Yesterday I finished up a look at the numbers of students that attend seminaries associated with the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and noted that in the wider universe of seminaries there is one that actually has more Presbyterian students than any of the PC(USA) seminaries.

This is an interesting situation that has sometimes led to questions about a student’s preparation for ministry, perspectives on theology, and in some cases their loyalty to the denomination.  I could tell you stories but that is for another time.  The topic for today is how this statistical profile from the seminaries gets reflected in the congregations.

I now return to the Presbyterian Panel and their 2009-2011 Panel Profile. Actually, I am going to look at the last five panel profiles.

One of the questions the Teaching Elders on the Panel (Research Services calls them clergy) are asked is:

From what school and in what year did you receive your M.Div. or B.D. degree?

Before breaking this down by school consider the groupings of PC(USA) seminaries versus non-PC(USA).

	Panel Profile 1997-1999		Panel Profile 2000-2002		Panel Profile 2003-2005		Panel Profile 2006-2008		Panel Profile 2009-2011
	Pastors	Spec.	Pastors	Spec.	Pastors	Spec.	Pastors	Spec.	Pastors	Spec.
PC(USA) seminary	69%	66%	70%	68%	68%	65%	69%	70%	66%	65%
non-PC(USA) seminary	31%	34%	30%	32%	32%	35%	31%	30%	34%	35%

Let me also remind you that the margin of error is +4% and “Spec.” is short for “Specialized Clergy” which are active Teaching Elders serving in a ministry other than in a congregation.

Looking at this table we can say (1) that the percentages of specialized clergy and the percentages of pastors from PC(USA) schools are statistically the same for each panel, and (2) that over the five panels there is no statistically significant variation with time although there might be a suggestion in the most recent panel that more pastors are coming from non-PC(USA) schools.

Now, let’s break it down by the individually seminaries:

	Panel Profile 1997-1999		Panel Profile 2000-2002		Panel Profile 2003-2005		Panel Profile 2006-2008		Panel Profile 2009-2011
	Pastors	Spec.	Pastors	Spec.	Pastors	Spec.	Pastors	Spec.	Pastors	Spec.
Austin	4%	3%	5%	4%	4%	4%	5%	4%	6%	3%
Columbia	8%	8%	10%	8%	9%	5%	8%	8%	10%	7%
Dubuque	4%	3%	3%	2%	4%	3%	3%	3%	2%	2%
JCS/ITC	1%	1%	1%	0%	NR	NR	*	1%	1%	1%
Louisville	8%	6%	7%	6%	8%	8%	8%	7%	7%	7%
McCormick	5%	8%	5%	7%	6%	7%	5%	6%	4%	5%
Pittsburgh	7%	7%	6%	10%	6%	6%	8%	5%	5%	5%
Princeton	18%	17%	19%	17%	16%	18%	19%	20%	20%	20%
San Fran.	6%	6%	5%	6%	6%	9%	5%	10%	4%	9%
Union (VA)	8%	7%	9%	8%	9%	5%	8%	6%	7%	5%
Evangelical	NR	NR	NR	NR	NR	NR	*	*	*	*
Fuller	7%	5%	9%	4%	7%	6%	10%	6%	9%	5%
Gordon Conwell	4%	1%	3%	3%	5%	3%	4%	3%	4%	3%
Union-Auburn	2%	5%	NR	NR	NR	NR	NR	NR	NR	NR
Yale	1%	4%	NR	NR	NR	NR	NR	NR	NR	NR
Other	17%	19%	19%	26%	20%	25%	16%	21%	20%	26%

Notes: 1) Evangelical is Evangelical in Puerto Rico, (2) JCS/ITC is Johnson C. Smith at the Interdenominational Theological Center, (3) NR is not reported on that panel so is included in “Other”, (4) * is less than 0.5% and is rounded to zero, (5) the PC(USA) seminaries are the first ten listed.

Looking at this table for trends what we can say is that statistically speaking each of the seminaries shows constant representation in the workforce over these twelve years.  There is the suggestion of a decrease in McCormick and maybe also Dubuque and Pittsburgh, and the slight suggestion of an increase in Princeton, Fuller and Other.  Again, while never present in statistically significant amounts, it is interesting to note that it is more likely for graduates of McCormick, San Francisco and Other  to be in the Specialized Clergy, while grads of Union (VA), Fuller, and maybe Austin, Columbia and Gordon Conwell are more likely to be Pastors.

What really surprised me about these tables, and the prime motivator for my quest for numbers yesterday, is the paradox that if Fuller has more Presbyterian students than any other school, why does it always have only half as many Teaching Elders in the workforce than Princeton grads?  One possibility is that while Princeton and Fuller consolidate all their Presbyterian students into the general category Presbyterian, there may be signifigantly different representation from the PC(USA).  It may be that Princeton has more PC(USA) students while Fuller’s Presbyterian students include more from Korean churches.  But I also have to wonder if fewer Fuller students from the PC(USA) enter the workforce as Teaching Elders in the PC(USA).  Do they go to other denominations?  Do they go into the workforce in non-ordained congregational or parachurch ministry?  Is the high number of Fuller students, while pretty constant across these reports, still a more recent development and its impact will be seen in the future?  More numbers and analysis are needed.

