Is Learner-centred Education ‘best Practice’?
In collaboration withCambridge Education UNICEF/UNI185994/MiltchevaEducation Think Piece SeriesUNICEF has commissioned 10 Think Pieces by leading researchers and practitioners to stimulate debate around significanteducational challenges facing the Eastern and Southern Africa region. While the pieces are rooted in evidence, they are notresearch papers or evidence briefs, nor do they represent UNICEF policy. Rather, they are engaging pieces that aim to inspirefresh thinking to improve learning for all.Is learner-centred education ‘best practice’?By Professor Michele SchweisfurthLearner-centred education (LCE) and related specificmethods such as activity-based, inquiry-based andproblem-based learning are widely promotedinternationally as examples of ‘best practice’ pedagogy.While it can be a slippery term with differentunderstandings and associated practices, a widely-usedand simple definition of LCE describes it as“ a pedagogical approach which gives learners, anddemands from them, a relatively high level of activecontrol over the content and process of learning. What islearnt, and how, are therefore shaped by learners’ needs,capacities and interests.”1LCE has become a ‘travelling policy’ in that it has movedaround the world and taken root in many differentcontexts. Its origins as an idea go back as far asSocrates in ancient Greece, with the Socratic dialogueenquiry method.2 In England, its child-centred versionwas part of education policy reform in the late 1960s;it was also central to the progressive movement in theUSA and had expression in Europe through specialistapproaches such as Montessori and Steiner schooling.More recently, it has been described as a ‘policypanacea’3 in the Global South, because it is believed tocontribute to development in several ways, as we shallsee below. Based on this promise, internationaldevelopment organisations and agencies, includingUNICEF, have been active in promoting LCE in the GlobalSouth. As a result of the widespread faith in LCE andenthusiasm for it, a 2008 analysis of Sub-Saharan Africannational education policies demonstrated that since the1990s, it has appeared virtually everywhere, at least atthe rhetorical level.4The aim of this Think Piece is to provoke readers to thinkcritically about the claims regarding LCE, and its suitabilityfor different cultural and resource contexts. It will firstlyunpack some of the main arguments in favour of LCEthat have made it a travelling policy and ‘best practice’. Itwill then draw on a wide range of evidence to show someof the problems that have arisen when LCE has beenintroduced in situations where teachers are unfamiliarwith it, where classes are large and poorly-resourced,and where cultural practices work against the kinds ofrelationships and attitudes to knowledge that underpin LCE.Schweisfurth, M, Learner-Centred Education in International Perspective: whose pedagogy for whose development? London, Routledge, 2013.Cited in Brandes and Ginnis P, A Guide to Student-Centred Learning, London, Simon and Schuster, 19963Sriprakash, A, ‘Child-centred education and the promise of democratic learning: pedagogic messages in rural Indian primary schools’, in International Journal of EducationalDevelopment, 30, 2010, pp. 297-304.4 UNESCO 2012 Position paper on education for children with disabilities https://www.unicef.org/disabilities/files/UNICEF Right to Education Children Disabilities En Web.pdf4Chisholm, L and Leyendecker, R, ‘Curriculum reform in post-1990s sub-Saharan Africa’, in International Journal of Educational Development, Vol 28, 2008, pp. 195-205.12
2 Improving classroom practice UNICEF Think Piece SeriesIt will also examine some of the Western critiquesof LCE; even in relatively luxurious school settings withwell-educated and prepared teachers, questions havebeen raised about it.LCE is something of a sacred cow and the aim of thisThink Piece is not to kill it outright. Rather, it is toencourage readers to think about when and where aspectsof it may be possible and appropriate, for whom, and forwhich learning goals, particularly in the context of SubSaharan Africa. Part of the problem with LCE is that it isoften polarised against teacher-centred or rote learning. Inreality, many good teachers draw on a range of methods intheir pedagogical practice, which are suited to the culturaland resource contexts in which they work. In addition tothis, the implementation of learner-centred practice byteachers can vary a great deal, meaning that a weak useof LCE will not necessarily be any more effective thanlecturing or drilling. And although ‘effectiveness’ shouldbe judged by children’s learning in the widest sense, itis often predicated on results in high stakes exams, forwhich drilling and other intensive rote-learning methodsmay be more effective. One thing is certain: teachersunaccustomed to learner-centred practice in their owneducational experiences or in the systems in which theywork are very unlikely to use it effectively based on shortterm training interventions or outsider recommendations.These can make things worse as well by underminingteachers’ established practices. In the light of these issues,this Think Piece will provide a set of flexible principlesthat are broadly learner-centred but can be adapted todifferent contexts in order to build on the best of teachermotivations, beliefs and practices.Why has LCE been promotedas a policy and practice?In my experience of teaching and researching in a widerange of countries, LCE is widely seen as a ‘modern’pedagogy that