In the summer of 1998, the ATS Commission on Accrediting conducted eight extension site visits in South Korea at locations where ATS member schools have become partners with Korean institutions in offering a degree program. After the site visits were completed, the accreditation evaluation committee was able to identify what it considered program characteristics that either strengthened or weakened international programs. The Commission requested that a summary of those characteristics be made available to all member schools.

Seven General Observations about North American Extension Site Education

in South Korea:

As the visiting committee reviewed its observations and evaluations of the eight sites visited, seven core themes emerged bearing on all these programs: (1) diverse patterns of institutional relations; (2) the appeal of the Doctor of Ministry degree; (3) faculty and supervisory advisement; (4) theological libraries, particularly the issue of translations; (5) systematic planning educational, institutional, and fiscal; (6) financial analysis and reporting; and (7) systematic evaluation.

1. Diverse patterns of institutional relations: The visiting committee discovered that several kinds of relationships exist between North American theological schools and their Korean host institutions, and that the quality of a program depends less on the kind of relationship than on the care with which the working relationship has been developed. Seminaries, universities, and local churches have entered into partnership with North American theological schools. Each pattern seems to work. No one pattern at this stage of development should be declared normative or inherently superior. The committee did discern differences in the degree to which matters of cultural context, ecclesial realities, and pastoral needs had been taken into account as partnerships developed. But these differences reflected not so much a specific institutional relational pattern, but rather the care with which the two institutional partners had gathered information, negotiated relationships, and entered into formal institutional relations. Culturally and ecclesially sensitive partnerships can be developed, we are persuaded from our visit. But truly mutual partnerships are not easy and they require constant tending.
2. The Appeal of the Doctor of Ministry Degree: The visiting committee learned, before its visit, that a North American Doctor of Ministry degree is highly valued by Korean pastors and churches. Many of the program sites visited were devoted to DMin studies. The attractions of the DMin are these:
• an earned American doctoral degree enhances the prestige of the pastor earning it and the church he or she serves;
• an American DMin degree program provides for a period of study in North America, a highly valued cross-cultural experience; (the current Asian economic crisis has caused some schools to relocate their summer programs usually held on the home campus to sites in Korea, however, thus limiting the program's cross-cultural attractions;)
• the Doctor of Ministry degree is designed to be an advanced contextually-based and practical program of studies for the pastor; and
• the South Korean Ministry of Education has been slow to authorize the granting of DMin degrees by Korean seminaries and universities; thus American theological institutions can offer a valuable degree that is not readily available at a home institution; (the visiting team heard several expressions of hope that the more liberal political leadership now in office will permit the DMin to be granted by Korean institutions; this situation will bear close watching).

3. Faculty and Supervisory Advisement: The visiting committee also learned that North American programs in South Korea displayed several patterns of student advisement. Some schools have two primary advisers, one a faculty adviser in North America and the other a pastoral adviser in South Korea. Other schools employed pastors or professors in Korea, or advisers in North America who counseled students about their programs, both on the North American campus and in regular visits to Korea. In some cases visiting professors from North American schools also advised students individually when they teach in Korea. The visiting committee became concerned about difficulties that can arise in student advising when there is insufficient consultation among these advisers and the students. It is especially important that academic advisers and pastoral advisers work closely together around issues of the integration of theory and practice. All these schools, in the judgment of the visiting committee, need to review their advising procedures to ensure faculty, staff, and pastoral counsel that will be focused around the integration of academic and practical studies, and focused on the needs of their students.

