Institute of Ministry
Benchmarking and Quality Standards
The Institute of Ministry benchmarks its courses against recognised published standards in theological education, online learning, ministerial formation, professional practice, and internal ecclesial formation. This page explains the framework used across the Institute, and then gives the Licentiate in Diaconal Ministry as a detailed worked example.
Important: benchmarking is not accreditation. The Institute does not claim that its courses are accredited by, approved by, equivalent to, or recognised by the external bodies named here unless this is stated separately and explicitly for a particular programme.
Institute-Wide Benchmarking Framework
| Area | How it is benchmarked across the Institute | What this means in practice |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose and course identity | Each course must state its ecclesial, pastoral, academic, or practical purpose clearly. | Candidates should know whether a course is for formation, continuing development, discernment, ministry preparation, or general learning. |
| Learning outcomes | Each course is checked for clear outcomes that match its level, length, audience, and intended use. | Courses should not simply provide information; they should form knowledge, judgement, practice, and reflection appropriate to the course type. |
| Theological integrity | Teaching is measured against the Mission's own Old Catholic, Western Rite, inclusive sacramental identity. | External standards help test quality, but they do not replace the Mission's doctrine, ecclesiology, or pastoral commitments. |
| Scripture and tradition | Courses are reviewed for responsible use of Scripture, Christian tradition, historical context, and doctrinal clarity. | Formation should avoid proof-texting, vagueness, and unsupported personal opinion. |
| Assessment and evidence | Assessment is expected to match the course purpose: quizzes, reflections, essays, practical tasks, portfolios, oral review, or participation evidence. | Assessment should test understanding, application, and ministerial judgement where relevant. |
| Pastoral and ethical seriousness | Courses touching ministry, pastoral care, safeguarding, leadership, or public witness are reviewed for ethical clarity and boundaries. | Formation must prepare people for responsible service, not merely title-seeking or credential collection. |
| Online delivery quality | Course structure is compared with recognised online learning principles: orientation, navigation, interaction, learner support, accessibility, and review. | Candidates should be able to understand what to do, where to find resources, how to submit work, and how to get help. |
| Accessibility and inclusion | Courses are checked for inclusive language, accessibility awareness, and realistic support for adult and often bivocational learners. | The Institute's inclusive theology should be visible in both content and delivery. |
| Quality review | Courses are reviewed after delivery, with attention to completion, candidate feedback, broken links, assessment performance, and tutor observations. | Benchmarking is a review cycle, not a one-time claim. |
External Reference Points
The Institute uses external standards as reference points for seriousness and quality. These bodies do not govern the Institute, and their mention here does not imply accreditation or approval.
International Council for Evangelical Theological Education - global theological education standards.
Association for Christian Theological Education in Africa - African theological education and open-distance learning standards.
European Council for Theological Education - European theological quality assurance reference point.
Association of Theological Schools, United States and Canada - graduate theological education standards.
Association for Biblical Higher Education - biblical higher education reference standards.
Professional chaplaincy formation standards where pastoral care, ethics, referral, and professional conduct are relevant.
Association of Christian Religious Practitioners, South Africa - relevant to professional religious practice and recognition of prior learning pathways.
Online and distance-learning design benchmarks.
What Applies to Every Course
| Benchmark question | Applied to all Institute courses? | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Does the course have a clear purpose and audience? | Yes | All courses should state who they are for and what they are intended to form or teach. |
| Are learning outcomes stated and appropriate? | Yes | Outcomes may be simple for short courses and more detailed for formation awards. |
| Is the course consistent with the Mission's doctrine and ecclesial identity? | Yes | This is an internal standard for every course. |
| Is assessment proportionate to the course? | Yes | Not every course needs a portfolio or oral review, but every assessed course needs credible evidence. |
| Is safeguarding considered where relevant? | Yes | Required wherever a course touches public ministry, pastoral care, vulnerable people, or leadership. |
| Is online delivery clear and usable? | Yes | Orientation, navigation, instructions, support, accessibility, and review apply across the site. |
| Is the course reviewed after use? | Yes | The depth of review depends on the course size, risk, and formation significance. |
| Does completion guarantee ordination, licensing, employment, or civil recognition? | No | No Institute course creates such a guarantee unless a separate formal agreement says so. |
LDM-Specific Benchmarking Example
The table below is specific to the Licentiate in Diaconal Ministry. It is included as a public example of how the Institute maps a major formation pathway against external and internal standards.
