STUDENT-CENTRED LEARNING: WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR

STUDENTS AND LECTURERS?

Geraldine O’Neill and Tim McMahon
University College Dublin
E-mail: [Link]@[Link] / [Link]@[Link]
Printer friendly version in PDF

Introduction
The term student-centred learning (SCL) is widely used in the teaching and learning
literature. Many terms have been linked with student-centred learning, such as flexible
learning (Taylor 2000), experiential learning (Burnard 1999), self-directed learning and
therefore the slightly overused term ‘student-centred learning’ can mean different things
to different people. In addition, in practice it is also described by a range of terms and
this has led to confusion surrounding its implementation.
The concept of student-centred learning has been credited as early as 1905 to
Hayward and in 1956 to Dewey’s work (O’Sullivan 2003). Carl Rogers, the father of
client-centred counseling, is associated with expanding this approach into a general
theory of education (Burnard 1999; Rogoff 1999). The term student-centred learning
was also associated with the work of Piaget and more recently with Malcolm Knowles
(Burnard 1999). Rogers (1983a:25), in his book ‘Freedom to Learn for the 80s’,
describes the shift in power from the expert teacher to the student learner, driven by a
need for a change in the traditional environment where in this ‘so-called educational
atmosphere, students become passive, apathetic and bored’. In the School system, the
concept of child-centred education has been derived, in particular, from the work of
Froebel and the idea that the teacher should not ‘interfere with this process of
maturation, but act as a guide’ (Simon 1999). Simon highlighted that this was linked with
the process of development or ‘readiness’, i.e. the child will learn when he/she is ready
(1999).
The paradigm shift away from teaching to an emphasis on learning has encouraged
power to be moved from the teacher to the student (Barr and Tagg 1995). The teacher-
focused/transmission of information formats, such as lecturing, have begun to be
increasingly criticised and this has paved the way for a widespread growth of ‘student-
centred learning’ as an alternative approach. However, despite widespread use of the
term, Lea et al. (2003) maintain that one of the issues with student-centred learning is
the fact that ‘many institutions or educators claim to be putting student-centred learning
into practice, but in reality they are not’ (2003:322).
This chapter aims to:
• Give an overview of the various ways student-centred learning is defined,
• Suggest some ways that student-centred learning can be used as the organising
principle of teaching and assessment practices,
 • Explore the effectiveness of student-centred learning and
• Present some critiques to it as an approach.

What is student-centred learning?

Kember (1997) described two broad orientations in teaching: the teacher
centred/content oriented conception and the student centred/learning oriented
conceptions. In a very useful breakdown of these orientations he supports many other
authors views in relation to student-centred view including: that knowledge is
constructed by students and that the lecturer is a facilitator of learning rather than a
presenter of information. Rogers (1983b:188) identified the important precondition for
student-centred learning as the need for: ‘... a leader or person who is perceived as an
authority figure in the situation, is sufficiently secure within herself (himself) and in her
(his) relationship to others that she (he) experiences an essential trust in the capacity of
others to think for themselves, to learn for themselves’.
Choice in the area of the learning is emphasised by Burnard, as he interprets
Rogers’ ideas of student-centredness as ‘students might not only choose what to study,
but how and why that topic might be an interesting one to study’ (1999:244). He also
emphasises Rogers’ belief that students’ perceptions of the world were important, that
they were relevant and appropriate. This definition therefore emphasises the concept of
students having ‘choice’ in their learning.
Harden and Crosby (2000:335) describe teacher-centred learning strategies as the
focus on the teacher transmitting knowledge, from the expert to the novice. In contrast,
they describe student-centred learning as focusing on the students’ learning and ‘what
students do to achieve this, rather than what the teacher does’. This definition
emphasises the concept of the student ‘doing’.
Other authors articulate broader, more comprehensive definitions. Lea
et al. (2003:322) summarises some of the literature on student-centred learning to
include the followings tenets:
1. ‘the reliance on active rather than passive learning,
1. an emphasis on deep learning and understanding,
1. increased responsibility and accountability on the part of the student,
1. an increased sense of autonomy in the learner
1. an interdependence between teacher and learner,
1. mutual respect within the learner teacher relationship,
1. and a reflexive approach to the teaching and learning process on the part of both
teacher and learner.’
Gibbs (1995) draws on similar concepts when he describes student-centred courses
as those that emphasise: learner activity rather than passivity; students’ experience on
the course outside the institution and prior to the course; process and competence,
rather than content; where the key decisions about learning are made by the student
through negotiation with the teacher. Gibbs elaborates in more detail on these key
decisions to include: ‘What is to be learnt, how and when it is to be learnt, with what
outcome, what criteria and standards are to be used, how the judgements are made
and by whom these judgements are made’ (1995:1). In a similar vein in earlier literature,
the student-teacher relationship is particularly elaborated upon by Brandes and
Ginnis (1986). In their book for use in second level education (post-primary), entitled ‘A
Guide to Student-Centred Learning’, they present the main principles of student-centred
learning as:
• The learner has full responsibility for her/his learning
• Involvement and participation are necessary for learning
• The relationship between learners is more equal, promoting growth, development
• The teacher becomes a facilitator and resource person
• The learner experiences confluence in his education (affective and cognitive
domains flow together)
• The learner sees himself differently as a result of the learning experience.
The theoretical standing of student-centred learning is often surprisingly absent in
the literature. However, it appears to relate primarily to the constructivist view of
learning in the importance it places on activity, discovery and independent learning
(Carlile and Jordan 2005). Cognitive theory also highlights activity but in a different form
than that supported by the constructivists (Cobb 1999). The cognitive view supports the
idea that the activity of learning is computed in the head, or as often described ‘in the
mind’. The constructivist view of activity is related more to performing physical activities,
for example, projects, practicals. Student-centred learning has some connections with
the social constructivist view, which emphasises activity and the importance of
communities of practice/others in the learning process. However, the definitions of SCL
do not necessarily highlight the importance of peers in learning
(Cobb 1999; Bredo 1999).
In summary, it appears from the literature that some view student-centred learning
as: the concept of the student’s choice in their education; others see it as the being
about the student doing more than the lecturer (active versus passive learning); while
others have a much broader definition which includes both of these concepts but, in
addition, describes the shift in the power relationship between the student and the
teacher.

How can you implement student-centred learning?

Learning is often presented in this dualism of either student-centred learning or
teacher-centred learning. In the reality of practice the situation is less black and white. A
more useful presentation of student-centred learning is to see these terms as either end
of a continuum, using the three concepts regularly used to describe student-centred
learning (See Table 1 ).

Table 1: Student-centred and teacher-centred continuum

 Teacher-centred Learning Student-centred Learning
Low level of student choice High level of student choice
Student passive Student active
Power is primarily with teacher Power primarily with the student

In examining how you might look at this in practice, it is worth thinking how far up the
continuum you are able to move within the contextual barriers in your teaching situation.
The next sections will present some ideas for your practice to aid you in making that
progression.
Implications for curriculum design
In relation to curriculum design, student-centredness includes the idea that students
have choice in what to study, how to study. However, to what extent can this be carried
out in the structures of today’s Universities? Modularisation, which will be expected in all
European undergraduate courses by 2006, provides a structure that allows students an
element of choice in what modules they study. Donnelly and Fitzmaurice (2005) in their
chapter in this collection on ‘Designing Modules for Learning’ highlight the importance of
attempting to focus on the needs of the students at the early stage of curriculum design.
Choice in the curriculum is not without its difficulties and Edwards argues about the
dangers of individuality in the concept of the social learner and how this can in a
seemingly contradictory way lead to disempowerment (2001).
One student-centred approach to curriculum design, Problem-Based Learning
(PBL), allows for some choice within a programme of areas that students may study. It
allows students to set some of their own learning objectives/outcomes, dependent on
prior knowledge. Problem-Based Learning, through the use of problems/issues/triggers,
encourages the students to develop their own learning goals, thereby filling in the gaps
in their knowledge or understanding (Boud and Feletti 1997). This element of choice or
control is referred to in many of the definitions of student-centred learning. This aspect
of responsibility aligns with the Lea et al. (2003) view that student-centred learning
involves ‘increased responsibility and accountability on the part of the student’.
Problem-based learning is higher up the student choice aspect of the SCL continuum in
Table 1 , than the usual problem-solving or problem-oriented exercises performed in a
lecture/tutorial. These approaches are more controlled by the teacher in their
presentation and outcome (Davis and Harden 1999). However, they are useful in
addressing the active learning aspect of student-centred learning. Other approaches to
curriculum design also support the idea of student choice and activity in learning, for
example, the systems-based approach, resource-based learning, and experiential/
personal relevance approach (Toohey 2000).
 A growing practice in course design internationally is the writing of learning
outcomes/objectives focusing on what the student will be able to do, rather than on the
content being covered by the teacher (UCD Centre for Teaching and Learning 2005).
This practice is an example of the move towards student-centred learning in the
curriculum and helps to shift the emphasis on the learner as opposed to a coverage
model by the teacher. Donnelly and Fitzmaurice (2005) re-iterate the importance of this
shift in emphasis. This is also reflected in Gibbs’ (1995) definition, i.e. an emphasis on
the process and competence, rather than content. Table 2 presents some examples of
student-centred learning outcomes.

Table 2: Learning Outcomes and Student-centred Learning

Student-centred Learning Outcomes: Traditional Learning

Some examples Outcomes/Objectives
By the end of this modules: you (the
student) The course will cover:
will be able to:
Recognise the structures of the heart The anatomy of the heart
Critique one of Yeats’ poems A selection of Yeats poems

Implications for teaching/learning methods

The University of Glasgow (2004) identified four main strategies in a study on
student-centred learning practices in their University. The first strategy was to make the
student more active in acquiring knowledge and skills and might include exercises in
class, fieldwork, use of CAL (computer assisted learning) packages etc. The second
strategy was to make the student more aware of what they are doing and why they are
doing it. A third strategy is a focus on interaction, such as the use of tutorials and other
discussion groups. The final strategy is the focus on transferable skills. This last
strategy is not mentioned in other definitions of the student-centred learning but does
look beyond the immediate course requirements to other benefits to the student in later
employment. Table 3 highlights a sample of student-centred learning/teaching methods
and includes some ideas for lecturers both within (more teacher-centred) and outside of
the lecture format. You may consider, however, in striving to reduce the amount of
lecture contact hours for more student-centred formats, where possible.

Table 3: Examples of student centred learning/teaching methods

Outside of the lecture

In the Lecture
format
Independent projects Buzz groups (short discussion in twos)
Pyramids/snowballing (Buzz groups continuing the
Group discussion
discussion into larger groups)
Peer mentoring of other Cross-overs (mixing students into groups by letter/number
students allocations)
Debates Rounds (giving turns to individual students to talk)
Field-trips Quizes
Practicals Writing reflections on learning (3/4 minutes)
Reflective diaries, learning
Student class presentations
journals
Computer assisted learning Role play
Choice in subjects for
Poster presentations
study/projects
Writing newspaper article Students producing mind maps in class
Portfolio development

Implications for assessment practices

Black (1999) summarised some of the difficulties highlighted in the literature in the
area of assessment, for example, a) that the giving of marks and grades are over
emphasised, while the giving of advice and the learning function are under emphasised,
b) pupils are compared with one another which highlights competition rather than
personal improvement. He also explains the concept of self-assessment as essential
activity to help students ‘take responsibility for their own learning’, an important aspect
of SCL (Benett 1999; Black 1999:126). Foucault argued that the examination was a
technique of power, where a student is ’controlled through a system ’micro-penalties’,
the constant giving of marks which constitutes a whole field of surveillance’ (cited
in Broadfoot 1999:88). The use of the written examination is still a strong practice in
today’s Universities and is primarily a summative assessment, i.e. an assessment for
judgement or accreditation. The addition of more formative assessment, which
emphasises feedback to students on their learning, would ‘enhance their (student)
learning’ (Brown et al. 1997; Light and Cox 2001:170). By developing more formative
assessment in your courses you can provide a focus for the student by highlighting their
learning gaps and areas that they can develop. Examples of formative assessment
include feedback on essays, written comments on assignments, grades during the year
that do not add to end of year mark and multiple-choice questions/answers for feedback
only. The addition of more formative assessment encourages a more student-centred
approach.
Table 4 presents practical examples of student-centred assessments as presented
by Gibbs (1995). Further details of some of these assessments can be seen on the
UCD Centre for Teaching and Learning website ( [Link]

Table 4: Examples of student-centred assessments (Gibbs 1995)

 • Diaries, logs and journals
• Projects
• Portfolios
• Group work
• Peer/self assessment
• Profiles
• Learning contracts and negotiated
• Skills and competencies
assessment

Peer and self-assessment both give some control and responsibility back to the
student, emphasising ‘ an increased sense of autonomy in the learner’ as noted in Lea
et al.’s definition of student-centred learning (2003). Learning contracts/negotiated
contracts are goals set by the student, depending on their learning gaps, which are in
turn negotiated with the lecturer (Knight 2002). The contract can also highlight the
manner in which the student would like to be assessed in order to demonstrate that they
have reached the goals. This can add choice in what to study and, in addition, choice in
how the student will be assessed. Choice is one of the key terms in relation to student-
centred learning. The concept of negotiation of learning also addresses the unique
change in relationship between lecturer and student noted by Lea et al. (2003) in their
definition of student-centred learning.
Gibbs (1995:1), as mentioned earlier, describes the range of choices available to
students in relation to assessment as: ‘......, what criteria and standards are to be used,
how the judgements are made and by whom these judgements are made’. In practice,
how do we give students some autonomy and decision-making in an area such as
assessment? Brown et al. (1994) highlight a range of suggestions on how lecturers can
involve students in the assessment process: (Table 5 ).

