Caucuses

A Testimonial from Dipa Hart, Chair Emeritus

I attended conferences for both ATFE and my caucus for evangelical seminaries (EATFE) for over 15 years. Though participation and membership with one is not a requirement for the other, both conferences remained a priority for me and my staff.  Often, others asked, “Why should I do both? Is the expense worth it?”

For starters, no one grows up wanting to be a field educator; it just happens. New field educators join their institution at various, sometimes tumultuous, times. However, ATFE conferences meet only in the odd dated years. EATFE meets in the even dated years. (Some of the other caucuses share this schedule while others meet in conjunction with the Biennial Consultation.) This allows new field educators to access resources, understand their responsibilities, and learn what other programs do, etc., in whichever conference comes first after their hire.

As an evangelical, I found ATFE's workshops on the “normal” topics - from mentoring to developing cross-cultural experiences - helpful and challenging as we redesigned our program’s direction for the students. I found the broader conversations engaged during ATFE easy to utilize and theologically nuanced for my constituency base. On the other hand, my caucus, EATFE, focuses on a single issue at conferences, for example, standards of accreditation and theological reflection have been primary topics. It turns out, no matter the theological grid, we all experience the same set of issues and concerns with our students and respective institutions. Both the caucus and larger organization offer an astonishing wealth of knowledge. Who needs to start from scratch when someone else is already addressing my questions?

I also engaged with ATFE to compare ideas and programs with more schools and members. The Biennial Consultation has over 100 attendees, and EATFE, even as the largest caucus, has only 30 attendees. When I first started in field education, both groups were vital to me for the diversity of program structures alone. Later, as the theological diversity increased among the own student body, attending the gatherings were vital to our development as a department. We want to equip our students to best serve the areas of their youth, where many intend to return after graduation. Connection with other institutions helped me think more broadly in terms of the students as a former field educator.

The camaraderie and shared fellowship at both conferences is tremendously helpful to reduce the isolation of being the solo field educator at any school. And even with a team, hearing from those outside my tradition sustained my passion for field education and constantly challenged me to not grow stagnant.

I want to continue to stress how ATFE works to create conferences that are topically relevant, regardless of denomination or theological commitment, and accessible to both seasoned veterans and new instructors of field education. I appreciate this commitment to variety and how the association works to always be responsive to its members.

Finally, I need to share how these gatherings helped me meet some of the best colleagues I have found in academia. They are supportive and sincere, which, unfortunately, feels like a rarity in the academy. Seeing these colleagues at ATFE and EATFE makes each conference vital to maintaining my focus on my calling as a field educator. As a field education veteran, I sincerely believe I would not have made it in my career without the prayers (and chocolate) of such devoted colleagues.

Whether you attend ATFE or your caucus meeting, I encourage you to stay connected. We are your people and look forward to seeing you soon.