Way back in 2016 I wrote a blog exploring the concepts of learning centred and learner centred education. It is still being widely read today.
I believe it is still as relevant now as when I wrote it but I originally wrote it with a particular context in mind so it could be time for a bit of an update.
Here then is version 2 [with a new diagram, I have also included the original diagram at the end of the blog, not sure why, but I have].
To explain…
Put simply, learning can be Learning or Knowledge focused and this is usually teacher directed or it can be learner centered which tends to be learner directed.
Whereas one is more learning centred the second is more learner centred. This then is the primary focus of the model, one appraoch is more focused on the learning of skills and content the other is more focused on the relevance and appropriateness of learning to and for the individual, it is the balance between them that needs to be constantly monitored..
In the former approach Learning or Knowledge is the primary focus and therefore cognition tends to be more obviously important. In the latter the learner is the focus and so metacognition tends to be a more obvious point of focus. Now the reality is that life in the classroom is never an either/ or but a mix, there is no black and white in the classroom only in the theories. What a skillful teacher has to do is navigate between these two concepts and find a blend that works at that time, for that particular context with that particular content and learning objectives and with that particular group of learners. It is not an either/ or but a constant ebb and flow dependent on time and place.
It is important to say that neither approach is ‘better’ than the other and neither is correct. Too much teacher direction will get compliance but compromise genuine engagement whereas too much of a learner centered approach could result in a lack of focus and progress.
The bridge between the two is the learning process [the first circle] The process for learning is basically the same regardless of whether the lesson is learning centred or learner centred. Schools will have their own versions of the learning process that work for them; the one in the diagram is a very generic process to show the basic flow of learning and mastery.
Learning starts with a problem to be solved or understood which means questions have to be answered. This is the case irrespective of whether it is the teacher who poses the problem or whether it comes from the learners. This leads to a seeking for answers which will result in a learner producing a response that they will present. This could be a formal exam just as easily as it could be a dramatic representation or animated film. The final step is evaluation and review by self /peer /teacher or all three.
Questions need to be answered, material needs to be analysed and answers or products need to be created and celebrated. By placing the process of learning at the centre it can be seen how both models can complement each other and how both have their role to play in the development of the learner. It is not a case of either/ or but a case of realising that, though they have differences, they also have many similarities and it is in recognising these similarities that the real synergy between the two becomes apparent.
So the process of learning is the important connector.
Both have to acknowledge the prior learning of learners and both have to realise the importance of each individual as a culturally placed young adult who brings an individual world view and perspective into any learning environment. The difference is that one acknowledges this prior knowledge while the other is more driven by it.
Ultimately in a learning centred approach the power rests with the teacher who determines the content and context that needs to be mastered based on their experience and their duty to deliver an appropriate and challenging curriculum. In the learner centred approach the learner determines content and contact based on individual need and personal motivating factors.
As I have said this is a simplistic representation. Too much of either approach will result in a small number of students thriving but many getting lost and frustrated.
If the two are appropriately blended and the ‘connect’ is found then this is where there is genuine empowerment and where genuine curiosity of the earner can flourish under the careful guidance of a skilled teacher.
The professional educator should be able to predict what types of knowledge and content their learner will need in the next stage of their learning and should be able to plan and prepare accordingly. This does not become a rigid scheme but more of a state of readiness to help learners over predicted and often predictable obstacles.
This ‘Connect’ zone is where students will find links between the learning and their lives, this is where they will be empowered to the extent of being able to predict outcomes and this is where they are more likely to delve deep into the learning and achieve mastery at a level just beyond what they thought was initially possible.
The knowledge empowers and enriches but is also transferable to different situations.
Ultimately what this should enable is greater empowerment on the part of the individual in other words it will lead to a greater release of the learner into an increasingly personalised world armed with the skills and knowledge to ensure depth of investigation.
I see the two not as adversaries but as partners. It is about getting the balance between the two models right and then more importantly seeing the connection between the two.
There is little doubt that a rigid traditional approach of pouring content into learners is no longer acceptable or relevant as the sole method of learning, but the need to acquire knowledge is as important as ever. This is particularly the case in developing foundational skills of literacy and numeracy which are the basic building blocks upon which all learning is based. In the same way the idea of just letting learners pursue their own educational pathway without support or accountability is equally ludicrous. Just as knowledge is still important, the development of the individual is of equal importance.
There is a plethora of material currently available around the whole idea of learner centred education. Whether it be project based, inquiry, UDL or some other title, I see all as having a high degree of similarity in that all follow a similar process and it is the process that is important, as it is the process that provides the necessary structure to a more personalized approach to learning.
The real purpose of being aware of the two models though is to see the connection between them. If the acquisition of knowledge is seen as an end in itself then the connection between the two will never be realised but if we start to see the purpose of one as leading to and supporting the other then we can really start to see how they can complement each other and provide a more holistic learning experience.
The purpose then of a learning centred approach is not only to complement but to feed and enrich so that the learner centred model is able to thrive.
The decision then becomes not which camp an individual educator sits in but how they effectively utilise both models to provide a rich learning environment that increasingly releases the independence of the learner.
]
Comments