is superior to ‘old-fashioned’ teacher centredpractice. Individuals on the ground state these beliefs, andthey are often embedded in policy as well. My study ofeducation policies and research across the Global Southuncovered the following narratives about LCE, all of whichhelp to fuel it as an advocated practice:1. The emancipatory narrative suggests that byputting more decisions in the hands of learners,learner-centred approaches free them from teacherauthoritarianism and from strict curricula that do notreflect their personal needs. By doing this, LCE isbelieved to protect learners’ rights and develop theskills and attitudes that promote democratic citizenship.2. The cognition narrative suggests that everyone learnsmore effectively when lessons build on their capabilitiesand interests and are based on problem-solving andapplication rather than pure individual rote learning.There is also an assumption that LCE is more activityoriented and engaging for students, thus promptingmore meaningful learning.3. The preparation narrative is increasingly common innational policies. It refers to the need for learners todevelop ‘21st century skills’ for life in the ‘knowledgeeconomy’. These include abilities and attributessuch as critical thinking, independent research, andflexibility. LCE is believed to support the developmentof these by reducing the content basis of learning andencouraging independence and collaboration ratherthan reliance on the teacher and text.I have used the term ‘narrative’ purposefully, because theevidence that any of the above is entirely true is limited.That they are beliefs, rather than proven facts, doesn’tseem to make the narratives any less powerful. UNICEF/UN0236403/Nakibuuka
3 Improving classroom practice UNICEF Think Piece SeriesWhat does the evidence tell us about theimplementation of LCE? What critiques helpto explain this?In 2011, I synthesised the findings from every availablearticle on LCE published in the International Journal ofEducational Development, which is the main academicjournal on education in developing country contexts. Ireviewed 72 articles on this theme and almost every singleone carried the same strong message: LCE isn’t working.Whether it was a case of full-scale policy changes, orsmaller-scale interventions by individual programmesor agencies, even when teachers were apparentlyenthusiastic about the ideas, there were not the expectedchanges to practice or learning. The evidence for this lackof change was, frankly, overwhelming.There were a small number of success stories. In a fewcases, a multi-pronged approach to implementation, whichsupported teachers in a range of ways over a long period,did bring about some changes. But the prevailing storywas what different researchers called ‘implementationfailure’, or, metaphorically, ‘tissue rejection’ (as in whena transplanted heart is rejected by the body). In somecases, there was little if any lasting change to practice. Insome worrying cases, the intervention made things worse.For example, in contexts where group work was beingadvocated, teachers sometimes put learners physicallyinto groups but continued to teach from the front. The neteffect on learning was that fewer learners could see or hearwhat was going on. Some teachers, who were not clearon the concept or on their responsibilities, implementedindependent learning in ways that left too many decisionsto unprepared learners, and classrooms became unfocusedand unproductive. UNICEF/UN0236403/NakibuukaSome of the articles put this lack of change orinappropriate change down to a range of problems withthe implementation process and barriers to it in schools. Anumber of explanations were put forward for this. The maincategories were: Unrealistic expectations for change from policy Lack of information dissemination on policy changes Minimal preparation – for example, expecting teachersto change their longstanding practice through a shortintervention or workshop Low teacher capacity – for example, in terms ofinitial training, pedagogical or subject knowledge,or motivation Teacher preparation which teaches about LCEbut does not model it Resource shortage in terms of teaching materials Large classes and crowded conditions High-stakes assessments which remain based oncontent which promote rote learning and teachingto the test Management and inspection regimes which wereunsupportive of LCE Language of instruction (usually English) beinguncomfortable for teachers and making them prefertext-based or scripted lessons.The list of barriers is a long and convincing one anddemonstrates that there are factors beyond teachers thatcan affect whether LCE can be sustainably implemented.But some other critiques strike at the heart of LCE itself,asking some challenging questions about whether it isactually suitable for all cultural or resource contexts.In many African cultures, for example, respect for eldersis ingrained; in such contexts where children do notquestion adults or the texts they have written, the criticaland independent thinking and questioning attitudesdemanded by LCE do not come easily. Others haveargued that LCE is a Western import and a form of neocolonialism. Botswana researcher, Richard Tabulawa, forexample, has written extensively on why this ‘paradigmshift’ is not appropriate in African contexts. He arguesthat authoritarian adult-child relationships are deeply heldfrom both traditional and colonial roots, and that changingclassroom practice in learner-centred directions is not justa case of modifying teaching technique but also culturalbeliefs and practices.
