Leadership

“By guiding attention we take in our hands the key to the formation and the development of personality and character.” Lev Semyonovich Vygotsky[2]

“Teacher,” Part One, “Scholar,” Part Two

My first stint as an educator was chosen by a four letter word: time.

My training was in pastoral studies.  But I was being offered a position as a high school teacher in a Christian school. Should I become a teacher, something for which I was not trained?  I made my decision based on time.

I asked myself how much influence could I have within a certain amount of time?  Teaching five times a week for 45 minutes a day over 180 days a year equals 135 hours per year.

But mentoring was the key to my decision.  I added to the amount of class time going to student concerts, games, plays, and graduations.  On top of watching student performances, I became involved in taking stats for basketball teams, weight-lifting with athletes, personal counseling, and parties at my home. Being with people was crucial in making my decision to teach.[3]  Mentoring is allowing people to be with us in our teaching, in our lives.  Discipleship is allowing time for imitation.[4]

Albert Bandura, following the behaviorists, introduced “new” ideas of cognitive repetition with his “bobo doll studies.”  Bandura had children watch a video of other children repeatedly knocking down a rubber bounce-back doll.  The result of observation was imitation which moved to changed behavior. The children immediately went into the next room to do what they had just seen.  Bandura’s observations (attention, retention, reproduction, motivation) emphasized that imitation causes people to demonstrate what they have learned, not to cause learning in and of itself.[5]  Bandura concluded, as a good humanist should, that the focus is on self. Response to imitation should be self-regulation, self-determination, self-control, even contractual obligations begun with oneself.

The biblical model, however, forces us to acknowledge that what our students emulate us because of The One we follow (1 Co 11:1 “be imitators of me as I am of Christ”). 2 Thessalonians 3:7, 9 takes us yet another step. Paul commands (“must”) that the church follow his leadership. Essentially, no teaching can ever be effective outside of the personal lifestyle pattern of the teacher.

Imitating positive role models has ancient roots with philosophers, rabbis, and teachers. But Scripture points to more: Timothy the modeler becomes the model for others (1 Co 4:17). Paul was not asking the Corinthians to practice anything different from what was done elsewhere “everywhere in every church” (cf. 1 Co 7:17; 11:16; 14:33, 36). The Corinthians were to become what the Thessalonians had become already—the developmental model which was now the model for others: imitation.

The imitators were imitated, leaving an “example” for others to follow (1 Th 1:6). The Greek for “example” is “type.” Originally the word meant a mark that left a blow or a design stamped on a coin, leaving a pattern—something to be copied and followed (cf. Titus 2:7; 1 Peter 5:3). The word order emphasizes “a result reached.”[6]

No where else does Paul mark a church as an example to follow as he does with Thessalonica (1 Th 1:8). Paul puts developmental theory on notice that in order to model we must “give ourselves” to others (1 Th 2:8). Scripture is clear about sanctification—it is more difficult to “take affect” unless a discipleship lifestyle accompanies the teaching (cf. Gal 4:12; Phil 3:17).

There are other words which further elucidate the model of modeling. “Walk the line” (Rom 4:12; Acts 21:24; Gal 5:25), “follow in his footsteps or tracks” (2 Co 12:18; 1 Pet 2:21), and “devotion” (1 Tim 5:10, 24) are metaphors which authenticate (cf. Mark 16:20) the talk with the walk. It is possible to follow the wrong behavior (2 Peter 2:2, 15) which is the reason why Bandura’s “operational learning” must submit to The Personal Eternal Triune Creator.

The mentor has a role to play. It behooves us as professors to know Whose disciples we are.  The developmentalists can theorize about the process of imitated behavior but have no basis for its authority.  We live our lives as mentor-disciplers because people “read” us (2 Cor 3:2). 

May our students know Whom we imitate.

My our students find us worthy of imitation.

May our students experience our discipleship inside and outside the classroom.

May our students mimic the traits they find in us because these traits are found in Scripture.

And most of all, may our students know that we always have time to spend with them.

Dr. Eckel has served the Christian educational community for over 35 years; teaching junior high through graduate school.  Mark now spends time with students at The Comenius Institute (website). Find our 1 minute video here. This article was first published for The Emerging Scholars Network (site). Photos: Snappy Goat and Wikipedia Commons.

[2] Vygotsky, L.S. 1997. Educational psychology. Reprint, Boca Raton, FL: St. Lucie Press, 133.

[3] Mark Eckel, “Time,” 11 June 2013, https://warpandwoof.org/cultural-practical/2592/

[4] The connection between developmental psychology and Scriptural precedent is found in Paul’s words, “I urge you to imitate me” (1 Co 4:16, see 4:14-21 for the whole context). Every time the noun form of “mimic” is used in the New Testament (we get our English word directly from the Greek; cf. 1 Co 11:1; Eph 5:1; 1 Th 1:6; 2:14, etc.) the verb ginomai gives the action–“to become.” The present imperative drives the imitator to develop character based on the given model. In short, the biblical framework informs every developmentalist’s model.

