I believe the key to successful teaching is maintaining a balance between pragmatism and idealism; that is, the ability to move between the practical needs and goals of students, and ideal standards demanded of the students by the instructor’s expectations, the class readings and assignments, and the institution. Why are students taking the class? What do they hope to get out of it? What are their interests? What are their unique experiences and backgrounds? What particular learning styles do they have? What is the end goal of the educational institution? At the same time, I expect students to challenge themselves, each other, and me as an instructor in the course of the class. I expect them to come to class; engage with the readings, lectures, and assignments; and participate and ask questions inside and outside of the classroom.

Flexibility and sensitivity to students’ individuality qua students is crucial for their learning, and not only because every student learns differently and comes to class for different reasons. It is also crucial because it allows the instructor to relate the class materials to students’ own personal and academic experiences, their strengths, backgrounds, and points-of-view. This allows students to learn from their own and other students’ lives. It allows them to apply concepts learned in class to what they see around them everyday, and thus to start thinking analytically, not just about what they read about in the class, but also about what they come across in other classes, in their everyday lives, and in the culture at large.

In short, an approach which is flexible to students’ needs, goals, expectations, and learning styles not only allows students to learn more, but also allows students to learn better through making the classroom experience relevant to their here-and-now and future. To this end, when teaching I make a point of: using examples that relate to students’ own lives and their own interests; altering the syllabus readings to students’ interests (whenever possible); assigning weekly reaction papers (see below); and having students do small assignments that require them to relate ideas discussed in class to some area of expertise that they have. For example, when discussing the varieties of language in my class “Language and Culture,” I had students make short presentations to the class on some variety of language that they are familiar with (e.g., students presented on Philadelphia English, the language of horse-shows, golf-talk, secret fraternity language, Spangelish, San Francisco hip hop slang, Jamaican patois, the language of knitting communities, Chinese regional dialects, etc.). Not only did students get to apply concepts to some aspect of their own lives (which many told me they had never analytically thought through before), they also enthusiastically learned from each other.

This attention to students’ interests, expectations, and needs requires that, as a teacher, I am always available to students, whether it is in class, during breaks, outside of class, on email, or in office hours. I believe that through constant feedback and communication, a teacher can truly begin to learn about, and from, his or her students, and thus to teach them. This is because I believe that students learn dialogically (from me and their peers), both inside and outside of the classroom. By always letting the students know that I am available, I try to create an atmosphere where students do not feel timid about asking questions about the readings, my lectures, and class discussions; or about voicing doubts and concerns about anything class related.

To cultivate this kind of learning environment, I insist that not only should students participate during class (in discussion, in-class group assignments, and mini-presentations), but also that they write weekly reaction papers on the readings. To these reaction papers I provide in-depth responses, comments, clarifications, and further questions for the students to think about. This kind of weekly feedback provides students with a forum to ask questions, voice concerns, integrate and synthesize concepts, and develop arguments and ideas which they may not be able to do during class. It also allows me to guide their readings through difficult texts by posing questions to be answered when reading (provided at the end of every lecture about the readings for the next week), to monitor their comprehension of the assigned texts, and thus to tailor my lectures and discussions to what they did and did not understand, what they did and did not find interesting or problematic, et cetera.

At the same time, I believe that students learn best when challenged, by the instructor, the other students, and the materials. Only by expecting the most from students (tempered, of course, by an evaluation of their particular strengths, weaknesses, and interests), and providing them with challenging materials, will students actually be able to attain a level of excellence (whether it be of writing, of argumentation, of comprehension, or of analysis) which they themselves perhaps did not realize they could reach. My experience is that demanding teachers, teachers who do not compromise on the integrity of academic excellence, allow students to flourish intellectually.

In short, I believe that by balancing the realities of the classroom with the ideals and goals that a teacher should hold for his or her students, students can maximize their own potentials and fully realize the benefits of, and take control of, their own education; and further, can develop learning skills (how to pick apart an argument, how to apply abstract concepts to concrete experiences, etc.) which will benefit them for the rest of their lives.