Post on 10-May-2023
a
Royal University of Phnom Penh
Master of Education Program
Community Learning Center Development in Cambodia:
The Case of Ksert Commune in Svay Rieng Province
karGPivDÆn_mCÄmNÐlsikSashKmn_enAkñúgRbeTskm<úCa³
krNIsikSakñúgXuMExSRt extþsVayerog
Pich Nipun
December 2008
b
Royal University of Phnom Penh
Master of Education Program
Community Learning Center Development in Cambodia:
The Case of Ksert Commune in Svay Rieng Province
Pich Nipun
A research report submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of
the degree of Master of Education
Supervisor: Dr. CHHINH Sitha
© 2008 (Pich Nipun)
December 2008
c
mUln½ysegçb
PsúþtagCaeRcInkñúgÉksarRsavRCavmYycMnYnsþIGMBIkarGnuvtþn_eKalviFIsikSaEbbsh
Kmn_bgðajBIkarb:unb:gcg;pSBVpSay b¤elIksÞÜykarcUlrYmrbs;shKmn_kñúgvis½yGb;rM[kan;
EtRbesIreLIg . kñúgbTBiesaFn_kargarGb;rMrbs;RbeTskm<úCaeKalviFIenH)anykmkGnuvtþ
cab;taMgBIedImqñaM 1990 mkedayGnuvtþtamry³RbB½n§salakRmg b:uEnþkarcUlrYmrbs;RbCa
CnkñúgkargarGb;rMtamry³salakRmgenHenAmankRmitenAeLIy . rhUtdl;qñaM 1999 km<úCa
)anGnuvtþnUveKalviFIsikSaEbbshKmn_fµImYyeTotkñúgbribTkargarGb;rMeRkARbB½n§ tamry³
kmµviFImCÄmNÐlsikSashKmn_ ehIyeRkaykarGnuvtþeTAtamkEnøgepSgKñakmµviFI)anpþl;TaMg
plviC¢manpg nig)anCYbRbTHnUv]bsKÁmYycMnYnkñúgkarGnuvtþkarpSBVpSay[mankarcUlrYm
BIshKmn_enH .
edIm,Iyl;[kan;Etc,as;nUvkarcUlrYmrbs;shKmn_kñúgvis½yGb;rM/ tamry³elIeLIg
karsikSakrNIkñúgmCÄmNÐlsikSashKmn_ExSRt/ karsikSaenHmanbMNgcg;EsVgrk[eXIj
nUvcemøIyEdlGaceqøIyelIsMNYrRsavRCavdUcCa³ etIkarcUlrYmrbs;shKmn_RbRBwtþeTAy:ag
dUcemþckñúgskmµPaBmCÄmNÐlsikSashKmn_? etIGñkRKb;RKgmCÄmNÐleRbIviFIsaRsþdUc
emþcxøHkñúgkarRbmUlFnFanedIm,IpÁt;pÁg;mCÄmNÐl? nigetIktþaNaxøHEdleFVI[shKmn_man
karcUlrYm nigktþaNaxøHEdlraMgsÞHdl;karcUlrYmrbs;BYkKat;? . ehIyedIm,IGaceqøIynwg
sMNYrTaMgenH)an karsikSaenH)aneRbITaMgviFIsaRsþtamEbbbrimaNvis½y nigKuNvis½ykñúgkar
RbmUlTinñn½yEdlsmRsb . kñúgkarRbmUlTinñn½ytamEbbKuNvis½y karsikSa)aneRbIviFIRb
mUledayeFVIkarsmÖasn_tamEbbsIuCeRmACamYyKN³kmµkarmCÄmNÐlshKmn_pg nigkar
smÖasn_edaymin)aneRBogTukCamunCamYyGaCJaFrEdndITaMgbIPUmienaHpg KWmanPUmiExSRt/
PUmieBaF× nigPUmikNþal . CagenHeTotcMeBaHkarRbmUlTinñn½ytamEbbbrimaNvis½yvij
karRbmUlTinñn½yedayGegáttamxñgpÞHRtUv)aneFVIeLIgedaymankarcUlrYmrbs;RbCaCnEdltM
NagBI 102 xñgpÞHmkBIPUmiTaMg 3 xagelI ¬PUmiExSRt 53 xñgpÞH/ PUmieBaF× 31 xñgpÞH/ nig
PUmikNþal 18 xñgpÞH¦ ehIykñúgcMeNamxñgpÞHTaMgenaHman 8 xñgpÞH KWCaRKYsarrbs;GaCJaFr
PUmi .
eRkayBIkarRbmUl nigkarviPaK lT§pl)anbgðajfa³ TImYy edayshKmn_mankar
yl;dwgc,as;GMBImCÄmNÐl RbCaCncUlcitþkarcUlrYmkñúgmCÄmNÐltamry³karRbCuM nigkar
eRbIR)as;esvaGb;rMrbs;mCÄmNÐleRcInCagskmµPaBcUlrYmepSg²eTot. rIÉkarcUlrYmcMENk
d
rbs;BYkeKkñúgkarCYymCÄmNÐltamry³fvika nigsmÖar³ KWnUvmankRmitenAeLIy ¬ b:uEnþkar
cUlrYmtamkmøaMgBlkmµKWmankarcUlrYmeRcIn¦müa:gvijeToteTaHbICaPaKryénkarcUlrYmrbs;
BYkKat;enAkñúgkarseRmccitþkñúgdMNak;karnanakñúgkmµviFIrbs;mCÄmNÐlmancMnYntictYckþI b:uEnþ
GñkcUlrYmTaMgenaHKWCamuxsBaØaepSg²dUcCaksikr/ GaCJaFrEdndI b¤Gñkman\T§iBlkñúgsh
Kmn_¬]>Gñkman b¤Gacarü¦ . TIBIr³ karsikSa)anbgðajfaviFIsaRsþmYycMnYn EdlKN³RKb;
RKgeRbIkñúgkareKogKrFnFanBIshKmn_ nigGñkBak;B½n§KWKat;)anbNþúHnUvkaryl;dwgBIsarRb
eyaCn_rbs;mCÄmNÐleTAdl;RbCaCnCamuntamry³karRbCuMepSg²b¤tamGaCJaFrEdndI cMeBaH
fvikavijKWBYkKat;eFVI[Gñk]btßmÖTaMgenaHmankareCOTukcitþcMeBaHkarRKb;RKgfvika/ nigBYkKat;
)anbegáInkarTMnak;TMngl¥Canic©CamYyGñkBak;B½n§TaMgLay . TIbI³ lT§pl)anbgðajfakarcUl
rYmrbs;RbCaCnKWbNaþlmkBIktþaCaeRcIndUcCaBYkKat;mankaryl;dwgeRcIncMeBaHGtßRbeyaCn_
rbs;mCÄmNÐl ehIynigbNþalmkBImanTMnak;TMngl¥rvag mCÄmNÐl nigGaCJaFr b¤RbCaCn
pÞal; nigbNþalmkBIvKÁsikSaTaMgenaHeqøIytbtamtRmUvkarrbs;BYkKat; . rIÉktþaraMgsÞHdl;
karcUlrYmKWbNþalmkBIkarmmajwkrbs;BYkKat;cMeBaHkargarciBa©wmCIvitkñúgRKYsar/ ehIyral;
GeBa¢Ij[BYkKat;cUlrYmKWmin)aneFIVeLIgCaTUeTAeT/ nigktþasMxan;enaHKWBYkKat;BuMTan;mansµartI
PaBCam©as;cMeBaHmCÄmNÐlrbs;BYkKat;enAeLIy .
i
ABSTRACT
Evidence abounds in the literature of community-based learning approach
attempt to promote community participation in education. For experience in
Cambodia, this approach has been applied since early 1990s through cluster school
system; unfortunately, the participation of community into the cluster school is still
limited. Until 1999, Cambodia had implemented the new community-based learning
approach into non-formal education context namely Community Learning Center
(CLC) project; then, in different settings, the project has not only produced positive
outcomes but also faced some challenges for promoting people participation.
To advance understanding of community participation in education, a case
of CLC in Ksert commune was postulated. In this study, three research questions
were assigned: (1) How do community people participate in learning center?, (2)
Which are the methods that the CLC committees have used to mobilize such
resources to maintain project activities? and (3) What are the factors foster or hamper
those participation? To answer these research questions, either qualitative or
quantitative methods were used to collect a sufficient data. In-dept interview with
CLC committees and unstructured interview with local community members were
employed to get qualitative data. Furthermore, in order to get quantitative data,
household survey was conducted of 102 households (of which 8 households from
local authorities) in three villages Ksert, Pour and Kandal (in correspond to 53, 31
and18 respectively).
The results of this study showed that: first, with strong awareness of CLC
information, most people would like to involve through meeting and use of services
in comparison to other forms of participation. This study also found that their
contributions for CLC through their money and materials are still limited (but high
for labor forces). Although the percentage of people participation in decision-making
stages is low, the participants were from different social status such as farmer, local
authority, or influential persons (eg: the rich and layman). Second, committees‟
methods for resources mobilization are getting more effectively, because they have
built community awareness of CLC benefits through meeting, and good networks
and linkages with stakeholders. Last, the factors driving a community participation
were strong of communication networks between CLC and either local authorities or
local community people, high communities‟ awareness on CLC and interesting
courses in the CLC for communities such as life skills, vocational skills and literacy
skills. However, there are some factors that impede their participations such as they
are busy with their works; no invitation; and no feeling of ownership with CLC.
ii
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
Name of program: Master of Education Program
Name of candidate: Pich Nipun
Title of research report:
Community Learning Center Development in Cambodia:
The Case of Ksert Commune in Svay Rieng Province
This is to certify that the research carried out for the above titled
master‟s research report was completed by the above named candidate
under my direct supervision. This material has not been used for any
other degree. I played the following part in the preparation of the
research report:
Supervisor: Dr. Chhinh Sitha
Date: 27 December 2008
iii
Royal University of Phnom Penh
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
This is to certify that the research report that I, Pich Nipun,
hereby present entitled “Community Learning Center Development in
Cambodia: The Case of Ksert Commune in Svay Rieng Province” for the
degree of Master of Education at the Royal University of Phnom Penh is
entirely my own work and, furthermore, that it has not been used to
fulfill the requirements of any other qualification in whole or in part, at
this or any other University or equivalent institution.
No reference to, or quotation from, this document may be made without
the written approval of the author.
Signed by:………………………………Pich Nipun
Date: 27 December 2008
Countersigned by the Chief Supervisor
………………………………………....
Date: 27 December 2008
iv
Royal University of Phnom Penh
Masters of Education Program
Title of research report: Community Learning Center Development in
Cambodia: The Case of Ksert Commune in Svay Rieng Province
Research report submitted by Pich Nipun
Recommended textual statement............................................................
...................................................................................................................
Research report committee members
Dr. Nith Bunly Dr. Dy Sam Sideth
Chairperson External examiner
Mr. Lim Sothea
Examiner
Date: 27 December 2008
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Without the co-operation of a large number of individuals, this study would
not have been possible. Within the two years striving to earn my degree of Master of
Educational Administration in Education at Royal University of Phnom Penh, I owe
gratitude to professors, family, friends and respondents. Without them, my study
would have never been possible and my dream would have never been fulfilled.
First of all, I would like to extend my thanks to my academic advisor, Dr.
Sitha CHHIN, for his patient guidance, helpfulness, and encouragement. My deep
gratitude and thanks must also go to my sub-supervisors, Dr. Bunly NITH, Dr. Sam
Sideth DY, and Mr. Sothea LIM for their insightful comments, constructive ideas,
and valuable input into my research report.
