great teachers

Jospeh Lowman argues that it’s best not to evaluate your teaching by what students learn, but rather by how well you motivate students to do their best work in your class and beyond. Research on student evaluations shows that teacher-student relationships rank second in importance only to clear and engaging presentations, so Lowman makes a case for two dimensions of teaching quality. An exemplary teacher excels at one or both and is at least adequate in the other.

Dimension I is “Intellectual Excitement,” meaning clarity of presentation and emotional impact in the classroom. At the “high” level, the teacher is well organized, presents clearly in an engaging manner, maintains a high level of energy, stresses application to new situations, regularly uses concrete examples, and clearly loves teaching. The effect on students is that they know where the teacher is going (frequent signposts and recaps), recognize the difference between important and unimportant details, see connections between concepts, are rarely confused by the material or the teacher, feel that the teacher’s presentation makes the material seem simple, have no difficulty paying attention (i.e. it's impossible to daydream), feel that class time passes quickly, are excited by the material and hate to miss class, and describe the teacher as “fantastic.”

Dimension II is “Interpersonal Rapport” inside and outside the classroom. At the “high” level, the teacher is warm and open, student-centered, and fairly predictable. The teacher is genuinely interested in students, picks up on their feelings about the class, encourages expression of feelings, asks questions and is eager to hear student viewpoints, directly and subtly communicates to students that their learning is important, and encourages creativity and independent thinking about the material. The effect on students is that they know the teacher cares about them and their learning, have positive and possibly affectionate thoughts about the teacher, show a high degree of motivation to do their best (in part not to disappoint the teacher), and describe the teacher as a “fantastic person.”

Tall order, eh? I think I’ve had one or two such teachers in my life, and maybe not so surprisingly, in the subjects I came to love the most. Interesting that Lowman never mentions the amount of student learning - I guess the idea is that if you do the above, students will learn. He doesn’t stress being knowledgeable either – in fact, he makes the obvious point that experts don't necessarily make good teachers. He does refer to teaching as a “performing art,” though, saying it’s important to have presence and energy, and that effective teaching not only entertains, but also stimulates the emotions and the intellect.
_________________

a modern interpretation of scripture

Bush may be adhering to a modern interpretation of scripture only a little too well. With the industrial revolution came hitherto (see I read my Marx - he says things like "hitherto" a lot) undreamnt of opportunities to exploit the labour of our fellow man and the church responded to this new development by emphasizing the "forgiveness" aspect of Jesus' teachings. The old "so long as one has faith in Jesus salvation is yours" deal regardless of whether any serious effort was made to live an ethical life. I've known "Christians", meaning people who professed the faith and went to church regularly, who appeared to live by precisely such a code.

Here is Han SuYin's infinitely preferable take on the situation...

Quote:
" 'Ah,' said Prem, sighing, 'never does one have to wait for all eternity, you know. Not if you are a Buddhist. The Lord of Compassion is not ruthless and absolute, damning forever, as your God is. The only trouble is that in this dimension there is no convenient scapegoat, as you have in yours. The invention of the scapegoat was an excellent way of evading responsbility. Once you have laid your sins upon one, you felt exonerated. But here it's different. Here it's quite different. No one can bear your sins for you. On the contrary. We are collectively responsible for all misdeeds, and the innocent pay for the guilty, but the guilty are still guilty, all of them together. It's somehow more fair, isn't it, than the other way round? But it takes longer, it's not so neat and packaged as your formulae..."

what do you think about thinking about thinking?

bob - I seem to be doing a lot of it (thinking about thinking) these days and am not really sure that it is entirely productive. Anyway, what do you think, about thinking about thinking I mean, like, or whatever...

Jaboney - I think it's like a dog chasing it's own tail.
Only it's not really it's tail, but the shadow of it's tail.
Consciousness lies. It's too slow to catch what's going on and too proud to admit it.
At least, that's about what I think about thinking about thought.

bob - .... the cure I sought. Brilliant. Thank you.