Daybreak begins a new series this Sunday. Life can be different, yeah, it really can.

Lately I have been thinking about the strategy that the church uses as a means to encourage the spiritual formation of others, specifically children. The following is the fifth article of a series of articles that attempts to understand how we can do this. You can find all the articles at www.drewboswell.com.

Evaluation is a means to make a poor teacher, adequate, an adequate teacher, good, or a good teacher, exceptional. Ephesians 4:11–13 states, “It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up” (NIV). These verses show that it is the responsibility of those who are in a church’s leadership position to train and equip those who teach the body of Christ.

While the Bible commands all Christians to “go and make disciples,”[1] which involves “teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you” and all parents are given clear mandate to teach their children the ways of the Lord,[2] should anyone or everyone teach in the church? In 1 Cor 12:4–7 it teaches that all Christians have been given a spiritual gift but that not all Christians have the same gift. These spiritual gifts are not for their own benefit but for the edification and common good of the church body. The verse states, “There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit. There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. There are different kinds of working, but the same God works all of them in all men. Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good” (NIV).

Later in verse 12 Paul adds, “The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body,” and he continues this line of thought in verse 14, “Now the body is not made up of one part but of many” (NIV). Therefore, if the church is to be seen allegorically as a body, which is made of different parts performing different functions, the answer to the previous question is no, not everyone should seek to teach but only those who have been given this gift from God. Romans 12:3–6 teaches that even among those who have the spiritual gift of teaching, this gift should be exercised in humbleness and love;

For by the grace given me I say to every one of you: Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment, in accordance with the measure of faith God has given you. Just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, so in Christ we who are many form one body, and each member belongs to all the others. We have different gifts, according to the grace given us (NIV).

James 3:1 warns that there will be an ultimate evaluation of the teaching ministry within the Church; “Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly” (NIV). Those that presume to teach should be evaluated in order to determine if they have the gift of teaching, and if they are exercising this gift with humility and love, so that when their ultimate evaluation before God is given they will hear the words, “Well done, good and faithful servant!” (NIV).[3]

But even if a person has been given the gift of teaching, there are other things to consider. Philippians 3:12–14 says,
Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already been made perfect, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me. Brothers, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus (NIV).
Therefore, a teacher is to be an example of a person who is “pressing on” and growing and maturing in their own faith. They recognize that even though they are an example that their students are to follow, they are not perfect and have areas of their own lives in which they need to grow.

God requires that teachers be faithful and 1 Cor 4:2 says, “Now it is required that those who have been given a trust must prove faithful” (NIV). Eldridge says, “Those in a Bible study class need to know that a teacher will be consistently present, adequately prepared, and personally interested in their lives.”[4] If students’ lives are to be changed because of the teaching in the classroom, they must respect and trust their teachers. Teachers must also be faithful to following the leadership that is over them, to remaining faithful to God’s Word, and to the church as a whole. Bruce Wilkinson has said,
If the truth has already transformed the teacher, then the truth has a far greater chance of transforming the students. That’s why teaching other people’s material often lacks power. Unless your presentation has your fingerprints on it, and has made a difference in your life, you can almost count on it not to compel you students to make changes in their lives.[5]

The Bible has to move the teacher and change her heart before it can ever move the students’ hearts toward obedience and love for God.
1 Corinthians 13:2 says, “If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (NIV). The apostle Paul gives another evaluative component of those that should teach within the local church, love. If a teacher lacks love for his students, but is brilliant in subject matter Paul says that he is “nothing.” Superior knowledge cannot replace love in the classroom. This is not a mushy sentimentality, but a genuine concern for another’s well-being.

Continuing to address the question of who should teach in the church, there is another area to be evaluated. Does the proposed teacher know how to study the Bible? While churches often give their teachers curriculum to follow, the Bible is ultimately the core of what is being taught. Eldridge states that it is hard to teach a lesson from Scripture if one only relies on other people’s understanding of the text.[6] When a teacher personally studies and wrestles with the concept in her own mind, it will enhance the teaching time far more than a skim through a teacher’s guide to a curriculum. Along this same line of thought is the teacher’s ability to communicate what he has learned or studied in such a way that the students understand. Even though the teacher may be well prepared and the text may have moved him greatly, he still needs to be able to show the students how to apply it to their lives at a level that they can understand. Besides knowledge of the subject matter, teachers need to understand the learning process.

Lastly, following the thought of evaluating who should teach, an administrator should look for a person who understands the importance of developing relationships both within and outside the classroom. The teacher has a very special opportunity to foster and cultivate a relationship that no one else can. It is through this relationship of love and understanding that the most dynamic teaching and learning can take place. It is during this most influential time that students need teachers who love and desire to teach them in such a way that their lives will be changed.

