“Although it may irritate the teacher, one of the most intelligent questions a student can ask is; Why

do we have to do this?” — Robert Sylwester My rationale for teaching revolved around student
centered learning. I deem it imperative for a lot of reasons. Student-centered learning moves
students from passive receivers of information to active participants in their own discovery process
(Lathika 2016). What students learn, how they learn it and how their learning is assessed are all
driven by each individual student’s needs and abilities. At the system level, this requires
implementing curriculum planning practices, pedagogy and assessment methods that support a
student-centric approach. In the classroom, teachers craft instruction and apply technology in a way
that best serves each student’s learning journey. Technology use is always guided by two primary
criteria: 1. What’s appropriate for the task at hand? 2. How can activities be designed to develop
higher-order thinking skills? In student-centered learning, all the requisites of effective teaching
revolves around the progress and abilities of students. The student centric approach is in fact
practical implementation of curriculum and teaching strategies to attain the maximum learning. The
one who does the work does the learning, which pertains to be the globally accepted reality. When
students take responsibility for their own learning, they become explorers capable of leveraging
their curiosity to solve real-world problems (McLeskey, Rosenberg and Westling 2017). As such, I
being the teacher can be guided towards designing learning experiences that permit student
independence and foster lifelong learning. The student centered approach allows for an
unprecedented level of personalized learning, with valuable opportunities to monitor progress and
engagement and follow student thinking (Parkay, Anctil and Hass 2014). When schools effectively
leverage both technology and pedagogy, both students and teachers become empowered to make
decisions about their own learning and teaching. True student-centered learning requires more than
just an implementation. It represents a shift in the educational culture toward a system that
supports the student centered approach for standards-based learning and real-world problem
solving (Friedlaender et al 2014). As the whole system transitions to a student-centered approach,
educators can more effectively apply teaching methods to improve learning outcomes and help
students develop the skills for college and career readiness. Successful student-centered teaching
emphasizes both creative and effective use of collaboration to meet students’ learning goals.
Teachers address content standards in ways that not only support the material, but also help
students develop the essential collaborative skills required for learning. When evaluating how
student-centered learning is incorporated into a school, it is critical to assess the extent to which: 1.
Collaborative pedagogy is applied 2. Interactive approach is used to increase access and differentiate
teaching approaches 3. Teachers know how to differentiate their teaching using interaction,
collaboration and learning Pertinent to the fact that education in our schools these days is rapidly
changing, we need to cater to the needs of students so as to provide them with an environment that
helps them learn and experiment. I, being an avid advocate of collaborative learning, prefer the
student-centered approach for my teaching lessons because it brings out creativity, fosters learning
and help the students take interest. Word limit: 500 words Word count: 526 2. Implementation of
the Chosen Strategy (300 words) DRP 2017-18 BNR SG-1 Beaconhouse School System BNR SG-1 DRP
Assignment 2017-18 To implement the student-centered approach, I used three methods, which
were: 1. Jigsaw 2. Think-pair-share 3. Debating When using Jigsaw, I made 5 mix-ability groups, with
each group consisting of four students. Numbers were assigned to each member of the group. A
portion of the chapter from the novel “A Tale of Two Cities” was given to each group. After the
groups had thoroughly understood the chapters, they were reformed again. One member from each
group was taken so as to form a new group. There was discussion about plot progression. The use of
figurative language and presentation was encouraged. Themes from the chapter were derived by the
students themselves, which pertained to be “Resurrection” and “Power of Mob”. Although some
students had a lower level of apprehension of their tasks, this activity helped them intermingle with
others of their sort who helped them gain a better understanding of the areas where they lacked.
When using think-pair-share, I formed several groups of two students, and gave them a section from
the novel “A Tale of Two Cities” to read. The section was named “Book the First: Recalled to Life”.
