Posted by Ir (Helen) on: 04.26.2006 /
I’ve been in a number of small group Bible studies. I used to like them a lot. Essentially what we did was talk about Bible passages and share prayer requestions. But since what we were actually trying to do was change our lives through studying the Bible, they were neat places to get to know each other and work on life goals along side each other.
It’s an awesome experience to be in a group where you feel comfortable enough to share that you have having problems in a close relationship, say, and then the next week people ask you “So how did it go with that person this week? Any change? Any progress?” And they’re asking because they care, not because they’re judging you. Being in a Bible study group can be wonderfully supportive.
In fact it was so important to me that when I was told I could not return to one group because of my mental illness, I immediately contacted another group to see if they’d have me. (They said “sure – no problem”) When I was ill I needed support more than ever – I knew that even if the Bible study leader who asked me not to return didn’t.
It wasn’t mental illness but something else which led to me eventually quitting Bible study groups. It was that I started to have different thoughts about the Bible. Thoughts which meant that if I answered the Bible study questions honestly, my answers would fall outside the ‘range of acceptable answers’.
It’s one thing to be a person who answers outside the range and is quite willing to have the rest of the group ‘domesticate’ them into the range. This sometimes applies to people new to the group (for what it’s worth, it could also apply to someone who has temporarily weird answers because he/she is somewhat mentally ill)
It’s quite another thing to inwardly delight in having found emancipation from the range and to have no interest in being ‘domesticated’ back into it. I knew without asking it that this was not something it would be beneficial to share in the type of groups I was in.
Because of my diagnosis, I was nervous about isolating myself from whatever support I got from Bible study groups. So I continued in them for a while, being careful to stay in the ‘range of acceptable answers’ publically, but being real about life goals I still had very much in common with other group members. There were many of these – the wives and mothers all wanted to be better at those roles, for example.
I suspect that many other types of groups have a ‘range of acceptable answers’ mentality also, to which people must conform or face group disapproval perhaps even to the extent of being asked to leave. In fact, in any relationship we’re in, the other person may have a ‘range’.
Have you run into this ‘range of acceptable answers’ mentality in the groups (or relationships) you’ve been in?
Have you been in any groups (or relationships) where you knew nothing you could say was outside the ‘range of acceptable answers’?
Comment by: Julie Marie
1My first marriage was definitely a range of acceptable answers relationship. It ended when my action - I have a job offer now, in a tight market, in the location of our dreams. I want to go and start; join me in six weeks when your committment ends. [pending exit from Air Force] was not acceptable.
I suspect my spiritual ideas right now may be outside the range of acceptable too, for my conservative church. Thus far I have only shared my journey with 2 people: my husband and my best friend.
I don’t think I’ve had a group experience like this. My marriage now is close - we have made a committment to share our dreams with each other, and as those dreams evolve, we commit to adapting our lifestyle. We have agreed to not censor our thoughts and hopes to fit our current plans.
Comment by: NCxian
2I have left a small group at a church. There was a subtle undertone in that group (perpetuated by a just a couple of the members) that while asking questions was allowable, questioning orthodoxy was generally a bad thing and so one should eventually resolve one’s questions with “Sorry I was questioning that–I see where I was wrong”. So I guess I did the converse of what you are talking about. I decided that their answers were unacceptable.
I have certainly removed myself from social conversation where racism was openly and unapologetically expressed. I am white but my family is mixed-race, so it happens on a rare occasion that some idiot will assume that because I am white they can say something racist in my presence (this is the South). I have just decided it is something I will not tolerate and I will generally turn heel and run–after saying something in return, sometimes civil, sometimes not, I’m afraid. Again, that is stated kind of the reverse of your language in your post, Ir, but I think goes to the issue of “unacceptable answers”.
Would you say that the folks in the groups you left gave you answers that were unacceptable–for example, “your questions are inappropriate? That you decided that those were people you didn’t want to associate with?
I guess we all decide that there are some parameters within which people must stay if we will associate with them. I’m pretty sure I would not have stayed in groups like you describe either. IMO, it made perfect sense to leave.
