Africa
Development, Vol. XXXVII, No. 2, 2012, pp. 1 – 14
© Council for the Development of Social Science
Research in Africa, 2012
(ISSN 0850-3907)
The Impact of Non-formal Education on Skills and Knowledge of Community
Development Workers: A Case Study
Derica Alba Kotzé*
Abstract
The ultimate route to address the
needs of the poor is through a community development process with projects as
the main vehicle. The main role player to facilitate this process is the
community development worker. This article focuses firstly on the role and
importance of non-formal education in community development and, secondly, on
the impact of non-formal education and training on the knowledge and skills of
community development workers responsible for the facilitation of projects. The
article is based on an evaluation of a nonformal education programme that was
developed to enhance the knowledge and skills of community development workers
involved in the planning and execution of community-based development projects.
Résumé
Une voie ultime pour répondre aux
besoins des populations pauvres passe par le processus de développement
communautaire, avec des projets comme principal véhicule. L’acteur essentiel
pour faciliter ce processus est l’agent de développement communautaire. Cet
article met d’abord l’accent sur le rôle et l’importance de l’éducation
non-formelle dans le développement communautaire et, en deuxième lieu, sur
l’impact de cette éducation sur les connaissances et les aptitudes des agents
responsables de la facilitation des projets de développement communautaire. Cet
article est basé sur l’évaluation d’un programme d’éducation non-formelle conçu
pour développer les connaissances et les aptitudes des agents de développement
impliqués dans la planification et l’exécution des projets de développement
communautaire.
* Department of Development
Studies, University of South Africa. Email: Kotzed@unisa.ac.za
2
Introduction
The focus of this article is the role and importance of
non-formal education in enhancing the skills and knowledge of community
development workers to execute participatory community-based development
projects, to address the needs of the poor in the development process. In this
article, the author reports on a research study that was conducted among
development facilitators employed by World Vision in Malawi as community
development workers (CDWs) and enrolled for the Certificate Programme in
Development for Development Practitioners offered by the Centre for Development
Studies, University of South Africa (Unisa). Although this programme has been
running for a decade, no research has yet been conducted to evaluate the impact
of this non-formal training programme on the skills and knowledge of community
development workers to successfully design, plan, implement, monitor and
evaluate community-based development projects.
Research Methods
For the purpose of this research,
two methods were used to collect data. The fist method involved a questionnaire
consisting of a combination of 15 closed- and open-ended questions (Babbie
& Mouton 2001:233). The purpose of this questionnaire was to do a survey of
the impact of nonformal education on the skills and knowledge as experienced by
community development workers. Closed-ended questions were characterised by a
limited number of options. Respondents did not have a ‘neutral’ option in order
to force them to exercise a choice and give an opinion. The completion of questionnaires
was anonymous and voluntary. Data from the responses on closed-ended questions
was stated in frequency tables while data collected from responses on
open-ended questions were analysed and summarised according to specific topics.
The sample was extracted from a population consisting of 75 World Vision
development facilitators working as CDWs in Malawi and enrolled for a
non-formal education programme in communitybased development project
management. A total number of 36 questionnaires, which constituted 48 per cent
of the total population, were received and analysed. The second method involved
an evaluation form designed by the 75 World Vision employees enrolled for the
programme. The purpose of this evaluation form was to give students an opportunity
to decide for themselves which aspects of the non-formal learning experience
and teaching process are important to them as CDWs and need to be assessed. A
total of 73 evaluation forms, which constituted 97.3 per cent of the total
population, were received and analysed. This evaluation form consisted of six
topic areas which students had to evaluate indicating their opinion by choosing
3
from a limited number of options. Students also had the
opportunity to give comments on ‘areas of celebration’ and ‘shortfalls’
relating to the training programme.
Role of Non-formal Education in Community
Development
The realities of the plight of the poor
in underdeveloped and underprivileged communities require immediate action to
enhance their position in society. The main route to address the needs of the
poor is through community development projects. However, these projects are
often ill-design and implemented in a top-down fashion, not based on active
community participation and empowerment and do not take the needs of the
intended beneficiaries into account. The potential of development initiatives
can only be realised through people’s participation in designing development
policies and programmes and their active participation in community development
projects. In this day and age with the MDGs closing in on us and the
realisation that poverty, food insecurity, gender inequality and economic
deterioration are out of control, it is time that we react to this changing
world. We need to train and educate development practitioners as ‘agents of
change’ who have the skills and knowledge to facilitate participatory
sustainable development and not only as well-educated people within the field
of development studies. Agents of change in the development environment must be
able to work and operate in poor communities, as well as enhance community
participation and should have a broad set of skills that include non-technical
skills, such as, negotiation, listening, communication, facilitation,
interpersonal, adaptive and problem solving (Hindes & Bakker 2004:77 &
79).
