The close reading and analysis of ancient primary texts is the bread and butter of our particular fields of ancient history. There is nothing quite like seeing students gain mastery over a passage of text, turning it over and over, interrogating it, and wrestling with its complexities and ambiguities. Unfortunately, not all students who come into our classrooms, especially at an undergraduate level, have the requisite languages or educational experience to dive deep into areas of deeper criticism (textual, literary, methodological, reception, etc.). To further complicate matters, reading critical commentaries (and specialized articles and monographs) is an acquired ability. How can we help students practice skills of textual analysis and scholarly engagement?

This article introduces a classroom activity called a Text Lab, which helps students engage critically with ancient texts while familiarizing them with the tools and scholarship necessary to analyze these sources. While this has been applied to the specific fields of its authors (biblical studies), it is applicable to any field within the humanities involving source media (e.g., literature, classics, history, philosophy, etc.), just as its predecessor does, the “gobbet.” After introducing what a Text Lab is, we outline the details of how it works, before concluding with a brief discussion of why it works.

WHAT IS A TEXT LAB?

A Text Lab is a structured class activity where students come prepared to discuss a short excerpt from a larger ancient source (for example, the story of the “Man with the Flow of Power” in the gospel of Mark 5:25–34). The discussion is meant to focus on a close analysis of the context, content, and contribution of the passage. As opposed to something like a class debate, which focuses on macroanalysis and wider thematic arguments, a Text Lab focuses on developing student facility with microanalysis and textual interpretation. The objective is to help students foster skills in critical, independent textual analysis and to provide them with the interpretive tools necessary to develop their own voices and views in relation to ancient sources.

The Text Lab is essentially a modification of a pedagogical tool used in the UK higher education system known as a “gobbet.” Though traditionally referring to a “chunk of flesh” (at least anecdotally), it often refers to a part of an examination where excerpts from readings (in translation or in their ancient language) are given to students to comment on. For example, during my (Isaac’s) examinations at Oxford, I was expected to have familiarized myself with the literary, historical, and theological issues related to the gospels of Mark and Luke in Greek. At my examination, a selection of passages from those two texts were provided, and I was expected to comment on their context, content, and contribution (more on these in a moment).

This is, of course, not something that is feasible for undergraduate students whose specializations vary and whose time is limited by the larger institutional format of North American instruction. When I (still Isaac) first started teaching in biblical studies, I wanted to figure out how to incorporate gobbets into a North American teaching setting, especially for students who did not have any knowledge of ancient languages. Beyond the obvious benefits of proficiency and skill, there is a tremendous joy in being able to get inside an ancient text to understand how it works. I was always mildly jealous that the natural sciences had “Labs.” Where were humanities labs? I sought the answer to that question by looking to gobbets, thus developing the Text Lab.

HOW IT WORKS

A Text Lab consists of three stages: student preparation, in-class activity, and teacher feedback.

1. Student Preparation

Students prepare before they come to class. For each Text Lab, students are given three things: (1) a passage of text relevant to the course, (2) a Text Lab Preparation template (see documents below), and (3) recommended resources to consult (e.g., commentaries, journal articles, book chapters, handbook entries). Each passage is listed on the course syllabus for the entire term, so students know well in advance what passage they will be analysing and when they will be analysing it.

Although passages can be studied in isolation, if placed within a wider weekly unit on a text or topic (e.g., the gospel of Mark, Genesis 1–11, apocalyptic literature, ethnic reasoning in Paul’s letters, etc.), it helps students contextualize the unit’s thematic content. It is best to have a Text Lab as the second or last class in a weekly unit (e.g., on Thursday or Friday in a TTh or MWF framework). That way, students can consolidate the knowledge acquired from lectures in the first class(es) of the week (e.g., on Monday or Tuesday in a TTh or MWF framework).

Depending on the degree and education level of students (undergrads, seminarians, postgrads, etc.), providing semi-technical or technical commentaries can greatly help with the preparation process, especially for students who have never encountered the commentary genre before. Providing photocopies (online) of commentaries also helps if you have a larger class of students who need to access a single physical copy. Some commentaries have been digitized through archive.org, but these are not always reliably accessible.

The Text Lab Template is a form that students can use (but are not obligated to use) to walk through how to analyze a gobbet, focusing on three areas: context, content, and contribution. Before consulting any resources, students are instructed to read the passage in multiple translations, if possible, and to interrogate the text critically and independently, asking questions about ambiguous words/phrases, big ideas, or anything in the text that may be unclear or unfamiliar to them. Each section includes columns where students can input their analyses, supply ancient evidence that supports their analysis, and cite any modern scholarship consulted along the way.