[5] Anthony, Michael J. 2001. Albert Bandura. In Evangelical dictionary of Christian education. Edited by Michael J. Anthony, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 63-64.

[6] Morris, Leon. 1979. The first and second epistles to the Thessalonians. Reprint, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans (page references are to the reprint edition), 59-60. We have an expectation for results but know that results are left up to God so our ministries are not “results-oriented.”

Staking out my political position.

After careful reflection, I want to declare . . . 

I’m a liberal in the classic sense of being broadminded, welcoming ideas and voices with which I may disagree while learning from the dialogue.

I am a conservative in the ancient sense of being a preservative of perennial principles, ideals which connect universal standards.

I am a progressive in the modern sense of being forward thinking, interested in the present application of comprehensive ethics.

I am a libertarian in the revolutionary sense of being glad to allow others to live as they would like, as they refuse to impose their rules on me.

I am a socialist in the Scriptural sense of being compassionate toward those who have less, needing help, reminding individuals who have more to serve those who have less.

I am a constitutionalist in the originalist sense of being certain that law and liberty has a primary source which gives foundation to earthbound directives.

I am a Biblicist in the eternal sense of being subservient to The Personal Triune Creator who has given Timeless Wisdom to His temporal world.

I have come to these political conclusions based on five “readings.”

1. My reading of the Bible tells me that The Personal Eternal Triune Creator of the universe has established a transcendent standard for all people, places, times, and cultures.

2. My reading of America’s founding documents tells me that the flawed individuals who established the nation knew the only way to overcome their faults was to rely on accountability for all through shared rule.

3. My reading of human nature tells me that human corruption permeates everyone’s being, needing correction by a source of Wisdom not our own.

4. My reading of literature tells me that great writers throughout history have pointed to the corruption of our nature while seeking redemption.

5. My reading of culture tells me that there is always a need to limit and lessen abuses, careful to provide benefit and goodness for others in my own place and time with the gifts given me.

Now I know that I have friends who may not agree with my conclusions. They will read my “readings” in a different way. I will never give up basic beliefs nor would I expect others to give up theirs. But folks who disagree with me will always be greeted with open arms. I try to avoid conflict. I love to find common ground. We truly need each other, keeping each other politically accountable.

How will that happen? Five attitudes may help us engage different political perspectives:

1. Clarification: questions allow exploration, inquiry moves toward understanding

2. Discernment: honesty, carefulness, and kindness appraise problems with ideas, not people

3. Allowance: being lovingly tolerant of people means we are willing to challenge their beliefs

4. Reserve: humility teaches if we never think we could be wrong, we already are

5. Audacity: saying we are “correct” depends on “truth” which depends on an outside source

It is imperative for all of us to remember that we live in a free country, protected by a strong military, governed by laws, where we are in agreement about basic ideals of life, liberty, and virtue. I could not write these words nor could you, the reader, publicly respond with your own views in places like China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, or Russia.

America is a great nation. Our politics should produce careful reflection.

At the age of 16 Mark thought about becoming a politician. Focusing the fire hose of Truth upon the coals of human sin instead of the heat of politics, Dr. Mark Eckel became a theologian instead. Mark is president of The Comenius Institute. First published at WarpandWoof, February 2016.

Afterword.

Teaching George Orwell’s 1984 in an upcoming class, I am well aware of the dangers of government power.

Political decisions are important.

We like to think that things were better in a former age. Wrong. Some of the worst attacks I have read in politics came from our founding fathers. Check out a few scenarios.

We complain about various candidates, parties, and persuasions because we think their actions are awful.

I would like to say this to everyone: we bring it on ourselves.

Our emotive, vitriolic, bombastic, shrill, and profane diatribes splinter, fracture, divide, and fragment us. Our politics are so loudly partisan, so intensely personal, that we cannot hear anyone else.

Beside our attitudes, we have numerous problems. We are not reading the same documents. We do not know America’s history: good, bad, and ugly. We are not moved by the same speeches, writings, and stories. Instead we are listening to commentators. We only travel in our tribes. We only read those with whom we agree. We attach ourselves to our labels and think no further than our nose.

If America survives the future it is building, some will look back on these days to lament. 

We need to commit ourselves to be OURSELVES. Read, learn, revere, gasp in horror, and redeem our national history. Only we can do this. No one will defend a nation if they have no idea why that nation should be defended.

Before November commit to reading The U.S. Constitution, Federalist Papers, Washington’s addresses, Lincoln’s inaugurals, MLK’s “I Have a Dream” Speech, Eisenhower’s Farewell Address, and the speeches of Ronald Reagan. If we are to be be E Pluribus Unum (“from the many, one”) we must hear many in order to be one.