Rosario, Argentina: Popular education? Oh no, that wouldn’t work here
Action
Soon after arriving in Rosario, we were invited to a series of participatory workshops organized by a city program called Rosario Habitat. The extensive program is responsible for developing formal urban infrastructure (e.g. roads, sewer systems, stable houses, public spaces) in the city’s many informally developed shantytowns (villas miseries). To accomplish this, teams of staff members are going to the shantytowns and asking residents how they want to improve their neighborhoods.
One weekend-long workshop that we attended brought together 150 residents of Villa Itati to identify the shantytown’s problems and start to develop solutions for these problems. The workshop started with groups of 6-9 residents and a facilitator working together to write down their neighborhood problems on index cards. Using prodding questions and cartoon illustrations of typical neighborhood scenes, the facilitator encouraged the participants to discuss a wide range of issues. Workshop coordinators then joined these small groups together in larger groups of 20-25 people, to share the ideas generated. As the groups presented, the coordinator posted the index cards in columns on the wall, grouping them into themes (e.g. urban infrastructure, security, environmental issues).
The next day, participants worked on developing solutions to the identified problems. First, they were asked to draw the neighborhood that they wanted to build on group flipcharts. The groups then shared their drawings and discussed the issues they raised. Finally, the participants divided into theme groups, each of which focused on one of the themes of problems generated the previous day. These groups reviewed the index cards of problems related to their issue and converted each problem into an objective. For example, the problem “unsafe streets” was transformed into “install street lighting”. After the participants wrote their objectives on new index cards, the workshop coordinators pinned the cards on the wall next to the columns of problems.
A few weeks later, I was asked to facilitate a workshop about public participation at the international Fair of Governance, this year held in Rosario. I proposed using a similar technique as the Rosario Habitat workshop – having participants write reflections about their experiences with public participation on index cards, and then sharing these ideas in small groups. To my surprise, my colleagues at the city said “No, that won’t work here.” They explained that the participants would be important representatives from different municipalities, and that asking them to do some sort of exercise using index cards would be an insult.
When we eventually had the workshop, most of my ideas had been dismissed. Instead, the other workshop coordinator decided to seat the 50 participants in a big circle and ask each person to introduce themselves and share a thought about public participation. As we went around the circle, some people spoke for 5 minutes and others declined to talk, some spoke about public participation and others about different things that they found interesting. When our allotted hour was up, only half the people had spoken, so the other coordinator extended the workshop into the snack break that followed. After another 45 minutes our bus drivers announced that they were leaving and we hurriedly ended the session, before some participants had their chance to speak.
Reflection
The participatory procedures used in the Rosario Habitat workshop are often referred to as techniques of popular education or facilitation. One of my goals during the past year has been to learn more of these techniques, since much of the theory and practice of popular education developed in Latin America (especially through Brazilians such as Paulo Freire and Augusto Boal). I was therefore somewhat surprised to hear that, after traveling to the middle of South America, I was in the wrong place to use participatory techniques. Or was it just that these techniques were only appropriate for poor people, not for government officials?
I wasn’t convinced. After all, I’d already seen the technique of writing ideas on index cards used by the Catalyst Centre (see chris’s blog) and the City of Toronto with a wide range of people. Sure, workshop techniques should be adapted to the local context and the participants, but I’d like to think that some rules of thumb are relatively universal. For example, everyone should have an equal opportunity to express their thoughts (in whatever way they feel comfortable, be it talking, writing, drawing...), you should respect the amount of time participants have allotted for the workshop, and the smaller the group the more time each participant has to express themselves. If these conditions are true, it seems to me like a participatory exercise with index cards and small groups might have been more productive than the 50-person roundtable, even with government officials. Perhaps the main reason why my colleagues thought a participatory exercise wouldn’t work is simply that they hadn’t tried it before?
Question
What do people say wouldn’t work or couldn’t happen in your city or community? Are they right? What do you think wouldn’t work or couldn’t happen?
Soon after arriving in Rosario, we were invited to a series of participatory workshops organized by a city program called Rosario Habitat. The extensive program is responsible for developing formal urban infrastructure (e.g. roads, sewer systems, stable houses, public spaces) in the city’s many informally developed shantytowns (villas miseries). To accomplish this, teams of staff members are going to the shantytowns and asking residents how they want to improve their neighborhoods.