Each pair was encouraged to think like the character from the chapter. They were told to share their
feelings if they were to meet someone so close after such a long time. They were then made to
share it with their fellow. The responses were built upon their feelings and the thought process was
very interactive. The third technique used to foster creativity was debating. The students were given
an argumentative essay whereby they were required to share their stance, argument with a back,
rebuttal of the counter claim and conclude. This activity encourages the students to think from a
variety of angles, and helped them gain a broader perspective. Word limit: 300 words Word count:
299 3. Evaluation of the Implementation (300 words) The jigsaw strategy created cooperation by
structuring student interdependence through the learning task. A process and outcome evaluation
of jigsaw was conducted. It was found that the jigsaw classroom pertained to be a research-based
cooperative learning technique. Just as in a jigsaw puzzle, each piece (each student's part) is
essential for the completion and full understanding of the final product (Sabbah 2016). If each
student's part is essential, then each student is essential; and that is precisely what makes this
strategy so effective. Jigsaw had the following advantages: 1. Learning fostered at an enhanced level
2. Me and my students both found it very interactive 3. It can be used with other teaching strategies
Think-pair-share was used as a collaborative strategy where students worked together to answer
questions about an assigned reading. This strategy requires students to think individually about a
topic or answer to a question and share ideas with classmates (Kwok and Lau 2015). It was found
that discussion with a partner maximizes participation, focuses attention and engages students in
comprehending the reading material. The following results were concluded from the activity: DRP
2017-18 BNR SG-1 Beaconhouse School System BNR SG-1 DRP Assignment 2017-18 1. It taught
students to share individual ideas with their fellows and builds oral communication skills 2. It helped
with attention and engaged students in comprehending the reading material Debating was found to
heighten students’ critical thinking and collaborative learning skills. According to Scott (2015),
classroom debates "can effectively facilitate critical thinking" and promote engagement in the
everyday learning environment. It was witnessed that debate provided students with the rare and
exciting opportunity to conduct their own research, maintain their own learning, and choose a topic
that is relevant to their own lives. One of the many benefits of this strategy is that it can be tailored
to any content on a variety of different subjects. Word limit: 300 words Word count: 300 4.
Implications for Future Practice (300 words) Jigsaw was the most liked activity among the students.
It made them discuss the plot from their own perspectives. However, for the future, I plan to rotate
the students from each group so that collaboration and interaction amongst all students can be
fostered. The prime aim is to encourage collaboration; thus, students need to be able to work with
their fellow so as to be familiarized with calibers of different levels. This can help can effectively
cooperative in group learning in their future lives as well. While the think-pair-share activity
performed very well and brought about amazing results, I feel that the future activities must be
based upon mix ability pairs to make it more meaningful. For this reason, I plan to make pairs that
consist of a high ability and a low ability learner. This is because fast learners can assist the slower
ones to achieve and do well. They can learn as well from the slow learner, in return, too. I have
understood that it is important to keep a few considerations in mind when using debate as a
teaching method. Although most debates are a great tool for engaging students and livening up
classroom curriculum, they do require proper set-up, planning, and preparation. For the future, I
should have students adopt specific roles for one another, such as Researcher, Speaker, Rebutter,
etc. These and other elements, such as time slots and presentation periods, can again be tailored as I
deem fit. Word limit: 300 words Word count: 244 5. Summary of Main Findings (100 words) research
Cooperative learning is a teaching-learning method to learn through interactions between members
by consisting a small group with a collective purpose. Based on collaboration, it alleviates
undesirable educational effects in over competitive situation and attempts emotional and cognitive
interaction between students. As the result of the activities, it can be inferred that the effect of
academic achievement in cooperative learning becomes higher through collaborative activities.
There was a positive effect by applying a student-centered approach to learning situations. Not only
it helped improve creativity among the students, it also helped them learn through interaction,
socialization and reflection. Word limit: 100 words Word count: 97 DRP 2017-18 BNR SG-1
Beaconhouse School System BNR SG-1 DRP Assignment 2017-18 Bibliography Friedlaender, D.,
Burns, D., Lewis-Charp, H., Cook-Harvey, C.M. and Darling-Hammond, L., 2014. Student-centered
schools: Closing the opportunity gap. Palo Alto: Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.
Kwok, A.P. and Lau, A., 2015. An Exploratory Study On Using The Think-Pair-Share Cooperative
Learning Strategy. Journal of Mathematical Sciences, 2, pp.22-28. Lathika, K., 2016. Student
Centered Learning. International Journal of Current Research and Modern Education (IJCRME), 1(1),
pp.677-680. McLeskey, J.L., Rosenberg, M.S. and Westling, D.L., 2017. Inclusion: Effective practices
for all students. Pearson. Parkay, F.W., Anctil, E.J. and Hass, G., 2014. Curriculum leadership:
Readings for developing quality educational programs. Prentice Hall. Sabbah, S.S., 2016. The Effect of
Jigsaw Strategy on ESL Students’ Reading Achievement. Browser Download This Paper. Scott, S.,
2008. Perceptions of students’ learning critical thinking through debate in a technology classroom: A
case study.