Abstract
This research explores the contextual approach within Christian-Jewish religious education, addressing a notable gap in existing literature and offering fresh insights into the application of the Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) model within Christian contexts. Through a qualitative literature study employing a three-step methodology, including an in-depth analysis of Deuteronomy 11:19–20, this study reveals that this biblical text provides both educational guidance and theological significance, serving as a foundational support for the CTL model in Christian-Jewish religious education. The integration of digital media into biblical sources holds promise for future research, while the central challenge lies in harmonising life experiences and empirical phenomena with biblical reflections to seamlessly integrate inquiry processes and pedagogical phases, with potential avenues for further exploration in scripture models endorsing CTL. This research provides valuable insights for educators, parents and policymakers in Indonesia and beyond, advancing educational research in contextualised teaching models within religious education.
Contribution: This article demonstrates that the CTL model in the digital era has the potential to revolutionise religious education and profoundly impact learners, making it a significant scientific contribution in the context of Christian-Jewish religious education.
Keywords: Contextual Teaching and Learning; Christian-Jewish religious education; Deuteronomy 11:19–20; educational strategies; scriptures; scientific contributions.
Introduction
The imparting of religious education in Indonesia requires significant improvements across various aspects, and this applies to the teaching of Christianity in formal schools as well. Several studies have highlighted the weaknesses in the Christian religious education system that need to be addressed by various stakeholders, including parents, teachers and even the government. For instance, the observations made by Siani Listio show that some students at SMPN 2 Sumbermanjing Wetan in the Christian religious education class display little interest in learning about Christianity. This is evident from their attitude, such as being lazy to do assignments, not paying attention to the teacher, talking to friends during class, frequently asking for restroom breaks and considering Christian religious lessons unimportant as they often receive such teachings at home or church (Listio 2023). Furthermore, another fact based on observation research conducted by Raulina Panjaitan (2023) at SMPN 3 Tualang Kabupaten Siak reveals that the learning outcomes of seventh-grade students in Christian religious education are still low. This is evident from several aspects: passive participation in classroom learning, students feeling bored during lessons, low academic achievement and students being hesitant to ask questions about unfamiliar subject matter.
These facts indicate that the teaching of Christianity lacks contextualisation and relevance to the students’ lives, resulting in their disinterest in participating actively in these lessons. This is a significant issue that needs to be acknowledged and addressed by those involved in Christian religious education. It is crucial to ensure that the current generation can comprehend the substance of Christian religious education, as it can have a negative impact on their knowledge, attitudes and actions. While Christian religious educators have implemented teaching methods, it is essential to assess whether these existing models align with biblical principles. There is a need to explore and, if necessary, adopt contextual learning models firmly rooted in biblical perspectives. One significant biblical passage for contextual study in education is found in Deuteronomy 11:19–20.
Literature review
Contextual Teaching and Learning
From the perspective of philosophy, Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) represents constructivism philosophy because it is believed that human behaviour is developed as an act taking place in a context (Biglan & Embry 2013). In that perspective, learning is considered as an act taking place in experience and from various situations (Frisby 1998). The experience of students in their life becomes the learning space context. Therefore, the teaching and learning process can no longer be considered as a simple process, which merely conducts the transfer of knowledge substance, which will only condition the students in a passive state and disconnected from the context, as that is what has been conducted in the traditional pedagogy so far. In contrast, according to Mayer (1998) the contextual approach guides and brings the students to be attached to their life context, where knowledge emerges during the teaching and learning process. Thus, what happens is that both teachers and students mutually collaborate to become an inclusive part of the teaching and learning process and jointly conduct cognitive reconstruction to form knowledge meaning (Mayer 1998). It can be concluded that the CTL strategy is a pedagogical model encouraging the teaching and learning process connected with the real-world experience of students taking place outside of class. The students will actively seek for and discover meaning because the academic materials taught to them rely on various daily experiences, such as social experience, cultural experience and social behaviour. This method, therefore, is the combination of constructivist and social-cognitive approaches. This method also underlines the importance of the teaching and learning social characteristics and the nature to share knowledge in the teaching and learning process (Granello 2011).
On the other hand, this approach is not a limitation. One of the important matters that need attention in its application is the existence of a big gap for some of the students to present assumptions. Similarly, from the side of the teachers, who can easily build partiality, it is stated that putting students in the real-world context is already enough so that they never encourage the experience integration with the theory-based teaching and learning in class (Granello 2011). In other words, the didactic instruction is based on theory in class, but its implementation is also considered important so there should be a balance between the two.
