Anna Shaw

A World in Pieces

            My world of turning to the academics, a solid foundation with no gray areas, to find facts is beginning to shatter. Science consists of theories that may never be proven. Literature contains the subjective opinions of authors that are prone to criticism and debate. Psychology and sociology continue to change with new discoveries and theories that often clash. Now, my concept of history, which is supposedly based on facts, has been altered because it also has no definite grounding.

            In the chapter "What is Evidence?" from the book Historian as Detective, Carl Becker defines history as "the memory of things said and done" (7). As I learned in my high school psychology class, memory can sometimes be a dangerous realm. Psychologist Elizabeth Loftus has conducted extensive research on the nature of memories. Her work includes a well-known experiment that showed how memories can be altered based on the way a person is led to recall a memory. Though her research focused primarily on the validity of eyewitness accounts, it seems to apply to history as well, given Becker's definition. Consequently, the accounts of history may not be as accurate as some people like to believe.

            According to Becker, life and history are closely intertwined because history "is so intimately associated with what [people] are doing and with what [people] hope to do" (13). Therefore, each person, with his or her own background and memories, brings a different interpretation and perspective to history. With the wide range of opinions, it is nearly impossible to end up with a consistent and fully accurate account of historical events. Given this point, Becker also describes history as "an imaginative creation, a personal possession which each [person] . . . fashions out of his individual experience, adapts to his practical or emotional needs, and adorns as well as may be to suit his aesthetic tastes" (13). History thus becomes similar to an art, where each person portrays his or her ideals subjectively. The "cold facts" no longer exist and are instead shaped by the interpretation of the historian (13).

            Government agencies and other powerful organizations are also responsible for distorted history. In another chapter of the same book, C. Vann Woodward lists four ways that powerful groups can influence past events (36-37). By designating certain pieces of evidence as "confidential" or "top-secret," organizations can control the classification of documents and limit the number of people who have access to important evidence. Similarly, archives can be made inaccessible, keeping historians away from information the agency does not want in the public realm. Selective publication also contributes to a distorted history because society does not receive a full picture of events that took place. Finally, the simple fact that historians are employed by governmental agencies that can withhold a paycheck can lead to a history that is shaped by the organization. It is most difficult for historians to maintain an objective interpretation of history when governmental agencies are hindering the research and contributing to the bias.

            This idea of "historical relativism," where each individual self-interprets, can result in a dangerous situation. In the introduction to the chapter "On Believing What One Reads" by C. Vann Woodward, editor Robin Winks discusses a few implications of historical relativism. The interpretations that are made so easily in one's private life can easily be transferred into one's public life, thereby affecting society as a whole (24). The history of America includes several examples of factual manipulation where the public has received propaganda-like information. For example, during the Civil War, the North attempted to justify its actions against the South by claiming the South was conspiring to undermine the Constitution. Later on, the South portrayed the North's attempts of Reconstruction as "brutal, hypocritical, and corrupt" (32). Historical relativism not only distorts an individual's own perspective of history, but can completely change a country's stance on an issue or a significant event.

            While no solution will be absolutely perfect, educating historians, politicians, and all members of society about the risks of historical relativism is a place to start. I personally had never heard about this phenomenon and am already a college student who has been told throughout my school career that history is based on facts. Educating students about the implications of biased interpretation, the flaws of memory, and our human tendencies will at least bring awareness. Perhaps the awareness will then turn into a standard by which members of society can hold each other accountable.

            Change must also occur in the governmental agencies of our nation if indeed they are responsible for a large portion of the slanted history. Removing laws that limit access to important evidence is one tangible way to make improvements in this area. Publications, news broadcasts, and other types of mass media can also strive to tell all sides of a story rather than being selective with the evidence. A system of open files for all people to further investigate events may be another option.

            Though we can discuss the flaws of history and attempt to become more objective in our interpretations, there is a root problem that we will never fix. That root problem is human corruption, which has been passed through humankind since Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit. It is because of our selfishness and our desire to make ourselves look good that we distort facts, hide important evidence, and let our memories wander. Yes, my perfect intellectual world has shattered--but it was never perfect in the first place.