I would also like to thank the Community Learning Center committees and
community members in Ksert commune for their interest in my research, and their
responsive cooperation in providing necessary data for my study. Thanks must also
go to my friends who have paid their valuable time in contributing to gathering data.
Finally, my special thanks and deep gratitude go to my parents, Mr. Ream
PICH and Ms. Houy KEO, who has been strongly committed and devoted to
educating me and my siblings. They always provide me such good advice, constant
encouragement, and various kinds of support. Without such their sacrifices, I would
not have been able to go to university, and would not be here today.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................... i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................... v
TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................... vi
ACCRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................. viii
LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................... ix
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................... x
Chapter I: Introduction ............................................................................................. 1
1.1. Background ............................................................................................................. 1
1.2. Problem Statement ................................................................................................. 2
1.3. Objectives of the study ........................................................................................... 3
1.4. Research Questions ................................................................................................. 3
1.5. Research Significance ............................................................................................. 4
1.6. Scope of the Study ................................................................................................... 4
1.7. The Case: Why Ksert Commune? ......................................................................... 5
1.8. An Overview of Ksert Commune .......................................................................... 5
1.9. Terminologies .......................................................................................................... 7
1.10. Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................ 11
Chapter 2: Review of Related Literature ............................................................... 12
2.1. An Overview of CLC program ............................................................................ 12
2.2. The difference between ‘School’ and ‘CLC’ ...................................................... 14
2.3. Objectives and functions of CLC program ........................................................ 15
2.4. Consequences of community participation ......................................................... 16
2.5. The promoting of community participation into the Cambodian education
system ..................................................................................................................... 17
Chapter 3: Research Methodology ......................................................................... 20
3.1. Secondary data collection ..................................................................................... 20
3.2. Primary data collection ........................................................................................ 20 3.2.1-Qualitative Method ............................................................................................................ 20 3.2.2-Quantitative Method .......................................................................................................... 20 3.2.3-Data Collection Procedure ................................................................................................ 23 3.2.4-Data Analysis Technique ................................................................................................... 24
vii
Chapter 4: Data Presentations, Analysis and Discussions ................................... 25
4.1. The community participation within CLC activities ......................................... 25 4.1.1. Understanding of CLC information .............................................................................. 25 4.1.2. The Use of CLC services ............................................................................................... 26 4.1.3. The involvement through meeting and consulting ......................................................... 30 4.1.4. In-kind and in-cash contribution ................................................................................... 31 4.1.5. The participation through delivery of a service ............................................................ 32 4.1.6. Participating in delivery of the service and course creation ........................................ 34 4.1.7. Participation in various stages of decision-making ...................................................... 35 4.1.8. The CLC management ................................................................................................... 35
4.2. Discussion .............................................................................................................. 37 4.2.1. CLC contribution .......................................................................................................... 37 4.2.2. Involving of community through meeting, consultation and course creation ............... 38 4.2.3. Involving through the decision making stages and delivering services ........................ 38 4.2.4. Ways of resource mobilization ...................................................................................... 39 4.2.5. Factors that foster and impede community participation ............................................. 40
Chapter 5: Conclusions ........................................................................................... 41
5.1. Summary of the Findings ..................................................................................... 41
5.2. Concluding Remarks ............................................................................................ 43
5.3. Recommendations ................................................................................................. 44
References ........................................................................................................... 46
Appendices ........................................................................................................... 49
Appendix I: In-Depth Interview with CLC committees and vocational trainers
........................................................................................................... 49
Appendix II: Questionnaire for community people.............................................. 50
Appendix III: CLC Action Plans and Outcomes in 2007 ..................................... 53
Appendix IV: The list of courses by year in Ksert CLC ....................................... 55
Appendix V: The participation of community people in various activities spited
by kinds of participants ................................................................... 56
Appendix VI: Map of Ksert, Pour, and Kandal village ....................................... 57
Notes ........................................................................................................... 58
viii
ACCRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS
APPEAL: Asia Pacific Program of Education for All
CLC : Community Learning Center
DNFE : Department of Non-Formal Education
EFA : Education for All
GOs : Governmental Organizations
IOM : International Organization for Migration
IRC : International Relief Center
MoEYS : Ministry of Education, Youth & Sports
MWA : Ministry of Women‟s Affairs
NFE : Non-Formal Education
NFUAJ : National Federation of UNESCO Associations in Japan
NGOs : Non-Governmental Organizations
PAP : Priority Action Program
UNESCO: United Nation Educational, Scientific & Cultural Organization
UNHSF : United Nations Human Security Fund
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1: Number of DNFE‟s CLC and vocational graduate learners ....................... 2
Table 1.2: Literacy classes by the year ........................................................................ 6
Table 3.1: Sample sizes selection .............................................................................. 22
Table 3.2: Descriptive Statistics of the respondents .................................................. 23
Table 4.1: The understanding on CLC information, N=102, N(%) ........................... 26
Table 4.2: Use of CLC services (N=102) .................................................................. 27
Table 4.3: Cross tabulation between „meeting participation‟ and „CLC benefit
awareness‟ (N=102) .................................................................................. 30
Table 4.4: Cross tabulation between „meeting participation‟ and „feedback provision‟
(N=102) ..................................................................................................... 31
Table 4.5: Involvement through the in-kind and in-cash contribution and awareness
of CLC benefits and the use of services .................................................... 32
Table 4.6: Community participation through various activities (N=102) ................. 33
Table 4.7: The participation in decision making on course creation by the meeting 35
x
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: The rung of community participation: degree of participation ................ 11
Figure 2.1: Differences between School and CLC ..................................................... 14
Figure 4.1: The involving of communities in quality of life improvement program . 27
Figure 4.2: The involving of communities in tailoring course ................................... 28
Figure 4.3: Community participation through various activities (N=102, N%) ........ 34
1
Chapter I: Introduction
1.1. Background
Ensuring Education for All goals achievement by 2015, non-formal
education system plays a significant role as well as formal education system. And it
has sufficient capacity, which the formal education system does not have, to meet the
needs of people learning in all areas, especially among the poorest and marginalized
children and youth from urban slump and in remote areas, disadvantaged and
vulnerable groups, and also street and working children, migrants, school drop-outs
and orphans who have no access to formal educational services (MoEYS, n.d.).
Over the past decade, in Cambodia, there are many widely-scattered non-
formal education initiatives which have developed, and the vast majority of which
are implemented by either governmental agencies or non-governmental agencies.
These programs include learning activities focused on adult literacy, income-
generation, health and nutrition, child care, agriculture and rural development. Some
of these initiatives, such as community learning center (CLC) project, have
successfully used an integrated community approach to learning, where a various of
activities are undertaken at a simple local facility such as a temple, or an existing
building (MoEYS, n.d.). This approach also aims at fostering local community
management of learning activities – it means that the CLC belongs to the community
people, operated or managed by community committees and all activities provided
for the benefits of all community people.
Actually, the first CLC initiatives of DNFE were started in 1994 with
supporting from UNESCO. Then, a pilot project on CLC under the support of
UNESCO Bangkok was implemented in 1999-2001 in three provinces namely
Takeo, Kampong Speu and Kampong Thom provinces (DNFE, 2008, p. 1). From the
best started experiences which DNFE learned, DNFE have expanded and improved
every year in the overall provinces and cities except Siem Reap and Odor Meanchey
provinces. From 2002 to 2007, 7,196 learners have completed the vocational training
courses from all CLCs in the whole country, of whom 4,491 are female – it means
that the figure of participants increased and the CLC project is expanded in every
year (see Table 1.1 below and in Appendix III).
2
Table 1.1: Number of DNFE’s CLC and vocational graduate learners
Year Number of CLCs
Participants
Total Female
2002-03 22 333 274
2003-04 25 1,227 803
2004-05 25 915 589
2005-06 62 2,232 1,478
2006-07 67 2,489 1,347
Total of participants 7,196 4,491
Source: NFE-MIS, 2007
In the nationwide, CLC projects have been carried out by Department of
Non-Formal Education (DNFE) of MoEYS of 67 CLCs (in Table 1.1), by UNESCO
Phnom Penh of 6 CLCs, by NFUAJ1 of 6 CLCs, by monk of 5 CLCs, and by other
NGOs of 6 CLCs (Cambodia Country Report on CLC, 2004). Indeed, there many
CLCs which were implemented by other ministries as Ministry of Social Affaire,
Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Rural Development, and relevant NGOs, but the
number of those CLCs were not known clearly.
1.2. Problem Statement
The CLC project, which is one of the NFE projects, has been recognized as
effective delivery mechanisms for promoting continuing education and also lifelong
learning for all people through community-based approaches, and it is a term of
national policy for achieving EFA goal in 2015. And “the community participation is
viewed as a key area of action and encourages the establishment of CLCs,” which
had been launched during the United Nation Literacy Declaration in 2003
(UNESCO, 2006, p.3). So that the support and participation of local community
plays a crucial role in CLC development – for instance, such cases of Japan‟s,
China‟s and Thailand‟s experiences showed that without the active participation and
commitment of the local community, it was undoable to maintain the CLC as active
and relevant to the community demands (UNESCO, 2007, p.9).
Of equal evident, through the experiences of CLC implementation in
Cambodia, the active participation of community people had been identified as one
of seven factors2 which make CLC sustainable (DNFE, 2008, p.6). Moreover, to be
3
self-sustainability in the long run, with external support in the initial stage, the
community people need to have a sense of ownership within CLC activities through
their co-operation, contribution and commitment (UNESCO/APPEAL, 2006, Part I,
p.16). Indeed, based on the evaluation of UNESCO since 2005 on the Umbrella
Project, some CLC projects of various organizations have been stopped after the fund
of donor ended because the level of people participation into the project site is very
low especially the involvement through contribution and decision making stages.
Furthermore, there is few research studies related to community
participation conducted in the context of Cambodia CLC. Therefore, the
understanding of level of community participation in the project activities is very
essential to recommending the donors or any CLC supporters to consider that the
projects still need funds or can be run by their own. Without proper identification of
the potential constraints into project activities, the Department of Non-Formal
Education as well as the donor organization or project implementers would find it
difficult to direct intervention efforts. This study was designed to contribute
knowledge and information relating to difficulties or constraints that CLC project is
facing in realizing community ownership and partnership in rural area.
1.3. Objectives of the study
The purpose of this study was conducted to gain better understanding how
the local community people participate into the CLC project of Non-Formal
Education. Specifically, its main objectives are:
1- To clarify the degrees or levels of community participation through CLC
activities.
2- To identify the methods that the CLC committees have used to mobilize
such resources to maintain their CLC activities.
3- To ascertain the factors that foster or hamper community participation.
1.4. Research Questions
To achieve the aforesaid objectives, the following research questions
attempting to answer were:
1-How do community people participate in community learning center?
4
2-Which are the methods that the CLC committees used to mobilize
resources?
3-What are the factors that foster or hamper the participation of community
people?
1.5. Research Significance
By using a case of Ksert CLC which is a small rural CLC, deeper
understanding of the degree of community participation is revealed. At the policy
level, this study also provides important practical insights to NFE policy makers in
central level as well as to the CLC planners or implementers in local level in order to
create effective CLC policies or plans to build the sense of partnership or ownership
of local community people. By focusing on one CLC, this study is able to provide
important details on various methods which the CLC manager used to mobilize such
resources to support the CLC, and to view some factors which foster or hamper the
community involvement.