According to
Hindes & Bakker (2004:78) ‘higher education institutions perform well in
the provision of the relevant multidisciplinary knowledge base, but falter when
it comes to the development of the competencies essential for effective
application of that to the world of work.’ In pursuit of effective and relevant
community development, educators, students and practitioners in the development
field must be continuously engaged in a process where both the teaching process
and learning experience address the realities and challenges of poor
communities to make community-based development a reality through a process of
participation and empowerment. It is within this context where non-formal
education plays an important role in addition to formal education to enhance
the skills and knowledge of community development workers to equip them to lead
poor communities to empowerment and decision makers of their own destiny. AEGEE
(nd:34) emphasises that NFE ‘is essential to carry through any change that has
to
4
do with peoples’ behaviours and their
interactions. Especially when it is about the most important values, like
freedom, human rights, democracy, peace, respect, diversity or gender
equality.’ Human development (UNESCO 2006:37) involves a process where people’s
opportunities and choices are enlarged. According to UNESCO (2006:39)
‘Non-formal education has always been part of the solution for marginalised and
vulnerable population groups because programmes are based on an integrated
approach that takes into account all the factors influencing the opportunities
and life-chances of different population groups, and the role played by
education systems themselves in the process of social inclusion and cohesion.’
UNESCO (2006:39) defines non-formal
education (NFE) as a process of learning ‘embedded in planned, organised and
sustained education activities that are outside formal education institution,
responding to education needs for persons of all ages. The purpose of NFE is to
provide alternative learning opportunities for those who do not have access to
formal schooling or need specific life skills and knowledge to overcome
different obstacles. Nonformal learning is also intentional from the learner’s
point of view, as opposed to incidental or random types of learning.’ Tight
(1996:68) also expresses this notion and describes NFE as ‘education, learning
and training which takes place outside recognised educational institutions.’
Non-formal education is associated with the following characteristics (Smith
2009:1):
•
Relevance to the needs of disadvantaged groups;
•
Concern with specific categories of person;
•
A focus on clearly defined purposes; • Flexibility in organisation
and methods.
NFE consists of a wide variety of activities and programmes
which include development initiatives to address the plight of poor
communities. It is directly linked to the development process which is regarded
as an educational process. Faundez (quoted in Smith 2009:4) explained it as
follows:
The development process is in fact an educational
process, or rather it should unfailingly be viewed as such. We cannot therefore
conceive of development in the absence of education any more than education in
the absence of development.
Development is about improving the
standard of living and quality of life of people and therefore depends
primarily on the community people themselves. NFE emphasises flexibility,
responsiveness and localness and it is outputcentred, environment- and
community-based, participatory and learnercentred, and a self-governing,
democratic process. NFE should be based on the interests of the learners and
has as ultimate goal to empower the
5
learners (Smith 2009:4 & 5; AEGEE
(nd):10). NFE is a planned programme of personal development aimed at improving
the skills and competencies of people outside the formal education system
(AEGEE (nd:10). AEGEE (nd:14) explains it as follows:‘Personal development
refers to the improvement of one’s own competencies. … The outcomes of personal
development are self-improvement and personal growth with the purpose of
realising one’s higher potential…’ Competencies refer to attitudes (what we
are), skills (what we can do) and knowledge (what we know) (AEGEE nd:14).
NFE makes it possible for development
practitioners to enhance their skills and knowledge to take initiative and
involve communities in making small steps towards improving their quality of
life and addressing their development needs. According to UNESCO (2006:63) NFE
has the ability to transform lives not only by improving the knowledge base of
people but in terms of skills development and increased ability to respond to
changes in society. Participants in NFE interventions gain different skills to
‘generate sustainable livelihoods and to cope better with community-related
issues. As a result, participants gain confidence and develop positive
attitudes about themselves and their role in the community. …learners develop
very valuable "soft skills" such as interpersonal communication,
teamwork, leadership, discipline, responsibility, planning, organising and
practical problem solving.’ The role and importance of NFE in development,
especially where international aid can have a dependency effect, is clearly
reflected in the following statement:
Through capacity building communities are learning to
stand on their own feet. If people discover and develop their competencies –
they build self confidence…. This process of empowerment can be successfully
initiated with methods of nonformal education (AEGEE nd:35).
