* It's easier to teach more for less than less for more.
If we only teach one idea, we must creatively amplify and explain it until it's understood clearly.
* The context of ministry seems to be more demanding than the content.
The context instead needs to become secondary to the content.
We need to prioritise thinking and teaching over rostering and administrivia.
* We have bought into the 'going deeper' myth.
Often we think we are going deeper but most of the time it means we are taking people in over their heads. We don't water down the message; but just make it flow like a tap rather than a fire hydrant.
* We worry about not having enough to say.
(Ouch. This is getting personal for me now. Lucky it doesn't mention "fear of being found out to be a fraud"!) The object of our communication is not to cover a lot of material but to make sure people learn. If the student hasn't learned, the teacher hasn't taught.
* We fear we will leave something out.
(Yikes! Like the gospel? Amen)
*If we try to explain everything, we can be sure they will understand nothing.
(Dave Thurston talks about intentionally leaving 'gaps' in our teaching - wide enough to spark thinking in the mind of the listener, but not so wide that they get confused or give up. This helps people learn how to think well for themselves, as well as the content that we are teaching)
* We teach what is predetermined by entities outside our ministry.
Often we are pressured into teaching what others think is important. We must remember that it is we who are responsible for what is taught to those in our care.
* We confuse information with application.
(I heard once whilst at college that good exegisis IS good application. Really? I don't doubt it - for college lecturers who haven't met a real person on the street for 15 years)
* Often when we review our sermons or seminars we ask the wrong questions:
Is is true? Interesting? Creative? Passionate? Entertaining?
When really these should be givens.
What we really must be asking ourselves on behalf of our listeners is "Is it helpful?"
If not, we've failed to help our people.
It's like teaching shakespeare to people who really need to learn how to dance.
Friday, March 26, 2010
4 Steps to teach less for more
1) Decide what you are going to say.
Determine the critical things this person/group needs to learn.
2) Decide to say one thing at a time.
Too much info has a cancelling effect. Multiples ideas actually compete for a listener's attention. Every additional idea we introduce diminishes the effectiveness of the prior ideas already presented. When people walk away from a teaching moment with just one principle that can be applied, they are much more likely to remember it and beging trying to apply it!
Focus on just one principle and you enhance the potential of every listener to really 'get it'.
3) Decide how you are going to say it.
We need to engage the mind and the heart. People have different learning styles which we must try to appeal to. When using multiple mediums, all must complement the one main idea.
When an audience gets confused by mixed messages, they disengage.
4) Say it over and over again.
What is worth remembering is always worth repeating.
Repetition is how we learn.
Repetition is thus really important.
Good presentation, not new information, engages a students imagination. We need to package the one idea in an engaging and relevant way. The problem is not finding new info, but better presenting timeless truths so they will never be considered irrelevant.
Repitition is really important....
Determine the critical things this person/group needs to learn.
2) Decide to say one thing at a time.
Too much info has a cancelling effect. Multiples ideas actually compete for a listener's attention. Every additional idea we introduce diminishes the effectiveness of the prior ideas already presented. When people walk away from a teaching moment with just one principle that can be applied, they are much more likely to remember it and beging trying to apply it!
Focus on just one principle and you enhance the potential of every listener to really 'get it'.
3) Decide how you are going to say it.
We need to engage the mind and the heart. People have different learning styles which we must try to appeal to. When using multiple mediums, all must complement the one main idea.
When an audience gets confused by mixed messages, they disengage.
4) Say it over and over again.
What is worth remembering is always worth repeating.
Repetition is how we learn.
Repetition is thus really important.
Good presentation, not new information, engages a students imagination. We need to package the one idea in an engaging and relevant way. The problem is not finding new info, but better presenting timeless truths so they will never be considered irrelevant.
Repitition is really important....
Teaching with the end in mind
We have to teach with the end in mind.
* When we do this, understanding that people are on a journey, we are forced to prioritise what we teach, and when.
* All Scripture is inspired by God; but not all Scripture is equally important to a person/group at any given time. Further, all Scripture is not equally able to be applied at any given time. (If we've worked with people in different age groups and different situations, we already know this to be true. We would find it unhelpful to try to teach the details of the story of David and Bathsheeba to preppies; but might find it very applicable to teenagers whose hormones are racing like crazy)
* To teach less for more, we must identify and package a handful of must-know, can't-be-without, age-appropriate principles for each target group.
