Skip to main content
Log in

Technology and student-centered learning in higher education: Issues and practices

  • Published:
Journal of Computing in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Unlike Didactic Approaches that dominated both lecture and mediated instruction in the past, systems are emerging that are designed to extend the unique inquiry priorities and needs of learners. Student-centered learning environments (SCLEs) provide complimentary activities that enable individuals to address unique learning interests and needs. They invite learner engagement through relevant problem contexts and the availability of appropriate resources. Technology enables methods through which important thinking processes can be guided. They support inquiry through information seeking, retrieval, and generation. While significant advances have been reported, problems have also surfaced. This paper introduces student-centered learning, provides examples of exemplary post-secondary student-centered learning practices, and identifies problems and issues associated with adopting, adapting, scaling, and advancing student-centered learning in higher education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aspy, D.N., Aspy, C.B., & Quimby, P.M. (1993). What doctors can teach teachers about problem-based learning.Educational Leadership, 50(7), 22–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, E., & Reiser, B. (1997, April).Inquiry through design: Situating and supporting inquiry through design projects in high school science classrooms. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. Oak Brook, IL.

  • Blumenfeld, P., Soloway, E., Marx, R., Krajcik, J., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning.Educational Psychologist, 26 (3 & 4), 369–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J., Franks, J., Vye, N., & Sherwood, R (1989). New approaches to instruction: Because wisdom can’t be told. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.),Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 470–497). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brickhouse, N.W. (1994). Children’s observations, ideas, and the development of classroom theories about light.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(6), 639–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A.L., Bransford, J.D., Ferrara, R.A., & Campione, J.C. (1983). Learning, remembering, and understanding. In J. H. Flavell & E. H. Markman (Eds.).Handbook of Child Psychology, Vol. 3, Cognitive Development (pp. 177–266). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning.Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carey, S. (1986). Cognitive science and science education.American Psychologist, 41(10), 1123–1130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, C-K, & McDaniel, E.D. (1995). Information search strategies in loosely structured settings.Journal of Educational Computing Research, 12(1), 95–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices.Cognitive Science, 8, 121–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chinn, C., & Brewer, W. (1993). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction.Review of Educational Research, 63(1), 1–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992). The Jasper Experiment: An exploration of issues in learning and instructional design.Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(1), 65–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • deGroot, A. (1965).Thought and choice in chess. The Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • deJong, T., & van Joolingen, W. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains.Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 179–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dick, W. (1991). An instructional designer’s view of constructivism.Educational Technology, 31(5), 41–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fetterman, D.M. (1998). Webs of meaning: Computer and internet resources for educational research and instruction.Educational Researcher, 27(3), 22–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garner, R., & Alexander, P.A. (1989). Metacognition: Answered and unanswered questions.Educational Psychologist, 24, 143–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, K.C. (1999).National survey of information technology in US higher education: The continuing challenge of instructional integration and user support. Encino, CA: California: Campus Computing. [ONLINE] Available at http://www.campuscomputing.net/

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, B.A. (1995). Comprehension of text in an unfamiliar domain: Effects of instruction that provides either domain or strategy knowledge.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 313–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. (1997). On claims that answer the wrong questions.Educational Researcher, 26(1), 5–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannafin, M.J. (1992). Emerging technologies, ISD, and learning environments: Critical perspectives.Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(1), 49–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannafin, M.J., Hannafin, K.M., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1997) Grounded practice and the design of constructivist learning environments.Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(3), 101–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannafin, M.J., Hill, J., & Land, S. (1997). Student-centered learning and interactive multimedia: Status, issues, and implications.Contemporary Education, 68(2), 94–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannafin, M.J., & Land, S.M. (1997). The foundations and assumptions of technology-enhanced, student-centered learning environments.Instructional Science, 25, 167–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannafin, M.J., Land, S.M., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundations, methods, and models. In C. Reigeluth’s (Ed.),Instructional-design theories and models, Volume II (pp. 115–140). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannafin, M.J., & Rieber, L.P. (1989). Psychological foundations of instructional design for emerging computer-based instructional technologies: Part I.Educational Technology Research and Development, 37, 91–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harless, W (1986). An interactive videodisc drama: The case of Frank Hall.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 13, 113–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, J.R., & Hannafin, M.J. (1997). Cognitive strategies and learning from the world wide web.Educational Technology Research & Development, 45(4), 37–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo, C., & Day, R. (1999). Contextualized questioning to scaffold learning from simulations.Computers and Education, 32, 151–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hooper, S., & Hannafin, M.J. (1991). Psychological perspectives on emerging instructional technologies: A critical analysis.Educational Psychologist, 26, 69–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jungworth, E. (1987). Avoidance of logical fallacies — a neglected aspect of science-education and science-teacher education.Research in Science and Technological Education, 5, 43–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, G., & Crawford, T. (1996). Students’ interactions with computer representations: Analysis of discourse in laboratory groups.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(7), 693–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitchener, K.S., & King, P.M. (1981). Reflective judgment: Concepts of justification and their relationship to age and education.Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 2, 89–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolodner, J., & Guzdial, M. (2000). Theory and practice of case-based learning aids. In D. Jonassen & S. Land (Eds.),Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 215–242). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koschmann, T. (1996),CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koschmann, T., Kelson, A., Feltovich, P., & Barrows, H. (1996). Computer-supported problem-based learning: A principle approach to use of computers in collaborative learning. In T. Koschmann (Ed.),CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm (pp. 83–124). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, D. (1999). A developmental model of critical thinking.Educational Researcher, 28(2), 16–26, 46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laffey, J., Tupper, T., Musser, D., & Wedman, J. (1998). A computer-mediated support system for project-based learning.Educational Technology Research & Development, 46(1), 73–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lajoie, S. (1993). Computer environments as cognitive tools for enhancing learning. In S.P. Lajoie & S.J. Derry (Eds.),Computers as Cognitive Tools (pp. 261–288). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Land, S.M., & Greene, B.A. (2000). Project-based learning with the World Wide Web: A qualitative study of resource integration.Educational Technology Research & Development, 48(1), 45–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Land, S.M., & Hannafin, M.J. (2000). Student-centered learning environments. In D. Jonassen & S. Land (Eds),Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 1–23). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Land, S.M., & Hannafin, M.J. (1997). Patterns of understanding with open-ended learning environments: A qualitative study.Educational Technology Research & Development, 45(2), 47–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Land, S.M., & Hannafin, M.J. (1996). A conceptual framework for the development of theories-in-action with open-ended learning environments.Educational Technology Research & Development, 44(3), 37–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, E., Stern, J., & Linn, M. (1993). The effect of computer simulations on introductory thermodynamics understanding.Educational Technology, 33(1), 45–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, X., Hmelo, C., Kinzer, C. & Secules, T. (1999). Designing technology to support reflection.Educational Technology Research & Development, 47(3), 43–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loh, B., Radinsky, J., Reiser, B., Gomez, L., Edelson, D., & Russell, E. (1997). The Progress Portfolio: Promoting reflective inquiry in complex investigation environments. inProceedings of the 1997 Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. [Online] Available at http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/cscl/.