Comment by: Ir
3NCxian, yes, I agree it’s the same thing - the point is that my range of acceptable answers and theirs don’t overlap enough, I guess.
I’ve never been told my answers were ‘inappropriate’ except by some people when I was mentally ill (which in retrospect I find inappropriate behavior towards an ill person - there have to be better approaches).
When I was well it was more that I didn’t want to introduce my answers into the group because it would distract them that I was having doubts and subvert it into a ‘let’s try to help Ir’ sort of group which I didn’t want to happen. It wasn’t that I thought they would be disapproving or unkind necessarily. It just didn’t seem a fair thing to do to a group who were all fine with each other’s range of answers - a group for whom the ’system worked’.
I still see some of these people socially and I’m gradually sharing what I didn’t want to share in the group context.
Comment by: Stephan
4Many of my answers at this point would certainly be on the fringe of the range of acceptable answers, but I am not in a small group right now. I do occassionally bug my wife, though. She is a bit more conservative than me, and I sometimes surprise her with my leftward drift.
I think part of this is wrapped up in expectations. If the people in your small group see you as one of “them”, and in agreement with “them”, and you suddently start disagreeing, it would be disconcerting to them. They would try to find out where you went astray and try to lead you back. This is probably where you would have been in your small groups, Ir, and with your pastors.
If, however, you come into a small group with the expressed viewpoint of a skeptic, you might find the response to be different. Depending on the people involved, they might accept you as you are and engage you on your own terms.
Comment by: Ir
5I think you’re exactly right, Stephan.
And for what it’s worth, I do think I’ve already considered all their ‘bring me back’ arguments. So why waste time initiating a process where they have to try them all out because while I’m fairly sure I’ve heard everything they have to say already, they don’t know that?
Which might make you wonder why I wanted to talk to the pastor on Monday. Because he initiated the contact; because it wasn’t subverting a group dynamic, I suppose.
I think with the groups I was in it would tend to react to a skeptic like NCxian mentioned, i.e. “while asking questions was allowable, questioning orthodoxy was generally a bad thing and so one should eventually resolve one’s questions” [by admitting one is wrong and embracing the group's range of acceptable answers].
Comment by: Julie C.
6I’ve been there. For awhile I would present my out of bounds thoughts as “I’ve heard that some people interpret this this way.” That could occasionally lead to some basic discussion, but more typically led to the standard evangelical response of laughing and calling it stupid. Other times I would bring up interpretations (alternative or standard) just in hopes of starting a discussion. Most Bible studies these days use workbooks with fill in the blank spots in which most women just copy whatever their study Bible has to say about the topic and then regurgitate it back to the group. There is never any thinking involved. Bringing up different interpretations never worked because it might have caused people to actually think about what they believe (or about history, psychology, gender issues, whatever…) So that’s my rant on the way Bible studies are run and how to be outside their bounds is annoying.
Comment by: Ir
7LOL - I love it, Julie! Why didn’t I think of that? ;)
*sigh* yeah. That really makes you feel connected to the group, doesn’t it?
Maybe it was a rant, but it certainly rings true based on my experiences in Bible studies.
Although, there is one where you aren’t allowed to use study Bible footnotes to answer questions - the founder of that did at least make some attempts to get people to think!
Comment by: Stephan
8I have never found the fill-in-the-blanks type of Bible studies to be all that helpful. They typically only get as deep as “what the text says”, but don’t delve into “what the text means.” There is little or no practical application.
My dream small group would involve total openness and mutual accountability. We would help each other be the best people we could possibly be. Whether this involves Bible study, or a book discussion, or talking about current events - I really don’t care. Give me a group of people with similar (though not the same) ideals, and let’s work together to MTWABP, one person at a time.
By the way, I’m adding “The Range of Acceptable Answers” to my list of band names.
