An outstanding teacher develops many abilities over time that become natural practices in the classroom. These grow from reflection on teaching experience and learner performance. First, great teachers are good listeners. They act as facilitators of learning, guiding students on their paths. Second, great teachers are fair in their assessments of students. In giving feedback, they are constructive in corrections and moderate in praise. They address issues with classroom management quickly, effectively and diplomatically. Third and most importantly, great teachers give students as much individual attention as possible. In doing so, they learn what motivates individual students, and then they apply this information in materials selection and adapting teaching methods to meet the needs and interests of students.
Take, as an example, one of my teaching assistants from three years ago who now is the teacher of his own classes. He told me he was wondering what really motivated his students. He has seen that the school year or semester begins with a lot of energy among students. Their energy level diminishes slowly at first and then rapidly at the end of a course. As good teachers do, he’s asked himself what he can do to stimulate motivation among his students, and he asked his colleagues—another indication of a great and dedicated teacher.
When we must follow a prescribed syllabus, we may supplement the required materials with some texts that will bridge the gap between abstruse topics and the interests of students. Thus, the teacher focuses more on tailoring teaching methods to student needs. When we as teachers have control over the course content, we can select materials that will appeal to our students. In contexts where there is complete flexibility, teachers can opt for self-directed learning and make students responsible for selecting texts. In this case, we presume students have intrinsic motivation to learn about the topics that pique their interests.
Because intrinsic motivation has the greatest effect on student achievement, educators ask, “What motivations are at play among our students?”
Students may initially want to please either their teacher or their parents by earning good grades. If the grade is evidence of achievement, what achievement beyond promotion to the next level do passing grades represent? Grades mark progress on the path toward graduation, and they indicate academic aptitude. Despite the nice feeling of seeing good grades when they are hard-earned, the ultimate pay-off may be years in future. With graduation far off for young students, we must continue to ask, “What motivates our students more deeply?”
Pupils want to be accepted by their peer group. And, though hard work in class may not be part of this equation, task-based learning can target this motivator. In addition, students deeply want to learn something of value. Learning is based on developing discrete skills, skills that can aid survival in a real and useful way. Therefore, the third realm of motivation is two-fold, self-improvement and self-improvement with the aim of serving a greater good—one’s own community or even the world—since individual longevity relies on collaboration with others.
Being of service begins with dignity; not to be perceived of as a burden on one’s family or the society. Yet, education is deferral of work at the higher levels. Full-time study is a luxury for many people because there is a trade-off between lost earnings (and, perhaps, debt) in the present, and the potential for higher earnings in the future. Very practically, students, therefore, consider what subject or course of study will bring them the greatest benefit. It is for this very reason, students as utility maximizers, in economic parlance, question whether school is worth their time. Unfortunately, not everyone can afford the luxury of an education for its sake alone. Nor is every student as keenly focused on the long-term pay-off of their time spent on coursework. Most unfortunately, some students cannot perceive achievement in education is either within their reach or promises to pay-off at all.
Now at a nadir of moral integrity in leadership in the United States, educators must seize the time to stimulate civic engagement among pupils to propel them toward achievement in school and success in life for the betterment of society. What follows is a discussion of lexical terms which should allow students to better understand their world.
The remainder of this discussion targets two audiences. First, my colleagues in Vietnam who may be curious about the political situation and the terminology used to discuss the issues presently at stake in the United States. Second, readers in the western hemisphere who wonder what freedoms people living in a country with a single-party state do or do not enjoy.
I will explore the topic by reviewing a list of thirty terms, the definitions of which come from Merriam Webster’s dictionary (www.m-w.com).
