Qualities of Good Teachers Essay Example for Free

Qualities of Good Teachers Essay There are many internet sources that post lists of qualities that all great teachers should possess. These lists range from 10-15 characteristics, but I believe that they can be summed into a love for children, not only a firm knowledge in their content area but passion as well, and that they take the time to get to know their students by developing a healthy student-teacher relationship. In his book Qualities of an Effective Teacher, James Stronge subcategorizes qualities into the teacher as a person, as an individual, and he lists specific qualities that show caring and responsibility for students. However, I believe what it really boils down to is a joy of being around students and a love for the job. If a teacher genuinely loves children, he or she will do whatever necessary to help that child succeed, including planning, mentoring, differentiated teaching, etc. Harry Wong states in The First Days of School that the students are going to want to know the teacher as a person and if the teacher will treat them with respect. Therefore, effective teachers will take the time to show the students respect and involve them in their own learning process. I don’t think that there is a difference between good and effective. I think that is just a matter of semantics. Of course we might be able to specify a good teacher is one who has a joy and gets the students motivated to learn while an effective teacher is one who performs the preparation tasks well: good planning, classroom management, monitors student progress. However, I think that if a teacher has such a joy for teaching and is enthusiastic, he or she will want to be effective as well and keep good records and plans, etc. The same is true for those teachers who are great at the behind-the-scenes tasks. If someone is so well-prepared, why wouldn’t he have enthusiasm and be able to motivate the students? Therefore, I believe separating these two words is impossible, for all good teachers are effective and vice versa.

Social Criticism in Literature :: A Tale of Two Cities Animal Farm Essays

Social Criticism in Literature Many authors receive their inspiration for writing their literature from outside sources. The idea for a story could come from family, personal experiences, history, or even their own creativity. For authors that choose to write a book based on historical events, the inspiration might come from their particular viewpoint on the event that they want to dramatize. George Orwell and Charles Dickens wrote Animal Farm and A Tale of Two Cities, respectively, to express their disillusionment with society and human nature. Animal Farm, written in 1944, is a book that tells the animal fable of a farm in which the farm animals revolt against their human masters. It is an example of social criticism in literature in which Orwell satirized the events in Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution. He anthropomorphises the animals, and alludes each one to a counterpart in Russian history. A Tale of Two Cities also typifies this kind of literature. Besides the central theme of love, is another prevalent theme, that of a revolution gone bad. He shows us that, unfortunately, human nature causes us to be vengeful and, for some of us, overly ambitious. Both these books are similar in that both describe how, even with the best of intentions, our ambitions get the best of us. Both authors also demonstrate that violence and the Machiavellian attitude of "the ends justifying the means" are deplorable. George Orwell wrote Animal Farm, ". . . to discredit the Soviet system by showing its inhumanity and its back-sliding from ideals [he] valued . . ."(Gardner, 106) Orwell noted that " there exists in England almost no literature of disillusionment with the Soviet Union .' Instead, that country is viewed either with ignorant disapproval' or with uncritical admiration.'"(Gardner, 96) The basic synopsis is this: Old Major, an old boar in Manor Farm, tells the other animals of his dream of "animalism": " . . . Only get rid of Man, and the produce of our labour would be our own. Almost overnight we would become rich and free.'" (Orwell, 10) The other animals take this utopian idea to heart, and one day actually do revolt and drive the humans out. Two pigs emerge as leaders: Napoleon and Snowball. They constantly argued, but one day, due to a difference over plans to build a windmill, Napoleon exiled Snowball. Almost immediately, Napoleon established a totalitarian government. Soon, the pigs began to get special favours, until finally, they were indistinguishable from humans to the other animals. Immediately the reader can begin to draw parallels between the book's characters and the government in 1917-44 Russia. For example, Old Major, who invented Social Criticism in Literature :: A Tale of Two Cities Animal Farm Essays Social Criticism in Literature Many authors receive their inspiration for writing their literature from outside sources. The idea for a story could come from family, personal experiences, history, or even their own creativity. For authors that choose to write a book based on historical events, the inspiration might come from their particular viewpoint on the event that they want to dramatize. George Orwell and Charles Dickens wrote Animal Farm and A Tale of Two Cities, respectively, to express their disillusionment with society and human nature. Animal Farm, written in 1944, is a book that tells the animal fable of a farm in which the farm animals revolt against their human masters. It is an example of social criticism in literature in which Orwell satirized the events in Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution. He anthropomorphises the animals, and alludes each one to a counterpart in Russian history. A Tale of Two Cities also typifies this kind of literature. Besides the central theme of love, is another prevalent theme, that of a revolution gone bad. He shows us that, unfortunately, human nature causes us to be vengeful and, for some of us, overly ambitious. Both these books are similar in that both describe how, even with the best of intentions, our ambitions get the best of us. Both authors also demonstrate that violence and the Machiavellian attitude of "the ends justifying the means" are deplorable. George Orwell wrote Animal Farm, ". . . to discredit the Soviet system by showing its inhumanity and its back-sliding from ideals [he] valued . . ."(Gardner, 106) Orwell noted that " there exists in England almost no literature of disillusionment with the Soviet Union .' Instead, that country is viewed either with ignorant disapproval' or with uncritical admiration.'"(Gardner, 96) The basic synopsis is this: Old Major, an old boar in Manor Farm, tells the other animals of his dream of "animalism": " . . . Only get rid of Man, and the produce of our labour would be our own. Almost overnight we would become rich and free.'" (Orwell, 10) The other animals take this utopian idea to heart, and one day actually do revolt and drive the humans out. Two pigs emerge as leaders: Napoleon and Snowball. They constantly argued, but one day, due to a difference over plans to build a windmill, Napoleon exiled Snowball. Almost immediately, Napoleon established a totalitarian government. Soon, the pigs began to get special favours, until finally, they were indistinguishable from humans to the other animals. Immediately the reader can begin to draw parallels between the book's characters and the government in 1917-44 Russia. For example, Old Major, who invented

