I suppose I must have read each of the preceding 133 posts on this subject and still I feel uneasy about it.
How do you define "favourite" and does it vary with time and experience? To give an idea,
- there could have been a teacher whoi let you get away with everything, who was warm and friendly - but from whom you learned nothing.
- another teacher insisted on good quality work and at the end of the academic year you realised that, for all the hard work she put you through, you had actually acheived a lot.
- another teacher you hated but, looking back 10 years you realised that she was doing and acheiving everything possible to ensure that you ended up a well rounded individal.
I have used the feminine only because it seems that mainly women who have had most to say on the subject.
As for my own experience, a Mr Kirby has been mentioned often enough. He was unconventional is almost every respect, he actually acheived a lot in his chosen outside interest of beekeeping, and he gave to at least many pupils a lot of responsibility. As an OB he knew the school from both sides and, with that experience, I believe he tried to make it a better place for pupils. JR recounts how, when he woke up after a nasty medical experience it was Mr Kirby who was at his bedside. What more can you say?
Favourite teacher definitely but did I learn much in his lessons - unfortunately not.
I feel uneasy about the question; I have been reading a novelette about how a senior prefect and her guardian were able to overturn a failing school by effectively concentrating on keeping those teachers who were effective as opposed to those who failed those in their charge. "Favourites" were not an issue, it being considered that those who were deservedly popular were those who were able to inspire pupils to do better. Of course it is fiction but seemed to have an element of common sense