​​

                Teaching Philosophy

​

               I am from Bangladesh, where we speak Bengali and English is taught as a second language. I hold a bachelor’s and a master’s degree in English Literature, with a concentration in English Language Teaching (ELT), and I am currently pursuing my second Master’s in M.A. in TESOL at Westcliff University. Education is a transformative journey that empowers individuals to grow intellectually, socially, and emotionally. It equips learners with the tools to think critically, communicate confidently, and contribute meaningfully to society. To me, teaching is more than delivering content—it is about inspiring change. Also, it is the opportunity to help and support learners in a subject that opens the global window for them. Teaching English in a Bangladeshi middle school was a significant experience for shaping my perspective. Despite having learned English from early childhood, many students lacked the confidence and abilities to utilize it successfully. This difficulty reinforced my notion that teaching must be student-centered, responsive, and empowering, particularly in circumstances where English is perceived as difficult or unusual. My teaching philosophy centers on a few fundamental beliefs: the teacher's role as a guide and motivator, the concept that all students can learn with sufficient help, and the belief that education should prepare students for real-world communication and global citizenship. These ideals drive my enthusiasm for teaching and inspire my dedication to equity, clarity, and lifelong learning. In the following elements, I will go over these topics in further detail, beginning with my thoughts on the overall goal of education.

               The primary purpose of education is to help people develop into capable, responsible, and knowledgeable members of society. Education should assist a person's overall development—not only academics, but also character, creativity, and critical thinking. It should educate learners for real-world difficulties rather than merely tests and employment. Education should encourage youngsters to think critically, ask questions, and solve issues on their own. In Bangladesh, where I am from, studying English could make a significant impact on a student's future. It provides opportunities for higher education, worldwide communication, and job progression. As a result, education should emphasize practical skills that students can apply in their everyday life. For me, teaching English is more than simply grammar and vocabulary; it is about giving students the confidence to utilize the language and flourish in the world. Furthermore, education should promote social responsibility, diversity, and empathy for others. As Paulo Freire (1970) emphasized, real education is about engaging the students in meaningful discussion that leads to change, rather than merely imposing isolated facts or knowledge on students' minds. Education should be a transforming process that promotes empowerment and intellectual freedom. I consider education as a lifelong journey that supports learners’ personal growth and equips learners to contribute positively to their communities and the world.

               In my educational perspective, the teacher is more than just a resource transmitter; he or she is also a facilitator, mentor, and guide who encourages curiosity, promotes inquiry, and scaffolds students' learning. Teaching is a dynamic interaction in which the instructor actively involves students in generating information rather than passively absorbing it. Based on constructivist philosophy, I see the teacher's duty as creating meaningful, student-centered experiences that encourage critical thinking and real-world application. Vygotsky (1978) highlighted his concept of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), which allows students to acquire greater levels of comprehension through social engagement and directed guidance. This is consistent with my conviction that teachers must provide focused scaffolding, particularly for English language learners, who struggle with confidence and fluency. For example, in my Bangladeshi classroom, I found that when students were given organized speaking exercises with clear supervision, their motivation to engage in English arose. A helpful instructor helps students bridge the gap between what they know and what they may accomplish. Furthermore, instructors should be thoughtful and sincere. According to Palmer (1998), successful teaching depends on the teacher's identity and integrity. A teacher who teaches from the heart, rather than merely the textbook, can build long-term motivation and connections. Teachers must demonstrate empathy, patience, and resilience, particularly in culturally and linguistically diverse environments.

Finally, the teacher is a lifelong learner who instills in pupils a growth mentality, promotes autonomy, and provides an inclusive atmosphere in which all students feel noticed and respected. This comprehensive function prepares students not just for tests, but also for responsible involvement in a global community.