Table 5: Assessment process and student-centred learning

Involving students at the stage when • Choosing the assessment task

the task is set: • Setting the assessment task
• Discussion the assessment criteria
• Setting the assessment criteria
Involving students at the stage after • Making self-assessment comments
the task is completed:
• Making peer-assessment feedback
comments
• Suggesting self-assessment grades/marks
• Negotiating self-assessment grades/marks
• Assigning self-assessment grades/marks
• Assigning peer-assessment grades/marks
 (Brown, Rust, and Gibbs 1994)

The suggestions in Table 5 above may seem a large jump from your current
practices, therefore, you might consider moving your assessment practice slightly up
the teacher/student-centred continuum. An example of a small but significant change is
to provide a choice of essay topics and exam questions as a manageable starting point.

The effectiveness and critiques of student-centred learning

The use of student-centred learning appears to be reflective of today’s society where
choice and democracy are important concepts, however is it an effective approach to
learning? Lea et al. (2003) reviewed several studies on student-centred learning and
found that overall it was an effective approach. A six-year study in Helsinki, which
compared traditional and activating instruction, found that the activating group
developed better study skills and understanding, but were slower in their study initially
(Lonka and Ahola 1995). Equally, Hall and Saunders found that students had increased
participation, motivation and grades in a first year information technology course (1997).
In addition, 94% of the students would recommend it to others over the more
conventional approach (Hall and Saunders 1997). Students in a UK University
elaborated on the impact of student-centred learning on them, i.e. they felt there was
more respect for the student in this approach, that it was more interesting, exciting, and
it boosted their confidence (Lea et al. 2003).
Student-centred learning, despite its popularity, is not without its critics. The main
critique of student-centred learning is its focus on the individual learner. In addition,
there are some difficulties in its implementation, i.e. the resources needed to implement
it, the belief system of the students and staff, and students’ lack of familiarity with the
term.
Simon (1999) describes that student-centred learning, in the School system, can be
in danger of focusing completely on the individual learner and taken to its extreme
does not take into account the needs of the whole class. Simon highlights the point that
‘if each child is unique, and each requires a specific pedagogical approach appropriate
to him or her and to no other, the construction of an all embracing pedagogy or general
principles of teaching become an impossibility’ (Simon 1999:42). Edwards (2001:42)
also highlights the dangers associated with student-centredness in adult education
where in empowering an individual there is a potential danger of ‘a person’s physical
isolation from other learners’. The importance of the social context of learning and the
value of interaction with peers is emphasised in the socio-cultural view of learning
(Bredo 1999). The concept of being an independent learner choosing his/her own route
of learning, may in fact drive some of the sociability out of the learning process if care is
not taken to emphasise the importance of peers. In relation to this individuality, Lea
et al.’s study on psychology students highlighted their concern over being abandoned or
isolated from other supports in a student-centred learning approach (2003).
 O’Sullivan (2003) described student-centred learning as a Western approach to
learning and may not necessarily transfer to the developing countries, such as Namibia,
where there are limited resources and different learning cultures. It can be equally hard
at times to see how the approach can be economical in the large classes associated
with many current University undergraduate courses. A comprehensive study was
conducted in 2004, by the University of Glasgow, on the use of student-centred learning
with full-time undergraduate students (2004). In this study they found that student-
centred learning (SCL) was more prevalent in the later years of the student degrees,
and this they believe is often down to class sizes.
Another concern regarding student centred learning is the belief that students hold
in relation to their learning. Students who value or have experienced more teacher-
focused approaches, may reject the student-centred approach as frightening or indeed
not within their remit. Prosser and Trigwell’s work in higher education emphasises the
different belief systems held by staff and students (2002). They found that lecturers with
a teacher-centred approach to teaching held views that students should accommodate
information rather than developing and changing their conceptions and understanding.
The reverse was true for those with more student-centred approaches to their teaching.
Perry’s work on the development of University students highlights how students move
from a dualistic view that knowledge is right or wrong to a relativist view that all answers
are equally valid (Perry 1970). This study highlights that even during the University
years, students can change their view on learning and as they move through the years
so to may their views on student-centred learning change. In support of Perry’s work,
Stevenson and Sander (2002) highlighted that 1st year medical students were
suspicious of the value of student-centred learning methods.
Finally, students’ familiarity with the term can be poor. Lea et al. (2003)
conducted a study on 48 psychology students in the University of Plymouth on students’
attitudes to student-centred learning. They found that, despite a University student-
centred policy, 60% of the students had not heard of the term.

Summary
The changing demographics of the student population and the more
consumer/client-centred culture in today’s society have provided a climate where the
use of student-centred learning is thriving. The interpretation of the term ‘student-
centred learning’ appears to vary between authors as some equate it with ‘active
learning’, while others take a more comprehensive definition including: active learning,
choice in learning, and the shift of power in the teacher-student relationship. It is used
very commonly in the literature and in University policy statements, but this has not
necessarily transferred into practice.
Student-centred learning is not without some criticism but in general it has been
seen to be a positive experience, for example, Edwards (2001) emphasises the value of
student-centred learning: ‘Placing learners at the heart of the learning process and
meeting their needs, is taken to a progressive step in which learner-centred approaches
mean that persons are able to learn what is relevant for them in ways that are
appropriate. Waste in human and educational resources is reduced as it suggested
learners no longer have to learn what they already know or can do, nor what they are
uninterested in’. (Edwards 2001:37).
Although recognizing that it is not necessarily an easy task, it is hoped that this
chapter has gone some way to providing evidence and ideas to move you higher up the
continuum towards a more student-centred practice.
.
Introduction
Twenty-first century classrooms challenge traditional, teacher-centered curriculum to meet the
increasingly diverse needs of students and make the required increases in achievement gains.
School violence, diverse student needs and populations, educational renewal, and technological
advances place demands on teachers in areas for which they were formally held accountable.
With teacher educators, problems occur when teaching styles conflict with students' learning
styles, often resulting in limited learning or no learning. Altan and Trombly (2001) offer learner-
centeredness as a model for countering classroom challenges because of its viability for meeting
diverse needs. Learner-centered classrooms place students at the center of classroom
organization and respect their learning needs, strategies, and styles. In learner-centered
classrooms, students can be observed working individually or in pairs and small groups on
distinct tasks and projects. The transition from teaching the entire group to meeting individual
learner needs involves extensive planning and task-specific classroom management.
•

Purpose
The premise--one teaching and learning approach fits all--is not working for a growing number
of student populations and has prompted this researcher to examine what is required to move
from a teacher-centered to a learner-centered approach. McCombs & Whisler (1997) identified
two essential factors for a learner-centered approach to education: (a) characteristics of the
learner and (b) teaching practices. By contrasting the use of reflective inquiry, thinking-centered
learning, and assessment of program quality to satisfy McCombs & Whisler's essential factors,
this article examines whether moving from a teacher-centered to a learner-centered approach
requires a transition or a paradigm shift.
Learner Characteristics
Learner-Centered Approach
An essential factor for a learner-centered approach is placing the learning characteristics of all
learners under the microscope with specific emphasis on low-performing learners. McCombs
(1997) explained that the focus in a learner-centered approach is on individual learners' heredity,
experiences, perspectives, backgrounds, talents, interests, capacities, and needs. She defined
learner-centered, from a research-based perspective, as a foundation for clarifying what is needed
to create positive learning contexts to increase the likelihood that more students will experience
success (Defining "Learner-Centered", [paragraph] 2). Cultural factors impact the connection
teachers must make to scaffold students' learning (Singham, 1998; McCombs & Whisler, 1997).
The focus is on metacognition, how individual students learn. Milambiling (2001) extended the
learner-centered definition by characterizing learner-centered education as context-sensitive. She
said that the culture of the learning context is as important to learning as the content and the
methods used. Milambiling recommended curricula which address the culture of the learner
within specific learning contexts.
Teacher-Centered Approach
The teacher-centered approach is associated chiefly with the transmission of knowledge.
McDonald (2002) clarified the definition by saying that the work of teachers depends upon the
abilities, skills and efforts of their students. Student achievement is at the forefront of teacher
centered curriculum, but teachers are driven to meet accountability standards and often sacrifice
the needs of the students to ensure exposure to the standards. Berliner (as cited in Scherer, 2001)
distinguished between the expert and the novice teacher. He explained that expert teachers have
case knowledge, knowledge of information stored in their memory banks, that allows them to
compare situations and respond accordingly. They have amassed a store of impromptu responses
for capturing teachable moments. The issue, however, is whether those impromptu responses are
a clear match for the learner who is having difficulty. Berliner emphasized that when teachers
study one another's lessons, visit each others' classes, and present case studies about hard-to-
teach students, the quality of professional growth will improve.
Teachers in a teacher-centered environment focus on making relationships with students that are
anchored in intellectual explorations of selected materials. They focus more on content than on
student processing. McDonald (2002) explains that it is difficult to believe in children's capacity
if one lacks a sense of how to work with it. A utilitarian approach to teaching that seeks
assimilation into society for minorities and supports the acquisition of behaviors is required by
the prevailing economic system and bureaucracies; this approach perpetuates inequities
(Blackwell, Futrell, and Imig, 2003).
Both approaches recognize the student as a key factor in improving student achievement. The
teacher-centered approach places control for learning in the hands of the teacher. The teacher
uses her expertise in content knowledge to help learners make connections. The effort to get to
know the learner and how he processes information is secondary. The learner-centered approach,
however, places more of the responsibility for knowing individual learner capabilities and
creating an environment where learners can make learning connections. Similarly the onus for
achieving is shifted to the student. Teachers provide a variety of instructional methods and
techniques for helping learners construct their learning and develop a system for applying
knowledge and theory.
The second essential factor, teaching practices, generates data for measuring the appropriateness
of teacher behavior for positive student learning (McCombs & Whisler, 1997). A system should
be implemented to measure the effectiveness of methods and strategies. That system should
detail approaches for giving teachers information about how they provide instruction and
orchestrate student learning; teachers need supportive feedback. Deciding how to use what is
learned from the telling of teacher narratives, determining how teachers know students are
learning, choosing what to do when students are not learning, and discussing what prompts them
to try different approaches is a more appropriate measure of the quality of programs.
•

Teaching-Centered Environments
Direct instruction is the predominant instructional practice used in the teacher-centered approach.
Instructional schedules and urgency to comply with legislation do not allocate time for teachers
to pose open-ended questions or to work on problem-based projects. Boyer (as cited in Perkins,
1993) reported that one percent of instructional time is devoted to questions that invite thoughtful
responses. Tomlinson (2000) describes the regiment of the factory model as a paint-by-number
template that does not fit student needs. However, the expertise that teachers bring to the
learning context cannot be underestimated. They see the big picture and have a command of the
content. Traditionally, teachers decided what students would learn and how. Orchestration in
traditional classrooms is limited because student interaction is basically responding to teacher-
directed questions. Rarely do students construct their own learning; achievement is measured on
objective tests. What is needed are approaches that operate in a manner to transform the school
culture from one that focuses on processing to one that focuses on invention in the interest of
Differentiated instruction meets the needs of diverse student populations by coupling student
needs with a focus on content, process, and learning profiles. With the learner-centered
approach, teachers bring command of content knowledge but design flexibility for learners to
construct their learning. Learner needs and characteristics take precedence over knowledge of
facts and skills; the emphasis is on engaging learners in learning for understanding and thinking,
to help them build their own interpretations. Teacher narratives and the emphasis on learner
characteristics make the learner-centered approach a viable alternative for matching teaching
practices with learner needs.
•

Reflective Inquiry
One approach to making learner characteristics become both a priority and a collective goal is
engaging educators in reflective inquiry. Henderson and Hawthorne (2002) explained that
reflective inquiry is the process of engaging teachers and leaders in thoughtful instruction,
research, narrative, and empowerment (p. 38). Reflective inquiry allows an individual to analyze
and identify assumptions and feelings associated with practice, to theorize how assumptions and
feelings are associated with practice, to theorize whether assumptions and feelings are
functionally or dysfunctionally associated with practice, and to act on the basis of the resulting
theory of practice (p. 40). Individual inquiry must occur and then be shared with the larger group
to effect contextual cControlling how instruction is provided distinguishes teacher-centered from
the learner-centered approach. Content and methods are handed down to teachers in the teacher-
centered approach. Teachers do not participate in the crafting or implementation of curriculum.
Usually, they are given directions by people who are not involved in instructing children and
who often never knew or have lost sight of the dynamics that diverse populations place on
classroom practice. Educators' levels of knowledge and approaches for instruction reflect how
they learned and what they feel comfortable teaching. Tomlinson (2000) explained that
approaches that lose sight of the soul of teaching and learning make it difficult to attend to
individual differences.
•

In both approaches, teachers provide background data and content, and pose questions that
students can use to create meaning. However, the diversity of teaching methodology, assessing
the quality of the programs and learning that is an integral part of the learner-centered approach
are ignored in the teacher-centered approach. Similarly, students' characteristics become the data
that teachers use to match learning. Conversely, in the learner-centered approach the curriculum,
although often commercially developed, is endorsed by the faculty; they make decisions about
what is appropriate for their learners and select strategies that will work for their learners.
Developers of learner-centered curricula are committed to seeing that teachers help students
achieve and that teachers are provided experiences to help them grow professionally.
Assessment of Program Quality
hange.
In the teacher-centered environment, teachers try to make sense of constraints imposed by
curriculum standards and legislation alone or in fragmented groups. Commitment from the top
down and the bottom up is not routine. Covering material takes precedence over teaching deeply
so that students can use learning in different situations. Teachers tend to follow the waves rather
than charter courses. They feel overwhelmed by the magnitude of the students' problems
(Haycock, 2003).

