By Professor David Sellnow<\/p>\n
Mr. Scribner stood in front of his sixth-grade classroom. He had prepared a SMART Board presentation titled, \u201cMajor Moments of World War II.\u201d At a touch, he brought up descriptions of what happened at various places on the map.<\/p>\n
A student interrupted with a question:\u00a0 \u201cWhy did the Hitler guy want pieces of Checkerslavka?\u201d<\/p>\n
Another asked, \u201cWhy did they call it lightning war? What did that mean?\u201d<\/p>\n
And another wondered, \u201cWhy was it a \u2018major moment\u2019 if people were losing and running away?\u201d<\/p>\n
Mr. Scribner brushed off their questions, wanting to get through his prepared presentation. \u00a0\u201cLet\u2019s not worry about that,\u201d he told the class. \u201cJust follow along and take notes on what happened at each place on the map. Tomorrow we\u2019ll have a quiz\u2014a matching exercise where you line up the events with where they happened.\u201d<\/p>\n
Quite likely, you cringe at Mr. Scribner\u2019s approach. \u00a0Teaching isn\u2019t just pushing out facts to be noted and then repeated on a quiz. Teaching intends to inspire questions \u2013 and seeks to answer them. \u201cAll learning is a process of discovery,\u201d said Mortimer Adler. According to Adler, \u201cPassive absorption or rote memorization does not deserve to be called learning\u201d (Adler 1976, 1987).<\/p>\n
Even in a subject like mathematics, where there\u2019s less room for interpretation and opinion than in history, we don\u2019t count learning merely as asserting accurate answers.\u00a0 Imagine a student brought her algebra homework to Mr. Scribner, saying, \u201cI got the right answer according to what\u2019s in the back of the textbook, but I\u2019m not sure how I got there or if I was doing it properly\u201d . . . and Mr. Scribner responded, \u201cIt doesn\u2019t matter whether you understand what you\u2019re doing; all that matters is that you have the right answers.\u201d<\/p>\n
Again, we\u2019d be disappointed in such a teacher\u2019s misplaced objectives. Philosopher of education Thomas F. Green said, \u201cIn mathematics . . . a concern simply to lead students to the right answer . . . is a fundamentally defective kind of instruction. To focus simply on securing a right solution without understanding the nature of mathematical operations is the mathematical equivalent of indoctrination\u201d (Green, 1971).<\/p>\n
Green used the term \u201cindoctrination\u201d in a pejorative sense. In English usage today, \u201cindoctrinate\u201d does come with unwelcome connotations. To indoctrinate is \u201cto teach (someone) to fully accept the ideas, opinions, and beliefs of a particular group and not to consider other ideas, opinions and beliefs<\/em>\u201d (Merriam-Webster Dictionary, emphasis added<\/em>).<\/p>\n As religious people, we tend to think of religious indoctrination as a good thing \u2013 imparting good doctrine to our children and our children\u2019s children. But as a method<\/em>, is indoctrination <\/em>the way to pass along the truths of Christian faith?<\/p>\n When Christians don\u2019t want to discuss difficulties and tackle objections, the world we seek to reach with the gospel remains unimpressed. David Kinnaman, president of the Barna Group<\/a>, has commented: \u201cA faith that does not effectively address convoluted and thorny issues seems out of tune with a generation asking big questions and expressing candid doubts. Spirituality that is merely focused on \u2018dos and don\u2019ts\u2019 rings hollow\u201d (Kinnaman and Lyons, 2008).<\/p>\n When teaching the faith, we want believers to consider all sorts of problems and ideas and opinions \u2013 in the interests of strengthening their confidence in Christ and his Word. Disciples do more than rehearse what answers are supposed to go in what blanks on their worksheets; they grapple with spiritual questions and see how those questions are answered in Jesus.