Does he like his students? Does he communicate this liking through patience and consistent kindness?
Does he respect his students?
Does he teach individual students or merely classes?
Does he understand his students? Does he understand the psychology of adolescence?
Does he meet his students where they are – cognitively, socio-emotionally, and in terms of acquired knowledge?
Is he effective in his teaching (effectiveness is much more important than efficiency)? That is, do his students achieve mastery of essential aspects of the material, and do they grow in skill and confidence?
Does he know his subject matter? Does he understand the essence of his subject? Is he passionate about his subject? Does he convey this love of knowledge and learning? Is he, himself, a learner?
Does he keep up with the “best practice” literature? Does he reflect on his teaching while maintaining skepticism about the faddishness of “best practice”?
Does he consistently communicate to his students how they are doing? Does he manage his students’ learning so that none flounders too often, too much, or too long – understanding that some preliminary floundering is a part of the learning process while at the same time monitoring student vulnerability to being left on their own?
Does he take steps to revivify his teaching?
Does he create and sustain an environment in which learning can take place?
Does he learn from his students? Does he explicitly acknowledge that he is not the be-all and end-all, the arbiter of all knowledge and all ways of knowing?
Does he help his students construct their own learning?
Does he draw his students to learning rather than push them?
No comments:
Post a Comment