being removed from localized communities in the West,
presented by Roland Robertson, (Robertson 1992, 282-286).
3 Collectivist is not used here as having political connotations related to the power of the state
over the individual, rather the power of the group (Hofstede, Hofstede, and Minkov 2010, 91).
59
Ziauddin Sardar says, “the assumption that the individual is prior to society is
unique to western culture,” and adds that this is foundational to the shaping of
“metaphysical, epistemological, methodological, moral, legal, economic and political
aspects” of liberal democracy. He goes on to make the point that, conversely, in non-
western cultures the individual is defined entirely in relation to group – “the family or
clan, the community or culture, religion or worldview” (Sardar 1998, 61). This view
opposes the Western approach of defining the individual by separating him or herself
from others. He goes on to ask, “If every individual is provided with the means to pursue
their own desires whatever they may be, so that they make their own rules, seek their own
happiness, and create their own ‘universe,’ how can genuine community be created from
individualistic greed?” (Sardar 1998, 62). Simply emphasizing difference through
individualism generates meaning by itself, “but it is meaning without content” (Sardar
1998, 74). From his perspective this results in “cultural poverty” where life is founded on
individualism in an attempt to be oneself – different, at the expense of community.
Cacioppo writes that he wants to use his research on loneliness “to start trying to change
our culture’s lopsided view of human nature, its focus on the individual in isolation as the
proper measure of all things” (Cacioppo and Patrick 2009, 19).
Kenneson argues that in the US, “The language of rights is rooted in the notion
that people need to be protected from each other.” When people view each other as
potential threats, it is little wonder that this culture is focused on adversarial relationships
– a culture that fosters “a climate of fear and suspicion [and] cultivates habits of
noninvolvement” (Kenneson 1999, 96). US culture values the self-directed, self-
governed, and autonomous individual who develops their own reasoning capacities,
potential, and moral values. This, however, can lead to the rejection of other forms of
authority. In recent years it has become even more evident that the president or
60
government and the church (its traditions, teachings, and moral authority) are also
rejected in favor of the authority of the individual. Further, this autonomy is reinforced by
the values of self-reliance, self-help, and ultimately, the self-made person, much of which
stems back to the mid-1800s when Ralph Emerson was focusing on the unlimited
possibilities within each person, exposing the limitations of tradition (Kenneson 1999,
166).
This kind of extreme individualism also affects the way people relate to the idea
of groups and relational communities. One perspective is that “the group exists to serve
the needs of the individual,” or conversely that “the individual exists to serve the group.”
Kenneson indicates that in the first perspective the individual is all-important and in the
other, the group is most important. He believes these perspectives are therefore
understood as discreet entities and that we have to decide which is more important.
Etienne Wenger also indicates that there are two commonly opposing assumptions in
regard to the relation between the individual and social that need to be discarded. The
first is that “there is an inherent conflict between the individual and the collective; that
the two are fundamentally at odds, representing inherently diverging interests and
incompatible tendencies, and consequently that human life is a compromise by which
each makes concessions to the other.” The second related assumption is “that one is good
and the other bad, one a source of problems and the other a source of solutions; that the
individual is the source of freedom and creativity while the social is the source of
constraints and limitations, or (conversely) that the social is the source of harmony and
order while the individual is the source of discord and fragmentation” (Wenger 1998,
146-147). He contends that both are flawed assumptions and for each one it should not be
“either/or” but “both/and.” Regarding the important relationship between the individual
and the group and how this affects identity formation, Smith and Berg (1997) argue that
61
to focus on identity formation for the individual alone, divorced from the group, is an
erroneous concept.
The biblical narrative was written over centuries within the context of collective
cultures where identity formation took place entirely within “the group.” Paul the Apostle
presents the analogy of the church community likened to a “body” with many members.
God has given us the gift of each other in order to function as a whole (Romans 12:3-8; 1
Corinthians 12: 12-31; Ephesians 4: 1-16). The Genesis account of creation provides a
framework for understanding humankind as created in the image of a Triune God
(Genesis 1:26-27). Jack Balswick, Pamela King and Kevin Reimer draw on the biblical
view of relationality within the holy Trinity as a basis for understanding the human self.
“This Biblical model allows us to assess the human self as an interactive being, the
reciprocating self – the self that, in all its uniqueness and fullness of being, engages fully
in relationship with another in all its particularity” (2005, 21). They quote Stanley Grenz
(2001), who develops his theological anthropology by focusing on relationality as the key
aspect of being human:
Theological insights regarding the manner in which the three Trinitarian

persons are persons-in-relation and gain their personal identity by means
of their interrelationality hold promise for understanding what it means to
be human in the wake of the demise of the centered self and the advent of
the Global Soul (2005, 20).4
Divorcing the essentially socially-oriented core of the nature of human
development, or how people learn through education for that matter, not only does people
a disservice, it defies what it means to “be human.” I propose that interrelationality lifts
the individual beyond what the individual is capable of learning or sustaining by him or
herself. Balswick, King, and Reimer take this further and propose that:
4 Balswick, King, and Reimer quote Stanley Grenz (2001, 9).

62
…human relationships are authentic—the way they’re meant to be—to the

extent that they are modeled after the way God enters into relationships
with humans. This way of relating is necessary to foster both the
development of the reciprocating self and to sustain its authentic quality
(2005, 50).
These foundational theological insights pertain to tasks to be achieved and learning to be
remembered in each developmental stage of life. Now more than ever, education plays an
important part in this process.
Extreme individualism, according to Philip Kenneson (1999), manifests itself in
terms of self-interest in a consumer society. The values associated with extreme

individualism promote self-sufficiency and independence. Balswick, King, and Reimer
indicate that the American values of independence and self-fulfillment have led to a
culture that nurtures individuals who are focused on self-care and personal fulfillment.
They go on to speak of the modern project as one that has pursued truth, universals,
freedom, and control, and ultimately has resulted in an era of fragmented, lonely, isolated
people (2005, 19-20).
The biblical model of community poses many inherent risks and perceived
dangers for individuals with fear of the “other” associated with group identity, for
example, totalitarianism and homogeneity. While in many circles the idea of community
might evoke deeply satisfying warm, fuzzy feelings, particularly for those from the 1960s
and 1970s when there was a reaction to over-institutionalized and impersonal systems,
creating a community that functions with mutuality is not easy or simple (Casey 2005,
108). In an extremely individualist society the perception in asking for help from
someone means that the person is essentially admitting to weakness and inadequacy,
which in this context is tantamount to failure. Is it any wonder that developing healthy,
interdependent relationships or community is so challenging? The idea is a cultural

63
anathema where extreme individualism and its apparent “achievements” are so highly
valued.
It comes as no surprise then, that students from multi-ethnic backgrounds struggle
with acclimating to cultural expectations and interpreting their experiences within the
educational systems and processes. Without anthropological and cultural awareness and
appropriate understanding of the rules of our “social game,” these students face conflict,
misunderstanding, disappointment, and reduced performance. Jack Mezirow indicates
that “it is not so much what happens to people but how they interpret and explain what
happens to them that determines their actions, their hopes, their contentment and
emotional well-being, and their performance” (Mezirow 1991, xiii). Cacioppo’s research
over 20 years on the science of social connections directly links well-being and cultural
and social acceptance to levels of perceived loneliness. He comments, “Conflicts between
cultural norms and our own desires can further complicate and sometimes camouflage
our experience of loneliness” (Cacioppo and Patrick 2009, 74).
Education that seeks to pursue the process of becoming in students’ lives will and
should feel the impact of wrestling with differing values across cultures. For instance,
individualism in Western societies is perceived as a “right” and a blessing while in other
societies it will be seen as a “threat” and personally alienating. So, using Dyrness’
analogy, in what ways can we use this current reality of diversity in our context as a
“mirroring experience” to understand the values shaping educational traditions in the US?
What are we doing to intentionally address this reality within online educational
programs and the courses which comprise these? Do we propagate the Western value of
individualism, the extreme form of which has been identified as potentially detrimental to
societies? What moral responsibility do we have?

64
Exploring this cultural value we hold dear will provide further insight as to the
challenge that exists and help to explain the nature of the struggle involved in
implementing or practicing “community” in Western contexts, whether it be at a societal,
family, church, or educational level. I believe educators involved in designing and
developing online programs that can be so readily “exported” have a moral responsibility
for appropriate reflection and a response that addresses this issue.
The Human Cost of Extreme Individualism: Loneliness
Technologically interactive societies have changed and continue to change the
way we socialize, work, live, and learn. As has been noted earlier, while communication
through Twitter, Facebook, e-mail, chat, texting, telephone, and the Internet have
provided endless opportunities for “virtual contact,” evidence continues to lead us to
conclude that we cannot assume meaningful relationships or connectedness are achieved
through this activity.
It has been well documented that without meaningful relational connections and
group identity, isolation threatens people with loneliness. This poses a risk factor that
extends beyond education, potentially impacting the well-being of the whole person
(Marano 2003). Cacioppo and John Patrick have undertaken unique research on the
effects of loneliness, and Hara Marano indicates that their findings are significant, saying:
• Perhaps most astonishing, in a survey conducted, doctors

themselves confided that they provide better or more complete
medical care to patients who have supportive families and are not
socially isolated.
• Lonely individuals report higher levels of perceived stress even

when exposed to the same stressors as non-lonely people, and even
when they are relaxing.
65
• The social interactions lonely people do have are not as positive as

those of other people, hence the relationships they have do not
buffer them from stress as relationships normally do.
• Loneliness raises levels of circulating stress hormones and levels

of blood pressure. It undermines regulation of the circulatory
system so that the heart muscle works harder and the blood vessels
are subject to damage by blood flow turbulence. (Marano 2003).5
Marano says that from this research Cacioppo has concluded that loneliness initiates
pathophysiological processes. Marano believes lonely people “cannot stay on track
mentally” and are “compromised physically.” She also asserts that “social skills are
crucial for health” (Marano 2003). Loneliness, while it can prompt people to behave in
ways that do not serve their immediate, individual self-interest, becomes an issue of
serious concern only when creates a persistent, self-reinforcing loop of negative thoughts,
sensations, and behaviors (Cacioppo and Patrick 2009, 7). If protracted, it can cause
“impaired regulation, combined with distorted social cognition, makes us less likely to
acknowledge someone else’s perspective…and less able to evaluate other people’s
intentions, which can make us socially awkward, but can also make us vulnerable to
manipulation” (Cacioppo and Patrick 2009, 16).
David and Roger Johnson in their research on cooperative learning report that
positive indices of psychological health result from this approach. They directly compare
the outcomes of this practice with individualistic and competitive learning approaches
and contend that “individualistic attitudes tend to be related to a number of indices of
psychological pathology such as emotional immaturity, social maladjustment,
delinquency, self-alienation, and self-rejection” (1996, 1024). Further comments on this
topic will be made in Chapter 6.
5 Marano refers to Cacioppo’s findings, but does not reference the publication where she obtained
this information.
66
Clearly, loneliness is not the same as being alone. Being alone can be refreshing;
however loneliness can be described as the absence of identification, understanding, or
compassion and can be experienced even in crowded places. Loneliness is personally
perceived. It begins with an awareness of a deficiency of relationships. This cognitive
awareness plays through our brain with an emotional soundtrack. It makes us sad. We
may experience a feeling of emptiness, or we may be filled with a longing for contact.
We may feel isolated, distanced from others, deprived. These feelings tear away at our
emotional well being (Marano 2003).
In a research study on the placement of loneliness within, or the spread of
loneliness through, social networks, Cacioppo, Fowler, and Christakis report;
The discrepancy between an individual’s loneliness and the number of

connections in a social network is well documented, yet little is known
about the placement of loneliness within, or the spread of loneliness
through, social networks…The spread of loneliness was found to be
stronger than the spread of perceived social connections, stronger for
friends than family members, and stronger for women than for men. The
results advance understanding of the broad social forces that drive
loneliness and suggest that efforts to reduce loneliness in society may
benefit by aggressively targeting the people in the periphery to help repair
their social networks and to create a protective barrier against loneliness
that can keep the whole network from unraveling (2009, 977).
This point is worth taking seriously, as it suggests distance learners undertaking
individualized or independent study courses and programs may be at risk of becoming
“people on the periphery” in a social sense, if they do not have established meaningful
social connections beyond their educational forum. Cacioppo goes on to note that humans
are an “irrepressibly meaning making species” and describe loneliness as “perceived
social alienation.” Peter Berger also contends that there is a deep foundational need
within all people that rejects “aloneness” and makes them unable to accept
“meaninglessness” (Berger 1967, 56).

67
The influence of the growing trend where people are sociable yet hide their
feelings can be seen in David Wood’s research, which found isolation and loneliness to
be contributing factors as to why pastors move out of local ministry. Woods reports;
Isolation and loneliness contributed directly or indirectly to pastors’

moves out of local ministry. Of those who left due to sexual misconduct,
75 percent indicated that they were lonely and isolated. In all five
denominational groups [Assemblies of God, Evangelical Lutheran Church
in America, Lutheran Church -- Missouri Synod, Presbyterian Church
(U.S.A.) and the United Methodist Church], the top motivating factors for
leaving were the same. Pastors reported:
“I felt drained by demands.”
“I felt lonely and isolated.”
“I did not feel supported by denominational officials.”
“I felt bored and constrained” (Wood 2005, 33-35).
Woods goes on to further describe how Dean Hoge and Jacqueline Wenger “discovered a
consensus among judicatory officers regarding pastors who have left local church
ministry: ‘These pastors tended to be loners in the district or presbytery, for whatever
reason not part of ministerial friendship groups or action groups.’”6
The findings of this body of research are informative to Christian institutions that
prepare students for church ministry and also to those who seek to offer online education
at a distance to students who remain as practitioners in their context while studying in
degree programs.
Concluding Comments
Given the findings presented above, students who are physically and
geographically distanced in online education have an even greater need for relational
connectedness in their online study. Social isolation in the context of the learning process
6 Wood quotes Hoge and Wenger (2005), but does not indicate the page number.
68
impacts not only the process itself but also the well-being of the student. My work thus
far, along with personal experience as a former student of distance education for nine
years and working professionally with hundreds of students over a period of 10 years,
have been motivating factors for further specific research in the area of how online
education can provide a real life experience that is formative and has the capacity to
counter the destructive nature of extreme individualism and its effects.
At this juncture, recalling the results of the findings from the original research
project on the effects of globalization on student leaders adds weight and impetus to the
focus needed. As will be reported in the following chapter, a new sample population of
cohort students within the MAGL at Fuller Theological Seminary was invited to
participate in further research. The research reflects the profound results of their journeys.
The survey instrument constructed and administered, the methodologies used, the data
collected and analyzed, and the findings are detailed in the following chapter.
CHAPTER 4
STUDENT SURVEY ON LONELINESS AND EXTREME

INDIVIDUALISM
The extensive analysis conducted on the MAGL students’ papers on globalization
noted in Chapter 2 showed congruence with major concerns and issues raised in the
literature review on factors of globalization. These findings provided the basis for which
the final research survey was designed to assess the effectiveness of the MAGL online
program in relation to the dominant theme of extreme individualism that is a factor in a
perceived sense of loneliness. The survey of MAGL students was conducted asking their
personal experience relating to extreme individualism and loneliness after completing this
online degree program, assessing these two themes for levels of change in students’ lives
after they participated in a cohort model of online learning. The survey instrument was
designed to use students’ self-assessment to measure the cognitive, affective, and
behavioral changes as a result of the cohort model learning experience in regard to these
two specific variables.
The survey (see Appendix C) included a preamble to bring clarification to the
terms used, providing a basis for the student’s personal assessment. “Individualism” and
“loneliness” were described in the following ways:
Many of us are shaped by cultures that value an ideology of individualism.

Its effects may cause us to become isolated, self-centered and self-reliant.
Alternatively an individualistic culture can empower us to prefer others
and to choose appropriately for ourselves.
69
70
This survey seeks to evaluate if (and/or how) the MAGL program

interfaces transcendent kingdom realities with personal reality in the
cultural context in which you live and minister.
The survey also asked questions about the issues associated with
“loneliness” which was briefly explained in the preamble to the second
part of the survey as follows:
Loneliness is not the same as being alone. Being alone can be refreshing,
however loneliness can be described as the absence of identification,
understanding or compassion and can be experienced even in crowded
places. Loneliness is personally perceived, and the following questions
seek an honest personal appraisal of this matter.
The survey used a Likert scale of nine multiple-choice questions on
“individualism” and six on “loneliness.” Students indicated if they experienced
differences in relationships with their family, faith community, and other relationships,
and these findings were assessed. Questions directed at assessing changes in family and
community relationships were anticipated to measure student transformation in these
areas.
Online Student Demographics
The students surveyed were not the same sample population as the first research
project. Of the total number of 154 students in cohorts 6-12 in the MAGL program who
were contacted by email about participating in this survey (see Appendix D), 108
responses were received; 107 indicated their willingness to complete the survey, and one
student indicated non-participation. This sample, therefore, represents a 70%
participation rate across the entire student population for these cohorts. Of the 107
students to whom the online survey was sent, 105 completed it and 2 did not. Therefore,
the completion rate for the survey was 98%.
While 9 nationalities were represented in the sample population, by far the
majority of students were US citizens (90), and 10 students were from other Western
71
nations. The Western cultural worldview ratio to those of non-Western was 95.2% to
4.8%. Students’ ethnic origins (nationalities) are listed below:
American 90 Rwandan 2
Australian 2 South African 1
British 1 Swiss 1
Canadian 5 Turkish 1
French 1 Unknown 1
TOTAL 105
However, of the 90 Americans surveyed, 30 were living and working in 22 non-
Western countries at the time of the survey, bringing diverse cultural perspectives from
their countries of service (see the total list of 31 nations below). Six of the North
Americans surveyed who lived in the US hold senior leadership responsibilities for major
regions of the world, affording them intercultural experience and perspectives associated
with their work in those regions.
Afghanistan 2 Netherlands 2
Australia 1 Portugal 1
Benin 1 Rwanda 3
Cambodia 1 Russia 1
Canada 1 Swaziland 1
Chile 1 Switzerland and Canada 1
China 1 Thailand 2
Congo 2 Tunisia 1
Costa Rica 1 Turkey 2
Denmark 1 United Kingdom 1
Ecuador 1 US 60
France 1 US Engagement in global, short-term
Ireland 1 missions 1
Haiti 1 US/Egypt & the Middle East 1
India 2 US/Europe 1
Israel 1 US/into 31 nations worldwide 1
Japan 1 US/sending to 15 locations in the 10/40
Korea 1 Window 1
Mexico 2 Uzbekistan (currently based in the US)
Middle Eastern country 1 1
72
In an attempt to make these findings usable and useful to a broad cross-section of
educational environments, nominal data variables of age (incrementally categorized) and
gender were used and cross-referenced with the independent variables (questions
pertaining to individualism and loneliness). This helps to assess the validity of an
academic cohort model of learning for effecting change in students in online learning
communities. Of the 105 MAGL students who completed the survey, there were 76 males
and 29 females, yielding a ratio of approximately 3 males to every 1 female.
Delimitations of the Survey Results for Analysis
Based upon the prior research findings, focused analyses of the survey findings
were limited to items associated specifically with loneliness and extreme individualism.
Although the survey asked nine questions of students on issues associated with
“Individualism” and six questions regarding factors affecting “Loneliness,” the
interpretation of the survey results was limited to the following six individualism
questions regarding:
1. Relationships in general (Q2)

2. Family relationships (Q7)
3. Faith community relationships (Q8)
4. Relationships outside family and faith community (Q9)
5. Decision-making methods (Q3), and
6. Accountable relationships (discipleship) (Q6)
and the following three questions pertaining to loneliness issues:
7. The degree of loneliness (Q1)

8. The sense of being loved (accepted) (Q5), and
9. Social alienation (Q6).
These were considered clarifying identifiers to determine any changes experienced as a
result of students’ study in the MAGL cohort program and aided interpretation of the
findings. The individualism questions 1-5 above were cross-referenced to the questions
73
listed in points 6 (Individualism Q6) and 7-9 (Loneliness Q1, Q5, Q6) to identify factors
that could contribute to the results. Additionally, the questions were analyzed by cross-
referencing them to nominal data categories firstly by age and then by gender.
Data Analysis – Validity and Reliability
The validity and reliability of the research data was assessed using the following
procedure. There were a few missing pieces of data (blanks in the spreadsheet) that were
replaced by using “mean interpolation.” This approach kept all respondents in the dataset;
otherwise those who were missing data would have been dropped from the analysis. This
also ensured that the value inserted remained, kept these respondents in the same range as
the other respondents’ answers, and maintained consistency.
After replacing the missing data, “Cronbach’s alpha” reliability test was
conducted on both the “individualism” and the “loneliness” items to measure internal
consistency. The intention was to ascertain if the items actually did measure the same
construct. If so, the scores on the items should be similar to each other – highly
correlated. More specifically, Cronbach’s alpha sought to examine the extent to which
each item was correlated with the sum of all the other items – item-total correlation.
Examining the nine “individualism” items, the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
(SPSS) reported low item-total correlations for questions 4 and 5, correlations of .11 and
.07 respectively. Therefore, these items were removed from the “individualism” measure.
The remaining seven items showed a Cronbach’s alpha of .73, which was considered
sufficient for the purposes of this research. The six “loneliness” items had an alpha of .69,
which could not be improved by removing any items. Again, this was considered
adequate for data analysis. These alpha coefficients indicated that the items held together
well, meaning that “individualism” and “loneliness” could be considered together as a

74
scale measuring the same construct. Therefore, each item did not have to be treated as a
separate variable.
The range for both scales was 18, and both had the same minimum and maximum
scores: 7 and 25 respectively. The mean and standard deviation for “individualism” were
14.71 and 3.81 respectively; for “loneliness” they were 13.48 and 3.20. The Pearson
correlation between these two variables was .54, which meant there was a fairly strong
and positive relationship between them, so the higher the “individualism” score, the
higher the “loneliness” score was. This correlation proved statistically significant at
p < .001, indicating that there was less than a one-tenth of one percent probability that
these results were generated by chance.
Clearly, the variables were related in the sample population of students, and there
can be a number of different reasons for this result. Consideration was given to the
correlation having similar wording between the scales. However, there was enough
variation in the wording structure and the ways the questions were constructed this was
not considered sufficient to cause this correlation. Also, consideration was given to the
students answering in the same way when asked about “individualism” and “loneliness,”
due to the questions being asked in the same way. While the questions consistently asked
how the students viewed themselves after participating in the MAGL program, the scope
and variety of topics and issues being questioned in each of the “individualism “ and
“loneliness” categories were dissimilar in that the same words were not used in the two
sections. Furthermore, the “loneliness” questions focused upon how the students
themselves felt regarding aspects of loneliness assessing affective change, while the
“individualism” questions were structured more on the practical behavioral and
functional changes in their personal social relationships and leadership methodologies.

75
Based upon these assessments, the two variables of “individualism” and
“loneliness,” were considered to be legitimate and theoretically distinct constructs. From
this conclusion, the scales used to assess the constructs were viewed as valid measures to
provide assessment of these two realms. This approach to the survey data provided the
best interpretation for validity of the findings.
The data revealed a genuine relationship between the two constructs:
individualism and loneliness. While the program had not been intentionally designed to
address these issues, the research provided solid evidence that students in six cohorts over
two years in the MAGL program experienced formative change as evidenced in their
personal lives and relationships.
Survey Results
The complete list of charts and graphs for each question and each construct in the
survey – “loneliness” and “individualism” – are presented in Appendix E. However, the
most significant findings are presented here and serve to indicate the extent to which the
detrimental affects of globalization within this population were redressed. Potential for
further design refinement and program development in online education to serve a
globalized context resulted.
Outcomes for Individualism Questions Statistically Cross-Referenced
The results of the survey are presented below, firstly as a general result for each
question in table form, then as graphs presenting the varied results obtained when cross-
referencing each question. The question sequence – 2, 3, 7, 8, and 9 – ranged from the
general question on individualism to the more focused questions on relationships with
family, faith community, and those outside family and faith community. The graphs are
designed to present the results for the question along the bottom axis with most positive
76
change on the left, the neutral position (no real change) in the middle, and the most
negative change on the far right. The cross-referencing results are indicated on the right-
hand side of the graph and are color coded. The top item is the most positive result, the
neutral (no change) indicator is in the middle, and the most negative change is listed at
the bottom.
After the tables and graphs are listed for each question a summary of the findings
is presented. A summary of the results and an overall interpretation of the findings from
this research will be presented later in this chapter.
Changes in Relationship to Others
This broader question in the survey dealt with relationship development, although
additional questions were designed to focus more specifically on relationships that the
student had with their family, faith community, and those outside their family and faith
community. The purpose of this question (2) in the survey was to provide a comparison
between students’ general relationships to their specific in-groups and out-groups.
It was interesting to note that for this question about student’s “relationship to
others” (in general), a statistically significant 74% of the students surveyed considered
that they had developed “somewhat” or “much closer” personal relationships with others
(see Table 4.1).
A most important finding was discovered when cross-referencing the results for
question 2 with those for the question seeking to know if students “felt more loved,”
assessing affective transformation regarding loneliness1 (survey question 5 in the
loneliness section) (see Figure 4.1). By far the largest number of students in any category
1 This is another way to ascertain if students are lonely. As Cacioppo indicates, “We also find that
social connections and the loneliness of the people to whom these connections are directed interact to affect
how people feel.” To undertake the research Cacioppo measured loneliness “from the ‘I feel lonely’ item”
in their Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (Cacioppo, Fowler, and Christakis 2009, 982,
985).
77
was those that experienced an “increased sense of feeling loved,” not the most positive
category but still a very significant result especially in the category of question 2 where
students indicated they had “develop[ed] somewhat closer relationship with others.”
Also, those that experienced an “increased sense of being loved” were strongly
represented in the results for positive improvement in development of relationships with
others.
TABLE 4.1
CHANGES IN RELATIONSHIP TO OTHERS
MAGL Student Survey 2009
What kinds of changes have you experienced as a result of the MAGL in regard to your relationship to
others?
Answer Options Response Percent Response Count
a. Due to personal growth through my MAGL study program I am much

21.0% 22
closer to people and more relational
b. The MAGL helped me to develop somewhat closer relationships with
53.3% 56
others
c. How I relate to others has not really changed 21.9% 23
d. I am a little more distant from people 3.8% 4
e. I am much more distant from people and do not have many close
0.0% 0
relationships
Answered question 105
Skipped question 0
It was interesting to observe that the results when cross-referencing “close
relationships” with “social alienation” showed that those who “on rare occasions felt
alienated” closely mirrored the results presented here for those that had an “increased
sense of being loved” (see Figure 4.2). Likewise, those that had “no sense of social
alienation” had very similar results to those that experienced a “deeper sense of being
loved.” These factors were closely aligned. However, when cross-referencing this
question with “loneliness,” it was fascinating to discover that 8.6% of students who had
78
FIGURE 4.1
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHERS CROSS-REFERENCED TO FEEL LOVED
FIGURE 4.2
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHERS CROSS-REFERENCED TO SOCIAL

ALIENATION
79
FIGURE 4.3
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHERS CROSS-REFERENCED TO LONELINESS
FIGURE 4.4
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHERS CROSS-REFERENCED TO CLOSE,

ACCOUNTABLE RELATIONSHIPS
80
FIGURE 4.5
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHERS CROSS-REFERENCED TO

GENDER
FIGURE 4.6
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHERS CROSS-REFERENCED TO AGE

81
improved relationships indicated that loneliness was “no longer an issue” for them,
and23.8% felt they were “less lonely than before,” a total 31.4% for whom this was a
direct correlation (see Figure 4.3).
Noteworthy in Christian education that seeks spiritual formation was that those
who were “actively involved in accountable relationships” (active discipleship) were
more developed in their general relationships, and those that “valued committed
(discipleship) relationships” also expressed improvements in their general relationships2
(see Figure 4.4). There seemed to be a direct correlation between the level of involvement
in discipleship-style relationships and improvement in student relationships in general.
Assessment of this question cross-referenced to a student’s “gender” revealed that
men and women (the percentage of total students being 72.1% and 27.9%) were
proportionately very similar in the way close relationships had or had not developed (see
Figure 4.5). However, when cross-referencing the question to “age,” it was interesting to
note that none of the younger students “20-29” nor older ones “50 or above” considered
that they were “more distant from others” while a few in the “30-39” and “40-49” age
groups did (see Figure 4.6). However, a most significant finding was that the age group in
which students were most transformed in general relationships was for those between 30
and 39 with 61% of this group stating “somewhat closer relationships” and 19% having
“much closer relationships.” A total of 80.6% of these students reported improved
relationships as a result of study in the program.
In summary, the findings for question 2 seem to have been consistent across the
variables. The fact that 74% of students who had “increased their relationships with
2 Two students indicated in their responses to the open question (Q 10) in the Individualism
survey that asked, do you think as a result of the MAGL program that you are different in how you think,
behave, or feel, and if so, in what way/s?: “[7.] I understand more fully how our community impacts our
spiritual growth. Healthy growth cannot happen without community and strong peer relationships”, and
“[91]. I have always tried to be part of the "big picture" of whatever God is doing in the faith community. I
likewise honor the fact that I submit to Spiritual authority, even when I don't agree with it.”
82
others” also felt more loved and less lonely or socially alienated than before the MAGL
program represented an encouragingly high number for whom transformation had
occurred throughout the two-year program. These effects were the most significant for
students aged 30-39, although students aged 40-49 were also greatly impacted. While
those in other age groups experienced some change, it was proportionately less. The
overall results were consistent for both males and females.
Relationships with Family Members
It was interesting to note for question 7 in the survey about student’s “relationship
to their family” was that more than 62.9% of the students surveyed had “positive
relational improvements” or “much stronger and closer” familial relationships after their
study in the MAGL program (see Table 4.2). Assuming students’ self-assessments were
not inflated, they may be the most accurate indicator of transformation in student’s lives,
given the “mirroring” nature of familial relationships. The large proportion of students
indicating an increased strength or closeness in their family relationships may well serve
as a positive marker for their educational process. Also, with 34% of the students
indicating that their relationships were about the same, the overall findings for this
question yielded very positive outcomes.
An important discovery emerged when cross-referencing the results for question 7
with “feeling loved.” For those who “felt more loved” or who experienced an “increased
sense of feeling loved,” the number of students for whom their familial relationships were
“stronger and closer” or “some positive improvements” was high with 49.1% indicating
positive results (see Figure 4.7). In addition, there were 13.3% of students who
considered that “nothing had changed” with regard to feeling loved, yet they indicated
they had improvements in their familial relationships. This means that 61% experienced
positive growth in the area of family relationships after study in the MAGL program.
83
TABLE 4.2
RELATIONSHIP WITH FAMILY MEMBERS
Reflecting upon your relationships with members of your family, as a result of your experience through
the MAGL would you say:
They are stronger and closer than before 29.5% 31

There have been some positive relational improvements 33.3% 35
I consider they are about the same as before 34.3% 36
They are not quite as good as before 1.0% 1
There has been a significant deterioration in my family relationships 1.9% 2
Skipped question 0
Interesting results surfaced when cross-referencing “family relationships” with
“social alienation” that showed that those who “on rare occasions feel alienated” were the
largest in each positive category related to family relationships, 36.2%, as well as for
those for whom family relationships “were about the same,” 18.1%. This, plus the strong
results for those who “have no sense of social alienation” and also experienced positive
improvements in familial relationships, 11.4%, were very significant since 47.6% of
students experienced this (see Figure 4.8). While this is differently distributed to the
aforementioned cross-reference, it showed a decrease in social alienation and a positive
improvement in family relations for a vast majority of students, 72.4%. Such a finding
may speak to the validity of this type of educational model to affect family relationships
and increase a student’s sense of social connectedness.

84
FIGURE 4.7
RELATIONSHIP WITH FAMILY CROSS-REFERENCED TO FEEL

LOVED
FIGURE 4.8
RELATIONSHIP WITH FAMILY CROSS-REFERENCED TO SOCIAL

ALIENATION
85
FIGURE 4.9
RELATIONSHIP WITH FAMILY CROSS-REFERENCED TO

LONELINESS
FIGURE 4.10
RELATIONSHIP WITH FAMILY CROSS-REFERENCED TO CLOSE,

ACCOUNTABLE RELATIONSHIPS
86
FIGURE 4.11
RELATIONSHIP WITH FAMILY CROSS-REFERENCED TO GENDER
FIGURE 4.12
RELATIONSHIP WITH FAMILY CROSS-REFERENCED TO AGE

87
When it came to cross-referencing question 7 to “loneliness,” the distribution was
very different. By far the largest number in each of the positive categories regarding
familial relationships and those for whom their family relationship remained unchanged
were for those that indicated “nothing had changed” in regard to “loneliness.” In all,
54.6% of students fell in these categories (see Figure 4.9). Overall, the positive results for
those that experienced an improvement regarding “loneliness” and also experienced
improvements in or no change to familial relationships were 35.2%. This result is
generally 4% higher than those discovered when cross-referencing “loneliness” to
question 2 on general “close relationships.”
A striking discovery was revealed when cross-referencing familial relationships
with “close, committed and accountable relationships” (discipleship). In each of the
categories where students noted positive improvements in their familial relations and
those for whom their familial relationships remained the same, the largest number were
those who were “actively involved in accountable relationships” (see Figure 4.10). This
group represents a total of 50.5% of students. Combining these, the total number of
students who showed positive results for “committed relationships” and those with
improved or similar familial relationships represented a significant majority of the
sample, 72.4% of students.
Assessment of this question cross-referenced to student “gender” revealed that
proportionately more men than women experienced improvements in their family
relationships with 67.1% of men and 48.3% of women (see Figure 4.11). Proportionately,
however, 44.8% women indicated their familial relationships remained unchanged
compared to 31.6% of men.3 The two students for whom family relationships had
3 Of the 105 students surveyed, 97 were married (90%) and 8 (7.7%) were single. Only two
students (1.9%) were divorced, one respondent did not indicate marital status, and no one indicated being a
widow or widower.
88
“significantly deteriorated” were women,4 and the cause for this was not identified in the
survey.
Lastly, when cross-referencing the question to “age,” it was clear that the “40-49”
year-old students were the largest number proportionately to experience “stronger and
closer” family relationships as a result of the MAGL program, 35.1% of their group. The
“over 50” age group was also strongly represented with 32% of their number
experiencing stronger familial relationships. The lowest group proportionately, however,
was the “20-29” year olds who only had 11% (see Figure 4.12). By far the largest group
proportionately to experience “some positive relational improvements” in family
relations was the “30-39” age group with 56% of their number, and surprisingly the “40-
49” age group was the lowest proportionately, only 18.9%. Those that considered their
family relationships were “about the same” had the largest proportion in the “20-29” year
age with 50%. Both the “40-49” and “over 50” age groups were proportionately equal at
41.7% in each group respectively, while the “30-39” age group had only 36.1% in this
category.
In summary, the findings for question 7 seem to have been consistent across the
variables. The fact that 62.9% of students experienced an improvement in their familial
relationships during study in the MAGL program is again a very significant indicator in
assessing transformation in their lives. These effects were the most significant for men,
who functioned in close accountable relationships (discipleship) and were in the “20-29”
age category. It is interesting to note, though, that the 62.8% of students experiencing
improvements in family relationships was less than the 74% that had improvements in
general relationships (question 2).
4 This issue may require more research and might need to be addressed in future MAGL cohorts.
It is difficult to determine from this result if singleness was a contributing factor for this deterioration or
not.
89
Personal Relationships within Student’s Faith Community
For question 8 of the survey a total 60% of students noted an improvement in
relationships with their faith community, and of this number 40% expressed a distinct
improvement. For 27.6% students there was no real change in faith community
relationships, and for 12.4% there was a slight deterioration (see Table 4.3). Further
cross-referencing with other variables assisted in determining some of the factors that
influenced such a large positive improvement, these results are encouraging.
A very important finding discovered when cross-referencing the results for
question 8 with those who “felt more loved” or who experienced an “increased sense of
feeling loved” was that 17.1% of students also actively sought out “closer deep
relationships” with their faith community. However, the most notable result was that
27.6% students who had “an increased sense of being loved” also experienced “a distinct
TABLE 4.3
RELATIONSHIPS WITH FAITH COMMUNITY
elationships with people in your faith community, since the MAGL:
Response Percent Response Count
20.0% 21
40.0% 42
27.6% 29
12.4% 13
90
0.0% 0

Skipped question 0
improvement in relationships” with their faith community. This was far more than for any
other item in the “being loved” category. When this result was combined with those who
“had a deeper sense of being loved on all levels,” 2.9%, and those for whom “no
observable change had occurred” in being loved, 9.5%, those who had a “distinct
improvement in relationships” with their faith community were 40.2% of students (see
Figure 4.13).
For just over one-quarter of the students, 27.9%, there was “no real change in
relationships with their faith community.” It was very interesting to observe that the
“slight deterioration in relationships” with the students’ faith community occurred mostly
for those who had “no observable change in a sense of feeling loved,” 6.7%, and the next
largest number of students were those who had “an increased sense of being loved,”
4.8%. Although this is important to consider, more assessment of this category through
91
FIGURE 4.13
RELATIONSHIPS WITH FAITH COMMUNITY CROSS-REFERENCED

TO FEEL LOVED
FIGURE 4.14

TO SOCIAL ALIENATION
92
FIGURE 4.15
RELATIONSHIPS WITH FAITH COMMUNITY CROSS-

REFERENCED TO LONELINESS
FIGURE 4.16

TO CLOSE, ACCOUNTABLE RELATIONSHIPS
93
FIGURE 4.17

TO GENDER
FIGURE 4.18

TO AGE
cross-referencing will be required to better understand the reasons for this deterioration.
94
Cross-referencing “relationships with faith community” with “social alienation”
showed that those who “on rare occasions felt alienated” were by far the largest number
of students for each of the positive categories for improved faith community
relationships, 35.2%, as well as those for whom these relationships have not changed at
17.1%. Those who had “no sense of alienation” were the second largest number for
whom positive changes occurred regarding faith community relationships with 16.2% of
students, meaning that for 51.4% of students, improvement in faith community
relationships resulted, and they had a reduced sense of social alienation (see Figure 4.14).
When examining those who experienced a slight deterioration in relationships with their
faith community, it was interesting to note that 8.6% of those students felt “slightly more
socially alienated from people” than before study in the MAGL program.
This area of the research is very important, as the research carried out by
Cacioppo, James Fowler, Nicholas Christakis indicates there is a correlation between
social alienation, loneliness, and group relations. They say:
Our results suggest that humans may…drive away lonely members…and

that feeling socially isolated can lead to one becoming objectively
isolated. Loneliness not only spreads from person to person within a social
network but it also reduces the ties of these individuals to others within the
network. As a result, loneliness is found in clusters within social networks,
is disproportionately represented at the periphery of social networks, and
threatens the cohesiveness of the network. The collective rejection of
isolates observed…may therefore serve to protect the structural integrity
of social networks.
In the present study, the finding that loneliness spreads more quickly
among friends than family further suggests that the rejection of isolates to
protect social networks occurs more forcibly in networks that we select,
rather than in those we inherit” (2009, 986-987).
It is, therefore, vitally important that if full engagement is to be effected with the
student’s faith community, loneliness and social alienation of the individual have to be
reduced.
95
Cross-referencing the question to “loneliness” revealed that for all categories of
positive improvement in faith community relationships, the largest numbers were of
students for whom “nothing had changed” regarding loneliness (see Figure 4.15). The
total number of students that experienced both a positive reduction in loneliness and also
better faith community relations was 25.7%.
Examining the results for those that experienced a slight deterioration in faith
community relations, the majority did not have any change regarding loneliness, 5.7% of
students. However, in this category there was one more person who “felt more loneliness
than before” with 3.8% of students compared to the ones that did not “experience
loneliness as much as before” at 2.9%. This difference is too small to enable any
significant conclusions to be drawn and perhaps indicates specific reasons for each of
those individuals.
A further noteworthy finding was found when cross-referencing faith community
relationships with “close, committed and accountable relationships” (discipleship). The
largest number of students who experienced improvement in faith community
relationships or they remained the same were students who also were “actively involved
in close accountable relationships,” 48.8% (see Figure 4.16). Those who “valued close
accountable relationships” were generally the second largest number of students in each
of the positive and neutral categories related to faith community relationships. Overall,
the total number of students who had positive development in their close accountable
relationships was also 48.8% of students. Lastly, there was a very mixed spread of
students in the category that experienced “a slight deterioration” in relationships with
their faith community. Some had close, accountable relationships and others did not, so it
is hard to draw a conclusion from these findings.

