Video in the field

A novel approach to farmer training

by Colin Fraser

It is notoriously difficult to bring effective training to the farmer level in developing countries. Scarcity of good trainers, large numbers of people to be trained, shortage of transportation, poor roads, and sometimes even the total isolation of rural areas during the rainy season are big problems. In addition, literacy levels are usually low among rural audiences and, therefore, brochures and simple booklets, which might form the backbone of farmer education activities, are of little value.

In some countries, farmer training centres work reasonably well, but it is seldom easy for smallholders to leave their enterprises for a week or two at a time. Even when they can, it is difficult to teach crop production subjects properly because, ideally, the farmer should see each and every phase of the growing cycle, from seedbed preparation to harvest. This is of course impossible to achieve in one short course.

The Government of Peru has been attempting to solve some of these problems of farmer training by means of a novel audiovisual system based on portable closed-circuit television (video). When Peru's sweeping land reform programme got under way in the early 1970s, it was realized that intensive training of campesinos would be vitally necessary. This was so because erstwhile agricultural labourers, unused to controlling agricultural production processes, to taking decisions, and to managing their own lives in general, need access to information and training on a massive scale if they are to shed their subservience, rise to the occasion of agrarian reform, and become efficient individual or cooperative agricultural producers. Given the low levels of literacy typical among Peruvian campesinos, and the size of the training problem, some new approach was needed.

And it was clear from the outset that the system would have to rely on audiovisual means. However, the arsenal of audiovisual media is now enormous, so the choice of system was not an easy matter.

A variety of different media

The responsibility for campesino training in Peru lies with CENCIRA (Centro nacional de capacitacion y investigacion pare la reforma agraria). In effect, CENCIRA is the country's agrarian reform institution. In the early 1970s it received help in several fields from a UNDP/FAO project, but in 1976 a second assistance project called Massive Audiovisual Training for Rural Development was begun. The main objectives of the project are to develop and apply, on a massive scale, an audiovisual training methodology suited to the socioeconomic conditions of rural Peru and to train national technicians in the project's field of work.

The Communication Department of CENCIRA, with assistance from FAO advisers, had tried a variety of different media before coming to the con-, elusion that portable video offered the best possibilities. The choice had boiled down to slide sets or video, but testing with campesinos seemed to indicate that the showing of movement offered by video was a major advantage over slides.

In developing and applying its audiovisual training system based on video, the CENCIRA communication team divided the problem into its various aspects: firstly, the technology - testing and deciding on the most appropriate video equipment; secondly, training Peruvians in programme production and use; and finally, training farmers. Let us examine some of the salient features of the project's work in these areas.

With regard to the technology, eight different models of video recorder, five different monitor screens and three different types of tape were tried before conclusions were drawn as to the most appropriate types for use in Peru. The equipment ultimately selected and purchased, partly with UNDP funds and partly with assistance from FAO's Technical Cooperation Programme, is giving excellent service. More details about this will be given later.

The training organized for Peruvian staff in the use of the equipment and in the production and application of training programmes for farmers has some interesting features. One of these features is the concept of non-specialization. TV production staff are normally divided into categories such as scriptwriter, cameraman, director, etc., but the project decided to give training that is not based on such specialization. In addition, the project decided that programme producers should also be trained in using the courses with farmers. Thus, the trainees who complete the courses go by the generic title of pedagogos audiovisuales - or audiovisual teachers. And following the principle of nonspecialization, a pedagogo audiovisual must be capable of every phase of the production and use of video programmes, from initial research to scripting, shooting and editing, right through to ultimate use of the courses with farmers. He will, however, work closely with subject-matter specialists during each and every phase to obtain the programme content and ensure technical accuracy.

Some 95 Peruvians have been trained by the project, though unfortunately about half of them have since moved to more remunerative work elsewhere. The pedagogos audiovisuales, many of whom are women, come from a variety of backgrounds; although the majority have some sort of training in the social sciences, a chauffeur and an architect are numbered among them. CENCIRA believes that a commitment to farmer training and rural development is the most important criterion, and in this connection, it is interesting to note how the training courses for pedagogos audiovisuales are run.