It is within this framework where NFE plays an essential role
in the training of development practitioners for the facilitation of
development projects aimed at improving the life of communities, addressing the
causes of poverty, and empowerment and capacity building. However, it is
reasonable to ask whether such NFE interventions have a significant impact on
the competencies (attitude, knowledge and skills) of development practitioners
taking part in such NFE training interventions.
Case Study
This research is based on a case
study of the impact of non-formal education on the skills and knowledge of
development facilitators of World Vision International (WVI) working as CDWs in
Malawi. WVI, founded in 1951, is an international Christian relief, development
and advocacy organisation
6
(NGO) working on six continents. World Vision’s purpose is to
‘create lasting change in the lives of children, families and communities
living in poverty’ (World Vision 2009:1). Their mission is to help the poor and
the oppressed by providing holistic interventions that promote transformational
development, self-sufficiency and dignity through, inter alia, community
development projects and area development programmes aimed at uplifting the
living standard of poor communities (WVI
1989:4; WVI 1993:1; WVZ 2000:5). The main focus of these efforts is
‘transformational development’ (where communities are empowered through
community participation in the project cycle of World vision development
projects to take ownership of local development activities), public awareness,
strategic initiatives and emergency relief (WVI 2009). World Vision explains
the transformational process as follows (WVI 2009:1):
•
Transformational development is the process
through which children, families and communities identify and overcome the
obstacles that prevent them from living life in all its fullness.
•
World Vision partners with communities to
improve lives.
•
Through these partnerships, communities access
the knowledge and resources needed to improve the well-being of children and
overcome poverty.
•
World Vision provides a range of interventions
tailored to the context, including programmes in education, health, economic
development, microfinance, agriculture, water and sanitation.
• By
helping community members help each other, World Vision ensures that the
process of positive change continues long after development staff have left.
According to Swanepoel en De Beer
(2006:xiv & xv) development agencies and facilitators, such as World
Vision, should fulfil an enabling and supportive role in the development
process in order for communities to be empowered and capacitated to take responsibility
for their own development through which their human dignity is enhanced. In
this supportive role, an adaptive mode of administration should be followed
implying that community development is a learning process through which the
people become involved in their efforts to break free of the cycle of poverty (Swanepoel & De Beer 2006:33).
Furthermore, the development process is political as the taking of power and
decision-making process regarding the use of scarce resources are political
acts and impact on the lives of the poor. The facilitator-community
relationship challenges not only the power relations in the community, but also
the traditional way of doing. The goal is to shift the traditional situation
7
and view of power and decision making
so that marginalised social and cultural groups get the position of power and
role of decision maker (Narsee 2004:90).
To achieve the
above, CDWs are required to have the knowledge, skills, understanding, values
and attitudes necessary to perform the development tasks and activities
associated with development project management within a holistic and
people-centred development approach which enhances participation and
empowerment of the intended beneficiaries. World Vision, one of the largest
international NGOs involved in development projects to address the needs of
poor communities, realised that a vastly different set of skills and knowledge
among their development facilitators are needed for the implementation of
transformational development, successful development projects and enhancement
of poor communities to become self-sufficient and self-reliant. In the light of
this World Vision approached the Centre for Development Studies (CDS)1
at the University of South Africa to develop a non-formal education programme
specifically aimed at increasing the effectiveness of the organisation’s
development efforts in poor communities. Consequently, the programme in
Development for Development Practitioners was developed by the CDS to equip
World Vision development facilitators, working on grassroots level and involved
in development project management, with the skills and knowledge necessary to
design, implement, monitor and evaluate people-centred development
projects. The objectives of the
programme can be summarised as follows (CDS Annual Report 2008:8):to provide
development practitioners with the necessary knowledge and skills in the
planning, implementation, evaluation and monitoring of communitybased
development projects through participatory research exercises to contribute to
successful and appropriate development initiatives amongst disadvantaged
communities.