Yuliana (2017) explained that CTL has three main characteristics. The first one emphasises on the direct experience of students in the teaching and learning process so that they can discover meaning based on their experience. The second one encourages students to actively discover the relationship between the meanings obtained from the learning materials with the context of social, cultural and daily presence. In other words, the learning materials are connected with the real life where students live. Therefore, the lessons will be attached strongly in the memory of students and will not be easily forgotten like the learning approach of memorising. The third one is that students are encouraged to make meaning not just as their intellectual-based wealth but also as the key factor to influence behaviour in their daily life. From those characteristics, it is obvious that meaning is dug out and discovered by the students themselves and constructively becomes the building of knowledge that will stay in them for a long time. On one hand, it will become the stock of knowledge that will stay for long, and on the other hand, it will become the aspect-forming character so that it has an effect on daily behaviour. This happens because the emphasis does not lie on the effort to condition the students to memorise but to build the skills to construct knowledge independently so that the competence of their learning results can be seen in their daily life (Loughran 2002). Based on those three aforementioned things, it is seen that CTL can become an alternative of the actual learning strategy. Students have the ability to develop knowledge by participating in activities and gaining experience, rather than merely memorising information. Referring to the knowledge concept as facts, concepts or norms that should not be remembered and memorised, students are indeed demanded to construct the knowledge and provide meaning to it via real experience (Wahyuningtyas et al. 2018). Therefore, the concept of CTL connecting every learning material with reality becomes substantive compared with the emphasis towards how much knowledge needs to be memorised by students.
The substance from CTL becomes clearer from the REACT formula prepared by the Center for Occupational Research (CoR) in the United States of America. According to the elaboration of CoR, CTL contains five important indicators: (1) Relating – in this indicator, teaching and learning are directed to relate daily situations by using the newest information, and those situations demand problem solving from empirical problems. (2) Experiencing – in this indicator, teaching and learning focus on the purposes of exploration, invention and even creation. Therefore, this indicator prioritises critical and analytical thinking through the inquiry cycle. (3) Applying – in this phase, students are demanded to seek for and carry out the implementation of their learning results into the concept of utility and the answers towards practical needs. This is the point where meaning application is carried out by students. (4) Cooperating – in this indicator, students mutually share information and have discussions in an active communication. This indicator places students with other students connected as fellow peers and even with the community outside school. (5) Meanwhile, the final practical aspect is transferring directed towards the effort to obtain knowledge and experience of new learning (Muslich 2009). Based on those formulas, it is seen that there is a chain of processes mutually integrated in CTL, and it is directed towards one point, which is the search of knowledge by bringing students to real experience.
However, it is crucial to recognise that the integration of digital technology and the internet into contemporary education deviates from the biblical context. The involvement of computers and the accessibility of educational apps on diverse digital platforms have reshaped the educational environment, extending it into an extensive and boundless domain. This shift places a creative burden on educators as they incorporate technology into their teaching strategies, encouraging students to actively participate in self-directed learning within and beyond the traditional classroom. The conclusion of Kumysheva’s research on the students in Russia in searching for information shows the positive correlation of the reproductive information consumption strategy in students’ works towards internet accessibility growth (Kumysheva 2019). This means that the contemporary education world is highly contextual in digital environment and internet culture. The research result of Liu (2011) shows that student learning achievement in Taiwan turned out to be able to increase when teachers have the confidence to apply the newest learning technology to students. This finding is logical because in the digitalisation era, the daily student life has already been attached to the computer, internet and other digital products. Similarly, the research result of Almerich et al. (2016) reveals that the key factor to integrate the technology resources into the teaching and learning process is teachers. The research shows that technological competence and pedagogical competence turn out to mutually depend and be connected in the correlational relationship to accomplish the purpose of pedagogy.
The Jewish religious education model
One of the Jewish education models that is practiced a lot in religious schools is Havruta. Zaluchu (2021) explained that the education implementation in Jewish schools does not involve merely teachers and students but also becomes the responsibility of three institutions, which are teachers (representing the education institution), rabbis (representing the religion institution) and parents especially mothers (representing the family institution as the non-formal education institution). These three institutions are convergent in achieving the main objective of education, which is to form students that have rich knowledge on one hand and are strong in religious aspects on the other hand.
The Jewish education system lays emphasis on the life process. Freeman (2023) stated that Jewish education is about life on Earth and all activities taking place in it. Freeman fixed the perspective mistake of many people that religious education among the pious Jewish society is merely about God, heavens and how to be accepted in heavens as what has been understood so far by the Western academia. Even though they admit that the spirituality and biblical substances become crucial in their education system, ‘meat and potatoes’ (using the term from Freeman) of Jewish education are not about how to be accepted in heavens but about how to make heavens on Earth. This rabi explained that the Jewish education system encourages every child to discover God in all of their daily businesses. Therefore, students are demanded to become active and intensive in constructing knowledge where mentors or teachers provide impulsive encouragement.
The teaching and learning process interaction in the Western education system positions teachers as the main resource persons that become the centre of all information. In the Jewish education system, what happens is the opposite. The teachers there are positioned as facilitators that only provide directions and teach principle matters (Zaluchu 2021). Botticini and Eckstein (Muir 2015) reported the research comparing the Jewish education system in 70 AD and in 1492. The conclusion is drawn that the education model in 70 AD was still backward because most of the agrarian Jewish community were illiterate. Then in around 1492, the Jewish community became the educated urban group and started to play a role in trading, the economic system and other various transactions. According to Botticini and Eckstein, the change in the education system is the key factor causing the huge transformation to happen in a community on the impact and the importance of education. Therefore, the explanation of Freeman makes sense because Jewish education, besides talking about being down to Earth, also has the aspect that exceeds time. Jewish children are always guided to be linear with history and also to move backward like a diachronic approach. However, the emphasis does not lie on what is happening but on the reflection of what is the position of one self. When they learn about Torah, Abraham, Sarah, Moses, other Biblical figures and also Jewish intellectual figures, like Hillel, Akiva, Maimonides and others, they are demanded to seek for answers on their own questions, ‘Where would I fit in with this big story? And where should I put it in my life? Because all move to one direction – moving towards Earth as referred to by the Creator’ (Freeman 2023).
