Teaching philosophy
Teaching is both a social and an intrapersonal activity. If learning is to happen these two spheres need to continually complement, challenge, and interact with each other. Both need to be valued and appreciated. Both need time and attention. While the social dimension of teaching usually stands in the limelight, as a teacher I know that it is the intrapersonal activity of teaching that shines light on it.
The two participants of the social activity are a student and a teacher. The interaction between them is continually evolving and changing. It is never stagnant. What accounts for this vibrant nature of their interaction is what Barnes terms “frames of reference.” In other words, both the teacher and the students have different knowledge, experiences, and “repertoires of practice,” which means that they are likely to interpret classroom events in a unique way (Gutierrez & Rogoff). In order to reach common ground and be able to communicate, they need to negotiate their meanings and understanding.
The two concepts which significantly shape my understanding of how knowledge is constructed are scaffolding and the Zone of Proximal Development, which originate from Vygotsky’s theory. First, I need to find out what my students know in order to identify their current level and challenge them to reach slightly above it. Importantly, the scaffold is only a temporary support which allows them to construct new knowledge, develop new understandings, and, finally, become more independent.
I strive to ensure that my classrooms are a place of mutual respect and equality. I understand respect as appreciating other’s knowledge and experiences and being able to learn from them. I respect my students by expressing my interest in who they are as learners and as people. I show my respect by listening carefully to their concerns without downplaying them, no matter how trivial they might seem to me. Equality is another important value in my classrooms. I used to consider myself as having more power in the classroom. Now I understand that I am in charge and responsible for students’ learning, but it does not mean that I have more power.
The intrapersonal dimension of teaching nurtures and nourishes the social one. It is time in which I reflect on my teaching and analyze it. I ask questions about my emotions and behaviors during classes. It is often a time of discoveries. While reflecting on a lesson, I often gain new insights about the reasons for my or students’ actions. These new realizations inform my practice of teaching.
Barnes D. cited in Johnson K. (1995). Understanding Communication in Second Language Classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gutiérrez K. D. & Rogoff B. (2003). Cultural Ways of Learning: Individual Traits or Repertoires of Practice. Educational Researcher, Vol. 32, No. 5, 19-25.
Vygotsky L.S. (1978.) Mind in Society: Development of Higher Psychological Processes. USA: Harvard University Press.
The two participants of the social activity are a student and a teacher. The interaction between them is continually evolving and changing. It is never stagnant. What accounts for this vibrant nature of their interaction is what Barnes terms “frames of reference.” In other words, both the teacher and the students have different knowledge, experiences, and “repertoires of practice,” which means that they are likely to interpret classroom events in a unique way (Gutierrez & Rogoff). In order to reach common ground and be able to communicate, they need to negotiate their meanings and understanding.
The two concepts which significantly shape my understanding of how knowledge is constructed are scaffolding and the Zone of Proximal Development, which originate from Vygotsky’s theory. First, I need to find out what my students know in order to identify their current level and challenge them to reach slightly above it. Importantly, the scaffold is only a temporary support which allows them to construct new knowledge, develop new understandings, and, finally, become more independent.
I strive to ensure that my classrooms are a place of mutual respect and equality. I understand respect as appreciating other’s knowledge and experiences and being able to learn from them. I respect my students by expressing my interest in who they are as learners and as people. I show my respect by listening carefully to their concerns without downplaying them, no matter how trivial they might seem to me. Equality is another important value in my classrooms. I used to consider myself as having more power in the classroom. Now I understand that I am in charge and responsible for students’ learning, but it does not mean that I have more power.
The intrapersonal dimension of teaching nurtures and nourishes the social one. It is time in which I reflect on my teaching and analyze it. I ask questions about my emotions and behaviors during classes. It is often a time of discoveries. While reflecting on a lesson, I often gain new insights about the reasons for my or students’ actions. These new realizations inform my practice of teaching.
Barnes D. cited in Johnson K. (1995). Understanding Communication in Second Language Classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gutiérrez K. D. & Rogoff B. (2003). Cultural Ways of Learning: Individual Traits or Repertoires of Practice. Educational Researcher, Vol. 32, No. 5, 19-25.
Vygotsky L.S. (1978.) Mind in Society: Development of Higher Psychological Processes. USA: Harvard University Press.