Two Views on the Role of the Teacher

Christian educators frequently differ on the role that the teacher plays in the teaching process. Primarily, differing views came about as the Christian school movement took shape in the 1950s and leaders struggled to identify one representative philosophy of education. However, the existence of multiple Christian institutions of higher education and multiple publishers of Christian curricula combined with the formation of various approaches to teaching and learning created an environment of partisanship among the leadership and teachers within the movement. Out of this partisanship developed two main views of the role of the teacher in the teaching and learning process which are seen currently in the Christian school movement.

The first view, the "methods are the key" view, is based on the premise that methods and materials of instruction are more important than the teacher's competency or his professional qualifications. There are two specific forms of this view: the traditional and the self-instructional forms. Baker (1979) promotes the traditional form of this view in his book designed to aid Christian educators in beginning Christian schools. He develops this form by offering the following suggestions to prospective principals and administrators regarding teachers:

1. Teachers should use teaching guides, called "day-by-day teaching curriculums," which provide daily lesson plans for the entire academic year.
2. Methods, not the teacher or his professional qualifications, give impetus for academic growth, consistency, and results.
3. Teachers should adhere to the day-by-day teaching curriculums for direction in determining student needs and instructional strategies.
4. Lesson preparation time is reduced by following the pre-made lesson plans.
5. Principals are promised that when teachers follow these pre-made lessons, they can be confident that teaching and learning have taken place (pp. 132-133).

Still other educators within the Christian school movement promote the self-instructional form of the "methods are the key" view, which is based on the self-instructional approach to teaching and learning. Proponents of this form subscribe to at least the following points:

1. The teacher is a supervisor, or monitor.
2. The self-instructional materials contain all essential subject matter knowledge.
3. Students initiate and direct learning by reading self-instructional booklets and completing tests contained in those booklets (Allison, 1990).

Characterizing the "methods are the key" view, Herbster (1988) states that it is "a philosophy [that] exists [in the Christian school movement] that says if you have the proper textbooks, it doesn't matter who teaches the materials from those textbooks. Any warm body will do. The emphasis has been put on books instead of on the Christlike model, the teacher" (p. 2). The inherent danger in practicing this view is that the teacher becomes subservient to the materials and methods, with the results that the professional qualifications of the teacher are deemed unimportant and recognized as unnecessary (Tyson-Bernstein 1988).

The second major view regarding the role of the teacher in instruction is "the teacher is the key" view (Herbster, 1984). This belief is based on the assumption that the teacher is the most important variable in the teaching and learning process. In this view, the teacher actively organizes and directs the instructional process for optimum learning results. Administrators provide the instructional leadership and supervision of teachers so that they can better influence learning. Furthermore, the content of instruction and the effectiveness of teaching are largely dependent on a well-qualified teacher who is competent in subject-matter knowledge, teaching methods, and educational philosophy (Herbster, 1988; Bell, et al., 1978).

Davis (1994) discusses the major ideas involved in this view of the role of the teacher:

1. "Teaching requires design and purpose."
2. A teacher is required who has "knowledge of the learning step..., [who] needs educational tools that will enable him to perform his teaching task with skill..., [and who] needs to develop insight into the student's special ways of responding and thinking."
3. "The teacher must be heavily involved in the learning process...[by interacting] with the student by asking leading questions that develop thinking patterns."
4. The teacher uses "stimulating dialogue, direct(s) hands-on experiences, [guides] independent student work, and [provides] immediate, meaningful evaluation."
5. the teacher should use "a good teacher's manual [which] provides the teacher with guidance to perform his task well...[by providing] a sequence of skills, lesson objectives, stimulating learning activities, and suggested questions and dialogue to direct the student's thinking process..." (p. 5).

Several educational studies support the belief that the teacher is the key to the learning process and that materials and methods of instruction are subservient to that teacher. In the Cooperative Research Program in First Grade Reading, 27 independent research studies were pooled to determine the relationship between certain factors, such as pupil, teacher, class and school characteristics with student reading achievement, and to determine the superiority of various reading approaches and methods. From this study, Bond and Dykstra (1967) concluded that successful instruction is not entirely dependent upon any single best method of teaching. On the contrary, they determined that several methods can be utilized to produce successful achievement. In addition, they concluded that the professional qualifications of teachers provide a better foundation for improved instruction than do instructional methods and materials.

