|
|
Family Cluster Program
Rationale for the Program
We begin with the following assumptions
- Religious education is the cradle to the grave process by which an individual develops values, personal and social, and grows meanings for his life.
- The chief locus for this process is the family, which nourishes him in his development of skills whereby he develops meanings- and values.
- The church is the one social institution which includes the whole family among its constituents. It therefore seems logical that a chief thrust of church programming be with the family unit.
- Further, it seems clear that there are forces operative in our society which segregate persons by age (the splitlevel American family), which permit children to look more to their peers for social values than to their family.
With these assumptions in mind, we initiated the Cluster Program in order to
- provide an extended-family experience for those family groups that don't come by them naturally, i.e. those whose relatives are far away, those who are childless, those who are widowed or divorced, etc.
- provide perspective for parents; seeing their children in the light of other children who are older or younger; And to provide other adult (acceptable!) models for the children.
- provide a small and intimate group experience for discussion, and celebration, for members of a too-large congregation.
- examine healthier techniques of interaction in families; the cluster unit being a "practice place" for better communications, and for discoveries about one another in the family; an escape from alienation.
Description
It was our intent to create clusters of four or more family units for a pilot period of six weeks. We described the program to adult education groups within the church, and to the Religious Education Committee, and also advertised in the church newsletter for two weeks. Fourteen families expressed interest for the Spring program, with several others opting for Fall, if such a program were offered then -- five families in the Tuesday group (led by Jan Rugh, Director of Religious Education), and nine families in the Wednesday group (led by Richard S. Gilbert, Minister, First Unitarian Church). Family schedules made it impossible to balance the size of the groups, which is important(!)
The leaders interviewed each family prior to the first session, Jan Rugh visiting their homes, and Dick Gilbert meeting them in his office. The former is to be preferred. The interviews provided time to further explain the program, obtain information about the participants, and begin the process of really knowing each other.
Cluster space included the church kitchen, a workroom, and a comfortable lounge. We met from 5:30 to 8:00 p.m.
Tuesday Session
Schedule -- We gathered for conversation, table setting and staggered arrival times from 5:30 to 6:00; then shared our meal, the children often choosing to sit near adults other than parents. Our general activities and discussions usually began around 6:40. We had fairly young children in our group, and rarely ran beyond 7:50 with those whose children were older 'staying to straighten rooms, etc.
Week 1: Sharing collections of snapshots and articles describing the personality of the entire family; sharing of one important thing from each member of the group -- something that indicates an individually held attitude; "either/or" games for clarifying visually different family and individual identities. Closing circle and prayer.
Week 2: Discussion of the question, "What does the word 'ritual' mean to you?" Then, with children in one group and adults in the other, asking each group to compose a farewell ritual. The only restriction was that the ritual contain a statement that the group felt to be important. Then coming together to share with each other the two rituals.
Week 3: Dividing into groups containing both children and adults;
but no parents with their own children, and no husbands with their
own wives. Talked about what important subjects were not talked
about at home why? And what important subjects were talked
about too much why? Brought the entire group together to share
the comments.
Week 4: Finger painting all together; trying to get at ways of saying
important things non-verbally, such as art, singing, drama,
dance. A time also for parents and children alike to discover playing together -- the enjoyment of seemingly purposeless activity.
Week 5: Memorial Day weekend; a picnic; general informality.
Week 6: Evaluation of the program
Evaluations
Time for discussion too short; could this possibly take place on a late
Sunday afternoon, with less time pressure?
Series should run longer.
More group activities; and a bit more structure (leader's absence at one
meeting unfortunate).
Wider variety of time choice as to day offered if possible.
Can this approach be used for a neighborhood group? And could the group
meet in homes?
Series should be offered again, in fall and late winter. It is
frustrat ing to have to miss meetings during the spring series because of school concerts, banquets, etc.
Group ideally should have 10-12 adults and an equal number of children. (Tuesday group "child poor" to the extent that when one family was absent there weren't enough children for valid interaction.)
Children very pleased: "We're treated as equals." Want more painting, songs, folk dancing; love talking about important things, and feelings too. Do not favor the idea of films for the series -- these are too passive. They expressed a wish to participate again if another series is offered.
