Post #2: Teacher Role

            Kumar chapter one was about the role of the teacher and the difference between theory and practice. According to the chapter, there are three different roles that teachers can play in the classroom. The first role is the view of teachers as passive technicians. The primary focus of teaching with this role is content knowledge. Also with this view, teachers and teaching methods are not seen as important. For this reason, there is more concentration on the education part than the teacher part. The second role is teachers as reflective practitioners where teachers are seen as “problem solvers possessing the ability to look back critically and imaginatively” (10). With this view of teachers, there is an emphasis on creativity, artistry, and context sensitivity. The final role of teachers is teachers as transformative intellectuals. In this role, teachers “strive not only for educational advancement but also for personal transformation” (14). Teachers help students function in society. In my opinion, none of these seem adequate enough to define a teacher’s role. I think that a teacher’s role should be a combination of all of the three, along with other components as well. The first role, teachers as passive technicians, bothers me since it follows the idea that teachers and their teaching methods are not important. Teachers are an extremely important component of the classroom. On the other hand, though, I do believe that there is a happy medium as far as how much the teacher should be the one leading the classroom. Sometimes, in specific contexts, it is necessary for students to take the reins and lead the learning. I agree with the second role, which states that teachers are problem solvers, but I don’t believe that this is a main component of their role. Yes, if a problem arises or students don’t understand a concept, it is the teacher’s job to solve those problems. I also agree that teachers have a hand in helping their students function in society. A teacher’s role encompasses so many different characteristics and duties which is why their job should not be labeled as including only specific components like the three discussed in the chapter.

            A question that was brought up towards the beginning of the chapter stuck out to me, asking whether or not teaching actually causes learning to occur (6). This is something that I feel like many people, including myself; just assume to be true since it makes sense. The text goes on to explain how teaching doesn’t always have to lead to learning since “learning can take place in the absence of teaching” (6). I never really thought about this idea until it was brought up in the chapter. I guess students can technically learn without a teacher or facilitator but I think that the learning of material is definitely easier when you have a teacher or someone who can be considered an “expert” on the concepts you are learning. Even though teaching doesn’t always have to lead to learning, Kumar explains how the entire “edifice of education is constructed on the foundation that teaching can contribute to accelerated and accomplished learning” (7).