Ulangan 6 ! Klik
Jumat, 13 Oktober 2017
Kamis, 12 Oktober 2017
Rabu, 11 Oktober 2017
Selasa, 10 Oktober 2017
Minggu, 08 Oktober 2017
Kamis, 05 Oktober 2017
Karakter Yusuf Anak Jakup
Cerita Yusuf fersi Anak anak ! Klik
Eksposisi Kejadian 37 Yusuf dan saudaranya ! Klik
Didaktis Kejadian 37 Yusuf Anak Yakub ! Klik
Kepemimpinan Yusuf ! Klik
Penyertaan Tuhan terhadap Yusuf ! Klik
1. Kerendahan Hati ! Klik
2. Bertanggung Jawab ! Klik
3. Berhikmat ! Klik
4. Menangung Penderitaan ! Klik
5. Teguh tidak tergoda ! Klik
6. Penyelamat Ekonomi ! Klik
7. Visioner ! Klik
Terimakasih
Eksposisi Kejadian 37 Yusuf dan saudaranya ! Klik
Didaktis Kejadian 37 Yusuf Anak Yakub ! Klik
Kepemimpinan Yusuf ! Klik
Penyertaan Tuhan terhadap Yusuf ! Klik
1. Kerendahan Hati ! Klik
2. Bertanggung Jawab ! Klik
3. Berhikmat ! Klik
4. Menangung Penderitaan ! Klik
5. Teguh tidak tergoda ! Klik
6. Penyelamat Ekonomi ! Klik
7. Visioner ! Klik
Terimakasih
Rabu, 04 Oktober 2017
Selasa, 03 Oktober 2017
Sabtu, 23 September 2017
Rabu, 20 September 2017
Info untuk Penulisan Naskah Khotbah Kelas 12 SMA ADVENT PURWODADI
Penting untuk di periksa Naskahnya dengan baik.
I. Apakah sudah memakai atau menuliskan yaitu :
1. Pendahuluan
2. Isi Khotbah di kembangkan menggunakan kalimat tanya 5 W 1 H
3. Alkitab
4. Kutipan Hamba Tuhan EGW
5. Penutup
II. Tuliskan apa yang akan kamu sampaikan agar di dengar oleh Anggota Jemaat
jangan lupa bahaslah APA PERMASALAHAN YANG KAMU AKAN BAHAS di dalam pembahasan Khotbahmu dan Berilah SOLUSI DARI MASALAH YANG KAMU ceritakan itu
berdasarkan Firman Tuhan.
semoga sukses
Selamat Berkhotbah.....
Tuhan Memberkatimu
I. Apakah sudah memakai atau menuliskan yaitu :
1. Pendahuluan
2. Isi Khotbah di kembangkan menggunakan kalimat tanya 5 W 1 H
3. Alkitab
4. Kutipan Hamba Tuhan EGW
5. Penutup
II. Tuliskan apa yang akan kamu sampaikan agar di dengar oleh Anggota Jemaat
jangan lupa bahaslah APA PERMASALAHAN YANG KAMU AKAN BAHAS di dalam pembahasan Khotbahmu dan Berilah SOLUSI DARI MASALAH YANG KAMU ceritakan itu
berdasarkan Firman Tuhan.
semoga sukses
Selamat Berkhotbah.....
Tuhan Memberkatimu
Minggu, 17 September 2017
Kamis, 13 Juli 2017
Cara Menggunakan Fungsi VLOOKUP dan HLOOKUP di Excel
Fungsi VLOOKUP dan HLOOKUP dalam Microsoft Excel berguna untuk membaca suatu tabel, lalu mengambil nilai yang diinginkan pada tabel tersebut berdasarkan kunci tertentu. Kunci ini berupa sel referensi (contoh: sel A2) atau nilai, seperti kode, nomor anggota, nama, dan sebagainya.
Jika tabel sumber data tersusun secara vertikal, kita menggunakan fungsi VLOOKUP.
Dan, jika tabel sumber data tersusun secara horizontal, maka kita menggunakan fungsi HLOOKUP.
Cara Penulisan:
=VLOOKUP(lookup_value,table_array,col_index_num,range_lookup)=HLOOKUP(lookup_value,table_array,row_index_num,range_lookup)
Dimana:
- lookup_value: nilai atau sel referensi yang dijadikan kunci dalam pencarian data.
- table_array: tabel atau range yang menyimpan data yang ingin dicari. Range untuk contoh tabel di atas adalah: A2:C4 (tabel pertama - VLOOKUP) dan B1:D3 (tabel dua - HLOOKUP).
- col_index_num: nomor kolom yang ingin diambil nilainya untuk fungsi VLOOKUP. Untuk tabel pertama (VLOOKUP): nomor kolom adalah 2, bila ingin mengambil nilai pada kolom Name. Nomor kolom adalah 3, bila ingin mengambil nilai pada kolom Price.
- row_index_num: nomor baris yang ingin diambil nilainya untuk fungsi HLOOKUP. Untuk tabel dua (HLOOKUP): nomor baris adalah 2, bila ingin mengambil nilai sel pada baris Name. Nomor baris adalah 3, bila ingin mengambil nilai sel pada baris Price.
- range_lookup: Nilai logika TRUE atau FALSE, dimana Anda ingin fungsi VLOOKUP atau HLOOKUP mengembalikan nilai dengan metode kira-kira (TRUE) atau mengembalikan nilai secara tepat (FALSE).
Contoh-contoh VLOOKUP:
Penjelasan Tabel
- Tabel 1 (A1:C4), merupakan tabel yang akan kita ambil datanya.
- Tabel 2 (A9:D12) memiliki tiga kolom (Customer, Unit, dan Code) yang sudah berisi data. Sedangkan kolom Total akan diisi dengan menggunakan data dari Tabel 1.
- Kunci (lookup_value) yang digunakan adalah nilai pada kolom Code, yaitu 1002, 1003.
Cara membaca:
- =VLOOKUP(1002,$A$2:$C$4,3,FALSE) akan menghasilkan 68,
yaitu: =VLOOKUP(temukan 1002 yang di C10,pada range A2:C4 di tabel 1, kemudian kembalikan nilai pada kolom 3 baris yang sama, dan kembalikan nilai hanya apabila menemukan 1002 pada tabel 1) - =VLOOKUP(1003,$A$2:$C$4,2,FALSE) akan menghasilkan GHI,
yaitu: =VLOOKUP(temukan 1003 yang di C11, pada range A2:C4 di tabel 1, kemudian kembalikan nilai pada kolom 2 baris yang sama, dan kembalikan nilai hanya apabila menemukan 1003 pada tabel 1)
Contoh VLOOKUP:
Tiga formula berikut digunakan untuk mengisi sel D10, D11, dan D12 pada kolom Total.
- =B10*VLOOKUP(C10,$A$2:$C$4,3,FALSE) akan menghasilkan 340.
Nilai 340 diperoleh dari 5 x 68. Dimana: B10 = 5, dan fungsi =VLOOKUP(C10,$A$2:$C$4,3,FALSE) yang mengembalikan nilai 68. - =B11*VLOOKUP(C11,$A$2:$C$4,3,FALSE) akan menghasilkan 320.
Nilai 320 diperoleh dari 10 x 32. Dimana: B11 = 10, dan fungsi =VLOOKUP(C11,$A$2:$C$4,3,FALSE) yang mengembalikan nilai 32. - =B12*VLOOKUP(C12,$A$2:$C$4,3,FALSE) akan menghasilkan 544.
Nilai 544 diperoleh dari 8 x 68. Dimana: B12 = 8, dan fungsi =VLOOKUP(C12,$A$2:$C$4,3,FALSE) yang mengembalikan nilai 68.
Contoh-contoh HLOOKUP:
=HLOOKUP(B1,$B$1:$D$3,2,FALSE) akan menghasilkan XYZ
=HLOOKUP(B1,$B$1:$D$3,3,FALSE) akan menghasilkan 33
Rabu, 12 Juli 2017
Keuntungan dan Kerugian Belajar
Belajar di sekolah, udah. Belajar di bimbel udah. Masih harus belajar lagi ya di luar dua tempat itu? Yaah, tergantung kebutuhan sih
sebenernya. Klo elo-elo mau punya pemahaman yg maksimal soal tema-tema
yang dipelajarin, ya lebih harus jungkir balik lagi belajarnya. Klo
emang cuma buat ngapal trus bisa jawab soal demi nilai bagus doang sih, yaah bisa aja belajar kebut semalem. Tapi, besok-besok dijamin lupa lagi tuh. Nah,
klo emang kebutuhannya selain nilai bagus tapi juga biar nguasain
materi pelajaran dalam waktu lama, belajar di luar kelas atau bimbel
berarti elo butuhin tuh.
Sekarang masalahnya, yang efektif tuh yg kaya gimana sih biar cepet bisa nyerap pelajaran di luar sekolah/bimbel? Apa harus bertapa dulu? Tunggu wangsit dulu? Sendirian atau ramean? Nah ini nih, yang mau kita bahas kali ini. Belajar tuh mending sendiri atau ramean yah? Mari kita bahas bareng-bareng.
Secara sekilas, kalau kita denger soal mending belajar sendiri atau dalam kelompok, kita otomatis langsung jawab, enakan dalam kelompok lah! Tugas lebih cepet selesai. Eits tunggu dulu. Lagi-lagi yg namanya preferensi itu pasti selalu terkait sama dua hal: 1) kepribadian, sama 2) hakikat dari tugas tersebut. Ribet yah? Nggak kok. Yg pertama itu berhubungan sama kecenderungan seseorang untuk lebih senang belajar sendiri, ada juga yang lebih cenderung senang belajar ramean. Persis kaya ada orang yang doyan teh, ada juga yg doyan kopi. Beda-beda Coy. Kalo yg kedua, nentuin belajar sendiri atau barengan itu ya harus disesuaikan sama jenis tugas ataupun tujuan pembelajaran yang ditentuin sama guru.
Klo tugas atau bahan pelajarannya itu butuh analisis yang mendalam, ada baiknya dilakukan bareng-bareng. Toh, banyak otak banyak ide, kan? Tapi, klo tugas ataupun materi pelajarannya lebih bersifat superficial atau cuma sekadar pemahaman yang tidak perlu proses analisis mendalam, belajar sendiri tentunya lebih efektif, soalnya minim distraksi (gangguan) untuk memahami hal tersebut. Jadi gue tekanin lagi nih, bukan sekadar tugas/belajar jadi lebih cepet, tapi juga berhubungan dengan efektivitas penyelesaian tugas tersebut.
Sekarang kita telusurin lagi nih, keuntungan-keuntungan dan kerugian-kerugian dari kedua metode belajar tersebut. Kira-kira mana nih yang paling pas sama kepribadian elo dan situasi yang sedang elo alamin. Mariii..
Keuntungan Belajar Sendirian
1. Fleksibel Booook!
Keuntungan utama dari belajar sendiri adalah ya yang satu ini, fleksibel. Elo mau belajar kapan kek, belajar yg mana kek, mau pake alat bantu apa kek, terserah. Sesuai yang menurut elo nyaman aja. Suka belajar tengah malem, hayok. Belajar subuh, marii. Kapanpun. Mau belajar di meja bisaa. Belajar sambil tengkurep di karpet boleeh. Bebas! Terus juga mau sambil denger mp3 atau diselingin nonton TV, ya bebas bebas aja.
