Make classes more like a conversation, less like a lecture.

[Rain]

When Come Follow Me came out I thought it was going to be different every year.  I was surprised when it was repeated. I have seen things updated within the lessons, but it would be nice if they would change the topics or at least only repeat them every 3 years or so.

Edited October 12, 2016 by Rain

[katherine the great]

I think the church should invest in clickers for everyone.  That way we can be interactive in class, everyone can participate and the conversation not be dominated by "those" three or four people.   Maybe for sacrament meeting too!

[rongo]

4 hours ago, sheilauk said:

Maybe and maybe not. In my stake, we have a monthly study group which uses the institute manuals. We have 10 regular attendees and most that I speak to about it aren't interested in undertaking such study.  And a lot of people I talk to don't want to go beyond the Sunday manuals.  Not every area is the same. 

I've been approached multiple times about holding study groups, but I've told people that the Church frowns on them, and why (this is where people leave the rails, and where well-meaning charismatic people lead themselves and others astray. Best to have priesthood oversight in official venues). I've suggested readings for people, but most seem to just want to outsource it to the "scholars" among them and get "executive summaries." 

Most people would be well-served to read the Standard Works, on their own, for the first time (or for the first time in a long time). No hurry; it's not a race. Other good, basic books would be the Talmage works, "Marvelous Work and a Wonder," and for the ambitious, Documentary History of the Chuch and Comprehensive History of the Church (which most people will never read. They don't know what they're missing). Others could be mentioned as well. Those who have read at least the scriptures and some of the above will be in a good place as far as foundation to handle whatever comes their way, even though they don't address the modern controversies (DNA, modern polygamy issues, etc.). They will have confidence via the Spirit that, although they don't know all the answers, that the foundation is solid and that there are answers. This would make more people in a good place as far as seeking answers. When people's only information source is Google and social media, sans their own foundation, then they fear and find themselves in a bad place.

Edited September 30, 2016 by rongo

[Duncan]

Just now, rongo said:

I've been approached multiple times about holding study groups, but I've told people that the Church frowns on them, and why (this is where people leave the rails, and where well-meaning charismatic people lead themselves and others astray. Best to have priesthood oversight in official venues). I've suggested readings for people, but most seem to just want to outsource it to the "scholars" among them and get "executive summaries." 

Most people would be well-served to read the Standard Works, on their own, for the first time (or for the first time in a long time). No hurry; it's not a race. Other good, basic books would be the Talmage works, "Marvelous Work and a Wonder," and for the ambitious, Doctrinal History of the Chuch and Comprehensive History of the Church (which most people will never read. They don't know what they're missing). Others could be mentioned as well. Those who have read at least the scriptures and some of the above will be in a good place as far as foundation to handle whatever comes their way, even though they don't address the modern controversies (DNA, modern polygamy issues, etc.). They will have confidence via the Spirit that, although they don't know all the answers, that the foundation is solid and that there are answers. This would make more people in a good place as far as seeking answers. When people's only information source is Google and social media, sans their own foundation, then they fear and find themselves in a bad place.

In our stake their is a Bishop who has only been a member since 2005? and I see his comments on FB and I don't want to judge the guy but he's been put in a difficult position. He wants to do the right thing but he just doesn't know stuff that you'd think a Bishop would know and he's never been in a Bishopric before and I feel for him, he sounds swamped

[rongo]

1 hour ago, boblloyd91 said:

I like that idea, nothing against the Presidents series, I found some benefit from it, but I hope that we can go deeper (not deeper in controversies, just deeper in regards to the curriculum). I think at one point there was a manual written by Nibley. Would like to have manuals like that rather than read out of a collection of quotes and soundbites....

That would be "An Approach to the Book of Mormon," a gospel doctrine manual written by Hugh Nibley. Those days are long gone. I'd settle for the Ensign being like in the early 80s. 