Comment by: Nutrideath
9imho, Bible studies should not be restrictive. They should encourage free thinking and open conversation.
imho, Bible studies should:
- always be topic based, so that more than one scripture is used to support ideas
- always discuss all aspects of whatever point you are studying, including all the crackpot ideas that you might hear and why they are in fact “crackpot.”
The Bible itself encourages this. Notice what it says about the Bereans as they learned about God:
(Acts 17:11) Now the latter were more noble-minded than those in Thes•sa•lo•ni´ca, for they received the word with the greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining the Scriptures daily as to whether these things were so.
A study of the Bible should not only provide answers to questions, it should give a solid scriptural basis for those answers. It should also inform you of wrong ideas on the subject that you may encounter in the future, and again — give a solid scriptural basis for why those ideas are in fact wrong.
I’ll use an example that might get your attention Ir. For instance, if your group is studying prayer and the question is raised: “Does God ever answer your prayers in your thoughts? Should you expect him to speak back to you during prayer?”
That question should not be “out of bounds.” Some teach that God does do that, others teach not. It is a very valid question, and deserves a good Bible based answer. If the question itself is “shushed” then the group isn’t willing to do the Bible research to find the answer. imo, that’s not a good Bible study group.
Bible research is an important part of any study of the Bible. Lots of questions come up — that’s the whole point of the Bible study group, right? For many of those questions the answer may not be readily apparent. If questions like that are discouraged, then it defeats the purpose of Bible study.
Comment by: TXatheist
10Ir,
Have you considered looking into UU xian groups? I know ours meets and I’m half tempted to go. I talked to these people and found them pleasant but I’m wondering what the progressive xian perspective is and how they’d respond to my views on the alleged jc. I doubt it would be taken hostile but I can’t say though I’ve contemplated going just to listen to them.
Comment by: Winn
11Ir,
You wrote:
Would you provide a concrete example of your experience in the Bible study you attended?
Comment by: Julie Marie
12I wondered that too.
Comment by: Cully
13It strikes me how similar the experience of “coming out” as gay must be to admitting your difference from any group. I remember going through a period in college where my ROAA was beginning to reach the edges of what I was willing to say out loud and I made the pronoun switch. “She” and “her” became the gender neutral “they” and “them.” That lasted until I got fed up with it and decided that they’d accept me, or they wouldn’t but I wasn’t playing semantic games anymore.
On a personal level I’m happy to say that I have best friends for whom there is no such things as a ROAA. I can’t say that I’ve ever been in a group where that was true. Does group dynamics automatically lower the ROAA? As group sizes increase the possibility of offending someone increases because you can’t predict everyone’s responses anymore.
Comment by: Ir
14I would like to see that.
I was in studies where the questions tended to be pre-assigned. But to the extent there was freedom to ask one’s own questions I can’t think of a study where this question about prayer could not have been asked. It was more that the range of acceptable answers was limited. Sometimes it was a big range, sometimes small - it depended on the question. Is Jesus God? No range there ;). That question could be asked but I suspect that anyone who did anything other than humbly receive the ‘correct answer’ would not have lasted long in the group. Sure they could ask for Scriptural proof of the correct answer. But not contest it.
Comment by: Ir
15It has crossed my mind. Right now I’m not really looking for a group. Admittedly I’m wary of all groups at present because a UU group, say, may have its own range of reasonable answers. I might like them better than the range the Bible studies I was in had, but I still would prefer equal openness to any thoughts. My sense about the local UU was that some people there have some ‘baggage’ and it might compromise the openness I’d be seeking.
Comment by: Ir
16I almost did - I guess it didn’t make the final cut :)
Let me know if this is the kind of example you’re looking for: one study often included the question “What attributes of God did you find in this passage?”
I don’t think they were looking for answers like “God is a sadist; God is an asshole; God has an anger problem”.
Now, it probably would have been ok to say those things but it would have been interpreted as “Ir is having a hard week” and/or “Ir is still coming to terms with how God sometimes seems this way because of our limited fallible human understanding. Of course God is perfect but sometimes we struggle with who He is because we are only human and can’t fully understand”.
