A teacher's job is to teach !

Not to "just" facilitate.

My stance:

As a teacher and a teacher developer, here’s my stance:

Education system is in shambles
because
most teachers believe (or are led to believe) that their job is not to teach* but to facilitate**

*to teach: in the current (philosophical and political) view, this is seen as conventional, traditional, teacher-centered, authoritative, controlling, outdated, etc.
**to facilitate: in contrast to teaching, this is seen as progressive, transformative, student-centered, modern, effective, etc.

Now, you might disagree and say this:

“Your stance is flawed because it just reflects your personal dissatisfaction with the educational system rather than an objective analysis. You are likely biased because of your belief that teachers need to be actively teaching rather than facilitating. Your perspective is narrow and fails to consider the broader educational paradigms that have been proven effective in various contexts. This bias makes it hard for you to see the benefits of facilitation in education.”

And you might also add:

“I sort of agree with you but the way you say it is too blunt and rude.”

Sure. I do get that as well (lol).

While I acknowledge that facilitation plays a crucial role in fostering student autonomy, critical thinking, and creativity, these skills cannot be built without a solid foundation of core domain knowledge.

Facilitation can be valuable, but it does overshadow the primary responsibility of teachers to deliver core content through a well designed explicit instruction.

Without a strong knowledge base, students cannot effectively engage in higher-order thinking or problem-solving, which most teachers/parents/society want eventually.

With regards to your dissatisfaction with my tone or mannerism, well, I’m sorry I didn’t mean to hurt your feelings. I just like to be a realist.

---

You might also mention Vygotsky and Dewey:

“Educational theorists such as Lev Vygotsky and John Dewey, have long advocated for the student-centric education, arguing that this method fosters critical thinking, creativity, and student autonomy, which are essential skills in the 21st century.”

And many other famous educationists who have talked about facilitative approach to education (aka the progressive stance).

I agree that’s what they have been advocating for. And, long ago, they have already called the conventional “teaching” as outdated.

I do respect the work of Vygotsky and Dewey however, their theories cannot be applied beyond the context of foundational knowledge. Effective facilitation cannot occur in a vacuum; it must be preceded by thorough teaching of fundamental concepts.

Teachers can then use facilitation as a tool to deepen understanding, not as a substitute for direct/explicit instruction.

(Btw, that thing Paulo Freire calls the “Banking method of Education” is outright flawed. Let me not digress though.)

---

Out of concern, you might also say this:

“By insisting that teachers should only teach and not facilitate, we risk moving towards an authoritarian model of education where students are mere receptacles of information. This could stifle innovation, reduce critical thinking skills, and ultimately produce graduates who are ill-prepared for the complexities of the modern world.”

Let’s say, this is Sir Ken Robinson’s argument, that schools (and teachers) kill creativity of the students through their traditional teaching.

Again, I understand the concern that strict teaching might lead to disengagement among students. Because there are plenty of badly trained teachers.

Valid reason.

But we also need to define strict teaching. I am not talking about a teacher wielding a stick or a belt and lashing out on students. (Back in my days, there were a lot of teachers who did that.)

I’m talking about a teacher who knows how to create a culture of learning where everyone follows the rules, routines, and rituals developed by the teacher. And every student is accountable for learning.

There’s a skewed belief that - to engage students in learning, teachers should let them choose their learning, topic, style, etc.

I am not advocating for an elimination of all student-centered learning approaches. That’s necessary when they have enough conceptual understanding and prior knowledge.

Also, well designed teaching methods can fully captivate students' interests while ensuring they build understanding of the key concepts.

Forget this phrase: a balanced approach to teaching and learning. There’s no middle ground approach. There are only phases of learning and the appropriate teaching approaches that support where the students are.

---

Finally, you might also say this back to me:

“You claim that the educational system is in shambles because teachers see themselves as facilitators. However, this misrepresents the situation. The problems in the education system are multifaceted, including issues like inadequate funding, large class sizes, and socio-economic disparities. Blaming the facilitative role of teachers oversimplifies the problem and ignores these significant factors.”

I agree a 100%.

I recognize that the education system's problems are multifaceted, including issues like politics, policy, infrastructure, funding, and socio-economic problems.

While these “system” issues are significant, the role of teachers within the classroom is something we can directly influence.

By prioritizing teaching over facilitation, we can ensure that all students, regardless of their background, receive the robust education they need to succeed in school and in life.

If teachers focus on delivering high-quality teaching, they are actually addressing the broader educational challenges.

And it all starts from the teacher who is willing to teach.

---

Thanks for reading this post.

Here are substack, I intend to reach out to teachers, educators, or anyone interested in "how learning happens" and "how teaching happens". I stay away from the narrative of “how learning SHOULD happen”.