printable version

TRANSFER: A Bridge From The Current Situation To Anticipated Changes

by Valerie Uccellani
Partner, Global Learning Partners

Yesterday I was asked what “transfer” means. “Is it,” they asked “transferring prior knowledge/skills to a new situation resulting in new knowledge/skills?” At first I thought to correct them with my own working definition of “transfer”. But, in a moment, I liked their definition better. “Transfer”, as I see it in the world of adult learning is, indeed, creating an opportunity for learners to take what they know, apply it to a new situation, and then use what they learn in their day-to-day world. I like to think of “transfer” like a bridge – bridging from the learners’ world, and bridging back into it. Designing for transfer of learning is an exercise in honesty. It requires that we: fully understand the realities of the learners’ situation, currently; and anticipate how that situation could realistically change as a result of their learning.

This training is designed for staff of 5 radio stations throughout Malawi. They work in community radio, private, and public radio stations.  They have varying degrees of experience in radio production.  All of these staff are part of the African Farm Radio Research Initiative (AFRRI) and, therefore have been together before in project-wide meetings.  They have never had a chance to work together in production efforts.

In the rest of this short article, I am

going to focus on one recent design in which we at GLP, Inc. were very attentive to transfer of learning. The design was created with the African Farm Radio Research Initiative (AFRRI). A bit of background on AFRII can be found in the above box. For more information visit Farm Radio International or contact:
valerie@globalearning.com.

Research has shown that farm radio programs can have a positive influence on farmers and can contribute to greater food security. AFRRI’s mandate is to build the quality and quantity of farm radio programming. As part of that mandate, AFRRI asked GLP, Inc. to help design a training package which would include face-to-face workshops and distance – learning. Participants would be staff of twenty-five radio stations across five African nations.

The Current Situation (aka the “why” statement)

To start the design, we researched the current situations of the station staff, as well as the quantity and quality of their current farming-related programs. Here’s a bit of what we found from our situation assessment in Malawi:

Station staff are generally experienced in interview-based programs. It is very common to create a narrated program with one “expert” interview on a topic. Many staff are quite comfortable with agricultural and food security topics but many are frustrated by lack of access to sources of information for food and agricultural programming. A small number of stations are creative in their broadcasts and are well-known by communities for the farm broadcasts. Community research showed that farming families want practical information through the radio (such as fluctuations in market prices of their produce) and they like to hear about experiences of other farmers. They enjoy a mix of formats. In order to improve their farm radio work, AFRII station staff wanted training on the use of technical equipment/ software. They felt fairly confident in the multiple roles they fill at their stations (i.e. producer, reporter, narrator, technician) but also eager to build their skills in these areas. Currently, station schedules include various amounts of broadcasting on farm and food security issues. Managers make final decisions about radio program schedules. Most of the participants of this training would not be broadcasters, not managers. Their role would be to encourage greater farm radio programming by proposing ideas for good programs, and by tracking listeners’ response to programs which were aired. In order to do this, AFRRI saw that staff needed guidance in how to: Effectively tap into sources of expertise on farming issues; Build programs from community research; Include farmers’ voices in their programs; Try out new formats (i.e. call in/ out) for more engaging programs; Use new equipment and software to support their work; Find ways to get feedback from listeners before and/or after broadcasting.

Looking at the current situation, we were able to get ideas on how to transfer the learners’ existing knowledge and skills into the face-to-face workshop. For example, participants:

• each brought samples of a farm radio program they wanted to share with others;
• critiqued each other’s programs using criteria we developed together (and gave constructive feedback);
• interviewed each other about what makes for a good farm radio program and reviewed the findings of their own community research for insights.

Changes We Hope to See (aka: Now What?)

An honest view of the current situation also helped us clarify and prioritize what changes we might hope to see as a result of this training effort. As a fellow designer, you can imagine that a huge international team of people giving input made this step in the design work difficult. We had to come to agreement on what realistic changes we anticipated as a result of this training. Only with such a unified vision, would we be ready for us to finalize the length of time for the training, the list of content, the achievement-based objectives and, eventually, the learning tasks. After a long stretch of dialogue, with input from a sample of learners themselves, we ultimately arrived at the following decisions.

Changes we Hope to See After the training, broadcasters will: Use local, and national sources to provide Farming Communities with information and services they want and need Increase field visits to communities to see and hear their perspectives on Agricultural and Food Security Issues Use two-way communication technologies to get community members’ voices on-the-air (i.e. call in, call out, field recording) Experiment with a variety of formats that seem to better engage listeners and help them to remember what they hear (i.e. field interviews, mini dramas, panel discussions) Capture listeners’ feedback as a way to influence future broadcasts Develop future programs that respond to feedback from the community – programs that grow/deepen, as the community’s relationship with the topic deepens, or programs that respond to listener feedback, wishes and needs Expand the number of hours devoted each week to Farm Radio program Analyze farming and food security issues and include different perspectives. As a result of these changes among broadcasters, here’s what’s possible: Broadcasters will have closer ties to farmers they serve, and will involve them in programming Radio will attract more listeners to the farm radio programmes because of the improvement in programming and quality Key players (such as agricultural extensionists) will get even more involved in radio programming There will be even greater interaction among broadcasters from different stations and stronger networks advocating for better radio policies, particularly for rural broadcasting.

Transfer Questions

You might feel, as I did, that these anticipated changes are a bit ambitious. Indeed they were. But, they were reasonable. We were able to use this list of changes as a constant reference point. We asked ourselves such questions as:

What could we do in the training so that staff would be more able to tap into a variety of sources for farm radio programs?

What kind of experience could we create for learners during the training that would make it more likely for them to experiment with a variety of formats after the training?

How could they practice ways to get community feedback during the training so they’d be more equipped to do so back at their own stations?

The “transfer” questions also forced us, as designers, to work within the realities of the participants. We didn’t pretend, for example, that they had free, reliable, internet access to tap into international sources for stories. We didn’t imagine that their managers would give them budgets and time to visit the community whenever they liked. We didn’t hope that they could use two-way communication technologies unless we supplied them with the equipment (which AFRRI did). In other words, we tried to focus on knowledge and skills which they could transfer into their work now – which they could use as soon as the workshop was over. On day one, all the participants examined the worksheet where we outline “Changes We Hope to See.” Each learning task was designed to move learners one step closer to that new reality.

We have just completed the first two runs of the face-to-face workshop (in Malawi and Uganda). By the time you read this article, the workshop will have been held also in Ghana, Tanzania, and Mali; the distance learning phase will be well underway in Malawi and Uganda. As the months of distance learning unfold, we are asking: What has staff transferred from the workshop into their day-to-day work at the radio stations? What can we discover together about farm radio programming as they work, now, in the realities of their world?

<<back