Guest article written by: Dr. Cas Olivier
As an ETDP SETA-accredited provider, I worked with six lecturers at a Further Education and Training (FET) college in South Africa to introduce the principles of great teaching. Before the intervention, these lecturers relied entirely on the traditional talk-and-chalk approach, and they were frustrated by low student engagement and weak assessment outcomes.
What is talk-and-chalk versus great teaching?
Talk-and-chalk is a teacher-centered method in which the instructor explains concepts while writing on a board or presenting slides, and students listen passively. This approach places the teacher at the center of the classroom and typically limits student input and interaction.
Great teaching, by contrast, is student-centered. It focuses on the learners’ needs, enabling students to discover and construct knowledge for themselves. Teachers who adopt this approach act as facilitators: they continually assess student progress and adjust their support to help students learn effectively.
Background
The college was concerned that roughly 20% of students consistently performed poorly on tests and often had to repeat modules or an entire year. The lecturers reported several recurring problems with their traditional practice:
- Repeated explanations did not lead to student understanding.
- Many students used their cellphones during lessons for messaging or social media.
- Class discipline was a widespread problem.
- Lecturers expressed a lack of hope for many students’ prospects.
- Lecturers felt exhausted from speaking most of the time in class.
- Teachers routinely provided answers rather than guiding students to find them.
- Despite optimism before tests, results did not improve.
- Students struggled to see the broader context, apply insight, or solve problems.
- Lecturers did not feel successful or effective as educators.
The lecturers were trained in great teaching principles
The six lecturers participated in a five-day training program delivered over five weeks. The program introduced a paradigm shift from talk-and-chalk to a student-centered model using a range of practical teaching methods. Training emphasized experimentation so lecturers could apply and adapt the principles in their own classrooms.
After the training, lecturers adopted multiple changes in practice, including:
- Converting curriculum content into learning challenges that require students to think and apply knowledge, rather than simply translating each curriculum item into a lesson.
- Designing learning materials intended for independent learning instead of creating aids just for teacher-led explanations.
- Starting with “quick-win” topics to build confidence and momentum, rather than unpacking the curriculum layer by layer without early successes.
- Linking new topics to students’ prior knowledge and real experiences rather than only to previous lessons.
- Interpreting “teaching” as the act of enabling students to learn, not merely explaining information.
- Enabling students to discover content and construct understanding instead of covering content through teacher monologue.
- Beginning lessons from what students already know and progressing to new learning objectives based on that starting point.
- Encouraging students to solve problems, work out answers, and construct knowledge rather than expecting passive mastery.
- Pacing instruction according to students’ learning speed rather than a fixed lecture tempo.
- Shifting the teacher’s role to guide and follow students’ learning processes rather than directing every step.
- Putting students in the “driver’s seat” of their learning and promoting ownership of progress and outcomes.
- Allowing productive noise—group discussions and collaborative thinking—alongside productive silence for reflection, instead of enforcing silence for its own sake.
- Prioritizing quick learning wins even when it requires deviating from strict lesson plans.
- Encouraging students to explain ideas until the teacher truly understands their thinking, rather than repeatedly asking whether students “understand.”
- Expecting students to summarize and synthesize work to consolidate learning instead of relying on repetitive drilling.
- Using rubrics and formative assessment tools to monitor learning progress and provide targeted feedback.
- Praising effort and using partially incorrect answers as stepping stones to further questioning and eventual correct responses.
- Diagnosing causes of slow progress and providing supports and scaffolds tailored to individual gaps rather than labeling students as slow learners who cannot catch up.
- Providing a range of scaffolds—prompts, models, worked examples and guided practice—rather than simply assigning extra exercises.
My observations
- Lecturers successfully implemented student-centered teaching and enabled students to discover and create knowledge.
- All students were actively involved in the learning process.
- Discipline problems largely disappeared.
- In one early observation a single student used a cellphone but stopped once they realized they were not engaged; in subsequent observations no students used phones during lessons.
- Students expressed enjoyment in solving their own problems and taking control of their learning.
- At the end of a session a student proudly declared himself “a clever guy,” reflecting increased confidence and a tangible success for the lecturer.
- Classrooms demonstrated a healthy balance of productive discussion and quiet reflection.
- Lecturers rarely reverted to talk-and-chalk; explanations were used sparingly and purposefully.
- Students discovered and constructed most knowledge themselves, which increased engagement and retention.
- Overall, students enjoyed learning and took ownership of their progress and achievements.
The impact on assessment results
Assessment outcomes for the topic “Electricity: The Theory of Lightning” showed dramatic improvement when taught with great teaching methods, compared with the five-assessment average achieved previously using talk-and-chalk:
- Pass rate increased by 20%.
- Group average rose by 24%.
- The lowest score improved from 15% to 61%, a gain of 46 percentage points.
- No learner failed the assessment after the new approach was implemented.
These results illustrate how student-centered, evidence-informed teaching practices can dramatically raise performance, increase confidence, and reduce disciplinary issues in FET classrooms.
About the author
Dr. Cas Olivier
Xanadu Nature Estate, Hartbeespoort
Provider of company-specific facilitator, assessor and moderator training — ETDP SETA Accredited
There is a tool on the author’s website to help determine your current teaching DNA (website name: learningdesigns.co.za). For more information about practical teaching strategies and chapters from related work, visit learningdesigns.co.za. Kindle readers can search for the relevant title on major online book platforms.
Teaching is like developing new medicine: it should respond to learners’ needs rather than the design preferences of the provider.