And the leader would have made a note to call me after the study, probably. To try to ‘help’ me with my understanding of the Bible.
To continue to ‘push’ any of my three discoveries about God would have been to arrogantly assert that I knew better than God.
It just couldn’t have gone anywhere constructive. In my opinion.
Comment by: Ir
17I only ever liked the studies which applied what was being learned to my life.
Hey, that’s my ideal group too!
Neat :)
Comment by: Marty
18For me the key is finding those with whom it is safe to be real. I then think about whether I provide others a safe place to be real. I think there is a way to be both real and respectful - which in turn makes it safe for the other person to be real. Providing a safe place to be real may have more to do with how we listen than what we say.
Comment by: David S
19The first half of my life was lived in the range of acceptable answers. Exploding that took me out of Christianity but it also eventually led to making my life and relationships real. The range of acceptable answers forces you to wear masks… it causes you to not really know those you have relationships with… in short it makes you live your life in lies.
I don’t know if there are religions that don’t force people to wear masks and otherwise live fake lives at least to some extent. As long as there is a fundamental expectation to be something or do something… a follower of Jesus for example… it tends to lead to mask wearing and lies. I think that to be who you are and to really know who you are with it requires escaping judgmental and controlling institutions.
Comment by: Julie Marie
20Now Marty, if you could just develop an interactive study to teach these concepts…that would MTWABP
I agree listening is soooo key, and there is so little of that in the world. Too many people just want to make their point and count to three. (one of the best lines in Oh Brother Where Art Thou, imo) I am trying to figure out how to ask good questions, too, though, questions that can help people flesh out their own thoughts. I’m not very good at it yet; there is still too much of me wanting to pipe up with MY TAKE on the situation. Sigh.
Comment by: Ir
21Yes indeed.
My life is also much more real than it used to be.
I agree.
Comment by: Julie Marie
22one of the things I am learning, as I read through the psalms, is that, right there, in the Bible, we are given permission to be real with God. Good grief, some of those psalms are so raw: God break their teeth, God, wake up, are you sleeping? God mince my enemies into little bits!!! Hardly an “acceptable” way to address your Lord, if you are trying to be a proper Christian. yet there it is. I think we spend alot of energy trying to impress each other with our piety and love and our goodness. I believe God has a problem looking at our messiness and our impolitical correctness, and our impertient demands that he wake up and act on our behalf do not offend him. We’re the ones that find it unseemly.
We should stop that and be real.
Comment by: Julie Marie
23yikes, I meant I DO NOT believe God has a problem…
need to proofread better.
Comment by: Marty
24David S - although I am involved in some Christian groups where it seems pretty much safe to be real (Quakers in partcular - and even a Prebyterian Church where I am very connected to the Pastor) - nevertheless I agree with what you said and I appreciated the gentle way you said it.
Comment by: RickLintx
25“Have you run into this ‘range of acceptable answers’ mentality in the groups (or relationships) you’ve been in?”
You mean besides this blog?
Comment by: skikid
26Thats an interesting point Rick…
Do you think that there is a range of aceptable answers here? What would be off limits? What is acceptable? Do you think that someone who is really attached to, say, a certain type of evangalism, or Bible interpretation (the list can go on) would feel like that is not accpetable here and leave?
Comment by: Nutrideath
27But Ir, those answers really only lead to bigger and more important questions (I’m just using these as an example - I’m not sure of which passages led you to those particular thoughts, but I’d be interested to know):
-”If ‘God is love’ why would he kill the people in Sodom & Gomorrah? or the Flood?”
-”Does God ever lose his temper? Does he ever lose control for a bit?”
Aren’t those important questions? If you limit yourself to ROAA, you short-circuit the learning process. Without true learning & satisfying answers you end up frustrated.
If you think a particular passage makes God seem to you to be angry and mean-spirited, yet you’re supposed to believe he is a God of love - it is important to reconcile those two in your mind. It may take more meditation on the passage, and cross-referencing it with other passages that have a bearing on the subject. But that reconciliation can be found.
