‘It is not politically correct’: exploring tensions in developing student-centred policy in Cambodia

A systematic review of the implementation of learner‐centred pedagogy in low‐ and middle‐income countries

“…A total of seven texts highlighted that hierarchical relationships existed between teachers and various educational stakeholders. This included teacher educators (e.g., Akyeampong, 2017 in Ghana), school authorities (e.g., Mohammed & Harlech‐Jones, 2008 in Pakistan; Sikoyo, 2010 in Uganda), policy makers (e.g., Le, 2018 in Vietnam; Ogisu, 2018 in Cambodia), consultants (e.g., Saito et al, 2008 in Vietnam), and society as a whole (e.g., Brinkmann, 2019 in India). For example, in teacher training settings in Ghana, Akyeampong (2017) reported that it did not seem acceptable for pre‐service teachers to question the knowledge and teaching practices that college tutors put forward.…”

“…In addition to an insufficient understanding of LCP, teachers—and sometimes even policy makers—had a distinctive understanding and interpretations of what LCP entails (e.g., Al‐Ramahi & Davies, 2002 in Palestine; Altinyelken, 2011, 2015 in Turkey; Lai, 2010 in China). For example, in Cambodia, Ogisu (2018) describes how two LCP‐based donor projects with different emphases did not provide a shared understanding of LCP among different levels of stakeholders, which ultimately caused considerable confusion.…”

“…O'Sullivan (2004) indicated that the adult‐child relationship in Namibia was ‘one of respect and authority’ (p. 595) in which children were brought up to follow adults' order and tradition, discouraging them from questioning established norms. This culture of respect might be seen to be incongruent with LCP principles, which tend to emphasise critical thinking and exploration, thus creating a ‘cultural mismatch’ (Ogisu, 2018, p. 779). Altinyelken's (2011) work in Turkey also illustrates how the promotion of democratic values through LCP may contradict the authoritarian regime in Turkey, meaning that LCP implementation is likely to be superficial.…”

“…In Jamaica, Jennings (2012) was particularly critical of the ‘one‐size‐fits‐all’ approach to teacher training, stressing that ‘there was no attempt on the part of the planners to ascertain how stakeholders would perceive the various attributes of [the reform]’ (p. 265). In Cambodia, Ogisu (2018) was particularly critical of how LCP had been implemented on a large scale by centralised bureaucracies, reporting frustration at the lack of autonomy granted to teachers to adapt pedagogies in their classrooms. Moreover, nine studies highlighted teacher educators as potential obstacles to LCP implementation, for example due to their lack of experience with learner‐centred approaches (e.g., Barnes et al, 2018 in Ethiopia; Otara et al, 2019 in Rwanda; Rogan & Aldous, 2005 in South Africa), and variability of understandings (e.g., Courtney, 2008 in Cambodia; Msonde & Msonde, 2018 in Tanzania).…”

Team Teaching with Overseas Partners in the Days of the “New Normal”: A Better Way to Introduce Innovation and Build Local Expertise

“…However, change is often slow as it takes time to embrace new concepts and adapt them to one's context. Furthermore, not all concepts immediately imply forms of practice that engender transformative learning experiences embedded in values, such as humanization, localization, regionalization, and universalization [1], which typify all modern curricula. For example, in Cambodia, as illustrated by Lor [2], higher education institutions rewrote their courses and curricula, yet publications reporting on the integration of the new international standards fail to make explicit links to those standards, let alone explain the processes that they entail.…”