As I mentioned in class today, this article gives a very concise introduction to identifying class struggle in modern America. I highly recommend it.
https://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/03/31-4
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Expectations and Relatability: A Response
Mike asked: "Do you remember more from stricter, hard-grading, coercive teachers? Cool, enticing teachers? Any other type of teachers? Have you felt your attitude about certain teachers/teaching styles has shifted since beginning college?"
There lies a great difficulty in determining what kind of teacher is "best," as different students will be better served by different types of teachers performing in different ways.
In my own experience, for example, I have found that I work best under teachers who have high expectations for students, but maintain a somewhat open, almost laid-back classroom. The best example I can draw from prep school was my Junior Honors English teacher. He was one of the toughest graders in the school, and we all knew it. But he was hardly coercive in his tactics. He was funny, social, very interested in his students' well-being, more than willing to take extra time after class to talk with students about not only class, but anything they had on their minds. Our classes were largely driven by discussion, and he had a knack for drawing his students out and engaging them in the discussion of the text. Combined with his infectious enthusiasm, this teacher never failed to bring the best out of his students -- as long as they were willing to put in the work.
College has only reinforced that the best teachers, for me, are the ones who have high expectations but hold a genuine interest in their students. The teachers a student can approach to talk about class and about life, the ones who care about their subject as much as they care about their students, and who are willing to put in the effort wherever possible to engage the interested students, seem to be best. Which returns us to the question of engaging the students.
One can have the best teacher in the world, but if the student is not interested in the subject, the possibility of real, lasting learning is slim. What, then, do we do about such situations? I have my own thoughts, but I shall save them for another post.
To end with a question (or two): Should we require students to take classes in subjects in which they are not interested? At what point do our intentions of ensuring an educated person begin to violate the autonomy of the student?
There lies a great difficulty in determining what kind of teacher is "best," as different students will be better served by different types of teachers performing in different ways.
In my own experience, for example, I have found that I work best under teachers who have high expectations for students, but maintain a somewhat open, almost laid-back classroom. The best example I can draw from prep school was my Junior Honors English teacher. He was one of the toughest graders in the school, and we all knew it. But he was hardly coercive in his tactics. He was funny, social, very interested in his students' well-being, more than willing to take extra time after class to talk with students about not only class, but anything they had on their minds. Our classes were largely driven by discussion, and he had a knack for drawing his students out and engaging them in the discussion of the text. Combined with his infectious enthusiasm, this teacher never failed to bring the best out of his students -- as long as they were willing to put in the work.
College has only reinforced that the best teachers, for me, are the ones who have high expectations but hold a genuine interest in their students. The teachers a student can approach to talk about class and about life, the ones who care about their subject as much as they care about their students, and who are willing to put in the effort wherever possible to engage the interested students, seem to be best. Which returns us to the question of engaging the students.
One can have the best teacher in the world, but if the student is not interested in the subject, the possibility of real, lasting learning is slim. What, then, do we do about such situations? I have my own thoughts, but I shall save them for another post.
To end with a question (or two): Should we require students to take classes in subjects in which they are not interested? At what point do our intentions of ensuring an educated person begin to violate the autonomy of the student?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)