Incorporating reflective inquiry, thinking-centered learning, and assessment of program quality

requires a paradigm shift. To support a learner-centered approach, stakeholders must support the
ideology. Issues of societal change, alternative pathways to teaching, and the historical context of
educational practices cannot be automatic. There must be a commitment to reflection, creating
thinking-centered learning, and constantly assessing the quality of instructional programs.

A student-centered curriculum is possible to design which does not compromise quality. However, the
mechanics of creating and operationalizing such a program are a complex matter and require the
ongoing support, assistance, and involved commitment of everyone involved under the broad umbrella
of curriculum. Given the highly specific learning needs of RRNs, a student-centered curriculum is most
easily implemented in an RN only program, where each element of the curriculum can be tailored
expressly to match learning style. RRNs describing the attributes of RN only designed programs cite
the support of independence that is the hallmark of such programs. For these reasons, RN only
programs best address the needs of adult learners.

Curriculum and Pedagogy Revisited: The

Shift Towards Active Learning and Student-
Centered Approaches in Ethiopian Primary
Education
By:

Teshome Nekatibeb,

Dr. Ernest D. O'Neil

The move towards active learning and student-centered approaches is a world wide trend. In
Ethiopia, a government educational policy which established active learning and a problem
solving approach was issued in 1994. The rationale for the new approach has been the need to
improve student learning. The policy indicates that this task would be carried out by curricular
and teacher education reforms and through research and development. To this end, new text
books, teacher guides, and activity books were prepared and distributed. Teacher education
colleges were assisted to focus on training teachers in this tradition. Professional development
activities were carried out in cluster schools and their satellites, and teachers were also trained in
carrying out action research. These efforts are certainly indicatives of the move towards a new
direction. The question, however, is how much active learning has been attained in the
classroom, and the extent to which teachers have been prepared as reflective practitioners. The
relevance and availability of learning materials, the quality and the extent to which teachers do
action research are other issues of major concern.
The purpose of this study is to explore the shift towards active learning and student-centered
approaches in Ethiopian Primary Education. The particular focus is on student participation in
classroom lessons, teachers training as reflective practitioners, the availability and relevance of
curriculum materials supporting active learning and the extent to which action research has been
practiced in primary education. The study will take place in a sample of cluster primary schools
and primary teacher education colleges. Classroom observations, teacher questionnaires,
observation checklists and interviews will provide the necessary data. Collected data will be
analyzed using relevant statistical packages and qualitative methods. It is hoped that this study
will provide an adequate understanding of the transformation of the curriculum and pedagogy of
primary schooling in Ethiopia.

Teshome Nekatibeb
Monitoring, Evaluation, Research and Analysis Advisor, AED/BESO II Project
Ministry of Education
Addis Ababa, The Academy for Educational Development, Inc.
Ethiopia
Teshome Nekatibeb is a Monitoring, Evaluation, Research and Policy Analysis
technical advisor of AED/BESO II in Ethiopia. He received his Ph.D. in International
Comparative Education from Stockholm University, Sweden. Prior to joining AED, Dr.
Nekatibeb served as an Assistant Professor and Chairman of the Department of
Curriculum and Instruction of the Faculty of Education, the Addis Ababa University.
He has been a consultant and advisor to several international institutions including
UNICEF,UNESCO-IICBA, NORARD and UNFPA. His research covers a wide range of
areas including educational media and information systems, gender and education,
school leadership, educational policy and innovations, student learning assessment,
educational theories, curriculum theory and practice.

Dr. Ernest D. O'Neil

Chief of Pary, Global Education Center
AED/BESO II
Academy for Educational Development, United States Agency for International Development

Ethiopia
Dr. Ernest O’Neil is the Chief of Party of the Academy for Educational
Development/Basic Education Strategic Objective (AED/BESO II) Project which is a
joint initiative between the United States Agency for International Development
(USAID) and the Ministry of Education in Addis Ababa. He has served in similar
positions in Jamaica and Bolivia. He has extensive experience in Ecuador as a Peace
Corps Volunteer, Research Associate with the Ministry of Education and College
Director. He has been a teacher, teacher educator, university professor and college
dean in the various states and within the University of Texas System for over four
decades. His holds a BS from the St. Bonaventure University, MS from The State
University of New York at Albany and a Ph.D. in International and Development
Education from the University of Pittsburgh.

Ref: L06P0519
[↑]

A NEW CHILD-CENTERED CURRICULUM FOR

EDUCATION
- PRENATAL TO ADULTHOOD -
The discussion of the creation of adult human lives can be
most fascinating - the job of parents, educators and the whole, wider
community...

Of course, hereditary factors have a part - but this is just the clay we have to
work with, which can be then molded to the optimum `shape' for the well-being of the
individual, and all he or she may come into contact with.
To find the kind of things each one can do best, with the most satisfaction,
is something we all would be glad to have happen to us.
It is the real task we have as educators, and how well it is done can make
such an enormous difference to each individual, to the families and communities who
make up our world.

This is the reason I am offering a new concept for a core curriculum.

The format is very simple, being based on human mental growth
steps, or seven stages of cognitive development, as follows...

- GROWTH
STAGES -
1) Conception to mobility: explore and develop the five sensory and innate
perceptions
2) Pre-school: physical exploration of familiar environment
3) Ages 4-7: developing communication skills
4) Ages 7-11: general studies - exploring creation, the universe
5) Ages 11-15: self and relationships study (puberty)
6) Ages 15 -17: Development of personal gifts and interests
7) Ages 16-adult: career, employment exploration
The age ranges are will overlap and build on what has already taken place, and open
the door on what is to come. It is the progression that's important, but most children
will be working on these topics at the about these ages. Note that some aural (sounds)
and emotional stimulation can happen pre-birth, although this is not a well explored
area. So, the curriculum activities are cumulative - each stage is built upon the last -
the next stage will involve the previous activities plus the new ones.
- A NEW MODEL FOR
INTELLIGENCE -

Looking again at the last three stages of cognitive development, I propose a radical
concept, basing development on a non-linear scale of intelligence. It declares that all
of us are intelligent, in different ways (excluding actual brain damage). The different
kinds of intelligence are valuable and needed.
I perceive there are three basic, overlapping areas - creative, academic and practical.
We need people working at tasks that involve good hand-to-brain function, for the
practical tasks that occur in the life sustaining requirements of food, clothing and
shelter. Creative people such as actors, writers and musicians make life interesting,
even worth living. Academic people can improve how we live, making life more
comfortable, less dangerous.
Not recognising the value and worth of creative and practical intelligence, is why I see
the school system failing just about everybody in terms of discovering and developing
individual capabilities. Surely education should have the goal of developing the
individual to the point where young people are ready for successful entry into adult
life. So few of them leave school feeling sure of what they want to do, or even what
they can do.
High IQ people display the irony of the supposed goal of education - to see people
highly educated... This is supposed to make life wonderful, successful, and rich; yet I
know many of the very highest achievers who have such a hard time at school,
persecuted by other jealous pupils (heard of nerds?), and not being extended by busy
teachers, resulting in boredom, mischief making, day-dreaming. At the other end of
the scale, non-academic practical people may feel they are failures, and second-class
citizens, yet without practical people, we would die. Both may lack the confidence to
find and train in work that is satisfying and challenging to them.
Each person has gifts and intelligence - they are different, not better or worse than
each other. Human abilities are as diverse as human needs. If we were able to choose
the genetic makeup of our children - so that all did well in our present academic
school system - so that practical ability was bred out of the human race - we would
have serious problems in finding people who are able to enjoy and be good at the
work involved in planting and harvesting crops, caring for farm animals, building
homes, sewing clothes.
To read a more detailed, somewhat light-hearted article on this crucial concept, see
my article online called: A New Model for Intelligence. (sorry, it is no longer
available on this high IQ site - but you may like to take at look at what is on it)The
article is now on my site - A New Model for Intelligence.
However, it should be evident that finding out what each person does best, makes
more sense than spending most teacher time on fixing weaknesses - and having
everybody end up with mediocre ability. The reason we have done this is because we
only see intelligence on a linear scale - low or high IQ. We think that the higher up the
scale we are, the more likely we are to succeed. Life proves this wrong time and time
again. No, we need to approach intelligence with a much wider focus... For this way,
no one fails, all are needed, respected, and honored. All children will feel they will
have a place in the world.
I have outlined the major thoughts in the new concept, a child-centered curriculum.
The following thoughts are filling out and developing some of ways it can be
applied....
-ADVANTAGES OF THE NEW
CURRICULUM -

But the beauty of this curriculum is that activities for each stage are developed on a
wide basis according to the ability of the child. This means whether a child is gifted or
handicapped, they will cover each stage - either just the rudiments, or to a highly
complex level. Readiness to move to a more complex level is determined by a
perception of the child's level of interest and occupation in the activities, and their
physical ability to be able to participate in them for increasing lengths of time.
I can see each age range working at a widely varying depth of study. At the first level
of schooling I see a practical child gain basic number and written language skills,
whilst a HiQ student explores university level mathematics, various languages and
literature - in a variety of ways - the internet is a must. I see extremely gifted children
working with others via e-mail, with a HiQ adult as majordomo. I see practical
children setting up gardens, and tiny farms and businesses with local business people
helping on occasion. The classroom is after all, an artificial environment. It may seem
an easier task to box everyone into school rooms, but in the end, society as a whole
will be poorer.
I feel that when children are doing things they enjoy, and feel they can get good at,
some of the discipline problems will disappear. Not all of them of course, human
nature being what it is! And there will always be problems brought from home.
However, in making school an enjoyable place to learn, the positive atmosphere will
be a great help in discipline.
- DEVELOPING THE
BLUEPRINT -

So what we have here is a "roadmap" And from here, we need a huge pool of activity
ideas - lesson plans - that can be made available online, plus needed resources. I have
enjoyed working on a few of the beginning areas... But it will be up to specialists in
different areas to create expansion studies.
It will require some new kinds of teaching material and methods. But in home-
schooling situations, or in private schools, it can start working immediately.
- HOW DOES IT WORK? LESSON PLANS AND
CONCEPTS -

