Student-centred design: paths to achieve it

Student-centered
Student-centered
design:
design:
paths to achieve it.
paths to achieve it.
Isabell Grundschober,
University for Continuing
Education, Krems (AT)
2022 eucen Autum Seminar

Universities are uniquely
positioned to equip learners
with the necessary skills and
expertise
to play an active part in [digital
transformation] processes
and adapt to our rapidly
changing societies.
Isabell Grundschober
@isabellgru #unikrems
(2022 eucen Autum Seminar program)

Student-centered
learning (SCLT) as key:
How can LLL at university remain
ahead of the labor market
demands and offer programs
relevant to the industry?
SCLT

"For the most part, we are still living in a
teacher-centred paradigm."
"mature SCLT ecosystems are not
widespread across Europe.“
"fragmented pockets" of SCLT practice in
HE
(Klemenčič et al., 2020)
SCLT - a reality in Europe?

"For the most part, we are still
living in a teacher-centred
paradigm."
"mature SCLT ecosystems are not
widespread across Europe.“
"fragmented pockets" of SCLT
practice in HE

Is student-centered learning (SCTL) actively implemented
in your institution's learning designs?
The participants made a mark for their institutions, indicating how much their
institutions implement SCTL in their institutions in %.

"Without clarity as to its
meaning and specific set
of indicators to assess
institutional practices,
almost anything can be
‘sold’ as student-centred
learning.“
(Klemenčič, 2017)

What do you associate with
student-centred learning?
autonomy and having a saying
Flexible learning, easily accessible
Co-created learning & individualization
Including experiential and work-related learning into
the learning design and validation of current learning
Support for lecturers to implement SCLT
Instructional design: Common design principles for all
disciplines
Validation of prior learning included
The participants of the Autumn
Seminar added post-its about what
they associate student-centered
learning with.
I clustered the post-its into the
following categories:

Why
The Golden
Circle
(Sinek, 2009)
What
How
Why: Goals, beliefs, attitudes, purpose
behind. Why does the organization exist?
How: How are the goals achieved?
What: Describing the service or product is is
offered by an organization (outcome)

Good Work
“work that is of excellent technical
quality, work that is ethically
pursued and socially responsible, and
work that is engaging, enjoyable, and
feels good”
(Gardner, 2007, p. 5)

The Golden
Circle and
Good Work
Hattie, J., Zierer K. (2018). 10 mindframes for visible learning. New York: Routledge.
Why/Ethics
What/Excellence
How/Engagement
Why/Ethics: Work that is ethically
pursued
How/Engagement: Work that is
ethically pursued and socially
responsible
What/Excellence: Work that is of
excellent technical quality

What is
student-centred
design?
What should be the end result?

There is no single, unanimously accepted definition,
but...
It is an approach to
designing learning
and teaching
Founded on the
concept of
student agency
Students take
influence and
responsibility

Principles of
student-
centred
learning
Learning outcomes & constructive alignment
Flexible learning pathways
Deep learning & knowledge transfer
Active, autonomous learners
Teachers als learning facilitators
Shared responsibility of learning process

Learning Outcomes and Constructive Alignment
Instructional
design
practice
Co-design
with students
and other
stakeholders
Activities and
outcomes need
to reflect the
other principles

Integrating
SCTL principles
in the learning
design
Learning outcomes & constructive alignment
Flexible learning pathways
Deep learning & knowledge transfer
Active, autonomous learners
Teachers als learning facilitators
Shared responsibility of learning process
The learning design needs to include
all aspects of SCTL. Otherwise, it will
be difficult to truly implement SCTL.

How to achieve
student-centred
design?
How to make it real?

Learning Design:
Both a Process &
a Product
(Boling und Smith, 2009)
Let's make it
participative and agile!

Phase 1: Context- & target group
analysis
Phase 2: Iterative planning & learning
design prototype
Phase 3: Implementation & formative
evaluation of the design prototype
Phase 4: Summative evaluation of the
design prototype
(based on the Successive Approximation Model, Allen & Sites, 2012)
Learning Design as a Process

Learning Outcomes
expected outcomes after the
learning process
1
Learning activities
What the students are
actually doing during
the learning process
2
Learning design:
Backwards design
based on "Constructive Alignment"
(Biggs & Tang, 200)
Assessment
How to understand
that the expected
outcomes were
achieved (and which
other outcomes)
3

Learning Outcomes
learning process
1
Learning activities
2
Learning design:
Backwards design
(Biggs & Tang, 200)
Assessment
How to understand
that the expected
outcomes were
achieved (and which
other outcomes)
3
Written in a
transparent
way
Informed by
students/ co-
written by
students
Addressing
"deep learning"
and transfer
into practice

