UNIT 3: PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES IN EXTENSION

PROGRAMME PLANNING
Introduction to participation and participatory approaches
Everyone who has ever worked in water utility Companies, Game Management, Security Firm,
Health, Community Development, Education, Extension Service etc knows at least one horror
story about an intervention that either went wrong or never worked for a minute. Often, when the
story is told, it becomes clear that the well-intentioned professionals in charge had totally
misunderstood or ignored some fundamental fact about the community or the target population.
Since they assumed they knew what was needed, they planned the whole project themselves...and
failed miserably. For every horror story, however, there's a story about an intervention where
everything went right or wrong. Below is a story to emphasize the point:

It is not uncommon that facilities and services are created and offered [my emphasis] to the
people, who then fail to use them satisfactorily. Many drinking water supply schemes have
been set up, but the women, the traditional water carriers, do not use the costly pumps
installed by programme agency. Rural housing is often built which people refuse to live
in... This happens when decision-makers exclude the participation of those affected
(Mathur, 1986:6).

In many of these cases, you'll find that the target population and often the larger community as
well was not included in the planning of the intervention from the beginning.
In view of the above, this unit will introduce you to how different people have defined
participation. Furthermore, you will be introduced to the challenges of participation. The unit
concludes by outlying a practical community participatory programme planning in extension.

Learning Outcomes:
At the end of the unit, you should be expected to:
1. Describe participation and participatory approaches
2. Illustrate various participation typology
3. Explain the importance of farmers/community participation
4. Explain challenges in community participation
5. Identify Tools used in community participation
6. Design practical steps in initiating a participatory extension programme planning.
3.1 What is Participation?

Although this may appear to be a simple question, there is no single definition of participation by
communities but, rather, a potpourri (freshener) of definitions varying mostly by the degree of
participation. The continuum in the next section provides a helpful framework for understanding
participation.

3.2 Typology of participation

According to the typology of participation developed by Pretty (1994), two forms of participation
derive from these two approaches. The first, found in blueprint approaches, can be called "passive
participation", whereby people participate by being told what is going to happen. The second,
found in process-oriented approaches, can be called "interactive participation" whereby people
participate in joint analysis, which leads to locally formulated action plans. Other types of
participation exist in between and outside these two (Table 2).

Table 1: Typology of participation

Typology Characteristic of each

✓ People participate in activities by being told what is going to happen or
has already happened.
✓ It is unilateral announcement by an administration or project
1. Passive participation
management without listening to people’s responses.
✓ The information being shared belongs only to outsiders or
professionals.
✓ People participate in activities by answering questions posed by
extractive researchers, using questionnaire surveys or similar
2. Participation in
approaches.
information giving
✓ People do not have the opportunity to influence on proceedings, as the
findings are neither shared nor checked for accuracy.
✓ People participate in activities by being consulted and external agents
listen to people’s views.
✓ These external agents define both problems and solutions, and may
3. Participation by
modify them in the light of people’s responses.
consultation
✓ Such a consultative process does not concede any share decision
making and professionals do not have obligation to follow the views of
the people.
✓ People participate by providing resources, for example labor for pond
construction, in return for food, cash or other material incentives.
✓ Much on-farm R&D falls in this category, as farmers provide the fields
4. Participation for
but are not involved in experimentation or on-farm testing or other
material incentives
learning processes.
✓ It is very common to see this called participation, yet people have no
stake in prolonging activities when the incentives end.
 ✓ People participate by forming groups to meet predetermined objectives
related to projects, which can involve the development or promotion of
externally initiated organization.
5. Functional ✓ Such involvement is quite rare at early stages of project cycles or
participation planning, it often appears after major decisions have been made.
✓ These institutions tend to be dependent on external agents, initiators or
facilitators, but may become self-dependent later on.
✓ Examples are state initiated: Cooperatives, Clubs, PTAs etc.
✓ People participate in joint analysis, which leads to action plans and the
formation of new community organization and local institutions or
strengthening the existing ones.
6. Interactive
✓ It has a tendency to involve interdisciplinary methodologies that seek
participation
multiple perspectives.
✓ Therefore, people have a stake in maintaining infrastructures or
practices.
✓ People participate in the development with self-initiative and control
over the changes of the community.
✓ They may develop contacts with external institutions for resources and
technical advices they need, but retain control over how resources are
7. Self - mobilization used.
✓ Such self-initiated mobilization and collective action may or may not
challenge existing inequitable distributions of wealth and power.
✓ Examples are community initiated cooperatives, clubs, associations
etc.
Source: Pretty, 1994.

The first six (6) definitions are founded on the comforts of a modernization theory premised on
the universal prescription of identical development packages to diverse regions with varying
problems. Modernization thinking of development admits that development is uniform to all
locales. Proponents of this school of thought does not appreciate that communities are risk-prone
and diverse both in resources and the problems that confront them.

The last two definitions generally are considered as being genuine participatory development. Such
definitions require extensive involvement of stakeholders in various stages of development
activities that is: programme design, implementation and monitoring and evaluation. Proponents
of this school of thought conceive that development is the transformation of communities
themselves into dynamic and self-reliant entities, which, by virtue of their effective organization
and development capacities and on the strength of their own internal momentum, are capable of
solving most of their development problems on their own on a continuing basis (Dipholo, 1996).