Ask the hard questions, they are usually the most important ones. And ignore the ranges in which you perceive your answers should fall. If you’re studying with someone who is intolerant of your answers, you’re studying with the wrong person.
Now, that’s not to say that there are not right answers & wrong answers. If you just want someone to listen to your viewpoints & agree or maybe just compare notes, well that’s altogether something different. But there is only one truth. Either God exists or he does not. Either Jesus is God or he is not. Either God has anger management issues or he is in total control.
And either the truth can be found in the Bible, or the Bible is just a collection of fables as some here are always saying. On the other hand, if the Bible truly is the Word of God, then it was given to us to answer just such questions as those.
Comment by: Julie C.
28lol, it’s so true…
Comment by: TXatheist
29Nutrideath,
How do you justify Jehovah drowning the whole world except Noah with a world wide flood?
Comment by: Ir
30TXatheist, I think this is a good question, but please start a discussion board thread and link to it if you want to discuss it, rather than doing it in this comments section.
Comment by: Ir
31“This blog” is a fine answer if that’s what you’ve found.
Part of the point is that we can encounter it in all sorts of places. Maybe there’s nowhere guaranteed to be free from it.
Comment by: Ir
32Nutrideath you just set up an ROAA.
You’ve invalidated “I was unable to find it” before I could even write it.
Comment by: Tom in Sacramento
33Skikid, for an example of ROAA in this group, I’d suggest starting a conversation about fundamentalism and the evidence for god. (You might want to put on your flame-proof jammies first. ;-) )
Ir, I have taught small groups in various settings — at church, in homes, at the University, in restaurants — for probably 30-35 years. I LOVE it when someone goes outside ROAA. It’s the first sign to me that SOMEONE is awake. I am convinced that, for the person who is sincerely interested in learning, there are satisfactory answers to most of the questions that arise (though there have been some ‘I don’t knows’ along the way. ;-) )
That is one of my biggest beefs with more conservative, and especially fundamentalist, churches. The ROAA mentality produces passive, ignorant Christians who wind up being easy prey simply because they have not had a chance to develop the mind that God gave them to use. If Christianity is incapable of producing reasonable, plausible answers, it OUGHT to be jettisoned.
Comment by: Stephan
34I would assert that all groups have their own ROAA. Some might be broader than others, but there are certainly things outside of societal bounds that would considered unacceptable in any group. Even in the most liberated group, intolerance would to outside of their ROAA.
If you find yourself consistently outside the ROAA of your particular group, you need to either seriously reconsider your opinions (which might actually be wrong) or reconsider your membership in the group (which might actually be wrong). Of course, it could be some combination of the two, but you get my point. It would be a social nightmare to continue to associate with a group of people when you are always at odds with them over issues you both feel are important and vital to membership in the group.
Of course, this does not apply to all social situations. I may enjoy a good game of tennis with someone with whom I disagree violently about politics, but politics is not important to the game of tennis. If we disagreed about the rules of tennis, that would be another matter.
To stretch the analogy, it sounds like Ir no longer liked the rules of tennis, or perhaps didn’t like the game at all anymore. Time to reassess your ideas about tennis, or move on and find a new game.
Comment by: Tom in Sacramento
35There is one sense in which a ROAA is necessary to learning of any sort. You must begin by eschewing the answers that say, “There is nothing to be learned from this source.” Do you see that? If you start with that assumption, then it becomes impossible even for sensible things to be useful. And there is no hope of reconciling difficult things.
So, to believe that there at least may be reconciliations possible for the various questions, is the minimum requirement for approaching any source document. I could not learn math or history or spelling if I was not prepared to accept that premise.
Comment by: Tom in Sacramento
36BTW, Ir, the reason that observations like, “God is really an asshole with an serious anger management problem,” would not be threatening to me in a group is that, a) I’ve thought it more times than I can count, and b) God knows I’ve thought it, and c) He loves me anyway, and d) I think He appreciates a relationship of integrity as much as anyone else. An, interestingly enough, when I have expressed that thought to God, rather than a lightning strike, the response has been more often one of peace and confidence in Him.
