Jump to content

It's not show business or is it?


up2you2

Recommended Posts

My son's previous teacher came out with the comment, "I'm not an entertainer".
This got me thinking, in just how important the qualities of being an entertainer might be in the class room.
So in the skill set of communicating, do entertainers come out on top?

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Solinvictus said:

I find being a teacher in Thailand is being 'an entertainer.' I mean if you are damn good at your job but no one was happy with you, you're out...

 

 

Schoo's that want "entertainers" are not that serious about what the students are learning. This seems to be more common in government schools, where teachers are employed to teach conversation. They want fun and entertainment. 

 

But other schools are driving students to do international exams such as IELTS, SAT's, etc. These classes are taken more seriously by the students, as most of them will go on to study in International programs or go overseas. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to clarify my initial post.

The point that I was trying to make, is that teaching I believe is a form of communication.
Students will either switch on or switch off.
So how does one teach through engagement, by making it interesting, informative and enlightening.
Throw humour into the mix, then I feel you'd be more than half way there.
Is teaching an art or a science, or at the end of the day it is those that can hook the fish, that land them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How about replacing the "entertainment" bit with "infectious enthusiasm". There can be nothing more likely to get students attention and engagement than a teacher who is, for wont of a better expression, excited about the subject being taught. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at the people that are the best teachers it is my belief that they are engaging and teach without teaching. They get you engaged in the message.  In order to teach you have to engage your students.  For some it is simply bringing them the material. But for many that have grown up in the short focus age it is entertain me. Some of our greatest teachers were entertainers. Red skelton big bird bugs bunny are examples.  What makes people sit for days with Tony robbins is he entertains and motivates.

 

The bottom line is that in order to teach we have to engage our audience.  If being an entertainer on a marginal scale gets your message across them go for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To entertain  is to amuse - being amused does not equate to learning. If you want to teach them something you must talk about things they are interested in or things that concern them. Show empathy and involvement. Remove the barrier and conversation ensues. Confidence and trust is generated and thus a true learning environment has been produced.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, poyai111 said:

being amused does not equate to learning.

Agreed: they are  not 100% identical.

BUT there is a very high correlation between ‘amusement‘, ‘engagement’ and ‘effective teaching/learning’ .  

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, PGSan said:

Agreed: they are  not 100% identical.

BUT there is a very high correlation between ‘amusement‘, ‘engagement’ and ‘effective teaching/learning’ .  

Not one lesson in my life was amusing or engaging, but I still  managed to get a degree and a postgrad.

But that was back in the days when you really wanted a degree, and only a few achieved them.

Now life is a game where everyone gets a worthless qualification,  and spends  the rest of their life trying to pay off the loan. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/9/2021 at 4:25 PM, up2you2 said:

My son's previous teacher came out with the comment, "I'm not an entertainer".
This got me thinking, in just how important the qualities of being an entertainer might be in the class room.
So in the skill set of communicating, do entertainers come out on top?

I took a 120 in-class TEFL course, and they hammered it in, again and again, the most important thing was to make it fun. That doesn't mean that teaching doesn't occur in the classroom. I am fortunate enough to be able to integrate music into my lessons, and that really sticks in their minds. Entertainer? Not so much at the cost of actual lessons. It is quite possible to do both teaching and entertaining.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A former colleague of mine summed it up perfectly. He was a big movie buff. I once commented to him about the absurdity of the paperwork we had to do, all the scoring, passing it to this office and that office, begging the students to turn in anything. None of it made them work any better. He said to me, “You know it’s all a show. Hollywood.”

 

The pomp and circumstance of the morning assembly, all the marching around, the grand activities and decorations, just so the students can go back to their rooms to goof off. Fancy equipment and special activity rooms, that may or may not be operational, shown off to parents and VIPs for photo ops. All a show.

 

Then the classroom show. Make it fun, sure. Give silly examples with the vocab. Make some jokes. Occasionally turn a lesson into a game. But you can’t always. Not all lessons easily convert. The “game” portion of a game is often quite time consuming, and calling on each student to make their move or whatever means not all the material will be covered. Too much fun and students get wild and distracted, taking up more time. I try telling them we can’t always be playing games, as you’re not going to get that out in the real world, where sometimes you have to get down to work.

 

Some teachers workship Kahoot! Heh. Sure, that competitive game show environment resonates with many. But making an A, B, C, D selection within a time limit somehow fails to capture the nuances necessary to produce composition, or engage in conversation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/11/2021 at 5:17 PM, up2you2 said:

The point that I was trying to make, is that teaching I believe is a form of communication.
Students will either switch on or switch off.

 

Why do you believe that foreigners should be entertainers whereas 
Thais not?

 

Teaching requires a balance and if you are acting like a clown to get a laugh out of the kids you will never be able to get them to become serious when you need to because the kids won't see you as a serious teacher.

 

Thais are not expected to be edutainers... why should we?

Link to post
Share on other sites

An equal amount of time will he spent on babysitting, and another equal amount of time will be spent on accounting/paperwork.  Doing what's right is usually not the best way to last. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...