A Tailored Education?

I was thinking today about the idea of an undergraduate degree. What does this really mean? Here I am, in my fifth year of college, with 140 some odd credits under my belt and 6 weeks away from earning my degree in Psychology. Reflecting back on my years here at Concordia, I've been wondering how I can actually apply what I've learned. I figured out that the majority of my classes as a Psychology major have been tailored to those people who will be actually starting a practice somewhere, counseling people and helping them with their problems. That's all fine and dandy, but what my concern is that since this is a Synodical school that puts out a majority of churchworkers, how are they tailoring their classes to best aide those people going into churchwork? Sure, my psych. classes will be applicable in some situations, but the majority of them were just interesting. I know this is a fine balance when the Concordia system prides itself in its accreditation, which I respect highly and am very thankful of, being that I'm a transfer student. However, the fact the my favorite and most applicable classes were my electives, really says something about how this institution prepares churchworking psych. majors.

Also, I've been having conversations with various students about the concept of Servant Leadership that has been ingrained in our minds since before we all started attending this institution. There is a general consensus that this catch phrase is overused and marketed beyond belief. It has turned a biblical principle of Jesus into a marketing campaign to put a pretty face on Concordia to draw students here and to build a firm reputation in the Synod. I've had my frustrations with it as well. It also makes me wonder about the faculty of the institution. The students here are taught to think critically about situations and ideas so that we can make a meaningful impact in the world and perhaps change some of the poorly considered situations that we encounter. However, the very people teaching us this principle are overlooking a problem on their very campus in which many students see a problem. I can understand overlooking a few students complaining about a stupid required class, but when an overwhelming percentage of students that have a firm understanding of ministry see a problem with the program, what does this say about the ability of the administration to serve the students as they so diligently strive to do. And don't get me wrong, they do a wonderful job at that in most other areas of campus life and education. But this one thing seems to constantly get overlooked and students seem to get ignored. They said, "Give it time." It's had time and is still not improving. Again, what does that say about the motivations of the concept? I challenge a reevaluation of this servant leadership, which could be used as an amazing tool with which to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ.