PRA-PALM Series

PARTICIPATORY LEARNING METHODS : A REVIEW WORKSHOP

Much has happened in MYRADA following the first PRA Workshop conducted by Dr.Chambers in Gulbarga (October 1989) and the subsequent one at Talavadi (January 1990) introducing PRA concepts and methods to all MYRADA projects. PALM has generated a good deal of excitement and has found many uses.

This workshop was to take stock of the past 7 - 8 months of PALM activity, discuss issues and concerns raised by the different projects with regard to the applications of PALM, and plot plans for the future regarding the growth, development, and use of PALM.

Al Fernandez :	We have now reached a stage where we have to become self-critical. We have much to feel satisfied about, so it is very important that we do not become complacent.
Robert Chambers :	The most positive thing about MYRADA has been its openness and willingness to share with others. This, in turn, has led to a similar culture of openness among those (non-MYRADA people) trained by MYRADA. We have to build on it.

Jimmy gave a concise overview of MYRADA’s PALM activities over the last 8 months. Detailed notes are available on request.

Major points were :

We can compliment ourselves that

To date we have conducted 28 PALM workshops.
We have introduced PALM to 764 development personnel of whom 413 are the staff of MYRADA, 48 are from various Government Departments and 303 are from other development institutions. Atleast 100 of the above have had the opportunity to participate in PALM workshops more than once.
We have experimented with PALM in relation to several issues: watershed planning, tank rehabilitation, credit management, forestry, health, agriculture-livestock, fodder development, etc. It has helped us see patterns of behaviour that we may have been aware of but had never really discussed with the people; it has also given us many new insights into what the priorities of rural people are, how they manage their livelihoods, and why they do the things they do. (For example, one group of farmers gave us rainfall data in term of the number of inches of moisture that permeated the soil; apparently, neither the quantum of rain nor the number of rainy days was important to them).
We have introduced some new exercises into PALM. Apart from games and cultural evenings that set the tone for an atmosphere of friendliness and informality, the most important has been the "Do-It-Yourself" (DIY) exercise where participants have to perform village tasks such as ploughing, thatching roofs, lighting a fire, making a basket, and so on. Our ability (or more often inability) to perform them leads us to a better understanding of what the tasks involve.

Al Fernandez: But do-it-yourself does more than that. Very often we enter a village with a baggage of ideas, attitudes and solutions. DIY helps to dilute this baggage. We realise that there are things that they can do that we cannot do. It develops humility in us and confidence in the villagers.

We have paid attention to documenting our workshops and experiences. In addition to literature, we have also concentrated on visual documentation. We have a good set of slides and are adding to them, we are also building up video documentation.
An important achievement has been the start of some good institutional linkages: with volags, Government Departments in whose training we have assisted; with research and training institutes, etc.
We have focused on identifying those among the PALM workshop participants who are emerging as trainers, and are fostering their capabilities in order to build them up as effective trainers. Depending upon interest, we are giving them opportunities to specialise in those exercises that they feel most inclined and confident to handle.

That is as far as we can take credit for. On the other had, there are also certain areas and issues that we have to take responsibility for :

§ Are our training programmes too tightly packed? A fair amount of responsible feedback seems to indicate that our training programmes of 3 to 5 days’ duration attempt to include more than what is reasonably possible to achieve. Not everybody gets a chance to try a hand at everything and some participants may be getting a little left behind. Can trainings be structured differently?

§ We have to look at the issue of quality control both in the dissemination and use of PALM.

§ All PALM exercises take up villagers’ time. We have to be more sensitive to this and concerned about it. Is it reasonable to think that they should be compensated for it? How?

§ We have allowed a backlog to accumulate in documentation. There is so much material generated at each training workshop that would be well worth carefully analysing, classifying and writing up. How can we ensure that all of it is not lost?

§ There is the problem of being unable to keep up with the demand for training. Trainee groups are in danger of becoming too large and too heterogeneous for effective learning.

These and other such issues would have to be addressed in the coming days.

The timing of PALM exercises may influence outcomes. E.g. assessment of credit needs in March may be different from assessment of credit needs in September. We have to be sensitive to this fact.
	PALM workshops are not ends in themselves. Neither is it necessary for every exercise to conclude with a plan. PALM has to be seen as part of a process.
The tendency to interview or even the use of the word ‘interview’ contradicts the spirit of PALM. An interview does not denote a relationship of equality between the parties involved. What else can we come up with?

Following this, there were presentations from projects on the work that each had done in the area of PALM. Almost all MYRADA projects have had training in PALM for staff; some have used PALM for programme planning, especially with regard to watersheds. Papers circulated by projects can be made available on request. A summary of points of interest consolidated from all presentations include the following:

- The variety of uses to which maps have been (and can be) put to. Village maps (i.e. maps drawn by the villagers themselves) had been used to see caste patterns, asset ownership, households with school-going children, credit-giving and credit receiving households, households with disabled persons, sanitation systems and points in the village where dirt accumulated, ownership of trees in the village etc., etc.