4 Improving classroom practice UNICEF Think Piece SeriesIt is not only in the Global South that questions have beenasked both about how widespread learner-centred practiceis, and whether it fulfils all its foundational promises.Even when it was inscribed in policy in England, practicediffered between teachers and many remained quiteteacher-centred in their practice. This remains the casein many countries in the Global North, where, ironically,many countries look for pedagogical inspiration from Asiancountries such as Singapore with successful results oninternational tests. On a more foundational level, childrenfrom less educated families are likely to be disadvantagedby LCE. If they are left to choose what they wish tolearn, such children will not have access to the ‘powerfulknowledge’ that might help to promote social mobilityand redress the imbalances that stem from the homeenvironment.6Are there some basic principles that canbe adopted that draw on the best of learnercentredness while respecting context andavoiding failure?This list of failures and critiques may be uncomfortablereading for professionals who, for sound reasons, arecommitted to LCE. The human rights basis of LCE willbe particularly powerful for UNICEF staff given UNICEF’smission, commitments and ethos. However, the evidence ofthe risk of failure needs to be acknowledged and the issueof fitness-for-purpose in low-income contexts also needs tobe addressed. One response is to say that LCE should notbe promoted at all, but that instead teacher developmentprogrammes should focus on making existing teachercentred practice more stimulating and learning-oriented.7However, I have argued that if we combine the rightsbasis of LCE with the evidence concerning pedagogy thatstimulates learning, it is possible to create a flexible setof principles that might be helpful in improving practiceeverywhere. Using such a set of principles would help toensure that the best promise of learner-centredness doesnot get lost because of the problems with previous attemptsto implement it. The principles are intended to be adaptableto all local contexts. They are also intended to take us awayfrom prescriptions about specific learner-centred classroomtechniques toward a more holistic and context-sensitiveapproach. Some of them are addressed to teachers andteacher educators, but some require the engagementof policymakers and cannot be tackled at the classroomlevel alone.The seven principles to make current teacher practicemore learning-oriented are:1. Lessons should be engaging to students,motivating them to learn. In some contexts, thismight include the use of technology or experimentequipment, for example, but this is not alwaysavailable. In some contexts, this might involve games,for example, but in other contexts this might be seenas insufficiently serious for the classroom. There isconsiderable evidence that engagement does enhancelearning, even though what constitutes engagementmay vary between contexts. I have observed lessonsin China, for example, where a variety of carefullytimed, intensive activities reinforce the same learninggoal, with short bursts of physical activity in between.2. Atmosphere and conduct reflect mutual respectbetween teachers and learners. Interactions andpunishments must not violate rights, and so corporalpunishment or humiliation have no place. It is worthnoting, though, that in some cultures the tone ofinteraction may not be as relaxed as in others – thisdoes not mean there is not mutual respect. Teacherswith serious demeanours may be the norm in contextsof higher power distance between elders and children,and this can potentially inspire affection as well as trustand respect in those settings. UNICEF’s Child-friendlySchools Framework8 is an excellent basis for therealisation of this principle.3. Learning challenges build realistically on learners’prior knowledge. There is considerable evidence thatmany syllabi are too demanding for many learners andthat accountability to higher authorities means thatteachers’ first priority is to get through the syllabus.This leads to ‘flat learning profiles’9 when learnerscannot keep up. This is a real dilemma for manyteachers, but policymakers also need to engage withthis reality so that teachers do not have to teach atthe expense of learning. Recommended interventionsinclude early remedial work with learners at risk offalling behind. Given the limits of teacher time andattention to individual learners, successful experimentsin India have used volunteer community teachers tohelp bridge the learning gap.10See Michael Young ‘The curriculum and the entitlement to knowledge’, 2014 for a discussion of ‘powerful knowledge’. He argues that all children should be entitled to learncontent that can help them to succeed in school and in life, especially since this knowledge is not evenly distributed among them if they are not taught it explicitly in school.7Gerald Guthrie is an example of such a critic. See: Guthrie, G, The Progressive Fallacy in Developing Countries: in favour of formalism, New York, Springer, ild Friendly Schools Manual EN 040809.pdf9Pritchett, L and Beatty, A, ‘Slow down, you’re going too fast: matching curricula to student skill levels’, in International Journal of Educational Development, 40, 2015,pp. 276-288.10Banerji, R, ‘Poverty and primary schooling: field studies from Mumbai and Delhi’, in Economics and Politics Weekly, 35 (March), 2000, pp. 795-802.6