A strong work ethic

The course now usually lasts from 70 to 90 days and its orientation is practical. The trainees start using video equipment immediately. The course is scheduled in such a way that when the end of the normal working day arrives, the trainees are involved in producing a video programme. The collective reaction is almost invariably to continue with the work whether it is time to go home or not. The result is that 12- to 14-hour working days, and 6- or 6.5-day working weeks are usually the norm during the course.

One by-product of this is that about 10 percent of the trainees drop out in the first week, refusing to work at such a pace. This naturally selects only the trainees most dedicated to the campesino cause. A second by-product is that in 70-90 days of such intense activity, the trainees can really learn to handle the equipment with a high degree of skill. And a third is that the long hours instil a strong work ethic, which stands the trainees in good stead when they move into the rural areas and begin field work.

One of the problems connected with the production of any type of training material for use at the farmer level is that it must be specifically tailored for the area in which it is to be used. A Masai cattle owner might find entertainment in a dairy husbandry film made in the Netherlands, but it will teach him next to nothing about how to look after his own cows. Problems of this nature emerge even within one country, and in effect Peru is actually three countries in terms of geographical, agricultural and social conditions. There is the desertic coastal plain, La Costa, under irrigated tropical and subtropical agriculture; the highlands of the Andes, La Sierra, where the harsh conditions permit only grazing and a few subsistence crops; and finally, the rain forest of the upper Amazon basin, La Selva.

To produce training materials to suit these regions, and the subregions within them, the CENCIRA/FAO project established five programme production and use centres in different parts of Peru. (One of these centres is supported by Netherlands bilateral assistance and another by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation of Germany, FR.) Naturally, there is also the CEPAC (Centro di produccion audiovisual pare la capacitacion) production centre in Lima. This Centre is in effect CENCIRA's Communication Department.

It carries out a good deal of the video production work that can be centralized, makes programmes for use in areas close to Lima, and generally provides backstopping to the five regional units.

By the middle of 1979, the project had produced just over 400 videotaped training lessons of about 25 minutes' duration each, supported by simple printed materials. A number of lessons - on average nine - go to make up a course. Courses fall into various categories, of which agricultural production techniques is the largest. Under this heading, courses have been produced on such topics as dairy cattle husbandry, irrigation, potato growing, citrus production, reclamation of saline soils, trout rearing, etc. A second category of courses can be classified as those concerned with the improvement of rural life: first aid, women's health, child health, treatment of snake bites, parasites in humans, etc. Finally, courses have been produced with the aim of improving farm management; for example, a course on farm bookkeeping falls into this category. Although most courses are in Spanish, some have been produced in, or translated into, Quechua and other Indian languages.

Drew attention

With regard to the use of the training courses with farmers, one fundamental concept is that the training should be taken to the farmers' normal place of work, or very close to it. Another is that discussion and practical work should complement the video lesson. In practice, most of the training courses applied to date have been in cooperative agricultural enterprises. Typically, a cooperative requests a course on a given subject and one lesson is given each day for as many days as there are lessons in the complete course. The lesson is usually early in the morning before the campesinos begin their day's work, or at the end of the day. The lesson begins with the 20-minute video programme. This is followed by a discussion, and handout of the printed material and by a session of practical work if the subject matter lends itself to such an activity. The total duration of a lesson is about two hours. As well as the pedagogo audiovisuals an extension worker or subject-matter specialist is present to lead the discussions and to answer queries. So far, about 30 000 campesinos have been reached.

By 1978, all the indications were that the training methodology based on video and developed by the project was successful. A number of associative enterprises in Peru had been clamouring for more courses and offering voluntarily to pay for them. Indeed, an equivalent of over US$50 000 has actually been paid by farmers in order to have courses. Not surprisingly, the project began to draw attention from outside Peru. Peruvian and international consultants from the project have now given advice on the methodology in Mexico, Honduras, Ecuador, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Brazil, as well as participating in a number of international conferences. And FAO-assisted projects in Mexico and Honduras are now using the methodology, while Unesco has adopted it too for a project proposed in Ecuador.

