My advice to the 2010 version of me
Yes I have changed as a teacher !!!
First, How to be an Extraordinary Teacher?
According to Alfie Kohn, here’s a characteristic of extraordinary teachers:
“One characteristic of extraordinary teachers is that they’re not fazed by kids who challenge them; indeed, they welcome this.”
Meaning, extraordinary teachers are open-minded, and not authoritarian. They do not view students’ challenges as disrespect but as signs of engagement. Instead of demanding compliance, they reframe challenge as learning.
The idea is to remove the so called “power” hierarchies between teacher and students because teaching is not about silencing but about facilitating dialogue.
“They’re willing to reconsider what they’ve said...”
The extraordinary teachers are humble and reflective, showing that what they teach in the class is not fixed but revisable.
Again, the idea is to reject the traditional model of the teacher as the ultimate source of truth. Instead, the teacher becomes a co-learner, modeling intellectual humility.
“...secure enough not to need to have the last word...”
The extraordinary teachers eliminate their authority and do not assert dominance by “winning” arguments. Their security lies in openness, not control.
Because the teacher’s power comes from facilitation and dialogue, not from command-and-control.
“...& aware that arguing may help to sharpen kids’ thinking.”
“Arguing” is an intellectual debate, not conflict. The extraordinary teachers see disagreement as a tool for critical thinking.
This elevates student voice. Because arguing is not disobedience but evidence of higher-order thinking. It is about inquiry, discussion, and discovery.
Seductive Power of Progressive Language
I started my teaching journey around 2010 at a private school in Lalitpur, Nepal. I have written and talked about publicly several times that I was “too idealistic yet heavily under-prepared” in the first two years of my career. Most of the times, all I did was tried to make the class “fun” so that I could be a popular teacher.
I was also deeply influenced by Sir Ken Robinson, especially after watching his famous TED Talk, Do Schools Kill Creativity?
Reflecting back, I am not ashamed to confess that I was terrible at teaching, thought at that time, I was proud/arrogant of what I was doing.
If I had read this tweet back in 2010, I would have completely agreed with Alfie Kohn because:
a. This tweet would have flattered my idealism.
As a new teacher entering the profession, I carried a strong sense of mission: I wanted to be “extraordinary,” not ordinary.
Kohn’s tweet set up a moral high ground. If I welcomed challenge, if I didn’t insist on authority, then I would have seen myself as one of the extraordinary ones. This would definitely have appealed to my self-image and desire to be different from the so-called “traditional” teachers in my school.
b. It would have affirmed harmony in the class without discipline.
As a novice, I often felt uncomfortable enforcing authority and discipline because it risked conflict with the students. In fact, classroom management was the last thing on my mind.
Kohn’s framing would have relieved me of that discomfort by recasting conflict as “good,” challenge as “healthy,” and even defiance as “engagement.”
c. It would have left the hard questions unasked.
Kohn didn’t clarify what kind of “challenge” or “argue” he meant. As a novice teacher, I would have taken this at face value and assumed every student pushback was intellectually enriching, when in reality most of it was just disruptive or emotionally manipulative.
Without experience, I would have lacked the practical filter to distinguish between genuine intellectual challenge and plain defiance.
d. It spoke the language of populism.
Teacher education programs over the last many decades have emphasized student voice, agency, autonomy, engagement, and co-construction of knowledge.
Kohn’s language echoed exactly that. As a novice teacher without any real training in pedagogy or evidence-informed practices, I would have been primed to see this tweet as not only pedagogically right but also morally correct.
In short, I would have completely bought Kohn’s tweet because it would have flattered, reassured, and validated my teaching.
How do I view Kohn’s tweet NOW?
I’ve been in this profession for around 15 years now. I’m not teaching in a school anymore. I teach grad and undergrad level students. But I do work with school teachers regularly as a teacher developer and a coach.
Now with more knowledge about teaching and learning; more experience in the class and in the workshop sessions; and deeper understanding of subjects and students this is how I read and interpret Kohn’s tweet now.
Kohn says, “One characteristic of extraordinary teachers is that they’re not fazed by kids who challenge them; indeed, they welcome this.”
Sure, I do welcome intellectual challenge by students (and by fellow teachers and educator). But I want to be real. Not all “challenges” thrown by students are genuine inquiry. Some are power plays, some are distractions, some are outright defiance.
Extraordinary teachers can distinguish between the two and are able to handle them differently.
He says, “They’re willing to reconsider what they’ve said...”
Yes, intellectual humility matters but I do not run a classroom on endless self-doubt. I am 100% sure that students appreciate clarity, consistency, and confidence from me as their teacher. Reconsidering is good, but not at the expense of my credibility, authority and instruction.
He adds, “...secure enough not to need to have the last word...”
Sure, I don’t need the last word, but I do need the class to stay on track. Sometimes letting a student “win” a verbal exchange derails the learning for everyone else. Security also means knowing when to close a discussion firmly and assertively.
And adds, “...& aware that arguing may help to sharpen kids’ thinking.”
100% true. Structured debate can sharpen students’ thinking. But arguing can waste time, exhaust the class, and undermine respect towards a teacher. The how and when of argument matter as much as the principle itself.
A novice and idealistic teacher will hear Kohn’s words as inspiration: I can be extraordinary if I embrace openness, humility, and student voice.
But now I see Kohn’s words as half-right: Yes, those values matter but without teacher’s authority, classroom structure, and discernment, they will collapse into chaos.
What would be my advice to the 2010 version of me?
So coming back to the topic of this post.
If I could sit down and sip a coffee with the 2010 version of myself, I would say this to him:
“Bro look, I know you are passionate about teaching and changing the education system of Nepal. But that’s not enough. Passion may get you started, but knowledge, discipline, and clarity will keep your classroom alive, make your teaching effective, and engage your students in meaningful learning.
Don’t confuse student defiance with intellectual engagement. Learn to see the difference, and don’t be afraid to enforce rules, structures, and boundaries. Yes, I know. You are doing this because you care about your students’ learning and growth.
Teacher’s authority is not the enemy of learning; misused authority is. If you want to be an amazing teacher, do not feel guilty about your authority. But implement it fairly, assertively, and intentionally.
Welcome questions, welcome genuine challenges, but don’t fantasize every pushback as growth. Sometimes students are just testing your limits, and you need to hold the line.
You don’t need to be an extraordinary teacher by rejecting common sense and authority. You become extraordinary by knowing when to be open, and when to be firm. When to be humble with confidence, and assertive with clarity.
Be super critical of the fluffy philosophies and romantic ideas in education. Your students do not need a hollywood/bollywood version of a heroic educator, nor they need an activist in disguise.
The students need a teacher who knows what and how to teach: when to instruct, when to listen, when to give feedback, when to guide, when to question, when to give a benefit of doubt, when to step aside, and when to say, ‘Enough, let’s get back to learning.’
Above all, remember this. Just because you are critical of the populist ideas in education, and just because you question the current orthodoxy, it doesn’t mean that you are morally inferior. You can be the authority inside the classroom and still till love your students, respect your colleagues, and contribute to your profession.”
Well, that’s the advice I wish I had received back then. And that’s the advice I would give to any novice teacher now.