96
When assessing this question cross-referenced to student “gender,” the
proportionate number of each gender in every category was almost identical, and no
gender was stronger or weaker in regard to faith community relationships (see Figure
4.17). However, when considering the results for this question referenced by age group, it
was interesting to find that those who “actively sought out relationships with their faith
community” from the younger “20-29” year olds were proportionately much lower with
12.5% (1 student) than the highest group proportionately, the “over 50” year olds with
28% (7 students) (see Figure 4.18). Then, for those who “experienced a distinct
improvement in those relationships,” the “30-39” age group were highest with 50% of
students while the other age groups were closely aligned with each other around 33%.
When it came to those who experienced “a slight deterioration in faith community
relationships,” the largest group proportionately were those in the “40-49” age group with
25% of those students.
In summary, the findings for question 8 have been consistently encouraging and
reinforce the positive transformational impact of the MAGL model. The fact that 60% of
students experienced an improvement in their faith community relationships during study
in the MAGL program is again a significant indicator of transformation in their lives
relationally. This was evenly spread among women and men. However, the strongest
results emerged for those that were actively involved in close accountable relationships.
For these, the percentage who experienced improvements were again significantly less
than the 74% who had improvements in general relationships. The deterioration in faith
community relationships were most significant for students in the age range of “40-49”
years old.
97
Relationships with People Outside Students’ Family and Faith Community
Question 9 in the survey showed a significant number of students, 36%, who
indicated their relationships with the broader community were “more developed than
before,” and when including the students who indicted their relationships were “improved
somewhat,” a total of 68.6% (nearly two-thirds) of all students considered their
relationships had improved. From a well-being and missional effectiveness perspective,
this is another exciting result. Only 2.9% of students considered these relationships not as
good as before (see Table 4.4). The program, therefore, nurtured and developed
individuals who were more likely to engage with society and the community beyond the
church. This often requires transformative elements that broaden perspectives and
energize outward movement in the life of the Christian, indicating a growth also in
relational resources for these students.
In cross-referencing question 9 to those students who “felt more loved,” it was interesting
to note that there were 18.1% of students for whom “outside” relationships are now
“more developed than they were before.” There was also a significant number of students
with more developed “outside” relationships who experienced a “deeper sense of being
loved on all levels,” 9.5% (see Figure 4.19). So, 27.6% of students expressed a positive
development in their “outside” relationships and also experienced a greater sense of
“feeling loved” after study in the MAGL program. The largest group for whom “outside”
relationships “improved somewhat” also had “an increased sense of being loved,” 21.9%,
which far exceeds the number of students in other categories of “feeling loved.” Of the
three students who indicated their “outside” relationships were “not as good as before,”
two had not experienced a change in their “sense of being loved” and the other had an
“increased sense of being loved.”

98
TABLE 4.4
RELATIONSHIPS WITH OUTSIDE COMMUNITY
As you consider your personal relationships with people OUTSIDE your family and faith community,
since the MAGL these relationships are:
More developed than they were before 36.2% 38

Improved somewhat 32.4% 34
Similar to what they were 28.5% 30
Not as good as before 2.9% 3
Are significantly worse than before 0.0% 0
Skipped question 0
FIGURE 4.19
RELATIONSHIPS WITH OUTSIDE COMMUNITY CROSS-

REFERENCED TO FEELING LOVED
99
FIGURE 4.20

REFERENCED TO SOCIAL ALIENATION
FIGURE 4.21

REFERENCED TO LONELINESS
100
FIGURE 4.22

REFERENCED TO CLOSE, ACCOUNTABLE RELATIONSHIPS
FIGURE 4.23

REFERENCED TO GENDER
101
FIGURE 4.24

REFERENCED TO AGE
It was interesting to observe that cross-referencing question 9 with “social
alienation” revealed that those who “on rare occasions felt alienated” were by far the
largest number of students for each of the positive changes in “outside” relationships as
well as those for whom these relationships were similar. In all, there were 39% of
students less alienated and 16.2% in the neutral category. This means that 55.2% of
students now “rarely felt alienated” and had similar, or improved, relationships with those
outside their family or faith community (see Figure 4.20). This, together with 10.5% of
students who noted they now “had no sense of social alienation” and had “more
developed” relationships with people “outside” their circle, means that social alienation
was reduced, and improved engagement with the general community resulted. Perhaps
not surprisingly, of the three students that indicated his or her “outside” relationships
were not as good as before, two considered themselves “slightly more alienated.”
102
However, a strange finding that does not align with other research was that the one
person for whom “social alienation is worse than before” also indicated their “outside”
relationships remained similar.
Cross-referencing the question to “loneliness,” the result that really stood out was
that for all categories of positive improvement in “outside” relationships as well as those
for whom these relationships were similar, the greatest number of students in each
category were those for whom “nothing had changed” regarding loneliness (see Figure
4.21). The next major observation was that those for whom “loneliness was no longer an
issue” and those who only “occasionally experienced loneliness,” there were more
students for whom “outside” relationships were “more developed than before.” This
number gradually lessened in each category, moving towards the neutral category for
changes in outside relationships. Those for whom a positive result was achieved in regard
to both “loneliness” and “outside” relationship development were 30.2% of students in
all, and this represents almost one-third of the students surveyed, which is a significant
result. For the three students who indicated their “outside relationships were “not as good
as before,” one was “aware of feeling more lonely” and two considered “nothing had
changed regarding loneliness.” There is no way of assessing the reasons for this or
knowing the level of connectedness of the persons’ relationships in the past. Again, the
surprising result was to discover one person who had “become very lonely” also
indicated his or her “outside relationships “had improved somewhat.” This same person
had a slight deterioration in relationships with their faith community while their family
relations remained about the same (observed in the results for question 7 and question 8),
and they indicated there had been a slight deterioration in their relationships in general
(question 2). It is difficult to interpret or account for the inconsistent results in this
particular instance.
103
Another significant discovery was revealed when cross-referencing question 9
with “close, committed and accountable relationships” (discipleship). Those for whom
the “outside” relationships were “more developed than before” and were also “actively
involved in accountable relationships” were 25.7% of students, and this was the largest
number by far in this category of “outside” relationship development (see Figure 4.22).
The total number of students who had positive improvement in both loneliness and
“outside” relationships was 54.3%, representing more than half the students surveyed.
Four students who indicated no change in their accountable relationships also noted that
their “outside” relationships were “not as good as before.”
Assessing this question cross-referenced to student “gender,” it was interesting to
discover that development of “outside” relationships by men was proportionately higher
than for women. The results for “more developed than before” were 36.8% men
compared to 31% of women. A similar result arose for these relationships being
“improved somewhat” with 35.5% of men and 24% of women in this category (see
Figure 4.23). The only item in which women were proportionately larger in number was
for relationships being “similar to what they were before” with 41.4% of women and
25% of men. Of those who indicated their “outside” relationships were “not as good as
before,” two were men and one was a woman, an almost equal proportion across genders.
Analyzing this question referenced to the age of the students was interesting.
Proportionately the “40-49” and “over 50” age groups were much larger in number for
those who had “outside” relationships “more developed than they were before” with
41.7% and 44% respectively. The “20-29” and “30-39” age groups were significantly less
with 28% and 27.8% respectively. However, of those indicating their “outside”
relationships had “improved somewhat,” the “20-29” and “30-39” groups were
proportionately larger being 37.5% and 41.7% respectively compared to the “40-49” and
104
“over 50” age groups with 22.2% and 32% respectively (see Figure 4.24). Interestingly,
the three people who indicated that their “outside” relationships were “not as good as
before” were all in the “40-49” age group.
In summary, the findings for this question indicate that a significant, positive
development in “outside” relationships occurred for 68.6% of students as a result of the
MAGL program. This again was less than the 74% who indicated improvements in their
general relationships (question 2). Still, this healthy result is another significant formative
indicator of growth in students’ lives. There was a slightly higher number of men than
women (proportionately) who experienced relational development, and again those who
were actively engaged in close, accountable relationships (discipleship) experienced
some of the strongest growth in these types of “outside” relationships.
Student Decision-Making Processes.
Question 3 in the “Individualism” section of the survey sought to understand the
decision-making style of leaders and provided an indicator of student cultural value for
independence or interdependence in their leadership styles. The way in which a person
values the connection between “self” and “other” in the decision-making process impacts
that person on an emotional level and affects their ways of being and resultant actions
(behavior). For this question, 76.2% of students (more than three-quarters) expressed
having more communal approaches to making decisions after their MAGL cohort
experience (see Table 4.5). This may well reflect one of the most influential findings to
emerge from the analyzed data. It indicates a marker for personal paradigm shifts for the
majority of students from culturally-oriented individualism toward a more collaborative
approach to decision-making, showing that a greater awareness of “self” and “others” had
resulted from their learning process. This would affirm that this particular educational
105
TABLE 4.5
STUDENT DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES
As you consider your level of relational independence when it comes to decision making, since completing
the MAGL would you say:
I have become very communal and confer with others in the decision-
18.1% 19
making process
I am more aware of communal approaches to making decisions and less
58.1% 61
relationally independent than I was
Nothing has really changed in the way I function in this regard 17.1% 18
I am somewhat less independent and more community-minded than I was 3.8% 4
I am still a very relationally independent person when it comes to decision-
2.9% 3
making
Skipped question 0
model has contributed to decreasing one of the most detrimental affects of globalization,
namely extreme individualism, where the rights of the individual take precedence over
the group.
When considering how to assess these results referenced to other factors in the
MAGL survey, it was decided that the variables of “sense of being loved,” “social
alienation,” and “loneliness” (used for the earlier questions) would not contribute
anything to the interpretation of these results. However, assessing results with reference
to “close, accountable relationships” (discipleship) and the fixed variables of “gender”
and “age” could clarify the results.
When cross-referencing question 3 about the level of relational independence in
decision-making to “close, accountable relationships” (discipleship), it was more than
encouraging indeed to discover that those students “actively involved in accountable
relationships” were by far the largest number in each positive growth category related to
communal decision-making (see Figure 4.25). In fact, it was strikingly evident that those
106
in this category of “close, accountable relationships” as well as those who “valued
committed relationships” were very actively involved in new decision-making paradigms
with 61% of students in these combined categories. There were, however, 12.4% who
had “active close relationships” but for whom “nothing had changed” in their decision-
making styles. It was interesting to see that the majority of those who were “very
relationally independent” or “somewhat less independent” in decision-making, 5.7% (6 of
the 7 students in these categories), were those who “do not have” or “have a limited
number of accountable relationships.” It would seem that valuing independence in the
extreme creates general resistance to accountability and translates into a more autocratic,
individualistic leadership style. This supports the anthropological perspective that core
cultural values we learn from childhood engender feelings (of things being right or
wrong, good or bad), around which certain behaviors, actions, and reactions are deemed
appropriate and are rewarded within the same cultural context (Hofstede, Hofstede, and
Minkov 2010, 11).
Cross-referencing this question to “gender” revealed that for those students who
have “become very communal” in decision-making, there were 18.4% of men compared
to 13.8% of women, which speaks for itself. This was similar for the category of “more
aware of communal approaches to decision-making” in that there were 59.2% of men and
55.2% of women (see Figure 4.26). In the category “nothing has really changed” in
decision-making, women were proportionately larger in number, 24.1%, than the 15.8%
of men. However, those who are “still very relationally independent” when it comes to
decision-making were all males (4%), which is worth noting.
Other interesting observations were noted when cross-referencing the question to
age. There was a proportionately higher number of students had “become very communal
in decision-making among “20-29” years old, 25% of this group, while the other age
107
groups were similar proportionately, around 16%. For the category “more aware of
communal approaches to decision-making,” the results were very strong for each age
FIGURE 4.25
STUDENT DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES CROSS-REFERENCED

TO CLOSE, ACCOUNTABLE RELATIONSHIPS
108
FIGURE 4.26

TO GENDER
FIGURE 4.27

TO AGE
109
group, and they were very similar to each other proportionately. However, again the “20-
29” year olds were 62.5%, which was slightly higher, and they were closely followed by
the “over 50” year olds at 60%, the “40-49” year olds at 58.3%, and the “30-39” year olds
with 55.6% who were more communal in decision-making (see Figure 4.27). For those
whom “nothing had really changed” in their leadership practices, the results were very
even proportionately. However, of the three who said that they were “still a very
relationally independent person” regarding decision-making, two were “over 50” and one
was “40-49.”
In summary, it is evident that the degree to which students are prepared to be
involved in “close, accountable relationships” (discipleship) is directly related to the style
of leadership they adopt and whether the decision-making process they use is more
communal (collaborative/consultative) or not. With 76.2% of students learning more
communal approaches to decision-making, the resultant effects upon the organizations
they lead will be significant.
Slightly more men than women reported using a communal approach in decision
making, and those who reported functioning more from an individualistic leadership style
were beyond 40 years of age. While much transformation has been accomplished in the
lives of many students in these age groups in terms of leadership methodology, a few
reported still functioning the way they have previously known and been taught.
An Initial Framework for Understanding the Results
I believe there are a number of defining factors unique to this pilot program that
contributed to these results. Students were given the freedom to develop their own group
identity through a Community Rule of Practice. They began a conversation together
within their cohort to discover and decide upon a set of shared values and practices and
developed a community rule to which they could all feel equally committed. They were
110
invited to choose a name for their cohort that depicted the group identity that was being
formed around their Community Rule of Practice.
This non-coercive and creative process spawned a foundational framework for
inclusivity, collaboration, connection, community, and group identity to develop.
Hofstede, Hofstede, and Minkov indicate that, “Creating shared rules, even if they are
never written down, is a precondition for group survival…to create a new culture” (2010,
12). Similarly Louise Stoll and Karen Louis Seashore believe that “the principles of
inclusion, wholeness and connection…are critical to the success of any learning
community” (2007, 15). David McConnell supports this idea and carries the value of such
community formation even further: “Any design we put into action has to provide useful
information, companionship, different levels of support and more than anything perhaps a
strong sense of connection that helps those involved to develop a sense of…cohort
identity” (McConnell 2006, 33). In the process students discovered that attaining and
processing knowledge is social as well as individual.
Personal relationships and the sense of group identity were strengthened as every
cohort group attended a seminar on campus in the second quarter of their program and
another 18 months later at the conclusion of their cohort studies as the MAGL program
used a blended online program design. These seminars provided opportunities for
students to share their personal stories and solidify their already developing relationships.
The seminar structure utilized adult learning principles, grouped students around tables,
and facilitated face-to-face interaction. It bears mentioning that the core value of a non-
coercive, connected, relational community was modeled by the administrative team who
had also intentionally embraced the same process of developing their own community
rule of practice by which they functioned. Many on this team had mentoring roles beyond
administrative service and support to the students.

111
It would be entirely remiss not to acknowledge the not easily defined but clearly
attending presence of the transcendent in the formative and transformative process.
While having core Biblical values in common, there was much diversity in each cohort
and therefore many differing cultural core values held. In my experience the process we
witnessed was unique in educational circles. I believe that the authentic, reciprocating
relationships developed within the framework of these learning communities, committed
to shared values and to one another, provided an organic and dynamic context into which
the Holy Spirit breathed.
This holistic model of education facilitated group learning extending beyond the
borders of knowledge that informed, to experience interdependence within a community
of learning where students were transformed.
Concluding Comments
The MAGL program’s mission was to “come alongside and equip in-service
leaders from all parts of the world with transformational graduate education for
leadership in their contexts” (Fuller Theological Seminary 2011). Course content, the
interactive nature of the learning model, and diversity within the cohort naturally meant
that contemporary Western paradigms were challenged. However, the MAGL program
was never intentional in its design to address the core concerns arising from the
detrimental aspects of globalization, namely loneliness and extreme individualism. Yet,
the data yielded conclusive evidence from a large sample population across six cohorts
that students experienced positive change and growth in areas that protect them from, and
perhaps give them skills to avoid, the negative impact of loneliness and extreme
individualism in an increasingly globalized world.

112
At this juncture, some of the written comments from students in the survey can
provide helpful insights into the changes that have resulted from study in the program. In
regard to loneliness, some of the notable comments listed in numerical order were:5
20. I entered the program feeling very lonely. I had a few friends I trusted
enough to share my heart. Since the MAGL I have an increasing
awareness that others love and care for me, whereas prior, I never
experienced that.
64. I do feel that I see loneliness in a different light. The realizations in

the MAGL have helped me seek out connection with other and made me
more intentional in making those connections.
74. I am simply more open to being with someone at more than a

superficial level. I also have a deeper, gut level appreciation for the fact
that every person I meet can minister to me, just as I can minister to them,
even if sometimes the means is not obvious.
80. I am given to loneliness as an introvert. It is in the intentional pursuit

of relationships that I still feel connected and loved. There are 4 students
that I still regularly dialogue with.
A few of the notable student comments regarding individualism and the need for
relational community were:
37. I see the global community in a very different way. I had very much
taken on the American way of life as the individual. I feel like I reject this
thought now and seek more of a community based approach in life.
38. Yes. I am more convicted about the way that I present the gospel and
what I communicate that we are invited into as we are reconciled to our
Creator. I now give more thought and emphasis to the importance of
community in the development of character, leadership and a contrast
society that exists to partner in God's redemptive mission.
57. I value the insight of both others inside and outside my community
more than I did before. I see the value of learning communities and now
prefer them over individualized learning.
5 The full text of all comments from students for both of the open questions in the survey, one
concerning individualism and the other loneliness, are listed in Appendix E.
113
78. The MAGL program helped me gain perspective on the power of

individualism in my life and soceity. I now find myself seeking
community and accountability in everyday life and decisions. I think this
is essential to being the people of God.
The data showed 63.8% of all the students surveyed reported positive
improvement in relationships with their families, faith community, and those “outside”
their family and faith communities. Added to this, 75.2% of students specifically reported
an improvement or increase in close, accountable relationships. On average, 62.7% of the
students experienced less social alienation, fewer feelings of loneliness, and an increased
sense of “feeling loved.” Beyond these encouraging results, it was found that 76% of the
student leaders, pastors, and missionaries surveyed now have more
collaborative/communal approaches to decision making after study in the MAGL
program.
This research reflects that students surveyed in the MAGL cohorts 6-12
experienced transformational changes of various types associated with values, emotions,
practices, cognition, and behavior. It would be remiss not to press on toward seeking to
further understand exactly why this process worked so well by comparing it with historic
community formation practices and contemporary spiritual and educational theories.

PART II
LEARNING STRUCTURES, THEORIES, AND PHILOSOPHIES
Understanding the current global and Western cultural context provides a
foundation for assessment of various historic and contemporary learning structures,
theories, and philosophies, and their appropriateness for online education in a global
world. This section of the research seeks to discover appropriate ways in which to
address the concerns discovered in Part I, to enhance the findings of research on the
MAGL program that has begun to address these concerns, and to discover a model that
will aid the holistic formation of students through learning – “a process of becoming.”
In order to accomplish these things Chapter 5 will examine historic practices used
in cenobitic communities in the third and fourth centuries. Chapter 6 will examine
contemporary spiritual formation issues and theories associated with online educational
models, the assessment of spiritual formation, and accreditation agency requirements for
theological education. Then, Chapter 7 will examine collaborative learning theories and
practices, Chapter 8 will focus on the development of Transformative Learning Theory,
and Chapter 9 will propose a model of online education appropriate for effecting holistic
student formation in response to the global and cross-cultural context in which we now
live.
114
CHAPTER 5
FORMATION IN HISTORIC SPIRITUAL COMMUNITIES
The formation, preservation, and propagation of Christian community since the
time of the early church has been key to spiritual formation, Christian discipleship, and
the preservation of the faith (Acts 2:44; Acts 4:32). I agree with Kurt Fredrickson’s
sentiment, “We do not dream of returning to the days of the first century church seeking
to duplicate a churchly order that was appropriate for that time” (Fredrickson 2009, 11).
However, in seeking structures to emerge in ways appropriate for cultural contexts,
looking at history and the realities that have transcended time and culture proves helpful
in understanding the elemental structures that contributed to the outcomes found in this
program.
From the early days of the Christian church, there were devout Christians who felt
called to dedicate their lives to God. Many began to live solitary lives as hermits in the
wilderness and were called monks (Greek monos, which means alone). They lived ascetic
lifestyles to remove obstacles to loving God. They felt that love was union of their will to
God’s will, and they attempted to achieve this by submitting to His will in all things: "If
you love Me you will keep my commandments" (John 14:15, New American Standard
Bible). Eventually there were many hermits in the wilderness, and they began to live
together in what were called monasteries. Christian monasticism developed into two
primary and contrary forms, the eremitic monasteries for solitary living and the cenobitic
for communal living. Later, fourth-century Christian monastic communities responded to
cultural issues of the day. They, like the early Christian church, provide insight into key
115
116
concepts and values that have been essential to Christian community since that time.
More recently new monasticism has been viewed by some as being valuable for
transformation and required in the lives of people in the contemporary church as a
community (Stock, Otto, and Wilson-Hartgrove 2007) (Sloan 2006). A deeper
examination of traditional cenobitic monastic communities, their structure, function, and
values may speak insightfully from the pages of history to the narrative in which we
participate today, specifically as it pertains to effective education for Christian leaders.
Therefore, this chapter will explore some of the structures and practices of Roman
Catholic Benedictine, Dominican, Jesuit, and Celtic communities, as well as insights
from Pachomius, Saint Basil, Saint Augustine, Saint Francis of Assisi, and Dietrich
Bonhoeffer as they consider spiritual formation in Christian community. The study is
focused on Western monasticism and significant theologians and leaders within this
tradition.
Celtic Community
Saint Patrick arrived with his colleagues to evangelize Ireland around 432. His
mission to penetrate the pagan world and extend the church was centered around Celtic
community. While Eastern communities were organized at that time to protest and escape
from Roman materialism and their monks withdrew from the world to focus on God, the
Celtic leaders organized communities to “save souls.” Their monasteries were not located
in remote and isolated places, rather in more trafficked areas close to settlements and
established trade routes or sea lanes. While some monks and nuns lived in Celtic
monastic communities, these communities were much more diverse than Eastern
monasteries as priests, teachers, scholars, craftsmen, artists, farmers, families, and

117
children also lived in community. Each monastic community was led by a lay abbot or
lay abbess1 and they were essentially lay movements (Hunter 2000, 28).
Unlike the desert Christians who tended to settle in one place for life, the Celtic
saints frequently embraced a life of pilgrimage and mission. Also, unlike the desert
guides whose classical education focused on the primacy of the scriptures, Celtic saints
loved learning and a life of study (Sellner 2002, 82). George Hunter says that Celtic
communities produced very different results in people’s lives compared to Roman forms
of monastic community:
…the monastic communities produced a less individualistic and more

community-oriented approach to the Christian life. This affected the way
in which – in parish churches, communities, tribes, and families – the
people supported each other, pulled together, prayed for each other,
worked out their salvation together, and lived out the Christian life
together. Every person had multiple role models for living as a Christian
and, in a more profound and pervasive sense than on the continent, Irish
Christians knew what it meant to be a Christian family or tribe (Hunter
2000, 30).
There were five major factors that seemed to contribute to changed lives in Celtic
spirituality. Firstly, they were expected to enter into voluntary periods of isolation like
the desert fathers and were told by their Celtic leaders to: “Go, sit in your cell, and your
cell will teach you everything.”2 For them, this practice or discipline was countercultural
just as it would be today. People think they are “islands,” alone, and as individuals will
be taught everything. To say, “Go, sit in your group – it will teach you everything” may
be difficult to embrace as we value privacy, independence, and self-reliance. Secondly, a
very close accountable relationship was established with an anamchara (soul friend) who
was not a superior mentor but rather a peer with whom they were to be vulnerable and
1 Brigid in Ireland and Hilda in England were the two most notable abbesses of large monastic
communities.
2 Attributed to an Egyptian abbot named Moses, quoted in (de Wall 1996, 87) and noted by
Hunter (Hunter 2000, 47).
118
accountable, making confession and receiving penance with mutual encouragement and
personal challenge. Thirdly, even in large monastic communities they were to spend time
in small groups of 10 people or less, led by a person noted for their devotion. This was
very similar to the practice of functioning in small groups that later operated in
Benedictine communities. Fourthly, there was participation in the life of the whole
community in sharing practices around common meals, work, learning, prayers, worship,
and Bible recitation. Then, lastly, experience in ministry was gained through observing
and participating in their small groups, the broader community life, and experiences with
their soul friends.
This structure provided strong personal foundations rooted in the Gospels and the
Scriptures and fostered the opportunity to experience the presence of God in an
empowered life. It also helped with the discovery of a person’s vocation, and enabled
members to fulfill their vocation as they experienced ministry firsthand with those who
were “seeking” alongside each other. This was an apprentice model of evangelization and
ministry that involved the whole person, and Hunter believes it vividly engaged people’s
feelings and their imaginations as they lived the Gospel (Hunter 2000, 48). The often-
heard adage that “Christianity is more caught than taught” is certainly reflected in the
Celtic model of spirituality found in community.
To fully understand Celtic spirituality, it is necessary to understand the nature of
the Celtic anamchara, or soul friend. An anamchara was “originally someone who, as a
companion, shared another’s cell and to whom one confessed, revealing confidential
aspects of one’s life” (Hunter 2000, 81). The Celtic tradition of spiritual guidance like
this may have been developed from the influence of the desert Christian tradition with the
syncellus, “the one who shares a cell,” that was prominent in eastern Orthodoxy. It was in
the cell where one encountered God, and to share one’s cell with another was to learn to
119
share one’s inmost self, one’s mind and heart, with a soul friend. In this regard the soul
friend was one to whom one confessed and revealed the confidential aspects of one’s life
(Chadwick 1961, 103ff and 149). Having a close accountable friendship, a confessor, and
spiritual mentor was so important to Celtic Christian spirituality that St. Bright of Kildare
said, “Anyone without a soul friend is like a body without a head” (Sellner 2002,
Dedication page).
While the church on the continent functioned with personal confession and
acknowledgement of sin, it also developed a formal and highly ritualized rehabilitation
process that was very public. The early Celtic church on the other hand developed its
confessional approach as a practice more aligned with healing, personal life
transformation, and spiritual guidance than public punishment. Sellner says that,
In the Celtic practice, there was no order of penitents nor any public ritual
or ceremony; privacy was assured and confidentiality was to be
maintained at all costs. Nor was the confessor necessarily an ordained
person. As in the desert tradition, confession was often made to monks,
ascetics, and women known for their holiness (Sellner 2002, 183-184).
The countercultural inclusivity of Celtic practice can be seen from the above quote in that
confessors were both male and female, priests and those not ordained. It would seem that
the soul friend confessor contributed to this more inclusive approach, and that person
functioned in a more non-coercive role as a spiritual guide rather than a judge and as a
healer and friend rather than a disciplinarian. Oscar Watkins, an early twentieth-century
scholar, said:
The outstanding significance of the Keltic monastic systems of Penance

for the student of the history of Penance is that whereas on the continent of
Europe the rule throughout the West is public penance and public
reconciliation, in the Keltic procedure the public character has been taken
away from penance and reconciliation alike. The change is of momentous
importance. It marks the beginnings of the modern revolution in
penitential procedure (Watkins 1920, 609) quoted by Sellner (184).
120
A deeper awareness of the dimensions of the Celtic soul friend, the anamchara, is
important in order to really understand the depths of Celtic spirituality. There was a
formal role of confessor that was eventually connected to the ordained priesthood.3
However, the other aspect involved a more personal and intimate friendship which,
according to Sellner, was characterized by true mutuality out of a profound respect for
each other’s wisdom, despite their age or other differences. This was built on great
affection, longevity, and extreme honesty. The perspective was that the other person was
a source of many blessings.
These communities appeared to have spawned new, countercultural opportunities
in that they shared “common values, a common vision of reality, and sometimes, an
intuitive sense of the potential leadership of the younger protégés” (Sellner 2002, 206).
Also, these friendships included affirmation while at the same time being able to
challenge each other when necessary, and despite geographical separation this type of
deep relationship survived. They were focused upon a relationship with God through
whom all soul friendships were united and did not depend upon each other alone but
grounded their relationship in God to receive gifts of hope, insight, and deepened faith.
Anamchara relationships valued both a close friendship and solitude as each contributed
through the transitions in life. An example of this can be seen in the life of Saint Cuthbert
who in many ways was the quintessential anamchara. Despite functioning in solitude he
also functioned in varying roles as “confessor, teacher, physician of souls, judge,
discerning guide, and spiritual mediator [having] pastoral skills of listening, discernment,
3 It is interesting to note that by the late eighth century, Sellner notes in his Endnotes, p. 251,
quoted here that a “…monk is recommended to place himself "in the hands of a holy mentor that he may
direct one's path through life"; it also suggests that "the advice of a devout sage is a great asset.'' "No matter
how much you esteem your strength of will," it says, "place yourself under the direction of another." See
"The Rule of Comghalt" in O’Maidin (O'Maidin 1996, 31-36). It appears the Celtic anamchara (soul
friend) relationship eventually adopted a more hierarchical upward mentor approach very different from its
original structure and function.
121
teaching, and challenging…expected of a soul friend” (Sellner 2002, 209-210). For the
Celtic communities, the greatest gift to be experienced was to give and receive from a
soul friend. Soul friendships result in a spirituality focused upon ongoing conversion and
reconciliation that starts within each person and is founded in a willingness to change.
Their strength is found neither in human perfection or concealing faults but rather
through vulnerability and truthfulness from the heart, striving to be known, to know the
“other” without fear, and to face the truth of their lives where the worst parts can be
acknowledged and changed. Life in the cell with a soul friend, however, was often like
being in a furnace where illusions and obsessions are burned up, revealing what lies
beneath the surface of people’s lives. It is through this “burning away” of falsehoods: the
desire for control, dread of change, and fear of dying, Sellner also says, that people could
see themselves as they really are and the world the way it really is (Sellner 2002, 218). A
soul friendship could also be a place of sanctuary and result in greater unity (or even
reunion) with those who might make them feel insecure, alienated, misunderstood, or
hostile. To this end, as is written in the Tripartite St. Gall Penitential about such honesty,
“For no one can raise up one who is falling beneath a weight unless he bends himself that
he may reach out to him his hand; and no physician can treat the wounds of the sick
unless he comes in contact with their foulness” (Sellner 2002, 181).4 Such practice of
spirituality depicts a community where an organic relational structure provides the means
for transformation through accountable relationships of meaning within a community that
is intentional and united in purpose.
The socialization dynamics within the Celtic community cannot be
underestimated. In fact, Hunter believes the Celtic approach is validated not only by the
resultant changed lives but also by foundational principles in the field of Sociology of
4 Quoted by Sellner from the original text, no references given.

122
Knowledge. Central to the three themes that Hunter identifies from Berger’s work that
align with Celtic practices are:
(1) A person’s view of Reality is largely shaped, and maintained, within

the community into which one has been socialized. (2) In a pluralistic
society, the possibility of conversion, that is, changing the way one
perceives essential Reality, is opened up through conversations with
people who live with a contrasting view of Reality, and (3) one adopts and
internalizes the new worldview through resocialization into a community
sharing that new worldview (Hunter 2000, 99-100).5
Finally, Celtic Christianity was countercultural in that it was adaptive. It was an

indigenous community being adapted to the people’s culture rather than imposing a
uniform community and practices that were viewed as required by the dominant culture.
Roman culture, its bishops, and stringent controls and customs were dominant in other
monastic communities that emerged throughout Europe and were strictly controlled to the
extent that the only way to do things was the “Roman way.” (Although Benedictine
cenobitic communities were influenced by Rome, they were flexible in many aspects.)
This uniform practice was alien to the Celtic church, its leadership structure, and its
practices and proved to be its genius. It meant, according to Hunter, that Celtic
communities worshipped using their own unique music (instead of Roman music), their
native language (rather than Latin), their cultural dress and norms, and even their own
hairstyles. Ultimately, it can be seen that Celtic Christianity and its community was a
very unique model of monastic Christianity where growth, learning, and formation
happened within countercultural discipleship processes. For new converts these presented
disorienting dilemmas through which they were “helped” by their soul friend, resulting in
a transformed life.
5 Hunter refers to Berger and Luckman’s (1966) work to support his claims.
123
Benedictine Community
Benedict of Nursia founded his first monastery in 529. Benedictine monastic
communities that have grown since then using the Rule of St. Benedict have significantly
influenced the monastic and the spiritual life of the West and also economics, education,
and government even though they are distinctly different from other religious orders that
developed during other periods of history.
The cenobitic life in Benedictine communities was comprised of three core
elements: “(1) life together in community; (2) following a monastic rule; (3) having a
monastic superior who is the spiritual guide for the community as a whole as well as for
each member” (Stewart 1998, 71). Although this was the common structure to
Benedictine communities, there was no uniformity except in having Benedict’s Rule as
the foundation, which was then supplemented by policies and interpretations that
modified and amplified the prescriptions in the Rule for a particular local group.
Sometimes groups of monasteries emerged that linked together to a common “reformed”
community, and these led to the development of “constitutions” that addressed issues that
the Rule did not. These constitutions were at times supported by “declarations” that were
used to interpret various chapters of the Rule according to the needs or context of a
group. Because of these distinctions Benedictines are not an order in the traditional sense
but rather “a federation of tribes with a common heritage” (Stewart 1998, 72). Benedict
encouraged the asking of questions about the larger purpose that might direct people’s
lives, and then challenged a reshaping of practice to align with the goal or purpose. This
is the process that MAGL groups went through in creating their rule of practice.
Much can be learned from Benedictine communities and the way they functioned.
Benedict insisted “upon listening to the whole community, especially the counsel of the
youngest” (Robinson 2009, 48). This revolutionized the approach that typified the usual
monastic hierarchical practice where wisdom flows in one direction, from the older to the
124
younger, and despite the hierarchical model being found throughout the Rule, Kardong
indicates Benedictine communities are egalitarian in regard to spiritual formation
(Kardong 2010). Farrington notes this egalitarian aspect of Benedictine community went
even further saying, “Benedict’s rule is less harsh and autocratic than most. The abbot, in
Benedict’s rule, is required to consult with the whole community, and the questioning of
authority – within certain boundaries – is even allowed” (Farrington 2000, 11). It was in
this vein that Benedict noted, “We do not correct each other because we do not love each
other enough,” (Kardong 2010, 40).6 However, this mutual obedience was not some form
of Aquarian democracy nor the negotiation of management structures or authority but
was founded on the common sense of purpose in finding God’s will together. The mutual
nature of these communities, being omnidirectional, Michael Casey says, meant that
participants had to be:
…willing to be loved as much as to love, open to being served as much as

outgoing in offering assistance. Those who operate under a compulsion to
perform good works need to learn the art of stepping back sometimes and
letting others acquire merit. It is only within the context of an integral
common life that I can acquire the virtues that are the providential means
to my transformation (Casey 2005, 111).
The cloister and community alone do not make a Benedictine. The focus of each
community was to seek God together, and this bonded them together in a very unique
way. The adoption of changes to the Rule made it easier for people to feel at home within
a community, and this contributed to the energy found when they sought God together
(Stewart 1998, 72).
Benedictine monks also took a vow of stability, committing themselves to being
planted in their community, and in this context of commitment, spiritual formation would
6 Kardong references the Rule of Benedict 23-30: 43-46 noted by Father Ambrose Wathen, Order
of Saint Benedict, speaking at a symposium on monastic penalties held at Benet Lake, Wisconsin, in the
1970’s.
125
mature. However, it is important to realize that this was more of a commitment to people
than to a geographical place. This vow is one of three vows central to Benedictine
spiritual formation. They also practiced vows of conversion to the monastic way of life,
and obedience (Robinson 2009, 176). The Rule of St. Benedict did not separate
spirituality from the whole life of the person although there was little or no spirituality
within it other than monastic spirituality (Jones, Wainwright, and Yarnold 1986, 156).
“But Benedict was an innovator. No one had ever set up communities like his before and
directed them with a Rule. Another contributing factor to the success of these
communities was that small groups were prescribed in Rule #21 of The Rule of St.
Benedictine, as follows:
If the community is rather large, some brothers chosen for their good
repute and holy life should be made deans. They will take care of their
groups of ten, managing all affairs according to the commandments of
God and the order of the abbot. The deans selected should be the kind of
men with whom the abbot can confidently share the burdens of his office
(Hunter 2000, 48).7
Finally, the other important aspect of Benedictine cenobitic communities was the
role of the abbot, which was to discern the gifts in those he governed, and as mentioned
before, it was done in consultation or collaboration with the rest of the community. This
was for the purpose of assigning roles and functions to enable the members of the
community to contribute and utilize their gifts and giftedness (Casey 2005, 114).
Dominican Community
In 1217 Dominic of Osma, sometimes referred to as Domingo Félix de Guzmán,
founded The Order of Preachers also known as the Friars Preachers. Dominican
spirituality contained four main elements:
7 Hunter quoted in the footnotes.

