RESULTS Continued

Hey all, so CJ and I recently picked up a district and did a few things differently. Here is an outline of what we did differently and the results that we saw in affiliation to those changes. The formatting is a little weird because I pasted it from pages... sorry about that enjoy!

Changes to District 5A

Purpose: To create a paradigm where missionaries apply their purpose every day and view their classroom time as a resource to answer their questions and aid their understanding so they can be more successful in fulfilling their purpose through teaching.

Three Main Changes:

1. Missionaries are given many different opportunities to fulfill their purpose including Two PI’s that they never see as teachers, gold tag investigators from the TRC, less active members, and members. They are given the freedom to teach these people as they please. 
   
2. Missionaries set goals and make plans according to the daily Key Indicators so they know how they can fulfill their purpose every day. 
   
3. Teachers demonstrate often in realistic scenarios so that missionaries can learn more by
   observation and doing. 
   

Changes on a Day by Day Basis

1. First Thursday

• Prepare to Teach the First Investigator - we discussed how important teaching is to the
  purpose. Then we introduces Melanie’s investigator through her video and invited them to write things down for her. Next, we told the missionaries that we presently had someone for them to teach there in the MTC. We brought in Eric and he introduced himself as Ben. He told them that he was friends with an MTC teacher, and his friend invited him to spend some time at the MTC and work with some missionaries. Eric acted like he didn't know a lot and so I as the teacher explained everything to him just as much as I explained it to them. He told them a little about himself, and then we gave them time to ask him questions about himself. 
  
• We told Eric that he would have a time later for the missionaries to share some things with him, then we escorted him out of the room. Next we did their planning with them for Eric. We explained that they would have 10 minutes to talk with him and increase his faith in God. 
  
• As we did the plan, study, teach cycle, we then talked about the different things that they would need to do to receive the necessary guidance from the Lord to help Ben increase in faith. 
  
• At the end they each had 10 minutes to teach. We went in there with them. Ben was open but played stupid because it was all new to him. 
  
• We then evaluated with them afterwards and only focused on helping them see how the purpose was fulfilled. (What evidence is there that he increased in faith, etc.) !
  RESULTS: They took the planning so seriously. Of course it was all cut down to allow teaching time, but they didn’t need a ton of time to plan for a short discussion. They left their first lesson so excited to teach Ben again, and they really felt like the Lord had used them despite their lack of knowledge. 
  2. Friday 
  

• Friday morning they taught Ben again. Even though they didn’t know much, they cared so
  much for him and the Spirit was strong. They were really inspired and they were powerful
  even though the doctrine was scattered. 
  
• Friday morning we introduced the key indicators and then did a planning demo. In explaining
  the key indicators we explained the “why”, and helped them understand that the key indicators help us focus on the fulfilling our purpose in helping others be converted. The “what” and “how” of this was explained later. 

• In our planning session we planned out an hour of our day together. We laid out the hour,
  then set goals in the key indicators box, then planned our studies accordingly. We chose to make plans and then set goals (even though that is backwards), just so that they could see the “numbers” as people first. 
  
• Friday night we demo’d a comp. study, and then we executed our plans. They saw us make a lesson plan from our personal studies, and then we went and taught Tim, and they observed. 
  
• Friday night they had their first chance to teach Carol. From this point on they taught Carol and Ben whenever they signed up for it. The intent was that they would never see Ben or Carol as teachers (unfortunately that didn't happen the whole time with Ben after a miscommunication).
  
• This is also when they found out that Ben is a teacher. At first they were really surprised and the sisters were a little crushed. We tried to help them evaluate the experiences that they had had and realize that they could have deep spiritual experiences even in role plays. They understood it intellectually but it didn’t sink in spiritually until they realized that they needed to “love everyone.” 
  RESULTS: They really took their planning seriously. They were also really able to identify how the purpose is fulfilled in a lesson, though they were still working on making it happen themselves. The realler is is the more they take it seriously. 
  3. Saturday
  

• Introduced the gold tag investigators to them to be used for their PI hour. Though at the end
  of their stay we would allow them to go out alone, for this first time we would have a teacher go with them to help them find someone and then evaluate afterwards. We helped them understand that this is a good way to find new investigators, and receive referrals. !
  
