Teaching Philosophy
“… [T]otalization no longer has any meaning, it is not because the infinity of a field cannot be covered by a finite glance or a finite discourse, but because the nature of the field--that is, language and a finite language--excludes totalization. This field is in fact that of freeplay, that is to say, a field of infinite substitutions in the closure of a finite ensemble.” -Jacques Derrida Structure, sign, and play in the Discourse of the Human Science, 1967 |
Deconstructionist Jacques Derrida, in his essay Structure, sign, and play in the Discourse of the Human Science, makes an impactful case about language: that it is structured yet always changing and that that change can occur because there is a structure (1967). As a teacher of language, this idea of a structured ever changing language is my foundation to teaching. I want my students to learn a "finite language" and learn the infinite possibilities it holds.
With this notion of endless possibilities, I want to create a safe learning environment through structured, scaffolded, and meaningful learning. Students trying to learn a new language often times come with many anxieties and frustrations with the second language. In a safe learning environment I want to be the map that guides them to wherever they want to go, and give them the skills to do so. In order to do so, I believe in learning more about my students through a Needs Analysis. It will help me gauge the 'needs' and 'wants' of my students. It should be the instructor’s responsibility to filter and organize the two and adjust the lessons for each class. scaffolding is an integral part of my teaching philosophy. It does not matter what is being taught or even what kind of pedagogy is being used. Scaffolding is a way to make content accessible, comprehensible, and meaningful for students. It automatically places the instructor in a position of guidance rather than dictator of information. Students should be able to notice linguistic aspects, comprehend them, and then practice them. For me it is very important that every aspect of a lesson has proper scaffolding to help students really recognize, comprehend, and then practice utilizing the language for themselves.
This leads to my beliefs in language pedagogy. As a second language learner myself, I am not a staunch advocate of "perfection" when it comes to language. It is too far-reaching and idealistic. With a mindset of using the Communicative Language Teaching approach, I combine recent findings in instruction in second language acquisition (SLA) research as part of my pedagogy to help students create building blocks to make their way towards more accurate and comprehensive language use.
The Communicative Language Teaching approach is a great way to incorporate culturally relevant pedagogy for students. It not only means I can integrate all four language skills (reading, writing, speaking, listening) but also provide a gateway into those skills by using authentic materials that can supplement any textbook/materials provided by an institution. This way, students can make clear connections to the world outside of the classroom as well as make connections for language use within their appropriate contexts. Assessment is a particularly difficult place to navigate as an instructor of language. Despite this, I feel all language instructors understand that assessing a language is more about constant observation rather than formal testing. Through observation, I can gauge the level of comprehension or lack of comprehension my students have with the lesson. Then I can adjust and provide further scaffolding to improve comprehension and also elicit more practice. In this sense assessment through observation is just as important for the instructor as it is for the students. In terms of formal assessment through testing, I believe that they do have a place in the classroom as they help gauge the level of linguistic comprehension the students have been able to either understand or remember. Again, I do not look for native-like perfection but I do look for progression in the language skills that show a move towards more accurate language use.
For me, teaching a language is a multifaceted and highly complex process. Not only am I helping students learn a new language but essentially, I am also teaching them to learn a new culture, adding to their perspectives, and possibly helping them navigate a new life. Language, in that essence, cannot be defined in any one way. And because of that, teaching cannot be defined in any one way. I hope to teach in a way that reflects the “finite” structures of language while allowing students to explore the “field of infinite substitutions in the closure of a finite ensemble” (Derrida, 1967).
References
Derrida, J. (1967). Structure, sign, and play in the discourse of the human sciences. In A. Bass (Ed.), Writing and Difference (pp. 278-294). Retrieved from http://hydra.humanities.uci.edu/derrida/sign-play.html
Gass, S. M. (2013). Second language acquisition: an introductory course (4th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
With this notion of endless possibilities, I want to create a safe learning environment through structured, scaffolded, and meaningful learning. Students trying to learn a new language often times come with many anxieties and frustrations with the second language. In a safe learning environment I want to be the map that guides them to wherever they want to go, and give them the skills to do so. In order to do so, I believe in learning more about my students through a Needs Analysis. It will help me gauge the 'needs' and 'wants' of my students. It should be the instructor’s responsibility to filter and organize the two and adjust the lessons for each class. scaffolding is an integral part of my teaching philosophy. It does not matter what is being taught or even what kind of pedagogy is being used. Scaffolding is a way to make content accessible, comprehensible, and meaningful for students. It automatically places the instructor in a position of guidance rather than dictator of information. Students should be able to notice linguistic aspects, comprehend them, and then practice them. For me it is very important that every aspect of a lesson has proper scaffolding to help students really recognize, comprehend, and then practice utilizing the language for themselves.
This leads to my beliefs in language pedagogy. As a second language learner myself, I am not a staunch advocate of "perfection" when it comes to language. It is too far-reaching and idealistic. With a mindset of using the Communicative Language Teaching approach, I combine recent findings in instruction in second language acquisition (SLA) research as part of my pedagogy to help students create building blocks to make their way towards more accurate and comprehensive language use.
The Communicative Language Teaching approach is a great way to incorporate culturally relevant pedagogy for students. It not only means I can integrate all four language skills (reading, writing, speaking, listening) but also provide a gateway into those skills by using authentic materials that can supplement any textbook/materials provided by an institution. This way, students can make clear connections to the world outside of the classroom as well as make connections for language use within their appropriate contexts. Assessment is a particularly difficult place to navigate as an instructor of language. Despite this, I feel all language instructors understand that assessing a language is more about constant observation rather than formal testing. Through observation, I can gauge the level of comprehension or lack of comprehension my students have with the lesson. Then I can adjust and provide further scaffolding to improve comprehension and also elicit more practice. In this sense assessment through observation is just as important for the instructor as it is for the students. In terms of formal assessment through testing, I believe that they do have a place in the classroom as they help gauge the level of linguistic comprehension the students have been able to either understand or remember. Again, I do not look for native-like perfection but I do look for progression in the language skills that show a move towards more accurate language use.
For me, teaching a language is a multifaceted and highly complex process. Not only am I helping students learn a new language but essentially, I am also teaching them to learn a new culture, adding to their perspectives, and possibly helping them navigate a new life. Language, in that essence, cannot be defined in any one way. And because of that, teaching cannot be defined in any one way. I hope to teach in a way that reflects the “finite” structures of language while allowing students to explore the “field of infinite substitutions in the closure of a finite ensemble” (Derrida, 1967).
References
Derrida, J. (1967). Structure, sign, and play in the discourse of the human sciences. In A. Bass (Ed.), Writing and Difference (pp. 278-294). Retrieved from http://hydra.humanities.uci.edu/derrida/sign-play.html
Gass, S. M. (2013). Second language acquisition: an introductory course (4th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
last edited: August 2014