I just finished reading a blog post about the disappearance of the pulpit from the sanctuaries of American Evangelicalism. As you lead your small group or class, what does your posture communicate? Do you stand or sit? Is there a piece of furniture (podium or lectern) that designates you as the leader? Do you sit in front of the class? close to the whiteboard? head of the table? Do you hold the remote to the PowerPoint (designating you are in control of the flow of the presentation) or do you set it down (communicating we are going to stay on this topic until it is adequately covered)? Do your students/participants respect you because you have lived life with them and you have relational influence or do you rely upon positional power?
My conclusion is that this is not an either/or issue, it is a both/and situation. Sometimes authoritative proclamation is most needed and sometimes relational dialogue is most appropriate. The wise communicator will use all sources of persuasion and use appropriate posture for whatever purpose he/she is speaking.
Below is a snippet of the blog post about the disappearance of pulpits. A link is at the end of this post if you would like to read the rest of his thoughts.
You may have noticed that most evangelical churches have abandoned the pulpit for a more seeker-friendly wooden stool.
“From the pulpit” is a phrase that is often used to communicate the authority of the message.
In Protestantism the pulpit stands as the iconic symbol for the very foundations of the movement.
I teach a teacher training course. During this course we discuss the way that one communicates non-verbally during a presentation. For example, when one wishes to teach in a more Socratic method, they will ask questions of the audience. The goal is maximum participation. Here, the desire is to make your audience think critically, expecting them to carry some of the burden. This method is accomplished best when the teacher is walking among the audience (peripatetic). He or she should not be on a raised platform, for this communicates a level of authority that will hinder participation. One wants to communicate that they are leading the discussion, not autonomously telling people what to think. Therefore, being on level with the audience is the best method.
However, if one is to speak authoritatively, this is not the best method. In this case, one wants to be seen as the teacher, not merely a participant in the learning or a discussion guide leader. Here preparation, authority, and command of the subject are communicated in two ways: 1) Elevated height. When one is physically raised above the audience, this not only gives the speaker the ability to be seen and heard, it demonstrates their unique position as the teacher. 2) Pulpit or podium. The podium serves as a separation between you and the audience demonstrating the authority of that which you are teaching.
In traditional Protestantism, the pulpit has served to position the Scripture as the ultimate authority.
interestic topic, Dave. i liked the analysis.
ReplyDeleteMy youth group is actually set up in the round with no center stage and just a music stand for my notes. I utilize the socratic method quite a bit, circling around as we wrestle through issues, engaging the audience in dialogue about the topic. Other times when the lesson is more a matter of teaching truth, I'll put a stool on one side and have them sit almost around (270 degrees) with no one behind me.
I applaud your creativity (you've never been short in that department) to vary between allowing teens to wrestle with issues and come to their own conclusions, but also being able to discern when there are issues when they just need to learn to accept it because it isn't open to personal interpretation.
ReplyDelete