See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/318762026

Reflections and Insights on the Models of Learning: Subject-centered, Learner-

Centered and Problem-Centered Design Models
Article · July 2017

CITATIONS READS

0 18,514

1 author :

Russell Rodrigo
Stamford International University
8 PUBLICATIONS 1 CITATION

SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Russell Rodrigo on 29 July 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Reflections and Insights on the Models of Learning: Subject-centered,
Learner-Centered and Problem-Centered Design Models

Russell Tagalog Rodrigo

29 July 2017

Numbers of ongoing studies related to curriculum design models have been on the rise and have
been debated and researched by many educationists today. With the demands caused by constant change
in the society, curriculum development and implementation have also been constantly changing over
time. Hence, the unending debates of which curriculum model best addresses the needs of the society and
private sectors continue to exist. This paper starts with the current challenges in the higher education
sector, and then discusses the impacts of subject-centered, learner-centered and problem-centered design
models on teaching and learning.

In the past decades, many changes have occurred in the higher education sector (Barnett, 2011). Policy
makers have aimed to provide higher education to greater numbers of population. Hence, the birth of
online or distance learning program and other student-centered learning approaches (Barnett & Coate
2005). This aim brought changes that are more complex in the society in the aspects of economy, politics,
technology, demographic, and workforces (Devlin & Samarawickrema, 2010). These changes put
pressure on the educationists in covering wider range of language, cultural and education backgrounds,
and prevalent changes in institutional aims and visions. Today, higher education is no longer treated as
corporations, but an enterprise that offers more practical programs equipping students with relevant skills
required of the workforce. Because of this, administrators and curricula experts have been working
tremendously in curriculum development, implementation and evaluation to ensure alignment of aims
among national, business sectors, and higher education. The paragraphs that follow weigh the impacts of
the relevant above-mentioned learning models.

Subject-Centered Design Model

Today, tertiary practitioners are faced with various concurrent issues and challenges in the areas
of alternative teaching and learning paradigms. By knowing and researching the best curriculum, design
and delivery can face overwhelming and obscure information and requirements. Therefore, this section
points out concepts of subject-centered approach based on personal experience backed up with research.

According Plate (2012) subject-centered design model refers to an organized and guided learning
experiences with clear and specific learning outcomes created through systematic construction of
knowledge and experiences. This curriculum model gives various useful and effective elements in higher
Russell Tagalog Rodrigo Page | 0
 education teaching and learning. Through giving consideration on the essential characteristics of the
subject matter, it aids higher education lecturers in determining the easiest and the most appropriate and
workable ways to deliver the subject matter. By focusing on the subject, both lecturers and students can
easily stay on the same page in the grip of learning the content (Rowland, 2008). Moreover, based on
experience, certain subjects choose teachers who have the knowledge and expertise of that field and not
the other way around. Academics are drawn to a professional field in the belief that it sheds light on an
individual’s identity. This same thought is reflected on how university students today choose their major
based on the subjects offered in such program. There is even an understanding that lecturers’ gaining
higher teaching evaluation results are due to their mastery of the courses being taught. Palmer (2010)
claimed that subject-centered curriculum creates a real, vivid, and so vocal leading to both teacher and
students alike accountable in teaching and learning. Furthermore, Rowland (2008) pointed out that the
relationship between the learner and subject matter as well as teacher and subject are due to intellectual
love. This kind of intellectual love encourages participation and conversation of topics. For example,
when teachers talk about types of advertisements, students who are inclined in this topic can participate
more actively than those who lack the interest of this topic.

Additionally, there is also a notion that subject-centered teachers who possess in-depth
knowledge of the subject matter have the greatest potential to engage students and inspire learning.
Because they know the subject matter too well, they are able to demonstrate flexibility in bringing the
topic to the realities of life making learning more meaningful. Similarly, outstanding teachers make
difficult topics taught in a simplified manner that helps students convey the concepts clearly and provide
aids in their difficulties, such as scaffolding a more difficult topic (Develin & Samarawickrema, 2010).
On a personal experience, many students show fears in writing academically. However, when the
expected outcome is modelled, scaffolded, and outlined in a simplified manner, students often feel proud
of themselves having completed tasks they initially perceived difficult. In short, subject-centered learning
provides relatively easy and effective method that tertiary teachers can use to guide the development of
their teaching plans. Eventually, students are able to transcend from what they learned from specific
courses to a greater sense of autonomy over their academic studies. Besides, subject-centered approach
does not always mean the teacher does the talking the whole time. In my current university, social
sciences subjects are still applying subject-centered approach and they are delivered with standardized
and business-like approach.