126
(1) Dominican spirituality is a share in Jesus Christ the Word in his

mission of announcing the Good News of salvation which he himself is;
(2) This calling is fulfilled by a community out of its experience of living
for God and for neighbors;
(3) The source of its light is prayer, especially liturgical prayer, for which
one is freed by ascetic discipline and simplicity of life;
(4) This prayer is fed by assiduous study of the Scriptures and of all
sources of truth that help us to understand the Word of God” (Ashley
1990, 24).
The Dominican Order adopted The Rule of Saint Augustine and it became the
basic Rule of the Order. While holding strictly to asceticism, it allowed for the saving of
souls as an apostolic mission through preaching and prophetic ministry. This Rule,
although briefer than most and more general in its instruction, focused on three main
areas: poverty, simplicity, and obedience. It also provided for the formation of
community in unity: “The chief motivation for your sharing life together is to live
harmoniously in the house and to have one heart and one soul seeking God (cf. Acts
4:32)” (Borgman 2001, 87). Founded upon Dominican democracy that varied slightly
from one Order to another, community was formed by actively seeking to dwell in Divine
presence, finding God in their midst such that mutual differences did not lead to strife.
The first Dominican constitutions were based on a true parliamentary

system. Later constitutions added a balancing of legislative and executive
powers. The legislation authority (constitutions) that governs Dominican
life, such as the election of religious superiors, are the result of meetings
called Chapters (The Order of Preachers 2010).
Dominicans believe that to live in the Kingdom is to live in Christian community,
and to preach the Kingdom is truly authentic when done while living in community that
this reflects Kingdom unity. Ultimately peace and rest in the midst of mobility and
turbulence was the fruit of a community functioning in unity (Borgman 2001, 86), and it
is; “Christian community whose unity is founded not merely in good human relations but
in those relations transformed by faith, hope, and sacrificial love. Christ Himself must be
the center and His Spirit the binding soul of community” (Ashley 2010). Dominicans
127
valued a fruitful community as a gift from God and longed for perfection of heavenly
community, yet did not have illusions about perfecting community life. This indicated
there is “no one specific right way,” but rather valued the process of transformation that
may involve conflicts of opinions (Sloan 2006, 102).
Unity in the Order was also strengthened by a vow of obedience, penitential in
nature, and required self-sacrifice. This was the only vow taken by Dominicans.
Obedience was promised to the Master of the Order and given without the pomp of
traditional rites, much like a feudal gesture of submission. It is interesting to note,
however, that obedience was to the Master and not to the Constitutions, and this defines
the limits and context of the submission. To a Dominican, the Constitutions were human
laws with no supernatural sanctions, while the precepts of the superior are binding in
conscience. Dominican Orders functioned using only an outline of the daily life in their
communities, and they did not use elaborate legislation like other Orders (Jones,
Wainwright, and Yarnold 1986, 298).
Jesuit Community
Íñigo López de Loyola, who later called himself Ignatius of Loyola, was the
founder of a school of spirituality in 1534, and his purpose for the Society of Jesus
(called Jesuits) was for each member:
…to strive especially for the defense and propagation of the faith and for
the progress of souls in Christian life and doctrine, by means of public
preaching, lectures, and any other ministration whatsoever of the word of
God and further by means of the Spiritual Exercises, the education of
children and unlettered persons in Christianity and the spiritual
consolation of Christ's faithful through hearing confessions and
administering the other sacraments.
Moreover, he should show himself ready to reconcile the estranged,

compassionately assist and serve those who are in prisons or hospitals and,
indeed, to perform any other works of charity, according to what will seem
128
expedient for the glory of God and the common good" (The Society of
Jesus in the United States 2010).8
Although the Society participated in the counter-reformation, it primarily sought “to
promote the glory of God through the spiritual good of the neighbor” (Ganss 1991, 46).
Even today Jesuits “seek to dedicate their lives to accompany people to a personal
encounter with the living God” (The Society of Jesus in the United States 2010).
Jesuit spirituality draws upon the Spiritual Exercises developed by Ignatius that
are a set of meditations, prayers, and mental exercises. Also the Constitutions, which
have never been altered, created a tightly centralized organization (Pollen 1912). Jesuit
community “is marked by Jesuits' readiness to be sent wherever the need may arise as
well as by the coming together in a sharing of life and goods with the Eucharist at the
centre” (The Society of Jesus in the United States 2010). The Constitutions address the
manner of distribution of Jesuit members as those who are sent (apostles) as laborers into
the field, the part of the world allotted to them. The dispersion of Jesuits could result in
disunion yet the cement that ties them both among themselves and with their head is the
love of God (Ganss 1985, 242, 247).
Despite the Constitutions not being altered it is interesting to note that, “The
Spiritual Exercises should be adapted to the disposition of the persons who desire to
make them, that is, to their age, education, and ability” (Ganss 1991, 126)9 An element
that supports cohesion in the community is obedience between the superior and subject
like the relationship of a father and son, the one that directs (the superior) to the one
being directed. A further element is the union of minds and hearts to the “Society of
8 It is reported by the Society of Jesus in the US that the Formula of the Institute is the
foundational document of the Society of Jesus. It was first approved in 1540 by Pope Paul III and
confirmed in 1550 by Pope Julius III.
9 Ganss notes that in Spiritual Exercises 18,19, and 20, Ignatius indicates the chief manners on
which these can be adopted to various classes and circumstances of people. The principles enshrined in the
Exercises can be communicated through a great variety of ways and means. Hence, many forms of retreats
naturally evolved.
129
love,” which Francis Xavier felt when traveling in the remotest parts of the world (Ganss
1985, 247).
General Christian Community Formation Principles and Practices
History has heard many other notable voices who have contributed to our
understanding of cenobitic life, and a very brief summation of these will complement the
discourse so far.
Saint Pakhom (292-348), commonly called Pachomius, was a Coptic who is
generally thought of as the father of cenobitic monasticism (functioning in community)
that had developed out of eremitic monasticism (monasteries of solitude). The core of his
relationships with other ascetics was his pledge that stressed the theme of mutual
support.10 “The Chief purpose of community was this sharing of responsibility for
material welfare and spiritual growth” (Jones, Wainwright, and Yarnold 1986, 128).
Saint Basil the Great (330-379), also called Basil of Caesarea, established
guidelines for monastic life which focused on community life, liturgical prayer, and
manual labor. He loved community and believed it was the heart of Christianity. Basil
believed that within each person there is a divine seed drawing us to God and toward our
neighbor, indicating that people are programmed for community. He also tied this
conviction to a biblical foundation:
Furthermore, no one is sufficient of himself to receive all the spiritual

charisms (of the Holy Spirit). Instead, the supply of the Spirit is given
according to the proportion of each one’s faith (Romans 12:6), such that,
in the communion of life the individual charism becomes the common
possession of fellow citizens. For to one is given the word of wisdom, to
another the word of knowledge, to another faith, to another prophecy, to
another the gift of healings (1 Corinthians 12:8) and so on. Each of these
the recipient has from the Holy Spirit not so much for himself as for the
10 Jones, Wainwright, and Yarnold (1986) reference this general principle as being expressed in
(G1 12, 20, 23f, Bo 20).
130
others. Therefore in community life the activity of the Holy Spirit of God
in one passes over to the all alike (is brought forth in common). Thus one
who lives by himself (and separated) may perhaps have one charism, yet
this very charism he renders useless by his idleness, having buried it in
himself. (Long Rule 7.13-17) (Kardong 2010, 39).
Since there are all types of people and most are not like us, we all have special gifts given
by the Holy Spirit to contribute to the spiritual development of others. Basil also believed
that every person needed mutual correction if there was to be healthy Christian growth in
the individual as well as the community. He stated:
The individual does not easily recognize his own faults and vices in his
withdrawal, for he has no one to reprove him and set him right with
gentleness and compassion. Although rebuke even from an enemy even
often induces in the well-disposed a desire to be cured, nevertheless, the
cure of sin is carried out adeptly by one who has sincerely loved, for he
who loves, it says, is diligent in discipline (Proverbs 13:24) (Kardong
2010, 40).11
Since Basil, together with Gregory of Nazianzus and Gregory of Nyssa, was known as
one of the Cappadocian Fathers who developed the definition of the Trinity for the First
Council of Constantinople in 381 and the final version of the Nicene Creed, his
theological foundations of community offer perspectives that are biblically robust.
Saint Augustine (354-430), also called Augustine of Hippo, as a Latin Church
father and one of the most important figures in the development of Western Christianity.
His theology on human unity – “one heart and one mind” – was very much related to the
Christian community of the day, and it provided the framework for this unity based on
the Trinitarian life of God. Terrance Kardong attempts to summarize this theology: “The
three divine persons are a unity of love. If the Spirit could weld the early Christians into
one mind and heart, that was only because the Spirit comes out of the fundamental divine
11 This is a direct quote used by Kardong but is not referenced as to the source document.
131
unity of persons” (Kardong 2010, 172-173).12 Augustine believed unification of the Holy
Spirit is working within community not just “in the Lord” but “toward God,” and the
ultimate goal of community is reunion with God. While the purpose of cenobitic
monastic life is mutual love and this could be considered the earthly purpose, the
heavenly purpose is to bring us to God.
A very interesting aspect of the Franciscan Order, a cenobitic monastic
community founded by Saint Francis of Assisi (1182-1226), is that while they had unity
in ascetic doctrine, the specific group determined how they would adopt the Benedictine
Rule in that:
It is not imposed upon the group by the outside – the authority of the
church is limited to ‘receiving and approving’ (PC 1) – but it is developed
and adopted by those who have received the impulse toward a new
evangelical life. Then it will be offered to those who receive the grace of
election and embrace it. Each new candidate who comes through the doors
of an institute is influenced by the Holy Spirit to make his own the
evangelical ideal which is presented to him in this concrete way of living
it and communicating it to men (de Aspurz 1974, 7-8).
There was a non-coercive nature to the creation of a Rule specific for the community
adapted from Saint Benedict’s Rule, where each individual has input into this Rule’s
formation or adaptation. In a community of this nature, there is a reciprocal enrichment
where the group offers its spirituality and ideals for a better Christian life to the new
member, yet each group receives a new injection of life in tune with the current
community of the period (age and time) from the new affiliate. This caused the group to
review the authenticity of its lifestyle and work as their values and practices were
challenged, and they sought to crystallize their initial aspirations in line with a new
reality.
12 Kardong writes this summary is based upon: Letter 238.16 (CSEL 57.545ff. = PL 33.1044D);
see Lue Verheijen, Nouvelle approche de la Règle de saint Augustin (Bégrolles-en-Mauges: Abbaye de
Bellefontaine, 1980), 39-40.
132
Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1906-1945), who was known for his Christian spirituality
and as being one who lived what he preached, also had a theology for Christian
community. He wrote that “the Christian needs another Christian who speaks God’s
Word to him. He needs him again and again when he becomes uncertain and discouraged,
for by himself he cannot help himself without belying the truth” (Bonhoeffer 1954, 23).
For Bonhoeffer this clarified the goal of Christian community as people who meet each
other as “bringers of the message of salvation” (Bonhoeffer 1954, 23). He strongly
believed that Christians belong to one another only through Jesus Christ, meaning that a
Christian needs others because of Jesus Christ and similarly that Christians come to
others only through Jesus Christ. Further, in Jesus Christ, Christians are chosen from
eternity and united for eternity. He also thought Christian community is likened to the
Christian’s sanctification, being a gift of God.
Comments
While contexts, cultures, and customs vary throughout history, spiritual formation
appears to transcend time. No one would argue that the appropriate context for effecting
spiritual formation is historically and biblically centered in the “Body of Christ,” the
church. Institutions offering ministry-training programs, which have historically been
offered on campus, need to see evidence that online training programs can effect spiritual
formation and a transformative process in students’ lives. This research seeks to add not
only current data but also historical records of formation within Christian communities.
Juxtaposition of Historic Practices of Christian Formation in Community with the

Online MAGL Program
A detailed examination of the ways the MAGL program was structured and how
it functioned will be considered in this chapter in relation to the major principles

133
discovered from the historical and theological study of spiritual formation processes in
cenobitic community.
The focus of the required “Community Rule of Practice” developed by each
MAGL cohort was similar to the Benedictine Rule. Namely, each member was to become
more Christ-like through spiritual practices and active commitment to one another
relationally. Each student was also challenged to develop and commit to his or her own
“Personal Rule of Practice.”
The dynamic relationships forged between the diverse students in their cohort
combined to provide an environment where students embraced a journey that was indeed
personal, interdependent, and developmental, the trajectory of which was often not linear
but was transformative as the Holy Spirit worked mysteriously in the process. The
Community Rules, fashioned by the students themselves, provided a framework and a
standard within which reciprocal, relational practices developed and functioned. Beyond
this, the students in the MAGL program research sample were practitioner church or
mission leaders who remained committed to and engaged in their ministries and their
specific contexts. They functioned in leadership and relationships in their faith
community and beyond, which provided continuity to their spiritual formation and a
context for implementing and validating learning as well as testing new things and asking
new questions.
Given that the ATS accreditation requirements are for students to experience
spiritual formation as well as a “community of learning,” the MAGL online program
included two on-campus intensive seminars and developed a cohort model of education
to ensure these objectives were intentionally addressed. While students enrolled in the
MAGL program primarily for the purpose of being better equipped in their calling and
more effective in ministry, they reported overwhelmingly that the cohort model provided
134
a rich community of learning, personal and group spiritual formation, and deep
relationships that far exceeded their expectations.13
To provide a biblical and historical “compass” or spiritual orientation, cohort
members were required in their first class to read Debra K. Farrington’s book Living
Faith Day by Day: How the Sacred Rules of Monastic Traditions Can Help You Live
Spiritually in the Modern World. Then, an assignment was given where the cohort as a
group conceived, agreed upon, and committed to a “Community Rule of Practice.”
Within that framework, each student also developed their own “Personal Rule” of
spiritual practice to which they committed during their study program. Farrington’s work
supplied a basic historical and biblical overview of traditional monastic (cenobitic)
practices and related them to the contemporary context spawning creative ideas that could
be used to help shape the conversation in each cohort. As they sought God together, the
process revealed to each group where their values intersected and varied and where
biblical and transcendent values became the predominant discourse. They distilled and
refined these until a brief statement or “Rule” became the foundational premise to
provide identity, motivation, and structure to each cohort group regardless of students’
ethnic, cultural, and ministry backgrounds. It became the basis for group interaction
online, support, correction, Bible study, prayer and other practices. Many students
expressed during the on-campus seminars that they believed God had specifically
“called” them to study together. This “revolutionary” approach challenges individualistic
cultural values in education and bears similar distinctive features to monastic community
practices that have also proved transformational throughout history.
13 As part of the assessment of the MAGL program, each cohort participated in a group exit
discussion, which was recorded on video, conducted after a final meal. This was a consistent theme
expressed by all of the cohorts in this debrief.
135
The Celtic communities, although not made up only of monks, functioned as
cenobitic monasteries. However, it was Benedict’s creation of a Rule for his cenobitic
monastery that started a new type of Order from which communal monastic tradition has
continued to develop. A concise review of monastic community formation presented after
an extensive literature review offers the research observations of both practice and
product in the MAGL program that bare similarity to traditional cenobitic monasticism.
The lessons learned and principles used in cenobitic monasticism for personal Christian
and community formation that were considered will be examined with reference to the
MAGL and its communal principles and practices.
Seek God and His Will
Cenobitic monastic communities emerged with the goal to have one heart and
soul as they sought God and his will together (Acts 4:32). This was the central theme for
Pachomius, Benedict, Dominic, Basil, Augustine, and Bonhoeffer. Augustine’s theology
of the Trinitarian life of God further strengthened the theological and biblical reasons for
community among believers. These fathers of the faith believed that to live in the
kingdom was to live in a communal relationship where the authenticity of relationship
reflected kingdom unity and also provided integrity and authenticity in preaching and
ministry practice.
In working with MAGL students over several years, they indicated that the main
reason they enroll in this graduate program is to become personally equipped for ministry
through theological education. In a post-Christendom context, the concept of deriving a
learning experience and being transformed through a collaborative, challenging group
process may not have been their initial primary objective. However, research evidence
presented in Chapter 4 suggests that as cohorts came together to seek God, the unity and
reciprocity experienced through the program’s instructional design and the “Rule of
136
Practice” they developed, created a non-coercive environment where group identity
propelled personal growth and transformation. For example, the Community Rule created
by the seventh MAGL cohort says:
Recognizing that God gathers together his people at specific times and
places for the purpose of declaring his glory to the nations, we, the
members of the Seventh Cohort of the Master of Arts in Global
Leadership, commit ourselves to the following community rules so that we
may glorify God, honor his initiative in bringing us together, and serve his
purposes in our generation (MAGL 7th Cohort).14
Preach and Evangelize
The Celtic, Dominican, and Jesuit communities were mission-minded and their
practices prepared them to this end, causing them to move in response to God’s call to
fulfill His mission and share the Gospel. Saint Patrick (Celtic monasticism) used the
communal model for the evangelization of Ireland, while Saint Dominic (Dominican
monasticism) established the Order of Preachers (Friar Preachers) to save souls. Saint
Ignatius (Jesuit monasticism) was committed to the formation of a society for the defense
and propagation of the Gospel. Saint Basil, like Dominic, believed that community
relationships were the heart of God drawing us toward our neighbor. While contexts and
approaches to theological and missional action vary throughout history, the missional
mandate remains consistent. This was integrated into the MAGL program as the second
learning outcome/objective states: “Graduates will make plans for their church’s
missional engagement with their cultural contexts…” (Fuller Theological Seminary). In
their Community Rule, the seventh cohort recognized God’s initiative in the process of
establishing their missional purpose (in the paragraph noted above). However, the ninth
cohort also perceived their contextual missional action as a direct result of intentional,
relational “knowing and being known,” both within the group and with God, they wrote:
14 The Community Rule for the seventh cohort is listed in Appendix F.

137
Acknowledging God's design for our group and our collective strength, we
seek to truly know and learn from one another with the intent of knowing
God more fully and impacting our world more effectively for the Glory of
God (MAGL 9th cohort).15
Personal Spiritual Growth and Transformation
Central to Celtic community and also to Jesuit tradition was the dynamic
momentum gained from encouragement from other Christians to faith, hope, and
sacrificial love as they journeyed on their pilgrimage together. The community shared
many daily rituals such as meals, work, prayer, worship, and Bible recitation. Bonhoeffer
took this further believing Christians belonged to one another. In a learning community
that connects physically and geographically for only four weeks (two, two-week
seminars) in the entire program, intentional cohort design facilitated “virtual community”
in the MAGL through contextually appropriate practices. For MAGL students from
diverse backgrounds and leadership experiences, this encouragement of one another grew
significantly as personal relationships developed and dynamically motivated and
supported them in their personal pilgrimage. This was also reinforced when students
shared personal testimonies and prayed for one another in the required seminars for each
cohort. No doubt this personal, face-to-face connecting further catalyzed and deepened
relationships of trust as they shared in openness and vulnerability. Again, the ninth cohort
Community Rule of Practice highlighted this aspect for their life in community, by
declaring:
Spiritual Community
We acknowledge that God has placed this group together for a purpose -
to learn from one another and to grow in community. Since we are
collectively much stronger than individually, we seek to learn together in
an atmosphere of love (MAGL 9th Cohort).16
15 The Community Rule for the ninth cohort is presented in Appendix E.

16 See Appendix E.
138
Saint Basil believed that every person needed mutual correction. He saw that
living in community provided for healthy Christian growth in the individual. As was
previously quoted, “The individual does not easily recognize his own faults and vices…”
(Kardong 2010, 40), a view also held firmly by Bonhoeffer. This principle is also upheld
in the Franciscan community as the group offers its spirituality for the benefit of each
member (1 Corinthians 12: 12-26). Celtic communities functioned with an organic
relational structure, and their accountability to the community was for the purpose of
restoration and showing openness with others in a culture of grace. A similar
philosophical understanding was reflected in the seventh and eighth MAGL cohorts, and
they indicated:
We recognize the importance of the godly principle of accountability.

Following the teachings of Jesus through the parables about being
accountable, we endeavor to practice excellence through accountability
with others. (MAGL 7th Cohort)
We confidently make our needs known to the others in order to receive

ministry from each other in an environment of grace (MAGL 8th
Cohort).17
On the other hand, Dominicans had no illusions about perfecting life together as
their main motivation for living together in community was that, despite personal
differences and potential for strife and contention, they took the view that God was in
their midst as the Divine presence creating harmony. This unity, however, was
strengthened by the self-sacrificing nature of their vow of obedience to the Master. Each
MAGL cohort was highly diverse having been selected specifically by the MAGL faculty
admissions committee based upon diversity in: gender, age, ethnicity, culture, ministry
function, location in the world (ministry context), and number of years in ministry as well
as denomination and mission agency diversity. Consequently, it was anticipated that by
17 The Community Rules for the seventh and eighth cohorts are presented in their entirety in
Appendix E.
139
intentionally creating diverse groups the process of creating a “Community Rule of
Practice” would assist in self and other awareness, becoming known and developing
unity around values held in common. It helped to define their expectations and provide
boundaries fostering respect and safety as paradigms were challenged. The seventh
cohort poignantly expressed this in their “Rule”:
• We are part of the living breathing global body of Christ. We will

practice a posture of humility toward one another by showing
respect for all cultures represented within our cohort. We declare
that Christ is Lord over all cultures. We will seek to interpret
culture in light of Scripture, and not Scripture in light of culture.
• As part of the living breathing global body of Christ, we will

practice the virtue of showing respect for one another’s traditions
and theological convictions. (MAGL 7th Cohort).
Formation of a Community Rule
Saint Benedict was an innovator as he was the first to establish monastic
community directing the community members with a Rule. Although a multitude of
communities have since been established using the common structure of the Benedictine
Rule, it is noteworthy that there was no uniformity among the communities as the Rule
was always modified pertinent to the particular group. A case in point, the Franciscan
Orders, while adopting the Benedictine Rule, functioned in a non-coercive way to adapt
the Rule to their specific community’s needs and purposes. A similar practice was
observed in Dominican communities as well, in that, although they adopted The Rule of
Saint Augustine, each community functioned using Dominican democracy to fashion the
Rule and their community in order to live harmoniously. It is interesting to note that the
Benedictine and Celtic communities, which were pioneers in monastic tradition by
creating dynamic, flexible, yet accountable structures, were more flexible than many
Orders that arose later such as the Jesuits, which were more rigid and hierarchical.
140
Although to be accurate, while Jesuit adherence to the Rule, the Constitutions, and their
structure may have been unidirectional regarding authority and function, the Exercises
were functionally adapted to the participants’ age, education, and ability.
Celtic and Benedictine communities were more egalitarian in that they listened to
the whole community recognizing the omnidirectional nature of God’s guidance through
community functioned with true mutuality, even from younger to older and women to
men (Celtic). These historical findings align in principle with the function of each group
in the MAGL as they conceptualized and processed the creation of their “Rule.” The
process and resultant outcomes are pertinent to ATS requirements for community
formation and for transformation in students’ lives in community. As every group was
different from the next, a uniform “Rule,” imposed upon each cohort would not have
been appropriate relationally, contextually or culturally. Thus, the freedom for each
cohort to create their own “Rule” suitable to the group in a non-coercive way after having
examined the Benedictine Rule in Farrington’s work, can be likened to the practices that
have functioned in other spiritual formation communities throughout history. Students in
the MAGL committed to their cohort’s “Community Rule of Practice” (not as a vow, but
rather as a guiding principle) for the duration of their study. This formed the basis for the
creation of spiritual community that, as described above, was dynamic in its function and
powerful in its capacity to grow and change those within it.
The Soul Friend – Mentoring Relationships
One of the most interesting aspects of Celtic spirituality is the very close
accountable relationships established for each person living within a community with
their soul friend, called the anamchara. This seems to be unique to Celtic spirituality.
Although accountability is expected of members in the other Orders, it was usually to the
abbot or Master of the Order, and in those communities their relationship functioned in a
141
hierarchical manner. However, in Celtic community the soul friend relationships were not
with a superior mentor but rather with a peer with whom there was great openness,
confidentiality and true mutuality despite age, occupation, or experience. These soul
friend deep relationships survived despite geographical separation because they were not
simply dependent upon one another, but were focused on a relationship with God as the
foundation.
In today’s context and language, the closest parallel to an anamchara would be a
peer mentor, which is unlike an upward mentor relationship model. Upward mentoring
can be likened to submission to an abbot, or to the “superior” in a Jesuit Order. During
the MAGL program, students study “mentoring” formally, and all forms of mentoring
relationships are explored, taught, understood, and practiced. The learning objectives for
the class on mentoring include, “…that upon successful completion of the course,
students will have:
• Described various types of mentoring and their dynamics
• Understood the way mentoring affects spiritual growth and

character development
• Practiced several mentoring styles, following models presented in

the course
• Learned strategies to implement culturally relevant mentoring in

their ministry contexts
• Written a personal mentoring case study applicable to their current

and future leadership practice” (Fuller Theological Seminary
2010).
This class together with the program design proved very successful in regard to
students developing close accountable relationships with others as research revealed that
51.4% of students surveyed were actively involved in accountable relationships, and
23.8% valued committed relationships yet maintained some areas of personal privacy.
142
The students who had positive responses to the question about close accountable
relationships also had major improvements in other relationships when those questions
were cross-referenced to the one on accountability. Also, close accountable relationships
developed between various students as peers, and these survived the geographical
separation often inherent in an online degree program. This highlights a commitment to
people and not to place, which perhaps requires greater intentionality.
Not only did the Celtic community view “soul friendships” as an essential part of
spiritual growth within their community, they also used them to build relationships with
seekers and provide spiritual guidance in a close, committed relationship. Ultimately the
soul friend helped the seeker transition and desire a life consecrated to God and His
service. While this realm of mentoring was not pursued in the MAGL, one might wonder
if the same attractiveness that compelled seekers to look seriously at the Celtic
communities and their consecrated life would have a similar “attractive” quality in
contemporary Western society where most experience relational brokenness in their own
families (Baker 2010).18
Small Groups within the Community
Although within Celtic spirituality an anamchara relationship was essential, in
larger communities people were to spend time in small groups of 10 or less to build
relationships and to foster spiritual formation. In a similar way the Benedictine
communities functioned using small groups. The cohort model of the MAGL functioned
with a maximum cohort size of 30 students. However, to enhance student relationship-
building and spiritual formation each student was assigned to a small group of around six
with whom they were to take several classes together. These small groups were
18 According to Jennifer Baker, the divorce rate in America for first marriage versus second or
third marriage: 50% percent of first marriages, 67% of second, and 74% of third marriages, end in divorce.
143
reassigned at pivotal stages in the program so that relationships and learning experiences
could be expanded through exposure to other colleagues in the cohort.
A Model of Authenticity
The Dominicans believed that to live in the Kingdom was to live in Christian
community, and authentic preaching emerged while living in a community that reflects
Kingdom unity. As the Holy Spirit bound their souls in unity, Christian community was
found in relationships transformed by faith, hope, and sacrificial love. The Celtic
communities, which were established as part of the planned evangelization of Ireland,
provided the opportunity for seekers to experience the presence of God within a living
example of Christian community. Within this context, many chose to become Christians.
By creating an intentional spiritual community, students in the MAGL program had a
structure and platform to build dynamic relationships. The students, similar to historical
findings, reported heightened authenticity in the ministries of preaching and teaching as
they remained working in their context while studying. As they personally experienced
the dynamic of intentional, relational community in a new way, they became inspired to
shape their faith communities toward reflecting this Kingdom reality. It bears mentioning
perhaps that when people become intentional about relationship and take a learning
posture not only with academic material but also with one another, the organic
environment yields transformative fruit in the lives and ministries of the students.
As was discovered about Celtic communities, there is an immediacy about this
model. The relationships developed within Celtic communities helped people discover
and fulfill their vocation as they experienced ministry alongside others. Similarly, this
action-reflection model in the MAGL also enabled the honing of ministry skills for the
students as the ministry leaders at home allowed them to immediately apply principles
learned in their ministry contexts. The leaders had context for application, and difficulties
144
encountered and wisdom gained from such application were often shared among the
cohort, as they learned from each other and from their context. Personal growth and
ministry development was reported from the cohort practitioner-learners.
Concluding Comments
Cultural anthropologists and historians would agree that history creates and
shapes national cultures, societies, and communities. History also reveals that individuals
within communities, societies, and national cultures have helped to create and shape
history. Out of necessity, these people and movements have often been countercultural.
Implicit values can be observed clearly in a culture through rituals, heroes, symbols, and
institutions. Education is just one reflection of cultural and social construction within a
society. As such, we care about it; it matters to us because it reflects our values. As
already noted, Christian education today is being challenged, not only by advancements
in technology influencing new and innovative pedagogical approaches but also because
the expansive nature of technology makes it possible to serve students in global,
multicultural contexts.
The findings of this research indicate that relational connections between faculty
and students and between student peers are no longer constrained only to the physical
classroom. Those of us involved in Christian education may argue that our goal is unique
in that the implicit value within our historical tradition is not only to inform and teach but
to do so in a manner where students experience spiritual formation or transformation.
Such a goal demands an effective model of education involving a synergy between logic
and the mystery of the relationship between the Divine and the mortal. As this chapter
has presented, biblical, theological, and historical evaluation of Christian tradition
pertaining to this synergy reveals principles and practices that value the organic and
dynamic process encountered between the Holy Spirit and learners, and their teachers,
145
faith community, and context. The question remains: how do we maintain our implicit
values and traditions yet develop a missional and theological model of education that
crosses cultures and is contextual for this time in history? This research would argue that
in order to develop such a model, one needs to understand not only historical and
theological values and current institutional and academic expectations set by the ATS
Standards, but also the unique challenges faced within our global cultural context.
The historically born and prevailing cultural context in the US, as outlined in
Chapter 3, has spawned conditions that contribute to loneliness and extreme
individualism and highlights foundational values of self-reliance and self-sufficiency.
Independence is generally valued more than interdependence, and asking for help is to
admit weakness, which can feel like failure. Consequently, the biblical precept of the
“Body of Christ” being and functioning as a community of interdependent and supportive
people requires a very countercultural approach when applied to education, particularly
online education. For leadership in mission and ministry, addressing this becomes crucial
given the findings thus far. By actually experiencing a countercultural model of learning
and being, students in the MAGL reported being better equipped to model, teach, and
preach the implicit value of our Christian tradition. They experienced within the online
learning community a commitment to one another such that paradigms could be safely
challenged as students grappled to gain insight and grow in their understanding of
themselves, God’s mission, His Church and His world.
A further challenge exists for both educators and students in seminaries and Bible
colleges as they seek to serve diverse people groups from around the world. A Western
educational model founded on the philosophical and cultural values of individual student
achievement appears as polar opposite to the biblical teaching and the historic model of
“life in the Body,” or learning together from each other, a concept not foreign to cultures
146
that value “the group.” To this end, it is imperative that seminaries and Bible colleges
wrestle with the status quo not only to find a way forward in this milieu, but also to learn
from it ourselves.
The results thus far affirm that the MAGL program provided a dynamic
educational model. It achieved the goal of synergizing a community of students within
cohorts where theological education embraced an interdependent community of student
learners and practitioners who, like many others throughout history, developed and
committed to a “Community Rule of Practice.” One student, commenting on the
relationships created in the cohort throughout the program, said:
59. ...it was not my first collaborative community, but it was the deepest
collaborative STUDENT community I have been in. This is in spite of me
having done a Master's degree previously that required continual "group
work."
Through group interaction and reciprocity with respect, students embraced a socially and
spiritually oriented learning “process of becoming,” which developed through authentic,
meaningful relationships. And that which we could not orchestrate, but surely hoped for
and witnessed in this process, was the powerful embrace of the mysterious nature of the
transcendent God through His Holy Spirit to them and through each other.
CHAPTER 6
STUDENT FORMATION
There is currently a growing body of research exploring online learning. Having
researched and presented data findings on one particular degree program, the MAGL,
further exploration is warranted to assess how contemporary spiritual formation theories
may further inform our understanding of the results from this particular research. This
will assist with the further development of a contextually appropriate and effective model
of online theological education and training.
The requirements of ATS, the accreditation body for theological education
institutions in the US and Canada, and its report on the MAGL will also be fully explored
later in this chapter.
Contemporary Spiritual Formation Theories
A paper written by Stephen D. Lowe and Mary E. Lowe from Erskine

Theological Seminary entitled “Spiritual Formation in Theological Distance Education:
An Ecosystems Model as Paradigm” was written for the National Consortium on
Spiritual Formation in Theological Distance Education in 2007. The authors provide a
contextual framework for this topic referenced to the ATS requirements for spiritual
formation in students and present a biblical perspective. The paper provides an excellent
critique of the current use of spiritual formation terminology and the concepts of spiritual
formation from a North American perspective. The point is made that there is no set
definition of what constitutes “spiritual formation,” which highlights the mystery of
147
148
divine work in students, and the authors establish grounds for assessment of student
spiritual formation from their perspective.
Formation in Community
Lowe and Lowe then address the need for the church and ministry training
institutions to deal with what they term “hyper-individualism,” and they indicate the
importance of using groups to address the problem despite the “shallowness” of much of
the group work undertaken on regular campuses. They speak to student “faith formation”
from this collaborative community perspective and write, “Community is an essential
part of the formation of persons, but it is not an automatic by-product of either form of
education, conventional or distance. Physical community does not necessarily produce a
community of scholars” (2007, 7). The foundation laid by these authors constitutes solid
arguments that reflect findings similar to those presented in this research, particularly in
considering the issues associated with learning in a community compared to those of
learning in an individualistic or competitive learning environment, which are even more
complex when being applied to student spiritual formation. Lowe and Lowe believe that
unless a biblically-shaped view of faith formation is embraced, the process of whole
person transformation into Christ’s likeness and image will not be achieved. It is from
this foundational construct that their thesis is presented as follows:
…the Bible assumes a one-to-one correspondence between the natural and

spiritual realms that is holistic in its orientation…we will examine the
biblical concept of “whole person transformation”…into “the image and
likeness of Christ.” Finally, we will suggest that the biblical framework in
which all of this transformation unfolds can be viewed as an ecosystem of
sorts in which nested contexts, persons, institutions, experiences, and other
factors conspire to facilitate the process of whole person transformation
into Christ. We will utilize the “ecology of human development” model
proposed by Bronfenbrenner as a social science explication of the Pauline
teaching on the “body of Christ” as set out in Snyder’s “ecological
understanding of the church” (2002) (Lowe and Lowe 2007, 22).
149
Whole Person Formation
Lowe and Lowe then proceed to indicate that whole person spiritual formation
involves an integration of intellectual, physical, social, cultural, emotional, and spiritual
dimensions of the person, and that these can be addressed in an online educational
context.1 Further, an ecology that is diverse, stimulating, multifaceted, and rich is
required to accomplish this formation rather than something focused only on one aspect.
This “whole person” approach to learning is supported by Derise Tolliver and Elizabeth
Tisdell, who believe that “learning will more likely be transformative if it permeates
one’s whole self” rather than being limited to a rational realm critically reflecting upon
assumptions as this then includes the spiritual, imaginative, somatic, and sociocultural
domains in a person’s life (2006, 38). The process of spiritual formation if understood as
an ecological system, as argued by Lowe and Lowe, can be viewed as part of human
development similar to Ted Ward’s argument (Ward 1995), which they quote when
speaking about human ecology, saying,
He asserted that five empirical domains of human development—(a)

physical, (b) intellectual, (c) emotional, (d) social, and (e) moral—serve as
“input and output functions to and from the spiritual core” (16). Ward
stated, “Ecology refers to the interdependence of each component in the
creation with respect to each other component” (p. 14). Each of these
components is an interrelated system of development (2007, 12).
Engagement in a Faith Community
Ultimately, the Lowes argue, “the laws of growth and development that operate in
the natural realm function similarly to patterns of growth and development in the spiritual
realm” (2007, 59). It is from this position that they directly contend the importance of
social engagement in faith communities, not only within the Christian educational
1 Lowe and Lowe (2007) reference Werner and Chabloz-Basso (1987, 26) and Hess (Hess 2000,
50) to support this point.
150
institution but more importantly in the student’s local faith community and with family
and friends.
A study undertaken in 2004 on Master of Divinity (MDiv) students at Concordia
Seminary in St. Louis, Missouri, by John Palka discovered that “seminarians identified
the classroom context as the third major community setting in which their spiritual
formation takes place; and a striking finding presented is the prominent role of external
church congregations [those outside the seminary] in the students' community life” (Palka
2004, 5). It was also discovered that the local faith community functioned as the
“laboratory” where learning gained in seminary was tested and validated, which is an
essential component to transformative learning as espoused by Jack Mezirow. However,
Palka went further by indicating, “It is also evident that congregations are an important
venue in which students obtain new information and spiritual development. This is not a
traditional view in theological education” (Palka 2004, 5). It is often mistakenly assumed
that the greatest impact upon student spiritual formation is from their seminary
experience on campus. Lowe and Lowe consider the student seminary experience as only
a part of the larger ecosystem contributing to student spiritual formation, and therefore,
online models, which enable students to remain in their ministry and cultural contexts
while they undertake study, actually better facilitate student spiritual formation. Clearly,
the research results presented confirm this, and having experienced this personally and
observed this in the hundreds of MAGL student practitioners I came to know personally
over seven years, this is something with which I totally concur.
Formation is Multicontextual
In another article by Lowe and Lowe with the same title written for Christian
Education Journal in 2010, they reference comments made about seminary education by
Dan Aleshire, a previous Executive Director of ATS. They quote him as saying:
151
Good theological education is always multicontextual. One important

context is the school… But that’s never enough. Students can’t learn what
they need to learn in an M. Div. program only in a traditional school
environment. They also have to be immersed in a context in which
practices of religious leadership occur (2010, 91).2
These comments support the Lowes’ thesis that theological education needs to be
conceptualized as an ecological model comprised of different and complementary
contexts. They further quote Aleshire, saying theological students are shaped and molded
in these contexts as a means to “cultivate persons who are authentically religious and who
are able in their respective communities and contexts to exercise leadership” (2010, 91).3
Hunter indicates that formation is also directly associated with learning to live the
alternate Kingdom reality faithfully within the world. Because of this, it is fundamentally
about the church’s task of changing or transforming people’s lives to present them “as
complete in Christ,” “fit for any calling.” He contends that healthy formation in people’s
lives is only possible within a healthy community culture (Hunter 2010, 227).
Reciprocal Relationships
In another paper, Lowe and Lowe further explore the imperative in the New
Testament for reciprocal interactions between members of the “Body of Christ” (Lowe
and Lowe undated). They argue that what developmental interactionists describe as
developmental reciprocity is likened to the Allelon that the New Testament requires and
that these close, personal social interactions provide critical ingredients that facilitate
spiritual development. They indicate that while faith is an individual response,
development of faith does not occur in isolation from or independent of others: this
occurs through reciprocal interactions in families and the church. Spiritual formation is
enabled by three factors: God’s Word, God’s Spirit, and God’s people. However, they
2 Lowe and Lowe reference (Aleshire 1999, 113).

3 Lowe and Lowe reference (Aleshire 1999, 119).
152
focus on the role of the community of faith which is all too often overlooked or not fully
considered in this process. The Lowes emphasize the reciprocal behaviors and attitudes
that Christians are to display and produce in themselves and each other. In light of these
biblical imperatives, they comment that all too often spiritual formation is undertaken and
assessed within the narrow framework of personal exposure to, and influence of,
“scriptural instruction, preaching, and personal devotions with prayer” (Lowe and Lowe
undated, 13). Instead, spiritual growth should be assessed, they argue, not simply from an
individualistic perspective, but also should include faith community involvement and
function within that community. They contend that “Biblical faith formation covers a
wide spectrum that embraces the fullness of Christ as a perfect human being. Included in
this is the need for social interaction between and among brothers and sisters in Christ”
(undated, 13).
This holistic approach to spiritual development aligns with the ecology of human
development principles held by Urie Bronfenbrenner, who Lowe and Lowe quote, “If one
member of a dyad undergoes developmental change, the other is also likely to do so”
(undated, 15). And they indicate that he refers to this phenomenon “as a context not
merely of reciprocal interaction but of reciprocal development” (undated, 15).4 Their
deduction from this, therefore, is that “reciprocal interaction leads to reciprocal
development” (undated, 15), and in accord with Bronfrenbrenner’s theory, as long as
people are interconnected in a bond, then these relational interactions stimulate and
sustain developmental processes.
Lowe and Lowe relate development to New Testament principles where
Christians are to be bound to Christ and to one another through community, communion,
joint participation, sharing, and intimacy (known in Greek as koinonia), and they believe
4 Lowe and Lowe (undated) attribute both of these statements to (Bronfenbrenner 2005, 65).
153
that through such joint participation in a common activity or experience, spiritual
development results. From a theological, psychological, and developmental perspective
Balswick, King and Reimer believe that the reciprocating self can be best nurtured when:
1. personal relationships are characterized by a covenant (unconditional

love) commitment rather than a conditional commitment
2. the response to failure in relationship is characterized by gracing

rather than shaming
3. persons in relationship use their power, giftedness and resources to

empower rather than to control the other
4. the relationship is characterized by an openness that can lead to

intimacy rather than isolation (2005, 51).
If Christians engage in reciprocal interactions as exchanges of love for the support
and edification of one another in this manner, these produce reciprocal Christian
development – spiritual formation. It is from these principles that Lowe and Lowe
conclude that deeply developed social relationships have to be included with individual
spiritual disciplines if holistic spiritual formation is to result.
Online Formation
Importantly though, Lowe and Lowe indicate that social ecologies and
community are not limited just to face-to-face encounters. They believe that “online
communities offer another kind of social interaction that can be as influential in
promoting human development as physical communities” (2010, 4). Speaking to the
ability of online communities to develop relationships, Dean Blevins and Mark Maddix
from Northwestern Nazarene University, quoted by Lowe and Lowe, indicate that “the
strength of the program is the online learning community. Students develop significant
relationships that support them in ministry and in life… [and that] Most of them would
argue that they experience more authentic community in their online classes than in
154
traditional courses” (2010, 6).5 Blevins and Maddix have found that since students can
conceptualize and relate their learning to their own setting and context, learning online
can be more transformational than traditional forms of education. They utilize a cohort
instructional design model for online education as this fosters strong and significant
relationships among students as they share life together in a learning community. Also,
since students are paired with their own spiritual director, there is personal spiritual
accountability.
Lowe and Lowe challenge the notion that faculty engagement in only face-to-face
dialogue produces spiritual formation. They state that the geographical proximity of a
faculty member is not relevant, and this idea is not a new one. They cite the example of
the Apostle Paul who was not physically present to many of the churches that he
mentored yet there was spiritual growth and formation in these churches. Paul, although
“absent in body” wrote:
For my part, even though I am not physically present, I am with you in

spirit. As one who is present with you in this way, I have already passed
judgment in the name of our Lord Jesus on the one who has been doing
this. So when you are assembled and I am with you in spirit, and the
power of our Lord Jesus is present…” (1 Corinthians 5:3, New
International Version).
They indicate that if there is intentional faculty interaction using good online class
instructional design, it results in students claiming “to have grown closer to God,
developed deeper relationships to other students, and expanded their horizons with
respect to worship, spiritual disciplines, and course content” (2010, 5). All of this is only
possible in a community of learning if there is honesty, openness, authenticity, and
acceptance between students whether in online or on-campus learning communities and
when empowered by the Holy Spirit. To help facilitate this development in learner’s lives
5 For this point Lowe quotes Blevins and Maddix (2010), but no page reference is given.
155
through community, many forms of engagement are required, and Tolliver and Tisdell
believe that in order to engage spirituality in practice through transformative learning,
activities need to attend to “the affective, somatic, imaginative, symbolic, cultural, and
communal, as well as the rational. [as] Such multiple engagements are often experienced
as both spiritual and transformative” (2006, 40).
Concluding Comments
From the perspectives presented by these various authors, student spiritual
formation:
• Is growth towards greater Christ-likeness, empowered by the Holy Spirit
through meaningful reciprocal interactions that stimulate and sustain a
developmental process.
• Occurs within a community and is not only accomplished from the
individualist perspective and an individual’s practices.
• Is strengthened and validated in the student’s local context and faith
community.
• Occurs through allelon6 and koinonia7 – reciprocal relational practices.
• Affects all aspects of a person’s life – holistic.
• Is developed/grows through human ecology.
• Is integrated through intellectual, physical, social, cultural, emotional, and
spiritual dimensions.
6 A Greek term meaning “one another, reciprocally, or mutually.”