Context concerns historical questions, such as authorship, audience, date, genre, purpose, and so on. But it also looks at literary questions, such as the relationship between the specific passage under consideration and its wider argumentative or narrative context, intertextual echoes or allusions, and parallel passages, as well as elements of the text that are otherwise unspecified, such as the antecedent of a pronoun and other context-dependent features. Students are encouraged to seek answers to these historical and literary questions inductively from the text itself, wherever possible, and to provide ample primary evidence to support their analyses. Or they may find the answers to such questions in the recommended readings (e.g., commentaries).

Content encourages students to concentrate on words or phrases that strike them as illusive, problematic, or important. Here, students typically consult commentaries and specialized literature, such as journal articles or handbook entries (recommended by the instructor or discovered for themselves), to focus their analysis of relevant interpretive issues that arise from the text. Students may also focus on ancient West Asian and/or Mediterranean cultural issues important for illuminating the text, and any other wider socio-historical relevant to the passage (e.g., political, ethnographical, mythological). Generally, students are encouraged to focus on historical, literary, or theological aspects of the text. For example, did the event(s) described in the text actual happen? What does this passage tell us about how the text was created/redacted/used? What does this passage tell us about the author’s views about the human person, law observance, ethnicity, gender, eschatology, and so on?

Contribution thinks about reasons why this passage is significant for the study of the content of the course (e.g., the History of Christianity, the Parting of the Ways) or whatever wider field one is in (e.g., biblical studies, classics, comparative religion). It also encourages students to explore any historical, social, or theological problems that the passage might create or address, whether ancient or modern. This section asks students to consider how the passage contributes to their knowledge of its author and audience in the ancient world, but also how it may or may not contribute to modern theologies, social issues, or decolonial efforts, including its potential use or abuse throughout history or in contemporary society. In other words, to what larger historical, literary, and/or theological problems does this passage contribute? Or, put another way, if this passage was the answer to a question, what would that question be?

Preparation for the Text Lab is a crucial component of the exercise. It serves as a helpful written assessment for evaluating class participation, without disadvantaging students who are less likely or unable to engage in class. It does not privilege spoken participation, recognizing that students who are neurodivergent or who live in anxiety/depression are less comfortable participating. The preparation allows instructors to assess student preparedness for class without creating an environment where students feel like they must artificially “pipe up” in class to demonstrate it. But it also gives students something to work with during the in-class activity. They do not need to think on their feet or to scramble for answers they have not yet considered. They may simply read from the template they prepared. This gives students notes to draw from, which increases the likelihood of class participation, without introducing undue discomfort among those who choose to participate, and without disadvantaging those who do not.

2. In-Class Activity

Time Requirements: I (Isaac) started developing the format for Text Labs in 2019–2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic, and, over the past four years, I have used it in undergraduate- and graduate-level courses at a SLAC, seminary, and public research university setting (both online and in-person). I have done this activity in 50-minute, 75-minute, and 90-minute classes. The activity is also suitable for a 3-hour seminar, especially if it involves students who are familiar with ancient languages and critical scholarship (say, at the graduate level).

Space and Accessibility Requirements: Ideally, the instructor has access to some kind of whiteboard/blackboard, whether digital or analogue. We often project the passage on a screen, write it on the board, or have it printed as a handout or available as a PDF for students to follow along. Making the text available on your institutional LMS is very helpful for students who have accessibility requirements.

Format: At the beginning of a Text Lab session, the instructor reads through the passage together as a class. The class then moves through each section of the exercise (Context, Content, and Contribution) with the students. The majority of the time spent on any given section depends on the focus of the course and the needs of the students. Because we often use this exercise in text-specific courses, the lion’s share of class time is often spent on Content, working through verses and highlighting key phrases or expressions that require critical interpretation. As much as possible, room should be given for students to bring their own questions and observations from pre-class research into the discussion. Ideally, the Text Lab should be less like a Q&A, where instructors pose questions about the text, and more like a student-guided exegesis, where students are able to explore their own interpretive questions.

Alexi: I tend to take a Socratic approach to the in-class activity. I ask leading questions to get the discussion going among students and then respond with follow-up questions, as necessary, pressing students to clarify their analyses and sharpen their insights. Rather than offering answers myself, I try to help students reach their own conclusions, resisting the temptation to disambiguate a complicated textual issue or defuse the tension that sometimes arises from controversial passages. While I still point out potential problems with proposed interpretations—drawing from my knowledge of the field to inform the discussion—I usually do this in the form of questions, too, in an attempt to help students reach their solutions for themselves. Not only does this keep the discussion moving forward, but it enables students to develop their own interpretive skills and empowers them to develop their own voices and views.