OK, next question: How does the pastoral workforce from PC(USA) schools correspond to their enrollment size as reported by the PC(USA)?

	Panel Profile 2009-2011		Panel Profile Normalized to PC(USA) schools		PC(USA) reported enrollment (number)	PC(USA) reported enrollment (percent of total)
	Pastors	Spec.	Pastors	Spec.
Austin	6%	3%	9%	5%	273	8%
Columbia	10%	7%	15%	11%	428	13%
Dubuque	2%	2%	3%	3%	177	5%
JCS/ITC	1%	1%	2%	2%	21	0.6%
Louisville	7%	7%	11%	11%	217	6%
McCormick	4%	5%	6%	8%	340	10%
Pittsburgh	5%	6%	8%	9%	370	11%
Princeton	20%	20%	30%	31%	703	21%
San Fran.	4%	9%	6%	14%	459	14%
Union (VA)	7%	5%	11%	8%	365	11%

Notes: (1) Due to rounding totals may not add up to exactly 100%.

There is clearly a considerable risk in comparing the numbers from the Panel with the total enrollment in the seminaries.  That is why I went on the unsuccessful quest I wrote about yesterday — to get more specific numbers.  In doing this comparison I assume that each seminary has the same proportions of M.Div. students and the same proportions of PC(USA) students in their total enrollment.  The indication from this table is that this assumption holds pretty well.  Within the confidence limits all that we can conclusively say is that there are more Princeton grads out in congregations than their proportional enrollment would predict.  There is the suggestion that Louisville is also over-represented and that Dubuque, McCormick and Pittsburgh are under-represented.

For comparison purposes, based on these numbers there are 3353 students at PC(USA) seminaries.  The PC(USA) statistical summary for 2008 lists 1164 candidates.  While it is a bit of a rough calculation, candidacy is usually the last of the three years at seminary, suggesting at least 3492 PC(USA) seminary students.  (On the one hand, since the care process is one of exploration of call we would expect candidates, the last stage, to be fewer than the other years so the number may represent a lower limit.  On the other hand, since
an individual would remain a candidate after graduation until they find a call the number might be pulled up by that.  I wonder how much those two effects balance out?)  Anyway, if 2/3 of students are at PC(USA) seminaries, that would give us a rough figure of 2328 PC(USA) students in M.Div. programs at PC(USA) seminaries or 69% of the total enrollment.  Seems a bit high from the numbers I wrote about yesterday so the pool of candidates may include a greater number seeking a call.

Finally, are there any trends seen in the year of graduation?

	Panel Profile 1997-1999		Panel Profile 2000-2002		Panel Profile 2003-2005		Panel Profile 2006-2008		Panel Profile 2009-2011
	Pastors	Spec.	Pastors	Spec.	Pastors	Spec.	Pastors	Spec.	Pastors	Spec.
Prior to 1960	5%	19%	2%	8%	1%	2%	*	2%
1960-1969	20%	25%	16%	25%	11%	18%	6%	13%	3% #	10% #
1970-1970	25%	23%	24%	26%	24%	28%	23%	24%	20%	23%
1980-1989	31%	24%	32%	27%	32%	33%	32%	34%	30%	30%
1990-1999	17%	7%	25%	13%	27%	19%	27%	23%	24%	26%
2000-2009					4%	1%	11%	4%	22%	10%
do not have degree	2%	2%	1%	1%	NR	NR	NR	NR	NR	NR

Notes: * – less than 0.5% and rounds to zero; # – number is for prior to 1970; survey is taken at the beginning of the panel time span.

The year grouping make these numbers a bit harder to track but accounting for that it is interesting to see the general distribution of graduation dates track across the panel surveys with little variation.  I don’t think that it is unexpected to see more recent grads in the pastor category and more older grads in the specialized ministry category where experience and flexibility are to be found.  It is interesting that this variation is in the tails of the distribution while in the center of the two distributions the shape is very similar.

So, looking at all of these number it raises the question of why we should care about them.  Reason number one is that they show a significant stability in the pastoral training in the PC(USA).  Yes, these are percentages of the number of graduates in the work force so it does not say anything about absolute numbers or changes in the quality or content of the education they are receiving.  In some respects this stability shows up in the PC(USA) annual membership numbers where the total membership is steadily declining but the number of Teaching Elders show little or no decline.

Another reason for having an interest in this is the question of PC(USA) seminaries versus non-PC(USA) seminaries.  This is the question that led me to have a closer look because I was trying to understand why Fuller did not appear stronger in the number of graduates.  I still don’t have a good answer for that but it is important to note that within the time range covered by these surveys there is no statistically discernable trend in graduates from Fuller, Gordon Conwell, or non-PC(USA) seminaries as a group.  These grads have been with us in fairly stable numbers so if you worry about how non-PC(USA) graduates impact the denomination we can’t say from this what the impact is but we can say that based upon the flat trend the effect should be constant with neither an increasing nor decreasing impact.

Well, I’m sure that is plenty of numbers for one day.  And hopefully in entering these tables I did not put in too many typos.  I’ll give the panel data a rest for a little bit as there is a bunch of other General Assembly related news to be found circulating right now.  And as always, if you see something in here that I missed I’m sure you’ll let me know.