What does a good teacher actually do?

After clarifying what TTC is and is not (T1), trainees face a simpler-looking question that is harder to answer: what does a good teacher actually do? Local courses often fill the gap with ready-made images — the fluent lecturer, the strict traditional instructor, or the entertaining host who keeps the room laughing. All three feel familiar in Iranian classrooms. None of them, alone, defines professional teacher-training work.

This Day-2 note separates the teacher’s job from “putting on a show” and from one-way knowledge transfer. It lands on a practical formula from Chapter 1 of Scrivener’s methodology book. We do not claim one personality style is best for everyone. We claim that without distinguishing teaching from learning, feedback on teaching becomes empty.

What is a teacher for? Scrivener’s starting point

In Learning Teaching (2nd ed., Chapter 1, “What is a teacher for?”), Scrivener reminds us that learners do not always need teachers. Self-study and immersion are real routes. A taught class is only one pathway. So if a teacher is present, what value do they add? For TTC trainees this question matters, because many mental models come from years of sitting as pupils — and those models sometimes normalise weak teaching.

Scrivener unpacks two popular but problematic images. First, the “entertainer”: lots of talk, jokes, performance. The hour may feel pleasant while little language is taken into use. Second, “traditional” chalk-and-talk teaching: the teacher explains, keeps control of the content, and learners mainly listen and take notes. In many cultures this is the default expectation; for language learning, long explanation alone is usually not enough.

Day formula: Teaching ≠ Learning

Scrivener’s formula is worth repeating daily: teaching does not equal learning. Teaching happening does not guarantee learning happening. A teacher may appear to “do little” while learners learn a lot — if conditions for real work are in place. Learning demands the learner’s own energy and attention. Nobody can pour understanding into another head like filling an empty mug from a jug.

In a class of twenty-five, one lesson is “taught,” yet many lessons are “received”: one learner connects ideas, one copies notes without thinking, one is tired, one misunderstood the topic, one is ready to try. Teacher performance is only one factor in learning — often less decisive than we feel. Professional work means arranging conditions that raise the odds of involvement, participation, and use.

Diagnostic table: three mental images of “teacher”

Practical translation for TTC trainees

A good teacher is not “the best actor in the room.” A good teacher helps create conditions for learning: clear instructions, pair/group work opportunities, monitoring time, and shorter explanations once learners are ready to try. Explanation is necessary — it is not a substitute for practice. This distinction becomes sharper tomorrow with Scrivener’s explainer / involver / enabler roles (Day 3 in the same cluster).

If a training course focuses only on “how to explain beautifully” and never observes real learner uptake, it pushes you toward the transmitter image. A strong local TTC — or a CELTA-informed pathway — keeps asking: when your talk ended, what did the learner do?

In your course / classroom

Early sessions in many local teacher-training courses introduce teacher roles and classroom expectations. A useful drill: review twenty minutes of your teaching (or a peer’s) and fill two columns — “minutes of teacher talk/teaching moves” versus “minutes of learner language work.” If the first column is always full, the problem is not your personality; it is your job definition.

Thirty-second check after each lesson: in this hour, how many minutes did learners actually use the language — not only listen? That question replaces moral labels (“good/bad teacher”) with behavioural evidence.