Advertisement

Personal Means Learner as Central

  • Mellita Jones
  • Karen McLean
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter explores student-centred learning as a core practice for personalising learning. Keamy et al. (2007) identify this core practice as a key tenet for personalising learning, which they termed “Learner as Central”. As a notion that has been fundamental to more contemporary ideas about effective teaching and learning in recent decades, much of this chapter looks to present an overview of what is already known about student-centred learning and how it has been developed, critiqued and refined in its relatively short history in education. In providing this summary, we are able to clearly explicate the ways in which this particular tenet is essential to personalising learning in the higher education context and more broadly. We also challenge the generally accepted dichotomy that is often presented between student-centred and teacher-centred learning, purporting instead that a strong duality between these approaches is needed to personalise learning in an effective manner.

References

  1. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  2. Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university (4th ed.). New York: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  4. Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behaviour. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dewey, J. (1897). My pedagogic creed. School Journal, 54, 77–80.Google Scholar
  6. Doyle, T. (2011). Learner centered teaching: Putting the research on learning into practice. Virginia: Stylus Publishing.Google Scholar
  7. Duffy, T. (2009). Building lines of communication and a research agenda. In S. Tobias & T. Duffy (Eds.), Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? (pp. 351–367). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Elen, J., Clarebout, G., Lèonard, R., & Lowyck, J. (2007). Student-centred and teacher-centred learning environments: What students think. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(1), 105–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Florian, L. (2009). Towards an inclusive pedagogy. In P. Hick, R. Kershner, & P. Farrell (Eds.), Psychology for inclusive education (pp. 38–51). Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Gresalfi, M., & Lester, F. (2009). What’s worth knowing in mathematics? In S. Tobias & T. Duffy (Eds.), Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? (pp. 264–290). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Herman, P., & Gomez, L. (2009). Taking guided learning theory to school: Reconciling the cognitive, motivational, and social contexts of instruction. In S. Tobias & T. Duffy (Eds.), Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? (pp. 62–81). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Hill, J. (2012). Learning communities: Theoretical foundations for making connections. In D. Jonassen & S. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (2nd ed., pp. 268–285). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Hmelo-Silver, C., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Illeris, K. (2009). A comprehensive understanding of human learning. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary theories of learning: Learning theorists…in their own words (pp. 7–20). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Jonassen, D., & Land, S. (Eds.). (2012). Theoretical foundations of learning environments (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Keamy, R. K., Nicholas, H., Mahar, S., & Herrick, C. (2007). Personalising education: From research to policy and practice (Paper No. 11. Office of Education Policy and Innovation). Melbourne: Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.Google Scholar
  17. Kirschner, P., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 4, 75–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Land, S., Hannafin, M., & Oliver, K. (2012). Student-centred learning environments: Foundations, assumptions and design. In D. Jonassen & S. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (2nd ed., pp. 3–25). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Lave, J., & Wegner, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Loughran, J. (2010). What expert teachers do. Enhancing professional knowledge for classroom practice. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Maeten, M., Kyndt, E., Struyven, K., & Dochy, F. (2010). Using student-centred learning environments to stimulate deep approaches to learning: Factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness. Educational Research Review, 5(3), 243–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mayer, R. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods instruction. American Psychologist, 59(1), 14–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mayer, R. (2009). Constructivism as a theory of learning versus constructivism as a prescription for instruction. In S. Tobias & T. Duffy (Eds.), Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? (pp. 184–200). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Mega, C., Ronconi, L., & De Beni, R. (2014). What makes a good student? How emotions, self-regulated learning, and motivation contribute to academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(1), 121–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2011). Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory. Behavioural and Brain Science, 34(2), 57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pirnay-Dummer, P., Ifenthaler, D., & Seel, N. (2012). Designing model-based learning environments to support mental models for learning. In D. Jonassen & S. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (2nd ed., pp. 66–94). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. Posner, G., Strike, K., Hewson, P., & Gertzog, W. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 102–119). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  29. Rust, C., O’Donovan, B., & Price, M. (2005). A social constructivist assessment process model: How the research literature shows us this could be best practice. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(3), 231–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Introduction: The new science of learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 1–18). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Schmidt, H., Loyens, S., van Gog, T., & Paas, F. (2007). Problem-based learning is compatible with human cognitive architecture: Commentary on Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 91–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schwartz, D., Lindgren, R., & Lewis, S. (2009). Constructivism in an age of non-constructivist assessments. In S. Tobias & T. Duffy (Eds.), Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? (pp. 34–61). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Sewell, A. (2002). Constructivism and student misconceptions: Why every teacher needs to know about them. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 48(4), 24–28.Google Scholar
  34. Smit, K., de Brabander, C., & Martens, R. (2014). Student-centred and teacher-centred learning environment in pre-vocational secondary education: Psychological needs, and motivation. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 58(6), 695–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sogunro, O. (2015). Motivating factors for adult learners in higher education. International Journal of Higher Education, 4(1), 22–37.Google Scholar
  36. Sweller, J., Kirschner, P., & Clark, R. (2007). Why minimally guided teaching techniques do not work: A reply to commentaries. Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 115–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tobias, S., & Duffy, T. (2009). The success or failure of constructivist instruction. An introduction. In S. Tobias & T. Duffy (Eds.), Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? (pp. 3–10). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Vale, C., Weaven, M., Davies, A., & Hooley, N. (2010). Student centred approaches: Teachers’ learning and practice. In L. Sparrow, B. Kissane, & C. Hurst (Eds.), Shaping the future of mathematics education: Proceedings of the 33rd annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia. Fremantle: MERGA.Google Scholar
  39. Verenikina, I. (2003). Understanding scaffolding and the ZPD in educational research. In Proceedings of the International Education Research Conference (AARE – NZARE), 30 November–3 December 2003, Auckland, New Zealand. Retrieved from http://www.aare.edu.au/data/publications/2003/ver03682.pdf
  40. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Wanner, T., & Palmer, E. (2015). Personalising learning: Exploring student and teacher perceptions about flexible learning and assessment in a flipped university course. Computers & Education, 88, 354–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wigfield, A., Cambria, J., & Eccles, J. (2012). Motivation in education. In R. Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of human motivation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Wise, A., & O’Neill, K. (2009). Beyond more versus less: A reframing of the debate on instructional guidance. In S. Tobias & T. Duffy (Eds.), Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? (pp. 82–105). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mellita Jones
    • 1
  • Karen McLean
    • 1
  1. 1.Australian Catholic UniversityBallaratAustralia

Personalised recommendations