Isaac: I don’t usually pre-prepare questions for students but, based on questions they raise or comments they make, I may inquire further or clarify where needed. Remember that students aren’t necessarily aware of the vast number of commentaries and scholarly resources that we are. This exercise is a way for students to access some of the relevant scholarship but in an accessible way. Sometimes that’s going to be through your comments or “side quests” in class itself.

Sample 75-min Class Schedule:

1. Welcome to the Text Lab

2. Preparation (5 minutes)

a. What was exciting about analyzing this week’s passage?

b. What was challenging about analyzing this week’s passage?

3. Reading (10 minutes)

a. Have one student read the wider context of the passage in full (up to a chapter)

b. Have another student read the specific gobbet passage in a different translation.

4. Context (10–20 minutes)

5. Break (5 minutes)

6. Content (20–30 minutes)

7. Contribution (5 minutes)

8. Reflection (5 minutes)

a. What surprised you/what did you learn from this exercise today?

b. What is something you didn’t think about before our discussion?

3. Teacher Feedback

Students receive feedback in two different ways. The first is through in-class discussion and supplementary comments or questions made by the instructor during the Text Lab itself. The second is through written feedback provided on Text Lab Preparations, which students submit the day before class. Not every student feels comfortable speaking up in class, so written feedback on the preparation assignments is crucial for connecting with students and for providing formative criticism and guidance for improvement to those who might otherwise remain silent in class. The written feedback also gives the opportunity for you as the teacher to critique more nuanced points and to foster academic formation among each individual student, say, related to argumentation, scholarship, or primary evidence (especially literary, artistic, or archaeological evidence). This feedback translates to the way students make arguments in longer-form writing (e.g., essays), because, just like an experimental lab session, the ability to practice the minutiae of argumentation helps students construct more convincing and well-structure meta-arguments.

The grading process for providing teaching feedback for a Text Lab can be a lot if you have a class with forty (40) students or more. There are a couple of approaches you can use to manage the grading.

Alexi: I tend to assign three or four Text Labs each semester, which are graded on a curve: the first is worth the lowest percent of the final grade, the second is worth a bit more, the third still more, and so on. But as expectations increase throughout the term—with students growing in their interpretive skills and becoming more comfortable with the format of the assignment—the level of feedback I provide slowly decreases. I give very detailed feedback on the first set of Text Lab homework, even though it is worth the least amount. For the next round of Text Labs, I provide about one paragraph for each of the three main sections (context, content, and contribution). For the final round of Text Labs, I provide no written feedback, only the grades themselves. By weighting my feedback heaviest towards the beginning of the semester, I am able to help students when they need it most, while they are still getting a feel for the assignment. But then by decreasing the amount of feedback offered by the end of the semester, I am able to expect a bit more from students while also giving myself more time to focus on grading other assignments, such as creative projects, research essays, or final exams.

Isaac: If I’m dealing with a larger class of students, I tend to give more critical feedback on the Text Lab homework earlier in the term, so students can incorporate the feedback in subsequent analyses. This usually tapers off as the term goes on, for a couple of reasons. First, there is less time, and, second, if students aren’t actually following or listening to the feedback, then it becomes a futile, time-consuming activity. In general, however, I wouldn’t focus on giving comments on every single section: highlight one or two things that the student is doing well and one or two things that could use improvement. The key here is consistent feedback; quality over quantity.

Sample Marking Rubric: The quality of Text Lab Preparation homework might be marked on a scale of 0–5 (5 = excellent quality work; 4 = good quality work; 3 = average quality work; 2 = poor quality work; 1 = incomplete; 0 = blank/not submitted). “Quality work” is the level of engagement with the text, the breadth and depth of ancient evidence and contemporary scholarship provided, the use and marshalling of evidence, arguments, and counter arguments. “Excellent” quality work is not defined by how many words are written but by the quality of work submitted. Students are not expected to master the passage beyond what is reasonable for their degree, but they should be able to demonstrate that they have wrestled with critical issues related to the text and consulted high-quality scholarship to support their interpretation. In order to distribute marks equitably throughout the assignment, 2 points might be designated for context, 2 points for content, and 1 point for contribution.

WHY IT WORKS

One of the biggest hurdles with teaching the interpretation of ancient texts is that there is an intense amount of pre-knowledge required to handle these sources responsibly and accurately. But this same issue can have the opposite effect. In the field of biblical studies, some of the passages selected for textual analysis are well known among some students—so well known that a perceived sense of familiarity can lead to an irresponsible and inaccurate reading of the text itself. Putting the text in front of students to analyze on its own terms can be an effective exercise in close reading that forces students to reckon with what the text actually says (and does not say). Having students read textbooks or commentaries is simply not enough: it is the practice of dealing with ancient evidence and their histories of interpretation that students really need. The Text Lab gives students a taste of interpreting the text for themselves, not simply regurgitating the conclusions of other scholars but thinking critically about why such conclusions may or may not be convincing.

