D&C 20:53-59 says,
53 The teacher’s duty is to watch over the church always, and be with and strengthen them;
54 And see that there is no iniquity in the church, neither hardness with each other, neither lying, backbiting, nor evil speaking;
55 And see that the church meet together often, and also see that all the members do their duty.
56 And he is to take the lead of meetings in the absence of the elder or priest—
57 And is to be assisted always, in all his duties in the church, by the deacons, if occasion requires.
58 But neither teachers nor deacons have authority to baptize, administer the sacrament, or lay on hands;
59 They are, however, to warn, expound, exhort, and teach, and invite all to come unto Christ.
That was all fine and dandy when teachers were adults. Soon after the turn of the 20th century, the office of Teacher was relegated to 14 year old young men as a way to activate male youth who were falling away from the church in droves. In fact, the entire Aaronic Priesthood was relegated to all young men, rather than adult men. Nobody expects teens or pre-teens to “warn, expound, exhort, and teach, and invite all to come unto Christ.” In fact, most young men are pretty intimidated when reading verse 59 in particular.
In the Community of Christ, if a person is called to teach Gospel Doctrine, whether male or female, they are ordained to the office of Teacher. That makes perfect sense. Instead, our “teachers” main responsibility is to prepare the sacrament (which isn’t mentioned at all in D&C 20.) Is it time to rename Teacher to something else to better indicate what they do, or would you prefer they keep the name even though they have nothing to do with teaching? Have you ever seen a Teacher ever “take the lead of meetings in the absence of the elder or priest?” Is this scripture simply out of date?