[Duncan]

4 minutes ago, rongo said:

That would be "An Approach to the Book of Mormon," a gospel doctrine manual written by Hugh Nibley. Those days are long gone. I'd settle for the Ensign being like in the early 80s. 

as an aside I wonder what the Church will do when they run out of Presidents? Like if the next 2-3 years are Pres. Hinckley and let's say Pres. Monson and Nelson is still around will they have some other thing and then just wait until Pres. Nelson dies?

[Doctrine 612]

A little bit more to my first comment.

before the church starts a new program they need to find a way to motivate the members to read the scriptures and learn about church history, I really dislike people's comments about the scriptures when they are totally wrong about them.

two weeks ago in class a high priest said "the verse in the bible about loving the sinner and hating the sin, has always been my favorite"

i very nicely said " the book of Gondi has many good verses"

the class and the high priest laughed because they thought that was a bible verse for years.

it was funny but also eye opening, what other things do members just think are in the scriptures but are not. 

I never said it was easy but it's worth it not in the bible.

gave a man a fish and teach a man to fish, not in the bible.

 

it make since now that we are told to never argue about scriptures with anyone but to just share our testamonys. I now see why we don't know the scriptures and I hate to say if we don't know the scriptures then do we really have a testamony since we don't have a true witnesses.

21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

now I am not saying to fight with people but to have the skills to share with others why we believe what we believe.

Edited September 30, 2016 by Doctrine 612

[rongo]

My title quote in a paper I wrote years ago* had a funny quip from Parley P. Pratt. It's from the 2nd talk in Journal of Discourses:

“It is a saying, that ‘dead men tell no tales.’ If this is not in the Bible, it is somewhere else; and if it be true, it is just as good as if it were in the Bible.” Parley P. Pratt, April 7, 1853. Journal of Discourses 1:7.

* http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/publications/dead-men-tell-no-tales

I think a lot of people use some sort of angle of "if it's not in the scriptures, then it ought to be." 

 

[JLHPROF]

20 minutes ago, Doctrine 612 said:

now I am not saying to fight with people but to have the skills to share with others why we believe what we believe.

In other words:
"Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please." - Mark Twain

[HappyJackWagon]

On ‎9‎/‎28‎/‎2016 at 5:52 PM, JLHPROF said:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865663412/Shaking-up-Sunday-School-Revolution-in-LDS-teaching-seeks-to-activate-learners.html

• Why alter all teaching in the church?
  LDS leaders say they want to help church members become better — and more active — learners, a critical skill in an age saturated by information.
  
  In the past, teachers in Sunday School, Relief Society, Primary and priesthood classes often focused on presenting information. It was common to hear a teacher cut off a class discussion by saying he or she had more material to cover. Leaders want to drum that out of the culture.

So this should be good for some discussion.
What do you see as the perks to this new teaching philosophy and what do you see as the drawbacks?

Is this going to result in members have more understanding of the gospel or less?

Honestly, I feel like open, honest discussion is dangerous to the church. It's a lovely ideal in theory but I don't think the level of study and discussion is conducive to faith the way the church wants it to be. I don't think it's conducive to a correlated doctrinal strategy. 

Having said that, I would welcome greater discussion. Our GD class is a lecture every week with 1-2 questions that require nothing more than pat Sunday school answers. Even though the teacher is well prepared and has good stories, it makes for a very long class. Most people check out. In fact I think most people have checked out with the constant diet of milk we receive at church. This change could open things up to more meat but it could be very disruptive to the correlated model of gospel study and learning.

 

[thesometimesaint]

Personally I've had about as much Gospel Rumor as I want.

[JLHPROF]

5 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Honestly, I feel like open, honest discussion is dangerous to the church. It's a lovely ideal in theory but I don't think the level of study and discussion is conducive to faith the way the church wants it to be. I don't think it's conducive to a correlated doctrinal strategy.

Having said that, I would welcome greater discussion. Our GD class is a lecture every week with 1-2 questions that require nothing more than pat Sunday school answers. Even though the teacher is well prepared and has good stories, it makes for a very long class. Most people check out. In fact I think most people have checked out with the constant diet of milk we receive at church. This change could open things up to more meat but it could be very disruptive to the correlated model of gospel study and learning.

