Would putting the point first make a difference?

Last Sunday I was building towards a point with the youngsters at church.

It wasn’t - I grant you - a life-changing point, but hopefully a somewhat coherent point nonetheless.

Then, as I was about to transition from my linking activity to the meat of my lesson a sky writer was spotted in the sky.

Understandably, this threw a significant spanner in the works.

That the sky writer loosely tied into my original game didn’t help.

Frankly, it hasn’t been the first time that a lesson of mine has been derailed.

Unexpected things happen.

Focus wains.

The best of plans unravel.

Everyone who has taught for a significant time has experienced this.

So, should lessons be flipped if you can’t ensure a set time of productivity?

Instead of ending with the main point, should you start with it?

Instead of unveiling your point it slowly, should you just reveal it up front?

While it may be harder to potentially plan the lesson, I think a subtle change of language would help bridge the main point with the lesson content.

Instead of saying/thinking “let me show/tell you how what we’ve done fits together”, now the lesson should be structured around the concept “now I’ve told you the main point, let me show/tell you why it makes sense.”

For occasions where your timeframe or focus may not be assured, putting your main point up front may provide you with a way to avoid leaving the lesson without feeling like you inadequately expressed your point.