Someone has defined lecture as a process by which information goes from the notes of a teacher to the notes of a student without having gone through the head of either! Such digs are offered only partly in jest. The lecture has suffered in recent years from attacks by critics and lack of response by students, but most of all, from misuse by teachers.

Is any teaching method absolutely better than the others? Probably not. The variable factors mentioned in the introduction (if you skipped it, please go back and read it now) make it a relative value choice each time. The lecture method is not inherently bad. Misuse rather than use is the culprit.

Originally, a professor’s lectures consisted of reading from the textbooks while the students took copious notes. The term itself comes from the Latin word legere (“to read”). Lecturing is simply a process of teaching in which an instructor gives an oral presentation of facts or concept . The procedure involves the clarification or explanation of some major idea which has been formed into a question or a problem.

The lecture technique has three basic aims. The first and most important is the communication of information. With the knowledge explosion of our day, students in any educational situation lack enormous amounts of information. There is relatively little time for them to get it inductively, so an overview of the subject matter is presented through the lecture.

Along with this knowledge aim however, there is also a comprehension aim A good lecturer seeks to interpret and clarify facts which he has presented or which have been learned inductively by the students, perhaps in advance of class.

Still a third goal is the structuring of material. The necessity of organization and logic in the lecture is apparent. Students unfamiliar with certain material may discover that the best preliminary exposure available to them is an enthusiastic overview presented by a teacher who has mastered the content and is able to communicate it in a lucid and interesting manner.

Values of the Lecture Method

A good lecture may cover the most material in the least amount of time. Given the proper audio equipment, it lends itself to groups of almost any size and can be handled with a minimum mastery of material on the part of the lecturer.

For example, one does not have to be an Old Testament scholar to present a fairly comprehensive lecture on Psalm 23. Obviously since the total context of that psalm is the entire Bible, one would be a better lecturer if he had competence in all of the Old Testament Scriptures, but such competence is not necessary.

In a lecturing situation the class is likely to stay centered on the subject matter at hand. The teacher is always in charge of the content, and relevant information about the lesson can be clarified and codified.

Lecture is a significant supplement to the printed page. As a college professor clarifies elements in the subject matter which confused the student who read his assignment before coming to class, so the Sunday School teacher explains and applies materials from the lesson manual or the Bible itself.

The good lecturer can also adapt to the needs, interests, abilities, and previous knowledge of his students. He can tie his information into contemporary issues and use realistic illustrations to make the lecture attractive. Such a lecture tends to channel the thinking of all students in a prescribed direction and can be organized either in the logical pattern of subject content or the psychological approach of interest-catching structure.

Problems of the Lecture Method

Unfortunately when misused, as it often is, a lecture can be boring. Any monological approach to the communication of information tends to lead even the best teacher into a rut. An overemphasis on one-way communication also violates some of the basic principles of teaching such as involvement and the motivation of group participation.

Some elements of learning such as attitudes, skills, and feelings are not best learned through “telling” procedures. The lecture can often encourage only the retention of facts as an end itself. What we really need is a translation of biblical information into the life of the student.

Successive use of lecturing tends to encourage acceptance of the teacher as the final authority for truth. This has both theological and pedagogical drawbacks. Theologically it detracts from the supremacy of Scripture as the only rule of faith and practice. The Bible is the authority; the teacher is only the agent through whom that authority is communicated.

Pedagogically, transmissive teaching tends to stifle creativity and initiative on the part of the student. There may be very little provision for individual differences, and students’ questions often go unanswered. Lecturing often gives a class little opportunity for problem-solving activities and may encourage a passive type of learning.

Communication theorists have told us that feedback is absolutely essential for the completion of the communication cycle. Unless the lecturer is skillfull at reading nonverbal feedback or builds in some kind of verbal feedback as a support methodology for his lecturing, he will have great difficulty discerning student reaction and therefore accurately programming his continuing remarks.

Principles of Effective Lecturing

Here are eight simple ways in which you can improve your teaching if you use the lecture method. Many teachers of adults find themselves making good use of the lecture method. Try some of these suggestions to enhance the value of what can be a valid approach to teaching.

