Teaching role Essay Example

speaking if a student in teaching college attends none of their lectures and only performs relatively well on heir placement in a school they can still emerge from the college with an excellent degree on the basis of exam results, their academic subject e. T. C. Therefore they do not possess the necessary skills of a teacher but are predominantly a "specialized technician".

This can also occur If a teacher ,for example has an extreme love of a subject e. G. English and spends countless hours teaching their class poetry ,stories e. T.C.

This is another example of a teacher who is just specializing to the detriment of the other subjects. Also central to the argument of suitability in the teaching reversion is the area of "culture "among teachers. Adorn suggests that in order to educate a child needs culture and "culture requires love" 5. An this sense I feel that Adorn seems to suggest that if a child comes from a disadvantaged area their teacher needs to be aware of this and respond with innovative teaching methods for the teacher.

Here he suggests that there may be problems as a result of an obvious language and cultural background.

While this is essentially true I believe that Adorns views on the rural urban divide are extremely archaic and out dated. In Ruth the perception of rural children not being as educated as their urban counterparts due to factors such as a lack of opportunity, finance or the draw of the land have long been left behind. There Is a necessity I feel, on the other hand to move away from the agrarian mindset, one that is in

perpetual decline. In a booming needs some alignment and revision.

Adorn also speaks of the importance of language in the teaching profession.

The teacher is essentially a model for the child's behavior and therefore if their speech, grammar, syntax e. T. C. Is not acceptable then t is inevitable that their student s will suffer as a result.

Oral language skills are cross -curricular and therefore fit the bill of the intellectual learner. Upon close inspection there are a number of ambiguities attached to the findings of Adorn. Len today's society the emphasis is largely on performance and results and the techniques or skills of the teacher is often irrelevant.

Education is becoming more and more goal orientated with the child being forced to store large amount of terms and information in their short term memory. This education does not fit the bill of the Adorn model but it is extremely easy to be a proficient teacher in this arena. Essentially the teacher Just gathers specialized information and transmits it to their children.

In the modern era of deadlines, exams and the points system I am of the opinion that there is no time for a teacher -especially in second level to become an intellect. Essentially the current education system rejects freedom of thought from the child.

If teachers, like us enter a classroom and try to implement freedom of speech will the authorities accept this or will they adapt a conformist attitude that is o rife in today's world. Change is often accepted as a dangerous process and if your superior staff members are of a mature or old-fashioned ilk there may be no option only to

respond in a manner befitting the system. Unless major transformations occur I believe, therefore that there is either no need or no relevance to the intellectual teacher.

After emerging from three years in a primary education college this study raises a number of questions.

Am I now a specialized technician or an "intellectual"? While I have attended seminars and lectures on every subject on he curriculum there is some doubt if I would be able to transmit a sense of passion in all these areas to the children. In this sense I feel Adorn is slightly elitist as he chooses to classify some people as "intellects "and exclude others. For me there is a huge difference between being extremely knowledgeable in many areas and being able to transmit a culture of learning and an interest level into your children.

If you are aware ,as a teacher of all the events surrounding World War 2 but your children are not engaged on the topic then I believe the role of the "intellect " is facile.

A teacher must reach equilibrium between subject matter and the needs of his or her audience. While I feel that Adorn is inherently wrong with some of his philosophies I am also acutely aware that he is extremely ethical and has the child's needs and wants in mind. Much of Adorns work is ethics driven and "in order to do justice to his philosophy it is necessary to disentangle and elaborate the always presupposed ethical contours of his thought. Therefore Adorn argues that it is only ethical to have an intellect as an educator as this takes care of all a child's wants

and needs. If a teacher is merely a specialized technician then they cannot take into account a child with special requirements or needs in the classroom.

Likewise they cannot cater for both the sporting and the musical or the artistic and the linguistic. Some extremely children can and do slip through then net in these situations and this is, for Adorn an extremely regrettable occurrence. Adorn argues this in relation to his correction of philosophy exams in third level.

The candidates knew specific he had an overall grasp of the topic but no idea of events preceding or following the event. This is another curse of the "specialized technician" syndrome which many teachers possess. While learning about an event such as the 1916 Rising in Ireland the majority of teachers will name the leader and the events which occurred during this week.

But will the children be aware of the events leading up to Rebellion? Or will they be aware of the events immediately following the Rebellion? In many case I believe that they won't and this adds major meat to Adorns argument.

In my opinion Adorn is predominantly pre-occupied with interest levels in teachers in a particular school. He argues that even though they have the necessary qualifications to be a teacher many lack the passion and interest level that those of a lower intellect may possessive a teacher e. G. If a teacher is impatient or nonplussed about teaching then it will reflect in their work. Many drift away from the profession into other Jobs.

"The people I have in mind are trapped within a vicious circle; their interest compels them to make the wrong decision

of which they themselves ultimately become the victims. This also leaves a void for other students who hap hoped to become searchers but their positions were taken by UN-interested students. Another argument of Adorns that I am not completely in tandem with is his view on philosophy. Philosophy is the "Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods" eh seems to suggest that many teachers are not philosophers and do not possess the level of thinking skills required to make philosophical decisions.

However I feel that many decisions made in a classroom are of this nature and that philosophy reverse as a bridging point between actual thinking skills and relationships with the children in the classroom.

Also I feel that the teacher is a vital cog in teaching the children about values and reality in the world. Apart from the child's parents no other person has such an influence on a child's development. There is a consensus from reading Adorn that he treats philosophy as elitist and a kind of a higher art form that not many people can attain to.

This also suggests some form of educational snobbery which I feel simply does not exist. While a teacher may not have a hilltop's degree they still are required to make decisions in this area and therefore it is an essential part of their make up.

However I believe that the central argument of Adorn is genuine. A child must be educated by an intellectual - a person who has the knowledge, passion and drive to be a teacher. This ethical view is slightly outdated

but it could potentially provide a much wider educational scope than the one that is now in place.

Changes in this area are not clearly forthcoming however and in my opinion it would not be a positive development to swing directly into an Adorn train of thought. This is largely due to the fact that I feel, if it were implemented, children's exam results would suffer in the long run. An intellectual may harvest extra learning and culture in the child but a "specialized technician" gets results.

Teachers are fully aware of their role in society and teaching and would surely reject a break away from this norm. Also I believe a flagrant freedom of expression would create problems in its own right.

The children would be the centre of attention but, from my experiences, there are occasions when this might not be a positive thing. Also freedom might create a lack of purpose and focus.

Some areas knowledge of the subject matter. Others which are not so interesting may suffer as a result. But there is a likelihood that both may appear on the exam. The children may then be intellectual learners on one hand but unprepared for academic success on the other.

In conclusion I feel that I must, to a large degree concur with Adorns views. This is largely due to my own experiences.

During my school years I undoubtedly learned huge amounts of information and subject matter. However the majority of this was stored in my short term memory and was never nurtured or elaborated on. Therefore in terms of teaching me from every aspect it was largely useless feel that this is predominantly

the case today. While I disagree with Adorn that there is a huge divide between the rural and urban educator and culture I agree that there is undoubtedly a need for the educator to be able to identify with the culture of his -her class.

This is essential so that the children will be interested observers and therefore active learners. While these are all extremely relevant areas and topics for discussion I feel that Adorns greatest legacy is in his treatment f the ethical realizes that children's needs are being neglected due to uninterested or unfocused teachers and he feels it is ethical that children should be taught be "intellectuals " and not specialized technicians".