on Culture & Development - Seameo-SPAFA

More documents

Recommendations

Info

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○was not an option should indeed all 40 people reply inthe positive! On the whole this strategy worked welland the prime determining factor directing the choiceon ‘invitees’ was balance. By balance, we mean thatwhere possible the case studies presented wouldreflect a range of topics with all organizational sectorsrepresented. However, this approach was stillconsidered somewhat flawed as it did identify and preselectparticipants.To counter this unease over not offering everyparticipant the opportunity to present a case study asecond strategy was tried out. This strategy involvedrequesting all participants to only ‘think about’ but notactually prepare a case study before coming to theworkshop. Once at the workshop the procedure andscope of the case study input requirements wereexplained and volunteers requested. In practice, thisstrategy also worked well as through discussion theparticipants were able to identify the case studyoptions that interested them most and proceed tomake the selection ‘democratically’.Employing either strategy does necessitate that fromthe very first day the facilitator assigned to Day 5makes arrangements outside the workshop hours toassist the selected case study participants in theirpreparation. The modality for the case study procedureis explained further in the Conflict Mediation &Transformation chapter for Day 5.It is interesting to note that the methodology of thecase study presentations made during the 2 nd series ofworkshops represents a significant departure from thatemployed in the 1 st series of workshops. Please referto pages 104-5 in the 1 st edition of the Guidelines.Here you will see that facilitators, rather thanparticipants, are encouraged to present their case25
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○studies. However, when embarking on the latest round ofworkshops it was decided that participant case studies wouldbe more beneficial even though, organizationally, they dopresent a challenge and require planning prior to and duringthe workshop.26Keeping TrackEvery team of facilitators will have their own set of strategiesto track the progress of the workshop they are involved with.Quite often these strategies evolve as we learn more. Thiswas certainly the case during the 2 nd series of workshopswhich were conducted in fairly quick succession. A few thingsto note which we found particularly useful included invitingpast participants to again join a workshop but in the role ofco-facilitator. Apart from obviously helping to accomplish theoverriding objective of attaining a multiplier effect throughthe repeat of workshops, a very practical outcome wasobtained. This practical outcome was that as a pastparticipant the person now participating as a co-facilitatorcould more readily identify potential problems and relatemore easily to difficulties participants may have beenexperiencing.End-of-the day meetings amongst the facilitators to assessthe day’s outcomes at times also included a few participantsto try and help ensure that we did receive a direct input anddid not discuss and evaluate our progress based only on ourperceived notions.‘Keeping track’ does of course include the wide and variedarea of documentation. We learnt from experience that wewere being rather excessive in our documentation ‘drive’. Ofmore concern was the realization that such documentationwas primarily for our own purposes rather than for theparticipants’ immediate reference and use. This led to adramatic shift from a ‘documentation overload’ wherein at the
Page 2: ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Page 5 and 6: ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Page 7 and 8: ContentsPreface to 2004 Guidelines
Page 9 and 10: “Development as it affects a comm
Page 11 and 12: 10PREFACE TO 2004 GUIDELINES EDITIO
Page 13 and 14: Fororeworord:12FororeworordDespite
Page 16 and 17: PART ONE15HOW THE GUIDELINES EVOLVE
Page 18 and 19: the best of intentions we can not o
Page 21 and 22: ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Page 23 and 24: ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Page 25: ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Page 29: ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Page 33 and 34: 32“Tolerance, inter-cultural dial
Page 35 and 36: 34IntroductionThe first day of the
Page 37 and 38: 36other groups may share those valu
Page 39 and 40: TOPICSWhat do I expect from this wo
Page 41 and 42: 406. A representative from each gro
Page 43 and 44: 1.3 Meanings of CultureTime: 90 min
Page 45 and 46: 4) Culture is the roles and guideli
Page 47 and 48: Step 26. The following cultural map
Page 49 and 50: Notes on Cultural MappingCultural m
Page 51 and 52: 50Discussion following this activit
Page 53 and 54: Questions ChecklistHas my understan
Page 55 and 56: 54“We need to find ways of relati
Page 57 and 58: 56IntroductionFollowing on from the
Page 59: 58include supporters or opponents o
Page 62 and 63: Activity 2.3 - Development CartoonT
Page 64 and 65: Activity 2.4 - Tools BrainstormTime
Page 66 and 67: 2. Invite volunteers to explain bri
Page 68 and 69: Activity 2.6 - Enabling & Inhibitin
Page 71 and 72: Questions ChecklistWhat is my view
Page 73 and 74: 72“Mr. Director General, why is i
Page 75 and 76: 74IntroductionRead the following co
Page 77:
76redundant because they consider t
Page 80 and 81:
Activity 3.3 The Programme Cycle79T
Page 82 and 83:
COUNTRYCONSULTATIONSEVALUATIONIDENT
Page 84:
What it is and why we use itFirst w
Page 87 and 88:
TERMAssumptionsMEANINGFactors exter
Page 89 and 90:
88Table 2: Log FrameOBJECTIVESPURPO
Page 91 and 92:
participants when they took the rol
Page 93 and 94:
Avoiding log frame design problems(
Page 95 and 96:
Questions ChecklistHow can I promot
Page 97 and 98:
96“One of the most difficult thin
Page 99 and 100:
98IntroductionThe overall aim of Da
Page 101 and 102:
100Activity 4.5, like 4.3, recommen
Page 103 and 104:
TOPICSHow does the way we represent
Page 105 and 106:
1044. Ask participants to repeat th
Page 107 and 108:
Activity 4.5 Attitudes and Assumpti
Page 109 and 110:
Activity 4.6 Colleague Card SortSou
Page 111 and 112:
Activity 4.7 Describing a Resourcef
Page 113 and 114:
Questions ChecklistWhat are my pers
Page 115 and 116:
114“Reconciliation is to understa
Page 117 and 118:
116IntroductionThroughout the works
Page 119 and 120:
TOPICSWhat is meant by conflict med
Page 121 and 122:
120maybe without even realizing or
Page 123 and 124:
1223. If necessary, demonstrate. Fo
Page 125 and 126:
124Notes on procedure: The above st
Page 127 and 128:
Conclusion126Transforming situation
Page 129 and 130:
128
Page 131 and 132:
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○
Page 133 and 134:
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○
Page 135 and 136:
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○
Page 137 and 138:
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○
Page 139 and 140:
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○
Page 141 and 142:
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○
Page 143 and 144:
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○ ○
Page 145 and 146:
ContributorsAnuchit Jittrathanakul
Page 147 and 148:
ContributorsVirongrung Bodharamik (
Page 149:
148For information and enquiries:Ce
show all

on Culture & Development - Seameo-SPAFA

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?