Combine the lecture with audience involvement methods such as discussion, reaction groups, or a question and answer period. This allows for feedback and gives the lecturer opportunity to clarify any concepts which might not have been understood by his audience.

Support the, lecture with visuals such as the chalkboard, overhead projector, or charts of various kinds. Often these things are simple and inexpensive to make and yet can increase learning measurably.

Have a clear and simple outline for the lecture. Some of the basic rules of homiletics (the art and science of preaching) apply to lecturing as a teaching method. Progressive organization, a clear-cut introduction and conclusion, and parallelism in the outline points will help to make the lecture a better tool for communicating truth.

Practice good principles of speaking such as eye contact, voice inflection, and proper posture.

Emphasize the important points. This may be done as part of the outline itself, but it is often helpful to make an extra effort to insure that students have understood the crucial points of any Bible lesson.

Use interesting illustrations. Illustrations are stories or quotations which “let in the light.” They should not be overused, but in proper balance they are a necessary ingredient in the lecture recipe. When a point is otherwise difficult to understand, an illustration should be applied to let students see how that particular concept applies in a real life situation.

Specify clear objectives for the lecture. Actually this is a principle of all good teaching regardless of the methodology. But if you really understand what you want your students to learn as a result of your lecture, you will be able to teach for that goal and come closer to accomplishing the learning objectives. Wasn’t it Socrates who said, “We have a much better chance of hitting the target if we can see it”?

Give your students a mimeographed outline or guide to follow while you are lecturing. This is not a manuscript. As a matter of fact, the outline should be just detailed enough to enable them to see how you are proceeding in the presentation of the material, but empty enough so that they can take notes during the lecture.

Some students were asked what they liked in lecturers. They listed a sense of humor, a conversational tone, a genuine interest in students, and understandable terminology Certainly these things can help us be better lecturers.

The presently popular technique, role playing, traces back to the psychotherapy of the 1930s. From that narrow beginning, role playing has spread to many and varied forms of education from the primary levels of the elementary school to the upper echelons in managerial training of business executives.

Many teachers confuse role playing and drama. Although they are similar, they are also very distinct in style. Perhaps the most strategic point of difference is the handling of the subject matter: genuine drama usually requires a script, whereas role playing retains the element of spontaneous or at least extemporaneous reaction.

Role may be defined as the way one behaves in a given position and situation. In managerial science, discrepancies in the identificational role are referred to as “role conflict”—inconsistent prescriptions held for a person by himself or by others. Role playing as a teaching methodology is the conscious acting out and discussion of the role in a group. In the classroom a problem situation is briefly acted out so that the individual student can identify with the characters.

A few years ago one of my seminary classes had a unique experience in role playing. It points up the dynamics which can accompany this teaching methodology. Small groups in the class had been assigned to demonstrate various teaching methods in class. The group on role playing set up a situation in which one member played the role of a young man seriously injured in an automobile accident. The only other role was God’s attempting to explain to the now rebellious young man how His plan included this catastrophe though the young fellow was about to enter Christian college and give his life for the ministry.

The group arranged the chairs of the class in a circle. In the center, two chairs were set facing each other and unrehearsed dialogue proceeded. The young man shouted at God because of what had happened to him. The calm response of the other player and the progress of the dialogue created a dynamic of learning which those present will not soon forget.

Values of Role Playing

Role playing can be used with students of most ages. The complexity of the role situations must be minimized in using the method with children. But if we keep it simple for their limited attention spans, role playing can be used even in teaching preschoolers.

Role playing allows people to make mistakes in a nonthreatening environment. They can test several solutions to very realistic problems, and the application is immediate. It also fulfills some of the very basic principles of the teaching-learning process such as learner involvement and intrinsic motivation. A positive climate often results in which one can see himself as others see him.

The involvement of the role playing participants can create both an emotional and intellectual attachment to the subject matter at hand. If a skillful teacher has accurately matched the problem situation to the needs of his group, the solving of realistic life problems can be expected.

Role playing can often create a sense of community within the class. Although at first it may seem a threatening method, once the class learns to share a mutual confidence and commitment to the learning process, the sharing of analysis over the role situations will develop a camaraderie never possible in monological teaching methods such as the lecture.

