This week I tried to get down the three things that I believe in as a teacher to include into my teaching philosophy. I have written a teaching philosophy before, but because it was for my Internship it was focused primarily on teaching film. The three things I believe can still fit into my old teaching philosophy with very little change.
I believe the power of language can be emphasized by focusing on clarity, brevity, and sincerity in student's writing;
I believe that good literature and writing has a social and cultural component and through the exploration of these ideas through classroom discussion can make literature from all regions and eras more relate-able to the students;
I believe the the class should be flexible and broad with goals and procedures to allow students to shape discussion and feel more invested in the discussions in class, and also a broadened focus allows literature to be attacked from multiple angles.
These are my three things (as of right now) and I think that they would work for composition, literature, or film teaching philosophy. These goals not only state my own position as a teacher but also how I align with different categories of approach. There are some definite social epistemic and mimetic things going on within these three things as well.
Tell me what you think, did I miss some major points/are there holes/etc.
Enjoyed reading your notes here, Scott. I agree about clarity. Oftentimes teaching people concision in their work helps resolve other grammatical and stylistic issues. Interesting note about social and cultural--looking forward to seeing your take on Bruffee. Every good class should be flexible, indeed. Easier said than done, as flexibility doesn't mean unequal and unfair educational opportunities.
ReplyDeleteI really like you thoughts about flexible/broad goals/procedures. It certainly seems as though this would strengthen student learning because they would feel more invested.
ReplyDelete