2.Ngelatih intelektualitas diri
Nah, di poin yang kedua ini, belajar sendirian itu bisa lho, buat ngelatih kecerdasan diri kita. Dalam hal ini yaitu kemampuan pemecahan masalah. Klo belajar sendirian, elo tuh bakal nyoba buat mecahin macem-macem permasalahan yang lo hadepin pas belajar atau ngerjain tugas, sendirian. Elo bakal ngembangin berbagai macem cara pemecahan masalah yang mungkin aja bisa lebih efektif dan efisien untuk permasalahan tertentu, lalu mungkin juga bakal menggabungkan beberapa cara pemecahan tersebut untuk permasalahan yang lebih rumit.
3. Fokus dan sesuai rencana
Belajar sendirian tuh membantu kita untuk tetep fokus sama bahan pelajaran yang pingin kita dalemin. Cuma hal ini ada syaratnya nih, keadaan lingkungan tempat kita belajar harus dalam keadaan tenang. Klo di rumah, misalnya, ya nggak boleh diganggu sama ortu, adik, kakak, atau tukang nasi goreng lewat. Klo di café ya jangan sambil ngeliatin cewe lucu (atau cowo lucu bagi elo2 yang cewe). Selain itu, belajar sendiri juga bagus buat kita dalam hal menentukan rencana belajar yang efektif. Bab mana yang harus kita pelajarin, bab mana yang belom kita kuasain, yg mana yang mau kita skip. Jadinya, kita bisa belajar sesuai dengan apa yg bener-bener kita perluin. Nggak buang-buang banyak waktu.
Kerugian belajar sendirian
1. Nggak ada proses pertukaran ide
Belajar sampe puyeng udah, semedi udah, tapi kok mentok yah? Nah, hal ini bisa aja nih gara-gara bahan yang lo hadepin itu membutuhkan proses analisis yang cukup rumit, yang mana nggak bisa elo selesein sendirian tanpa bantuan orang lain. Nah, kejadian kaya ginilah yang membuat belajar kelompok lebih berguna.
2. Nggak ada acuan terhadap performa belajar siswa lain
Belajar sendiri nyantai tiba-tiba temen-temen udah pada jago aja. Akhirnya rendah diri, setres, makan ati, trus males belajar lagi. Nah, yang kaya gini-gini nih yang sebenernya bisa ditanggulangin dengan sesekali belajar kelompok sama temen-temen.
3. Banyak banget distraksi
Lagi enak-enak baca materi pelajaran, tiba-tiba ada BBM, ada whatsapp, ada SMS, selesai texting-textingan, trus nyokap manggil suruh angkat jemuran. Selesai angkat jemuran, ada film oke di TV. Kapan belajarnya cuy? Ini dia nih masalah paling umum yang dihadapin kita klo belajar sendirian di rumah.
Keuntungan Belajar Kelompok
1. Ngebantu ngurangin prokrastinasi
Prokrastinasi itu apa sih?! Yah, gampangnya gini aja deh, kita punya tugas yang harus diselesein minggu depan, tapi sebelom H-1, kita cenderung untuk bilang dalem hati: “Aah besok ajeeh”, “ntaran lah kerjainnya, mau maen game dulu barang sepukul dua pukul”. Nah, gejala ini udah termasuk gejala prokrastinasi nih. Dengan belajar kelompok, gejala ini bisa ditanggulangin, karena kita bekerja dengan orang lain berarti tenggat waktunya juga nggak bisa seenak jidat kita yg tentuin sendirian. Kita sebisa mungkin harus patuh dan kompromi terhadap aturan-aturan kelompok.
2. Dapet sudut pandang yang beda
Ini nih yang jadi keunggulan utama belajar dalem kelompok. Belajar kelompok bikin kita dengerin banyak sekali masukan-masukan dari sudut pandang yang berbeda-beda. Hal ini bisa bikin pemahaman yang lebih, kaya mengenai topik yang lagi kita pelajarin.
3. Mengembangkan kemampuan-kemampuan baru di luar pelajaran
Selain nambah pengetahuan dan ngeluasin sudut pandang, belajar kelompok juga bikin kita makin jago dalam hal kemampuan untuk berdiskusi, berdebat, nulis catetan diskusi, trus juga bisa ningkatin kemampuan organisasi kita. Kok bisa?! Lah iya, dalam sebuah kelompok, mau secupu apapun kelompoknya, pasti ada kecenderungan untuk berorganisasi. Pasti ada yang muncul jadi pemimpin. Ada juga yang jadi pengikut doang. Ada juga yg kerjaannya cuma ngetik doang, ada yang mikir doang, dsb. Nah, dengan kondisi ini, kita bisa ngelatih kemampuan organisasi kita. Contohnya kemampuan untuk negosiasi, untuk ngelobi, untuk patuh terhadap peran, untuk bisa me-manage anak buah, dan sebagainya.
4. Nambah temen nongkrong
Udah, nggak usah diomongin lagi lah klo belajar kelompok pasti bikin kita makin menjadi sosial. Jelas, lah. Dari jumlahnya aja lebih dari satu, berarti kan nggak kesepian, kan?! Udah gitu, tempat belajarnya bisa aja di tempat-tempat gaul, tempat nongkrong favorit lo dan temen-temen, atau malah di perpustakaan..
Udah gitu, kalo misalnya lo pingin buat ngembangin jaringan sosial lo,
lo bisa aja kan gabung sama kelompok lain buat belajar bareng-bareng.
Atau malah gabungin kelompok lo sama kelompok baru tersebut, biar
sekalian pertukaran idenya lebih maknyus.
5. Ngurangin stres sebelom ujian
Sebelom ujian, pasti elo-elo pada ngerasain setres, kan? Ada yg ringan, ada juga yang sampe keringet dingin sepanjang hari. Nah, belajar kelompok tuh bisa banget lho, nurunin level stress lo. Lo bisa ngeliat orang-orang yang lagi “seperjuangan” sama lo, yang mana bakal memotivasi lo buat semangat ngadepin ujian. Cuma jangan kebalik nih, belajar bareng itu sebaiknya sebelum ujian, jangan setelah ujian berlangsung. Klo setelah ujian, lo bakal jadi setres deh mikirin jawaban lo yg salah di mana orang lain bener. Udah jadi hukum psikologi manusia, bahwa kita sedih kalo ada orang lain yang sedih, tapi kita makin sedih kalo ada orang lain seneng.
Kerugian belajar kelompok
Sumber
https://www.zenius.net/blog/1815/mana-yg-lebih-baik-belajar-kelompok-atau-belajar-sendiri
Sekarang masalahnya, yang efektif tuh yg kaya gimana sih biar cepet bisa nyerap pelajaran di luar sekolah/bimbel? Apa harus bertapa dulu? Tunggu wangsit dulu? Sendirian atau ramean? Nah ini nih, yang mau kita bahas kali ini. Belajar tuh mending sendiri atau ramean yah? Mari kita bahas bareng-bareng.
Secara sekilas, kalau kita denger soal mending belajar sendiri atau dalam kelompok, kita otomatis langsung jawab, enakan dalam kelompok lah! Tugas lebih cepet selesai. Eits tunggu dulu. Lagi-lagi yg namanya preferensi itu pasti selalu terkait sama dua hal: 1) kepribadian, sama 2) hakikat dari tugas tersebut. Ribet yah? Nggak kok. Yg pertama itu berhubungan sama kecenderungan seseorang untuk lebih senang belajar sendiri, ada juga yang lebih cenderung senang belajar ramean. Persis kaya ada orang yang doyan teh, ada juga yg doyan kopi. Beda-beda Coy. Kalo yg kedua, nentuin belajar sendiri atau barengan itu ya harus disesuaikan sama jenis tugas ataupun tujuan pembelajaran yang ditentuin sama guru.
Klo tugas atau bahan pelajarannya itu butuh analisis yang mendalam, ada baiknya dilakukan bareng-bareng. Toh, banyak otak banyak ide, kan? Tapi, klo tugas ataupun materi pelajarannya lebih bersifat superficial atau cuma sekadar pemahaman yang tidak perlu proses analisis mendalam, belajar sendiri tentunya lebih efektif, soalnya minim distraksi (gangguan) untuk memahami hal tersebut. Jadi gue tekanin lagi nih, bukan sekadar tugas/belajar jadi lebih cepet, tapi juga berhubungan dengan efektivitas penyelesaian tugas tersebut.
Sekarang kita telusurin lagi nih, keuntungan-keuntungan dan kerugian-kerugian dari kedua metode belajar tersebut. Kira-kira mana nih yang paling pas sama kepribadian elo dan situasi yang sedang elo alamin. Mariii..
Keuntungan Belajar Sendirian
1. Fleksibel Booook!
Keuntungan utama dari belajar sendiri adalah ya yang satu ini, fleksibel. Elo mau belajar kapan kek, belajar yg mana kek, mau pake alat bantu apa kek, terserah. Sesuai yang menurut elo nyaman aja. Suka belajar tengah malem, hayok. Belajar subuh, marii. Kapanpun. Mau belajar di meja bisaa. Belajar sambil tengkurep di karpet boleeh. Bebas! Terus juga mau sambil denger mp3 atau diselingin nonton TV, ya bebas bebas aja.
2.Ngelatih intelektualitas diri
Nah, di poin yang kedua ini, belajar sendirian itu bisa lho, buat ngelatih kecerdasan diri kita. Dalam hal ini yaitu kemampuan pemecahan masalah. Klo belajar sendirian, elo tuh bakal nyoba buat mecahin macem-macem permasalahan yang lo hadepin pas belajar atau ngerjain tugas, sendirian. Elo bakal ngembangin berbagai macem cara pemecahan masalah yang mungkin aja bisa lebih efektif dan efisien untuk permasalahan tertentu, lalu mungkin juga bakal menggabungkan beberapa cara pemecahan tersebut untuk permasalahan yang lebih rumit.
3. Fokus dan sesuai rencana
Belajar sendirian tuh membantu kita untuk tetep fokus sama bahan pelajaran yang pingin kita dalemin. Cuma hal ini ada syaratnya nih, keadaan lingkungan tempat kita belajar harus dalam keadaan tenang. Klo di rumah, misalnya, ya nggak boleh diganggu sama ortu, adik, kakak, atau tukang nasi goreng lewat. Klo di café ya jangan sambil ngeliatin cewe lucu (atau cowo lucu bagi elo2 yang cewe). Selain itu, belajar sendiri juga bagus buat kita dalam hal menentukan rencana belajar yang efektif. Bab mana yang harus kita pelajarin, bab mana yang belom kita kuasain, yg mana yang mau kita skip. Jadinya, kita bisa belajar sesuai dengan apa yg bener-bener kita perluin. Nggak buang-buang banyak waktu.
Kerugian belajar sendirian
1. Nggak ada proses pertukaran ide
Belajar sampe puyeng udah, semedi udah, tapi kok mentok yah? Nah, hal ini bisa aja nih gara-gara bahan yang lo hadepin itu membutuhkan proses analisis yang cukup rumit, yang mana nggak bisa elo selesein sendirian tanpa bantuan orang lain. Nah, kejadian kaya ginilah yang membuat belajar kelompok lebih berguna.
2. Nggak ada acuan terhadap performa belajar siswa lain
Belajar sendiri nyantai tiba-tiba temen-temen udah pada jago aja. Akhirnya rendah diri, setres, makan ati, trus males belajar lagi. Nah, yang kaya gini-gini nih yang sebenernya bisa ditanggulangin dengan sesekali belajar kelompok sama temen-temen.
3. Banyak banget distraksi
Lagi enak-enak baca materi pelajaran, tiba-tiba ada BBM, ada whatsapp, ada SMS, selesai texting-textingan, trus nyokap manggil suruh angkat jemuran. Selesai angkat jemuran, ada film oke di TV. Kapan belajarnya cuy? Ini dia nih masalah paling umum yang dihadapin kita klo belajar sendirian di rumah.