The Text Lab serves other practical purposes, too. By aligning the required readings for a course with Text Lab Preparation homework, it becomes easier for instructors to evaluate whether (and to what degree) students are in fact engaging with the readings. It also ensures that the readings themselves have real-time payoff for students, since their direct relevance to the course can be more readily perceived and appreciated.

While essays have been (and, in large part, continue to be) one of the main modes of evaluating student engagement with ancient texts and modern scholarship, the Text Lab helps students develop the interpretive skills necessary to write such essays. And it does so with the active involvement and ongoing guidance of the instructor, in addition to the possibility of input from student peers during the in-class activity. In the UK educational system, essays are sometimes a weekly affair, developed under the watchful eye of a one-to-one supervisor. But in a North American undergraduate context there is less opportunity for practical instruction of this sort. The Text Lab is well suited to provide such instruction in larger institutional formats, repurposing gobbets as a lab for the humanities.

Alexander Chantziantoniou, Crandall University and Isaac Soon, The University of British Columbia

SAMPLE DOCUMENTS: Text Lab Preparation Template
Formatted PDF available here.

Text Lab Preparation Template
Name of Professor-on-Record
Name of Institution

Student Name:
Student Number:
Course Number:
Date:

1. TEXT

Read the text slowly and carefully (if possible, in multiple translations). Highlight points that catch your attention, whether because they are interesting or because they are unclear. Ask questions—any questions!—even if you don’t know if you’ll be able to find the answer.
Read the wider literary context, including one chapter before it and one chapter after it.
Consult recent scholarship, such as introductions, commentaries, journal articles, book chapters, handbook entries, or academic monographs. Check Moodle and consult the library.

2. CONTEXT

Who is the author of the text? Who is the intended audience
When was the text written?
Where was the text written?
Why was the text written?
What is the text’s literary context? Is it part of a wider argument? What role does it play?
Explain unspecified elements that are assumed from elsewhere (e.g., who is “he” referring to?).
What parallel passages are related to the text, if any? Are any other texts cited or alluded to?

Supporting evidence, if any, should be shown preference in the following order of relevance:

(1) same text
(2) same chapter
(3) same book
(4) same author
(5) other source

Analysis

Supporting Evidence

Scholarship (Author, Title, Year, Page)

3. CONTENT

Explain and analyze the details of the text itself, focusing on its actual content. Identify main characters and/or events, key concepts, and other terms or phrases in the text that seem significant, problematic, or illusive. You may not be able to know which terms and phrases are significant in this way, so consult scholarly resources (e.g., commentaries), if/when possible.
Focus on literary, historical, social, and/or theological aspects of the text. For example:
- Literary issues: e.g., how does the stated audience of the text affect its interpretation?
- Historical issues: e.g., who really read it? did it really happen? how was it understood?
- Social issues: e.g., what does the text tell us about the author’s assumptions about gender ideologies, sexuality, ethnic stereotypes, disability, marginalized peoples, and so on?
- Theological issues: e.g., what does this passage tell us about the author’s views on their own god, foreign gods, ancestral customs, religious practices, and so on?
If possible, provide additional insights from other ancient West Asian and/or Mediterranean themes, discourses, or practices that may illuminate some of the above aspects of the text.

Analysis

Supporting Evidence

Scholarship (Author, Title, Year, Page)

4. CONTRIBUTION

Provide reasons for why this passage is significant for the content of the course, including
(but not limited to) historical events, social practices, or big ideas.
Explain any historical, literary, social, or theological problems the text may create or solve.
Explain how the text contributes to our knowledge of its author, its time or place, or ancient West Asian and Mediterranean cultural issues more broadly.
Explain how the text may or may not contribute to modern theologies, social issues, or decolonial efforts, and comment on its potential use or abuse throughout history (or in contemporary life today) either to help or to harm.

Analysis

Supporting Evidence

Scholarship (Author, Title, Year, Page)

Marking Rubric

Pay attention to how marks are given. Provide more detail for sections with a greater number of marks.

Additional Notes

Students do not need to answer every question listed in every section. They are provided as examples of the sort of thing one might ask when analysing an ancient text. They are designed to help students develop their own critical, independent analysis of New Testament texts.
Marks are not given for the number of comments made but for the quality of work done.