![]() |
|
PRESENTED AT THE FNTI 10th ANNUAL
CONFERENCE, MAY 1999
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Commonalities | Stakeholders |
| Cautiously optimistic acceptance of PLAR by partners | All |
| No expansive claims of benefits | All |
| Trust is absolutely essential to PLAR process | All |
| PLAR provides access to formal education system for individuals and groups normally excluded (mature students, aboriginals, etc.) | All |
| Portfolio/self-assessment incorporated into PLAR process builds self-esteem | Small Business, School Boards, Equity Groups, Credit Unions |
| Recognition of prior learning results in pride, confidence, motivation | Small Business, School Boards, Equity Groups |
| Recognition of prior learning helps with employee retention, increases individuals' interest in learning and ability of organization to be a learning organization | Small Business, Large Business |
Specific Values Identified by Partners
| Values | Stakeholders |
| PLAR builds key learning analysis and decision making skills | Small Business |
| Commitment to employee development is equated with a commitment to provide high quality goods and services | Small Business |
| PLAR brings benefits to employees and companies by forging new links between their private training programs and the system of public learning | Large Business |
| PLAR potential to increase mobility to employees between public/private systems welcome | Education |
| Both program and individual evaluation has significant results | Credit Union/Professional Association |
Identified Risks and Concerns
| Risks | Stakeholders |
| Need for increased cooperation between all players, including the learner | All |
| The degree of interaction required between all players will be thwart with difficulties | All |
| Costs–savings invisible, costs poorly distributed | All |
| Interest rather than commitment on the part of education systems | Education |
| Lack of willingness of colleagues to work systematically on skills/procedures involved in making the evaluations functional | Education |
| Lack of demand for PLAR | Education |
| Employers' use of PLAR possibly resulting in incresed use of formal credentials which may or may not be relevant to the job | Labour |
| Need for easier access for employees not to credentialing but to learning opportunities that the sector finds difficult to provide | Small Business |
| Complexity of current PLAR processes | Small Business |
| Lack of clarity in communication/expectations | Small Business |
| Who is responsible for naming the learning? Determining the validity of knowledge | Aboriginals, Equity Group |
"Knowledge is local, interested, relational. It is created by active human groups in the process of sustaining the human world. It is socially and historically situated, that is, always embedded within the matrix of social relationships and social activity - all knowledge is situated knowledge." Michelson, 1996, p. 191.
"We must be careful that we do not fall into the trap of using PLA to legitimize knowledge and skills that reassembles the academic norm and which extends the academy's traditional gate-keeping function of barring alternative cultures of knowledge and calibrates the legitimacy of students' knowledge according to sameness and correspondence." Michelson, 1996, p. 193.CORE ISSUES AND QUESTIONS
The public education system is a closed system with the power and autonomy to determine whether to permit access and on what terms to do so to each non-traditional learner. The impact of admission of students of diverse backgrounds on student composition and formal educational system is significant because of the balance of power. Who can do what to continue to break down the walls?
What are the values and technical problems
which impede progress in increased cooperation between all players?
Top
of Page
Bibliography|"Values"
Statements|Current Status
NALL
website|Introduction|Publications|Links|Contact
us