Great Teachers
I’ve got the impression from several sources that The Divine Conspiracy by Dallas Willard is the end-all to religious books. And I’m not saying it isn’t. I am saying, from my vantage point half-way through, I’m not convinced.
Nonetheless, there’s a lot of really good stuff I’ve discovered so far, and I’m underlining quite a few things, but the overall thesis he seems to be trying to connect hasn’t grabbed me yet. Then again, I’m an idiot, so what do I know? In the meanwhile, I may throw a provocative thought or two out from this book for your viewing pleasure.
One of the interesting sections dealt with “how” Jesus taught, and as a teacher, I find this to be a most interesting topic. Everyone on this blog has their experiences of good and bad teachers, and I think his thoughts will resonate with everyone:
We must recognize, first of all, that the aim of the popular teacher in Jesus’ time was not to impart information, but to make a significant change in the lives of the hearers. Of course that may require an information transfer, but it is a peculiarly modern notion that the aim of teaching is to bring people to know things that may have no effect at all on their lives… [Today] [t]he teacher must get the information into them. We then “test” the patients to see if they “got it” by checking whether they can reproduce it in language rather than watching how they live. Thus if we today were invited to hear the Sermon on the Mount – or, more likely now, the “Seminar at the Sheraton” – we would show up with notebooks, pens, and tape recorders. We would be astonished to find the disciples “just listening” to Jesus and would look around to see if someone was taping it… Working our way through the crowd to the right-hand man, Peter, we might ask where the conference notebooks and other material were and be further astonished when he only says, “Just listen!” The teacher in Jesus’ time – and especially the religious teacher – taught in such a way that he would impact the life flow of the hearer, leaving a lasting impression without benefit of notes, recorders, or even memorization. Whatever did not make a difference in that way just made no difference. Period… We automatically remember what makes a real difference in our life. The secret of the great teacher is to speak words, to foster experiences, that impact the active flow of the hearer’s life. That is what Jesus did by the way he taught. He tied his teachings to concrete events that make up the hearers’ lives… Now, Jesus not only taught in this manner; he also taught us, his students in the kingdom, to teach in the same way… By showing to others the presence of the kingdom in the concrete details of our shared existence, we impact the lives and hearts of our hearers, not just their heads. And they won’t have to write it down to hold onto it.
#1: Do you agree with Willard’s analysis of a “great” teacher?
#2: Have you ever had a “great” teacher? If so, what seemed to be her or his secrets?
Nonetheless, there’s a lot of really good stuff I’ve discovered so far, and I’m underlining quite a few things, but the overall thesis he seems to be trying to connect hasn’t grabbed me yet. Then again, I’m an idiot, so what do I know? In the meanwhile, I may throw a provocative thought or two out from this book for your viewing pleasure.
One of the interesting sections dealt with “how” Jesus taught, and as a teacher, I find this to be a most interesting topic. Everyone on this blog has their experiences of good and bad teachers, and I think his thoughts will resonate with everyone:
We must recognize, first of all, that the aim of the popular teacher in Jesus’ time was not to impart information, but to make a significant change in the lives of the hearers. Of course that may require an information transfer, but it is a peculiarly modern notion that the aim of teaching is to bring people to know things that may have no effect at all on their lives… [Today] [t]he teacher must get the information into them. We then “test” the patients to see if they “got it” by checking whether they can reproduce it in language rather than watching how they live. Thus if we today were invited to hear the Sermon on the Mount – or, more likely now, the “Seminar at the Sheraton” – we would show up with notebooks, pens, and tape recorders. We would be astonished to find the disciples “just listening” to Jesus and would look around to see if someone was taping it… Working our way through the crowd to the right-hand man, Peter, we might ask where the conference notebooks and other material were and be further astonished when he only says, “Just listen!” The teacher in Jesus’ time – and especially the religious teacher – taught in such a way that he would impact the life flow of the hearer, leaving a lasting impression without benefit of notes, recorders, or even memorization. Whatever did not make a difference in that way just made no difference. Period… We automatically remember what makes a real difference in our life. The secret of the great teacher is to speak words, to foster experiences, that impact the active flow of the hearer’s life. That is what Jesus did by the way he taught. He tied his teachings to concrete events that make up the hearers’ lives… Now, Jesus not only taught in this manner; he also taught us, his students in the kingdom, to teach in the same way… By showing to others the presence of the kingdom in the concrete details of our shared existence, we impact the lives and hearts of our hearers, not just their heads. And they won’t have to write it down to hold onto it.
#1: Do you agree with Willard’s analysis of a “great” teacher?
#2: Have you ever had a “great” teacher? If so, what seemed to be her or his secrets?
posted by Al Sturgeon | 3:23 PM
7 Comments:
#1 -- I agree with his general point, though I'm skeptical on the social history particulars. The life-impact of Jesus' teaching was in the content, not the pedagogical detail of whether people were taking notes or not. After all, we know about his teachings only because some people DID write them down, and they're still life-altering in that form. All that said, I do think it's useful to just sit and absorb sometimes, rather than trying to transcribe everything a teacher/lecturer says. What you're really after is the thinking skills and conceptual tools that the teacher/lecturer has; you can pick up the information on your own time.
#2 -- Happily, I have had some great teachers. Off the top of my head, the thing they all had in common was their a) focus on explanatory concepts rather than specific facts, and b) ability to insinuate those concepts into our minds so they became ours. Oh, and c) a genuine interest in the subject.
#1 -- I agree with his general point, though I'm skeptical on the social history particulars. The life-impact of Jesus' teaching was in the content, not the pedagogical detail of whether people were taking notes or not. After all, we know about his teachings only because some people DID write them down, and they're still life-altering in that form. All that said, I do think it's useful to just sit and absorb sometimes, rather than trying to transcribe everything a teacher/lecturer says. What you're really after is the thinking skills and conceptual tools that the teacher/lecturer has; you can pick up the information on your own time.
#2 -- Happily, I have had some great teachers. Off the top of my head, the thing they all had in common was their a) focus on explanatory concepts rather than specific facts, and b) ability to insinuate those concepts into our minds so they became ours. Oh, and c) a genuine interest in the subject.
Sorry about the double-post. The site wigged out as I was submitting it, and now I can't even delete the second one.
That's alright - just padding my comment stats...
:-)
Al,
I'm not going to answer either of your two questions, but that is one of the quotes from the book that stuck out for me as well.
I just wanted to share general agreement that there were parts of his book that I loved, but it is not "the end-all to religious books" as you put it.
Very glad to hear you say that, Duane. I was feeling sort of bad about not falling in love with it!
JU answers question #2 very well. So I'll try to ruin it by adding more. Most teaching in high schools and universities (in America, at least) is what is called the "banking system" (I think Pauolo Freire is responsible for this term). There is a body of information that everyone needs to know and schools are the banks that hold that information. But this model of teaching is problematic if no one understands *why* this information is important. As JU says, great teachers "focus on explanatory concepts". Rather than forcusing solely on individual facts, they want students to understand the concepts, the reasoning behind those facts. Through understanding the concepts, it help students think about why certain information is important and how they can use that information. This does seem to be what Jesus did. He wasn't concerned with his students memorizing everything he said (I mean, we really only have brief exerpts of his life). He wanted them to understand the concepts behind what he said. He wanted to challenge the way they perceived and acted and moved through the world. Part of his teaching was his actual teaching, but a good deal of it was also living out the philosophy he taught. Which gets to another point JU made -- a genuine love for the subject by the teacher. Jesus *loved* his subject.
Post a Comment
<< Home