The $3,000 question revisited

I realize this is a post of frustration, and I can certainly understand. There is no reason to pay for something and not have the academic rigor for the degree to carry its own weight. I am wondering, what are you trying to accomplish? You obviously have a ThD, if you are looking for some recommendations for DMin programs, or are you trying to obtain another doctorate. If you are looking for a PhD then I would recommend Oxford Graduate School. They have had a bad reputation on this board, but I have been there and they will be accredited through TRACS, which is seemingly everyone's favorite accrediting body on this board. It provides diversity, scholarship, research, and a incredible experience. It is rather pricey though, but they do work with you through scholarships, and payment plans, etc. If you are not just wanting to continue education, then why not enroll in a certificate program at an Seminary or University. Basically, the $3000 question is: What is it you are wanting to do?

 

Terrell,

Sorry to hear about your bad experience with LBU. Have you considered Luther Rice or Liberty? Both offer accredited DMin programs online.


Martin.

 

Both Luther Rice's and Liberty's are sort of online, more modular than online, some on campus requirements, though they are very reasonable. I think 4-6 weeks total campus time for the Liberty D.Min. spread out over 3 years.

 

Liberty's DMin is 30 hours at $425.00 per credit hour. You will need a lot more than three thousand to cover that. Luther Rice is 30 hours at $235.00 per credit hour (much more reasonable). With Luther Rice part of the requirement to even be considered is to write a rather lengthy research paper and that using the ever confusing Kate Turabian format. I guess they want the applicant to know that they are serious about academics as opposed to the supposed practicality that a D.Min is supposed to bring to the candidate. Overall, considering the cost and relative good reputation of both seminaries, I'd jump through the hoop, write the paper, and go with Luther Rice.

 

==Turabian is an absolute nightmare. I can't understand why there can't be a more simple formatting style. I have the older and the updated versions of the guide. Neither are worth the paper they are printed on. Worse yet every professor has his/her own understanding of it. It makes life very difficult. Well, my life anyway. :BangHead:

==If I was going for a DMin that is exactly what I would do. The accredited but less expensive program. Beside I don't know if student loans are realistic right now so more expensive schools might be unrealistic for many people. This economic crisis might make more schools realize the advantage of having a strong distance learning program. The college I teach at is working on offering more and more classes online because of the economic situation. We have already moved to a four day week and this semester we are offering more online classes than ever before. If a state college can do that there is no reason private Christian schools cannot. I now know that all of this "our accreditation does not allow for degrees via distance learning" is nothing but a lame excuse. Outside of ATS, most accrediting agencies have no problems with online degrees. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

 

While in seminary Kate T. was a nightmare. Every professor and grader had their own pet peeves. I'd get used to the wants and wishes of one only to find out that wasn't right or good enough in another's class. When I graduated Kate went onto file 13. Good riddance as far as I was concerned.

 

I got to mastering Kate T. At one point, I didn't need my handbook. :laugh:

 

I purchased this for use at Liberty Seminary. http://www.styleease.com/ Now, as you say, each professor has their own understanding of the format. For one the "Seminary Style" version of Turabian Style Ease is perfect, for another the "Chicago Style" version of Turabian Style Ease is perfect. For most, though, they can simply not be pleased...

 

Mixed emotions

I have very mixed emotions about this kind of thing. On the one hand, software greatly increases productivity and saves time. On the other hand, it is almost as if we are either too lazy or too ignorant to do our own citations. It could be viewed as a cheap out. The purpose of doing citations by hand is to understand the principles behind the procedures.

Furthermore, I have never respected the professor who was so rigid and stiff as to make moot points of citation his emphasis. The use of any system of citation is open to interpretation. Even Katie Turabain was challenged by others and made adjustments in her interpretations based on the Chicago Manual. Then, there are unique situations that challenge all of us. We must not lose sight of our goal in citations—namely to give a clear, unambiguous path to our sources. How to do this systematically is not always easy and there is no consensus on the methods.

So, the professor who makes life hard for his students by being picky on citations is usually covering for lack of substance in intellectual content by trying to enforce a rigid systematization to give an appearance of rigor and academic prowess. The truly meticulous professor debunks your argument and logical flaws, not your citations.

 

Paid, I think most of your post is right on target! However, do you really think using a software like StyleEase is lazy? You still have to input the sources for your research, but time is being saved in the meticulous formatting. I guess I don't understand your argument. To me, it seems like a similar argument would be for us not to use MS Word because it's too easy and go back to using manual typewriters.

Please take the questions in the spirit intended.....I beg your forgiveness if it appears combative, that is not my intention. I want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding you.

 

==I tend to agree. I just wish there was a set, simple, clear system for everyone. Instead we have several systems and the new 7th edition (2007) of the Turabian Manual for Writers has over 400 pages of rules, guidelines, and examples. It is the most confusing thing I have ever tried to figure out. I can never get it right. One professor says "this" is the proper way in Turabian. So I change my note and the next professor says "that" is wrong and it should be "this" way. All the while my head is about to explode. I have even had two professors disagree, in front of me, over how a certain chart should be cited. It is way too complicated.

==Amen to that!

==I have had professors who let all but the worst citation issues slide. I have had others who would throw a fit over one little mistake. I don't believe any of them were "covering for lack of substance in intellectual content". I think the problem is that some people, by their very nature, are more structured than others. To these people everything has to be right. Also many graduate level professors expect graduate students to know how to cite properly. They don't seem to understand that they often conflict each other when giving correction/instruction.

The whole system is too confusing. I say there should be one system, that system should be clearly, simply, concisely explained in a short but direct booklet. That one system should apply to all subjects. Then there would much less confusion.

Well, thats my opinion anyway...

 

In principal I appreciate what you are saying but I am working on my third graduate degree. I already figured out the principals behind "citations" and I want more time to focus on research, content, and application.

 

I concur on the AMEN to this statement!

 

No disagreement

I don't think we are at odds here. If one is learning the art of research and writing, then he or she ought to do the citations by hand. I don't like the idea of the student using software to cover his ignorance. On the other hand, the experienced researcher/writer can save valuable time and effort by using software to automate the task much like using a word processor. However, this should come only after mastering the art. What do you think?

 

But, when the citation process requires hours of pouring through a manual hundreds of pages long rather than actually researching the subject at hand something is wrong. I think it is called the tail wagging the dog.

 

Perhaps I am missing something... What art is there to "citations????"

Citations are used as a matter of proprietary. It is inappropriate - and in many cases illegal - to quote someone without citation. Proper citation also gives the reader valuable information for their edification / further research into the subject matter at hand.

It seems a stretch to refer to citations as art. Well, on second thought, your right. Perhaps I will take the next cover page to a paper I write, frame it, and hang it on the wall in my office

Forgive my sarcasm but something about calling citations an art strikes me as humorous... Drudgery, a Chore, a necessity... these terms seem much more appropriate...

It seems my suggestion about Styleaze has hijacked this thread... I'll start a new one... somewhere...

 

Paid, I agree with that analysis completely. Thanks for the clarification.

I have only a Bachelors degree, but many of my courses required a great deal of research and writing....some of which I didn't enjoy completely, but I'm thankful that my profs sought to teach us those skills.

I have a close friend in a DMin program at a prominent seminary and he shared with me that for one of their first research assignments there were students that actually turned in handwritten papers with no citation whatsoever. I was in complete shock....as was my friend.....and the prof for the course!

I shared all that just to say....research, writing, and proper citation is something that students should be mastering (to some degree) at the undergraduate level, so that when the student reaches the graduate level, more time can be spent on genuine research than remedial preparation.

-Matt