Comparative Analysis of Student-Centered and Teacher-Centered Pedagogies on Teaching Effectiveness in a Liberian Technical College
Keywords:
Student-centered learning, Teacher-centered instruction, Teaching effectiveness, Technical education, LiberiaAbstract
This study examines the effectiveness of student-centered and teacher-centered pedagogical approaches in higher education, focusing on Bong County Technical College, Liberia. Despite global and regional advocacy for learner-centered instruction, many technical institutions in Liberia continue to rely on traditional teacher-centered practices. Using a descriptive comparative research design, data were collected from 10 instructors and 60 students through structured questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and independent samples t-tests, while qualitative data were examined thematically. The findings indicate that student-centered approaches enhance student engagement, participation, and collaborative learning, particularly through group work, presentations, and interactive activities. However, teacher-centered methods remain preferred for complex and technical subjects where structured guidance is required. Both instructors and students reported that a blended pedagogical approach yielded the most effective learning outcomes. The study concludes that while student-centered pedagogy improves instructional effectiveness, its successful implementation depends on institutional support, teacher capacity, and contextual adaptation. These findings suggest the need for targeted professional development and pedagogical reforms to strengthen teaching effectiveness in Liberian technical colleges.
References
African Union. (2016). Continental education strategy for Africa 2016–2025. African Union Commission.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university (4th ed.). Open University Press.
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
Gibbs, G. (2013). Improving the quality of student learning: Based on the Improving Student Learning Project. Routledge.
Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014
Kwasi, E. K., & Williams, P. (2021). Teaching methods and learning outcomes in higher education institutions in West Africa. Journal of Education and Practice, 12(4), 37–45.
Ministry of Education. (2022). Education sector plan 2022–2026. Government of Liberia.
OECD. (2019). Innovating education and educating for innovation: The power of digital technologies and skills. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264313124-en
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
Schunk, D. H. (2020). Learning theories: An educational perspective (8th ed.). Pearson Education.
Tabulawa, R. (2013). Teaching and learning in context: Why pedagogical reforms fail in sub-Saharan Africa. CODESRIA.
Tanga, P. T., & Maphosa, C. (2018). Teaching strategies for effective student learning in higher education. Journal of Social Sciences, 55(1–3), 42–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/09718923.2018.1473814
Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. Jossey-Bass.
UNESCO. (2020). Education in a post-COVID world: Nine ideas for public action. UNESCO Publishing.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