Havruta is a widely used model of CTL in Yeshivah, specifically designed for Jewish children. Through this model, students are encouraged to explore various aspects of life and their place as part of creation in relation to the Creator. The key component of the Havruta learning method is the emphasis on pair discussions. Students sit together in pairs to study texts, search for meaning and engage in discussions to uncover the significance of the content in their lives. This process fosters the development of explorative and reflective questions based on the contextual understanding of the texts (Kent 2010). In the Western education system, this method is known as the discussion technique. However, the Havruta model goes beyond mere discussions; it includes partial brainstorming to facilitate text-based learning, question-and-answer sessions, discussions and the application of texts to real-life situations in a contextual manner. Numerous educational research studies have found that students learn more effectively when they actively participate in collaborative activities with their peers. Cooperative learning among students has also been proven to improve knowledge retention, which aligns perfectly with the objectives of the Havruta model.
Nevertheless, the Havruta system similar to various educational models has weaknesses when applied in religious education. As Havruta guarantees freedom and openness in delivering ideas and perspectives, the opinions of students become very subjective and are influenced by presupposition. Therefore, the supervision by teachers becomes very important. Kent (2010) saw this weakness as an opportunity. According to him, with the pair system, if one of the parties makes a mistake, his or her peer will correct that mistake. The same goes for the peer when making an error. Kent argued that if the system is carried out individually, the correction towards mistakes can never happen. The error-correction process can never be accomplished if the learning process is conducted individually. Although at the beginning, this Havruta model was limited to be carried out in religious education institutions, eventually this model can be applied and adopted by the secular education system.
It can be concluded that Havruta specifically and the Jewish religious education system generally support the CTL approach and involve all important institutions in the education system, the government, religious figures and family. Therefore, the output from the Jewish religious education always generates spirituality reflection from the life taking place on Earth, the social life, culture and daily activities.
The process of education, teaching and learning undergoes constant transformation and is heavily influenced by the era in which it takes place. In the 1.0 society era, learning methods were vastly different, relying on natural materials like rocks, animal skins or cave walls for writing. However, in the 5.0 society era, digital technology has revolutionised teaching and learning, allowing for writing and educational activities to be conducted digitally through various computer programs and similar media. Undeniably, the advancement of technology directly and indirectly impacts the success of teaching and learning (Rasheed, Kamsin & Abdullah 2020). This is influenced by external factors such as culture and social systems that continually evolve. As a result, both the teaching and learning models and strategies are always dynamic and responsive to the demands of the era and the culture shaping education.
Smith (2011) explained that each group of students has distinct and specific needs, requiring continuous efforts to develop CTL models that promote critical thinking and attitude among students. With each changing era, human thinking, behaviour and responses to the environment also change. Nowadays, educational processes not involving technology are considered ineffective, outdated and impractical. Educators and institutions are now competing to innovate and incorporate the latest teaching and learning technology to enhance teaching and learning effectiveness to the fullest.
One of the newest teaching and learning approaches is the transformative model, known for its contextual nature. Greenhow, Robelia and Hughes (2009), for example, discussed how the conceptualisation of classrooms has shifted and influenced teaching and learning practices. This shift was brought about by the presence of Web 2.0-based teaching and learning technology, which has significantly impacted education. Similarly, Loughran’s research (2002) highlighted the importance of reflective practice in the teaching and learning process, emphasising the need for a contextual approach to make the learning experience meaningful. Smith (2011) proposed concrete steps through critical reflection, encompassing various objectives such as thinking, learning, self-assessment and social system considerations. Critical reflection can pose challenges for curriculum design, assessment and professional development. Teece (2010) suggests that religious education requires different pedagogical strategies than general education, emphasising the need to distinguish between learning religion and learning from religion.
The research conducted by Kurniawati (2019) shows that the application of the CTL learning model at SMPN 4 Surakarta has been successful in promoting positive character development among students, particularly in fostering traits like love, honesty, discipline and responsibility. Qualitative findings indicate that students willingly complete tasks without complaints, actively participate in morning prayers and demonstrate a deep understanding of Christian values.
The research conducted by Siburian (2019) shows that the development of a context-based learning model has a positive impact on students, empowering them to become active, creative and innovative learners, while teachers take on roles as facilitators, managers and mentors who can motivate learning and academic achievement. This approach also enhances students’ competencies and fosters their interest in studying Christian Religious Education, particularly at SD HKBP Maranatha during the academic year 2019/2020. Secondly, based on various studies, research and papers, the development of a contextual approach in the learning model has demonstrated significantly better learning outcomes compared to conventional teaching methods, both quantitatively and qualitatively, in the subject of PAK (Christian Religious Education) among students.
