In education circles, the topic of a flipped classroom is gaining traction, and it has many strengths that the church should seriously consider.
The flipped classroom is one that moves away from the traditional classroom model where a teacher (supposedly all-knowledgable!) lectures from the front, students take notes, maybe have opportunity to ask questions, then take homework to complete in their own time. On the other hand, when the classroom is flipped, the teacher provides an opportunity for the learning session in the student's own time, usually by posting a lecture video and sending an invitation. When the teacher and student come together, they can cover off questions the student has prepared, have discussions and class interaction, or focus on a specific problem the individual is having. This way, all students work to their own pace, pursue personal learning goals and objectives and have more freedom to use their own learning styles.
Some of the problems with the traditional classroom include students at different stages of learning, learning difficulties, different learning styles, varying work ethic and concentration span, vastly different personalities, educational history, and preferences and biases learned from experience. We can certainy see the impact of these problems in our traditional church leadership development! Classroom learning holds many back from serious progress, whilst it is too fast-paced for others. We have people who are "up-front" leaders, who want to ask questions, dominate conversations and discussions (but hopefully not debate the teacher...!), and the shy ones who don't even want to speak in class!
I am not certain who coined the phrase, "From Sage on the Stage to Guide on the Side", but the earliest reference I can find to it is attributed to Alison King in 1993. I like this quote.
There is certainly an argument for the sage on the stage teaching method, and that's why the flipped classroom is a hot topic. But there's also an argument for the other style - guide on the side.
Jesus spoke to the crowds and imparted information and knowledge to them. Paul went to places where the people were; he sought out places of congregation. Stephen is famous for his speech in Acts 7 to a large crowd. These examples were not interactive teaching. These are examples of the "Sage on the stage", and yes, we find such examples in the bible. More recently, Billy Graham's ministry is an example of teaching from the front, so is Chuck Swindoll's, John F. MacArthur's and Alistair Begg's, but I'm sure these men also disciple others in a small group and individual setting.
Guide-on-the-side is more conducive to the biblical model of discipleship. Jesus spoke to the crowds, but he spent quality time with the twelve! He gave the crowds information, but he explained and practiced his teaching with the disciples. He spent even more time with Peter, James and John. The guide-on-the-side style doesn't even need to rely on the classroom environment but can be practiced in the field. It can be activity or assignment-based. The flipped classroom method has been used successfully by military organisations for centuries.
From a leadership development viewpoint, there are other advantages too. These include stronger team development, better peer learning and accountabilities, and a more cohesive team.
Sage-on-the-stage is teacher-centric whereas Guide-on-the-side is learner-centric. I'd push that analogy a little further and say that in the church, Guide-on-the-side is increasingly Jesus-centric as the learner desires to become more Christ-like through learning, guiding, mentoring and discipleship.
Hopefully this article is just enough to whet your appetite to do your own research (or did you fall asleep in the research methodology lecture...?)
Reference:
King, A. (1993), From Sage on the Stage to Guide on the Side, College Teaching 41(1):30-35