http://www.cps.neu.edu/prospective-students/american-teaching-methods.php

The above article – “The American Teachings Methods” was about the variety of new and old teaching styles and methods that teachers use in the College of Professional Studies at Northeastern University. Northeastern’s recommended teaching methods not only teach the students while keeping them engaged in the classroom but also expose the prospective teachers to learning styles that they will be able to add to their repertoire as a future instructor. Several examples of learning styles were listed –

• Class lectures delivered by expert professors who are also leading practitioners in their professional fields
• In-class discussions promoting interaction to help students improve verbal skills and to learn through dialogue and debate
• Class presentations encouraging students to take a leadership role, share their knowledge, and improve public speaking skills
• Challenging opportunities to participate in advanced research and formulate opinions
• Course readings that require students to expand their perspective and synthesize new material
• Peer student feedback that promotes learning through constructive critiques of each other’s work

Methods of teaching fascinate me as an educator, but much balance is required for one to be an effective biblically based instructor. This was a good article, and I do not have a problem with the idea or the methods described either philosophically or biblically.

Some further considerations >

What is the proper place of “fun” in the classroom? Learning can and should be fun; the teacher has an obligation to connect with each and every student in order to interest him in the subject material. Therefore, teaching does not happen if learning does not take place (exceptions arise). Is learning hard work? There is no doubt learning is difficult, but the more interest that is created the easier the task becomes. Is there a stewardship issue? Both as a student and as a teacher the principle of biblical stewardship applies (study to show thyself approved). Does the subject, the level, the time of day, time of year, etc., affect the degree of “fun” used? Absolutely, unless you are Lowery or Robin Williams, you will not always be fun – 180 days of school is a long time period, and fun is not always appropriate. The content and the age is also a factor at times. However, there is no excuse for a bitter, hateful, “unfun” teacher in the classroom. As an administrator, it is one of your responsibilities to identify and extract mean-spirited, unfit teachers.

 

Here is another interesting concept found on this website> http://www.ronclarkacademy.com/our-history

Although I agree with the premise to create excitement and the big idea behind RCA, we need to be cautious as Christian school educators (opposed to private schools) to not buy into worldly philosophies or use an approach that is not biblical in nature or even one that may be humanistic.

Here is a final thought I found > Great quote: “My ultimate goal is to lead students to be more like Christ; and if I can make learning fun in the process, I have no problem with doing so.” This is truly the ultimate goal of ALL Christian education.

The teacher definitely sets the tone of the classroom… “If Mama (or teacher) ain’t happy – ain’t nobody happy!”

Christian Fundamentalists are being maligned today, even by other “religious” groups. You can mention a generic god … but when you talk about “Jesus” or the God of the Bible even “religious” people get upset. Kinda like Merry Christmas vs. Happy Holidays!

We have lost this battle even on the civic level a long time ago. Unitarians took over the first Public School departments and are continuing to move American schools to atheism. “All it takes for evil to triumph is good men to do nothing.” We actually saw a great grassroots movement in Greenville with the contract with America in 1996.

We are seeing a reverse censorship now in secular education. Anything Christian is being left out, overlooked, or despaired. The idea of separation of church & state has been railroaded to mean what the secular postmodernists want it to mean – which gives license to misinterpret the idea of church separation. I have reviewed textbooks often in administration and see them becoming more and more anti-Christian. Our great country was established with the idea of “Freedom of religion” – NOT freedom from religion.

John Dewey Summary

MEILLEUR (2005) Jay Martin writes: “Compared with every one of the major persons contributing to American life during Dewey’s time—indeed, compared with most of the minor ones—Dewey has been accorded almost no biographical attention.” He credits George Dykhuizen’s, The Life and Mind of John Dewey (1973) for being Dewey’s only extant biography.” The lack of biographical material on John Dewey is surprising. Meilleur goes into great detail describing Dewey’s transformation that took place about the time he moved to Columbia University. Dewey was said to become very dark even depressed as his son died in Europe the summer before he started at Columbia. Dewey shifted to an aggressive nature particularly concerning politics and the U. S. thoughts on World War I. His views and support of America joining the War effort caused great conflict even among some of his friends and former students. Dewey also moved to more philosophy after his move to Columbia.