  • McCaslin, M., & Good, T. (1992). Compliant cognition: The misalliance of management and instructional goals in current school reform.Educational Researcher, 21(3), 4–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M.D. (1991). Constructivism and instructional design.Educational Technology, 31(5), 45–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, (1995). Information problem solving: A wider view of library skills.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicaise, M., & Crane, M. (1999). Knowledge constructing through hypermedia authoring.Educational Technology Research & Development, 47(1), 29–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, K. (1999, February).Computer-based tools in support of internet-based problem solving. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology. St. Louis, MO.

  • Owston, R.D. (1997). The World Wide Web: A technology to enhance teaching and learning?Educational Researcher, 26(2), 27–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pea, R.D. (1985). Beyond amplification: Using the computer to reorganize mental functioning.Educational Psychologist, 20(4), 167–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D.N. (1986).Knowledge as design. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D.N. (1985). The fingertip effect: How information-processing technology shapes thinking.Educational Researcher, 14(7), 11–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D., & Simmons, R. (1988). Patterns of misunderstanding: An integrative model for science, math, and programming.Review of Educational Research, 58, 303–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petraglia, J. (1998). The real world on a short leash: The (mis)application of constructivism to the design of educational technology.Educational Technology Research & Development, 46(3), 53–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rakes, G. (1996). Using the internet as a tool in a resource-based learning environment.Educational Technology, 36(5), 52–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C.M., & Squire, K. (1998). Emerging work on the new paradigm of instructional theories.Educational Technology, 38(4), 41–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, M. (1998). Technologies for lifelong kindergarten.Educational Technology Research & Development, 46(4), 43–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W-M. (1995). Affordances of computers in teacher-student interactions: The case of Interactive PhysicsTM.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(4), 329–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G. (1986). Information technologies: What you see is not (always) what you get.Educational Psychologist, 20, 207–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G. (1997, August).Novel constructivist learning environments and novel technologies: Some issues to be concerned with. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the European Association for Research in Learning and Instruction, Athens, Greece.

  • Salomon, G., Globerson, T., & Guterman, E. (1989). The computer as a zone of proximal development: Internalizing reading-related metacognitions from a Reading Partner.Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 620–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savery, J.R., & Duffy, T.M. (1996). Problem-based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. In B.G. Wilson (Ed.),Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design (pp. 135–150). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., McLean, R., Swallow, J., & Woodruff, E. (1989). Computer-supported intentional learning environments.Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5, 51–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, D., Brophy, S., Lin, X., & Bransford, J. (1999). Software for managing complex learning: Examples from an educational psychology course.Educational Technology Research & Development, 47(2), 39–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shotsberger, P. (1996). Instructional uses of the World Wide Web: Exemplars and precautions.Educational Technology, 36(2), 47–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soloway, E., Krajcik, J., Bkumenfeld, P., & Marx, R. (1996). Technological support for teachers transitioning to project-based science practices. In T. Koschmann (Ed.),CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm (pp. 269–306). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiro, R., Feltovich, P., Jacobson, M., & Coulson, R. (1991). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains.Educational Technology, 5, 24–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Surry, D.W., & Land, S.M. (2000). Strategies for motivating higher education faculty to use technology.Innovations in Education and Training International, 37(2), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, J., Dana, T., & Tasar, M. (1999, August).An integrated Engineering/Physics course for Elementary Education majors. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT), August 3–7, San Antonio, TX.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

ABOUT THE AUTHORS Michael Hannafin is the Wheatley-Georgia Research Alliance Eminent Scholar in Technology-Enhanced Learning, Professor of Instructional Technology and Director of the Learning and Performance Support Laboratory at the University of Georgia. His research focuses on developing and testing frameworks for the design of technologyenhanced, student-centered learning environments. He earned his doctorate in Educational Technology from Arizona State University.

Susan Land is Assistant Professor of Instructional Systems at The Pennsylvania State University. Previously, she worked as a post-doctoral fellow at University of Georgia’s Learning and Performance Support Laboratory (LPSL) and held a faculty position at the University of Oklahoma. Her research focuses on the process of conceptual development with learner-centered technology environments. She earned her doctorate in Instructional Systems from Florida State University.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hannafin, M.J., Land, S.M. Technology and student-centered learning in higher education: Issues and practices. J. Comput. High. Educ. 12, 3–30 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03032712

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03032712

Keywords

Navigation