               Learning is a dynamic, constructivist process where students actively build knowledge through experience, reflection, and social interaction. Rather than passively receiving information, learners construct meaning by connecting new content to prior knowledge and real-world experiences. This aligns with Piaget’s theory of cognitive development, which asserts that students learn best when they are developmentally ready to engage in inquiry and problem-solving tasks that challenge their current understanding (Piaget, 1972). Educators may foster deeper comprehension and active involvement by providing students with meaningful learning experiences that are appropriate for their cognitive development. This strategy also creates the groundwork for a classroom atmosphere that fosters curiosity, critical thinking, and autonomy—all of which are essential components of student-centered learning, as outlined in the next section. Collaborative and experiential learning environments promote greater comprehension, particularly when students engage in discourse, challenge assumptions, and co-create meaning. Vygotsky stressed the importance of social contact and language in learning, claiming that meaningful learning takes place in the Zone of Proximal Development when pupils are directed by more competent peers or instructors. This emphasizes the role of scaffolding and classroom conversation in promoting student development. Dewey (1938) also emphasized that true, meaningful experiences should serve as the foundation for learning. Discovery-based learning and inquiry projects empower students to take control of their education and apply what they have learned in real-world situations. Teachers encourage pupils to ask questions, explore, and reflect, which promotes critical thinking and long-term retention. Students learn best when training is student-centered, socially engaging, and based on real-world applications that encourage inquiry, discovery, and reflection.

               An effective curriculum must provide learners with both fundamental academic information and the abilities required to navigate a complex, corresponding environment. In my educational perspective, I advocate for a comprehensive liberal arts curriculum that incorporates interdisciplinary learning, emotional intelligence, and critical life skills. The most important knowledge extends beyond content mastery in areas such as mathematics, physics, literature, and history to encompass the development of ethical thinking, communication skills, empathy, and the capacity to think critically across disciplines. John Dewey (1938) argued that education must relate learning to experience. Curriculum, according to this viewpoint, should be a dynamic structure that promotes inquiry and reflection rather than a static collection of knowledge. Students learn best when the content is relevant and connected to real-world situations. An interdisciplinary approach, which combines the humanities, sciences, and arts, allows students to make connections, creatively solve problems, and develop a sense of purpose. Equally crucial is the incorporation of social-emotional learning (SEL), which promotes emotional literacy, resilience, and strong connections. According to Noddings (2005), curriculum design should prioritize the development of the complete child, including intellectual, moral, and emotional growth. When students are helped to understand their own feelings and respect others, they are more likely to achieve academically and socially. Finally, a culturally sensitive curriculum promotes inclusion and equity. As Gay (2018) argues, recognizing and incorporating students’ ethnic identities into learning validates their experiences and increases participation. A well-designed curriculum does more than just transfer knowledge; it fosters thoughtful, compassionate, and socially responsible individuals.

               In my educational philosophy, I advocate for a student-centered learning environment in which the learning process is guided by the students' interests, experiences, and needs. A student-centered approach promotes active participation, critical thinking, and learner autonomy by enabling students to build knowledge collectively and meaningfully (Brooks & Brooks, 1999). This perspective is consistent with the constructivist notion that learners best comprehend new information when they relate it to existing knowledge and engage in genuine, meaningful tasks. For example, combining group discussions, project-based learning, and reflective activities encourages students to take ownership of their education and build lifetime learning abilities. However, I acknowledge that teacher-centered education is still necessary, particularly in situations when students need explicit direction or are gaining core information. Vygotsky's (1978) concept of the Zone of Proximal Development exemplifies how teacher scaffolding helps learners progress beyond their existing capacities by providing required structure and expert modeling. Effective teaching combines direct instruction with chances for student discovery, resulting in courses that are both demanding and approachable. Furthermore, Freire's (1970) pedagogy emphasizes discussions between instructors and students, observing education as a collaborative, emancipatory process. This approach encourages instructors to see learners as active participants, rather than passive recipients. Finally, a dynamic combination of student-centered and teacher-centered strategies honors learners' uniqueness while upholding academic standards. By providing a responsive learning environment, I hope to motivate learners, promote equity, and foster critical thinking, preparing them for success both in and out of the classroom.

