Should I Or Shouldn't I . . .

[consiglieri]

All the fuss about teaching the lesson, how to teach the lesson, what's forbidden to include in the lesson, getting approval for the lesson....

What about the student?

I think the Church teaches, and it is a true principle, that the focus properly ought to be more on the OBJECT of instruction rather than the SUBJECT of instruction. We should focus on caring about and helping the STUDENTS and not on covering the MATERIAL.

I think this is a good point you bring up, Helmuth, and so let me ask you a follow up question.

Through this thread, it has become pretty clear that a Sunday school class can be divided into roughly two groups: (1) Those who find offensive any teaching that is not in the manual or the "approved materials"; and, (2) Those who are bored senseless because the teaching is restricted to the manual and the "approved materials."

It seems clear that one teacher cannot please both kinds of students in the same lesson.

Someone has suggested more than one Sunday school class, to fill the needs of the different kinds of students.

But that is something that has to come down from the bishop.

Other than different classes, what would be your suggestion as to how to teach in this situation?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[SolarPowered]

We covered this section in our SS class last Sunday. Our teacher spent about 10 seconds on this and mentioned that the story is "Lukian" and wasn't originally in John but was found in some old texts of Luke.

I don't know that I buy the idea that it belongs in Luke. Stuck into Luke in some texts, yes. But I've never heard anyone before suggest that it actually belongs in Luke.

[consiglieri]

I covered it in Sunday school in more than 10 seconds, but less than a minute.

The story is not found in the earliest and best manuscripts of John, and when it does start showing up, it is found in different places: (1) In a place about 20 verses earlier than it is currently; and, (2) in some texts, it is just stuck on at the very end of John after the resurrection, etc. And it is also found in some early manuscripts of Luke's gospel.

So it bounced around from place to place until it found a home.

In my class, I did not say it started out in Luke, because I think that would be . . . speculative.

Nor did I say that it was not originally in John because that, too, would be . . . speculative.

Nor did I say that it was originally in John because that would be . . . speculative.

So why is it people think I am too speculative in what I teach?

--Consiglieri

[SolarPowered]

So why is it people think I am too speculative in what I teach?

--Consiglieri

Objection!, Your Honor. The Consiglieri is asking the witness to speculate!

Regarding my mention of 10 seconds, I wasn't intending to imply that it should be disposed of in 10 seconds; I was merely imparting the information that this is what my particular Gospel Doctrine teacher did.

(For those who recall a comment in another thread, our GD class is team-taught, and the teacher this week was not the person I previously mentioned.)

[Helmuth]

I think this is a good point you bring up, Helmuth, and so let me ask you a follow up question.

...

It seems clear that one teacher cannot please both kinds of students in the same lesson.

...

Other than different classes, what would be your suggestion as to how to teach in this situation?

First let me say I have not noticed this phenomenon. In my lifelong travels, it rather seems that if a class is boring, everyone will be bored, and if it is engaging, everyone will be not bored. Some people are bored more easily than others (their boredom-sets-in threshold is lower), but everyone appreciates something interesting.

That seems to not be your situation. You maybe have a personality conflict somehow with some of these students? Or maybe your ward is full of strange and boring people.

One finds, of course, slightly different tastes in what folks find interesting. The biggest gulf in tastes I can think of was in my teen SS classes between those who really were not interested in the gospel but came/had-to-come anyway and the rest. The lesson could be really good and it would not necessarily keep the had-to-comes from trying to fall asleep in the back of the class and feeling that "I wish I could get out of here. I wish I could get out of here...". Now if the teacher is really excited about the gospel and really wants to reach that type and engage them, it can be done. Even then it may not happen every time, and it's certainly harder work than just teaching the rest of the class and ignoring the had-to-comes. Still, the teacher should try, he care about them, show interest in their lives, teach using examples about trucks and girls, quote passages relevant to the lesson from Megadeath and Pink Floyd (Yes, it can be done. Eg., "Where did we come from, why are we here, where do we go when we die? What lies beyond? and what lay before? Is anything certain in life?" That's lyrics from hard rock band Dream Theater.), things like that.

It seems the people who don't like your class may have some deep-seated issues why they don't like it. For the most part, different issues I'm sure than the uninterested teens in my teen SS classes. But perhaps you can approach the problem in a similar way. Here's two ideas. These people probably have a good knowledge of the gospel and are life-long members. You could give them a chance to show it off, feel good about themselves. Like ask "Can anyone tell me the 10th article of faith?" (of course you have to work it into the lesson somehow) and then, having memorized it in Primary they can recite it and everyone will be very impressed with them and they will feel worthwhile. Second, you could use object lessons involving their occupations or something in their lives. Eg.: Sister Stormcloud, you work at Al's Lawnmower Repair. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but in the crackcase of a lawnmower engine, there is typically a magnet, is there not? Now why in the world is there a magnet? What does that magnet do? (Attract metal shavings and debris and keep them from wearing down the engine.) So that's like the process of repentance: like the magnet, we need to constantly be removing the debris and undesirable things in our lives, taking them out of the oil-flow. Otherwise, they will wear and tear and scratch and wreak havok on our spiritual engine, until they finally destroy it altogether. Obviously you can come up with analogies for pretty much anything: scrapbooking, her kids, baking a casserole, whatever.

Those are just two ideas.

[consiglieri]

Wow! Thank you for the in depth response, Helmuth. I will definitely give it some thought!

I think you may be closest to the mark when you mentioned a "personality conflict."

There are so many people out there who have a personality conflict with me.

I can't understand what's wrong with them.

Even Bob Bennett (I mean, "Betts") has a personality conflict with me. (See signature line below.)

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Objection!, Your Honor. The Consiglieri is asking the witness to speculate!

Regarding my mention of 10 seconds, I wasn't intending to imply that it should be disposed of in 10 seconds; I was merely imparting the information that this is what my particular Gospel Doctrine teacher did.

(For those who recall a comment in another thread, our GD class is team-taught, and the teacher this week was not the person I previously mentioned.)

Objection overruled!

SolarPowered is found in contempt of court and fined $500.