7 Another Greek term meaning “fellowship, association, community, communion, joint
participation, or intimacy.”
156
• Is accomplished very effectively through online programs, “face-to-face”
through a new concept of “reality” online that engenders faculty-to-
student and student-to-student interaction.
• Can be strengthened through mentor and/or peer accountability.
• Is enriched by cultural and ethnically diverse student interaction.
• Is encouraged through transformative learning principles.
As can be seen, spiritual formation involves multiple interfacing factors, none of
which are static and all of which are observable by others in the life of the one who
pursues it. This assessment concurs with research findings presented in previous chapters.
Spiritual Assessment
Other academicians have developed instruments measuring spirituality and they
also add to the dialogue. Assessing “spirituality and religiousness” from a psychological
perspective, Todd Hall and Keith Edwards in 2002 conducted research on 438 students in
a private Christian university in order to develop a Spiritual Assessment Inventory (SAI).
The Spiritual Assessment Inventory was designed as a relationally-based measure to
assess students’ “Awareness of God” and “Quality of Relationship with God” as two
dimensions of spiritual development. They conducted this research because there did not
appear to be an objective, multidimensional measure of spiritual development that could
be clinically useful for psychotherapists, pastoral counselors, chaplains, and clergy.
While it is not possible to do justice here to the extent of this research, it was considered
important to include some information gleaned from this body of work. This measure
utilizes a matrix of five psychological assessments developed since the 1980s and may
perhaps be another tool available to Christian educators in the future. Hall and Edwards
believe the model has much potential for research and clinical use, saying:
157
The model of spiritual development is unique in emphasizing what would

traditionally be viewed as a more “spiritual” dimension (awareness), as
well as a more traditional “psychological” dimension (relational maturity)
that we believe is a fundamental component of spiritual development. As
such, the model avoids both spiritual reductionism and psychological
reductionism by emphasizing a holistic view that may be termed
psychospiritual development or maturity…
It could also be used to investigate the impact of discipleship, support

groups, pastoral counseling, and numerous other growth experiences…
The multidimensionality of the SAI makes it particularly suitable for
research in more general areas in the psychology of religion and
spirituality, as well as ministry effectiveness and selection (2002, 353).
The authors say that the SAI is not simply a global measure of spirituality or religiosity
replicating existing measures. However, the results indicated:
…there is a substantial relationship between awareness of God and

spiritual well-being, particularly satisfaction and meaning in relationship
with God, which makes theoretical sense. In addition, the present results
indicate that the quality of one’s relationship with God is relatively
independent of spiritual well-being or satisfaction with one’s relationship
with God and with life (2002, 352).
While on the surface this may appear contradictory, a closer look reveals that
Christians immersed in consumer society may have chosen feelings of satisfaction above
the quality of relationship with God. This cultural context makes it challenging to assess
people’s spiritual formation because what are considered as indicators have become
culturally subjective. Hall and Edwards say that further research is needed for validity
criterion to be established, and norms need to be developed for different populations.
They hope the SAI might be a useful instrument for pastors and educators and not simply
for researchers and psychologist practitioners. They indicate:
As research on the SAI continues, it may begin to be used by pastors,

pastoral counselors, chaplains, and psychotherapists to assess individuals’
spiritual development. This is an area that is currently neglected in clinical
assessment with religiously-committed clients and parishioners.
Psychological assessment is conducted with religiously-committed clients
and pastors/pastoral counselors often use such instruments as the Myers-
158
Briggs to assess personality types. However, psychotherapists and

pastors/pastoral counselors rarely formally assess their clients’ spiritual
development even though it is important and often the focus of pastors’
work.
We hope that the SAI will provide a clinical tool for pastors, pastoral
counselors, chaplains, and psychotherapists to formally assess
parishioners’ and clients’ spiritual development. Our vision is for the SAI
to be a tool that would assist in identifying individuals’ strengths and
weaknesses, thus providing direction for pastoral counseling or
psychotherapy. In addition, our experience suggests that individuals find it
helpful to reflect on the items (2002, 353).
While the SAI is likely to be extremely useful for pastors and educators and
examines many relational factors, it focuses on assessment of the individual’s spirituality
separate from the holistic influence of close intimate and accountable relationships within
and beyond the community of faith. On the basis of the research presented thus far, the
measure, while helpful, falls short in that it does not encompass the ecological nature of
human development nor the accountability that comes from these.
During a personal interview with Keith Edwards on May 31, 2011, several
concerns about the limitations of the SAI to assess spiritual formation in community were
discussed. Edwards indicated that Todd Hall had developed the SAI more extensively in
recent years but confirmed that it was more focused upon an individual’s spiritual
formation and their personal relationship with God.
Extensive research conducted across many Christian institutions with on-campus
students in recent years using the SAI revealed the concern that students, after starting
college with strong convictions and faith, seemed to struggle with their faith as they
progressed towards their senior college year. This caused great concern to Biola
University and other Christian academic institutions as to what happens to the students,
why, and how this could be addressed.

159
As the research unfolds in this dissertation, suggestions will be considered that
may well speak to the issues raised through the college students, research project that are
not yet addressed.
Assessment of Student Formation in the MAGL
From an institutional perspective, assessment took place on the MAGL program
in various ways – from the point at which students were considered for acceptance as part
of the program to the very end of their course of study and graduation. The MAGL
faculty took a holistic approach to this process in that they conceptualized spiritual
formation and student transformation in terms of the entire program rather than this only
being achieved throughout several specific classes. They assessed interaction and
relationships within the cohort, student integration of reading, Bible knowledge, the
students’ ability to present arguments with clarity and competence along with other
spiritual and disciplines and practices. The students’ capacity for thinking, contextual
application, leadership, and giftedness development were all assessed throughout the
work of the classes and incorporated within the design of the study program as a whole.
A further objective assessment was undertaken when the supervisors,
superintendents, or other ministry leadership peers who were references on student
applications to the MAGL program were randomly surveyed by the Provost’s office. This
survey sought to obtain objective evidence from people close to the students who had
known them for a considerable time yet were not involved in their program, and could
report anonymously as to their personal growth and spiritual development as a result of
study in the MAGL program. This also formed part of the material presented to ATS as
evidence of spiritual formation accomplished in students through involvement in the
program.
160
ATS Standards for Student Formation
ATS is a peer accreditation agency for institutions in the US and Canada that has
functioned since 1938. It has maintained standards of excellence in theological education
that define minimal requirements for accreditation and identify good institutional and
educational practice for the accreditation of member schools. “The standards require
schools to offer programs that provide opportunities through which students may grow in
personal faith, emotional maturity, moral integrity, and public witness” (The Association
of Theological Schools 2010, 106), and affiliate schools are also required to “promote
awareness of the diversity of race, ethnicity, and culture” (The Association of
Theological Schools 2010, 79)8 as part of their educational and institutional practices.
Since theological schools are to be communities of faith and learning, they are to
cultivate theological reflection, develop student character, reflect awareness of diversity
in the worldwide and local settings, and contribute to the spiritual formation of students.9
This can be accomplished with the assistance of technology to enhance, strengthen, and
provide access for student learning. However, the use of technology must “be sensitive to
the diversity of student populations, different learning styles of students, the importance
of communities of learning, and the instructional goals” (The Association of Theological
Schools 2010, 81).10 Also, because theological scholarship is enhanced by active
engagement with the wider public in the global context, programs offered by member
schools should provide a “consciousness of racial, ethnic, gender, and global
diversities…[and] the school’s own community of learning should also represent
diversity in race, age, ethnic origin, and gender” (The Association of Theological Schools
2010, 82).11 This global awareness is accomplished through educational practice that
8 Section (2.5).
9 Sections (3), (3.1.1), (3.2.1.3), (3.2.2.3).
10 Section (3.2.2.2).
11 Section (3.3.1.3).
161
produces an appreciation of global interdependence and interconnectedness pertaining to
the mission of the church. Opportunities for cross-cultural experiences and well-designed
community activities can cultivate global awareness.12
In approving ministerial leadership educational and vocational degree programs,
ATS has several foci necessary for each program. These include understanding Scripture,
tradition, history, doctrines, and practices of a student’s faith community and
contemporary expressions of the same. Understanding the cultural realities and social
settings – cross-cultural and global aspects – in which they live and minister, as well as
providing opportunities for growth in the practice of ministry and an awareness of the
need for continuing education, are included in these foci. However, probably the most
important feature required is also the most difficult to define and assess. Programs must
provide formational experiences that may cause student spiritual growth, emotional
maturity, moral integrity, and social concern, all of which are essential for the
development of ministry leaders (The Association of Theological Schools 2010, 107).13
Degrees that are required to meet these requirements include programs like the “Master
of Divinity, Master of Arts in Religious Education/Master of Religious Education, Master
of Arts in _______(e.g. Counseling)” (The Association of Theological Schools 2010,
107-108).14 The ATS Degree Program Standards for each of these programs clearly sets
forth the requirement for personal and spiritual formation. Examples of these are:
1. The Master of Divinity:
The program shall provide opportunities through which the student may
grow in personal faith, emotional maturity, moral integrity, and public
witness. Ministerial preparation includes concern with the development of
capacities—intellectual and affective, individual and corporate, ecclesial
12 Sections (3.3.4.1), (3.3.4.2).

13 Section (DS.2.1).
14 Section (DS.2.2).
162
and public—that are requisite to a life of pastoral leadership (The

Association of Theological Schools 2010, 111).15
2. The MA in Religious Education/Christian Education:
The program shall provide opportunities through which the students may
grow in personal faith, emotional maturity, moral integrity, and public
witness (The Association of Theological Schools 2010, 114).16
3. The MA in Specialized Ministry:
The program shall provide opportunities through which students grow in

personal faith, emotional maturity, moral integrity, and public witness
(The Association of Theological Schools 2010, 117).17
In order to accomplish these comprehensive and high standards for student
academic and spiritual formation, an accumulation of independent courses and
independent work is not sufficient. A comprehensive learning community is required. To
this end, ATS has required that at least one year of full-time academic study (or its
equivalent) is completed on an institution’s main campus, an approved extension center,
or by means of distance education.18 Should an extension center or distance learning be
utilized to meet this requirement, the institution must demonstrate how “the community
of learning, education for skills particular to this degree, and formation elements of the
program are to be made available to students” (The Association of Theological Schools
2010, 115).19 In order for an institution to meet the needs of its constituencies and fulfill
its mission, programs can be developed that can be completed away from the institution’s
primary location as long as there is academic support and essential services to serve
15 Section (A.3.1.3).
16 Section (B.3.1.4).
17 Section (C.3.1.1.3).
18 Sections (A.3.2.1), (A.3.2.2), (B.3.2.1), (B.3.2.2), (C.3.2.1), (C.3.2.2). “Distance education is
defined, for the purpose of this standard, as a mode of education in which major components of the
program, including course work, occur when students and instructors are not in the same location.
Instruction may be synchronous or asynchronous and usually encompasses the use of a wide range of
technologies” (The Association of Theological Schools 2010, 102), Section (10.3.1).
19 Section (B.3.2.2).
163
students and the formational components are effectively present. However, for distance
education degree programs, ATS has specific requirements pertaining to their design and
function:
Programs of distance education shall demonstrate the collaborative nature

and research dimensions of theological scholarship that foster critical
thinking skills. According to the degree program requirements, distance
education programs shall seek to enhance personal and spiritual formation
appropriate to the school’s mission and ecclesiastical tradition and
identity, be sensitive to individual learning styles, and recognize diversity
within the community of learners. Courses shall provide sufficient
interaction between teachers and learners and among learners to ensure a
community of learning and to promote global awareness and sensitivity to
local settings (The Association of Theological Schools 2010, 102-103).20
It is important to note that along with these standards, institutions are also required to
ensure their distance education programs “provide appropriate opportunity for
collaboration, personal development, interaction among peers within a community of
learning, and supervised field or internship opportunities when appropriate to the degree
program” (The Association of Theological Schools 2010, 103).21 As long as the ATS
general educational standards and the distance education requirements are satisfied, the
ATS board may approve theological programs that embody an educational design that
ensures high standards of quality which are congruent with a school’s mission and its
educational values and desired outcomes.22
The MAGL program, being a distance education degree approved by ATS,
complied with these standards and requirements, and because of its interactive cohort
design (with attendance at two on-campus seminars required), the global awareness,
diversity, cultural, academic, and personal formation requirements of ATS were fully
met. An evaluation of the MAGL program by Bethel Seminary, a peer institution,
20 Section (10.3.3.3).
21 Section (10.3.4.3).
22 Section (10.4.2).
164
provided an external assessment of the program’s effectiveness and was conducted
January 24-25, 2008. This evaluation was prior to, and part of, the continuing approval by
ATS for the MAGL (see Appendix G). The peer reviewers said:
As outside evaluators we commend the MAGL team in their

comprehensive response to the initial ATS focus visit. In short, we believe
the actions taken bring this degree well within compliance of Standard 10
(Bourgond and Cionca 2008, 1).
They reported on several key aspects of the program, indicating that:
Clear assessment criteria and procedures for learner outcomes, including

student assessment portfolios are evident in the documentation reviewed
and comments from students. The templates for foundational courses 581
[Developing Your Learning Plan], 582 [Character, Community, and
Leadership] and 583 [Global Leadership: Implication for Ministry]23 are
especially noteworthy. All courses demonstrate the same careful
treatment of outcomes and assessment practices…
Student ownership of their learning experience through development and

revision of student learning plans appropriate to their missional ministries
insures personal ownership. Review of the initial and revised student
learning plans reveal growth, maturity, focus, and development…
(Bourgond and Cionca 2008, 3).
The close community of learning experienced and attested to by students

making their journey rewarding and fulfilling regarding development of
leadership character, competence and congruity. Community learning
experiences that require interactive involvement with each other has
produced a broader learning environment. Students testify that exposure
to perceptions and experiences of others have enriched their lives and
ministry (Bourgond and Cionca 2008, 4).
Also, a noteworthy recommendation from one of the reviewers said:
Within a masters degree focusing on global leadership we recommend that

at least one course be taught outside North America. Additionally, course
material representing diversity in leadership practices should be
intentionally incorporated where it makes sense to do so (Bourgond and
Cionca 2008, 5).
23 The course titles were not included in the document and have been inserted here to inform the
reader.
165
In conclusion, the report commended the MAGL program faculty and administrators for
having exceeded the ATS accreditation standards. The commendation noted:
…the administrative team and faculty have gone well beyond what is
required in the accreditation standards and serves as a model for other
schools seeking to offer similar degrees. The team is to be commended for
their efforts especially their genuine commitment to excellence, relevance,
and ministry effectiveness (Bourgond and Cionca 2008, 5).
The MAGL program, as a distance education ministerial degree offered primarily
online, was not only effective in student spiritual formation as noted by the ATS peer
review, it went well beyond what is required by ATS in accreditation standards.

CHAPTER 7
COLLABORATIVE LEARNING
In the MAGL cohort program, participants purposefully sought to commit to each
other within an authentic community and took ownership of the structures in place to
promote this. As has been seen thus far, whether in times of old or in current contexts
such as the MAGL, we might describe this as a “dynamic community.” How did this
actually develop, and what are the best structures necessary in the design of classes
within a program to promote this? Taking an overview of research on contemporary
collaborative learning theories provides a platform for further dialogue and discovery.
Holistic “Communities of Practice” for Online Education
In recent years, significant development in the design and function of
“communities of practice” for educational purposes has resulted in the emergence of a
variety of group-learning structures. Collaborative learning structures associated with
“collaborative inquiry,” “cooperative learning,” and “virtual communities” – while
distinctly different in purpose and function – all attempt to bring people together for the
purpose of learning.
Etienne Wenger has developed foundational principles of operation for
communities of practice in education, and other scholars have built upon his seminal
work. Wenger based his work upon assumptions that he claims are essential aspects of
knowledge and learning: we are social beings, knowledge is a matter of competence in a
field attained by participation in that field through active engagement in the world, and
166
167
such learning will produce meaning. His perspective on learning is holistic and relies on
imagination generated through a process of orientation, reflection, and exploration that
place “our identities and practices in a broader context.” Learning involves an interplay
between local and global where the local practice is defined in a global context (Wenger
1998, 227-228). Thus, for Wenger, education at whatever age it takes place is, in its
deepest sense, far more than training. He indicates training has an inbound trajectory
aimed at competence in a practice, whereas education explores new ways of “being”
beyond our current state, and this affects identity. Education “is not merely formative – it
is transformative” (Wenger 1998, 263). In like manner, education goes beyond mere
socialization and is a developmental process undertaken between communities and
individuals to their mutual benefit. So, social participation moves a group from mutual
engagement as sharers of knowledge to a coherent community of practice that fosters
learning. This requires work, and it defines and provides a true sense of “belonging.”
Charles Graham and Melanie Misanchuk (2004, 188) write that Ted Panitz (Panitz
1999a) (Panitz 1999b) lists 67 benefits related to collaborative learning that include
improved critical thinking skills and student results, increased motivation, improved
student self-esteem, and a reduction in anxiety. In the light of these findings, further
exploration on the learning dynamics within communities of practice is warranted.
Community Charter (Rule, Code of Practice, or Team Charter)
Lisa Kimball and Amy Ladd (2004), writing about communities of practice,
indicate that being explicit about a clear purpose and framework for community
formation at the outset as the group creates a “community charter” provides a framework
by which meaning and purpose are negotiated and explored. Richard Schwier and Ben
Daniel support this idea and expand it further, indicating that fundamental to community
is “commitment to a set of shared values, norms, and meanings, a shared story and
168
identification…” (2008, 348). They also indicate that learning communities require rules
to govern their operation, articulating protocols, roles, expectations, explicit learning
goals, and communication patterns, which result in rituals being established. Rena Palloff
and Keith Pratt (2005) discovered that “team charters” or “agreements” are tremendously
important in promoting learner satisfaction with collaborative online learning. Such
charters, agreements, or contracts between members set forth how they will interact,
determine their roles in collaborating, and establish learning benchmarks. They concur
that the best practice is to assign the development of such charters to team members early
in a course where collaborative work will be used or as soon as the group is formed.
Leonie Ramondt says “ownership” by members is a central concept for communities of
practice, and this drives outcomes, participation, and learner satisfaction (Ramondt 2008).
Palloff and Pratt seem to be among the few who take “rulemaking” (charters) further.
They challenge the group to explore identity and choose a “group name” that reflects and
defines their group’s purpose and character.
Relationship Formation, Community, and Isolation/Cohesion
Unfortunately, much like the verbiage “cutting edge,” overuse of the term
“community” tends to strip away its powerful meaning and transformative effect from
people’s perception. From our assessment thus far, there is a marked difference between
a group of students working together collaboratively and a community of learners. The
term “virtual community” is often generically used and may refer to “members” who pay
a fee, use a password, or visit a particular web site. Similar current uses for the term
minimize the core concept of “belonging” as having shared meaning and purpose.
Wenger warns against “community” being viewed simply as a helpful, friendly, and
bounded group.
169
Babak Abedin, Farhad Daneshgar, and John D’Ambra (2010, 585) report that
studies indicate social and relational dimensions of collaborative environments are often
neglected or are assumed to arise by default in virtual learning environments. They
further indicate that greater developmental efforts need to be undertaken if a learner’s
isolation and lack of sense of community are to be redressed, since these are key pitfalls
in online learning environments. Johnson and Johnson believe that “educators fool
themselves if they think well-meaning directives to “work together,” “cooperate,” and
“be a team” will be enough to create cooperative efforts among students” (1996, 1027)
for true collaborative learning. They indicate that it takes focused effort and discipline to
structure positive interdependence. For Etienne Wenger, Richard McDermott (2002), and
William Snyder (2002, 34), social learning goes far beyond the sum of the individuals in
the group as people build on each others’ ideas in an atmosphere of openness that has
been built upon trust. Johnson and Johnson support this premise and indicate learning
communities are based as much upon relationships as they are on intellectual discourse,
and there is a direct correlation between positive relationships among students and how
committed they are to others’ success, how hard they work, and how productive they are.
They also report that the more people care about each other, they will apply greater effort
to achieve mutual goals. Positive relationships in groups are educational tools available to
educators (1996, 1024-1025).
Shashi Dewan and Disha Dewan strongly support community formation for
online learners, indicating social and interactive elements of knowledge construction are
more student-centered and have been found to be extremely effective. Learners acquire
skills: “social learning skills, discursive ordialogical skills, self and group evaluation
skills, and reflection skills” (2010, 677). Such skills may bring a beneficial contribution
to an individualistic culture beyond the learning group. Given these comprehensive

170
benefits, enhancing student learning through intentional online community –
incorporating forums where students share their history, culture, and context – has also
yielded positive results in group relationship strength (Schwier and Daniel 2008).
Kimball and Ladd believe that an essential stimulus to virtual community formation is
holding a face-to-face event near the beginning of a program when a community is
forming. While this is not always possible for students scattered throughout the world, it
is ideal in that it serves to forge stronger relational ties and connectedness.
Accountability and Self-Direction
Mutual accountability is integral to Wenger’s perspective on developing
communities of practice. It provides a framework by which members of a community feel
concerned about what they are doing, what is happening around them, and whether they
will neglect or attempt something. This accountability extends to group learning activities
where individuals are required to fulfill their portion of the group’s responsibilities and
thus contribute to the group learning process of “becoming.” Johnson and Johnson
indicate that, in their opinion, true cooperative learning is rare even on campus, because
educators (and students) all too often seek shortcuts to quality group work and assume
that traditional classroom groups will suffice. Easy alternatives are sought for the
disciplined application of the basics to create effective groups that provide for individual
and group accountability, as this deep community relationship requires appropriate use of
social skills and in-depth group processing (1996, 1027).
Pavel Lushyn and David Kennedy report that as groups start in “safety,” they
move into confrontation over fundamental assumptions, and as they process acceptance
and resolution of the conflict, a deeper sense of “self” and “other” understanding results
in more safety or trust, and the process continues. This is a paradox that starts when
participants feel “safe” and then move to feeling comfortable enough to confront others
171
about diverse-meaning models. A new level of “safety” and courage arises from this
honest sharing. Thus, Lushyn and Kennedy believe the community of inquiry model is
“not only in contradistinction to transmissional pedagogy,” it is a “whole pedagogy”
because it works with the systemic nature of group processes that recognize the
fundamental urge for self-actualizing transformation, a theoretical perspective well
documented in the historical development of group work in psychology (Corey 2008).
The important point is that confrontation should not be avoided because it is vital to the
group finding a unitary identity, and the emergent responsibility is expressed in diverse
ways that lead to new types of commitment. This process moves a learning group from
being simply “collaborative” to committed, and members are confident to express their
own worldview perspectives, being challenged, and beginning to “hear without fear”
alternate perspectives. As students defend their own ideas and challenge other students,
they learn to negotiate meaning. Johnson and Johnson call this type of cooperative
learning “academic controversy” and note that it is “one of the most dynamic and
involving, yet least-used, teaching strategies” (1996, 1019). Since confrontation, once
processed, has been shown to ultimately result in a greater degree of commitment to the
group by the members, the usual practice of avoiding confrontation can be reframed in
light of providing an opportunity for meaningful learning and group growth and can thus
be encouraged with confidence by faculty. However, it is also important to note that
common guidelines developed for and by the group will enable students to navigate
differences appropriately. This process in an online community provides “virtual
proximity” for faculty to observe and input discourse, further enhancing the safety of an
environment where conflict and controversy enhance paradigm change, re-negotiate
meaning, and promote growth.

172
Wenger’s research also supports the principle that disagreement and conflict
within a community of practice can be used to deepen both relationships and learning.
Additional pressures can occur in groups with participants from different cultures.
Potential differences in value systems, communication, and participation styles can also
result in conflict. Lushyn and Kennedy indicate conflict produces a more inclusive and
also more diversified level of integration and results in individuals who can think for
themselves and with others (2000, 14). Commenting about group self-regulation they
note, “Groups which do not, in the very process of the interactions which constitute them,
emerge in a context of commitment, responsibility and development will never emerge
into collective subjectivity, and will disband” (2000, 15). This is even more evidence for
the integral role of faculty who are prepared for diverse cultural contexts in which
learning outcomes within learning communities are achieved.
Identity Formation
Johnson and Johnson report that cooperative learning and identity formation for
individuals and for groups has yielded positive psychological indices including emotional
maturity, well-adjusted social relations, strong personal identity, ability to cope with
adversity, social competencies, and basic trust in and optimism about people. Not only
are self-confidence, independence, and autonomy promoted, they directly compared these
outcomes with individualistic and competitive learning approaches that promote self-
achievement and individualism, which are related to indices of psychological pathology.
Perhaps a controversial concept to some, creating an identity within an online
community facilitates a process which challenges the values and outcomes of
competitiveness that are very prevalent in an individualistic culture. Hanni Muukkonen,
Kai Hakkarainen, and Minna Lakkala (2004, 37) support collaborative learning and claim
that students in community attain more success than individuals working alone.
173
Johnson and Johnson write that of more than 375 experimental studies on social
interdependence and achievement, “cooperative learning results in significantly higher
achievement and retention than does competitive and individualistic learning” (1996,
1022). Also, according to Graham and Misanchuk, collaborative learning encourages
motivation to learn, the reconceptualizing of prior knowledge, a higher level of reasoning
and cognitive development, and high quality decision making as individuals within
groups summarize, elaborate, and explain information to each other. This brings both
increased individual and group gains. Therefore, the psychological and educational
benefits for students resulting from collaborative education that forms identity necessitate
close attention being given to the dynamics of group membership. Each participant in a
community of practice finds a unique place within the group and therefore gains a unique
identity as they define who they are through their experience in participation. This is
called negotiated identity, which is different from identity derived from simply being a
member of the community, or identity discovered in the relationship between local and
global realities created by relations with the world, or identity found when assimilating
and reconciling various identities into one. However, John Dirkx and Regina Smith
indicate students move from “a subjective sense of identity” based firmly upon an
individualistic concept of learning to an “intersubjective identity” of self, directly related
to their membership in a group (2004, 156).
As active participants in the practices of social communities, identities are
constructed in relation to these communities, and this shapes not only what they do but
also who they are and how they interpret what they do. Learning changes student identity
and creates personal histories referenced to community and how they experience life.
Thus, identity formation, purpose, and meaning are deeply interconnected and mutually
defining. It is evident that learning, therefore, is far more than skills formation and
174
transmission of, or gaining, information. It entails both “process” and “place” related to
context that enables new identity and new ways of knowing, and education becomes a
mutual process of development between individuals and communities.
Imagination, Creativity, and Group Dynamics
Ken Robinson argues that creativity is a process which draws upon the ideas,
achievements, and stimulation of others and is not simply an individual or personal
process. It occurs in an atmosphere of innovation through interaction and dialogue
between people with different areas of expertise, experience, and perspective and is an
essential dynamic that education should promote (Robinson 2001, 195).
Imagination and creativity have been found to abound in collaborative learning
contexts as students draw upon the diversity of perspectives and the passion for, and
expertise in, a topic explored among group members. They also begin to understand
others’ perspectives and have their own challenged as new trajectories for learning
unfold. Wenger believes that imagination is extremely important in the context of
communities of practice and indicates that educational imagination is about students
identifying themselves and their place in the larger landscape. It is obtained through deep
reflection where students look at themselves with new eyes, becoming aware that there
are multiple ways of interpreting their lives. In this sense, it is identity through self-
consciousness. Further, educational imagination is also about students not accepting
things the way they are, but instead experimenting, exploring possibilities, and
reinventing themselves in daring ways as they consider new trajectories and consider
different futures. If this occurs, creativity and new identities are created through
imagination.
In view of the above, Wenger stresses that the “infrastructure of imagination” is
related to identity and not simply information gathering, which is meaningless by itself.
175
Hubert Saint-Onge and Debra Wallace consider this community approach to be a source
of great innovation that is measurable as people together find solutions to complex
problems. Motivation is also enhanced through these practices, and this has a positive
influence on the great variety of interactions between students on issues, the nature and
scope of their interactions, and the time spent on working with content as compared to
students who are in individual learning contexts (2003, 69, 115, 211).
Cultural Challenges
As has been previously established, the differences between national cultures are
clearly visible. However, the invisible values within cultures, shaped over time and
molded by the history of a country, pose the most challenge when it comes to creating a
workable synergy in cross-cultural groups. It is understandable that working within
homogenous groups is more likely to avoid discomfort, anxiety, and potential conflict.
Paradoxically, while educators may gravitate towards seeking cohesive groups that run
smoothly or function by consensus, it has been found that they are not necessarily
conducive to or indicative of effective learning. In fact, as noted by Schwier and Daniel
(2008) and Barab, MaKinster, and Scheckler (2004, 80), increased student growth and
learning has been evidenced in communities of practice where there is diversity and
difference. This has specifically been observed in research where “low-ability” students
in heterogeneous groups increase their level of achievement more than similar students
who participate in homogenous groups. This adds merit to the concepts already presented
in this particular research that heterogeneous groups provide greater opportunity for
“self” and “other” awareness and discovery increases educational benefits. There is an
added “value” in intentional communities encompassing cultures with diverse
perspectives and contexts wherein meaningful commitments promote stronger
relationships, and students experience paradigmatic changes as a result of experiencing

176
“difference.” While anthropologists agree it is generally more challenging to develop
trust across ethnically diverse groups of people, Wenger, McDermott, and Snyder
indicate that pursuing this goal – where safety and respect in the group has been
established – gave rise to a process wherein students engaged “cutting-edge issues,” and a
“global talent pool” emerged (2002). Dewan and Dewan report that recent studies reveal
the composition of online learners “is becoming more diverse, dynamic, tentative,
younger, and responsive to rapid technological changes” (2010, 675). This confirms
research referred to in the introduction and reflects the anomaly that exists in the current
context saturated by social media. Dewan goes on to indicate that these learners possess
better interpersonal and communication skills, and understand and value collaborative
self-directed learning and the need for affiliation. Consequently, the challenge of
embracing cultural diversity among group members is one that is worth being pursued by
educators and instructional designers of online programs.
Hofstede’s extensive cultural research has shown there are four main problem
areas common to all cultures, but the solutions to these issues differ. He explains that
these can be understood as four dimensions of culture where each dimension addresses an
aspect that can be “measured relative to other cultures” (Hofstede, Hofstede, and Minkov
2010, 30). These four areas include: power distance (social equity, and relationship to
authority); collectivism versus individualism; femininity versus masculinity (social,
emotional, behavioral implications related to gender roles); and uncertainty avoidance
(weak to strong, dealing with uncertainty and ambiguity related to the control of
aggression and the expression of emotions). Consequently in a culturally diverse group,
students will relate differently to their professor, to deadlines, to gender-oriented
behavior and roles, and to anxiety over exploring new territory, and they will have
different motivation for pursuing study. These four values are experienced by every
177
culture; only the cultural response to the factors varies and makes them unique and
“different” to other cultures.
Intrinsic motivation is governed to a large extent by emotions. In turn, our
emotions are socialized through culture. According to Kitayama and Markus (1994) in
Raymond Wlodkowski, emotions influence task engagement and are the visible outcome
of learner motivation. These authors indicate that what “elicits frustration, joy, or
determination may differ across cultures, because cultures differ in their definitions of
novelty, hazard, opportunity, and gratification and in their definitions of appropriate
responses” (Wlodkowski 1999, 7). Thus a person’s response to a learning activity, while
they may see it as personal, in fact reflects his or her culture.
Since a student’s value of, or response to, the learning process and the material
presented will be filtered, interpreted, and experienced through the lens of his or her
culture, differences will emerge at various stages of group development. Every culturally
diverse community of practice needs educators who are both aware of, and sensitive to,
essential cultural differences and a curriculum design which enables participants to move
beyond a “right or wrong” way of thinking to assume an attitude of openness and develop
a paradigm that recognizes the understanding expressed by Anaïs Nin, that “we don’t see
things as they are…, we see things as we are” (Nin 1903-1977). This process marks
increased maturation on and of the learning community, allowing students to share with
greater freedom and building flexibility and trust in the group process. Otherwise, these
differences become stumbling blocks, significantly affecting members of a community,
their relationships, their identity formation, and learning outcomes.
Marcelle Dupaw and Marya Axner (1997) give examples of how issues of
communication can be affected by culture through different:

178
• communication styles – language usage (inferred – explicit) and usage of
nonverbal styles which can be limited in virtual environments
• attitudes towards conflict and how to resolve it – some avoid conflict and
others embrace it
• approaches to completing tasks and using resources, depending upon values
for time and timeliness – and it is very important for collaborative work
• decision-making styles, democratic or deferring to others – roles vary by
culture
• attitudes to disclosure related to emotions, sharing personal information, or
dealing with conflict
• approaches to knowing and learning – some prefer discovery (finding
information), some prefer talking to others who have experience, some prefer
more cognitive approaches and being “told” while others prefer community-
based ways of learning and knowing.
By addressing these issues, an opportunity is given for dialogue and for
relationships to develop within the group through awareness of differences and mutual
respect. Wlodkowski indicates that “Among people of good intentions, misunderstanding
is probably the most common enemy of respect” (Wlodkowski 1999, 121). To be
respected in any culture means to be given the opportunity and freedom to express
authentic cultural values and norms without fear or threat of blame and shame.
Successfully addressing these important issues from an anthropological and theological
perspective will inevitably result in providing a “mirroring experience” for each person,
which in turn brings new self/other insight, wherein lies the “magic” of a group. The
trajectory of such a group has the potential to better master two developmental tasks
central to human existence and learning, namely autonomy and interdependence.

179
Paradoxes of Groups
Understanding and preparing for the paradoxical quality of group life is essential
for both faculty and students. Smith and Berg describe “paradox” as a search for the
“link” that one cannot see, and as such, members of the group have to develop courage to
believe it exists. These might include the paradoxes of: identity, individuality, intimacy,
disclosure, inadequacy, and dependency.
• The paradox of identity is that tension between an individual’s personal
identity and how they experience this in the context of group identity.
• The paradox of individuality is where the only way for a group to become a
group is for the individuals within it to express their individuality while
accepting and developing the connections within the group.
• The paradox of intimacy explores varying levels of preparedness to share
openly and know each others’ weaknesses and strengths within a meaningful
group relationship. In the early stages of this paradox especially, it takes trust
and courage to share. However, once this begins, intimacy will develop within
the group. Thus, the paradox of intimacy “is a relationship between
intrapersonal and collective intimacy” (1997, 110). This is aligned with the
paradox of disclosure, where people often want to know about others first in
order to feel safe to self-disclose to the group. However, in order to know
others, someone must be willing to trust enough to be known, all the while
hoping for acceptance yet cognizant of the risk of rejection.
• The paradox of inadequacy, where people join a group realizing their need to
learn and progress yet they can only develop as they feel free to share their
expertise first so they can receive from others. Likewise, when weakness is
shared paradoxically the person gains strength.

180
• The paradox of dependency exists when people need to give expression to
their dependence on others in the group in order to experience independence
in group life. Then collective interdependence becomes “independence with
meaning” (1997, 90-143).
So, activity that promotes interdependence between people without meaningful
“connection” results in isolation. From experience this can become frustrating to students
when they are required to participate in collaborative assignments if the relational
commitment is not there to sustain the activity. Consequently, those who struggle to
embrace the paradoxical qualities of group work will continue to experience inabilities in
the areas of trust, self-awareness, and social competency. If embraced, however
tentatively, a network of interdependence releases individuals from the kind of
“independence” that is based upon a fear that the group is unreliable. The more faculty
become aware of these dynamics within the learning group, the more prepared they will
be to encourage and support students as they navigate this journey of risk and reward.
These conceptual realities and powerful paradoxes become even more rewarding in
culturally diverse group populations as has been discussed earlier.
Exit/Termination Strategies
This issue is not frequently discussed in the literature, yet if a true community
develops over a period of time in the manner being proposed in this paper, having a
strategy for completion of a degree will mean more than graduation and a degree
conferred. Learners have become friends; faculty have become mentors. Therefore, the
process of terminating a learning community at the end of an educational program needs
to be discussed, prepared for, and processed with sensitivity. Group members often
grieve the impending loss of connection with the other members of the group. This loss
may be heightened and exacerbated because people close to them, their family or
181
colleagues, have not traveled or shared as intimately in the learning journey that brought
transformation in their lives. An additional component, similar to programs offered to
expatriates who reenter their culture, would provide students with the opportunity to
prepare for and adjust to program termination.
Concluding Comments
This chapter has evaluated a variety of significant theoretical approaches that
contribute to a growing body of research in effective adult learning. Beyond integration
of these, a challenge is now proposed to take steps forward to incorporate concepts not
previously explored, to re-evaluate the impact of cultural values on present pedagogy and
philosophy, and suggest a paradigm shift from the primary focus on individual distance
learning in classes/courses to a more holistic approach to learning in intentional virtual
communities throughout a program.
The MAGL Cohort “Communities of Practice”
While some authors on collaborative learning adopt the use and concept of
“rules,” “charters,” or “norms,” students in the MAGL created their own “Community
Rule of Practice.” Each cohort chose a name for their group, which engendered group
identity, clarity of purpose, and ways of “being” within their context. The rules created,
incorporated most of the components related to purpose and motivation, and added the
extra dimension of spiritual practices for the formation and transformation of the group
and individual members of it. Student satisfaction with the program enabled and
produced evidence of strong learning and spiritual formation outcomes, confirming the
principles and concepts described in the research.
In regard to relationship formation, community, and isolation/cohesion referenced
above, research on the MAGL would confirm that if structures are in place to foster
182
deepening relationships within authentic community, learning is enhanced. The program
design required and facilitated mutual commitment and a sense of belonging from within
the cohort. This is reflected in the following student’s comment from the survey research:
68. I think there is a greater appreciation for the group dynamic and the
synergy and or the sharpening that happens in a group forum. I still fight
individual tendencies, but once I take the step towards group evaluation,
for example, I glean much from it. It's a learning process and one I'm more
and more eager to engage in.
The MAGL program with its cohort design commences with an online class, and
the second and third classes are one-week intensive classes conducted consecutively on a
Fuller Seminary campus. The first online class design is intentionally focused on forging
relationships. With student permission, a student directory is provided detailing each
student’s name, leadership function, physical location, and a brief biography about the
student which includes his or her family context, leadership experience, and other history.
Comprised of approximately 30 students, the cohort is divided into smaller groups for
interactive study and relationship-building exercises. These exercises and assignments,
together with discussion among students in creating the “Community Rule of Practice”
and a cohort name, serve to further process relational bonds by the end of the first online
class. Meeting on campus for a “face-to-face” second class in the program serves to
reinforce and further develop these personal relationships. Within each cohort, a strong
intentional community was formed that unfolded and strengthened throughout the
remainder of the online classes as the cohort studied together over the two-year period.
Each cohort reported that an atmosphere of openness and trust was established
that enhanced student learning and affected personal and group transformation. This
design facilitated and necessitated a process of accountability and participation, which
ensured that concerns expressed by these collaborative learners were addressed regarding
cohesion, community formation, and accountability.