Duchess of Malfi Essay

The Duchess of Malfi written by John Webster was first performed around 1613. A dramatic tragedy, the play is about a forbidden marriage between the Duchess and Antonio her steward, and the wrath of her brothers which leads to many of their deaths. Webster focuses on the role of rank to detail the emotions between relationships in an aristocratic family in a time when class was all important. He uses many distinctive features to convey the substance of the play and its characters, and give the actors playing the roles cues for stage performance. This extract is part of the proposal and marriage scene, one of the biggest emotional dramatic scenes of the play. The duchess is marrying in secret against her brothers wishes; their fear is that she will demean the family’s honour by remarrying. It also forms the most positive aspect of the play, using one of the traditional stage conventions of love, defiance and disapproval (Pacheco and Johnson (2012) pg. 93). This serves to provide a ‘lift’ to an otherwise dark play, and compares the lighter side of the Duchess’ sexual desire to her brother Ferdinand’s. The extract is set at the second half of Act 1 scene 1, the first half being to set the backdrop for the audience and give them a good idea of each character and a good indication of things to come. Specifically, the extract is between the Duchess finding out how Antonio feels about marriage and their union itself; here, the Duchess is convincing Antonio that he is worthy of her, that she is woman enough despite her brothers, her rank and her status as a widow. This is achieved by the features of Webster’s distinctive language and the stage directions (both written and performed through reading). The Duchess uses double meaning in her dialogue, ‘So now the grounds broke/ you may discover what a wealthy mine/ I make you lord of.’ (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.432-33). She is referring to her own wealth and the value of his rank when they marry. This wordplay is also in the line ‘we are forced to woo because none dare woo us:’ (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.446) she is again referring to her rank and playing on the word ‘woo’ to mean ‘woe’ (and the irony being that she is wooing him). These are very persuasive lines for Antonio, who feels unworthy of the Duchess despite the traditional gender roles being swapped, and the dominance of the Duchess being prevalent. He realises this with the line ‘These words should be mine,’ (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.476). There is also wordplay in ‘All discord, without this circumference, / Is only to be pitied and not feared.’ (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.473). The Duchess is referring to the situation they are in (secret wedding and/or the room), the wedding ring she has given him and to the confinement her brothers wish for her. There could also be reference to how Antonio will be should they marry – a higher rank, but it will be a secret for some time. The duchess is trying to assuage the fear of it all by saying without it there is only pity (for her). The metre and rhythm of the speech in this extract is another distinctive feature. It is un-rhyming blank verse and follows the rules of iambic pentameter except where Webster wants a character to pause, for example, ‘You were ill to sell yourself’ (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.435) is only three feet of the full five feet line, leaving two for pause before the next line. This puts impact on that line but also on the ones following it. This technique is also echoed in the ‘woo’ line (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.446); the metre of the line is slightly too long, which shows the Duchess’ unwillingness to follow orders. Likewise, the line ‘You have left me heartless, mine is in your bosom’ (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.453) is too long, giving emphasis on the line and a cue for the actress playing the Duchess to use it for stage direction. The Duchess and Antonio’s dialogue overlaps through most of this extract; it makes them sound as if they are thinking together – giving the audience a feel for the emotional charge between the two characters. We have already seen from earlier in scene 1 that the Duchess is clearly defiant of her brothers, so it is little surprise to see that in response to Antonio’s fear of them she shrugs them off with the line ‘Do not think of them.’ (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.472). this confirms the audiences view of her as being strong and resilient but also somewhat naive, and also gives them a clue of what is to come, especially when she follows with the lines ‘Yet, should they know it, time will easily/ scatter the tempest.’ (Webster, (2010 [1623]) 1.1.476). This dramatic irony confirms what the audience knows but Antonio does not: that her brothers are unaware of their impending marriage. Indeed, with these lines Webster is inviting the audience to fear the brother’s reaction too after hearing their earlier death threat to the Duchess. (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.298-344) The depth of each character and difference of rank is shown in this extract by Webster’s use of figurative language. The Duchess continuously shows her determination and sprit, something which continues throughout the play – even to her death. And poor Antonio, who despite being honest and loyal, is overwhelmed at the turn of events and the metaphoric swapping of gender roles to the point where he is seeking solace in the Duchess’s words and is happy to be deluded ‘Would not have savoured flattery’ (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.478). He is painfully aware that he is not equal in rank but will be in marriage, and his fears exaggerate her strength ‘These words should be mine,/ And all of the parts you have spoke, if some part of it/ Would not have savoured flattery.’ (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.476-8) As for performance, the extract only provides one written key stage direction ‘(she kisses him)’ (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.468). However, there is plenty in the reading of the extract to relate to performance. This also leaves room for interpretation in relation to performance possibilities. The pace of the dialogue changes depending on which character is speaking, for example, lines 445-462 are full of short syllables which quicken the rhythm of the metre to make it energetic and erratic, ‘And fearfully equivocates,’ (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.448). It could serve to make the Duchess sound tense yet determined, and she could be sort of ranting in her attempts to convince Antonio. These lines also provide many words that can be used as stage direction, for example while she is speaking between lines 445 and 451 she could be pacing the stage and using her hands to emphasise her point ‘The misery of†¦ Thing it is not’ (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.445-52). Also in ‘Go, go brag,’ (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.452), she could point off stage as if inviting him to leave, either in an angry or defeated way. After, in ‘You have left me heartless’ (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.453), her hands could go to her heart, and then onto his with ‘mine is in your bosom’ and leave them there for ‘you do tremble (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.453-54). She could shake him at ‘awake, awake, man,’ (Webster, (2010[1623]) 1.1.459). The pace slows down again after Antonio has promised to protect her reputation; the syllables become longer and more even and written commas slow the dialogue to make it measured. This follows to the end of the extract so we can see that the Duchess is calmer and happy now that Antonio has accepted her proposal. This should reflect in the way that the person playing the Duchess should perform, especially when she is shrugging off the fear of her brothers, as it is almost nonchalant. The stage set up should have enough room for there to be complete focus on the characters and no superfluous scenery – perhaps only what is required to make it obvious what the room is, plus the table and chair for Antonio and the curtains for Cariola to hide behind. If the Duchess is pacing the stage while she rants there should be adequate room for this, and Antonio could follow behind her. Indeed, if he is seeking solace in her words, the actor may wish to appear meek (and therefore filling the gender and rank role) by following her blindly but also allowing her to turn to place her hands on him where necessary. In all, we can see how the distinctive features of Webster’s language have brought the play into being. The use of dramatic irony, metre and rhythm, imagery and figurative language to convey emotion, bring scenes to life and help the audiences perception. Webster also especially does this in his use of figurative language to create stage directions for the cast, which in turn helps them to set and convey the scene. With the play only having little written stage directions, Webster leaves the play open for the actor’s interpretation, and its possibilities onstage.

