Something to think about...

I feel as if I'm on a new journey of discovery. Every page I read these days brings new information and prompts questions. The questions are all seem to be pointing to one big question... "What type of teacher do I want to be?"
My latest discovery is the concept of the liberationist teacher. This is a new team for me and I latched onto it immediately. What is a liberationist teacher?  Part of the definition is simple and yet a true teacher of this style would provide a few well chosen sentences and then let the reader (or student) explore those ideas and see where they lead. This concept intrigues me because I believe firmly in a student being his own best motivator for what he learns. A simple definition of a liberationist teacher would be a teacher that guides a student to explore, question and discover his own meaning and purpose in the world around him. The goal would be a young human that is contributing to the world around him and making it a better place through his own efforts. Imparting knowledge is a specific goal of the liberationist, but reciting facts and memorizing dates is not the same thing as imparting knowledge. For the liberationist teacher to be successful the student must seek out the knowledge that is important and can make him a better contributor to the world outside of his own "personal bubble".
It is exciting to think about empowering students in this way. However, the risk is that not all students (or teachers) can or will respond to this type of classroom environment. Many teachers, students and administrators in todays educational climate require the concrete test scores, the "proof" that something was taught and therefore something was learned. How can the liberationist teacher provide these results?  I really do not know. However, I still maintain that traditional teaching is not working and that this progressive style might be a tool to incorporate into some of the lessons.  Students need to be able to take charge of their education and I believe this is a step towards empowering them to do so.

Can a student be expected to be responsible for his own learning?

In the last post, I discussed my experience with the executive approach to teaching.  It is an easy style to define and traditionally the style used in most classrooms. Is there a different approach to teaching?  What would a classroom be like if there was not an authority figure standing in front of the chalkboard and teaching from a textbook?  Would the students still learn? Would they be able to develop to their full potential and function in society?  I think that some teachers are starting to explore the possibility of a different, not necessarily better, approach to teaching called the facilitator approach. 

A facilitator teacher focuses less on the methods of teaching a topic or on the actual factual knowledge absorbed by the student.  Instead the facilitator approach proposes to engage the mind of the individual – to make each student aware of his own potential. I can think of many times during my high school career where this type of “teaching” would have opened my mind and allowed me to explore beyond the text book. It would have put the responsibility for learning on my shoulders and required me to be inquisitive and thoughtful.  The facilitator approach also has some drawbacks.  It is difficult to determine if the student is actually gaining knowledge. It downplays the importance of grasping key concepts and core subjects are often taught selectively.  This can be a disservice to students that want to continue further in their education and are seeking the acknowledgement from the academic world that they are capable of higher learning. Without the test scores to prove they are ready and able to tackle the more difficult curriculums after high school, they will find it hard to be accepted into the university.

There are parts of the facilitator approach that have great appeal. I value the opportunity for students to be autonomous in their learning. However, I think that this style is not practical for an entire curriculum of study.  It should be a compliment to other teaching styles and careful thought put into the correct and appropriate forum.  Students should have some accountability for the information they are supposed to be learning. Many core subject areas need more structure in order for the students to be prepared to compete in a global world. But teaching students the value of thinking for themselves and self-discovery is just as important.

At the Front of the Room...

At times it feels like I’ve been going to school forever!  Ok, not really forever, but for at least over half my life.  That is a lot of time behind a desk and a lot of time looking, listening and learning form the teacher standing at the front of the room.  This traditional approach falls right in line with the executive approach to teaching.  In addition, the executive teacher sets up the classroom to be run like a well-oiled machine: class starts on time, desks in rows, time allotted to each section and activity.  I think that most of the teachers I’ve had fall into this category. The executive teacher is always the authority figure of the classroom. He sets the rules and dictates the learning environment.  It is his role to make sure the students pass the test and know the required material. This is especially important in today’s political education system.

In some ways, this approach is useful. It provides a clear method for determining what is taught and then assesses the student’s ability to retain the information. I don’t believe it provides much in the way of freedom to explore different points of view or branch out to new discoveries.

In my classroom, I believe that structure is important to a degree. However, I hope that I will be able to forgo the temptation to lecture to my students and to be less of the authority figure and more of a guide as they search for the knowledge for themselves.

Is one better... ???

I've had many opportunities to teach throughout my life. I have also had countless opportunities to be taught.  I feel fairly qualified in my ability to determine an effective teacher for me vs. an ineffective teacher. I know the types of teachers that I connect with and I can almost instantly know if my time spent learning will be tedious or enjoyable. But other than my own personal feelings about the type of  teaching style motivates me to learn, what is the more general idea of a good teacher. I've been told over and over again throughout my college career that good teaching is more about the way a student learns than it is about how one teaches. So how does one individual teacher, teach a classroom of students that all learn differently?  In reading about the different approaches to teaching, I am no closer to determining a general description of an effective teacher for all students universally. 