Keuntungan Belajar Kelompok
1. Ngebantu ngurangin prokrastinasi
Prokrastinasi itu apa sih?! Yah, gampangnya gini aja deh, kita punya tugas yang harus diselesein minggu depan, tapi sebelom H-1, kita cenderung untuk bilang dalem hati: “Aah besok ajeeh”, “ntaran lah kerjainnya, mau maen game dulu barang sepukul dua pukul”. Nah, gejala ini udah termasuk gejala prokrastinasi nih. Dengan belajar kelompok, gejala ini bisa ditanggulangin, karena kita bekerja dengan orang lain berarti tenggat waktunya juga nggak bisa seenak jidat kita yg tentuin sendirian. Kita sebisa mungkin harus patuh dan kompromi terhadap aturan-aturan kelompok.
2. Dapet sudut pandang yang beda
Ini nih yang jadi keunggulan utama belajar dalem kelompok. Belajar kelompok bikin kita dengerin banyak sekali masukan-masukan dari sudut pandang yang berbeda-beda. Hal ini bisa bikin pemahaman yang lebih, kaya mengenai topik yang lagi kita pelajarin.
3. Mengembangkan kemampuan-kemampuan baru di luar pelajaran
Selain nambah pengetahuan dan ngeluasin sudut pandang, belajar kelompok juga bikin kita makin jago dalam hal kemampuan untuk berdiskusi, berdebat, nulis catetan diskusi, trus juga bisa ningkatin kemampuan organisasi kita. Kok bisa?! Lah iya, dalam sebuah kelompok, mau secupu apapun kelompoknya, pasti ada kecenderungan untuk berorganisasi. Pasti ada yang muncul jadi pemimpin. Ada juga yang jadi pengikut doang. Ada juga yg kerjaannya cuma ngetik doang, ada yang mikir doang, dsb. Nah, dengan kondisi ini, kita bisa ngelatih kemampuan organisasi kita. Contohnya kemampuan untuk negosiasi, untuk ngelobi, untuk patuh terhadap peran, untuk bisa me-manage anak buah, dan sebagainya.
4. Nambah temen nongkrong
Udah, nggak usah diomongin lagi lah klo belajar kelompok pasti bikin kita makin menjadi sosial. Jelas, lah. Dari jumlahnya aja lebih dari satu, berarti kan nggak kesepian, kan?! Udah gitu, tempat belajarnya bisa aja di tempat-tempat gaul, tempat nongkrong favorit lo dan temen-temen, atau malah di perpustakaan..
Udah gitu, kalo misalnya lo pingin buat ngembangin jaringan sosial lo,
lo bisa aja kan gabung sama kelompok lain buat belajar bareng-bareng.
Atau malah gabungin kelompok lo sama kelompok baru tersebut, biar
sekalian pertukaran idenya lebih maknyus.5. Ngurangin stres sebelom ujian
Sebelom ujian, pasti elo-elo pada ngerasain setres, kan? Ada yg ringan, ada juga yang sampe keringet dingin sepanjang hari. Nah, belajar kelompok tuh bisa banget lho, nurunin level stress lo. Lo bisa ngeliat orang-orang yang lagi “seperjuangan” sama lo, yang mana bakal memotivasi lo buat semangat ngadepin ujian. Cuma jangan kebalik nih, belajar bareng itu sebaiknya sebelum ujian, jangan setelah ujian berlangsung. Klo setelah ujian, lo bakal jadi setres deh mikirin jawaban lo yg salah di mana orang lain bener. Udah jadi hukum psikologi manusia, bahwa kita sedih kalo ada orang lain yang sedih, tapi kita makin sedih kalo ada orang lain seneng.
Kerugian belajar kelompok
- Kita lebih cenderung untuk melakukan hal-hal yang kurang berhubungan dengan tugas/pelajaran. Kita punya kecenderungan untuk lebih menikmati gosip, obrolan tentang film, obrolan bola, obrolin cewe cakep, dll. Trus selain obrolan yang ga nyambung, kadang kita juga sering ngelakuin hal yang ga nyambung juga, kaya makan bareng, maen PS, chatting sama temen lain, dsb.
- Kita malah bakalan ngurusin satu temen kita yang ketinggalan, akhirnya diskusi yg udah jalan jadi terbengkalai.
- Kita terpengaruh sama temen kita yang bisa aja salah, tapi karena dianggep jadinya kita percaya-percaya aja. Makanya diskusi dan debat diperluin nih untuk ngatasin masalah kaya gini. Kita punya hak untuk mendebat apapun dan siapapun biar dapet kesimpulan yang lebih kaya
- Udah jadi kebiasaan dalem diri kita, terutama elo-elo yang orangnya kompetitif, bahwa kita setres kalo liat temen yang lebih pinter dari kita. Belajar kelompok itu membutuhkan kerelaan diri bahwa ada kok emang orang-orang lain yang lebih jago dari kita dalam hal apa pun. Dan itulah dunia. Sedap.....
- Nah, kerugian terakhir dari belajar kelompok, ada satu fenomena menyedihkan yang sering gua perhatiin, terutama buat elo-elo yang muales banget belajar. Banyak banget nih, anak-anak males yang rupanya cuma ngandelin belajar kelompok dengan harapan bisa diajarin sama yang laen atau istilahnya "kecipratan pinter". Terus ujung-ujungnya waktu belajar kelompok anak2 males ini cuma sibuk minjem catetan, fotokopi, terus minta "disuapin" pelajaran yang gak ngerti, atau yang lebih parah nanya "Eh kira-kira yang penting bakalan keluar apa aja, sih?". Yah, sebenernya sih gpp kayak gitu satu-dua kali kalo emang lu lagi buta sama sekali, tapi yang bahaya adalah kalo yang kayak gini jadi KEBIASAAN ! Nantinya, lu gak akan terlatih untuk menjalani tantangan dan selalu 'lari' dengan ngandelin orang laen.
Sumber
https://www.zenius.net/blog/1815/mana-yg-lebih-baik-belajar-kelompok-atau-belajar-sendiri
Pengertian Metode Ekspositori
Pengertian Metode Ekspositori
 |
| Ilustrasi Metode Ekspositori |
Roy Killen (dalam Wina Sanjaya) menamakan metode ekspositori dengan istilah strategi pembelajaran langsung (Direct Instruction). Karena dalam hal ini siswa tidak dituntut untuk menemukan materi itu. Materi pelajaran seakan-akan sudah jadi. Oleh karena metode ekspositori lebih menekankan kepada proses bertutur, maka sering juga dinamakan istilah metode chalk and talk.
Metode ekspositori merupakan bentuk dari pendekatan pembelajaran yang berorientasi kepada guru (teacher centered approach) (Wina Sanjaya, 2008:179). Dikatakan demikian, sebab guru memegang peran yang sangat dominan. Melalui metode ini guru menyampaikan materi pembelajaran secara terstruktur dengan harapan materi pelajaran yang disampaikan itu dapat dikuasai siswa dengan baik. Fokus utama metode ini adalah kemampuan akademik siswa (academic achievement student).
Prinsip-prinsip Metode Ekspositori
Prinsip-prinsip pembelajaran dengan metode ekspositori yang harus diperhatikan oleh setiap guru antara lain (Wina Sanjaya, 2008:181)1. Berorientasi pada Tujuan
Walaupun penyampaian materi pelajaran merupakan ciri utama dalam metode ini, namun tidak berarti proses penyampaian materi tanpa tujuan pembelajaran, justru tujuan itulah yang harus menjadi pertimbangan utama dalam penggunaan metode ini.2. Prinpip Komunikasi
Proses pembelajaran dapat dikatakan sebagai proses komunikasi, yang menunjuk pada proses penyampaian pesan dari seseorang (sumber pesan) kepada seseorang atau sekelompok orang (penerima pesan). Pesan yang ingin disampaikan dalam hal ini adalah materi pelajaran yang telah diorganisir dan disusun dengan tujuan tertentu yang ingin dicapai. Dalam proses komunikasi guru berfungsi sebagai sumber pesan dan siswa berfungsi sebagai penerima pesan.3. Prinsip Kesiapan
Dalam teori belajar koneksionisme, “kesiapan” merupakan salah satu hubelajar.Inti dari hukum ini adalah guru harus terlebih dahulu memosisikan siswa dalam keadaan siap baik secara fisik maupun psikis untuk menerima pelajaran. Jangan memulai pelajaran, manakala siswa belum siap untuk menerimanya.4. Prinsip Berkelanjutan
Proses pembelajaran ekspositori harus dapat mendorong siswa untuk mau mempelajari materi pelajaran lebih lanjut. Pembelajaran bukan hanya berlangsung pada saat itu, akan tetapi juga untuk waktu selanjutnya.Prosedur Metode Ekspositori
Pada Pelaksanaannya metode ekspositori memiliki prosedur-prosedur pelaksanaan, secara garis besar digambarkan oleh Wina Sanjaya (2008) sebagai berikut :1. Persiapan (Preparation)
Tahap persiapan berkaitan dengan mempersiapkan siswa untuk menerima pelajaran. Dalam metode ekspositori, keberhasilan pelaksanaan pembelajaran sangat bergantung pada langkah persiapan. Tujuan yang ingin dicapai dalam melakukan persiapan yaitu :- Mengajak siswa keluar dari kondisi mental yang pasif.
- Membangkitkan motivasi dan minat siswa untuk belajar.
- Merangsang dan mengubah rasa ingin tahu siswa.
- Menciptakan suasana dan iklim pembelajaran yang terbuka.
2. Penyajian (Presentation)
Tahap penyajian adalah langkah penyampaian materi pelajaran sesuai dengan persiapan yang telah dilakukan.Hal yang harus diperhatikan oleh guru adalah bagaimana materi pelajaran dapat dengan mudah ditangkap dan dipahami oleh siswa. Oleh sebab itu, ada beberapa hal yang harus diperhatikan dalam pelaksanaan langkah ini diantaranya : Penggunaan bahasa, intonasi suara, Menjaga kontak mata dengan siswa, serta menggunakan kemampuan guru untuk menjaga agar suasana kelas tetap hidup dan menyenangkan.3. Korelasi (Correlation)
Tahap korelasi adalah langkah yang dilakukan untuk memberikan makna terhadap materi pelajaran, baik makna untuk memperbaiki struktur pengetahuan yang telah dimiliki siswa maupun makna untuk meningkatkan kualitas kemampuan berpikir dan kemampuan motorik siswa.4. Menyimpulkan (Generalization)
Menyimpulkan adalah tahapan untuk memahami inti (core) dari materi pelajaran yang telah disajikan. Sebab melalui langkah menyimpulkan, siswa dapat mengambil inti sari dari proses penyajian. Menyimpulkan berarti pula memberikan keyakinan kepada siswa tentang kebenaran suatu paparan. Sehingga siswa tidak merasa ragu lagi akan penjelasan guru. Menyimpulkan bisa dilakukan dengan cara mengulang kembali inti- inti materi yang menjadi pokok persoalan, memberikan beberapa pertanyaan yang relevan dengan materi yang diajarkan, dan membuat maping atau pemetaan keterkaitan antar pokok-pokok materi.5. Mengaplikasikan (Aplication)
Tahap aplikasi adalah langkah unjuk kemampuan siswa setelah mereka menyimak penjelasan guru. Langkah ini merupakan langkah yang sangat penting dalam proses pembelajaran ekspositori. Sebab melalui langkah ini guru akan dapat mengumpulkan informasi tentang penguasaan dan pemahaman siswa terhadap materi yang telah diajarkan. Teknik yang biasa dilakukan pada langkah ini diantaranya, dengan membuat tugas yang relevan, serta dengan memberikan tes materi yang telah diajarkan untuk dikerjakan oleh siswa.Kelebihan dan Kelemahan Metode Ekspositori
Kelebihan Metode Espositori
- Dengan metode ekspositori guru dapat mengontrol urutan dan keluasan pembelajaran, dengan demikian ia dapat mengetahui sejauh mana siswa menguasai bahan pelajaran yang disampaikan.