All of these findings are important experiences for sharing to all CLC
committees to consider or to use them as an evidence for improving their own CLC.
Indeed, being informed of the constraint and facilitating factors surrounding the
implementation of the CLC activities, the policy maker and also the planner will be
able to develop effective implementation strategies in order to ensure that a well-
designed policy or planning can be translated into expected outcome.
1.6. Scope of the Study
This study was limited to one CLC in Ksert commune of Kampong Rour
district, Svay Rieng province, namely Ksert Community Learning Center where a
CLC project have been supported by both NFE program of MoEYS and NGOs. The
research generated data from a sample size of only 102 respondents who represent to
102 households from the three villages, 53 households of Ksert village, 31
households of Pour village, and 18 households of Kandal village. Moreover, this
study identified the degrees of participation of the three community people into the
Ksert CLC activities.
This research study, however, did not generalize all aspects of community
participation in every CLC project in Cambodia; it only attempted to view how local
community people involve in one CLC project in rural area.
5
1.7. The Case: Why Ksert Commune?
There are three reasons why this research uses Ksert commune as a case
study. First, Ksert commune has a CLC which is high degree of sustainability – it
means that this CLC is still running and providing various courses to the target
groups since 2003 even though MoEYS had not supported between 2005 and 2007
(see Appendix IV). And this CLC has linkages very closely with various
stakeholders like: Ministry of Women‟s Affairs (MWA) and other Non-
Governmental Organizations (NGOs) to support their programs. Second, this
commune locates in the rural area and has border with Viet Nat country; moreover, a
haft of population in the whole commune is poor. Third, the majority of community
people in this commune are Lao people who live – that is different from other places.
Furthermore, in order to make this case study to be more specific, the
overview of social status and non-formal education achievements in the commune
(especially CLC program) were input into the following section.
1.8. An Overview of Ksert Commune
The population of this commune is 11,038 (female: 6,244), in which there
are 2,279 families and 75% of the commune population are Lao people who live in 8
villages. Generally, the majority of population living in this commune depends upon
farming, animal husbandry and mat-weaving; and 50% of the whole Ksert population
lived below the poverty line and some of them go to Viet Nam for labor employment
at the sunrise and back home at the sunset (Ksert CLC report, 2007).
Ksert CLC History
Ksert Community Learning Center established on 08 August, 2003 is
located in Ksert village of Ksert commune, Kampong Rour district, Svay Rieng
province – that is 32 km away from the provincial town and about 6 km away from
the Kampong Rour district center. This learning center can deliver education services
to the targets in the 14 villages of Ksert commune. Since 2003, the learning center
committees had proposed to rehabilitate an old three-room-building to be community
learning center by organizing one room used for management office and CLC
library, and the two other rooms used for vocational classes. By using MoEYS
budget (namely PAP85) and under contributing of community members through
6
labor, money and materials, the old three-room-building that located in the periphery
of Hun Sen Ksert primary school was re-established.
Then, one year after, because this CLC located in the primary school which
annoyed other primary students during class, the learning center committees and
local authorities have decided to communicate with International Relief Center (IRC)
for Cambodia to get a new building in a new place. Due to the close relationship
between CLC committee and IRC director, this organization had donated a new
three-room building with necessary furniture such as 4 long tables and 30 chairs, a
two-room restroom, a deep well and a center periphery fence. Beside the IRC,
UNESCO has offered a twenty inch television, a VCD player with 24-story-dishes, a
five-kilowatt generator and an iron closet.
In addition, International Organization for Migration (IOM) in 2006 donated
20 sewing machines run by motor, a zigzagged-sewing machine run by motor, one
generator, one book shelve, a 200 meter-long fabric, an iron and four fences, and
beside material supports, IOM has sponsored to any vocational trainer and provided
fuel for running generator as well.
Illiteracy Eradication Activities in Commune
Before 2002, the illiterate people in the whole commune were 819 aged 15-
45 years (632 are female) and 335 aged over 45 years (261 are female). From 2002 to
2007, 34 literacy classes have been organized; 878 learners have joined the classes,
of whom 755 are female; however, 802 have completed the literacy classes, of which
715 are female (see Table 1.2 below). And most of the literacy classes were run
outside the learning center.
Table 1.2: Literacy classes by the year
Academic
year
Number
of Classes
Number of teachers Student
Enrollment
Student
Achievement
Total Female Total Female Total Female
2002-03 10 10 0 400 336 360 318
2003-04 09 09 0 178 152 163 151
2004-05 08 08 02 160 142 145 130
2005-06 05 05 01 100 86 94 77
2006-07 02 02 0 40 39 40 39
Total 34 34 3 878 755 802 715
Source: Literacy classes records of Ksert CLC.
7
Thus, according the figure in Table 1.2, 802 illiteracies (92 per cent of all
illiteracies), whose age from 15 to 45, were eradicated and some of them have
continued their education in vocational program.
CLC services
Beside the literacy course, Ksert CLC has provided some vocational skill
trainings such as tailoring, machinery repair skill, motor bike repair skill, electronic
device repair skill, and traditional music skill; and provided other services like
quality of life improvement and library service. Moreover, the scope of these
services serves not only for the people in 14 villages of the whole commune, but also
from other communes and district where are next to the Ksert commune. For the
vocational training students who come from outside the Ksert commune, they have
been provided accommodation and pocket money 0.5 dollars for the student from the
same district and 1 dollar for the students from other districts. This support is in
charge of International Migration Organization.
Looking through Appendix IV, from 2003 to 2005, this CLC was running
the courses by using fund from MoEYS in the courses of tailoring, electronic repair,
traditional music, and small machinery repair. From 2005 to 2007, this learning
center was sponsored by Ministry of Women‟s Affaire (MWA) and IOM on the
course of tailoring by using motor-based sewing machine. Then, from 2007 to date,
the center has been supported by both MoEYS and MWA co-operated with IOM in
the courses of tailoring and motorbike repairing. Furthermore, 37 courses of
vocational training have been opened from 2003 to mid-2008, in which 36 have been
completed already and one course of motor bike repairing is still running; 625
learners (included 12 male learners from motorbike repairing course) have been
enrolled, of whom 459 are female; 611 have completed the training courses, of which
459 are female.
1.9. Terminologies
a) Non-Formal Education (NFE)
“Non-formal education is simply any organized educational activity
outside the school and college mainstream: whether or not the school
and college system is graded and hierarchically structured is not the
issue; activities in the formal and non-formal sectors may well share the
8
same characteristics; and so on. The point is that the activities are
supplementary or, in some cases, alternative to that mainstream.”
(Carron and Carr-Hill, 1991, p.21)
An NFE activity is focused on any organized systematic learning activities
which were implemented outside the framework of the formal education system to
provide selective courses for any learners (MoEYS, 2008). For Cambodia, NFE
covered on such learning programs like: literacy program, life skill, occupational
skill, basic education which is a continuing education, and equivalency program or
re-entry program for integrating into the formal system. All of these NFE activities,
therefore, aim to build life long learning for all persons of all ages endowed with
equity, justice, and social development; and it contributes to achieve EFA goals
(MoEYS, 2002, p.1).
Moreover, NFE has several different features from formal education: (1) it
responds to the learner‟s needs, (2) uses the learner as resources, (3) stresses relevant
activities and practical outcomes (Peace Corps, 2004, pp.6-7), (4) serves different
clienteles, (5) and is organized by different agencies (Carron and Carr-Hill, 1991,
p.21).
b) Community Learning Center (CLC)
Before CLC was implemented, the UNESCO have defined that “CLC is a
local place of learning outside the formal education system. Located in both village
and urban area, it is usually set up and managed by local people in order to provide
various learning opportunities for community development and improvement of the
quality of life. A CLC doesn’t necessarily require new infrastructure, but can operate
from an already existing health center, temple, mosque or primary school.” And it is
a place where belong to the community providing various kinds of education
activities and knowledge in term of lifelong learning, which focused on adult
literacy, income generating, health, and nutrition, child care, agriculture, and general
rural development, vocational skill training, useful knowledge and up-to-information
(MoEYS, n.d.).
c) Community Participation
9
To understand the concepts of community participation deeply, such themes
as community, participation and the forms of community participation, will be
reviewed in the literature.
Definition of Community
Community is a group of people residing in a specific locality. They
normally practice and are bound by similar customs and traditions and lead similar
lifestyles. For example, a farming community is usually inhabited by farmers and
people engaged in related activities such as fruit processing or rice milling
(UNESCO/APPEAL, 2006, Module.1, p.2).
As Bray (2001) determined that community at least has some features such
as “a network of shared interests and concerns, a symbolic or physical base,
extension beyond the narrowly-defined household, and something that distinguishes
it other similar groups.” And he has identified several types of community which are
especially occurred in the field of education: (1) geographical communities, which is
determined based on its members‟ place of residence like villages, districts or
suburbs; (2) ethnic and racial groups, especially ones that are minorities and that
have self-help support structures; (3) religious groups of various kinds; (4)
communities based on shared family concerns, including Parents‟ Associations based
on adults‟ shared concerns for the welfare of their children; and (5) communities
based on shared philanthropy, and in many cases operated by specifically-designated
charitable and/or political bodies. (p.5)
Definition of Participation
According to Collins dictionary, the term of “participation” is a noun from
the verb of “participate” which defines as “to take part, be or become actively and
genuinely involved or share in” (sited in World Health Organization, 1999).
And a definition of participation introduced by World Bank (1996, p.3) “is
the process through which stakeholders influence and share control over initiatives
and decisions and resources which affect them.” Equally, the term of participation is
used by different actors to refer to the word: collaboration (eg. contribute land or
labor or other resources, hence some forms of stakeholders) or targets beneficiaries
(just receiving program benefits) or involvement (active engagement in some
activities), or lately empowerment (political process of gaining information,
understanding, skills and power necessary to articulate their concerns, ensure that
10
action is taken to address them and, more to broadly, gain control over their lives)
(Olico-Okui, 2004, p.3).
Community Participation
The meaning of “community participation” is defined as a process by which
community members are allowed to be involved much more actively and genuinely
in various stages such as „in determining the issues of concern to them, in making
decisions about factors that affect their lives, in creating and implementing policies,
in planning, developing and delivering services and in taking action to achieve
changes’ (sited in World Health Organization, 1999, p.9). Indeed, the people (both
individual and families) can develop their capacity to contribute to community
development, and they can solve their common problem when they understand their
own situation deeply. This enables them to be active agents of development
themselves rather than the passive beneficiaries of development aid (Olico-Okui,
2004, p.3).
The forms of participation
There are various forms of community participation in education which
have been identified by many researchers. And the many forms of community
participation are illustrated by some researchers sited in Uemura (1999), Colletta and
Perkins (1995) identified that the forms of participation are „research and data
collection, dialogue with policy makers, school [or CLC] management, curriculum
design, development of learning materials, and school [or CLC] construction;‟ and
Heneveld and Craig (1996) views that there are five types of parent and community
support: (1) sending their children to school, (2) supporting financial and material,
(3) creating the frequent communication (between [CLC], parent and community),
(4) having a significant role of community in [CLC] management, and (5) assisting
with instruction.
Community participation as it relates to education can take the form of
anything from sending children to learning centers and attending meetings, to
providing labor for learning centers construction, to managing learning centers and
paying teachers‟ salary. These different forms can become the different levels of
participation (Shaeffer, 1994).
