Teaching – Page 3 – Education is Discipleship

August 5, 2019

Verse of the Week: II Timothy 3:7

“…always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth.”
II Timothy 3:7

In his list of the evil attributes of people in the last days, Paul includes this stinging indictment. It’s a poignant one for anyone involved in education.

Two things strike me.

First, it’s possible to learn and not have truth as that learning’s object. The learning is real. It just doesn’t go where it should.

Second, the destination does matter. It’s not just about the journey or process of learning. If I keep gathering knowledge but don’t care about how what I’ve learned connects to the truth, my learning is a distraction.

As the semester nears, I want my students to learn but I am desperate for them to know the truth of God’s love, grace, mercy, and justice. I pray that my own educational ventures will be focused on truth and that in living this out, I will be better able to teach my students to do this as well.

July 31, 2019April 19, 2020

How Do You Think Well?

Jacobs, Alan. How to Think: A Survival Guide for a World at Odds, 2017.

Alan Jacobs, an English professor in the Baylor University Honors Program, provides hope for those who wish to think more soundly in these contentious times through this short, lively manual on the way we make decisions. Jacobs engages with the experts on the topic (chiefly Daniel Kahneman and Jonathan Haidt), pulls specific examples out of the recent past to illustrate his points, and even provides a compelling checklist for thinking well. As Jacobs contends, part of good thinking is merely diagnostic: knowing that you have a thinking conundrum. If you can internalize a few more of Jacobs’s recommended best practices, you’ll be glad you read the book.

July 30, 2019

Why I Believe in God Part 1: Rhetorical Analysis

Over the next couple of weeks, I’ll be analyzing the rhetoric of Cornelius Van Til’s “Why I Believe in God.”

In the first part of his apology for believing in God, Cornelius Van Til argues that believing in God is necessary because without God we couldn’t understand anything else. He begins his apology for believing in God by bringing up eminent scientists and philosophers who are have recently addressed belief. Jeans and Eddington allow for the possibility of religious experience, and Joad says that evil’s reality forces him to consider the possibility of God’s existence. Van Til wonders if the reader has pondered what happens after death. After all, even Socrates—the wisest philosopher—was uncertain of what would happen after he died. Is there a judgment or might there be a God? How does one know for sure. Asking such questions is a sure sign of intelligence and indicates a desire for you to know why it is you believe what you believe. You want to know what’s real, and asking about God is one way of doing that. Van Til indicates that his belief in God started when he was young and that he knows such an admission will taint his case in the reader’s eyes. He doesn’t agree, however. He will discuss the arguments he’s heard against God since he’s been an adult and why he’s even more positive now that God exists. Both the arguments he makes and the arguments he anticipates his readers will make are premised on God. He compares this state of affair to arguing about air while breathing it the entire time or trying to blow up a gun stand while using the gun stand as a foundation for your guns. Unless the thing you’re attacking existed in the first place, you couldn’t make your attack on its existence.

July 27, 2019

First Principles: Teaching Reflection

Every summer I tell myself to just let my courses be. I can keep the syllabus, I reason, but tweak the in-course execution of my overall plan.

It never works, however. As I pray and read and think about what my students struggled with during the previous year, I always end up changing something. This summer was no different: new assignments, new course schedule, and a new assessment approach.

The tension I felt acutely this week was that my focus was supposed to be on living out God’s commandments rather than simply learning about them or passively believing them. What did that look like for me as I put together my assignments and assessment percentages for the new semester?

July 25, 2019

Educational Aspiration: Rhetorical Analysis

In his opinion editorial titled “Aspirational parents condemn their children to a desperate, joyless life,” George Monbiot argues that our culture’s quest for success is actually guaranteeing its opposite. Children are told they can improve their lives, but they are looking at a world that is worse than the one their parents grew up in. Childhood is being stripped from young people as they must begin training for success immediately. Everything from internships in college to getting into the right elementary show how success rather than happiness is culture’s ultimate goal. What makes it worse, Monbiot argues, is that the British government doesn’t seem to care about the mental toll this is taking on the country’s youths. Recent survey results show there is cause for concern. Children are hurting themselves and getting eating disorders more frequently. They feel less secure about their future and have less of a desire to go to school. Monbiot concludes that the very ambition that motivates these children to endure these hardships will rob them of the joy that their material success is supposed to bring.

July 22, 2019

Verse of the Week: I John 2:3

We know that we have come to know Him if we keep His commands.
I John 2:3

To know God is to love Him, and to love and glorify Him is the grand purpose for our lives. In the same letter that declares that God is love, John tells us that we can know if we know God by looking at our actions. Do we keep His commands? Do we love God with everything we have and seek to love others in the way we love ourselves?

This week, I will be using this verse and the questions it provokes to orient my course plans for the new semester. I want to give students the opportunity to do things with what we’re learning. Yes, we will read, and yes, there will occasionally be lectures. My best gauge for their knowledge will not be answers to an exam, however. It will come in the form of practice: note taking, timed writing, revised essays, and multimedia projects.

More than that, I will demand my own participation. I will not just talk about my discipline and its spiritual foundations. I must live them out. I pray that God gives me the grace and skill to do that.

July 10, 2019

The Democratic Spirit: How To Think Chapter 7

In this chapter, Alan Jacobs uses a David Foster Wallace book review to tout the two most significant traits of good thinking: rigor and humility.

Wallace’s review demonstrates a person thinking well as review that he is good precisely because it upholds the Democratic Spirit (yes, with capital letters as a kind of tongue in cheek joke). The book Wallace examines is about language usage, and Wallace finds it refreshing that the book’s author, Bryan Garner, is able to offer expert advice without being preachy. In short, Garner manages to write with the authority of a lawyer or doctor rather than a dictator or preacher. This means that Garner meshes rigor (clear answers with solid reasons on all sort of usage questions) with humility (clear explanations that resist the urge to demean, belittle, or assume his position is automatically the correct one).

Once again, Jacobs preaches temperance. We cannot possibly maintain a constant Democratic Spirit about us at every conceivable moment. Instead, we must make a concerted effort to admit where we’ve erred, show a willingness to learn from mistakes, and demonstrate a willingness to believe our opponents might benefit from the extension of that Spirit. This is easier said than done. It’s when reading books like Garner’s, or reviews like Wallace’s, or books like Jacobs’s that we can best see this kind of rigorous and humble thinking in action.

July 8, 2019

Open Minds: How To Think Chapter 6

In this chapter, Jacobs explains that neither an open nor a shut mind is preferable: the two should work in tandem. Someone who has no set beliefs cannot be trusted. Someone whose every belief is unshakeable cannot be reasoned with.

Jacobs offers two metaphors to help us understand the proper relationship open and shut minds. The first is our appetite. We shouldn’t open our mind unless we intend to close it. If we’re going to think about something, we should be ready to digest it. The second concerns solidity. We should aim for firmness in our beliefs, neither rigidity nor flimsiness.

Sunk costs pose the greatest danger for the person prone to rigidity. Sunk costs refer to unrecoverable resources that one invested cannot be reclaimed. For instance, if you’ve been supporting a cause for 30 years, it will be difficult to renounce your position without putting your identity in jeopardy.

One of the things I’ll insist on my students considering is that college is a time for them to take advantage of their minimal sunk costs which can encourage their flexibility. At the same time, they’ll need to be responsibility not to mistake flexibility for flimsiness under the mistaken impression that changing your mind has no cost or that lacking firm beliefs is a virtue.