The involvement of the people entails allowing them to discover the possibilities of exercising
choice and thereby becoming capable of managing their own development. Consequently,
participatory development embodies a "process of enlarging peoples’ choices" (Martinussen,
1997). The opportunity to make choices should include the opportunity to choose not to develop,
or to develop according to their own understanding of development.

The justification for participatory development is not an attempt to invalidate the knowledge of
development professionals. Expert knowledge is indispensable to the development processes, but
development cannot be planned exclusively on the basis of opinions of or studies conducted by
experts from outside. Local people may not have the required technical expertise to undertake a
particular project and they will therefore need the input of experts from outside. But by the same
token, outsiders may not necessarily have a better understanding of local problems than insiders
and they, too, will need assistance from locals.

3.3 Importance of farmers or the community participation

Development practitioners have come up with various reasons why the community should
participate in development programmes. This section will not exhaust all of them. However, the
following are some of the major reasons:

When the community participates,

i. It will ensure that the project revolves around people’s felt needs, and is therefore, more
responsive to local conditions;
ii. It enhances project sustainability;
iii. It builds and promotes the community’s ownership of the project. If people are integral
to the planning of a community intervention, then that intervention will be theirs. They
have a stake in it not only as its beneficiaries or staff or sponsors, but as its originators.
They'll do what they can to see their work succeed.; and
iv. It empowers the people, build social capital, and strengthen governance.

3.3.1 When is participatory planning appropriate, and when is not?

There are three distinguished extension programmes: developmental, informational, and
institutional. The first one is clearly process centered, and objectives derive primarily out of the
needs and problems of the participants. The second is predominantly top-down oriented, and
participants are primarly recipients of information. The third type corresponds basically to training
and instruction and is developed from a field of knowledge and from the educator. However, Boyle
(1981) stressed that in the course of extension work these types usually overlap; that is, a locally
initiated participatory project can very well benefit from centralized efforts to disseminate
information and from training activities. However, there are also some general guidelines for when
a participatory planning process may be appropriate or not appropriate at all, including:

i. When there's simply no time. An outbreak of a disease may erupt – it may have reached
such crisis proportions that it must be addressed immediately. In such a circumstance, it
may be possible to do some participatory planning after the fact, either to adjust the
intervention before it begins, or to plan its next phase.
 ii. When a community is so brutally divided, it's impossible to get all - or even any - of the
rival factions to the same table.
iii. When the target population is simply not interested in participating, and just wants the
organization to take care of it. One goal may be to get them interested, but that may have
to be part of the intervention, rather than part of the planning process.
iv. When the intervention rests on technical knowledge of a kind that the target population and
community members simply don't have.
v. When funding constraints or funders' regulations don't allow it.

3.4 Challenges of community participation

Despite significant benefits of participatory approaches to development in ensuring greater

efficiency and effectiveness in service provision, to the contrary, there is little evidence of the
long-term effectiveness of improving the conditions of the most vulnerable people or as a strategy
for social change. Furthermore, very few farmers or communities demand extension services or
are self-mobilisers. The question is why?

This sub-section signals common pitfalls, identifies constraints that need to be considered, and
presents ideas for solving potential problems. The common failings have been that:

i. Of changing the mindsets and behaviour of the community/people who have developed
a syndrome of dependence on government or extension providers. People have fixed
mindset of the impossibility believe that they are “set” as either good or bad. As such,
by simply engaging such people in participation will not change their fixed mindsets
and behaviour.
ii. The perception that even local camp extension officers are considered “outsiders” of
the village residents has been a misnomer. The fact of the matter is that, in extension
ethics, local camp extension officers are part and parcel of the village residents who
live with the village residents, implying that the problems facing the village residents
also affect him/her in one way or another; hence in one way or another, s/he knows the
problems facing the community. Therefore, local camp extension officers in
partnership with the farmers should also be involved in the planning process.

iii. The PRA tools such as social mapping, transect walk, ranking, problem tree, etc, have
been applied mechanically regardless of the cultural context. Social stratification,
divisions along ethnic lines, personal competitions and social factionalism are some of
the factors which make it difficult to talk about community mobilization through
participation. For example, a community defined by geography, perhaps most
appropriate for improving sanitation, may be too riven with social discoid to permit
mobilization. In such a context, participation may bring unresolved and irresolvable
conflicts out into the open, exacerbating rivalries of ethnicity;
 iv. In majority of development programmes, the community has been invited to participate
in activities already designed by the service organizations to address their goals instead
of people’s goals. Sometimes, participation of community in development programmes
is used to legitimize externally promulgated programmes (large development projects
that are on tight timelines). The idea of participation is used to legitimize the project’s
own priorities and needs and the needs of donors to include such processes in their
projects; and
v. Furthermore, majority facilitators of participation manipulate their audience to ensure
a quick, rapid application of the concept; so as to cover as many communities as
possible within a short space 'of time; and
vi. Often the top-down managerial style, characteristic of bureaucracies, tends not to be
compatible with participatory, bottom-up approaches and often favors more responsive
clients who are typically the better-off.

While these challenges may present potential or real problems to the success of a participatory
programme, overcoming them may tremendously increase the possibility of designing and
carrying out an effective community intervention. In most cases, the choice is not at one extreme
of the continuum, but somewhere in between. At the same time, a combination of different
approaches may even be necessary and advantageous.

