In Trust Center
The In Trust Center podcast is hosted by Matt Hufman. Walk alongside theological school leaders and innovators as they explore issues relevant to North American seminaries, all while helping institutions live out their missions more intentionally. Find more at intrust.org/podcast.
In Trust Center
Ep. 94: Innovating along the way - emerging trends, lessons learned from the Pathways initiative
As the Pathways for Tomorrow Initiative reaches its midpoint, theological schools are navigating both promising innovations and growing tensions. In this episode, Matt Hufman speaks with Jo Ann Deasy of ATS and Amy Kardash of the In Trust Center about how schools are reassessing mission, sustainability, and alignment. With new programs, nontraditional students, and expanded collaborations, institutions are rethinking everything from board engagement to what success really means. While some schools are thriving through strategic alignment, others face challenges in leadership turnover, funding models, and adapting to shifting demands. The conversation underscores a growing shift from competition to collaboration, and a recognition that long-term vitality requires deep listening, experimentation, and clarity about mission.
Hello and welcome to the Inter Center podcast, where we connect with experts and innovators in theological education around topics important to theological school leaders. Thank you for joining us. Hi, everyone. I'm Matt Huffman. Through the Pathways for Tomorrow initiative, which was announced, believe it or not, back in 2021, Lily Endowment Inc. has put millions of dollars into theological higher education to help theological schools strengthen and sustain their ability to prepare congregational leaders. There were in that first round, that first big uh grant, there were three rounds of funding, the planning phase and then two phases of funding to help schools increase capacity in their work. While Lilly Endowment has recently announced new rounds of funding under Pathways, we're halfway through the original grants. The coordination program for the initiative has been overseen by the Association of Theological Schools in coordination with the Intrust Center for Theological Schools. In July of 2025, the coordination program hosted a meeting for grantees that brought more than 230 people to Indianapolis to discuss their work. It's a great time of sharing and discussion. So I've invited the Reverend Joanne DC, the Director of Institutional Initiatives for ATS, who's leading the coordination effort, along with Mrs. Amy Kardash, the president of the Interest Center, the co-coordinator of this, to discuss what the field can learn at this point from the Pathways for Tomorrow initiative. And there's plenty to discuss. First, Joanne, welcome back to the program. Thanks, Matt. Good to be here again. And Amy, welcome back as well.
SPEAKER_03:Thanks, Matt. Good to be here with you and Joanne.
SPEAKER_00:So in this recent event, the big theme was the passage in the third chapter of Philippians to run the race to gain the prize. And we're kind of at that point in the program where there's a lot of evaluation. People can see the prize ahead of them, or they've understood the, we'll say politely, stresses of the race. Most of these schools, again, are about halfway through, and there's plenty of assessment along the way. Um, Joanne, let me start here with you. The initiative is at an interesting point because while it's not new, there's still a lot of things people are learning. Uh, there's plenty that uh we've seen in the data that's been gathered. What would you say about where we're at in the initiative? As in, you know, what are some of the things that you would say that the field can be learning from this initiative at this point?
SPEAKER_01:Matt, that's a a great question. Um when we we gathered uh earlier this summer, it was it was really great to see an initiative maturing. So uh a sense that conversations were deepening, that most people had at least got out of the starting blocks. Um, when we first started this initiative, people were really starting from different places. Um, some really needing to reenvision and create brand new programs, while others were already in that process. And uh this just accelerated that or provided the resources needed. So schools starting at very different places, but right now you can see that um most of the schools are are hitting their stride, um, which means both that they're finding the things that are going well and also hitting the tensions that emerge as they're making shifts and changes. Um yeah, Matt, I can say more about some specific areas where we're seeing where we're learning things, if that would be helpful at this point. Um but I think what we have seen is where people would hope for uh enrollment growths. It's been a mixed bag for our schools and it's hard to know. Um, when Chris Meinzer talks about uh new programs and enrollment, he often says that new programs bring enrollment bumps for a few years and then the market kind of levels out. So um we don't know if this is an early bump in enrollment in some schools, if others are just ramping up to a place where their programs will actually gain enrollment because others had sort of a longer on-ramp of marketing and listening. I I think that's uh we've we've noted that through this initiative, I think we we probably know more than we have in a very long time about what's happening with our constituents and in the church and with pastoral leaders. And for some schools, that has meant some significant changes to how they do theological education to meet their constituents where they're at. Um so hard to know what the long-term enrollment benefits will be. Um, clearly, some short-term financial benefits or an influx of funding, but um but really pushing the fact whether our current models uh I think we all know that our current models are not sustainable. And I think that's been highlighted in this grant. And there's perhaps some early indicators of where some uh new models might bring some financial health, um, some new pushes towards different ways of scaling that have to do with collaboration, whether internal with other schools, with uh larger universities or with denominational ministry networks. But but those are all, I think, the areas where we're really um we're we're seeing we're we're sort of on the the cusp of things, whether or not uh it will move in new directions and how what that will look like.