- Metode pembelajaran ekspositori dianggap sangat efektif apabila materi pelajaran yang harus dikuasai siswa cukup luas, sementara itu waktu yang dimiliki untuk belajar terbatas.
- Melalui Strategi pembelajaran ekspositori selain siswa dapat mendengar melalui penuturan tentang suatu materi pelajaran, juga sekaligus siswa bisa melihat atau mengobservasi (melalui pelaksanaan Demonstrasi).
- Metode Pembelajaran ini bisa digunakan untuk jumlah siswa dan ukuran kelas yang besar.
Kelemahan Metode Ekspositori
- Metode pembelajaran ini hanya mungkin dapat dilakukan terhadap siswa yang memiliki kemampuan mendengar dan menyimak secara baik.
- Metode ini tidak mungkin dapat melayani perbedaan setiap individu baik perbedaan kemampuan, pengetahuan, minat, dan bakat, serta perbedaan gaya belajar siswa.
- Metode ini sulit mengembangkan kemampuan siswa dalam hal kemampuan sosialisasi, hubungan interpersonal, serta kemampuan berpikir kritis.
- Keberhasilan metode pembelajaran ekspositori sangat tergantung kepada apa yang dimiliki guru, seperti persiapan, pengetahuan, rasa percaya diri, senmangat, antusiasme, motivasi, dan kemampuan mengelola kelas. Tanpa itu sudah dipastikan pembelajaran tidak mungkin berhasil.
- Pengetahuan yang dimiliki siswa akan terbatas pada apa yang diberikan guru.mengingat gaya komunikasi metode pembelajaran ini lebih banyak terjadi satu arah (one-way communication). Sehingga kesempatan untuk mengontrol pemahaman siswa akan terbatas pula.
Daftar Pustaka
- Jamarah,B.S. 2002. Strategi Belajar Mengajar. Jakarta : Rineka Cipta.
- Popham,W.J. 1992. Tehnik Mengajar Secara Sistematis. Jakarta :Rineka Cipta.
- Sanjaya, W. 2008. Strategi Pembelajaran. Bandung : Kencana Prenada Media Group.
Sumber:
http://www.kajianpustaka.com/2012/12/metode-belajar-ekspositori.html
Metode Pembelajaran Kerja Kelompok
- fasilitas yang tersedia;
- perbedaan individual dalam minat belajar dan kemampuan belajar;
- jenis pekerjaan yang diberikan;
- wilayah tempat tinggal peserta didik;
- jenis kelamin;
- memperbesar partisipasi peserta didik dalam kelompok; dan
- berdasarkan pada loter/ random.
Tujuan Metode Pembelajaran Kerja Kelompok
Penggunaan metode kerja kelompok menurut Moedjiono (1992:62) bertujuan untuk:- Memupuk kemauan dan kemampuan kerjasama di antara para pesera didik
- Meningkatkan keterlibatan sosio-emosional dan intelektuan para peserta didik dalam proses belajar mengaar yang diselenggarakan
- Meningkatkan perhatian terhadap proses dan hasil dari proses belajar mengajar secara berimbang
Langkah-Langkah Pembelajaran dengan Metode Kerja Kelompok
1. Kegiatan Persiapan Metode Kerja Kelompok- Merumuskan tujuan pembelajaran yang akan dicapai
- Menyiapkan materi pembelajaran dan menjabarkan materi ?tersebut ke dalam tugas-tugas kelompok.
- Mengidentifikasi sumber-sumber yang akan menjadi sasaran ?kegiatan kerja kelompok.
- Menyusun peraturan pembentukan kelompok, cara kerja, saat ?memulai dan mengakhiri, dan tata tertib lainnya.
3. Kegiatan Membuka Pelajaran
- Melaksanakan apersepsi, yaitu pertanyaan tentang materi ?pelajaran sebelumnya.
- Memotivasi belajar dengan mengemukakan kasus yang ada ?kaitannya dengan materi pelajaran yang akan diajarkan
- Mengemukakan tujuan pelajaran dan berbagai kegiatan ?yang akan dikerjakan dalam mencapai tujuan pelajaran itu.
- Mengemukakan lingkup materi pelajaran yang akan dipelajari
- Membentuk kelompok
- Mengemukakan tugas setiap kelompok kepada ketua ?kelompok atau langsung kepada semua siswa
- Mengemukakan peraturan dan tata tertib serta saat memulai dan mengakhiri kegiatan kerja kelompok.
- Mengawasi, memonitor, dan bertindak sebagai fasilitator selama siswa melakukan kerja kelompok.
- Pertemuan klasikal untuk pelaporan hasil kerja kelompok, pemberian balikan dari kelompok lain atau dari guru.
- Meminta siswa merangkum isi pelajaran yang telah dikaji melalui kerja kelompok.
- Melakukan evaluasi hasil dan proses
- Melaksanakan tindak lanjut baik berupa mengajari ulang materi yang belum dikuasai siswa maupun memberi tugas pengayaan bagi siswa yang telah menguasai materi metode kerja kelompok
Kelebihan dan Kekurangan Pembelajaran Kerja Kelompok
Kekuatan dari metode kerja kelompok ini adalah :- Membuat peserta didik aktif mencari bahan untuk menyelesaikan tugasnya
- Menggalang kerjasama dan kekompakan dalam kelompok
- Mengembangkan kepemimpinan peserta didik dan pengajaran keterampilan berdiskusi dan proses kelompok
- Kerja kelompok hanya memberikan kesempatan kepada peserta yang aktif dan mampu untuk berperan sedangkan peserta didik yang terbelakang tidak terbuat apa-apa
- Memerlukan fasilitas yang beragam baik untuk fasilitas fisik dan ruangan maupun sumber-sumber belajar yang harus disediakan.
Alasan Penggunaan Metode Kelompok
Metode kerja kelompok digunakan guru karena alasan sebagai berikut:- Membuat peserta didik dapat bekerja sama dengan temannya dalam satu kesataun tugas.
- Mengembangkan kekuatan untuk mencari dan menemukan bahanb-bahan untuk melaksanakan tugas tersebut.
- Membuat peserta didik aktif.
Sumber:
https://idtesis.com/metode-pembelajaran-kerja-kelompok/
Pendidikan agama merupakan mata pelajaran wajib
Pendidikan pada hakekatnya merupakan proses pendewasaan manusia menjadi
manusia seutuhnya. Manusia seutuhnya meliputi keseluruhan dimensi
kehidupan manusia: fisik, psikis, mental/moral, spiritual dan religius.
Pendidikan dapat berlangsung secara formal di sekolah, informal di
lembaga-lembaga pendidikan dan pelatihan dan nonformal dalam keluarga.
Pendidikan agama di sekolah sebagai salah satu upaya pendewasaan manusia
pada dimensi spiritual-religius. Adanya pelajaran agama di sekolah di
satu pihak sebagai upaya pemenuhan hakekat manusia sebagai makhluk
religius (homo religiousus). Sekaligus di lain pihak pemenuhan apa yang
objektif dari para siswa akan kebutuhan pelayanan hidup keagamaan. Agama
dan hidup beriman merupakan suatu yang objektif menjadi kebutuhan
setiap manusia.
Pelaksanaan pelajaran agama di sekolah selama ini sudah berjalan.
Sekolah-sekolah di Indonesia memberlakukan/memasukkan pelajaran agama
dalam kurikulum. Pelajaran Pendidikan Agama merupakan salah satu
pelajaran ‘wajib’, harus ada dan diterima oleh para siswa. Di Indonesia
persekolahan-persekolahan swasta umum dengan ciri keagamaan tertentu
menerapkan pelajaran agama sesuai dengan diri khas keagamaannya.
Pendidikan agama merupakan mata pelajaran wajib di dalam kurikulum pendidikan dasar, menengah dan tinggi.
(1) Kurikulum pendidikan dasar dan menengah wajib memuat:
(a)
pendidikan agama, (b) pendidikan kewarganegaraan, (c) bahasa, (d)
matematika, (e) ilmu pengetahuan alam, (f) ilmu pengetahuan sosial, (g)
seni dan budaya, (h) pendidikan jasmani dan olah raga, (i)
keterampilan/kejuruan, dan (j) muatan lokal.
(2) Kurikulum pendidikan tinggi wajib memuat:
(a) pendidikan agama, (b) pendidikan kewarganegaraan, (c) bahasa.” (UU 20/2003, pasal 37/1-2).
(2) Kurikulum pendidikan tinggi wajib memuat:
(a) pendidikan agama, (b) pendidikan kewarganegaraan, (c) bahasa.” (UU 20/2003, pasal 37/1-2).
“Kurikulum untuk jenis pendidikan umum, kejuruan dan khusus pada
jenjang pendidikan dasar dan menengah terdiri atas:
(a) kelompok mata
pelajaran agama dan akhlak mulia, (b) kelompok mata pelajaran
kewarganegaraan dan kepribadian, (c) kelompok mata pelajaran ilmu
pengetahuan dan teknologi, (d) kelompok mata pelajaran estetika, (e)
kelompok mata pelajaran jasmani, olah raga, dan kesehatan.” (PP.
19/2005, tentang Standar Nasional Pendidikan, pasal 6).
“Kelompok mata pelajaran agama dan akhlak mulia pada SD/MI/SDLB/Paket
A, SMP/MTs/SMPLB/Paket B, SMA/MA/SMALB/Paket C, SMK/MAK, atau bentuk
lain yang sederajat dilaksanakan melalui muatan dan/atau kegiatan agama,
kewarganegaraan, kepribadian, ilmu pengetahun dan teknologi, estetika,
jasmani, olah raga, dann kesehatan.” (PP. 19/2005, pasal 7/1).
Sistem Pendidikan Agama Dalam Pendidikan Nasional
(1) Pengertian pendidikan agama.
Pendidikan agama adalah pendidikan yang memberikan pengetahuan dan
membentuk sikap, kepribadian dan keterampilan peserta didik dalam
mengamalkan ajaran agamanya, yang dilaksanakan sekurang-kurangnya
melalui mata pelajaran/kuliah pada semua jalur, jenjang, dan jenis
pendidikan.” (Pasal 1/1, PP. 55/2007, tentang Pendidikan Agama dan
Keagamaan).
(2) Fungsi dan Tujuan Pendidikan Agama.
1. Pendidikan agama berfungsi membentuk manusia Indonesia yang beriman
dan bertakwa kepada Tuhan Yang Maha Esa serta berkhlak mulia, dan mampu
menjaga kedamaian dan kerukunan hubungan intern dan antar umat
beragama.”
2. Pendidikan bertujuan untuk berkembangnya kemampuan peserta didik
dalam memahami, menghayati, dan mengamalkan nilai-nilai agama yang
menyerasikan penguasaannya dalam ilmu pengetahuan, teknologi dan seni.”
(PP. 55/2007, pasal 2/1-2).
Program-program pemerintah untuk penyediaan tenaga pengajar agama dan
peningkatan kualitas pengajar agama (dengan program sertifikasi dan
pelatihan-pelatihan) belum menjangkau seluruh guru. ketiga, fasilitas
pelajaran agama yang kurang/tidak representatif. Kenyataan di lapangan
pelajaran agama yang tidak ada sekolah-sekolah negeri, khususnya siswa
yang jumlahnya lebih sedikit sering tidak mendapatkan tempat/ruang dan
jadual yang representatif untuk pelajaran agama.