- PRESCHOOL -
The curriculum is child-centered, and aims gradually to teach the child to teach
themselves - particularly in the school situation. This will enable more teacher time to
assist the really needy children to gain communication skills.
The first two pre-school stages require parents as teacher, in the main, but
grandparents, aunts, friends etc should all have their input. The child’s most basic
emotional needs are:- to feel safe, accepted and important.
From this healthy position, they can begin to explore and to manipulate their
environment - and some of that will involve making mistakes and learning what isn’t
safe, hopefully from the carer, much more than by experience! They need to learn that
some things (which include other people) are not to be manipulated - which is where
the carer has to be firm - for everybody's sake! The child needs to be given time and
attention, and this will decrease with maturity, if the right amount is given at the right
time. This means that the child's needs come first, but then the parent/ carer can take
some time for themselves or others. This kind of balance, and a mix of company and
solitary play, is part of what a child needs to learn, for a healthy outlook on the world.
So, what can be done at each stage to enhance our children’s learning - which is the
job of parents, relatives, educators and the wider community?
It is simple, and it can begin even before birth.
1/ Newborn to two year old... Parents, extended family, day-care centres etc. need
ideas of how to stimulate and develop the five senses - (shapes and colors, textures,
taste, sounds, smells), and provide a healthy emotional atmosphere - the latter will be
mostly involuntary learning, but parents will need to have some control over this -
e.g., low levels of tension around the baby, who can perceive both physical and
emotional states.
Stimulate and develop the five senses :
visuals - colors - variations - shapes... mirrors - torches ......
sounds - anything from classical music to motor noises
smells - anything from orange peel to leather to smelly shoes!....
touch - a good one - textures of all sorts - sand paper, tissues, ice, cats, vegetables,
grass, pine cones, rocks - take them out to touch trees and leaves and flowers...
taste - see above... some things you watch them with - some things you clean, and
leave where they can get into them.
And then there's combinations - like the rustle of shiny black plastic strips that catch
and hide the light, the whole orange to touch, taste and smell.............
This is just the beginning - each stage should carry through to the next stage and on
into life...
2/ The young child - 3-5 year olds need to learn about their environment - to develop
knowledge of the everyday world, learning words, ideas, and about people and what
they do...
They need to begin exploring the familiar environment: [including which human
beings, animals etc. are safe to interact with!]
The child will begin to physically explore and endeavor to manipulate what they can
get to. The home and backyard have endless possibilities for discovery and
manipulation - and from there, the child can explore where things have come from,
that are in the home, they can explore their neighborhood, the local store, zoo, park,
factory, doctor's surgery... some things are set up for this - some will need to be
arranged - like a visit to a milk processing plant, farm, building site, the beach, the
rivers, the factory, the marae, the hospital, the school - etc.
This is a stage of hands on, practical, physical learning. Starting with home - let them
get into the pot cupboard, the plasicware - do the under the bed, behind the couch, in
the cupboard things - the hut things inside and out - the picnics at home... the critter
thing - explore the grass, the earth - magnifying glass, microscope; and with
binoculars, the stars at night...
Out to the park, the shops, the library, the zoo, the workplaces, the beach and river
and mountain - talk to lots of neighborhood people about themselves - shops, garage -
- introduce them to the librarian, ask the simple questions. The parent's job is to help
them learn the safety issues, to open the doors for the exploration, and to talk, talk,
talk the language...
The child needs to know "Am I safe?" and "How can I affect my world?" and the
balance of these will springboard them for the next step.
THE FORMAL EDUCATION SYSTEM
Readiness for each stage may be determined by both observation, and entry mastery
tests, which are designed to be passed well by most people. Each day should have
some set activities, where for an hour an appropriate age-range principle is presented.
The rest of the day can be given to facilitated learning at each child‘s level. For older
children, a much wider range of subjects and credits should be offered.
Here in New Zealand, a reform of the examination system is taking place, where
students gain credits in a wide range of subjects towards a National Certificate of
Education Achievement. Numeracy and literacy will form part of the standard
necessary for a level one pass. Passes will be gained by reaching a certain standard,
rather than competing with other students in any particular school.
Physical fitness is also important in education, especially these days where children
have so much of interest to keep them indoors. Wider ranging television and video
games access, thepersonal computer, complex toys, etc mean too many overweight
young ones, so an exercise program and a sport of choice needs to be part of the
curriculum.
And although spirituality is not usually able to be included in the state school
program, for a holistic approach, I think it should be respected and discussed in an
open way, if appropriate. There are difficult times in everyone’s life, where deeper
things cannot be avoided. I think, in the case of death of friends or family, that classes
or individual pupils should be allowed to work through things in their own way, with
support from the teacher, or others.
3/ School entry: 5-7 year olds... Communication skills development in early school -
communication studies begin with the five "R's" - reading, writing, arithmetic, aural
and oral... - phonics should be taught along with the `look and say' method, where
children connect a picture with a word shape, so that children have a pool of decoding
skills. This will do a great deal towards improving literacy standards. They also
should learn how to speak, write and listen well, and basic arithmetic/ number
communication. Each of these has a great deal of extension possibilities which can
carry through to the next stage as soon as a useful level of ability is reached.
Rudiments of other languages can also be taught to most children while their
tongue/ear/mind connection is still flexible. The child's own historical/ non-English
cultural background should be drawn upon here, for a number of reasons, or a
language that can be used in a local cross-cultural situation.
They will already have lots of words - now it's learning to read, write, spell, speak
clearly, listen carefully, and basic arithmetic - or number language. All the basic skills
should be there by age seven - unless there's actual learning problems - brain damage,
dyslexia, emotional disorders - in which case, the need will be to keep giving them
steps 1 & 2 in the classroom...
4/ 7-11 year olds: Applying communication skills to learn about the universe... - an
introduction to various sciences, history, geography - the kind of things children want
to know - these can be teacher assisted projects - with children learning to teach
themselves at their own pace... This will give more time to teach communication skills
to those having difficulty, at the same time, not holding back those who are gifted....
Calling this stage "learning about the universe" is a quote from Einstein, who said he
was studying to find out "how God made the universe." And itis true, the first chapter
of Genesis is a useful list covering all topics. There are the sciences involved in light
production: physics, chemistry :- matter, energy, time; the water cycle and the
atmosphere, caves and the sea; then on to ecological systems, geology, plant biology,
astronomy, fish, birds, amphibians, dinosaurs, "creeping things", animals; and then
people studies - social, life sciences... History, sociology, anthropology, literature, the
arts etc ...
Children can learn the basics of all of these sciences, if they are introduced with
simplicity and enthusiasm. [I've kept kindergarten children enthralled with a story
about what happens when a fox eats an apple, and the seeds get into his droppings,
and an new tree grows and a bee puts pollen in a flower to make a new apple -
complete with actions of course!] And here, the child who is taught to teach
him/herself can come into their own, with an endless supply of books, the internet and
other resources, they can go as far as they wish to at their own speed, with some
guidance and encouragement from their tutors.
As you start to teach them how to teach themselves - they can keep diaries, and self
designed personal and group projects, and talk, talk, talk... The "5 R’s" can be
incorporated into these activities rather than in repetitive, irrelevant exercises - it's up
to the teacher to think of different ways - It can all be used again, and there's so much
scope, you'll never run out of material, and don't need to limit it to a few means of
expression - use imagination/ stories, models, dramatization, songs.......
With the sciences - extension can also be through trips to more technical/ complex
places, visit a laboratory, even a senior school might have fun showing young ones
some things. Start with light/ heat/ waves/ sound - and put order into it - answer some
of the `whys' etc. - help them think of the questions... lots of science experiments of
the most basic sort... Talk it, read it, draw it, and write it...
Then the water cycle, clouds, atmospheres, snow, thunderstorms, tornadoes,
underground caves, river systems, waterfalls - why does frozen water get lighter when
everything else gets heavier when it becomes solid?
And then some geology fun - volcanic rocks, sedimentary, and metamorphic -
earthquakes, tidal waves, floods - take them out to explore banks and cliffs - the
foundations of our earth, look for the volcanic extrusions, evidence of earthquakes in
layering, ... And plant biology - what do plants eat? How do they grow? How big,
how little - strange plants - sea plants - flowers, pollination, seeds - experiments, bean
sprouts, grass hair, gardens - orchids, cacti, vegetables. How many different species of
plant/tree can they find in your locality? - Have children make name labels for plant
collections e.g. cacti, and find out interesting things about them.
Space - this isn't hands on! This is where you get all the books, and videos - and take
them on night trips to the observatory. Can you set up a telescope? Here's a couple of
internet sites [Link] , and [Link] . Get
them to suggest ways they might want to remember, and keep it varied - some might
want to make models, or draw, or write stories...
Some more biology - get out the books on fish and birds, on dinosaurs, tigers, whales,
microbes and creepy crawlies - get them to write careful reports - teach them new
words like habitat, ecosystem, life cycle... Get them to draw diagrams and labels and
do graphs and layouts - to do class books.... Help them dissect a dead animal (fresh off
the road - yuck!)
And now for people - history - the story of man - a class timeline with pictures and
labels that they note down as you tell the story - And then there's museums, and
cultural events. And geography - what would you want to know if you went and
stayed with some people in another country? Food, houses, games etc - these make a
good list to ask the people from other places as you invite them in - note it down, try
their food, their language, their songs... [Yes - I've been a teacher and my class of 7-
11 year olds loved these kind of activities - they would tell it all again to their
parents!]
5/ 12-14 years: Learning about oneself - self exploration and discovery: This has
to be more than human biology - there is a need to relate the maturation process to
each individual. It is an intensely self-focused and personal time in our lives... The
child needs to know where he/ she fits into the scheme of things. They need to
discover their gifts, abilities, interests - 'Am I practical, creative, academic or a
combination?'
Plus social skills - plus opportunities need to be given to try all the crafts, and lots of
discussion groups, and computer/ video learning - stretching the mind, abilities, and
learning how to control and emotions, respect differences...
To do this, it can be a time when various diagnostic activities can take place. Test
what kind of learning style the child has; theirpersonality profile; give them
challenges - physical and psychological - a very generalized but full-on approach to
the budding adult - experiencing all kinds of activities, discussion groups, visits and
visitors to help develop awareness of strengths and weaknesses.
Some are just an exploration of various kinds of activities that may be used in terms of
a career - art, music, carpentry, film making, instructing others, home crafts - (which
is valuable for everyone to have some knowledge of, in any case)... -Mechanics,
electronics, creating a newspaper, a report on a science experiment, driving skills,
balancing accounts, childcare, first aid and other simple medical procedures, etc. The
range should be across all types of intelligence. There should also be some learning
and discussion of social skills and activities - some of the positive and negative ways
used to encourage people into a wholesome lifestyle. Sports, crime and punishment,
award systems, helping agencies.
This can be a stage where the door can begin to open to the adult world, and all its
joys and pitfalls.
6/ 14-15 years: Study of many kinds of skills and how they can be applied for the
good of yourself and others - employment studies....
This area should have a broad approach, where things that the child feels are of
interest are pursued, as well as their obvious gifts, even if they are not quite so
interested... He may enjoy cooking, and be very good at computer studies. These may
seem too disparate to pursue - but there must be an inclusive attack here, rather than
exclusive. Remember, we are trying to find the optimum use of the basic genetic
material, rather than trying to fit in with family expectations. It could be that, for
instance, grand-dad can't stand computers, and auntie thinks boys shouldn't cook, and
so would try and influence the child. - Yet, maybe the adult may write a program that
can create original recipes!
7/ 16+: Discovering and choosing a career path and beginning to learn the skills
that will be needed, and career or work options which can use what you're good at,
and enjoy doing - mapping these choices, and be ready to step into the desired field by
having interviews, having a C.V. ready - and work experience or further specialized
education in the chosen course if necessary. It is then, a time to discover personal
placement options, preparation and entry into employment, also, finding out who to
see, and where to go to, to use those skills.
This stage is one where employment types and opportunities are actively pursued, and
will finish when the young adult moves into the workplace, with a range of options to
follow according to the vagaries of the job market, and personal circumstances. This
stage may take only a short period for the practical minded, and much longer for the
academic, with university, medical school etc. It should mean that no-one leaves the
education system unemployable.
This is an idealistic approach, but it is much better to aim at something high, and do
the best we can to achieve it.

CLASSROOM EXAMPLES
I’ve been thinking of my experience as a teacher - where over a year, I got my class to
teach themselves - surely the best kind of educating... I’ve been trying to analyze how
I did that...
I didn't have much time to work with - the morning being taken up with set reading
and mathematics subjects - a private school situation... So the ideas may well be of
use as out of school activities. In fact, maybe there should be a system where special
needs children only attend school part of the day?...
These were 7-11 year olds, a small class of 15-20 pupils. I remember getting all the
books I could find on the subject matter, and laying them out before the children,
along with a list of topics they could choose to work on - individually, or in a group...
I gave them a format - for instance, with creatures, they made up an A5 card, titled it
with the animal name, and had to fill out a list of subtitles : habitat, food, appearance,
activities and family life. They also added an original picture. The cards were
displayed on the class wall afterwards. The difference in the pupils work was marked
- but by the length of time I had had them in my class, rather than their intelligence -
the range there was marked as well - from very bright to intellectually handicapped...
For history, we did a timeline - this time they had to do sketches and notes as I
lectured them [story style], and then we made up a timeline on continuous feed
computer paper, and they had to choose to develop their sketch into a proper picture
and label and paste it correctly in place. Lots of books again for them to look at was
the key...
For geography, a different learning situation again... I called it "Visiting round the
world" and invited people from other cultures into the class - but first the class
discussed what we would want to know if we went visiting another culture... They
came up with great questions of the really important stuff - food, houses, clothes,
language, appearance, games/ hobbies, schooling & health, countryside, animals,
work, - and rules/government.
We learnt songs in other languages, ate strange food, tried clothing on; and the guests
had a great time too. The children loved it and would go home and repeat it all to their
parents - [now how often does that happen with school work! My three boys never
did!] Of course, with just a few children - you can actually go to people's homes -
even better! I expect the internet would be great as well....
And one other thing we did, was write and perform a musical - a bit more difficult -
but they had a go at the writing - and did great on props and the actual performance.