World Vision
development facilitators are trained in poverty and development, participatory
research methodology and development project management which consists of the
following three phases:project planning for development, planning for
implementation, planning for monitoring and evaluation. These are based on what
is known as the ‘project based approach’. It is also known as ZOPP (Ziel
Orientierte Projekt Planung), Logical Framework Approach (LFA or logframe) and
Project Cycle Management (Randel & Thaw 2003:11). Development projects are
the instrument used to realise this planning method in practice and can be
defined as interventions to address and solve development problems. The
assumptions of the project-based approach are that a development project is a
way of providing external support where it is needed and such an
8
intervention has as focus the
sustainable alleviation of poverty. Furthermore, a project seeks to meet the
needs of the people and not that of the outside agency’s; the intervention must
be well planned and managed; and lastly the intervention or project must come
to an end. The aim of these projects/interventions is to bring about an ongoing
improvement in the living conditions of people (Randel & Thaw 2003:16).
The instructional
methodology used is based on the philosophy of popular education and includes
residency training sessions, learning-by-doing techniques, participatory
research methodology and open distance learning. Through the use of brain
storming exercises, capacity-building workshops and peer-education, the
programme fosters the training of development facilitators with the knowledge
to develop a critical vision of reality, the skills to search collectively for
solutions of identified community problems as well as to design, implement,
monitor and evaluate community-based development projects.
Facilitators of
non-formal education programmes and capacity building workshops, however, are
often unaware of the shortcomings or the areas of excellence of their
facilitation, contents and curriculum. According to Van Rheede van Oudtshoorn
and Hay (2004:140) ‘It is in the best interest of teaching and learning to
study the perceptions of students in this regard in order to address possible
areas of concern and success.’ According to Whitaker and Moses (Steyn 2000:174)
‘Being quality and service minded in education means relating to and carrying
out the goals, needs, desires and interests of customers and making sure they
are met.’ It is therefore essential that thi programme and the consequent
learning process needs to be assessed to determine its impact on World Vision’s
transformational development efforts where communities are empowered through
community participation in the project cycle of World vision development
projects to take ownership of local development activities. Another reason is
that students’ perceptions of content and teaching are central to the
evaluation of a non-formal education programme because ‘the effectiveness of
their learning is not related to the educators’ interpretation of the course
but to the learners’ own experiences.’ (Ramsden & Dodds in Steyn 2000:174).
This programme also has a large distance education component that has the
danger that the ‘faceless’ numbers of students may become invisible to
educators and in pursuit of quality, students and lecturers must engage ‘in a
process of finding opportunities for improving the learning process, the
quality of learning experience and the way it is delivered.’ (Steyn 2000:174
& 175). The Centre for Development Studies, as provider of the programme,
is concerned with the effects and impact of this non-formal teaching on World
Vision’s development
9
practitioners’ learning experience and
their work and actions to promote transformational development.
In light of the above, the author of this
article, in her role as facilitator and lecturer on the programme, decided to
study the perceptions of students enrolled for this NFE programme.
Subsequently, the following secondary objectives were formulated for this
article, namely:
• To
determine whether or not students feel positive about the relevancy of the
non-formal education Programme in Development for
Development Practitioners for the
training of development facilitators involved in community-based development
projects
•
If students feel that the non-formal education
Programme in Development for Development Practitioners enhanced their knowledge
and skills in the management of development projects
•
Students’ perceptions about non-formal teaching
programmes as an important educational tool to supplement formal school
education and/or post-school qualifications to increase practical skills and
knowledge for the successful implementation of community-based development
projects;
• Students’
perceptions about the positive impact of the programme in Development for
Development Practitioners for enhancement of community participation in
development project management.
Results
The main objectives of the
questionnaire were to establish, firstly, students’ feelings about the
relevancy of the programme for the training of people involved in
community-based development projects and whether the programme enhanced their
knowledge and skills in the management of development projects; and secondly,
their perceptions about non-formal training programmes as an important
educational tool to supplement formal degree qualifications to increase
practical skills and knowledge of successful development projects. A third
objective was to determine their opinions about the impact of the programme on
enhancing community participation in development project management.
It is clear
from the questionnaire results that the programme is both highly relevant and
highly suitable for the training of CDWs involved in participatory
community-based development projects for transformational development. Out of
the 36 questionnaires, 27 respondents (75%) found the training highly relevant
while 25 per cent (8 respondents) found it relevant. No respondent found it
irrelevant. A total of 24 respondents (66.7%) found
10
the programme highly suitable with the balance of 33.3 per
cent indicating it as suitable. No negative response was given (see Table 10.
Table 1: Responses to the suitability
and relevancy of the Programme for the training of people involved in
development projects.