Richard Baxter, the author of "Directions about Our Labor and Callings," lived in England during the 17^th century.  He was opposed to the parliamentary government that Oliver Cromwell established and did not think that the church should have bishops.  This was interpreted by the Church of England as being disloyal.  In addition, Baxter thought the various groups of Christians, namely the Episcopalians, Presbyterians, and independents, should unite and show respect for each others' beliefs.  In this particular passage, Baxter describes why labor is important in life, and how that relates to one's personal calling.  He establishes some guidelines and suggestions about one's calling, including that a calling should be safe, lawful, for the public good, beneficial to the soul, and in line with one's unique gifts.  Through these descriptions, Baxter answers the question of this period, "To what particular work is God calling me?"  He answers the question "How can I serve God through family life?" indirectly in his point that parents should not force their children into a certain vocation if it does not fit the children's particular talents.

 

As briefly described above, Baxter describes several guidelines for people to follow in discovering their calling.  He first establishes that labor is a necessary part of life because God has commanded it and it benefits society.  Baxter connects this to one's calling by giving a definition of calling: "a stated, ordinary course of labor" (Callings, p. 281).  In discovering one's calling, one should make sure that it is lawful and appropriate.  A calling should also be safe and for the public good.  If two equally good callings should present themselves, one with the promise of riches and the other as beneficial to the soul, one should choose the one that is beneficial to the soul.  Baxter suggests that one's calling be one that exercises the body and mind if possible.  He also emphasizes that fact that one's calling should fit the person's talents.  In determining one's calling, he or she should seek the advice of others.  Finally, and ultimately, people should not complain about the calling that they follow, but should serve God in whatever they do.

 

Baxter specifically emphasizes the idea that one's calling should serve the public good.  He gives examples of vocations that serve this purpose: magistrates, pastors, teachers of the church, schoolmasters, physicians, lawyers, and shepherds (Callings, p. 283).  In contrast, he shows that professions such as tobacco and lace-sellers, feather-makers, and periwigmakers are not as beneficial to society (Callings, p. 283).  Of the callings that serve the public good, Baxter also points out that one should choose a calling that is beneficial to the soul over one that brings in more wealth.  In many ways, this recommendation relates to my project at PLUS Time.  There are certainly many other things that I could be doing with my time, whether that be earning money, working on homework, or doing something else that will help me in the future.  Yet, I choose to spend two to three days a week helping low-income immigrant students on homework so that they can make progress in school and reach their full potential.  In this sense, I am taking Baxter's advice and putting aside money to do something that is so much more satisfying.  After all, there is a certain sense of fulfillment that I feel when I know I have put aside my own selfishness and helped another person.

On Tuesday, we were given the privilege of listening to Dr. Loma R. Meyer speak on the integration of faith and learning at the annual Poehler Lecture.  Dr. Meyer is a former professor of education at Concordia University, and began teaching in 1967.  During her time here, she held a variety of positions, including professor, direct or of instruction, dean of the faculty, vice president for academic affairs, and executive vice president.  As she joked in her lecture, since many of these roles were held simultaneously, Meyer often had to "consult with herself to reach consensus on an issue!"   In addition to these positions, Meyer has served on a variety of committees, including the Minnesota State Board of Education.  She has also earned two doctorates from the University of California, Santa Barbara and the University of Minnesota.  Looking at all her credentials, it is no wonder that she is held in such high esteem by her students and coworkers.  Yet, it is not just her academic or career-related achievements that have earned the respect of many.  Dr. Meyer also is a strong Christian who lets her faith shine in her life.  As Dr. Bunkowske pointed out at the end of the lecture, Dr. Meyer lives her life in such a way that faith and learning are not two separate things; instead, her faith is such an integral part of who she is that it is expressed in all that she does.

 

Dr. Meyer divided her talk into three main categories: autobiographical, historical, and futuristic.  In the autobiographical section, she described how her husband's death reminded her that faith and learning are part of both life and death.  In the historical section, Meyer pointed out some of the changes that have occurred at Concordia University over the past 60 years.  Many of the changes involved new buildings, new programs, new administrative systems, new perspectives of diversity, and so forth.  Yet, probably the most striking change is that of the makeup of the student body.  In 1967, 93% of all students were in a church work program.  In 2009, only 5% of all students were in a church work program.  Amidst all of these changes, there has been some focus on the integration of faith and learning.  Finally, Dr. Meyer talked about the future.  She encouraged Concordia University to live out its mission statement, stressing that learning should strengthen one's faith, and that, sometimes, too much learning can cause faith to be lost.  She advocated for all to be "agents of change" and embrace the new technological advances that are altering the ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­picture of higher education.  Dr. Meyer ended her talk with the idea that though the past is history and the present may seem somewhat bleak, the future holds promise.

