TeacherCentered or StudentCentered Pedagogy
Teacher-Centered or Student-Centered Pedagogy Education is a consequence of civilization, globalization, and modernization meaning it should strive toward eliminating ignorance in society. This includes the need for equality and equity in the process of imparting knowledge and skills for students in educational institutions. Therefore, in the selection of a functional pedagogy, both teachers and students should agree on the effective method that gives learners an added advantage during the education process. As this paper will demonstrate, student-centered pedagogy approach is better than the teacher-centered because it encourages group work and collaboration. In teacher-centered pedagogy, learning revolves around those tasked with imparting the pertinent issues define the course content, curriculum, and interactivity of courses. However, in student-centered pedagogy, learning is geared toward benefiting the learners instead of the teachers. Educational institutions, therefore, are tasked with putting the priorities of the student first especially in the provision of learning materials and classrooms as opposed to according teachers the necessary teaching materials (Weimer 78). Similarly, while student-centered pedagogy is critical in infusing collaborating skills during learning, under a teacher-pedagogy this is absent. This implies that teacher-pedagogy stifles the student’s innate talents and socialization skills because it isolates the learner into doing things on his own. The teacher approach is equally deemed retrogressive because it suppresses the independence that is integral in harnessing creative and critical thinking processes for the student. By learning on their own, students find an opportunity to develop the curiosity of excavating other forms of relevant knowledge in their respective areas of study. The method as opposed to teacher-approach is fundamental because it encourages group work. It, thus, allows communication across learners of divergent capacities and how their immediate collaboration with the teacher can post a positive result for long-term purposes. However, while teacher-centered pedagogy ensures that the learner is constantly under supervision to answer the fundamental questions troubling the learner, it still lacks student-friendly approach. Contrastingly, student-pedagogy approach while it recognizes the need for monitoring, it is sensitive on feedback to identify the areas that require urgent correction. This suggests that the teacher’s approach lacks a comprehensive method of addressing issues such as evaluation and analysis on the progress of the student. Additionally, it does not permit the learner to make mistakes and instead penalizes those who err in their class work. It is a phenomenon deemed reproductive in assessing a student’s overall academic progress. Alternatively, while the student-pedagogy approach enjoys the autonomy of setting a benchmark of being the valid information source, the teacher-learning method lacks this essential component. As result, teachers are compelled to impose new language and information upon the learners in spite of the inequality that characterizes most learning sessions in classrooms. Overall, this negates the holistic approach of education to cater for all individuals irrespective of their capacities of grasping new ideas and knowledge. This demonstrates that education fails to bridge the social status gap that is often achieved through the use of the student-pedagogy approach. Another interesting issue with the two pedagogy approaches revolves on the focus during learning. Teacher-centered pedagogy approach, for example, concentrates on the instructor with emphasis on the knowledge he possesses and this often hinders a mutual concept that defines learning. It is different from the student-centered pedagogy that focuses on the two entities namely the learner and his instructor. This comes to the language applied during the pedagogy process with the student approach using typical and practical situations as opposed to the abstract concept rampant in teacher-pedagogy (Weimer 89). Consequently, this usually affects the forms and structures that essential in deducing meanings from complex materials learnt in class. In retrospect, this dictatorial tendency is what prevents students from asking critical questions integral in learning new things and expanding one’s knowledge and skills. This often hinders communicative skills that are fundamental in integrating learning activities both within and without the classroom. Peer communication and student motivation equally suffer largely when the teacher-centered pedagogy is not serious about student-teacher relationships. However, while the teacher approach is useful in reducing the disruptive behavior, it fails to accord learners the responsibility of discovering self as means of becoming both innovative and creative in handling problems. It, therefore, is imperative for educational stakeholders to focus on an approach that essentially equips students with life skills of becoming productive members of the society. This begins with eradicating the negative aspects of teacher-centered pedagogy such as too much focus on the instructor instead of the learner. Conversely, the student approach deserves a boost to infuse contemporary ideas that acknowledge the role of the teacher. Work CitedWeimer, Maryellen. Learner-Centered Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice. New York, NY: John Wiley amp. Sons. 2013. Print.