A study was conducted by Wongkar, Sumarno and Rini (2020) on the implementation of CTL to enhance the quality of Christian Religious Education at SMK Kristen Bethel Jakarta, using the Classroom Action Research (CAR) method. The results of this research show that the utilisation of CTL strategies in Christian Education has led to significant improvements in the overall quality of the learning process. The initial conditions showed that only 11.50% of the learning was at the desired level, but this increased substantially to 92.30% in the final condition. Moreover, the effectiveness of Christian Education Learning material also saw a remarkable enhancement. In the initial condition, only 0.76% of the material was deemed satisfactory, but in the final condition, this percentage rose substantially to 92.30%. The competence of Christian Education teachers also underwent a positive transformation. In the initial condition, only 0.76% of teachers had a low qualification, while 92.3% had sufficient qualifications, and none had a good qualification (0.00%). However, by the final condition, the percentage of teachers with sufficient qualifications reached 92.30%, representing a significant improvement from the initial 0.00%. Regarding student learning activities in Christian Education, there was a noticeable increase from 30.70% in the initial condition to 76.90% in the final condition, indicating a positive shift in their engagement and participation during the learning process.
The research conducted by Binti Yusup, Prasetiawati and Tantri Yosepa (2022) on the CTL aimed to test the effectiveness and determine the significant difference in using the CTL model to enhance critical thinking abilities among students in classes VIII A–C, compared to classes VIII D–E, which did not use the CTL model during online learning of Christian Religious Education at SMPN 9 Palangka Raya. The research employed the Quasi-Experimental Design as the chosen methodology. The results showed that the CTL model effectively enhanced students’ critical thinking abilities during online learning of Christian Religious Education at SMPN 9 Palangka Raya.
While the CTL model has demonstrated positive results when implemented independently, it is important to acknowledge that these outcomes are promising in their own right. The research has shown that the CTL model can effectively enhance students critical thinking abilities, promote positive character development and improve learning outcomes in Christian Religious Education.
The decision to explore the contextual approach in Christian-Jewish religious education was driven by several compelling reasons. Firstly, it addresses a notable gap in the existing literature, where limited attention has been given to the application of the CTL model in religious education, particularly within the context of Christian religious education. Secondly, the study aims to shed light on the effectiveness of this teaching model in Christian-Jewish religious education settings, bridging the gap between these two faith traditions. Thirdly, it seeks to underscore the importance of a biblical perspective within the contextual teaching framework. By delving into this area, we hope to contribute valuable insights that can benefit educators, parents and policymakers in Indonesia and beyond while also advancing the field of educational research, specifically in the realm of contextualised teaching models and their relevance in religious education.
Research methods and design
To address the research question, the authors employed a qualitative literature study (Zaluchu 2020) (Zaluchu 2020) following a three-step approach. Initially, the paper delves into the concept and methodology of CTL, which is commonly understood in the general education system. Subsequently, the focus shifts to exploring Jewish religious education in general by conducting an in-depth study of various literature to construct a theoretical framework. In the final step, the author conducted a narrative study of the text Deuteronomy 11:19–20, analysing it from an educational perspective based on the CTL approach. The author considers that Deuteronomy 11:19–20 contains educational guidance and insights into the teaching and learning process. However, they also acknowledge that the text holds theological significance in its primary narrative context. For the analysis of the results and discussion, the author adopts a critical thinking analysis approach as referred to by Gilbert (2018).
Results and discussion
Contextual Teaching and Learning in Christian-Jewish religious education
The philosophy of the Jewish religious education and the Christian religious education has the same root, which is from the Bible verses. The explanation of Gangel (1991) provided a very clear description that the heart of the Christian education is the teaching–learning process aiming to complete the mandate to make everyone His disciples. Therefore, various teaching–learning strategy approaches in the Christian religious education are never far from the main principles existing in the Old Testament and the New Testament. Similarly with the Jewish education system, besides relying on various teachings in the Old Testament, it also has a simultaneous purpose to train people to be strong and to grow in faith, obeying the laws in the Old Testament and the teachings of the prophets as well as maintaining the tradition legacy (Widder 1991). That is why the laws of the Old Testament are really integrated in every aspect of life of a Jewish in the teaching–learning process. Meanwhile, on the other hand, the Christianity even until today does not stand on its own because it is always connected with the Hebrew root. The fact is revealed by Sayes (1978) stating that every research on Christian education has to start with Jewish education, particularly in the Old Testament, as Christianity until today maintains plenty of Hebrew legacy. Therefore, it becomes relevant when talking about the Christian religious education system, the best references philosophically and the implementation are those that are built by the Jewish education system itself. The basic thinking of this system is that God is as the teacher, providing humans the reflective ability to seek for the truth and capture it as well as living with it. In this case, humans become the partners to help Him in teaching and learning.
