Teacher-centered instruction, a dominant approach for centuries, finds its roots in several ancient civilizations and has evolved through a variety of cultural contexts. History helps explain how this type of education has reflected certain social values and sustained its popularity through the transformations of the industrial era. It wasn’t until the 20th and 21st centuries that significant re-evaluations began to challenge this traditional model, based on outcome 
evidence and learning science. To understand the factors behind s transition, it’s crucial to examine the long trajectory of teacher-centered pedagogy, including the influence of global educational traditions and the impacts of capitalism and modernization. This exploration provides a comprehensive understanding of the present state of higher education and the diverse factors that have shaped its evolution.
The tradition of teacher-centered pedagogy finds its roots in ancient civilizations such as Greece, China, and India, predating widespread literacy and printed materials. In ancient Greece, figures like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle engaged in dialectic methods, fostering environments where oral discourse was paramount.[1] In China, Confucian education emphasized hierarchical relationships and moral instruction, with teachers like Confucius himself serving as the central figures of wisdom.[2] Similarly, in India, the Gurukul system placed teachers (gurus) at the heart of the educational process, guiding students (shishyas) through rigorous intellectual and spiritual training. These diverse traditions reflect a shared emphasis on the teacher’s role in imparting knowledge through direct interaction and dialogue. Socratic questioning, Confucian moral education, and the Guru-Shishya relationship exemplify these early educational paradigms, underscoring the global origins of teacher-centered pedagogy.
Western educational traditions, significantly influenced by the Christian era, saw priests and clerics assuming the role of knowledge bearers and spokespeople for divine wisdom. The advent of the printing press in the 1400s revolutionized information dissemination, yet the interpretation of religious doctrine remained in the hands of learned clergy. Catholic Popes and leaders of the Protestant Reformation utilized the printing press to propagate theological ideas while maintaining a teacher-centered relationship with their congregations.[3] This period also saw the expansion of religious education across European colonies, where indigenous educational practices were often supplanted by missionary schools that replicated these hierarchical models. Thus, the clergy’s monopoly over knowledge dissemination ensured reliance on their interpretations, reinforcing a hierarchical educational structure both in Europe and its colonies.
During this period, secular reading and knowledge primarily were reserved for privileged social classes, predominantly white men in Europe and its colonies. Education was a luxury for this elite, who were expected to wield political and economic power. Well known figures like Sir Francis Bacon and René Descartes both were products of such an education system designed to prepare the aristocracy for leadership or academic roles.[4] This exclusivity extended to the colonial education systems, where local elites were often educated in European languages and curricula to serve colonial administrations. The general populace, including women, people of lower social strata, and indigenous populations, were largely excluded from formal education, perpetuating a cycle of social stratification and limited intellectual mobility.
As society modernized during the Industrial Revolution, the need for broad-based education became evident. Urbanization and the growth of factory systems necessitated a workforce with basic literacy and numeracy skills. This period saw the adoption of the teacher-centered method on a large scale, facilitated by technological advancements such as the blackboard and the textbook. These tools allowed for more efficient instruction to large groups of students, epitomized by the Lancasterian system, which utilized monitors to teach large classes under the supervision of a single teacher.[5] This system mirrored the industrial model of production, emphasizing uniformity and efficiency in education. Similar models were adopted in colonial territories, aiming to produce a compliant workforce for colonial economies.[6]
The industrial era’s approach to education mirrored the mass production processes that dominated society. Schools became akin to factories, where large numbers of students were taught the same material in the same way, fostering a culture of passivity and obedience.[7] The emphasis was on producing students who were punctual, quiet, and compliant, ready to follow a time clock and perform repetitive tasks. This model, evident in the rigid curricula and standardized testing practices of the time, prioritized rote memorization and conformity over critical thinking and creativity. The educational experiences of this era were designed to prepare students for industrial work, rather than for democratic participation or personal fulfillment. This approach was exported to many parts of the world through colonial education systems, further entrenching these methods globally.[8]
In the 20th century, critiques of the teacher-centered model began to gain traction. Educational theorists like John Dewey in the United States and Rabindranath Tagore in India argued for more student-centered approaches, emphasizing experiential learning and the development of critical thinking skills.[9] Dewey’s work in progressive education highlighted the limitations of factory-style schooling, advocating for environments where students could engage in hands-on activities and learn through doing. Tagore’s vision for education stressed the importance of creativity, self-expression, and connection with nature, challenging the rigid, exam-focused systems introduced by colonial powers. The success of such programs in fields like carpentry and nursing underscored the need for pedagogical methods that prioritized active engagement and practical application.
