Teacher Training: Objectives, Praises, and Critiques
Teacher Training: Objectives, Profession, Praises, and Critiques
1. Teacher Training Team
1.1 Reason
Teachers train future professionals to adhere to the objectives of the intervention processes. These are qualified and ideal objectives that are set based on rescuing the most pleasant and positive intervention processes, drawing from real business practices and institutions.
1.2 Profession Objectives
To ensure that welfare is properly managed and that students acquire the necessary skills, curricula are based on the direct, steadfast performance of companies and identities.
1.3 Praises
The training provided to students is directed at individuals or groups, and the aim is to increase the autonomy of students and enable social groups to increase their capacity to change the reality in which they are embedded.
1.4 Critiques
A good professional is one who has acquired the capacity to focus their actions on the ideal targets and who acts independently.
One of the essential attitudes is respect. Respect does not mean that one cannot have individual thinking, make decisions, and act for themselves. Professionalizing primarily involves developing critical thinking, autonomy, and reflection in students, turning them into critical transformers of reality.
- Critical Thinking: Students become transformers of reality.
- Empathy: (Putting yourself in the other’s place): To be effective mediators.
- Reflection: To develop meaningful work.
Teachers felt it necessary to train these attitudes to facilitate student access to the labor market because they believe that these attitudes open the way for the acquisition of knowledge and expertise.
Regarding the training modules that are given:
- Praise: When viewed as a virtue, preparing students to start their own businesses is sometimes the only solution to escape an uncomfortable work situation.
- Criticism: Training modules are often the product of policies that arise as a solution to the problems of job placement, labor market flexibility, and the motivation for everyone to generate their own employment.
Some teachers show a contrast between their models, which seek to form a well-rounded professional, and the curricula, which seek quick and immediate training.
The author states that in all cases, there is a “teacher resistance.” This is not resistance to the schools themselves, but a resistance to the demands and promises of the dominant model of vocational training. Teachers do not believe in the promises:
- Firstly, due to ethical issues.
- Secondly, for practical reasons.
- Thirdly, due to ideological questions.
Where are the jobs that these future professionals will be allowed to occupy? The roles of socio-cultural and social integration are those that are least recognized. Yet, teachers are concerned about the placement of graduates. As it is not in their power to change this situation, they are convinced that these future professionals will be needed someday socially and will find jobs. They should adapt to what exists but fight to change the experienced reality by seeking alternatives.
Paul Willis initiated the theories of resistance in his work “Learning to Labour,” studying cases of student rejection. Especially in the working class, anti-school students oppose (resist) the behaviors and tasks demanded by teachers.
Teachers are not mere transmitters of either model, but rather active agents for their pupils. Therefore, teachers may adhere to the dominant models, adapt, dissociate, or resist.