 

Several of Dr. Meyer's points are related to the focus on faith and learning that is found in the Honors program.  Toward the beginning of her talk, Dr. Meyer asked and briefly answered the question, "How do you integrate faith and learning?"  She said that an integration of faith and learning begins with faith and leads to individual areas of learning.  Faith frees us to examine each academic discipline and apply it to other areas.  I think this is one of the goals of the Honors program - to view each academic area of study through the lens of faith and determine how faith connects each separate area.  Dr. Meyer also talked about the idea of vocation, a topic that we have spent the past year studying.  She mentioned that each person can engage in service to others, whether that is through a church profession or simply as a Christian in a particular career.  In Honors this year, we have talked about how being a Christian affects our calling, and how our calling does not necessarily have to be in a church profession, but rather could involve working as a Christian accountant or a Christian lawyer.  Finally, Dr. Meyer talked about being a lifelong learner who asks good questions, evaluates information, seeks a balance between challenge and support, and realizes the importance of discovery.  In the process, the learner strives to incorporate all of the learning into a meaningful whole, with faith as the foundation.  The Honors program attempts to teach students how to think critically and challenge them academically with the hope that an integrated approach will show students how all components of learning are interrelated and how they can make a difference in society.  As President Holst commented at the end of the lecture, we are privileged to be a part of a community that is filled with both Christians and non-Christians, allowing us to take part in the sometimes difficult, but always meaningful, dialogue of how faith affects our lives and education.

William Perkins was a Puritan theologian who studied and taught at Cambridge University.  In the passage titled "A Treatise of the Vocations" from Callings, Perkins defines "vocation" or "calling," explains its causes, describes the two types of callings, and lists several "rules" that should guide a person's view of his or her calling.  Perkins answers the questions of this historical period (1500-1800) throughout his passage.  The first question, "To what particular work is God calling me?" is answered when Perkins describes a few of the "rules."  Perkins stresses the importance that one's calling should be fitting to his or her talents and gifts from God.  He reminds his readers that God made each person different, thus giving each person a unique calling.  Perkins outlines two steps for people to follow to discover what God has called them to do: examine their interests and examine their gifts.  The place where these two things meet is where God has called them.  Above all, Perkins encourages his readers to remember their general calling - the calling to be a Christian - and make that the focus of their work.  In this, Perkins answers the second question, "How can I serve God through family life?"  He emphasizes that a person's calling to be a Christian should permeate their lives, that is, in all aspects of their profession, and in all areas of their family life.  Parents can also serve God in their family lives by helping their children discover where God has called them based on their gifts and talents.

 

Perkins defines calling as "a certain kind of life, ordained and imposed on man by God for the common good" (Callings p. 262).  He describes two types of causes: the efficient cause and the final cause.  The efficient cause is what initiates the calling; in this case, Perkins points to God as the efficient cause for each person's calling.  The final cause is the means for which one is striving, or the purpose.  He points to the phrase "for the common good" as the final cause for each person's calling.  Perkins also differentiates between a particular calling and a general calling.  A general calling is one's calling to be a Christian, a member of the body of Christ.  One's particular calling, however, is to a certain line of work, such as a physician or a pastor.  In his list of "rules," Perkins states that all people have a calling, that each person's calling must be the best for him or her, that the calling to be a Christian and the calling to a particular profession should be intertwined, and that the general calling would override a particular calling should the two be in conflict.

 

Throughout the passage, Perkins emphasizes the idea that a person's calling should serve the community and have a purpose.  He uses monks, servants, the rich, and beggars as examples of people who do not seem to be serving their community and living out their calling.  Instead, he believes that, in their own ways, they are simply existing in the world without truly contributing to society as they ought to.  In a way, PLUS Time exists to prevent this from happing -its goal is to help students discover how they can make a difference in their world by filling in the academic gaps that hinder them from doing so.  At the same time, PLUS Time works to create an environment where students can also develop socially.  Social skills are a part of every activity and students are expected to behave in a respectable manner.  Though PLUS Time is not a Christian organization, there is a parallel between its goal of integrating social and academic skills and Perkins' emphasis on intertwining a person's general calling and particular calling.  Just as Perkins stresses the importance of living a Christian lifestyle in every area of life, PLUS Time teaches social skills that are necessary to function in any setting, whether academic or not. 