John Dewey made several contributions in the areas of Psychology, philosophy, and education. Throughout his life, Dewey wrote over 35 books and published over 815 articles on numerous subjects. He taught at the University of Michigan for almost ten years; then he was a professor at the University of Chicago for ten more, before moving to Columbia University where he taught for a tenure of 26 years at the Teaching College. Dewey also traveled literally all over the world as a guest lecturer spreading his agenda and philosophy. Dewey was a brilliant man with a passive way of deceptively persuading the opinions of men to believe like he did when it comes to philosophy and education. Dewey was respected by his peers and his students but stood out head and shoulders above his contemporaries in the field of education and philosophy.

 

John Dewey Critique

The ironic thing with Dewey is while he believed in free thought and no absolutes – he was a highly educated man, setting at the feet of many lecture style instructors. Then Dewey taught on the college level for over forty years intentionally influencing multitudes of students to be like him.

John Dewey impacted education during his time and now like no other scholar in the modern era. Progressive thought became the accepted norm for nearly fifty years in America as a result of Dewey’s life and propaganda. Even to this day, we are still seeing a profound impact on education in America and abroad. Dewey’s influence on current practices of education particularly methods has been an uphill battle in Christian circles. His philosophical thought is also pervasive throughout the United States and Europe.

Fortunately, the last fifty years have seen somewhat of a shift back-to-basics in educational thought but the effects are still everywhere we turn in education. It is my recommendation that educators, particularly Christian education professionals not only steer clear of John Dewey’s philosophy of education. But also that Christian educators are diligent to be extremely cautious when it comes to modes or methods of education that may seem harmless but do not have a Biblically firm foundation. Secular humanism and postmodern thought are dominating institutes of higher education, Universities, and even secondary schools now more than ever. We as born-again fundamental Christians need to be strong and vigilant not only in our endeavors to train the next generation but also in our responsibility and privilege to spread the Gospel to a needy world without Christ. But be encouraged that people are spiritually hungry and young people today are searching for truth more than ever. The millennial generation is not afraid to ask questions and we should not be afraid to stand and give an answer even in the face of liberal philosophy.

 

 

 

References

Meilleur, Maurice (2005). John Dewey redux. The Antioch Review, 63(1), 173-193.

Lumm, L.W. (1996). A biblical analysis of the educational philosophy expressed by John Dewey

            in his original writings. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Bob Jones University,

Greenville, SC.

Our cultural changes, particularly in Christianity, has increased exponentially in the last decade. This change is obviously multifaceted – I believe these changes are the result of the millennials’ style as well as many Christians’ values waxing worse and worse.

While it is ok to evaluate our Christian forefathers’ beliefs and practices and it is ok to change how we do things even in the church, we need to make sure we not only change orthodoxy in light of the Bible’s never changing principles but also make sure we know why the “fence” was there in the first place. Old generations were usually slower to make changes and typically stood for tradition for the sake of tradition. I believe a balanced approach is wise regarding changes and it borders on arrogance to think we are smarter than our fathers.

I know I am older than some educators; but my approach to any change, particularly when it comes to administration, is to move slowly and “boil frogs” so as not to alert the frog (employee, parent, student, or church member). Remember, we can change anything to grow more members – but what we gain them with not only matters (Biblically), but the means with which we won them will have to be increased in order to keep them.  I do not believe in the “come as you are and stay as you were” mentality that is being disseminated in Seeker Friendly ministries. Whether we are talking about Christian or Church education we need to be pointing others to Christ both in evangelism and discipleship. Our worldview must be intentional and Biblical. As Christians, we have a responsibility to individually reach individuals for Christ and then to train them (new Christians/the disciples) to reproduce themselves – to “teach others also” through testimony, teaching, and talking/witness. While being culturally relevant we must be Biblically rooted.

This is one of the biggest problems every Christian school (CS) or any institution of any kind faces. In order to stick with the original mission or the schools stronger modified mission the CS must intentionally train new staff, remind former staff, and review its mission / worldview continually. This will naturally be done during accreditation visits but should also be made part of the In-service process and built into the school culture. Students need to have ownership in this as well in order for it really be effective.

We do need to get back to the foundations of why we have and believe in Christian schools. Biblical wisdom must be modeled as well as taught. We as educators must focus on a truly Biblical worldview being instilled into the students – that is ultimate education/ discipleship; “teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you” Mt. 28:20. We must produce disciples that can reproduce.

A lot of times children reject the teachings of their parents, churches & Christian schools. I have seen a lot of this, being in administration, through the years. Students graduate from Christian schools and turn their backs almost immediately on God. Some of this may be from seeing the hypocrisy in the Christian leaders’ lives – we can speculate all day; if I knew the answer to this I would dedicate my life exclusively to speaking on this one thought in Christian schools and conventions.