This morning at our church's brunch, I tried something new for our Godly Play lesson with the children. I told two stories "side-by-side". You hear this term a lot in GP circles, but there isn't much literature on how to do it. I actually had to ask a colleague, Markus from Gott im Spiel, about how exactly to do it.
Basically, you tell two stories, one after the other. Although you can do a separate Wondering time after each story, most of the time you do one Wondering session after both stories have been told. You ask the usual questions for whatever genre(s) you are dealing with, and then a special question: "Is there something in this story that can help us understand the other story better?"
The stories that I chose were "Jonah" from the official Godly Play "canon" and a story in Godly Play-style, "Jesus Calms the Storm", written by some religious educators in Germany, among them, the above-mentioned Markus.
I hit upon the idea to tell the two stories side-by-side, because the authors made this suggestion for older children in their liner notes. I had already been in limbo about what story to tell, since I will only see some of these children one time before Easter. And I didn't want to tell "The Mystery of Easter", because some of them will hear it in Easter Club next week. I love to tell Jonah before or during Lent, because it deals with the theme of repentance. But I also think hearing stories about the life of Jesus is important as well. The "side-by-side" option solved my dilemma.
All the children present had heard the Godly Play version of "Jonah" at least once before, and some 2-3 times. And most of them were familiar with "Jesus Calms the Storm" from children's Bibles. There was only one child that I was not completely sure about, but everyone ended up completely engrossed in both stories.
I chose to ask at the end of the first story, "What did you like best?" before beginning the second story. And then I repeated this question at the end of the second story.
Then, I asked, "Is there something in 'Jonah' that helps us understand the second story better?" There, I was met mostly with confused stares - much different from silent wondering! An older child said, "Well, I can tell you how Jonah and Jesus are different . . . " and proceeded to talk about how Jonah wasn't exactly a "tip-top prophet" and how Jesus in contrast was obedient to God, the Father.
Following this child's cue, we then discussed what the two stories had in common and then how they were different. This seemed to helped the others break down my previous question into smaller bite-sized chunks that was easier to talk about.
As many of you know, children usually do not create art about stories that they have just heard, when given the choice. Most of the time, they return to a story that they have heard the week before or some time earlier. So, I was rather surprised when two of the children made artwork directly relating to the two stories I told today. One girl drew a picture of the ship carrying Jonah and the big fish that swallowed him.
Another boy made the wool picture below of Jesus in the boat speaking to the wind and waves.
All in all, the "side-by-side" storytelling was a good experience, and I will definitely do it again.
Basically, you tell two stories, one after the other. Although you can do a separate Wondering time after each story, most of the time you do one Wondering session after both stories have been told. You ask the usual questions for whatever genre(s) you are dealing with, and then a special question: "Is there something in this story that can help us understand the other story better?"
The stories that I chose were "Jonah" from the official Godly Play "canon" and a story in Godly Play-style, "Jesus Calms the Storm", written by some religious educators in Germany, among them, the above-mentioned Markus.
 |
| "Jonah" and "Jesus Calms the Storm" side-by-side |
I hit upon the idea to tell the two stories side-by-side, because the authors made this suggestion for older children in their liner notes. I had already been in limbo about what story to tell, since I will only see some of these children one time before Easter. And I didn't want to tell "The Mystery of Easter", because some of them will hear it in Easter Club next week. I love to tell Jonah before or during Lent, because it deals with the theme of repentance. But I also think hearing stories about the life of Jesus is important as well. The "side-by-side" option solved my dilemma.
 |
| End scene of "Jonah" |
 |
| End scene of "Jesus Calms the Storm" |
I chose to ask at the end of the first story, "What did you like best?" before beginning the second story. And then I repeated this question at the end of the second story.
Then, I asked, "Is there something in 'Jonah' that helps us understand the second story better?" There, I was met mostly with confused stares - much different from silent wondering! An older child said, "Well, I can tell you how Jonah and Jesus are different . . . " and proceeded to talk about how Jonah wasn't exactly a "tip-top prophet" and how Jesus in contrast was obedient to God, the Father.
Following this child's cue, we then discussed what the two stories had in common and then how they were different. This seemed to helped the others break down my previous question into smaller bite-sized chunks that was easier to talk about.
As many of you know, children usually do not create art about stories that they have just heard, when given the choice. Most of the time, they return to a story that they have heard the week before or some time earlier. So, I was rather surprised when two of the children made artwork directly relating to the two stories I told today. One girl drew a picture of the ship carrying Jonah and the big fish that swallowed him.
Another boy made the wool picture below of Jesus in the boat speaking to the wind and waves.
All in all, the "side-by-side" storytelling was a good experience, and I will definitely do it again.
