Why am I here? Where do we go from here? (Part 1)

Before we begin answering the big questions in the title, it's apt that I provide some explanation to the scope of the questions I asked. The problem is that "here" is type of word that linguists call a deixis, a word that requires contextual clarification. In this case, "here" refers to both a place and time.

 Location: NIE             Time: At the beginning of my PGDE course

Before I left CJC after almost a year of contract teaching, students asked me for the reason I am leaving them. 

My answer, "I need to go to NIE. I need to get trained". 

The reply often was, "but, you so good in Physics already, why need to get trained?"

Herein lies the very crux of the question we ask here, "Why NIE?". Firstly, we need to recognise that knowing a subject and teaching it are two distinct set of skills. The recognition of the varied models of intelligences and learners are proof of these diversity, some of us are better at grasping certain concepts in certain ways better than other.

Learning is primarily a process of internalisation, understanding something for yourself. At the end of the day, it is the individual who needs to understand the concept, a process independent of the understanding of your peers [1]. 

Teaching, in contrast, is an act of "delivering" (for the lack of a better word) ideas catering to a diverse set of personalities, competencies and preconceived perspectives. Catering to all of these different viewpoints, even if you are talking about a singular concept is extremely difficult. However, that is one of the main goals as teachers, to send the message across clearly to all the intended recipients. These considerations make clear that even if I do know my subject well, there's still quite a lot to learn about dealing with this diversity to make my teaching effective.

Returning to the core question, why am I here? The simple answer would be to develop the core teaching competencies with my conceptual knowledge of my subject content as a foundation. 

1. To develop the right values to be a good (both competent and ethical) teacher 
2. To figure out how best to create a learning environment that will attempt to cater to all these diverse needs of students so that I can deliver my content well.
3. To learn how to deliver the actual content well, and finally, 
4. To understand why certain methods work and why other do not. 

Indeed, if I do keep these ideas in mind, the learning processes in NIE will be a lot more meaningful. The above are the ends in mind, and the courses are the means to that end. We tend to think that many of these traits are instinctive: the so-called, "it's all "common sense" isn't it?", and the quip, "surely anyone who knows the content well can teach". 

Well, there is a little bit of truth in it, I find myself having thought of the same questions the courses in NIE aim to answer in my stint in teaching, and developed some of the answers myself, but ultimately, there are still plenty of gaps, self-realisations and mistakes that remain to be ironed out if I am to be a better teacher, and deliver my content and discharge my duties effectively.  

This, I do hope, serves as slightly protracted, but very personal answer to the question my students ask, and of course, more importantly, as a little reflection about the significance of my journey in NIE right before I begin. I am afraid I've run out of time to type out the response the the second question, so... see you next post.

[1] At this juncture, I feel I need to clarify this point. I acknowledge that learning can take place collaboratively, but still ultimately, it is still out of self-initiative and personal effort to examine and toy with the concept in which truly meaningful learning takes place. I like to think of it as an openness of the mind