WHAT ABOUT MAJOR EXCEPTIONS?

There will be some extremes such as the intellectually handicapped, or those impaired
in a certain area e.g. dyslexia. There are also to be considered those that could be
called severely gifted, e.g. who can read Shakespeare at the age of three. Yet even
with such children, it is important that each of the stages are covered, for the sake of
being balanced in development, for even a gifted child may not know something
obvious in every area, and will also enjoy practical manipulation tasks such as
cooking or clay work, or a visit behind the scenes at the local shops; - as will a
handicapped child. There are socialization factors such as patience and tolerance,
which can always be gained from mixed groups
THE INTERNET AS A CLASSROOM AND COMMUNITY
This is an area of particular interest to highly academically gifted children - who often
have a difficult time in normal school, sometimes knowing more than their teachers
do, in their specialist subjects. Discovering useful links to areas of interest through
search engines is usually, but not always a useful thing to do. It needs to be supervised
THOUGHTS ABOUT DISCIPLINE - for stage 2...
The aim with discipline is to gradually teach children to internalise it - self discipline.
There is a need to help them see that the world goes better for them when they behave
in healthy ways - 'Doing to others what they want them to do to them"
I think that the children need to learn that Mom isn't `all that pleasant to be around'
when they don't behave, for instance with tidying up... Because it's better that they
learn that adults are humans with needs and tolerance levels too - with you - than with
others that have no reason to care so much...
It is jolly hard - but start by working with them to tidy up - pick up the toy and hold it
in their hand as you take it the toybox, and "It's a race - who can do the most!" it can
be done... A wise lady once said - "We can protect and provide for our children, but if
we don't train them - we'll have to look after them all our lives"...
It can be fun - or at least a normal part of life - where everyone does what they can to
make things nice and comfortable... Children need to feel they are an important part of
the family - and everyone does what they can to help - as soon as they are capable -
with a lot of encouragement and praise. Focusing on behaviour, and not expecting the
impossible, using words like "Well done, I like that, what a good helper!" is better that
"Good person" - or "Bad person!" if they misbehave, which can put too much pressure
on.
It is helpful to use creative ideas like: - "Forgot to say please? - Wait a few minutes
and ask me again in a more friendly way" - [it's a long time for a little one - and you
don't want them to go hungry/ thirsty]
It is all worth it in the long run. After all, we are creating adult human beings here!
Peace, grace and joy in your work
Deb

#298965

There are distinct differences between these

two types of curricula
When addressing curriculum development it is essential to determine if one is philosophically
predisposed to a subject centered or student-centered approach to instructional planning. Subject
centered approaches are often easier to approach when planning for instruction. If the instructor
determines that will be the approach used, it is simply a function of determining the x-amount of
content to be disseminated by a target date. that is followed by breaking down the content into
more manageable deadlines. The solution is contrasted with the other key considerations when
planning for instruction.

A very brief overview of key considerations when determining whether the curriculum will be
subect- or stucent-centered. It is essential that one determine the prior to beginng to plan the
curriculum as it will completely affect the overall curriculum. Instructional planning and
expected outcomes will likewise be affected.

What is this?

By OTA - Overall OTA Rating

A student-centered curriculum is possible to design which does not compromise quality.

However, the mechanics of creating and operationalizing such a program are a complex matter
and require the ongoing support, assistance, and involved commitment of everyone involved
under the broad umbrella of curriculum. Given the highly specific learning needs of RRNs, a
student-centered curriculum is most easily implemented in an RN only program, where each
element of the curriculum can be tailored expressly to match learning style. RRNs describing the
attributes of RN only designed programs cite the support of independence that is the hallmark of
such programs. For these reasons, RN only programs best address the needs of adult learners.

Switzerland's first master's program in public health was established in the fall of 1990 at the
University of Geneva School of Medicine. The 3-year program is fully learner centered and
community oriented. The process of problem-based learning (PBL), around which the program is
designed, is well accepted by students and staff. In the summer of 1993, the first cohort of
students was certified as competent public health specialists who have acquired relevant
professional skills as well as a holistic “public health culture.”

Throughout the curriculum, students plan, implement, and evaluate projects related to health
problems they have encountered in their own employment as health professionals. Individual and
group work, discussions and seminars with teachers and other students, and brainstorming
sessions with the program's specially trained facilitators allow students to identify and achieve
individual educational objectives while working on community-related health projects.

Beyond its internal objectives, this program may assist the spirit of change emerging in those
Swiss medical schools that are considering ways to reform their approach to traditional
undergraduate medical training and to adopt a more community-oriented and PBL perspective.
AAAS Conference on Developing Textbooks That
Promote Science Literacy
February 27-March 2, 2001
American Association for the Advancement of Science
Washington, D.C.

Student-Focused Curriculum Materials Development:

The “Food For Plants” Story
Kathleen J. Roth
Michigan State University
February 25, 2001

Outline
• Introduction
• Becoming a curriculum developer
○ Roots in teaching
○ A researcher’s perspective
• Examples from the Food for Plants Materials
○ Examples for providing a sense of purpose
○ Examples for taking account of student ideas
○ Examples for developing and using scientific ideas – building a case
○ Examples for promoting student thinking about phenomena, experiences, and
knowledge
• Concluding Remarks
• References
• Table 1. Comparing student conceptions and ways of thinking with scientists’
conceptions and ways of thinking about plants and their food
• Appendix A. Project 2061 Criteria for Evaluating the Quality of Instructional Support
• Appendix B. Content organization and background for the Food for Plants unit
• Appendix C. Food for Plants pretest (PDF, 815 KB)
• Appendix D. Pages from the Introduction to the Teacher (PDF, 827 KB)
• Appendix E. Selected student pages from Food for Plants (PDF, 964 KB)
• Appendix F. Selected teacher pages from Food for Plants (PDF, 848 KB)
Student-Focused Curriculum Materials Development:
The “Food For Plants” Story
Kathleen J. Roth
Michigan State University
February 25, 2001
My experiences as a teacher and a researcher convince me that traditional science
textbooks are not useful learning tools for the majority of students. In addition traditional
teacher’s guides do not provide sufficient support to help teachers guide students in
developing real understandings of science concepts. But textbooks and teacher’s guides
can be improved, if we take seriously the research on student thinking and learning about
particular ideas in the science curriculum (AAAS, 1993, Chapter 15). This research
knowledge about student thinking on specific topics in the science curriculum makes it
possible to create curriculum materials that better support students in developing genuine
understandings of important science ideas. Researchers working on the Project 2061
Curriculum Materials Analysis Study (Roseman et al., 1999) looked for evidence that
curriculum materials were making use of this research base and found scant evidence that
such research was playing a central role in the development of science textbooks and
teacher’s guides.
There are two purposes for this paper. The first purpose is to describe how my experiences
as a teacher and a researcher led me to these conclusions about the limitations and
potential of science curriculum materials. The second purpose is to provide examples
showing how this research was used to create an alternative text and teacher’s guide, Food
for Plants, that addresses some of the Project 2061 curriculum materials analysis criteria.
Using research about students’ thinking and learning about how plants get their food, this
alternative text and teacher’s guide puts students’ thinking and experiences at the center of
the development process. In addition to writing the text, I also taught the unit and did a
series of in-depth studies of student learning throughout the unit. This research convinced
me of the particular importance of the following Project 2061 criteria in science curriculum
materials (see Appendix A for a complete list of the Project 2061 criteria):
Providing a Sense of Purpose
Conveying unit purpose
Justifying lesson sequence
Taking Account of Student Ideas
Alerting teacher to commonly held student ideas
Assisting teacher in identifying own students' ideas
Addressing commonly held ideas
Developing and Using Scientific Ideas -- Building a case
Synthesizing ideas over time
Providing practice
Promoting Student Thinking about Phenomena, Experiences, and Knowledge
Encouraging students to explain their ideas
Guiding student interpretation and reasoning
Encouraging students to think about what they've learned
The theme running through all of these criteria is eliciting and guiding student thinking about
particular content ideas. Using knowledge about students’ thinking and learning in science,
and about their understandings of plants, in particular, I wrote the Food for Plants student
text and teacher’s guide. The materials begin by eliciting students’ ideas and experiences
about plants and food. As the unit proceeds, the teacher is supported in continually
assessing student thinking and understanding (and misunderstanding) and in guiding and
supporting students’ development of important science ideas. The materials are not about
presenting content to students; instead, they attempt to convince students through a
connected series of activities and experiences that the idea of photosynthesis makes sense.
“Convincing” students involves gathering evidence that will challenge them to reconsider
and change their common ideas that plants get their food from the soil or from water or from
the air. “Convincing” students also involves paying attention to students’ experiences and
their ideas, presenting carefully selected and sequenced experiences with phenomena and
new ideas, and supporting and guiding students’ attempts to make sense of these
experiences. Thus, the materials attempt to engage students in constructing a reasoned
understanding about plants and food.
The paper is organized in two major sections. I will first describe key experiences that
influenced my curriculum materials development work, which included my experiences as a
teacher of science and my work as a researcher studying classroom teaching and learning
in science. I will then provide examples from the Food for Plants materials, illustrating how
they address the Project 2061 criteria listed above.

Becoming a Curriculum Developer

Roots in Teaching

As a middle school science teacher, I was frustrated with science textbooks. And it was this
frustration that eventually led me to develop “alternative” curriculum materials designed to
help 5th-6th grade students understand how plants get their food.
In my teaching of middle school science, I used two different textbooks, one with my
seventh grade life science students and another with my eighth grade earth science
students. The earth science text was the kind of text I was familiar with as a student myself
—full of text definitions and explanations, words in bold print, diagrams to memorize, end-
of-chapter words to define and questions to answer. This text was an interesting and helpful
resource to me in planning units of instruction. But I could never figure out a way to make it
interesting and helpful to my students. I assigned reading and check-up questions as
homework, and my students dutifully (for the most part) answered the questions and
defined the words. However, it was clear to me that this text was not communicating clearly
to my students. In class, it was as if they had never read the text at all. And it did not seem
to help to read the text together in class.
The seventh grade text was quite different from the typical text. This was one of the texts
created during the post-Sputnik era of NSF-funded science curriculum development efforts.
In fact, this text—Interaction of Man (sic) and the Biosphere (Abraham et al., 1975)—had
very little narrative text compared to traditional textbooks. Instead, each chapter or unit
started with a “big” question—a question focused around a major theme in biology. For
example, the chapter about photosynthesis was framed as an investigation of interactions
between plants and the environment. The questions guiding the chapter were: List things
“that you think might be involved in this interaction between green plants and their physical
environment. How could you determine which things are necessary and which are not
necessary for photosynthesis to occur?” (Abraham et al., 1975, p. 28). The rest of the
chapter included a series of readings and laboratory activities that were used to help
answer the framing question. The lab activities were not optional; they were the core of the
text. Students conducted experiments to gather evidence that sunlight and carbon dioxide
are necessary for photosynthesis and that sugar and starch are produced in the leaves of
the plants. They examined Priestley’s historical experiment with the mouse and a plant
under a bell jar to provide evidence that oxygen is produced in photosynthesis. Throughout
the chapter, the students are engaged in gathering evidence to “build” a basic equation for
photosynthesis:
Green plants + CO2 + light + chlorophyll —produce→ Sugar and starch
Thus the text attempted to build an argument, or case, for the content ideas (see Project
2061 criterion IVa).
This nontraditional text changed my way of thinking about science teaching in three
important ways. First, it was the first time I had seen a text attempt to engage students in
building an argument. Second, it helped me reimagine science teaching as a process of
engaging students actively in building ideas using evidence. In this view, student activity
was central in the development of ideas. This contrasted with my assumption that the main
part of teaching was the presentation of clear explanations of science content and that
student activities were nice extras, thrown in to make things a little more interesting. Third, it
helped me understand science in new ways. It shook my belief that content was largely lists
of terms to memorize and focused my attention instead on the big ideas in science and their
conceptual connections.
But this nontraditional text also posed some problems for me as a teacher. Because I
wasn’t having students read traditional text, would they be disadvantaged when they took
high school science courses where they would be expected to read content-dense
textbooks? Should I use traditional textbooks so that I can help students learn how to use
these textbooks? Or should I abandon the textbooks and teach in the ways that seemed to
be most effective in helping students understand the science ideas? It was these questions
that eventually led me to graduate school and into the world of research.