One of the narrations that is referred to by many as the education system reference is Deuteronomy 11:19–20. The text in that verse provides a framework of education in the scope of both Jewish religious education and Christian religious education. The narration was actually the commandments of Elohim to the Israeli congregation through Moses to remain faithful towards Him. Even though the verse theologically talks about the importance of commitment and fidelity to Elohim, the education element contained in it has a very strong narration there. Hamilton (2008) stated that Moses was asked to guarantee that the implementation of the testament with Elohim keeps on being carried out permanently and maintained constantly throughout the life of those Israeli people. That can only be conducted via education. His laws must be in their hearts, on their hands, in their eyes, on their gates and on the pillars of their home’s door. In order to become the maintained teachings throughout generations, the only step to do is by teaching them. The following is the complete quote of the verse:
And ye shall teach them your children, speaking of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt write them upon the door posts of thine house, and upon thy gates. (Dt 11:19–20 [KJV])
Observed from the education perspective, there are a number of descriptive conclusions on the verse. Firstly, the verse contains the commandments of Elohim to ‘teach’. The Hebrew word lâmad is used by the author of the Deuteronomy book to explain the education meaning as the process to train, improve skills, encourage and specially build habits. Specifically, the word contains meaning to learn and teach throughout the time (Renn 2010). Besides being understood as a verb containing the element of commandments, lâmad has the time indicator, as an act that has to be conducted constantly. In the education perspective, lâmad can be translated as a teaching activity that has to be carried out continuously.
Secondly, from the text is the use of the word daw-bar’, which means to talk about (or to say) from the sentence ‘speaking of them’. As a verb daw-bar’ not only covers the oral verbal communication content but also specially depends on the time and situation of what is said. Different from the word ӑmar, which also means ‘to say’ daw-bar’, seems to be deliberately chosen by the author to extend the conversation meaning as this word appears without any specification on the matters communicated or talked about. This means it covers the conversation in a vast scope. Another difference is that the word ӑmar covers the conversations that happened in the past (using past tenses) to a greater extent, while the word daw-bar’ covers various things wherever and whenever in a significant context.
Deuteronomy 11:19–20 in religious education perspective
Deuteronomy 11:19–20 states:
And ye shall teach them your children, speaking of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt write them upon the door posts of thine house, and upon thy gates. (Dt 11:19–20 [KJV])
This passage encourages parents to continuously instil religious teachings in their children, making faith an integral part of their daily lives. By emphasising the importance of immersive and contextually relevant instruction, Deuteronomy highlights the significance of practical application and consistent integration of religious teachings.
Based on Murphy’s research (2019) on Children and the Sayings Source Q, which also makes reference to Deuteronomy 11:19–20, this essay applies K.S. Han’s ‘allegiance types’ method to examine Q’s viewpoint on the Jerusalem Temple from a child’s perspective, with a specific focus on passages Q 11:19–20; 12:53; 14:26 and 17:1–2. The study reveals that these passages primarily highlight the experiences of adult or adolescent children. Despite using household imagery, the language employed in Q suggests the vulnerability of the family unit, which holds significant importance in the lives of children. The findings can be valuable for investigating Q’s association with apocalypticism, ‘renewal’ ideology, asceticism or the endurance of the family unit. Additionally, this analysis effectively showcases the adaptation of K.S. Han’s methodology, illustrating how a particular theoretical framework, can provide insights into historical family dynamics, thereby enhancing our comprehension of the lives of children and families during Q’s time. Consequently, this connection can motivate educators to integrate contextual approaches when teaching religious or historical texts, fostering a deeper understanding of social structures, family roles and the experiences of children in ancient societies.
Deuteronomy 11:19–20 lays the groundwork for applying CTL in Christian-Jewish religious education. The passage emphasises the importance of consistent instruction and integrating faith seamlessly into everyday life, which aligns with CTL principles. It underscores the significance of immersive and relevant teaching methods, urging religious educators to design learning experiences that deeply resonate with students outside of formal settings. By incorporating religious teachings into their daily routines, learners can foster a stronger spiritual bond and effectively apply faith principles in their day-to-day choices.
Discussion
The most significantly contextual element can be seen if we read this verse based on five indicators of CoR. The relating element can be seen in the conversation context or daw-bar’, which will definitely be followed with intensive discussion and conversation as it is with Havruta. The other four elements, such as experiencing, applying, cooperating and transferring, can be found in the sentence: ‘when thou walkest by the way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up’. Schipper (2020) called this as a parental instruction covering all teachings and learning throughout life. It is obviously seen that the Israeli people not only learn and reflect constantly all the laws of God all of their lives but are also responsible to inherit the knowledge from their descendants throughout their lives. The main foundation to teach those laws is to family (the phrase the home door pillars). Moreover, the gates and home doors imply the act to share the laws of God with other people in a wider scope. At that time, the city gate became the public space where all information could be found. In other words, the life in family and the social life put the contextual position in terms of religious education and that became the answer to why this text supports the idea and model of CTL.
Holzer argues that Havruta text study is firmly rooted in specific textual, interpersonal and intrapersonal practices, providing a dedicated space for nurturing intellectual and emotional habits. These habits encompass adopting a curious approach to teaching and learning, embodying effective teaching traits, being aware of the interpretive nature of understanding and developing a deeper comprehension through encountering, supporting and challenging diverse interpretations (Gold, Raider-Roth & Holzer 2021). Additionally, it involves recognising and revising one’s own preconceptions and fostering ethical attributes like attentive listening and mutual responsibility for each other’s learning. The primary goal of this method is to prompt participants to cultivate consciousness and intentionality regarding the intricacies of their own interpretive and relational processes. This includes acknowledging and comprehending their preconceived notions, being mindful of how they fill gaps in meaning, remaining open to revising their understandings and actively engaging with their partner’s learning journey as well as their own. Ultimately, the Havruta text study aims≈to facilitate participants’ growth in their intellectual, emotional and ethical aspects as they deeply immerse themselves in the text and interact with one another (Gold et al. 2021).
