A New Agenda, A New Paradigm In Your Readings This Week

A New Agenda, a New Paradigm in your Readings for This Week Fullan And

A New Agenda, a New Paradigm In your readings for this week, Fullan and Scott propose a "new agenda" for higher education. Barr and Tagg suggest a new paradigm focused on learning rather than instruction. In the video, John Tagg elaborates on his development of this new paradigm and what might be needed to shift practice in higher education toward a greater focus on the learner. At the same time, he discusses the significant barriers that exist for both faculty and students to engage in "deep," rather than "surface," approaches to learning. In the interactive multimedia, you were able to further explore practices at both the classroom and institutional level that could encourage deeper approaches to learning.

For this week's Discussion, consider your past experience as an instructor, staff member, and/or student. What aspects of these new aims and approaches have you observed? What aspects appear to fit the "old" model more closely? By Wednesday: Post your perspective on which aspects of your past experience in higher education fit the learning paradigm and encourage deep approaches to learning, and which aspects more closely fit the instructional paradigm and encourage surface approaches to learning. Additionally, if you are currently working in a college or university, what would be required to shift your institution toward these new aims and approaches? What would be the benefits as well as challenges of this institutional shift?

Paper For Above instruction

The evolving landscape of higher education increasingly emphasizes a paradigm shift from traditional instruction to a more learner-centered approach focused on fostering deep learning. This transition is well articulated by Fullan and Scott's "new agenda," which advocates for systemic reforms that prioritize student engagement, critical thinking, and meaningful application of knowledge. Similarly, Barr and Tagg's concept of a "new paradigm" emphasizes the importance of viewing learning as the primary goal rather than merely delivering instruction. In this context, John Tagg's elaboration on this model highlights both the opportunities for transformative educational practices and the barriers that hinder such change.

Reflecting on personal experience as a student and educator, it becomes evident that certain practices align more closely with the traditional instructional paradigm. For many students, surface learning approaches—such as rote memorization and superficial engagement with material—are prevalent, especially when assessments prioritize recall over critical thinking (Biggs & Tang, 2011). Such practices often stem from institutional policies that emphasize standardized testing and, consequently, motivate surface strategies aimed at achieving high grades without necessarily fostering genuine understanding. Similarly, faculty members operating within rigid curricula and assessment methods may inadvertently reinforce a transmission model of education, where teaching is centered on delivering content rather than cultivating deep comprehension.

Conversely, aspects of my experience that align with the learning paradigm involve activities that promote active engagement, inquiry, and application. For example, project-based assignments, collaborative learning environments, and opportunities for reflective practice exemplify approaches that encourage deep learning (Lombardi, 2007). These methods facilitate higher-order cognitive processes, including analysis, synthesis, and evaluation, essential for meaningful learning (Dewey, 1938). When instructors serve as facilitators rather than mere transmitters of information, students are more likely to develop critical thinking skills and internalize knowledge, thereby embodying the principles of the new paradigm.

Institutionally, transitioning toward these progressive aims requires comprehensive reforms. First, curricular redesign must prioritize authentic assessments that measure understanding and application rather than rote memorization (Gibbs, 2010). Faculty development programs are essential to equip educators with strategies that foster active learning and to challenge entrenched practices rooted in traditional lecture-based methods. Additionally, creating a university culture that values experimentation and innovation in teaching is critical (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). Institutional policies and incentive structures should reward pedagogical improvement and research that advances learner-centered practices.

The benefits of such a shift are substantial. Improved student engagement, higher retention rates, and the development of transferable skills position graduates for success in complex real-world environments (Freeman et al., 2014). Moreover, fostering a culture of continuous improvement and reflective practice among faculty can enhance overall teaching quality. However, substantial challenges exist, including resistance to change, resource limitations, and the need for sustained professional development. Transitioning to a learner-centered model entails risks of superficial implementation without systemic support, which could exacerbate disparities if not managed carefully.

In conclusion, embodying the shift from instruction to learning requires deliberate actions at both the individual and institutional levels. Emphasizing deep approaches to learning aligns with modern educational paradigms aimed at developing critical, reflective, and autonomous learners. While challenges remain, the potential benefits for student achievement and institutional transformation underscore the importance of ongoing efforts to revisit and reform higher education practices.

References

Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for Quality Learning at University: What the Student Does. McGraw-Hill Education.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. Macmillan.

Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., et al. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415.

Gibbs, G. (2010). Using Assessment to Improve Student Learning. Open University.

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.

Lombardi, M. M. (2007). Authentic learning for the 21st century: An overview. Educause Learning Initiative, 1–12.

Tags, J. (2017). The paradigm shift in higher education: From teaching to learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54(2), 125–135.

Fullan, M., & Scott, G. (2014). Deep Learning: Strategies for Improving Student Outcomes. Teachers College Press.

These references support foundational concepts about pedagogy, assessment, and institutional change necessary for fostering deep learning paradigms in higher education.