Student-Centered Teaching: Making It Work

Abstract

I recently taught new course at two-year technical school. I knew from my investigation of the program that learners were typically exposed to authority approaches to learning. At the first session, I asked learners to complete an and background form and one of the questions I asked was, Do you need help with tests, writing, or public speaking? One of the students checked off yes next to help with tests and wrote in, Thank you. No one has ever asked before. Why don't we ask our students what they need? What does it take to be more focused on those needs, to be more student-centered? Ultimately, being student-centered is more of an attitude than an activity. Appreciating student-centered teaching means starting at the source. Student-centered teaching, responsive teaching, and individualized instruction are concepts in adult education that flow directly from humanistic educational philosophy. goal of humanistic education is the development of persons--persons who are open to change and continued learning, persons who strive for self-actualization, and persons who can live together as fully-functioning individuals (Elias and Merriam, 1984, p. 122). Humanistic education values the student as whole person, person who deserves to be treated with respect and dignity. role of the teacher in humanistic education setting is that of facilitator, helper, and partner in the learning (Elias and Merriam, 1984, p. 125). Student-centered then is the total orientation of the teacher to the learner. This includes the teacher's attitudes, behaviors, beliefs, and values system. The need for individualizing instruction, is recognition of the belief that learners differ in all respects: intellectual, cognitive, affective, and situational. Only from the humanistic perspective can the full import of student-centered teaching and individualized instruction be realized. Learners can be said to differ in respect to intellectual ability, styles and methods of cognitive processing, personality, ways of making meaning, physical characteristics, socialization, developmental characteristics, educational attainment, and more. This is not by any means an exhaustive list of individual differences. Paradoxically, generalizations about learners are useful not so much to guide your teaching as to guide your understanding of the individual participants in each program. Effective teaching depends on being student-centered to the learners in your course or program, not to all learners. Fortunately, the list of differences that you can hope to assess or appreciate in any given group of learners is manageable. These include learner needs, preferences for different cognitive and learning styles, preferences for different teaching styles, physical differences, and preferences for learning environments: cognitive, emotional, and physical. Student-centered teaching begins long before learners enter the picture. You can readily engage in self-assessment process regarding your own proficiencies. Numerous recommendations have been made regarding the skills and proficiencies required for student-centered teaching. Two broad categories of instructor proficiency can be identified: mastery and teaching style. Hiemstra and Sisco (1991) and Knox (1986) discuss number of strategies for becoming an effective instructor including understanding good instruction and effective instructional planning. For instructors whose aim is to empower participants with the desire and ability to guide their continued learning beyond the program, instructional mastery and style are intertwined components of the teaching/learning transaction (Knox, 1986, p. 40). A high-level of mastery allows for the possibility that you will be able to accomplish the subject matter objectives and also be student-centered to learners, including individualizing instruction. As Knox (1986) says, a very proficient instructor may be able to respond to unanticipated questions and directions of inquiry and to encourage learners to pursue their varied interests related to the content (Knox, 1986, p. …