3.5 Tools used in community participation

3.5.1 Prioritizing and ranking tools
3.5.1.1 Semi-structured interview,
3.5.1.2 Wealth ranking,
3.5.1.3 Pairwise matrix ranking
3.5.1.4 Preference ranking
3.5.1.5 General Consensus
3.5.2 Analysis tools
3.5.2.1 problem tree,
3.5.2.2 objective tree and
3.5.2.3 table of village solutions.
1.1.1 Linkages and relationship tools
1.1.1.1 Mapping,
1.1.1.2 transect walk
1.1.2 Data collection tools
1.1.2.1 focus group discussions,
1.1.2.2 Semi-structured interview
1.1.2.3 key informant interviews,
1.1.2.4 social maps,
1.1.2.5 ranking,
1.1.2.6 scoring, case studies, and
1.1.2.7 individual life stories.
 1.1.3 Action planning tools

3.6 Practical steps in initiating a participatory extension programme planning

It must be emphasized that when conducting a participatory extension programme planning, there
is no set standard therefore; each planning must be tailored to the specific objectives of the
programme or project and the context in which it is implemented. However, this unit provides a
general guideline to follow when conducting a participatory extension programme planning as
envisaged in Participatory Extension Approach (PEA), Participatory Village Development in
Isolated Areas (PaViDIA), Farmer Field Schools (FFSs), Farmer Input Support Response Initiative
(FISRI) Conservation Agriculture Scaling up for Increased Productivity and Production (CASIPP)
etc.

In order to have a demand-driven extension programme, the following main phases, which
constitute the demand-driven extension approach, are considered:

3.5.1 Preparatory phase

3.5.1.1 Building trust in the community especially the poor of the poorest and marginalised

The first step in initiating a participatory programme is to arrange for an informal meeting with as
many people as possible (e.g. Chiefs, village leaders, influential village residents etc) and explain
the new approach intended to be introduced. Since you want to introduce a new extension approach
different from the one, they have been used to, it’s better first to conscientise or break the ‘culture
of silence’ and ignorance inherent in the subject-object binomial relationship, only can they be
able to change.

3.5.1.2 Collect basic data

Credible and committed development actors, who are interested in bringing about sustainable
development through the participation of the poor, will first seek to know the micro-situations of
the area they want to intervene. This can be done by conducting baseline survey studies. Depending
on the type and objectives of a programme, however, the following information can be collected
and analysed by the project managers in collaboration with the community: farming opportunities
and problems, available natural resources, local leadership, types of crops grown and management,
breeds of livestock and management, culture, norms, education and poverty levels, hectarages,
local channels of communication, transport facilities, local credit and marketing systems, health
and nutrition levels etc. This type of data will serve as baseline data which will help in determining
whether the project has made an impact or not. It also helps in defining community needs and
priorities before starting a project. There are a number of methods and tools that can be used in
collecting basic data. Some of the more common methods are focus group discussions, key
informant interviews, social maps, ranking, scoring, case studies, and individual life stories.
3.5.2 Diagnostic phase
Identifying community needs/or problems

At this stage, both the local extension officers and the community identify the major opportunities,
problems or needs of various enterprises in terms of bio-physical and socio-economic factors. The
identification of the community problems or needs can be done by employing PRA tools such as
mapping, transect walk, semi-structured interview, problem tree etc. The community
opportunities, problems or needs are then prioritized or ranked according to importance and
feasibility criteria using various PRA ranking tools such as wealth ranking, matrix ranking etc.
Thereafter, possible technical interventions are found such as forming a cooperative, a
demonstration, field day/visit, experimentation etc.

Once the problems or needs are identified, the next stage is to prioritise them on the basis of the
most important problems and their feasibility. The methodology to prioritise the problems can be
done through:
(i) General consensus,
(ii) Preference ranking, and
(iii) Pair wise matrix ranking.
Ranking means giving scores to items and then placing them in order of importance and feasibility.

Following the completion of problem analysis, and that possible immediate and underlying root
causes have been identified, the next step is to formulate solutions. Ensure that the solutions sought
must be realistic, practical and action-oriented. The tools that can be used to search for solutions
to identified causes are:
i. objective tree and
ii table of village solutions.

3.5.3 Action planning phase

Planning is a process by which the community translates the objectives into activities/ or actions
for onward implementation within a given time frame and budget. Prepare a tentative action plan
for possible services/interventions required from inside and outside the community to implement
the solutions. Although there variations in the format or design of action plan, however, the
following should concisely be stipulated: objectives, activities to be carried out, and person
responsible for implementation, period and target groups, required resources and indicators of
achievement (Table2). In consultation and collaboration with donors, the
community/beneficiaries, and implementers decide what will be monitored, define the expected
outcomes and designate indicators to measure achievements and how the monitoring will be
conducted.

Table 2: Example - Action plan

Objective Activity By Who When Resources Budget Assump Indicat
tions ors
To increase Providing L/stock 1st Resourc Increase
milk yields from water farmers June- es in milk
10 regularly 20th Com. Other Com Other acquired yield
litres/milking to Nov, on time
20 2022 Drums, Ceme K1000 K7000
litres/milking Shovels, nt
by Dec 2024. sand,
labor, land
To assess 30th 4 K5000 K7500 Funds Activities
whether milk Nov - evaluators available evaluated
increased from 10th (2 from
Farmers &
10 litres to 20 Evaluation Dec,22 L/stock Cooperat
CEO
litres farmers & ion
2 CEOs,
Stationery

3.5.4 Implementation phase

However well a project has been conceived and planned if the implementation is not proper, it will
result in inefficient and wasteful loss of scarce resources. To implement the programme, the
activities specified in the work plan above have to be carried out. This detailed work plan will take
account of progress and problems encountered. Therefore, on completion of the planned activities,
a community coordinating body has to be constituted to oversee the implementation process.