One weekend-long workshop that we attended brought together 150 residents of Villa Itati to identify the shantytown’s problems and start to develop solutions for these problems. The workshop started with groups of 6-9 residents and a facilitator working together to write down their neighborhood problems on index cards. Using prodding questions and cartoon illustrations of typical neighborhood scenes, the facilitator encouraged the participants to discuss a wide range of issues. Workshop coordinators then joined these small groups together in larger groups of 20-25 people, to share the ideas generated. As the groups presented, the coordinator posted the index cards in columns on the wall, grouping them into themes (e.g. urban infrastructure, security, environmental issues).
The next day, participants worked on developing solutions to the identified problems. First, they were asked to draw the neighborhood that they wanted to build on group flipcharts. The groups then shared their drawings and discussed the issues they raised. Finally, the participants divided into theme groups, each of which focused on one of the themes of problems generated the previous day. These groups reviewed the index cards of problems related to their issue and converted each problem into an objective. For example, the problem “unsafe streets” was transformed into “install street lighting”. After the participants wrote their objectives on new index cards, the workshop coordinators pinned the cards on the wall next to the columns of problems.
A few weeks later, I was asked to facilitate a workshop about public participation at the international Fair of Governance, this year held in Rosario. I proposed using a similar technique as the Rosario Habitat workshop – having participants write reflections about their experiences with public participation on index cards, and then sharing these ideas in small groups. To my surprise, my colleagues at the city said “No, that won’t work here.” They explained that the participants would be important representatives from different municipalities, and that asking them to do some sort of exercise using index cards would be an insult.
When we eventually had the workshop, most of my ideas had been dismissed. Instead, the other workshop coordinator decided to seat the 50 participants in a big circle and ask each person to introduce themselves and share a thought about public participation. As we went around the circle, some people spoke for 5 minutes and others declined to talk, some spoke about public participation and others about different things that they found interesting. When our allotted hour was up, only half the people had spoken, so the other coordinator extended the workshop into the snack break that followed. After another 45 minutes our bus drivers announced that they were leaving and we hurriedly ended the session, before some participants had their chance to speak.
Reflection
The participatory procedures used in the Rosario Habitat workshop are often referred to as techniques of popular education or facilitation. One of my goals during the past year has been to learn more of these techniques, since much of the theory and practice of popular education developed in Latin America (especially through Brazilians such as Paulo Freire and Augusto Boal). I was therefore somewhat surprised to hear that, after traveling to the middle of South America, I was in the wrong place to use participatory techniques. Or was it just that these techniques were only appropriate for poor people, not for government officials?
I wasn’t convinced. After all, I’d already seen the technique of writing ideas on index cards used by the Catalyst Centre (see chris’s blog) and the City of Toronto with a wide range of people. Sure, workshop techniques should be adapted to the local context and the participants, but I’d like to think that some rules of thumb are relatively universal. For example, everyone should have an equal opportunity to express their thoughts (in whatever way they feel comfortable, be it talking, writing, drawing...), you should respect the amount of time participants have allotted for the workshop, and the smaller the group the more time each participant has to express themselves. If these conditions are true, it seems to me like a participatory exercise with index cards and small groups might have been more productive than the 50-person roundtable, even with government officials. Perhaps the main reason why my colleagues thought a participatory exercise wouldn’t work is simply that they hadn’t tried it before?
Question
What do people say wouldn’t work or couldn’t happen in your city or community? Are they right? What do you think wouldn’t work or couldn’t happen?
2 Comments:
At 10:55 PM, lernerm said…
I had a similar experience many years ago when I was a teacher - I proposed that all students should be told explicitly what it would take to get an A, and then allowed to work until they got an A (mastery learning)- I was told that first of all it wouldn't work, and that even if it did work, it shouldn't be done because it would prevent the sorting out process since all students would get A grades. I always find it amazing that at many conferences that I've gone to they still do the "let's have everyone introduce themselves and say what they think - and oops, looks like we've used up our time and the conference is almost over" I think that in general there is a tendency to resist any change in the established way of doing things (first law of inertia), and in particular, to resist empirical data in favor of personal experience ("to hell with what the research shows, based on my experience...). This is probably why lecturing is still the most common form of "teaching" even though there is no empirical evidence to suggest that this is more effective than discussion, or problem based learning, or mastery learning,etc.
At 5:46 PM, Jen said…
I hear a lot of 'well, that's just how it's done down here.' Even if people don't like it, tradition plays such a major role.
People are afraid of change - they'd rather take what they know, even if they don't like it - than try something new.
I mean, I can't criticize too much - I spend a lot of time trying to talk myself out of all the reasons I think for something new not working.
Then, when you finally do try something new, and it works better - you can't imagine how you could have EVER done things the old way :)
Post a Comment
<< Home