Not everyone is cut out to be a teacher. Some people think that teaching is easy and that anyone can do it, but that's just not true. Teaching requires patience, knowledge, sensitivity, flexibility, a good sense of humor, and the list goes on and on. Teachers of course must know the material they are teaching and know it well, and they must be able to make that material come to life, no matter how dull the general population may consider it. As such, there are four qualities that every teacher must possess in order to be an effective and memorable educator. These qualities are passion, intelligence, personableness, and flexibility.
Without a doubt the most important quality for any teacher to have is passion. It is fairly easy to stand in front of a group of people and recite information with no excitement or investment in the material. I have had teachers like this, as I'm sure everyone has. These teachers are not memorable and do not make the learning experience a pleasant one, which it should be. What separates a teacher from being good and being great is passion. A teacher needs to make the material they are teaching come alive. They need to get their students excited about what they are learning so that they will be invested in their education and therefore, their future. A teacher who is passionate about their work will make students look forward to class, to school, to learning. As educators, that is our ultimate goal: to make learning an enjoyable and exciting experience for everyone involved.
On perhaps a more superficial, but no less important level, intelligence is also a quality that any good teacher must possess. This may seem like an obvious thing to point out, but a teacher who is worldly and intelligent and a critical thinker is a teacher who will encourage his or her students to be intelligent, critical thinkers. An intelligent teacher is not knowledgeable only about the subject they teach, but about other topics as well. The ability to speak about a variety of topics allows teachers to make connections between what they are teaching and what their students may be learning in other classes. It also allows teachers to make what they are teaching pertinent to their students' lives. If a teacher is able to connect a science lesson to what students see everyday in the natural world, that teacher is reaching the students on not just a teacher-student level, but on a person to person level. A teacher who is not only book smart but street smart will be able to connect with his or her students in an infinitely more significant way than what the usual student-teacher dynamic allows for.
A good teacher is also a personable individual. Some teachers, especially in secondary and postsecondary institutions can give off an air of superiority or oppressive authoritarianism. While this does not necessarily explicitly affect the learning process, it may make it less meaningful than it could be. The ability of a teacher to connect with his or her students and to come off as just another person with interests, emotions, and a life outside of school will make them less of an intimidating authority figure and more of a relatable partner in learning. If students feel comfortable approaching their teacher, they will feel comfortable with that teacher and with asking questions, which in turn enhances the learning process. A teacher with an outgoing personality and the ability to relate to students will succeed in building meaningful and beneficial relationships with those students.
Lastly, a good teacher must be flexible. Unexpected situations arise all the time, especially in any environment where there are children. As a result, teachers must always be ready to switch gears, overhaul a lesson plan, or do something completely unplanned for the sake of the integrity of the class. Not everyone is able to do this, and so a teacher who is flexible enough to keep a class going in the face of something unanticipated is a good teacher indeed. Flexibility can also be applied to individual students and their needs. Teachers have an obligation to their students to do their very best to allow them to thrive and succeed in their class and at school in general. Teachers who are able to adjust their teaching methods or their lessons to suit a student's needs will ultimately be more successful and better respected in the long run.
Teaching is a difficult profession, and there is a lot that separates a good teacher from a great teacher. Teachers who possess passion for what they teach will be able to push their students above and beyond, and get them excited about the subject matter, but more importantly, about learning in general. Intelligence too is important for teachers to posses, as it will allow them to make real world connections and have deep, honest conversations with their students. The abilities to connect with students on a personal level and to meet their needs by being flexible and understanding are just as important as passion and intelligence. These qualities will allow a teacher to gain respect from his or her students and to create significant relationships with them. Of course, these four characteristics are not necessities, but they are my idea of what makes a truly excellent teacher.
This comment is in response to your MicroTeaching I lesson, Kevin.
ReplyDeleteI was the person who taped your lesson, so I didn't get an up close look at any of your documents or handouts. I didn't participate in the lesson, so my reflection can only be so helpful.
I'm assuming that your lesson on the decision to drop the atomic bomb on Japan is a part of a unit on World War II, although I could also see it easily fitting into a unit on wartime legacies or war ethics. The topic of the atomic bomb had so many resources to use and is an emotional issue, so it is easy to evoke passionate responses from your students. Using the bombings to learn about bias in primary sources was an interesting idea.I thought that it was a strength to use more than one type of source as well.
Your introductory video about the bomb was good at getting the class warmed up and ready to think about the past, although it may have been more useful if you had found a video about the aftermath of the bomb. Maybe something talking about the pros/cons or about the contemporary responses would have been a stronger video to show, as your lesson wasn't really about the bomb but more about how to sort through responses to it.
I think that your lesson would have benefitted by you taking some more time to better explain exactly what you were looking for the class to do. As I'm sure you know, when it comes to primary sources, each one is biased. Sometimes a bias makes a source unusable whereas sometimes the bias is actually the evidence you are looking for. I think that you may have assumed too much about what the class knew about source work. Again, I think it was good that you used a variety about sources, but I think that each source was also too different in purpose to be comparable. For example, I think you had a few letters from Truman as well as a few newspaper articles by groups who would be predisposed to feel one way or another about the bomb. I think you stopped short of explaining how the bias impacted what they wrote. It's kind of hard to explain but I don't think that you completely connected the dots between identifying bias and putting that knowledge to use.
Perhaps what may have been a more effective way to execute your lesson would have been to have two or three articles by people with different affiliations and opinions reporting on the dropping of the bomb. Not giving an opinion piece after the matter, but the day after report of what happened. You could have had the students read the articles and fill out a three-way venn diagram of sorts. In the middle would be the things they all agree on and on the outsides would be each papers' particular spin. That may have been a more effective jumping off point.
Hey Kevin, I thought you did a nice job with your micro teaching 1 lesson. The topic of analyzing primary sources was a great choice. Not only do the students get to investigate some actual documents that are relevant to whatever they are studying in history, but they can also take the skills to their other subjects and improve their performance there as well. I also really liked your choice of what we read as well, and the questions you lead the class with were awesome. We got to approach your readings from a historical, moral, and a scientific standpoint. In a discussion like that I'm sure every student will have something to say. I liked your classroom presence as well, your responses showed that you had interest in what we as your students were saying and I could tell you were actually coming up with appropriate responses to challenge what we said, instead of reading off a predetermined script in your head. I appreciated that you linked the skills we were using to other subjects outside of history, and you showed that you had a clear understanding of your unit and where the lesson was going.
ReplyDelete