3.5.5 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) phase

Both the farmers and CEO will be constantly reviewing and evaluating the progress during the
year and at the end of the year depending on the programme design. This evaluation, together with
an up-dated situational analysis, provides the basis for planning the next year's programme. A
reminder: Participatory monitoring and evaluation is an integral part of the participatory project
design and implementation process. It works best when the entire project process, from planning
to the final evaluation, is conducted in a participatory manner.

More details on participatory monitoring and evaluation are discussed in the next unit.

Unit Summary

To sum it up, let’s remaind ourselves of the points below.

Remember!
➢ Participatory planning implies that all the key decisions regarding the project (objectives,
activities to be implemented, strategies for implementation, and timeframe) are taken
jointly by the members of the communities for whom the project is being designed and the
project staff;
➢ Participatory planning is based on the results of the participatory appraisal and reflects the
problems, needs and concerns that communities are experiencing as well as the suggestions
they provide for addressing these issues;
➢ Participatory planning takes place at the community level where decisions are made on
how selected activities will be implemented for people living in that community; and
➢ Participatory planning precedes the design of a participatory monitoring and evaluation
plan.

Self-Study Questions and Exercises

1. Why is situation analysis important in this process?
2. Is participation, participation? If not state various participation typology.
3. Differentiate between ‘needs’ and ‘needs assessment’.
4. Why should farmers participate in decisions regarding the extension programme?
5. Briefly, discuss how to initiate practical participatory planning.
6. Diagrammatically illustrate steps in participatory extension programme planning
7. List PRA tools you studied
8. Narrate to your colleague the possible challenges you expect to face as you promote
community participation.
Unit 4: Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation (PM&E) of
Extension Programmes
Introduction
With increased importance of participatory programme planning, there is also a growing
recognition that monitoring and evaluation of developmental programmes affecting the people
should also be participatory. The focus of this unit, therefore, will be on participatory monitoring
and evaluation.

Learning Outcomes:
At the end of the unit, you should be expected to:
1. Define the concepts; monitoring and evaluation
2. Explain the purposes of evaluation
3. State myths about evaluation
4. Identify where one can focus the evaluation
5. Explain why projects are rarely evaluated
6. Outline types of evaluation.

1.1 The Concepts; Monitoring and Evaluation

1.1.1. Monitoring
i. the recording and tracking the progress of a programme while it is running
ii. to determine what progress has been made in relation to the work plan.
iii. It is carried out to take corrective measures before the project or activity is adversely
affected.

1.1.2. Evaluation:
First of all, what does the word evaluation mean? You may discover that there are various
definitions depending on one’s educational background.

i. Some would define it as ‘to assess the value of something.’

ii. Others may even go further to say that evaluation is like
a) looking to see where and
b) how fast you are going, and
c) then estimating when you are likely to reach your destination.
Despite these variations in definitions, in this course we are going to adopt the following definition.
Evaluation is
i. a process of collecting, analyzing and interpreting information
ii. to determine the worth or goodness of a project/programme or activity
 iii. for various types of decision – making.

Evaluation provides information about past or ongoing activities as a basis for modifying or
redesigning future strategies. Evaluation begins with a baseline survey that is conducted before
project activity begins.

1.2 Why Evaluate?

Purposes for conducting an Evaluation are:

i. As pseudo self-serving purposes: Since organizations, including extension systems, have
a self-serving tendency, it is not unreasonable to expect that some staff members, especially
those in the highest positions may want a pseudo evaluation that will postpone, buy time,
or avoid threatening change. In these cases, evaluators are not taken seriously, and the
evaluation becomes a meaningless political diversion. In other cases, some members of
organizations want evaluations as excuses for evading or avoiding administrative
responsibility or to provide a scapegoat for criticism. Evaluations that are undertaken only
to make the programme look good ("whitewash job") or to make someone or some aspect
of a programme look bad ("hatchet job") are pseudo and illegitimate.

ii. To enhance accountability: It is quite common for external donors to expect that
evaluation will provide accountability through evidence of impact or to document cost-
benefits, or to measure efficiency-effectiveness. In some cases, this evaluative evidence is
considered in decisions to continue the programme; or to propose change, expansion, or
reduction of a programme; or to change a policy, organizational structure, philosophy, or
design. The potential for negative findings and the threat of discontinuing funding has led
to "hiding the mistake," a dysfunctional practice. However, evaluations rarely provide a
single basis for political decisions. They often are used by funders, administrators, or policy
makers to justify their decisions even when the evidence of benefits is weak.

iii. To improve performance: This purpose of evaluation is sometimes called "formative"

because the results are intended to help improve the programme during its formative stages.
This is in contrast to "summative evaluations" when the purpose is to sum up or summarize
the accomplishments at a point in time. When evaluations are to improve programmes,
lessons learned about strengths and limitations of the programme are determined from the
data so that changes can be made immediately. Sometimes the intent is to discover new
approaches and alternatives or to adjust the programme to changing situations or client
groups. Evaluation also is used to understand multiple reasons for apparent failure or to
improve the management or operation of a programme.

iv. As a learning or communication Process: Sometimes evaluations are intended to

stimulate political dialogue or to resolve political conflicts intelligently. For example, an
 evaluation of extension in a country could provide an opportunity to debate the need to hire
more women agents to respond to an increase of women in small-scale agriculture or to
extend the extension network to subsistence farmers not being served. Often the most
significant contribution of an evaluation is the creation of new expectations, new
organizational arrangements, new linkages, and new purposes and goals. Evaluation may
give visibility to a good idea and new language that can communicate new ways of viewing
extension to others who also may want to share an experiment.

