>
#mamy
>
Despite adopting curriculum based competence in 2005 teacher remains less reluctant to integrate learner centered design in their instructional practice?
1 answer
Sort By
ChatGPT
Oct 26, 2023
There could be several reasons why teachers may be less reluctant to integrate learner-centered design in their instructional practice, despite adopting curriculum-based competence in 2005. Some possible explanations include:
1. Lack of training and support: Teachers may not have received adequate training or support in implementing learner-centered design. They may feel more comfortable sticking to the traditional curriculum-based approach because they are more familiar with it and have been trained in that method.
2. Time constraints: Teachers often have limited time to plan and deliver instruction. Implementing learner-centered design requires more time and effort in designing and facilitating student-centered activities and assessments. Teachers may feel overwhelmed by the additional workload and choose to stick to the more familiar curriculum-based approach.
3. Pressure to cover content: In some educational systems, there may be pressure on teachers to cover a specific curriculum within a given timeframe. This pressure can make teachers reluctant to deviate from the prescribed curriculum and explore learner-centered approaches that may require more flexibility and time.
4. Assessment and accountability: Many educational systems have standardized assessments and accountability measures that focus on content mastery. Teachers may feel that a curriculum-based approach aligns better with these assessments and ensures that students meet the required standards.
5. Resistance to change: Change can be challenging for individuals, including teachers. Some teachers may be resistant to adopting new instructional approaches, especially if they have been successful with the curriculum-based approach in the past. They may be hesitant to try new methods that they perceive as risky or unproven.
Overall, the reluctance to integrate learner-centered design in instructional practice despite adopting curriculum-based competence in 2005 can be attributed to a combination of factors, including lack of training and support, time constraints, pressure to cover content, assessment and accountability measures, and resistance to change.
1. Lack of training and support: Teachers may not have received adequate training or support in implementing learner-centered design. They may feel more comfortable sticking to the traditional curriculum-based approach because they are more familiar with it and have been trained in that method.
2. Time constraints: Teachers often have limited time to plan and deliver instruction. Implementing learner-centered design requires more time and effort in designing and facilitating student-centered activities and assessments. Teachers may feel overwhelmed by the additional workload and choose to stick to the more familiar curriculum-based approach.
3. Pressure to cover content: In some educational systems, there may be pressure on teachers to cover a specific curriculum within a given timeframe. This pressure can make teachers reluctant to deviate from the prescribed curriculum and explore learner-centered approaches that may require more flexibility and time.
4. Assessment and accountability: Many educational systems have standardized assessments and accountability measures that focus on content mastery. Teachers may feel that a curriculum-based approach aligns better with these assessments and ensures that students meet the required standards.
5. Resistance to change: Change can be challenging for individuals, including teachers. Some teachers may be resistant to adopting new instructional approaches, especially if they have been successful with the curriculum-based approach in the past. They may be hesitant to try new methods that they perceive as risky or unproven.
Overall, the reluctance to integrate learner-centered design in instructional practice despite adopting curriculum-based competence in 2005 can be attributed to a combination of factors, including lack of training and support, time constraints, pressure to cover content, assessment and accountability measures, and resistance to change.
0