Dari paparan dan telaah diatas dapat direkomendasikan sebagai berikut:
1. Semua pihak harus menghormati dan melaksanakan kesepakatan bersama
antara Menteri Agama dan Menteri Pendidikan, bahwa pendidikan agama
menjadi tanggung jawab Menteri Agama.
2. Semua satuan pendidikan hendaknya tunduk terhadap UU No. 20 Tahun 2003 dan PP No. 55 tahun 2007.
3. Pola pembelajaran pendidikan agama perlu dikembangkan secara
sistematis dan terukur agar anak tidak hanya mengetahui dan memahami
ajaran agama tetapi juga melekat dalam kepribadian setiap manusia.
4. Perlu memperkuat sinergisitas antara Kementerian Agama dan
Kementerian pendidikan dan Kebudayaan dalam hal pengembangan pendidikan
agama.
5. Dalam rangka pemenuhan hak anak, Kementerian Agama dan Kementerian
Pendidikan harus bertindak tegas kepada satuan pendidikan yang jelas
melangar UU N0. 20 Tahun 2003 dan PP No. 55 Tahun 2007.
Sumber:
http://www.kpai.go.id/artikel/implementasi-pendidikan-agama-di-sekolah-dan-solusinya/
Sabtu, 01 Juli 2017
Guru Menyampaikan Materi, Murid asik Bermain Telkomunikasi Bagaimana Ini
Belajar adalah salah satu kegiatan yang dilakukan didalam kelas maupun
luar kelas antara guru dan murid, namun apa jadinya jika seorang guru
menerangkan sebuah materi murid asik bermain HP.
Mungkin ini akan menjadi masalah bagi guru ketika menyampaikan sebuah
materi namun anak tersebut tidak paham dan ngerti yang mana setiap
pembelajaran ada yang namanya evaluasi, maka dari itu ini menjadi PR
buat guru.
Sungguh ironis jika melihat kegiatan belajar tersebut,mungkin ibu dan
bapak lebih tahu mengenai suatu masalah ini, jika memang murid dan guru
ingin belajar lebih harmonis dan nyaman tentu akan membuat yang namnya
peraturan sehingga anak tidak membawa alat telkomunikasi disekolah.
Namun apa boleh buat jika anak tersebut tidak disiplin dalam peraturan
maka akan tetap bawa alat komunikasi maka dari itu guru dan pihak
sekolah semoga selalu memeriksa muridnya yang membawa alat komunikasi.
Maka dari itu sekolah wajib memasilitasi dengan adanya telpon sekolah,
sehingga ada kepentingan anak dengan orang tua bisa berjalan dengan
baik.
Semoga bagi ibu dan bapak yang menjadi tenaga pendidik disekolahnya
tidak membolehkan anaknya membawa alat komunikasi sehingga kegiiatan
belajar lebih harmonis dan nyaman.
Sumber
http://operatornesia.blogspot.co.id/2016/07/guru-menyampaikan-materi-murid-asik.html
Perbedaan Mengajar dan Mendidik
Perbedaan Mengajar dan Mendidik Yang perlu diketahui - jika kawan dan sahabat seperjuangan sedang mencari refrensi tentang Apa
Perbedan Mengajar dan Mendidik tepat sekali admin sudah menyiapkan
beberapa pemaparan yang mana akan admin paparkan di bawah ini.
Jika dilihat sepintas memang mengajar dan mendidik dan mengajar itu sama saja akan tetapi ada sedikit perbedaan berikut adalah penjelasan tentang Perbedan Mengajar dan Mendidik Yang perlu diketahui
MENGAJAR
Untuk dapat melaksanakan kegiatan mengajar dengan baik setiap guru di tuntut untuk menguasai hal seperti dibawah in:
Untuk dapat melaksanakan kegiatan mengajar dengan baik setiap guru tentunya dituntut untuk mengetahui hal di bawah ini :
Jika dilihat sepintas memang mengajar dan mendidik dan mengajar itu sama saja akan tetapi ada sedikit perbedaan berikut adalah penjelasan tentang Perbedan Mengajar dan Mendidik Yang perlu diketahui
MENGAJAR
Mengajar adalah kegiatan yang dilakukan guru dalam mentrasnfer atau
memberi pengetahuan dan informasi sebanyak-banyaknya kepada siswa sesuai
dengan pedoman dan petunjuk yang telah ditetapkan. didalam kegiatan
mengajar ini tentu ada unsur kegiatan. akan tetapi ada aspek dominan
yang dikembangkan dalam mengajar adalah asfek kognitif ( pengetahuan )
Untuk dapat melaksanakan kegiatan mengajar dengan baik setiap guru di tuntut untuk menguasai hal seperti dibawah in:
- mampu menguasai prinsip-prinsip belajar mengajar
- menguasai sumber belajar mengajar
- mampu menggunakan sarana belajar dengan baik
- mampu tujuan pembelajaran dan mampu mendorong siswa untuk selalu aktif
Mengajar tanpa memperhatikan hal yang telah disebutkan diatas seperti pengertian mengajar merupakan pemborosan dan hanya membuang waktu sehingga tujuan tidak tercapai.
MENDIDIK
Mendidik adalah kegiatan guru dalam memberi contoh , tuntunan yang dapat
memberi petujuk dan keteladanan yang dapat ditiru dan diterapkan oleh
sikap dan prilaku ( ahlakul karimah ) dalam kehidupan sehari-hari.
adapaun aspek yang dominan yang dapat dikembangkan dalam proses
pendidikan adalah aspek afektif ( nilai dan sikap )
Untuk dapat melaksanakan kegiatan mengajar dengan baik setiap guru tentunya dituntut untuk mengetahui hal di bawah ini :
- mampu merumuskan tujuan yang ingin dicapai
- mampu menjadi teladan yang baik
- mampu menjadi orang tua kedua disekolah
Itulah beberapa poin tentang Perbedan Mengajar dan Mendidik Yang perlu
diketahui semoga kita semua tambah tahu sebagai pendidik dan pengajar
disekolah. dan bisa menjadi contoh untuk generasi masa depan.
jika kiranya ada sedikit keluhan baik itu berupa pemaparan silahkan
untuk berikan sedikit penambahan dan butiran berupa kata untuk lebih
baik lagi di bawah ini.
Sumber :
http://operatornesia.blogspot.co.id/2017/03/perbedan-mengajar-dan-mendidik-yang.html
Jumat, 23 Juni 2017
hlm 2-akhir
sionary spirit. You will understand something of this by
ruminating on the following quotation from his Toward an Old
Testament Theology:
Our proposal is to distinguish
sharply biblical theology's method
from that of systematics or the history of religion. There is an inner
center or plan to which each [Bible]
writer consciously contributed. A
principle of selectivity is already evident and divinely determined by the
rudimentary disclosure of the divine
blessing-promise theme to all men
everywhere as the canon opens in
Genesis 1-11 and continues in Genesis 12-5O. Rather than selecting that
theological data which strikes our
fancy or meets some current need,
the text will already have set up priorities and preferences of its own.
These nodal points can be identified,
not on the basis of ecclesiastical or
theological camps, but by such criteria as: (1) the critical placement of
interpretive statements in the textual
sequence; (2) the frequency of the
repetition of ideas; (3) the recurrence
of phrases or terms that begin to
take on a technical status; (4) the
resumption of themes where a forerunner had stopped often with a
more extensive area of reference, (5)
the use of categories of assertions
previously used that easily lend
themselves to a description of a new
stage in the program of history; and
(6) the organizing standard by
which people, places, and ideas
were marked for approval , contrast,
inclusion, and future and present
significance (Kaiser 1978: 11-12).
In effect, Kaiser is saying that certain
basic hermeneutical principles are
implicit in the biblical text itself if we pay
attention to them. This becomes
tremendously important in circumstances
where (1) sound principles of biblical
interpretation are widely disregarded in
sending churches; and, (2) such
principles, when introduced to members
of the receiving churches, seem to be
imposed upon the text by foreign
“experts” rather than growing out of
Scripture itself.
Timothy M. Warner first crossed
my pathway when some years ago I
became exercised over the direction
that so muchof Christian counseling was
taking, following as it was upon the
heels of humanistic psychology. One of
my colleagues at TEDS, Warner became
more and more involved in spiritual
warfare and a deliverance ministry. It is a
long story, but I will just say that one
day before his departure for another ministry I went to his office. During the
ensuing discussion Warner made a statement that was to be confirmation of
the direction my own thinking and writing
was taking at the time. He said,
“Dave, I have become convinced that
truth encounter must precede power
encounter.” He went on to explain that a
great number of Christian people
themselves—many of them already in
Christian service (!)–have not really
grasped a biblical worldview and as a
consequence live frustrated, defeated
lives. He was in process, therefore, of
building his counseling ministry upon
the foundation of a reexamination of the
relationship between the Triune God,
men and women, the spirit world, and the
self as it unfolds in Scripture beginning with Genesis and working straight
through the Old and New Testaments.
Very late in my teaching ministry at
TEDS, the Lord brought the anthropologist Paul Hiebert to be a faculty colleague. His arrival occasioned a restudy of his “critical contextualization”
writings and that has provided what
may prove to be one of the final pieces in
completing the contextualization puzzle. Hiebert takes a very common sense
view of the nature of language—the
view of “critical realism” (Hiebert 1989).
That is, meaning is to be found in the
correspondence between the mental image
of the word-user and the outer reality
to which the word refers. “Critical realism” avoids two extreme —it opposes
the view that says that meaning is to be
found only in persons and that one
must somehow get “into the head” of the
message source in order to discover
his/her meaning. It also opposes the opposite view—namely, that meaning is
inherent in the signs and forms themselves. The former view leads to
over-contextualization by making even
the signs and forms of the Gospel,
such as doctrinal formulae and water baptism, almost totally subjective and
cultural. The latter view leads to undercontextualization by making certain forms of the
receiving culture inherently evil and
by insisting on certain (Christian) linguistic and behavioral forms without
bothering to inquire into the meanings
assigned to them in the receiving culture.
“Critical realism” insists that
meaning is to be found in the relationship
between signs/forms and reality; that
it is discoverable by a careful examination
of context; and that, insofar as possible, the people of the receiving culture
context must contribute to that process.
Process Principles
Perhaps we are now prepared to
begin to put the pieces together in such a
way as to view the larger dimensions
of contextualization as herein conceived.
Three principles apply throughout
that process.
First, Great Commission contextualization strategy begins with a practical
application of Scripture as seen
through the lens of biblical theology.
Scripture must become not only the
substance but also the strategy—not only
the message, but also the method—of
authentic and effective Gospel contextualization. If God has revealed His will
and plan, then almost by definition the
strategy He employed in doing so
takes priority over human strategies. If
God has chosen certain methods of
communication in Scripture, then insofaras those methods are reproducible,
they take precedence over our own methods.
For example, one of the most effective means of communication is
story-telling. It may then be advantageous
for me to begin my Christian witness
by telling the story of how God has dealt
with me personally–with how he has
changed my life and given me hope for
Testament Theology:
Our proposal is to distinguish
sharply biblical theology's method
from that of systematics or the history of religion. There is an inner
center or plan to which each [Bible]
writer consciously contributed. A
principle of selectivity is already evident and divinely determined by the
rudimentary disclosure of the divine
blessing-promise theme to all men
everywhere as the canon opens in
Genesis 1-11 and continues in Genesis 12-5O. Rather than selecting that
theological data which strikes our
fancy or meets some current need,
the text will already have set up priorities and preferences of its own.
