BACHELOR OF THEOLOGY, CERTIFICATE IN THEOLOGY, AND CERTIFICATE FOR THEOLOGY GRADUATES

Transcription

1 UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD, FACULTY OF THEOLOGY AND RELIGION BACHELOR OF THEOLOGY, CERTIFICATE IN THEOLOGY, AND CERTIFICATE FOR THEOLOGY GRADUATES Examiners Report Trinity Term 2015 Section A: General Report Qualification Completing candidates Continuing candidates Bachelor of Theology (BTh) Certificate in Theology (CTh) 9 1 Certificate for Theology Graduates (CTG) 1 2 Numbers sitting in each of the papers: Paper Title Seated exams Long essays A3B Development of Christian Life and Thought 0 1 B1 Old Testament B (English) 8 10 B1 Old Testament B (Hebrew) 5 0 B2 New Testament B (English) 4 9 B2 New Testament B (Greek) 4 0 B3 Biblical Interpretation 0 1 C1 Christian Doctrine 1 26 C2 Church History (6 th 11 th C) 0 1 C2 Church History (11 th 14 th C) 0 3 C2 Church History (17 th 18 th C) 0 1 C2 Church History (19 th 20 th C) 0 4 C3 Ecclesiology 0 12 C4 Study of Theology 0 1 D1 Mission and Ministry 0 18 D2 Christian Ethics (a) 9 12 D2 Christian Ethics (b) 21 0 D3 Christian Worship 13 0 D4 Christian Spirituality 0 2 E1 Christian Mission 0 2 E2 Christian Faith and Other Religions (Islam) 1 0 1

2 E2 Christian Faith and Other Religions (Judaism) 0 1 E3 Christian Faith and Philosophy 0 1 E6 Christian Faith and Psychology 0 1 E7 Western Canon Law 0 1 E9 Translation Paper (Hebrew) 2 0 E9 Translation Paper (Greek) 4 0 F1 Dissertation 0 4 F2 Project 0 1 Total Submissions This round of the BTh provided some very high quality work, and on the whole the marks were very satisfying, with average scores within the mid 2:1 range. There were a number of distinctions awarded, and several candidates demonstrated first class work across the board. There were two papers where students struggled and the number of 2:2 scores outweighed those of the higher classes New Testament B, and Mission and Ministry. The examiner s reports below outline substantially the problems that occured and both students and tutors are strongly encouraged to make themselves familiar with the guidance offered. The examinations process functioned very smoothly. There were very few irregularities in the paperwork associated with the submission of essays, and the overall marking process went well. As with last year it is notable that very few of the marks agreed upon by the first and second markers were changed by the moderators, and there were relatively few instances where markers could not reach an agreed mark. A number of issues were brought to the attention of the examination board: - There were several candidates who suffered illness whilst taking their exams. They correctly submitted Part 13: Factors Affecting Performance applications along with documentation from both their college and doctors, and these were successfully processed by the Examining Board. - There were concerns about the word length of several essays, and both candidates and supervisors are strongly advised to make sure they are clear about which essays, for which modules, in which years carry which word lengths. As with the FHS, penalties for overlength pieces may be applied. - A concern about plagiarism was raised by one of the markers, and the relevant material was passed over to the Proctor s office for processing, as per the Policy and Guidance for Examiners requirements. Candidates are strongly encouraged to make themselves aware of the plagiarism policy in the BTh Handbook, and to note that markers may penalise work that is derivative (most commonly when a single source is largely relied upon for both content and structure) in addition to whether it may be plagiarised. - The Chair of Examiners records his thanks to the examining team: Prof Mark Edwards (Faculty Moderator), Prof Neil Messer (External Examiner), Dr Mary Marshall, Dr Andrew Atherstone, 2

3 Dr Andrew Teal, and Dr John Jarick. The assessors who assisted the examiners all turned around their material to deadline. Dr M Kirkpatrick (Chair) Dr A Atherstone Dr M Marshall Dr A Teal Dr J Jarick Prof M Edwards (Faculty Moderator) Prof N Messer (External Moderator) 3

