Teaching is a craft. Everyone has their own idea of what makes a person a “good” teacher and their own parameters by which they determine someone’s teaching as “good.”
As a pre-service teacher in my undergrad, it was then imperative that I defined “good” teaching for myself. This essay is one that has been modified from one I wrote for my Foundations of Education course in my junior year at Ball State Univeristy’s Teachers College. I hope that you as a future, current, or present educator (because we are all educators if you think about it) can find a few pearls of wisdom in my definition of “good” teaching.
The generic standard for “good” teaching seems to be increasingly reliant on students’ standardized test scores, so it is essential that we each create a metric by which to determine our own success. That being said, I have come to believe that a “good” teacher is an advocate.
As many of us know, historically, teachers have not had advocates unless they take on the role themselves. We know, of course, that teachers have to advocate for their students, particularly in the face of high stakes, standardized testing, but I think they
also need to advocate for themselves. Testing like this does not provide a holistic look at a student or their knowledge of the subject let alone their actual intelligence, and it is creating an ever narrowing curriculum that all teachers are either required or feel the need to adopt sooner or later. Standardized testing streamlines the process of reducing students and teachers down to a set of characteristics that we then use to define them. Karolyn Tyson reminds us in her essay “The Making of the ‘Burden’: Tracing the Development of a ‘Burden of Acting White’ in Schools” that we cannot do this to our students.
Defining our students by one or two characteristics is a very slippery slope that can actually be detrimental to their learning, and evaluating a teacher based on test scores completely eliminates the need for more pedagogically sound teaching strategies rather than just drilling their students for a test (Tyson p. 74-75). A “good” teacher works hard to ensure that their students, and themselves, are not boiled down to a test score but rather assessed based on the multiple intelligences that they possess. They work to create a better school environment for their students whether it is only in their individual classrooms and schools or in the educational system as a whole. In my personal practice of this advocacy I want my students to know that I will not intentionally set them up for failure. I want my students to understand that there is not just one way to learn or to be intelligent. I hope that they experience success in my classes beyond a grade on a test.
In order to help students experience success, a “good” teacher has to be adaptive to their students learning needs and teaching preferences. “Good” teachers create classroom environments that are designed to encourage students to fall in love with and take ownership of their learning. This classroom environment can be modeled after those described in D. Bruce Jackson’s article “Education Reform as If Student Agency Mattered: Academic Microcultures and Student Identity.” Although the article sets forth a solution that would be hard for one teacher working on their own to implement, Jackson does have a few pearls of wisdom that the “good” classroom teacher can take to
heart. One thing in particular that can be applied in every discipline is Jackson’s reliance on identity sensitive education (p. 583). By allowing their pedagogy to be guided by and sensitive to their students’ identities, “good” teachers create environments of mutual trust; the students trust the teacher to cover important and relevant content, and the teacher trusts the students to take ownership of their learning and academic success. It is easier to do this when students understand that their teacher does not expect more of them than they are capable of doing. A “good” teacher’s classroom is a safe and open space where everyone is met where they are at academically and as a whole person rather than as a test score to be raised by the end of the course.
It is nearly impossible for students to take ownership of their learning if their teachers have not mastered the content that they teach. A “good” teacher knows their content area and is passionate about their subject. Though this is good in theory, it has been a challenge to put into practice lately, especially in states that are experiencing an extreme teacher shortage like Indiana is right now. When faced with the challenges of emergency licensing and allowing those with a bachelor’s degree to teach without a license at all, what can “good” teachers do to ensure that they are providing the best education possible to their students? Although it does look bleak from time to time with continual budget cuts and teachers burning out at a staggering rate, I do not think that all hope is lost. Hopefully in the future we can avoid asking teachers to teach subjects that they are not qualified to teach, but even in that situation, there is an opportunity for growth. “Good” teachers figure out how to excite their students about the content of their courses and are continually learning. A “good” teacher is always honing their skills to perfect their craft. What better way to encourage our students to become lifelong learners than to model it ourselves?
Our students are keen observers, particularly high school students, and they can sniff out hypocrisy a mile away. This is why it is incredibly important that a “good” teacher is also a good collaborator. They say it takes a village to raise a child, and that bleeds over into educational practice. A school cannot function well without the teachers, administrators, staff, students, parents, and the community at large collaborating to create an environment that is conducive to learning. Our public education system will not improve until everyone is on board with the changes. As much as we hope to affect these changes in our time as teachers, it may not happen, so we have to develop our students’ ability to collaborate to make the changes necessary to sustain our world and our society. In order to do that, “good” teachers have to collaborate to create a positive work environment of mutual respect for fellow educators. In my own classes, I want to instill in my students the understanding that theatre is not just entertainment but rather can be used as a tool to change not only themselves but the world.
As they seek to create an identity-sensitive curriculum and collaborate with their fellow educators, “good” teachers, however still have to deal with the funding inequalities that plague most, if not all, schools. Reading Rebecca Klein’s article from the Huffington Post, it is disheartening to see just how large the gap is in funding provided to rural or urban schools as opposed to suburban schools (para. 4, 10). It would be wonderful if solving funding inequalities would guarantee an equitable education for all students, but unfortunately that is not the case. As we read more about the educational history of our country in Bruce Mitchell and Robert Salsbury’s essay “Early Beginnings of American Education,” it becomes clear that the public education system in the United States has never really been set up to create equitable educational opportunity for all students (p. 2-4, 8-11, 13, 17-18). In this environment where the cards are already stacked against them and their students, a “good” teacher does not give up hope. They rise to the challenge to create the most equitable environment that they can with the resources at their disposal. I hope to inspire my future students to be the best versions of themselves that they can be by teaching them how to survive and work in a system that is inequitable and has been since it was created.