Today, we were given the opportunity to listen to Dr. Mitri Raheb, a Palestinian Christian.  He grew up in Bethlehem and is now pastor of Christmas Lutheran Church in Bethlehem.  He studied in Germany and is multilingual.  Dr. Raheb founded DIYAR, which consists of three organizations that provide culture, health, and education services to the community.  He has earned several awards and honorary degrees, and is the author of several well-known books.  For more information about him or his organizations, visit his website.

 

I thoroughly enjoyed hearing Dr. Raheb's presentation today and learned much about his work in the Palestinian area.  It was interesting to find out that while Christians were the majority in Palestine at one point of time, they now make up the minority.  However, contrary to many people's beliefs, they are not cultural minorities as they are Arabs like their Muslim neighbors, but rather minorities based on their faith.  Though Christians make up approximately 2% of the population, they are essential to the community.  1/3 of the health care system and 45.4% of Non-Government Organizations are either operated or funded by Christians.  There are other advantages to having Christians in Palestine.  Unlike the United States, which is becoming a multicultural country, Palestine is monocultural in that it consists primarily of Arabs.  Christians help bring diversity to the community.  They also help the country make progress politically and socially as Middle Easterners tend to be more conservative.

 

Dr. Raheb, through his organizations, is working to form unity between the Christians and also establish relationships between the Muslims and the Christians.  Since Muslims and Christians share a common Arabic culture, Dr. Raheb's goal is to use this as a neutral platform.  As Christians work in the political arena to push for equal rights and other important aspects of civil society, Dr. Raheb hopes that Christians and Muslims can join together in the effort.  Once this bond has been established, interfaith dialogue can take place.

 

In describing his work in Palestine, Dr. Raheb made several key points that I would like to share.  First of all, he mentioned that the Bible is a book of minorities, not majorities.  Though it may seem unfortunate that there is such a minority of Christians in Palestine, it is nothing new in the history of Christianity.  Both the Jews and early Christians were considered minorities in their culture.  At the same time, minorities can make a large difference in their community.  Dr. Raheb referred to the Biblical passage in Matthew 5:13 where Jesus tells people they are the "salt of the earth."  He explained there does not need to be a large amount of salt for it to do its work.  In fact, there is often so little salt in food that it cannot be seen; however, it is always tasted.  In the same way, though Christians may be the minority and not always "visible" to the rest of the community, they can still make a great impact.  His words were definitely a challenge to me, especially as I see Christians becoming more and more the minority in this country.  As I continue on this journey called "life," I hope that I can be this "salt of the earth" to which Jesus calls us - making a difference through the small things we do.

Ignatius Loyola is the founder of the Society of Jesus, or Jesuits.  In his passage from Callings, titled "The Spiritual Exercises," he talks about how to make a decision in life.  This is an indirect answer to the question "To what particular work is God calling me?" because Ignatius describes the process that Christians should engage in to determine the answer.  In the excerpt, Ignatius gives a short and long answer to the question.  The short answer is that one should consider his or her purpose in life - to praise God and serve Him - and ensure that all decisions are made based on that idea.  In the long answer, Ignatius first describes the implications of making choices.  This includes the difference between immutable, or unchangeable, choices such as marriage and mutable changes such as accepting money.  Ignatius also encourages people to make decisions and stick to them.  Finally, he describes the three times when decisions should be made.

 

Ignatius lists one of these times as a "time of tranquility."  He defines it as a time "when the soul is not agitated by diverse spirits, and is freely and calmly making use of its natural powers" (Callings p. 241).  He gives two different methods, one of which I will try to describe here.  To explain it, I am going to use the scenario of a schoolteacher, Mrs. Brown, who has been offered a position to work on the school's administration team.  It contains six different steps:

1. Focus on the decision.  In this case, Mrs. Brown should think about the position she has been offered - becoming a school administrator.

2. Focus on the purpose - to give God glory - while ensuring that outside biases do not distort this purpose.  Mrs. Brown needs to make sure that she does not accept the job for the money or the prestige it may give her.

3. Seek God's will.  Mrs. Brown, in this step, should pray and ask that God's will be revealed to her.  Ignatius also emphasizes praying that God would not just show His will, but enable a person to act according to it.

4. Evaluate the pros and cons.  Mrs. Brown should come up with a list of advantages and disadvantages of accepting the job.

5. Evaluate which choice is more reasonable.  Mrs. Brown should determine whether it is better to keep her job or accept the new job.

6. Make a decision and pray for confirmation.  After choosing to accept or decline the job, Mrs. Brown should pray to make sure that she has made the right decision.