Furthermore, the theory’s principles, revolving around the Havruta text study and the cultivation of habits of the mind and heart, closely align with the teachings presented in Deuteronomy 11:19–20. In this biblical passage, Moses instructs the Israelites to diligently teach God’s commandments to their children, discussing them during various daily activities and inscribing them on their doorframes and gates. This emphasis on continuous religious education, inquiry-based learning and the integration of faith into everyday life resonates with the Havruta approach. Both underscore the significance of regular engagement with religious texts, fostering a curious and inquisitive mindset towards understanding and creating a holistic relationship with the teachings of their faith. Additionally, the cultivation of ethical dispositions, such as attentive listening and mutual responsibility, as emphasised in the theory, finds alignment with Deuteronomy’s message of transmitting these values to future generations. Thus, the theory and Deuteronomy 11:19–20 share a common objective of fostering deep and meaningful engagement with religious teachings, leading to the growth of individuals’ intellectual, emotional and ethical dimensions within the context of their faith.
Contextual Teaching and Learning in Christian religious education involves making learning relevant by connecting classroom content to real-world contexts. An example of CTL implementation is exploring biblical ethics and social issues in a high school setting. Students research contemporary social problems from a biblical perspective and present their findings to the class, discussing practical applications of Christian principles. Another case study involves promoting interfaith dialogue and understanding in a diverse Christian college. Students participate in visits to places of worship, engaging in discussions with representatives from different faiths. In a primary school, CTL encourages personal reflection and devotion by relating biblical verses to students’ lives. Service learning projects in a youth group and biblical drama in a summer camp are other examples of how CTL can be applied to Christian religious education. These approaches aim to deepen students’ understanding of biblical principles and facilitate their application in real-life situations.
As an example, based on research conducted by Anggrini Wongkar, Yuel Sumarno and Rini at SMP Kristen Bethel Jakarta, the implementation of the CTL strategy in religious education can improve the quality of students’ learning activities in PAK classes. The research showed that the quality of students’ learning activities increased from a low 30.70% at the beginning to a high 76.90% after implementing CTL (Wongkar et al. 2020). This indicates that the CTL teaching strategy is highly effective in enhancing the quality of students’ learning in the classroom. Students can comprehend the subject matter and apply the religious education material to their real-life situations.
Based on the findings of this research, the researchers suggest that schools, especially Christian religious teachers, should develop CTL strategies in religious education classrooms. Utaminingsih and Shufa (2019) outline several steps for implementing CTL. Firstly, the approach involves encouraging students to engage in meaningful learning activities by thinking critically and independently, constructing their own knowledge and skills. Secondly, the method emphasises the use of inquiry-based activities across all subjects. Thirdly, CTL aims to foster students’ natural curiosity by encouraging them to ask questions and explore topics further. Fourthly, creating a supportive learning community through group discussions and interactive sessions is an essential aspect of the approach. Fifthly, the utilisation of models, illustrations and real-life examples serves as an effective way to enhance the learning process. Overall, these steps aim to make the learning experience more relevant and engaging, promoting active participation and application of knowledge in students’ lives.
The implementation of CTL in Christian education could face various challenges. Firstly, time constraints may arise as preparing contextually relevant activities requires careful planning, which must be balanced with covering the curriculum adequately. Secondly, teachers may need support and training to effectively execute CTL strategies, including designing context-based activities and guiding students through the learning process. Thirdly, traditional assessment methods may not align with CTL’s process-oriented approach, necessitating the development of appropriate assessment techniques to measure students’ understanding and application of religious concepts. Fourthly, discussions on sensitive religious topics require teachers to navigate them with sensitivity to avoid conflicts or misunderstandings among students and their families. Additionally, accommodating diverse learners from varying backgrounds in Christian schools poses challenges when tailoring CTL activities. Fifthly, resource constraints, such as limited access to multimedia and real-world examples, may hinder the full implementation of CTL. Nevertheless, collaborative efforts involving educators, school administrators and stakeholders, along with a commitment to meaningful and relevant religious education, can help address these challenges and realise the benefits of CTL in enhancing students’ understanding and practice of Christianity.