Highly Irrelevant Irrelevant Relevant Highly Relevant
8 27
Highly Unsuitable Unsuitable Suitable Highly Suitable
6 24
In response to the questions whether
the programme enhanced the student’s knowledge and skills for planning,
implementing, monitoring and evaluating community-based development projects,
all 36 respondents indicated positively that the programme enhanced both their
knowledge and skills. In response to a statement that the ‘Certificate
Programme in Development for Development Practitioners is an important
educational tool to supplement formal degree qualifications to increase
practical skills and knowledge of successful development projects’, 24
respondents (66.7%) strongly agreed, 27.8 per cent agreed and only 5.6 per cent
strongly disagreed.
On the positive
impact of the programme in Development for Development Practitioners for
enhancement of community participation in development project management,
students answered as follows:
|
|
Strongly
|
Agree
|
Disagree Strongly
|
|
|
|
agree
|
|
|
disagree
|
|
Community participation in project planning
|
29
|
7
|
0
|
0
|
|
Community participation in project implementation
|
30
|
6
|
0
|
0
|
|
Community-based development
|
29
|
7
|
0
|
0
|
|
Project ownership by communities
|
32
|
4
|
0
|
0
|
|
Community capacity building
|
28
|
8
|
0
|
0
|
|
Participation of beneficiaries in projects
|
27
|
9
|
0
|
0
|
11
In response to a separate question
about the opinion of the contribution of the programme towards participation of
project beneficiaries in World Vision’s projects, 100 per cent of the students
indicated that the programme contributed positively to beneficiary
participation. It is clear from the above that the participants in this NFE
programme are convinced that the programme is relevant and an important
instrument to address the development needs of poor communities in such a way
that it improves their living conditions. It has as point of departure the
participation of communities in identifying, planning and executing relevant
development projects. This participatory approach is supposed to enhance
community empowerment and capacity for self-sustaining development, leading to
selfreliant development as communities become more effective in planning,
managing and using resources for community-based development. However, at the
end of the day, it is not the opinion of community development workers that matters,
but the opinion of the affected communities. Therefore, they should be included
as respondents in the research process in order to determine whether NFE
actually contributes positively to the skills and knowledge of CDWs to enhance
community participation and self-sustaining, transformational development.
Results from the evaluation form which
was designed by the students themselves also confirm that the programme and its
contents are relevant for the training of CDWs. The largest majority of
students are of the opinion that the NFE Programme is excellent in content and
relevancy with regard to planning (83.6%), implementation (84.9%), and
monitoring and evaluation (82.2%) of development projects. A total number of 48
students (65.8%) indicated that the programme is excellent for improving the
skills of development facilitators while the rest (34.2%) indicated that the
programme is good for improving the skills of development facilitators. The
largest majority of the students gave very positive comments under ‘areas of
celebration’. These include the following:
•
Acquisition of knowledge, skills and expertise
on how to do community-based development work;
•
Whatever we have learnt is very relevant to our
work;
•
The content has really helped to open the mind
to face future challenges;
•
The material is very relevant to our work;
•
Be able now to plan well for programme
activities and will manage to facilitate development;
•
Course content relevant for distance learning
12
•
Modules covered are relevant to the work which
we do on the ground
•
Capacity enhancement on project planning
implementation and management;
•
The modules have broadened our horizon regarding
development work in rural communities;
•
Skills acquired on project planning was great;
•
Planning for monitoring and evaluation;
•
Have now knowledge in programme/project
management;
•
The course content and group work;
• The
course modules are just very good and an eye opener for the well-being of my
job.
