The process of bridging a community learning and communications technology has been happening in Newfoundland and Labrador for about 30 years and is perhaps unique to the culture of this province.
Specifically, we are talking about adult, non-formal, community-based learning. The common ground between learning within a community education context and the methodology of participatory communications is respect for local knowledge and local way of doing things. Learners and facilitators are peers in a long process of self development and social awareness. The process mobilizes individuals to analyze and plan for their own future and the future of their communities. In order to plug participatory communications into community education, however, it is essential to humanize and demystify the technology. The technology described here is video used in an interactive, participant-controlled local television environment.
In an early attempt to humanize communications technology, they established principles such as the need for a sensitive film crew. Later during the Port au Choix project, they introduced the "approval screening" where participants in the film were given the opportunity to judge if the film actually represented what they wanted to say.
Today, the "Fogo Process" is known globally in adult education and participatory communications circles.
In 1979, the Extension Service and its media unit began to experiment with a television transmitter in rural communities. These experiments evolved into phone-in community forums on local issues and needs. Typically the projects began with discussions between field workers and community representatives, which resulted in the media unit bringing in a producer and technicians to pre-tape programming and produce live television in a community hall. Local people appeared on-camera, operated cameras and provided cultural input. This process provided delivery of information to the community and an opportunity for residents to engage in dialogue and plan the future.
Between 1983 and 1989, there were eleven transmitter projects focusing on public discussion of issues facing rural communities. But by the end of the 80s, there was a shift of focus from media technology to popular education - the people took control of the technology.
There were several reasons for this. Financially, the media unit had been eliminated and Extension could no longer afford professional technicians. Technologically, the proliferation of local cable systems meant the technology was already in the community ready to be tapped. Philosophically, there was a move to a popular education methodology.
By 1989, Extension workers had perceived that one danger of using video in a community is that the technology is often controlled by outsiders. With popular education methodology, it is essential that people do their own media. This not only ensure ownership of the process, but in itself develops self-confidence, self-reliance and pride. Using the tools of technology, the community takes control of its own learning process. Then, from a position of self-confidence and control, the community can work with external agencies and facilitators to design programs which meet its needs and aspirations.
The experience of the local-television community-dialogue process, facilitated collaboratively by volunteers and extension workers in the early 1990s, exemplifies the principles and assumptions of community learning currently being realized by the Port au Port Community Education Initiative.
In 1993, the first community television forums were organized in five communities on the Port au Port Peninsula. The purpose was to inform the residents about the work of the Education Initiative but, more importantly, to involve them in the planning process [See Local comments on...].
In 1995, the Initiative co-sponsored another grassroots process called the Communiquer Pour Survivre / Communication for Survival Institute. This process is based on the premise that constructive dialogue and communication are the key to the ability to plan together for a better future. Designed as a collaboration between sponsors, community partners, participants and initiators, it promotes the sharing of experiences and plans withing and between communities. One of its tools is small format video and community controlled television.
There are no professionals in grassroots participatory communication; ordinary people plan the programming and operate the equipment. Resource people work mostly with youth and women in the communities - participants are students, itinerant farm workers, housewives, teachers, fishermen, unemployed fish plant workers, union officers, small business operators.
Trying to ensure that as many people as possible participate in the community communication process is a priority. "All the voices" is an essential component of grassroots communication. But it's not easy. Ordinary people are not used to being asked to speak publicly on issues and, when they do, nobody listens.
We are all conditioned by our life-long experience as passive recipients of information from media and educational institutions. Therefore it requires a major effort to understand why it is futile to expect communication or education to effect a positive change unless the people themselves perceive the process as meeting community needs and being "from here."
The practice of respect for local ways of doing things - the common ground between community education and participatory communications technology - is essential for all educators and communicators who want to participate in development processes which meet the needs of our rural communities. The community can and must take ownership of its own communication process.
Activities: Live phone-in public meeting on community cable television systems; students videotaping interviews, "streeters" and cultural events; community round tables; workshops on group development; students producing video dramas to sent to other communities; forming black and white photography groups; producing posters and brochures to publicize local events and festivals; transforming a corporate newsletter into a community newsletter; assisting a colleague to produce a regional newspaper; regional steering committee meeting of volunteers to discuss common issues and strategies.
This is a reproduction of the article that appeared in LACMF LITERACY ACROSS THE CURRICULUMEDIA FOCUS, Volume 13, Number 4.