Very interesting, I get quite frustrated at times with the things godly play doesn't really tell you enough information about, it is quite difficult when you are learning and godly play is very new hear in Australia, so we don't have many nearby people with very much experience
ReplyDeleteI think that's one reason why these on-line forums are so important. GP is really an art form that really has to be learned in community. It's like knitting. I am knitting a skirt for my daughter right now, and I could google most of the stitches that I didn't know. But then I came to something where googling didn't help anymore and needed to seek out a friend to help me figure it out. I can't tell you how much I've learned from people like David (below), Storyteller (Wonderful in an Easter Kind of Way), Markus and Leslie (Thoughts from the Sheepfold).
Delete"Side-by-sides" are indeed stimulating as the children in the Godly Play circle explore the interconnectedness of the stories around the room. I have appreciated their value since I observed a 5 year old some years ago take out the parable of the deep well during the work time and lay it alongside the materials of the Good Shepherd. She then proceeded to lead the sheep from the green pastures and out into the desert, and finally around the deep well where they had to fathom out how to get to the refreshing water down below.
ReplyDeleteBut that was in the child's response time. The issue I'd like to question is using "side-by-sides" in the initial storytelling presentations and the danger in that of allowing teacher-controlled outcomes to creep in, which, of course, flies in the face of GP's open-ended ethos. Teacher-controlled outcomes, it seems to me, can be pretty subtle and often implicit. "So, here are 2 stories, children. I wonder if there is anything in this story that will help us understand the other one better?" can suggest that, as the teacher did not obviously select the stories to be told at random, then she or he already "knows" that there is at least one important connection... so the exercise turns into a kind of guessing game: "I wonder if we (the children) can guess the connection that's in the storyteller's mind"!
Maybe the best time to support the children's own discovery of the possible connections between stories is during the wondering time (ideally for a group that has already worked with the whole cycle of core lessons at least twice). We could simply glance around the room and ask after virtually any presentation: "I wonder if there is any other story here that can help us understand this one better":
Just some random thoughts. Thanks for another stimulating post. I love the example of wool pictures that you have illustrated!
Those are some good points, David. I hadn't thought of how much interpretation is implied when we tell the stories side-by-side. I wonder if it makes a difference when we don't have a Godly Play room? Or when we don't see the children often enough to have through the core cycles? Those are definitely some of the challenges we face here in Germany that the American storytellers, for instance, don't deal with as much. Sounds like a good topic for another post. I'll get some thoughts together and we can continue this discussion.: )
DeleteWenn ich David richtig verstanden habe, ging es ihm darum zu verhindern, eine zu deutliche Fährte für die Kinder zu legen, damit sie in die vermeintlich "richtige" Richtung denken. Dies kann ich verhindern, wenn ich zwei Geschichten wähle, die erst einmal nicht sol viel mitenander zu tun habe. Ein Beispiel: Für die Netzwerktagung in Hildesheim nächste Woche, haben wir überlegt die Elija-Geschichte zu spielen. Ein erster Vorschlag war, dazu side-by-side "Gott hören" von den Quäkern zu spielen. Da ist, finde ich, die Verbindung zu eng, oder zu deutlich. In beiden Geschichten geht es ja darum zu verdeutlichen, wie ich Gott begegnen kann. Natürlich kann es beim Wondering immer wieder Überraschungen und neue Deutungen geben, aber mich hat das nicht gereizt. Ich habe nun den Vorschlag gemacht, zur Elija-Geschichte die Geschichte von der Stiftshütte zu spielen. Beide Geschichten spielen zwar in der Wüste, aber die Art der Gottesbegegnung ist doch sehr unterschiedlich. Ich denke, die beiden Geschichten haben sich viel zu sagen.
ReplyDeleteShort translation for those following this feed: Markus says, "If I understood David correctly, his point is that we avoid 'steering' the children in a particular direction by telling stories side-by-side. We can avoid this by sharing stories that don't necessarily have a direct connection to one another. An example is from the planning of our GP Germany conference next week. One suggestion was to tell the Elijah story side-by-side with "Hearing God" from the Quakers. I thought this was too leading, so I suggested that we tell the Tabernacle story. Both stories take place in the desert, but the way that God's presence is presented is completely different. And I think both stories have a lot to say."
DeleteAnother good point. The jury is still out for me. I certainly don't want to be too leading, but I think there is some value in side-by-side storytelling.
This where it might help me to have a FB page for this website, but I'm afraid at this stage of life, I'd never be able to maintain it.
DeleteGreat idea to do back to back stories. I loved seeing the children's art work.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the feedback, Faye!
DeleteSheila do your children take their wool art work home or is it a process type activity
ReplyDeleteI let them take it home for two reasons: 1) I don't have a Godly Play room to store it in, and 2) I don't see the children on a regular basis, since we only have children's church 1-2 times a month. In the after-school clubs, however, the children do leave their work until it is finished.
Delete