dissertation

285
Another research interest was the educational philosophy and theoretically grounded visions
on learning. We were interested to see whether sources could be found that both
addressed what theological learning is and gave attention to related topics such as
theological reflection, understanding, and creativity; learning environments; learning to
learn; learning styles and multiple intelligences, etc. We were also interested to see
whether any document would explain what learning theory was deemed most appropriate
(e.g. self-directed learning, transformative learning, or experiential learning), and
why. 43
10.1.4 Presentation of Data
In the next three sections, we first make some introductory comments about the institution
that yielded the data. Then we give attention to the framework of questions as a
whole. The main question here is: How did the interviewees or focus group participants
react to this heuristic device? Subsequently, each of the nine questions is discussed separately,
so that the emphasis in the presentation of the data is on content, rather than
anything else. Direct quotations appear only when they are particularly apt or illustrative.
Furthermore, synthesized or quoted viewpoints are not those of just one or two
participants, but are more widely shared. If this is not the case, or if this is uncertain, a
comment is added. 44 Sections 10.2-10.4 emphasize perspectives on leadership and practices
of leader education, a limitation that had to be made for reasons of space.
10.2 Visions on Leader Education in the Protestant Theological University
(PThU)
10.2.1 Obtaining the Data
As mentioned earlier, the PThU is aligned with the largest protestant denomination in
the Netherlands, the Protestantse Kerk in Nederland [Protestant Church in the Netherlands],
abbreviated as the PKN. The PKN was established in 2004 as a merger of three
43
Cf. Reg Wickett, “Adult Learning Theories and Theological Education,” Journal of Adult Theological Education
2, no. 2 (2005), 153-161.
44
In Exhibit A, “The Survey Issued before or at the Start of the Focus Group Sessions,” the exact responses
of the students – i.e. where they put their X marks on the survey – will not be detailed below. Discussing
these forms would require many additional methodological comments, but would not add anything substantial
to the descriptions and conclusions that will be put forward. The following general comments may,
however, be of interest: students from the PThU and TUK placed most of their X marks on the left side
(‘do not agree’, or ‘agree somewhat’), while students from the ETF, relatively speaking, placed their X
marks more in the middle (‘agree’) or to the right of the middle (‘agree strongly’). At the end of the sessions,
when the students were asked to fill in the form again, their responses mostly stayed the same, but if
a change was made, it was almost always to the left – as if during the session the student had come to the
realization: “I now know better what I do not receive studying here.” The one exception to this rule was the
ETF. Some (but not all) students from the ETF went more to the right with their X marks (e.g. from ‘agree
somewhat’ to ‘agree’) as if to say: “I now know better what I receive studying here.”