A Researcher’s Perspective

As a graduate student, I participated in a research study of 5th grade science teaching and
learning (Roth, Anderson, and Smith, 1987; Roth, 1984). As a researcher, I had the
opportunity to sit in classrooms with my attention focused on the students: How are they
making sense of this lesson, this science activity, this unit of study? I interviewed students
at critical points throughout a unit of study about how plants get their food, and analyzed
their written responses on pre- and posttests. These experiences in tracing student thinking
transformed my views about teaching. Consistent with a large body of research on students’
thinking and learning about science concepts, my own research provided critical insights
about why it is so difficult for students to develop useful, conceptual understandings of
many of the subjects they are taught in school (Anderson and Roth, 1989; West and Pines,
1985).
Table 1 presents some key findings from this research, comparing the goal conceptions of
the unit (those consistent with the thinking of the scientific community) with the experience-
based conceptions that students bring to the classroom. These experience-based ideas are
often in direct conflict with the scientific conceptions. For example, scientists believe that
plants get their food energy by taking non-energy containing matter (water and carbon
dioxide) and combining them in the presence of light energy to create high-energy food
matter (in the form of sugars and starches). This process is called photosynthesis, and it
represents an essential difference between plants and animals. Only plants can make their
own food, and all other life ultimately depends on this energy-capturing process done by
plants for their own sources of food. [1] For further information about the content of this unit,
see Appendix B, which includes the pages in the Teacher’s Guide that describe the content
goals of the unit.
However, students cannot see any evidence in their everyday life that plants make their
food. Quite to the contrary, they see evidence that plants are like people—they take in food
from their environment. They drink water and they suck up nutrients and minerals from the
soil. They believe that plants, like people, have multiple sources of food that they take in
from their environment. But why do these student conceptions matter in the teaching of
science? It matters, because it is not easy for students to give up or change their
commonsense ideas about plants. The research shows that students (and adults!) will hang
on tenaciously to the ideas they have built from experience. They might memorize a
definition of photosynthesis, but this does not fundamentally change the way they think
about plants.
Building on Piaget’s ideas about the importance of cognitive conflict in the learning process,
Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Hertzog (1982) used research about students’ ideas to develop a
conceptual change theory of learning. In their view, there are three conditions that must be
met before genuine conceptual change can occur. First, students must find a new idea
intelligible; that is, they must be able to understand what the new idea is proposing. Second,
they must find the new idea plausible; that is, they must be able to reconcile their own ideas
with the new idea. And finally, they must find the new idea fruitful; that is, they must be able
to see the usefulness of the new idea in a variety of real-world contexts. If they do not see
the usefulness of the new idea, it is not worth the struggle to change conceptions.
In my own research, I watched students in an active science classroom, where both the
teacher and the students were enthusiastically engaged in conducting a series of
experiments with plants. Using the Science Curriculum Study materials (Knott et al., 1978),
the teacher skillfully guided students in collecting data about plants’ growth under varying
conditions and supported them in graphing and summarizing data. However, in the end, the
students’ posttests were not significantly different from their pretests. Students began the
unit holding the belief that “light is needed for plant growth,” and they ended the unit with the
same belief. They began the unit asserting that plants get their food from the soil or from the
water in the soil, and they ended the unit still clinging to these core beliefs. At best, they
also added into their schema the idea that plants could also make their own food. Thus the
majority of students did not show significant growth or change in their thinking about plants
and food.
I was shocked by these results. I had observed the students actively engaged in the
activities, including rich discussions about their explanations of the results. I thought that the
teacher had successfully helped them interpret the data in ways that would have convinced
them that plants are very different from humans—that they have the unique ability to make
their own food out of raw materials (water, sunlight, carbon dioxide). What had gone wrong?
This experience gave me a new appreciation of the difficult challenge both students and
teachers face when they are trying to change deeply-held, experience-based ideas that are
in conflict with scientific explanations. Those few students who were successful in changing
their personal theories and in understanding and accurately using the idea of
photosynthesis had to use a variety of higher-level thinking skills. They continually tried to
use new information to explain and make predictions about plants and their needs. Often
this was a difficult and confusing process, as students encountered areas where their
knowledge was incomplete or in conflict with the ideas presented. Such conflicts led to
analyses of the differences between them and to restructuring of the student’s personal
conceptual frameworks. These students were metacognitively active, monitoring their
developing understandings and resolving areas of confusion (“If water isn’t their food, then
why does my Mom water her plants?”). In the end, they developed conceptual
understandings of photosynthesis that they could use to explain why plants in a cave will die
or why we need to water plants and give them sunlight. These students’ conceptual learning
was not a straightforward process of hearing a new idea, using it once, and then
understanding it. And most students did not go through this process. I wanted to help the
less successful students go through that same complex process of conceptual change as
the few top students had experienced.
In my initial study of the SCIIS curriculum materials, I believed that the SCIIS activities had
laid out a solid plan for “building a case” that plants make their own food. In Posner et al.’s
terms, the materials made the ideas intelligible. In this regard, the SCIIS materials met the
following Project 2061 criteria for analyzing science curriculum materials:
• provided a clear sense of the unit purpose (Ia),
• laid out a strategic sequence of activities, each clearly linked to the next (Ic),
• included a variety of vivid experiences with phenomena (IIIa and b),
• synthesized ideas over time (IVd), and
• used the activities to build a case that plants need light, air, and water to make food
(Iva).
Examining the materials in the context of the student learning data, however, I developed
the hypothesis that the materials had failed to:
• take students’ ideas into account (II).
• provide enough support to help the teacher guide student interpretation and
reasoning of the experiments they conducted.
• give students enough practice in using the new ideas in a variety of contexts (IVg).
For my dissertation study, I wrote an alternative science textbook to accompany the SCIIS
activities (Roth, 1984). The research goal was to study student thinking as they read about
how plants get their food. The study looked at middle school students who were reading
traditional textbooks about plants and food as well as students who read the Food for
Plants text. I wanted to find out whether students’ processing of text would be any different
if the text anticipated and interacted with students’ ideas more explicitly. This led to a
decision to provide more opportunities for students to practice using the new ideas.
The results of the study surprised me. I did not expect students to undergo any significant
conceptual change from just reading a text. However, the findings were dramatic. Only one
student out of 12 students who read the traditional texts used a conceptual change reading
strategy and developed a solid understanding of the key concepts. In contrast, 6 out of 7
students using the Food for Plants text used a conceptual change reading strategy and
developed a solid understanding of the three key concepts: a) plants make their food (and
do not take it in), b) plants need light to make their food, and c) plants get their food ONLY
by making it. Similar to the students reading the traditional texts, the students reading the
experimental text included students with reading levels ranging from grade 3.4 through post
high school.
The dissertation study convinced me of the power of taking students’ ideas seriously in
writing curriculum materials. After the completion of my dissertation study, I conducted a
classroom-based research study of fifth grade students’ thinking and learning about science
across the school year. I took on a teacher-researcher role, teaching the science, using a
conceptual change teaching approach, and studying student learning across the school
year. The Food for Plants unit was taught in this context. Not only did students demonstrate
a high level of conceptual growth during the plants unit in the fall, their knowledge of these
concepts remained strong in interviews at the end of the year. Convinced that paying
attention to students’ thinking had transformed my teaching and contributed to high levels of
student learning, I revised the Food for Plants text, supplementing it with additional activities
for students and adding a Teacher’s Guide that paid particular attention to helping teachers
to guide student interpretation and reasoning (Project 2061 criterion Vb).

Examples from the Food for Plants Materials

My research and teaching experiences led me to the conclusion that it was essential to plan
learning experiences for students (both in curriculum materials and in actual teaching)
based on knowledge from research about students’ ideas and thinking about the particular
topic being studied. The Food for Plants text and teacher’s guide provides examples of the
Project 2061 criteria that I believe are most important in taking students’ ideas seriously in
writing curriculum materials.
In this section, I describe the ways I went about writing an alternative text that seriously kept
students’ ideas, experiences, and thinking as the central focus in making decisions about
activities and tasks for the students and about notes to help the teacher guide and support
student learning. The examples are organized around the criteria from the Project 2061
analysis of curriculum materials that I found to be most important in developing a student-
centered set of materials:
Providing a Sense of Purpose
Conveying unit purpose
Justifying lesson sequence
Taking Account of Student Ideas
Alerting teacher to commonly held student ideas
Assisting teacher in identifying own students' ideas
Addressing commonly held ideas
Developing and Using Scientific Ideas -- Building a case
Synthesizing ideas over time
Providing practice
Promoting Student Thinking about Phenomena, Experiences, and Knowledge
Encouraging students to explain their ideas
Guiding student interpretation and reasoning
Encouraging students to think about what they've learned
But I want to preface this section with a caveat. It is important to note that only the second
Project 2061 criterion for analysis of curriculum materials (Taking account of student ideas)
explicitly focuses on taking students’ ideas into account. However, writing the Food for
Plants text with a focus on student thinking and learning forced me to consider each Project
2061 criterion from the students’ perspectives. For example, the research studies I had
conducted clearly indicated that these concepts about plants and food were not easy for
students to grasp and that they needed a lot more practice using and applying new ideas in
different contexts (Project 2061 criterion IVa). It was one challenge for students to
understand the new idea about photosynthesis (to find the new idea intelligible) (Posner et
al., 1982). It was another challenge to find the idea plausible in relationship to their entering
ideas—to reconcile or accommodate their ideas about food coming from the soil with ideas
about plants making food (photosynthesis). And it was yet another challenge to find the idea
useful (fruitful) in a variety of contexts and therefore, worth the struggle to understand.
Thus, the Project 2061 criterion, “providing practice” became central in writing this student-
focused text. I knew that teachers were not likely to recognize how students need to
struggle with new ideas in multiple contexts before they will really understand the new idea.
Traditional textbooks communicate that learning happens with one reading and a few
follow-up questions. I wanted to challenge this assumption and to help teachers realize how
difficult and complex learning about plants can be for students.
NOTE: Cited Food for Plants pages can be seen in full in Appendix E. Teacher pages are
located in Appendix F. In the original Food for Plants text, the teacher pages are located
opposite the corresponding student pags.
Examples for Providing a Sense of Purpose: Does the material convey an overall sense
of purpose and direction that is understandable and motivating to students? Does the
material convey the purpose of each lesson and its relationship to others? Does the
material involve students in a logical or strategic sequence of activities (versus just a
collection of activities)?
Both the student text and the teacher’s guide emphasize the unit purpose. The unit begins
with a central question, “How do plants get their food?” Three activities frame this question
initially for students and engage them in generating hypotheses about how plants get their
food.
In the “Seed and the Log” activity (pp. S5-6), students examine some pine tree seeds and a
large piece of a tree trunk. They are asked:
How does such a tiny seed grow into a huge tree with a trunk and branches and needles (or
leaves) and many roots? What are YOUR hypotheses about how a TINY seed can change
into a HUGE tree? Where does all the stuff in the tree trunk come from? Talk with your
partner or group about your ideas. Listen to their ideas.
1. Then write down your ideas about how a tiny seed can become a huge tree.
2. Draw a picture showing your ideas about how a tiny seed can become a huge tree.
3. Tell how your ideas are different from someone else in your group.
The next activity, “Our Inquiry: What is food for plants?” (pp. S7-9), explicitly states the unit
questions:
In our investigations about plants we will focus on questions about how plants get their food:
What is food for plants? How do plants get their food? How does their food help plants live
and grow? Do they need food in the winter? How can plants use food to change from tiny
seeds into large plants (bushes, trees, flowers, grasses, etc.)?
The activity continues by providing a scientific definition of food as containing energy that
living things need to live and grow. A discussion follows that engages students in thinking
about why people cannot live by eating dirt or water alone.
In the next activity, “Beginning Ideas About the Question: What is food for plants?” (p. S11),
students are asked to write down their own ideas about how plants get food. They draw
arrows on a diagram of a plant to show how food moves inside the plant. The text then
guides the teacher and students in having a “scientific discussion” about these hypotheses,
again beginning the discussion with reference to the framing, central questions of the unit:
Student Text:
In this unit, we will explore what food is for plants and how plants get their food. We will test
our hypotheses to find out how plants get food that contains energy that they can use to live
and grow. As we go along, compare what you find out with what you have just written. See
how your ideas change and grow. (Student text, p. S12, emphasis added)
Teacher’s Guide:
A Possible Teacher Narrative:
“Let’s see how many ideas, or hypotheses, we have about how plants get their food. I will
keep a list of our ideas on the board/overhead/poster. I want you to listen carefully to other
scientists’ ideas. Do you have evidence to challenge or support their ideas? Do you agree
or disagree? Why? Are you clear about what the other person is saying? Can you ask a
question to get clearer about what someone else is saying? (Teacher guide, p. T12,
emphasis added)
But the central question is not limited to the introductory lessons of the unit. This question is
repeatedly posed to students in each lesson as they accumulate evidence across lessons to
support and/or challenge different hypotheses about plants and their food. For example,
even the activity titles communicate this ongoing exploration of the question about plants’
source of food:
Activity Six: Are seeds food for plants?
Activity Eight: Is water food for plants? Is soil food for plants? Is sunlight food for plants?
Activity Nine: Dr. Van Helmont – Is soil food for plants?
The entire lesson sequence is designed to address this central question, following a model
of science instruction that begins by engaging students in considering the central question
and eliciting their ideas. After this initial phase, the instruction moves to an “Explore and
Challenge” phase, where students are given opportunities to explore their ideas and to
consider challenges to their ideas. “Challenge” activities are designed to produce cognitive
conflict—to call students’ attention to ways in which their original hypotheses might be
limited. After students’ ideas have been challenged to the point where they are beginning to
wonder whether their original hypotheses adequately answer the question, the idea of
photosynthesis is introduced to them during the “Explain Scientific Concepts” phase. It is
introduced in comparison with the students’ hypotheses, and students are asked to consider
whether it makes sense in light of the data gathered so far. In the next phase of instruction,
students are given many opportunities to use, or apply, the idea of photosynthesis in
different real-world situations. At first, they need strong guidance and support (coaching)
from the teacher to reason successfully through these problems. The teacher supports
students in reconciling this new idea with their entering ideas. As they become more
confident in their understandings of the new concept, students need less and less explicit
support from the teacher. Thus teacher support gradually fades. Throughout the unit, there
are activities designed to support students in reflecting on their own learning and to raise
questions and new connections, explorations.
This learner-centered instructional model is explained to teachers in the introductory pages.
It is used to guide the sequence of activities. A chart showing the main instructional function
of each activity is included in the introductory pages for the teacher. Activities are listed as
falling into one of the following instructional phases:
Establish the Problem and Elicit Students’ Ideas
Explore Activities to Challenge Students’ Ideas
Explain Scientific Concepts
Apply Activities to Practice Using New Concepts in relationship to students’ preconceptions
Examples for Taking Account of Student Ideas
The Food for Plants text addresses all three of the Project 2061 criteria in this category:
1. Alerting teacher to commonly held student ideas: Does the material alert
teachers to commonly held student ideas (both troublesome and helpful) such as
those described in Benchmarks Chapter 15: The Research Base?
The introductory pages of the text provide some background information about
students’ ideas and the importance of making the students’ ideas central in science
teaching. In a section titled, “Starting with the Students: Students’ Ideas about Plants
and Ways of Thinking” (pp. 2-8 Teacher Introduction, see Appendix D), the teacher
is given a description of the research on students’ ideas about plants and their food.
Four specific barriers to students’ developing understanding of photosynthesis are
then described: 1) everyday vs. scientific definitions of “food”, 2) the challenge of
understanding the abstract concept of energy, 3) the challenge of thinking about
invisible particles and processes, and 4) students’ satisfaction with explanations that
fall short of explaining “why” or “how”.
Equally important, however, the Teacher’s Guide provides commentary throughout
about anticipated student responses. The teacher is given guidance about the
significance of different types of anticipated student responses and suggestions for
how to react. These comments are highlighted on the Teacher Pages under the
heading, “Common Student Responses.” This is a regular feature of the activities,
and the anticipated responses focus on “incorrect” responses as much as they do on
“correct” responses. Typically, a range of possible student responses is given.
For example, on p. T11, the teacher is provided with a range of possible responses
that students might give to the question: “Write down YOUR ideas about [how] plants
get their food.” These possibilities (all of them contrast with the goal concept about
photosynthesis) include water, soil, plant food sticks, sunlight, or a combination of
these. In addition to these common student ideas, the guide provides the teacher
with some commentary about the patterns of student responses:
Water is one of the most common responses. Many students list multiple sources of
food for plants. Some students tend to think about anything plants need as food for
the plant. Others think that whatever plants take into their bodies (“eat”) is food for
plants. Still others identify only fertilizers or minerals as food for plants. (T11)
In another example, students dissect seeds and observe the seed parts. They are
then asked whether they think the seed is food for the plants (p. S16). A chart of
“Common Student Responses and Suggested Teacher Interpretations and Actions”
appears on p. T16. This chart suggests to the teacher that students should not be
expected at this point to hypothesize that the embryo gets food from the food stored
in the cotyledon, or even that the seed is a source of food. Instead of bringing these
goal ideas and terms into the discussion, the teacher should let the students use
their own ideas and words— referring, for example, to the “baby plant” to describe
 the embryo. They should also make sure that all students observed the “baby plant”
since many are likely to have missed it.
2. Assisting teacher in identifying own students' ideas: Many questions posed to
students in the Food for Plants text are designed to elicit the students’ ideas, so that
the teacher can learn about the particular ideas and experiences of his/her own
students.
The pretest (Appendix C), along with its associated analysis strategies, is an
example of assisting the teacher in finding out about his/her own students’ ideas
about plants and how they get their food. The questions are designed to elicit
students’ own ideas and experiences. The questions are primarily open-ended
questions. Many of them provide scenarios for students to explain. By looking at the
pattern of answers across items, the teacher can diagnose each student’s entering
ideas about plants and food. For example, a student might give the following pattern
of responses, which indicate that she believes that plants have multiple sources of
food that they take in from their environment and that anything they take in is food
(just like anything humans eat is considered food):