All in all evaluation purposes tend to vary, depending upon where one stands within a system
like extension. For example;
i. External funders often want an accountability purpose, while
ii. field staff are more likely to favor a programme improvement purpose.
iii. Policy makers and programme administrators can often appreciate an evaluation that
contributes to new ways of thinking about extension or new forms of extension.
iv. Farmers want an evaluation to improve the benefits they may receive from extension staff.

1.3 Exploding Myths about Evaluation

Several evaluation myths have often discouraged extension managers from engaging in useful
evaluation. Lets now explore some of the myths;

i. Evaluate only when mandated. It is a myth that evaluation should occur only if it is
mandated. On the contrary, evaluations that are self-initiated are more likely to be taken
seriously for immediate programme improvement. Programmes become responsible and
excellent just as often through self-initiated evaluation.
ii. Evaluation is an add-on. It is a myth that evaluation is an add-on activity or at most a
pretest with a posttest. It is most meaningful when it is integrated with decision making at
every stage of programme planning.
iii. Evaluation is an activity for experts. It is a myth that evaluation should be undertaken
only by technical experts. Yes, complex methods can be used; however, systematic
evaluation can be undertaken by inexperienced managers, and specialists and educators
themselves can be helped to critique their own work.
iv. Outside evaluators are best. It is also a myth that evaluation should be done only by
external, outside, objective evaluators. Yes, external evaluators are often useful in
challenging insiders to address what they have overlooked because of their
nearsightedness. However, internal, self-initiated, and subjectively oriented evaluations
also can be valuable. In fact, because they often are participatory in generating, analysing,
and interpreting data, they may result in greater acceptability of the findings and
recommendations.
v. There is one best evaluation approach. Still another myth is that there is one best way to
conduct an extension evaluation. Some approaches are probably better than others for
 addressing particular types of questions or concerns. However, the many types of
evaluation approaches have their own strengths and limitations. Some situations require
quantification and measurement, while others require qualitative, descriptive, and
subjective data. Alternative approaches will be briefly described later in this unit.
vi. Quantitative data are best. A mixed-methods approach combining qualitative and
quantitative methods can lead to better understanding and appreciation of phenomena
under evaluation and provide triangulation, convergence, and collaboration of results from
different methods. Qualitative methods are best for understanding the nature of something,
while quantitative methods help in appreciating its extent.

1.4 The Focus of Evaluation Effort

What should be the focus of programme evaluation? This question raises the motive to evaluating
everything which is impossible. Choices and priorities among many possible questions have to be
made. Generally, what to focus when evaluating programmes depends on:
i. the model of evaluation chosen,
ii. the concerns of stakeholders and
iii. goals of the programme.
Nevertheless, a full range of possible focuses can be represented at least in part by the levels
represented in Table 4.1 below which shows eight major areas of focus for programme evaluation.

Note that you can’t evaluate everything thus the need to set limits!!

Narrowing the focus usually begins during planning with the major stakeholders in a programme
effort (farmers, extension staff, administrators, and funders).

Table 4.1: Focus of evaluation

 8. National impacts: Political stability, economic fairness, agricultural environmental sustainability

7. Community change: Changes in administration of justice; health, welfare, and quality of life; fairness in the
marketplace; change in human rights, status of women; change in economic and social indicators for poor; change of
indicators of sustainable agriculture and natural resource management; change in communication patterns and access to
education and news; public opinion change; fairer distribution of land and other resources; improved interorganization
relations; evidence of conflict resolution; and cultural practice change

6. Organization change: Group operation and management; economic performance; technical operation and management;
financial operation; group institutionalization and self-reliance, new groups of farmers included, new organization
linkages; change in staff performance, new service delivery, new methods used, additional facilities and equipment; cost-
benefits improved; new philosophy, purposes, and goals; improved organizational culture

5. Individual change: Changes in knowledge, attitudes, skills; sustainable agricultural practice; change in aspirations, self-
image, perspectives; expenditure of effort and money; use of methods, services; invention of appropriate technology;
increased production or use of tools; compliance with or opposition to public policy; patterns of communication, career
directions, and family relationships

4. Reactions: Testimonials; reactions to the relevance of content; appropriateness of technology, helpfulness, perceived
value of educational experience; reputation of the extension provider

3. Participation: Farmer access to extension services by social class, gender, and ethnic groups; intensity of face-to-face
contacts; extent of media-assisted contacts; type of participation (volunteering, planning, recruiting, learning,
experimenting, evaluating); indicators of commitment (attendance, continuity, frequency)

2. Activities: Participatory rural appraisal; planning; local knowledge documentation; farmer experimentation; farmer-to-
farmer knowledge sharing; farm tours; farmer organizing; master farmer leadership training; farm demonstrations;
exhibitions and fairs; residential workshops; marketing analysis; farm policy education

1. Inputs-resources: Organizational sponsorship and networks; funds; organizational design, facilities, equipment;
philosophy, mission, goals, objectives; staff, resource people, volunteers; local and external research knowledge and
relevance; cultural, economic, and political context.

