The “it” teacher.

photo by Rhansanne.photos via Flickr. Published under creative commons.

I am not ashamed to say that I support the teaching of discrete disciplinary knowledge. I really do think that teachers who have a love and understanding of  a particular topic and, importantly, who can ‘teach’ have a lot to offer students and their peers. So, when I talk about collaboration, I am not referring to the development of esoteric topics which require little disciplinary knowledge or expertise. Collaboration requires thoughtful planning not just a bunch a of ‘passionate educators’ who want to create ‘powerful learning experiences’.

There is a skill to teaching. I know of several amazing scholars who, even by their own admission, “could never teach secondary school students”. That is not a criticism of them, in fact the admission is an admirable one: it acknowledges that teaching is a craft.

Over the past twenty years in fashion, luxury items have become part of popular culture. These items such as “it” bags from Chloe or Louis Vuitton are coveted because of the subjective status and sartorial appeal that they  offer. And it is design and not build quality for which they are desired because how else would the counterfeit market of these goods exist? When you see a young ingénue toting a Louis Vuitton backpack, it is unlikely a) that it is real and b) that she are aware that there exists a tradition upon which leathergoods or luggage like that have been created. As the brand permeates popular culture and the imitations are produced, the brand flourishes but the sentiment behind the craftsmanship becomes devalued.

When we look at teachers, do we see them as a generic product which has become undervalued? Do we want teachers to be relegated to the likes of the ‘it’ bag of 2008? Do we forget that behind the teacher is a tradition almost artisanal in character?

I wonder, when people talk about teaching and education’s need to change, whether we sometime forget about some of the basic traditions of the profession. The knowledge of the teacher, the quality of the materials with which they work should be carefully scrutinised and then revered. We shouldn’t see teachers as a fashionable commodity or as purveyors of faux luxe. I think it’s time to look at the teacher as artisan and look how each type, with their own expertise in whichever area they practice, can offer something of much more value to an individual than the generic educator who seems to take on everything.*

This is neither anti-technology post nor supporting the pro-history cause – it’s about appreciating the craft of many disciplines through those who can impart it. Sometimes appreciation of the artisan and his practice and the wealth of knowledge that he has to offer is simply enough to unleash creativity, and imagination.

*LOL – almost another post here about the idea of ‘Master’ teachers and ‘self interest’ cf. Adam Smith.