* What are we going to say and not say in the limited time we have with people?
* We must make time before teaching a group, to decide what the big issues are for them; and establishing them as the irreducible minimums we must address.
* In doing this, we are saying that these things are the MOST important; not the ONLY things that are important.
* Thinking this way asks the question "How do I want to help shape these people?", since we must keep the end in mind.
* When we think about how we are helping to shape people, this changes the way we teach.
* When we do this, understanding that people are on a journey, we are forced to prioritise what we teach, and when.
* All Scripture is inspired by God; but not all Scripture is equally important to a person/group at any given time. Further, all Scripture is not equally able to be applied at any given time. (If we've worked with people in different age groups and different situations, we already know this to be true. We would find it unhelpful to try to teach the details of the story of David and Bathsheeba to preppies; but might find it very applicable to teenagers whose hormones are racing like crazy)
* To teach less for more, we must identify and package a handful of must-know, can't-be-without, age-appropriate principles for each target group.
* What are we going to say and not say in the limited time we have with people?
* We must make time before teaching a group, to decide what the big issues are for them; and establishing them as the irreducible minimums we must address.
* In doing this, we are saying that these things are the MOST important; not the ONLY things that are important.
* Thinking this way asks the question "How do I want to help shape these people?", since we must keep the end in mind.
* When we think about how we are helping to shape people, this changes the way we teach.
Teach Less for More
I have a real problem limiting how much info I want to teach people when I preach.
So it's great to read some really mind-bending ideas in a good little book that we are going through together as a staff team. It's called "7 Practices of Effective Ministry" and yes, it's American.
I'm finding the current chapter (practice #4) particularly helpful.
The key idea is that we need to Teach Less for More.
Information Overload
* We all accumulate a lot of knowledge in our lives; very little of which is actually helpful on a practical level.
* When learning a sport or hobby, a good teacher will first focus on the fundamentals of the game, teaching us only what we need to know.
(I've got a good friend called Peter Evans who I've watched model this really well. Find someone who teaches well and watch them in action)
* This is especially the case when the game is a complex one.
* When we think about it, we don't really learn something until we really need to know it.
(A good example is talking to people about Jesus. I find that when I go through periods of lots of conversations with people, my efforts at sharing the gospel seem far better and sharper than when I'm hit up to explain the gospel after a long period of stagnation. At that point, I essentially have to re-learn a lot of what I had already loaded into my brain on previous occasions)
* The greater the need, the higher the interest and potential to actually learn.
(Now that I've begun having some good conversations with some pretty fundamentalist muslims, I'm becoming much more interested in how best to talk about Jesus with people from such radically different backgrounds to me)
* Most of us don't learn so we can know more; we learn when we need to know something.
(Changing a tyre on the company car when on the edge of the gateway motorway, in peak hour traffic, in the middle of winter, with about 30cm's of lane space to work within...... that's when I learnt to change a tyre!)
* Our responsibility as teachers and communicators is critical: we must make sure we know what people really need to learn.
* Sometimes this involves helping people understand themselves why they need to learn something.
(I never learned of my need for Jesus until my friends explained the sin within)
* We can drastically improve how much people learn if we teach less but better.
* Sometimes we will actually need to say more about fewer things.
* These things should be limited to what our hearers most need to hear.
* Kids learn by doing things. Most adults still learn like kids. Concrete applications are crucial (Eg. 'our lives depend on them!')
* We must therefore separate what is important from what is merely interesting.
* We must be infocists (my term). All knowledge is NOT equal.
* Good teachers begin by identifying what is most important for their students to know.
So it's great to read some really mind-bending ideas in a good little book that we are going through together as a staff team. It's called "7 Practices of Effective Ministry" and yes, it's American.
I'm finding the current chapter (practice #4) particularly helpful.
The key idea is that we need to Teach Less for More.
Information Overload
* We all accumulate a lot of knowledge in our lives; very little of which is actually helpful on a practical level.
* When learning a sport or hobby, a good teacher will first focus on the fundamentals of the game, teaching us only what we need to know.
(I've got a good friend called Peter Evans who I've watched model this really well. Find someone who teaches well and watch them in action)
* This is especially the case when the game is a complex one.
* When we think about it, we don't really learn something until we really need to know it.