The issue in many wards (although not all) is that more discussion doesn't equal more meat.

Sometimesaint is right that without study (a CFR function if you will) discussion will quickly become Gospel Rumor instead of an increase of meat.
It will be "well I heard so and so said" and there will be no increase in information as a result.

Either the correlated model starts putting more fact and doctrine into the manuals or we are pretty much stuck drinking milk.

[Jeanne]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

The issue in many wards (although not all) is that more discussion doesn't equal more meat.

Sometimesaint is right that without study (a CFR function if you will) discussion will quickly become Gospel Rumor instead of an increase of meat.
It will be "well I heard so and so said" and there will be no increase in information as a result.

Either the correlated model starts putting more fact and doctrine into the manuals or we are pretty much stuck drinking milk.

But you could follow up the next week..with the gospel principles and go from there. Imagine, even if you don't get to real doctrine the full time, just having people excited to go to class and to church. I felt this way when I took the adult institute class on the Book of Mormon..half of us was full of questions and we discussed..but the next week, the teacher had some answers.

Edited September 30, 2016 by Jeanne

[thesometimesaint]

Sunday School is not an adult institute class. Both have their place, but they are not the same thing.

[HappyJackWagon]

7 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

Sunday School is not an adult institute class. Both have their place, but they are not the same thing.

Why not. Why can't they be the same kind of class. Institute classes don't exist in my area.

For all the negative talk about correlation there is a legitimate need for it. Otherwise we get rumor and rumination by the crazy guy in the back of the class taught as doctrine. There's no doubt that a balance would be challenging. It seems to me like an adult institute class is a better balance than the standard SS class.

[Jeanne]

9 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

Sunday School is not an adult institute class. Both have their place, but they are not the same thing.

Just different manuals..that is a shame because I ate that institute class up...I have never studied so hard and had fun at the same time. What was really nice was that all of us class members became great friends.

Edited October 1, 2016 by Jeanne

[thesometimesaint]

3 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Why not. Why can't they be the same kind of class. Institute classes don't exist in my area.

For all the negative talk about correlation there is a legitimate need for it. Otherwise we get rumor and rumination by the crazy guy in the back of the class taught as doctrine. There's no doubt that a balance would be challenging. It seems to me like an adult institute class is a better balance than the standard SS class.

I don't know. However nothing is stopping you from reading, studying, praying, for the correct answers on your own. Ask your Home Teachers, Priesthood leaders. Heck you can even ask me.  

[strappinglad]

I hereby prophesy that within 10 years , Sunday School will be eliminated and that the block will reduce to 2 1/4 hours. This will be done for demographic and financial reasons. If I am wrong, I will be off by only ONE order of magnitude.

[churchistrue]

If the teacher can make it interesting, with good insights into the text, humor, interesting stories that relate to the material, etc, than I would much rather the teacher lecture the whole time rather than take comments.  Comments are usually lame.  Worst of all would be a bad teacher that bores the class to death.  In that case, comments are better.  Brethren are probably hedging against that.

 

 

Edited October 12, 2016 by churchistrue

[stemelbow]

1 hour ago, churchistrue said:

If the teacher can make it interesting, with good insights into the text, humor, interesting stories that relate to the material, etc, than I would much rather the teacher lecture the whole time rather than take comments.  Comments are usually lame.  Worst of all would be a bad teacher that bores the class to death.  In that case, comments are better.  Brethren are probably hedging against that.

 

 

I hate to say it but I agree.  The worst lessons in GD are the ones that just leave it open for the class to talk.  Some of the least productive things are said when that happens.  Even in fairly well structured classes we get some pretty lame comments, stories or anecdotes.  Then again what is to be expected with the really lame teaching material? 

I say I hate to say it because for me some of my favorite times in life are sitting around discussing openly with people.  I don't see it working well in GD though.  Too many people and the course material is a joke to begin with. 