11
1.10. Theoretical Framework
For analysis of participation in the field of education, Sheaffer (1994)
devised a ladder which has seven rungs which are divided into two types: (a) genuine
participation or much more active role (the rungs are stated with the word
„participation‟ or the number of 5, 6 and 7) and (b) largely passive collaboration (all
the rungs which are stated with the word „involvement‟ or the number of 1, 2, 3 and
4) (see Figure 1.1).
Figure 1.1: The rung of community participation: degree of participation
7- Participation in real decision-making at every stage
6- Participation as implementation of delegated powers
5- Participation in the delivery of a service
4- Involvement through consultation (or feedback)
on particular issues
3- Involvement through the contribution
2- Involvement through attendance
and the receipt of information
1- Involvement through the mere use of a service
Source: Shaeffer (1994), pp. 16-17
Furthermore, in a wider development context such as education sector,
Sheaffer (1994) gives some specific activities which involve a high level of
participation. Those activities are: collecting and analyzing information; defining
priorities and setting goals; deciding on and planning program; assessing available
resources; designing strategies to implement these programs and dividing
responsibilities among participants; managing programs; monitoring progress of the
programs; and evaluating results and impacts.
Passive Collaboration
Active Role or Genuine
Participation
12
Chapter 2: Review of Related Literature
2.1. An Overview of CLC program
The Asia and Pacific Program of Education for All (APPEAL), launched
since 1987, is an inter-country co-operative program designed to promote basic
education for all in the countries of the region; and its main objectives are to promote
primary education, literacy and continuing education for all children, youth and
adults in order to develop human resources and to eliminate the poverty and huger.
And the APPEAL focused on the three priority program areas: (1) reaching the un-
reached, under-served and disadvantaged groups who lived in the rural and urban
areas especially girls and women, (2) improving relevance and quality of basic
education and enhancing achievements of all children, youth and adults, and (3)
promoting community participation and ownership (UNESCO, 1998, pp. 1-2). Then,
a manual training was developed with the title on “APPEAL Training Manual for
Continuing Education Personnel” (ATLP-CE) in eight volumes
3 and a series of
Technical Working Group Meeting of Experts were convened by following the
recommendation UNESCO/ PROAP.
Since 1998, the APPEAL‟s CLC project has been implemented with
financial support from Japan and Norway. For seven years of project from 1998-
2005, the CLC projects were taken part in Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, China,
India, Indonesia, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Mongolia,
Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, The Philippines, Samoa, Sri Lanka,
Thailand, Timor Leste, Uzbekistan and Viet Nam.(UNESCO, 2006, p. 4)
“Community Learning Centers have traditionally been regarded as
useful venues in local communities where literacy programs and other
non-formal education activities serving these communities take places.
Over time, however, the more successful CLCs have enhanced their
roles and expanded their services to include skills training, income-
generation ventures, community awareness and development, in
general. In order to do this, it has become necessary for CLCs to
expand their capabilities, expertise, and resources through
collaboration with a variety of partners.” (UNESCO, 2007)
13
There are numerous CLCs that have been established in many Asia-Pacific
countries but some CLCs are named differently by different countries such as
reading centers in Bangladesh and continuing education in India. (UNESCO/
APPEAL, 2006, Part I, p.1). Moreover, in various countries, the CLCs were created
in diverse purposes – for example, in Bangladesh, CLCs are progressively seen as a
crucial strategy to develop socio-economy through non-formal education and adults
education. But, in Nepal, local schools are used as centers to promote education and
community development activities. And in Indonesia, CLCs are learning centers to
eradicate illiteracy and to promote non-formal education options for children and
lifelong learning to improve the quality of life of community people. CLCs in Viet
Nam concentrate on continuing education to strengthen literacy and provide
equivalency and income generation programs. For Lebanon, CLCs empower the
rural poor in hitherto neglected areas with useful personal, social and employment
skills. Similar to Viet Nam, in Thailand, CLCs contribute to improving literacy skill;
furthermore, they provide learning experiences to reinforce sustainable and self-
sufficient communities. In Kazakhstan, CLCs focus on vocational training, life skills
and cultural activities which empower individuals and promote community
development through lifelong education. CLC programs, in Uzbekistan, offer
chances for all individuals to get knowledge and skills that are useful to gain
employment. In China, CLC programs and activities in the rural areas are the key
factor to achieve EFA goals, lifelong learning for literacy and training in practical
life skills with linkages to community education in urban areas (UNESCO, 2006,
p.5).
It is similar to some countries such as Viet Nam, Thailand, Kazakhstan, and
Uzbekistan, the purpose of Cambodian CLCs is to promote and provide relevant
basic education, responding to the needs of rural communities and preventing relapse
to illiteracy. In addition, the CLCs also provide vocational training which offered
only skills training in conventional basic vocational subject area – for example,
sewing, motorbike repair, barbering, traditional music, etc. Moreover, in order to
promote continuing education and post-literacy Programs, CLCs have been set up
with community library (UNESCO, 1999, p.16). Most CLCs are located in the
compounds of Buddhist temples, but some of them occupy unused government
buildings such as the existing building in the formal school.
14
2.2. The difference between ‘School’ and ‘CLC’
Education is recognized as a powerful response to meet the various demands
of society under renovation. And a literate population is the foundation for any
meaningful development effort. For a long time ago, school has been known as the
unique educational institution and form of education. As the school can not respond
to the need of all people, the emergence of non-formal education movement has
become stronger during the last years to cater for all people who do not fit into the
formal education system, especially disadvantaged children or adults, marginalized
groups, girls...etc. The one of non-formal education infrastructure is Community
Learning Center (CLC), usually organized and managed by the local communities
themselves, and the CLC is attempted to promote life long learning through a
multitude of community activities at local level including NFE activities, literacy
teaching, vocational skills training and environment and population education
(UNESCO, 1998, p.20). To increase the literate population in one country, the school
or schooling (namely formal education) is not the only one educational institution,
but the CLCs (non-formal education) also play an important role as an alternative
learning institution serving for all target groups.
Figure 2.1: Differences between School and CLC
Source: UNESCO, (1998), p. 21
Thus, non formal education program is more flexible than formal program
and its programs (especially CLCs curriculum) are more responsible to community
1-Inward Focus
2-Time Bound
3-Certificate Oriented
4-Restrictive Programs
1-Focus on Outreach
2-Lifelong Opportunities
3-Community Development
Orientation
4-Responsive Programs
Education Programs
Formal Non-Formal
A School A Community
Learning Center
15
needs and serve all kinds of population – particularly, the poor or girls and women. It
seems that CLC has broad view of education rather than school (narrow view of
education) (Literacy Watch Committee of NEPAL, 1999, p.3).
Although the target groups or program are very different, the relationship
between CLC and public school is very close. According to GSID reports (2006), it
showed that the linking between CLC and school is the sharing of resources and
information – first, the human resources such as teacher and village member,
teaching tools and teaching material, have been shared. Second, in order to achieve
goals, CLC and school need to exchanged information each other about the student
information such as dropouts, or literacy rates – for example, teachers encourage the
dropouts to come back to schools again but if it is impossible, they and CLC
manager recommend those to go to CLC.
2.3. Objectives and functions of CLC program
Although, there is a little bit different purpose of CLC for each country, at
least the central objectives of CLC are:
1- To serve as center for conducting learning activities like literacy, post-
literacy, and continuing education and out of school programs through non
formal and informal learning.
2- To empower the community people and promote community development
through lifelong education for all target groups
3- To improve the quality of life of community members
4- To expand basic vocational training to meet the needs of community
development
Furthermore, CLC has four main functions – first, as the venue for education
and training courses, the CLC provides education and skill training activities to the
people, and trains the NFE staff and promotes continuing education; second, as
community information and resource services, the CLC can be both information
disseminated center and advisory or counseling center; third, as a venue for
community development activities, it can promote “general community activities”,
“community development projects” and provide a brighter future for community;
fourth, as a place for coordination and networking, it creates the linkages between
governmental organizations (GOs) and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and
16
promotes lifelong education (Literacy Watch Committee of NEPAL, 1999, p. 3;
UNESCO/APPEAL, 2006, Part I, p.10).
2.4. Consequences of community participation
As a mentioned main purpose above, CLCs are centers for promoting
community development or empowering community people; thus, the active
involving of people is very important for many reasons and offers many different
benefits for individual, communities, organizations and society as a whole (Smithies
& Webster, 1998 sited in WHO, 1999, p.10) such as:
1- The active involving of community people can make the CLC committees
“target the resources more effectively and efficiently”
2- Their active presence “in planning and delivering services allows them to
become more responsive to need and therefore increases uptake”
3- Through their participation, communities will be developed within
“skills” and built their “competencies and capacities”
4- The better decision will be made when community people involves
genuinely in the decision-making in every stages, and the program will be
more appropriate to their needs and become sustainability because the
communities run the program themselves
5- Community participation is an mechanism to promote “democratic
process, to open up governance and redress inequality in power”
6- The involving of community can provide “new opportunities for creative
thinking and innovative planning and development”
The participation of community can improve democracy, empower people,
mobilize resources and energy, develop holistic and integrated approaches, achieve
better decisions and more effective services and ensure the ownership and
sustainability of programs.
Similarly, the importance of community participation in education, which
contributes to achieving the goals of education activities attempting the involvement
of communities to improve the quality of children‟ learn, has been comprised of: (1)
maximizing limited resources, (2) developing relevant curriculum and learning
materials, (3) identifying and addressing problems, (4) promoting girls’ education,
(5) creating and nourishing community-school partnerships, (6) realizing
17
democracy, (7) increasing accountability, (8) ensuring sustainability, and (9)
improving home environment (Uemura, 1999, pp. 4-8).
2.5. The promoting of community participation into the Cambodian
education system
Cambodia has been initiated to increase the community participation in the
local decision-making processes by reforming decentralization system through
commune council election. In early 1990s, the reforms of decentralization in
education system were started by promoting community participation through the
cluster school. And then this approach has been piloted in few provinces between
1993-1995, and it included into national policy in 1995. After applying this approach
into education sector, the local governance environment had been changed and the
new space of participation had been created. Moreover, at the beginning stage, the
community people have been involved through contributions of cash, labor and
materials; and they have learnt a lot about the importance of education through this
contribution. Although the communities are more pleased with material
contributions, they are likely to be excluded from the decision-making processes of
school because they feel that “the technical and administrative matters” are not their
responsibilities, this is only for school committees. And it seems that there doesn‟t
work well for designing to promote community participation through the cluster
school. Indeed, the influence of traditions and modern development on social
changes has been reflected contrastingly. But “traditional pagoda associations and
other community-based associations can play a vital role in the process of promoting
community participation and representing community interests in school
clusters”(Pellini, 2005).
Then, since 1999, a new community-based approach, namely Community
Learning Center project, has been implemented in Cambodia of the three provinces
as the pilot project: Kampong Speur, Kampong Thom, and Takeo. This project was
supported by UNESCO co-operated with Department of Non-Formal Education. For
these CLCs, the committees have been recruited from the local community after the
end of workshop by community election and the CLC have been used the existing
building in school, and pagoda. After the project operated, the positives outcomes
were produced such as: the changes of communities‟ attitude, thoughts and intention
in improving life condition in either spirit or material; poverty rate was alleviated
18
through providing some skills to people; the useful information have been
disseminated through a honorary chairman or some local authorities; the illiteracy
rate was reduced; and the project has been involved more by local people through
both in-kind and in-cash contribution because they understood the benefits of CLCs.
