About Me

Teaching is not only an interesting field, but it is also an incredibly flexible one. No two teachers necessarily have to teach in exactly the same way in order to be successful at their work and that is what, ultimately, made me interested in the field when I was younger. There are endless possibilities when it comes to teaching because of the different needs of all students. 
It is one thing to say that you want to be a great teacher and another thing entirely to truly understand what that entails. As a student in both primary and secondary education, I always knew which teachers I would admire the most within the first week or so of school. Although I was unaware of the correct terminology for the styles of teaching that appealed the most to me, I had a fairly good idea of what kind of educator I wanted to be. For the most part, I want my teaching to lie in the realm of constructivism, the theory of learning that emphasizes the fact that all students are capable of improving their intelligence, no matter what their previous educational background. The notion that certain students are less capable than others would be discouraged in the classroom because students would not only lose confidence in themselves but also cause them to acquire a fixed mindset. This would inevitably prevent them from reaching their fullest potential.  
In using the constructivist approach to teaching, students would not only be encouraged to learn, but they would be put in charge of their own learning, which is a key part of the theory. This is to say that I would not be at the head of the classroom, lecturing and controlling every aspect of the student’s learning experience. Instead, I would be a facilitator of discussion in the classroom, encouraging students to help one another to get to the correct solution or goal. The idea is that I would not be “handing” my students the answers to any questions, as a lecturer would do. Simply giving students the answers without encouraging exploration of the subject is not only unengaging, but it also lacks the challenge that gives them the experience that Piaget theorized as helping students build their knowledge. Students would know that making mistakes would not be something they should be ashamed of in order to encourage them to learn from their own downfalls and build their knowledge from there.
While a constructivist classroom, when done correctly, can already be quite engaging for students, it is important to me to make my lessons culturally relevant as well. In STEM courses, especially, it is incredibly rare to see content that is not only engaging but relevant to a student’s culture. Culturally relevant content was not necessarily something I was ever exposed to in my math or science courses, but I was always more interested in my English courses, especially, when they touched upon issues or topics that were personally important and pertinent to my life. As an educator, I want my students to realize that math has its place in their life, perhaps in ways that are unexpected and impressive to them, which I believe will not only engage them but encourage them to see mathematics in an entirely new light.
Student learning can be measured in a variety of ways, but as an educator, it is important for me to assess understanding above all else. End-of-year assessments are important, yes, but are not the best evaluation of a student’s understanding. Assessments are best used for student comparison when it comes to college applications and class ranking, but it is important to recognize that high scores on student assessments are not equivalent to their understanding. Instead of relying on summative test scores, I would use student contributions in group discussions and formative assessments to gauge my student’s growth. Group discussions would already be an integral part of the classroom because of the constructivist format I will be drawing from. While group discussions are helpful for engaging students in the curriculum, it would also be a way to observe what students do or do not understand, based on whether they are able to explain concepts to one another or not. However, as previously mentioned, the curriculum would not always make discussions a valid option for every lesson. As such, I would also use formative assessments that would not only inform me of what students are strongest and weakest at but also help me alter my lesson plans needed to fit students’ needs. While using both of these forms of assessment, I would put an emphasis on the improvement of my individual students, rather than their immediate understanding of the information presented in the classroom. All students learn at different speeds and I would be as accommodating to that as possible. It is important for students to gain some form of proficiency, but it is also important to acknowledge the effort a student is putting in to learn the material.