183
The positive indices of psychological health referred to by Johnson and Johnson
resulting from identity formation by individuals in groups has been evidenced in the
research findings of the MAGL program as well. Student identity on both a community
and individual level was forged through a combination of practices such as formation of
the community rule of practice, naming the group, creating a personal spiritual rule of
practice, sharing narratives with the cohort group related to their lives, their families,
their organizations, and joys and struggles of leadership.
Vulnerability and openness fostered a growing trust in a confidential, safe space.
New levels of relationship were forged among members of the group and new personal
and group identities developed as together they discovered meaning from their narratives.
The evolution of these cohorts was indeed paradoxical in nature and very consistent with
Smith and Berg’s review. Research conducted of each cohort group in the MAGL
program concurred that the group process reduced the individual student’s sense of
“loneliness,” which had been found to be a factor in attrition for church and mission
leaders in the workplace.
In regard to imagination and creativity, which is seen by Wenger as very
important for communities of practice, the foundational ethos for the program is that
learning is a lifelong process, a concept with which sociologist and psychologists who
study human development would now agree. Course content is designed to challenge the
students beyond the scope of their existing understandings, developing an openness and
imagination for unlimited possibilities. The integration assignment required of each
student in the MAGL program explores and develops the future they imagine for
themselves.
Addressing cultural challenges highlights a number of areas in which the MAGL
program could be improved. While it is a program with a very diverse student body and
184
there have been efforts to include required texts that address non-Western perspectives,
more focused attention could be given to cultural factors. A comprehensive dialogue and
teaching opportunity modeled on Hofstede’s work covering the four domains would
assist in developing an understanding of core values and how these impact
communication, learning, and decision-making styles, power, conflict resolution,
emotions, and disclosure for people from other cultures. This, together with training
faculty in guiding groups through the many paradoxes of group life, would help enhance
the program and increase the already positive results in educational outcomes, formation
and transformation, and in so doing address “loneliness” and “extreme individualism”
prevalent in Western culture. Conclusive evidence of a direct correlation is supported by
findings from the research reflected upon in this chapter along with the findings
presented from the data collected from the MAGL student survey.
Lastly, attention to program termination and the loss of regular interactive
relationship within the cohort online community is required as currently this is not
addressed. An exit strategy would provide students the opportunity to psychologically
and socially prepare for, and adjust to, the change in order to better navigate this as a life
transition, making further meaning of the experience and being challenged to integrate
“ending” as intentionally into their lives as they did in “beginning” the cohort group. This
could be done meaningfully through the use of narrative and group “storytelling” or other
creative forms of expression.

CHAPTER 8
TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING THEORY
In many academic disciplines, one cannot consider education separate from
transformative learning and its theory, especially in the social sciences, teacher education,
business, leadership, missiology, and theology. A study of transformative learning theory
and how it functions is extremely beneficial for Christian education institutions in
general, and particularly for online degree programs offered both nationally and
internationally by those institutions. Attention will also be given to the culturally defined
limitations and implications of this theory.
An Outline of Transformative Learning Theory
Jack Mezirow has written several seminal works on transformative learning for
adults (1990, 1991, 2000, 2009)1 setting forth definitions and detailing how this theory
functions to impact and change students’ lives. Since then, various authors have
developed this theory to comprehensively address cultural, social, and community issues
applicable for online programs. Transformative Learning Theory has developed from a
“cognitive revolution” resulting from numerous studies undertaken in the fields of
psychology and psychotherapy. Transformative Learning Theory supports Mezirow’s
findings that “it is not so much what happens to people but how they interpret and explain
1 The two additional texts that are not referenced in the Bibliography are:
Mezirow, Jack. 1990. Fostering Critical Reflection in Adulthood: A Guide to Transformative and
Emancipatory Learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
________. 2000. Learning as Transformation: Critical Perspectives on a Theory in Progress. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
185
186
what happens to them that determines their actions, their hopes, their contentment and
emotional well-being, and their performance” (Mezirow 1991, xiii). Therefore, from
Mezirow’s perspective “learning” is a:
…process of using prior interpretation to construe a new or revised

interpretation of the meaning of one’s experience in order to guide future
action… Action…includes making a decision, making an association,
revising a point of view, reframing or solving a problem, modifying an
attitude, or producing a change in behavior… …not only behavior, the
effects of a cause, but rather “praxis,” the creative implementation of a
purpose (Mezirow 1991, 12).
While some educators indicate there are three metaphors of learning-acquisition,
participation, and knowledge-creation – others simply acknowledge two: learning as
acquisition of knowledge and learning as participation in community’s work or activity
(Muukkonen, Hakkarainen, and Lakkala 2004, 31).2 It is apparent from what has been
revealed so far that learning is far more than acquisition, participation, and knowledge-
creation. From Mezirow’s understanding, learning is not simply an accumulation of
knowledge as purely cognitive insight or knowledge creation, it is about teaching for
change in a person’s life where learners desire to act within and on their world (Taylor
and Jarecke 2009, 277). This occurs when a person’s “meaning schemes,” which are
made up of knowledge, beliefs, value judgments, and feelings that constitute
interpretations of experience, are transformed by reflection on the assumptions that
underlie a problem and the premises held are critiqued in the context. Mezirow says
Bateson (Bateson 1972) believes there are three levels of learning: “level I is learning
about habitual responses, and meanings schemes do not change – action without
reflection; level II is learning about contexts through cultural assimilation to produce
learning traits or character; and level III involves content or process reflection by which
2 Hanni Muukkonen, Kai Hakkarainen, and Minna Lakkala reference the following sources for
these metaphors of learning (Paavola, Lipponen, and Hakkarainen 2002) and (Sfard 1998).
187
we make changes in our meaning schemes.” Level III, Mezirow indicates, involves
transformations of the nature that occur in religious conversion and are perspective
transformations through which people are aware that their whole way of perceiving the
world has been based upon questionable premises (Mezirow 1991, 90-91).
What Mezirow calls “meaning perspective transformations” are in effect
“paradigmatic transformations,” and a paradigm (a model, conceptual framework,
approach, and worldview) is culturally defined and determined and is “an articulated,
theory-based, collectively held, meaning perspective” (Mezirow 1991, 46). It is important
to follow his reasoning and to grasp what he is conveying in these insights, because doing
so enables one to comprehend the dynamic nature and scope of transformative learning in
people’s lives. Meaning perspectives are primarily prerational, unarticulated
presuppositions that often result in distorted views of reality, because of the following:
1. Meaning perspectives are rule systems of habitual expectation
(orientations, personal paradigms), and meaning schemes (knowledge,
beliefs, value judgments, and feelings that constitute a specific
interpretation) are specific habits of expectation. Both influence the way
we define, understand, and act upon our experience. Meaning perspectives
generate meaning schemes.
2. Meaning perspectives are structures of epistemic, cultural, and psychic
assumptions within which our past experience assimilates and transforms
new experience. …[and] they are informed by a horizon of possibility that
is being anticipated and that represents value assumptions regarding ends,
norms, and criteria of judgment (Mezirow 1991, 61-62).3
3 The emphasis in italics is mine. The rule systems, expectations, and meaning perspectives are
determined by, defined by, and rewarded by culture.
188
Transformative Learning Theory is founded on "perspective transformation" that
occurs in three realms: psychological (changes in understanding of the self), convictional
(revision of belief systems), and behavioral (changes in lifestyle). One key concept in this
theory is, “Meaning perspectives and schemes can be transformed through a reflective
assessment and critique of the presuppositions upon which they are based” (Mezirow
1991, 62).4 Thus, for students to experience transformative learning, opportunities for
reflection by the student incorporating validity testing that involves an openness to
critique of the content, process, or premises may result in a sequence that brings
transformation of meaning schemes enabling students to act upon these new
understandings. In this learning process, however, remembering is central since people
learn with their old interpretations, and any revised or new interpretations must also be
remembered by the brain in order for a person to judge, analyze, synthesize, generalize,
or make extrapolations from what they learn or experience. Mezirow says that, “If an
interpretation is not remembered, it implies thinking but not learning” (Mezirow 1991,
12).5
In considering the need for the reflective process and its applicability in an online
environment, Sorensen says, “Processes of reflection not only imply distance, they are
preconditioned by distance.” She says:
4 There is critique by some scholars regarding Mezirow’s theory in that they claim it grants
rational critical reflection too much importance. While it certainly is rational, it can also be a profound
experience involving spiritual or emotional transformation as well. Also, dealing with racist, sexist, and
other oppressive attitudes can be very painful and emotional. One prominent author noted by Yorks and
Kasl as proposing these things are Robert Boyd and J. Gordon Myers (1988). Yorks and Kasl indicate that
they and other authors believe that transformation works with the cognitive and personality using
extrarational aspects of human reality such as symbols, images, and archetypes which contribute to a
person’s meaning schemes. I personally think it is not an “either or” situation rather a “both and,” as all of
these aspects are important.
5 Neurobiological pathways are formed through memory.
189
…the virtual universe – contrary to the physical world in which

involvement may be viewed as preceding reflection6 – provides a context
and an “ontology” in which reflection precedes involvement… The
reflective character of our actions in the virtual space implies the distance,
which causes us to acknowledge them (Sorensen 2004, 253).
Thus, the virtual or online environment can be a significant tool in enhancing the
reflective process essential to transformative learning, as students cannot make a
comment or interact without first having to reflect at a meta-level about the content, their
culture, and context. The implications of this are important not only to students but also
to academicians and educators embarking on new forms of delivery in an expanding
market.
The practical application of the dynamics of this theory is enhanced through
asynchronous, online class design where group discussion boards provide the forum for
reflective thinking, writing about and critiquing important content or concepts, and
interacting with each other on the issues. The time availability for students enables them
to process thoughts and then to write them coherently, reinforcing learning and retention
of their learning. The virtual, interactive online community of learning is an ideal
environment for this process.
Stages of Human Development and Disorienting Dilemmas
Early in life, children seek for meaning schemes that have absolutes. Mezirow’s
research indicates that adaptive meaning schemes that are more flexible and consensual
often result from rational discourse, which develops in adulthood (late twenties to early
thirties). It has often been associated with advanced education in those years. He
indicates that psychologists have found that between the ages of thirty-five and fifty-five
years, a transition in autonomy exists that may extend from between five to twenty years
to achieve this developmental task. Those who don’t navigate this crisis successfully tend
6 Sorensen references these comments to Heidegger (Heidegger 1986).

190
to have rigid and highly defended thought patterns. Developing a mature perspective
happens as people become more inclusive and discriminating, integrating experience with
openness to alternative perspectives. This results in making choices and acting upon these
understandings. These processes are extremely important considerations for adult
education whether on campus or online if student transformation is sought.
One of the main causes of perspective transformation is what Mezirow calls
“disorienting dilemmas.” These usually occur as part of life and are experienced as events
for which existing meaning schemes are inadequate. Events “such as death, illness,
separation or divorce, children leaving home, being passed over for promotion or gaining
promotion, failing an important examination, or retirement” (Mezirow 1991, 168), are
just some of these. However, other factors can contribute to disorienting dilemmas that
start the process of transformation such as when things contradict or challenge deeply
held, previously accepted presuppositions that challenge personal values and identity
(Mezirow 1991, 168, 215). These can include being exposed to different cultures and
their values and practices, art, poetry, and the like that might contradict previously
accepted presuppositions. It is easy to see from the above how group or collaborative
learning with culturally diverse students could stimulate this reaction. As has been
discovered, that perspective transformation is a social process. A participant in a group
may experience points of view or values that they find distasteful or threatening, and later
they may come to recognize that these alternate perspectives help explain their dilemmas
at which time these perspectives become indispensable to them when dealing with
personal experiences. This social process involves testing new perspectives with friends,
peers, and mentors and validating them through rational discourse. Then any effects upon
relationships that might result from the new perspective have to be worked out.
191
Edward Taylor indicates that in a learning environment, both prior experiences
and those created in the class through relationships, dialogue, and activities with other
learners provide the foundation for critical reflection that can lead to the creation of new
perspectives. This, together with personal critical reflection questioning the validity and
integrity of deeply held prior assumptions and beliefs through any conflicting thoughts,
feelings, and actions, can lead to perspective transformation. He indicates that there are
three forms of reflection that inform transformation of meaning perspectives: “content
(reflecting in what we perceive, think, feel, and act), process (reflecting on how we
perform the functions of perceiving), and premise (an awareness of why we perceive)”
(2009, 7). Specifically addressing online learning, he says:
…recent research has identified instructional aids that assist in its

maturation [of critical reflection], such as writing both online and in
reflective journals (Boyer, Maher, and Kirkman 2006); (Chimera 2006);7
(Kitchenham 2006); (Ziegler, Paulus, and Woodside 2006). The written
format potentially strengthens the reflective experience by creating
artifacts of ideas of the mind. It requires learners to externalize their
reflective experience, taking the “discussion away from the merely
affective and/or psychological domains and forces a kind of reconciliation
with the material-inherently perspective altering, socio-communicative
activity” (Burke 2006, 85) (Taylor 2009, 8-9).
However, for dialogue and critical reflection to operate in a group (in contrast to
normal everyday discussions), the credibility of a person making a statement, the
authenticity of what is being asserted (in relation to feelings), and the truth and
appropriateness of what is being discussed (in relation to norms) all contribute to
promoting transformative learning (Mezirow 1991, 77).8 For these to function, the ideal
conditions for rational discourse would include the following:
• Freedom from coercion,
7 I could not find a reference for Chimera, 2006.

8 This is also quoted by Taylor (2009, 9).
192
• Openness to alternative points of view and perspectives on how others
think and feel relative to their context,
• Being critically reflective of presuppositions and the results and
consequences of same,
• Having an equal opportunity to participate – to challenge, question, or
refute, and
• Being able to accept an agreed-upon result that validates, at least until new
perspectives are encountered.
Thus, for educators utilizing these principles, dialogue is far more than simply
engaging in an analytical conversation, as reflective dialogue helps the learner identify
the “edge of meaning” (sometimes also considered the edge of knowing) which is a
liminal realm, a transitional zone of meaning making that can be similar to the
disorienting dilemmas, which foster transformative learning. However, Taylor indicates
that what educators need to be acutely aware of is the:
…learner’s attitudes, feeling, personalities, and preferences over time, and

as signs of change and instability begin to emerge, educators can respond
accordingly. It also means developing a sense of trust in the process of
dialogue with others, creating a setting that helps learners live with some
discomfort while on the edge of knowing, in the process of gaining new
insights and understandings (2009, 10).
Other Ways of Knowing
In this process of gaining new insights while “on the edge of meaning” (besides
the use of cognitive discourse opportunities for learners), educators can engage students
in other practices to help facilitate this learning process through other ways of knowing
like the arts, image, symbol, poetry, music, dance, movement, mime, and drama. They
could also include myth, fable, allegory, or story that can be related to culture. All invite
193
expressive ways of knowing and are extremely important to a holistic approach to
education. Wlodkowski writes that he has found learners across cultures:
…welcome the invitation to infuse their academic work with artwork,

such as sketches and poetry…projects that include works of fiction,
playwriting, visual art, musical composition, songwriting, and
performance art as essential components offer access to some of the most
profound understandings adults gain from their learning (Wlodkowski
1999, 236).
The use of images to experience ideas enhances student learning and is a more
compelling, memorable learning approach due to the emotional associations evoked in
the process. Shauna Butterwick and Randee Lawrence believe the arts-based processes to
be extremely powerful because “they tap into embodied knowledge, honor emotions, and
create spaces for rehearsal for action” (2009, 44). Added to this, they indicate that
“Telling and hearing stories is essential to human nature. It is the way we make sense of
things. It is compelling… [students] can personalize knowledge – use their own language,
metaphors, experiences, or history to make sense of what they are learning” (2009, 70).9
These “other ways of knowing” touch the “affective, intuitive, thinking, physical,
spiritual self” of the student. Tisdell and Tolliver link this dynamic human process within
culture saying:
…working with images that arise out of conscious and unconscious

memory specifically around aspects of one’s culture is a way of engaging
cultural imagination that can potentially lead to transformative learning.
Culture is never static. We are always in the process of making further
meaning of prior experiences, including those specifically related to
culture (2009, 90).
There has been a growing number of scholars who expand transformative learning
theory from that which was originally cognitively-focused (Yorks and Kasl, 2006, 46).10
9 On these issues they reference M. Belenky et al. (1986).

10 Also, the use of arts is strongly suggested by Tisdell and Tolliver (2009, 90) and by Butterwick
and Lawrence (2009, 44) in one of Mezirow’s latest texts.
194
Although speaking to the issue of spirituality and not mentioning “other ways of
knowing,” Mezirow indicates that in order for “integral transformative learning” to be
effected, environmental, spiritual, and self-concept issues have to be included. He found
that transformative learning conducted within an intimate Methodist Church setting
flourished using religious service, emotional encounter, and community-building
components as newly transformed perspectives developed in their lives (Mezirow 2009,
28, 168).
Lyle Yorks and Elizabeth Kasl propose that three factors contribute to whole
person transformation. These are: “the adult learning discourse that grounds our
theoretical understanding of transformative learning, Heron’s conceptualization of whole-
person epistemology, and the linkages provided by expressive ways of knowing” (2006,
60). They depict in diagrammatic form the linkages created by expressive ways of
knowing proposed in this expanded theory (see Figure 8.1). They indicate that John
Heron’s epistemological theory of personhood (Heron 1992) is that:
…experiential and propositional ways of knowing are linked by the

expressive knowing that Heron labeled presentational. Experiential
knowing according to Heron, includes both emotion and feeling. Heron
explained his special usage of the word feeling as including a felt
resonance with the human and more-than-human world (Yorks and Kasl
2006, 60).
Expressive ways of knowing at the individual level help student awareness of tacit
and subconscious forms of knowing, making them accessible for critical reflection. Since
transformative learning is also social, they indicate that “expressive ways of knowing
provide pathways among individuals by giving individuals more ready access to the
experimental knowing of the other, thus bringing learners into an empathic connection
for learning-within-relationships” (Yorks and Kasl 2006, 61). They, therefore, view their
taxonomy as a step toward conceptualizing the use of expressive ways of knowing to

195
foster significant whole-person engagement in learning from experience that is applicable
for adult education.
However, Yorks and Kasl believe that since educator’s training in the majority of
cases has not included dealing with the whole person using arts theory (multiple ways of
knowing), they have not included alternative and complimentary practices using
expressive modes as complimentary to didactic pedagogies and propositional knowing
(2006, 44, 46). They make a valid point for which there is growing support.
Experiential Knowing Propositional Knowing
Intrapersonal
Whole-person Emotion & Critical
Learning Feeling Reflection
Expressive Knowing
Pathway
Interpersonal
Learning- Empathic Critical
Within- Connection Discourse
Relationship Expressive Knowing
Pathway
FIGURE 8.1
EXPRESSIVE KNOWING IS A PATHWAY

(Yorks and Kasl 2006, 60)
196
Metaphors and Imagination
Transformative learning can be promoted by the use of metaphors and
imagination. Learning through metaphors, according to Mezirow, transcends identifying
with similarities as metaphors are based upon “correlations between the experience
perceived and something known.” In communicative learning, reasoning is undertaken
through metaphors rather than hypotheses. This type of logic is called “metaphorical-
abductive” logic, and it helps people make sense of the unknown when they compare it to
aspects of their previous experience (Mezirow 1991, 80, 97).
Imagination on the other hand, entails things like: recognizing our experience in
others, connecting what we do with an extended identity, creating models and reifying
patterns that can produce representational artifacts, and reinterpreting history. It creates
new terms, generating scenarios for exploring other ways of doing what we do in other
worlds and with other identities, all of which can expand our perspectives and help move
the person to a transformed reality and practice. This combination of engagement with
the world and imagination results in reflective practice through which people can identify
with an enterprise and at the same time view it in context as imagination allows the
crossing of boundaries like time and language to gain other perspectives (Wenger 1998,
185, 217).
Given these perspectives, it can be seen that not all learning undertaken in
academic institutions is transformative as knowledge can simply be added to student’s
understanding, which in some disciplines may be sufficient. Transformative learning,
however, incorporates reflective changes to “beliefs, attitudes, opinions, and emotional
reactions that constitute meaning schemes or transforming our meaning perspectives (sets
of related meaning schemes)” (Mezirow 1991, 223).

197
The MAGL Program and Transformative Learning Theory
An examination of the MAGL program: (the learning objectives of the courses
studied and student assignments, many of which are done in cooperation with other
students in the cohort), indicates that student learning which occurs reaches level III
processing and reflection according to Bateson (Bateson, 1972, aforementioned) where
meaning schemes and meaning perspectives are dramatically impacted. Given what we
know so far, the culturally diverse student body along with the reflective, interactive
assessment and critique by students in each context provided perspective transformation
in the three primary areas of human functioning considered important by Mezirow:
psychological, convictional, and behavioral.
The MAGL program was designed with the goal of providing a collaborative
atmosphere, fostering freedom rather than coercion, an openness to the opinions of
others, equality in participation, and receptivity to critique and evaluation from others.
Often students in the program held leadership roles and functions within global
organizations. Many encountered disorienting dilemmas in their lives and ministries,
experiencing transitions in autonomy.
Feedback from the groups has revealed that during the course of their studies, a
majority of students have had to transition through such dilemmas, and these experiences
had significantly changed their perspectives as a result of being able to test the validity of
their experiences with others in the group. In this way, they have processed the three
forms of reflection that Taylor refers to: content, process, and premise.
While a significant proportion of the MAGL program is designed for cognitive-
reflection, there was opportunity, particularly in the on-campus seminars, for the
integration of “other ways of knowing” through music, song, creative presentations, and
sharing personal stories. The research presented clearly indicates that further use of
“other ways of knowing” in the MAGL class design would broaden students’ opportunity
198
to engage the transformative learning process, yielding the benefits and outcomes
outlined in this chapter.

CHAPTER 9
A MODEL OF ONLINE EDUCATION EFFECTING HOLISTIC

STUDENT FORMATION APPROPRIATE FOR GLOBAL CROSS-
CULTURAL CONTEXTS
The empirical research conducted and findings presented in the previous chapters
provides evidence sufficient to propose a contemporary model for adult learning that
incorporates the resources unique to the current context as well as an historical and
theological hermeneutic for transformative adult learning. While this model is ideal for
Christian educational institutions seeking to serve a global constituency, the concept is
one that could potentially be used in most educational settings where the aim or goal is to
move beyond transferring information to individuals for the sake of competency in a
discipline towards a holistic developmental learning process through reciprocal
relationships in the context of a committed community of adult learners and practitioners.
My research advocates that a model is needed that not only builds upon the work
of contemporary programs, authors, researchers, and theories but that moves online
learning forward with a guiding teleology that entails philosophy and pedagogy
appropriate for a global context. Like many practices and traditions of Christian history,
it is culturally paradoxical in nature, revolutionary in its concept, and yet practical in its
application for culturally diverse students in online or blended online programs.
Overview of the Model
This organic model seeks to realize spiritual formation at the intersection of each
of the following domains to facilitate holistic student spiritual formation (see Figure 9.1):
199
200
• The mystery that is the relationship between the Divine through His Spirit
and Word with His people.
• The human need for connectedness and belonging: The formation of a
learning and spiritual formation community using a cohort model where
students develop their own community rule of practice that is Benedictine
in nature. This enables reciprocating relationships and accountable peer
relationships to be integrated through the relational community.
• The individual’s personal spiritual practices.
God’s Word Cohort

& Holy Community
Spirit & Rule
Spiritual Formation
Personal
practices
FIGURE 9.1
HOLISTIC SPIRITUAL FORMATION
Further, by creating a safe environment for students from diverse ethnic origins,
learning and engagement-producing personal transformation can be anticipated at the
intersection of the three domains as depicted in Figure 9.2. This will enable the learner to
explore new areas of understanding, traverse disorienting dilemmas, and test validity of
the learning:
201
• Cultural values and diversity are respected, sought to be understood, and
incorporated into the learning process. How students view roles, power,
status, relationship, personal disclosure, accountability, communication,
and learning styles are discovered from an anthropological perspective.
Diversity of students also provides the broadest possible learning
experience. This process can be reinforced using a blended online program
design where face-to-face engagement occurs.
Culture Transformative
Respected Learning in
& Adjusted Community
Student Transformation
through Learning
Students in
their Context
FIGURE 9.2
LEARNING FOR STUDENT TRANSFORMATION
• Transformative learning principles are applied and understood within a
“Community of Practice” where strong student-to-student relationships
recognize, allow for, and contain sometimes painful, disorienting
dilemmas to be processed and where new paradigms evolve. This will
touch all areas of students’ lives: their beliefs, practices, lifestyles, and
meaning perspectives.
202
• Practitioners still living and working in their cultural context can apply,
reinforce, and validate their learning. Feedback from students in this
process provides opportunities to assess and revise the program and
highlights the organic and responsive nature of this model.
Each of the trilogies represented above, strategically designed in a comprehensive
and integrated way, will produce holistic learning and student spiritual transformation
(see Figure 9.3). This integrated approach to Christian online education will also provide
protective barriers to the negative impact of globalization. It will increase cultural
competency where students begin to “see” themselves and their world in a new way
through reciprocal interaction with faculty and fellow students as they engage the
material and the diverse cultural contexts represented in their cohort. In a globalized
world where a vision for Christian education serves ethnically diverse students who live
and minister in countries throughout the world, it is imperative that these elements are
included in the design and structure of an online program for adult learners.
Program Instructional Design
Using the MAGL program and its practices as a foundational construct, I propose
a model for online degree programs that incorporates additional components to address
Christian education needs in the current context of a globalized world. Sound
instructional design is required when planning to create and offer any online degree
program (fully online or blended online programs), and each of the components required
in this model are crucial to accomplishing the vision and mission of Christian education.
Included below are the essential components relative to the core domains presented.
203
God’s Word & Transformative

Spirit Learning in
Community
Culture Respected Personal Practices

& Adjusted
Student Spiritual &

Learning Transformation
Cohort Community Students in their

& Rule Context
FIGURE 9.3
SPIRITUAL AND LEARNING TRANSFORMATION
A Cohort Model
The structured “community of practice” model of education used by the MAGL
program was, and continues to be, groundbreaking. The research presented has facilitated
a thorough exploration of the reasons for the success of this program. It has provided
evidence that supports a rationale that is best understood through the transformation in
students’ lives, and it provides a model for other ATS ministry degrees as attested to by
the ATS review committee in their report in 2008.
The MAGL model accomplished the spiritual formation and community
relationships sought by those who envisioned, designed, and implemented the program as
well as ATS standards. It provides a solid framework for further online degree program
design for Christian educational institutions. It can, however, be improved further by
adopting the “best practices” used in collaborative and cooperative learning described in
Chapter 5.
204
A Blended Online Program
In support of the comments made by Kimball and Ladd, I would agree that face-
to-face interaction at strategic points within an online program will definitely promote the
already developing authentic relationships being fostered within the community of
learners. Therefore, rather than being totally online, the degree should incorporate at least
two face-to-face intensive workshops within the design of the online program course
cohort sequence. At these face-to-face interactive junctures, the program could include
practical courses that might function more effectively using real-time interaction.
The blended online program speaks profoundly to those who question the validity
of online education due to the lack of face-to-face, social interaction. In speaking about
the importance of meeting people in person, Cacioppo indicates that this is a very
significant way that relational connection is made. He says, “The kinds of connection—
pets, computers—we substitute for human contact are called “parasocial relationships.”
And he asks the question, “is this an effective way to fill the void when connection with
other humans, face-to-face, is thwarted?” He indicates, “most face-to-face encounters in
real life allow us to communicate through even more subliminal cues—body chemistry,
body language, action semantics, mimicry—in addition to words and gestures…the mind
that seeks to connect is first about the body, and leaving the body behind can make
human connections less satisfying” (Cacioppo and Patrick 2009, 256, 259). A blended
degree design would facilitate meeting the nuances associated with meaningful
communication and connection of face-to-face that is supplemental to the interactive,
reflective processes shown to have been successful through online learning.
Spiritual formation, which is a core learning objective for Christian programs can
include additional activities in on-campus courses in order to build and reinforce the
creation of a strong learning community that encourages formation. The face-to-face
component enables personal sharing of narrative, the chance to use the arts, music, and
205
other creative expression, and the opportunity for different cultural perspectives and
values to be experienced. From a logistical point of view, these seminars could be held in
strategic locations around the globe depending on the students’ cultural needs and places
of work and service, not necessarily in the US.
Community Rule of Practice
The use of a Benedictine-style Community Rule of Practice (CRP) like those used
for spiritual formation in cenobitic Christian community since the fourth century proved
transformational for MAGL students. In other settings, the terms “Charter,” “Rules,”
“Learning Agreement,” or “Norms” tend to function in similar ways to the CRP used in
the MAGL. The principles and practices developed through the CRP used in the cohort
educational model aligned with best practices for collaborative and cooperative learning,
and equipped students to design and agree upon a rule of practice to which their group
adhered during the course of their study program. This functioned to establish norms for
relationships, identification, and definition of roles; provided for accountability both
academically and spiritually; gave direction to student learning; fostered new and diverse
cultural learning perspectives; and provided the foundation for strong and intimate
relationships within the cohort.
Transformative Learning Theory
A most important goal for Christian education is to facilitate the transformation of
students holistically – spiritually, relationally, cognitively, emotionally, and behaviorally
(their lifestyles) – while preparing them for their work and ministry. Transformative
learning principles are focused on facilitating these life changes in students, and while
developing cognitive capacities exercises one hemisphere of the brain, the use of the arts
allows for development of the other. Storytelling, music, song, and other tactile
206
expressive forms can help develop students holistically. Understanding this theory also
equips teachers to recognize the precious value of essential disorienting dilemmas. It
cannot be understated how important is the “holding environment” created by faculty and
the cohort community who provide a safe, accepting, non-coercive space for students as
they traverse these liminal stages. Where students have this type of environment to
explore and process these dilemmas, research has shown that new paradigms are
explored, expressed, and acted upon. These are remembered over time. Learning results
and transformation occurs. These experiences yield changes in value, meaning, affect,
behavior, and relationality. Such learning for an online student can then be tested for
validity beyond the learning environment to the context in which the student lives and
works. Further, new meanings are established and remembered and education becomes
learning in the real sense of the word.
Cross-cultural
In an increasingly multicultural global context, addressing cultural differences and
challenges from an anthropological perspective has to be included in educational models
serving diverse student bodies. This can help students engage the process of “becoming,”
defining new roles as they function within the online community. Sometimes this process
will be countercultural for them. Cultivating defined practices and pre-supposed values
will result in countercultural activities and interactions, challenging “norms” once
understood as simply “the right thing.” In this sample population for instance, women
taking leadership and men engaging in vulnerable dialogue and ways of “being” were to
some, countercultural activities. Also, conflict management, blame and shame issues,
communication styles, and timely participation and contribution in community by
culturally diverse students can be understood and adjustments made. This can be
207
empowering as these issues contribute to a safe environment for learning through honest
and open sharing and critique.
As noted in the research on collaborative learning (Schwier and Daniel, and
Barab, MaKinster, and Scheckler), increased student growth and learning has been
evidenced in communities of practice where there is diversity and difference. This
therefore provides greater opportunity for “self” and “other” awareness and reinforces the
concepts already presented in this research indicating heterogeneous groups and
discovery, increased educational benefits. Developing authentic relationships and
intentionality in design provided opportunities for students to process alternate realities
both facilitating individual and group development and learning and transformation.
Spiritual Formation
Student spiritual formation undertaken within a community brings accountability,
security, maturity, a broader perspective to Christian doctrine and ministry, and
enhancement of group and individual spiritual practices. Using a cohort model and the
community rule of practice outlined above provides the structure, yet flexibility, for
culturally diverse students to grow and mature in a way that accomplishes all of the
objectives noted. When groups, or cohorts of faith and learning, are created in this way,
Christian educational institutions will offer an alternative model for transformative
learning, which by virtue of its intentional structural design and theoretical orientation
will counteract social alienation that causes loneliness and extreme individualism that are
so prevalent in Western society and the church.
Embracing the ecological spiritual development of the whole person in reciprocal,
authentic relationships and incorporating biblical spiritual practices yields transformative
results. As has been seen through the MAGL program these results are observable and
measurable and are essential for the accreditation process in any educational institution. I
208
would argue that this yields a more comprehensive assessment than those assessing
spiritual formation solely from the perspective of the individual.
Spiritual formation in community will affect the beliefs, practices, lifestyle, and
meaning perspectives of students. As was discovered in Chapter 5 in the study of historic
practices, students who engaged in personal relationships with accountability greatly
benefited from them. Similarly, each student in the MAGL program had a mentor for the
duration of the program, and positive changes in cognitive, affective, and behavioral
patterns were discovered and reported. Therefore, this model encourages students to have
a mentor in their local context with whom they have an authentic and accountable
relationship. In so doing, the opportunity for further growth and stability is promoted
once the student graduates from a program.
Asynchronous Design
Practical logistics alone dictate that any online program that reaches around the
world cannot expect students to meet in “real time.” Real time program design is simply
not appropriate for the model described wherein adult students are also working and have
family commitments. However, asynchronous online program design also has other
significant educational benefits as reported by Sorensen when addressing the dynamics of
Transformative Learning Theory. Where the “process of reflection” is encouraged
through the use of discussion boards appropriately incorporated using sound instructional
design, enhanced learning has been reported. Over and over again, faculty who teach
online – even those who have previously only ever taught face-to-face – attest to the
depth of engagement with the learning material by students when utilizing these design
principles.
209
An Exit Strategy
Finally, an exit strategy for terminating a program is an extremely important part
of the process. Assisting students to prepare for this adjustment psychologically and
practically in the final stages of their program will enable them to reflect on the journey
shared and provide “space” and time for celebrating and processing feelings about the
change and loss. The fact that the students have continuity within their home context and
place of service is another protective element in the transition from cohort learning to
ministry service, especially when close, accountable mentoring relationships have been
nurtured.
CONCLUSION
“If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.” An African Proverb
This research evolved out of a proverbial “perfect storm”: curious disposition, an
insatiable appetite to find ways to understand how we can do things better, a divine
appointment within a context that provided the “soil” for the research, and people who
encouraged and enabled me to “go for it.” My desire was and is to develop an educational
model that serves students at home and abroad in a way that facilitates a “process of
becoming.” It is indeed a “community” model that allows dynamic interactive learning in
such a way that students not only realize their own potential but in the process act as
catalysts for this process in others. The research began by asking several pertinent
questions.
An initial study of student papers in the course “ML582: Global Leadership in
Context” showed specific areas of concern students had. These results fueled further
curiosity to consider how the cultural context in the US contributes to the issues reported.
From this assessment, a survey instrument was designed to research two main realms of
students’ lives, loneliness and extreme individualism, and this was distributed to a new
sample population. The data collected yielded empirical results revealing some of the
ways in which, and the extent to which, the Master of Arts in Global Leadership program
at Fuller Theological Seminary proved successful in transformation for adult student
practitioners in cohorts 6-12. Definitive and direct correlations were found between the
two variables, “loneliness” and “individualism,” and where there was a high incidence of
210
211
“accountable relationships” for students in the program, low levels of loneliness were
reported.
The data showed 63.8% of all the students surveyed reported positive
improvement in relationships with their families, faith community, and those “outside”
their family and faith communities. Also, 75.2% of students specifically reported an
improvement or increase in close accountable relationships. On average, 62.7% of the
students experienced less social alienation and feelings of loneliness and an increased
sense of “feeling loved.” Beyond these encouraging results, it was found that 76% of the
student leaders, pastors, and missionaries surveyed now have more
collaborative/communal approaches to decision making after study in the MAGL
program.
Further research was conducted regarding historical formation in community and
contemporary formation and education theories and practices, and this yielded commonly
occurring indicators for the effectiveness of the program. On the basis of this, ways of
improving the MAGL program were considered, and a critique has been presented for
consideration. Additional components that could enrich the MAGL program include
elements described from Transformative Learning Theory, adoption of other
collaborative learning and community formation practices, and an exit strategy. Further,
by deliberately addressing cultural competency from an anthropological perspective and
by understanding the paradoxical nature of groups, the dynamic of the cohort community
could be even more powerful in effecting transformation. Beyond this, incorporating
biblical, reciprocal spiritual practices and accountable peer relationships will better
prepare and equip Christian leaders for ministry and leadership.
As a result of the research, an alternate, contextual, innovative, and integrative
theoretical model of education has been presented in this dissertation. This model will
212
foster effective student formation and transformation relevant for the Christian context
and even beyond to any educational institution desiring a holistic approach to adult
learning in a world being impacted and changed through globalization and technology.
Out of necessity and intention, the model proposed is countercultural and as such may be
perceived as paradoxical as the prevailing cultural context in the US fosters values that
lead to extreme individualism, which often leads to social alienation contributing to
students’ perceived sense of loneliness. While our context holds as foundational the
values of independence, self-reliance, self-sufficiency, and competition to reach one’s
full potential, these values are antithetical to the biblical and historical communities of
faith that foster discipleship and learning within contexts of authentic, committed,
reciprocal relationships. Contemporary research on learning theories has found these
values contribute to pathological personal behaviors and social patterns and result in
psychological, emotional, and relational maladies.
The research on the process of learning within the MAGL cohorts explored what
happened when students committed to each other and to their own community rule of
practice. Not by intentional design but by the elements that were incorporated in the
design of the program, the two specific, prevailing, and threatening factors of
globalization – namely loneliness and extreme individualism – were countered. This
design clearly provided a protective barrier to the “exporting” of this particular Western
value from the dominant culture through which the program was being offered.
I propose that the future development of Christian education using this model will
prove to be effective in equipping women and men who will model what they have
experienced for themselves, which in turn will impact their families, faith communities,
and God’s mission in the world.

