1. Introduction
1.1. Relevance and Context
The modernization of higher education in the context of globalization and the formation of a unified international scientific and educational space places new demands on the training of specialists. Proficiency in a foreign language, primarily English, has transformed from a desirable advantage into a mandatory component of professional competence for graduates of any field. For students of non-linguistic faculties, the goal of language learning is not philological knowledge per se, but the ability to use English as a tool for solving professional tasks: reading specialized literature, writing academic and business communications, participating in international conferences and collaborations. This shift necessitates a fundamental revision of traditional pedagogical strategies, moving from a knowledge-transmitting, teacher-centered paradigm to a student-centered (personality-oriented) one [1; 10; 11].
1.2. Problem Statement
Despite the widespread theoretical recognition of the student-centered approach's value, its practical implementation in English language classrooms at non-linguistic faculties faces systemic contradictions. The standardized curriculum, often designed for an "average" learner, clashes with the pronounced heterogeneity of student groups in terms of language proficiency, learning styles, cognitive strategies, and professional interests. Furthermore, the extrinsic motivation of students, for whom English is a secondary discipline, is frequently low. A formal, uniform approach exacerbates this, leading to disengagement and ineffective learning outcomes. Thus, a profound gap exists between the declared adherence to humanistic educational principles and the actual pedagogical practices in many university settings [2; 4; 6].
1.3. The objective of this study is to develop a theoretically grounded and practically applicable model for implementing a student-centered approach in English language teaching at non-linguistic faculties.
1.4. Theoretical Framework.
The research is grounded in the humanistic psychology of C. Rogers and A. Maslow, the theory of developmental learning (Л.С. Выготский, Д.Б. Эльконин, В.В. Давыдов), the concepts of learner autonomy and self-determination theory (R. Ryan, E. Deci), and the methodology of English for Specific Purposes (ESP). The works of domestic scholars on personality-oriented pedagogy (И.С. Якиманская, Е.В. Бондаревская, В.В. Сериков) form the conceptual core for adaptation to the language teaching context.
2. Methods
This study employs a comprehensive qualitative methodology based on theoretical analysis and synthesis, drawing on pedagogical design principles. A descriptive-analytical design was used, focusing on modeling an optimal pedagogical process rather than conducting a new empirical experiment. The study synthesizes existing theoretical knowledge and best practices. The study is primarily theoretical and model-building. While it generalizes from practical experience, its conclusions would benefit from subsequent quantitative and qualitative empirical validation through action research, surveys, and controlled observations in specific university settings.
3. Results
3.1. Theoretical Foundations and Core Principles of the Student-Centered Approach.
The student-centered approach is not merely a set of techniques but a holistic pedagogical philosophy. Its implementation in English language teaching is based on the following key principles:
Recognition of the Learner as the Subject of Activity: The student is an active constructor of knowledge, not a passive recipient. Learning is a process of personal meaning-making.
Reliance on Subjective Experience: The learner's existing knowledge, life and professional experience, interests, and perceptions serve as the starting point and resource for learning.
Individualization and Differentiation: Accounting for individual differences in pace, style, and level of learning. This involves varying the content, process, product, and learning environment.
Creating a Situation of Success and a Favorable Psychological Climate: Minimizing anxiety, fostering mutual respect and cooperation, providing positive feedback that supports self-efficacy.
Development of Learner Autonomy and Reflexivity: Teaching students to set goals, select strategies, self-assess, and reflect on their learning process—skills crucial for lifelong learning [3; 5; 7].
3.2. Specifics of the Educational Environment at Non-Linguistic Faculties.
Heterogeneity: Groups often consist of students with language proficiency levels ranging from A1 to B1+ on the CEFR scale.
Instrumental Motivation Dominance: Motivation is often pragmatic (pass an exam, read articles) rather than integrative. It must be cultivated by demonstrating clear professional relevance.
Limited Classroom Hours: English is one of many disciplines, with typically 2-4 academic hours per week, necessitating highly efficient lesson planning.
Professional Orientation: Content must be subordinated to the future specialty (economics, engineering, medicine, law), requiring the instructor to possess or acquire basic knowledge of that field.
3.3. A Model for Implementing the Student-Centered Approach. A phased model is proposed:
Phase 1: Diagnostic and Goal-Setting.
Diagnosis: Conduct a multi-faceted diagnosis at the beginning of the course: language level testing (placement test), surveys on professional interests and language learning needs (e.g., "Do you need to write emails or read research papers more?"), identification of preferred learning styles (visual, auditory, kinesthetic).
Negotiation of Goals: Based on diagnostics, jointly with students formulate individual learning goals that align with the general curriculum and their professional aspirations.
Phase 2: Content and Process Differentiation.