               Continuing from my belief that education should empower students to take ownership of their learning, my instructional methods center on active, student-driven engagement supported by intentional guidance. I adopted a blended approach that incorporates hands-on learning, inquiry-based exploration, collaborative problem-solving, and purposeful technology integration. This variety ensures that lessons address diverse learning styles while maintaining high levels of motivation and participation. In my classroom, learning often begins with meaningful questions or real-world scenarios designed to spark curiosity and connect new concepts to students’ lived experiences. Guided inquiry activities—such as research projects, role-plays, and simulations—allow students to investigate, hypothesize, and draw conclusions, fostering deeper conceptual understanding. This reflects the constructivist idea that learners actively construct knowledge through interaction and reflection (Bruner, 1996). By creating these authentic, interactive opportunities, I aim to empower students as active participants in their learning journey. This foundation naturally supports my next focus: designing assessments that measure not just knowledge, but application and critical thinking.

               Collaboration is another pillar of my instructional practice. Structured group work, peer review, and cooperative tasks encourage communication skills, cultural awareness, and the ability to synthesize multiple perspectives. I also use concise, targeted lectures to provide essential background knowledge or clarify challenging concepts, ensuring that students have the scaffolding needed to succeed. Technology serves as an enabler rather than a distraction. Digital tools—such as interactive presentations, online discussion forums, and multimedia resources, enhance engagement and extend learning beyond the classroom. As Prensky (2010) suggests, effective teaching for today’s learners requires partnering with them through the technologies they naturally use, creating an environment where content is relevant and accessible.

By blending these strategies, I aim to create a flexible yet structured learning space where curiosity is nurtured, collaboration is valued, and knowledge is applied in authentic contexts, preparing students for both academic achievement and lifelong adaptability.

               I believe progress is best captured through triangulation of evidence—the convergence of what students produce (performances, drafts, projects), what they say (conferences, reflections, explanations), and what we observe (process notes, checklists). Day to day, I use learning targets written in student-friendly language and co-constructed success criteria so learners can see what “quality” looks like and monitor their own growth. During instruction, I gather quick formative signals—exit tickets, hinge questions, mini whiteboard checks, and think-alouds—and immediately adjust pacing, grouping, or modeling. Over time, I curate portfolios (digital or paper) that include initial attempts, feedback cycles, and polished performances; this shows growth, not just a snapshot. For example, in a persuasive writing unit, students submit a one-sentence thesis mid-lesson for rapid feedback, then revise in pairs using a single-point rubric before drafting a paragraph—evidence that informs both next-step teaching and student strategy use (Black & Wiliam, 2018).Beliefs about standardized testing and quantitative measuresStandardized tests and other quantitative indicators can be useful but limited. They help reveal broad trends, equity gaps, and cohort growth; they are also helpful when setting baselines or evaluating program-level interventions. However, they can underrepresent complex outcomes like collaboration, creativity, multilingual development, and critical thinking. Scores should therefore function as one data point among many, interpreted alongside classroom evidence and student voice. When a standardized reading score flags a concern, I follow up with targeted probes (fluency, vocabulary, background knowledge) and a performance task to pinpoint the barrier. My stance is to use numbers to ask better questions, not to make final judgments about learners (Popham, 2014).

                Formative assessment is a continuous feedback loop—gathering evidence during learning, giving actionable, timely feedback, and adjusting instruction while there’s still time to improve. Effective feedback names what was done well, what needs work, and the next move the learner can try, ideally with a chance to apply it immediately. Summative assessment verifies mastery after learning: unit performances, capstone projects, curated portfolios, or exams. I design summative tasks to mirror authentic purposes (e.g., an op-ed, a community presentation, a lab report), and I share rubrics in advance so expectations are transparent. Crucially, I allow summative revisions when feasible; if assessment is about learning, students should be able to act on insights rather than simply receive a score (Brookhart, 2017).

