cus on the desired outcomes of making the kids learn what the teachers want them to learn as well as ensuring that the teaching methods are appropriate for the level at which the kids are studying.
At first glance, the articles seem to be different in the kind of content and message that they are sending out to the intended audience. However, on closer look, one can comprehend that the thrust of both articles is about the ways in which teaching methods can be improved to make a difference in the way children are taught. Both articles talk about teachers making decisions in the daily interactions with their wards. The difference in the articles is the way in which each article suggests different methods to achieve the common goal of making the students understand what is being taught and how teachers can be role models for their students.
The article about “Teaching children what we want them to learn” concentrates on the different ways in which children pick up things from their teachers by looking up to them as role models as well as imbibing values and qualities from the teachers. The article makes the point about how kids at such an young age are impressionable and hence are prone to look up to their teachers in a manner similar to that they do with their parents and hence the teachers have to extra careful in the messages that they send to the students. These include verbal and non-verbal cues as well as the kind of lessons that the teachers pick for their children every day.
This article also mentions the subtle difference between the statements that express a reflective desire to inculcate learning in the children as opposed to expecting the children to learn better. For instance, there is a huge difference in taking personal responsibility as a teacher and ensuring that the children get to learn and thinking about the children as being responsible for their education. One is reflective (as mentioned above) and the other is reactive. A teacher who is