Problems in Role Playing

Perhaps the major drawback to teaching by role playing is the insecurity of class members. Some may react negatively to participating in a situation which will be discussed and possibly criticized by other members of the class. And role playing takes time. The class discussion of a five-to-ten-minute role playing situation may extend to several times the length of the situation itself. Sometimes extremely beneficial results may accrue. At other times, because of ineffective performance on the part of the players, or mishandling on the part of an unprepared teacher, the outcome may only be a superficial rehash of what everyone already knows about the problem.

The relationship of the people in the group is a crucial factor in the success of role playing. At times it may emerge as a negative factor. For example, previous interpersonal difficulties experienced by group members may arise in class to corrupt the role playing situation. Also, if the group has people of different status, they may be reluctant to become involved for fear of being humiliated before the members of the class who are smarter or more popular.

These difficulties with the method are formidable, but they are not insurmountable. Nor are they so extensive that they should prohibit us from experimenting with role playing. The potential benefits of the method quickly overbalance the difficulties which seem so apparent in the initial preparation stages.

Principles for Effective Role Playing

As a teaching technique, role playing is based on the philosophy that meanings are in people, not in words or symbols. If that philosophy is accurate, we must first of all share the meanings, then clarify our understandings of each other’s meanings, and finally, if necessary, change our meanings.

In the language of phenomenological psychology, this has to do with changing the self concept. The self concept is best changed through direct involvement in a realistic and life-related problem situation rather than through hearing about such situations from others.

Creating a teaching situation which can lead to the change of self concepts requires a distinct organizational pattern. One helpful structure for role playing follows:

1. Preparation

a. Define the problem

b. Create a readiness for the role(s)

c. Establish the situation

d. Cast the characters

e. Brief and warm up

f. Consider the training

2. Playing

g. Acting

h. Stopping

i. Involving the audience

j. Analyzing the discussion

k. Evaluating

Although we do not have time to explore each of these in detail, it is important to note that all of them focus on group experiences rather than on unilateral behavior of the teacher. The group should share in the defining of the problem, carrying out the role playing situation, discussing the results, and evaluating the whole experience.

The teacher must identify the situation clearly so that both the characters and the audience understand the problem at hand. In casting the characters, the wise teacher will try to accept volunteers rather than assign roles. Students must realize that acting ability is not at stake here but rather the spontaneous discharge of how one thinks the character of his role would react in the defined situation.

Players may be instructed publicly so that the audience knows what to expect or privately so that the audience can interpret the meaning of their behavior. Be sure to allow for creativity of the actors within their character roles and do not overstructure the situation.

The discussion and analysis of the role playing situation depends upon how well we involve the audience. Key questions may be asked by the leader and/or buzz groups may be formed. All members of the group (actors and the audience) should participate, and the reactions of the actors may be profitably compared to those of the audience.

The audience is just as much involved in the learning situation as the actors are. In the analysis and discussion time, the audience should provide possible solutions to the realistic problem situations which surface.

It is important to evaluate role playing in the light of the prescribed goals. Categorizing behavior is often overdone and gets in the way of the learning process. Evaluation should proceed on both group and personal levels, raising questions concerning the validity of the original purpose.

Throughout the entire process it will be necessary to deal with certain problems which arise in role playing situations. The backward, silent member must be encouraged to contribute. Create an atmosphere in which he is unafraid to share ideas, confident that no one will laugh at his contributions or harshly criticize his conclusions.

The overbearing monopolizer must be curtailed in the discussion phase of role playing lest he dominate the group and thereby quash the dynamic, Solving this problem may require some personal counseling outside of class. Tension and conflict in the group may not always be bad. Sometimes these elements act as a stimulant to thinking. There is such a thing as “creative tension,” and it is frequently found in a role playing situation as group dynamic emerges.

At the end of the discussion time the group should collectively measure its effectiveness in reaching biblical solutions to the role problem posed at the beginning. The techniques of role playing afford another approach to involving students in their own learning process toward the clarification of self concepts, evaluation of behavior, and aligning of that behavior with reality.. You can see why this is a desirable approach to classroom procedure for the Christian teacher. Prayerfully used under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, role playing can be an effective instrument in the Christian classroom.