Take that however you want. YMMV.
Comment by: Ir
37I still don’t like to have “I couldn’t find them” invalidated by a cheery confident pronouncement that they can be found - which seems to imply that I didn’t bother to look or I am not very good at looking. I know neither of those are true so I find the implication disrespectful.
Maybe I am taking this too personally…sorry if I am.
Comment by: Ir
38Tom I’m glad those answers wouldn’t be threatening to you in a group. That means it’s less likely that your response to someone who says them would be hurtful.
Comment by: TXatheist
39Ir,
How do you expect to find one set of right answers? There are over 1000 sects of xianity because they all think they have the truth when all the bibles have been translated from copies of copies and none of them are from the original. Is the truth of xianity within a bible study anything more than a church that supports your preconceived view already? I was recommending UU not because the humans don’t have baggage but because it won’t be the literal fundamentalist view that most churches have. What type of book study are you looking for? If you think you are going to find one that tolerates views like Spongs in bible study I’d be ready to be very disappointed at that level of intellectualism.
Comment by: Nutrideath
40Ir, why is “I couldn’t find the answers myself” any sort of problem? There is no embarrassment to say that, for you or me or anyone.
I have not memorized the Bible verse by verse, cover to cover. Why should I expect you to have? Furthermore, I may read a particular verse from one perspective, and you read the same verse and see it in a way that I missed, but that I need. Is there any shame in that? I don’t think so.
I wasn’t implying that you didn’t look, or aren’t any good at looking. I wasn’t being disrespectful, and I wasn’t offering the cheery wide-eyed pat answer.
What I was trying to say is not to give up asking the “big questions.” If you feel the Bible doesn’t hold the answers, well — that may be true for you. But I for one feel that anyone can ask those questions of the Bible & find the answers there.
Comment by: Nutrideath
41Oh, forgot to add, thanks Tom, for your #32.
Comment by: NCxian
42Cully said:
I am thinking there is something very important in what Cully says here. How does a group (as opposed to an individual) establish ROAA? It does seem to me that a group would have to set more compact parameters so that everybody’s individual ROAAs would not be violated. The more people, the narrower ROAA? Maybe so. Interesting to think about.
It seems to me that it is only people with whom one has an intimate relationship that the ROAA answers would be nearly infinite (although even there, there would have to be respect for the rules of the relationship itself.) And to have “intimate” relationships with 10 people in a small group would just be weird, IMO! That might explain why you, Ir, are more comfortable being authentic with just a few folks who were in your group, and only after you left the group. On a one-on-one basis, you may perceive that ROAA to be broader, and that that individula’s ROAA match your own better.
Comment by: Ir
43TXatheist I’m sorry - I don’t understand exactly what you’re asking me. I expect the most liberal Christian groups would love Spong’s view. Well, that’s what he was, after all - a liberal Christian bishop - before he retired.
Comment by: TXatheist
44How are you going to find a church that has the right answers? Most are fundamentalist views and all think they are the correct way and only a very few are open-minded like you and Spong. If you don’t go to UU xian groups your choices for progressive, open-minded churches is very limited.
Comment by: Ir
45Yes indeed. The specific way in which you are stigmatized isn’t something I’ve experienced, yet I have definitely experienced stimatization because of my diagnosis. So I feel we have common ground experientially, in the big picture.
I understand.
What I found is, it’s so unfulfilling to have the hiding-version of myself accepted - it still gives me no idea whether they’ll accept the real me or not.
I’m glad.
Yes - I found that to be a problem in some Bible study groups I was in where the group size was 15; it seemed like invariably there was a Catholic basher in the group as well as a Catholic. Oh well.
Comment by: Marty
46I will be going to here Spong speak tonight - in a Luthern Church. Will report on it tomorow.
Comment by: Julie Marie
47I look forward to your impressions, Marty!
Comment by: Ir
48Ok, I see what you mean.
