In the previous post on InDepth, I described a pattern of shared participation in our Board meetings that often surprises those who encounter it for the first time. Perhaps less visible but more significant is what makes that kind of participation possible. At Winebrenner, practices like collaborative governance are not simply structural decisions. They are the fruit of an ongoing commitment to trust, integration, and shared responsibility across the organization.
That same commitment is leading us to revisit another deeply embedded structure within theological education: the credit hour.
When I was a full-time faculty at an out of state university, my contract was based upon how many credits I taught each term. Concerns like the number of students, course content, and learning outcomes were secondary to how many credits I would teach. In that context – and many academic settings – the credit hour serves as an “organizing principle” for the entire organization.
As I write this, Winebrenner faculty and staff are gathered for what we call “workload meetings.” These conversations occur three times a year and focus on how each person is investing their time in terms of administrative responsibilities, teaching, mentoring students, participating in academic conferences, and engaging in research. More than scheduling exercises, these meetings are moments of shared discernment about how our mission is embodied in daily work.
Winebrenner’s academic rhythm is built around three 12-week trimesters, with most courses meeting once a week for two- or three-hour sessions, typically hosted live through Microsoft Teams. On the surface, this structure feels familiar. But beneath it, something more fundamental is being reconsidered.
In many ways, the credit hour functions as the basic currency of higher education. It standardizes expectations and enables transferability. Yet it is not a direct measure of learning. A fancy way to say this is that it is a proxy – a socially constructed agreement linking time, effort, and educational progress.
The Lumina Foundation highlights this tension in “Cracking the Credit Hour,” noting both the utility and the limitations of time-based metrics. Systems built on proxies require reinforcement. Time must be tracked. Participation must be verified. Learning is often assumed.
But what happens when an organization operates from a foundation of trust? In other words, what happens when trust is the organizing principle instead of the credit hour?
Trust does not remove the need for structure, but it reframes its purpose. Structure becomes less about control and more about supporting discernment, responsiveness, and shared accountability. In that environment, the credit hour begins to loosen its grip as the primary unit of value.
This is not a move away from rigor. It is a move toward a more integrated understanding of formation; one that accounts not only for time spent, but for depth of engagement, context of ministry, and evidence of transformation. This foundation of trust is what allows a student in a ministry context with strong mentorship to complete a course “in context” as opposed to completing a traditional course. The same elements are present including relevant readings, instruction through mentorship, and some appropriate expression of learning that permits assessment. However, the packaging is different from what most assume fits within an academic setting.
Revisiting the credit hour, then, is not merely a technical adjustment. It reflects a deeper shift in how we understand learning, authority, and community. It is also a natural extension of our approach to governance. When no single group “owns” curriculum, the question is no longer how to protect a system, but how to steward a shared educational mission. And that kind of stewardship requires ongoing formation.
In the weeks ahead, I’ll continue exploring how these shifts connect to our participation in the Novare project and what it might look like to cultivate fresh expressions of theological education that are both deeply rooted and genuinely responsive.
- Brent C. Sleasman, President