Students and Faculty Indivisible: Crafting a Higher Education Culture of Flourishing

This dissertation is comprised of three separate articles addressing related issues central to the culture and future of higher education. The questions that animate the investigations are: In what ways is writing self-efficacy forged in the learning relationships between student and instructor? In what ways, if any, do traditional assessment practices impact student development? In what ways, if any, does institutional culture shape faculty identity, and what is gained or lost in the process? These queries stem from concerns about possible disconnects between visions of higher education\u27s potential and actual practices in the classroom. The dissertation uses grounded theory to explore the deep nature of student learning needs as articulated by the students themselves, seeks alignment between pedagogical and assessment protocols that foster writing expertise, and uses social reproduction theory and intersectionality to reveal the foundations of faculty identity development that can work across student development needs. Specific recommendations for meaningful reform are identified with an eye on cultivating a culture of collegiality and mutual trust where learning relationships can flourish

Energetic kenosis as an approach to the problem of divine impassibility

Classical theism has long affirmed impassibility to be both a philosophically sound and scripturally warranted attribute of God. An affirmation of this attribute of divine apatheia is found in the works of theologians and philosophers of classical Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. However, over the last century, there has been a significant shift away from this tradition of divine impassibility. Divine impassibility has been challenged from many quarters, especially from Protestant Christianity, as a doctrine foreign to the scriptures of Abrahamic monotheism and philosophically incompatible with a scriptural conception of God as personal, reactive, and relational. Many of the critics of divine impassibility suggest that there is a dilemma for these monotheists: that God may be impassible and yet unable to engage in personal, pathic, or relational ways with creation as the scriptures of the Judaism, Christianity, and Islam suggest, or that God may indeed express some pathos and reactivity but may no longer be understood to be impassible. In this work, I argue that this dilemma is a false one and that a third way, or via media, is possible. In support of the proposal I offer, I provide a critical analysis of impassibilist and passibilist arguments on historical, philosophical, and theological grounds. I demonstrate that strong affirmations of either position (impassibilism and passibilism) are indeed untenable, and in their places I propose a model of divine interaction based on an energetic kenoticism. In the via media offered below, I argue that we may yet retain a robust notion of divine impassibility in the essence or ousia of God, while allowing for a fuller account of divine pathos, reactivity, and interaction with creation via the kenotic and self-limiting divine energies. In this way, we may retain many of the classical commitments regarding the nature of God and yet provide more room to speak to these scriptural accounts of God’s interaction in the cosmos