[1] Matt 28:19–20
[2] Deuteronomy 6
[3] Matt 25:21
[4] Eldridge, The Teaching Ministry of the Church, 298.
[5] Bruce Wilkinson, The Seven Laws of a Learner (Sisters, OR; Multnomah, 1992), 157.
[6] Eldridge, The Teaching Ministry of the Church, 299.

In order to see if this gradual spiritual development of the child is taking place, there must be some way of determining spiritual formation and teaching effectiveness. If the teacher in the classroom is not teaching adequately, then the entire children’s ministry department suffers. It suffers because the teacher of the next age/skill level has to go back and reinstruct basic principles in order to move forward to more complicated material.

Eldridge gives several definitions of educational evaluation when he says,
Ralph Tyler (1949) defines it as documenting the congruence of learner outcomes and program objectives. Popham (1971) says it is a comparison of performance data with a commonly accepted standard. It is also viewed as specifying, obtaining, and providing relevant information for judging decision alternatives (Stufflebeam, 1971). D. Campbell Wyckoff defines evaluation as ‘a process of comparing what is with what ought to be, in order to determine areas and directions for improvement.’[1]

For the purpose of this article, the following definition will be used for evaluation: “To gather data for the purpose of making a decision.” With regard to the individual teacher, evaluation consists of two areas: 1) Is the teacher following the “big picture” plan for her age group and not her own agenda, and 2) Does the teacher have the skills to teach what needs to be taught? Are the kids growing spiritually? Therefore, before any person begins to teach, there should be some way to evaluate if that person should serve in this area. In too many instances, there is a “desperate” need to have a person in the classroom to fill an age graded slot, and anyone who is willing to do it is put in the classroom with no training, no expectations or job description, and no help. Sink or swim! They are figuratively locked away in a classroom and are expected to stay there indefinitely. Curriculum is slid under her door every quarter, and the prayer is that she will just keep teaching.

Recruiting and volunteer retention could be improved by providing clear expectations, a path for them to follow, and thorough evaluations that are designed to help the teachers improve their teaching skills. 2 Timothy 2:15–16 says, “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth” (NIV). A church may have trouble recruiting new teachers or retain the teachers they already have, if that person feels “ashamed” of their ability to teach. But if someone were to show them where they could improve and how to do so, they may remain. No matter how gifted the teacher, there is always room for improvement.

Sadly, too many (not all) parents are not concerned about measurable goals or learning objectives. Many are more concerned about their children behaving properly at church and show little or no concern for what they are actually taught during their time there. Barna has said,
In all the evaluation research we have conducted during the past two decades, I have seen firsthand that you get what you measure. Unfortunately, most parents are pleased simply to have churchgoing children. If the children learn anything of positive value while they are at church, it is deemed as a bonus – if it is even noticed. There is usually little if any attempt by the family to track what the child is learning and integrating. The outcomes that are measured more closely relate to behavior modification than to spiritual development.[2]

If there is no evaluative process to determine the progress or lack of progress in a student’s life, then “assessment is based on assumptions and intuition.”[3] The problem with this, or any subjective way of evaluating a ministry, is that it is based upon emotions and impressions that can greatly fluctuate from week to week, or even moment to moment. Focus by leaders is then focused on placating these opinions and emotions instead of being able to strategically deal with objective issues in tangible ways and making real changes for the better. A subjective evaluator may not even have a full picture of the overall ministry, but may only have a skewed picture of reality. By having an objective means to evaluate, it is easier to develop a more extensive diagnostic process that would enable an evaluator to develop a more complete picture of the ministry. This process can be added to or removed, depending upon the value of data collected.

You can also view this article and the entire series at www.drewboswell.com.

[1] Eldridge, The Teaching Ministry of the Church, 310.
[2] Barna, Transforming Children Into Spiritual Champions, 126.
[3] Ibid.

I came home from work day before yesterday to Kimberly saying, “the principal called today.” I said, “hold on, let me put my stuff down.” So I then went into the kitchen, sat down and Kimberly told me the story. As the kids were leaving the house that morning they had all asked for cards to give to their friends to invite them to come to church. So I dug through my “stuff” and pulled out several for each of them, and off they went to get on the bus. Apparently, as they were in route to school a boy on H-G’s bus had emptied the contents of his backpack, unzipped it and placed it upon his head. She then told him to take it off or he was going to die (or get hurt we can’t get the story straight). She then handed him a sermon series card from our church entitled “parenting under attack” and went on her way, and invited him to come.

For some reason the boy’s mother became aware of this conversation and the boy’s being “proselytized” and went to the principal saying something about separation of church and state. The principal went to H-G in her classroom and demanded all the rest of the religious propaganda (too late she had already infected others with her zealous hateful propaganda). — I know I’m starting to exaggerate so I’ll tone it back down.

