Chapter 11 - Attention

To further explicate points made in chapters nine and ten, James describes what he calls the attentive process, underscoring that even in situations where one is interested in a subject, attention waxes and wanes. Moreover, in order for a subject to remain interesting for students, it must exhibit some degree of change while it is examined. If the subject matter is static or dull, then the teacher must present it in dynamic ways. Moreover, James admits that some teachers simply possess an innate ability to make static things more interesting and that this gift cannot be neither precisely described nor perfectly taught.

This particular topic is something that I have discussed in previous EDC classes. I am not sure yet where I stand on the issue except to say I know there are born teachers out there who never would have had to take a single education class. When you have the ability to connect with students, gain their trust and garner their attention, the delivery of instruction might almost become ancillary. Yet I know we study instruction relative to a set of stated goals based on discovered needs because for those of us who do not perfectly connect to learners, there are helpful strategies to assist us.

James makes one of the most useful suggestions toward the end of the chapter.

"Do not, then, for the mere sake of discipline, command attention from your pupils in thundering tones. Do not too often beg it from them as a favor, nor claim it as a right, nor try habitually to excite it by preaching the importance of the subject. Sometimes, indeed, you must do these things; but, the more you have to do them, the less skillful teacher you will show yourself to be. Elicit interest from within, by the warmth with which you care for the topic yourself, and by following the laws I have laid down" (p. 56).

There must be a component of disposition and personality inherent to most good teaching. This feels true to my own experience. What do you think? Can someone master instructional techniques and still be a lousy teacher? Can someone be a fantastic communicator and teach effectively without using prescribed methods?