Question Response

4. Describe what food is for plants Air, water, soil, stuff in the soil

7. What do you think happened to the seeds They died. They had food cause they had
[that the man planted in a closet]? air and water. But plants need light, too,
and they didn’t have light.

9. Draw arrows to show how food moves [Draws arrows going in the roots and up
in a green plant. the plant and also going from the air into
the leaves]

11. Most plants get food from… Soil, air, water

13. Which living things take in their food Both plants and animals
from their outside world (their
environment)?

14. Which living things make their own Humans

food?

Circle any of the following that you think Soil, air, water, fertilizer, oxygen, carbon
is food for plants. dioxide, plant food you buy at the store

3. Addressing commonly held ideas: Does the material attempt to address

commonly held student ideas?
Many of the activities in the Food for Plants unit were selected because of their
potential to challenge and address particular commonly held ideas that students
bring to the science classroom. For example, many students begin the unit believing
 that plants get food from water or from fertilizers and minerals in the soil. They have
watched their parents add both water and “plant food” (bought at the store) to make
plants grow better. This is strong evidence to support their ideas that both water and
plant food are food for plants! But in fact, the water and the minerals and the fertilizer
do not provide food energy to the plants—that can only come from the energy-rich
sugars that are created during photosynthesis. How might the curriculum materials
help challenge and support students in changing their ideas about water and
minerals and fertilizers?
In the Food for Plants text, a series of activities attempt to challenge students’ ideas
that water is food for plants. Early on, for example, students act out how they would
feel if they had only water and no other “food” (S9 and T9). They realize that they will
quickly run out of energy and die, even if they continue to drink lots of water. This
activity raises doubts about water in some students’ minds, but others are not
convinced. They argue that water DOES provide energy for plants, but not for
humans.
Later on in the unit, the ideas that water and minerals are food for plants are
challenged in another way. Students learn that calories are a unit used to measure
the amount of food energy in a substance. They also learn that calories are
determined by how long a substance burns; high-energy foods burn longer than low-
energy foods. They then examine nutrition and ingredient labels on various
substances to determine whether they are energy-containing matter (S36-38, S40).
Among the items they test are a variety of high-energy foods, but also included are
non-energy containing water, vitamin pills, and “plant food.” They find that water,
vitamin pills, and minerals contain no calories—no food energy.
In addition to reading ingredient and nutrition labels, the students observe as the
teacher tries to burn a peanut, a plant food stick, and a vitamin pill. Only the peanut
burns. A series of questions (S40 and T40) structure students’ efforts to interpret
these observations. The activity is structured around the hypothesis that “Plant food
or minerals and fertilizers are food for plants.” Students are challenged to find
evidence to support and challenge this hypothesis.
The food label analysis activity was designed specifically to address the common
and persistent idea held by many students that plants get their food from minerals
and fertilizers we put in the soil. It was not in the original Food for Plants text, but
was created in response to continuing confusion among students about the role of
minerals and fertilizers.
Examples for Developing and Using Scientific Ideas -- Building a case
1. Synthesizing ideas over time: Does the material provide a logical sequence of
encounters with the key ideas and tie them together?
The Food for Plants unit begins with a clear framing of a central question: How do
plants get their food? Each activity in the unit is then clearly linked to this central
question, so that students understand that they are not just studying about plants but
that they are trying to figure out how plants get their food. And each activity plays a
role in challenging students’ initial hypotheses and in building a case for the idea that
plants make their own food, using air, sunlight, and water. But an activity does not
stand alone. Each activity is linked to the others to help students synthesize ideas
across time. Three examples will illustrate this criterion.
 On p. S41, students are guided in connecting together their findings from three
different activities: 1) a grass experiment where they grew plants in the light and the
dark, 2) van Helmont’s experiment showing that soil is not food for plants, and 3) a
food analysis activity that demonstrated that water and plant food do not contain any
calories, or food energy. In a reflection activity on p. S41, students are guided in
synthesizing the findings from these three activities. The text models how to reason
from the findings of these three experiments to conclude that neither soil, water, nor
plant food minerals are food for plants. Students are then asked to consider whether
they are convinced that water, soil, and minerals in the soil are or are not food for
plants (p. S42).
Another synthesis activity occurs on p. S47, where the text helps students build a
link between an experiment and the idea of photosynthesis. An earlier experiment
had demonstrated that growing bean embryos get their food from the cotyledon.
What does the bean seed have to do with photosynthesis? Through a cartoon and
series of guiding questions, students are helped to put two ideas together: 1) plants
make their food, and 2) stored food in the cotyledon feeds the growing embryo.
Where did the stored food in the cotyledon come from? It was made by the adult
plant during photosynthesis.
A third synthesis activity occurs on pp. S48-S49. The text provides a chart to help
students summarize their findings about what goes into plant leaves and what is
produced by the leaf. After a narrative summary of the key ideas, the text challenges
students to “use these ideas to explain the following situations.” Thus, the text first
provides a structure for synthesizing ideas and then presents two scenarios for
students to explain using the synthesized information.
2. Providing practice: Does the material provide tasks/questions for students to
practice skills or use knowledge in a variety of situations?
The Food for Plants text provides numerous opportunities and contexts for students
to use their new ideas about photosynthesis. On p. S65, for example, students are
directed to create a skit or a concept map to model what they have learned about
how plants get their food. A series of application questions are included on pp. S67-
S72. The problem situations that students are asked to explain include seeds in a
cave, a pine tree in winter, plants getting food at night, an amaryllis bulb, and maple
sugaring. It takes many application opportunities to enable most students to change
their ideas and use the new idea regularly and effectively.
Examples for Promoting Student Thinking about Phenomena, Experiences, and
Knowledge
1. Encouraging students to explain their ideas: Does the material routinely include
suggestions for having each student express, clarify, justify, and represent his/her
ideas?
In the Food for Plants text, students are regularly asked to explain their thinking and
to justify their positions with evidence. This demand for explanation begins with one
of the first activities, The Seed and the Log, pp. S5-S6. Students are first
encouraged to talk with their group about their ideas about how a tiny pine tree seed
could grow into a huge pine tree. After discussing their ideas in small groups, each
student is asked to write down his or her ideas, to draw his or her ideas, and to
contrast his or her ideas with someone else in the group.
 On p. S20, students are asked to write individually their explanations about the bean
seed experiment: Why did some seed parts grow and others did not? With the grass
seed experiment, students are also asked to explain their ideas. On p. S27 they are
asked to explain their predictions for the experiment, and on p. S28, S29, and S30
they are asked to write out their explanations of the experimental results.
After the completion of the grass plant experiment, the van Helmont experiment, and
the food analysis activity, students are asked on p. S42 to write about their thinking
about the conclusions from all of these experiments. Are students really convinced
that water, soil, and minerals are not food for plants? As usual, they are directed to
give reasons, to explain their positions and their thinking.
2. Guiding student interpretation and reasoning: Does the material include tasks
and/or question sequences to guide student interpretation and reasoning about
experiences with phenomena and readings?
The teacher’s guide pages in the Food for Plants text regularly provide specific
suggestions to the teacher about how to guide student interpretation and reasoning.
These suggestions are derived from the research about student learning about this
particular topic. In addition, the student text pages are structured in ways that guide
student reasoning, again with a focus on the research about commonly held student
ideas that might get in the way of their understanding of the concept of
photosynthesis.
Activity Nine, titled “Dr. van Helmont: Is soil food for plants?”, provides a good
example of the guidance provided to both students and the teacher. Instead of
simply describing the van Helmont experiment and its results, as traditional texts
might do, the text engages students in reasoning about this historical experiment.
First, on pp. S32-S33, students are asked to make predictions about the experiment:
A small tree is planted in a bucket of soil. It is watered and given sunlight over a
period of five years. Will the weight of the tree go up or down? Will the weight of the
soil go up or down? Why? The teacher’s guide (T33) points out that students who
believe that plants get some or all of their food from the soil will predict that the
weight of the tree will go up and the weight of the soil will go down. In fact, most
students in my research make this prediction. On p. S34, the students see what to
most of them is a surprising result: The weight of the tree goes up, but the weight of
the soil stays essentially the same. The text then prompts students to make sense of
these surprising findings through a series of carefully structured questions. Note that
the second question on p. S34 guides students to consider the “correct” conclusion,
if they have not already done so:
1. What do you think van Helmont concluded? Is soil a food for plants? Why or
why not?
2. Van Helmont decided that soil is NOT a food for plants. The tree did not use
any of the soil to grow bigger. In order to grow bigger, the tree (like all living
things) needs ________________ that is in food.
Think about our scientific definition of food.
Does van Helmont’s experiment give us evidence to say that soil is or is not
food for plants? Explain your thinking.
The teacher’s guide helps the teacher anticipate unexpected student responses as
well as the desired response to these questions. In this case, there are a wide range
 of unexpected responses to consider. Some students will argue that the tree did get
its food from the soil, but that minerals have no weight, and others assert that the
tree DID “eat” the soil but it pooped out its waste products so that is why the weight
of the soil did not change. The teacher’s guide provides interpretations of these
responses, focusing on how students are making sense. In addition, the teacher’s
guide explains that despite the instructional activity, students will likely still be holding
onto two commonly-held student ideas (p. T35). The guide suggests how the teacher
might choose to address the first issue, about minerals and fertilizers, by providing
students with a more complicated definition of food. Regarding the water issue, the
guide helps the teacher to accept student confusion at this point, noting that this
confusion can be resolved after the idea of photosynthesis has been introduced:
Addressing the Nutrients Issue
Students may have questions about what minerals and fertilizers do for the plant if
they are not “food.” Why do people spend so much money on fertilizers and
minerals? Don't they help plants grow?
With some students it is better to set the nutrient issue aside and keep the focus on
the energy issue. Your students, however, may be ready to consider a more
complicated definition of food…..
Addressing the Water Issue
Most students are reluctant to abandon the idea that water is food for the plants.
Telling them that water does not have energy in it is not very convincing to them.
They argue that maybe it doesn't have energy for people, but it does for plants.
There is no one single activity that will convince students otherwise. The strategy
employed in this unit is to repeatedly raise questions about the water, so that
students are at least questioning their original certainty that water is food. This
questioning stance towards water will enable them to hear photosynthesis as a way
to solve the puzzle they are experiencing: “Water must be food for the plants
because they cannot live without it, but water does not provide energy to living things
so water cannot be the food. I'm confused.”
Confusion is a good sign at this point!
3. Encouraging students to think about what they've learned: Does the material
suggest ways to have students check their own progress?
The Food for Plants Student Text and Teacher’s Guide routinely includes a section
called “Reflect and Connect.” These sections prompt the teacher and students to
reflect on what they are learning and to make connections from one lesson to the
next. As the Teacher’s Guide introductory pages state:
Each lesson should support students in reflecting on their thinking processes: Have
today’s activities given you any new ideas about our central question? What is
confusing? How did you do today in thinking and acting in scientific ways to explore
ideas about our central question? Do you have any new evidence to support or
challenge any of our hypotheses about how plants get their food? This reflection can
take many different forms including class discussion, small group discussion, small
group problem solving or concept mapping task, and individual writing/drawing in a
science journal. (Teacher’s Introduction, p. 15)
Examples of these “Reflect and Connect” sections appear in almost every activity.
On p. S46, questions help students think about what they have just learned about
 photosynthesis and to connect that with their initial ideas about how plants get their
food.
Toward the end of the unit, students are asked to look at a book with photographs of
bean plants at different stages of development. Thinking about what they have
learned, students are expected to describe how the plant is getting its food at each
stage of development (p. S50).
The entire unit ends with a Reflect and Connect activity titled, “Revisiting Your Initial
Ideas” (p. S73-74). In this activity students are guided to reread what they initially
wrote about how plants get their food and to now write about their new
understandings about this question.