5 Improving classroom practice UNICEF Think Piece Series4. Authentic dialogue is used, including openquestions. Drills and whole-class chanting servepurposes in reinforcing some learning and pulling theclass together. However, dialogic teaching requiresa fuller engagement and has been shown to havea greater impact on learning. Dialogue is not onlystimulating to learners by engaging learners andmaking space for creativity. It also makes the learningvisible to teachers so they can formatively assessthe extent to which individuals and the whole classare ‘keeping up’. Above all, teacher education at bothpre-service and in-service levels should model it, asinterventions in South Africa have demonstrated,11since teachers who have not personally experienceddialogic pedagogy cannot simply be told how to do it.5. Curriculum is relevant to learners’ lives andperceived future needs, in a language accessibleto them (home language preferred). This is notalways possible in multilingual contexts, but dialogicteaching will be facilitated by this and teachers will bemore confident to respond to learners and be flexiblein their teaching. This is in part a policy issue andthe (mistaken) belief persists that colonial languagessuch as English can be learned through using themas language of instruction, and that this will lead tobetter employment opportunities for learners. However,if teachers are not fully proficient in the language ofinstruction, they will use more closed pedagogies andbe unable to teach dialogically.12 And if learners cannotunderstand lessons, then their learning is jeopardised.Where teachers have no choice regarding the mainlanguage of instruction, code switching should not beseen as poor practice.6. Curriculum is based on skills and attitudes but doesnot ignore content. These should include skills of criticaland creative thinking and attitudes related to nationaland global citizenship. It is difficult for teachers whohave not personally experienced such teaching in theirown education to know how to approach it. Evidencereviewed points to the need for in-service training whichnot only teaches about these approaches, but, again,models them.13 Most teachers are used to teachingknowledge. The proposed framework is not asking themto stop doing that, but not to focus exclusively on contentor to do so only through rote methods.7. Assessment follows these principles by testing awide range of thinking skills. Exams should not bepurely content-driven as success is often based onrote learning. Where systems are driven by high-stakesexaminations that are largely based on knowledge,policymakers need to consider whether these reflectthe kind of citizens the country needs, and also to notethat these examinations will have a powerful impact onteaching practice. In most contexts, teachers have thefreedom to introduce formative assessment that adheresto these principles, but if learners are concerned primarilywith passing common examinations, alternatives maynot be perceived as a good use of time. Assessment forlearning14 is a helpful general principle, while keeping inmind that assessment can be happening informally on adaily basis in a dynamic, dialogic classroom. It needn’tadd unduly to the teachers’ formal marking load but doesrequire he or
often polarised against teacher-centred or rote learning. In reality, many good teachers draw on a range of methods in their pedagogical practice, which are suited to the cultural and resource contexts in which they work. In addition to this, the implementation of learner-centred practice b
The teacher-centred teaching strategy 18 2.2.2. The teacher-centred strategy in South Africa 18 2.2.3. The learner-centred teaching strategy 20 . iv 2.2.4. The learner-centred strategy and the focus on the individual 21 .
inability to be person-centred. This guide offers clear and concise advice on how to go about bridging this gap. Too often, person-centred support gets put to the back of the queue behind the perceived necessity to meet targets and deadlines. This guide does an excellent job of focusing attention on the importance of being person-centred.
f and 10 (1)). We believe that person centred planning can help to achieve this objective. Person centred planning is a way of discovering how a person wants to live their life and what is required to make that possible. Person centred planning has its roots in the normalization and independent living movements. It is grounded in a social model of
Person Centred Working (day-to-day) is informed by person centred thinking. Every aspect of your day-to-day support work is carried out in a way that is respectful of the individual's wishes and dignity. In everything you do, you strive to support the individual to take control. Person Centred Planning (for future change) is the name given to a
The emphasis is upon person centred, rather than service led, outcomes. Person centred planning tools are used to capture information that feeds in to the care and support or educational plan for a person. There are many different tools that can be used i.e. the relationship circle, communication chart. These tools allow for person centred
studies student teachers‟views on the implementation of learner-centred education in primary schools. 2.3 Aiding children's education rights and achievement of their full potential through better classroom pedagogical practices Supporting the need for better classroom pedagogical
3.0 TYPES OF CURRICULUM There are many types of curriculum design, but here we will discuss only the few. Types or patterns are being followed in educational institutions. 1. Subject Centred curriculum 2. Teacher centred curriculum 3. Learner centred curriculum 4. Activity/Experience curriculum 5. Integrated curriculum 6. Core curriculum 7.
Waves API 550 User Manual - 3 - 1.2 Product Overview . The Waves API 550 consists of the API 550A, a 3-Band parametric equalizer with 5 fixed cutoff points per band and the API 550B, a 4-Band parametric equalizer with 7 fixed cutoff points per band. Modeled on the late 1960’s legend, the API 550A EQ delivers a sound that has been a hallmark of high end studios for decades. It provides .
