Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so. - Acts 17:11 (ESV)
This article is about how small group leaders can think about and use discussion questions when they are provided.
In the context where I preach, I write discussion questions as part of my preparation of the sermon. I write the questions after taking all my notes and checking my interpretations against those of other established authors.
The Purpose of Discussion Questions
The discussion questions aim to establish a logical, systematic flow from interpretation to application. The idea is to cultivate in students a disposition to query the sermon and its relationship to the text. It is common for students to be accustomed to believing whatever an authority figure tells them. They are taught generally not to question their parents, babysitters, teachers, or anyone else in authority. They are used to being expected to hear and obey, even if they are not accustomed to following through. Why should they not expect to do the same in church when they listen to a sermon?
There is a nugget of good in this, of course. We do not want to cultivate mistrust in the preachers and teachers the students will hear. However, it is important that students learn to distinguish between what Scripture says and what a preacher preaches. These two are supposed to match up, but they do not always.
This leads to the discussion questions. The questions are intended to serve as launching points for the group. They are not intended to be a rigid structure for the group to follow. Instead, they are intended as potential avenues of exploration to be used at the leader´s discretion. What follows are several points about discussion questions, including their design and their use.
The Design and Use of Discussion Questions
Discussion questions should be open-ended. An open-ended question is one that does not require a yes or no answer. If a question can be easily and fully answered with one word, then it is not open-ended. To be open-ended means that the question can lead to any number of possible answers. They are composed of the classic journalistic or investigative question starters: Who? What? When? Why? Where? How? For the purposes of a small group, and with theology and doctrine in mind, the three most commonly used of this list are what, why, and how.
Open-ended questions are generally better than closed questions because they provoke a thoughtful response drawn from the heart of the group rather than a simple “yes” or “no.” However, closed questions can be helpful for provoking a discussion within the group. A closed question will divide the group into at least two sides. At that point, the leader can leverage the closed question to ask an open-ended question: why does the group think differently? From there, the group can discuss their differing positions, and a good conversation can begin.
Discussion questions should be thought-provoking. They should promote deeper thinking by challenging assumptions. One of the points of the discussion questions is to draw out for examination and discussion what people think. An offhand question that goes nowhere and provokes no thought does little good. It is difficult to ask thought-provoking questions because the questions themselves require quite a bit of thought. The discussion questions I write are intended as a model for how to ask questions. I have sat in groups with other leaders who were clearly looking at the questions I had written, but made them their own by modifying them. Many times, though not always, the leaders have improved upon my questions. I do not consider that a failure on my part to ask good enough questions to begin with. Instead, I consider it to be a successful sort of leg up for the leader to start a productive conversation.
Finally, discussion questions should not be leading questions. This is the bane of many a small group leader. A leading question is really a statement by the leader disguised as a question. It is the same kind of question that invites objections in the courtroom based on the charge that the questioner is leading the witness. In other words, leading questions are questions that suggest the desired answer by the questioner. In general, the problem with this is that the leader is asking the students to read the leader’s mind, to come up with the answer that the leader has. This may seem interesting, fruitful, and even fun to the leader, but it rarely turns out that way. This is because the students are not interested in what the leader thinks.
It is rare for students to be fascinated by what a leader thinks, or to be intensely interested in thinking like him or her. And this should not be the leader’s goal anyway. The goal is to know what God thinks, what God says. When a leader makes the discussion center around finding out what he thinks is the right answer, the discussion is diverted from seeking the mind of God to knowing the mind of the leader. The two are not the same thing. The leader is in effect making himself the center of attention rather than God, even if his leading question is about God. Because the question is a leading one, the answer in the leader’s head becomes the priority rather than the content of the answer itself. Leaders avoid this by making what is in their minds not the priority. The priority is pushing the students to pursue understanding what God has revealed in the Scriptures. For that, the best kind of questions the leaders can ask are ones that promote exploration and curiosity about God and His Word, not what is in the leader’s head.
In conclusion, discussion questions provided to small group leaders are a tool to be put to use as the leaders see fit. There are no perfect discussion questions, but there are better and worse questions. As I write them, I attempt to provide the leaders with different avenues of approach to the students depending on where the leaders discern the students to be. In the next article, I will walk through how I actually go about writing the questions, including an explanation of why the first few are always the same.