Why I Teach

Undergraduate Mock Trial Competition

In my first year of undergraduate study, I began pursuing degrees in politics and economics hoping to go to law school after graduation. However, while competing in various public speaking events, I became quite concerned with the problem of sophistry. I watched

competitors in mock trial advocacy, platform speaking, and policy debate win competitions using dubious “facts,” tricky arguments, and great presentation skills. After my experiences in these speaking disciplines, I changed majors in hopes of becoming a speech or communication teacher.

Platform Speaking Competition

Although I wanted to study speech and communication, I decided to pursue degrees in classics and philosophy so that I could understand the development of communication disciplines in the Western Tradition. In addition to philosophy and classics, I also wanted to study teaching itself, so I minored in education. While studying education, my professors emphasized how, although they are very helpful, teachers only assist students who do their own work of learning.

While taking a class called “Plato and Socratic Dialogue,” I explored models of teaching through discussion and leading rather than teaching didactically.  As an example, in his dialogue Meno, Plato has the character Socrates describe the teacher as a sort of guide in relation to a student. In the Meno, the character Socrates guides Meno’s servant, a person without a formal education, through a complicated geometric proof (Plato, trans. 1997, 83a-86c). Even though this character did not know how to do the proof, after Socrates engaged with him in dialogue, pointed out the order of the proof, and directed the servant’s mind to things he already knew, the man was able to do the proof on his own (Plato, trans. 1997, 83a-86c).

College Hall at Gonzaga University

However, if one plans to teach in this manner, one must know one’s

discipline quite well. Although I felt that I had a good grasp of the western rhetorical tradition after studying classics, philosophy, and education, I decided that, if I were going to guide students well, I would also need to pursue a course of study that included contemporary communication theory and practice. Because of that, I decided to enroll in Gonzaga University’s Communication and Leadership program since it included coursework in contemporary communication theory while also having a specialization in pedagogy for communication classes. The concentration in teaching especially appealed to me since I hope to teach at the undergraduate level at some point in the future.

In my classroom at Bloomfield Christian School

However, before I started with Gonzaga’s Communication and Leadership program, I began my teaching career in junior high and high school classrooms. For the last few years, I have had the opportunity to teach Latin grammar, logic, and rhetoric to students ranging from seventh grade to twelfth grade. In grammar class, I try to guide students to see the fundamental structures of language so that they can understand texts and communicate with clarity. In logic class, I guide students on a journey of discovering how terms and propositions build into discursive reasoning and problem solving. In rhetoric class, I introduce students to the five canons of rhetoric, show them Cicero’s methods for invention, and watch students become strong communicators able to fashion an argument in a pleasing manner. While in this rich learning environment for a new teacher, I began working on my Master’s degree to further my understanding of contemporary theories of communication.

Although contemporary theories have enriched my understanding, yet another very old framework that I have encountered at Gonzaga also greatly shapes the way I now teach. Indeed, the tenets of Ignatian pedagogy as expressed in the Ratiō Studiōrum strongly

influence my practices in the classroom (see my article on Ignatian teaching here: https://jc20201.wixsite.com/mysite/post/the-five-pillars-of-ignatian-pedagogy). In the same way that Ignatius focuses on “preludes,” “repetition,” “application,” and “reflection” in his Spiritual Exercises, the Ratiō Studiōrum applies those same principles to the classroom (Kolvenback, 1986, § 160). Currently, I give a “prelude” or explanation of a concept, develop activities for repeated practice of a concept, and push students to apply information and concepts practically. Finally, I try to incorporate a time of reflection at the end of a unit or our course to give students a time to connect class work to other bodies of knowledge, consider the worth of the material learned, and decide whether the things learned ought to influence the way one lives.

After doing my own process of reflection, I hope to make a career in the classroom. 

References:

Kolvenback, R. P. (1986). The characteristics of Jesuit education. Rome: The International

Commission on the Apostolate of Jesuit Education.

Plato (Trans. 1997 G.M.A. Grube). Meno. In J. Cooper & D. Hutchinson (Eds.), Plato:

Complete works. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.

All photo content is the property of this author.