The progressive education movement of the early 20th century pushed for systematic implementation of student-centered pedagogy, recognizing that the industrial model was ill-suited for a democratic society. Dewey and other reformers argued that education should not only impart knowledge but also foster the ability to analyze information and make informed decisions. This movement paralleled broader social changes, including the expansion of suffrage and the rise of new forms of democratic participation. Schools were envisioned as laboratories for democracy, where students could practice the skills needed for civic life. This approach contrasted sharply with the passive, authoritarian model of teacher-centered instruction. Similar educational reforms were seen globally, influenced by decolonization and the desire for systems that reflected local cultures and democratic values.[10]
As research on educational efficacy expanded, evidence increasingly supported the benefits of student-centered learning. Studies showed that practices such as inquiry-based learning, group discussions, collaborative projects, and applied learning led to deeper understanding and retention of knowledge. For example, the research of educational psychologists like Lev Vygotsky and Jerome Bruner demonstrated the importance of social interaction and scaffolding in learning.[11] These findings influenced educational policies and practices, leading to more widespread adoption of methods that prioritize student engagement and active participation. The shift towards evidence-based practices marked a significant departure from the traditional, teacher-centered approach. This shift was also seen in non-Western contexts, where traditional and colonial education systems were reevaluated and reformed to incorporate more holistic, learner-centered approaches.
In contemporary society, the shift towards student-centered education reflects the demands of a knowledge-based economy. In a world where information is readily accessible via the internet, the ability to memorize facts is less valuable than the ability to find, evaluate, and apply information. This is particularly important in an era characterized by rapid technological change and the need for lifelong learning. Cognitive science and brain imaging research have further bolstered the case for student-centered learning, showing that interest, engagement, motivation, and feedback are crucial for deep learning and knowledge synthesis.[12] These insights underscore the importance of creating educational environments that foster curiosity, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills, preparing students to navigate and contribute to an increasingly complex world. This global perspective highlights the universal applicability of student-centered learning principles across diverse educational contexts.
[1] Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics.3rd ed., trans. Terrence Irwin (New York: Hackett, 2019).
[2] Confucius, The Analects, trans. Arthur Waley (New York: Vintage Books, 1938).
[3] Martin Luther, 95 Theses, trans. C. M. Jacobs (Project Gutenberg, 2005).
John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Henry Beveridge (Grand Rapids: William. B. Eerdmans, 1989).
[4] Francis Bacon, trans. James Spedding Robert Leslie Ellis, and Douglas Denon Heath, (London: P.F. Collier & Son, 1902); Novum Organum.René Descartes. Meditations on First Philosophy, trans. John Cottingham, (Cambridge: Cambridge, 1996).
[5] Joseph Lancaster, Improvements in Education (London: Darton and Harvey, 1803).
[6] Amartya Sen, Development as Freedom (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999).
[7] Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (New York: Random House 1995).
[8] Joel Spring, Education and the Rise of the Global Economy (New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1998).
[9] John Dewey, Democracy and Education (New York: Macmillan, 1916); Rabindranath Tagore, Towards Universal Man (Mumbai: Asia Publishing House, 1961).
[10] Gerald L. Gutek, A History of the Western Educational Experience (Long Grove: Waveland Press, 1995) : Martin Carnoy, Education as Cultural Imperialism (New York: Longman, 1974).
[11] Lev Vygotsky, Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes (Cambridge: Harvard, 1978; Jerome Bruner, The Process of Education (Cambridge: Harvard 1960).
[12] Sabine Hoidn and Manja Klemenčič, eds., The Routledge International Handbook of Student-Centered Learning and Teaching in Higher Education (New York and London, Routledge, 2023).