213
The conclusion of this research reflects a long and sometimes arduous personal
journey. The many stories of students, while not told in words or shown in pictures, along
with the humbling, mysterious work of the transcendent, Triune God, enrich its worth
beyond measure. Clearly, it is a complex “stage” on which we find ourselves, one that
requires ears and eyes attentive to the present needs yet cognizant of the history that
informs its narrative. I would argue that the extent to which those afforded a voice in
directing this “play” can keep this meta-narrative perspective, yet remain focused on and
committed to a guiding teleology that embraces these theological, developmental,
pedagogical, and anthropological perspectives, will be the extent to which online
educational programs are successful in facilitating outcomes espoused in this research.
The development of contextually appropriate online education for adult learners in the
global context demands and deserves this kind of resolve, dedication, and hard work.
APPENDIX A
ALL TREE NODES REPORT
May 2006
Listed Descending Order by Document
% of
TOTAL # Documents Paragraphs Passages
Papers Coded Coded Coded
Node
(1) Church
74
1.1 Missional Issues
Missional
Response/Engagement 81.1% 60 190 197
Contextualization 39.2% 29 50 55
Missionary community 25.7% 19 26 25
Missional Issues 16.2% 12 23 17
Passion for people 13.5% 10 20 10
Mission orthopraxis and
orthodoxy 8.1% 6 8 7
Missional Leadership 6.8% 5 7 10
Over-simplification of mission 5.4% 4 4 5
Church to exploit cultural
values 2.7% 2 2 4
Redemptive analogies 1.4% 1 3 6
1.2 Holistic Ministry

Ministering holistically 77.0% 57 122 121
Reconciliation 64.9% 48 96 200
Church must be relational 37.8% 28 46 43
Social responsibility 35.1% 26 41 41
Incarnational Ministry &
Service 33.8% 25 43 45
Servant evangelism 29.7% 22 52 38
Social Action 24.3% 18 36 55
Spiritual Journey 16.2% 12 32 24
Church must be real 13.5% 10 13 12
Exclusion 10.8% 8 13 10
214
Empowering 8.1% 6 7 7
Addressing this 6.8% 5 9 9
Indigenous music 5.4% 4 4 4
Interaction 5.4% 4 9 9
Holistic Solutions needed 5.4% 4 8 7
Church not peacemaking 4.1% 3 4 8
Incarnational leadership 2.7% 2 2 2
Christians and the arts 1.4% 1 3 3
Sacrificial love 1.4% 1 1 1
1.3 Discipleship Issues

Belief Issues 60.8% 45 111 233
Transformation Required 59.5% 44 107 217
Discipleship Needed 48.6% 36 74 60
Relativism 25.7% 19 53 116
Discipleship lack 18.9% 14 18 17
Spiritual Growth 13.5% 10 20 40
1.4 Church Reform
1.4.1 Community Issues

Alternative Prophetic
Community Needed 33.8% 25 46 50
Church creating local
community 32.4% 24 28 28
Church not alternative
community 25.7% 19 25 23
Christian community as a
witness 13.5% 10 13 13
Covenant community 2.7% 2 4 4
1.4.2 Model of Church

Issues
Religion/ Religions 60.8% 45 125 265
Church reform required 48.6% 36 196 169
Churches Affected Need to
Change 37.8% 28 149 176
Consumer Christians 35.1% 26 71 69
Church as a model 32.4% 24 37 33
Technology used by church 29.7% 22 42 51
Theological change 14.9% 11 15 14
Church Using Corporate
Structure Principles 14.9% 11 22 27
Kingdom is not a program 12.2% 9 10 10
Private faith 6.8% 5 12 11
Materialistic church 5.4% 4 7 7
Church is competitive 4.1% 3 4 3
Church as social club 2.7% 2 2 4
Institutional Christianity 2.7% 2 4 2
Fundamentalism 2.7% 2 2 4
215
Anti-materialistic 1.4% 1 2 2
Revenue-driven faith 1.4% 1 1 1
1.4.3 Leadership Issues

Church Leadership Issues 27.0% 20 48 99
Authoritarian leadership
Structure 4.1% 3 3 6
Church leadership abuse of
power 2.7% 2 3 3
1.4.4 Denominational
Issues
Church collaboration 9.5% 7 9 10
Restructuring 8.1% 6 6 12
Denominational change
required 6.8% 5 12 11
Transdenominational issues 5.4% 4 7 15
Church "brand" loyalty 4.1% 3 5 3
Church common mission task 4.1% 3 5 4
Unity of the church as
witness 4.1% 3 8 4
(2) Identity Issues
2.1 Individual Identity

Individuality / Individualism 87.8% 65 160 342
Identity 66.2% 49 271 362
Powerlessness 44.6% 33 97 217
Fragmentation 21.6% 16 30 65
Anxiety 16.2% 12 15 30
Hopelessness 14.9% 11 15 31
Disillusionment 9.5% 7 9 18
Insecurity 5.4% 4 6 12
Compartmentalized 5.4% 4 9 18
Restored hope 2.7% 2 2 2
Status 2.7% 2 2 2
Personal inadequacy 2.7% 2 2 4
Emotional pain 1.4% 1 1 2
Restless wandering 1.4% 1 3 6
2.2 Self Issues

Self-Worth 21.6% 16 30 36
Self-centered 16.2% 12 15 15
Self-Identity 6.8% 5 17 15
Self determination 1.4% 1 1 2
Self-justification 1.4% 1 1 2
Self-pity 1.4% 1 1 2
216
2.3 Values
Materialism 56.8% 42 154 319
Meaning 54.1% 40 105 211
Pluralism 45.9% 34 149 325
Lifestyle Issues 44.6% 33 74 151
Pleasure 31.1% 23 47 44
Choice 27.0% 20 70 57
Private 23.0% 17 32 64
Valueless 13.5% 10 19 17
Purpose 9.5% 7 11 10
2.4 Connectedness Issues

Loneliness 50.0% 37 66 134
Abandoned 16.2% 12 23 24
Connectedness 12.2% 9 10 20
Alienation 10.8% 8 12 23
Belonging 10.8% 8 12 12
Acceptance 2.7% 2 3 3
Fear of rejection 1.4% 1 1 2
(3) Capitalism
3.1 Work Issues

Work 36.5% 27 204 264
Labor 13.5% 10 14 14
Unemployment 10.8% 8 14 29
Career 8.1% 6 8 16
3.2 Economic Issues

Environment abused 51.4% 38 93 195
Global communications 48.6% 36 77 76
Global economics 45.9% 34 103 110
Corporate Power 23.0% 17 37 37
Globalized technology 16.2% 12 15 15
Mass Production 4.1% 3 4 3
3.3 Marketing Issues

Culture industries 75.7% 56 96 196
Media power 63.5% 47 102 104
Consumerism 54.1% 40 143 309
Marketing 40.5% 30 54 108
Western Influence 21.6% 16 66 75
Spiritual consumerism 9.5% 7 17 19
217
(4) Societal
4.1 Community Issues

Community sought 35.1% 26 36 38
Eroding community 23.0% 17 29 30
Indigenous local community 6.8% 5 5 5
Community transformation 5.4% 4 7 4
Online communities 5.4% 4 6 4
4.2 Relationship Issues

Relationships 55.4% 41 158 145
Social relations 4.1% 3 7 4
Shallow relationships 4.1% 3 4 8
Mutual interdependence 2.7% 2 2 3
4.3 Social Issues

Poor 87.8% 65 219 265
Politics 55.4% 41 134 282
Stratification 50.0% 37 85 87
Education 50.0% 37 91 185
Domination Issues 40.5% 30 62 126
Justice 39.2% 29 50 49
Suffering 23.0% 17 39 80
Abuse 16.2% 12 16 33
Liberation Issues 16.2% 12 14 28
Institutional Issues 14.9% 11 31 40
Migration 13.5% 10 20 40
Corruption 12.2% 9 18 39
Ethics 10.8% 8 22 11
Sociopolitical problems 10.8% 8 10 11
Meaningful communication
tools 4.1% 3 4 4
Loss of work 1.4% 1 2 2
4.4 Cultural Issues

Cultural value 28.4% 21 74 63
Non-Western 12.2% 9 16 33
National Leaders 5.4% 4 10 11
Culture of dependence 4.1% 3 3 3
Rejection of tradition 2.7% 2 2 2
Dominion 1.4% 1 3 3
218
Percentages
M
in
is
te
rin
g
ho
Ch lis
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
ur Re tic
ch al
ly
m co
us nc
In tb ilia
ca
S e tio
rn oc re n
at ia la
io lr tio
na na
l M esp l
in on
ist sib
ry ilit
Se &
rv Se y
an rv
te ice
va
ng
el
So ism
cia
Sp lA
iri ct
tu io
Ch al n
ur Jo
ch ur
m ne
us y
tb
e
re
al
Ex
clu
Em sio
p n
219
Ad owe
Topics
dr rin
es g
APPENDIX B
In sin
di g
ge th
no i s
Church - Holistic Ministry
FIGURE B.1
us
Ho
lis m
us
tic
In ic
So te
Ch lu ra
FROM STUDENT PAPERS
ur tio ct
ch ns io
no ne n
In tp ed
ca ea ed
rn ce
at
io m
na ak
Ch l in
ris lea g
CHURCH – HOLISTIC MINISTRY

tia de
ns rs
an h ip
d
th
Sa e
ar
cr ts
ific
ia
GRAPHS OF RAW DATA – GLOBALIZATION ISSUES
l lo
ve
Series1
Church - Discipleship Issues
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
Percentages
Series1
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Belief Issues Transformation Discipleship Relativisim Discipleship lack Spiritual Growth
Required Needed
Topics
FIGURE B.2
CHURCH – DISCIPLESHIP ISSUES
Church - Reform - Leadership Issues
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
Percentages
15.0% Series1
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
Church Leadership Issues Authoritarian leadership Structure Church leadership abuse of power
Topics
FIGURE B.3
CHURCH – LEADERSHIP ISSUES
220
Identity - Individual Identity Issues
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
Percentages
50.0% Series1
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
m
us
y
y
s
ss
cy
g
pe
n
t
n
ed
rit
et
tit
en
es
lis
rin
ai
tio
at
ua
ne
ho
en
xi
cu
iz
lp
m
ua
sn
de
ta
St
An
eq
ss
ta
on
se
Id
na
en
d
es
id
an
en
le
re
ad
si
iv
In
io
gm
el
w
er
to
illu
nd
rtm
ot
in
op
w
es
ss
a
Em
/I
is
al
Fr
Po
pa
tle
D
on
ity
om
es
rs
al
R
Pe
du
vi
di
In
Topics
FIGURE B.4
IDENTITY – INDIVIDUAL IDENTITY ISSUES
Identity - Self Issues
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
Percentages
Series1
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
Self-Worth Self-centered Self-Identity Self determination Self-justification Self-pity
Topics
FIGURE B.5
IDENTITY – SELF ISSUES
221
Identity - Values Issues
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
Percentages
30.0% Series1
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Materialism Meaning Pluralism Lifestyle Pleasure Choice Private Valueless Purpose
Issues
Topics
FIGURE B.6
IDENTITY – VALUES ISSUES
Identity - Connectedness Issues
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
Percentages
30.0% Series1
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Loneliness Abandoned Connectedness Alienation Belonging Acceptance Fear of rejection
Topics
FIGURE B.7
IDENTITY – CONNECTEDNESS ISSUES
222
Societal - Community Issues
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
Percentages
Series1
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
Community sought Eroding community Indigenous local Community Online communities
community transformation
Topics
FIGURE B.8
SOCIETAL – COMMUNITY ISSUES
Societal- Relationship Issues
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
Percentages Series1
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Relationships Social relations Shallow relationships Mutual interdependence
Topics
FIGURE B.9
SOCIETAL – RELATIONSHIP ISSUES
223
Societal - Social Issues
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
Percentages
50.0% Series1
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
es
n
k
cs
s
es
n
es
s
or
e
g
or
io
ic
ic
io
em
us
tio
rin
ol
io
su
Po
hi
su
su
lit
at
w
st
at
to
pt
ra
Ab
Et
ffe
Is
bl
Po
Is
ic
Is
Ju
uc
ru
of
ig
n
ro
tif
Su
io
or
Ed
M
na
ss
lp
ra
io
tio
at
C
tio
St
Lo
at
ca
ic
ra
in
un
itu
iti
be
om
ol
m
st
Li
op
om
In
D
ci
lc
So
fu
ng
ni
ea
M
Topics
FIGURE B.10
SOCIETAL – SOCIAL ISSUES
Societal - Cultural Issues
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
Percentages
15.0% Series1
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
Cultural value Non-Western National Leaders Culture of Rejection of Dominion
dependence tradition
Topics
FIGURE B.11
SOCIETAL – CULTURAL ISSUES
224
APPENDIX C
MAGL STUDENT SURVEY – ONLINE
(conducted online through Survey Monkey)
Preamble to the Survey
Thank you for your participation in this survey as both your time and opinions are greatly
valued.
Two pervading areas influencing people in our globalized world are individualism and
loneliness. These two specific issues are considered in the questions in sections 1 and 2
below which are designed to understand the effects both positively and negatively that
the MAGL program had upon you personally as an MAGL student.
Note, this questionnaire is confidential and anonymous, and personal details of

respondents will not be released.
Each question below calls for candid reflection and evaluation of how you perceive
yourself since study in the MAGL cohort.
225
Section 1 - Individualism
Many of us are shaped by cultures that value an ideology of individualism. Its effects
may cause us to become isolated, self-centered and self-reliant. Alternatively an
individualistic culture can empower us to prefer others and to choose appropriately for
ourselves.
This survey seeks to evaluate if (and/or how) the MAGL program interfaces transcendent
kingdom realities with personal reality in the cultural context in which you live and
minister.
1. If you evaluate how you respond to the needs of others in relation to your own, since
you completed the MAGL cohort classes would you say you are:
• Very much more considerate of others deferring to their needs above my own
needs
• Somewhat more considerate and respectful of others and often consider their
needs before my own
• Much the same, giving equal attention to self and others
• Somewhat more attentive to my own needs over those of others
• Much more inclined to attend to my own needs before the needs of others
2. What kinds of changes have you experienced as a result of the MAGL in regard to
your relationship to others?
• Due to personal growth through my MAGL study program I am much closer to
people and more relational
• The MAGL helped me to develop somewhat closer relationships with others
• How I relate to others has not really changed
• I am a little more distant from people
• I am much more distant from people and do not have many close relationships
3. As you consider your level of relational independence when it comes to decision

making, since completing the MAGL would you say:
• I have become very communal and confer with others in the decision-making
process
• I am more aware of communal approaches to making decisions and less
relationally independent than I was
• Nothing has really changed in the way I function in this regard
• I am somewhat less independent and more community-minded than I was
• I am still a very relationally independent person when it comes to decision-
making
4. Since the MAGL, how would you rate "self-care" in relation to care for others?
• I always give a higher priority to care for others over myself
• While caring for others I try to care for myself
• I balance priorities so that I care for myself and others equally
226
• I am mindful that self-care is necessary in order to care for others
• Care for myself is primary and the needs of others are secondary
5. In the face of personal opposition or conflict how do you respond since your
involvement in the MAGL?
• I respect people and their different views and seek to understand them
• It is my goal to respect, hear, and understand other people and their opinions,
however I sometimes react negatively
• I respond neither negatively or positively
• I sometimes react negatively
• I usually react negatively and take things personally
6. Since your MAGL experience concerning close, committed and accountable

relationships with others, in the process of accomplishing personal or group
objectives/goals would you say?
• I am actively involved in accountable relationships
• I value committed relationships for many things, however there are some areas I
consider private
• Accountability is important but so is personal responsibility
• I have a limited number of committed/accountable relationships
• Currently I do not have any relationships that involve accountability to
accomplish personal or collective goals
7. Reflecting upon your relationships with members of your family, as a result of your
experience through the MAGL would you say:
• They are stronger and closer than before
• There have been some positive relational improvements
• I consider they are about the same as before
• They are not quite as good as before
• There has been a significant deterioration in my family relationships
8. Likewise, in regard to personal relationships with people in your faith community,

since the MAGL:
• I find more meaning in, and actively seek out, closer deep relationships than
before
• I have experienced a distinct improvement in relationships
• No real change has occurred
• There has been a slight deterioration in close relationships
• I experience close relationships less frequently than before
9. As you consider your personal relationships with people OUTSIDE your family and
faith community, since the MAGL these relationships are:
• More developed than they were before
• Improved somewhat
• Similar to what they were
227
• Not as good as before
• Are significantly worse than before
10. Concerning “individualism” do you think as a result of the MAGL program that you are
different in how you think, behave, or feel, and if so, in what way/s
228
Section 2 - Loneliness
Loneliness is not the same as being alone. Being alone can be refreshing, however
loneliness can be described as the absence of identification, understanding or compassion
and can be experienced even in crowded places. Loneliness is personally perceived, and
the following questions seek an honest personal appraisal of this matter.
1. After studying and building relationships through the MAGL program:

• I consider that loneliness is no longer an issue for me
• I occasionally experience loneliness but not as much as before
• For me nothing has changed in this area
• I experience (or am aware of) the feeling of "loneliness" more than before
• I have become a very lonely person
2. Where the soul experiences a loneliness that deepens and connects to a sense of
personal “emptiness,” would you say that since the MAGL:
• I don’t experience a sense of personal emptiness
• Any sense of emptiness I previously experienced has diminished
• Nothing seems to have changed
• I sometimes experience a sense of “emptiness” more frequently than before
• I often find myself feeling very “empty”
3. In so far as your ability to experience/receive "compassion" from others, your

experience in the MAGL:
• Has helped me to receive and know the compassion of most people
• Has made me aware that some people show me compassion
• My perception concerning peoples’ level of compassion toward me remains
the same
• I feel less compassion from people than before
• I rarely find that people have compassion for me
4. When assessing your life since the MAGL when it comes to being "understood",
you feel:
• I am very well understood by others
• Most people have some understanding of me and my concerns
• No real change has occurred and people understand me the same
• I feel less understood than before
• Very few people truly understand me
5. As you reflect upon your life following the MAGL when it comes to connection
verses alienation, you think:
• I have no sense of social alienation at all
• On rare occasions I feel alienated from others
• I feel neither very connected or alienated
229
• I consider myself slightly more alienated from people than before
• Social alienation is worse for me than before
6. The authenticity of feeling “loved” is experienced on many different levels. If we
understand this as being cherished, valued, known, and accepted, how has your
experience and study in the MAGL program (either directly or indirectly)
impacted you in knowing this sense of being “loved”. It has:
• Enabled me to experience a deeper sense of being “loved” on all levels
• Increased my sense or feeling of being “loved”
• Resulted in no observable change in this area
• I feel less “loved” than before
• Reinforced that I don’t feel “loved” at all
7. Concerning “loneliness” do you think as a result of the MAGL program that you
are different in how you think, behave, or feel, and if so, in what way/s?
General Background Information
A few questions about you
1. Gender? Female Male
2. Age range? 20-29 30-39 40-49 50 or above
3. Nationality?
4. Where serving (nation)?
5. How long in ministry?

0-5 years 6-10 years 11-15 years 16-20 years More than 20 years
6. Marital status? Single Divorced Married

Widow/widower
7. Ministry function? Youth Pastoral Missionary Parachurch Other
230
APPENDIX D
EMAIL TO STUDENTS SEEKING SURVEY PARTICIPATION
From: Ron Hannaford [mailto:ronaford@fuller.edu]

Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 9:57 AM
To: ….
Subject: Cohort 6 - MAGL Response - Yes or No?
Dear ….,
Greetings! I hope you are doing well.
At Fuller's Office of Distance Learning we are constantly seeking ways to improve

our Master of Arts in Global Leadership (MAGL) program by developing up-to-date
courses relevant to our constituents and their context. Since you have completed the
required cohort learning classes I have a small favor to ask of you. Would you be willing to
participate in a brief survey (sixteen multiple-choice and two open answer questions) which
will provide additional information for us as we assess the effectiveness of the program?
Research has shown that Individualism and Loneliness significantly impact people in our
globalized world and consequently we are interested in understanding if, or how, students
studying the MAGL may have been affected by these issues. While addressing these
specific areas has not been a focus of the MAGL, current trends compel us as educators to
ask these questions and respond accordingly. The survey would be conducted online
anonymously and all responses are confidential.
Please kindly reply to this email and indicate your preparedness to assist us in this
endeavor by participating in the survey. A simple yes or no is sufficient. If you are able to
do so I will forward the survey to you shortly.
Thank you for taking time to consider this request.
Sincerely,
Ron
231
APPENDIX E
MAGL STUDENT SURVEY – RESULTS (Raw Data)
Q1 Individualism: If you evaluate how you respond to the needs of others in relation
to your own, since you completed the MAGL cohort classes would you say you are:
TABLE E.1
If you evaluate how you respond to the needs of others in relation to your own, since you completed
the MAGL cohort classes would you say you are:
Very much more considerate of others deferring to their needs above

13.5% 14
my own needs
Somewhat more considerate and respectful of others and often
58.7% 61
consider their needs before my own
Much the same, giving equal attention to self and others 26.9% 28
Somewhat more attentive to my own needs over those of others 1.0% 1
Much more inclined to attend to my own needs before the needs of
0.0% 0
others
Skipped question 1
FIGURE E.1
232
Q2 Individualism: What kinds of changes have you experienced as a result of the
MAGL in regard to your relationship to others?
TABLE E.2
What kinds of changes have you experienced as a result of the MAGL in regard to your relationship to
others?
a. Due to personal growth through my MAGL study program I am much

21.0% 22
closer to people and more relational
b. The MAGL helped me to develop somewhat closer relationships with
53.3% 56
others
c. How I relate to others has not really changed 21.9% 23
d. I am a little more distant from people 3.8% 4
e. I am much more distant from people and do not have many close
0.0% 0
relationships
Skipped question 0
FIGURE E.2
233
Q3 Individualism: As you consider your level of relational independence when it
comes to decision making, since completing the MAGL would you say:
TABLE E.3
As you consider your level of relational independence when it comes to decision making, since
completing the MAGL would you say:
I have become very communal and confer with others in the decision-
18.1% 19
making process
I am more aware of communal approaches to making decisions and
58.1% 61
less relationally independent than I was
Nothing has really changed in the way I function in this regard 17.1% 18
I am somewhat less independent and more community-minded than I
3.8% 4
was
I am still a very relationally independent person when it comes to
2.9% 3
decision-making
Skipped question 0
FIGURE E.3
234
Q4 Individualism: Since the MAGL, how would you rate "self-care" in relation to
care for others?
TABLE E.4
Since the MAGL, how would you rate "self-care" in relation to care for others?
I always give a higher priority to care for others over myself 2.9% 3
While caring for others I try to care for myself 34.3% 36
I balance priorities so that I care for myself and others equally 30.5% 32
I am mindful that self-care is necessary in order to care for others 32.4% 34
Care for myself is primary and the needs of others are secondary 0.0% 0
Skipped question 0
FIGURE E.4
235
Q5 Individualism: In the face of personal opposition or conflict how do you respond
since your involvement in the MAGL?
TABLE E.5
In the face of personal opposition or conflict how do you respond since your involvement in the
MAGL?
I respect people and their different views and seek to understand

60.0% 63
them
It is my goal to respect, hear, and understand other people and their
38.1% 40
opinions, however I sometimes react negatively
I respond neither negatively or positively 1.0% 1
I sometimes react negatively 1.0% 1
I usually react negatively and take things personally 0.0% 0
Skipped question 0
FIGURE E.5
236
Q6 Individualism: Since your MAGL experience concerning close, committed and
accountable relationships with others, in the process of accomplishing personal or
group objectives/goals would you say?
TABLE E.6
Since your MAGL experience concerning close, committed and accountable relationships with others,
in the process of accomplishing personal or group objectives/goals would you say?
I am actively involved in accountable relationships 51.4% 54

I value committed relationships for many things, however there are
23.8% 25
some areas I consider private
Accountability is important but so is personal responsibility 8.6% 9
I have a limited number of committed/accountable relationships 15.2% 16
Currently I do not have any relationships that involve accountability to
1.0% 1
accomplish personal or collective goals
Skipped question 0
FIGURE E.6
237
Q7 Individualism: Reflecting upon your relationships with members of your family,
as a result of your experience through the MAGL would you say:
TABLE E.7
Reflecting upon your relationships with members of your family, as a result of your experience
through the MAGL would you say:
They are stronger and closer than before 29.5% 31

There have been some positive relational improvements 33.3% 35
I consider they are about the same as before 34.3% 36
They are not quite as good as before 1.0% 1
There has been a significant deterioration in my family relationships 1.9% 2
Skipped question 0
FIGURE E.7
238
Q8 Individualism: Likewise, in regard to personal relationships with people in your
faith community, since the MAGL:
TABLE E.8
Likewise, in regard to personal relationships with people in your faith community, since the MAGL:
I find more meaning in, and actively seek out, closer deep
20.0% 21
relationships than before
I have experienced a distinct improvement in relationships 40.0% 42
No real change has occurred 27.6% 29
There has been a slight deterioration in close relationships 12.4% 13
I experience close relationships less frequently than before 0.0% 0
Skipped question 0
FIGURE E.8
239
Q9 Individualism: As you consider your personal relationships with people
OUTSIDE your family and faith community, since the MAGL these relationships
are:
TABLE E.9
As you consider your personal relationships with people OUTSIDE your family and faith community, since
the MAGL these relationships are:
More developed than they were before 36.2% 38

Improved somewhat 32.4% 34
Similar to what they were 29.5% 31
Not as good as before 1.9% 2
Are significantly worse than before 0.0% 0
Skipped question 0
FIGURE E.9
240
Q10 Individualism: Concerning “individualism” do you think as a result of the MAGL
program that you are different in how you think, behave, or feel, and if so, in what
way/s? (open question)
Concerning “individualism” do you think as a result of the MAGL program that you are
different in how you think, behave, or feel, and if so, in what way/s?
Answer Options Response Count
98
Skipped question 7
TABLE E.10
The written responses to this open question are listed below:
1. The MAGL emphasis on community and learning and practice helped me to think in terms of
what can I do with others so that we can learn together or so that they can become better disciples
along with me in the process. Wed, Jul 15, 2009 12:43 PM.
2. I now have a much deeper "village" mentality, realizing that we all have a role to play in finishing
the task and that I can't do it all... Wed, Jul 15, 2009 6:26 AM.
3. I have a more holistic framework in my thinking and attempt to understand how peoples opinions
and views fit within the broader scope of life as opposed to the discussion focus.
Tue, Jul 14, 2009 1:56 PM.
4. I am much more open to other's world views, not in terms of more tolerant, but in terms of willing
to learn about them, understand them, and respond in a Christ-like manner, rather than in simply a
way in which i was conditioned. Tue, Jul 14, 2009 9:38 AM
5. I THINK the MAGL program has given me a better perspective on how individualism is
pervasive in our culture and how we are called as Christians to reflect different values - such as
community and caring for others Mon, Jul 13, 2009 9:48
AM
6. i think Communities of Practice vs individual; i feel broader in my approach to ministry vs just
thinking linear/boxed-in Thu, Jul 9, 2009 5:01 PM
7. I understand more fully how our community impacts our spiritual growth. Healthy growth cannot
happen without community and strong peer relationships. Tue, Jun 30, 2009 10:10 AM
8. There are not huge differences in individualism. I think that my inner view of others has changed.
I am more accepting of people who are different than me, especially when it comes to different
ages. But, that is not exactly concerning individualism. Mon, Jun 29, 2009 8:13 PM
9. Yes, MAGL opened me up more to the world as a whole and the beauty of learning in a
community setting especially leaders from other countries. Sat, Jun 27, 2009 11:19 AM
10. I think I am different, particularly in terms of mentoring and being mentored. Also, community
(especially MAGL community) has become very important to me. Relationships developed will
last for life. Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:49 PM
11. I consider this area to be slightly improved due to the level of awareness and understanding of
others in their distinct values. Thu, Jun 25, 2009 12:55 PM
12. The benefit of MAGL did not particularly address individualism for me.
241
Thu, Jun 25, 2009 7:51 AM
13. team invlovement, ADEPT much more important Thu, Jun 25, 2009 6:46 AM
14. yes. i have a more collaborative and shared vision mentality through my leadership. i also was
deeply impacted by establishing more intentional mentoring relationships that have moved me into
deeper community and development. Thu, Jun 25, 2009 5:19 AM
15. The MAGL has helped me identify the "blind spots" of individualism in my own culture and
religiosity. It has helped me understand the virulence of individualism and our need for others.
Wed, Jun 24, 2009 11:43 PM
16. Helped me improve a broader persective on collectivism, and work better this this collectivism
culture of India Wed, Jun 24, 2009 10:59 PM
17. To start with I come from a much less individualistic society than most of the rest of MAGL'ers.
However I did become more intentional in living in community, which would be visible in the
ongoing small group/church community that we're involved with, as well as the ongoing
mentoring relationships. My wife and I also started seeing another couple regularly for our
marriage time. So it looks like other people are involved in our lives (and vice versa) at various
levels as has never happened before in my Christian life. I believe this is one of the most important
impacts of the MAGL in my (and my family's) life. Wed, Jun 24, 2009 10:25 PM
18. Individualism as an ideology is soundly counteracted by the MAGL teaching.. however the
amount of effort and interaction that the program required of me in my actual setting detracted
from the power of the teaching. I had to sit in front of a computer and "talk to a screen" for hours
each week... virtually talking with a community scattered around the globe, but not interacting
with my familly, friends and people God has put into my life for me to minister too. The
experience was a little micro community, that in most of its elements was virtual and to some
extent not real. I continue to keep in contact with these people I now call friends, but there is
somethign inately frustrating and very unrewarding about the whole experience of living out
community on line. No matter how much we try to say it differently this is the reality of virtual
communities and the MAGL would be better served by presenting this reality clearly on the for-
front of the program.. it adds an air of authenticity...
Am I still an individual? yes... was there a positive efffect on my ability to see and understand tha
this tendency in me can and is over emphasized at times both consciously and unconsciously...
Yes. I think I value community more and thus my above comments about my frustrations with
virtual communities. I want to invest and be a substancial part of the lives of the people I value
and get to know... around me. The virtual community of the MAGL actually took away from that
as it introduced a whole separate community to my awareness and required me to interact with it.
just me... Wed, Jun 24, 2009 10:20 PM
19. Yes, I am more self aware and I am learning to live in constant communion with Christ. I am able
to express my feelings and I am learning to practice "reflective listening"
Wed, Jun 24, 2009 8:15 PM
20. Yes, I am. I experienced a great deal of healing, especially in my first small group. It was
affirming to have others listen emphatetically. I felt legitimized through the cohort section of the
MAGL program. Since going through the cohort, I am more confident, my vision is refined, and I
am not afraid to share my vision with others. I've experienced many paradigm shifts since entering
the program. Wed, Jun 24, 2009 7:54 PM
21. MAGL helped me identify and name individualism in a clearer more concise way.
Wed, Jun 24, 2009 7:03 PM
22. I most definitely feel like I am different than I used to be. For the past several months I feel like I
don't belong with my friends. I definitely think differently and have been challenged in everything
that I used to believe. I am still trying to sort through the process.
Tue, Jun 23, 2009 5:19 PM
23. Developing a communal rule of life amongst our mid-sized communities
Tue, Jun 9, 2009 11:45 AM
24. i've come to think that so much of our theology and ecclesiology in the West is predicated upon
individualism. i think the MAGL helped me identify and take an axe to the root of it, but it would
be saying too much to pretend it's eradicated completely. Sat, May 30, 2009 4:42 AM
242
25. I have come to believe that mentoring and accountable relationships, especially within postmodern
settings, is critical for all areas of growth. This has challenged me to not see others as tools to my
agenda or vision but as people who come equppied to add to and increase the value of the whole
ministry. I am also more aware of how to build trust with others through strong relational
networks and follow through of my intentions. Tue, May 26, 2009 10:14 AM
26. The biggest chang for me has been how I view the importance of relationship in the spiritual
journey. The MAGL has helped me see my mission field as outside the walls of the church
building. I am now actively persuing non-Christian neighbors to share life with. In my vocation, I
have decide to change jobs to join a group of folks who are engaged in ministry that is more in
line with my heart. These folks are more friends than colleagues, which will be a new step of faith
to live and work in vulnerable community with people. Tue, May 26, 2009 8:20 AM
27. The MAGL has had great impact on my way of thinking, behaving and even feeling. The different
courses I took helped me in many areas as I chose the optional courses according to my different
learning needs at the level of personal development, family relationships and church growth. My
leadership abilities have visibly been boosted as well as my relational abilities at different levels.
Tue, May 26, 2009 7:20 AM
28. I have realised that especially in leadership it is important to not be too independent but have
"flatter" structures of leadership. Mon, May 25, 2009 10:59 AM
29. I intentionally look for partnerships in ventures, comrades in fellowship and I am more
understanding of the diversity of opinions, outcomes and strategies.
Thu, May 21, 2009 10:02 PM
30. Personally, I value working with others in a community setting. The MAGL experience added to
this previously existing value and allowed us to interact well with each other as a group. In our
cohort there were only two of us who came from "egalitarian" church polity backgrounds, but
others in the group were open to working together. Thu, May 21, 2009 5:50 AM
31. I have come to undersood the concept of community more clearly and saw the darkness of
individualism. In turn this shift in paradigm shifted my own attitudes and thinking.
Wed, May 20, 2009 7:36 AM
32. I think I am able to work together with others in small groups better as a result of the MAGL
online cohorts. They have helped me develop my interpersonal communication abilities.
Tue, May 19, 2009 6:10 PM
33. no. It was already an area that I recognized personally (tnedencies) and also structurally (within
my org). Behaviors re that remain about the same. Tue, May 19, 2009 11:42 AM
34. In many ways, I think I am different than how I was before the MAGL. Specifically, I am much
more aware of having a place of responsibility, for being accountable for my place within the
body, but with individual functionality which is mine alone with God's help.
Mon, May 18, 2009 5:12 PM
35. I see the church as much more interdependent, and the world not as the enemy, but as captives that
need Jesus to free them. Mon, May 18, 2009 1:29 PM
36. Very much so. The MAGL program has helped me be able to diagnose individualism in my life
and others in order to speak in. Mon, May 18, 2009 9:24 AM
37. I see the global community is a very different way. I had very much taken on the American way of
life as the individual. I feel like I reject this thought now and seek more of a community based
approach in life. Mon, May 18, 2009 7:56 AM
38. Yes. I am more convicted about the way that I present the gospel and what I communicate that we
are invited into as we are reconciled to our Creator. I now give more thought and emphasis to the
importance of community in the development of character, leadership and a contrast society that
exists to partner in God's redemptive mission. Sat, May 16, 2009 3:43 PM
39. I definitely have a much greater awareness of individualism and a deep desire to "fight" against it.
Fri, May 15, 2009 9:45 PM
40. The MAGL helped me to further articulate and define the role of community in the Russian
mission effort. However, we moved 1.5 yrs ago and, at the moment, are very isolated. So, not sure
how valid the questions are given our current context. Fri, May 15, 2009 12:11 PM
41. The MAGL has challenged me regarding my idividualistic tendencies. I am much more convinced
about the importance of community. Fri, May 15, 2009 7:20 AM
243
42. I think that I behave more along the lines of empowering others while taking personal
responsibility especially in light of ministry, sharing the gospel and living missionally.
Thu, May 14, 2009 11:57 PM
43. In many areas I am working toward understanding others' perspective or at least asking and
listening intently. I think of have become more aware of the need for community while helping
others discover their unique individual. It has also caused me to desire more intensely to find ways
to reach across various culture lines and just let people be themselves.
Thu, May 14, 2009 7:58 PM
44. I am much more aware of the validity in other's perspectives, even the unbelieving population,
while still being firmly rooted in a biblical worldview. Thu, May 14, 2009 4:26 PM
45. There are some contradictions in myself as a result of the MAGL. I am more aware of my strong
desire for good relationship and a priority on others/community over self. I see how individualism
has influenced me and I see my strong post-modern desire to break out of it. I have taken steps to
live more in accountable relationship with others and now have a group of guys I meet with each
week. I have become much more proactive in assessing needs in my neighbors and trying to meet
needs. At the same time, with all the theological/ministry shifts I have experienced in the MAGL,
I am further away from people and communities now because I have a transformed set of
values/goals/visions for the future for myself my family, friends a ministry.
Thu, May 14, 2009 11:31 AM
46. Though my culture is not individualistic I sometimes rejected other cultures thinking that they
were not good as compared to the Word of God, Christian values. However, as a result of MAGL,
I managed to learn that each and every culture has good things and rooms for improvement. In
other words, cultures are natural and each and every one may be used for good. I think in this way
my way of thinking changed. Thu, May 14, 2009 7:52 AM
47. Prior to participating in the MAGL, I was already involved in an emergent/communal house
church in which we dialogued about the roles of individualism in culture and the church. The
MAGL did help to bring clarity and to affirm how God was already stirring and leading our
family. I think the MAGL was one factor in many that converged at once to help us rethink
community and the church. Now, we are part of a small intimate community that is mission-
oriented and depends deeply on one another. But I don't know that I am much "different" as a
result of the MAGL - more like propelled forward in the same direction, if that makes sense.
Wed, May 13, 2009 2:30 PM
48. Although the concept of "individualism" was talked about a lot in our coursework I am not sure
the program directly influenced how I behave or feel. Now it reiterated the thoughts I have had
about individualism and its influence on our culture, but it is very hard to change your feelings and
behaviors especially in the trials I have endured during this time. Wed, May 13, 2009 1:33 PM
49. It is important to note that the questionaire does not take into consideration the fact that some of us
actually were and are still strongly focussed on the relational aspect of leadership - and therefore
we answer "not much change". The MAGL has confirmed and strengthen my conviction of
teamwork and leading as a team with different functions and roles. Wed, May 13, 2009 11:48 AM
50. MAGL involvement helped me develop more skills and attitudes that help in relating to people
who differ in perspective and conviction. Wed, May 13, 2009 11:07 AM
51. This really was not a driving issue for me in regard to the MAGL. I found out I could learn via
distance, but it not really address the issue of individualism. Wed, May 13, 2009 10:18 AM
52. This really was not a driving issue for me in regard to the MAGL. I found out I could learn via
distance, but it not really address the issue of individualism. Wed, May 13, 2009 10:18 AM
53. Absolutely I am different, I am much more aware of the universal Body of Christ, and how JEsus
is drawing others into that body. Wed, May 13, 2009 7:59 AM
54. I would have to say I am much ore 'informed' . . . I feel I have gotten up to speed in what has been
happening in Christendom and where new areas of focus are wide open.
Wed, May 13, 2009 7:59 AM
55. I do feel differently about individualism because the MAGL made me view "time" as a precious,
perishable resource. The MAGL requires much time to do well. This attention to school has put
me in a place of isolation. While these are good at times, I look forward to not experiencing a high
frequency of isolation as before, and hope to cultivate relationships closer than I have had time
previously. Tue, May 12, 2009 11:23 PM
244
56. What MAGL has done is helped me to understand myself and my needs more clearly. It has
helped me to put my own needs in perspective--knowing where and how they "fit" in ministry.
Tue, May 12, 2009 9:34 PM
57. I value the insight of both others inside and outside my community more than I did before. I see
the value of learning communities and now prefer them over individualized learning.
Tue, May 12, 2009 8:43 PM
58. yes but primarly on the intellectual level, as I have learnt to listen more to other christian voices. I
think less alone, and value more diversity Tue, May 12, 2009 8:19 PM
59. Yes...it was not my first collaborative community, but it was the deepest collaborative STUDENT
community I have been in. This is in spite of me having done a Master's degree previously that
required continual "group work." Tue, May 12, 2009 7:38 PM
60. I am better able to consider how the whole picture fits together, i.e. in analyzing how individuals
affect the sum. Tue, May 12, 2009 5:38 PM
61. Able to admit my need for others, especially mentoring relationships and community
Tue, May 12, 2009 5:08 PM
62. Less isolated. As a result of Leadership Training Perspectives I see larger patterns at work in
life...I also gain from hearing other people's stories and experiences. Also the Mentoring
coursework made me more aware of the many influences and people in my life...and my role(s)
/potential roles in other people's lives Tue, May 12, 2009 2:50 PM
63. It is hard for me to distinguish how much the MAGL classes have influenced me with regard to
this "minidset." Having previously been exposed to the necessity of the Western individualism
both in my father's generation and in previous missions ministry, I know by experience the
importance of being able to stand alone and endure hardship and lonliness.
However, beginning with my own ministry experience in the late 70's I have exposed to and
shared in the great blessing of being a part of a true community and not having to walk alone. MY
wife and I have been deeply enriched by enduring relationahips.
I do believe that there is a need for strength of soul in handling hardship alone which does not
require nor justlify isolation.
In my judgment, individualism in kingdom of God life and ministry is a thing of the past: God is
building his church where each one is being knit into the corporate (Col 2:2:2-3) expression of our
Lord. Tue, May 12, 2009 1:52 PM
64. I am much more tolerant of others Christianity. Tue, May 12, 2009 11:58 AM
65. It is my goal to respect, hear, and understand other people and their opinions. This statement really
sums up well the way I think differently as a result of the MAGL.
Tue, May 12, 2009 11:28 AM
66. I see the kingdom as much more diverse than I did before. I was very closed in my way of seeing
other faith traditions before embarking on the MAGL. Tue, May 12, 2009 11:03 AM
67. I already had a very high value of community, but MAGL helped me to put some flesh on that
value Tue, May 12, 2009 10:53 AM
68. I think there is a greater appreciation for the group dynamic and the synergy and or the sharpening
that happens in a group forum. I still fight individual tendencies, but once I take the step towards
group evaluation, for example, I glean much from it. It's a learning process and one I'm more and
more eager to engage in. Tue, May 12, 2009 9:12 AM
69. I am more aware of the aspect and impact of community on my/our ability to work out an
everyday theology in a practical, missional manner. Tue, May 12, 2009 8:46 AM
70. I have a better understanding of the essential nature of community and how individuals can come
together to accomplish tasks and grow from each other. I do not however believe that it replaces a
leader's need to be a decision maker. I have also learned some ways to think about and approach
the readical individualism in our culture and how we can approach people in that place when
necessary and invite them into community when possible. Tue, May 12, 2009 8:23 AM
71. Some of this are hard to determine based only upon MAGL influences. I think that I am far more
conscious of individualism, and yet it is hard function much differently if others do not share this
awareness, nor if don't care too. Tue, May 12, 2009 8:09 AM
245
72. yes. However, this beast still lurks but with tools gained in the MAGL program I, and others under
my care, can better handle the individualism that is so real. Tue, May 12, 2009 7:41 AM
73. I am very much aware of my individualism now so I can check myself in many areas where i
gravitate toward that. It has helped me to be more aware about my self and my many personal
biases. Tue, May 12, 2009 7:40 AM
74. I think this survey assumes a strong individual bias when beginning the cohort sequence. This was
not quite the case in my situation. The MAGL studies have helped me to understand why I was not
fitting into American society and how to better relate Majority World values to Western values.
The MAGL studies have also reinforced changes which were beginning to erode in my thinking to
where I understand and embrace the values I was impacted by so greatly while serving on the
foreign mission field. I also now have an understanding of what I had previously rejected on an
emotional level, moving it to more cognitive convictions. A sense of
community/comunitas/contrast community as the Church now facilitates greater movement
between theological persuasions which are not known for seeing eye to eye.
About feelings, I am much less frustrated with the West than I had been. I still reject many of its
values, but in a less personal way now, while giving less space for them than previously. I have a
basic understanding of why we differ in our thinking and how to offer alternatives palatably to
those caught in individualism of modernity and the hyper-individualism of post-modernity through
unconscious influences. Tue, May 12, 2009 7:22 AM
75. Yes. Because of the things that I have learned, I have experienced some signficiant paradigm
shifts in my thinking. The difficulty has been trying to introduce those shifts into my environment
here. That is why I feel a little more distant in some ways than ever before -- because I have made
some shifts that others in my context have not. Tue, May 12, 2009 7:07 AM
76. Yes. I think more in terms of the big picture and God's Missionary action throughout history.
Rather than cater to individualism I am constantly advocating that we think in terms of the body of
Christ. Tue, May 12, 2009 6:38 AM
77. Individualism now means how to serve the communities I'm involved with that the Holy Spirit has
led me into ... Tue, May 12, 2009 6:22 AM
78. The MAGL program helped me gain perspective on the power of individualism in my life and
soceity. I now find myself seeking community and accountability in everyday life and decisions. I
think this is essential to being the people of God. Tue, May 12, 2009 5:43 AM
79. I have moved more toward both understanding consensus decisions and a desire to live in a
community that values this. At the moment I do not live this way, but I am praying for God to
open the appropriate door. Tue, May 12, 2009 5:25 AM
80. As a result of the MAGL I think very differently - I see the world through different lenses -
globalism, post modernism, futuristic in my viewpoints. While this has opened my mind up to
different ways of thinking it has also secluded me some from those around me who have not read
and learned all the same things I did in MAGL. It is a steep learning and development curve for
me while those around me are understandably not on the same path. This results in some better
relationships since I am more open minded. It also results in some loneliness since there aren't
many people to talk with about issues that are important to me. Tue, May 12, 2009 5:06 AM
81. I would say that the MAGL program did not really raise any issues for me regarding
individualism. My own journey regarding individualism has occurred in my ministry setting as I
minister in a group-oriented culture. On the flip side, I am the only one ministering from my
organization so I have sought community with those from other organizations because I value
community. I don't feel the MAGL program prompted this in any way.
Tue, May 12, 2009 3:23 AM
82. I think that I value community to a much greater degree than prior to the MAGL. I see more now
the privilege and potential of community rather than just the difficult aspects.
Tue, May 12, 2009 2:53 AM
83. I am different because I learned how to hear others with differing viewpoints better and how to
share my viewpoint without being so emotionally engaged that it creates a firestorm.
Tue, May 12, 2009 2:29 AM
246
84. Yes. I consider others more when making decisions and seek the advise and counsel of others
more readily. I also seek more accountability with the people close to me and within my
organization. Mon, May 11, 2009 10:58 PM
85. As a result of the MAGL, I feel less guilt about not caring for the institution of church, and feel
more draw to individual communal relationships rather than large group expressions of faith.
Mon, May 11, 2009 9:48 PM
86. I think if anything the MAGL reinforced the communal way of life that God cultivated in me on
the mission field and living among Muslims (who were very communal). The busyness of the
MAGL in conjunction with full-time ministry had a bit of a negative effect, though the interaction
with my cohort members helped counter that. Mon, May 11, 2009 8:38 PM
87. Less individualistic. Mon, May 11, 2009 8:19 PM
88. I think I definitely am. I am collaborating more and helping empower more people around me.
Mon, May 11, 2009 7:33 PM
89. I'm much more aware of the impact of individualism and realize the impact it has had on my
development. Mon, May 11, 2009 7:32 PM
90. "individualism" was never an issue for which I gave much thought. Although I was an only child
(or perhaps because of it), I always craved community... whether in sports, student activities, or a
local church. When there was a "community need", I was always eager to serve and often looked
down with self-righteousness on those who failed to volunteer - as though I was more selfless and
sacrificial than others. This pattern was in me before coming to Christ, as well as after.
God has dealt (and continues to deal) with me regarding that self-righteous attitude, but learning
about "individualism" as a Western-culture based value has helped me to understand others'
behaviors a little better. Sure, I sometimes feel that the term legitimizes self-centered behaviors by
blaming it on cultural values, but it has helped me understand why some Christians don't volunteer
or serve others or consider community needs as unimportant or tend to live very selfishly. Yes, I'm
still judging them in my heart (naughty, naughty), but at least I'm not completely in the dark
regarding their cultural values. Mon, May 11, 2009 7:24 PM
91. I have always tried to be part of the "big picture" of whatever God is doing in the faith community.
I likewise honor the fact that I submit to Spiritual authority, even when I don't agree with it.
Mon, May 11, 2009 7:22 PM
92. I am different, primarily in that I think and pray more about my decisions before making them and
taking action. I have always taken counsel with wise people before making decisions, but not
always been so strong to thing for myself as I now am. Mon, May 11, 2009 7:08 PM
93. in terms of maturity and relating i began the program older than most and i don't know that my
relating has changed. my understanding of modernistic thinkig vs. post, or materism or the west,
or cross cultural awareness has been significantly impaced Mon, May 11, 2009 7:00 PM
94. I am much more aware of the influence of our individualistic culture than before taking the
MAGL. Sometimes the course load has pulled me 'inward' more than I would have liked because I
had to prioritize completing coursework over forming/developing relationships (this occurred after
the cohort portion of the MAGL was completed). Outside of this dynamic, however, I feel like I
have been exposed to a positive influence in dealing with an individualistic culture once my
coursework is completed. Mon, May 11, 2009 6:49 PM
95. I have grown significantly more communal, relational and place a very high value on forming
relationships with people from very diverse backgrounds and cultures. I have grown to slowly and
authentically engage and become a part of a Korean fellowship, missionaries from around the
world, and grow with my African brothers and sisters as God has led and given divine favor and
grace. To my dismay, my relationships with my family of origin have deteriorated as I have
embraced this way of life as well as stood up for my beliefs that I now realize differ from my
family's. Mon, May 11, 2009 6:40 PM
96. Yes I think I am better able to understand multiple perspectives. I also have a greater desire to
network with others for the advancement of kingdom work. Mon, May 11, 2009 6:35 PM
97. While I was brought up in the American culture of individualism, I am half Japanese and this
brought an element of communal living to my own family of origin. If anything, I found that I had
poor boundaries and the MAGL program actually taught me that self-care was something that was
necessary to be able to minister to others. The program brought both cultural contexts into the
247
light where I could evaluate and integrate both ideals and yet not fall into the trap of one or the
other. I find I am much more aware of my American sense of entitlement and much more aware of
protecting my emotional state and not allowing others to project on to me.
Mon, May 11, 2009 6:15 PM
98. I cannot begin to describe how much more global I think and feel. I have led a trip to Kenya since
my involvement in the MAGL. I have friends who live in Turkey, France, Somalia, Kenya,
Mexico. Mon, May 11, 2009 6:07 PM
99. Yes, I am different, and I am much happier to submit to the needs of the community. The
deterioration in relationships outside my close circle is due to time constraints and a particular
family crisis that has claimed a disproportianate amount of time in the past year. I believe that will
all improve as I finish my studies and reallocate my time. Mon, May 11, 2009 5:44 PM
248
Q1 Loneliness: After studying and building relationships through the MAGL
program:
TABLE E.11
After studying and building relationships through the MAGL program:
I consider that loneliness is no longer an issue for me 10.5% 11