After which, the principal went back to her office and called Kimberly asking our family not to do this anymore. It was not given out during the instruction time. She was expressing her first amendment right to speak about what she believed and wanted to persuade others to her point of view. If there had been a Muslim boy or Jehovah’s Witness giving my children “stuff” I would have talked with my children about what we believe, discuss the material but I would never demand that the other children don’t have the right to tell others what they believe.

It was the atheist Voltaire who said, “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”

We live in a crazy world, that just doesn’t make sense some times. But my kids resolve in their beliefs have only been strengthened not weakened. And they will not remain silent — trust me, I try often.

The boys did something similar a while back:
bus stop evangelist part two

also here’s the original bus stop evangelist entry
bus stop evangelist part one

Lately I have been thinking about the strategy that the church uses as a means to encourage the spiritual formation of others, specifically children. The following is the third article of a series of articles that attempts to understand how we can do this. You can find all the articles at www.drewboswell.com.

Another way to help parents and teachers in their effort to educate their children would be to have written learning goals and objectives. Doug Fields has written a book entitled Purpose Driven Youth Ministry. What makes this book different from any other “how to do youth ministry” book is that he introduces the concept of identifying “H.A.B.I.T.S. ”[1] that students should be encouraged to implement into their lives.[2] These are activities that students do outside of structured church programs and are an effort to get students to have a quiet time, an accountability partner, memorize Scripture, etc., on their own, away from adult supervision. Field’s theory is that if these “H.A.B.I.T.S.” truly become second nature in the lives of the students, they will more than likely carry them over when they graduate out of youth ministry. The strength of this concept is that he has identified a short list of six things that the youth ministry can focus on and encourage in the lives of the student.
With regard to a strategy of equipping children within the local church, it would be helpful to provide parents and teachers with a list of learning objectives that the church feels are fundamental to the child having a balanced and maturing relationship with God.[3] These learning goals can even be broken down by appropriate age range. For example, two-year-olds would have completely different objectives than second graders. In order for the material to be reviewed over time these various sets of learning objectives could build upon one another over the course of the child’s time in the church’s children’s ministry.

Someone may ask, “But what if a new student comes into the class or a student misses several lessons?” This lack of knowledge on a particular topic (missions, evangelism, Samson, for example) can be dealt with by making the topics cyclical in nature. For example, a first and second grade class may learn about “missions” and when they graduate up to the third and fourth grade class, they may study it again. Instead of repeating the old material, it will be reviewed and new material will become the focus. At each class level, even though the same topics may be covered, the learning objectives change toward becoming more complex.[4]

There are several benefits of having written learning goals and objectives. One is that the teachers have a clear list of learning objectives that can help them in evaluating if their teaching has been effective. Second, parents have a clear list of learning objectives so that they can be working on these concepts at home, in the car to the soccer game, during bath time, or whenever the parent thinks would be an appropriate time to teach.[5] The third benefit is that the home and the church can work together, in concert to see that the child’s life conforms to the set biblical teaching objectives and life habits. It has been said that, “what is not evaluated is not worth much.” It is humanity’s natural tendency to drift toward mediocrity rather than push toward improvement and growth. Therefore, a fourth benefit of learning objectives is that it encourages the teacher to do a good job of teaching because he knows that his ministry will be evaluated when the child “graduates” to the next class. There will also be a form of outside evaluation when the child goes home and the parents ask them questions based on the set learning objectives. In discussing this concept of written goals and learning objectives Barna says,

One of the most startling revelations I encountered on this journey was finding that many of the effective ministries have a long-term plan—in some cases an 18-year developmental plan with specific ideals outlined for each age groups from infants through high school seniors. While those churches allow for spontaneity and flexibility despite their long-range planning, they are fully committed to implementing their “big picture” plan.[6]

A teacher may have teaching objectives for a given year, and she may even have learning objectives that she has developed on her own, but for her ministry to be successful these goals have to coincide with the “big picture” for the child’s spiritual development.

A fifth benefit of having written goals and objectives is that the teaching ministry of a church from nursery to high school can function as a team, with one level building upon the next until the child is mature in Christ.[7] A teacher or parent could reference the learning goals and objectives and seek to help one another in their teaching efforts. It is in essence a map for everyone to follow, so that one could get to the desired destination; a growing disciple of Christ.

[1] HABITS is an acronym where the “H” stands for Hang Time With God, “A” stands for Accountability Partner, “B” stands for Bible Memorization, “I” stands for Involvement in the Church, “T” stands for Tithing, and “S” stands for Studying the Bible.
[2] Fields, Purpose Driven Youth Ministry, Chap. 9.
[3] See Appendix A
[4] See Appendix B for an example of how topics can be repeated with the learning objectives becoming more complex.
[5] Deut 6:7–9
[6] Barna, Transforming Children Into Spiritual Champions, 100.
[7] “Maturing” as defined in Heb 5:14, “But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.” (NIV)