the call to teach: my own metaphor

In his letter to the Ephesians, in chapter 4, the apostle Paul writes, "I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called."

This is something I have been contemplating a lot lately. I am so undeserving of the blessings God has bestowed on me, but because He has blessed me, I desire to walk worthy of the tasks and plans that God has given me. Here, Paul uses the word "vocation" to describe these God-given responsibilities. As a Christian, I am to follow what God has called me to do and do it with my whole heart.

In the beginning of chapter 1, on page 6, Kumaravadivelu defines the word "vocation" as a "summons or bidding to be of service". In his text, he describes teaching as a calling, as a vocation. As teachers, we are called to serve our students just as, as children of the King, we are called to serve Him.

with my whole heart.

This, to me, is my own metaphor of teaching. My service to my students should not equal my service to God, because only He is God, but it should echo it. Kuma presents several metaphors of teaching in this chapter - teachers as passive technicians, as reflective practitioners, as transformative intellectuals. He says that none of them completely capture teaching, but that teaching involves BOTH educational advancement AND personal transformation. Indeed, I have learend more about myself through teaching than I ever thought possible. To me, my metaphor of teaching that I described above, does completely capture it, at least for me.

So what does service to our students look like? How do I serve them - with what methods? What is method? That is the key question of Kuma's next chapter. He describes language-centered, learner-centered, and learning-centered methods, but goes on to say that "methods tend to drift wildly from one theoretical extreme to the other". I was waiting for someone to say this! My head is spinning from all these methods, ideas, theories, and techniques. I described in an earlier blog post that it is so free-ing to have the autonomy, as a teacher, to implement methods in the classroom that work for that context, for that group of students, and for that day, based on needs assessments and resources. It is impossible to successfully teach when one is required to subscribe to a specific method regardless of the needs of the students. However, in this chapter, Kuma presented a very key quote that really made me think. I think he is quoting another person here, but he writes, "It is quite common to hear teachers say that they do not subscribe to any particular approach or method in their teaching but are 'eclectic'. They thereby avoid commitment to any current fad [...] If by eclecticism is meant the random and expedient use of whatever techinque comes most readily to hand, then it has no merit whatsoever" (31). He describes the weakness of the eclectic position, and I completely agree with him.

I think a key phrase here is "avoiding commitment". Do we really do things as we do them to serve others, in this case, our students, or do we do them just to avoid commitment? I think it is very possible to serve ourselves under the guise of serving others.

I could go on and on here and extend my metaphor, but my plane is getting ready to board. Sometimes its nice to have a need for closure. :) All this to say, I am called to serve! I am called to walk worthy of my vocation, in devotion to God, my husband, my family, my co-workers, my friends, my students.

I think that Paul, inspired by God, says it best:
"with all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace" (Ephesians 4:2-3)