{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017928286852589643, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.668141592920354, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Contextualisation within context: A pedagogical spectrum of six methodologies

The field of contextualisation is broad, with a vast diversity of definitions, models and methodologies. There are now many useful models of contextualisation from which to choose. But clearly, there is no one-size-fits-all solution – the diverse collection of options are not equally valid or useful or effective in all ministry contexts. How should one choose the best method for his or her ministry and context? This article argued that the ministry ‘context’ – the area, actors and activity of ministry – is the key determining factor for choosing the most effective contextualisation method for each ministry situation. The various contextualisation models and methods are based on the ministry context for which they are designed, as the constraints of each specific ministry context significantly influence the ideal contextualisation methodology. This article considered six distinct ministry contexts, each of which requires a different contextualisation methodology.Contribution: This article contributed to the discussion of contextualisation methodologies. While there are many settled theories and methods in this area, there remains considerable divergence and disagreement around various contextualisation concepts and practices. This article provides a useful pedagogical framework for organising the various methods in order to aid the academic discussion as well as the practical application of these methods.