My teaching philosophy rests on the idea of building knowledge -- that no matter how many gaps there are in a student's knowledge it is the duty of a good teacher to not only patch those gaps, but also build them up so that in the end the student has full confidence in their knowledge of a subject.

During the first session, I like to cover two things: 1) what the student consciously knows he/she is missing - AKA, why he/she came to me, and 2) the inherent fundamentals of the subject the student needs help in. As soon as those larger concepts are learned, then we can delve deep into the intricacies of a subject and get those test points.

By reversing our roles -- instead of them asking me questions, I'll be the one asking them. The best way to learn something is to teach it anyways, isn't it? This method will instill confidence in their knowledge. Perhaps in the end their method of thinking something through can teach me something! With this confidence comes curiosity. Any independent learner treasures curiosity: that's what spurs learning outside of a classroom. That question "I wonder if..." can create so many self-made opportunities for learning for a student.

Think about the end-goal. Yes this is tedious and this may not be your strength, but by golly think about whatever motivates completion. Think about the prospect of being done, or that hypothetical higher grade that can only become real through hard work. All of a sudden the tediousness is justified, therefore it must continue.

I'd say to either tackle it from another angle (such as showing its parallel in a similar concept) or to leave it be to try another skill. Sometimes taking a break to work on other things helps the brain when we do return to that tough skill.

Depends on the reading level: -- Go through the readings strategically, paragraph-by-paragraph, sentence-by-sentence. -- Ask questions, going from concrete to figurative, about the content of the reading. See if there's a specific level where the reading comprehension drops off -- if so, then what is the student missing? Is it a simple question of not knowing what they're looking for? Is it not knowing the strategies of higher level reading comprehension? Once we figure out the issue, we can address it and rock that reading comprehension.

1) Going from fundamentals to specifics of an issue. Each subject has its overall fundamental concepts: once we get those down, the rest will follow. 2) Narratives. Stories are so much easier to remember than conglomerations of letters and numbers -- memorization doesn't work. So instead, we'll make small stories for ease of memorization. 3) Generally, applying values thought of as foreign to the subject at hand. Meaning: using creativity in STEM, and strategy in humanities. Seems odd? Let's try it out and you'll see that it works. 4) Visual learning. Carrying around information in our head is hard. It's so much easier once it's on paper; after all, nothing becomes real until it is seen. So that means that I want math problems visualized, written out, with every step shown. That means that I want faces to go along with names in history. That means that every "to be" verb in an essay will be painstakingly highlighted so that students can see how many boring verbs they use in their essays.

Connect them with something that they do enjoy in that subject --- the satisfaction of getting a problem right, the process of solving something, the potential of the knowledge they're learning. And if that's not enough, there's always the small comfort that they'll learn the concept and be one step closer to mastering or completing it.