Let’s MIXit!
One of the demands of OBE is that teaching should be ‘learner-centred’ rather than ‘teacher-/educator-centred’. This is probably one of the main reasons for the failure of OBE. Let’s not reduce teachers to being a mere ‘facilitator’.
Malcolm Venter
One of the demands of OBE is that teaching should be ‘learner-centred’ rather than ‘teacher-/educator-centred’. This is probably one of the main reasons for the failure of OBE.
Before elaborating on the particular problem here, let me say that it is part of a bigger problem – the tendency to operate in terms of a simplistic ‘either-or’ mentality. This approach ignores the fact that real truth is most often found in a ‘both-and’ approach (except in the case of universal values) – what I like to call ‘the power of paradox’. So we find people who argue that capitalism is the only way to go when it comes to the economy, but they are howled down by the advocates of socialism who regard socialism as the basis of utopia. It took many years for people to realise that we need a combination of both, allowing for different economies (or the same economy at different times) to fuse together differing quantities of each.
The same paradox applies to the concepts of Eurocentric and Afrocentric – the one is pitched against the other in this country to suggest how we should think and behave. But this is nonsense – and it is contradicted in practice (e.g. fusion music, cuisine, fashion). Black South Africans have their own traditions, but they have grown up in a country which – whether anyone likes it or not – has been (and will continue to be) influenced by European culture. Similarly, white South Africans are of European descent, but have grown up in a country where they have been (and will continue to be, more and more) exposed to African culture. In other words, we are all cultural hybrids – and we should not only acknowledge but also celebrate this.
To come back to teaching: We should, in similar vein, avoid the extremes of teacher-centred and learner-centred teaching. A purely teacher-centred approach has the disadvantage that learners are not encouraged to explore issues or to arrive at new insights (especially in the humanities) on their own; thus they do not develop their thinking skills. Nor does this approach allow the teacher to be able to use learner feedback to shape the lesson. In the end, learners are not prepared for an examination which demands thinking on the spot.
A purely learner-centred approach, on the other hand, deprives the learners of the teacher’s knowledge and often merely reinforces ignorance or leads to playing rather than learning and superficiality.
Thus the answer is not to reduce the teacher to being a mere ‘facilitator’. There are times when the teacher may indeed play that role, but within the context of the teachers’ knowledge of the subject and the requirements of assessments. There are, however, also times – either in terms of the subject matter, or the level of ability of the class, or because of time constraints – that the teacher will simply teach. We have to allow teachers to combine so-called ‘learner-centred’ teaching with ‘teacher-centred’ teaching, with more emphasis on one or the other as the teacher sees fit.
So let’s stop lambasting teachers for being ‘teacher-centred’ and making them feel guilty if they do what they were trained to do – that is, to teach; and let learners do what they are meant to do – that is, to learn. If effective teaching and learning are occurring, we’re wasting our time and frustrating our teachers by demanding that one particular approach be used exclusively. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, not in the prescribing of particular recipes.
Teacher's Monthly experience
Ah indeed, whilst not defending OBE (or any given system for that matter) my sense is that the concept of OBE being learner centered as opposed to teacher centered is that the teaching and learning process is a two way stream and one has to guard against the teacher who is her/himself, not teachable. I think my colleagues across the world would agree that the teacher never should stop learning as even in the act of teaching a lesson one learns and learns and learns…
Agree with you Bruce. I have come across MANY teachers who are so absolutely set in their ways. They are not willing to change, to learn, or to improve. In the end, education evolves, but they get left behind.
And that is exactly the purpose of this website,
To keep teachers updated so when education evolves, they don’t get left behind.
Yes, I agree, Michael. However, I think that the term ‘learner-centred’ has been hijacked to reject any type of teaching or leading on the part of the teacher. If the previous writer means that she is defending a system whereby the teacher tells the kids everything, then I don’t agree with her. But if she means that teachers should not be told not to teach, then she has a point. The key issue is that the kids are involved and are being challenged to think and problem-solve. This can be done in many ways, including having the teacher teach.
Adrian, just get this straight. Teachers are lazy to develop themselves in any field. You can see them attending workshops, it’s only for them to be away from the classroom. If the same workshops are conducted over the weekend, after school or during holidays, you won’t count more than your two hands the number of teachers who will attend. The first thing teachers ask when they go to the workshop is the rising time. They always expect the workshops to be briefer than the normal school days.Others are simply enjoying to sleep in the hotels but there are no implementation afterwards.the only time teachers develop themselves is when they want a raise in their pay.about 400 teachers attended an opening workshop at the UKZN on their introduction of a Mentoring in schools Programme. But when realising the amount of work they had to do in 6 Saturdays, most teachers dropped out. Can you imagine how many teachers are still computer illiterate in these days and time;computer is a neccessity for every one. All they are looking up to is to receive those Laptops even though they do not have the relevant skills to use them.There still teachers who absent themselves from school for more than a year while still getting paid, when are they going to be developed? I was so shocked at realising a teacher who had a lesson plan and assessment which were way different from her Work Schedule
As a teacher who is constantly updating my own subject related knowledge to keep up with the technology, I find it hard to incorporate this in the classroom. Reason be that the SMT of the school is ‘old school’. I am not allowed to be too noisy( but other subjects are allowed to ‘bring down the roof’). My kids are not allowed to bing their cellphones to class for me to teach eachother the latest of usage methods etc.
It is very sad for someone with 20 + years of experience
I have a question. One that I intend publishing an article about.
Why did the government change the school curriculum?
Is it because they felt they had to change everything about the past (read apartheid) simply because it was from the past?
Is it because the previous education system (which I was schooled in) didn’t work?
Or is it because they felt that the previous education system wouldn’t meet the needs of the then disadvantaged schools and communities?
I would like to differ a little from the perception that the old system was a waste of time. It really worked for many, especially us Blacks. It helped to develop our life skills and our language abilities. It is indeed true that nowadays you cannot a tertiary student or a graduate so to speak with someone who had studied through the so called Black Education. Their manners, and freedom of speech is way ahead of today’s students. Our education is doomed, I really don’t know why they changed it. At least if they had left some of the old system it would have been better. I am a classroom based teacher, and struggling to get my grade 5 learners to do the times tables right. When I think of how I used to sing my tables in standard 1 back then, there is no match. Grade 5 learners are still struggling with every concepts of maths and how are we going to get future engineers. As for the language, it’s a disgrace. They can twang all the way, but when given a piece to read, what a shame. My 17 year old niece attending the predominantly Coloured school from Grade 1,was reading an invitation card recently, I got a shock of a lifetime, hearing how a grade 10 child can’t read and can’t pronounce the words properly. She can’t even write the word “Peanut” correct. That’s the damage brought about by the new education system
Learners come into secondary school( grade
with very little numeracy or literacy skills. What is happening in the primary schools ( at Govt. schools)? We need to go back to teaching the basics – “the 3 R’s”. We are living proof that the “old” systerm worked.Primary school learners should be doing their tables; Reading and comprehension as the priority.
Hi
Yes I agree that education should be attacked from as many angles as possible. It should be both learner centred and teacher centred. Although I use many learner centred lessons, when I teach reading, it is task centred. (I am a grade one teacher) At this level it SHOULD be teacher centred until they are on their way with reading on their own. I can teach anyone to read if they follow a few simple techniques. The younger the child, the more teacher centred it should be so they can master the basics and then as they get older it should become more child centred but always both approaches are used and are equally necessary.
Exactly! The key point is that you should not be made to feel guilty for using your professional judgment when to be ‘teacher-centered’. It’s not either-or but both-and.