               Informal assessments are woven into daily instruction and are typically ungraded: observing small-group talk, circulating with a checklist of misconceptions, or asking a hinge question to decide whether to reteach or extend. These are especially powerful in multilingual classrooms, where spontaneous explanations, gestures, and drafts reveal partial understandings that standardized items might miss. For instance, while students annotate a text on public health, I listen for how they justify claims; if I hear reliance on personal anecdotes instead of text evidence, I pause the class for a two-minute micro-lesson on citation frames and then send them back to apply it. Formal assessments are planned, documented, and typically graded with a rubric: performance tasks, presentations, unit tests, or portfolio checkpoints. I use formal assessments when I need comparable evidence across students, when reporting progress to families, or when a proficiency decision will guide placement.

               To keep formal assessments fair and rigorous,

• I align each criterion directly to the learning targets and share exemplars beforehand.

• Calibrate scoring with colleagues using anchor samples to improve reliability.

• Provide access supports (time, language scaffolds, multiple modalities) that preserve the construct being measured. 

               My approach centers three non-negotiables: equity, transparency, and actionability. Equity means varied, culturally responsive ways to show learning and careful interpretation of quantitative data. Transparency means students know the target, the criteria, and the path to improvement. Actionability means every assessment—informal or formal—leads to a concrete next step (reteach, extend, regroup, or revise). In practice, that looks like this cycle: elicit evidence → give specific feedback → practice the next move → reassess for growth. When assessment serves learning in this way, students don’t chase points; they build competence and confidence—the real goals of education.

               My ethics as an educator begin with care, equity, and curiosity. I try to build relationships that help students feel seen and safe enough to take risks. As Noddings (2013) argues, genuine learning grows from attentive, responsive care; when students know I’m listening, they’re more willing to grapple with hard ideas and with one another. Equity and inclusion are daily practices, not slogans: I design multiple ways to access content and show understanding, invite students’ funds of knowledge, and examine my materials and assessments for bias. In culturally responsive classrooms, students’ identities are resources—Gay (2018) highlights how honoring culture, language, and lived experiences raises engagement and achievement, and I see that when I integrate community examples and student voice.Promoting a love of learning means centering curiosity over compliance. I provide choice, authentic tasks, and frequent feedback so students connect effort to growth. Respect for diverse perspectives is modeled through discussion norms that prioritize listening, evidence, and humility; we practice disagreement without disrespect and restore trust when harm occurs. Finally, academic integrity and fairness guide grading and feedback: I use clear criteria, offer revision pathways, and explain decisions transparently. Taken together—care, cultural responsiveness, curiosity, and integrity—these principles help every learner feel welcomed, challenged, and dignified.

               Reflecting on my philosophy of education, I see teaching as both an intellectual and moral endeavor. It is not only about transferring knowledge but about shaping environments where learners feel valued, challenged, and empowered to think critically. Every component—whether the purpose of education, the teacher’s role, or the nature of learning—centers on the belief that education must prepare students for life, not just exams. For me, this means cultivating curiosity, fostering equity, and creating inclusive spaces that honor diverse voices and experiences. I believe teaching requires continuous self-reflection and growth. Each classroom moment is an opportunity to model empathy, fairness, and integrity while guiding students to become independent thinkers and responsible global citizens. Ultimately, my goal is to inspire learners to see education as a lifelong journey—one that equips them not only with skills and knowledge but also with the confidence and compassion to contribute meaningfully to society. 

References

• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2018). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. GL Assessment.

• Brookhart, S. M. (2017). How to give effective feedback to your students (2nd ed.). ASCD.

• Bruner, J. S. (1996). The culture of education. Harvard University Press.

• Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1999). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms (Rev. ed.).      

• Dewey, J. (1938/1997). Experience and Education. New York, NY: Touchstone.

• Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum.

• Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary ed.). Continuum.

• Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press.

• Noddings, N. (2005). The challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to education (2nd ed.). Teachers College               Press.

• Piaget, J. (1972). The Psychology of the Child. New York, NY: Basic Books.

• Palmer, P. J. (1998). The courage to teach: Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher’s life.

                  Jossey-Bass.

• Prensky, M. (2010). Teaching digital natives: Partnering for real learning. Corwin Press.

• Popham, W. J. (2014). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know (7th ed.). Pearson.

• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.

                  Harvard University Press.​

​