From teacher-centered to student-centered teaching

In the early stage of my career as a university teacher, I used lectures and direct instruction as the dominant method of teaching because my own classroom experiences, both as a student and a teacher, during my higher education in Nepal (as well as on some courses in Norway), were predominantly based on a teacher-centered learning approach. Based on this approach, my major goal in teaching was to find the best way of convey my content and materials during a lecture. The use of multimedia (using PowerPoint presentations) was the dominant form of teaching, but I also used the black/whiteboard from time to time. My focus was on the use of balance and an appropriate combination of pictures and words in the slides, and an attempt to reduce external materials and highlight essential materials. I attempted to engage students in appropriate cognitive processing during the lectures, based on what Mayer (2008) called ‘multimedia instruction’ or ‘multimedia learning’. Questioning at regular intervals was another technique that I commonly used during my lectures, with the intention of encouraging the class to be interactive. I also used to summarize my main points at regular intervals. At the beginning of the lecture, I would provide a review of the last lecture/practical session.

However, very often I noted the decreasing concentration levels of the students during the course of my theoretical lectures. My lectures, in both halves, used to begin with enthusiastic students and a very positive classroom environment. At the beginning, the students seemed very much engaged with taking notes and asking questions; however, by the end of the session, some students seemed disinterested and were eagerly awaiting the end of the lecture. I attempted to explore the causes and find a solution. First, I tried to improve my slides, using more interesting pictures (as well as short videos), making the slides interesting rather than simply educational, linking the content with real-world situations, and using more examples. The results, however, were not as encouraging as expected. Sometimes, I ended by blaming those passive students as being ‘bad’ and/or blaming my own lecturing style and skills.

In the practical sessions of my courses, the attendance was relatively very high. The students attempted to follow my instructions and the hands-on exercises; however, some students (mainly those students who became passive during the theoretical sessions) struggled to link the theory with the practical skills, and were not able to achieve the learning outcomes as planned. I used to provide many useful resources prior to the lectures (theory) and computer labs (practical) for the students to read or to use for preparatory work. Only a certain proportion of the students used to come to my classes prepared, and the result was that only they performed well in their exams, as expected.

I have been exploring better ways to achieve student participation, engagement and interactivity in my classroom. I attended a number of workshops/seminars about teaching and learning in higher education at UiB, and tried to reflect on my own teaching experiences. From these workshops/seminars, I came to understand that decreasing concentration levels in students at some point during a lecture is a common problem in teacher-centered lecture methods. Although there is variation in the literature about what point in a lecture the decrease in student concentration levels occurs, there is consensus that, after a certain time, the greatest level of student concentration starts to decrease steadily (Burke & Ray, 2008; Stuart & Rutherford, 1978; Wilson & Korn, 2007). This clearly calls for the adoption of some teaching/learning activities to begin around the time the students reach their concentration ‘saturation points’ during a lecture in order to maintain their participation and engagement in the classroom. As a student at the Master’s/PhD level, I have also experienced a high level of engagement of students in learning activities in some practical-oriented courses, such as field courses and courses with problem-based learning approaches. Studies on teaching and learning have also suggested that the use of a variety of teaching activities can maintain student engagement (Lépine et al., 2005; Wilson & Korn, 2007).

In the last year of my teaching at UiB, and over the last three years at UiT, I attempted to use a variety of teaching learning activities (TLAs) in my courses. The GIS and Quantitative Method courses that I teach both have two components: theoretical aspects and practical skills. Therefore, the TLAs in these subjects have to create integrative learning environments (i.e., connecting knowledge and skills). Taking this as a guiding principle, my teaching methods consisted of a combination of mini lectures & practical sessions, demonstrations, the use of digital tools/multimedia, web courses, seminars/presentations and a flipped classroom. Group discussions, role-play (using layers of printed/digital maps to solve a problem), questioning, and think–pair/square–share techniques are common activities that I employed to engage students during a mini lecture session. The lecture (generally lasting a maximum of 30 minutes [15 + 15] in a two-hour session) is usually combined with a practical session or with other TLAs, such as role-play and group discussion.