Could there be supplemental meetings during the series for adults to ssess directions, etc.? Some thought this kind of meeting should be first; I think not, for fear of losing the children. Should this program be the vehicle for a course about UniUni?
Attrition unfortunate: avoidable or not?
Recommendations
Home visits prior to the first meeting crucial to leader and group. Some of the projects should be visible reminders; things to take home, such as bird feeders, collages, photographs of the group. Other projects might be worship services, new songs, new readings, etc. to share with the congregation. Try a live-in weekend or two at church during the time span of the series. Curriculum springing from the group is exhilarating for all; give it a try!!
Wednesday Session
5:30-6:00 Browsing through materials, social hour
6:00-6:45 Eating: preceded by a ceremony ("grace" if you will) shared by various families. The first meal consisted of sandwiches, while subsequent meals were potlucks arranged by alternating mothers. Group singing often followed the meal.
6:45-7:15 Clean-up and Family Council. The latter was a gathering of all participants to talk over problems and plan programs.
7:15-7:45 Family Program (to be described below).
7:4S-8:00 Friendship Circle concluded by singing.
For the first session families were asked to bring family albums, Pictures, slides and artifacts which were important both to the family as a whole and to individual members of the family. Each family group during the course of the evening told about their materials. Slides of the families provided the substance of the Friendship Circle. The purpose of this session was to help develop some sense of family and individual identification and to-get acquainted with the other families.
The second session had been intended to explore further the people in the Cluster with various get-acquainted activities but the first lovelyspring day "intervened" and so we spent most of our time together out of doors playing games. We held our Friendship Circle on the church grounds.
The third session featured folk dancing, the Virginia Reel in particular. This again was intended to help us relax with one another and to provide a fun experience that crossed age gaps.
For the fourth session we invited persons to bring with them their favorite records. It was another fine evening and so we placed the loudspeakers outside the church, spread our finger painting paper on the ground and finger-painted to rock music provided by one of our teenagers.
The fifth session activitiy was to invite the families to make maps of places important to their families. Then they shared with the group both their map and the reasons why these particular places were important. One leader was surprised to learn his four year old son chose Carrolls and McDonalds as the most important places to him.
The final session featured the showing of the film "Families"
obtained
from the Department of Education and Social Concern in Boston. While
designed to prompt discussion it did serve to summarize some of our
discussions of the family unit. An outdoor picnic, planned to
conclude
the cluster, was rained into the church.
Evaluations
Evaluation on was done on a rather casual basis in the case of the Wednesday night cluster. Those comments can be divided into the programmatic and the mechanical.
Mechanically, there was some feeling the group was too large though many members of the group felt it seemed small because they had become so well acquainted. Food, while consistently outstanding, consumed too large a part of the evening's program. Clean-up after so elaborate meals also took considerable time.
Programmatically, the leader of the Wednesday evening group thought there was too little of substantive program, discussion, projects etc. It was the general feeling that the fellowship dimension of the cluster would be justification enough for its continued existence. Especially significant was the opportunity of children to share as equals with adults. Also, there was Wednesday evening too little inter-family activity. A number of these experiences had to be cancelled because of a lack of time. Generally, there was a positive response and a desire to see such a program continued in the fall.
There should be a family Cluster Program in the 1971-72 church year,
for two ten-week periods, one in the fall and one in the winter. The
spring period, because of good weather and increased daylight make it
difficult to develop consistent program (though some modification of
the cluster is possible then).
Jan Rugh and Dick Gilbert should lead the fall series training leaders for future clusters by inviting persons. to be co-leaders with them. In turn these co-leaders., working with them could recruit and train leaders in the winter session.
The eating process should be simplified so it does not consume a
disproportionate amount of time. Simple sandwiches, community meals prepared in advance by one or more family groups, are examples of a
simpler process. The Family Council and singing could well take place over
the
meal.
Interviews with the families by the leader(s) should be carried out
in the home.
Additionally, an orientation session for the adults on the
philosophy of family clusters should be held (either for the registrants
alone
or for a more generally interested group). |
|
 |
 |
|
