Transmitting instructional development to university faculty: Two approaches

Conclusion

The future of both projects depends not only on success in meeting the established goals and objectives, but also on how successful it appears to the supportive groups sponsoring these two different approaches to training faculty in instructional development. The results of the CAUT Project have been deemed worth the investment; and the data are published in various documents, journals, and publications. It is too early, at this writing, to determine the effectiveness of the FIPSE Project; however, current reports are encouraging.

This paper has dealt with the efforts of one university to stretch the instructional development expertise to as many faculty as possible yet maintaining centralized programs offering coordinated assistance and support. The cost-effectiveness of both approaches are meaningful in terms of the total faculty, students, and innovations served by increasing the campus instructional development knowledge and practices.

The cases described in this paper speak to the effectiveness of four faculty who have prepared instruction as a result of attending one of these two methods of providing for the needs of faculty, students, and the total instructional community.