I was recently
afforded the opportunity to teach a few education classes at a local community
college and had the distinguished pleasure of reading mounds of educational
philosophy papers. Now, it has been several years since I wrote my original required
paper, and I have no doubt it was a gigantic pile of garbage from my arrogant nineteen-year-old brain. Fortunately, I can’t locate the floppy disk on which
it is stored…nor do I still have access to technology that would even open
it. Thus, it is easy for me to list the
ridiculous mistakes my current students are commonly making against my rather
vocal opposition. However, I am current I was an offender of some, if not all, of these rules.
1. DO NOT ramble.
Look, we all can
ramble when we are sharing our beliefs about a topic for which we are
passionate. It is extremely important to organize these thoughts and make them
as concise as possible. If you start over-explaining them or using unfamiliar
philosophical jargon, you are just going to sound like a babbling idiot. Don’t
write down everything you are thinking because you will certainly start to sound like a blabbering idiot.
2. DO NOT rant.
Ranting is similar to
rambling but with a negative undertone, making it more unpleasant to read.
It is basically the equivalent of complaining which is such an exhausting
turnoff when written on paper. A philosophy paper is not the place to push a
political agenda, especially if it may possibly offend a future employer. Plus, if
you are already complaining now, you are going to make one miserable teacher.
3. DO NOT tell cliché stories.
Statistically speaking, 74% of the educational
philosophy papers I read this semester included a story about how the author knew he or she
wanted to be a teacher after playing school as a child. Please stop telling
that ridiculous story! We all played school! No one is playing human resources
representative or marketing accountant. Does pretending to be something as a
child better qualify you for that role as an adult? If so, my son is going to
be one heck of a Ninja Turtle!
4. DO NOT describe bad teachers.
What is the
infatuation with detailing undesirable characteristics of people? Experienced
teachers know that you put yourself on a pedestal daily for many little eyes to
judge. If you have even the tiniest personality or physical flaw, you better
believe a student is going to make you aware of it. (Never make a drastic
change to your hair in the middle of the school year unless you have tire-thick
skin!) Your philosophy should include your opinion of the role of a teacher.
People want to know what you are going to do…not what you aren’t going to do!
5. DO NOT dumb things down for your reader.
Let’s be honest;
very few people are actually going to read your philosophy of education. It
will likely only be read by college professors and perhaps future employers, all people
who are considered education professionals. Thus, there is no need to explain
the basic content covered in your Introduction to Teaching class, because we
already know it. In fact, we either taught it to you or are currently living
it. We all know the difference between auditory and visual learners. Also,
please don’t define philosophy!
6. DO NOT demean the profession.
Avoid trashing
teaching as an underpaid profession. Teachers have great benefits, a
summer, spring, and/or fall break, and earn a salary that is typically equal to the average
household income of th surrounding community. Being a teacher is a respectable and influential job, and you
should be honored to enter the profession regardless of the pay. Plus, when you
belittle the earnings of a teacher, you may also be inadvertently insulting the
teacher reading your paper.
As a paper, your
philosophy of education may not change any lives, including your own. However,
it is extremely important to be able to articulate your philosophy of
education. That should be the purpose of your writing.
Need more help? Check
out my FREE product on TeachersPayTeachers. It includes a prewriting activity
and rubric to help guide your writing.