Practical sessions include laboratory work (using hands-on exercises), in-class exercises, web courses, case-based instruction, mini-projects (instructor-guided), group projects, and assignments (voluntary, as part of their work requirement, and formally graded). I use hands-on and in-class exercises to help students learn particular methods and think logically. Homework assignments (both voluntary and mandatory) are based on problem-based learning, where students employ practical skills and theoretical principles to solve particular problems. Developing academic/scientific writing skills also forms part of these assignments. I also use quizzes, such as Kahoot! and Socrative, at the end of modules/lectures as game-based learning activities to review and refresh the learned concepts, as well as to assess the effectiveness of the lectures and practical sessions.

Recently, I have also been using a form of student peer-teaching and critical review (Biggs & Tang, 2007, pp. 289–290) as student-centered learning activities in Master’s-level courses. In critical review, the students undertake a critical review of three research papers that have used GIS in any field of their interest, and present the methodology used by those papers. The students have to critically evaluate the methodology, and reflect on how they could use and/or improve/modify that methodology in their case. After the presentation, the other students are required to give feedback on their peer’s presentation. The feedback from students on student peer-teaching and critical review have been very positive. Developing the students’ oral presentation/teaching skills, as well as their peer-review skills, is also the goal of these activities. I believe that such tasks can increase the students’ critical thinking, and prepare them to make complex judgements on their own work and that of others. In my teaching development project, I aim to combine online resources (web courses) and student peer-teaching to engage students as partners in a learning and teaching environment.

Size of classroom and teaching form

I have taught different sizes of class, ranging from three to 64 students. During my teaching in the Department of Geography at UiB at the undergraduate level, the class size was relatively large (50+). The teaching was divided in two sessions: theoretical, involving a lecture/seminar, and practical, involving a computer lab. During the lectures, I was using PowerPoint presentations, combined with questioning, group discussions, and student presentations. For the practical sessions, manuals with detailed hands-on exercises were provided to the students, and the class was divided into three or four groups. Teaching assistants were used as instructors during the computer labs; however, later, at UiT (undergraduate-level Quantitative Methods course), I used combined lectures/seminars and practical sessions, including a variety of teaching/learning activities, such as group discussions, Kahoot! quizzes, think-pair-square-share, in-class exercises, and test exams.

Except for the above-mentioned undergraduate-level courses, the average attendance on my courses has usually been under 20. For these, I used a variety of teaching activities, based on student-centered learning approaches, as mentioned above. When the class size was greater than 15, I also used teaching assistants during the practical sessions to provide more individual teacher/instructor support for greater one-on-one learning.

During supervision (Master’s/PhD), as well as during personal guidance/counselling and informal teaching situations, where students could contact me any time during office hours, I used one-to-one teaching. I tried to create a friendly environment so the student would feel welcome. The mode of teaching in such a context was usually in the form of conversations/discussions, providing hints, problem solving, and demonstrating (on the computer), as required by the nature of the question. I provided constructive feedback, and moved them in the right direction, as needed. I usually tried to foster the students’ independent and critical thinking skills. As a supervisor, I always kept an eye on their project-related activities. If they were struggling, I would try to assist, as needed. Together with the student (and their supervision team), we would make a clear time plan, and aim follow that. I always tried to provide a good team to support them.

References

Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university : what the student does (3rd ed. ed.). Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill/Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.

Burke, L. A., & Ray, R. (2008). Re-setting the concentration levels of students in higher education: an exploratory study. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(5), 571-582.

Lépine, R., Bernardin, S., & Barrouillet, P. (2005). Attention switching and working memory spans. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17(3), 329-345.

Mayer, R. E. (2008). Applying the science of learning: Evidence-based principles for the design of multimedia instruction. American psychologist, 63(8), 760.

Stuart, J., & Rutherford, R. J. D. (1978). Medical student concentration during lectures. The Lancet, 312(8088), 514-516.

Wilson, K., & Korn, J. (2007). Attention during lectures: Beyond ten minutes. Teaching of psychology, 34(2), 85-89.

Teaching history | Basic repertoire |Assessment methods| Ethical dimension