4. Library Resources and Issues of Translation: Students in Korean extension site programs have access to library resources in both the North American institutions offering the degree and in the libraries of partner institutions in Korea. It seems likely that the North American campus libraries are used primarily when the Korean students are studying at those campuses. That places particular emphasis on library materials available in South Korea, where there seemed to be considerable variety in the quality of Korean partner institutional libraries, or other libraries with which agreements have been made. There is also a concern about theological texts and teaching materials in other languages, especially English, that have been translated into Korean. While advanced electronic technologies have apparently greatly improved the mechanics of translation, the visiting committee is concerned that there may be instances of violations of the international copyright law, and instances of producing quick but literal translations that miss the subtleties and nuances of properly translated writings. It is the responsibility of each North American theological school offering programs in South Korea to see that its translation policies and procedures are in strict compliance with international copyright law, and the canons of proper translation.
5. Systematic Planning Educational, Institutional, and Fiscal: The visiting committee discovered that in several instances, the programs offered by North American theological schools in Korea had been developed only recently, in response to expressed needs for advanced studies, and often with little attention to systematic planning. Even more established programs seemed to lack the kind of systematic planning expected of all member schools. It is clearly expected that these North American theological institutions should see that their Korean programs are set within the larger framework of systematic planning conducted by the entire institution. Otherwise these programs in Korea will be at the mercy of the dynamics of the moment. International and cross-cultural programs must not be left at the mercy of such careless planning.
6. Financial Analysis and Reporting: At many of the sites visited in South Korea, financial reports on program costs and income were either not available or were so modest and general as to be of little use in analyzing where the Korean program fit in the wider institutional finances of the North American theological school. Even allowing for the short notice of the visit and hastily-gathered information, it was dismaying to the visiting committee that schools were unable to provide clear and detailed summaries of the actual costs and income of the programs conducted in Korea. Future accrediting visits to international sites should insist upon such information in advance of the visit.
7. Systematic Evaluation: The visiting committee noted that while some programs at extension sites in South Korea practiced careful and systematic evaluation of students, faculty, institutional resources, goals and purposes, etc., as required by the ATS standards, in other programs there were more modest, fragmentary, pro forma, or altogether missing evaluation procedures. Occasional and informal exchanges by mail or telephone do not comprise a systematic planning approach. As these programs develop and mature, it will be incumbent on the schools to practice comprehensive and systematic evaluation, and for the Commission to require that this is done.

Summaries of Program Strengths and Weaknesses Observed in the South Korean Visit:

The visiting committee, in addition to discussing the seven core themes identified in the previous section of this introduction, also noted a number of program strengths and weaknesses listed below. These do not necessarily characterize all of the sites visited, or any one of them individually, but taken with the specific observations at the end of each individual site report, make up a compendium of the committee's judgments on what comprises a good international extension site, and what characteristics threaten the quality of a potentially good program.

General Program Strengths:

The visiting committee identified these characteristics of a good international extension program in theological education:

1. A process of negotiating and reviewing interinstitutional agreements in a spirit of genuine mutuality, clarity, and commitment to the benefits that accrue to both institutions from shared international education programs.
2. Administrative structures, committees, and personnel that are strongly committed to offering programs of high quality.
3. The investment of sufficient financial resources to sustain a quality program of teaching and learning, student services, and procedures of evaluation.
4. Regular visits between partner institutions by senior administrators, trustees, faculty, and staff as well as by students in these programs.
5. The regular involvement of core discipline faculty from the home campus in the teaching and learning at the extension site, and in student advising.
6. Continuing programs of cultural and social orientation to the distinctive characteristics of Korean cultural and church life, to enable home campus personnel to engage in extension site education with understanding and appreciation.
7. Attention to teaching and evaluation methodologies, especially team teaching, case study methods, and the advance translation of teaching materials.
8. Curricular designs that address the needs of Korean pastors and churches sensitive to Korean cultural and church life.
9. The engagement of distinguished and respected Korean professors from partner institutions and beyond in the teaching and advising at the North American extension site in Korea.
10. Adequate library resources with attention to the availability of books and other teaching materials that have been translated into Korean.
11. Educational, residential, worship, and dining facilities that foster student community and spiritual life, especially for the brief time periods spent in intensive courses.
12. Systematic planning and evaluation procedures shared by the home campus and the extension site.

General Program Weaknesses:

The visiting committee views the following matters as threats to the quality of theological programs offered at extension sites in South Korea:

1. Lack of clarity and specificity in inter-institutional agreements.
2. Informal and unclear administrative relationships and decision-making.
3. The lack of sufficient financial resources committed to the Korean site programs.
4. Authority lodged in a few administrators, who insufficiently engage other program participants in the processes of needs assessment, curricular planning, and systematic evaluation required in a good program.
5. Importing courses into Korea that were designed for a North American cultural and church context.
6. Insufficient attention to library resources and teaching materials available in the Korean language.
7. Failure of consultation with the ATS Commission on Accrediting in developing international extension programs, and offering degree programs that do not comply with ATS standards.
8. Insufficient attention to systematic planning and evaluation in all aspects of the extension site program, most notably the failure to report income from the program and its costs.
9. Insufficient attention to student advising and mentoring.