In view of the interest being aroused, the Development Support Communication Branch of FAO's Information Division, which operates and backstops the project, felt that it would be advisable to have some independent analysis of the validity of the approach before promoting it actively elsewhere. Accordingly, a group of consultants carried out a technical analysis of the project in the last months of 1978.

The analysis, the methodology of which was also drawn up by an independent consultant, worked on three fronts: firstly, the technological aspects of the medium being used, its cost, maintenance aspects, etc., and the quality of the training programmes produced in video; secondly, the methodology used in training Peruvians in the use of the equipment and in the production of training courses; and thirdly, the field application of audiovisual training programmes, with emphasis on farmers' reactions to the courses and on whether subject-matter specialists are satisfied with their technical content. The analysis deliberately ignored general organization, financial or political issues, which might be the result of local circumstances rather than of the video methodology per se.

The quality of the sound track

One of the main issues that called for investigation by the first consultant was whether the use of video in such a context represents appropriate technology. That is to say, does it create more problems than it solves, because of its relative sophistication? And secondly, does its use, with international assistance, tend to create long-term technological dependence? In response to these concerns, the analysis of the project very definitely concluded that video is appropriate in the context of Peru. Among the points made to justify this assertion, the consultant stated that the equipment provided to the project (total value just under $500 000) is all in excellent working condition and "should last ten years," whereas one would normally expect such equipment to last only five years. The consultant also noted that Peruvian technicians, without international expertise to help them, had modified some of the equipment to adapt to the local needs. They had also designed and built inverters to take 12 V DC current from an automobile battery and convert it to the 130 V AC needed by some of the equipment. The cost of the inverters built by the Peruvians worked out at $200 each, whereas the purchase price for such a device from a commercial supplier would have been about $1200 each. In addition, the consultant noted that when the video equipment did need to be repaired, the majority of the spare parts required were purchased in the local flea market.

It would seem indeed, therefore, that in a country like Peru, portable video equipment should not be considered inappropriate or of such a level of sophistication as to cause difficulties of assimilation. On the other hand, the use of video for farmer training is a technological approach, and there are people both in Peru and elsewhere who will argue the merits of traditional methods like lectures with blackboard and chalk.

The independent analysis of the project found that although the quality of the video programme was broadly adequate, there was room for improvement. At the same time, it was recognized that almost all of the programmes had been produced by trainers and recently trained pedagogos audiovisuales. The consultant also stated that there should be more campesino participation in the video programmes, and that they should be less like lectures in their approach. He also criticized the quality of the sound track on some of the programmes. This was particularly so in some of the early programmes produced, and before the Peruvian technicians modified the automatic microphone system to avoid picking up unwanted noise.

The consultant looking into the training of pedagogos audiovisuales traced the history of the four training courses given to date and the shift in emphasis from the rather theoretical approach of the first course organized by the project, down to the extremely practical, intense training provided by the recent courses. He commented favourably overall but raised the doubt that the recent courses are too practical and do not include enough about pedagogical theory. He also questioned the non-specialization approach, at least insofar as it applies to producers of training programmes actually using the programmes with farmers. In practice, however, it has not always proved possible to maintain the nonspecialization approach to this extent and it is still premature to decide whether it is valid as a concept. It is almost certainly valid, however, with reference to actual programme production: for even if a team made up of specialist scriptwriters, cameramen, etc., may produce better quality programmes, there are inevitable bottlenecks and delays when specialists are attendant upon the work of other specialists.

The third consultant, a Peruvian university professor, used a team of six students to assist him in his inquiries among the rural population regarding their attitude to training by video. On the positive side, he discovered that 80 percent of the campesinos interviewed had found the training course they attended worthwhile and wanted more video courses. There was no evidence available, however, as to how the training course had actually affected practice. In fact, it is still too early in the experience to be able to gather conclusive evidence on this point.

