Abstract
This paper adopts Heideggerian authentic and inauthentic solicitude to explain how the teacher-centred learning (TCL) approach serves as a possible necessary condition for the student-centred learning (SCL) approach through hermeneutic phenomenology as the methodological direction. The two approaches should be seen as sharing an existential relationship, rather than conflictual. For one, TCL can be characterized as more inauthentic solicitude by which teachers as authoritative sources of knowledge as “The They” dominate education discourses, leaping in for students as passive learners in the inauthentic mode. For the other, SCL can be characterized as more authentic solicitude by which teachers as facilitators enlighten and leap ahead for students as active beings who reclaim the grip of mine-ness to initiate self-directedness in learning and intersubjective interaction with others in the authentic mode. Students’ passive role in learning from “The They” lays a solid foundation for later authentic solicitude in active learning which necessarily emerges from accumulated tradition and experience. Existentially, TCL constitutes a pool of “The They” out of which SCL becomes possible.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For instance, “[……] many institutions or educators claim to be putting student-centred learning into practice, but in reality, they are not” (Lea et al., 2003).
- 2.
Jones (2007) mentioned that “It’s a place where we [as teachers actively] consider the needs of the students, as group and as individuals, and encourage them to participate in the learning process all the time.”.
- 3.
For instance, apart from “transmission of knowledge to supporting and guiding self-regulated student learning” (Van Eekelen et al, 2005: 447), three basic attitudinal conditions of SCL by Aspy (1972) are firstly realness between teachers as facilitators and students who share genuine teacher-student relationships and communication, secondly acceptance and prizing that recognize students’ hard work and personalities, and thirdly empathic understanding from teachers which allows students’ voices to be heard.
- 4.
Change of teaching methods, materials and assessment formats in SCL implies flexible learning as another characteristic of SCL. To achieve flexibility in learning, students with autonomy may expect to negotiate with teachers on matters including but not limited to topical areas to be covered, use of materials, teaching schedules, and weighting of assessment tasks, based on contexts and individual needs of students (Guest, 2005, 287). The aim is to bring in more flexible, contextualized, and formative assessment (Ellery, 2008).
- 5.
- 6.
Heidegger’s philosophy which this paper concerns, in the same way suggests that this is “to let that which shows itself be seen from itself in the very way in which it shows itself from itself” (Heidegger, BT: 58).
- 7.
Dasein indicates that human beings’ ongoing existence is essentially and constantly interconnected to the world and becoming itself, which is the most fundamental and undeniable mode of existence unless human beings are no longer alive and living and by no means Being-possible without consciousness due to actual death (Stefani & Cruz, 2019).
- 8.
Such inextricable link to the co-existence with one another is attested by (Heidegger, 1996: 118)’s “The world of Dasein is a with-world. Being-in is Being-with others. The inner-worldly being-in-itself of others is …… [with-Dasein]”.
- 9.
Average everydayness refers to a fundamental and primordial daily experience of Dasein with regard to humans’ ultimate existence as usual as the natural use of a toothbrush, the implementation of teaching duties and footballers’ daily training, which are taken for granted without being called into question. This experience witnesses the close and connected convergence between Dasein as the Subject and Things as the external Objects, before a Subject-Object dichotomy by which humans hold their own Subject positions to view Objects as external and alienable (Schmidt, 2006: 51).
- 10.
This greatly echoes with Abergel (2020)’s suggestion on students’ “absorption in its world of concern and the “They” [as teachers], the shared, public interpretations that govern the intelligibility of its world”.
- 11.
This is to clarify that Dasein’s mine-ness cannot be lost, but the grip of it can be lost, since authentic and inauthentic ways of living are equally built upon Dasein’s mine-ness—“always-being-on-own-being” (Heidegger, 1996: 42; Schmidt, 2006: 63). Dasein is essentially “in each case mine” (Heidegger, 1962: 67/42).
- 12.
I refer to pre-understanding as a human being’s incessant and constant flow of subliminal primordial understanding which naturally aids Dasein to experience the world primordially at every moment before a Subject-Object dichotomy happens (Stefani & Cruz, 2019). This kind of understanding is different from the understanding of a thematic and theoretical Object (Schmidt, 2006: 63). Such subliminal primordial understanding precedes and serves as a necessary condition for all derived thematic and theoretical understanding to address clear external Objects in front of “me” as Subject in a scientific fashion (Heidegger, 1996: 134).