These are the three (general) approaches to teaching I've been familiarizing myself with:

•    The Executive:  To me this style of teaching reminds me of my fourth grade teacher. He was the "authority" on all things that 9-year-olds should know.  He always came to class wearing a tie and suit jacket. Class always started on time and we worked according to a pre-set schedule. I don't remember it exactly, but I do remember that there was a time for math, a time for science, a time for reading and so on.  It felt very structured. Time in class was filled with lectures and handouts and assignments.  Homework was assigned everyday and collected on time the next day. Most of the teachers in my elementary years, approached the classroom setting in this way.  

•    The Facilitator: If I had to pick one to teach me, this guy would be the one.  This approach to teaching finds ways of connecting to his students on a more meaningful and relevant level than just stating the facts from a textbook.  By attaching student experiences to the topic, this type of instruction captures the learner and instantly makes learning more personal. Because this approach focuses on the student, the teacher also comes across as having a personal relationship with each of his students in which he believes they have great potential and can succeed in whatever environment they are in.

•    The Liberationist: When I try to picture the type of teacher that takes this approach, I again go to stereotypes.  I believe that Robin Williams portrayed this type of teaching method in the film Dead Poet's Society.  Here was a teacher that encouraged the students to think for themselves and to explore all the possibilities, rather than just accept the common.  This approach teaches in "questions" and expects the answers to be discussed and debated. His job is to open up the minds of the students to allow them to explore the answers not written in the books. 

I don't think that anyone way is the absolute "right" way to teach. In fact, I'm pretty sure that there is a need for all of them and sometimes they need to be combined and mixed together. My most effective teacher didn't follow a set pattern or rule for teaching. He had qualities and traits and methods that were pulled from each of the above approaches. I think that the best approach is a personal collection of the teacher's experiences and then she must evaluate the students she is teaching and if need be adapt to meet the needs of the individual learning styles.  There is not just three approaches to teaching... I would argue that the number of approaches to teaching are infinite. 

The Reason I Made This Choice...

1. It has been a summer of reflection for me regarding my desire to be a teacher. In April I was confronted by a person that is close to me about my career choice. My friend felt it necessary to point out to me that "I couldn't possibly be doing it for the money!" He was right, I'm not interested in teaching as a means of gaining wealth. He also mentioned that it couldn't be because teachers were valued in the community because everyone knows that teachers are severely under appreciated. I agreed with him on this point also. I was not pursuing a teaching career to receive praise from my neighbors or anyone really. Finally, he said, "The only valid reason you can give me for wanting to teach is because you want to play in the summer." While I don't agree with him on this point either, I will concede that having extra time in the summer is appealing. But before all the teachers out there stand up and protest - I also realize that very few teachers "take the summer off".
   
   
   In addition to this friends obvious disdain for a person's willful choice to enter the education field, I was also offered a very well-paying job. I took the job on a temporary basis and soon found that i really enjoyed the job, not to mention the cash that was more than I had been used to in a long time.  I am good at this job and within a few weeks I was asked to stay on full-time and possibly delay or even stop working on my teaching degree.
   
   
   As the start of summer classes got closer and closer, I knew I had to really define my goals and my desires for my future career. It was easy to decide to continue on with the path towards graduation.  
   
   
   I want to teach for many reasons. Some of them are trivial to most people and some may be unique to only myself. But for me the most compelling reason that I want to become a teacher is very personal and deals with my son. All the other reasons are susceptible to change and/or evolution. However, for purposes of this post, I will explain my best reason and leave the others for later.
   
   
   When my son was 7, his father and I got a divorce. After 4 years, I decided to remarry and move to a different state. I had custody of my son and could have brought him with me, however, I feared that his father would become a memory instead of an active participant in his life. I chose to leave him with his dad and I took on the responsibility of driving 4 hours one-way every single week and sometimes twice, to be involved in his life. Years always go by so fast and soon he was in high school. I know the divorce changed him and he became quiet as opposed to the boy that was always anxious to share with me his school activities.
   
   
   It wasn't until after he graduated that he confided in me. He told me that after the divorce he felt guilty when he confided in his dad and not me or vice versa. He said that many times he stayed after school to talk with a particular teacher that he felt was safe and non-judgmental. He said that he wished that some of his friends that had issues with divorce, sex, drinking, bullying or any other problem had a safe "non-parent" adult to talk to and ask questions. He said that this teacher was well respected by the students and well liked. But my son felt that he was special and that all the troubles of teenage life were made a little better by an adult who cared not just about his test scores or football stats, but really cared about him. My son told me that he can think of no other environment that would put so many kids with so many needs in place with so many potential "mentors, friends, confidantes and of course, teachers". He never told me who the teacher was, but he said that that one man made a difference in the choices he made.
   
   
   For me, I want to be to my students what this man was to my son (and to many others, i'm sure). I want to teach, I think I'm good at it. But ultimately, I want to help and to be someone safe and trust-worthy that can impact a kid for good.