Most of teachers are good they try
the best to transfer all of their knowledge to students in the differences
methodologies to students but we only pick some of them that we think are
necessary to us in the class or to manage all students.
We need to understand about our
students clearly while we are teaching whether they understand the topic or not
if not we need to change the style of teaching.
Whether our class is boring or not if
so, teachers must make something to attract the student’s motivation. We can
make a joke maybe 5 minutes or any game that make all students feel freshly
felling to learn more
If students at the back don’t care to
study and they make noise in the class and other students cannot study. Teacher
must find some solution to control them by let them come to the board to do the
test or answer the lesson or let them go out if they don’t want to study (if we
don’t have other choices) but don’t us violent.
If
we teach children, it is completely difference to adults, every teachers
must be well educated to teach children,
teachers must strongly keep cold because with children is so difficult, some of
them cry some shouting, some running in the class also make noise all the time.
For adults, is more easy than
children but this ages is the problem with the knowledge of teachers or the
methodology. Teachers must be well organize before coming to the class and the
methodology is the must, because even teachers got the good knowledge but they
don’t know how to share his or her knowledge to students it is still the waste.
Sometimes teacher face complain from students that teachers don’t have enough
ability to teach them that is why all teachers must past the methodology exam
before becoming the teacher.
Teaching in colleges is marked by
historic paradox: though institutions constantly talk up its importance, they
evaluate faculty primarily based on scholarly achievements outside the
classroom. Teaching is what almost every professor does, but it seems to suffer
from that very commonness. It occupies the greatest amount of most professors'
time, but rarely operates at the highest level of competence.
There seems to be an ingrained academic reluctance to
regard teaching in the same way the profession regards every other set of
skills: as something that can be taught. Professors who take painstaking care
for method within their discipline of chemistry, history, or psychology, for
example, all too often are unreflective when it comes to teaching.
Some professors even regard teaching as so straightforward
that it requires no special training. Others find it so personal and
idiosyncratic that no training could ever meet its multiplicity of demands. But
most share the common folk belief that teachers are born and not made. "He
(or she) is a born teacher," is said of too many good teachers as a copout
by those who aren't. And some good teachers fuel this belief by agreeing,
"I guess I'm a good teacher. Things seem to go well in the classroom. The
students say they like what I do. But I don't really know how I do it."
In fact, the marginal
truth in this belief applies no more to teaching than to any other profession.
If there are born teachers, there are born physicians, born attorneys, and born
engineers. Yet those who are naturally great at these professions invariably
spend an unnatural amount of time acquiring skills and practising in the vortex
of intense competition. Potentially great teachers become great teachers by the
same route: through conditioning mind, through acquiring skills, and through
practising amidst intense competition.
The interest in improved teaching has mushroomed rapidly
in recent years, burrowing into all areas of the country and all types of
institutions. Colleges and universities are moving from lip-service
endorsements of the importance of teaching to concerted and sustained efforts
to improve programs. Faculty and administrators flock to teaching conferences;
government agencies and private foundations offer financial support, and a wave
of new books on the subject appear.
Yet the concept of improving teaching
is hardly new. Years ago its emphasis was to improve subject matter competence.
To further such competence, sabbatical leaves and attendance at professional
meetings were encouraged. Claimed as rationale was a deeper understanding of
the content of a discipline. Practically no attention was paid to how that
understanding could best be imparted to students. Today, this early approach
has been turned around. Now the concept is based on three assumptions: first,
the primary professional activity of most professors is teaching; second, instructional
behaviour is not inborn, but rather a learned web of skills, attitudes, and
goals; and third, faculty can be taught how to improve their classroom
performance.
The "new" emphasis on teaching stems from
"new" social and political forces. Demographics have changed the
student population and their educational needs. The advent of educational
technology has forever altered concepts about teaching and learning. And public
outcries demanding reaching accountability have roused legislators and governing
boards to actions. All forces rally for improved teaching.
No comments:
Post a Comment