LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — February 18-20, 2011, Page 10

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

With respect to approval of an individual course syllabus, however, the Bylaws do not require the entire
faculty’s involvement. A syllabus provides an outline and timeline for a particular course. It may give a
brief overview of the course objectives, expectations, reading assignments, and exam dates. Curriculum,
on the other hand, describes a general focus of study, consisting of multiple individual courses all
designed to reach particular competency or qualification. The Bylaws prescribed that in Synod schools,
the faculty is responsible to develop and construct this focus of study consistent with the goals and
objectives established by the Synod. Nothing in the Bylaws of the Synod requires that entire faculties
review and approve each individual course syllabus.
Question 2: More generally, in matters of curriculum, how much flexibility does the Synod’s Handbook
provide the faculty in constructing review and approval processes in matters pertaining to
curriculum? In short, do all curriculum matters require the review and approval of the plenary
faculty or can the plenary faculty delegate review and approval oversight to duly constituted
faculty sub-groups, e.g. the faculty of a particular school?
Opinion: As described above, the faculty of each Synod school is responsible to assure that its curriculum
is designed to “obtain the objectives of preparation for professional church workers and other Christian
leaders as approved by the Synod” (Bylaw 3.10.5.6.10 [d]). While the plenary faculty may delegate
review, approval, and oversight of portions of the overall curriculum of an institution to a duly constituted
faculty subgroup, such as faculty of a particular school, the plenary faculty must retain such review and
control as is necessary to be able to fulfill its responsibility to see to it that the institution as a whole
develops and constructs a curriculum consistent with the bylaw.
(Adopted February 20, 2011)
32. Pending Business
The commission continued to retain the following items of business for inclusion on future agendas of its
meetings:
•
•
•
•
•

Concordia Historical Institute Policy Manual (08-2523) – Secretary Hartwig will remind the
Board of Governors of Concordia Historical Institute of this pending matter.
Oklahoma District Bylaws (08-2536) – Secretary Hartwig will remind the district president of
the Oklahoma District of this pending matter.
Article VI and Heterodox Congregations (09-2544) – The commission continues to await
further response from the Commission on Theology and Church Relations.
North Dakota District Bylaws (09-2549) – Secretary Hartwig will remind the district
president of the North Dakota District of this pending matter.
Concordia University Ann Arbor Bylaws (09-2552) – Secretary Hartwig will provide a copy
of new Bylaw 1.5.7 governing removal of board members to Concordia Ann Arbor’s Board
of Regents.

33. Other Business
The commission addressed the following matters of concern or interest:
•

Commission on Handbook: Secretary Hartwig reported that the final steps of the appointment
process are underway, this matter to go to the Council of Presidents during its meeting the
week following.
156