• Also, at this point we no longer went in with them for their PI, but we did explain that we could be used as a member present. 
  
• For the demo teach CJ taught Tim whom we had previously taught the day earlier as part of our PST demo. It was great for the missionaries to see a teacher work with a PI, and help them live the doctrine of Christ through subsequent lessons. 
  
• Saturday night was John’s first time with them. Earlier when we did restoration we helped them understand how an understanding of the doctrine would help them fulfill their purpose as they teach to needs. At this point they had enough teaching experience that they realized that their lessons were spiritually limited without the firepower of the doctrine. Anyway, that night we had them really focus on it personally. It was totally on them. 
  
• Saturday night they planned with John. Though they had planned the night before, this was their first time with a teacher so they asked him questions about the “how” and “what” of planning. They would set goals for each of the daily key indicators, plus Investigators Invited to be Baptized and Investigators with a Baptismal Date, and then plan accordingly. 
  RESULTS: Though they were excited for the gold tag investigators they had few great experiences with them because either there weren't many around or they would drop appointments. I think that there is a lot of potential here but we would need to do it differently for it to be most effective. Their planning was great for them. We never saw them slacking off and they took their studies really seriously because they understood that they would be teaching often ever day. They also seemed to really understand the order and application of the PST cycle because this planning time was meaningful. 

4. Monday

• In introducing the fundamental, I taught George the less active. He was then the focus of the fundamental (planning and practices), and they were told that they would have a chance to teach Greg. He was then added to their PI schedule as a LA to be taught. !
  
• At this point they had taught a lot so coaching was really important to help them with their specific needs that they had as a result of all their teaching.!
  RESULTS: As we introduced new opportunities it unearthed misunderstandings that they had with their purpose. For instance, as they began teaching a less active they had questions like, “how do we help someone who knows everything?” This shows a misunderstanding the link between testimony and conversion, but it probably wouldn't have been brought up as they just taught investigators. This was also effective in demos and teaching for Rev. through Church Attendance because that was our big commitment for him. 
  
  5. Wednesday
  

• They were given the option to teach members (teachers as themselves). This rounded out
  all the opportunities that they had on the board. The list included Ben, Carol, Gold Tag Investigators, George, and a teacher member. By this point they were setting up more lessons with Gold tags and so they were teaching a lot. 
  
• We recognized that at this point they had reached a high level of personal agency outside the classroom due to their planning and goal setting, and so we needed to continue that throughout class. Teachers had a much smaller role in coaching from this point on, and the missionaries responded well in learning by the Spirit. 
  RESULTS: They felt less and less intimidated to teach those that “already knew everything”, and more able to follow the Spirit. At this point there strengths were teaching to needs, personally getting to know an investigator, and following the Spirit.
  
  For the most part everything else went as planned. We made sure to work closely with John throughout the time so that they had enough personal time with the doctrine since they were spending so much time teaching. There were a couple of tools that helped us organize everythgin effectively. We made a schedule that integrated all the available options for PI, and told when gold tag investigators would be around. This was really helpful for us to plan both in the short term and in the long term. We also made a google doc that graphed their key indicators over time so we could see where they were focusing (the last tab on the “Mock Schedule” sheet linked above). If you look at it you’ll see that it wasn't used very often. We hoped that John would input it every night, but we understand that its new and he just forgot. However, the few times it was used were helpful for us so that we could see what they were doing. For instance, the sisters put one of their TRC investigators on date and we wouldn't have known if it wasn't for the Key Indicators sheet. I think this could have some potential in the future as long as its not too complex of a reporting process for people. !
  