Republic (noun) “a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law”
Political Party (noun) “a group of persons organized for the purpose of directing the policies of a government”
Republican Party (noun) “of, relating to, or constituting the one of the two major political parties evolving in the U.S. in the mid-19th century that is usually primarily associated with business, financial, and some agricultural interests and is held to favor a restricted governmental role in economic life”
Democratic Party (noun) “of or relating to a major American political party of the early 19th century favoring a strict interpretation of the Constitution to restrict the powers of the federal government and emphasizing states’ rights”
Constitution (noun) “the basic principles and laws of a nation, state, or social group that determine the powers and duties of the government and guarantee certain rights to the people in it”
Enfranchisement (noun) “to admit to the privileges of a citizen and especially to the right of suffrage”
Entitlement (noun) “a government program providing benefits to members of a specified group also : funds supporting or distributed by such a program”
Civil liberties (noun) “freedom from arbitrary governmental interference (as with the right of free speech) specifically by denial of governmental power and in the U.S. especially as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights —usually used in plural”
Conservativism (noun) “a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change specifically : such a philosophy calling for lower taxes, limited government regulation of business and investing, a strong national defense, and individual financial responsibility for personal needs (such as retirement income or health-care coverage)”
Liberalism (noun) “a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties specifically : such a philosophy that considers government as a crucial instrument for amelioration of social inequities (such as those involving race, gender, or class)”
Censorship (noun) “the actions or practices of censors [ a person who supervises conduct and morals: such asan official who examines materials (such as publications or films) for objectionable matter] especially : censorial control exercised repressively”
Neoliberal (noun) “a liberal who de-emphasizes traditional liberal doctrines in order to seek progress by more pragmatic methods”
Neoconservative (noun) “a conservative who advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and U.S. national interest in international affairs including through military means”
Sovereignty (noun) “freedom from external control : AUTONOMY”
Self-determination (noun) “determination by the people of a territorial unit of their own future political status”
State capitalism (noun) “an economic system in which private capitalism is modified by a varying degree of government ownership and control”
Communism (noun) “a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production”
Socialism (noun) “any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods”
Social democracy (noun) “a political movement advocating a gradual and peaceful transition from capitalism to socialism by democratic means”
Repressive (adjective) “put down by force”
Authoritarian (adjective) “of, relating to, or favoring a concentration of power in a leader or an elite not constitutionally responsible to the people”
Fascism (noun) “a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition”
Revanchist (noun) “of or relating to a policy designed to recover lost territory or status”
Populism (noun) “a member of a political party claiming to represent the common people”
Isolationism (noun) “a policy of national isolation by abstention from alliances and other international political and economic relations”
Globalization (noun) “the development of an increasingly integrated global economy marked especially by free trade, free flow of capital, and the tapping of cheaper foreign labor markets”
Laissez-faire (noun) “a doctrine opposing governmental interference in economic affairs beyond the minimum necessary for the maintenance of peace and property rights”
Tariff (noun) “a schedule of duties imposed by a government on imported or in some countries exported goods”
Multilateralism (noun) “involving or participated in by more than two nations or parties”
Unilateralism (noun) “a policy of taking unilateral action (as in international affairs) regardless of outside support or reciprocity”
Apart from the political framework of governments, the other aspect necessary to making comparisons between countries is the economic system. While government investment (in tandem with private corporations) in countries like Vietnam, China and Singapore, may seem to parallel the subsidies that the United States government provides to the energy or pharmaceutical industries, there is an important difference. The stakeholders, which are the entire the citizenry, in the Asian countries mentioned, are also shareholders. As such, they are the people voting not only for civil servants, but also for the policy of industries in which the government has invested.
Conversely, in the United States, once a drug or technology has been developed in universities or by the Pentagon, it is auctioned to corporations for them to bring the product to market at the highest price they can get for it. Unfortunately, prices are not as responsive to demand in the United States as they are in Asia. In Vietnam, there is less menu-pricing across various industries, and therefore, higher price elasticity of demand. In particular, prices of goods in the industries in which the government is invested are not driven by profits, but rather are set for the welfare of the people.
As I am most familiar with the Vietnamese economic situation having lived in Vietnam for five years between 2014 and 2019, I will continue with it as my example economy under a single-party state. Unfortunately for the Vietnamese citizenry, there is very little regulation of the local economy, and to that extent, the economic policy of the Vietnamese government promotes a greater level of free-trade and purer form of capitalism than exists in the United States. The interventions that benefit people in the United States with regards to public health or environmental protection are robust in comparison to Vietnam. These hard-won regulations, as in labor, food safety and equal access, in the United States, stand in stark contrast to the lack of regulation or barriers to entry in markets in Vietnam where hazardous work environments are permitted and poor waste management is tolerated. The reasoning behind this is all to stimulate foreign direct investment. There are high levels of surplus labor, low wages, high savings rates, stable price inflation and favorable interest rates. The economy is booming and shows no sign of slowing down. The population is large and there is great demand in the domestic economy for both local and imported products.
While these labor protections and regulations had been a point of pride, the United States has, in 2020, found itself at a low-point with regards to public health, affordable higher education, and environmental stewardship.
Why then does the United States push for democracy in other countries if it fails so greatly in its own? Private profit. From the US point of view, if there were wider enfranchisement in developing nations where governments exercise tight control over public discourse, it would be fairly easy to get people to vote for a more liberal government with regard to privatization of natural resources if they can be sold on the benefits of laissez-faire economics. While such changes would inevitably favor foreign actors and limit sovereignty, they would be easily portrayed to have a favorable economic outcome for a country struggling to develop. More private wealth among a population fuels hope of escaping poverty. To the people of an imperial power, interventionism is sold as a path toward political stability, and as an added benefit, it would deter immigration.
With a base of knowledge in civics, teachers offer society by way of their students the foundation for an informed, engaged leadership based on integrity, participation and cooperation—a foundation without which there is no society.