<\/p>\n In Scripture, Jesus frequently is referred to as \u201cTeacher\u201d (cf. Mark 13:1, John 13:13, etc). The term is used nearly 50 times in the Bible to characterize Jesus\u2019 work (Graves, 1919). In the language of the New Testament, the word \u201cto teach\u201d literally means \u201cto cause to learn\u201d (BibleHub, 2004-2015).<\/p>\n Watching Jesus in action as a teacher of spiritual truths, we see him spurring learning with lots of conversation and interaction. Jesus engaged learners by means of stories and illustrations \u2013 parables, we call them. And if the disciples didn\u2019t quite grasp his intended meaning, he took the time later to explain (cf. Luke 8:4-15). His \u201ctests\u201d were embedded in real-life issues and situations. Jesus taught much doctrine, yes. However, it would be inaccurate to say he indoctrinated<\/em> people.<\/p>\n But what shall we say about a teacher like the apostle Paul? Didn\u2019t he do much that could be called \u201cindoctrination\u201d? Isn\u2019t Romans essentially a doctrine lecture?<\/p>\n Look again. Even in that thorough detailing of doctrines, Paul anticipated questions and responded to them. More than half a dozen times in the course of his instruction, Paul paused to ask, \u201cWhat shall we say?\u201d and expanded on the thought or dealt with possible challenges to his points. (Cf. Romans 3:5, 4:1, 6:1, 7:7, 8:31, 9:14, 9:30.) (Maybe you caught on that I was trying to do something similar in this paragraph, responding to a potential counterargument.)<\/p>\n When I surveyed students about religious teaching they had experienced in their Lutheran education (elementary, high school, college), a fourth of them characterized the mode of teaching as \u201cindoctrination\u201d \u2013 with a negative connotation. I won\u2019t go into further details here. (There\u2019s a webinar for that<\/a>.)<\/p>\n I hope, though, that each of us, at all levels of spiritual instruction, will seek to engage the hearts and minds of those who are learning of Christ. Becoming well-versed in doctrine is good, but we want to lead learners there by instructing, interacting, relating, connecting . . . not so much by what would be termed \u201cindoctrinating.\u201d<\/p>\n David Sellnow (NWC 1982, WLS 1986) teaches theology, history, and philosophy at Martin Luther College, where he also currently serves as chairman of the General Education Committee and of the History-Social Science Division. He has presented on the topic of \u201cTeaching the Faith\u201d at the Lutheran College Conference (2014) and the Western Wisconsin Lutheran Teachers\u2019 Conference (2015).<\/em><\/p>\n To pursue this topic further, consider enrolling in a webinar titled, \u201cTeaching the Faith: Will We Instruct or Indoctrinate?\u201d\u00a0 The webinar, led by Prof. Sellnow, will spur discussion of the issues raised in this article. <\/em><\/p>\n WEB0801 is slated to run July 27 \u2013 August 3.\u00a0 Enroll in the webinar ($20 enrollment fee) at the <\/em>MLC Continuing Education site<\/em><\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n References<\/p>\n Adler, M. (1976, 1987).\u00a0 Teaching, learning and their counterfeits.\u00a0 Reforming education: The Opening of the American Mind. <\/em>Retrieved April 4, 2015 from http:\/\/www.learningmethods.com\/downloads\/pdf\/adler–reforming.education–letter.size.pdf<\/p>\n Didasko. (n.b.).\u00a0 In BibleHub: Online Bible study suite<\/em>. Retrieved April 4, 2015 from http:\/\/biblehub.com\/greek\/1321.htm<\/p>\n Green, T.F.\u00a0 (1971). The activities of teaching. <\/em>New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.<\/p>\n Graves, F.P. (1919). What did Jesus teach?\u00a0An examination of the educational material and method of the Master.<\/em> New York, NY: Macmillan.<\/p>\n Kinnaman, D. & Lyons, G. (2007). Unchristian: What a new generation really thinks about Christianity\u00a0 . . . and why it matters. <\/em>Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.<\/p>\nShare this:<\/h3>