In previous work, we have described how an objective-based approach may be used to enhance the learning process with the help of a student-centred environment. We argued that students place different emphasis on different aspects of their study. Some students—‘deep learners’—concentrate on reflecting on the material taught, understanding and analysing the concepts discussed, and trying to independently find answers to questions. Other students—‘surface’ or ‘shallow learners’—tend to listen more than reflect, have fewer questions to ask, and are typically more concerned with clearing the next hurdle than comprehending the material. Although this is a generalisation and individual students will usually show facets of both types of learning behaviours, the more motivated students demonstrate deep learning behaviour more frequently and consistently than less motivated students.

Since these represent two different attitudes to learning, we contend that exemplary tertiary teaching should be able to induce a shift in student disposition, from surface to deep learning attitudes. Teaching should encourage students to exploit their higher cognitive skills, by being active participants in the learning process and achieve a high level of understanding. Students ought to be required to learn in a manner that results in them questioning, deliberating and solving, rather than simply memorising the material. Learning activities should focus on what students have to do, changing the emphasis from teaching to learning. In this way the teacher acts mostly as a mediator, designing activities to induce consideration and inquiry, supporting the students’ learning process and enhancing their interactions with staff.

Over the last few years, new learning technologies have shown much promise, since they provide sophisticated platforms for independent learning. With these approaches, the teacher may often be absent when learning takes place, and students are expected to follow a carefully structured and planned cognitive path, in which all the components of the teaching system—formal lectures, tutorials, laboratory work, group collaborative work, formative quizzes and tests—should complement each other to induce deep learning. In this way, not only can the fundamental concepts be ‘cross taught’, reinforcing the message in different ways to achieve the desired level of learning, but students are also able to monitor their own progress and determine by themselves when they need help. Teaching material, learning activities and modes of assessment need to be coordinated in an overall aligned instruction strategy. That is why the first step in our student-centred learning strategy is to establish what the students are supposed to learn. We clearly specify the desired outcomes, and we state the level of student learning required on each one. We posit that designing the learning experiences to address the stated objectives and making sure that the outcomes are at the centre of the assessment tasks will ensure that students have the best opportunities for learning, and demonstrate their comprehension of these topics, at the required level.

However, the reality of tertiary teaching in Science and Engineering poses particular difficulties, especially in the crucial first year of university. Teachers often have to contend with large class sizes, comprising students of diverse backgrounds and abilities. Thus, the essential communication between teachers and students to instruct, discuss problems, correct answers, point out errors and provide suggestions does not take place with the desired regularity. Problems can easily be put to students, but there is little opportunity to discuss their answers: the student-teacher-student feedback cycle, essential for learning, often fails to materialise.

Due to their presentation and penetration possibilities, multimedia on-line and electronic teaching methods have received significant attention, and have been suggested as a possible solution to some of the problems mentioned above. However, educators and teachers can easily fall into the trap of concentrating on the presentation and dissemination aspects, rather than on the system interaction with the students. In this case, the offering is then only a refined version of the traditional model where students remain essentially passive spectators. Instead, our objective is to base learning on what students do; hence, their activities and experiences must take preeminence in the teaching model. The effort made in developing such materials should focus on providing an instruction environment within which students can successfully interact to learn, and the tools for teachers and students to be used to better control the process.