1.5 Reasons Projects are Rarely Evaluated

Although extension educators, funders, and administrators are in favor of evaluating extension
programmes, honesty requires us to admit that most of us are not too enthusiastic about undertaking
it. There are many reasons for resistance and these include:

i. The first form of resistance is fear, particularly the fear of change that evaluation might
precipitate. It is the nature of organizations to be self-protective and defensive. Evaluation
and organizational comfort appear to be somewhat incompatible because evaluation
challenges organizations to change. We all resist change to some extent. Although
evaluation is not revolutionary, it is a handmaiden to gradual change, and we have to
recognize that our reluctance to participate in evaluation is partially a reluctance to embrace
needed change.
 ii. Another resistance to evaluation comes from our need to avoid embarrassment about
potential bad news. We need to know the quality of our efforts, but we also have a fear of
finding out the truth about our achievements, particularly if we lack confidence. Most of
us avoid tests for the same reason. We need to face up to our personal and organizational
ambiguity regarding our need to know and our fear of knowing.
iii. Still another real resistance results from the fact that evaluation is often seen as an
additional task to an already impossible workload. Those whose job description includes
evaluation may need only to be reminded of this. However, potential benefits may have to
be discussed and identified if collaboration is to become a reality among those who do not
have a formal professional responsibility for under-taking it. Benefits include recognition
for achievements, opportunities to improve practice, establishment of accountability, and
learning new lessons about our efforts; and
iv. The other reason is lack of time and resources - Evaluation is regarded as an expensive
exercise.

1.6 Types of Evaluation:

There are 4 major types of evaluation at stage levels, namely:
i. the inception evaluation,
ii. the interim or midterm evaluation,
iii. terminal or completion evaluation
iv. post project or impact evaluation.

The inception evaluation is

i. conducted after the starting of the first year of project implementation.
ii. It helps to review the first period of the project progress.

The interim or mid-term evaluation is

i. done at the mid-way of the project period.
ii. This exercise helps to review the progress in term of what has been achieved with regard
to expected effects, therefore on the basis of reviews the corrective measures are taken.

Terminal or completion evaluation is

i. generally done at the end of project period
ii. it is usually taken to indicate what has been achieved by the project funding sources.

Post or impact evaluation is

i. done a few years after the completion of the project implementation.
ii. conducted after such project became a routine or regular work that is about 2-3 years after
the project termination in order to evaluate the extent to which the project has contributed
in achieving the broader national development objectives.
iii. Therefore, this latter evaluation also refers to as the impact evaluation of the project.
 Unit Summary

You are now an evaluator, we defined the concepts; monitoring and evaluation, we explored why
we need to conduct an evaluation and equally why we try by all means to avoid doing an evaluation
of our projects. The myths about evaluation were discussed. The types of evaluations were outlined
and explained too. Go now and evaluate your day!

Activity 4.1 (about 15 minutes)

Extension officers often consider evaluation exercises a threat. What can an

evaluator do to reduce this threat?

Am sure you had a number of answers on your list. Creating positive evaluations images is
one way. Read on below to understand how this can be done.

SELF STUDY QUESTIONS AND EXERCISES

1. Why is monitoring and evaluating extension programmes important?

2. Discuss the resistance to evaluate extension programmes.
3. Discuss evaluation myths that have often discouraged extension managers from engaging in
useful evaluation.
4. List at least three evaluation purposes.
5. What should be the areas of focus of programme evaluation?

Unit 5: Extension Methods and Techniques

Introduction
In this unit you are going to learn about the various agricultural extension teaching methods. As
we all know, teaching is the imparting of information and extension teaching guides the learning
process so that the farmer learns more and better but don’t forget participatory principles.
 Learning Outcomes:
At the end of the unit, you should be expected to:
1. Extension methods
2. Extension techniques
3. Teaching Aids

2.1 Extension methods

Extension teaching methods may be defined as devices used to create situations in which new
information can pass freely between the extension worker and the farming communities.

It is the function of the extension worker to use the extension methods which provide
opportunities for rural people to learn and which stimulate mental and physical activities
among the people. For extension workers to be successful they must be skilful in technical
knowledge and educational process and must also have the right attitude towards rural people.

There are several extension methods extension officers can use therefore; choice depends on
certain factors such as:
i. the specific goals,
ii. the number of people targeted and
iii. the capacity of the extension service (van den Ban and Hawkins, 1996; Albrecht et al,
1989).

Traditionally, extension methods are classified into three:

i. individual,
ii. group and
iii. mass methods.

2.1.1. Individual Methods

The individual methods consist of visits of an extension officer to clientele’s /farmer’s homes or
vice versa. At such a contact, face-to-face interaction ensues. The extension officer meets the
clientele /farmer at home or on the farm and discusses issues of mutual interest, giving the farmer
both information and advice. The atmosphere of the meeting is usually informal and relaxed, and
the clientele/farmer is able to benefit from the visit as an individual. This individual contact
between the extension officer and the client/farmer can take a number of forms; the following are
some of the methods:
 5.1.1.1 Farm visits
Farm visits are the most common forms of personal contact between an extension officer
and the client/farmer and often constitute over 50% of the extension officer’s activities. At
times, the extension officer will make a farm visit spontaneously if he happens to be passing
by and it is convenient to drop in. Such informal visits may have no specific purpose but
are a useful way to assist an extension officer to obtain first-hand information on the
client’s/farmer’s problems/challenges, needs, and opportunities. In addition, even if the
extension officer just drops in to greet the client/farmer and his or her family, this short
visit can do a lot to foster mutual respect and friendship. Because they take up so much of
the extension officer's time, they are costly and coverage is small and the tendency for an
extension to visit the same client, it is important to be clear about the purpose of such visits
and to plan them carefully especially if they are not demand-driven.

