HBLT / MWGYW
I thoroughly enjoyed both approaches. Both of them in their own way were beneficial and proved to be effective for teaching and communicating in a way that can promote learning. I honestly appreciate aspects about both methods and believe both can be very useful; however, I felt more comfortable with Andy Stanley’s MWGYW approach, mainly due to the easy flow of communication it presents. I found it to be much simpler to understand from a development standpoint and especially after implementation; I strongly believe it is the clearest approach in order for presentation and for understanding. The MWGYW approach generates the most thought, connection and emotional reaction that will prompt a life-changing decision. I feel the transparency of this approach and how the teacher can initially be vulnerable but use that to their advantage in order to promote learning is outstanding. I truly connected to this aspect because this is the approach that I often employ into my messages. As Stanley, I believe that work from your own emotions and experience is imperative to the message you are delivering. The learners want to see our heart integrated into the material. Stanley mentions, “I go out of my way to lay my humanity and frailty out on the front of the stage. Doing so tears down walls. Besides, if you preach from your weakness, you will never run out of material” (Stanley, 124). This was valuable insight for me as I am always looking to improve the presentation of my messages that I teach and preach. I believe allowing myself to “come out of my box” and be more transparent and real will definitely improve aspects of my style and method of teaching the word of God. They both can offer high levels of learning; however, the HLBT approach is more resource driven than the MWGYW approach and can offer more of an academic perspective; whereas the latter draws from personal perspective and sparks and emotional response. Honestly after learning about...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document