This article is divided into two parts: the first part shows the difference between teacher-centred and learner-centred instruction and highlights the latter, while the second presents the practical applications in implementing learner-centred instruction.

Looking back at the past century, it’s interesting to note that a number of new theories on teaching and learning have emerged. Among those theories which have been popular and become the bases of the theoretical foundations in the field of education are socio-cultural and constructivism. The socio-cultural theory of Vygotsky posits that social interaction plays a fundamental role in the development of cognition (Kearsley, 1994b). Constructivism, on the other hand, states that learning is an active process in which learners construct new ideas or concepts based upon their current/past knowledge (Kearsely, 1994a). If we go deeper into these theories, we will come to an understanding that they focus on the learner, while the teacher’s role is that of an inquirer, observer, facilitator and creator of ‘rich’ learning environments from which the learner can make his/her own discoveries. These two perspectives (socio-cultural and constructivism) became the foundation of learner-centred instruction, which is often contrasted with the teacher-centred approach. With the emergence of different theories in education, one may question: Is there a currently recognised approach that is a generally accepted norm in education? The answer is yes. It is an approach that puts the learner at the heart of teaching and learning—learner-centred instruction.

Teacher-centred vs. Learner-centred Instruction

The Faculty Development Institute of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (2002) differentiates teacher-centred from learner-centred instruction based on the following five variables in Table 1:

Brown (2001) summarises the differences between teacher-centred instruction and learner-centred instruction by highlighting the latter, which includes:

1. Techniques that focus on or account for learner’s needs, styles and goals,
   
   
2. Techniques that give some control to the student (e.g. group work or strategy training),
   
   
3. Curricula that include the consultation and input of students and do not presuppose objectives in advance,
   
   
4. Techniques that allow for student creativity and innovation,
   
   
5. Techniques that enhance a student’s sense of competence and self-worth,

Barrows (1994) and Feltovich et al. (1996) point out the potential benefits of the learner-centred approach namely, increased student motivation, active participation in the learning process and better learning. Others like Bostock (1997) and Scardamalia & Bereiter (1992) claim that students under learner-centred instruction as compared with non learner-centred instruction students, may be able to apply the knowledge better, have a deeper understanding of the materials, develop more cons among the concepts, and acquire greater critical thinking skills.

Practical Applications

Reflection. The first and the most important step in creating learner-centred instruction is to examine our philosophy of teaching and learning. We have to look back at what we have done in the classroom. This includes revisiting the approaches, methods and strategies we have employed.

Specifically, we have to ask a question: Are our methods and strategies anchored in the principled approach in teaching and learning? In line with this question, http://www.teachervision.fen.com/lesson-plans/lesson-4786.html offers some useful suggestions:

• Initiate collaboration with other educational professionals.
  
  
• Locate and share studies that document successful learner-centred classrooms.
  
  
• Attend conferences and workshops geared toward learner-centred topics.

Based on my experience as a teacher, administrator and researcher in a private educational institution in Southeast Asia, many teachers exert little or no effort at all in doing the above-mentioned activities. The reason is neither the non-availability of research materials and educational experts nor the lack of funding, but it is simply the ‘I know that already’ mentality. Such teachers tend to think: Why should I waste my time reading educational studies, talking to other teachers and attending seminars when ‘I know them already’? As educators, we should not think this way. Let me quote what Brown (2001) says to second/foreign language teachers, which I believe is true and useful across curricula:

Table 1

The way you understand the language-learning process—what makes for successful and unsuccessful learning—may be relatively stable across months or years, but don’t even feel too smug. There is far too much that we do not know collectively about this process, and there are far too many new research findings pouring in, to allow you to assume that you can confidently assert that you know everything you already need to know about language and language learning.

Group Work. Group work or cooperative learning is solidly grounded in research principles. A 1981 meta-analysis of 122 achievement-related studies reported that Cooperative Learning (CL) promotes high achievement rather than competitive or individualistic learning across all age levels, subject areas and all tasks except rote learning and decoding type of tasks (Johnson et al., 1981). Brown (2001) suggests that the group activities—role-play, simulations, drama, jigsaw, information-gap, problem solving and decision-making, brainstorming, interview and projects—can be effective in the classroom if implemented properly. He further makes some suggestions on how to plan for those group activities:

6. introduce technique,
   
   
7. justify the use of small group for the technique,
   
   
8. model the technique,
   
   
9. give explicit detailed instructions,
   
   
10. divide the class into groups,
    
    
11. check for clarification, and
    
    
12. set the tasks in motion.

Conclusion

The focus of learner-centred instruction—having learners at the centre of the teaching and learning process—poses a big challenge to every classroom teacher. This entails maximising the full potential of the learners by ‘empowering’ them in the classroom. This is not an easy task because it changes our beliefs about teaching and learning and pushes us to think of strategies that can give learners some control of their learning. For those who have been practising learner-centred instruction, the challenge lies on exploring other ways that will allow for learner creativity and innovation, and perhaps sharing your insights with other classroom teachers.

References

Barrows, H. S. (1994). Practice-based Learning: Problem-based Learning Applied to Medical Education. Springfield, IL: Southern Illinois University of Medicine.

Bostock, S. J. (1997). ‘Designing Web-based Instruction for Active Learning’. In Kahn, B. (Ed.). Web-based Instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, Inc. pp. 225–230.

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.

Coelho, E. (1991). Jigsaw. Revised edition. Markham, Ontario: Pippin Publishing Ltd.

Faculty Development Institute of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, (1992). ‘Learner-centered and Teacher-centered Instruction. A Comparison’, Faculty Development Institute, Virginia, http://www.fdi.vt.edu/summer/2002/Content/TrackH/UnitB/B-21.html (Last accessed: 4 December 2002).

Feltovich, P. J.; Spiro, R. J.; Coulson, R. L. & Feltovich, J. (1996). ‘Collaboration within and among Minds: Mastering Complexity, Individually and in Groups’. In Koschman, T. (Ed.), CSCL: Theory and Practice of an Emerging Paradigm. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. pp. 25–44.

Grabinger, R. S. (1996). ‘Rich Environments for Active Learning’. In Jonassen, D. H. (Ed.). Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster Macmillan. pp. 665–692.

Johnson, D. W.; Maruyama, G.; Johnson, R.; Nelson, D. & Skon, L. (1981). ‘Effects of Cooperative, Competitive, and Individualistic Goal Structures on Achievement: A Meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 89: 47–62.

Kearsley, G. (1994a). ‘Constructivist Theory (J. Bruner)’. Explorations in Learning & Instruction: The Theory Into Practice Database. http://www.gwu.edu/~tip/bruner.html (Last accessed: 10 December 2003).

Kearsley, G. (1994b). ‘Social Development Theory (L. Vygotsky)’. Explorations in Learning & Instruction: The Theory Into Practice Database. http://www.gwu.edu/~tip/vygotsky.html (Last accessed: 10 December 2003).

Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (1992). ‘An Architecture for Collaborative Knowledge Building. In deCorte, E.; Linn, M.C.; Mandl, H. & Verschaffil, L. (Eds.), Computer-based Learning Environments and Problem Solving. Berlin: Springer Verlag. pp. 41–66.

Family Education Nenc. (2003). ‘Learner-centered vs. Curriculum-centered Teachers’. http://www.teachervision.fen.com/lesson-plans/lesson-4786.html (Last accessed: 4 December 2003).