4 Section B: Subject Reports A1: Old Testament A There were no candidates for this paper. A2: New Testament A There were no candidates for this paper. A3a: Foundations of Christian Thought There were no candidates for this paper. A3b: Development of Christian Life and Thought There was 1 entry by long essay. A4: Christian Witness and the Contemporary World There were no candidates for this paper B1: Old Testament B Seated Examination: Long Essay: Total: Candidates for this paper by seated examination were set the task of answering three questions, each from a different section, to be chosen out of four sections (Historical Books set texts, Writings set texts, Historical Books topics, and Writings topics). Of the thirteen candidates on this occasion, eleven chose to write on two set texts and one topic (including four candidates who translated and commented on the two Hebrew set texts), while three chose to write on one set text and two topics (including one candidate who translated and commented on one of the Hebrew set texts). For English set texts, 2 Kings and Psalms were equally popular, while Job attracted some interest but 2 Samuel was not in favour. The most popular topical question was on the concept of the Deuteronomistic History, but most questions elicited at least one response. The best answers were focussed on the specifics of the chosen text or the key words in the question asked, and the comments or arguments made were supported by close attention to primary and secondary sources. The weakest answers made misinterpretations of the text under scrutiny or missed a significant issue raised by the question being addressed. The examiners were particularly pleased that five candidates wrote on Hebrew texts, with useful translations and worthy comments upon those texts. Candidates for the paper by long essay were almost evenly divided in canonical terms, with four of the ten essays being on topics pertaining to the Historical Books and six on topics pertaining 4

5 to the Writings. In the latter category, no less than four of the five Festival Scrolls (with only Lamentations missing out) each received attention, along with Psalms and Proverbs, so the spread of topics which elicited student interest was very pleasing. The standard also was generally pleasing, with mostly fluent and intelligent discussions of the issues under investigation, although the examiners would like to encourage all candidates to engage directly with the biblical text and not only with the secondary literature. B2: New Testament B Seated Examination: Long Essay: Total: Written Exam It is instructive also to compare performance on Greek and English papers respectively. Texts in English: Texts in Greek: These statistics tally with the sense of the examiners that candidate s answering on Greek gobbets gave a stronger performance than those answering only on the English text. Performance on the English Text was disappointing, representing a drop in 4-5 marks from the overall averages on the 2014 paper. Whether this discrepancy reflects student response to the particular gobbet passages selected, the enhanced understanding which might be gained from studying the text in its original language, or the particular calibre and confidence of this year s Greek and English candidates remains an open question. All three set texts were represented in responses to Section A. The strongest gobbet answers focused their comment on the passage set while weaker answers presented general essays on abstracted themes or synopses of sections of the text. Essay questions on John s Gospel and Romans remain popular choices with essays on Hebrews also strongly represented. Question 4(b) on the purpose of Romans was particularly popular with candidates while 4(a) was (perhaps surprisingly) under-represented. Essays on the purpose of Romans ranged from strong to very weak. Some candidates omitted to make any reference to the text of Romans in their answer, even in support of the scholarly opinions they presented. Other candidates adopted uncritical positions, defended in a homiletic tone. Examiners again lament candidates reluctance to engage with the particular demands of the question set, preferring to rehearse favourite arguments. Several answers to 3(b), for example, did not recognise that the significance of Jesus death in John might be interpreted in a variety of ways. Examiners reiterate the comment from the 2014 report that marks tended to be capped not by the limits of candidates knowledge but by the dubious relevance of their answers in response to the question set. 5

6 Long Essays In line with the outcome of last year s examination, the mean and median marks are significantly higher for long essays than for the written exam (yielding the only first class marks on this paper) suggesting that this may have been a wise choice for some of the candidates who selected this option. Nevertheless, the overall standard was disappointingly poor with only three of the nine candidates obtaining marks higher than 60. Some candidates were hampered by their choice of title, attempting either something which invited only limited critical analysis or else a topic which could not reasonably be dealt with in a long monograph, let alone a short essay. Choice of title is therefore partially determinative of success and students are encouraged, with their tutors, to choose a question which will enable them to demonstrate their skills as well as spark their interest. The essays addressed several different topics and most evinced engagement with a range of secondary literature. Whereas weaker essays were derivative, candidates obtaining higher marks were able to engage independently in analyses of the primary text and to assess scholarship in an appropriately critical fashion. All candidates are reminded and strongly encouraged by the examiners to check their work very carefully. The grade descriptors cite good presentation and linguistic accuracy as characteristic of first and upper-second class essays. B3: Biblical Interpretation There was 1 entry by long essay. C1: Christian Doctrine Seated Examination: Long Essay: Total: Long Essays The quality of long essays was varied. Essays which remained descriptive and lacking in analytical exploration were few but clearly less strategically planned. Essays which asserted compulsively without evidence were thankfully absent. Essays which did well helped the examiner to see sorting strategies, were characterised by careful discussion, and came to wellargued conclusions which grew out of the material discussed. Note has obviously been taken of previous examiners reports. Two essays were of excellent quality. 6