- 13.
Dasein in its full absorption in its own everyday concern cares most about its own “pre-established individual role” and does not reflect on what its role of a community is about, its originality and the rationale behind it (Stroh, 2015: 252), as attested in “‘the Others’ whom one thus designates in order to cover up the fact of one’s belonging to them essentially oneself, are those who proximally and for the most part ‘are there’ in everyday Being-with-one-another” (Heidegger, 1962: 164/126).
- 14.
Distantiality leads Dasein to focus on the ways of being non-relationally different from the Other members of the community and establishes an individualized perspective (“I” view) for it to define and differentiate itself from the rest of the community (Stroh, 2015: 252).
- 15.
This is attested in: “Constant care as to the way one differs from [Others]” (Heidegger, 1962: 163/126).
- 16.
Domination and dependency (subjection) co-occur to Dasein because of Others. Heidegger suggested that “Others” refers to everybody with oneself included (Stroh, 2015: 248) such that every Dasein is everybody else’ Others—“I” am the Others to other people, and other people are the Others to “me”. With this dual “identity” that Dasein possesses, domination and dependency (subjection) can co-occur to Dasein. Therefore, with the reasons: (1) There are co-occurring activities of domination and dependency happening to a community; (2) There is the dual “identity” in a case of Dasein; (3) Hence, inauthentic Dasein’s self is lost in the They “who is no one in particular and therefore precisely anyone” (Krahn, 2007: 148). On the other hand, primordially, all Dasein experiences the same that it cannot distinguish itself in its own average everydayness and absorption—Sameness. Therefore, there exists seeming tension between (1) individualization, nonrelational differences and distantiality and (2) sameness, as attested in: “Dasein’s anxious concern about its difference vis a vis the Other leads it, paradoxically, into the sameness of the they-self. Measuring itself in terms of the Other, Dasein falls into subjection [Botmassigkeit] to Other” (Fynsk, 1982: 191).
- 17.
This is attested in: “But this distantiality which belongs to Being- with, is such that Dasein, as everyday Being-with- one-another, stands in subjection [Botmassigkeit] to Others” (Heidegger, 1962: 164/126).
- 18.
Stroh (2015: 243) argues that when living authentically, the authentic human existence is “cognizant of the way our identities are always formed within a pre-existing community”.
- 19.
According to Stroh (2015), the rationale for marking the word “re-claim” is that Dasein must proximally and for the most part experience its own individualized roles isolated from a community in its average everyday lives, and then reclaim the communal intersubjective self in a collective community which has been already inherent there in every single Dasein.
References
Abel, E. M., & Campbell, M. (2009). Student-centred learning in an advanced social work practice course: Outcomes of a mixed methods investigation. Social Work Education, 28(1), 3–17.
Abergel, D. C., & Circle, T. H. (2020). The Confluence of authenticity and inauthenticity in Heidegger’s Being and Time. Gatherings: The Heidegger Circle Annual, 10, 74–110.
Abrantes, J. L., Seabra, C., & Lages, L. F. (2007). Pedagogical affect, student interest, and learning performance. Journal of Business Research, 60(9), 960–964.
Aho, K. (2009). Heidegger’s neglect of the body. SUNY Press.
Al-Zu’be, A. F. M. (2013). The difference between the learner-centred approach and the teacher-centred approach in teaching English as a foreign language. Educational Research International, 2(2), 24–31.
Anowai, E., & Chukwujekwu, S. (2019). The concept of authentic and inauthentic existence in the philosophy of Martin Heidegger: The ‘quarrel’ of communitarians and libertarians. Review of European Studies, 11. Canadian Center of Science and Education.
Armstrong, J. S. (2012). Natural learning in higher education. In N. M. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning (vol. 1, pp. 5–10). Springer.
Asikainen, H., & Gijbels, D. (2017). Do students develop towards more deep approaches to learning during studies? A systematic review on the development of students’ deep and surface approaches to learning in higher education. Educational Psychology Review, 29(2), 1–30.
Aspy, D. N. (1972). Toward a technology for humanizing education, champaign (IL). Research Press Company.
Attard, A., Ioio, E. D., Geven, K., & Santa, R. (2010). Student centred learning: An insight into theory And practice. Education International. European Students’ Union.
Barr, R., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 27(6), 13–25.