Based on the discussion, it can be concluded that CTL is a pedagogical method that leads students to learn through daily lives. This method makes students get used to learning and making it an inclusive part of their daily lives, even though the knowledge material sources were initially obtained in class but assembling and disassembling knowledge are the process constantly taking place through their lives.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the CTL model stands as a versatile teaching and learning template with applicability across various educational systems, including Christian religious education. It is worth emphasising that while the context of Deuteronomy 11:19–20 may differ from our present circumstances, this biblical text can indeed serve as a foundational support for the CTL model. Furthermore, there exists ample room for further exploration within scripture models that endorse CTL, with particular focus on the Book of Proverbs and the teachings of Jesus. In today’s digitalised and internet-driven era, the incorporation of digital media into biblical sources holds great potential to invigorate and facilitate additional research and the development of alternative strategies beyond those suggested by CoR with its associated indicators. Nonetheless, the principal challenge in implementing this contextual model remains the harmonisation of life experiences and empirical phenomena with biblical reflections, thereby enabling the seamless integration of the inquiry process and pedagogical phases.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to the Ministry of Religion of the Republic of Indonesia for accepting the results of this research as leading research in 2023.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationship(s) that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
Authors’ contributions
All authors, J.M.T., O.C.W., S.E.Z. and F.R.B.Z., have the same role in research conceptualisation, methods and field research. J.M.T. and O.W. conducted the theoretical framework of CTL for analysis. F.R.B.Z for Jewish educational concept. S.E.Z on Deuteronomy analysis and final script writing.
Ethical considerations
The authors confirm that ethical clearance was not needed or required for the study.
Funding information
This research was funded by a leading lecturer research project by the Ministry of Religion of the Republic of Indonesia, which was channelled to the Manado State Christian Institute, North Sulawesi.
Data availability
Data sharing does not apply to this study because no new data were created or analysed during this study.
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated agency of the authors.
References
Almerich, G., Orellana, N., Suárez-Rodríguez, J. & Díaz-García, I., 2016, ‘Teachers’ information and communication technology competences: A structural approach’, Computer & Education 100, 110–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.002
Biglan, A. & Embry, D.D., 2013, ‘Changing cultural practices: A contextualist framework for intervention research’, Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 2(3–4), 95–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2013.06.001
Binti Yusup, W., Prasetiawati & Tantri Yosepa, 2022, ‘Efektivitas Penggunaan model Pembelajaran Contextual teaching and learning Terhadap Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Peserta Didik Pada Pembelajaran Pendidikan Agama Kristen’, Harati: Jurnal Pendidikan Kristen 2(1), 18–31. https://doi.org/10.54170/harati.v2i1.93
Freeman, T., 2023, Jewish education: How it came about and what it is meant to be, Chabad.Org, viewed 19 June 2023, from https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/4028110/jewish/Jewish-Education.htm.
Frisby, C.L., 1998, ‘Contextual factors influencing the classroom application of learner-centered principles’, in N.M. Lambert & B.L. McCombs (eds.), How students learn: Reforming schools through learner-centered education, pp. 61–80, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
Gangel, K.D., 1991, ‘What Christian education is’, in R. Clark, L. Johnson & A. Sloat (eds.), Christian education: Foundations for the future, pp. 13–30, The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago, Chicago, IL.
Gilbert, M., 2018, ‘Integrative critical analysis’, in M. Gilbert, A.R. Johnson & P.W. Lewis (eds.), Missiological research: Interdisciplinary foundations, methods, and integration, pp. 47–52, William Carey Publishing, Pasadena, CA.
Gold, M.M., Raider-Roth, M. & Holzer, E., 2021, ‘Teachers learn and learners teach: Enacting presence in Online Havruta text study’, Journal of Jewish Education 87(4), 332–365. https://doi.org/10.1080/15244113.2021.2002090
Granello, D.H., 2011, ‘Contextual teaching and learning in counsellor education’, Willey Online Library 39(4), 270–283. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.2000.tb01237.x
Greenhow, C., Robelia, B. & Hughes, J.E., 2009, ‘Learning, teaching, and scholarship in a digital age’, Educational Researcher 38(04), 246–259. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09336671
Hamilton, V.P., 2008, Handbook on the Pentateuch, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, MI.
Kent, O., 2010, ‘A theory of havruta learning’, Journal of Jewish Education 76(03), 215–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/15244113.2010.501499
Kumysheva, R.M., 2019, ‘The conceptual model of contextual teaching and learning in the information world’, Science for Education Today 09(03), 102–119. https://doi.org/10.15293/2658-6762.1903.06
Kurniawati, M.E., 2019, ‘Model Pembelajaran contextual teaching learning dalam Pendidikan Agama Kristen untuk Meningkatkan Karakter Siswa Kristiani’, EPIGRAPHE: Jurnal Teologi dan Pelayanan Kristiani 3(1), 28. https://doi.org/10.33991/epigraphe.v3i1.45
Listio, S., 2023, ‘Rendahnya Minat Belajar Siswa Pendidikan Agama Kristen: Studi Kasus di SMPN 2 Sumbermanjing Wetan’, DIDAKTIKOS Jurnal Pendidikan Agama Kristen 5(2), 90–97. https://doi.org/10.32490/didaktik.v5i2.96
Liu, S.H., 2011, ‘Factors related to pedagogical beliefs of teachers and technology integration’, Computers & Education 56(04), 1012–1022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.12.001
Loughran, J.J., 2002, ‘Effective reflective practice: In search of meaning in learning about teaching’, Journal of Teacher Education 53(01), 33–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487102053001004
Mayer, R.E., 1998, ‘Cognitive theory for education: What teachers need to know’, in N.M. Lambert & B.L. McCombs (eds.), How students learn: Reforming schools through learner-centered education, pp. 353–377, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
Muir, J.R., 2015, ‘The chosen few: How education shaped jewish history, 70–1492’, The European Legacy 20(03), 308–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/10848770.2014.999558
Murphy, J., 2019, ‘Children and the sayings source Q: What the double tradition reveals about Q’s attitude toward children (Q 11:19–20; 12:53; 14:26; and 17:1–2)’, Biblical Interpretation 27(1), 69–90. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685152-00271P04
Muslich, M., 2009, KTSP Pembelajaran Berbasis Kompetensi dan Kontekstual: Panduan Bagi Guru. Kepala Sekolah, dan Pengawas Sekolah [KTSP competency-based and contextual learning: A guide for teachers, principal, and school supervisor], Bumi Aksara.