I would check out the beliefs of a particular church before joining their group; I think I could tell that way whether they are accepting of Spong or not. I think the Episcopal church in my neighborhood would be because they have had some guest speakers who are about where Spong is in terms of belief.
You may be right that the majority of churches wouldn’t accept views like Spong’s; I don’t have a good sense of that. The proportion of Spong-accepting churches doesn’t really matter to me.
But just to be clear - I’m not looking for a Christian Bible study at the moment - I’m just saying, if I were looking, I’d probably look at both UU and liberal Christian groups; to me they have a lot in common.
Comment by: TXatheist
49Marty,
Do it on the DB please.
Comment by: Ir
50Neat - thanks! Yes, as TXatheist says, please post all about it on the discussion board. I’d like to read that.
Comment by: Ir
51But now you’re minimizing the amount of Bible study I’ve done.
*sigh* I have to live my life, though. I can’t sit and ask the big questions all day. That’s why I stopped asking. I needed to stop so I could get on with the rest of my life.
Ok, I respect that. I hope you can respect that there’s only so much asking I can do without it interfering with my life in ways I can’t justify.
Comment by: Nutrideath
52Ir, I wasn’t minimizing the amount of Bible study you’ve done. What I meant was that we’re all learning constantly, yet there is always more to learn. Even if you’ve memorized every verse of the Bible cover to cover that doesn’t mean you’d have all the answers to Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Ir, I hope you don’t think I was trying to attack you personally.
Comment by: Tom in Sacramento
53Julie wrote
Your first question is, IMHO, the critical key to a good study group. The biggest difficulty is, if you aask “hard” questions, it seems a lot of people either don’t know how to do the critical thinking necessary or don’t want to make the effort. But it is still vital to ask those questions because that sets the stage so that others with hard questions will feel free to ask theirs.
And your last clause is my biggest failing. Dead air in a discussion group can get pretty uncomfortable. But it is sometimes the very thing that gets someone to respond with new insights.
Comment by: Julie Marie
54the old deer in the headlights look. I’ve seen it too. I think we’ve been programmed to believe their is a right answer that is expected, and no one wants to pipe up with something that is too far off “right.” Something they can at least “clarify” to mean what the “expected” answer was.
Now I don’t need another windmill to joust with. But our educational system sets us up for this…
Comment by: Stephan
55This reminds me of one of those great sermon illustrations:
A pastor calls the kids up front during the Sunday morning service and asks, “What’s grey, eat nuts and has a big furry tail?” After an awkward silence one of the kids answers, “Well, I know the answer is Jesus, but it sure sounds like a squirrel.”
A very small ROAA.
Comment by: Tom in Sacramento
56Julie, you hit the nail on the head! The educational system is totally fouled up because they can’t reach consenses on “why?” The result is that they teach sex ed, but not how to effectively parent. They teach lots of facts, but not how to critically evaluate them. They teach history and social studies, but not how to be a good citizen.
Comment by: Ir
57Ok, fair enough.
No, I didn’t think that. I would never think you would do that to me. I apologize for being a bit touchy today in my responses to you.
Comment by: Ir
58Yes, that’s a good example of one! :)
Comment by: Eliza
59Ir, thanks for this discussion & the concept of ROAA. Very useful and interesting!
The comments on fill-in-the-blanks or find-the-expected-answer approaches reminded me of what in medical education we call “Can you guess what I’m thinking?”
It’s when the instructor asks a student or resident a question and gets a blank look or a shot in the dark, obviously learner doesn’t knowing what answer the instructor wants to hear but can tell from the question that there’s one “right” answer. Then the instructor realizes what’s going on, points out (oops) that he/she just asked a “Can you guess what I’m thinking” question, and lets the poor learner off the hook by giving the answer - ideally followed by a teaching point.