SPEAKER_00:Well, I think there was that certainly that belief that if you build it, they will come and there will be a net overall increase. As you said, Chris Meinzer, the chief operating officer of uh ATS, is long said that that's not always the case. I mean, I know in the schools I've served, uh, the school I served in, it was certainly you build a new program, there's interest, there's a little growth, and then you see what the market really holds. There have been interesting conversations in the rooms, I think, were between uh we've seen re-engagement, I think, of some schools and their denominations, uh a new vitality or interest in uh certainly uh partnerships in that part of the pathways program was to find ways for folks who may not be traditional students in. And and those numbers aren't in yet. We won't see the the reality of that, probably until after uh this the initial grant period. It is over as those pathways take years to to build.
SPEAKER_01:Absolutely. We have seen some increase in non-degree programs this last year, both within pathway schools and beyond. So um, not just a trend for pathway schools, but uh overall a trend in theological education.
SPEAKER_00:So, Amy, let me turn to you for a second. We've seen people follow different paths as we as we're just talking about, whether non-traditional students, non-degree programs, and others. I want to take a little broader view. Uh, how do you see the movement of this regarding mission? As in how are things aligning in schools and how perhaps are governing boards and senior leaders seeing these as ways to either further enhance or bring vitality to their mission, or perhaps maybe mission creep, as as sometimes new prod projects do?
SPEAKER_03:Yeah, thanks, Matt. That's such a good question. I think for both as we think about the pathways for tomorrow grantees, but then any institution that's looking at a new opportunity for a grant or an initiative, and and how do you think about that as it relates to your mission, your core values, your theological roots, and and I think um some of what we've seen is where there's clear alignment and maybe where there isn't alignment. And um, some of what we talked about when we gathered a few weeks ago um were things that impacted that alignment. So there are there are a large percentage of schools that have um experienced executive leadership turnover or turnover within their project, whether it's project or other critical partners. And sometimes that change has brought about um challenges because perhaps that was an individual's passion project or um something that a smaller group of people were really driving, right? And so that kind of highlighted perhaps some misalignment where there's those projects that are on the peripheral edges and maybe haven't been centered in the institution. So something that really is being seen as a project and not integral to the institution's sustainability. And I think in those spaces that can create misalignment. But um, there are projects where and initiatives where schools have been intentional about alignment, and so recognizing that that looks like the executive leader being a champion for and a driver of um the project, that looks like a board that has been engaged, and in some cases from the very beginning, right? Um, we did a workshop on board engagement, and the participants, some of them talked about we pulled the room, and some of them said the board has been on board since the very beginning. Others said it's been really difficult to get, you know, in front of the board or to align this with the board's um priorities. And so those well-aligned projects really include um the executive leader support and um board engagement. And I think that has a lot to do with, again, the alignment to the institutional um priorities, board's priorities. Um, one of the things we said in our board engagement workshop was um, as fiduciaries of the institution, the governing board is all about the long-term interests of the institution. It's all about what's mission-centric. And so if the pathways project has been aligned in those areas, by default, the board should be engaged, right? And a couple of other uh factors I might just point to, Matt, and and one is going to be right up your alley, of course, is um how schools have thought about their communication plan and their strategy around communicating to really engage additional internal stakeholders and external stakeholders. Um, and I think also being really um knowledgeable about the contribution to or the impact on institutional resources. So, yes, there's grant funding for the project, but there's all kinds of other institutional resources that are drawn upon for a project, and just having an understanding of um what's the benefit, the long-term benefit of this initiative, or if it's drawing from the resources, is it because it's critical to our mission? And I think all of those things are what grantees are grappling with right now. And I think those are the things that any school that's pursuing an initiative or anything needs to think about to really get at that alignment question.
