At a recent training session for new supervisors, someone
asked a very provocative question about reflecting on case studies with our
students. She asked, “I’ve read the case
study, the student is meeting me in a few minutes to talk about the case study,
how do I open up conversation?”
Writing a thoughtful case requires a certain amount of
transparency and vulnerability on the part of the writer. Honesty about one’s emotional landscape,
one’s (dis)comfort with various aspects of the pastoral role, as well as one’s
most cherished beliefs and values is key to gaining insight.
Therefore, an important dimension in reflecting on a case
together is to comment (at some point in the conversation) about the degree to
which the student was successful in doing this.
If the case study reflected a high degree of self-awareness and
transparency, affirm this. If the case
study felt thin, or guarded, or trivial, it is important to find ways to say
that, as well. It is sometimes necessary
to remind the student that this kind of learning does not always feel safe, and
maybe even ask them if there are things we need to put in place during this
Field Ed experience that can increase their sense of safety. (The importance of this spans far beyond the
Field Ed experience. Religious
leadership of any sort requires the capacity to be honest about one’s inner
life.)
One of the primary agendas of these supervisory sessions
around case studies is to begin to tease out the theological questions that the
student is encountering and to help them begin to clarify their own values and
beliefs around the question. Some
supervisors open up these kinds of conversations by having the pair (student
and supervisor) brainstorm together about all of the theological issues that
are present in this case. This
list-making, in itself, can be a teaching moment as students come to see how
the ordinary dilemmas that are the stuff of ministry can be richly layered and
nuanced with theological questions and intersections. Once a good list is established, the
supervisor might ask the student to name one or two of the items on the list
that are most pressing for them. Then
jump in. “How has your mind changed?” “Where are you stuck?” “What claims can you make?” “What do you have difficulty claiming?”
Another supervisor suggested that in order to make these
conversations more mutual, they have started a practice of each person (student
and supervisor) choosing one theological issue raised by the case to explore in
deeper discussion. This way the student
can see that the work of reflecting theologically is a lifelong process, one
that continues long after Divinity School.
In this model we become theologians together, trying to make faith sense
of the dilemma the student has presented.
I also think it’s helpful to let the conversation extend
beyond the supervisory hour. As we come
across things (articles, blogs, poetry, books) that address the questions we
talked about when we were together, we would do well to share them
generously. Invite students to do the
same. Put lots of stuff in the pot and
let it simmer. Return to it every now
and then to see how it’s shaping up.
The more we can enter into the theological streams in
which our students live and move, the more this process itself will remind us
that theology is never really a finished product, but more an organic and
vibrant process, requiring the best of our intellect and imagination.
What wisdom would you add?
--Viki Matson
No comments:
Post a Comment