Bevan, R., Badge, J., Cann, A., Willmott, C., & Scott, J. (2008). Seeing eye-to-eye? Staff and student views on feedback. Bioscience Education, 12(1).
Bontekoe, R. (1996). Dimensions of the hermeneutic circle. Humanities Press.
Boyer, E. B. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Brandes, D., & Ginnis, P. (1986). A guide to student centred learning. Blackwell.
Bransford, J. D., Vye, N., & Bateman, H. (2002) Creating high-quality learning environments: Guidelines from research on how people learn. In P. A. Graham & Stacey (Eds.), The knowledge economy and postsecondary education: Report of a workshop (pp. 159–197). National Academy Press.
Cannon, R. (2000). Guide to support the implementation of the learning and teaching plan year 2000. The University of Adelaide.
Cardoso, A. P., Ferreira, M., Abrantes, J. L., Seabra, C., & Costa, C. (2011). Personal and pedagogical interaction factors as determinants of academic achievement. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1596–1605.
Cassidy, R., & Ahmad, A. (2019). Evidence for conceptual change in approaches to teaching. Teaching in higher education, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2019.1680537.
Collins, J., & Selina, H. (1998). Heidegger for beginners (pp. 81–89).
Crippen, K. J., & Earl, B. L. (2007). The impact of web-based worked examples and self-explanation on performance, problem solving, and self-efficacy. Computers & Education, 49(3), 809–821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.018
Cucen, A. K. (2017). Is Heidegger's hermeneutics an interpretation of being of Dasein? European Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 2(5). ISSN 2414-8385
Dallmayr, F. (1980). Heidegger on intersubjectivity. Human Studies, 3, 221–246.
Dreyfus, H. L. (1991). Being-in-the-world: A commentary on Heidegger’s being and time. MIT Press.
Ellery, K. (2008). Assessment for learning: A case study using feedback effectively in an essay style test. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33, 421–429.
Elpidorou, A., & Freeman, L. (2015). Affectivity in Heidegger I: Moods and emotions in being and time. Philosophy Compass, 10(10), 661–671.
Exeter, D. J., Ameratunga, S., Ratima, M., Morton, S., Dickson, M., Hsu, D., & Jackson, R. (2010). Student engagement in very large classes: The teachers’ perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 35(7), 761–775.
Frambach, J. M., Driessen, E. W., Chan, L. C., & van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2012). Rethinking the globalisation of problem-based learning: How culture challenges self-directed learning. Medical Education, 46, 738–747.
Freeman, L. (2011). Reconsidering relational autonomy: A feminist approach to selfhood and the other in the thinking of Martin Heidegger. Inquiry, 54(4), 361–383.
Fuster, D. (2019). Qualitative research: Hermeneutical phenomenological method. Propósitos y Representaciones, 7(1), 201–229. https://doi.org/10.20511/pyr2019.v7n1.267
Fynsk, C. (1982). The self and its witness; on Heidegger's being and time. Boundary 2(3), 185–207. https://doi.org/10.2307/302786
Gadamer, H. G. (1975). Truth and method. Sheed & Ward.
Garrett, T. (2008). Student-centred and teacher-centred classroom management: A case study of three elementary teachers. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 43(1), 34–47.
Guest, R. (2005). Will flexible learning raise student achievement? Education Economics, 13(3), 287–297.
Guignon, C. (2007). Authenticity, moral values, and psychotherapy. In C. Guignon (Ed.), The cambridge companion to Heidegger (pp. 268–292). Cambridge University Press.
Harden, R. M., & Laidlaw, J. M. (2013). Be fair to students: Four principles that lead to more effective learning. Medical Teacher, 35, 27–31.
Harkema, S. J. M., & Schout, H. (2008). Incorporating student-centred learning in innovation and entrepreneurship education. European Journal of Education, 43(4), 513–526.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.) Harper & Row Publishers.
Heidegger, M. (1996). Being and time (Joan Stambaugh, Trans.). State of New York Press.
Heidegger, M. (1967). Sein und Zeit, 7th edn. Neomarius Verlag
Huntington, P. (2001). History of the feminist reception of Heidegger and a guide to Heidegger’s thought. In N. J. Holland & P. Huntington (Eds.), Feminist interpretation of Martin Heidegger. Penn State University Press.
Jalani, N. H., & Sern, L. C. (2015). Efficiency comparisons between example-problem-based learning and teacher-centred learning in the teaching of circuit theory. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 204, 153–163.