I'd rather have a skilled teacher free to broach topics and use material outside the manual.  Engage me with cool visuals or even animations.  I'd eat that stuff up.  But nobody but a few of us loonies would want that, I've learned. 

[Atheist Mormon]

On 9/28/2016 at 5:52 PM, JLHPROF said:

Is this going to result in members have more understanding of the gospel or less?

The sad thing about religion is no matter what you do you cannot overcome the boredom of the subject; the story is always the same.     I still have the manuals from late seventies which to their credit CES was very inventive about diversifying the subjects......Even then one year you study OT, other year NT, next comes Church History....End of the day the boredom fills the student...as the Ecclesiastes writer so succinctly expresses; "Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher, vanity of vanities! All is vanity."  "Meaningless! Meaningless!" says the Teacher. "Utterly meaningless! Everything is meaningless.".

In contrast the whole Planet races towards knowledge, discovering unknowns of wast Space, Oceans, Medicine......In contrast some us stuck studying myths......

[HappyJackWagon]

On ‎10‎/‎1‎/‎2016 at 1:34 PM, thesometimesaint said:

I don't know. However nothing is stopping you from reading, studying, praying, for the correct answers on your own. Ask your Home Teachers, Priesthood leaders. Heck you can even ask me.  

No kidding  I do all of those things, even interact with you, which is lovely. But think about the need a board like this fills. It is filling a void that many members feel. They feel the need to discuss and dig deep and share opinions and bounce ideas off each other and express frustration and doubt and...all the other ways an open and active community communicates with one another.

People like me post under pseudonyms because I can't discuss anything outside the standard, approved church narrative with my HT or PH leaders because of fear of reprisal. So the church can either be involved in the conversation or they can continue to sit on the sidelines. A place like Sunday School class should be a place where open, honest, ethical discussions can be engaged instead of simply having a teacher regurgitate the lesson manual.

 

[bsjkki]

25 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

No kidding  I do all of those things, even interact with you, which is lovely. But think about the need a board like this fills. It is filling a void that many members feel. They feel the need to discuss and dig deep and share opinions and bounce ideas off each other and express frustration and doubt and...all the other ways an open and active community communicates with one another.

People like me post under pseudonyms because I can't discuss anything outside the standard, approved church narrative with my HT or PH leaders because of fear of reprisal. So the church can either be involved in the conversation or they can continue to sit on the sidelines. A place like Sunday School class should be a place where open, honest, ethical discussions can be engaged instead of simply having a teacher regurgitate the lesson manual.

 

That is why I'm here.  I feel I can't seek help for my doubts or have honest discussions in the real world. 

[bsjkki]

This board has helped me through a faith crisis.  Expressing concerns and questioning things and reading through many posts debating some unanswerable questions, has actually increased my faith.  Realizing people much more educated than I can have questions, debate answers, admitt the "church" is imperfect and still retain a firm testimony has broadened my knowledge and allowed me to retain a desire to "stay in the boat."

Edited October 12, 2016 by bsjkki

[thesometimesaint]

2 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

No kidding  I do all of those things, even interact with you, which is lovely. But think about the need a board like this fills. It is filling a void that many members feel. They feel the need to discuss and dig deep and share opinions and bounce ideas off each other and express frustration and doubt and...all the other ways an open and active community communicates with one another.

People like me post under pseudonyms because I can't discuss anything outside the standard, approved church narrative with my HT or PH leaders because of fear of reprisal. So the church can either be involved in the conversation or they can continue to sit on the sidelines. A place like Sunday School class should be a place where open, honest, ethical discussions can be engaged instead of simply having a teacher regurgitate the lesson manual.

I've never felt any fear of reprisal for what I say in Sunday School, and I'm rather outspoken. If someone gets a little better understanding of the subject at hand that's GREAT. If not OH WELL that's their problem. I've taught in Sunday School, Elders Quorum Meetings, and High Priest Group Meetings. They keep asking me to do more. I'm either pretty good at it, or they're delusional.