5.1.1.2 Office visits

Just as an extension officer visits the client/farmer, so s/he can expect that from time to
time, the client/farmer will visit him or her at his or her office. Such a visit is often a
reflection of the interest which the extension officer may have aroused among the local
farmers. The more confidence local farmers have in the extension officer, the more likely
they are to visit him or her although this may not be the best measurement. Such office
visits are less time consuming for an extension officer. While no extension officer would
wish to be overwhelmed by such visits every day, s/he should let the clients/farmers to
know which times s/he can be available in the office.

5.1.1.3 Phone calls/Messaging

In today’s modern technology, communication with the clients/farmers on electronic
gadgets such as cell phones, radio messages etc are easy, where infrastructures are
available. If the telephone is used, however, it will not be for long discussion but for passing
on specific advice or information for instance about commodity prices.

5.1.1.4 Informal contacts

Clients/farmers can meet an extension officer without prior arrangements. This could be
by the roadside, at social gatherings such as market days, funerals, filed days, traditional
celebrations, religious events etc. By so doing, it will bring him or her into contact with the
clients/farmers with whom s/he is working. By attending such events, s/he can become well
acquainted with the area where s/he works and with the farmers and their problems, and
s/he will be able to pass on ideas and information on an informal basis.

2.1.2. Group Methods

The use of groups in extension has become more common over the past decades especially with
the promotion of participatory approaches. Group methods are characterized by reaching many
clients/farmers who have some degree of opportunity for interaction and feedback. Group
extension is the most important method for advising and promoting the interest of a large number
of small-scale farmers/clients. To be effective, however, it also has to be supplemented by
individual and mass extension methods. Some of these group methods include: meetings,
demonstrations, field tours, field days and trips.

5.1.2.1 Group meetings

The group or community meeting is a useful educational forum where the extension officer
and clients/farmers can come together, and ideas can be openly discussed and analysed. It
is important that the clients/farmers know in advance what is to be discussed, time and
place so that they can prepare themselves. When group meetings are promoted, it is
advisable that they be held in a neutral place. Some examples are of group meetings:
cooperative meetings, Farmer’s association meetings, crush pen association meeting etc.

5.1.2.2 Demonstrations
Demonstrations are very important methods of communicating innovations to the
clients/farming community. Clients or farmers would like to see how a new idea works,
and also what effect it can have on increasing production or welfare. Both purposes can be
achieved by means of on-farm demonstrations. A demonstration is a particularly powerful
method to use with farmers who do not read easily. A demonstration will give such farmers
the opportunity to observe at first hand, for example, the differences between a
recommended new crop practice and traditional practices. The strength of the
demonstration should lie in its simplicity and its ability to present the farmers with concrete
results and above all, the need for it. In such a case, they serve more if they have been
planned by the clients/farmers than where they are planned by the extension officer or
extension organization.

Demonstrations are divided into two principal types: method demonstrations and result
demonstrations.

Method demonstrations
Basically, method demonstrations show the clients/farmers how to do something. In the
method demonstration, the client/farmer is shown step by step for example, how to plant
seeds in lines, how to make a wooden maize sheller, how vegetables are preserved etc. The
extension officer can only conduct a method demonstration only if the clients/farmers have
already been convinced or accepted the particular practice but need to know how it can be
done practically or how to do it themselves.
Result demonstrations
The main purpose of result demonstrations is to show
clients/farmers that a particular new recommendation is
practicable under their local conditions. In result
demonstration, the farmer is shown the end product of two
practices, that is, a new or recommended practice and an
old practice for them to compare. Comparison is the
important element in a result demonstration. For example,
comparisons between compost and no compost, between recycled seed and certified seed,
or between use of fertilizer and no fertilizer. In this case, "Seeing is believing" is an old
adage. In conservation farming it is called “Conservation farming works” or “Look and
learn.” Unless a client/farmer has actually seen the good results of an innovation already
been convinced, s/he will not be convinced by the extension officer's recommendations.

Both method and result demonstrations are extension activities that require a lot of thought,
careful planning and efficient execution. Although the two demonstrations differ somewhat
in their purposes, they share a lot of common points and, in terms of their preparation and
execution, they can be considered together.

5.1.2.3 Field days

A field day is a trade show to which all stakeholders in
agricultural sector are invited to display their products and
pass information too. Field days are arranged in places
where a large group of clients or farmers can gather to see
trials and demonstrations. There are usually run in a more
informal and less highly structured manner. The purpose is
often to introduce a new idea and to stimulate the interest
of as many clients/or farmers as possible. A field day
should be interdisciplinary in order to bring extension, research and other agencies together
into a coordinated educational undertaking. Field days can be held on farmers’ field,
Farmer Training Centre or research centre. However, field days held on farmer’s field are
more effective than the one held on FTC or research stations. Normally, a field day takes
the whole day and involves visiting the field, discussions and viewing exhibits and
displays.

