1 / 56

Media training: triumphs or travesties? Experience from Southern Africa

Media training: triumphs or travesties? Experience from Southern Africa . by Guy Berger, presentation to seminar: “Impact indicators: making a difference” Independent Journalism Centre, Chisinau, Moldova 15 May 2003. Preview points. Stakeholders Complexities Principles

deanne
Download Presentation

Media training: triumphs or travesties? Experience from Southern Africa

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Media training: triumphs or travesties?Experience from Southern Africa • by Guy Berger, • presentation to seminar: • “Impact indicators: making a difference” • Independent Journalism Centre, Chisinau, Moldova • 15 May 2003

  2. Preview points • Stakeholders • Complexities • Principles • Priorities • Case study • Conclusion

  3. Introduction: ideal logic • Constructing new societies •  • Media’s role in democracy •  • Strengthen through training

  4. Get close up to stakeholders • Ideal vs reality • Journalists are not saints • Donors & media are industries • Training impact is unclear

  5. Close up 1: Trainers’ interests • True or false? • “Trainers are pure altruists”

  6. Who earns & who learns? • Choose the right answer - • Who gets the most benefit from training: • (a) trainer? • (b) trainee? • (c) employer? • (d) donor?

  7. Close up 2: Donor drivers • King of the network • An industry as well • Has its own market fashions, flirtations & fluctuations • Needs hard results = deliverables req’d • But hard to measure.

  8. Close up 3: employers • Some employers don’t want better journalists • Most don’t want to pay for training; some can’t • Fewer have a training strategy

  9. Close up 4: Trainees • True or false? • Many are professional trainees in search of per diems

  10. Once they’re trained, we pray they’ll stay • Hand-up = hand-out into PR industry/govt? • Does training lead to draining of talent? • Do we really make enough sustained impact from our training?

  11. Close up: summing up • So, creating effective training is a hard-nosed business! • And there are different interests in impact assessment (IA): • trainers, • funders, • trainees, • employers

  12. A complex business: • Creativity & chaos complicate cause-effect • Yet what works best - • Train on-site or not? • Centre vs periphery? • Language & culture? • Skill, talks & texts? • Journos as trainers?

  13. More complexity: • Skills transfer, or is it growth? • Go for breadth, with many trained, or • Go for depth: train fewer, but better?

  14. Is there a multiplier effect? • Do trainees bomb out back at the newsroom? Or is it: “each one, teach one”?

  15. For training to fly ... • We need core principles about what makes for effective training. • We need to evaluate training in their light … if we want to assess impact (for stakeholders). • Training • principles ...

  16. PRINCIPLE 1: Trainee- • Focus point: Learner-centred • So: set objectives in relation to: • needs analysis • baseline data • Then: measure success in terms of: • objectives, and • baseline data or trend analysis Note: objectives do not always = changes

  17. PRINCIPLE 1: Trainer-trainee-employer • So: a triangle • of participants • “As the strength of a chain is determined by its weakest link, so the least contribution of any one partner becomes the maximum level of effectiveness possible”

  18. PRINCIPLE 2: Ladder of learning • One-off and fragmented training experiences = resource waste • Develop an ongoing culture of learning • Give certificates for competence, not attendance

  19. PRINCIPLE 3: proactivity • Serving the sector  a servant of the sector. • Providers should offer: • Needs-driven AND needs-arousing training. • Demand- AND supply- driven courses. • “Put the gain into train”

  20. In one SA needs analysis of 14 radio stations, 13 failed to identify anyneed for: • journalism training, • skills in covering poverty • reporting local govt. • Only 3 said gender training. • None said training in media convergence. • Trainers must be leaders

  21. PRINCIPLE 4: Process • No application within the newsroom  • Maybe: trainee didn’t learn much  • Cos poor delivery or good, but … • Poor course design  • Or: reason is - course wasn’t based on needs … • Training is a journey • - you can trace problems backwards

  22. Process stages • If course did meet needs • Maybe the wrong people went on it • Or: the workplace blocks all  • Or:training not in fact the solution

  23. Process lessons • Front-end work • is critical: • you can’t salvage a wrong course or wrong trainees. • Secrets of success can also be traced through preceding phases In short, evaluate at all stages! Pre-training, during, afterwards

  24. PRINCIPLE 5: Holism Training target A: Head • Train the brain: • information • knowledge • intellectual skills

  25. Training target B: Hands • Practice: • Skills to implement

  26. Target C: Heart of the matter • If you forget about attitude, your training won’t fly. • (You can train for media freedom & ethics, for anti-sexism, diversity, anti-racism, etc.)