Johnson, E. (2013). The student-centred classroom. Social Studies and History, 1, 19.
Jones, L. (2007). The student-centred classroom. Oxford University Press.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., Tuovinen, J. E., & Sweller, J. (2001). When problem solving is superior to studying worked examples. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 579–588.
Kant, I. (2003). On education. Dover.
Kember, D. (2009). Promoting Student-Centred Forms of Learning Across an Entire University. Higher Education, 58, 1–13.
Kember, D., & Kwan-Por, K. (2000). Lecturers’ approaches to teaching and their relationship to conceptions of good teaching. Instructional Science, 28, 469–290.
Koch, T. (1996). Implementation of a hermeneutic inquiry in nursing: Philosophy, rigor, and representation. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 24, 174–184.
Kwan, R., & Mafe, C. (2016). Rote learning: A necessary evil. Advances in Medical Education and Practice, 7, 429–432.
Krahn, R. (2007). Heidegger with Dewey: Mitsein, solicitude, and education. Revista Filosofía Uis, 6(1).
Lak, M., Soleimani, H., & Parvaneh, F. (2017). The effect of teacher-centeredness method versus learner-centeredness method on reading comprehension among Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Advances in English Language Teaching, 5(1), 1–10.
Lau, H. S. (2020). Comparing the effectiveness of student-centred learning (SCL) over teacher-centred learning (TCL) of economic subjects in a private university in Sarawak. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 10(10), 147–160.
Lea, S. J., Stephenson, D., & Troy, J. (2003). Higher education students’ attitudes to student-centred learning: Beyond ‘educational bulimia’? Studies in Higher Education, 28(3), 321–334.
Lemos, A. R., Sandars, J. E., Alves, P., & Costal, M. J. (2014). The evaluation of student-centredness of teaching and learning: A new mixed-methods approach. International Journal of Medical Education, 5, 157–164.
Lizzo, A., & Wilson, K. (2008). Feedback on assessment: Students’ perceptions of quality and effectiveness. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33, 263–275.
Ludigo, H., Mugimu, C. B., & Mugagga, A. M. (2019). Teacher centred strategy and academic achievement of students in public Universities of Uganda. Direct Research Journal of Education and Vocational Studies, 1(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3497108
Maclellan, E., & Soden, R. (2004). The importance of epistemic cognition in student-centred learning. Instructional Science, 32(3), 253–268.
Machemer, P. L., & Crawford, P. (2007). Student perceptions of active learning in a large cross-disciplinary classroom. Active Learning in Higher Education, 8(1), 9–30.
Martínez, M. (1996). Investigación cualitativa. El comportamiento humano (2nd ed.). Trillas.
McCombs, B. L., & Whisler, J. S. (1997). The learner-centred classroom and school: Strategies for increasing student motivation and achievement. Jossey-Bass Inc. Publishers.
Mezirow, J. (1981). A critical theory of adult learning and education. Columbia University Teachers College.
Milanese, S., Gordon, S., & Pellatt, A. (2013). Undergraduate physiotherapy student perceptions of teaching and learning activities associated with clinical education. Physical Therapy Reviews, 18(6), 439–444.
Moffett, J., & Wagner, B. J. (1992). Student-centred language arts. K-12. Boynton/Cook Publishers Heinemann.
Ng’umbi, M., & Andala, O. H. (2016). The teaching methods used in universities in Rwanda and their effect on the students’ academic performance. World Journal of Educational Research, 3(5), 1–18.
O’Brien, M. (2014). Leaping ahead of Heidegger: Subjectivity and intersubjectivity in being and time. International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 22(4), 534–551. https://doi.org/10.1080/09672559.2014.948719
Oerther, S. (2020). Analysis methods in hermeneutic phenomenological research: Interpretive profiles. Frontiers of Nursing, 7(4), 293–298. https://doi.org/10.2478/FON-2020-0038
O’Neill, G., & McMahon, T. (2005). Student-centred learning: What does it mean for students and lecturers. Emerging Issues in the Practice of University Learning and Teaching, 1.
Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (2005). Biology students’ utilization of tutors’ formative feedback: A qualitative interview study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30, 369–386.
Papert S. (1989). Constructionism: A new opportunity for elementary science education. In A proposal to the national science foundation. Cambridge, Massachusetts, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Media Laboratory, Epistemology and Learning Group.