These nodal points can be identified,
not on the basis of ecclesiastical or
theological camps, but by such criteria as: (1) the critical placement of
interpretive statements in the textual
sequence; (2) the frequency of the
repetition of ideas; (3) the recurrence
of phrases or terms that begin to
take on a technical status; (4) the
resumption of themes where a forerunner had stopped often with a
more extensive area of reference, (5)
the use of categories of assertions
previously used that easily lend
themselves to a description of a new
stage in the program of history; and
(6) the organizing standard by
which people, places, and ideas
were marked for approval , contrast,
inclusion, and future and present
significance (Kaiser 1978: 11-12).
In effect, Kaiser is saying that certain
basic hermeneutical principles are
implicit in the biblical text itself if we pay
attention to them. This becomes
tremendously important in circumstances
where (1) sound principles of biblical
interpretation are widely disregarded in
sending churches; and, (2) such
principles, when introduced to members
of the receiving churches, seem to be
imposed upon the text by foreign
“experts” rather than growing out of
Scripture itself.
Timothy M. Warner first crossed
my pathway when some years ago I
became exercised over the direction
that so muchof Christian counseling was
taking, following as it was upon the
heels of humanistic psychology. One of
my colleagues at TEDS, Warner became
more and more involved in spiritual
warfare and a deliverance ministry. It is a
long story, but I will just say that one
day before his departure for another ministry I went to his office. During the
ensuing discussion Warner made a statement that was to be confirmation of
the direction my own thinking and writing
was taking at the time. He said,
“Dave, I have become convinced that
truth encounter must precede power
encounter.” He went on to explain that a
great number of Christian people
themselves—many of them already in
Christian service (!)–have not really
grasped a biblical worldview and as a
consequence live frustrated, defeated
lives. He was in process, therefore, of
building his counseling ministry upon
the foundation of a reexamination of the
relationship between the Triune God,
men and women, the spirit world, and the
self as it unfolds in Scripture beginning with Genesis and working straight
through the Old and New Testaments.
Very late in my teaching ministry at
TEDS, the Lord brought the anthropologist Paul Hiebert to be a faculty colleague. His arrival occasioned a restudy of his “critical contextualization”
writings and that has provided what
may prove to be one of the final pieces in
completing the contextualization puzzle. Hiebert takes a very common sense
view of the nature of language—the
view of “critical realism” (Hiebert 1989).
That is, meaning is to be found in the
correspondence between the mental image
of the word-user and the outer reality
to which the word refers. “Critical realism” avoids two extreme —it opposes
the view that says that meaning is to be
found only in persons and that one
must somehow get “into the head” of the
message source in order to discover
his/her meaning. It also opposes the opposite view—namely, that meaning is
inherent in the signs and forms themselves. The former view leads to
over-contextualization by making even
the signs and forms of the Gospel,
such as doctrinal formulae and water baptism, almost totally subjective and
cultural. The latter view leads to undercontextualization by making certain forms of the
receiving culture inherently evil and
by insisting on certain (Christian) linguistic and behavioral forms without
bothering to inquire into the meanings
assigned to them in the receiving culture.
“Critical realism” insists that
meaning is to be found in the relationship
between signs/forms and reality; that
it is discoverable by a careful examination
of context; and that, insofar as possible, the people of the receiving culture
context must contribute to that process.
Process Principles
Perhaps we are now prepared to
begin to put the pieces together in such a
way as to view the larger dimensions
of contextualization as herein conceived.
Three principles apply throughout
that process.
First, Great Commission contextualization strategy begins with a practical
application of Scripture as seen
through the lens of biblical theology.
Scripture must become not only the
substance but also the strategy—not only
the message, but also the method—of
authentic and effective Gospel contextualization. If God has revealed His will
and plan, then almost by definition the
strategy He employed in doing so
takes priority over human strategies. If
God has chosen certain methods of
communication in Scripture, then insofaras those methods are reproducible,
they take precedence over our own methods.
For example, one of the most effective means of communication is
story-telling. It may then be advantageous
for me to begin my Christian witness
by telling the story of how God has dealt
with me personally–with how he has
changed my life and given me hope for
the future. But Great Commission contextualization as
proposed here requires
me to move early on to the story of God’s
dealings with mankind, not just to
inferences gleaned from that story. This
may well be part of the “all things
that I have commanded” of the Great
Commission!
Second, if God’s revelation to mankind is to become meaningful—really
“meaning-full”–to the people of any given
culture, those who introduce it and those
who carry it forward (the
“planters” and the “waterers”)
must allow the Gospel message
as unfolded in Scripture to
inform every aspect of the discipling ministry. Missionizing,
evangelizing, catechizing,
counseling, preaching, worshipping—these and other discipling-related activities are 4not
to be separate and unrelated
ministries developed by the
“experts” in each of these ministries. All
must work in line with one divine
“blueprint” and complement each other.
Thirdly, if the Gospel is to be
understood by people of various languages and cultural contexts, the
divine Word must, of course, be transmitted in the thought forms and symbol
systems of those peoples. The Old and
New Testaments do not constitute a
replica of some heavenly document.
Unlike the Koran, the Bible is translatable. Morever, the Bible writers were
inspired by the Holy Spirit to write
their respective portions of the one story
in ways that were meaningful to their
particular audiences and at a critical juncture when it was imperative that people representing a variety of languages
and cultures simultaneously hear and
understand the Gospel on that first Pentecost. It is that same Holy Spirit who
gave the “gift of tongues” enabling Parthians, Medes, Elamites and others to do
just that (Acts 2:10).
In our own case, however, the situation is quite different. We must labor
me to move early on to the story of God’s
dealings with mankind, not just to
inferences gleaned from that story. This
may well be part of the “all things
that I have commanded” of the Great
Commission!
Second, if God’s revelation to mankind is to become meaningful—really
“meaning-full”–to the people of any given
culture, those who introduce it and those
who carry it forward (the
“planters” and the “waterers”)
must allow the Gospel message
as unfolded in Scripture to
inform every aspect of the discipling ministry. Missionizing,
evangelizing, catechizing,
counseling, preaching, worshipping—these and other discipling-related activities are 4not
to be separate and unrelated
ministries developed by the
“experts” in each of these ministries. All
must work in line with one divine
“blueprint” and complement each other.
Thirdly, if the Gospel is to be
understood by people of various languages and cultural contexts, the
divine Word must, of course, be transmitted in the thought forms and symbol
systems of those peoples. The Old and
New Testaments do not constitute a
replica of some heavenly document.
Unlike the Koran, the Bible is translatable. Morever, the Bible writers were
inspired by the Holy Spirit to write
their respective portions of the one story
in ways that were meaningful to their
particular audiences and at a critical juncture when it was imperative that people representing a variety of languages
and cultures simultaneously hear and
understand the Gospel on that first Pentecost. It is that same Holy Spirit who
gave the “gift of tongues” enabling Parthians, Medes, Elamites and others to do
just that (Acts 2:10).
In our own case, however, the situation is quite different. We must labor
diligently to understand both the original
language/culture of the Bible writers
and the language/culture of contemporary
respondents with a view to proper
translation and interpretation. When we
do that we soon discover that there is
no one-to-one correlation between the linguistic and non-linguistic forms of
Scripture, our own culture, and respondent cultures. For example, hamartia
in the New Testament may translate as
“sin” in the United States and tsumi in
Japan, but not only are the word symbols
different. their meanings are quite different as well. Again the ritual of bowing
in the Old Testament, bowing to an
audience in America and bowing before
the portrait of the deceased at a Japanese funeral, while appearing to be the
same act, nevertheless have radically
different meanings.
These examples are simply indicative of the fact that at the earliest stage of
missionizing in Japan, qualified
informants were greatly needed. At later
stages the Japanese church as a priesthood of believers became (or should have
become) a “hermeneutical community” deciding how the Scripture is best
understood and applied in the Japanese cultural context. While often overlooked, this is what is involved in the
discipling of the panta ta ethne of the
Great Commission.
The Process Analyzed
Now perhaps, we are somewhat better prepared to analyze some specific
proposals that will serve us when evaluating, comparing and contrasting what I
have called “Great Commission Contextualization” with two other
approaches–one quite traditional and
the other very contemporary. The setting
is a village in the Central African
Republic. (For most of us that will assure
enough cultural distance to make
more objective analysis possible.) The
particular issue involved is that ageold problem of polygamy and the contextualization focus will be upon one of
the qualifications for local
church episcopoi (overseers) as we have it in Paul's
first letter to Timothy,
Chapter 3 verse 2: “the husband of one wife.”
First, consider the “undercontextualization”
approach of C. Caverno and
some missionaries to
Africa. The attitude and action
of many missionaries and
not a few of their national counterparts
vis-a-vis polygamy and I Timothy 3:2
has been informed by people like C.
Caverno who have analyzed the practice of polygamy in one dimension only–
the moral dimension. In an article that
appears in the 1939 edition of The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
he wrote:
Polygamy has been and is the open
blazon by the human race of sex
vice. . . There is hypocrisy beneath
the word polygamy. It is an
attempt to cover up by the term
“plural marriage” what is not marriage and cannot be marriage.
There is no particular need of
defining what the condition is, so
long as we can look upon it as a
violation and negation of the marriage relation. The very use of the
term from any language covering a
like condition is an attempt—“to
steal the livery of the court of
heaven to serve the devil in”
(Caverno 1939: 2416).
Caverno goes on to explain that
polygamy is primarily the outcome of
tribal wars when victors took women captive as concubines and slaves. In
polygamy, he says, “Woman is reduced to
language/culture of the Bible writers
and the language/culture of contemporary
respondents with a view to proper
translation and interpretation. When we
do that we soon discover that there is
no one-to-one correlation between the linguistic and non-linguistic forms of
Scripture, our own culture, and respondent cultures. For example, hamartia
in the New Testament may translate as
“sin” in the United States and tsumi in
Japan, but not only are the word symbols
different. their meanings are quite different as well. Again the ritual of bowing
in the Old Testament, bowing to an
audience in America and bowing before
the portrait of the deceased at a Japanese funeral, while appearing to be the
same act, nevertheless have radically
different meanings.
These examples are simply indicative of the fact that at the earliest stage of
missionizing in Japan, qualified
informants were greatly needed. At later
stages the Japanese church as a priesthood of believers became (or should have
become) a “hermeneutical community” deciding how the Scripture is best
understood and applied in the Japanese cultural context. While often overlooked, this is what is involved in the
discipling of the panta ta ethne of the
Great Commission.
The Process Analyzed
Now perhaps, we are somewhat better prepared to analyze some specific
proposals that will serve us when evaluating, comparing and contrasting what I
have called “Great Commission Contextualization” with two other
approaches–one quite traditional and
the other very contemporary. The setting
is a village in the Central African
Republic. (For most of us that will assure
enough cultural distance to make
more objective analysis possible.) The
particular issue involved is that ageold problem of polygamy and the contextualization focus will be upon one of
the qualifications for local
church episcopoi (overseers) as we have it in Paul's
first letter to Timothy,
Chapter 3 verse 2: “the husband of one wife.”
First, consider the “undercontextualization”
approach of C. Caverno and
some missionaries to
Africa. The attitude and action
of many missionaries and
not a few of their national counterparts
vis-a-vis polygamy and I Timothy 3:2
has been informed by people like C.
Caverno who have analyzed the practice of polygamy in one dimension only–
the moral dimension. In an article that
appears in the 1939 edition of The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
he wrote:
Polygamy has been and is the open
blazon by the human race of sex
vice. . . There is hypocrisy beneath
the word polygamy. It is an
attempt to cover up by the term
“plural marriage” what is not marriage and cannot be marriage.
There is no particular need of
defining what the condition is, so
long as we can look upon it as a
violation and negation of the marriage relation. The very use of the
term from any language covering a
like condition is an attempt—“to
steal the livery of the court of
heaven to serve the devil in”
(Caverno 1939: 2416).
