Page 40 - Looking_after_school

Looking after school: a critical analysis of personalisation in education

changes (Van Parreren, 1976, pp. 16-17). It is important here to discern
between the processes and the results of learning because this distinc-
tion allows us to begin with (desired) learning outcomes in order to
map the corresponding learning processes and their necessary pre-
requisites (see for instance Gagné, 1970). From this perspective, atten-
tion is directed toward the so-called learning functions which must
be fulfilled for effective learning (Verschaffel, 1995). These functions
can be taken up by the teacher (teacher-centred education), can be
distributed among the teacher and the students (shared direction),
or they can be fulfilled by the students themselves (learner-centred
learning). In this context, the model of information and knowledge
transfer is criticised for ignoring the fact that knowledge is always con-
structed, which implies certain (meta)cognitive processes on the part
of the learner that must be taken into consideration. Powerful learning
environments are needed in which all learning functions are fulfilled
as much as possible, in order to stimulate a learning process which
will result in pre-defined learning outcomes. Within this perspective
of applied learning psychology, this is the first movement towards a
more central role of students: the learning process, not teaching, is of
primary importance. It is not about ‘providing education’, but about
the fulfilment of learning functions by organising effective learning
environments.
What this perspective implies, is that teacher-centred education is not
necessarily problematic as such, but that instruction and the organ-
isation of education should also always take specific characteristics of
the learner into consideration, arguing that students learn in different
ways. Teachers should thus take the following aspects into account:
learning styles, available metacognitive abilities, learning capacity, and
learning motivation. Learning capacity may refer to “the independent
execution of learning functions” and depending on this capacity the
distribution of tasks among teacher and student will differ (Simons,
1995, p. 26). Next to focusing on the learning process (and on under-
standing instruction as the fulfilment of learning functions), educa-
tion and instruction are considered problematic in so far as these
insufficiently take the differences between students and the differ-
ences between kinds of learners into account. In other words, not only
should the learning process become the main concern, but also the

40