written by: a student
We all have our favorite teachers. There are the ones that augment your love for a subject, the ones that let you sleep in class, the ones that throw objects across the room, the ones that stretch your mind, the obviously passionate ones, the overly nice ones, the cool, the clueless, and the quirky. But what, really, defines a “good” teacher? Certainly, their ability to teach is the most important. But is that all it takes?
Through my entire public school experience, I’ve noticed the characteristics that teachers I’ve learned a lot from have in common. These five-star teachers, who’ll remain nameless, really define, in my opinion, what it means to be an excellent teacher. In no particular order, here are the five factors that I think make a five-star teacher:
#1 Charisma, chutzpah, and other nouns that suggest an engaging personality
Not all teachers have to be comedians, but they do have to engage a class and, in a way, put on a show. It seems that one of the most difficult challenges that teachers face is maintaining an attentive class. After all, wasting a thought-out lesson plan and an hour-or-two on an apathetic classroom is something all teachers work to avoid. True, some teachers keep a class engaged just by incorporating humor into their teaching. Notorious others may throw random, sudden, sharp questions at anyone who might seem like they’re drifting off.
An important part of being engaging is being vocal. Tacit teachers are rarely good ones. That said, teachers can keep attention on what’s being taught by simply expressing it with enough conviction. Depending on the subject, a teacher’s volume and the number of people paying attention are directly proportional (And for logic’s sake, there’s probably a threshold volume that keeps everyone glued.). If a teacher can keep a room full of kids focused, they’ve already gotten one star on the five-step ladder.
#2 Knowing what the heck you’re talking about
A good teacher’s knowledge goes beyond knowing a particular subject by heart. More importantly, good teachers have to anticipate the kinds of questions their students might ask. The worst thing a teacher can do is be roundabout with their answer or respond with, “I don’t know.” If that happens, students lose faith in the credibility and intellect of their instructor—whether consciously or not. I’ve found that teachers who are able to incorporate applications to the real world or include outside references are generally the most effective. Thus, knowledge means knowledge outside of the textbook and, in fact, knowledge outside of the classroom.
The best way a teacher can demonstrate his or her knowledge is by answering questions thoroughly, clearly, and–most importantly–correctly. Students should get the impression that their teacher is a guru of the subject.
#3 Friendliness and other, similar, non-evil qualities
Even though it sounds cheesy, friendly teachers are easier to approach with questions, easier to learn from, and easier to communicate with. I find that teachers who are too sarcastic, too jocular, or just flat out mean are difficult to relate to. A good teacher strives to get to know his or her students by finding similar interests, exchanging anecdotes or by simply breaking out the small talk. And although it’s ultimately up to a student to mold their learning experience, a friendly teacher will always be more impacting than an unfriendly one.
A good teacher does their best not to be cranky. In most cases, if the teacher’s in a good mood, the whole classroom, eventually, will be too. And if a student’s in a good mood, it gives them the impression that they have a good teacher. It’s all really systematic.
#4 Usefulness i.e. the quality of being useful
For all classes, especially Advanced Placement ones, it is crucial that teachers equip students with what they need to know for assessments. Nothing drains faith in a teacher more than being horribly underprepared for a test or quiz. Although it’s solely up to a student to be ready, it should seem obvious that a good teacher will clearly define what is to be assessed. As such, the vast majority of material should be learned within the classroom, rather than at home, where said learning should be applied. Those that expect too much of their students, assume wrongly, or fail to prepare adequately, are poor teachers. And I say that with some reserve, understanding that it’s a student’s job to learn, capture, and use given material. But at the same time, a good teacher will make sure what’s being taught is ready to be applied and assessed.
At an even more fundamental level, the way that classroom time is used also indicates the quality of a teacher. To put it bluntly, a class shouldn’t waste time doing something in a classroom that can just as easily be done at home. Time spent in a classroom is valuable and should be treated that way; every drop of learning should be squeezed out while a teacher’s in the room. Namely, things like group work, lectures, and activities make good use of the setting. The goodness of a teacher should be judged by how fulfilled a student feels walking out of the classroom. And how ready they are walking in.
#5 Actually caring
The best teachers are the ones that are truly interested in the success of their students both in and out of the classroom. Teachers who are willing to go the extra mile, say, by staying after school to answer questions or by holding review sessions every morning, are teachers that students can appreciate most. When a teacher makes it clear that they are motivated to help, they have an intrinsic quality that motivates students to do their best. These are the kinds of instructors, mentors, role models—teachers that are truly exceptional.
A five-out-of-five teacher is rare, no doubt, but not nonexistent. Luckily for me, Wayzata is fortunate enough to have a lot of ‘em.
More insight: See comments.
2 things: first, I saw some direct references to Mrs. Grack show up in here, or at least I think i did.
and second, while teachers should be gurus of their subject, it can also hurt ethos to pretend to know an answer to a student’s question. I think good teachers will answer a question to the best of their ability, but aren’t afraid to say, “I don’t know.”
You’re right. I meant to articulate that teachers shouldn’t be satisfied with not knowing the answer to a student’s question. A good teacher will search for an answer by the next class or, at the very least, justify their not knowing.
To Amy and Ishmam,
I’m glad to see you two fleshed out this concept a bit. Teachers are afraid to say we do not know sometimes, but the reasons when we do vary dramatically.
I don’t know because I never learned it myself. But I will find out, as I do not like not knowing something. Anything, really.
I don’t know because I have no idea what this kid is talking about. Rephrase your question, student.
I don’t know because, while I see where you are going with this line of reasoning or synthesis, answering this question will take us on a journey far outside the objective of today’s lesson.
I don’t know because I think you are simply trying to force me to become your quiz-prep surrogate. If you did not study for the quiz about applying this course’s content to the meaning of life, then I cannot tell you what the meaning of life IS in the time allotted today.
My hope remains that good teachers articulate their reasons to their students whenever the conditions arise to say those horridly suspicious words, “I don’t know.”
Wow man, that was a great post. Some of the stuff you said needed quite a bit of digging. I’m glad that your school has a blogging “community”, or so it appears… mine, though it is in the heart of the Silicon Valley, has moved onto Twitter saying “Blogging is old”… after like 3 years… what’s up with that? Sometimes I really hate California.
Anyways, this is one of my favorite posts, Ishmam,
Thanks Mihir!
What does “usefulness” mean? I get the feeling that you’re treating people as MEANS rather than as ENDS.
I’m trying to get at the fact that teachers are as much of a functional utility, a resource, as they are compassionate and caring individuals. I agree, though; “usefulness” is a little too blunt.