Active teacher vs passive teachers
What style of teacher is better for learning a language? In my opinion as a teacher. Someone who is full of energy and demonstrates is 100% better than a teacher who explains. Americans make good foreign language teachers as they tend to be very animated and dynamic. I think this is much more important than knowing grammar rules. I think most people want to get off the ground when trying to learn a language. The additional grammar work they can do themselves at home. Motivation is a huge part of language learning and if the teacher is doing back flips for you, this is the best. I have been in classes where teachers are low energy and monotone, boring. You tell your self maybe they are good teachers. No they are not. Teaching to be effective must make some emotional and motivational impact on the student. The downside of teaching with energy is it wipes out the teacher. So if you do learn a language at a school, try not to think, which school to pick, as many of the language schools share teachers, as trying to find the right teacher for you.
3 responses to Active teacher vs passive teacher when learning a language
I agree. As a teacher, one of the best things that you can do is get your student excited about your subject.
Anderson, Very good point, See I am a big believer in the socratic method. That is drawing the language out of the student. Make the student active. Because you can have a teacher that does a song and dance but if the students just sit there with a blank face, waiting for the language to magically go into their brain, its not going to happen. The teacher has to actively make the students active.
Yeah, but I think the question is also how a teacher activates the students. For too many of them keep their student’s looking down into their books, instead of being active.
Leave a reply to Active teacher vs passive teacher when learning a language