On the contrary, subject-centered learning lacks integration. After all, life events are not based on
separate events but are interrelated. Every decision we make is based on multiple considerations such as
the people around us, and the environment. A conventional curriculum heavily focuses on each subject
individually, and there is a lack of integration on how one subject influences or applies the others.
Moreover, subject matters are chosen by experts or teachers and are unlikely seen valuable by students to
learn. In short, it does not foster interest from students to learn but being passive. Finally, there is too

Russell Tagalog Rodrigo Page | 1

 much authority in this approach. It does not offer wide alternatives in consideration of student diversity
and cultural backgrounds. Topics are planned and need to be covered. Students are expected to receive
and absorb all the information provided and comprehension is weighted quite heavily rather than practical
application of things learned.

Learner-Centered Design Model

Meanwhile, there is a common assumption that constructivist model helps students demonstrate
the ability of subject matter understanding through active engagement with the subject. Brown (2008)
argued that the learner-centered approach encourages learning and retention because lessons are placed at
the center of the students’ needs, inquiry and interests. Students become engage to learning as learning is
feeding their natural curiosity. Hence, teachers’ roles are to provide a breakdown of big and difficult
tasks into scaffolding manner to help students learn, reflect on their own learning and competency, and
provide more opportunities for active and deep learning. In this approach, teachers are just facilitators of
learning and students are taking accountability and responsibility of their own learning process. Devlin
and Samarawickrema (2010) also added that learner-centered model occurs when planning, delivery, and
evaluation measurements revolve around the students’ needs and abilities. This type of learning is seen
relatively essential in higher education as practitioners revolved around creating student-centered and
non-conventional assessments and meaningful learning experience.

However, some downsides of student-centered approach is teachers’ availability to provide extra

guidance or support, passion and dedication, and clear and constant communications with students
especially relating to course assessments. Providing assistance and quick communication in teaching
academic and research writing to a class of 30-35 students multiplied to 3 to 4 sections can be exhausting
and time consuming. If subject-centered approach focuses on teachers’ knowledge of the subject matter,
learner-centered approach gives emphasis on teachers’ traits which include providing conducive learning
atmosphere, teachers’ time spent on communicating what needs to be done and completed, paying
attention to students’ concerns, motivation, time management, and course organization. It always goes
back to one’s dedication and passion in inspiring learning and helping students unleash their greatest
potential. If teachers are provided with enough facilities needed, given lesser workloads, appreciated, and
driven, teachers are likely to be more motivated to give the best learning environment the students
deserve. However, if teachers lack the support and demotivated, students’ are the ones at risk. Oftentimes,
Clegg and Rowland (2010) noted that tasks’ complexity and difficulty inevitably result to students’
confrontation to teachers regarding the pain and anxiety of learning.

With the rising popularity of technology, student-centered teaching seem to cater different
learning styles and proficiency levels as this approach encourages teachers to use multimedia and various
teaching strategies that address diverse needs. The use of technology provides students more independent
study time which helps them improve autonomy in learning as well as communications skills, when at
Russell Tagalog Rodrigo Page | 2
 times there is a need to communicate for clarifications of lessons, and critical thinking skills. On the one
hand, there is also a need to create standardized learning outcomes that drive teachers to be more
innovative and creative in making student-centered classroom.

Problem-Centered Design Model

Problem-Based model is a type of student-centered learning that exposes students to inquiry type of
learning. Students identify root causes of a certain problem and look for solutions. They are also expected
to evaluate their alternative solutions and make decisions on which solution is the most workable one.
This model brings many positive impacts on students.

First, learning through this approach may decline the levels of learning in the initial period, but
over time, it increases retention and knowledge. According to Norman and Schmidt (1992), students
taught in problem-based learning activities develop long-term knowledge because such knowledge is
learned through sharing facts and ideas in-group discussions. Hence, retrieval of subsequent learning
comes easy. The chance to elaborate lessons aids comprehension of the subject matter. Moreover,
students get to participate regardless of their levels and class size. Secondly, teachers can play along
diverse types of teaching strategies. Through problem-based learning, students are exposed to real life
issues requiring real solutions. When a problem is given, students get to brainstorm ideas, and participate
actively in finding solutions. These open doors to greater avenue to excel not only academically but also
personally. It also encourages creativity and innovation in looking for solutions, critical thinking in
evaluating the pros and cons of each solution, and creativity in presenting solutions. In short, lessons can
cater different learning styles.