I occasionally experience loneliness but not as much as before 27.6% 29
For me nothing has changed in this area 52.4% 55
I experience (or am aware of) the feeling of "loneliness" more than before 8.6% 9
I have become a very lonely person 1.0% 1
Skipped question 0
GRAPH E.10
249
Q2 Loneliness: Where the soul experiences a loneliness that deepens and connects to
a sense of personal “emptiness,” would you say that since the MAGL:
TABLE E.12
Where the soul experiences a loneliness that deepens and connects to a sense of personal “emptiness,”
would you say that since the MAGL:
I don’t experience a sense of personal emptiness 22.3% 23

Any sense of emptiness I previously experienced has diminished 30.1% 31
Nothing seems to have changed 36.9% 38
I sometimes experience a sense of “emptiness” more frequently than
8.7% 9
before
I often find myself feeling very “empty” 1.9% 2
Skipped question 2
GRAPH E.11
250
Q3 Loneliness: In so far as your ability to experience/receive "compassion" from
others, your experience in the MAGL:
TABLE E.13
In so far as your ability to experience/receive "compassion" from others, your experience in the MAGL:
Has helped me to receive and know the compassion of most people 27.6% 29
Has made me aware that some people show me compassion 36.2% 38
My perception concerning peoples’ level of compassion toward me remains
34.3% 36
the same
I feel less compassion from people than before 1.9% 2
I rarely find that people have compassion for me 0.0% 0
Skipped question 0
GRAPH E.12
251
Q4 Loneliness: When assessing your life since the MAGL when it comes to being
"understood", you feel:
TABLE E.14
When assessing your life since the MAGL when it comes to being "understood", you feel:
I am very well understood by others 18.3% 19

Most people have some understanding of me and my concerns 59.6% 62
No real change has occurred and people understand me the same 12.5% 13
I feel less understood than before 8.7% 9
Very few people truly understand me 1.0% 1
Skipped question 1
GRAPH E.13
252
Q5 Loneliness: As you reflect upon your life following the MAGL when it comes to
connection verses alienation, you think:
TABLE E.15
As you reflect upon your life following the MAGL when it comes to connection verses alienation, you think:
I have no sense of social alienation at all 19.4% 20

On rare occasions I feel alienated from others 57.3% 59
I feel neither very connected or alienated 11.7% 12
I consider myself slightly more alienated from people than before 10.7% 11
Social alienation is worse for me than before 1.0% 1
Skipped question 2
GRAPH E.14
253
Q6 Loneliness: The authenticity of feeling “loved” is experienced on many different
levels. If we understand this as being cherished, valued, known, and accepted,
how has your experience and study in the MAGL program (either directly or
indirectly) impacted you in knowing this sense of being “loved”. It has:
TABLE E.16
The authenticity of feeling “loved” is experienced on many different levels. If we understand this as being
cherished, valued, known, and accepted, how has your experience and study in the MAGL program (either
directly or indirectly) impacted you in knowing this sense of being “loved”. It has:
Enabled me to experience a deeper sense of being “loved” on all levels 20.2% 21

Increased my sense or feeling of being “loved” 53.8% 56
Resulted in no observable change in this area 25.0% 26
I feel less “loved” than before 1.0% 1
Reinforced that I don’t feel “loved” at all 0.0% 0
Skipped question 1
GRAPH E.15
254
Q7 Loneliness: Concerning “loneliness” do you think as a result of the MAGL
program that you are different in how you think, behave, or feel, and if so, in what
way/s? (open question)
TABLE E.17
Concerning “loneliness” do you think as a result of the MAGL program that you are
different in how you think, behave, or feel, and if so, in what way/s?
Answer Options Response Count
92
Skipped question 13
The written responses to this open question are listed below:
1. I've been able to better identify the difference in my life between being alone and loneliness and
respond accordingly. I don't feel so bad about being alone, knowing that it can strengthen and
renew me in my relationship with God, in my relationship with family and friends, and in ministry
Wed, Jul 15, 2009 12:49 PM
2. I think I have realized that loneliness is a reality of leadership, but I have found that this can be
overcome by seeking out other leaders who have the same understanding... Wed, Jul 15,
2009 6:28 AM
3. It merely brought clarity to past isolation times in my development. Tue, Jul 14, 2009 1:58 PM
4. When I may feel down due to local ministry circumstances, reflection upon the relationships I
have made in my cohort encourage me significantly. Mon, Jul 13, 2009 9:09 PM
5. I don't know that the MAGL has directly impacted this area of my life. However, as a part of my
personal and spiritual journey, I feel more connected and understood by others.
Mon, Jul 13, 2009 4:01 PM
6. no signif diff Thu, Jul 9, 2009 5:14 PM
7. I am not much if any different. I have never really struggled with loneliness.
Tue, Jun 30, 2009 10:15 AM
8. Not very much at all. Loneliness has never been something that I have struggled with. I do not
believe that the program has affected this in a way that I have noticed.
Mon, Jun 29, 2009 8:18 PM
9. From going to Pasadena knowing people only through online and coming with a feeling of love
for each person, it showed me the depth of feelings we can have for folks that we really do not
know. Having had the experience, It makes me realize even more that there are so many people to
meet! Sat, Jun 27, 2009 11:29 AM
10. Don't think I am really different, but probably make more effortto not give in to loneliness.
Fri, Jun 26, 2009 5:52 PM
255
11. The MAGL program has heightened my awareness of the value that can come from moments of
loneliness as well as anticipating these times during moments of dramatic change and seeking the
Lord to find the meaning and benefit of enduring loneliness. Thu, Jun 25, 2009 1:03 PM
12. The benefit of MAGL was not concerning "loneliness." Thu, Jun 25, 2009 7:56 AM
13. more accepting of who I am Thu, Jun 25, 2009 6:48 AM
14. nothing substantial, but that's because loneliness hasn't been a needed area of growth for me.
Thu, Jun 25, 2009 5:22 AM
15. The cohort community in the MAGL was an incredible salve for my loneliness, particularly during
a very difficult time overseas. Wed, Jun 24, 2009 11:46 PM
16. none-I worked through these issues long ago Wed, Jun 24, 2009 11:02 PM
17. I think I am a better communicator now that before the MAGL. This increase in skill has given me
a better understanding of people, tools to understand and listen to them as well as tools to state
clearly what I am really trying to relay. I "feel" that I am less lonely than before because I have a
tangible and increased capacity to communicate. I work more diligently to understand where
people are coming from, what social games they are playing, what traditions they are bringing to
the conversation. I do not feel offended when people misunderstand what I have said or am trying
to communicate because I know they are simply trying to understand. I have less anger than I used
to as a result of this greater capacity. Overall I have grown in my compassion for those people
who have been in church all their lives and still dont truely get it (nominal christians) I feel less
lonely because I understand. Wed, Jun 24, 2009 10:30 PM
18. Briefly, I have become less of an introvert in the last few years, largely due to the depth and
quality of relationships I have experienced. And in terms of loneliness, I know that even though all
the friends, connections, mentors etc. that I have here in my home country would suddenly
disappear one day, I still maintain a real and deep enough relationship with some of my cohort
members that I would never feel lonely. Wed, Jun 24, 2009 10:29 PM
19. Yes. I am a little less connected to peers, but I think that this is more related to my stage of life
(family with young children) than the MAGL! Wed, Jun 24, 2009 8:18 PM
20. I entered the program feeling very lonely. I had a few friends I trusted enough to share my heart.
Since the MAGL I have an increasing awareness that others love and care for me, whereas prior, I
never experienced that. Now if someone does not like me, my thought now is, "That's too bad, it's
their loss." That may sound arrogant, it is not meant to be arrogant. The shift reflects a confidence
now that even if someone should not warm up to me, I do not feel lonely or rejected as a result of
someone excluding me from an activity. Wed, Jun 24, 2009 8:03 PM
21. I would say that MAGL has given me some good friendships...my lack of connection or
understanding has more to do with circumstances outside of MAGL. Wed, Jun 24, 2009 7:06 PM
22. I most definitely think my loneliness has been a result of going to school- not necessarily the
MAGL program specifically. I have struggled so much with figuring out where I belong and often
feel alone and like an outsider. Tue, Jun 23, 2009 5:22 PM
23. Similar Tue, Jun 9, 2009 11:48 AM
24. the feelings of swimming against the stream in a post-Christian culture are allayed somewhat by
the fact that there's others around the world who're doing the same things and thinking through the
same things i am. Sat, May 30, 2009 4:50 AM
25. I am more aware of loneliness now. For me, I think it is related to how can the MAGL continue to
integrate into my present ministry. I also feel a lack of completion due to the fact that funds are
low and I have not been able to continue study this summer. I also enjoyed the process of
liminality with my Cohort and now miss the fact that we will not continue to completion of the
MA together. Others around my campus do not have the same experience and/or focus of
education and this further separates me from those I lead.
I do wish Fuller would examine other financial options for those "Western" students who are
committed yet lack financial means to finish. What I've understood from many, is that tuition
funds are predominately given to foreign students only. I have observed over many years of
ministry that some (not all) foreign students come and "milk" the system of generosity from
256
institutions, churches, and individuals who, in the end, do not make good on their call and/or focus
of ministry. Tue, May 26, 2009 10:26 AM
26. The MAGL openned to me the ability to build community around new and different paradigms. I
have learned to be able to receive wisdom, care, and guidence from just about any group I am
with. I've learned how to give and receive from those whith whom I don't necessarily have the
same worldview or life experiences. Tue, May 26, 2009 8:24 AM
27. In all honesty, loneliness was not a major problem in my life even before joining the MAGL. But
the MAGL has increased my sensitivity to building relationships and a social base for better
leadership. Tue, May 26, 2009 7:24 AM
28. these questions were a little difficult to answer. I did not feel any sense of loneliness or emptiness
before starting the MAGL so completing it did not improve or change this area in my life.
Mon, May 25, 2009 11:02 AM
29. In some ways, I feel less lonesome and detached. In other ways, I feel more detached. Maybe a
sense of higher calling and commitment to accountability without seeing immediate rewards?
Thu, May 21, 2009 10:05 PM
30. The MAGL has helped give me a greater perspective on my life. As I looked back at life and
ministry experiences through various MAGL classes I was affirmed in seeing God's working in
my life. I could see excellent desicions made over time and God's blessing. I feel strongly affirmed
in my relationship with God, with my wife, with my kids, with others in ministry and through my
fellow MAGL students. Thu, May 21, 2009 6:06 AM
31. I beleive understanding destiny and ultimate goal has made me less lonely and more connected.
An increase in my own sense of value and it shows on how I relate to others.
Wed, May 20, 2009 7:39 AM
32. Not much difference, though I do feel connected with more people as a result of the MAGL.
Tue, May 19, 2009 6:15 PM
33. I have an additional lens for this called 'Isolation' which has helped me and others significantly.
Tue, May 19, 2009 11:45 AM
34. In some ways I am less lonely as I have experienced a substantial improvement in my
understanding of my place in the body and the strengths and weaknesses that God is using for His
glory. Mon, May 18, 2009 5:16 PM
35. I now see the kingdom as much bigger than I thought, and the winds of most circumstances well
out of my control - there has been a letting go to trust God's soveriegnty.
Mon, May 18, 2009 1:32 PM
36. Again, it is a connectivity which others across the global. I know I have a group which I can go to
both here in the states and around the world. Mon, May 18, 2009 7:58 AM
37. I have been encouraged by those in my cohort who are pursuing Jesus and his call on their life.
Their example is reassuring. But even these relationships are difficult to maintain given the ever-
present demands on all of our time. MAGL provided interaction in regards to assignments but not
really outside the courses and their content. Sat, May 16, 2009 3:48 PM
38. I don't think the MAGL had much impact at all on lonliness, but I'm not someone who experiences
lonliness very often at all to begin with. Fri, May 15, 2009 9:47 PM
39. The MAGL did help me articulate our vision for ministry, and convey this to others. Yet, with
regards to relationships and loneliness, I don't think that the MAGL made much impact here.
Fri, May 15, 2009 12:14 PM
40. No real difference. Fri, May 15, 2009 7:23 AM
41. Loneliness was never an issue for me and I don't think there's a difference in how I behave or feel.
Fri, May 15, 2009 12:00 AM
42. Through MAGL I can see in clearer ways the need to understand the perspective of others and
seek to learn from others. I can also see how a person can feel even more alone in this process of
learning because they are unable to connect with others. Thu, May 14, 2009 7:58 PM
43. I am more aware of the asset I have in the overall Body of Christ, and have become MUCH less
dependent on one church or ministry to meet all of my relational needs.
Thu, May 14, 2009 4:28 PM
257
44. I have another antimony on this one. On one hand, I feel that I have grown in my understanding of
the sources of loneliness and the theological context of relationships as linked to the image of
God. I feel that I've learned to be proactive when I feel lonely...instead of sulking in loneliness, I
now can sense it and call someone up to hang out. I see that many people are lonely and isolated
and it's not just me. In that sense the MAGL (strangely enough through some of CLinton's
concepts about proactively seeking growth and learning) I've really grown here. At the same time,
I feel like I'm from another planet now with ministry hopes and dreams. Some of this I need to test
out...I'm still on campus. It's a fake world here and there are many who share my visions. We'll see
what happens when I get back into my ministry context. I actually anticipate being quite lonely. At
the same time, I've learned to call someone up....so I could call up a fellow student or join an
online community or something. Thu, May 14, 2009 11:37 AM
45. My way of thinking in terms of physical, social, economical, spiritual needs has changed. This
happened by the time of learning about my time line. Thu, May 14, 2009 8:01 AM
46. I don't know that I necessarily think about loneliness differently, because I am a highly relational
person that seeks out and nurtures close relationships constantly. However, I experienced deep
connections with the folks in my cohort during the MAGL. After three years of being in
community with them, I definitely felt the lack of connection once our program was done.
Coupled with the fact that I transitioned out of the ministry I was leading, I experienced a time of
real lonliness and isolation. I have maintained close relationships that have nurtured and
stengthened me during this transitional year, but I definitely have missed those in my cohort and
the comraderie that we had established. Wed, May 13, 2009 2:41 PM
47. I have to preface this by saying I have been going through a really hard time in ministry that has
really taken its toll on me. Since before the MAGL I do feel, behave and think about my loneliness
a lot; however, it has much to do with outside things other than the MAGL.
Wed, May 13, 2009 1:39 PM
48. It is extremely difficult to determine whether my development is due to the MAGL or general
spiritual maturity. Wed, May 13, 2009 11:53 AM
49. I am well connected with ministry colleagues, friends, and family and felt no sense of loneliness
prior to MAGL making it diffiuclt to evaluate if MAGL affected me in this area. However, I can
say that my participation in MAGL has made me more sensitive to others and able to better
address loneliness for others. Wed, May 13, 2009 11:13 AM
50. I think there is slightly more loneliness in my life, simply because I have dedicated more time to
study. However, there's an upside to this as well in that I have come value personal solitude much
more. So, the trade off has been worth it. Wed, May 13, 2009 10:21 AM
51. I have shared in my past papers the value of creating non-neutral learning environments in truly
developing a sense of communitas. If we had some kind of experience together as a cohort
BEFORE the initial beginning of a cohort one's cup of 'loneliness' would be filled to the brim and
would carry itself over into the rest of the program. Wed, May 13, 2009 8:07 AM
52. I'm more aware of my needs for relationships, but I still need to make changes in how I meet those
needs. Wed, May 13, 2009 8:01 AM
53. I am very different on "loneliness." I don't mean the following as a negative statement, but my
time with the MAGL the past 4 plus years has been at times, like attending to a spoiled child. To
do well, school ALWAYS demands attention. This of course takes time away from family,
ministry and cultivating relationships. End result: Periods of loneliness.
Tue, May 12, 2009 11:28 PM
54. I don't think that I behave or feel differently, however, MAGL has given me a whole new "family"
of friends outside of myself and my faith community. They are the kind of relationships that have
deepened my understanding and appreciation for other faith communities.
Tue, May 12, 2009 9:40 PM
55. I don't see a huge difference in this area. I'm more aware of how others may be experiencing
loneliness than before. Tue, May 12, 2009 8:47 PM
56. no changes, except for the book of Shelley Trebesh on isolations, which gave me a better
perspective when such times come Tue, May 12, 2009 8:23 PM
258
57. It was hard to answer these questions because being in such a wonderfully close community as
MAGL did leave a "hole" in my life as I left it. This meant I felt more isolated and alone. While I
was in this community, it was a deep, challenging, transforming lifeline--sometimes one of the
few positive "voices" in my life. Also, the spiritual formation and the curriculum (especially
emotional intelligence and forgiveness topics, development of individuals, and other topics)
helped me understand others better. So, overall, MAGL left me better able to be in, lead, and
respond to community. But it's still a true gap an broken area in my life...even though I've been in
other close communities before. MAGL did help me move forward, however.
Tue, May 12, 2009 7:44 PM
58. The relationships developed in MAGL have widened my circle of "deeper" relationships.
It has taught me to better recognize the need for individual time for reflection and the need for
developing friendships and balancing these both. Tue, May 12, 2009 5:42 PM
59. Stating my need for others has helped me to move intentionally toward others, sharing more about
my personal life, joys and challenges. Tue, May 12, 2009 5:13 PM
60. The coursework, the interaction with the other students and the faculty has/is enabling me to see
myself a bit differently. This is changing the way I relate to others, both MAGL and outside the
program. Tue, May 12, 2009 2:56 PM
61. In my application and letters of recommendation, it can be seen that my experiences when
combined with my personality tended to cause me to be isolated and there were times of feeling
lonely in certain circumstances. ML530 was a powerful experience with God-given revelation
which gave me freedom in areas of confusion and self-doubt. I remain exceedingly grateful for
that experience.
Further, the warm of the MAGL personnel expressed towards me has been very much appreciated.
I knew when I was accepted into the program that my experiences were outside the paramiters of
what would be normal and that I was somewhat of a risk. In the first class with Dr. Erickson I so
appreciated his personal effort in reaching out to me. There have been many others too.
Our ministry takes us away from the opportunity to be in close contact with most of those I came
to know in the 6th Cohort, but I continue to have a special sense of connectedness to many of
them, which further reflects the kind of spirit you maintained in such an excellent academic
environment. Thank You! Tue, May 12, 2009 2:17 PM
62. I feel connected to other believers seriously wanting to grow not only intellectually, but
spiritually. Tue, May 12, 2009 12:04 PM
63. Not so much because I did not struggle with a sense of loneliness before entering the MAGL
program. Tue, May 12, 2009 11:33 AM
64. I do feel that I see loneliness in a different light. The realizations in the MAGL have helped me
seek out connection with other and made me more intentional in making those connections.
Tue, May 12, 2009 11:06 AM
65. I feel a strong sense of being part of something much bigger than myself and my Church after
interacting with so many co-laborers in the program Tue, May 12, 2009 10:55 AM
66. I have gained a sense of community. A band of brothers (& sisters) sort of reality. I know there's a
group who's gone through something with me and I can count on them. This is GREAT!!
Tue, May 12, 2009 9:21 AM
67. I have been blessed in this area, because I have never really experienced a sense of loneliness
either before or since my MAGL involvement, Tue, May 12, 2009 8:49 AM
68. I don't think this is an area I struggled in and so I don't think much has changed.
Tue, May 12, 2009 8:28 AM
69. I'm not sure. I imagine that its true for many students in higher education, that you learn more
about a field of study; which in this case is radically different to that which many church people
do not have. This causes a level of alientation/misunderstanding. I don't feel lonely per-se, but I do
think there are less people to talk over many deep isssues learned from seminary.
Tue, May 12, 2009 8:14 AM
259
70. Yes indeed. I am so much more aware of everything, especially God's fingerprints on everything
and they serve to remind me that God is active in everything and every event, conversation or
meeting is an opportunity to see God or witness to his Kingship.
Tue, May 12, 2009 7:44 AM
71. I had felt highly alienated and misunderstood before beginning the MAGL program. Since that
time the cause of the alienation has not changed. I had been trying hard to fit in, but now I
endeavor to be who God has created me to be and relate to the environment where He has placed
me. I am more compassionate toward those who reject me understanding they are offended by my
values, no so much my person. I also embrace the loneliness which occurs. Isolation is a powerful
opportunity for positive change. It also produces comunitas because in our present situation there
are several of us who are marginalized for our values. We have learned to edify each other and
embrace where the Lord is taking us while being quiet voices of positive change to those whom
have marginalized us.
As you can tell, the concepts and material from my studies have been passed on to others in our
ministry facing similar challenges. Tue, May 12, 2009 7:35 AM
72. No. At least at this life stage I do not see an effect as we are in a well nurtured relational
environment. Tue, May 12, 2009 6:41 AM
73. Loneliness would mean for me as the one person to hear the call from the Holy Spirit that others,
I'm sure, have also been hearing ... Tue, May 12, 2009 6:26 AM
74. I am simply more open to being with someone at more than a superficial level. I also have a
deeper, gut level appreciation for the fact that every person I meet can minister to me, just as I can
minister to them, even if sometimes the means is not obvious. Tue, May 12, 2009 5:28 AM
75. While it is sometimes a lonely place (as I referenced in the previous essay) I am also in a much
better place with my relationship with God and this brings me to better relationships with those
around me.
For me the Lifelong Development class and the sovereign mindset where an epiphany that have
changed my viewpoint of God's activity in my life. With this knowledge of Him, I am not lonely.
Tue, May 12, 2009 5:10 AM
76. MAGL was healthy for me as I work in relatively isolated environment where results are not
always visible. It gave me a bench-marker to see that I was actually going some where with my
time which decreased my sense of emptiness. I enjoyed dialogue with some of my colleagues in
the program, however since our cohort finished it's core classes I have not been in contact with
any of them, so in that way I would say it had little affect on long-term sense of being known, etc.
I would say that although rewarding, MAGL did not offer much in terms of relational support. I
think some of the reading helped with a sense of connectedness because it showed me how other
people across the globe are thinking through creative venues for ministry, etc. which made me feel
less alone in my calling and direction. After living cross-culturally I was often frustrated with the
American church, so material about missional church, the emerging church, etc. really helped
renew my vision for the American church and gave me a new respect for those who minister
within it. Tue, May 12, 2009 3:55 AM
77. I am very different in how I think as a result of the MAGL program. It is isolating in that I see
things so differently than many in my community. I have longed for someone to discuss the things
I am learning and the things I am learning but don't understand with. I wish that I had pursued one
other person from my location to go through the program with me. That would have made all the
difference I think. Tue, May 12, 2009 3:05 AM
78. I'm more aware of my need for others and of my need to keep a full 'mentoring matrix' in play in
my life. Tue, May 12, 2009 2:31 AM
79. I don't feel as isolated, but neither do I feel as connected as I need to be. Part of that is because I
was the only female in each of my groups, and therefore was not able to connect adequately with
other women in leadership. Though I connected well with the men in my groups, because I'm not a
man, I don't feel like I'm part of the group in the same way, or understood the same way.
Connecting with other leaders of the same sex I believe would have really helped me.
Tue, May 12, 2009 12:33 AM
260
80. I am given to loneliness as an introvert. It is in the intentonal pursuit of relationships that I still
feel connected and loved. There are 4 students that I still regularly dialogue with.
Mon, May 11, 2009 9:50 PM
81. I think I feel a bit more isolated. This is not due to the MAGL per se, but the extra work on top of
an already demanding schedule has meant less time to develop relationships. This has been tough
since I moved to a new city during the program. Mon, May 11, 2009 8:47 PM
82. Less lonely, because the MAGL helped me see the Kingdom and my value in it outside of my own
denomination. Mon, May 11, 2009 8:21 PM
83. For me, I think the MAGL program was there for me during my most lonely and difficult periods
of life thus far. I am still emerging from a painful season of deep betrayal and alienation after my
previous ministry experience. These events would have happened regardless of my enrollment in
the MAGL, but I think the classes helped me "process" these experiences much more fully than if
I had not been at Fuller.
All that to say, my comments may be quite "skewed" from what I would have been able to share
given a normal MAGL experience (whatever that may be). I feel more lonely, alienated and
without a driving purpose at this time in my life, primarily because I lived for nearly 15 years in a
very tight-knit spiritual community that loved, affirmed, and encouraged one another daily... very
transparent and authentic. Unfortunately this community was severely wounded by avarice and
manipulation, resulting in a lot of hurting people. This all happened during my MAGL program,
and so I find myself longing for authentic community while eschewing anything that reminds me
of the past hurts.
Fortunately, many of my closest friends shared the same experience and we have each other. We
don't work together in ministry anymore, and most of us miss the beautiful aspects of our earlier
community days, but we are "moving on" - healing, growing, living.
So yes, I do feel more lonely than prior to MAGL. But I feel more healthy. This loneliness is
being mended with a myriad of new relationships in a new place, and I wouldn't trade it for the
world! Mon, May 11, 2009 7:37 PM
84. Not as much on this one. This is not something that I feel like I struggle with.
Mon, May 11, 2009 7:36 PM
85. I'm still waiting for "whatever's just around the corner." My peers all have MDIV's and boast
about it making my MAGL seem pretty insignificant! I do not feel "connected" to them.
Mon, May 11, 2009 7:27 PM
86. I think MAGL helped me to feel more secure in Christ, and be confident in Him more than what
my peers and leaders may say or think, with all due respect. Mon, May 11, 2009 7:11 PM
87. The cohort portion of the MAGL was especially significant in connecting with others. I felt the
time we devoted to sharing our stories was the most powerful thing I have been apart of that has
made me feel connected to others. Mon, May 11, 2009 6:52 PM
88. I have allowed deep healing into my life regarding social relationships and God has brought many
loving people into my life that have responded to my newfound openness. Although there have
been some painful experiences along the way, I am reminded of Psalm 69:4 and count it all joy for
the sufferings and persecutions for standing for Jesus. Due to my personal growth in this area,
these few painful experiences do not discourge social expansion and engaging in mutually loving,
Christian fellowships. Mon, May 11, 2009 6:44 PM
89. I do sense some change. Just the ability to connect with others going through the same stuff. Also
in knowing people value what I do. This helps me in the hard times.
Mon, May 11, 2009 6:38 PM
90. If I remember correctly, I think the MAGL addressed loneliness as part of the leadership
development timeline. I do think differently about times of loneliness now. Trebesch's book on
isolation was profound for me and I am able to now see the rare times of isolation as part of God's
plan to mold and develop me into the unique leader that He is creating me to be. I am more likely
to embrace times of isolation and loneliness than I was before. Mon, May 11, 2009 6:21 PM
261
91. I think MAGL relationships are rarely sustained at a level which makes a difference in someone's
life. Mon, May 11, 2009 6:10 PM
92. MAGL has really broadened my understanding of connection to people with very different
backgrounds and beliefs. It has given me a sense that there is always common ground. In some
ways I feel more alienated from my own tradition, which like many others can be very parochial.
Without the MAGL connections, I think this parochialism would ultimately have defeated my
sense of call. MAGL will give me strength for the long haul I would not have otherwise had. I
hope I will have the sense to continue to call upon these connections. I am beginning to
understand how important they are. Mon, May 11, 2009 5:52 PM
262
APPENDIX F
COMMUNITY RULES OF PRACTICE – COHORTS 6-12
COHORT 6 – “HISTORY MAKERS”
Daniel 12:3 “Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens and those who lead
many to righteousness like the stars for ever and ever."
PURPOSE STATEMENT
To be a community of leaders and learners that reflect the character of Christ; sharpening,
encouraging, and supporting those in our community so that we will each achieve and receive all
that God has in store for us as graduates of the 6th MAGL cohort.
PRINCIPLES VALUES
1. SEEK GOD DAILY: We will remember to seek Christ in our personal walk, seek to live in
His Love and do our best to be Christ-like in all our attitudes, interactions, and dealings with
our community.
Psalm 105:4 “Look to the LORD and His strength; seek His face always.”
2. CONTINUE TO PRAY FOR EACH OTHER AS GOD DIRECTS: We recognize that we

are engaged in spiritual growth, spiritual ministry, and spiritual warfare and prayer as God
directs for each other is crucial.
Ephesians 6:18 “And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and
requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the saints.”
3. AUTHENTIC RELATIONSHIPS WITH EACH OTHER AND BEYOND: We commit

to authentic relationships with each other for support, encouragement and networking. We
will be constructive, always with a view to build each person up so that they are equipped to
be more effective leaders in their present and future context. In our communications, we will
seek to build each other up to maturity in Christ by being courteous, constructive, truthful and
loving, even in accountability.
Hebrews 10:24-25 “And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and
good deeds. Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us
encourage one another – and all the more as you see the Day approaching."
4. AS A COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE WE WILL PROVIDE RESOURCES TO EACH

OTHER: We will provide each other with resources, suggestions on books, conferences and
more.
5. WE WILL HONOR EACH OTHER’S WISHES: Anyone of our community can

participate or opt out. Anyone who participates will agree to post authentic, personal updates
at least annually, and provide the group with current e-mail information.
John 13:34-35 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you
must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one
another.”
263
COHORT 7 – “I-61”
"Vision without action is merely a dream. Action without vision just passes the time. Vision with
action can change the world." -- Joel Barker
Recognizing that God gathers together his people at specific times and places for the purpose of
declaring his glory to the nations, we, the members of the Seventh Cohort of the Master of Arts in
Global Leadership, commit ourselves to the following community rules so that we may glorify
God, honor his initiative in bringing us together, and serve his purposes in our generation.
1. PRAYER
• As fellow cohort members, we recognize our utter dependence upon God. We will
endeavor to pray daily for fellow cohort members in our small group. Also out of
Christian love and compassion, we will pray for members of our entire cohort as
necessary.
2. INTIMACY WITH GOD
• Jesus is our life-source. In order to remain connected to our life-source, we commit

to constantly study God’s Word and to invite the Holy Spirit’s power and influence.
In addition, it is important to maintain a practice of intentional meditation upon the
written Word.
• God’s Word states that Jesus inhabits our praise. Therefore, we will cultivate a heart
that constantly praises the goodness of God through formal and informal expressions.
3. CHARACTER
• As fellow cohort members, we recognize that it is impossible to please our Lord apart
from practicing godly character. Therefore, we will endeavor to practice respect and
love in all communications between cohort members. We will speak the truth in
love.
• We will cultivate the practice of integrity in all areas of our lives: personal,
professional, ministerial, educational, financial, and any other area not listed. Our
beliefs according to God’s Word will inform our actions.
• We recognize that right priorities reflect godly balance in one’s life. Therefore, we
will be intentional in guarding how we spend our time between God, family,
ministry, work, study/education, and friends.
4. RELATIONAL SUPPORT/ACCOUNTABILITY
• As fellow cohort members, we seriously take our commitment to one another

throughout this cohort, and for those who desire, beyond. In order to govern the
attitudes of our commitment to help each other according to Galatians 5:22-23, we
purposefully maintain daily reading and meditation of God’s Word, practice
264
continual confession and pursuit of humility through prayer, and defer to one another
as an expression of respect.
• As fellow cohort members, we will esteem one another during this cohort experience
— and for those who desire, beyond — by sharing ideas and, where possible,
resourcing one another. We recognize that we are part of the body of Christ and, as a
body, we live our lives as a symphony of cooperation.
• We recognize the importance of the godly principle of accountability. Following the

teachings of Jesus through the parables about being accountable, we endeavor to
practice excellence through accountability with others. (Please note: some of our
cohort members are already in accountability groups, and to involve themselves in
yet another one would not be the best use of their limited time.)
5. MINISTRY
• As fellow cohort members, we recognize and practice our responsibility to minister

within our local body of Christ. To the best of our ability, we will implement our
newly acquired knowledge into our respective area of ministry.
6. COMMUNITY LIFE
• We are part of the living breathing global body of Christ. We will practice a posture
of humility toward one another by showing respect for all cultures represented within
our cohort. We declare that Christ is Lord over all cultures. We will seek to interpret
culture in light of Scripture, and not Scripture in light of culture.
• As part of the living breathing global body of Christ, we will practice the virtue of
showing respect for one another’s traditions and theological convictions.
AND for those members of the Seventh Cohort who want to commit to further
relationship and support with their colleagues after the cohort classes finish:
7. BEYOND OUR FORMAL COHORT EXPERIENCE
• As a global community, we commit to participating in a bi-annual intensive prayer

(24/7) for each other (details to be worked out later this summer during our
intensive).
• Scripture states that a cord of three strands is not easily broken. Therefore, we will
place ourselves into small groups of three for daily personal and ministry-related
prayer support of each other. (These small groups will rotate every six months.)
• Every three years, we will endeavor to meet, in a different ministry location of a

fellow cohort member, for a reunion to continue building relationships, for to
encourage one another, and to pray for each other. (Two or more cohort members
submitted this suggestion.)
265
COHORT 8 – “PANGEAN 8”
266
COHORT 9 – “NINE ON THE VINE”
"Acknowledging God's design for our group and our collective strength, we seek to truly
know and learn from one another with the intent of knowing God more fully and
impacting our world more effectively for the Glory of God."
Community Passage: Isaiah 27:2-3

"In that day we will sing of the pleasant vineyard. I, the LORD, will watch over it and tend its fruitful
vines. Each day I will water them; day and night I will watch to keep enemies away.
Prayer Mission
Understanding that to love We commit to use what we learn
God and to love others are the together to build up and extend
greatest commandments, we will the Kingdom of God.
pray for one another in our We celebrate success in this
different ministry assignments cohort in small increments as a
and for each of our personal way to acknowledge God's
lives. faithfulness.
Spiritual Community Care for Ourselves

We acknowledge that God has We recognize that the MAGL
placed this group together for a program is a long term
purpose - to learn from one commitment and that it must be
another and to grow in balanced in the midst of other
community. Since we are responsibilities God has already
collectively much stronger than given each of us.
individually, we seek to learn
together in an atmosphere of
love.
Collaboration
Diversity We support one another as
We rejoice in the success of outlined in Fuller’s guidelines.
learning and growing as a We speak honestly to one
group and refrain from another and are committed to
competitiveness. Yet all the while work through misunderstanding
encouraging one another to and conflict. We recognize that
excellence as we utilize the gifts learning is active and depend on
He has given to their full one another to engage in this
potential for the Glory of God. process.
267
COHORT 10 – “DIAMOND CUT”
268
COHORT 11 – “METANOIA 11”
Romans 12:1-2 -MSG

So here's what I want you to do, God helping you: Take your everyday, ordinary life – your
sleeping, eating, going-to-work, and walking-around life – and place it before God as an offering.
Embracing what God does for you is the best thing you can do for him. Don't become so well-
adjusted to your culture that you fit into it without even thinking. Instead, fix your attention on
God. You'll be changed from the inside out. Readily recognize what he wants from you, and
quickly respond to it. Unlike the culture around you, always dragging you down to its level of
immaturity, God brings the best out of you, develops well-formed maturity in you.
Values
Love, transparency, mercy, humbleness, prayer, justice, service, patience, community, listening,
peace, kindness, reconciliation, faith, healing.
Commitments
Worship
We commit to take our everyday, ordinary life and place it before God as an offering.
Servanthood
We commit to embrace what God has done, is doing, and will do for us individually and in
community and model His example.
Transformation
We commit to fix our attention on God, individually and in community, and to seek discernment
so that we can be changed from the inside out.
Mission
We commit to respond to the leading of the Spirit, giving feet to our faith, loving our neighbors as
ourselves.
Practice
Together, our community of faith and learning will practice the following disciplines:
Weekly reflection and prayer for each other
• Slowing down, reflecting on our studies together, praying for specific requests and
seeking discernment for Spirit lead communal prayer.
Monthly fast for one day
• Refraining from a common habit or food with the intention of fixing our attention on
God and offering our fast as communal worship.
Regular testimony on the community board
• Sharing the stories, trials, praises, questions and hopes of our journey in Christ by
dialoguing with each other and building common life, purpose, and trust.
Amendments
With the conclusion of our required coursework, our cohort decided to stay connected in 2 ways:
1. To communicate testimony and prayer requests via a Facebook group.
2. To have a reunion every 2 years beginning with Hawaii in 2010.
269
COHORT 12 – “MISSION 12”
THE PURPOSE OF THE RULE:

The purpose of our community rule is to maximize our learning and leadership
experience as part of the community of the 12th Cohort.
EMBODIED VALUES:
We all subscribe to these common embodied values.
Loving God
• Prayer - Sharing common prayer practices
• Worship – Sharing common worship practices
• Work – Sharing common Kingdom efforts
Loving People
• Serving – Sharing needs and being available

• Leadership – Sharing ideas and taking initiative
• Community - Sharing common space and connecting regularly
OUR COMMON PRACTICES:
We covenant throughout our term as the 12th Cohort that we will fulfill our
purpose consistent with our embodied values by practicing the following rules.
RULES:
1. Learning: We will learn through the full participation in all course exercises.
2. Listening: We will question things critically according to the standard of the

Scriptures, but interact with grace - adopting a posture of humility and
sympathetic listening.
3. Leadership: We will lead each other as servants - not trying to Lord it over
one another - from the conviction that the Holy Spirit is our true leader.
270
APPENDIX G
PEER ASSESSMENT REPORT – BETHEL SEMINARY
DATE: January 25, 2008
FROM: Gregory W. Bourgond, D.Min., Ed.D., and John R. Cionca, Ph.D.