We’re taught more effective ways to teach - ask the learner what he/she thinks is going on (this is in the context of patient care, e.g. in the hospital but could apply to any small group situation), why he/she thinks that and how sure he/she is of that, try to give quick teaching point w/ feedback on anything you’d add or correct about their diagnosis and support of that diagnosis, then ask what they would want to do next to further diagnose or to treat the patient. (It’s harder to see how that last part would translate to Bible study.) ;)
It’s a great framework when the instructor can remember not to stop the learner’s thinking process, by putting his/her 2 cents in, either as a comment or as a loaded question. Needless to say, we all slip in that regard at times!
Comment by: Eliza
60(that is, all of us who are teaching at the hospital - didn’t mean to imply anyone here!)
Comment by: Julie Marie
61thanks Eliza, that is helpful. I think the last part is the life application part. Having arrived at this understanding, how then do you apply that learning to your life - how are you going to implement it in a way that supports the integrity between your beliefs and your life.
Comment by: TXatheist
62Tom said:
Tom, it is my opinion that is a parent’s job and not the school systems job. I don’t think parents are perfect but I like the idea of parents teaching values, not schools. Yes, most of the parents I associate with have good and compliant kids.
Comment by: Julie Marie
63TX
I agree parents need to take responsiblity for parenting. But I also would like to see critical thinking skills taught in school. I posted somewhere else about how it wasn’t until the last semester of my second trip through an undergraduate program that I got a course on how to evaluate research. That stinks!
I trust the media to accurately evaluate research about as much as I trust a politician. Politicians will manipulate research to energize their base and the media will manipulate it to sell papers/airtime.
Teaching how to assess, question, evaluate…that is an appropriate task for the school system.
Comment by: Ir
64How people take data and tell stories about it that further their own agendas is a good example of story-telling, imo.
Comment by: Tom in Sacramento
65TX, in an ideal world, I couldn’t agree more. But in the real world I live in I see a huge percentage, maybe even a majority, of kids growing up in environments that are absolutely incompatible with teaching kids the practival values that will make life work for them.
Just to take one, fairly noncontroversial issue (I hope), I heard yesterday that a survey of young people found that teenagers still in high school were carrying an average debt load of $230 each. That means that by the time they graduate they are already upside down and don’t know one of the key principles to long-term financial success and lack an essential discipline to make it happen. And the fault is two-fold, imo. Schools that won’t teach it (lest they offend someone) and parents who can’t teach it (because they, too, are ignorant of the principles.)
Would that it were otherwise…but then we’d become a nation of fiscal conservatives. ;-)
Comment by: TXatheist
66This bleeding heart liberal atheist is as tight and budget conscience as you can get. My dad taught us about money and my wife and I discussed it heavily before we got married. We paid off her school loans and credit cards just about the time we got married. Now she snips at me about spending habits though I only want two things. I am wanting a Prius next year and a hdtv in 2 to 3 years. I could buy the tv/car today but I don’t need it so I set a timeline up for these purchases.
Comment by: Eliza
67And the credit card companies salivate over getting the high school kids signed up for credit cards, so the kids learn how great it feels to just “charge it” way before they can accept the financial responsibility that comes with credit. The free market isn’t teaching fiscal responsibility to kids, except through the school of hard knocks. (This coming from another bleeding heart liberal atheist who is a tightwad and pays off the credit card bill in full every month. Except maybe in January, after Xmas.)
Comment by: Tom in Sacramento
68TX, Eliza, congrats! May your tribe increase. When I was working actively in personal financial planning, I ran into almost no one who didn’t have credit card debt that they carried over from month to month. The worst case I ever saw was about 110% of annual salary on credit cards…not counting car loan.
It seemed that the number of people like you, TX, who could identify a ‘want’ and then discipline themselves to put it off until some future date (longer than tomorrow ;-) ) was somewhere between few and none. But that is one of the keys to financial success.
Comment by: Love is the most excellent way · The Range of Acceptable Answers (ROAA)
69 12/18/06 4:42 AM | Comment Link |[...] I was guest blogger for the Off The Map eBay Atheist blog April 25-27. I posted this piece of writing as one of my blog entries. If you follow the link you can read how people responded to it. [...]