Mr.M said:
I am always fascinated with the results of combining naivety and egos regarding learning the Word of God and the things people dream up to stroke their need for dominance, influence, opinion and significance.
With almost every subject in life, learning is based on master/student learning. The teacher is the master and the students are there to learn. Abandoning this formula for something more egotistically satisfying is frankly, selfish.
Having taught Sunday school classes for nearly 20 years (I'm a pup compared to some of you), I found the opposite to be true. The most egotistical teachers I know are the ones who think that theirs should be the only voice heard during the time the class is together.
Such teachers are usually, in my own experience, more concerned with teaching a lesson than they are in teaching students/members.
What I have learned to do (btw, I had to learn this from experience, no amount of lecturing would have prepared me for this) is to clearly establish that this time we have together is for the study of God's Word with the presumption that it is fully inspired, without error, incapable of error, and that it is God's revelation to us. As such, we don't interpret the Bible out of our own experience but, rather, we study the Bible to understand the truth. I usually only have to make this case when starting a class. Of course, it is incredible helpful to have such a class in a church that is founded on the same viewpoint.
I've found that establishing such a foundation at the outset addresses many of the "what this verse means to me" type of comments.
I use two models at this point: inductive and a modified socratic. Inductive is obviously more intense in that it requires members to do work outside of class in order for the class to function properly. I usually strive for this method periodically for maybe 2-3 books per year. The remainder of the time I utilize a modified socratic method where we read a passage together and then I ask pointed questioned that are designed to provoke additional and deeper thought about the passage. As we work through the passage, I will take a few minutes, as needed, to explain certain concepts and to refer to other texts that assist in providing background, definition, and so on.
We undergird both models with a fairly aggressive schedule of fellowship opportunities throughout the year (I've found that at least one per month is optimum) and make sure that we invite every potential prospect to these gatherings. As the class matures, relationships deepen such that it becomes important to each member that each other member grows and continues to grow in the faith.
What I've found, over the years, is that this approach results in members who remember what we studied in class and that it helped in spurring them on to their own private study.
As teachers, we need to consider what our members are confronted with. Using the common model for church, our members hear 52 to 156 sermons each week where there is no interaction or questioning and an additional 52 Sunday school lessons. That's a range of 104 to 200 lessons/message opportunities in a given year. I assume that not even the most diligent learner would be able to recall the points of each of those sessions not to mention the contents.
Mr. M said:
This is not to say that in an informal setting this isn't some latitude, but it should be limited. It is not time for people to start usurping the teacher. If someone comes to a class it is to learn, if not they shouldn't be there. If they are there primarily to socialize they are disingenuous at best and designing a class to serve the dishonest is only a fool's design.
Perhaps the classes that you thinking about are different than the ones I refer to. There is definitely a social aspect of these groups. Even though the Sunday morning time is primarily for study, we still assemble together in a group dynamic. There is a reason, other than just rote obedience, that we gather like this. We need to exhort and encourage one another. If all that happens when we assemble is that we sit down, shut up, and let a single person tell us what he knows, we've missed a critical part of the family component of the Body of Christ.
Mr. M said:
Imagine how serious subject matter is taught and learned by those who teach with authority? How hilarious it would be for med students to sit around and share what "they think" about how some medical procedure should be done. Hahahaha. They would be laughed out of school.
You are correct. Sunday school is not medical school. Medical school is not about developing a proper relationship with Christ and our fellow believers. If there is no relationship building between members during Sunday school, we will make it all the more difficult for the members to properly develop this relationship with Christ.
The bottom line in teaching is that if the learner hasn't learned, the teacher hasn't taught.
raying: ut from time to time I come across a book or hear about how someone else does it and I just get to wondering. I suppose it never hurts to examine how we are doing.