Modular Curriculum: Structure the course into thematic modules related to professional fields (e.g., "Company Structure," "Technical Description of a Device," "Academic Abstract Writing"). Within modules, offer materials and tasks of varying complexity.
Choice and Variability: Provide students with choices where possible: selection of topics for projects or presentations, types of tasks (e.g., write a report or prepare an oral presentation on the same topic), sources of information.
Phase 3: Application of Active and Interactive Methods. The core of student-centered lessons.
Case Studies: Analysis of real or simulated professional situations requiring language-based solutions (e.g., resolving a miscommunication in an international team).
Project Work: Long-term individual or group projects (e.g., creating a business plan for a startup, designing a website for a virtual company, conducting a mini-research on a professional topic). This integrates all language skills.
Role-Plays and Simulations: Modeling professional interactions (job interviews, client consultations, scientific discussions).
Problem-Based Learning (PBL): Presenting an open-ended professional problem that students must investigate and solve using English resources.
Collaborative Learning Techniques: Think-pair-share, jigsaw, peer review of written work.
Phase 4: Reflexive-Evaluative Stage.
Formative Assessment: Ongoing feedback through checklists, rubrics, self-assessment questionnaires, and teacher-student conferences. The focus is on progress, not just the final result.
Portfolio Assessment: Students compile a portfolio of their work (writings, project reports, audio/video recordings), which demonstrates growth and achievement of individual goals.
Development of Self-Assessment Skills: Teaching students to use criteria to evaluate their own and peers' work.
3.4. Identified Challenges and Barriers.
- Organizational: Large groups (25+ students), rigid schedule, lack of flexible learning spaces.
- Psychological: Students' entrenched passive learning habits from school, fear of making mistakes, low initial motivation.
- Methodological: Lack of ready-made differentiated teaching materials for specific specialties; the challenge for the teacher to be both a language expert and a facilitator/consultant.
- Professional Competence of the Teacher: The need for continuous professional development in both language teaching methodology and the basics of students' core disciplines [4].
4. Discussion
The proposed model demonstrates that implementing a student-centered approach is a complex, systematic task requiring transformation at all levels: from the instructor's philosophy to daily lesson planning.
4.1. Interpretation of Key Findings.
From Teacher as "Sage on the Stage" to "Guide on the Side": The most significant shift is in the teacher's role. The instructor becomes an organizer, facilitator, consultant, and co-learner. This requires high pedagogical skill and emotional intelligence.
Motivation through Relevance and Success: By tying language content directly to professional interests and providing achievable challenges, intrinsic motivation is fostered. A sense of autonomy and competence, as per Self-Determination Theory, is crucial.
Differentiation as a Key Mechanism: It is not about creating individual programs for each of 30 students, but about building a flexible educational trajectory within a common framework. Technology (LMS platforms, online exercises with adaptive difficulty) can be a powerful ally here.
The "Subjectivity" of Language: Language is not taught as an abstract system of rules, but as a living tool for expressing one's own professional thoughts and intentions. This aligns with the communicative approach and makes learning personally meaningful [9].
4.2. Practical Implications.
For Educators: Requires willingness to experiment, share control with students, continuously update subject knowledge, and invest time in developing a repository of differentiated materials.
For University Administration: Should support teacher training in new methodologies, consider reducing group sizes for practical language classes, and encourage the development of interdisciplinary connections between language and core departments.
For Curriculum Developers: ESP curricula should be co-designed with specialists from core faculties to ensure authentic professional content and allow for elective modules.
5. Conclusion
The realization of a student-centered approach in English language teaching at non-linguistic faculties is not merely a methodological trend but a necessary response to the demands of modern professional education. This study has shown that its effective implementation is a multifaceted process based on a clear understanding of theoretical principles (individualization, subjectivity, autonomy) and a sober assessment of the specific conditions of non-linguistic education (heterogeneity, professional orientation, limited hours).
The core of success lies in the transition from teaching English in general to teaching professional communication in English. This is achieved through a diagnostic stage, the design of a flexible, modular curriculum, the systematic use of active and interactive methods (case studies, projects, role-plays), and a shift to formative, reflexive assessment.
The main obstacles – large groups, varying motivation levels, and the need for teacher retraining are significant but surmountable. Overcoming them requires concerted efforts from teachers, methodological associations, and university management. The teacher, in this paradigm, transforms from a knowledge transmitter into a designer of educational experiences and a facilitator of students' cognitive and professional growth.
Ultimately, the consistent application of the student-centered approach contributes not only to the development of foreign language communicative competence but also to the formation of a modern specialist's key qualities: adaptability, creativity, ability to learn independently, and readiness for intercultural dialogue.
.png&w=640&q=75)
