Best (and Worst) Practices

The Top Five Best Practices According to Urban Program Directors:

  1. Using Scripture study, biblical teaching and theological reflection
  2. Creating authentic, highly relational and diverse experiences of community
  3. Forming consistent, ongoing partnerships with local agencies
  4. Using experiential learning pedagogies that require participation and action
  5. Showcasing the city and immersing students in it through housing, teaching, activities and experiences

BEST PRACTICES 

(the converse of which are worst practices)

  • Projects are designed by Staff teams, in consultation with partnering agencies or churches.
  • Projects have a clear support of area and regional teams, who become partners in the recruiting process, and who cycle staff and directors through on a rotating basis.
  • Projects have a champion who builds continuity from year to year, and who develops healthy relationships with partnering agencies and churches.
  • Design of projects includes a healthy cycle of action/reflection/action.
  • Projects include a variety of delivery systems for the message, including manuscript study, videos, speakers, exposure to indigenous leaders, prayer walks, guided tours, and service opportunities that are debriefed.
  • Specific opportunities for response and continued involvement are presented during, and at the end of the project, as well as a mechanism for further study.
  • A design feature for rest and reflection in the middle of the project.
  • Prepared materials (packets, handouts, lists, resources).
  • Staff who model ministry among the poor and a commitment to reconciliation and justice throughout the year, beyond the confines of the project.
  • Attempts are made to recruit student teams that as closely as possible resemble ethnically the communities in which students will minister.
  • Pejorative attitudes toward the urban poor, as well as naive, savior mentalities of well-meaning students are addressed head-on in the orientation.
  • Dialogue and interactive teaching methods are employed that allow students to question openly.
  • A spectrum of theological positions is acknowledged.
  • Director works systematically through a written preparation schedule over a period of several months prior to the project.
  • Defining your goals prior to choosing a project format or content.
  • Use current students as future SG leaders or Assistant Site Coordinators
  • Use Project as conduit for chapter involvement
  • Keep the word of God and the work of God in close proximity, as well as chances to reflect and interpret.
  • Define outcomes and create mechanisms for achieving them
  • Create a direct feedback loop with partnering agencies.
  • Post project reporting and evaluation (internal and external).
  • Financial accountability
  • Incorporation of the six UP ministry values on record
  • Guarantee soul to soul contact: interaction with people of the city
  • Good balance of cognitive and experiences design components
  • Training and support structures are in place for directors upon their return
  • Staff are prepared for the spirituals aspects of what happens on a UP

WORST PRACTICES 

(the converse of which are best practices)

  • Creating a special, non-reproducible event just for the project, in isolation from the ongoing efforts of an indigenous agency or church.
  • Creating discontentment with or judgment of the church or campus fellowship, without defining pathways for proactive responses.
  • Not conducting orientation or debrief with students.
  • Leaving pejorative attitudes of students toward the city or its people unaddressed.
  • Designing a project that consists of all action, no reflection.
  • Not preparing students for their return to campus.
  • Any activity that fosters "group think" or pressure to conform to an "approved" theological or political position.
  • Not leaving enough space or alone time in the schedule of a project to allow students to recharge their emotional and physical energy.
  • Leaving risk management or personal health and safety issues of students unaddressed.
  • No evaluation is done with partnering agencies or churches or ministry sites after the project.
  • National forms are not filled out, or are filled out late (e.g., camper insurance, temporary employee packets, budget forms).
  • Inappropriate balance of challenge and support

Urban Program Checklist