In discussion it was expressed that participative mapping was one of the most versatile of PALM exercises which could be used not only to gather but also to update various types of information and evaluate development programmes.

- The enormous amount of data that PALM can generate if questions are open-ended and timed well, if outsiders’ function as facilitators rather than interviewers, if people are allowed to express themselves in the way in which they are comfortable and if observation is combined with following up on the leads thrown up by people. Since this is more spontaneous data, it is also more relevant for development purposes.

- The usefulness of combining two or more methods in seeking information. E.g. mapping with wealth ranking, transects with resource mapping, seasonal analysis with ranking, and so on. The data that is generated is both relevant and comprehensive.

- The use of children as informants. Children have produced village maps that often include details left out by the adults. When engaged in discussions they are often more observant and have a greater eye for accuracy and detail (E.g. "there is one more well in the village, only thing there is no water in it", "So-and-so’s house used to be the school but now she has taken it back").

- The usefulness of diagrams and graphic representation of data. They are more easily understood by everybody, since they rely less on words and numbers. If we go a step further and get the people themselves to make the diagrams, then far less explanation is required from our side.

- Using farmers as trainers. This is both necessary and possible. Here we are going beyond the stage of using farmers only as informants; we are acknowledging that they have their own areas of specialisation and are training them to communicate their knowledge and experience to others.

- Quantification of data is a frequent cause of problems. Often there is a tendency to let farmers indicate preferences by using stones or seeds, and later convert them into numbers or percentages. It is best not to do so unless one is absolutely sure. For E.g. to indicate cash earning from neem in relation to tamarind the farmer say:

Neem : = oo
Tamarind: = oooooooooooo

Instead of concluding that tamarind earns 5 times more than neem or that neem earns 80% less than tamarind it is best to say that returns from tamarind are much more than from neem. To understand this much is usually enough for our purposes. Quantification in absolute terms can take us off the track if we are not careful.

Our professional training orients us to measure things in absolute terms whereas relative terms are more acceptable, more sensitive and yield more information.

- At times there are difficulties in understanding information, i.e. what people say may be different from what they mean, which may be different from what we interpret. In such cases, it is better to use the output generated directly by the people rather than our version of it, and then ask for clarifications.

- Another point where misinterpretations can occur is when matter from the ground (E.g. maps, seasonality diagrams, etc.) is being transferred on to paper. Once again, this will have to be done carefully and with clarifications.

- How do people understand time? And how do they represent it? This is an area where our understanding is limited. Sometimes, it is represented as a circle, sometimes as a straight line. On two occasions (with 2 different groups) people have drawn horseshoe-shaped timelines on which events were marked. If we do not have a shared understanding of time, then what is the basis for communication where time is involved?

- When complex data is generated there is no compulsion to force it into simple categories; in fact, good information can get lost in this way.

- The response to wealth ranking has been mixed. The criteria used for ranking may differ from group to group within the same village. Should discussions be held in private or in public? Should they involve one farmer or a group of farmers? If one farmer, the how should he/she be chosen?

In fact, the choice of informant(s) for any exercise is a critical and tricky issue. To explore deeper and to cross verify any information is an important part of the PALM process.

- The discussion process itself is also critical.

v The need for all participants to be clear about the objectives of any exercise is important if later confusion is to be avoided (this has been a problem more than once).

v The method of conducting an exercise must also be clear (more in terms of what not to do) though there is much scope for improvisation on the spot.

v The need to anticipate that all trainees may not be equally ‘proficient’ has to be borne in mind. Therefore, every training group must have a facilitator who is clear on what PALM is all about.

v The need to be aware of when and how to facilitate discussions is important. For example, in constructing the history of the village, is the advent of the post office considered to be an important event by the villagers themselves, or are we provoking them into recording it as such?

In one case we asked a group of farmers "What are your problems in marketing cotton?" One participant-observer pointed out and proved that much more information regarding the dynamics of cotton-marketing could be got by asking instead, "How do you market cotton?"

- Finally, there were issues like: why should we talk about things that both the villagers and we ourselves know the answers to (E.g. seasonality of agricultural operations)? Why should we perform village tasks? Isn’t it more of a gimmick? And so on.

a) The point is not to talk about the obvious (we may have been doing so upto now because we are still being trained to understand the methods/exercises themselves, and have not really gone into using them independently and outside the workshops). But the real issue is: do we have a shared understanding of issues and priorities? Have we reached a point in our relationship where we recognise each others’ knowledge, are confident about each other, and respect one another? That is the real objective of PALM and that is the real test of PALM.

b) The value of any learning depends on the seriousness of the student. Whether an exercise is a gimmick, or a symbolic act, or a learning opportunity depends upon the frame of mind with which the student approaches it.

How can we make PALM a better tool in fulfilling MYRADA’s Mission?
	This led to a session of questions, doubts and clarifications.