Hm, INTPs would probably be better with teacher-centred rather than student-centred learning. Simply because most students are fucktards and should be shot beautiful and unique rainbows. They never do the work, and all the effort you put into tailoring the concepts you're trying to put across specifically to them go wasted and make you want to murder a kitten. Just ignore the damn students and teach it however you please, and give up on their progress, because either way you're going to end up repeating the same damn thing 50 times before you see any improvement, and we all know just how fun repetition is. That's for lazy, cynical and/or realistic INTPs, anyway.
For those who keep trying - I'd say INTPs would probably be quite energised by tailoring lessons to the individual. There's a bit of trial and error involved, and I think that's very gratifying because Ti-Ne makes a fantastic troubleshooter and solution-generator. Making something *work* for a particular mind, and watching understanding dawn on another's face (after hours of grueling explanations and demonstrations) is very satisfying. We do try to get things very precise as well, and our tendency to look at the whole picture to see how it all hangs together and *then* go down to the details would really aid in clarity.
But then, I've seen a lot of kids stare at me with a 6 year-old's version of 'wtf' on their faces, totally lost. I think INTPs might get overexcited about explaining everything there is to know about a particular concept, and totally overwhelm their student (there's a definite tendency to teacher-based learning, in other words). Also, some kids just do better with step-by-step, forget-the-big-picture approaches, or they get confused. Give them a few pieces and they'll slowly put the whole together themselves.
Overall, I'd say they're best suited to explaining concepts and adjusting explanations to suit the student (Ti-Ne precision and troubleshooting). Rote learning/drilling, which is required regardless of the teaching approach imo is probably not their strongest spot. They *could* find ways to make it fun and interesting, but Ne doms and NFs would probably find that more gratifying. Ti's imperative is clarity, which means explaining things in as many ways as necessary to get the point across - not so much dealing with retention issues. (I've found Taboo a really fantastic game for Ti-Ne.)
So on the conceptual/explanatory level, INTPs are great at and would enjoy student-centred stuff. But on teaching as a whole, especially the less savoury aspects - INTPs probably wouldn't enjoy it as much and therefore might not bother trying as hard/may actually just suck.
Although personally the repetition doesn't really bother me at all. I like drilling, to an extent. It's straightforward and you know what to do. I also don't really mind if the student doesn't do the work; it's their loss. Just makes the lesson a bit pointless. Still, explaining's the most fun.
*edit
Worth noting that some students really are fantastic and make teaching very, very fun. A willing student is a real treasure.