Legend: ✓ = aligned and evidenced; P = partial or context-specific alignment; I = met by the Mission's own internal ecclesial standard; - = not applicable.
| Formation domain | LDM standard | ICETE | ACTEA | ECTE | ATS | ABHE | Chap. | ACRP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Admissions & selection | Discernment, interview, references, police clearance, language readiness. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Vocational discernment | Ongoing discernment with mentor accountability. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | P |
| Biblical studies | Old Testament, New Testament, hermeneutics, and Scripture-study tools. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | P | P |
| Theology & doctrine | Inclusive Old Catholic theology and ecclesiology. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | P | P |
| Church history | Early Church, Great Schism, Reformation, Old Catholic movement, independent sacramental movement. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | - | - |
| Liturgy & sacraments | Western-Rite competence, seven sacraments, and diaconal limits. | I | I | I | ✓ | I | - | - |
| Spiritual formation | Rule of Life, Daily Office, and sustainable prayer. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | P |
| Ethics & moral theology | Virtues, Decalogue, conscience, human dignity, clergy conduct. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Polity, governance & administration | Synodal governance, Rector and Council, non-profit accountability, finance, audit. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | - | - |
| Ecumenism & interreligious engagement | Dialogue, association, intercommunion framework, and Lima Text awareness. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | - | - |
| Evangelisation & mission | Mission as proclamation and presence; house-church witness. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | P | - |
| Safeguarding | Separate safeguarding course and clearance before ministry. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Pastoral care | Presence, boundaries, confidentiality, referral. | P | P | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Communication | Proclamation, preaching, teaching, digital witness. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Leadership | Servant leadership and anti-clericalism. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Practical ministry | Community-based and house-church practicum, not external curacy. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | P | ✓ | P | ✓ |
| Critical reflection | Critical theological reflection on practice. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Assessment | Varied assessment, secure practice, 80% pass standard, moderation. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | P | ✓ |
| Quality assurance | Review after every cohort and version-controlled improvement. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | - | P |
| Continuing formation | Ongoing formation beyond the programme, including CPD. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Digital & online ministry | Responsible online ministry and public witness. | P | P | P | P | P | - | - |
| Inclusion | Inclusion as a theological and sacramental commitment. | I | I | I | I | I | I | I |
Online Delivery Benchmarks
These standards apply across the Institute's Moodle site, with the depth of implementation scaled to the size and purpose of each course.
| Delivery domain | Institute standard | Quality Matters | OLC Scorecard | ACTEA ODeL |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Course overview & orientation | Clear start, structure, expectations, and navigation. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Learning outcomes | Published course or module outcomes. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Assessment & measurement | Outcome-aligned and proportionate assessment. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Instructional materials | Curated, current, copyright-clean materials. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Interaction & cohort | Appropriate learner contact, discussion, mentoring, or support. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Technology & tools | Stable platform and appropriate learning tools. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Learner support | Defined support routes and learner guidance. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Accessibility | Accessibility awareness and inclusive design. | P | P | P |
| Review & improvement | Review after use and version-controlled improvement. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
Review and Continual Improvement
Benchmarking is part of the Institute's course review cycle. After delivery, courses are reviewed for clarity, completion patterns, assessment performance, learner feedback, tutor observations, accessibility, broken links, resource currency, and alignment with the stated course outcomes.
Major formation pathways, such as the Licentiate in Diaconal Ministry, receive fuller domain-by-domain mapping because they prepare candidates for serious ministerial discernment. Shorter courses and continuing formation units are reviewed proportionately, using the same Institute-wide principles without pretending that every course requires the same level of evidence or assessment.
The purpose is simple: courses should remain honest about what they are, serious about what they teach, and accountable for how they form learners.