  27. Target D: The Wallet • The point is: • What’s the pay-off? • Financial • Organisational • Job-related • Challenge: make a difference to the fulfillment of the clients’ missions

  28. Holistic training • So, training should be planned and assessed in terms of: K nowledge A ttitude P ractice P ay-off

  29. PRINCIPLE 6: RLAP • Reaction: do they like it? • Learning: are they learning it? • Application: are they using it? • Pay-off: does it make a difference?

  30. Remember ... • Good reaction •  learning • Learning •  application • Application •  effective pay-off • It’s a package.

  31. RLAP = indicators of kapp: • Reaction • ≡ Attitude • Learning • ≡ Knowledge • Application • ≡ Practice • Combination affects Pay-off

  32. Recapping principles • Golden triangle: trainer, • trainee, employer • Ladder of learning • Proactive • Process • Holistic (kapp) • RLAP

  33. At last: Impact Assessment

  34. Priorities: what to select?

  35. Evaluation: • Begin before the beginning of a course; • Continue after the end. • Remember reaction, learning, application, pay-off … at every stage. • Prioritise what to focus upon • Results: you’ll find out: • what works, • what needs work. • “It’s the training that did it”

  36. Fly in the ointment… • How? • Evaluation & impact assessment takes • time, money (10%?), skill, follow-up • Needs to be against training objectives & baseline/trend analyis – BUT be open to unexpected findings • Don’t be dominated by findings • Beware being too training-centred.

  37. Get to grips with HOW • Questionnaires • Focus groups • Observation • Testing • Other: • Output, awards, • promotions, • public opinion.

  38. Case study: Southern Africa • Stakeholders: • NSJ • Funders • Me • Other trainers • A range of interests.

  39. Principles @ work: • Research done .5 to 2.5 years after courses: • 12 courses 1996-97 • 374 individuals • 29% responses • Considerations: • Triangle • KAPP-RLAP • Proactivity • Process • Objectives & baseline

  40. Case study: Southern Africa • Scoping: • Individual • Newsroom • Medium • Society • Method: • Questionnaires – 58 qtns • (incl asking for evidence) • Quantitative & qualitative

  41. Indicators • Individual • Skills (LA), confidence (R), motivation (R) • Remuneration (A), position (A) • Perceptions of limitations (A) • Newsroom • Sharing of information (L) • Learning culture (R) • Society • Media freedom & independence (A) • Provoked ire (R)

  42. Sampling needed: • Structured & representative: • Training rich/poor countries • Media free/restricted countries • NSJ activity concentrated • Potential markets & donor dependent • State and private media • Broadcast and print media • Male and female Total: 25 journalists (7%), 6 editors

  43. Matrix of countries:

  44. RLAP across scope:

  45. Interesting findings: • 77% said performance increased from average to above-average 90% more motivated & confident Time elapse: longer = gtr impact

  46. Pay-off findings: • Asked for value of training received: $25 – $500 a day! 30% promoted or pay increase – attributed to course (40% of men, 9% women)

  47. “Triangle” findings: • Trainees rated improvement higher than their bosses did. • Trainees say they circulate training materials, bosses differ. 60% bosses value certificate; 20% of trainees value it.

  48. Gender findings: • Guess who shares course materials – men … or women? • Significance: • To make impact, train more women. • To get more women, change duration of course.

  49. Macro-findings: • More impact on: • training-poor countries, • public media. • Raised ire: • 40% private media • 25% of public • Newsroom conservatism as obstacle to application: • 75% public • 20% private

  50. Unintended impact • A community of southern African journalists with a growing regional identity

More Related