Caverno goes on to explain that
polygamy is primarily the outcome of
tribal wars when victors took women captive as concubines and slaves. In
polygamy, he says, “Woman is reduced to
the position of ministrant to man’s
unmodified sensuality” (Ibid.).
Please pay special attention to the
phrase “in any language;” to his
explanation of polygamy in terms of tribal
wars; and to his insistence that unbridled sensuality is the root cause of polygamy. That he could easily be challenged on all three counts does not seem
to occur to him. His judgment is
strictly moral and, to a lesser extent,
theological.
It is important to understand that a
previous generation of missionaries
largely would have concurred. I remember discussing the subject of polygamy in tribal Africa with the late Walter
Trobisch, author of the best selling
books I Loved a Girl and I Loved a Boy.
He spoke of the growing desperation
he experienced when his Africa mission
colleagues almost unilaterally decided
to refuse communion to polygamists until
such time as they had divested themselves of all but one wife. Those missionaries were not without compassion.
However, given their understanding of the
biblical text, the roots or “polygamy,”
and the immoral nature of the practice as
described by such scholars as
Caverno, they felt that they had no choice.
To accept polygamists as members of
the congregations in good standing would
be to compromise Christian truth. To
refuse to accept them helped to assure
missionaries that church leadership
would not fall into unworthy hands.
Polygamy had to be rejected out of
hand.
Nevertheless, as Trobisch himself probed the issue from an African perspective, he concluded that iconoclastic denunciation of polygamy in this
fashion was tantamount to exorcising
the house only to let more devils in. The
natives did indeed have some most
bizarre notions regarding sex and marriage, but Trobisch found that those
notions functioned quite well as practical
safeguards against physical and social
dangers. Though polygamy did indeed
entail some negative consequences, in the
African context the moral code did
not militate against it; it protected wives
from serial pregnancies; it made provision for women who might otherwise be
left helpless; it provided the husband
with ready and willing labor for his gardens; and it enhanced the husband's
prestige and status in the village. To force
the polygamist to divest himself of all
but one wife, on the other hand, had cruel
consequences for those wives who
suddenly found themselves without solace
or support.
Little Improvement
Now we might be tempted to think
that this is a scenario of the past when
missionaries were not anthropologically
informed and were less sensitive to
cultural concerns, and when national leaders were more willing to conform to
foreign domination. Not entirely so, as
time has passed, the problem of
polygamy is not as great as it once was
due to a variety of factors. But it is
still there. Perhaps more importantly, our
approach to a variety of issues in
church and mission shows little or no
improvement whatsoever. As often as
not we fail to study the text carefully we
oversimplify the nature of language
and culture; we do not consider the difference between form and function; and
(perhaps most importantly) we do not take
time to explore emic (insider perspective) understandings and interpretations.
Under-contextualization is very much
with us today.
Far removed from the approach
informed by the likes of scholars such as
Caverno is the approach informed by
scholars such as Charles Kraft. Kraft
believes that meaning is to be found
in persons, not in words or rituals themselves. In his understanding, the Bible
is a cultural sea with supracultural truths
floating around on it. The Bible is not
revelation as such, but nevertheless all of
it is potentially revelatory. As for cultures, they are divinely ordained and give
evidence of their divine origin in the ways
that they order life and values and
allow societies to maintain themselves
(C. Kraft 1978).
Given these assumptions, one
approaches the list of qualifications
for church leadership in I Timothy 3:3-9
very differently (Kraft 1978). The
qualifications were not normative and
meant not to be applied “as is” to
every cultural situation. Rather, they mirrored the expectations and values of
Ephesus and the larger Greco-Roman
world in which Paul and his colleagues labored. In that cultural context,
adherence to the list of qualifications
as they appear in Paul’s letter resulted in
the kind of church leadership that
merited the respect and admiration of the
community. In the eyes of the public
of that time and place adherence resulted
in church leadership that was, in
Paul's words, “above reproach” (I Tim.
3:2).
By way of contrast, the current North
American context is very different.
Our culture acknowledges such things as
the equality of women, the capability
of young people, the legitimacy of
divorce in many situations, and so on.
According to Kraft, this should result in a
culturally-nuanced interpretation and
application of the biblical text. To begin
with, insofar as order reflects priorities, the order of leadership qualifications
might be changed so as to reflect, for
example, the value that we in North
America place upon youthful vigor as
over against senior status and maturity.
Secondly certain items should be
changed somewhat: as concerns marital
status, it seems that in the first century Greco-Roman context irreproachability (“without reproach”) demanded
that a man not take a second wife after the
death or divorce of his first wife.
American congregations experience no
problem at all with remarriage after
the death of a spouse. Most (but not all)
would have a problem with the remarriage of a pastor (at least) after divorce,
unmodified sensuality” (Ibid.).
Please pay special attention to the
phrase “in any language;” to his
explanation of polygamy in terms of tribal
wars; and to his insistence that unbridled sensuality is the root cause of polygamy. That he could easily be challenged on all three counts does not seem
to occur to him. His judgment is
strictly moral and, to a lesser extent,
theological.
It is important to understand that a
previous generation of missionaries
largely would have concurred. I remember discussing the subject of polygamy in tribal Africa with the late Walter
Trobisch, author of the best selling
books I Loved a Girl and I Loved a Boy.
He spoke of the growing desperation
he experienced when his Africa mission
colleagues almost unilaterally decided
to refuse communion to polygamists until
such time as they had divested themselves of all but one wife. Those missionaries were not without compassion.
However, given their understanding of the
biblical text, the roots or “polygamy,”
and the immoral nature of the practice as
described by such scholars as
Caverno, they felt that they had no choice.
To accept polygamists as members of
the congregations in good standing would
be to compromise Christian truth. To
refuse to accept them helped to assure
missionaries that church leadership
would not fall into unworthy hands.
Polygamy had to be rejected out of
hand.
Nevertheless, as Trobisch himself probed the issue from an African perspective, he concluded that iconoclastic denunciation of polygamy in this
fashion was tantamount to exorcising
the house only to let more devils in. The
natives did indeed have some most
bizarre notions regarding sex and marriage, but Trobisch found that those
notions functioned quite well as practical
safeguards against physical and social
dangers. Though polygamy did indeed
entail some negative consequences, in the
African context the moral code did
not militate against it; it protected wives
from serial pregnancies; it made provision for women who might otherwise be
left helpless; it provided the husband
with ready and willing labor for his gardens; and it enhanced the husband's
prestige and status in the village. To force
the polygamist to divest himself of all
but one wife, on the other hand, had cruel
consequences for those wives who
suddenly found themselves without solace
or support.
Little Improvement
Now we might be tempted to think
that this is a scenario of the past when
missionaries were not anthropologically
informed and were less sensitive to
cultural concerns, and when national leaders were more willing to conform to
foreign domination. Not entirely so, as
time has passed, the problem of
polygamy is not as great as it once was
due to a variety of factors. But it is
still there. Perhaps more importantly, our
approach to a variety of issues in
church and mission shows little or no
improvement whatsoever. As often as
not we fail to study the text carefully we
oversimplify the nature of language
and culture; we do not consider the difference between form and function; and
(perhaps most importantly) we do not take
time to explore emic (insider perspective) understandings and interpretations.
Under-contextualization is very much
with us today.
Far removed from the approach
informed by the likes of scholars such as
Caverno is the approach informed by
scholars such as Charles Kraft. Kraft
believes that meaning is to be found
in persons, not in words or rituals themselves. In his understanding, the Bible
is a cultural sea with supracultural truths
floating around on it. The Bible is not
revelation as such, but nevertheless all of
it is potentially revelatory. As for cultures, they are divinely ordained and give
evidence of their divine origin in the ways
that they order life and values and
allow societies to maintain themselves
(C. Kraft 1978).
Given these assumptions, one
approaches the list of qualifications
for church leadership in I Timothy 3:3-9
very differently (Kraft 1978). The
qualifications were not normative and
meant not to be applied “as is” to
every cultural situation. Rather, they mirrored the expectations and values of
Ephesus and the larger Greco-Roman
world in which Paul and his colleagues labored. In that cultural context,
adherence to the list of qualifications
as they appear in Paul’s letter resulted in
the kind of church leadership that
merited the respect and admiration of the
community. In the eyes of the public
of that time and place adherence resulted
in church leadership that was, in
Paul's words, “above reproach” (I Tim.
3:2).
By way of contrast, the current North
American context is very different.
Our culture acknowledges such things as
the equality of women, the capability
of young people, the legitimacy of
divorce in many situations, and so on.
According to Kraft, this should result in a
culturally-nuanced interpretation and
application of the biblical text. To begin
with, insofar as order reflects priorities, the order of leadership qualifications
might be changed so as to reflect, for
example, the value that we in North
America place upon youthful vigor as
over against senior status and maturity.
Secondly certain items should be
changed somewhat: as concerns marital
status, it seems that in the first century Greco-Roman context irreproachability (“without reproach”) demanded
that a man not take a second wife after the
death or divorce of his first wife.
American congregations experience no
problem at all with remarriage after
the death of a spouse. Most (but not all)
would have a problem with the remarriage of a pastor (at least) after divorce,
Dynamic-equivalent transculturation
in our Central African Republic will
involve a process. Those who pioneer the
work will need to be armed with an
understanding (misunderstanding?) of language and biblical revelation that
allows for this kind of (over?) contextualization. They will then be free to translate I Timothy 3:1-9 (and the rest of Scripture) in the manner indicated, and
they will teach the Scripture accordingly.
Polygamy, therefore, will present no
real problem initially. At the same time
they will be aware of the fact that
monogamy is both the ideal of Scripture
and the direction in which world cultures are moving. Polygamy should be,
and will be, replaced by monogamy.
That being the case, over time and as
national leadership emerges and is
trained, both the original translation and
attendant interpretation and instruction will be modified to reflect the biblical
ideal and macro-cultural realities.
It goes without saying that this
approach entails significant difficulties for those who would employ it, even
though polygamy itself may not
appear as an immediate problem. Not
only will the emerging church have to
cope with problems that accrue to social
change, but eventually the contextualizers will be forced to explain how it is
that the Bible could seemingly say
one thing at one time and something else
at another time. But, of course, the
explanation for that state of affairs reveals
why, for the conservative contextualizer, Kraft's approach entails not only
significant difficulties, but insuperable ones
Over the years I have come to believe
that an omniscient God has already
provided the key to both world
evangelization and effective
contextualization.
not so much with lay remarriage, and
more and more churches are putting
women in top leadership roles in accord
with societal changes. “The husband
of one wife,” therefore, contextualizes
into “faithful to one spouse (at a
time).” Thirdly, we may choose to add
such things as administrative ability
and personableness to the list. Kraft calls
this “dynamic-equivalent transculturation.”
Returning to our African village
mission/church scenario, the specific problem is
polygamy and
the focus is on I
Timothy 3:1-9,
especially verse 2.
Since Kraft’s
missionary experience was among
the Higi of Nigeria, those who would
employ his approach in our village
situation would have no difficulty knowing how to proceed. In the beginning,
they would translate (not just interpret)
the passage differently. First, the village culture valuing membership in the
“royal class,” maturity, and hospitality very highly, these would be placed at
the top of the list of leadership qualifications.
Second, “the husband of one
wife”qualification would be omitted and
“one who manages his own household well” would be modified. As we
have seen in the African context, plural wives often elevate a man’s social
status and prestige. Moreover, “managing a household well” is deemed to be
demonstrated best in a polygamous
household for any man should be able to
manage a household with only one
wife in it! (The Kru of Liberia have a saying, “You cannot trust a man with
only one wife.”) So the solution would be
to delete “the husband of one wife”
and change “one who manages his own
household well” (verse 4) to “one
who manages his own (polygamous)
household well.”