Discussion teaching differs from question and answer teaching primarily by the kind of questions used. In discussion it is our purpose to get students to think through the issues rather than verbalize memorized data or repeat right answers. Most often discussion will center on the solution to a problem or perhaps the interpretation of a verse of Scripture. Discussion can also be thought of as an attempt to interact with others toward arriving at a solution based on thoughts and ideas expressed by members of the group.

In the Christian classroom, thoughts and ideas are not merely opinions based on personal experience or perhaps prejudice. Rather, they are understandings of the meaning of those portions of Scripture which have a bearing on the problem at hand. AU those meanings are made clearer to the discussants by the ministry of the Holy Spirit (“He will guide you into all truth,” John 16:13).

Basic to a good discussion is a problem which is clearly defined. The problem must be limited in scope so that it can be understood by members of the group and satisfactorily dealt with in the allotted time. When used as a teaching method, discussion is not conducted for the sake of therapy but rather for the sake of pinpointing answers and solutions.

As the group approaches the problem (s) at hand, the members seek to analyze the issues involved in the light of biblical* evidence. Possible solutions may be presented by the members of the group as they weigh and consider ideas and viewpoints. Through this process a line of reasoning or logical thought should emerge and lead to one or more solutions to the problem.

These solutions are then examined to determine their validity and implications. Remember that discussion is not debate. It is not the purpose of the class to “win” an argument or to establish one way of thinking. Teacher and students are engaged in a cooperative effort to seek for truth, knowing in advance that truth and its application to life can be found in God’s Word.

Values of the Discussion Method

Teaching by discussion utilizes one of the best principles of the learning process, namely, the involvement of students in active participation in the learning experience. A good discussion will help students express themselves verbally, crystalize their thinking in conjunction with the thinking of their peers, and develop a tolerance for those with whom they may disagree.

Management research teaches us that people change most rapidly and completely in proportion to the amount of interaction which they have with other people. People who tend to isolate themselves physically or mentally will become set in their ways and resist innovation in their lives or thought patterns. On the other hand, people who engage in open exchange of ideas with others will learn both the existence and validity of other points of view and will more readily moderate, or perhaps even drastically change, their own ideas.

Teaching by discussion is a motivational technique which encourages a student to think through concepts which have been hazy. Wrong conclusions may be corrected through the influence of the group rather than the unilateral actions of the teacher. Problem-solving techniques are learned which can be applied not only in the search for knowledge, but in all aspects of life. Creative thinking may also be stimulated.

A discussion setting also provides an atmosphere which can enhance group rapport and camaraderie. The informality of the situation (when properly conducted) allows group members to sense how other people feel, and identification with the group begins to emerge. In a good discussion session, one soon learns that the questions which have been bothering him are not unique but are problems faced by many of his friends. The humanness and concern of the teacher comes through much more clearly in a discussion than it can in a lecture.

One of the essential factors in the communication process is the securing of feedback. In lecturing or storytelling the teacher is dependent upon nonverbal feedback (unless he can combine those methods with supportive dialogical techniques). In discussion, however, if the teacher is asking the right questions and soliciting genuine thought and honest expression on the part of the class, he will soon learn whether they understand the subject matter or further clarification is necessary. Good discussion questions will capture a mind that might wander to more attractive mental pastures during a monological form of teaching.

Problems of the Discussion Method

Small group study is very popular in the church today. Yet it detracts from our purposes when it becomes a substitute for rather than a supplement to the proclamation of the Word of God. Some want to avoid such a dangerous tendency by steering away from dialogical teaching altogether. But such a reactionary swing of the pendulum is also unfortunate. Discussion teaching does not have to degenerate to a pooling of ignorance. Only two things are necessary to avoid this problem: a teacher-guide who genuinely knows how to use the Bible; and a commitment on the part of the group members to search for biblical answers rather than experiential opinions to problems.

Another possible drawback to teaching by discussion is the amount of time required to cover any given amount of material. It will take longer to teach the same material by the discussion method than by the lecture method. On the other hand, students will be learning technique as well as content, and both the retention and comprehension levels may be markedly increased because of participation in the interaction. But discussion does take time, and the teacher who is intent on “getting over the lesson” will not be as committed to teaching by discussion as the teacher who wants to “get the lesson over.”

