Journal of K-12 Educational Research 13 such a study as paramount to a person’s trust of God and experience of God, these spiritual formation experts had overwhelming consensus in such a focus. Concerning the most important God Cards to include in a spiritual formation curriculum, the 16 experts ranked collectively Valentine, Creator, Easter, and Knows My Name as the top cards of importance related to their mean score. The God Cards of Artist, Promise Keeper, and Shepherd were the next highest group. Table 1 lists the cards receiving the most important rankings from both factor arrays. A factor array is a representation of several expert God Cards sorts into one single sort. This sort showed the correlation amongst viewpoints based on the strength of the Z scores. The researcher chose to focus further analysis on these two factors for three reasons: all 16 spiritual formation experts were included in this two-factor array, the Eigenvalues were highest in value in this factor array versus the other factor array choices of three-seven, and the correlations between factor scores was appropriate. The results of the two factors were also consistent with the post-sort interviews as to the rationale for sorting the cards in importance. The spiritual formation experts ranked the God Cards based on two rationales. One group focused more on the theological aspects of the cards, while another group focused more on the relational aspects of the cards. While it became clear that their rationale for sorting was either from a theological or relational perspective, both groups of spiritual formation experts ranked one card at the top of their list. It was the only card that showed the greatest similarity in ranking. That God Card was Valentine: “I believe God loves me.” The researcher found this significant in that it was the only card out of 42 that held a similar ranking in importance. It also stands to bear that whether someone comes from a theological or relational perspective related to spiritual formation, first and foremost it is God’s love that leads the way. As for RQ2, the education experts achieved consensus that the six approaches to teaching and learning in the God Table 2 Summary of Best Practices in Teaching and Learning with Additional Recommendations from Education Expert Focus Group Table 4 Summary of Best Practices in Teaching and Lear ing with Additional Recommendations from Education Expert Focus Group Approach/Practice Research to Support Focus on Prior Knowledge Coward (1990), Ennis (1992), Jensen (1998), Lackney (2002) Sensory—Based Understanding Heath & Heath (2008); Hein (1991); Marzano (2001); Medina (2014); Wolfe (2001) Emotional/Purpose Based Approach Daggert (2012); Heath & Heath (2008); Jensen (2014); Pink (2006); Sousa (2017) Critical Thinking Approach Bloom (1956); Marzano (2001); Sousa (2017) Experiential Learning Approach Dweck (2008); Heath & Heath (2008); Marzano (2001); Medina (2014); Pink (2009); Schlechty (2011) Story-Based Approach Heath & Heath (2008); Jensen (1998); Norman (1993); Pink (2006) The education experts also held consensus that the God Cards curriculum did align with the six constructivist approaches t teaching and learning. Comm nts fr m education experts illustrated the multi-sensory nature of the cards with the metaphors and creative drawings; the life application element to the cards with the conversation amongst f mily members after the individual time to process; and finally, the experiential opportunity to continue the purposeful talk throughout the week. Participant Hyman finally noted a thorough representation of the six approaches when she said, The choice of how to express the child's thoughts on each verse is a component of constructivism. The arts/performances align tightly to the sensory and the emotional aspects of constructivism. Conversations support the idea of reflection. If children work
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODc4ODgx