Advice to those considering entering the FLCP process

Constitutions, law, and even major software developments are all things that grow iteratively, and must by their very nature do so. Why? because they involve a huge variety of people working on a very complex task that in the end must meet the needs not only of the individual, but a huge variety of stakeholders. In the case of FLCPs this includes not only the individual instructor, but their department, their school, and NSCC as a whole. Implementing the FLCP process is a huge task and it requires 'learning as you go' by all parties involved. There is no getting around this.

My advice then, to those considering entering the FLCP process, is simply patience. If you really want lots of good examples, if you really want a streamlined process and experienced mentors, team managers, deans, and approval committee, then you should wait until others have had the opportunity to beta test the system. For how would it be possible to have enough and varied examples of learning plans - without people first creating them and submitting them? How can mentors have enough experience - without they themselves having had the opportunity to produce both their own FLCP's and mentor a few others first? How can managers and deans be sure of signing off on learning plans - without having the experience of test cases coming back from the approval committee? How can the approval committee itself be confident in its' process - when they will be faced with plans as varied as all the individual talent and imagination of all the instructors across NSCC? The simple answer to all the above questions is that 'it is not possible'.

I feel very proud that NSCC has taken the step to 'walk the walk' of portfolio learning and given us the opportunity to participate in the FLCP process. It is a process I am enjoying helping with right now, and one that can only get better and better over time.

David Russell