SPEAKER_00:Well, I think you know, one of the things about the alignment question is you can be perfectly aligned and it may not work. There may not be students, you may find that there's not people may go elsewhere, or there may just not be a market for it, I think. You know, so there's there's an interesting period. I think we may still be in here, is where the experimentation is happening. Um, the question is if there's a payoff. And and in fairness, I mean, we don't we talk about this certainly in coordination. We're very focused on this project, but each school has a number of other things going on at any time. And so trying to center a project, you're not sure if it's gonna work. Now, granted, some schools are doing that at the at the same time they know what they're currently doing doesn't have, as as Joanne pointed out, doesn't have sustainability. Um, but there's a lot of of interesting experimentation. I mean, Amy, you talked about communication. There's an internal piece, there's an external piece. Um, and sometimes I think what we find is we made it whether we're communicating the right thing or not, did we hit the right market? That's a difficult question, I think, to find somebody move. Pardon me. That's a difficult thing to find somebody move into that project, into the center to have that conversation with the board. Because right, I guess the the follow-up here, Amy, is at what point should the board be deeply involved in this? Um, you know, what the feedback loop of, hey, great, we've got a grant, we're going to go do this. Now, does it become as a fiduciary, is this what we're putting all the chips in on? Is is this where we're we're pushing our future?
SPEAKER_03:Yeah, that's a great question, Matt, because I I think as you pointed out, there could be any number of initiatives that a school is engaged in. I think the real question is back to that is it peripheral or or centered? And so there are many pathway schools that they're just expanding what they were already doing. Right. So they already they already were good listeners to their markets. They were already being responsive, they were already clear about how they do things and why they do them that way. And their full community was already, you know, understanding that this is the direction we're moving. And so pathways gave them some additional capital and some additional opportunities to maybe expand their collaborators or think about their reach in different ways, but it wasn't necessarily a new thing. And that doesn't mean a new thing is bad, but if you're taking on a new thing, you probably have to let go of something else, right? And we talked a little bit about this. So I I think when when schools are thinking about how do I get the board involved, if it's a brand new thing and it's it's something extra, that might be a little more difficult than saying we're really excited about the opportunity to build on what we're already really good at in doing. And we're just finding new people who are eager for what we have to offer, right? And then you see that reflective in all of the metrics that you're tracking. But I think when schools have difficulty with identifying the right KPIs and identifying how to engage the board and you know, and what type of research you need, those questions might be indicative of something related to are we really expanding that which we're already good at, or are we trying to add something else? And I think those are real questions to ask. And I'm not suggesting one is bad and the other is good, but just if you know it going in, then it helps you answer this other question.
SPEAKER_00:Yeah, those are great points, Amy. I think the engagement on this and figuring out what is vital, which may be a new thing, it may be the old thing, it may be doing the old thing better or finding as as pathways has been to find non-traditional students and find ways to bring them into the training to get them into church ministry. Uh, Joanne, we've seen this experimentation in in a variety of ways. As Amy noted, there are some programs that have been there that are are being revitalized. There's some things that are brand new, there are some things that again, they're re-engaging denominations, et cetera. You had mentioned uh uh continuing education. What what types of uh efforts are you seeing emerging that you'd say these are these are kind of cutting-inch trends or these are trends that seem to be growing that that the field may want to take note of?
SPEAKER_01:Yeah, I do want to, I hope we come back to that mission alignment question as well at some point, because I think one of the um when I've talked with our pathway schools, we've done a lot of work with the project directors to try to help them think about how to align projects and how to do that at different levels. And some of them have come back to say, except for our project was actually designed to shift the mission. That was the whole point. Interesting. And so uh what does that mean about how you position work to make those big changes if a school needs to do that? Um, still, you know, as Amy was saying, you're still you have to build upon a core that existed at your school. You you you can't just start something brand new from scratch. It has to build upon something, but but how do how can these projects serve as catalysts for these changes? Um and I guess, yeah, go ahead.
