- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I have a question — one problem we have at church is that it is BORING. We need a quality church experience, in my view, to keep people there. We need quality to stitch people in when they spontaneously come back to chuch, and we need it for our children and youth. Part of the reason for this is that we have a lay ministry and people who are often learning new skills, or working in their areas of weakness and not strength. Think about it — without turning it into a light show, band, or other entertainment-oriented experience, if we had really good talks and lessons, full of the Spirit, consistently, it would HAVE to fuel attendance from the members. Not only attendance, but true learning.
But really, we’re not all that concerned about it as a church. If you mention quality, people pull out all kinds of arguments about how a) you’re there for the people struggling to learn to speak or teach b) that if you stacked your Sac Mtgs and lessons with good speakers/teachers all the time, non-members would have an unrealistic idea of what they are getting over the long-term if they join.
I can only take so many years/decades of being there for people who are basically losing the audience. I have tried to listen carefully and then complement on the good aspects of what many do, but it is VERY hard to sustain. Also, youth get bored and want no part of the experience.
I’ve heard a lot of arguments that seem to downplay the need for quality.
So, my question — what is the right balance between quality and the lack luster performance we see when you have a lot of people participating in speaking and teaching with little or no training or preparation? Do we have that balance in the church? If not, how do we achieve it?
Remember, and organization that makes anything a priority can usually achieve it with persistent effort.
There are a few reasons why, I think, the Church is run the way it is. -First, the more you invest in something, the more you become committed to it.
-Second, the more vocal you are about a belief, the more you come to believe it.
-Third, the more in common you have with someone, the more you will agree with them.
We are also heavily focused and reliant on the “influence of the Spirit”, both for conveying “truth”, and giving you the power to “Lift up your voices unto this people; speak the thoughts that I shall put into your hearts, and you shall not be confounded before men; For it shall be given you in the very hour, yea, in the very moment, what ye shall say.” Therefore, if you have the Spirit, your message will reach those who also have the Spirit. If the mesage isn’t recieved, it is because the speaker or the listener did not have the Spirit with them.
But lets face it; Rhetoric is where it’s at. It’s what causes the congregations in other churches to stand up and shout, “AMEN, BROTHER! HALLELUJAH!”. It’s what got 9/10 presidents elected, when all they said was contradictory gibberish. It’s what comapines pay inspirational speakers $10,000+ for. And most of all, it’s a LEARNED skill. Faith and the Spirit can only take talent so far (forgive me, God, for saying so).
What we need, are more practical classes for Sunday School. Forget the chronological study of conference talks and scriptures. I want application! We could call the class “Helping to cultivate the feelings of the Spirit”. Let’s analyze the teaching styles of Uchdorf and Holland, as well as the reasons why certain other speakers put their audience to sleep. Let’s establish exactly what increases empathy, attention, and application. If the lay ministry falls short, let’s get them properly trained.
I think the people who downplay the need for quality do so out of a belief that volunteer organizations that ask almost anyone to be teachers can’t do high quality. To a degree, they are correct – if you analyze every class and insist on a high percent of classes being high quality. Yes, we have an issue with too many mediocre to bad lessons at church, but . . . 1) I think it is wrong to assert that most members don’t value or care about quality – or that there are a tiny number of high-quality lessons taught throughout the Church. Almost every member I have seen experience a high-quality class likes it and wants it all the time – and I have experienced high-quality lessons fairly regularly. (maybe not half of the time, but not too much lower than that) People just don’t let themselves expect it, given their life experiences with volunteer teachers, in order not to be disappointed regularly.
2) I am positive the Church leadership understands the need for quality instruction and wants it to happen. They talk about it regularly, especially in training sessions with local leaders – and it is a big focus right now. I just think they differ from most people here in their view of what CAN be good instruction – so what they organize as the lesson structure doesn’t fit with what people here desire – so the lessons aren’t seen as high quality almost regardless of the quality of the teachers, if the lessons are followed closely.
3) It is an interesting phenomenon that most people will rate a lesson as mediocre to bad if they don’t agree with the message being taught (in church, at work, in school, etc.), no matter how well / skillfully that message is presented.
I’m glad that you acknowledge 50 to 60 percent of the lessons aren’t great. For me that’s way too high, and it has nothing to do with my agreement (or lack therefore) of the material. I think it’s great that leaders talk about lesson quality, but talk never got anyone anywhere except elected for office 
They are in fact putting their money where their mouth is with Teachers Council, I will give them that. Allowing them to hold it during the 3 hour block is revolutionary given all the emphasis on “meetings” and “councils” NOT interfering with the lesson periods. So, that is very much to the leadership’s credit. Seriously — I acknowledge that.
