1. Teaching Statement
I have a vivid memory of my very first EFL class. At the tender age of 10, I was one of the “privileged”
kids to attend an English-medium school, where we would learn English 25 hours per week in our
foundation year, and study all other classes in English as we moved through the grades. On the first day
of school, the very first period of the day, we met Ms. Tokgoz, a stern looking woman with very short
hair and a very big voice. As soon as she walked in, she started speaking English and during the two
semesters she taught us, we never heard her utter a single word in any other language. She was a great
teacher, if a little peculiar. Her classes were challenging, especially at the beginning. We were not
allowed to use bilingual dictionaries and translating was a big no-no. Yet, we never had a dull moment,
because she turned learning into a fun process through a variety of activities. Naturally, we had no clue
that Ms. T was an avid fan of communicative approach, which had been sweeping the EFL world in early
80’s. All we knew was that it worked. By the end of the second semester, we were watching Hollywood
movies without subtitles, reading contemporary literature, having heated debates, and writing full on
essays – all in English. We even wrote short plays that we put on stage.
Years later, when I started studying TEFL in college, it was late 80’s and communicative approach was
still very popular. It was not a coincidence that I became a follower instantly. As I studied the method in
depth, I realized that the foundation of my English was cemented in communicative approach. I
designed all my teaching assignments, lesson plans, materials around it. Every time I had a mock
teaching session for class, I used it religiously. It didn’t hurt that all our professors, including the TEFL
Department Chair were firm believers. We were taught that drills were evil and grammar translation
method was archaic and obsolete.
It all made complete sense. I believed then, as I do now, that the goal of language learning is not
mastery of grammar, but communication. Grammar is merely a tool that helps us achieve this goal ---a
vehicle, if you will, to take us to our destination. That is how I learn and teach languages. In “real life”
nobody is asked to verbalize the structure for present perfect tense or to “change the following from
active to passive.” We are, however, expected to understand the time reference of a sentence in
present perfect tense, or to use passive voice correctly when needed, both orally and in writing, for the
sake of accurate communication. Therefore, communication should be the focus of language teaching,
as well as learning.
In my senior year in college, when I went to the school where I would do my internship, I had a nice
surprise waiting for me in teachers’ lounge: Ms. T! She had transferred to that school couple years ago
and would be my supervisor for the internship. She ended up becoming so much more than that. Ms. T
was my mentor. She guided me through my planning and teaching, we had long discussion sessions after
every class I observed and even longer feedback sessions after every class I taught. At the end of my
internship, Ms. T was kind enough to write a very flattering report that read “Some people are born to
teach; Yesim is one of them.” It made me feel as if I had won the gold medal in TEFL Olympics.
As much as I cherished those words, through my years in teaching, I found out that Ms. T was wrong. I
was not born to teach; I was born to learn. And some of the greatest lessons I have learnt are from

2. teaching. The most valuable one of all is that it is not about how the teacher teaches, but how the
students learn.
When I first started teaching, communicative approach was my Bible. I would use it in every class, for
every objective, in every situation. Every single technique I used in class had to be communicative. I
loathed drilling and avoided translation like the plague. I would snarl at the sight of grammar rules and
took pride in the fact that my students would never have to recite one. I was dedicated to using
communicative approach extensively and exclusively. And I was so focused on my teaching that I failed
to notice how my students were learning. Naturally, I had assessments through writing papers, exams,
assignments, projects, etc., but I was not actively concentrating on their learning process.
I was teaching foundation classes at a university and I loved my students. Most of them were fresh out
of high school, still trying to find their way from adolescence to adulthood, and experiencing the process
of learning as their own choice for the first time. Since this was their first “voluntary” learning
experience, they were discovering their learning skills and preferences, too.
One day, in class, I was doing my usual “expose, elicit, exercise” routine through stories, sample
dialogues, group work, and games to teach conditionals. One student asked me to write the grammar
rule for “Conditional 1.” Trying to disguise my contempt for the terminology, I told him to not worry
about the rule and focus on the function. When he insisted, I gave him the usual “grammar is not the
goal, it is just the tool” spiel, but he would not back down. Then he told me he was a “visual-mechanical
learner” and he needed to see the rule in front of him in order to fully comprehend a structure. It was
like Education 101 case study. That’s when it hit me that my students’ learning abilities and preferences
mattered much more than my choice of teaching approach.
Today, I still believe that the destination in language learning is communication, not grammar. And I still
prefer to teach --and learn-- languages through communicative approach. However, I am now acutely
aware of the fact that in any classroom, there are many different types of learners with various learning
skills and abilities, as well as preferences. Therefore, to create an efficient learning environment, I do my
best to be flexible enough to adjust my teaching style according to the learning needs of my students.
Nowadays, in every class I teach, I implement a variety of techniques utilizing different approaches.
Although communicative approach is still my favorite, I now know that there is a right time, right place,
and right learner for every other approach out there. Now, in addition to communicative techniques, my
classes have a healthy mix of drills, grammar structures, occasional “repeat after me”s, and yes, even
some translation here and there. I must admit I still despise the idea of worksheets, but when all else
fails I throw in one.
I also think that learning occurs better and more easily in student-oriented environments, rather than
teacher-oriented classrooms. Although there are times when the teacher should take center stage and
guide the learning process, more often than not, s/he should stay in the background, merely as a
facilitator, allowing students to learn through their own experience or from their peers in group/pair
work.

3. Last, but not least, I think every teacher should make a conscious effort to remain forever as a learner in
his/her own classroom. Particularly in language classes, since languages are alive and dynamic, there are
endless possibilities and so many of them are presented by the creative minds of students. There is no
end to what we can learn from them if we can let go of the “teach” in teacher.