My rationale for this approach has been influenced by my work in distance education and instructional development. I see some common issues and challenges with respect to faculty adoption of technologies for teaching and learning and their adoption of PLAR principles and procedures. My reflection has been guided by the wisdom of many educators, including Steven Gilbert, from the arena of Information Technology, and Maryellen Weimer, from the arena of Instructional Development. It serves to remind me that before I recommend the adoption of alternative ways of doing things, I should try to understand the context in which the change is to take place, the characteristics of the tools for implementing change, and the implications of the proposed change for both faculty and students. Maryellen Weimer is a well-known facilitator of instructional development workshops.
Technique is a blessing in that it celebrates the wisdom of practice and the richness of diversity.
New faculty who want to learn something about effective instructional techniques have a plethora of examples to choose from for experimentation. At this point, technique can become a curse because the publications often do not provide any context to demonstrate why this or that technique works, and in what instructional environment. PLAR challenges faculty to find ways of assessing what has been learned outside of the university and make judgments on whether the learning is relevant and equivalent to the content and processes that students are expected to learn in their courses and programs. While experiential learning is generally acknowledged to be an important component of the learning process, it is valued to different degrees by different faculty. With an understanding of this context as a guide, the Saskatchewan University PLAR project invited proposals from the U of S's 13 colleges and the U of R's 8 faculties to initiate pilot studies of how of PLAR tools and processes can be adopted for specific purposes.