(A good example is talking to people about Jesus. I find that when I go through periods of lots of conversations with people, my efforts at sharing the gospel seem far better and sharper than when I'm hit up to explain the gospel after a long period of stagnation. At that point, I essentially have to re-learn a lot of what I had already loaded into my brain on previous occasions)
* The greater the need, the higher the interest and potential to actually learn.
(Now that I've begun having some good conversations with some pretty fundamentalist muslims, I'm becoming much more interested in how best to talk about Jesus with people from such radically different backgrounds to me)
* Most of us don't learn so we can know more; we learn when we need to know something.
(Changing a tyre on the company car when on the edge of the gateway motorway, in peak hour traffic, in the middle of winter, with about 30cm's of lane space to work within...... that's when I learnt to change a tyre!)
* Our responsibility as teachers and communicators is critical: we must make sure we know what people really need to learn.
* Sometimes this involves helping people understand themselves why they need to learn something.
(I never learned of my need for Jesus until my friends explained the sin within)
* We can drastically improve how much people learn if we teach less but better.
* Sometimes we will actually need to say more about fewer things.
* These things should be limited to what our hearers most need to hear.
* Kids learn by doing things. Most adults still learn like kids. Concrete applications are crucial (Eg. 'our lives depend on them!')
* We must therefore separate what is important from what is merely interesting.
* We must be infocists (my term). All knowledge is NOT equal.
* Good teachers begin by identifying what is most important for their students to know.
Monday, March 22, 2010
The Single Issue
I'm reading 'The Single Issue' by UK author Al Hsu.
It's not the sort of book I'd choose to read while at bible college (I have around 10 books to read on justification at the moment) but a lady from church who was single for a long time lent it to me....with a strong recommendation that I get into it and at least start thinking things through about singleness.
Of course, I couldn't help but check out Al's take on 1 Corinthians 7.
This was the first thing to do.... to see if it was in accord with Dr Brucey Winter's take on singleness and marriage. But, thankfully, I was able to shake myself free of that creeping habit of assuming that my scholar and teacher (whoever that may be) is the guru and font of all knowledge. I'm also finding it hard to relate to singleness since I married my highschool sweetheart at age 22.
I've only just covered the intro and chapter 1. While the author sounds a little too defensive and reactionary (and seems to blame the church for his own hangups) I am being made to rethink some of my unconscious assumptions about singleness, society and church. (Maybe it's me who's being defensive about his hangups?)
One interesting observation she makes (is Al a guy or a girl?) is that virginity now carries the social stigma that adultery and premarital sex once had.
If that is the case, it's no wonder we live in a confused society.
It's not the sort of book I'd choose to read while at bible college (I have around 10 books to read on justification at the moment) but a lady from church who was single for a long time lent it to me....with a strong recommendation that I get into it and at least start thinking things through about singleness.
Of course, I couldn't help but check out Al's take on 1 Corinthians 7.
This was the first thing to do.... to see if it was in accord with Dr Brucey Winter's take on singleness and marriage. But, thankfully, I was able to shake myself free of that creeping habit of assuming that my scholar and teacher (whoever that may be) is the guru and font of all knowledge. I'm also finding it hard to relate to singleness since I married my highschool sweetheart at age 22.
I've only just covered the intro and chapter 1. While the author sounds a little too defensive and reactionary (and seems to blame the church for his own hangups) I am being made to rethink some of my unconscious assumptions about singleness, society and church. (Maybe it's me who's being defensive about his hangups?)
One interesting observation she makes (is Al a guy or a girl?) is that virginity now carries the social stigma that adultery and premarital sex once had.
If that is the case, it's no wonder we live in a confused society.
Friday, March 19, 2010
DeYoung and the Restless: Christianity vs McLarenism
For some great discussion and thinking on what Brian McLaren has been smoking, check out this guy, who is fast becoming one of my favourite authors.
Here's his blog:
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevindeyoung/2010/02/17/christianity-and-mclarenism-1/
Dave
Here's his blog:
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevindeyoung/2010/02/17/christianity-and-mclarenism-1/
Dave
Personality Cult?
I just saw an article on the Sydney Anglicans website titled "Personality Cult?"
It was headed with a small picture of a bloke that looked like Peter Jensen..... what??
Upon checking it out I discovered it was a piccie of Richard Dawkins. Woops.
It was headed with a small picture of a bloke that looked like Peter Jensen..... what??
Upon checking it out I discovered it was a piccie of Richard Dawkins. Woops.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)