Teaching Philosophy

History and, indeed, the social studies as a whole, can be an overwhelming subject to
study. Many students of all ages complain that they simply do not enjoy history classes or that
they cannot seem to "memorize" all the information. I do not believe that either of these are valid
grievances; history (in the hands of an expert) can be the most fascinating subject that is taught
in school! My goal is, of course, to become just such an expert and to make history as interesting
to my students as it is to me.
My goal (as it pertains to the students) is ultimately to send students out of my room as
better people and citizens than they were when they first came in. Although history is certainly a
wealth of knowledge waiting to be tapped, the most important lessons to be learned from history
are the moral ones. While it is clich to say that my reason for teaching is to have the students
"learn from the mistakes of the past in order to avoid repeating them," this is not an inaccurate
assessment of what I want to accomplish in my classes. Knowledge is a good thing to possess,
but a strong moral foundation will always go further than can knowledge. In 1 Corinthians 8:1,
the Apostle Paul wrote, "[W]e know that 'all of us possess knowledge.' This 'knowledge' puffs
up, but love builds up." This verse sums up my view of how I should be teaching in my classes.
To this end, I want to, along with each lesson, include some sort of "What Can We Learn
From This?" question. That way, the students can see how things like dishonesty or tyranny, etc.
can cause problems for people. This structure has two major foreseeable benefits: (1) the
students will morally benefit from this, and (2) there will be a single, unifying theme that winds
its way through the entirety of the course material. In addition, this will not interfere with the
ability to cover all of the prescribed course material, since it simply fits into the existing material.

In order to measure the effectiveness of this approach, the assessment will have to be a
little "out of the box." Certainly I can assign essays for the students to do individually, asking
each student what he/she has learned (morally) from this lesson. But the ultimate summative
assessment of the effectiveness of this approach will come at the end of a unit, etc., at which
point I will be able to see if they are applying these new lessons in their everyday interactions.
Both of these assessments will combine to effectively measure whether the students are
comprehending the lessons.
All of this is not to say that the knowledge components of the curriculum will be ignored;
the moral lessons will be impossible to teach without teaching the historical facts. Although I
have a predilection towards lecturing, I do not intend to inundate my students with non-stop
lectures; the students should be taking initiative through group work and classroom discussions
based on readings, etc. The ability to interpret history and intelligently discuss it will equip the
students to better engage with historical material that they will encounter later in their scholastic
careers.
In summary, from my point of view, the course material is only of auxiliary importance;
history is uniquely person-centric in its nature. History has lessons to teach us, but these lessons
are not limited to the traditional, boring lessons. Teaching is about changing lives primarily, and
we (as teachers) have the opportunity to "fill" young minds with knowledge while we are
changing these lives. Ironically, there is no state or national standard regarding this, despite its
importance in what we do. Nonetheless, it is the foundation of my teaching philosophy.

Kyle T. Garbely