SPEAKER_00:Let's let's talk about that then. Let's talk about that for a second, because there are projects that they said we're going to try to revitalize the mission through through this grant, right? No, no pressure, no pressure, right? Right, here we go. We're gonna revitalize this 150-year-old institution or whatever it is. Um, and here's the grant to do it. And and you know, Amy just talked about board engagement on this. This would be one where again you're dealing with adaptive change, you're dealing with all kinds of change and change management all at once. You've got faculty that was trained in one way for one style school, perhaps, or working there. You're dealing with a board that has been focused on a certain model. Um, you know, your dashboard, if you have a dashboard, is going to change all of this. So let's talk about that. I I think that's uh key is is what you're seeing because uh certain schools looked at this. I think the endowment looked at this as this is one of the possibilities of how schools may use this uh for mission vitality.
SPEAKER_01:Yeah, I'm trying to uh as you're talking about that, I'm thinking about um I think two things. One, how mission, the understanding of mission had to shift in some spaces. So it's not my mission, it's not the president's mission, it's not the the historic mission, but having to look at that intersection of where God is working at your school and where God is working in the world and and aligning those two. Um, instead of saying God has led me this way, and so God will provide, like that, and having to really shift that that thinking that God is working in a number of ways, and your job is to find that point of intersection. Um, I think of some of the schools, like like I'm thinking particularly of say a school like a Luther Seminary that started a a sort of a non-degree sort of aspect, continuing education, church education piece of their work outside of the main programming. As that, as they did that work, they had to realign how they worked with faculty and technology in order to develop the resources in ways that added to instead of or added to, but not overwhelmed faculty, right? That that was sustainable ways to to move in this direction. But as that work has grown, they're now moving what was an external component into the dean's office, and it's becoming an integrated part of their education program. So to they then think of curriculum as one large continuum, not a particular degree, right? Uh so both of those pieces are there. But um, so I I think about that that piece. Um I think about Pacific School of Religion that is uh trying to think about ways to uh to rethink um expertise and wisdom and who defines those things within an institution, but they're starting it in a platform outside the institution where they'll really wrestle with these questions while having parallel conversations with faculty about what that might mean for their work and their role. And and they're informing one another. And eventually I think we'll see some more significant changes, but that's how they're working on some of those pieces. Um I'm trying to, there are there are many others. I think of Acadia that has a lab that has a futuring project, learning, right? But then has a lab to figure out how that might the futuring information, you know, what they're learning from these trends might actually then become a part of teaching and curriculum and not just what you teach, but how you teach it and and and experimenting in those spaces so they can bring those experiments back into the school. Amy, I'm sure you have moth what other examples.
unknown:Yeah.
SPEAKER_03:So Joanne, as you were giving those examples, I I kept coming back to this commitment. So the three that you named, and certainly others, of the um the organization being committed to being the learning community together and that the majority or the whole community embracing it. So those are excellent examples of that. Um, and so many schools are really recognizing like this is a multi-year journey of in some cases shifting culture, shifting or challenging, you know, our kind of traditional or historical thinking about things like where is knowledge and expertise centered. So when you talk about PSR, I feel like they're they're really challenging that, right? And I think that, you know, as you mentioned, Acadia, they're really, they're really challenging like how what's our how are we thinking about a trajectory for the future? And let's recognize like it's not one path, right? There's all of these paths, and it's gonna be somewhere in this like you know, like cone of the future. And we're we're really trying to think about that intentionally so we know where we're going and how we how we respond to it. And so that to me, uh as we kind of connect this back to mission and and shifts in mission, is really saying, as an organization, you know, if if this is the core of who we are and who we serve, how are we going to be better positioned to do that? And how is that shifting our kind of our our whether it's our programs or degrees, our lifelong learning opportunities, our accompaniment, our responses? Like, how can we be more nimble and responsive in ways that historically our schools haven't? And I think that's where when we talk about this sort of mission expansion, it's around that and the ability for schools to be learning communities. And I think this ties back to that. Is it centered? Is it is it the whole community? Is it on the edges or is it we're all we all understand this? And I think those are good examples of of schools where it's really centered and we're all working towards that.
