Romantic Ideas in Teaching - Part 1

“Teacher as a guide on the side in a classroom” AI generated pic.

Romantic Idea 1:
"I don’t teach subjects, I teach students."

(Nepali: म विषय पढाउँदिन, म विद्यार्थीहरूलाई पढाउँछु।)

That’s a nice-sounding slogan, but it entirely misses the point of teaching and learning.

I see the sentiment behind the phrase, ‘I don’t teach subjects; I teach students.’ It highlights an important truth: that students are individuals, with their own levels of prior knowledge, beliefs, capabilities, behavior, interests, and ambitions.

At the same time, teaching subjects is also an act of teaching students. The subject is what gives us the lens through which we help our students gain foundational knowledge, improve their skills, think critically, and engage with the world. We are passing that lens to them.

For example, when we teach literature or math, we’re not just teaching facts about literature and math. We’re teaching our students how to interpret, solve problems, and make connections between the text and the world.

In their defense, I see where romantic/progressive teachers are coming from. Without a doubt, as a teacher, it’s important to care about the “whole” student, and that’s a core part of effective teaching (and education perhaps). But at the same time, a subject isn’t just an afterthought or relic from the past — it’s what gives the students the knowledge and tools to grow.

And for teachers, it’s the subject that gives teaching its structure and purpose. And meaning.

We teach both: the students and the subject. Get to know your students so that you can teach them better. If we lose sight of this, we will miss the chance to prepare our students for the real world.

---

Romantic Idea 2:
The less a teacher talks, the more the students learn.

(Nepali: शिक्षकले जति कम बोल्छ, विद्यार्थीले त्यति धेरै सिक्छन्।)

Another misleading cliché! The premise that students learn less just because a teacher talks more is quite absurd.

Honestly, this mindset does more harm than good, as it glorifies a hands-on approach while simultaneously insulting a teacher’s expertise and judgment.

The truth is, effective learning isn’t about how long a teacher talks in the class —it’s about what a teacher talks and when a teacher talks.

Most teaching is communication and effective teachers don’t just talk about “content”. They check the prior knowledge, instruct, explain, guide, provoke thought, ask questions, provide feedback, and scaffold complex ideas in ways that self-discovery alone cannot achieve.

Think about it: if more “student-talk time” was the key to meaningful learning, why would they struggle to learn complex subjects on their own?

I admit. There’s a lot of “bad” teaching. For instance, giving a 2 hour lecture nonstop without engaging the students is ineffective. I wouldn’t want to be in that session. But reducing teaching to “less teacher talk” isn’t going to make “good” teaching either.

Remember, effective teaching is about meaningful dialogue, strategic questioning, and structured explanations that help students connect their prior knowledge with new ideas, make them think harder, and deepen their conceptual understanding.

If you are an effective teacher, you know how to talk and also how to make that talk count.

---

Romantic Idea 3:
Teachers are the oppressors, Students are the oppressed.

(Nepali: शिक्षकहरु उत्पीडक हुन्, विद्यार्थीहरु उत्पीडित हुन्।)

This is a surface level rhetorical tactic to make teachers “feel” guilty. This is what I call an extreme version of romanticism.

This idea, which stems from the book “Pedagogy of the Oppressed”, is an ideological oversimplification that distorts the nature of teaching and learning.

It creates an adversarial view of learning rather than recognizing a teacher’s important role in developing intellectual growth.

Are there “bad” teachers? Sure. Is there a lot of “bad” teaching? Absolutely.

But most of the teachers I know (and you know) are in this profession because they care about students and their learning, not because they want to 'oppress' them. (Again, I know there are terrible people who have no business working as a teacher.)

Teaching and learning have a contradictory relationship but it isn’t about a power struggle. It’s a process of explicit instruction and challenge; control and autonomy; structure and creativity.

I have rules, norms, and routines in my class - not because I am the “oppressor” but because I care about my students’ learning.

Some of you will whine, “you must be ignorant about the historical and political context of the book.” Trust me, I have read that book and I know the agenda behind that book.

Labelling the entire act of teaching as an act of oppression is an ideological overreach. Doing this disregards “how learning happens”, the expertise of teachers, and the diverse ways in which effective teachers help students gain foundational knowledge and critical thinking skills.

If teachers are oppressors, by this logic, every doctor who tells a patient what to do is a dictator, every coach who corrects an athlete is a tyrant, and every parent who disciplines their kids is a bully.

---

What romantic ideas have you come across? Let me know.