Islamic Mullah

Mullah is the name given  to teachers or scholars of Islamic learning or the leaders of mosques. The term is usually a mark of respect but can also be used in a derogatory manner and is primarily used in Iran, Turkey, Pakistan, and the former Soviet republics of Central Asia. In Arabic-speaking lands, an Islamic cleric is called an imam or Shayk  instead. Mullah is derived from the Arabic term mawla, which means master or the one in charge. Throughout Southern Asias history, these rulers of Arabic descent have led cultural revolutions and religious war alike. However, a mullah is general a local Islamic leader, although sometimes they rise to national prominence. Usage in Modern Culture Most often, Mullah refers to Islamic scholars well-versed in the sacred law of the Quran, however, in  Central  and  East Asia, the term mullah is used on a local level to refer to mosque leaders and scholars as a sign of respect.   Iran is a unique case in that it uses the term in a pejorative manner, referring to low-level clerics as mullahs because the term derives from Shiite  Islam wherein the Quran casually mentions mullah multiple times throughout its pages while Shia Islam is the dominant religion of the country. Instead, clergymen and religious leaders use alternative terms to refer to their most respected members of the faith.   In most senses, though, the term has disappeared from modern usage except to mock those who are overly devout in their religious pursuits, a sort of insult for reading the Quran too much and assuming oneself the Mullah referred to in the sacred text. Respected Scholars Still, there is some respect behind the name mullah, at least for those who regard those well versed in religious texts as mullahs. In these cases, the astute scholar must have a firm understanding of all things Islam, especially as it pertains to the contemporary society wherein the hadith (traditions) and fiqh (law) are equally important. Oftentimes, those considered to be mullah will have memorized the Quran and all of its important teachings and lessons, though oftentimes throughout history uneducated common folk would misname visiting clerics mullahs because of their vast knowledge (comparatively) of the religion. Mullahs can also be considered teachers and political leaders. As teachers, mullahs share their knowledge of religious texts in schools called madrasas in matters of Shariah law. They have also served in positions of power, such as the case with Iran after the Islamic State took control in 1979. In Syria, Mullahs play an important role in the ongoing conflict between rival Islamic groups and foreign adversaries alike, valuing the protection of Islamic law while staving off Islamic extremists and attempting to restore democracy or civilized form of government to the war-torn nation.