Why is subject matter competency so important to a teacher?
One of the main focuses of the undergraduate Liberal Studies program is to prepare students to be competent in the subject matter of teaching elementary school. The California Commission on Teacher Credentialing requires future teachers to demonstrate competency through coursework and testing (CBEST, CSET) before that student can receive a credential. Students in the Liberal Studies program have taken a number of classes in the subject areas of elementary education, including English Language Arts, History, Maths, Science, Fine, and Performing Arts, Human Development, and Physical Education.
In this assignment, reflect upon your experiences so far in becoming competent in the subject matter. In a 1-2 page paper, respond to the following prompts:
Why is subject matter competency so important to a teacher?
What benefits does a teacher’s subject matter competency offer to students? If a teacher is not subject matter competent, what are some of the consequences to students?
What areas of subject matter are you most confident in? In what areas do you feel future study and growth are still needed? How do you plan to pursue those areas in the future?
Dramatist, playwright, and author George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950) famously wrote: He who can, does. He who cannot, teaches. Although this is harsh criticism of teachers, there’s some measure of wisdom in the barbed quip.
Typically, teacher development programs tend to focus on enhancing pedagogy and classroom teaching skills and developing trendy 21st-century skills such as creativity and collaboration. Too often, teacher trainers forget that expert knowledge of a subject is as important as expert knowledge of how to teach. Teaching is, after all a process of interaction between teacher, student and subject matter. Effective teaching requires teachers to possess detailed subject matter knowledge intertwined with knowledge of pedagogy, curriculum, student behaviour, learning objectives and outcomes. Unfortunately, most teachers lack adequate subject matter knowledge (SMK) and curiously this lacuna is tolerated by most Indian schools.
However, although SMK is a necessary skill, per se it’s insufficient for a teacher. But conversely there™s no guarantee that a teacher with SMK will be effective because of the other intertwined pedagogical requisites of effective teaching. Sadly, the opportunities teachers have to self-learn are uneven and inadequate, as they are products of the same system. It is thus imperative that teachers stay ahead of their students by continual exposure to subject material that is deeper than what they are expected to teach. Without continuous learning, they run the risk of precocious students posing baffling questions which embarrass teachers and undermine their authority in the classroom.
Against this backdrop, how can school managements ensure teachers have the required SMK? How do they help teachers develop their SMK continually in a changing landscape of academic standards, teaching philosophies (such as problem-based learning), international curricula and enrichment programmes? How can they be helped to accurately and continually measure and benchmark their teachers SMK, to ascertain the degree of remedial support or advancement they need?
Before addressing these questions, it’s worth noting that student enrichment programmes incorporated into school curriculums improve student performance dramatically, and enable teachers to measure their progress. Therefore, a growing number of schools are exploring how to provide academic enrichment material and programmes to students and are benchmarking them not just against standard curricula but international norms as well. Is it possible to adopt a similar approach to developing the SMK of teachers?