Harris and Morrison (1969) conducted The Comparison of Reading Approaches in First Grade Teaching with Disadvantaged Children project to evaluate reading achievement of 1,141 students and to compare approaches and methods of reading instruction. They found that the variance in mean scores between approaches or methods was not significant. From this finding they concluded that the "teacher is far more important than the method" in the reading process (p. 339).

The major implication of this discussion is that the principal's attitude concerning the role of the teacher in instruction will influence his view of the importance of his teacher's possessing the competencies essential for effective teaching and learning. Sutton (1990) studied elementary teachers in North and South Carolina to determine if certain professional teaching factors influenced level of reading knowledge. One of the professional teaching factors studied was degree earned. He found that teachers employed by schools practicing the "methods are the key" view (n=101) had (1) more teachers teaching without a college degree (18.8%), (2) more teachers teaching without a degree in education (28.7%), (3) fewer teachers teaching with a degree in elementary education (48.5%), and (4) fewer teachers teaching with master's degrees in education (4.0%). Conversely, teachers employed by schools practicing the "teacher is the key" view (n=74) had (1) fewer teachers teaching without a college degree (6.7%), (2) fewer teachers teaching without a degree in education (21.6%), (3) more teachers teaching with elementary education degrees (63.6%), and (4) more teachers teaching with master's degrees in education (8.1%). He concluded that a relationship seemed to exist between a principal's view of the role of the teacher and his teachers' level of educational professionalism.

During the middle-to-late 1960s, educators contemplated the idea of computer-assisted instruction (CAI). Regarding the potential use of this new technology (a technology which has a great potential to enrich the classroom's resources and to change the way a class is conducted), Harris (1969) commented as follows: There are those who have discarded the notion that teacher effectiveness can be greatly improved through better teacher training and supervision. Their solution is to produce equipment which will teach in a way that is invulnerable to teacher incompetence or inefficiency. In other words, they want teacher-proof education (p. 195).

The leadership within the Christian school movement finds itself in much the same position in that some continue to grapple over the teacher's role in the teaching and learning process. However, we concur with Deuink (1991) who contends that "teachers are undoubtedly the most important" (p. 1) component in a genuinely Christian school. Effective and successful teaching should stem from competent teachers properly prepared in the art and skill of teaching and learning rather than from unprepared, unimportant or irrelevant teacher's mere handling of instructional materials. Therefore, for the good of the movement and, most importantly, for the good of the students within the movement, Christian school leaders should demand that teachers with the best preparation and those who are the most professional occupy positions of teaching in Christian school classrooms of America.

Bibliography

Allison, K.L. (1982). An investigation of the influence of the Accelerated Christian Education program of instruction upon student achievement in a Christian college. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Bob Jones University, Greenville, SC.

Baker, A.A. (1979). The successful Christian school. Pensacola, FL: A Beka Books.

Bell, R.D., Frederick, K.H., Fremont, W.G., Horton, R.A., Rumminger, E.L., Salter, G.E., & Smith, P.D. (1978). The Christian philosophy of education. Greenville, SC: Bob Jones University Press.

Bond, G.L., & Dykstra, R. (1967, Summer). The cooperative research program in first grade reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 2(4), 5-142.

Davis, J. (1994, May). The teaching process. Balance, 13(5), 5.

Deuink, J.W. (1991). Building your professional staff. Balance, 11(7), 1-3.

Harris, A.J. (1969, December). The effective teacher of reading. The Reading Teacher, 23(3), 195-204.

Harris, A.J., & Morrison, C. (1969, January). The CRAFT project: A final report. The Reading Teacher, 22(4), 335-340.

Herbster, C.D. (1984). The teacher is the key. In J.W. Deuink (Ed.), Some Light on Christian education. (pp. 77-80). Greenville, SC: Bob Jones University Press.

Herbster, C.D. (1988). Productive teaching in the Christian school. Greenville, SC: Bob Jones University Press.

Sutton, J.A. (1990). Analysis of selected factors influencing the Christian school elementary teacher's knowledge of reading. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Bob Jones University, Greenville, SC.

Tyson-Bernstein, H. (1988, September 21). Questioning teacher's outlook on texts. Education Week, 8(3), 31.

Reprinted from Balance, a publication of the School of Education, Bob Jones University. Used with permission of Bob Jones University. Please write BJU Press, for permission to reproduce this article.