SPEAKER_00:Well, note that in the examples you've used, the president has been centrally involved in in each of those. Um, and so the the sense of mission becomes this project or this idea as they move forward, uh, which isn't every case. I mean, some are some schools are still experimenting. There's a project director leading it, Dean may be involved or somebody, but but in terms of these ones where we're seeing some significant progress, uh, it's very clear that it's at the heart of the institution because the president is is either driving it or helping drive it. One of the tensions we have seen, I think, in pathways is where there's a grant, it's a project, that's great, but the project director either there's been turnover or there hasn't been buy-in. You know, there might have been buy-in when you put in the grant. I always say I always used to feel this way when when I was at a school was like, man, you get the all of a sudden the grant comes and it's like the dog has chased the car and caught the car. Now what do you do with it? Right. Um, because again, what the president signs off on and says, Yeah, we'll try for this grant, now it becomes a reality. Um, so I want to talk a little bit about the tensions because we've had we've had some great examples of where this seems to be working because the president's involved or the board's behind it. But we're also seeing tensions where there isn't that. We're seeing tensions with pivoting. Um, you know, it didn't work out the way they thought. The the experiment didn't work. Um, so let's talk a little bit about this because I think in in our discussion so far, even those schools have had tension points where they've had to pivot, they've had to recenter, they've had to refocus uh as they experiment. So, Joanne, let me start with you. You know, what common tensions are you seeing in this grant that have risen up? Because I think that's a good lesson for the field is uh everybody's trying to figure out what's next. We don't often talk about the obstacles that come in trying to get there.
SPEAKER_01:Yeah, I was thinking uh not just uh tensions, but this uh we've talked about our schools are in transition in the midst of organ other organizational organizations in ecology that are in transition. And so um so it could be that the the bishop that you're trying to work with or the leader of this denomination could have been the childhood friend of the president, and all of a sudden that's gone, or uh or that you know there had been some commitment between two individuals that can't when one of them shifts, changes, that can't carry forward. And so I think that um that I think there's internal tension for leaders who maybe are being called upon to have and bring a new vision, but what they really but they know what they need to do is develop the vision that exists within the community and and expand that. And that takes a different kind of work and can take more time to unfold. But there's that the the need to shift the ownership of the mission in some cultures from individuals to this communal sense of mission, which really changes how you how you lead and how people participate in that space, including uh boards and faculty and administrators. Um, so I I think I often see the tension I note is between mission and transitions and how you keep mission moving forward, who owns the mission, uh, who carries the vision. Um, so that would be one of the major ones. I I think um when we've talked about uh tensions, it's often between things like mission and money, leading with mission, but money doesn't follow. If you're looking to improve quality, access, and affordability, um, all of those things require more investment. And so then how do you pay for that? Um, that's been a real challenge. Maybe a lot of mission, but not a lot of money, a lot of students, but still not a lot of income given the structures that we have. And I'd say the one of the other tensions then is sort of high. Higher education structures and pastoral preparation structures, or you know, for in our particular grant with this emphasis on our expanding, uh expanding our capacity to prepare pastoral leaders. Um sometimes those those two structures have both alignment but also tension and perhaps a growing tension as we're uh reaching, reaching into communities and spaces and reaching out to pastoral leaders who where the alignment between a master's degree and pastoral preparation is not an assumed and is not structurally supported. So you see that tension.
SPEAKER_00:Amy, I see you nodding furiously and in agreement. Um things you want to add to that or other tensions you want to talk about, particularly inside organizations, boards, and the alignment there.