 

At first glance, Ignatius' steps seem a bit extreme.  After all, who makes a decision by following step-by-step instructions?  Yet, I think he does touch on some good points about decision-making that I can use in my own life.  First of all, it is very important to make sure that we understand our purpose in life and use that as a basis for all of our actions.  If our goal is to serve God, but we engage in behavior that does not meet this goal, we are, in some sense, disregarding our goal.  I think the fact that we are here for a purpose, as defined by God, makes it even more important that we keep this the focus.  I also like that Ignatius emphasizes both spiritual and cognitive methods in making a decision.  While it is important to pray, we cannot expect God to call down from heaven with an answer.  Instead, I think that sometimes God uses our gift of reasoning to speak to us.  He has given us many tools (prayer being one of the most powerful of these) that we should utilize when making decisions.  To connect this to my project, I know that I used a few of these steps when figuring out which organization I should work with.  When I have other decisions to make in the future, including those that will deal with my calling in life, I know that I will use the same approaches.

Thomas Aquinas, a member of the Dominican order, describes his views of the religious life in "Summa Theologiae."  He provides answers to several questions, such as whether a contemplative or active life is better, or whether poverty, obedience, and perpetual continence (refraining from marriage) are requirements for religious perfection.  To answer each aspect of the religious life, Aquinas anticipates objections to his argument, presents his point of view, and then answers each objection from his perspective.  He quotes the Bible, Aristotle, and other important religious works of the time.  Aquinas' entire piece of writing answers the question, "What kind of Christian should I be?" as he explores various parts of the religious lifestyle.  He concludes that a contemplative life is more important than an active life, and that a contemplative life will not be hindered by an active life.  He believes that religious perfection is rooted in charity, and that poverty, a life of celibacy, and obedience are necessary to obtain religious perfection.  He also believes that religious persons can become involved in secular activities.

 

The last question that Aquinas asks is Q. 187, a. 2 "Whether it is lawful for religious to occupy themselves with secular business?" (Callings p. 173)  In other words, Aquinas attempts to figure out whether Christians can become involved in activities that are not "religious" and still be right with God.  Aquinas answers that Christians can and should be involved in secular activities.  He defends his argument by claiming that involvement in secular activities can be acts of charity, which he has already shown is part of achieving religious perfection.  He also cites Galatians 6:2 ("Bear ye one another's burdens: and so you should fulfill the law of Christ") and James 1:27 ("Religion clean and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to visit the fatherless and widows in their tribulation") as evidence for his position.  Aquinas does point out, however, that monks and clergy should be careful not to involve themselves in secular activities out of greed, but with a desire to help others.

 

When I think about how this question and Aquinas' answer relates to my life today, the saying "Be in the world, but not of it" comes to mind.  To me, this phrase means that we should participate in the "secular" activities that occur around us, but not let the ways of the world influence our beliefs.  It is when we start compromising our values that it becomes a problem.  I also think of all the verses in the Bible that tell us to be a light to the world and a witness for Christ.  As Christians, we are asked to share the Good News and often that means being in "secular" environments.  I went to a public high school and I think my experience there helps me understand what Aquinas is trying to say.  There were few Christians in my public school, so it was an opportunity to share my faith.  At times, it was difficult because I knew that my values were drastically different than the values of my peers.  Yet, based on several conversations I had with my friends about my faith, I knew that God had placed me there to be a light.  After all, if we are constantly surrounded by only people who share our beliefs, how can we share Jesus with someone who doesn't know Him? 

John de Joinville was a noble in King Louis IX's court in France.  In the excerpt titled "Chronicle of the Crusade of St. Louis," de Joinville describes how King Louis IX lived his life as a Christian.  At a Franciscan friar's encouragement to "administer justice well and promptly to his people," the king began to act out of justice and mercy to those around him.  Despite all these actions, it is hard to answer the question "What kind of Christian should I be: one who prays, fights, or works?" from the king's example because he did not devote his life specifically to any of the three tasks.  Instead, he led a simple lifestyle by refusing to indulge in the best food or clothes.  He also made public service a part of his life by giving to the poor.  King Louis IX showed that those in high authority as well as the monks and nuns could live in simplicity and devote themselves to service.

 

King Louis IX showed justice and mercy in several different ways.  First of all, he did not elevate himself above those in his kingdom by taking advantage of a life of privilege.  For example, he did not wear furs or scarlet cloth, but woolen cloth.  He diluted his wine and did not ask for special food.  This shows justice because he did not try to elevate himself above the other people in his kingdom by living an extravagant life.  He showed mercy to the poor and needy by giving them food and money.  He would also visit different churches and hospitals around the area to give donations.  The king was also an amiable person and made people of all ages and economic statuses feel welcome.  He lived a moral life by refraining from bad language and encouraging his children to follow the good example of generous royal figures in history.