The consultant and his team of students unearthed a number of issues that were of considerable interest. One was that, on occasion, a cooperative would organize a training course and then order campesinos to attend it, hardly an approach likely to inculcate a frame of mind conducive to learning.

Perhaps the most serious criticism levelled by the consultant, however, was that the video courses are sometimes used without any concurrent development activity, which would make it easier for the farmers to apply their newly found knowledge. For example, the value of a course in dairy cattle husbandry will be limited if the Government does not have dairy development activities in the area to provide other necessary inputs and follow-up advice.

A weak point

Finally, an important aspect revealed by the consultant and his assistants was that lime use was made of the printed material produced in support of the video programmes; and this despite the fact that the printed materials are designed with a minimum of text so as to be useful to those who are barely literate.

However, despite the operational criticisms in their reports, the consultants were unanimous in their endorsement of the video-training methodology itself. The project staff themselves feel that with time they can perfect the use of the system.

Unfortunately, the serious economic problems besetting Peru at present are casting a shadow over the project, as was revealed by the project Mid-Term Review in May 1979. This Review, in which the Government, UNDP and FAO officials participated, found that the project had accomplished most of its aims in terms of developing the video technology, in programme production and in training Peruvians in the methodology. However, a weak point remains the presentation of courses to farmers. During a trial carried out between March and July 1979, CEPAC staff showed the feasibility of reaching large numbers of campesinos with training courses. Each of thirteen playback units was able to give an average of 2.5 lessons per day. Now, however, with over 30 playback units spread among CENCIRA's zonal offices, the course presentation rate averages only about one third of this.

To keep it economical

The low presentation rate is bound to affect the economics of the operation. The coatings calculated to date are as follows: on the basis of the course presentation rate achieved by CEPAC staff in 1978, and assuming a total audience of 1000 campesinos for a given course, the cost of producing and presenting a complete course is about $12 per campesino. This figure includes the international expert costs provided by the project and it will therefore be lower once international assistance terminates. And 1000 campesinos as the total audience for any one course is also a very conservative estimate. Even so, the $12 figure must compare favourably to the cost of training in farmer training centres and using more traditional methodology.

The main problem facing CENCIRA now is that of attaining and maintaining, on a national scale, a rate of course presentation that is high enough to keep the operation economical. And at the same time, account has to be taken of the findings of the independent analysis in respect of the context in which courses are used.

Unfortunately, the severe financial restrictions in Peru, and in CENCIRA too, aggravate the problems. CENCIRA cannot recruit staff to replace those who have left, and fuel and vehicles are in short supply. However, the project runs until December 1980, and every effort will be made between now and then to solve the problems of course presentation. Already people talk of a breakthrough in farmer training methodology. It is perhaps premature to use such a sweeping phrase. But certainly the projects in Peru, Mexico and Honduras that are using video for this purpose give cause for optimism and lead to the thought of a possible region-wide promotion of the system in Latin America in due course.

What is video?

A video tape recorder (VTR) is quite similar in appearance to a tape recorder for sound; it is box-shaped and there are models that take either tapes in cassettes or tapes on open reels.

The VTR is equipped with a camera and microphone so that it both records image and sound on magnetic tape. Video equipment for black and white or colour is available, though colour is considerably more expensive. A portable VTR weighs 10-20 kg according to the make and model. The models designed for field use run on rechargeable batteries.

Video-taped programmes are played back by plugging the VTR into a monitor or TV screen. The immediacy of the playback facility - as opposed to cine film which requires laboratory developing - is a valuable feature: the video programme producer can play back the material he has just recorded and if he is not satisfied, he can re-record the sequence again immediately. Participants in the programme production can also see themselves immediately on the TV screen. The video tape can be erased and used many times over, ensuring low running costs once the initial investment in equipment has been made. Although the equipment is electronic, it stands up surprisingly well in the field if used by well-trained people.