The largest majority of students did not have any comments
under ‘shortfalls’. The few comments that were received had to do with either
the venue where the training took place or the short duration of the training
which lasted three days. Based on the evaluation done by the students and their
comments received, one can conclude that the programme in Development for
Development Practitioners is successful in achieving its primary purpose,
namely, to provide CDWs with the necessary knowledge and skills in the
planning, implementation, evaluation and monitoring of community-based
development projects to contribute to successful and appropriate development
initiatives amongst disadvantaged communities. It should be noted that this
paper focuses on the relation between NFE and developing the skills and
knowledge of CDWs. Therefore, in light of the perceptions and evaluations of
the respondents, it can be concluded that NFE did contribute towards capacity
building among CDWs. It is however ungrounded to make the assumption, based on
the opinions of the respondents, that NFE enhances the involvement and
participation of local communities and beneficiaries in the design of
development projects through their meaningful participation, control and inputs
in the development process. It also does not substantiate that the acquiring of
skills and knowledge through NFE contribute to transformational community-based
development.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this paper has
evaluated the impact of non-formal education on the development of skills and
knowledge of community development workers. It is clear from the case study
that non-formal education could be one of the most effective instruments to
train development facilitators and community development workers in a practical
way to master the skills
13
necessary to manage development projects efficiently and in a
people-centred manner. From the study it is clear that the respondents are of
the opinion that they (1) experienced a learning process through this NFE
Programme and (2) increased their knowledge and skills to implement development
projects that enhance the participation, self-reliance and empowerment of poor
people. This research article reflects the students’ positive perceptions of
content and teaching and the effectiveness of learning as related to the
learners’ own experiences. One can thus conclude that the programme is
successful in training CDWs with relevant knowledge and the necessary skills to
perform development activities and facilitate development projects. However, it
is necessary to expand the research study to include members, stakeholders and
beneficiaries of the communities involved and affected by the community
development efforts of these development facilitators. This study does not
provide any evidence that transformational development of poor communities has
taken place. Neither does it prove that non-formal education of community
development workers promotes holistic, people-centred and sustainable community
development. The question that should be answered is whether non-formal
education of CDWs has a positive impact on grassroots level and the lives of
vulnerable groups. Only when all stakeholders are involved in the research
process can one make an objective ruling about the impact of non-formal
education on the skills and knowledge of CDWs in the facilitation of
community-based development projects.
Note
1. The Centre for Development
Studies (CDS) was established in 1993 with the specific aim to address not only
the shortage of skilled development practitioners but also the need for
non-technical skills among development practitioners (development facilitators,
community development workers, government officials) to respond innovatively
and actively to the increasing demand for community development training and
capacity building. The CDS is committed to ‘supporting training needs,
enhancing development skills and promoting a process of participatory,
people-centred, sustainable development’ through non-formal education
programmes (CDS Annual Report 2008:3).
References
AEGEE Europe, No date, NFE
Book. The Impact of Non-formal Education on Young People and Society, Brussels:AEGEE
Europe.
Babbie, E. and Mouton, J., 2001, The Practice of Social Research. Cape
Town:Oxford University Press.
14
Bhasin, K., 1991, ‘Participatory
Democracy Demands Participatory Training’, Convergence
XXIV (4).
Centre for Development Studies (CDS), 2008, Annual Report, Pretoria:Unisa
Cohen, J.M. and Uphoff, N.T., 1980,
Participation’s Place in Rural
Development:Seeking Clarity, Ithaca, New York:Cornell University.
Hindes, C. and Bakker, K., 2004,
‘Between Deconstruction and Systems Thinking – Some Practicalities of
Incorporating Non-Technical Skills into Curricula Using Critical Thinking as an
Example’, South African Journal of Higher
Education 18(2), pp. 76-86.
Liebenberg, S. and Stewart, P.,
1997, Participatory Development
Management and RDP, Cape Town:Juta.
Narsee, S.D., 2004, Durban
Institute of Technology’s (DIT) Response to the Challenges of Multiculturalism
and Diversity South African Journal of
Higher Education 18(2),pp. 87-96.
Randel, M., and Thaw, D., 2003, Project Planning for Development,
Durban:Olive Publications.
Rowland, J., 2005, Empowerment Examined, Development in Practice 5(2).
SDdimensions, 1997, ‘Participation
in Practice. Lessons from the FAO People’s Participation Programme’
(http://www.fao.org/sd/PPdirect?PPre0044.htm) (accessed on 2009-05-20).
Smith, M.K., 2009, Non-formal
Education, (http://www.infed.org/biblio/bnonfor.ht) Accessed on 04 28 2009-.
Steyn, G.M., 2000, ‘Applying
Principles of Total Quality Management to a Learning Process:A Case Study’ South African Journal of Higher Education
14(1), pp. 174-184.
Swanepoel, H.J., 1997, Community
Development:Putting Plans into Action. Cape Town: Juta.
Swanepoel, H.J. and De Beer, F.C.,
2006, Community Development. Breaking the
Cycle of Poverty. Lansdowne: Juta and Co Ltd.
Tight, M., 1996, Key
Concepts in Adult Education and Training, London: Routledge.
No comments:
Post a Comment