 

There are several areas of King Louis IX's rule that would be nice to see incorporated into the lives of current politicians.  Today, I feel like so many politicians operate off of their own agenda, almost to the point where they work for the good of themselves as individuals rather than for the country as a whole.  King Louis IX's willingness to help the poor and serve his community reveals that he truly cared for the people in his country.  The king's simple lifestyle is also something that could be adopted by current political leaders.  Several politicians live extravagantly and take advantage of their large paychecks to buy the best of everything.  At the same time, there are many citizens who are just trying to survive.  I think King Louis IX's simple lifestyle is one that should be imitated by any leader because it shows humility and can help prevent corruption.

Mechthild was a German mystic who left her family of nobility to become a part of the Beguine community.  The Beguine community is based on the monastic lifestyle, but does not require its people to take formal vows.  In the passage titled "The Flowing Light of the Godhead," Mechthild reflects on several characteristics she believes are important in following God and being an example to others.  She also describes her respect for St. Dominic, who, as a prior, seemed to embody the characteristics that every prior should have.  In the passage, Mechthild answers the question, "What kind of Christian should I be: one who prays, fights, or works?" by describing the attitudes and behavior that priors should have toward those under them.  She emphasizes praying when she advises them to set aside time to spend with God because He is like a waiting bridegroom, and working when she tells them to help in the kitchen.  Mechthild also encourages the priors to show humility, kindness, support, and joy.  She seems to favor a more Benedictine style of religious life that focuses on prayer, service to the community, and obedience.

 

 As I was reading, I found a quote that applies to my work at PLUS Time.  On p. 152 in Callings, Mechthild writes, "Great fear is bound up with power.  When one says, 'You are now our superior or our prior or our prioress,' God knows, my dear friend, you are in dire straits.  You should then perform your venia [prayer for forgiveness] with great humility, turn immediately to prayer, and let God console you.  You should so transform your heart in God's holy love that you love in a special way each and every brother or sister entrusted to you in all his needs.  In all their difficulties you should show your subordinates and brothers loving cheerfulness or kind concern and compassion."

 

Mechthild's words are a great reminder to me of my purpose and goal in volunteering at PLUS Time.  As a volunteer, I am in a position of authority like the priors.  As a result, Mechthild's warning to the priors that they let their position cause feelings of superiority also applies to me.  I should not take advantage of my authority.  Mechthild's encouragement to priors to "love in a special way each and every brother or sister entrusted to [them] in all his needs" particularly struck me.  It reminds me the importance of making each individual child at PLUS Time feel special, whether that be by helping with homework, chatting with them at snack time, or encouraging them.  In doing so, I am making a conscious effort to show God's love to each and every child.  Mechthild's last piece of advice is to show "loving cheerfulness or kind concern and compassion."  The reminder to put on a cheerful attitude and show kindness to everyone is always good, and will also apply to my time at PLUS Time.

Though we are not required to blog about our project, I want to share how my afternoon at PLUS Time went today.  This semester, I am starting to lead weekly math activities for the students.  Tuesday has been designated "Math Day" and I spent some time during Christmas break brainstorming and planning activities for this spring semester.  Today, I broke the students into groups and gave each group the name of a shape on a piece of paper.  With the group, they wrote on a poster the characteristics of the shape (I encouraged them to write it in a riddle format) as well as real-life examples of the shape.  Each group then presented their poster to the other groups, who were able to guess which shape the group had.  The activity helped the students explore shapes, apply that knowledge to their lives, and also had a literacy component.

The most difficult thing today was management.  I have taught lessons in classrooms before and taught Sunday School to preschoolers all last year.  However, none of my past teaching experiences was as difficult as today.  First of all, I have not been established quite yet as a figure of authority at PLUS Time because I am a volunteer and the workers are the ones who take care of all the discipline.  The fact that it is not a classroom sometimes leads the students to act up more frequently.  Also, there are a lot more kids at PLUS Time than there were in my Sunday School classroom.  Though it was not easy, I know what to expect next time.  I am really glad, though, that I have had some experience leading activities in a classroom or I think it would have been even worse.  Overall, I'm really excited to lead the math activities this semester and will probably try and blog about some of the more memorable days!