7 C2: Church History There were 9 submissions by long essay, 1 in the 6 th 11 th C, 3 in 11 th 14 th C, 1 in 17 th 18 th C, and 4 in 19 th 20 th C.. C3: Ecclesiology Long Essay: The standard of essays submitted for this paper was generally solid, on a wide variety of topics. The strongest were evidently well-researched, with attention to a range of texts concerning the doctrine of church and sacraments, both historical and contemporary. C4: Study of Theology There was 1 entry by long essay. D1: Mission and Ministry Long Essay: The aim, objective, regulation rubric, and further advice, as set out in the BTh handbook, make clear what is required for this, admittedly rather demanding, Paper. In short, the student is expected to: 1. Explain the ministry of the church, chaplaincy, etc. and its significance, in its context; 2. Explain the relevant features of his/her own placement; 3. Identify one or more areas for theological reflection that arise from the placement itself; 4. Engage in this theological reflection using appropriate resources these should include scholarly works on Scripture, theology, pastoral practice, psychology, sociology, as needed; 5. Make any appropriate recommendations for pastoral action that flow from the reflection. The best essays in this batch did draw together Scripture, theology and pastoral activity in a really fruitful way. And most of the essays did show a significant degree of pastoral sensitivity. There were a number of ways in which many of the students failed to accomplish all that was expected of them. Often, the omission of one element in the edifice of this Paper meant that the fruitful interaction between the required components could not take place. Giving here some pointers towards improvement is perhaps the clearest way to exemplify the effect of omitting a key element: 1. Make sure the title of the essay lets us know what it is about. E.g. if it s about a community s decision making process, don t give the impression it s about the issue that 7

8 sparked off the process you witnessed. If you experienced some pastoral problem, make sure the reader knows the history of the problem early in the essay, so that the issues are clearly contextualised. 2. Make more effort to preserve the anonymity of the place where you did the placement. 3. Describe the pastoral reality you were part of, and not just a single incident you witnessed. 4. Therefore, employ appropriate means of investigation. Statistics may help, but are not enough. If an incident suggests motives on the part of the participants, do not just speculate about their motives, but interview them (gently and discreetly). 5. Do not use an aspect of the placement merely as a springboard for a theological train of thought that is independent of the placement itself. For this Paper you need to reflect, theologically, on the pastoral reality you experienced. 6. Use tools prudently. For example, use the pastoral cycle if and only if it is helpful in the context in which you worked, and only go round it twice if a new episode follows on from the first implementation of the cycle. Evaluating tools that might be used in a pastoral situation is not enough; you need to have used them, and reflect theologically on the outcome of their use. The theological tools you should use may well include Biblical commentaries do not leave serious Scriptural scholarship behind when you complete your Biblical Papers in the BTh! 7. Be aware of the wider Christian reality. If for example theological issues about jurisdiction arise, find out how these issues have been or are lived in the early Church, in other denominations, or in missionary territories. Quite a few students showed a significant openness to learning. In some cases the experience sparked off a theological development and the description of that conversion experience was not what this Paper is looking for. In other cases, the student clearly reflected on a feature of the placement, such as a leadership style witnessed, and true pastoral growth was achieved, perhaps drawing on and qualifying the student s previous experiences of leadership. I would recommend students to familiarise themselves with the purpose of the Paper and the skills required before undertaking the placement. The best essays were from students who went into a placement with eyes and ears open, with a readiness to witness, with empathy, the skills and the styles of work of the ministers alongside whom they worked, and with a determination to pick up on the needs, hopes, strengths and problems of the other participants in the pastoral situation. Appropriate tools of theology, psychology and/or sociology were deployed unobtrusively and in a natural way to help the student and the reader of the essay see what was going on, whether for admiration or for improvement; in the best essays, any suggestions for improvement needed were made with modest pastoral sensitivity. D2: Christian Ethics D2a Ethics and Faith Seated Examination: Long Essay:

9 D2b Ethics and Ministry Seated Examination: D2 Combined final Mark Candidates Mean Median Exam and Essay On the whole, the exam questions were answered well. There were no outstanding scripts, but most scores were in the mid 2:1 range. As with previous years, scripts that scored highly demonstrated a clear and directed answer to the question and understanding of its nuances, but also engaged with the question from more than one perspective. Essays that scored lower often failed to be precise in addressing the question, or were too limited in their scope. Although essays are always limited in an exam, the examiners noted that candidates often failed to explain why they were answering a question in a certain way rather than another, justify the omission of certain thinkers or perspectives, or at least show knowledge of how their answers might be (perhaps necessarily) incomplete. In some cases, answers were made with very little reference to sources. In paper D.2a, there was a slight preference of candidates answering 2 applied ethics questions (Section B) over the foundational concepts (Section A). However, unlike in previous years, there was a far greater preference for a handful of questions. In Section A, question 3 (Natural Law) was by far the most popular and 4 out of 10 questions were unanswered (4, 6, 7, and 9). However, this was even more pronounced in Section B where questions 12 (Euthanasia) and 15 (Abortion) made up 73% of the responses from that section. Questions 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, and 20 remained unanswered. Unlike previous years, there were considerably more long essays submitted in exchange for the D2a seated exam. In contrast to the seated exam, there was a much broader spread of marks, ranging from a 54 to a 72 with other marks spread across this range. Therefore, where some candidates were able to submit work of a higher standard than was found in the seated exams, so the reverse was also true in some cases. Those of a lower standard suffered from many of the classic essay writing pitfalls, such as providing simple description rather than critically engaging with the views presented, offering too limited a perspective on the question, not correctly balancing the essay in terms of the views presented, and even not answering the question. One essay in particular based their essay almost exclusively in one introductory source. A further potential consequence of the greater submission of long essays may also be the impact it has on paper D2b. The examiners noted that the answers for the case study exam were noticeably lower than in previous years, and that this was particularly the case for those who had submitted long essays (half received a mark of less than 60 and three quarters received a mark of 65 or less). A particular danger of this paper, as described by previous examiners reports, is in not offering adequate attention to both the ethical discussion and the pastoral response. This year, the predominance was for a weakness on the ethical discussion, and a number of the answers that did poorly appeared to be based on general knowledge rather than any special expertise in applied ethics. What this may indicate is that where those who study for the D2a exam must be knowledgeable about a wide range of applied ethical topics in order to answer Section B of that paper (and we note again that the preference seems to be to answer 9

10 2 questions from this section), so those submitting a long essay may not necessarily have studied broader applied topics than the single one they may be writing on. Consequently, those who take the D2a seated exam will be far better prepared to answer the ethical discussion in paper D2b. Students and tutors are strongly advised that paper D2b requires specialist knowledge of applied ethics and that a student s study must be far broader than the single topic they may be completing for a long essay. With respect to the case study paper, it was also noticeable that a number of candidates writing from the Anglo Catholic perspective were often able to identify the Roman Catholic and Anglican positions on certain issues, but struggled to articulate their own position or to offer concrete guidance in their pastoral response in relation to these positions. D3: Christian Worship Long Essay: The standard of essays submitted for this paper was generally good, on a wide variety of interesting topics, mostly Baptist and Anglican. Highest marks were awarded for essays with strong argumentation, and close attention to liturgical texts or nuanced theological debate. D4: Christian Spirituality There were 2 entries for this paper, both by long essay. E1: Christian Mission There were 2 entries for this paper, both by long essay. E2: Christian Faith and Other Religions There were 2 entries for this paper (Islam and Judaism), both by long essay E3: Christian Faith and Philosophy There was 1 entry by long essay. E5: Christian Faith and Social Sciences There were no candidates for this paper. E6: Christian Faith and Psychology There was 1 entry by long essay. E8: Confessional Study There were no candidates for this paper. 10

11 E9: Translation Paper There were 6 candidates who sat the seated exam for this paper, 2 in Hebrew and 4 in Greek. F1: Dissertation There were 4 entries for this paper. F2: Project There was 1 entry for this paper. MDK/14 July