That being said, a “good” teacher works to create a community that supports their educational goals, even if they do not have a large amount of resources available to them. As mentioned previously, teachers cannot be expected to fix the problems facing their students and schools on their own. Robert Evans says essentially the same thing in his article “Reframing the Achievement Gap.” He argues that the issues leading to the achievement gap we are currently facing “lie neither in students nor in schools” but rather as a result of a number of factors based mostly in the societies that create them (Evans p. 583). If the problems leading to these issues have their roots in society, then “good” teachers need to be involved in the communities that surround their schools. Evans also says that “schools reflect society much more than they shape it,” so a “good” teacher needs to try to solve inequalities in the community that then lead to inequalities in their school (p. 586). Part of the inequalities in the community can be addressed in a theatre classroom by encouraging students to build trust with their classmates and allowing them to build their identities with the knowledge that there are lots of different kinds of people in the world and all of them have dignity and deserve respect. This once again returns to the idea of using theatre as a tool for social change.
One of those potential changes is to create a democratic classroom and school that empowers students to be a part of the decisions that affect their education. David Labaree argued that democratic equality is one of the three goals of public education but that it has seen a steady decline in importance or priority over the last several decades in his article “Public Goods, Private Good: The American Struggle over Educational Goals” (p. 41, 43-46). I think that down-playing the goal of democratic equality is one of the things that has led to the highly inequitable public education system that we have today. Having said that, it is important to remember that creating democratic classrooms and schools is possible if teachers, administrators, and students are willing to commit themselves to the values of democracy. Michael Apple and James Beane identify what they define as the key values of democracy in their essay “The Case for Democratic Schools” including “the use of critical reflection and analysis to evaluate ideas, problems, and policies” (p. 7). A “good” teacher seeks to create a democratic classroom and curriculum that asks their students to think critically about the things they are learning in school and the world around them.
The values that Apple and Beane outline should seem like “no-brainers” to citizens of a democracy, but they are things that we have to consciously develop in our students because history has shown us that they will not necessarily show up on their own. Apple and Beane go on to encourage the participation of students in decision-making that impacts their curriculum, school culture, and overall education (p. 9). This can take many forms in different situations and circumstances, but in my future classroom I want my students to know that they are all capable of growing as individuals and theatre artists by cultivating the values of democracy in their lives. I want to empower students to make bold choices with confidence and creativity. I want them to give them a space to “fail” at the acting tactic, design choice, directing style, etc. that they tried out while knowing that they can still succeed in my class. Giving students the agency to be a part of the decision-making process in the classroom and school does not undermine the authority of a “good” teacher but rather enables that teacher to better serve their students leading to a continually growing and developing democratic curriculum.
This definition of being a “good” teacher seems like a lot to expect out of teachers, especially new teachers, on top of all of their official responsibilities to their school and students, but this is just my definition. I believe that by careful planning and intentional implementation of these characteristics, teachers can be incredibly effective and powerful educators that encourage the growth and development of all their students, regardless of any divisions that society makes among them. This is the metric by which I hope to measure myself as an educator. I know I will not be able to completely revolutionize the teaching profession or the public education system, but in my own way, through the practices outline in this essay, I believe that I can make a difference in my community and, most importantly, in my students’ lives.
Works Cited
Apple, Michael W., and James A. Beane. “The Case for Democratic Schools.” Democratic Schools, edited by Michael W. Apple and James A. Beane, Association for Supervision & Curriculum, 1995, p. 1-25.
Evans, Robert. “Reframing the Achievement Gap.” The Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 86, no. 8, 2005, pp. 582-589. JSTOR, www.jstor.org.
Jackson, D. Bruce. “Education Reform as If Student Agency Mattered: Academic Microcultures and Student Identity.” The Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 84, no. 8, 2003, pp. 579-585. JSTOR, www.jstor.org.
Klein, Rebecca. “School Funding Inequality Makes Education ‘Separate And Unequal,’ Arne Duncan Says.” Huffington Post, 13 March 2015, https://www.huffpost.com/entry/arne-duncan-school-funding-disparities_n_6864866. Accessed 29 Jan 2019.
Labaree, David F. “Public Goods, Private Good: The American Struggle over Educational Goals.” American Educational Research Journal, vol. 34, no. 1, 1997, pp. 39-81. JSTOR, www.jstor.org.
Mitchell, Bruce, and Robert E. Salsbury. “Early Beginnings of American Education.” Unequal Opportunities: A Crisis In American Schools?, edited by Bruce Mitchell and Robert E. Salsbury, Bergin and Garvey, 2002, pp. 1-24.
Tyson, Karolyn. “The Making of the ‘Burden’: Tracing the Development of a ‘Burden of Acting White’ in Schools.” Beyond Acting White: Reframing the Debate on Black Student Achievement, edited by Erin McNamara Horvat and Carla O’Connor, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2006, pp. 57-88.
コメント