Sometimes reticent or bashful students may be embarrassed in a discussion situation. This may be true of an entire class on occasion if that class has not had opportunity to experience dialogical teaching techniques. Teachers should be careful not to publicly humiliate a student by asking an unusually difficult question or forcing his involvement when he clearly does not wish to participate.

Rambling or wandering from the subject at hand is another common problem in many discussion situations. Here again the leadership of the teacher is essential. Sometimes teachable moments will arise, and the teacher will deliberately allow discussion to wander into a bypath that might seem profitable for learning. Generally, however, he will keep the group from being diverted.

Some teachers feel safer with the lecture method. If a teacher has only a shallow understanding of the subject or has prepared inadequately, he will be threatened by the possibility that students may ask questions he cannot answer. Many teachers are insecure in their classroom situations and find safety in a kind of teaching which allows them to stick strictly to “the script” and avoid having to think on their feet. Most teachers fear discussion, however, because they simply do not know how to employ the techniques.

A class should be reasonably small in order to use the discussion method. To involve the entire class with as many. as possible participating in a given hour, 20 to 25 students is probably the maximum number for effectiveness. However, there are various subcategories of discussion teaching which can be used with much larger numbers. These will be discussed as separate teaching methods in this book.

Principles for Effective Discussion Teaching

Probably one of the most important factors in securing a good discussion is framing the problem or question. Just getting people to talk does not guarantee that a genuine learning-by-discussion situation is in effect. Application of biblical truth is essential. The questions themselves must be worded to produce thought rather than factual response. Many good discussion-type questions begin with the words why or how.

The arrangement of the room is a significant factor in discussion. Although it is possible to have effective discussion with participants in rows or pews, the group dynamics necessary are more likely to be achieved by the use of a circle. The teacher should be part of the circle, sitting with the students to engage in “the cooperative search for truth.”

Attitudes are very important in discussion teaching. The teacher must have the disposition of a co-learner rather than that of a lecturer or a scholar. He must be a goad and guide rather than a teller and transmitter. The attitude of all group members must be one of receptivity and openness to new ideas. They should not be afraid to share ideas, confident that no one will laugh at their contributions or harshly criticize their conclusions.

About 10 years ago I was conducting a Christian Education Conference in a church in downstate Illinois. At the last minute I was asked to teach a young adult Sunday School class. I decided to attempt a dialogical approach, just to see what would happen. My first question, “What have you been studying this quarter?” brought no response whatever from the 20 young adults. I then asked, “Is it in the Old Testament or the New Testament?” I still got no response. After two or three more questions a lady in the back row timidly raised her hand and volunteered a piece of information.

That class was communicating to me their ideas of what Sunday School ought to be. It was clearly a place where the students sat and listened while the teacher spoke. Classes like this do not change their attitudes easily nor quickly.

It will be essential to deal with certain problems which arise in discussion situations. The silent member must be encouraged to contribute. The overbearing monopolizer must be curtailed in his efforts to dominate the group. Solving this problem may require some personal counseling outside of the classtime itself. Tension and conflict in the group may not always be bad. Sometimes these elements help stimulate thinking.

Do not forget evaluation. At the end of the discussion time, the group should collectively measure its effectiveness in reaching biblical solutions to the problems posed at the beginning.

The technique itself should be evaluated, seeking ways in which procedures could be improved the next time. Sometimes it is helpful for group members to talk about how they felt when certain ideas were introduced or certain conclusions drawn by the group.

The modern church which employs the small discussion group in its instructional organization will go far toward establishing the type of personally focused group life which gave the Gospel its start in the world. Christian education has been effective where the small group was vitalized by a Christian personality able to communicate biblical truth to others with warmth of spirit and depth of insight. Can you be that kind of teacher?

Apparently the method known as “buzz groups” was first used by Dr. Donald Phillips at Michigan State University. He would divide his large classes into six-member clusters asking them to discuss a certain problem for six minutes. As you might guess, it was not long until the new approach became known on campus as the “Phillips 66” technique. Now the use of buzz groups is quite popular, and varying formats and arrangements have been introduced to add a great deal of flexibility to this type of discussion teaching.

