Here’s a little gem of a study from the latest issue of Usability News. Basically, it demonstrates that student-centered teaching approaches can go too far, negatively impacting learning outcomes:
In this study two different class formats, each with differing instructor roles, were compared. Our hypothesis was that the more student-centered the class format, the more performance and collaboration amongst students would be enhanced. Our findings contrast this idea. This study supports the notion that, in order for technological integration in the classroom to be effective, the instructor must take a prominent role in the class structure. Technology and computer-mediated instruction cannot replace what is contributed by the presence and formal guidance of the lecturer. Technology is a powerful tool for enhancing educational settings, but the instructor must guide the students when using these tools.
The short lecture and list of objectives offered at the beginning of each “hybrid” class not only changed the teacher-student interaction and the way the technology in the class was used, but also altered the student-student interaction. The experience of all students receiving the same lecture every class period may have fostered a more cohesive group than a setting wherein a group of individuals sat in a classroom and worked at their own pace.
Now, this study happened to focus on a live classroom with some online enhancements, but I strongly suspect that the same applies (perhaps even more than in the live class) in distance learning as well. While I am often an advocate for a more student-centered approach in distance learning, the fact is that the “guide on the side” metaphor isn’t quite right. Students need a balance; they need some guidance. I’d say “guide leading the way” is a more balanced goal.