Taxonomy of Cognitive Processes
remember understand apply analyze evaluate create
Knowledge
Factual/theoretical
Skills
Cognitive/Practical
Competence
Responsiblity/Automony
Lecturer Tutor Coach
Anderson, Krathwohl et al. (2001) and (Baumgartner 2016)
Addressing
"deep learning"
and transfer
into practice

Knowledge
Factual/theoretical
Skills
Cognitive/Practical
Competence

Analysis of
learning
outcome
statements in
a competence
framework
Skills
Cognitive/Practical
Knowledge
Factual/theoretical
Competence

Learning and
teaching
scenario
(minutes-hours)
Inclusive Hierarchy of Learning Design Levels
based on Baumgartner (2017): Module3 Presentation Slides. For the VALERU Project, slide 24.
Module
(e.g. between 3-15 ECTS points)
Curriculum
Higher Education Institution
MIKRO
MESO
MAKRO
Course
(e.g. 3 ECTS points)
Policy, EQF, educational standards

Learning Outcomes
learning process
1
Learning activities
2
Learning design:
Backwards design
(Biggs & Tang, 200)
Assessment
How to understand
that the expected
outcomes were
achieved (and which
other outcomes)
3
flexible
pathways
(communicati
on styles)
e.g. hyflex
Students are
actively shaping
their learning
path
Peer feedback
and reflection
(formative
feedback)
= learner
community
Teachers monitor
& support
Iterative, agile
way of shaping
the learning path
Aligned with
learning
outcomes
Choosing suitable
digital tools and
platforms as well
as (physical)
rooms end
environments

Learning Outcomes
learning process
1
Learning activities
2
Learning design:
Backwards design
(Biggs & Tang, 200)
Assessment
How to understand
that the expected
outcomes were
achieved (and which
other outcomes)
3
Transparent and
aligned
assessment
methods
Negotiated
assessment-
criteria

COMPASS
Course Design
Template
Learning design as a product:
A plan is collaboratively
created. The template
reminds lectures of the SCTL
principles when designing
courses.

COMPASS
Course Design
Template
Context & Target Group Analysis
The context and target group is
analyzed in order to define
relevant learning outcomes and
activities in the next step.
The persona approach can help to
gain empathy, if properly used.

COMPASS
Course Design
Template
Learning Design Prototype
The learning outcomes, activities,
pedagogical principles,
assessment methods, delivery
mode, and used (digital) tools are
chosen based on the context- and
target group analysis.

COMPASS
Course Design
Template
Information about the involved staff
We need to know what the
involved higher education staff
needs to know in order to
successfully implement the
learning design.

ats2020.eu
Student-centred learning in action
It basically is a co-design of the learning process.
The teacher is setting up an initial plan (see COMPASS course design template),
but it can have deviations based on the real learner's needs.
The learning process cannot be completely anticipated.

https://bit.ly/patternsSCTL
Useful patterns for
student-centred learning

"How"-Pitfall 1:
Unsuitable digital
tools and platforms
Tools and platforms chosen during
"digital transformation" phases are not
suitable to support SCTL

"How"-Pitfall 2:
Lecturers don't
know the target
group
Especially external lecturers often do
not receive the information about the
learned they would need to properly
design a course.

"How"-Pitfall 3:
Lecturers don't
know about
instructional design
Internal and external lecturers are used to
design courses based on "gut feeling" and
their vast experience in their field.
This is not enough for thought-through SCTL
designs.

"How"-Pitfall 4:
No time for all these
feedback loops and
iterative adaptation
of the design.
Some teachers find it difficult to include
agile learning design adaptions in their daily
teaching practice. They have limited time
resources for this kind of individualized
learning designs.

Why are we
trying to achieve
student-
centered design?
What is the purpose?

Foundational period
Challenges brought by new
demographic trends, change in
gender roles, globalization, and
digitalization in the late 1980s
and early 1990s.
Growing awareness of the
rapid obsolescence of
disciplinary knowledge >
knowledge and skills as
determinants of economic
independence (social
investment paradigm)
(Telling & Serapioni, 2019)
Institutional period
Competence-based learning as a
political strategy in the EU,
growing awareness of the
conceptual confusion of the
notion of "competence"
Convergence processes,
harmonization, mobility
(Lisbon Agenda in 2000, Key
Competence for LLL in 2006 and the
EQF in 2008)
Endorse new tools, values, and contents
Readiness to spread new norms and
standards (internalizing contents and
values which originated outside traditional
structures
Effectiveness and efficiency to respond to
its new mandate for all-encompassing
social and economic amelioration.
Transformational
course
1) Normative weakening of national
education systems & change of
organizational culture
2) Institutions will try to regain
normative authority:
1992-2000 2000-2013 2013- now
History of competence strategy in the EU

Competence-orientation:
Away from models based
on traditional
disciplinary knowledge to
one prioritising learning
outcomes.

