Resources

This article originated as a brief reflection on pedagogical issues intended to catalyze collegial discussions at a meeting of the Comparative Religious Studies faculty at San Jose State University. The author distinguishes four interrelated elements that motivate his own teaching: human meaning, dialogic inter-activity, responsible response, and multi-methodologic study. Dialogic pedagogy is illustrated with concrete examples of how theory fits in the classroom. To further clarify the discussion, Martin Buber's theory of educating is applied to the teaching process, especially his understanding of "one-sided inclusion."

The article is a reflection on what I perceive to be a confusion about the relation between theoretical judgments and judgments of pedagogical efficacy. My interest in the issue originated with my own confusion over persistent student resistance to certain assigned texts that I had initially felt confident would prove valuable in the classroom. The essay unfolds in three segments. In the first, I recount how this concern about the relation between theoretical judgments and judgments of pedagogical efficacy evolved out of my own teaching. I next list three tentative conclusions about the correlation or lack of correlation between theoretical judgments and judgments of pedagogical efficacy. In the concluding segment, I call for concerted resistance to the tendency of pure rationality to colonize the aesthetic and dramatic components of experience so essential to transformative teaching and learning.

Drawing on his own work in educational theory as well as his classroom experience, the author identifies important dialogical vices that he finds in his students: pride and cowardice. These vices are put both in the theoretical context of a greater understanding of the role of dialogue in learning and in the social context of the contemporary multicultural ethos from which the students come. In opposition to the vices, the author proposes dialogical virtues (humility, charity, and courage) and a concept of tolerance that help us to avoid pride and cowardice. In this way, we achieve genuine dialogue and multiculturalism and avoid what the author calls a pernicious multiculturalism

Many faculty members reach for powerful clips or entire films to give background information to a topic or to provoke discussion. We do this because we have a sense that such materials engage students in a way that more theoretical texts, speculative discussions, or even case studies do not. In the field of ethics, however, one meets resistance to employing narratives that are too engaging. The wary ethicist doubts that a medium that manipulates the viewer, engages the emotions, and elicits a personal connection to the characters is the best resource for ethical reflection. This paper argues that film, like other narrative forms, is indeed an appropriate medium for teaching ethics and suggests methods for doing so effectively.

This brief meditation on teaching was shared at a gathering of mid-career theological school teachers for a retreat in Scottsdale, Arizona. It draws upon the author's familiarity with the desert to provide a metaphoric exploration of the "desiccation and delight" that surprises us repeatedly in our classrooms and instructs us in humility and hope.

This article explores the art form of dance as a metaphor for the teaching of theology. Employing the work of Maria Harris, the author contends that there are seven elements of dance than can serve as metaphors for teachers of theology: preparation, rhythm, movement, expectancy, response, embodiment, and performance. Each dance element is described in detail, and the correlations between specific elements of dance and how one might teach theology are presented as possible methodological steps for teaching.

Using an autobiographical approach for pedagogical reflection, the author raises questions about how to include "hospitable kinship" and "gift exchange" in teaching and learning. Her experience with a Zimbabwean community circle of hospitable kinship has prompted her to consider how this method of community formation might be employed in classroom situations. Definitions for hospitable kinship and gift exchange are woven throughout the narrative. Attention to the role of the teacher as host is provided as well. The essay prompts readers to turn their attention toward specific strategies that will aid in the formation of classroom community.

The theological pedagogies which dominate degree-granting schools originated in the courses of study and graduate programs of the teachers. These pedagogies foster a deep rift between theology as an academic or scholarly discipline (science?) and the situations and interests of students. Students are taught to imitate what scholars do: interpreting texts, making formal arguments, and writing essays. Accordingly, theology recedes from the present and future of students including future clergy, having little to do with their religious life or career. By defining theology as scholarship, academic pedagogy obscures its primary meaning, the critical and creative thinking of the situations of life and world under the perspective of the Gospel. If theology's primary meaning is scholarly knowledge and its preoccupation with text interpretation and doctrinal exposition, the result will be to ignore religion's actual practices, especially its idolatrous tendency to literalize its own language and absolutize its institutional mediations. A pedagogy that reflects theology's primary meaning will focus on contemplation, reflection, and thinking and thus order methods, texts, and doctrines to that.

In addition to the pragmatic concerns that often drive the use of technology in theological education, there is a need to develop theological justification and direction for online education. Several Roman Catholic Church documents propose the "divine pedagogy," the manner in which God teaches the human race, as a model for catechesis or religious education. This can provide a rich resource for developing a theological pedagogy for online education. This is especially relevant to the justification for online education, because critics sometimes refer to the incarnational character of the divine pedagogy to argue against the disembodied nature of virtual education. This article addresses such criticisms and more constructively, relates several aspects of the divine pedagogy such as adaptation, community, and participation to teaching and learning in the online environment. (This paper was presented at Theology and Pedagogy in Cyberspace II conference in Evanston, Ill. on April 17, 2004.)