LIKE ALGEBRA, BUT WORSE

Imagine if your high school math teacher approached algebra like the typical church approaches faith education.

First of all, class would only meet once or twice a week and there would be no expectation of students doing any learning outside of class.

The teacher's sole approach would be lecture. 

Correct answers would be supplied for every problem - no need for students to wrestle through any sort of practice exercises.  

Worst of all, the teacher would skip around the math book, pulling out random, disconnected lessons from week to week. Today from chapter 7, next week a single equation from chapter 13, and then back to chapter 2 the following week. 

The only thread tying the lessons together would be the fact that they all concern numbers.  

It's fair to say that the students sitting under that math teacher would be thoroughly confused and constantly frustrated. 

And bored.

Week after week, they would be no closer to comprehending math than when they started.

Along the way they may pick up some math terminology, but they would not grasp workable definitions.

At the end of the semester, the teacher would still be the only one in the room who truly understood math. 

(If even he did.)

And when all was said and done, most of the students would drop out of further math classes at the first opportunity - unless maybe they enjoyed hanging out with their friends in the class.  

OUT OF THE MIST

I thought of at least one more basic premise of good teaching since yesterday - and it is super basic, but in the pulpit it doesn't always happen.

So here it is: An effective teacher knows the material inside and out. 

If the teacher is confused or unsure, the students will be doubly so.

It has been said that "a mist in the pulpit becomes a fog in the pew". 

The best-case scenario, of course, is when the teacher is utterly fascinated by the subject matter. 

A preacher should be utterly impressed with the beauty, wisdom, and power of Scripture.

A genuine fascination can be contagious.

And one other premise that I am reminded of just now: A good teacher consciously teaches students HOW to think, not just WHAT to think. 

This can only be accomplished if the teacher makes a practice of critical thinking in his or her own study and preparation. 

BASIC TEACHING

If at all possible, I plan to avoid using words like "pedagogy" in my dissertation and keep to a straightforward exploration of "teaching". 

Because teaching doesn't HAVE to be complicated and learning how to teach doesn't HAVE to involve a bunch of $5 words or drawn-out explanations of esoteric philosophies. 

(Is "esoteric" worth at least $5?)

Teaching is a skill, a science, and an art - but the basics of competent and effective teaching are not beyond the reach of any ordinary person. 

Off the top of my head, here are some basics of teaching:

• Start with what the students already know - or think they know.
• Set objectives: what do the students need to know?
• Plan the "test" in advance: How will the students show they have learned the material?
• Determine a logical order of presentation.
• Provide some sort of road map up front. 
• Make the material relevant. You should have a good answer to the question in the back of every student's mind: "Why are we learning this?"
• Review frequently – learning requires repetition.
• Give students time and opportunity to process and practice, not just listen.
• Check comprehension periodically along the way – If you are losing them, you want to know ASAP. 

If you're a teacher or if you've ever sat under an expert teacher, I could use some feedback here: Which other aspects of teaching do you consider essential?

GOOD TEACHING IS HARD TO FIND

(No time to revise tonight - this is very rough drafty.) 

Good teaching is hard to find. 

I know there are standout teachers at all levels, but have you ever noticed that, on average, as the grade level increases, the quality of teaching decreases?

Kindergarten and first grade teachers are masters at the art of teaching. They have to be, or their kids make no progress - which proves to be very apparent at that stage! Administrators and parents put lots of pressure on teachers at the front end of kids' education. 

But by high school? It's fairly common to hear students complaining about "not learning anything" over an entire semester. And often it isn't really hyperbole. 

By the time a student gets to the college level, "teaching" is pretty much synonymous with "lecturing". 

And this paragraph and the next will likely not make it into my dissertation in any form, but I was astonished by the poor teaching practices I encountered during my two years taking classes at the doctoral level. I had one professor out of 8 who really excelled at TEACHING. 

The others "knew their stuff", no doubt about it, and they were wonderful people. But if they ever took courses on best teaching practices, it didn't show.

(In fact, as I understand it, once I have my doctorate degree, I will be magically qualified to teach at the seminary level - not because I happen to have been trained as a teacher and have years of experience, but by virtue of having a depth of knowledge on some particular topic and a degree to prove it. And, obviously, attaining a depth of knowledge for oneself does not automatically translate into the ability to convey that knowledge to others.) 

So if even those in the teaching profession often fail in educating their students, what hope do we have that pastors will automatically be good teachers? Does attending seminary qualify someone to teach?

I am not aware of any seminary which requires general students to take classes on best practices in educating others.

But what's crazy is this: good teaching IS hard to find, but it's not overly complicated to do. 

PREACHING AND TEACHING

When I started serving as minister at Sardinia Baptist Church two and a half years ago, I quickly realized I was much more comfortable Teaching rather than Preaching.

At first, I wasn't even aware that there was a difference and I'm still not sure where the line between the two actually is drawn.

Maybe I'm being overly simplistic, but I understand Preaching as aimed at the heart and the spirit. It is meant to motivate and persuade.

And Teaching is aimed at the mind, seeking to foster knowledge and understanding. Its goal is to explain and equip. 

Both can and should spur transformation. Under Preaching, it is the transformation of thoughts, words, and actions. 

And under Teaching, it is the imagination.  

I don't suppose either is inherently more valuable, but I do think there is an order: Teaching first, and then Preaching. 

There should be an order and there should be balance.

But in the American church, Preaching has long been prioritized over Teaching.

TWO TROUBLES

Ronald Reagan famously said, "The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."

And I would say that, unfortunately, American Christianity suffers from both troubles: ignorance and wrong belief. 

Both, in the end, amount to unbelief.

Off the top of my head, here are a few important things I would guess most American Christians are ignorant of:

• The scope of the gospel
• The historical context of various books of the Bible
• The cultural contexts of the original audiences
• The metanarrative of the Bible
• Church history
• The major themes of the Bible

And a few of the things, in my opinion, which many American Christians "know that isn't so":

• Hell as eternal conscious torment
• Calvinism and all its distinctives regarding predestination, election, sovereignty, and etc.
• Penal substitutionary atonement 
• Faith as mental assent to propositional truth

THE HEART OF THE PROBLEM

At the heart of my dissertation work is the importance of education.

To put it negatively, a lack of proper education is often found at the very heart of society's greatest problems. And if it's not at the heart, at the very least poor education exacerbates other societal weaknesses.

Take our nation's current political climate as an example. How much of today's polarization could be toned down if the populace was trained in critical thinking?

I believe this much: if the citizens magically became critical thinkers tomorrow, much of the politicians' rhetoric would fall flat. Their word games would be over and they might be forced to govern instead. 

Fix the education and you fix the culture.

I believe the same is true within the American Church - we have a major education problem. And it's the root cause of all sorts of issues which weaken the witness and the power of the Church. And jeopardizes its future. 

Believers, by and large, simply do not know the Scriptures. In fact, they do not even know how to read them or where to start. They are fully dependent on interpretation done by pastors who are almost as ignorant. As a result, too many believers don't know God's character, His mission, or His provision for humanity.

They certainly don't seem to know the gospel. 

So how does the Church's education problem get fixed? Where do we start?

I know there's no quick fix. 

But I believe the starting point is with the young. 

P.S. I recognize that it's entirely possible this is only confirmation bias on my part - since I am a teacher at heart. Maybe I want to believe that teachers have the power to solve the world's problems. (But maybe they do.)