Consequences for higher eduation
Education as
prerequisite for
success in the
economic sphere and
the basis for well-
being.
University is not an
ivory tower
anymore!
Transition from being
institutions for only a
few to institutions for
many
Heterogenous
learners:
Student-centred,
competence-
oriented
approaches are
needed

Knowledge
Factual/theoretical
Skills
Cognitive/Practical
Competence

Mass acceptance of
student-centred
learning design?
Get them with the "WHY"!

"WHY"-Pitfall 1:
The WHY cannot be
truly accepted.
The WHY of SCTL is the opposite of what
the university thinks it should be.
The traditional vision of what the university
is doesn't correspond with the new SCTL
vision of what the university is.

SCLT
Student-centered
learning (SCLT) as key:
How can LLL at university remain
ahead of the labor market
demands and offer programs
relevant to the industry?

Conflicts
Why/Ethics
What/Excellence
How/Engagement
Implementations without
"why" - which
consequences?
Conflicts between "how" and
"why"
Conflicts between "what"
and "why"
....

Organizational sensebreaking (unlearning)
Meaning void (unfreezing)
Sensegiving
Acceptance of strategy (nascent freezing)
(Mantere et al., 2012 combined with Telling & Serapioni, 2019)
We need to create a
sense of urgency.
What else could the
motor of change?
Toxic energy could be consequence
Losing students
Becoming irrelevant
Research happens faster elsewhere
Not the center of knowledge anymore
The threat of losing of normative authority of universities
Social investment paradigm of the EU
Competence-orientation
A new mandate for all-encompassing social and economic amelioration is
promoted and accepted.
New habits of creating and implementing learning design on all educational levels
Sensegiving in strategic organisational change

What pitfalls of
SCTL are there
relating to the
WHY, HOW, and
WHAT?

"Why"-Pitfall 2:
The lecturer and the university are
"gate-keepers" of knowledge. Lecturers
know. Students don't know.
"What should I learn from students?"
"How should students identify learning outcome
if they don't know anything about the subject?"
Power imbalance

"Why"-Pitfall 3:
Students and lecturers refuse student-
centered learning.
S: "Why do I have to organize everything?"
T/S: "I don't have time for this."
T/S: "This is overwhelming."
(T - not wanting to be transparent/afraid to be
transparent)
Value is not clear to stakeholders.

SCTL in a nutshell
Make use of digital tools and
techniques to understand the
target group and their
situtation
Focus on the learners Build empathy for your
learners and their situation
Stay relevant and increase the
number of students at your
institution
Use digital tools to improve
the learners' experience
Co-designed learning designs
based on autonomy and
flexibility and other SCTL
principles, they mutually
reinforce each other
Only possible if the
"WHY" is accepted by
all stakeholders

Isabell Grundschober, BSc, BEd, MA
Deputy head of the Centre for Applied Research
and Innovation in Lifelong Learning at the
University for Continuing Education Krems (AT)
isabell.grundschober@donau-uni.ac.at
isabellgru.eu
@isabellgru
Thank you!

Literature
Gordon J, Halasz G, Krawczyk M, et al. (2009) Key competences in Europe: Opening doors for lifelong learners across the school curriculum and
teacher education. Report, No. 87, 2009. Warsaw: CASE Network Reports.
Telling, K., & Serapioni, M. (2019). The rise and change of the competence strategy: Reflections on twenty-five years of skills policies in the EU.
European Educational Research Journal, 18(4), 387–406. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904119840558
Rat der Europäischen Union (2017). Empfehlung des Rates vom 22. Mai 2017 über den Europäischen Qualifikati-onsrahmen für lebenslanges
Lernen und zur Aufhebung der Empfehlung des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 23. April 2008 zur Einrichtung des Europäischen
Qualifikationsrahmens für lebenslanges Ler-nen: 2017/C 189/03. Retrieved from Rat der Europäischen Union website: https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32017H0615(01)
Europäisches Parlament, Rat der Europäischen Union (2006). Empfehlung des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 18. Dezember 2006
zu Schlüsselkompetenzen für lebensbegleitendes Lernen: OJ L 394. Ret-rieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/DE/ALL/?
uri=celex:32006H0962
Klemenčič, M., Pupinis, M., Kirdulytė, G. (2020). ‘Mapping and analysis of student-centred learning and teaching practices: usable knowledge to
support more inclusive, high-quality higher education’, NESET report, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. doi:
10.2766/67668.
Klemenčič M. (2017). 'From student engagement to student agency: conceptual considerations of European policies on student-centered
learning in higher education', Higher Education Policy 30(1), 69-85.
Gardner, H. (Ed.). (2007). Responsibility at work. San Francisco: Jossey–Bass.
Mantere S, Schildt HA, Sillince JAA (2012) Reversal of strategic change. Academy of Management Journal 55(1): 172–196.

Student-centred design: paths to achieve it

More Related Content

Similar to Student-centred design: paths to achieve it

More from Isabell Grundschober

Recently uploaded

Student-centred design: paths to achieve it