The Biblical Narrative
Third, we will turn to a “Great
Commission contextualization” scenario
as advocated here. It begins with
quite different understandings and
assumptions of the nature of symbols
and rituals, revelation and contextualization, and the Great Commission and
world evangelization as such.
Whether our Central African
Republic village represents virgin territory or has already had a Church
planted for a generation
or more, the contextualization approach
advocated here will
likely be much the
same. How ever
church planters may
make their initial
contacts, identify with
the people and gain
a hearing, they will quickly introduce the
Bible narrative—first communicating
chronologically the great events and
themes and then over time filling in
the gaps. In whatever state “church waterers” may find an existing church,
very possibly they will find it necessary to
begin at the beginning and proceed in
much the same fashion.
As indicated above, the Great
Commission contextualization process
will then be carried forward by learning the significance of local culture language and customs from the villagers;
by rehearsing and applying lessons
learned from the events and themes of
biblical revelation; and by employing and
reinforcing the methods of biblical
theology in all ministries of the mission
and church. In this way, whether in
evangelism, catechizing, counseling or
preparing leadership, Christian
believers will become well informed on
such matters as Adam and Eve's relationship to God and each other; the marriages of Abraham, Jacob, David and
Solomon; the selection of O.T. judges,
kings and prophets as well as New
Testament apostles, elders and deacons;
in our Central African Republic will
involve a process. Those who pioneer the
work will need to be armed with an
understanding (misunderstanding?) of language and biblical revelation that
allows for this kind of (over?) contextualization. They will then be free to translate I Timothy 3:1-9 (and the rest of Scripture) in the manner indicated, and
they will teach the Scripture accordingly.
Polygamy, therefore, will present no
real problem initially. At the same time
they will be aware of the fact that
monogamy is both the ideal of Scripture
and the direction in which world cultures are moving. Polygamy should be,
and will be, replaced by monogamy.
That being the case, over time and as
national leadership emerges and is
trained, both the original translation and
attendant interpretation and instruction will be modified to reflect the biblical
ideal and macro-cultural realities.
It goes without saying that this
approach entails significant difficulties for those who would employ it, even
though polygamy itself may not
appear as an immediate problem. Not
only will the emerging church have to
cope with problems that accrue to social
change, but eventually the contextualizers will be forced to explain how it is
that the Bible could seemingly say
one thing at one time and something else
at another time. But, of course, the
explanation for that state of affairs reveals
why, for the conservative contextualizer, Kraft's approach entails not only
significant difficulties, but insuperable ones
Over the years I have come to believe
that an omniscient God has already
provided the key to both world
evangelization and effective
contextualization.
not so much with lay remarriage, and
more and more churches are putting
women in top leadership roles in accord
with societal changes. “The husband
of one wife,” therefore, contextualizes
into “faithful to one spouse (at a
time).” Thirdly, we may choose to add
such things as administrative ability
and personableness to the list. Kraft calls
this “dynamic-equivalent transculturation.”
Returning to our African village
mission/church scenario, the specific problem is
polygamy and
the focus is on I
Timothy 3:1-9,
especially verse 2.
Since Kraft’s
missionary experience was among
the Higi of Nigeria, those who would
employ his approach in our village
situation would have no difficulty knowing how to proceed. In the beginning,
they would translate (not just interpret)
the passage differently. First, the village culture valuing membership in the
“royal class,” maturity, and hospitality very highly, these would be placed at
the top of the list of leadership qualifications.
Second, “the husband of one
wife”qualification would be omitted and
“one who manages his own household well” would be modified. As we
have seen in the African context, plural wives often elevate a man’s social
status and prestige. Moreover, “managing a household well” is deemed to be
demonstrated best in a polygamous
household for any man should be able to
manage a household with only one
wife in it! (The Kru of Liberia have a saying, “You cannot trust a man with
only one wife.”) So the solution would be
to delete “the husband of one wife”
and change “one who manages his own
household well” (verse 4) to “one
who manages his own (polygamous)
household well.”
The Biblical Narrative
Third, we will turn to a “Great
Commission contextualization” scenario
as advocated here. It begins with
quite different understandings and
assumptions of the nature of symbols
and rituals, revelation and contextualization, and the Great Commission and
world evangelization as such.
Whether our Central African
Republic village represents virgin territory or has already had a Church
planted for a generation
or more, the contextualization approach
advocated here will
likely be much the
same. How ever
church planters may
make their initial
contacts, identify with
the people and gain
a hearing, they will quickly introduce the
Bible narrative—first communicating
chronologically the great events and
themes and then over time filling in
the gaps. In whatever state “church waterers” may find an existing church,
very possibly they will find it necessary to
begin at the beginning and proceed in
much the same fashion.
As indicated above, the Great
Commission contextualization process
will then be carried forward by learning the significance of local culture language and customs from the villagers;
by rehearsing and applying lessons
learned from the events and themes of
biblical revelation; and by employing and
reinforcing the methods of biblical
theology in all ministries of the mission
and church. In this way, whether in
evangelism, catechizing, counseling or
preparing leadership, Christian
believers will become well informed on
such matters as Adam and Eve's relationship to God and each other; the marriages of Abraham, Jacob, David and
Solomon; the selection of O.T. judges,
kings and prophets as well as New
Testament apostles, elders and deacons;
the Church, and so on.
Insofar as polygamy is not a
moral issue in the village, it may not
emerge as a significant problem
early on. However, it is obvious that at
some juncture it will surface as a primary concern. When it does, Great Commission contextualization will build
upon the foundation already laid and
exhibit four critical characteristics.
First, the matter will be considered in the
church—the “body of Christ,”the
“company of the committed,” the “hermeneutical community.” Second,
those who lead this process will be prepared to encourage open discussion
concerning local understandings related
to polygamous marriages. Third,
leaders will both teach and model basic
principles of Bible interpretation.
Fourth, the problem will be discussed in relation to the various contexts of Scripture: monogamy and polygamy in the Old Testament; the
teachings of Jesus including his teaching
on divorce; the New Testament epistles with special attention to the Pastoral
Epistles; the context of First Timothy
including the doctrinal section immediately preceding the list of qualifications in chapter 3; and, finally, the events
and imagery of the Book of Revelation. Bathed in prayer and concern for
God’s greater glory, this kind of discussion can be expected to lead to mutually acceptable decisions.
Our immediate reaction may be that
this seems like an extremely arid and
laborious task. But, if it seems so, I suggest that you recall the multiplied
hours you have likely spent in Bible studies that were little more than a recital
of proof texts and personal opinions. I
suggest that you also remember the
seemingly endless hours spent on questions of far less importance in church
business meetings. Also I ask that you
consider how many church divisions
and world compromises might have been
avoided if local congregations would
have met in prayer and around the Word
of God in this fashion.
The Prognosis
Perhaps all of this is another case
of “old men dreaming dreams.” The very
idea of any large grouping of missionaries, evangelists, counselors, and
pastor/teachers subordinating their
carefully studied—or at least, habitual—
approaches to the framework of biblical theology seems idealistic in the
extreme. The notion that it would
make any significant difference if they did
may seem to be hopeful but quite
impractical. Not so! After going through
“Walk Through the Bible,” “Divine
Drama,” “Bible Panorama” and similar
studies, even Christians who have
been in the church for many years often
exclaim, “I’ve never seen it this way
before.”
In my estimation, Great Commission contextualization is our most
hopeful strategy if we are serious
about world evangelization. Not only does
it best meet the requirements of Scripture itself, it also qualifies on the basis of
sound principles of communication,
anthropology, psychology and other
social science disciplines.
To be sure habits are not easily
changed. Though storytelling is one
of the earliest and most important arts
known to man, telling and retelling
redemptive history and prophecy does not
seem sophisticated enough for moderns and post-moderns who are beholden
to human sciences. We have become
so addicted to the idea that some strategy
of man’s devising (once baptized with
the holy water of Bible proof texting) is
key to world evangelization that we
cling to that idea even though recent history shows that one key after another
fails to turn in the lock. Could it be that,
despite all our emphasis on understanding receptor cultures, we have failed
to understand how captive we are to
our own culture and its worldview?
Were someone to ask me what I
believe to be the greatest missiological
strategy ever devised I would now
answer,”Tell them the story of Jesus.
Write on their hearts every word.”I
would remind us all of that which we
may already know—namely, that He is
the Seed of the woman in Genesis 3,
the Bright Morning Star of Revelation 22,
and that indeed, the whole Bible
relates the “story of Jesus.
Insofar as polygamy is not a
moral issue in the village, it may not
emerge as a significant problem
early on. However, it is obvious that at
some juncture it will surface as a primary concern. When it does, Great Commission contextualization will build
upon the foundation already laid and
exhibit four critical characteristics.
First, the matter will be considered in the
church—the “body of Christ,”the
“company of the committed,” the “hermeneutical community.” Second,
those who lead this process will be prepared to encourage open discussion
concerning local understandings related
to polygamous marriages. Third,
leaders will both teach and model basic
principles of Bible interpretation.
Fourth, the problem will be discussed in relation to the various contexts of Scripture: monogamy and polygamy in the Old Testament; the
teachings of Jesus including his teaching
on divorce; the New Testament epistles with special attention to the Pastoral
Epistles; the context of First Timothy
including the doctrinal section immediately preceding the list of qualifications in chapter 3; and, finally, the events
and imagery of the Book of Revelation. Bathed in prayer and concern for
God’s greater glory, this kind of discussion can be expected to lead to mutually acceptable decisions.
Our immediate reaction may be that
this seems like an extremely arid and
laborious task. But, if it seems so, I suggest that you recall the multiplied
hours you have likely spent in Bible studies that were little more than a recital
of proof texts and personal opinions. I
suggest that you also remember the
seemingly endless hours spent on questions of far less importance in church
business meetings. Also I ask that you
consider how many church divisions
and world compromises might have been
avoided if local congregations would
have met in prayer and around the Word
of God in this fashion.
The Prognosis
Perhaps all of this is another case
of “old men dreaming dreams.” The very
idea of any large grouping of missionaries, evangelists, counselors, and
pastor/teachers subordinating their
carefully studied—or at least, habitual—
approaches to the framework of biblical theology seems idealistic in the
extreme. The notion that it would
make any significant difference if they did
may seem to be hopeful but quite
impractical. Not so! After going through
“Walk Through the Bible,” “Divine
Drama,” “Bible Panorama” and similar
studies, even Christians who have
been in the church for many years often
exclaim, “I’ve never seen it this way
before.”
In my estimation, Great Commission contextualization is our most
hopeful strategy if we are serious
about world evangelization. Not only does
it best meet the requirements of Scripture itself, it also qualifies on the basis of
sound principles of communication,
anthropology, psychology and other
social science disciplines.
To be sure habits are not easily
changed. Though storytelling is one
of the earliest and most important arts
known to man, telling and retelling
redemptive history and prophecy does not
seem sophisticated enough for moderns and post-moderns who are beholden
to human sciences. We have become
so addicted to the idea that some strategy
of man’s devising (once baptized with
the holy water of Bible proof texting) is
key to world evangelization that we
cling to that idea even though recent history shows that one key after another
fails to turn in the lock. Could it be that,
despite all our emphasis on understanding receptor cultures, we have failed
to understand how captive we are to
our own culture and its worldview?
Were someone to ask me what I
believe to be the greatest missiological
strategy ever devised I would now
answer,”Tell them the story of Jesus.
Write on their hearts every word.”I
would remind us all of that which we
may already know—namely, that He is
the Seed of the woman in Genesis 3,
the Bright Morning Star of Revelation 22,
and that indeed, the whole Bible
relates the “story of Jesus.