Concluding Remarks

Textbooks can be improved using the Project 2061 guidelines for analyzing curriculum
materials. Taking the Project 2061 criteria seriously means paying attention to research on
student thinking about particular topics in the science curriculum. This research on students’
ideas can provide the central focus in the development of learner-centered curriculum
materials.
However, this research base is incomplete. There are many topics in the science curriculum
that have not been studied carefully enough. In these cases, curriculum materials
development needs to include research activities. It may be impractical for publishers to
conduct the in-depth studies of student learning and thinking that would be required.
Therefore, I propose that new partnerships between researchers and curriculum developers
be developed so that teachers and students can have access to the best quality curriculum
materials. While there is much yet to be learned about the learning process and the role of
curriculum materials in that process, it would be unfortunate if what we already know about
student learning fails to make its way into the curriculum materials development process.

A learner-centered curriculum based on

award-winning literature
A learner-centered focus in reading creates a dialogue between students and teachers. This focus
in classrooms can heighten awareness of the needs of individual readers, providing the impetus
for teacher knowledge of the literature itself. Teachers need knowledge about the subjects they
teach, but teachers at the elementary level especially need a broad knowledge of children's
literature. Additionally, teachers at the middle and high school levels need to develop knowledge
of young adult literature, and then craft the curriculum to support a knowledge base that is
learner-centered and emphasizes quality reading.
Lack of children and adolescent literature knowledge is problematic in many schools. Richards
(1994) stated that many teacher preparation programs did not provide instruction on using
literature in the curriculum and, almost overnight, teachers have been asked to become literature
experts, knowing the perfect book for every situation, every reader and every curriculum area.
And, not just the perfect book, but also an extensive repertoire of perfect books. Teachers must
continue to develop professionally if they want to maximize their students' learning. It is almost
impossible to know all of the literature that has been published, but knowing about many
different genres will assist teachers.
Using literature in the classroom has many advantages. Research indicates that children use the
language they hear and read. Therefore, teachers should be aware of various types of literature in
the classroom. Selecting books for the classroom and guiding children in their reading require an
understanding of the literacy elements of children's literature. Karrer (1985) lists the criteria used
in Teachers' Choices For Choosing Quality Literature:
1. Books with literary quality that can be used effectively.
2. Books with aesthetic or literary qualities which might be neglected by their readers without
help from a knowledgeable and sympathetic guide.
3. Books that elicit thoughtful responses from children.
4. Books that contain elements that children could grasp with guidance.
5. Books that provide pleasure and lead to discoveries about literature.
Additionally, Routman (1988) states that literature allows meaning to dominate in the
classrooms, and promotes language development and fluency in reading. However, it is not
enough for teachers to understand the literacy elements; they also must appreciate and
demonstrate excitement about the literature they use. Invariably the purpose of teaching literature
includes both increasing students' appreciation of it and developing other attitudes. Greater
appreciation of literature increases pleasure in reading, which causes students to turn to books
instead of away from them (Norton, 1983).
Teachers are not always prepared to work with literature based language arts curriculums
(Beach, 1993). Teachers who are not familiar with their teaching materials will not use them
correctly. The International Reading Association and the National Council of Teachers of
English have recommended that literature courses be required in all teacher education programs
(1993). Not only must a philosophy be developed by the individual teacher, but a practical action
plan must be developed to integrate literature into the elementary language arts curriculum.
Elementary teachers need to know a wide variety of authors and illustrators and their works, and
need to know how to prepare relevant activities based on this literature. Teachers who have
knowledge of a wide variety of books will be able to impart success to their students. Ouzts
(1994) stated that, as educators, we must sensitize children to themselves and to others through
books. Books may offer possible solutions to problems or even present the solution that could
lessen a person's inner turmoil and thus break many attitudinal barriers to learning. The best
chance of breaking attitudinal barriers is through the use of literature. The Caldecott Medal and
Newbery Medal books are excellent books to begin searching for materials. These books have
been judged as some of the best books in children's literature.
In today's schools many teachers are confronted with children who are depressed and often
stressed. This situation would be easier to acknowledge if the teacher had knowledge of books
considered as bibliotherapeutic literature. Ouzts (1984) defines bibliotherapy as therapy through
books and says that it is an effective technique that can be used to help children cope with their
problems and thus promote mental health. It is important that a teacher be able to select
bibliotherapeutic books. Jalongo states that there are three criteria to be used in selecting books
for bibliotherapy: potential for controversy, accuracy or credibility, and value to literature
(1983).
One must realize that bibliotherapy is not the only reason that teachers should be familiar with
literature. Reading should not only be required, but it should be fun. Unfortunately, many
children have differing views on reading. Children who are considered as excellent readers
believe that reading is a way of learning, a private pleasure, and a social activity (Lamme, 1987).
Conversely, children in low reading groups think that reading is saying the words correctly,
doing schoolwork, and a source of status (1987). The way that teachers can break through this
barrier is to make reading fun. This almost impossible feat requires a large library of books. The
teacher must build a classroom library where books are easily accessible. These books need to be
of high literary quality and interesting to the students. Overall, the teacher must be
knowledgeable about literature.
Teachers should not only be interested in literature that they enjoy, but also literature that
children in their classes can enjoy. Multicultural children's literature is extremely important in
the elementary school. Children must be able to coexist with various ethnic and cultural groups.
This will benefit the children of the particular ethnic group because by reading stories about their
own culture they are able to see life through other people who share their experiences.
Multicultural literature should contain:
1. Positive portrayals of characters with authentic and realistic behaviors, to avoid stereotypes of
a particular cultural group.
2. Authentic illustrations to enhance the quality of the text, since illustrations can have a strong
impact on children.
3. Pluralistic themes to foster belief in cultural diversity as a national asset as well as to reflect
the changing nature of this country's population.
4. Contemporary as well as historical fiction that captures changing trends in the roles played by
minority groups in America.
5. High literary quality, including strong plots and well-developed characterization.
6. Historical accuracy when appropriate.
7. Reflections of the cultural values of the characters.
8. Settings in the United States that help readers build an accurate conception of country and the
legacy of various minority groups (Beilke (1986), Harada (1995), Harris (1991), and Pang,
Colvin, Tran and Barba (1992)).
These suggestions are very useful for teachers selecting multicultural literature and are
appropriate for classroom use.
Selecting quality multicultural children's literature presents many problems, but one must
understand that positive gains can be made in using this literature. Teachers who are
knowledgeable about children's and adolescent literature can increase their students' performance
in school. Benner (1992) stated that the failure of professionals to acknowledge and value
diversity has historically contributed to the poor school performance of minority children.
Additionally, Kruise (1990) stated that quality literature is essential to an effective language arts
program.
One part of teaching literature is keeping the student's attention long enough to develop a
genuine interest. The classrooms that are able to accomplish this have many commonalities. The
teachers:
1. created opportunities for students to practice reading skills through self-selected reading
during an allotted time
2. presented literature daily,
3. established attractive, accessible library centers, and
4. provided literature-related activities (Hickman, 1981).
The teachers were not immediately able to develop a learner-centered curriculum based on
literature without initially developing their classroom's image and their literature knowledge
base. There were specific behaviors that facilitated a student's quest for literary knowledge. The
teachers:
1. displayed books attractively and provided ample time for children to read
2. presented literature daily,
3. discussed books with children, and
4. provided time to engage in book-related activities (1981).
These behaviors were indicative of successful classrooms.
Research indicates that children's literature is extremely important to a child's overall language
development. Tieman (1987) discussed the lack of serious study of children's literature in
elementary schools across the country and stated that the study of literature is given little, if any,
serious attention. Many teachers who have taken numerous reading courses still have limited
knowledge of children's literature. Ouzts conducted research in the area of children and young
adult literature knowledge, and devised two surveys to test teacher knowledge of both the
Caldecott and Newbery books. The surveys and the results of the surveys are listed.
Ouzts (1994) analyzed teacher knowledge of award-winning children's literature. From this
research one can conclude that fewer than half of the sample population recognized the Caldecott
Award Books, while less than one-third of the sample population recognized the Newbery
Award Books. The data show that many teachers may not have current knowledge of many of
the Caldecott and Newbery award-winning books.
In order for teachers to see the importance of literature, and to feel comfortable about it, more
extensive training must occur. This training should revolve around five basic goals of a
literature-based program. These goals are as follows:
1. To provide children with a range of literature experiences that builds on and extends their
knowledge base, including an awareness of people and other living things, of events, and of ideas
not present in their own life experience.
2. To bring children's prior knowledge, life experience, and values into sharper focus through
active comprehension by examining and contrasting the many aspects of life represented through
literature via language.
3. To provide children with pleasure through the joy of language; and to encourage the
appreciation of life experience by isolating, magnifying, or contrasting, "slices of life" for
aesthetic observation.
4. To develop children's self-understanding through insight into their own behavior as they
encounter a broad range of human behavior.
5. To develop children's awareness of language as a powerful means of human expression as they
experience the skillful use of imagery, drama, humor, and pathos (Ruddell, 1995).
Using children and young adult literature offers benefits to many children and adolescents. These
students often become lifelong readers, and teachers often become enthusiastic about using
literature in the classroom. This increased enjoyment provides opportunities to read and share
books, develops a knowledge of genres, and provides instructional practices that make
differences in what students learn as well what teachers actually teach.