However, the weakness and challenges have been faced during conducting this
project. The weakness of these three CLCs are (1) less efforts of CLC leaders in
managing, (2) communities want to have skills that respond to their need
immediately, (3) less participation or support of people who have no relations learnt
in those CLC, (4) democracy in Cambodia is not strong yet, and (5) the bad impact
of NGOs on CLC after the project end such as financial support of NGOs for
implementers is higher than government. Some challenges are also comprised of:
(1)some people do not understand and believe in CLC but they believe on aid and
religion; (2) lack of instrument serving for dissemination; (3) committees‟ capacities
are still limited; (4) community having CLC does not use the locally available
resources in participation and development yet; (5) outputs of CLC are still away
from free market (much expenditures, but less income); and (6) lack of
communication network (DNFE, 2002).
Of equal evidences, under the umbrella project4 of UNESCO Phnom Penh
focused on “non-formal basic education and vocational skill training for children and
youths at risk (street and working children” with funding from the United Nations
Human Security Fund (UNHSF), the communities have been changed their
knowledge, attitudes, behavior, skills, status and system, on the one hand. On the
other hand, their living condition have been improved, and both community
awareness and their participation were positive correlated each other – it means that
the more communities understood the project, the more they participate in.
Furthermore, the degree of community participation in this project is still weak,
while the degree of sustainability of project has been shown that it cannot be possible
when the fund ended (Sotheary & Sithon, 2005).
Based on the research of GISD (2005), it showed that, from the experiences
of 35 CLCs, the forms of community participation included consultation meetings
with villagers organized by CLCs, in-kind and in-cash contribution from villagers
and maintenance and repair works on facilities and surrounding infrastructure of
CLCs. But decision-making on the CLC program was done by donor and local
authorities. Moreover, the level of community involvement varies among the
19
different CLCs and villages. One case viewed that the people living far from the
center had less chance to involve into the consultation of their needs in the
community. Importantly, this research also viewed that one of the factor fostering
villagers‟ participation was the dissemination of local authorities on CLC
information. However, CLC managers and trainers found it difficult to motivate
villagers to attend the CLC training, partly because no secure job opportunities exist
after completing the training courses and partly because villagers were busy with
their own livelihood activities. In order to implement the CLC effectively, the key
factor is to collaborate among different stakeholders in designing and implementing
the CLC program.
Through this review, the community participation in education which have
been promoted more than ten years in Cambodia context did not reach the expected
outcome yet because the communities only involve in the service use stage (passive
cooperation) rather than in the decision-making stage (active role). And based on the
literature, this can be result from Khmer tradition which is a little bit contrast against
the modern development, and the low democracy and more centralization system in
Cambodia situation. In different way, based on the theory of participation proposed
by Shaeffer (1994), in this paper new questionnaires had been designed for
conducting surveys and interviews to measure the degree of participation and to
advance understanding of the community participation into the CLC project of the
Ksert commune. In addition, the methodologies of resource mobilization of
committees and the factors of participation or non-participation of villagers had been
revealed in this paper also.
20
Chapter 3: Research Methodology
In order to answer the research questions which are mentioned in the
chapter 1, this study have been based on the two major sources of data collection:
secondary source and primary source.
3.1. Secondary data collection
Inevitably, this study need to review with some previous study or research
and some relevant documents which are mostly produced by UNESCO and some can
be found from Department of Non-Formal Education and the libraries like Document
Centers, Hun Sen library and e-library (especially in UNESCO website, and Google
search). However, these data are still not enough for the study so that it further needs
to conduct a field research to collect the primary data.
3.2. Primary data collection
To collect the primary data, both qualitative and quantitative data collection
tool were used to investigate the overall aspect of community participation into the
CLC activities.
3.2.1-Qualitative Method
For qualitative data collection tool, the in-dept interview was used with
Ksert CLC committees who work as direct implementers (such as CLC manager,
vocational teachers, literacy teachers and other committees), and this interview
covered on the process of the CLC establishing, managing, and participating of
community people (see Appendix I). Additionally, the unstructured interview was
also conducted with community members during completing the questionnaire to
view their perception on CLC management and what they have learnt from the
center.
3.2.2-Quantitative Method
3.2.2.1-Identification of studied area
To gather the important and relevant information for this research, a field
study was conducted with households from three rural villages, Ksert, Pour and
21
Kandal villages in Svay Rieng Province, Cambodia. The selection of the three
villages was done based on several following rationales. Firstly, these villages are
typical Cambodian rural villages located 32 km away from the provincial town, 15
km away from the national road number 1 and 6 km away from Kompong Rour
district central. Secondly, these three villages are closer to the Ksert community
learning center (CLC). Thirdly, people in these three villages (and also the whole
Ksert commune) share commonality with the majority of Cambodian rural
population in terms of being subsistence farmers and most of them are Lao people.
3.2.2.2-Measuring instrument
A questionnaire, which was used for interviewing either local authority or
community people, was designed to conduct the household survey to view the
community people‟s perception with their CLC and to explore the degree of their
participation into CLC activities. Most items in this questionnaire are required to tick
or to rate according to the types of question. And it covers three parts of information:
(1) information about the respondents‟ understanding on CLC information such as
awareness of the existence of CLC, CLC committees, CLC curriculum, CLC
announcement, CLC schedule, CLC benefits, and the information of CLC sponsor;
(2) the use of CLC services for any family members of respondent such as involving
to vocational training courses, quality of life program or library service; and (3) the
participation experiences of any family members of respondent into CLC activities –
for example, the experience in involving CLC through contribution or through
consultation, in delivery of a service (or being a teacher), in decision making on the
course creation and so on (see Appendix II). Besides all of this information, the
demographic information and some open-ended questions were included as well.
The questionnaire of this study was developed by researcher, and also
consulted and revised by advisor for several times. Furthermore, it had piloted one
time to find out the misunderstanding concepts of the questions.
3.2.2.3-Sampling
The population of this research is every household in these three villages:
Ksert, Kandal and Pour village. And the participants of this study were the local
government officials and the family header who is a representative of one household,
but any members of the family were interviewed when the header was not presented.
22
Details of demographical information of the participants are presented in Table 3.1
and Table 3.2. The sample sizes of this research were 102 households which were
taken out of 397 households (153 households of Ksert village, 124 households of
Pour Village and 120 households of Kandal village).
Table 3.1: Sample sizes selection
Village Name Population sizes
(in household)
Sample sizes
(in household)
Percentage in row
(%)
Ksert 153 53 34.64 %
Pour 124 31 25 %
Kandal 120 18 15 %
Total 397 102 25.69 %
For sample selection, purposive and convenience sampling technique was
used to select households or respondents for this study. Through purposive selection,
the 8 local authority people were chosen for interviewing, of whom 2 were selected
from Skert village, 3 from Pour village and 3 from Kandal village. And then by non-
random sampling, the community people were selected in two stages – first, by using
purposive sampling, all households which locate along the village roads had chance
to be selected. Second, through walking on village roads, by using convenience
selection, data collectors looked for any households where any householder were
staying there, and the beginning of this walking started from the Ksert CLC to the
three villages (see the map in the Appendix VI). After the three day survey, 102
samples (household representatives) were picked out, in which there are 53
households (52%) from Ksert village, 31 households (30.4%) from Pour village and
18 households (17.6%) from Kandal village.
23
Table 3.2: Descriptive Statistics of the respondents
N Min Max M SD
Com
mu
nit
y p
eop
le
Sex 94 1 2 1.37 .49
Age 94 22 70 44.48 12.12
Address 94 1 3 1.76 .89
Married status 94 1 3 2.07 .39
Male members in the house 94 0 5 2 1.23
Female members in the house 94 0 6 2.52 1.29
Number of children 94 0 8 3.01 1.76
Education level of respondent 91 0 6 2.13 1.48
Loca
l au
thori
ty
Sex 8 1 2 1.13 .35
Age 8 41 68 54.75 10.04
Address 8 1 3 2.13 .83
Married status 8 2 2 2.00 .00
Male members in the house 8 1 3 2 .93
Female members in the house 8 1 4 2.75 1.04
Number of children 8 1 5 2.75 1.75
Education level of respondent 8 1 6 2.38 1.85
3.2.3-Data Collection Procedure
In order to run this research study smoothly, permission letters to conduct
the study in the Ksert Community Learning Center were issued by the Master
program coordinator of Royal University of Phnom Penh and distributed to
commune chief and CLC manager for cooperation. Upon their approval, the
researcher contacted the CLC manager to invite other CLC committees to involve in
this interview and the CLC was a place for this appointment. To feel confidently,
tape recorder was used during the interview, and then 5 committee members, who are
CLC manager, literacy teacher, two vocational teachers and guardian, were
interviewed one by one with the questionnaire.
To gain sufficient data, the survey research was conducted with the
community people who were selected as previously mentioned. To maximize the
accuracy of the responses to items in the questionnaire, the researcher-completed
procedure and some unstructured interviews were used in this survey.
24
3.2.4-Data Analysis Technique
For quantitative data, the people interview responses were number-coded
and then entered into SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Science) program. This
survey data were analyzed by means of descriptive such as frequency distribution
and cross tabulation. This analysis was used for the data of close-ended questionnaire
from the household survey.
And qualitative data analysis procedure was also employed. The content
analysis was utilized for the data getting from in-dept interviews with CLC
committees and from the open-ended items of questionnaire of the survey.
25
Chapter 4: Data Presentations, Analysis and Discussions
In this chapter data are presented, analyzed and discussed according to the
information obtained from questionnaires, in-dept interviews and unstructured
interviews. This is done under two sections: (a) to view how community people
involve or participate into the Ksert CLC activities, how the CLC committees
manage their CLC and which factors foster and hamper their involvement; and (b) to
discuss this research findings with other prior researches.
4.1. The community participation within CLC activities
This section is divided into two main parts. The first part focuses on the
understanding or awareness of community people about CLC information – that is,
the interviewer wants to ascertain the sense of ownership of the community people
have towards their CLC. And the second part covers on the use of CLC services of
village people and the interview will explore explicitly which courses were popular
to the village people or to the students, this part is also viewed that how the
community people participate through various CLC activities and pointed out the
levels or degrees of their involvement.
4.1.1. Understanding of CLC information
To build ownership or also to get more participation within CLC,
community people need to be equipped with all information related to the CLC
including the benefits of CLC, the daily CLC activities, the CLC curriculum and also
CLC resources (both human and financial resources). According to the Table 4.1
below, it shows that all of the survey respondents know the Ksert CLC in which over
88% of them know clearly when they can tell CLC‟s name correctly during the
interview and less than 12 percent only named the CLC incorrectly. And there are
more than 90 percents who know the CLC committees, curriculum, schedules, and
announcement both clearly and unclearly, but in which more than 74 per cent always
receive the CLC announcement clearly because the CLC committees have used
various media to disseminate all information related to CLC activities especially
about the announcement for selection of vocational candidates. There are several
26
important methods for dissemination that have been notified in conducting
interviews– first, the committees have informed all information through the meeting.
After the meeting, the local authorities or villagers, who had joined, also have told
the others, who were not involved, about the news too. And then, the committees
have re-informed the information by pasting the announcement sheet on the bulletin
board which stands in front of the center.
Table 4.1: The understanding on CLC information, N=102, N(%)
Type of information Levels of understanding
Clear Unclear Not at all
Awareness of the existence of CLC 88.2% 11.8% 0%
Awareness of CLC committee members 67.6% 25.5% 6.9%
Awareness of CLC curriculum 57.8% 34.3% 7.8%
Awareness of CLC announcement 74.5% 18.6% 6.9%
Awareness of CLC schedule 53.9% 36.3% 9.8%
Awareness of CLC benefits 56.9% 34.3% 8.8%
Understanding about information of supporters of
CLC 30.4% 33.3% 35.3%
Furthermore, through this meeting, the community members were promoted
about the benefits of CLC project for their community development and quality of
life improvement in order to engage them to improve participation. According to the
Table 4.1, more than 91 percents of all respondents have known the benefits of the
CLC, in which only 34.3 percents who did not know clearly. Surprisingly, even
though the percentages of understanding on other variables are high, there is about
more than one-third (35.3%) of respondents who have never known who support
their learning center.