Evaluation

On their last day I told them that we had done some new things with them, and they agreed to answer some questions truthfully concerning their experience. I’m sure that I could have come up with better diagnostic questions but it was kind of a spur of the moment thing so this is what I came up with.
Q: Were the key indicators helpful or burdensome? Why?
A: “They really helped us bring purpose into every day.” “They helped us stay on task throughout the day, we always had something worthwhile to do.” “I felt like they helped me understand how to set goals for myself.”
Q: Was it a helpful experience to not know Ben was real?
A: “Yes! We really took it seriously!”
Q: If we were to do it again, should we tell you that he is a teacher acting as an investigator beforehand?
A: “No, we needed that experience first.” “No, it was good to plan for him thinking it was real, it made the first few days really exciting.” “No, it really helped us learn to love the character.”
Q: Do you think that it would be helpful to give you an easier investigator early on so that you could see him progress a little faster?
A: “No, it felt real and that made a big difference.” “No, might as well give it to us like it will be in the field so that we can grow into it.”
Q: If you could, is there anything that you could change about your MTC experience?!
A: “The first day was really overwhelming.” “There were a lot of demos and that was helpful” “Maybe if we could have had the opportunity to practice contacting earlier it would have given us the experience of being rejected earlier. At first that was hard but then I felt like I learned to work with it. However, in the beginning everyone is pretty accepting of everything.”
Q: Since you were teaching so much, did it feel like you didn't have enough time for you to receive what you needed to personally?
A: “I got everything that I needed in my personal study.” “Usually my questions or concerns were put to rest as I was teaching and preparing for lessons.” “Yea, I would have liked a little more time to study personally.”

Potential Issues!

• As is usually the case, their limited doctrinal understanding was a hinderance to their teaching
  the whole time. Although they planned well with great “technique” (lack of a better term) and effort, their lesson plans still weren't great because they didn't understand the doctrine well. !
  • We’re not sure if this was more the result of the system or just a trend with the specific group
  we had. We new it would be a struggle from the start as many of them had a hard time with
  simple doctrinal points and revealed that they didn't have a deep doctrinal conversion. !
  
• Scheduling PI on the large scale would have to be flawless. We had a lot of resources and
  even still it took work on our part to get it all set up. Its definitely possible but it would take
  careful planning/ probably better coordination with the TRC. 
  
• The fundamentals have to be deeply personal because that is the only time during the day
  that they aren’t teaching. 
  
  • None of this would work unless teachers had a holistic view of the MTC experience. It would fail logistically and in purpose. However, it also makes things seem smoothly progressive and so I think it wouldn't be too hard for teachers to pick up.

Other Potential Applications!

• Ask the District leader to take 5 minutes of his planning time every night to collect Key indicator reports from each companionship, and then report them to the Zone Resource. One of our branch president’s main concerns is that his presidency doesn't have the time to help leaders truly become leaders. I think that if given this opportunity they would feel more responsible for the members of the district, and it would give them a numerical representation of needs. It would also give a resource a chance every night to quickly talk to the district leader and give council.
  
• Make Gold Tag investigators more organized. Maybe we call the TRC before prep to see who is there or maybe we coordinate to have a set number be available at a set time. If we organized it better so they were there when we expect them to be there for initial meetings and return appointments, I think it would produce great opportunities for the missionaries.!
  
• Despite the fact that the missionaries said they liked it the way it was, I still think it may be a good idea for one of the two investigators that they first start teaching to be easy. We hope for them to invite to baptism on the first lesson and then our investigators aren’t ready for it and so we say “no” and look confused. As a result they don’t invite again until much later. I think if one of their first investigators was realistically easy (or we could say faithful) it would help fortify the expectation of inviting early and often to baptism, and it would give them many experiences teaching someone that has committed to baptism. I think this is where they often understand faith unto repentance and repentance unto covenants, after they’ve had the “they have a bap. date, now what?” moment.