effectiveness of modular training at farmers - IPMS Information ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

stated that, there was no made to ask farmers’ needs before, during and after the training.Tsion (2008) also explained that there was no as such organized need assessment even inresearch centers, but it was organized based on the needs of DAs and experts.4.1.3.2. Content of the trainingContent of the training is one of the important aspect to be considered in the process of humanresource development. Training content should connect with training needs of the farmers.Training plan or curriculum and training programs should correspond with the content of thetraining.Table 6: Trained farmers’ response on the content of the trainingContents of the trainingTrained FarmersFrequency percentRelevant 55 91.7Non relevant 5 8.3Total 60Source: Own survey, 2010Based on the data gathered from interview schedules, 91.7 % respondents explained that thetraining content was relevant in terms of the training contents towards farming communities;where as 8.3 % respondents explained that the training content was not relevant. The trainingwhat they had conducted was curriculum based and relevant to the farming system, but itdoesn’t mean that only training contents can achieve the stated objectives for successfultraining results. The guideline was developed at Federal level by experts of the Ministry ofAgriculture and Rural Development and interpreted to the local language at regional level asindicated by Fisseha (2009). Training texts were prepared to train farmers based on tasks andduties presented in the modules. Farmers were not deemed and involved while the contents ofmodules were produced.44
4.1.3.3. Delivery of modular trainingDuration, proportion, seasons, techniques and styles of the training are very important trainingmethodological aspects that can affect the effectiveness of modular training.Table 7: Training delivery dimensionsItems Trained farmers (n= 60)FrequencyPercentLength of trainings• Sufficient 50 83.3• Not sufficient 10 16.7Preferred style of training• With interval 53 88.3• Continuous 7 11.7Training mix• More theoretical 54 90.0• More practical 3 5.0• Balanced 3 5.0Training methods• Class lecture 46 76.6• Mixed type 9 15.0• Group discussion 3 5.0• Demonstration 1 1.7• Field visit 1 1.7Source: Own survey data, 2010According to the data gathered from respondent farmers through interview schedules the timeallowed to take modular courses was sufficient as 83.3% of sample respondents’ responsesand was not sufficient according to 16.7% of respondents. Approaches or styles of the training45
Page 1 and 2:
EFFECTIVENESS OF MODULAR TRAINING A
Page 3 and 4:
SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIESHARAMAYA
Page 5 and 6:
STATEMENT OF AUTHORFirst of all, I
Page 7 and 8:
ABBREVIATIONS (Continued)RAAKSSGSWH
Page 9 and 10: ACKNOWLEDGMENTFirst and foremost le
Page 11 and 12: TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)2.5. E
Page 13 and 14: LIST OF TABLESTablepageTable 1. Est
Page 15 and 16: LIST OF TABLES IN THE APPENDIXAppen
Page 17 and 18: 1. INTRODUCTION1.1. Background of t
Page 19 and 20: since 2004 in Ethiopia. Farmers wer
Page 21 and 22: undertaken. If institutions focused
Page 23 and 24: panel discussion, conference, exper
Page 25 and 26: 2. LITERATURE REVIEWIn this chapter
Page 27 and 28: Figure1. Four Stages of the TIER Mo
Page 29 and 30: Level 1: Reactions: At this level,
Page 31 and 32: In 1963, agricultural extension was
Page 33 and 34: stated objectives which involves co
Page 35 and 36: trainees’ farm cooperation and co
Page 37 and 38: Modular training was supposed to gi
Page 39 and 40: achievement of a corporation purpos
Page 41 and 42: e examined, defined and described b
Page 43 and 44: FTCs are expected to play active ro
Page 45 and 46: deficient in training skills, espec
Page 47 and 48: 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGYIn this chap
Page 49 and 50: Figure 4. Map of the study Area (Fo
Page 51 and 52: 3.2.2. Sample size and sampling pro
Page 53 and 54: 3.2.3. Types and sources of dataTo
Page 55 and 56: 3.2.5. Method of data analysisBased
Page 57 and 58: Table 4: Profiles of respondentsNo
Page 59: The data in the Table reveal that t
Page 63 and 64: also have not participated with ful
Page 65 and 66: Table 8: Knowledge test of sample h
Page 67 and 68: 4.2.2. PracticePractice was operati
Page 69 and 70: The responses of farmers were categ
Page 71 and 72: system. Actors’ interactions can
Page 73 and 74: FTCs and this project supports only
Page 75 and 76: 4.3.5. Actor linkage matrixActor li
Page 77 and 78: According to actor linkage matrix;
Page 79 and 80: followed by projects, NGOs and rese
Page 81 and 82: may have access for information abo
Page 83 and 84: 4.5.3. Lessons learned from better
Page 85 and 86: SWOT AnalysisStrength, Weakness, Op
Page 87 and 88: Opportunities• Participatory plan
Page 89 and 90: Practice was assessed based on trai
Page 91 and 92: with communication media, articles,
Page 93 and 94: BoARD and SWHISA (Bureau of Agricul
Page 95 and 96: IPMS (Improving Productivity and Ma
Page 97 and 98: Taddesse Mulugeta, 2007. Rural wate
Page 99 and 100: Appendix Table 1. Category of train
Page 101 and 102: Appendix Table 5: Extent of linkage
Page 103 and 104: 3.2. What do you think about the ti
Page 105 and 106: 4.5 Practice (Indicate whether you
show all

effectiveness of modular training at farmers - IPMS Information ...

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

Delete template?

Save as template?