4.1.2. The Use of CLC services
In the Ksert CLC, there are seven courses or programs which had been run
since 2003. After the survey, it shows that there are two interesting programs or
popular programs of all programs in this learning center. The first program is the
quality of life improvement program which focused on hygiene or child care,
HIV/AIDs prevention and other various contagious deceases (such as bird flue or
27
malaria), gender problem, violence, agriculture...etc, in which there are almost 56
percent of whom have joint this program. (See Table 4.2 below)
Table 4.2: Use of CLC services (N=102)
Joining the courses Yes No
Literacy course 30.4% 69.6%
Tailoring course 33.3% 66.7%
Motor repair course 0% 100%
Traditional music course 0% 100%
Machinery repair course 3.9% 96.1%
Electronic device repair course 3.9% 96.1%
Quality of life improvement program 55.9% 44.1%
Library service 13.7% 86.3%
Figure 4.1: The involving of communities in quality of life improvement program
Indeed, through interview of 57 households who had joined the quality of
life improvement program, there are 40 households that have at least one member, 16
households that have two members, and only one household that have up to three
members, who had involved in this program (See Figure 4.1). The quality of life
improvement program is one of the CLC courses which provide general knowledge
to the community people and take only a few days, especially hygiene, HIV/AIDS
prevention, gender, culture, morality, human right, agriculture, peace or family
violence reduction and civics in daily life. And these topics are very interesting to
community people and it responds to their needs in daily life – for example, the
majority of local people are farmers so the course of agriculture is very important to
them to know how to increase the yield of their agricultural products by using new
0 person,
45
1 person,
40
2 persons,
16
3 persons,
1 0 prerson
1 person
2 persons
3 persons
Number of family members
28
0 person
68
1 person,
32
2 persons,
2
0 person
1 person
2 persons
Number of family members
strategies which are presented by professional teachers. By using video tapes, these
courses become more attractive, which encourages more involvement in the courses.
Through the video showing, the people can gain more knowledge about the epidemic
disease prevention such as bird flu and HIV/AIDS, gender, family violence
reduction, and safety migration.
Figure 4.2: The involving of communities in tailoring course
And tailoring course is the second popular course in the vocational training
program that is more than 33 percents who join this course, in which 32 households
(in Figure 4.2) have one family member, and only 2 households have two family
members, who had joined this course. Because the tailoring course designed based
on the market needs in the region, the training duration take only 1 month that it is
different from other CLC6, and after the training end, the training graduates could get
both certificate of tailoring skill and labor identification card issued by Ministry of
Labor and Vocational Training that cause them to find the job easily. This is one
course of curriculum that responds to the communities‟ needs immediately and is
interesting for not only girls but also boys (see Appendix IV). Because the garment
factories increased more not only in Phnom Penh city but also in Svay Rieng
especially in Bavet that is a special economical area, so that the tailoring graduates
have been employed better than other courses.
Interestingly, the vocational training courses in the CLC also play important
role for the formal school student – particularly, for the course of agriculture and
home economics have been taught within CLC instead. For the reason that CLC has
enough material for teaching those courses, the students have gotten much more
insights of the lesson theme and they can get a specific skill also.
29
Besides, some courses such as traditional music course (0%) and small
machinery repair course (3.9 percents) are less popular course because they could be
run only one term which produced 17 students of traditional music course and 25
students of machinery repair course and then these courses have been disappeared
(see Appendix IV). However, there are not any households involved the motor bike
repair course; this course is not less popular yet because it is a new course which is
still running.
For the electronic device repair course, although it had been run in three
terms, the number of students had decreased by the years (see Appendix IV). And
based on the interview with CLC committees, they said that, in the present, some
courses have disappeared because they are less popular and small market needs. For
example, in the case of a student who graduated from electronic device repair course,
he got a negative outcome – it means that he didn‟t get proper employment and he
lost his skill. After he graduated from this skill, he had opened an electronic device
repairing shop (the electronic devices are TV, radio, etc.). Unfortunately, after the
long 2-3 months, the shop had been closed because, actually, there are more
secondhand electronic devices which imported into the Cambodian market and
caused these products become cheaper and cheaper so that most clienteles prefer to
buy a secondhand products rather than repairing the old one. Inevitably, this
electronic graduate has decided to abandon their skill, and found a new job or go
back to do farming again for surviving himself and his family.
Meanwhile, committees also viewed that the course of traditional music has
been operated only one term; for this course it needs a team work when they want to
apply for incomes, they need all trainees to employ together because there are many
kinds of music instrument that need more people to play together at the same time.
Thus, this employment seems to be sustainable in short term only because they will
break out when they have family individually.
Although the results of the survey didn‟t show any more use of library
service, it shows that, according in-dept interviewing, this service are for both the
NFE targets such as the literacy or vocational student and the any students and
people in the commune especially the students of Ksert primary school.
30
4.1.3. The involvement through meeting and consulting
Regularly, CLC meeting have been celebrated one time per month, but the
irregular meeting have been prepared based on their needs. In formal meeting,
committees have invited the village chiefs, commune councils, layman or monk, and
people. And the committees did invite community members for irregular meeting.
The involving of people in the meeting is very active because the rate of involvement
is over 78 per cent, and 27.5 per cent of them are have provided the feedback (or
consulting) to learning center from interviewing (in Table 4.6 and Figure 4.3).
Moreover, the result of survey (in Table 4.3) shows that more than 71
percent of the people who knew the CLC benefits clear have involved the CLC
meeting. And this figure is higher than the percentage of the people who understand
clear about CLC benefits but never involved (only 19.6%) and the percentage of
people who have involved but don‟t understand the CLC benefits at all (6.9%). Thus,
the result can verify that the people who have more often involved the meeting can
get more insights about the CLC benefits.
Based on the in-dept interview with the CLC committees, they told that,
through the meeting, they have disseminated all information about the CLC
usefulness to the participants. Therefore, the meeting is one of the popular methods
which the committees used to build ownership and to mobilize any resources from
them also and then that information can be disseminated continuingly through
villager or local authorities who have participated.
Table 4.3: Cross tabulation between ‘meeting participation’ and ‘CLC benefit
awareness’ (N=102)
Involvement through the
meeting Total
No Yes
Awareness of the CLC
benefits
No at all 2.0% 6.9% 8.8%
Clear 19.6% 71.6% 91.2%
% of Total 21.6% 78.4% 100.0%
Furthermore, among 78.4% respondents who have involved the meeting,
there are only 26.5% having experiences in providing feedbacks or any commends
on the particular issues to the CLC committees during the meeting. And 52% of
31
respondents only join and receive information (or is a passive participant) (see Table
4.4).
According to the result of survey, it shows that the capacity of the
participants is still limited and it is very difficult for them to provide any ideas or
commends to the meeting. However, some people provide much more feedbacks to
the meeting like the proposing of the new courses or providing some solution for the
gangster problem...etc. because they want to see any improvement in their commune.
Table 4.4: Cross tabulation between ‘meeting participation’ and ‘feedback
provision’ (N=102)
Involvement through
the meeting Total
no yes
Feedback provision (or active
involvement within meeting)
No 20.6% 52.0% 72.5%
Yes 1.0% 26.5% 27.5%
% of Total 21.6% 78.4% 100.0%
4.1.4. In-kind and in-cash contribution
According to the Table 4.6, the people tend to involve through in-kind
contribution (46.1 per cent of interviewees have experienced in labor contribution)
rather than in cash contribution (28.4%) and materials contribution (12.7%). At the
initiative stage of CLC establishing, the communities were mobilized to contribute
through providing land for build the CLC, through money distribution for buying soil
to fill the former farm land; through material, communities have contributed of
vegetable in CLC celebration; and through labor, they have involved to care for all
materials such as machines, furniture and building as well. In addition, the
community people and local authorities have cooperated with the committees to
protect the students from outside the commune or district to stay and learn in the
CLC.
Table 4.5 shows that, among 93 respondents who know the usefulness of
CLC very clearly, there are more than 30 % having contributed the CLC with money
but nearly 70% have never contributed the money. For the people who have used the
CLC services, there are only 37.8% (N=74) having contributed and more than 62%
have not done at all. And there are more than 96% (N=28) who neither use the CLC
services nor contribute the money.
32
Table 4.5: Involvement through the in-kind and in-cash contribution and
awareness of CLC benefits and the use of services
Contribution through Total in
row (N) Money Material Labor
Yes No Yes No Yes No
Awareness
of CLC
benefit
Clear 30.1% 69.9% 14% 86% 50.5% 49.5% 93
Not at all 11.1 88.9% 0 % 100% 0% 100% 9
Use of
CLC
services
Yes 37.8% 62.2% 16.2% 83.8% 54.1% 45.9% 74
No 3.6% 96.4% 3.6% 96.4% 25% 75% 28
Furthermore, for contribution through the material, only 14% (N=93) of
people who know the CLC benefits clearly have provided some materials to the CLC
and 86% have never provided anything. Interestingly, 100 percent of 9 respondents
who don‟t understand benefits at all have never contributed and 96.4 percent of 27
respondents who have never both involved any services and material supports. And
there are nearly 84 percent of 74 respondents that have never contributed any
materials even they have used the CLC services.
Table 4.5 also shows that over the haft of 93 respondents who have clearly
understood about the CLC benefits has contributed through labor force; however, all
of the respondents having unclear about CLC benefits did not involve CLC through
labor force. Surprisingly, one forth of 28 respondents has involved through any kinds
of labor forces though they didn‟t have any family members using the CLC services.
Therefore, these results can be identified that the people who have neither
understood the CLC benefit clear nor used the CLC services tend not to contribute
any things even labor force.
Based on extra interviewing, there are some causes with these issues. They
said that they are poor and busy in their works which caused them not provided
available money or materials to the CLC, so that they only involve through the labor
force sometimes.
4.1.5. The participation through delivery of a service
As mentioned above, the CLC committees were chosen from the local
communities through election, but they have given up. And then, committees were
selected from the NFE staff instead such as literacy teachers, and Vice-Principal of
33
the primary school. Those are living in the same commune. For CLC manager, he
has many tasks in education sectors including the task at primary school and at the
cluster school; however, he is still involved in the task at CLC in order to keep its
activities run. And although other committees lacked supports and their capacities
were still limited, they tried to run the courses smoothly by building networks with
NGOs for funds. Thus, participation of community is still happened through a
service delivery.
