ABSTRACT
Is learning a taken-for-granted part of higher education? It just seems to happen on its own. Tutors who see learning as entirely students’ responsibility can give all their attention to the subject matter and its presentation. But a tutor who wishes to share responsibility and control faces questions about how much and what kind. Is it a minimal responsibility to organise the syllabus, the explicit curriculum, using principles such as progression: from less difficult ideas to more difficult ones, or from smaller, contributory ideas to bigger, more general ones? Is it enough to vary teaching styles, inserting a tutorial or two, as a break from block lectures, to maintain interest? Are there parts of the syllabus/curriculum which are better learned through practical work than by being told? Or should tutors go further, making larger assumptions about students’ learning and their needs, and plan in some depth and detail what learners are to do? Might this include planning learning tasks which determine a linear path of thought and cognitive development for students to follow? Or should there be open-ended activities, in which students’ own initiatives set the direction? What are the implications for the provision of resources for learning, not least, time? Are there pedagogic principles or theories which should guide decisions? Finally, does a pragmatic consideration of formal feedback from students and external examiners direct some decisions about how much control over and responsibility for students’ learning is taken by tutors?