Because, of the flexibility, buzz groups cannot be narrowly defined. The name certainly can be applied whenever a large assembly of people is divided into small groups (usually of no less than three and no more than eight) which for a limited time simultaneously discuss separate problems or various phases of a given problem. If possible, recorders from each of the groups report their findings to the reassembled large group. This technique can be effectively used as early as the Junior Department and increases in significance up to young and middle adulthood.

Frequently buzz groups will follow a lecture, panel, or some other teaching form which has been used to transmit certain basic information about a given subject. The groups can be assigned questions raised by the speaker, or unresolved issues which emerge from the first part of the teaching period.

I’ll never forget a situation in which I used buzz groups with a young adult class. As I explained what we would be doing that morning their eyes filled with terror. This new approach seemed threatening to them, and they would much rather have had me take care of all of the performance. The plan was to have them study certain verses of Scripture for about 20 minutes in their buzz groups and then report to the wider group.

Things started slowly, but at the end of the 20 minutes when I informed them that they should “wrap up their findings” and prepare for reports, I had a mini-rebellion on my hands. “Quit? Wind up? Ready to report? Why, we just got started.” The thrill of learning had set in. They were hooked. Some of those folks had entered into group Bible studies seriously for the first time in their adult lives.

Herbert A. Thelen, in his book Dynamics of Groups at Work (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill.), suggests, “the buzz group offers a natural and useful transition from the listening situation to the decision of each individual to act. It is an intermediate step in the movement of responsibility from the officials (leaders) to the small groups to the individual.” He also suggests four other valuable uses for this approach in teaching and group work:

1. To get a meeting started on significant problems with the members assuming considerable responsibility

2. To set up an agenda for a meaningful learning experience

3. To overcome a feeling of helplessness or apathy and to redirect the group toward action

4. To test a set of ideas, and to increase communication between speaker and audience

Flexibility and variation are important factors in the use of buzz groups. Let us look at a Sunday School teacher who exemplifies these qualities.

Jim T. is the teacher of a young adult class. After coming back from a Sunday School convention last month, he decided to put into practice the things he learned in a workshop on buzz groups. His class numbers about 30 and meets in a little prayer chapel. His lesson for Sunday focuses on the personal witnessing techniques of Christ as seen in John 4:1-38. Jim plans to approach his teaching hour this way:

9:45—9:50 Welcome, announcements, and opening prayer.

9:50—10:10 Give a brief explanation of the setting of John 4. This will include showing something of the geographical setting of Samaria in relation to Judea and Galilee. To do this Jim intends to use an overhead projector with prepared maps. He will also briefly touch on the nature of the Samaritans: who they were, where they came from, and what they believed.

10:10—10:15 Explain the following six questions for discussion:

1. What specifically did Christ mean by his reference to “living water?”

2. Why did Jesus bring up the subject of this woman’s husbands?

3. What kind of diversion does the woman raise in verse 20, and how does our Lord handle it?

4. What is the meaning of verse 24, and what implications does it have for our worship today?

5. What did Christ mean by His statement, “Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest” (v. 35)?

6. According to verse 38, how were the disciples involved in this ministry?

10:15—10:30 Chairs will be rearranged into six circles of approximately five people each. A group leader will be appointed whose task it is to keep the discussion on target and involve au the members of the group. He is not to teach or to dominate discussion. Each group will immediately select its own recorder or secretary, who will be responsible for the report.

10:30—10:45 The groups will reassemble, and each reporter will have approximately two minutes to share the findings of his group in answer to the question assigned. Jim may make one or two closing remarks at the end of the hour and then dismiss the class with prayer.

Several things are assumed in Jim s lesson plans. First of all, the Adult Department in his Sunday School has wisely given up its old system of “opening exercises.” Each class goes immediately to its classroom, and any preliminaries are taken care of there. Jim does not have to worry about passing around any kind of attendance lists since the class secretary sits in the back of the room and checks the attendance during the first few minutes.

Jim also has the advantage of a room with some privacy and folding chairs which can be moved anywhere he wants to put them. In addition, he has a small enough class so that division into smaller groups is quite workable.

But remember the flexibility angle. Suppose Jim had 60 students instead of 30. If the chairs were still movable and the room large enough, he could have retained his lesson plan with one exception: be would have assigned two groups to each question rather than one.