Panjaitan, R., 2023, ‘Peningkatan Hasil Belajar Pendidikan Agama Kristen Siswa SMP Melalui Metode outdoor study’, KHIRANI: Jurnal Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini 1(2), 01–09. https://doi.org/10.47861/khirani.v1i2.194
Rasheed, R.A., Kamsin, A. & Abdullah, N.A., 2020, ‘Challenges in the online component of blended learning: A systematic review’, Computers & Education 144, 103701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103701
Renn, S.D., 2010, Dictionary of bible words, Hendrickson Publishers, Massachussets.
Sayes, J.O., 1978, ‘The Biblical basis for Christian education’, in A.E. Sanner & A.F. Harper (eds.), Exploring Christian education, pp. 35–50, Beacon Hill Press, Kansas City, MO.
Schipper, B.U., 2020, ‘Teach them diligently to your son!’: The book of Proverbs and Deuteronomy’, in K.J. Dell & W. Kynes (eds.), Reading Proverbs intertextuality, pp. 21–34, Bloomsbury Publishing, Broadway, NY.
Smith, E., 2011, ‘Teaching critical reflection’, Teaching in Higher Education 16(02), 211–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2010.515022
Siburian, T., 2019, ‘Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Pendidikan Agama Kristen Melalui Pendekatan Kontekstual (Contextual Teaching and Learning/CTL) pada Siswa Kelas IV Dan V di SD HKBP Maranatha Tahun 2019/2020 [Development of a Christian Religious Education Learning Model Using a Contextual Approach (Contextual Teaching and Learning/CTL) for Class IV and V Students at HKBP Maranatha Elementary School in 2019/2020]’, PROVIDENSI: Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Teologi 2(2), 113. https://doi.org/10.51902/providensi.v2i2.63
Teece, G., 2010, ‘Is it learning about and from religions, religion or religious education? And is it any wonder some teachers don’t get it?’, British Journal of Religious Education 32(02), 93–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/01416200903537399
Utaminingsih, S. & Shufa, N.K.F., 2019, Model contextual teaching and learning Berbasis Kearifan Lokal Kudus, UPT PERPUSTAKAAN, Universitas Muria Kudus, viewed 20 June 2023, from http://eprints.umk.ac.id/id/eprint/11906.
Wahyuningtyas, D.T., Yuniasih, N., Irawan, E.B. & Susiswo, S., 2018, ‘Desain modul pembelajaran geometri dengan pendekatan contekstual teaching and learning untuk siswa sekolah dasar’ [Geometry learning module design with a contextual teaching and learning approach for elementary school students]’, Kajian Teori dan Praktik Pendidikan 27(1), 30–38. https://doi.org/10.17977/um009v27i12018p030
Widder, W.A., 1991, ‘Reviewing historical foundations’, in R. Clark, L. Johnson & A. Sloat (eds.), Christian education: Foundations for the future, pp. 43–56, The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago, Chicago, IL.
Wongkar, A.A., Sumarno, Y. & Rini, 2020, ‘Peningkatan Kualitas Pembelajaran Pendidikan Agama Kristen Melalui Penerapan Strategi Pembelajaran contextual teaching and Learning Pada Siswa Kelas VII SMTK’, Edukasi: Jurnal Pendidikan Agama Kristen 11(1), 01–07. https://doi.org/10.47562/edk.v11i1.136
Yuliana, L., 2017, Implementasi Pendekatan Pembelajaran contextual teaching and learning (CTL)Dalam Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar Siswa Pada Mata Pelajaran Fiqih di MTs. Al Khairiyah – Kaliawi Bandar Lampung, UIN Raden Intan Lampung, Bandar Lampung.
Zaluchu, S.E., 2020, ‘Strategi Penelitian Kualitatif dan Kuantitatif Di Dalam Penelitian Agama’, Evangelikal: Jurnal Teologi Injili dan Pembinaan Warga Jemaat 4(1), 28. https://doi.org/10.46445/ejti.v4i1.167
Zaluchu, S.E., 2021, ‘Model pendidikan nasionalis-religius Yahudi, dan refleksinya dalam pendidikan teologi di Indonesia’, Kurios: Jurnal Teologi Dan Pendidikan Agama Kristen 07(02). https://doi.org/10.30995/kur.v7i2.299
|
Hide
Show all
Email this article (Login required)
