Dialogue
Education at Work in Bangladesh
by
Danielle Pécore-Ugorji*
Canadian Foodgrains
Bank, Winnipeg, Manitoba
I
would like to provide you here with some of my reflections on the dialogue education
approach I used to design and co-facilitate this "End of Project Reporting"
workshop in Bangladesh, February 1-5, 2005. I had a few "ah-ha!" moments
during my design and facilitation of this workshop and I'd like to share these
lessons learned with you!
Dialogue
Education really does get across a powerful message about knowledge: who processes
it, how it's obtained, how it's valued, and by whom and how it's shared. It became
very clear to me during this workshop that this methodology reinforced to everyone
in the room that they all possessed a lot of knowledge and that the learning would
happen essentially amongst themselves if everyone shared their knowledge and experience
with the group. This was particularly valuable in this workshop given that participants
had varying job descriptions and levels of experience with Canadian Foodgrains
Bank (CFGB) and food programming generally. I know that many so-called "junior
staff" (i.e. young people with a lot of education but little experience and
fairly new to their job) really caught on to this message about knowledge and
used every opportunity available to learn from the really experienced (i.e. the
"masters" - the Derek D'Silvas, the Robin Mondals) staff people present.
However, even those with a lot of experience expressed to me how much they learned
from the others present... the partners of the five CFGB members present at the
training have decided to get together and form a network for learning and sharing
information amongst themselves. I think this is the most important outcome of
the workshop and is proof that Dialogue Education fosters a very different attitude
about knowledge than standard workshop methodologies.
Dialogue
Education enables a shift in power relationships between the facilitators and
learners. It's easy to say and very powerful to feel: with Dialogue Education
the facilitators are not in control of the learning, the learners are. This became
very clear to me as I struggled to try and complete my Learning Resources and
Needs Assessment first by email and then in Dhaka during a hartal. Not knowing--or
being able to hear first hand--some things about participants' needs going into
the workshop placed a huge constraint on me during the design phase. However,
building opportunities into the workshop to share needs, resources, experiences,
frustrations and expectations enabled participants to direct the flow of the workshop
as well as ensure it met their needs for learning. We tried to remain as flexible
as possible and allowed participants to prolong key discussions and tasks that
were important components of their learning and cut short those that did not add
to their learning journey. I feel that this exact same workshop could be given
again to other partners without it feeling at all like the same workshop. How
much participants contributed directly determined how much they--and the rest
of us--learned. This workshop was a success because of how much participation,
leadership and ownership participants took for their own learning.
Dialogue
Education makes a difference in the quality of partner-donor relationships before,
during and after the workshop. First, conducting a Learning Needs and Resources
Assessment (LNRA) builds great rapport and allows all people involved to get to
know a lot more about each other than they would normally prior to meeting. The
seven steps of the design made the rational for the workshop clear - by clearly
stating the needs of both learners and facilitators/Members/CFGB - but also showed
very clearly how participants needs and prior experience were being taken into
account in the design. I feel that the rapport and working relationships built
with partner staff over these five days were on a very different level - both
in terms of the mutual learning, openness and real respect and admiration - than
previously established in such a short time with other partners. This facilitated
numerous less formal discussions about a variety of programming and contextual
issues as well as created mutual trust and understanding which led to more effective
meetings. Plus, despite covering some tough issues and heavy material, we had
a lot of fun together, allowing us to get to know each other on a human level.
Dialogue Education is not just about "moving
away from a presentation style" and "using small group work".
It is essentially about needs and attitudes. Such an incredible attitude of respect
hovered over the workshop--it was evident in how participants treated each other
(despite the different power relationships and rivalries in the room) and the
facilitators (despite the fact that I was a woman). And as a facilitator, always
keeping the needs of others in the center of everything I did and thought really
framed things differently for me: this workshop was not about covering a set
of materials but about creating a space for the needed learning. And this doesn't
apply only to workshops - this attitude and focus on the needs of partners can
be applied to meetings and a variety of other contexts.
Dialogue
Education is worth the time and effort it takes to use comprehensively. Although
I cannot pretend to have done a cost-benefit analysis of a traditional-style workshop
and a workshop designed and facilitated using dialogue education (although what
a good thesis topic!), I am convinced that although the later takes more effort,
work and time than other methodologies it also yields disproportionately more
results than other methodologies. I intend to try and measure the results of this
workshop through a systematic comparison of pre-workshop EPRs and the next EPRs
submitted by these partners - I'll keep you posted on the results. However, because
of the amount of effort, work and time that it takes - especially for this size
of group, it's essential to have a co-facilitator. Having Sam Vander Ende co-facilitate
not only allowed participants to benefit from two facilitators' knowledge, experience
and facilitation style, but allowed Sam and me to stay attentive to participants'
needs, to better prepare those extra things (examples, materials, visuals) that
made the workshop special and run smoothly as well as to reflect as we went on
the tasks, the sequencing, the energy-level and the appropriateness of different
activities. Thank you, Sam for all your hard work during the workshop!
*Danielle
took GLP's Advanced
Learning Design course in January 2005 here in Toronto, just prior to her
leaving for Bangladesh. She is also a graduate of GLP's Learning
to Listen-Learning to Teach.
<<back