SPEAKER_03:Yeah, thanks, Matt. Thanks, Joanne. I was I was nodding and agreeing. And I think um as I was listening to Joanne, she was kind of talking about some of those external tensions and stressors that are real and sort of the ocean that we're all swimming in, and and certainly regulatory climate and collaborative relationships and all of these external things that are interesting to what's happening. Um, and then it was also reminding me of, and at the same time, there are those sort of like internal tensions that schools are grappling with, and um, a few that I might just touch on. And we talked a lot about this at the pathways gathering, but I think that's applicable to all schools, is that tension internally about what it is that we're tracking or counting, or you know, what are our metrics and um, you know, so we, as Joanne talked a little bit about enrollment, and sometimes, you know, and all of our schools are focusing on headcount and um or FTE, but um, but not always are we tying that into the metrics that probably are most important about placement rate and retention, um, not just of our own students, but of our graduates and where they're serving. And are we tracking that and are we tracking that as a means to think about our future support of pastoral leaders? And so, you know, I kind of put that in the category of what are we counting versus what counts. Um, and and that's a tension point because it is important to track enrollment, right? That's a metric that we've used forever. Is it is it going up, is it going down? You know, what's impacting it? But I don't know that that's the real number, or are we having conversations about whether that's the real number, right? Or what um another one that we've talked a lot about is supply and demand, right? And so are people still demanding those things that we like to supply? Right? We have traditionally supplied things that institutionally we're either really good at or our people really love, and there may no longer be a market for that. So are we listening? Are we sure that there's a market for what we're offering? Are we going about market research in the right way? Meaning, are we listening before we create? You know, we don't want to have that we'll build it and they will come mentality. Um, and so sometimes our package is our default, sorry, is to repackage that which we're already good at or sell more, um, you know, add a little extra. Um, and so really being thinking about that tension of supply and demand intentionally, and you know, what is it, what is it helping us to decide as far as what we need to add, what we need to kind of selectively let go of. And maybe the last thing I'll say is that tension around sustainability, that tension around what are we preserving, what are we sustaining? Are we sustaining our mission? Are we sustaining our institution, our place, you know, our programs, and just having a real understanding as an organization about what are we seeking to sustain, and how is that aligned to what Joanne said about mission and money, our finite number of resources that we're sorting. How are we best using them to respond to the needs of those that we serve, whether that's our current students, our future students, or the pastoral leaders that have educated and want to support?
SPEAKER_00:Yeah, I want to say, other than the PTSD twitch I kind of got from my time in school, because Amy, you're absolutely right. Everything you said, and I'm thinking of conversations of how you're gonna pave that because the alumni want one thing, right? And the the MDiv I took 20 years ago, 50 years ago, whatever was good enough for me. And you're like, you know, and that there's all kinds of things that people have to navigate in this. The tensions are very real, but I think you you you put all those together very well of things that schools need to think about because we're at a very um we're at a tipping point, we're at a critical point in the field, which is why Pathways for me has been such an exciting initiative, because it's giving people the opportunities to ask these questions. So uh for those of you listening, rewind that, listen to what Amy said. There's some very key points of discussions that need to happen, and those are difficult discussions, uh, tension points because of all of the voices and the stakeholders that come into play. Uh, but these are critical, I think, for future vitality.
SPEAKER_03:Matt, can I add one more?
SPEAKER_00:Oh, absolutely.
SPEAKER_03:And because we've talked about this too, and and this gets at sort of like mission shift, is um when we're no longer doing that which we were um organized to do. And so we hear from a lot of schools that we're not actually preparing pastors for congregational ministry. You know, we're um educating uh a global um student base. We're educating people who are going to serve and use theological education in new and creative ways, and that as outside the congregational church. And I think that can create some tensions internally, whether that's related to potential funding opportunities or just being really clear about what we no longer do in the ways that we do it. And and those lead to, I think, really important institutional conversations with boards, with administration faculty.
SPEAKER_00:Yeah, thanks, Amy. I I want to, it's surprising how quickly the time has moved. So I want to wrap up here with some thoughts. Because again, as as we're thinking through all that in the Pathways Project is putting you know people into churches in ways, and and there are, I mean, there are some very big picture issues, particularly as schools are educating the international church as well. Um, and and many churches or many schools have looked at that as a lifeline, as a pathway to vitality. These are big, big conversations. Uh, we're gonna have to schedule more time, I think. Um, but let me finish with this. The the last question is we've we've talked internally a lot about the future. You know, understanding it is still being it is still being written, it is still being written by these schools. Um, Joanne, let me let me start with you um as we talk about the future, because you've been both a leader in the church and theological education. How do you see the schools moving through this initiative to better prepare church leaders for future ministry? So fast forward, think a little bit about the future for me and and where do you see this going?