Moreover, problem-based learning encourages continuous engagement. Vernon and Blake,

(1993) pointed that this approach engages students by perceiving group discussions and brainstorming
activities as a break from the conventional lessons. Students are continuously engaged as they collaborate
to solve problems creatively especially when the subject interests them. However, if the activities appear
routinely and predictable, it may lead to loss of interest and boredom. Additionally, students gain many
skills transferrable to other situations or courses across their studies. Such skills include teamwork and
interpersonal skills, communication, analytical and critical thinking skills. To add research support to this,
my previous publication was based on the use PBL approach specifically service learning and its impacts
on course learning outcomes achievement. My findings were congruent with those of Vernon and Blake
(1993) and Norman and Schmidt (1992). Students in the experimental groups had higher gains in course
assessments, due to their engagement in the course throughout the semester. Learning was very practical,
student-centered, and engaging. Hence, learning becomes more meaningful and relevant to life.

However, it also possess various downsides. Students who were used to be assessed
unconventionally may perform low in written assessments such as examinations. Students’ readiness to
Russell Tagalog Rodrigo Page | 3
 this kind of learning is also another issue. Therefore, identifying students’ proficiency levels, maturity,
and prerequisite knowledge is crucial in the preparation of any problem-based learning tasks. Preparation
can be very time-consuming as assessments and activities need to be carefully aligned with the course
learning outcomes as well as the relevance and applicability of the task given. Most importantly, teachers’
knowledge of problem-based approach plays significant role in an effective delivery of this approach. If
these things are considered beforehand, the maximum effectiveness of this approach is likely achieved.
As Norman and Schmidt (1992) once claimed, there are plenty of evidence showing that PBL curricula
boost transfer of concepts to new situations or problems and encourages students to be intrinsically driven
to learning.

Conclusion

In conclusion, all of the three learning models possess advantages and drawbacks. Subjectcentered
approach benefits students by getting inspired by the lecturers who are experts of the subject matter.
However, it can cause passivity and lack of integration. Meanwhile, learner-centered model provides
more opportunities for students to engage in learning, enhance autonomy in learning, and develop a great
sense of accountability and responsibility. On the other hand, it heavily burdens the teachers in providing
support and effective communications to students. Lastly, problem-centered model displays very practical
approach to learning that encourages students to approach learning deeply, and boosts retention and high-
order thinking skills. On the contrary, it can be very time consuming and requires expertise from teachers
in planning a PBL task that has high degree of value and applicability. In short, all of these have both
shortcomings and benefits. A combination of the three may greatly address the needs of the students in
the 21st century. If expert practitioners apply learner-centered approach such as problem-based learning,
add more student engagement and high-order thinking activities, ensure clear alignment of the PBL
activities to the course learning outcomes, and provide proper monitoring and preparation, a conventional
classroom will transform into an avenue that motivates deep learning and creates life-long learners.

References
Barnett, R. & Coate, K. (2005). Engaging the curriculum in higher education. Open University Press,
Maidenhead. Retrieved from

[Link]/[Link]/reflecting/article/download/56/62

Barnett, R. (2011). The coming of the ecological university. Oxford Review of Education, 37(4), 439-
455.
Retrieved from [Link]

Russell Tagalog Rodrigo Page | 4

 Clegg, S. & Rowland, S. (2010). Kindness in pedagogical practice and academic life. British Journal of
Sociology of Education, 31(6), 719-735. Retrieved from
[Link]

Devlin, M. & Samarawickrema, G. (2010). The criteria of effective teaching in a changing higher
education context. Higher Education Research and Development, 29(2), 111-124. Retrieved from
[Link]

Palmer, P. & Zajonc, A. (2010). The heart of higher education: A call to renewal. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.

Plate, R. (2012). The evolution of curriculum development in the context of increasing social and
Environmental complexity. Creative Education, 3(8). Retrieved from
[Link]
25629

Norman, G. R. & Schmidt H. G. (1992). The psychological basis of problem-based learning: a review of
the evidence. Academic Journal: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.
67(9):557-65. Retrieved from [Link]

Rowland, S. (2008). Collegiality and intellectual love. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 29(3),

353-360. Retrieved from [Link]

Vernon, D.T. & Blake, R. L. (1993). Does problem-based learning work? A meta-analysis of evaluative
research. Academic Journal: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges. 68(7): 50-
63. Retrieved from [Link]

Russell Tagalog Rodrigo Page | 5

View publication stats

Russell Tagalog Rodrigo Page | 6