Do Learners want Teachers?

Do Learners want Teachers? It seems a strange question, doesn’t it, but do learners want teachers? Over recent years there has been a shift in emphasis away from teaching and teachers toward learning and learners. This has been to such an extent that even a major quango spent thousands changing one of its departments from Teaching and Learning to Learning and Teaching. I will say, though, that I think the change in emphasis is justified; learning is more important than teaching. A teacher in a school can teach and teach as much as they can but if the people they are teaching do not learn, then the teacher has been wasting time; the role of the teacher is to enable and ensure that learning takes place. Of course, any and every teacher knows this and also knows different strategies and approaches to facilitate learning. At the end of the day, a school is judged on how/what the learners have learnt (or parts of what they have learned) rather than on what teaching took place. Increasingly, we hear people say that the learner is responsible for their learning and that the role of the teacher is to guide the learner through their learning. The teacher standing in front of the class is something that is frowned upon nowadays, rather the teacher should be at the side of the learner to give support and direction; this is the ‘sage on the stage’ versus ‘the guide at the side’ argument. While we can accept that the role of the teacher is changing, that learning is now seen as more important than teaching and that the learner now has responsibility for their learning, does this mean that teaching or the teacher are no longer valued? I think not. It still seems that people want teaching and value good teachers. Let us consider an example; if you wanted to learn something completely new and, all things, such as price, being equal which approach might you choose? You could choose to learn from an online course, from text books or attend classes led by a teacher/tutor/facilitator. Most people would appear to opt for an approach that involves a teacher over a completely self-learning approach. Even if the approach had just one session with a teacher, it would appear to be preferred over an approach that has no teaching element. It would seem, therefore, that learners do value being taught or, at least, having some teaching input. Consider the training courses you have been on, though, and ask yourself what have been the most valuable parts of those courses. The chances are that you will say the most valuable parts have been those times when you have been allowed to trial, play, or explore for yourself. These have probably been the times when you have been able to learn what you have wanted to learn or to learn what appears most relevant to you or your work. Other valuable parts may have occurred when you found yourself ‘lost’ or had made a mistake and called upon the teacher to help you fix the situation and to avoid it happening again. How many of us, also, have been on a course that we initially thought would be a ‘waste of time’ only to have new light or new possibilities created because of the enthusiasm, passion or skill of the teacher? So the value of having a teacher would appear to lie in having an expert on hand, in having someone to at least introduce an area of learning to us and in having someone open our eyes to new possibilities. So while it may be clear that the nature of teaching and the role of the teacher may be changing, it is also clear that teaching and good teachers are also highly valued.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Inspiring active learning with limited resources (guardian.co.uk)
• Examples of Diverse Learning Styles (brighthub.com)
• Reflections (gartmanbarryedm310.blogspot.com)
• Fred Garnett on how to create new contexts for your own learning (alchemi.co.uk)