SPEAKER_01:Yeah, I uh I hope we'll uh I hope we'll create structures where we can actually hear the future speak back to what we've been doing. Meaning, Amy, you know, mentioned are we counting what's important, are we listening? We know that our schools don't always listen to their alums very like there's we don't have a ton of data as an industry about our alums and and what's happening, how it's impacting pastoral ministry five, 10 years down the road. So that's a big question. But I think some of the things that I'm seeing, um I I think the we often use the word uh contextualizing theological education, integrating. Um, I think that the the ability to integrate theology and what's taught in seminaries to the actual work of the church has just gotten it it's more difficult. For some students, it's always been difficult because their contexts have been so different than the context that's being assumed within the teaching model that they're a part of. Um, but I think also just uh people are not sort of swimming in theology in the church the way they used to, um, or within our theological schools, but uh in even in society. And so having to make the leap for what does a pastor actually do and what am I learning and how do I connect those? And I think these projects are trying to get to that, whether it's through competency-based theological education or field education or CPE or um or just contextualizing your teaching by learning more about the various contexts where students will be serving, um, whether it's various cultural contexts, uh racial, ethnic, or demographic or urban versus rural, all of that. Um, so I see that. Um I see schools are sort of continuing uh continuing with the professional model. So we're seeing expanding sort of those hard competency teachings, whether it's leadership, finance, um, preaching, pastoral care. But so all those competencies, but also in parallel trying to deepen the formation model. So um, but of course, that gets to the attention of can a school be all things to all people, or what is the role of the theological school in preparation? And and it may be that a school um picks one area, it may be that it curates a particular area. I'm thinking about uh some language Debbie Jin and I used in a recent article about directions schools will go, whether they're comprehensive all across, doing everything or curated, or or are they do they recognize their space within a broad ecology that they connect students into? Um, and then I do think the lifelong learning piece, I think schools are really leaning into that. Um, and lifelong learning, not necessarily meaning post-seminary, postgraduate degree, but lifelong learning meaning um just ongoing preparation of pastoral leaders, some post-seminary, but some it may be their first entry into theological education, but recognizing the need to continue to um to not just teach, but support and and form pastors as they move through the various stages of pastoral work and encounter different challenges and opportunities along the way. So I think I'll stop there.
SPEAKER_00:That's a great list. Amy, as final words, what do you what do you see?
SPEAKER_03:I mean, that was a great list, Joanne. And uh I was thinking, yeah, as you were saying, like this explosion in contextual learning and lifelong learning, and that's so, you know, uh energizing, I think, to to see that schools are being responsive. I think just a couple other things that I would say I feel excited about. Um Joanne already also pointed to sort of that that sort of skyrocketing growth, um, both within pathways and outside of pathways in non-degree programming at large. Um, also the engagement and use of technology in new and creative ways, and just the explosion of that across the field. So, whether we're talking about AI or platforms or ways to engage people using different modalities and um, and and that's exciting, and also the um expansion of all types of collaborations and thinking across a broad spectrum of not only the types of collaborations, but who those collaborators might be. And so, not just the traditional denomination or universities or but thinking about churches, parachurches, community organizations, and how can we leverage resources to do things better together. I think pathways has been a springboard for that, but we're seeing other schools do it. There's a lot of excitement and energy there and opportunity, and I'm really hopeful in this current round of pathways, the next round of pathways, but also for schools that may not be participating in pathways, but learning from those initiatives and how that that learning can be transformative in other schools.
SPEAKER_00:Great words. And Joanne, you've got something else.
SPEAKER_01:Yeah, just one more thing. I think one of the other exciting things about this is being able to do it together. Um, I mean, both in trust and ATS, but um to to see we saw at this last gathering people really being willing to share resources, but also obstacles they were facing, um, ways they needed to pivot, um, superpowers. So we talked about the strengths of each school, but um but we I've seen a real shift from competition to collaboration happening throughout the industry. And uh that's exciting to me that we're sort of thinking together about how to best accomplish this large vision that we have for graduate theological education and then the theological schools in which these programs are embedded. Um, so uh exciting and and hopeful, I think, for the future.
SPEAKER_00:That's a great way to uh to put a cap on this conversation. I know that we will have more. I'll put some links in the uh chatter of the podcast episode so you can see where the the Joanne mentioned uh an article about the future of theological education. She and uh Debbie Jinn did, uh, which is worth a read, as well. We'll put some links to the pathways projects you'll be able to see. And of course, we'll have I know follow-up conversation in in this space. Thanks again to today to my guests, the Reverend Dr. Joanne DC and Mrs. Amy Kardash. Thank you both for all your insights and the work you're doing.
SPEAKER_02:Thank you.
SPEAKER_00:Thank you for listening to the Intrust Center's Good Governance Podcast. For more information about this podcast, other episodes, and additional resources, visit intrust.org.