But let us assume for the moment that Jim bad to meet his class in the sanctuary, where they sit in pews rather than folding chairs. Could he have used buzz groups?

Yes, assuming he has had the foresight to bring all of the class members together in one comer of the auditorium rather than letting them spread out. He will still use his same lesson format and the same questions. But now he will go to a variation of buzz groups called either “neighbor nudging,” “triads,” or “diads.” This is a technique which involves two or three people sitting together and discussing a question among themselves. There is no appointed leader, and the teacher may select any one of the two or three to give the informal report.

If his class numbers 60 and Jim wants to keep his original six questions, he might decide to use triads, thus giving him 20 small discussion groups. He would have at least three groups on each question and four groups on two of the questions. The major deficiency here is that he will surely not have time for all of the reports so he will have to select a representative sample. The advantage is that he can use diads or triads with almost any type of room furniture and arrangement in a class of almost any size. Perhaps the diagram on page 47 will more clearly establish the buzz group arrangements discussed above.

Values of Buzz Group Teaching

Buzz group teaching, like other forms of discussion, takes advantage of that significant teaching principle, interaction. The class confronts the subject matter firsthand rather than passively receiving what a teacher has to say. Jim could have answered any of

his questions in a lecture, but the answers will be much more meaningful if the class members can find them in the text. Some of the class members would never participate in a discussion if the whole class were listening to their contribution. In the small group, however, the threat is minimized, and people find it easier to express themselves and share their understanding of scriptural issues.

Adaptability is a plus factor for this teaching method. We saw how Jim could adapt if the Sunday School superintendent suddenly moved him into the auditorium. The subject matter is also a flexible item. Buzz groups can deal with interpretation of Scripture, discussion of topical matters, controversial questions raised by a guest speaker, implementation of ideas by the members of the group, and many other types of learning. Sometimes patience and tolerance develop as group members are forced into a situation of listening to what someone else has to say on the subject.

Do not forget the factor of leadership development. Although the roles of group leader and recorder-reporter may not seem very significant at the time, this exposure to the sharing of responsibility for the effectiveness of the class is an important ingredient in the process of training classmembers to be leaders themselves.

Problems in Using Buzz Groups

Sometimes the use of buzz groups will threaten a class. As a matter of fact, the first time you use the technique you should expect your class members to be somewhat afraid of the group interaction. But soon they will discover that learning is enjoyable when the learner is directly involved.

Sometimes the groups will not arrive at the conclusions which the leader might have desired. If he has left himself some time to “pull together” the issues, he may be able to solve this problem. But an honest discussion should not predetermine what conclusions the group is to reach. The process should be as inductive as possible.

Sometimes a weakness shows up in the selection of the group leader. If the leader fails to take the responsibility to keep his group on the subject and to catalytically draw out each member, then the effectiveness of the technique will be in danger.

Buzz groups also take time. Just as in any other kind of discussion teaching, the teacher must plan to invest more time to cover the same amount of material than if he were teaching monologically. But again, the emphasis should be on creating learning in the minds and lives of the students, not necessarily in covering the greatest amount of material in the shortest time.

Principles for Effective Buzz Groups

Some pitfalls can be avoided if the teacher will carefully observe some basic principles which facilitate the effectiveness of buzz group teaching.

Plan the classtime to allow for moving chairs, explaining the technique, and hearing reports. These items will usually take longer than you anticipate.

Make clear to the class what the roles of group leader and recorder should be. This is done before the entire group so that everyone will know how he is to react to the leader and recorder in his group.

Set a definite time limit for discussion. The general tendency is to think that groups will be able to do more in a certain amount of time than they can actually handle effectively. If five group members have 15 minutes to deal with their question, each member of the group can speak to the question only three minutes.

The teacher should “float” from group to group to motivate better involvement, help them over any hurdles, and generally spread enthusiasm around the room.

Gather the notes from the reporters, and prepare a mimeographed sheet of the total findings of the class. The recorders will probably be speaking so fast that no one can take notes. Furthermore, this sheet will give the class a symbol of their own effectiveness in discussion and Bible study. The leader can also add his own comments at the end so that such a report sheet will be helpful as a reference item long after the class is over.