Based on survey, it revealed that the local people, in the three villages, only
2 people (0.2%) have experience in teaching literacy. But there are no one of all
respondents experienced in being as vocational trainer. (See Table 4.6)
Table 4.6: Community participation through various activities (N=102)
Types of participation No Yes
Money distribution 71.6% 28.4%
Material distribution 87.3% 12.7%
Distribution through labor force 53.9% 46.1%
Meeting 21.6% 78.4%
Consulting 72.5% 27.5%
To be literacy teacher 98% 2%
To be vocational teacher 100% 0%
Decision making on course creation 66.7% 33.3%
In doing survey 90.2% 9.8%
In identification problems 86.3% 13.7%
In planning 89.2% 10.8%
In implementing the plan 86.3% 13.7%
In evaluating plan 90.2% 9.8%
34
Money distribution
Material distribution
Distribution by labor force
Meeting
Consulting
Being literacy teacher
Being vocational teacher
Decision making on course creation
Doing survey
Identification problems
Planning
Implementing the plan
Evaluating plan
71.6
87.3
53.9
21.6
72.5
98
100
66.7
90.2
86.3
89.2
86.3
90.2
28.4
12.7
46.1
78.4
27.5
2.0
0.0
33.3
9.8
13.7
10.8
13.7
9.8
0 20 40 60 8
0
100
Yes
No
Figure 4.3: Community participation through various activities (N=102, N%)
4.1.6. Participating in delivery of the service and course creation
Table 4.6 and Figure 4.3 show that among the two services in CLC –
literacy and vocational training services – there is only literacy service and only one
respondent have experienced to deliver it. Based on interviewing, it provided some
evidences that because the vocational training courses are new and there are no any
skillful persons in the commune, so all training teachers were employed from outside
the commune.
To meet the demands of the community, all those courses have been raised
by the people themselves, and then the priority course has been chosen by election
during the meeting. From the Table 4.6 and Figure 4.3, there are more than 33 per
cent experienced in course selection. Those courses are traditional music, machinery
or electronic devices repair, etc. However, the course of Tailoring by using motor-
running- machine proposed by NGOs.
And also, the Table 4.7 shows that most of the course decision making
process is conducted through the meeting (91.2% of 34 respondents who involved
the course decision making) and 72 % of 68 people have never involved in the
decision making, even they have experiences in participating in the meeting.
35
Table 4.7: The participation in decision making on course creation by the meeting
Participation in decision making on the
course creation Total
No Yes
Involvement
through meeting
No 19(27.9%) 3 (8.8%) 22(21.6%)
Yes 49 (72.1%) 31 (91.2%) 80(78.4%)
Total in column (N) 68 (100.0%) 34 (100.0%) 100.0%
4.1.7. Participation in various stages of decision-making
In this stage, there are 5 sub activities included the participation in doing
survey, in identification problems, in planning, in implementation of the plan and in
evaluating the plan. Before the CLC have run the courses, they needed to conduct the
survey to find out the communities‟ needs. Most of the time, this activity was run by
the central level, and they only needed some local people, who are famous person or
local governmental officials, to assist in this survey. Although, after course end in
some terms, the meeting has been created to identify problems and the communities
and local community have involved also.
In accordance with Appendix V, the results reveal that even though the
number or percentage of the community participation into those stages are very low,
every kind of respondents (for example, farmer, local authority and influential person
including monk, layman or rich man) has experienced in participating through those
activities. Among the participants who have involved through these stages, the
percentage of farmer participants is higher than the number of local authority and
influential person. In contrast, if the percentages are compared into the same kinds of
respondents individually, it reveals that the percentages of farmer participant are only
around 5.6 percent to 10.1 percent (N=89) in every stage which is lower than the
percentages of local authority participant (50 percent, N=8) and the percentages of
influential participants (20 percent, N=5).
4.1.8. The CLC management
In the CLC management structure, there are six committees – one honorary
chairperson who is commune council, one CLC manager (or executive chairperson)
who is vice-chief of Hun Sen Ksert primary school, one vice-executive chairperson
and three executive members who are the NFE staff.
36
Though in-dept interview, the management of CLC have been notified some
strengths, weaknesses and viewed some challenges which were faced.
Strengths of CLC management included: good networks and linkages with
development partner, because committees have prepared a clear work plan for fund
and shown accountability of resource management; more concentrated on outcomes
first, it means that they have monitored on the students‟ achievement and
employments; and strong commitment in their work, committees always work by
self-management and use their old experience to solve the problems.
For additional strength points, the executive chairperson and other
colleagues have mobilized resources not only from the internal community but also
from the external community. On one hand, to mobilize resources in the community
successfully, they have used several methodologies – first, they have disseminated
information about resource deficiency which CLC faced through the meeting in order
to find the generous person. Second, the effective way is that they have used the
religious context to collect resources by celebrating village ceremony. But they need
to keep transparency to the people for using that money. On the other hand, based on
the CLC committees‟ efforts and good networking, some resources are mobilized
from external community like digging well and other learning materials.
In addition, they always propose new courses after the old course is ended
in order to attracting the learners because the old course has produced enough
resource to compensate the market needs in commune.
However, the major weakness of this management is a lack of human
resources because the manager has many tasks in the same time and some time less
concentrated on CLC; of equal weakness, committees don‟t have skillful person to
take care any machines in CLC and committees such as vocational trainers care
much more about their skills. And because of the financial constraints in their family,
some committees have decided to get new jobs and they have less involved in the
CLC activities.
Furthermore, some challenges are: different gaps of student capacities that
caused teacher can not provide knowledge equally; and various kinds of students
from different commune and district that outside committees‟ control to join courses.
37
4.2. Discussion
In this study, although the community people have gotten high awareness of
learning center‟s information especially the CLC benefits and CLC services, the
results show that such forms of community participation into the CLC activities are
still limited. Those forms are the contribution to CLC, involving through meeting or
consultation, and involving through the decision making stages.
4.2.1. CLC contribution
In-kind or in-cash and material contribution are kinds of involvement in
education that support CLC to be sustainability in the long run. The results of this
research revealed that community contribution is still limited especially through in-
cash and material support. According to the interviewing with committees, the
poverty rate in the whole Ksert commune is 50 percent which is the high figure, and
the results of the survey also show that most households are big that has up to 4
children so that they have a big responsibly survive their family. Thus, the money or
materials contribution from them can not be available every time.
But, when they have used the CLC services or understood more about the
usefulness of CLC they tend to involve through contribution rather than the people
who have never used services or understood of the CLC benefits. This finding is
consistent with researchers also elaborated that the community awareness toward the
projects was very high and result in strong community participation into project
activities (Sotheary & Sithon, 2005) and then they contributed money whatever
amount they could afford to give – for example: contribution for the construction of
the CLC (GSID, 2005).
Therefore, in order to mobilize resources from the community people
effectively, the committees need to build up the awareness of them about project
activities and encourage them to use of CLC services more by creating the new
attracting courses for CLC. And based on the in-dept interviewing with committees,
it shows that the other effective methodology is used the religious ceremony to
collect money – in fact, Khmer communities are based on extended family networks
that maintained close links with Buddhist religious and want to contribute any money
or materials (Pellini, 2005).
Furthermore, the material resources which were mobilized from any
stakeholders have been used effectively not only for CLC students, but also for
38
school students. It means that CLC have shared their material resources and human
resources with school also (GSID, 2006). In deed, for the home economics course
and agriculture course in the school, the students have practiced their skills in the
CLC. Thus, if CLC and school keep this good linkage each other, CLC program will
provide benefits for both NFE target groups and formal school students.
4.2.2. Involving of community through meeting, consultation and course
creation
The results of survey have shown that, beside the use of services, the people
in these three villages like to involve the meeting rather than other CLC activities
beside the use of services. However, most of the meeting participants have only
attended and received information of the CLC – it means that they involved
passively. The percentage of active participants has only 26.5% of all respondents,
and all of these participants have provided consultation during the meeting such as
giving feedbacks to the committees.
Additionally, among 80 meeting participants, there are only 31 participants
(or 38.8%) who have involved the decision making on the courses creation.
Moreover, although the involving of community people is high (78.4%), the level of
participation through consultation and course decision making is still low. In this
issue, Pellini, (2005) pointed out that “the community members are satisfied with
their materials supports and feel that the technical and administrative matters are the
responsibility of the [CLC committees] and teachers.” And according to survey,
some respondents felt that there are no tasks for them to involve into those stages and
some though that they don‟t have capacity enough to involve.
Hence, the people in this commune are lacking the sense of ownership and
they didn‟t understand of the usefulness of their participation into the project
activities yet. To build community ownership with CLC more, the committees need
to invite them to involve the meeting more often and then train them with the comm-
unities‟ responsibilities and the important of their participation into project activities.
4.2.3. Involving through the decision making stages and delivering
services
There are lower than 14 per cent of all respondents who involved in the
decision-making stages: doing survey, identification of problem, project planning,
39
implementing of the plan and evaluating of the plan. But all participants are from
various kinds of community people such as farmer, local authority, and influential
person. If the percentages of participants were compared in the kinds of communities
individually, the result shows that the percentage of local authority participants is
higher than the percentage of participants who are farmer and influential person. For
the involvement through delivery of service, there is only one person who has taught
literacy. Based on the interviewing with committees, the vocational teachers were
from outside the commune and there are no skill trainers to deliver CLC services.
Furthermore, at the end of the course, the committees have conducted the evaluation
of the course and trainers, often they have invited only the relevant person such as
local authorities or some villager who have capacity enough to provide feedbacks or
evaluate the courses so that there is a little change for most villagers who has less
educated.
Thus, the lack of people participation in the decision making process will
cause the process of problem identification in the community or the proposing of any
plans not to achieve the project‟s goals. Because the special needs of local villagers
are for marginal and vulnerable groups, if lacking of their involvement into this
process, commune problems could not be solved. Therefore, CLC clearly need to
take into consideration the matching of the skills offered in CLC training and local
skills demand, facilitate the trainees‟ search for jobs to apply their skills (GSID,
2005).
4.2.4. Ways of resource mobilization
Depending on information of surveys and interviews, it showed that the
building of community awareness on CLC was a method to encourage the people to
participate and contribution any resources to the CLC activities. The research of
GSIC (2005) also found that when the communities understood and got the benefits
from the CLC such as they can get skills, employment, and livelihood improvement,
they were likely to involve any CLC activities included contributing through their
money, materials and labor force, and helping the CLC committees to raise funds.
Besides, the committees have used religious context to raise fund from villagers.
Because Cambodian communities are close linked with pagoda, the Buddhist
ceremony was celebrated in the purpose to raise money to support CLC. Moreover,
lacking of resources in the commune, undoubtedly, the CLC needed to find any
40
external support from outside community. To do that, the CLC had built networks
and linkages with relevant stakeholders and external generous persons to support the
CLC activities such as: constructing a new building, supporting teacher salary and
the students who come from far commune and providing learning materials.
Furthermore, to keep these networks closely and to sustain those supports, the
committees showed their responsibility and accountability in resource management
to all donors and supporters. To be accountable, the committees had regularly
reported to the donors included the use of budgets and students‟ information
(enrollment, achievement and employment), and the courses have been followed up
and evaluated after the course ended. To villagers, the committees showed the
transparency of resource use – especially the money which collected from the
villagers.
4.2.5. Factors that foster and impede community participation
After conducting interviews, the reasons or factors of participation and non-
participation were revealed. The factors which pushed them to participate into any
CLC activities are: first, because the communities have high awareness on the
benefits of CLC for either their commune and family; second, because the linking
and networking between CLC and community are very close so that it make the
communities get all information on CLC such as meeting, disseminating of epidemic
diseases and operating of trainings which encourage them to involve; third, because
the CLC provided interesting and useful courses such as life skills, vocational
training skills or literacy skill which respond to their needs in order to improve their
livelihood; fourth, because of their attempts to develop their community and to
sustain the CLC for the next generation.
However, there are some factors that impeded for community involvement.
First, some people themselves were busy with their works (GSID, 2005) and some
people were never invited (eg. meeting). The second factor is because of negative
thought of some community members. Some thought that they were not committees;
thus they did not have enough capacity to join, and some thought that they did not
get any benefits from CLC because they had no children learning there. The third is
because of the family‟s economic condition. Indeed, this commune has high poverty
rate, so that they are much more thinking about their family first.