Pellert, A. (2009). Organisational development and promoting change: The deeper dimensions of the bologna process. In European University Association (Ed.), EUA bologna handbook: Making bologna work, (vol. 1.7–1, pp.1–20).
Pham, T. T. H., & Renshaw, P. (2013). How to enable Asian teachers to empower students to adopt student-centred learning. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(11), 65–85.
Protheroe, N. (2007). Research report: How children learn. Principal, 86(5), 40–44.
Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (2014). Qualitative variation in approaches to university teaching and learning in large first-year classes. Higher Education, 67(6), 783–795. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9690-0
Postareff, L., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2008). Variation in teachers’ descriptions of teaching: Broadening the understanding of teaching in higher education. Learning and Instruction, 18(2), 109–120. 10.1016/j. learn instruc.2007.01.008
Randall, L., & Zundel, P. (2012). Students’ perceptions of the effectiveness of assessment feedback as a learning tool in an introductory problem-solving course. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 3(1), 1–16.
Rizescu, A., & Rizescu, M. (2009). Study on the modernization of academic didactics from higher military education through the introduction of learner-centred education. Revista Academiei Fortelor Terestre, 4(56), 135–141.
Rogers, C. (1983). As a teacher, can I be myself? In Freedom to learn for the 80s. Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company
Schmidt, L. T. (2006). Understanding hermeneutics. Acumen Publishing Limited.
Silén, C., & Uhlin, L. (2008). Self-directed learning—a learning issue for students and faculty! Teaching in Higher Education, 13(4), 461–475. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510802169756
Silverman, D. (1999). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analyzing talk, text, and interaction. Sage.
Smith, J. K., & Heshusius, L. (1986). Closing down the conversation: The end of the quantitative-qualitative debate among educational inquirers. Educational Researcher, 15(1), 4–12.
Stefani, J., & Cruz, N. O. (2019). Understanding and language in Heidegger: Existence, ontological openness and hermeneutics. Bakhtiniana: Revista de Estudos do Discurso, 14(2), 112–127.
Stroh, K. M. (2015). Intersubjectivity of Dasein in Heidegger’s being and time: How authenticity is a return to community. Human Studies, 38, 243–259.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285.
Tarmizi, R. A., & Bayat, S. (2012). Collaborative problem-based learning in mathematics: A cognitive load perspective. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 32(2011), 344–350.
Tsui, L. (2002). Fostering critical thinking through effective pedagogy: Evidence from four institutional case studies. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(6), 740–763.
Uiboleht, K., Karm, M., & Postareff, L. (2018). The interplay between teachers’ approaches to teaching, students’ approaches to learning and learning outcomes: A qualitative multi-case study. Learning Environments Research, 21(3), 321–347. 10. 1007/s10984-018-9257-1
Van Manen, M. (2003). Investigación educativa y experiencia vivida. Ciencia humana para una pedagogía de la acción y de la sensibilidad. Idea Books.
Van Eekelen, I. M., Boshuizen, H. P. A., & Vermunt, J. D. (2005). Self-regulation in higher education teacher learning’. Higher Education, 50, 447–471.
Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 147–177.
Vélez, O. Y., & Galeano, E. (2002). Investigación cualitativa. Estado del arte. Universidad de Antioquia.
Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-centred teaching: Five key changes to practice. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Wildemeersch, D., & Leirman, W. (1988). The facilitation of the life-world transformation. Adult Education Quarterly, 39(1), 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001848188039001003
Wrathall, M. A. (Ed.) (2013). The Cambridge companion to Heidegger’s being and time. Cambridge University Press.
Young, L. E., & Paterson, B. L. (2007). Teaching nursing: Developing a student-centred learning environment. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Zhao, N., Valcke, M., Desoete, A., Sang, G., & Zhu, C. (2014). Does teacher-centered teaching contribute to students’ performance in primary school? A video analysis in Mainland China. International Journal of Research Studies in Education, 3(3), 21–34.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lau, HY.J. (2024). Existential Relationship Between Teacher-Centred Learning and Student-Centred Learning Inauthentic Solicitude as a Necessary Condition of Authentic Solicitude. In: Ma, W.W.K. (eds) Engaged Learning and Innovative Teaching in Higher Education. Lecture Notes in Educational Technology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-2171-9_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-2171-9_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-97-2170-2
Online ISBN: 978-981-97-2171-9
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)