But I think we can do much much better. It’s funny that our HPGL wants everyone to go out and bear the rejection of members who want nothing to do with us (through home teaching) to get them back. Yet he feels fine about standing up in our meeting and talking non-stop for the full lesson period. I hope he’s noticed that attendance has fallen by 50% since he started teaching every lesson that way.
When they tried to put me back on the radar a year ago, three people called me with the phrase “We Want You Back”. My thought was “back for What? The same old same old after all these years? What have you done to improve the experience???”. I didn’t say it. But it surprised me how their sales pitch was simply telling me what THEY wanted to serve their needs rather than sweetening the experience by enticing me back with quality.
In my view “If we build it they will come” from the movie “Field of Dreams” applies — and we seem so focused on getting people to come we forget about building the ball diamond. We advertise the best hamburgers in the world, but when people show up for the hamburgers, at least 50% of them are cold, rubbery or stale. Often we are fresh out of them. And we have only one flavor most of the time.
I have often thought it would be valuable to have itinerant speakers for sacrament meeting in the stake. Instead of a High Council visit (sometimes good, often not), we have a Stake Speaker visit. This person is called to give knock-out talks across the stake. There is a group of them so every week you get a really good speaker. Call 12 of them so every Ward gets a good one every week and there is little repetition. These people are called because they have a love and passion for speaking, and are good at it.
Even something simply like Sacrament meeting talk guidelines would help. For example, don’t start off your talk by telling everyone how unprepared you are, how nervous you are, signalling a snoozeville experience is about to happen. Avoid the “When brother X asked me to speak preamble”. Focus on personal experiences. If possible, don’t read it, although we understand if you feel you have to. Allow Toastmasters to meet in our building and encourage members to join, even subsidizing a membership for people who demonstrate they are willing to attend regularly.
Keep up with the teachers council, and implement metrics that gauge, at a general level, how members are perceiving the quality of their Sunday or classroom experience.
For a church that invests 80% of its local time in meetings, we could certainly do better.
I want to share this quote from LeadingLDS.com on quality teaching and learning…this came from Spencer W. Kimball. Quote:
“Stake presidents, bishops, and branch presidents, please take a particular interest in improving the quality of teaching in the Church. I fear that all too often many of our members come to church, sit through a class or a meeting, and… then return home having been largely [uninspired]. It is especially unfortunate when this happens at a time … of stress, temptation, or crisis [in their life]. We all need to be touched and nurtured by the Spirit and effective teaching is one of the most important ways this can happen. We often do vigorous work to get members to come to Church but then do not adequately watch over what they receive when they do come.”Elder Holland then quotes President Hinckley when he said,
“Effective teaching is the very essence of leadership in the Church. Eternal life will come only as men and women are taught with such effectiveness that they change and discipline their lives. They cannot be coerced into righteousness or into heaven. They must be led, and that means teaching.”
Further evidence that yes, they talk about it. While i know that people are learning, and there must be allowance for that, I would love see a “sandbox” where you can learn and have non-successes, while also setting up the learning experience so there is a greater emphasis on regular quality….
We put missionaries through 3 weeks of training in how to teach the gospel in the MTC, I think it would be wonderful to really emphasize grooming people with interest, and talent in teaching and speaking. A core, so to speak, who provide at least a basic level of quality you can expect every Sunday.
SD, my comment was in response to the statement in the post that “we’re not all that concerned about it as a church”. Fwiw, I have said over and over, for a long time, that the one thing that would increase attendance and activity rates is more spiritual Sacrament Meetings (true worship services), excellent Sunday School lessons, and more focus on pure service during the third hour (and overall).
SilentDawning wrote:Even something simply like Sacrament meeting talk guidelines would help. For example, don’t start off your talk by telling everyone how unprepared you are, how nervous you are, signalling a snoozeville experience is about to happen. Avoid the “When brother X asked me to speak preamble”. Focus on personal experiences. If possible, don’t read it, although we understand if you feel you have to.