TO: Fuller Seminary Administration, Faculty, and Staff – MAGL
SUBJ: MAGL Continuing Program Review – January 24-25, 2008
In accordance with the assessment plan for Fuller Seminary’s Master of Arts in Global
Leadership (MAGL), a Continuing Program Review was initiated.
The MAGL is a 72-unit degree program offered by the School of Intercultural

Studies through Fuller Theological Seminary’s Horner Center for Lifelong
Learning. The degree is completed in two phases: the first phase is completed as
a cohort over two years and consists of nine courses, four of which are done as
intensives and five as mediated, peer engaged distance courses. The second phase
offers courses in several disciplines and delivery systems selected by the student
in accordance with their learning plan. Nine courses must be completed in this
second phase to complete the entire degree. As of January 2008 fifteen cohorts of
students have been admitted and have commenced studies, and 273 students are
currently active in the program. Forty nine students have graduated as of Summer
2007. The first cohort has yet to complete the program but is expected to do so
June 2008.
The assessment plan required the following action.
“In the fifth year of the program (Fall 2007), two faculty members from regional peer
institutions will be invited to participate in the faculty review process, providing an
external assessment of program effectiveness.”
Drs. Gregory W. Bourgond and John R. Cionca of Bethel Seminary in St. Paul were
requested to conduct the program review on January 24-25, 2008. Dr. Bourgond is the
Vice President of Operations and Strategic Initiatives with oversight responsibility for
Bethel’s technology-mediated delivery system currently offering six master’s degrees in
that format. He was also chair of the ATS Focus Visit which initially evaluated the
271
MAGL in October 2003. Dr. Cionca is Director of the non-traditional Seminary delivery
system currently offering two degrees and is Professor of Ministry Leadership.
Prior to the onsite visit pertinent documents were furnished by seminary leadership for
review. Access was also granted to online courseware, student records of achievement,
course documents, administrative resources, course and program evaluations, summative
student documents, and critical reports submitted to ATS.
The visiting evaluators read the Report on Implications of Students’ Plans to Use
Distance Learning Exclusively and Results of Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan
first submitted on November 1, 2005 to ATS as requested by the focus visit team in
October 2003. The visiting team was also provided with the MAGL Update of Results of
Implementation of the November 2005 Comprehensive Plan (approved by ATS) dated
November 2007. Retention statistics, data collected by phone interviews, and surveys
provided by students, faculty, and staff were also reviewed. Finally, in preparation for
the visit the team was given a copy of the revised Assessment Plan.
The visit was conducted on January 24 and 25 of 2008. Additional documents were
provided for review including comprehensive student evaluations, videos of student exit
interviews, minutes from faculty meetings and training sessions, courseware, hard copies
and electronic copies of student documents including learning plans, summative
integrative papers, policies and procedures, records of formative actions taken throughout
the existence of the degree, and other valuable resources. Interviews with students across
the cohorts, faculty, and staff were conducted. Individual interviews were initiated with
key personnel. The following evaluative remarks represent conclusions reached during
the visit.
As outside evaluators we commend the MAGL team in their comprehensive response to

the initial ATS focus visit. In short, we believe the actions taken bring this degree well
within compliance of Standard 10. All issues raised by the ATS visiting team in October
2003 were addressed to the satisfaction of the visiting evaluators. For instance, the
faculty and staff have initiated actions that have strengthened the academic rigor of the
program, limited the number of IDL courses acceptable in the program, and reorganized
the sequencing of courses.
In addition, the team has integrated character formation and assessment, responded to
formative issues raised by students, and established continuing online community
through experimental blogging, Facebook for social networking, and ePortfolios for
sharing insights. These efforts are being evaluated for effectiveness. The staff and
faculty have delineated learning and related ministry applications, mediation of attrition
rates, and retention of matriculated students. Ongoing efforts have resulted in
sophistication of development and revision of student learning plans in accordance with
growth and exposure to new ideas and experiences. Situational faculty and staff
development efforts were designed to address issues and needs and expand on delivery
expertise. All three foundational courses were revised to focus on personal development
272
and lifelong learning. Also, integration and refinement of objectives, incorporation of
expectations for faculty teaching in the degree program, intentional focus on mentoring
experience for all students, and establishment of rubrics for evaluating learning outcomes
were also accomplished and continue to be addressed.
In addition we commend the team for the following initiatives.
§ Establishment of solid support structures for students and faculty including online
resources, timely responses to questions and concerns, faculty mediated efforts
with students in academic and personal stress, technology infrastructure support,
academic and personal student advising, and guide-by-the-side support
throughout the program.
§ Proactive course technological development efforts including the establishment of

protocols for use of all technological elements and components used in the
program. The MAGL team is continually looking for effective technology to
facilitate the learning experience.
§ Clear course objectives, relevant content, and objective assessment represented in

every syllabus. It is clear that students know what is required of them and how
their work will be evaluated. Content and focus of instruction is continually
evaluated for relevance and ministry application.
§ Teamwork of professors of record, cohort advisors, technology support personnel,

and program administrators is collaborative and offers helpful interactive and
insightful recommendations for ongoing excellence of the program.
§ Clear assessment criteria and procedures for learner outcomes, including student
assessment portfolios are evident in the documentation reviewed and comments
from students. The templates for foundational courses 581, 582 and 583 are
especially noteworthy. All courses demonstrate the same careful treatment of
outcomes and assessment practices.
§ Good efforts toward retention are evident in the production of detailed records
updated regularly to identify reasons for non-matriculation, stop-outs, leave of
absences, and other reasons. Contact with these students is consistent and
repeated.
§ Student ownership of their learning experience through development and revision

of student learning plans appropriate to their missional ministries insures personal
ownership. Review of the initial and revised student learning plans reveal growth,
maturity, focus, and development.
§ Written faculty evaluations of each student’s summative paper which represents

their cumulative learning experience and work throughout the degree program
273
demonstrate appropriate oversight faculty responsibility for learning across the
entire program.
§ Regular ongoing issue-specific faculty development addressing topics such as

diversity, integration, course expectations, faculty competency and delivery of
courses, scheduled two days every six months, insures that the program will
continue to be relevant and effective in developing transformational ministry
leaders.
§ Collegial spirit of the MAGL team is noted and appreciated by students. The staff
and faculty accept ownership of the degree in planning and implementation.
Students universally recognize that the staff and faculty not only care for them but
genuinely are interested in their ministry effectiveness and personal pursuit of
holistic expression of their calling.
§ The close community of learning experienced and attested to by students making
their journey rewarding and fulfilling regarding development of leadership
character, competence and congruity. Community learning experiences that
require interactive involvement with each other has produced a broader learning
environment. Students testify that exposure to perceptions and experiences of
others have enriched their lives and ministry.
The following recommendations are offered as suggestions for the ongoing effectiveness
of the program.
§ Maintain the collegial relationship among program leadership. The acceptance

and camaraderie among staff and faculty powerfully incarnates, models, and
communicates the values of global leadership.
§ Help students count the cost of the program prior to admission. By helping
prospective students understand expected course workloads and financial
commitments may positively impact retention. Availability of students currently
in the program to prospective students is another vehicle for encouraging
matriculation and increasing retention.
§ While it is understandable that some courses reflect a greater emphasis on

thinking, being, and doing, the richest integration will be found when each of
these elements in each course.
§ Establishment of an ongoing advisory group consisting of effective and diverse

ministry practitioners that will provide insights in what current and future
ministry practices and competencies are needed in a global setting will help the
program remain relevant.
§ Continual development of additional qualified faculty to teach core courses as the

program expands is essential. Although a lead faculty is necessary to insure
274
standardization of content delivery, additional adjunct faculty will be needed to
accommodate anticipate growth of the program.
§ Strengthen the financial base of the MAGL program. With an adjustable

percentage of institutional costs charged to each program, the burden of finances
in never eased. A revenue stream is advised for this program independent of
overall institutional funding.
§ Professors who teach the core courses in the cohort phase of the program should
not teach back to back classes. The contribution of an individual professor should
be stretched across the program.
§ Outsource infrastructural components such as hardware, firmware, and software

that support instruction. Competitiveness, availability, and quality of vendor
resources continue to expand and have become very cost-effective. Providing
these resources internally is not cost-effective and can drain limited resources that
may be used in more strategic areas and could adversely affect the quality of the
degree. Curriculum development, androgogical (learner centered) practices,
course conveyance, and other hands-on practices should be handled internally and
not outsourced.
§ Within a masters degree focusing on global leadership we recommend that at least

one course be taught outside North America. Additionally, course material
representing diversity in leadership practices should be intentionally incorporated
where it makes sense to do so.
§ Realizing that individual comments do not necessarily reflect objective reality or

group consensus, nevertheless we recommend that the MAGL team do the
following: 1) review the feedback from the student question and answer session
for implications on potential program adjustments and potential faculty
development topics, and 2) review the feedback from the MAGL faculty and staff
Q&A session for the purposes stated above. Feedback from both sessions is
attached at the end of this report.
In summary, regarding the evaluation of the MAGL program, we believe the concerns
raised in earlier visits have been rectified. In many cases, the administrative team and
faculty have gone well beyond what is required in the accreditation standards and
serves as a model for other schools seeking to offer similar degrees. The team is to be
commended for their efforts especially their genuine commitment to excellence,
relevance, and ministry effectiveness.
Respectfully submitted,
275
Gregory W. Bourgond, D.Min., Ed.D.
Vice President of Operations and Strategic Initiatives
Bethel Seminary
John R. Cionca, Ph.D.

Professor of Ministry Leadership and Director of SemPM
Bethel Seminary
276
REFERENCES CITED
Abedin, Babak, Farhad Daneshgar and John D’Ambra. 2010. Underlying Factors of Sense
of Community in Asynchronous Computer Supported Collaborative Learning
Environments. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 6 (3):585-596.
Adams, Shalea. 2005. Becoming the Church in a Postmodern Age: The HMO Church
Model. Pasadena, CA: Fuller Theological Seminary.
Aerts, Renske. 2005. The Cultural Context of Soul Survivor the Netherlands. Pasadena,
CA: Fuller Theological Seminary.
Aleshire, D. 1999. Seminaries and the Ecology of Faith: An Interview with Daniel
Aleshire. The Christian Century 116 (4):110-123.
Ashley, Benedict M. 1990. The Dominicans. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press.
_____________. "Community Life". The Order of Preachers 2010 [cited November 21,
2010. Available from
http://curia.op.org/en/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=321-
community-life&Itemid=55.
Baillie, Gil. 1995. Violence Unveiled: Humanity at the Crossroads. New York, NY:
Crossroad.
Baker, Jennifer. Divorce Rate. Forest Institute of Professional Psychology 2010 [cited
November 29, 2010. Available from http://www.divorcerate.org/.
Balswick, Jack O., Pamela Ebstyne King and Kevin S. Reimer. 2005. The Reciprocating
Self: Human Development in Theological Pespective. Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press.
Barab, Sasha A., James G. MaKinster and Rebecca Scheckler 2004. Designing System
Dualities: Characterizing an Online Professional Development Community. In
Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning, edited by S. Barab,
R. Kling and J. H. Gray New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Bateson, G. 1972. Steps to an Ecology of Mind. New York, NY: Basic Books.
277
Bauman, Zygmunt. 2000. Liquid Modernity. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
Belenky, M., B. Clinchy, N. Goldberger and J. Tarule. 1986. Women's Ways of Knowing:
The Development of Self, Voice, and Mind. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Berger, Peter L. 1967. The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion.
New York, NY: Doubleday.
Berger, Peter L., and Thomas Luckman. 1966. The Social Construction of Reality: A
Teatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York, NY: Doubleday.
Blevins, Dean Gray, and Mark Maddix. 2010. Discovering Discipleship: Dynamics of
Christian Education. Kansas City, MO: Beacon Hill Press.
Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. 1954. Life Together. New York, NY: Harper Brothers.
Borgman, Erik. 2001. Dominican Spirituality: An Exploration. London, UK: Continuum.
Bourgond, Gregory W., and John R. Cionca. 2008. MAGL Continuing Program Review.
Pasadena, CA: Fuller Theological Seminary.
Boyd, Danah. 2011. Privacy in an Era of Social Media. In Educause Annual Conference
2011. Philadelphia, PA.
Boyd, R. D., and J. G. Myers. 1988. Transformative Education. International Journal of

Life-long Education 7 (4):261-284.
Boyer, N.R., P.A. Maher and S. Kirkman. 2006. Transformative Learning in Online
Settings: The Use of Self-Direction, Metacognition, Collaborative Learning.
Journal of Transformative Learning 4:335-361.
Bronfenbrenner, Urie, ed. 2005. Making Human Beings Human. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Burke, A. 2006. Do the Write Thing. In Teaching for Change: Fostering Transformative
Learning in the Classroom. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education,
edited by E. W. Taylor. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Butterwick, Shauna, and Randee Lipson Lawrence. 2009. Creating Alternative Realities:
Arts-Based Approaches to Transformative Learning. In Transformative Learning
in Practice: Insights from Community, Workplace, and Higher Education, edited
by J. Mezirow, E. W. Taylor, and Associates. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Cacioppo, John T., and William Patrick. 2009. Loneliness: Human Nature and the Need
for Social Connection. New York, NY: W. W. Norton and Company.
278
Cacioppo, John T., James H. Fowler, and Nicholas A. Christakis. 2009. Alone in the
Crowd: The Structure and Spread of Loneliness in a Large Social Network.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 97 (6):977-991.
Casey, Michael. 2005. Strangers to the City: Reflections on the Beliefs and Values of the
Rule of Saint Benedict. Brewster, MA: Paraclete Press.
Chadwick, Nora. 1961. The Age of the Saints in the Early Celtic Church. London, UK:
Oxford University Press.
Corey, Gerald. 2008. Theory and Practice of Group Counseling. 7th ed. Belmont, CA:
Thompson Brooks/Cole.
de Aspurz, Lázaro Iriarte 1974. The Franciscan Calling. Chicago, IL: Franciscan Herald
Press.
de Wall, Esther. 1996. The Celtic Way of Prayer: The Recovery of the Religious
Imagination. London, UK: Hodder and Stoughton.
Dewan, Shashi, and Disha Dewan. 2010. Distance Education Teacher as a Leader:
Learning from the Path Goal Leadership Theory. Journal of Online Learning and
Teaching 6 (3):673-685.
Dirkx, John M. and Regina O. Smith. 2004. Thinking Out of a Bowl of Spaghetti:
Learning to Learn in Online Collaborative Groups. In Online Collaborative
Learning: Theory and Practice, edited by T. S. Roberts. Hershey, PA: Information
Science Publication.
Dupaw, Marcelle E., and Marya Axner. Working on Common Cross-Cultural

Communication Challenges 1997 [cited April 29, 2011. Available from
http://www.pbs.org/ampu/crosscult.html.
Dyrness, William A. 1997. The Earth is God's: A Theology of American Culture. Eugene,
OR: Wipf and Stock.
Farrington, Debra. 2000. Living Faith Day by Day: How the Sacred Rules of Monastic
Traditions Can Help You Live Spiritually in the Modern World. New York, NY:
Berkeley Publishing Company.
Fleming, Charles. 2005. From Restless Wanderers to Reverent Pilgrims: Pathways to

Mission-Leadership in a Globalized World. Pasadena, CA: Fuller Theological
Seminary.
279
Fredrickson, Kurt Norman. 2009. An Ecclesial Ecology for Denominational Futures
Nurturing Organic Structures for Missional Engagement, School of Intercutlural
Studies, Fuller Theological Seminary, Pasadena, CA.
Fuller Theological Seminary. MAGL - Academic Information, Mission Church the Goal of
Leadership [cited November 29, 2010. Available from
http://www.fuller.edu/campuses-online/fuller-online/MAGL-Academic.aspx.
_____________. 2002. Revised MAGL Proposal to ATS. Pasadena, CA: Fuller

Theological Seminary.
_____________. ML523: Mentoring, Course Description 2010 [cited November 29,

2010. Available from
http://schedule.fuller.edu/registrar/schedule/ecdtemp.asp?ECD=/cll/dl/ecds/magl/1
04/ML523_Hankins.html.
____________. Our Mission, Vision, Values and Learning Outcomes 2011 [cited
December 24, 2011. Available from http://www.fuller.edu/campuses-online/fuller-
online/magl-mvv.aspx.
Ganss, George. 1991. Ignatius of Loyola: The Spiritual Exercises and Selected Works.
Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.
Ganss, George E. ed. 1985. Ignatius of Loyola, Founder of the Jesuits: His Life and Work.
St. Lois, MO: The Institute of Jesuit Sources.
Giddens, Anthony. 1990. The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford, CA: Stanford

University Press.
_____________. 2003. Runaway World: How Globalization is Reshaping Our Lives. New
York, NY: Routledge.
Graham, Charles R., and Melanie Misanchuk. 2004. Computer-Mediated Learning

Groups: Benefits and Challenges to Using Groupwork in Online Learning
Environments. In Online Collaborative Learning: Theory and Practice, edited by
T. S. Roberts. Hershey, PA: Information Science Publication.
Grenz, Stanley. 2001. The Social God and the Relational Self: A Trinitarian Theology of
the Imageo Dei. Vol. 1. Lousville, KY: Westminster John Knox.
Hall, Todd W., and Keith J. Edwards. 2002. The Spiritual Assessment Inventory: A
Theistic Model and Measure for Assessing Spiritual Development. Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion 41 (2):341-357.
280
Hashimoto, Sheri. 2005. How Globalization Affects the University of Hawaii. Pasadena,
CA: Fuller Theological Seminary.
Heidegger, M. 1986. Sein und Zeit Tübingen, Germany: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Heron, J. 1992. Feeling and Personhood: Psychology in Another Key. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
Hess, Mary Elizabeth. Attending to Embodiedness in Online, Theologically Focused

Learning. University of Drayton 2000 [cited May 21, 2011. Available from
http://www2.luthersem.edu/mhess/web/Writing.html
Hofstede, Geert, and Gert Jan Hofstede and Michael Minkov. 2010. Cultures and
Organizations: Intercultural Cooperation and Its Importance for Survival. New
York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Hoge, Dean R., and Jacqueline E. Wenger. 2005. Pastors in Transition: Why Clergy Leave
Local Church Ministry. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company.
Hunter, George G. 2000. The Celtic Way of Evangelism: How Christianity Can Reach the
West...Again. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press.
Hunter, James Davison. 2010. To Change the World: The Irony, Tragedy, and Possibility
of Christianity in the Late Modern World. New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.
Johnson, David W., and Roger T. Johnson. 1996. Cooperation and the Use of Technology.
In Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology,
edited by D. H. Jonassen. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
Jones, Cheslyn, Geoffrey Wainwright and Edward Yarnold, SJ eds. 1986. The Study of
Spirituality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Kardong, Terrance G. 2010. Pillars of Community: Four Rules of Pre-Benedictine

Monastic Life. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press.
Kenneson, Philip D. 1999. Life on the Vine: Cultivating the Fruit of the Spirit in Christian
Community. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
Kimball, Lisa, and Amy Ladd. 2004. Facilitator Toolkit for Building and Sustaining
Virtual Communities of Practice. In Knowledge Networks: Innovation Through
Communities of Practice, edited by P. M. Hildreth, and C. Kimble. Hershey, PA:
Idea Group.
281
Kitayama, S. and H.R. Markus. 1994. Emotion and Culture: Empirical Studies of Mutual
Influence. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Kitchenham, Andrew. 2006. Teachers and Technology: A Transformative Journey.

Journal of Transformative Learning 4 (3):202-225.
Kramer, Geertruyt. 2005. Spiritual Consumerism. Pasadena, CA: Fuller Theological

Seminary.
Ledbetter, Andrew M., and Joseph P. Mazer, Jocelyn M. DeGroot, Kevin R. Meyer,
Yuping Mao and Brian Swafford. 2011. Attitudes Toward Online Social
Connection and Self-Disclosure as Predictors of Facebook Communication and
Relational Closeness. Communication Research 38 (1):27-53.
Lowe, Stephen D., and Mary E. Lowe. 2007. Spiritual Formation in Theological Distance
Education: An Ecosystems Model as Paradigm. Charlotte, NC: Erskine
Theological Seminary.
______________. 2010. Absent in Body: Is Spiritual Formation Possible in Online

Christian Education? Christianity Today (May 2010).
______________. 2010. Spiritual Formation in Theological Distance Education: An

Ecosystems Model. Christian Education Journal 7 (3) (1):85-102.
______________. Allelon Reciprocal Commands and Christian Development. Erskine

Seminary undated [cited March 10, 2011. Available from
http://www.erskineseminary.org/Academics/EDEN/pdfs/Allelon%20Reciprocal%
20Commands%20and%20Christian%20Development.pdf.
Lushyn, Pavel, and David Kennedy. 2000. The Psychodynamics of Community of Inquiry
and Educational Reform: A Cross-Cultural Perspective. Thinking 15 (3):9-16.
Marano, Hara Estroff. The Dangers of Loneliness (July 1). Sussex Publishers 2003 [cited
September 5, 2010. Available from
http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200308/the-dangers-loneliness.
Markus, Hazel Rose, and Shinobu Kitayama. 1991. Culture and the Self: Implications for
Cognition, Emotion, and Motivation. Psychological Reivew 98 (2):224-253.
McConnell, David. 2006. E-Learning Groups and Communities. Maidenhead, UK: Open
University Press / McGraw-Hill Education.
McPherson, M., L. Smith-Lovin and M.T. Brashears. 2006. Social Isolation in America:
282
Changes in Core Discussion Networks Over Two Decades. American Sociological
Review 71:353-375.
Mezirow, Jack. 1991. Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
_____________. 2009. Transformative Learning Theory. In Transformative Learning in

Practice: Insights from Community, Workplace, and Higher Education, edited by
J. Mezirow, E. W. Taylor, and Associates. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Muukkonen, Hanni, Kai Hakkarainen and Minna Lakkala. 2004. Computer-Mediated

Progressive Inquiry in Higher Education. In Online Collaborative Learning:
Theory and Practice, edited by T. S. Roberts. Hershey, PA: Information Science
Publication.
Nin, Anaïs. The Diary of Anaïs Nin 1903-1977 [cited June 17, 2011. Available from
http://www.filestube.com/d/diary+nin.
O'Maidin, Uinseann. 1996. The Cetic Monk: Rules and Writings of Early Irish Monks.
Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publishers.
Paavola, S. L. Lipponen and K. Hakkarainen. 2002. Epistemological Foundations for

Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning: A Comparison of Three Models of
Innovative Knowledge Communities. In Computer Support for Collaborative
Learning: Foundations for CSCL Community, edited by G. Stahl. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Palka, John. 2004. Defining a Theological Education Community. International Review of

Research in Open and Distance Learning 5 (3):Technical Evaluation Report 38.
Palloff, Rena M., and Keith Pratt. 2005. Collaborating Online: Learning Together in
Community. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Panitz, Ted. 1999a. Collaborative Versus Cooperative Learning: A Comparison of the

Two Concepts Which Will Help Us Understand the Underlying Nature of
Interactive Learning. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED448443.
_____________. 1999b. The Case for Student Centered Instruction via Collaborative
Learning Paradigms. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED448444.
Pollen, John Hungerford. 1912. The Society of Jesus. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New
York, NY: Robert Appleton Company.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14081a.htm (accessed November 20, 2010).
283
Ramondt, Leonie. 2008. Online CoPs: Towards the Next Generation. In Communities of
Practice: Creating Learning Environments for Educators, edited by C. Kimble, P.
Hildreth and I. Bourdon. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Richards, Lyn. 2005a. Handling Qualitative Data: A Practical Guide. London, UK: Sage.
______________. Resource Pages for Handling Qualitative Data: A Practical Guide

2005b [cited September 15, 2005. Available from
http://www.sagepub.co.uk/richards/.
Robertson, Roland. 1992. Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture. London, UK:
Sage.
Robinson, David. 2009. Ancient Paths: Benedictine Guidance for Christian Spiritual
Formation in the Local Congregation, Fuller Theological Seminary, Pasadena, CA.
Robinson, Ken. 2001. Out of Our Minds: Learning to Be Creative. Chichester, UK:
Capstone Publishing.
Saint-Onge, Hubert, and Debra Wallace. 2003. Leveraging Communities of Practice for
Strategic Advantage. Boston, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Sardar, Ziauddin. 1998. Postmodernism and the Other: The New Imperialism of Western
Culture. London, UK: Pluto Press.
Schreiter, Robert J. 1985. Constructing Local Theologies. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis.
Schwier, Richard, and Ben K. Daniel. 2008. Implications for a Virtual Learning
Community Model for Designing Distributed Communities of Practice in Higher
Education. In Communities of Practice: Creating Learning Environments for
Educators, edited by C. Kimble, P. Hildreth and I. Bourdon. Charlotte, NC:
Information Age Publishing.
Sellner, Edward C. 2002. The Celtic Soul Friend: A Trusted Guide for Today. Notre
Dame, IN: Ave Maria Press.
Sennett, Richard. 1978. The Fall of Public Man: On the Social Psychology of Capitalism.
New York, NY: Vintage Books.
Sfard, A. 1998. On Two Metaphors for Learning and the Dangers of Choosing Just One.
Educational Researcher 27:4-13.
Sloan, Karen E. 2006. Firting with Monasticism: Finding God on Ancient Paths. Downers
Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
284
Smallbones, Mike. Holistic Ministry – What is it? Scripture Union Africa 2008 [cited
February 6, 2012. Available from www.su-international.org.
Smiley, Thomas. 2005. A New Kind of Christian: Glocal and Missional Church in
America, a Personal Journey. Pasadena, CA: Fuller Theological Seminary.
Smith, Kenwyn K. and David N. Berg. 1997. Paradoxes of Group Life: Understanding
Conflict, Paralysis, and Movement in Group Dynamics. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Sorensen, Elsebeth Korsgaard. 2004. Reflection and Intellectual Amplification in Online

Communities of Collaborative Learning. In Online Collaborative Learning:
Theory and Practice, edited by T. S. Roberts. Hershey, PA: Information Science
Publication.
Stewart, Columbia. 1998. Prayer and Community: The Benedictine Tradition. Maryknoll,
NY: Orbis Books.
Stock, Jon, Tim Otto and Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove. 2007. Inhabiting the Church:
Biblical Wisdom for a New Monasticism. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock.
Stoll, Louise, and Karen Louis Seashore 2007. Professional Learning Communities:
Divergence, Detail, Difficulties. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press /
McGraw-Hill
Taylor, Edward W. 2009. Fostering Transformative Learning. In Transformative Learning

in Practice: Insights from Community, Workplace, and Higher Education, edited
by J. Mezirow, E. W. Taylor, and Associates. San Francisco,CA: Jossey-Bass.
Taylor, Edward W., and Jodi Jarecke. 2009. Looking Forward by Looking Back:
Reflections on the Practice of Transformative Learning. In Transformative
Learning in Practice: Insights from Community, Workplace, and Higher
Education, edited by J. Mezirow, E. W. Taylor, and Associates. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
The Association of Theological Schools. Degree Program Standards 2010 [cited

November 26, 2010. Available from
http://www.ats.edu/Accrediting/Pages/StandardsOfAccreditation.aspx.
_____________. General Institutional Standards 2010 [cited November 26, 2010.

Available from
http://www.ats.edu/Accrediting/Pages/StandardsOfAccreditation.aspx.
The Order of Preachers. Dominican Democracy 2010 [cited November 21, 2010.
Available from
285
http://curia.op.org/en/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=53&Itemi
d=64.
The Society of Jesus in the United States. The Formula of the Institute 2010 [cited
November 20, 2010. Available from
http://www.jesuit.org.mt/vocation/formula.html.
_____________. The Society of Jesus 2010 [cited November 20, 2010. Available from
http://www.jesuit.org.mt/vocation/sjvocation.html.
Tisdell, Elizabeth J., and Derise E. Tolliver. 2009. Transformative Approaches to

Culturally Responsive Teaching: Engaging Cultural Imagination. In
Transformative Learning in Practice: Insights from Community, Workplace, and
Higher Education, edited by J. Mezirow, E. W. Taylor, and Associates. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Tolliver, Derise E., and Elizabeth J. Tisdell. 2006. Engaging Spirituality in the
Transformative Higher Education Classroom. New Directions for Adult and
Continuing Education 109 (Spring 2006): 37-47.
Ward, T. 1995. Forward. In Nurture That is Christian, edited by J. Wilhoit, and J. Dettoni.
Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.
Waters, Malcolm. 2001. Globalization. 2nd ed. London, UK: Routledge.
Watkins, Oscar D. 1920. A History of Penance. Vol. II. London, UK: Longmans, Green
and Company.
Watson, Elbert. 2005. The Kingston Challenge: Developing Missional Ministry to Young
People in a Changing South Africa. Pasadena CA: Fuller Theological Seminary.
Wenger, Etienne. 1998. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. New
York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Wenger, Etienne, Richard Mc Dermott and William M. Snyder. 2002. Cultivating

Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge. Boston, MA: Harvard
Business School Press.
Werner, D., and D. Chabloz-Basso. 1987. Spiritual Formation in Theological Education.

In Programme on Theological Education: Workshop on Spiritual Formation.
Geneva, Switzerland: World Council of Churches.
Wlodkowski, Raymond J. 1999. Enhancing Adult Motivation to Learn. San Francisco,

CA: Jossey-Bass.
286
Wood, David J. 2005. Exit Interview - Why Pastors Leave. The Christian Century 122
(25):33-35.
Yorks, Lyle, and Elizabeth Kasl. 2006. I Know More than I Can Say: A Taxonomy for
Using Expressive Ways of Knowing to Foster Transformative Learning. Journal of
Transformative Education 4:43-64.
Ziegler, Mary, Trena Paulus and Marianne Woodside. 2006. Creating a Climate of
Engagement in a Blended Learning Environment. Journal of Interactive Learning
Research 17 (3):295-318.
287
VITA
Growing up in Coffs Harbour, Australia, Ronald Geoffrey Hannaford has found

distance education a major theme in his adult life. To enhance his qualifications in Local
Government, he earned a Health Inspector’s Certificate, a Noise Control Diploma, and a
Building Surveyor’s Diploma through distance education at the University of Technology in
Sydney. Through distance education he also obtained a Certificate as a Public Health Inspector
from the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health in London in the United Kingdom. Later,
he earned a Certificate in Pastoral Education from Rozelle Psychiatric Hospital in Sydney and
studied through distance education to earn a BA in Biblical Studies from Pacific College of
Graduate Studies in Launceston, Tasmania, Australia.
Following a career in Local Government, in 1986 Ron accepted the position of
Assistant Pastor of New Covenant Church in Nowra, NSW, Australia, a church that missionally
engaged local community in the City of Shoalhaven. After five years in this position he was
appointed Senior Pastor. During this time as a pastor, Ron additionally functioned as a Police
Chaplain and a Psychiatric Hospital Chaplain and served internationally as a teacher and
mentor to indigenous pastors in Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh, India; Manila and Davao,
Philippines; and Suva, Fiji.
In 1998 Ron and his family responded to the leading of the Lord in a new endeavor.
Ron resigned from pastoral ministry and the family moved to Pasadena, California, where Ron
began graduate studies at Fuller Theological Seminary. He graduated in 2000 with an MA in
Intercultural Studies and in 2001 with an MA in Theology. He completed a PhD in Intercultural
Studies in 2012.
While at Fuller Seminary from 1998-2001, Ron provided administrative support for
faculty in the School of Intercultural Studies. He served as a reader/advisor for pastoral
students undertaking field education practicums, and as an adjunct instructor, he taught various
Masters level courses both online and on campus in missional engagement with contemporary
Western culture, leadership, and evangelism.
In 2002 Ron was appointed as the Director of Distance Learning at Fuller Theological
Seminary where he facilitated the growth of the graduate online classes serving students from
the three schools at Fuller and developed integrated student-focused administrative services for
students studying around the world. During his tenure at Fuller, the department’s annual budget
grew to $3 million. As director, Ron was also part of a team of three who initially designed and
developed the highly successful and innovative MA in Global Leadership degree, the first
blended online theological degree of its kind to be approved by the Association of Theological
Studies accreditation agency.
Responding to new challenges, in 2009 Ron was chosen to start a new department as
the Director of Distance Learning at Biola University in La Mirada, California. In this capacity,
he has been instrumental in conducting professional development workshops on designing and
teaching online classes for more than 150 Biola faculty and overseen the development of more
than 200 new online undergraduate and graduate classes for the seven schools at the university.
Strategic planning, budget management and development, integration of academic and
administrative systems, policies, and procedures draw upon Ron’s expertise with online
program design and implementation. He has also served on three of the President’s Advisory
Council task forces at Biola, examining college affordability, educational technology, and new
educational initiatives which have provided him the opportunity to constructively contribute to
the mission of the university as it seeks to serve a global constituency.
288

A Model of Online Education Effecting Ho

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Model of Online Education Effecting Ho

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Model of Online Education Effecting Ho

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A MODEL OF ONLINE EDUCATION EFFECTING HOLISTIC

STUDENT FORMATION APPROPRIATE FOR GLOBAL

Ronald Geoffrey Hannaford

A Dissertation Presented to the

Faculty of the School of Intercultural Studies

FULLER THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

In Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Philosophy in Intercultural Studies

Hannaford, Ronald Geoffrey. 2012. “A Model of Online Education Effecting Holistic

Factors associated with globalization and unprecedented technological

exponential growth has resulted in more convenient access to learning, increased

online education. An individualistic culture, if coupled with a geographically and

pedagogically isolating learning environment, threatens students with greater levels of

individualism and social alienation, which pose detrimental consequences beyond

personal well-being to the broader society. Therefore, a model of online education is

a community of committed adult learners.

historical communities and contemporary collaborative learning theories, transformative

formative “process of becoming.”

Mentor: Wilbert R. Shenk, Ph.D.

This comprehensive research is dedicated to my wife Deborah Lynne Hannaford,

who attends the transformative nature of reciprocal, meaningful relationships found in

dynamic, interrelated communities. Our lives bear witness to this reality.

My deep appreciation is also extended to the members of my doctoral committee,

their wisdom, grace, and belief in me.

strength at critical moments, enabling me to press on and accomplish this milestone. I am

have been realized.

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. xi

LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... xii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................xv

CHAPTER 1 THE RESEARCH FOCUS ...........................................................................8

PART I THE CONTEMPORARY LEARNING ENVIRONMENT .............................. 19

CHAPTER 2 FACTORS OF GLOBALIZATION: RESEARCHING A SAMPLE

CHAPTER 3 THE CULTURAL VALUE OF INDIVIDUALISM AND ITS

CHAPTER 4 STUDENT SURVEY ON LONELINESS AND EXTREME

CHAPTER 5 FORMATION IN HISTORIC SPIRITUAL COMMUNITIES ...............115

CHAPTER 6 STUDENT FORMATION .......................................................................147

CHAPTER 7 COLLABORATIVE LEARNING ...........................................................166

CHAPTER 8 TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING THEORY .......................................185

CHAPTER 9 A MODEL OF ONLINE EDUCATION EFFECTING HOLISTIC

APPENDIX A ALL TREE NODES REPORT ............................................................. 214

APPENDIX B GRAPHS OF RAW DATA – GLOBALIZATION ISSUES FROM

APPENDIX C MAGL STUDENT SURVEY – ONLINE ............................................ 225

APPENDIX D EMAIL TO STUDENTS SEEKING SURVEY PARTICIPATION .... 231

APPENDIX E MAGL STUDENT SURVEY – RESULTS (Raw Data) ...................... 232

APPENDIX F COMMUNITY RULES OF PRACTICE – COHORTS 6-12 ............... 263

APPENDIX G PEER ASSESSMENT REPORT – BETHEL SEMINARY ..................271

CURRICULUM VITAE ..................................................................................................288

TABLE 2.1 CHURCH ISSUES – COMPARISON BY GENDER..................................43

TABLE 2.2 CHURCH ISSUES – COMPARISON BY CONTEXT ...............................45

TABLE 2.3 IDENTITY ISSUES – COMPARISON BY GENDER................................46

TABLE 2.4 IDENTITY ISSUES – COMPARISON BY CONTEXT .............................48

TABLE 2.5 SOCIETAL ISSUES – COMPARISON BY GENDER ...............................49

TABLE 2.6 SOCIETAL ISSUES – COMPARISON BY CONTEXT ............................51

TABLE 4.1 CHANGES IN RELATIONSHIP TO OTHERS ..........................................77

TABLE 4.2 RELATIONSHIP WITH FAMILY MEMBERS..........................................83

TABLE 4.3 RELATIONSHIPS WITH FAITH COMMUNITY .....................................89

TABLE 4.4 RELATIONSHIPS WITH OUTSIDE COMMUNITY ................................98