Practitioner’s Notes: Analysing expected and unexpected changes when F2F training and mentoring goes online: a Caribbean view

Abstract

In 2009, TCPC started working with CARIMAC and COL to develop and demonstrate a cost effective model for the creation of non-formal education programming about local community issues for specific target groups. The partners had several deliberate intentions: 1) to move away from the conventional practice of making communication programmes on behalf of communities towards communities making programmes for themselves, 2) to focus on learning and related change outcomes, and 3) to keep in mind issues of scale and sustainability of the model. The community learning programme (CLP) model draws primarily on participatory communication and social and behaviour change communication theories. The approach to CLP implementation in the Caribbean leads groups from analysis and planning, through design, development and delivery to evaluation. // TCPC/COL’s work followed a “predictable” process in which programmes were developed in a small number of pilot sites, using the “tried and proven format” of face-to-face workshops and sharing of profiles and case studies. // Issues: - That was a great 4day workshop – now what? Although workshops resulted in one programme, participants found it difficult to navigate follow-up programmes on their own. There was a clear need for consistent mentoring in order to sustain production. - Considering airfare, accommodation, workshop and associated costs, face-to face mentoring for 2 programmes could cost CAD25,000. // In 2012, TCP and COL in association with CARIMAC tried a distance training/mentoring approach. In the initial pilot eight participants representing six groups from Jamaica and Belize participated in a four month activity. This resulted in groups writing sponsorship proposals to local businesses and scripts for the production of three programmes.// In 2013 the approach was expanded to include five mentors and two e-facilitators. This time 42 participants from sixteen groups in Jamaica, Trinidad and St. Lucia participated. 32 participants completed the programme and 8 programmes are in the production phase at less than half the cost of the initial F2F meetings. // Paper ID: 480