Historical Review of Student-centered Education: Examining the Distinctiveness of the Student Agency Discourse

Objectives This study aims to examine the historical evolution of student-centered education and subsequently to reveal the distinctive features of the OECD’s student agency discourse. Methods The primary research method employed in this study is literature analysis. To investigate the historical changes in student-centered education, I have analyzed the works of key thinkers who established the theoretical foundations for the idea of childhood and student-centeredness, along with various academic journal articles and policy documents that address practical implementation of student-centered education. Results I begin by examining the historical development of student identity through looking at the emergence of the concept of childhood. Subsequently, I broadly divide the major historical turning points of student-centered education into four periods. First, I examine the period of so-called ‘romanticism’ in Europe from the late 18th to the early 19th century, when a new understanding of children began to emerge. Second, I focus on the characteristics of ‘progressivism’ from the late 19th to the early 20th century, during which this idea expanded to the United States. Third, I examine the mid-20th century development, when student-centered education was implemented as formal education policy in several countries, applying the practical aspects beyond theoretical discussions. In this context, I focus on the cases of student-centered education policies in the United Kingdom and South Korea. Finally, I investigate discussions and practices of student-centered education that emerged from the late 20th century onwards, a period marked by the growing influence of globalization on education. Conclusions I conclude by revealing the distinctive features of student-centeredness appeared in the the OECD’s student agency discourse. In this paper, I suggest that in the face of the renewed emphasis on student-centeredness in contemporary education reforms, it is essential to maintain a critical perspective on the subtle “double-facedness” hidden behind the superficial slogan.