The article "From Teaching to Learning: A New Paradigm for Undergraduate Education" by Robert B. Barr and John Tagg, published in 1995, discusses the shift from an Instruction Paradigm to a Learning Paradigm in higher education. The authors argue that the traditional focus on teaching as the primary purpose of colleges is outdated and needs to be replaced by a focus on producing learning. They compare the two paradigms on several dimensions, including mission, criteria for success, teaching/learning structures, learning theory, productivity and funding, and faculty roles. Under the Instruction Paradigm, colleges are structured to deliver lectures and courses, with a focus on quantity rather than quality. This paradigm is criticized for its rigid structure, which limits the ability to innovate and adapt to new learning methods. In contrast, the Learning Paradigm emphasizes student-centered learning, where the goal is to create environments and experiences that promote active learning and discovery. This paradigm shifts the responsibility for learning from the institution to the student, encouraging students to take responsibility for their own learning. The authors highlight the importance of assessment in the Learning Paradigm, suggesting that institutions should focus on measuring learning outcomes rather than inputs. They also advocate for a more flexible and dynamic structure that allows for continuous improvement and innovation. The Learning Paradigm is seen as a way to enhance productivity and efficiency, as it allows for the production of more learning outcomes without increasing costs. Overall, the article calls for a rethinking of the traditional college model to better serve the needs of students and promote effective learning.The article "From Teaching to Learning: A New Paradigm for Undergraduate Education" by Robert B. Barr and John Tagg, published in 1995, discusses the shift from an Instruction Paradigm to a Learning Paradigm in higher education. The authors argue that the traditional focus on teaching as the primary purpose of colleges is outdated and needs to be replaced by a focus on producing learning. They compare the two paradigms on several dimensions, including mission, criteria for success, teaching/learning structures, learning theory, productivity and funding, and faculty roles. Under the Instruction Paradigm, colleges are structured to deliver lectures and courses, with a focus on quantity rather than quality. This paradigm is criticized for its rigid structure, which limits the ability to innovate and adapt to new learning methods. In contrast, the Learning Paradigm emphasizes student-centered learning, where the goal is to create environments and experiences that promote active learning and discovery. This paradigm shifts the responsibility for learning from the institution to the student, encouraging students to take responsibility for their own learning. The authors highlight the importance of assessment in the Learning Paradigm, suggesting that institutions should focus on measuring learning outcomes rather than inputs. They also advocate for a more flexible and dynamic structure that allows for continuous improvement and innovation. The Learning Paradigm is seen as a way to enhance productivity and efficiency, as it allows for the production of more learning outcomes without increasing costs. Overall, the article calls for a rethinking of the traditional college model to better serve the needs of students and promote effective learning.