5.1.2.4 Field trips

A field trip is a carefully planned educational visit in which a group of farmers visit a place
of interest for first-hand observation and study of something that cannot be brought to the
learning group. The visiting group makes its trip under the guidance of a person well-
informed about the given area under consideration. Field trips are usually of short duration.
 They may involve less than an hour and usually do not require more than 2 or 3 hours. For
example, farmers would like to be given a chance to see how other farmers cultivate their
land, and to exchange ideas and experiences with them. It is important, therefore, that the
area to be visited be in some way similar agriculturally to that of the visiting farmers.

5.1.2.5 Field tour

This is a special visit made to several places or points of interest. It is a carefully planned
educational activity and may require a day, several days or even weeks. It is also conducted
for first-hand study of something that cannot be easily brought to the learning group.

2.1.3. Mass Methods

The aim of mass methods is to address a large number of people at once. It is particularly useful
in making large numbers of people aware of new ideas and practices. It is equally good to announce
sudden emergencies, campaigns or crusades. It is clear that mass methods have a function mainly
in stimulating clientele after which they seek additional information by individual or group contact.
Traditionally, mass methods are limited by low level of feed-back. Examples are radio, posters,
agriculture shows, displays and exhibits, leaflets, fliers etc.

2.1.3.1. Radio and Television

The coming of relatively solar panels and solar operated TVs has made rural community
to have access to more information. For example, the Department of National Agricultural
Information Services (NAIS) and other extension organizations provide extension services
to clients by use of these electronic gadgets such as ZNBC, Muvi TV, and other community
media.

2.1.3.2. Agriculture shows

Towards the end of the agricultural season, shows are held in Zambia. First, ward
agricultural shows followed by district, provincial and finally the national shows are held.
The objectives of these shows are to:

i. Spread new innovations/ideas in farming;

ii. Provide an opportunity for farmers to discuss their problems with
fellow farmers and share experiences;
iii. Encourage competition in order to stimulate farmers to improve
their farming practices;
iv. Advertise goods and services available to farmers; and
v. Sometimes it provides farmers with the opportunity to market and sell their produce.
 2.2. Extension Techniques
Extension techniques are means to achieving extension methods.

In this section, only extension techniques that are commonly conducted in the field are discussed.
These are: Role plays, workshops, seminars, conferences and discussions.

2.2.1. Role - Playing

i. Simulation involving a simple plot and participants are assigned roles to act out the
situation that is subject to discussion thereafter.
ii. There is normally no script, however, participants are allowed to apply their own
experience and skills to create learning environment.
iii. Discussions should follow role playing during which the audience will freely assess the
points raised and jointly come out with alternative solutions.
iv. Role plays are commonly promoted by Ministry of Health and Community Development,
Mother and Child Health.

2.2.2. Workshops
i. A workshop is a programmed group meeting held for a specified focus.
ii. It can be conducted either in an open environment or in a structure.
iii. designed in such a way that more time is spent on hands-on aspects than theory.
iv. It focuses on skills
v. held between one week to two weeks
vi. comprises between 10 – 25 participants.
vii. The participants are active in deliberations and facilitators are required. Keep in mind that
in a workshop people expect to participate so try to talk for only 20 minutes in an hour.
Ice-breakers such as exercises and other interactive activities are done.

2.2.3. Seminar
i. A seminar is an educational event that features one or more subject matter experts
delivering specialised topics primarily via a lecture.
ii. an expert does the “work” while the audience is doing the active listening.
iii. The participants must come away from the seminar with the knowledge, so the attendees'
progress is sometimes tracked individually or as a team.
iv. has about attendees (10 – 100)
v. takes a day to one week
vi. used to present technical reports or papers on a specified topic.
 2.3. Teaching Aids
Teaching aids are devices used to increase effectiveness of an extension/ teaching method.

2.3.1. Audio aids

Audio aids refers to materials which produce sound. They emphasize on listening and
hearing, for example Radio. Radiogram. Gramophones, cassette tapes and CD
recording, MP3 players, Phones, iPod etc.

2.3.2. Visual
Visual aids refer to material used in teaching with emphasis on seeing. The sense of
sight is key element in the process of both teaching and learning.
For example, Pictorial material, Photographs, Maps Graphic materials, Diagrams and
charts, Posters, billboards and Fliers

2.3.3. Audio - Visual Aids

Visual-audio– refers to a combination of sound and sight
They supplement written or spoken words in transmitting of skills, and Knowledge,
for example Television, Sound film strips with commentaries, Video recording
Photographs with sound, hologram, etc.

Unit Summary

The main points in this unit included the following

i. Extension teaching methods may be defined as devices used to create situations in which
new information can pass freely between the extension worker and the farming
communities.
ii. Extension methods may be classified in three groups on the basis of the number of people
they are designed to reach. These are:
a. Individual methods
b. Group methods, and
c. Mass methods
iii. Individual methods are used in extension teaching in recognition of the fact that learning
is an individual process.
iv. Group methods take into account the inclination of the individual to respond to the
pressures and opinions of groups in which he participates and to listen to the views of
others before arriving at a decision about making changes in his farming operations.
v. Individual and group methods cannot reach everyone who wants and needs information.
So mass methods are used to reach large numbers of people quickly.
vi. Teaching Aids are devices used to increase effectiveness of an extension/ teaching
method learning situation such as the Audio, Audio - Visual and Visual aids.
 SELF STUDY QUESTIONS AND EXERCISES

i. What is extension teaching method?

ii. List four conditions necessary for effective use of teaching methods
iii. Extension methods may be classified into three groups
iv. What are some of the examples of individual methods?
v. Give examples of Group methods.
vi. List the components of mass methods.