Yes, yes. So much yes. I hate hearing people’s “bear with me” excuses. The best way to deal with stage fright is just to act as if nothing is wrong. Sure, you’re probably still nervous, but you don’t need to call attention to that fact, as it detracts from your message. It’s like those people who show up late to college classes and try to “sneak in” or apologize for being late; they call more attention to themselves and look more ridiculous than if they walked in as if that was when they intended to arrive.I agree that this is a massive deficiency in the church. I hate how most Sunday school lessons consist of regurgitating the same stories we’ve all heard before, applying the standard primary answers to it, then going home having learned nothing. You have maybe5 years in the adult classes before you’ve heard everything and you will go weeks, months, or perhaps years between interesting lessons where you learn something new. I think a lot of the problem comes from complacency and black-and-white thinking. A significant chunk of the membership is satisfied with a “the church is true; what more do you need?” mentality. They don’t see a problem in church being boring to most people because they think having a testimony should be enough to keep people at church. We and many others see that it isn’t that simple for everyone.
My mom is very black-and-white stage 3. When I expressed similar feelings as this thread, she stated that she enjoyed church and felt inspired by church most weeks. She was utterly surprised when I told her that SM is high on the list of boring church services across all faiths. I guess some people don’t even recognize there is a problem because it doesn’t affect them personally. Some people are legitimately satisfied by the repetitive nature of LDS church experience, but the rest of us are not “broken” for feeling that church is repetitive and boring.
SilentDawning wrote:
We put missionaries through 3 weeks of training in how to teach the gospel in the MTC, I think it would be wonderful to really emphasize grooming people with interest, and talent in teaching and speaking. A core, so to speak, who provide at least a basic level of quality you can expect every Sunday.
I don’t think 3 weeks is enough- at least not on its own. I’m sure you’ve seen enough greenies to know that the MTC isn’t what makes missionaries good at teaching… At least not with Preach My Gospel. And I don’t think you could really call the days of memorized lessons “good teaching” anyway, so that’s sort of a moot point. Some of these missionaries are so socially awkward (or something like that) that they still can’t teach a coherent lesson after 2 years, while some others are naturally gifted orators who are teaching compelling lessons before ever reaching the field. Some can strike up a conversation with anyone but can’t bring the spirit when they teach. Others can barely string sentences together yet carry the spirit with them everywhere they go. So yeah, there’s something not quite right about the dartboard approach we have right now toward teaching/talks.I wish I got more opportunities to speak in SM. I actually enjoy giving talks, but I only seem to be assigned to give a talk every couple years, when I wouldn’t mind doing one every other month or so. I always seem to have this supply of talks I want to give if given the opportunity, yet I never really have the opportunity.
At least it’s looking like I’m going to end up being called to teach Gospel Doctrine, so I can at least solve the problem within my own sphere of influence.Love those quotes from Kimball and holland! Old Timer wrote:
SD, my comment was in response to the statement in the post that “we’re not all that concerned about it as a church”.I realize that. I’m influenced by my leadership training — you now organizations are serious about things when you can point to physical evidence of their concern. The Teacher’s council is one such piece of evidence. So I give credit for that, but over the last 30 years I’ve been in the church, organizational commitment to quality teaching has been sporadic at best. The odd Teaching the Gospel Course here and there if the Bishop decides its important. A brief flirtation with a Teacher IMprovement Coordinator position, and then the recent lightening up of the first Sunday to make it an opportunity to council about local needs. All pointing to a greater consciousness about the need to improve gospel teaching.
But for a church that spends so much time teaching others, it isn’t enough in my view…here are some ways we could improve:
a) better technology in the classrooms, and support for it.
b) elevating the role of the Sunday School presidency, and staffing such presidencies with more than the typical lightweight personalities that have, on average, typified those positions.
c) prioritizing the training, and calling of effective teachers and speakers.
d) manuals that have really really good questions in them. Not the lame ones that we normally get, but really, really good ones.
e) Practical components to lessons that are drawn from practitioner literature — but which are totally consistent with the gospel.
But alas, all I have is my little Ward to focus on. I guess that’s enough. I had about 15 people in attendance last time using techniques I use to pack restaurants to see my bands.
If I ever become a bishop in a Ward like mine (highly unlikely at this time, given my falling off the wagon a few years ago), my first priority would be to work hard at having a very inspiring Ward on Sunday. A clear vision for what the Ward is to accomplish developed through broad-based, participative leadership techniques. Solid Sunday experiences with carefully picked people. Guest speakers drawn in from the outside (while navigating policy at the same time), regular reviews of how we are doing against such vision.
Strategy without Execution is Dead.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.