41
Chapter 5: Conclusions
This research study evaluated the level of community participation into
community learning center, viewed the methodologies of CLC manager used for
mobilizing resources and found out some factors which fostered and hampered the
people involvement, to draw some lessons learnt for replication. This study focused
on only one CLC in the Ksert commune. This chapter presents a summary of the
findings, conclusions, and recommendations.
5.1. Summary of the Findings
Under the current situation, formal education doesn‟t meet the people‟s
learning needs. Therefore, the Royal Government of Cambodia considers Non-
Formal Education as an official education system, which contributes to achieving
Education For All (EFA). The target groups of NFE are poor people and those living
in difficult circumstances, working youth, ethnic minority children and youth, adults
aged 15 to 45 years. Among these groups, the girls and women are placed a special
emphasis on. Operating areas of NFE are rural, remote/disadvantaged areas, poor
areas, and reintegrated areas.
The NFE curriculum is focused on literacy and vocational skill training,
continuing education, family education for early childhood development and re-entry
program for primary school dropouts. And one of the NFE program is community
learning center (CLC), which has been carried out by Department of Non-Formal
Education and other involved organizations.
The aim of this project is to empower individuals and promote community
development through life-long education for all people in the community including
adults, youth and children of all ages. Another aim is to improve community-based
approach. And the main activities of CLCs are literacy programs and vocational skill
training for income generation, such as tailoring, repairing small machineries,
repairing motorbikes, repairing electronic device, sewing, raising animal, etc.
Based on the nearly ten year experience of CLC implementation in
Cambodia, the crucial problem which CLC projects faced is lack of community
participation in CLC activities that caused these projects still depend on NGOs‟ fund
to support their activities. Of equal evident, such projects supported by UNESCO
42
could not sustain after funds were ended. This is viewed that the promotion of
community-based approach has been not reached the goals yet. Meanwhile, the
actively involving of community is viewed as an important factor which forced CLC
activities keep running. Thus, the understanding of levels of community participation
into CLC is significant for any donors to consider whether or not continuing their
funds on those projects.
By viewing the case in Ksert CLC, the levels of community participation
into CLC activities have been evaluated in this study. And the CLC management
methodologies which are mobilized resources and/or solving the obstacles, and the
potential factors which pushed and impeded, have been explored. According to the
in-depth interviews with center committees and the community household surveys,
the finding revealed that (1) More than 90 percents of respondents understood of
CLC information such as CLC name, committee, curriculum, announcement,
schedule, and CLC benefits, but more than one-third of them (35.3%) did not know
the CLC supporters. (2) In term of the use of services, the study found that two
courses are the most popular in this CLC – quality of life improvement (55.9 %),
tailoring (33.3 %) and literacy program (30.4 % and most of this literacy classes run
outside CLC)– among the 7 courses and library service. (3) Among all activities of
CLC, 78.4% of the community members liked to involve the meeting and 46.1%
were willing to contribute either their money or their labor force in the first stage of
CLC establishment; moreover, 33.3% had experienced in course decision making of
vocational skills. (4) To mobilize resources successfully, the center committees have
built community awareness of CLC benefits and information through meeting, local
authorities, villagers, and especially through monks or famous persons; in addition,
they have showed accountability in resource management to donors and other
stakeholders. (5) The factors driving participation were the strong of communication
networks between CLC and either local authorities or local community people, high
communities‟ awareness on CLC, CLC provided interesting courses such as life
skills, vocational skills, and others. However, there were some obstacles that impede
their participation are: they are busy with their works, no invitation, and no feeling of
ownership with CLC.
However some courses are not responsive to their needs any more such as
electronic device repair, some of them were employed in the wrong ways (because of
those fields that are not yet relevant in labor market), while tailoring graduates have
43
employed positively. Moreover, this study also found that the percentages of
community participation in the active stage were still low and most of participants
were the elite in the community, such as village chiefs.
5.2. Concluding Remarks
From the findings of the study, the tree conclusions were drawn. Firstly, the
degrees of community participation in CLC activities have been showed that most of
these three villagers were likely to involve in the meeting and they were also willing
to contribute either their money or their labor force for CLC establishment. And they
also enjoyed the CLC services especially quality of life improvement program and
vocational training skills. However, some courses were no longer responsive to their
needs any more such as electronic device repair and traditional music. In addition,
some of them were employed in the wrong ways because of those fields were not
relevant in labor market yet. Furthermore, into the active stages, the villagers would
like to involve through the course creation rather other decision making stages. In
short, the level of involvement of Ksert community into the CLC project is very
active either local community or external community; however, the level of their
involvement is different by the different kinds of communities – that is, ordinary
people is likely to participate in the use of services, meetings and course creation;
and the local authority tend to participate into active stages such as planning,
evaluating, etc.
Secondly, the potential methods which CLC manager has used to mobilize
resources from community members or stakeholders were (1) to build community
awareness of CLC benefits through their meeting and (2) the CLC committees show
accountability in resource management to any stakeholders that supported CLC. Of
equal evidence, the main ways driving community participation were to build the
strong communication networks between CLC and either local authorities or local
community people or other development partners (GOs or NGOs); importantly, CLC
has provided interesting courses such as life skills, vocational skills, and other
services. In brief, the CLC committees used different methods to mobilize resources
for different kinds of supporters and for different kinds of resources.
Thirdly, in this research, several factors that both foster and hamper the
villagers to participate into the CLC have been revealed. Some main factors that
encourage their involvement are (1) partly because of their high awareness on CLC
44
such as the usefulness of CLC, CLC services and other information; (2) because of
the attracting course in the CLC like: quality of life improvement and vocational
skills which provided them a useful knowledge and matched to the job market; (3)
because of wanting to help their commune and being a model for their next
generation; and (4) due to wanting to improve their knowledge about the social
issues or developments and to drive the program get sustainability in the long run.
However, there were some factors that hamper them from involvement.
Those included some people themselves were busy with their works and some people
have been never invited to join meeting. This study also found negative thought of
some community members. Some thought that they were not committees; thus they
did not have enough capacity to join, and some thought that they did not get any
benefits from CLC because they had no children learning there.
5.3. Recommendations
5.3.1. Recommendations for the ministry
Based on the new findings of the case of Ksert CLC, the researcher has
drawn the following suggestions to improve CLC implementation:
• The vocational training program should focus on the skills that are locally
needed such as agriculture or poultry farming which are the core skills for
community.
• Train vocational graduates with functional literacy and adaptability skills for
them to look for jobs, because most of them tend to migrate in other place.
• Most of participants, who participated in the active stages, are the elite in the
community, such as village chiefs, who participate in active stage; thus, the
CLC committees should motivate local people and influential persons,
especially the rich, to participate in order to improve communities‟
knowledge, to build ownership and to mobilize resources more easily in the
future.
• The CLC committees should find out any illiteracy information about the
students coming from other communes and districts in order to prepare the
literacy course for them before the vocational training is provided.
• The governmental budget‟s flow needs to be on time to keep the project
running smoothly.
45
• CLC needs to build close networking or collaboration with the pagoda in
order to mobilize resources to support the CLC.
5.3.2. Recommendation for further study
Even though this paper did not extend its findings on what would happen in
the classroom reality and how community motivated their children to join the CLC
classes rather than public school. Therefore, further studies should be conducted to
see extend of the motive forces in participation of community. In order to do that (1)
the sample sizes should be expanded to maximize the accuracy; (2) the comparative
research should be conducted between different community participations in CLC
and CLC or between CLC and public school; and (3) proper tools or procedures for
measuring the level of participation should be reviewed from other literatures – it
means that the measurement should showed enough validity and reliability.
46
References
Bray, M. (2001). Community participation in education: Dimensions, Variations,
and Implications. France: UNESCO.
Carron G. and R.A. Carr-Hill. (1991). Non-formal education: Information and
planning issues. Pans: IIEP/UNESCO.
Colletta, Nat J. and Gillian Perkins. (1995). Participation in Education. Environment
Department Papers. Paper No.001. Participation Series. Washington,
DC: The World Bank. In M. Uemura, (1999). “The community
participation in education: What do we know?”. Washington, DC: The
World Bank.
Department of Non-Formal Education. (2002). Final report on activities of
Community Learning Centers. Phnom Penh: DNFE.
Department of Non-Formal Education. (2008). Community Learning Center
activities handbook. Phnom Penh: MoEYS.
Graduate School of International Development Nagoya University. (2005, March).
Assessment of community learning center (CLC) experience in Cambodia
: Making CLC work. Nagoya: GSID.
Graduate School of International Development Nagoya University. (2006). Overseas
fieldwork report 2005 Takeo province, Cambodia. Nagoya: GSID
Heneveld, Ward and Helen Craig. (1996). Schools Count: World Bank Project
Designs and the Quality of Primary Education in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Washington, DC: The World Bank. In M. Uemura, (1999). “The
community participation in education: What do we know?”. Washington,
DC: The World Bank.
Ksert CLC. (2007). Ksert community learning center report on management and
sustaining the CLC. Unpublished report. Svay Rieng, Ksert CLC.
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports. (2002). Policy of non-formal education.
Phnom Penh: MoEYS.
47
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports. (2005, December). Education Strategic
Plan 2006-2010. Phnom Penh: MoEYS.
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports. (2008). Non-formal Education Indicators
2003-07. Phnom Penh: MoEYS.
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports. (n.d). National Policy on Non-Formal
Education 2004-2015. Phnom Penh: MoEYS. Retrieved on 20 September
2008, from http://www.moeys.gov.kh/en/education/nfe/index.htm.
Olico-Okui. (2004). Community participation: An abused concept? Health Policy
and Development, 2(1), pp. 7-10. Retrieved on 20 July 2008, from
http://www.bioline.org.br/pdf?hp04003.
Peace Corps. (2004). Non formal education manual: Information collection and
exchange publication no. m 0042. Washington, D.C: The Peace Corps
Center for Field Assistance and Applied Research.
Pellini, A. (2005, June). Decentralisation of education in Cambodia: Searching for
spaces of participation between traditions and modernity. British
Association for International and Comparative Education, vol. 35, n. 2,
pp.205-216.
Shaeffer. (1994). Participation for educational changes: A synthesis of experience.
Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning.
Smithies, J. & G. Webster. (1998). Community involvement in health: From passive
recipients to active participants. Aldershop: Ashgate. In World Health
Organization, (1999). Community participation in local health and
sustainable development: A working document on approaches and
techniques. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe.
Sotheary, K.& K. Sithon. (2005, September). Final evaluation report Umbrella
Project on non-formal basic education & vocational skill training for
children & youths at risk (street & working children). Phnom Penh:
UNESCO.
48
Uemura, M. (1999). The community participation in education: What do we know?.
Washington, DC: The World Bank.
UNESCO. (1998). Technical working group meeting on Community Learning
Centers, Chiang Rai, Thailand, 19-20 January 1998. Bangkok:
UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2006). International seminar on community learning center: Hangzhou
and Shanghai, China, 27-30 October 2005. Bangkok: UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2007). Strengthening community learning centers through linkages and
networks: A syntheses of six country reports. Bangkok: UNESCO.
UNESCO/APPEAL. (2006). CLC Management Handbook. Bangkok: UNESCO.
Retrieved on 15 September 2008, from: http://www2.unescobkk.org/elib/
publications/clcmodule/CLC_Management_Handbook.pdf
World Bank. (1996). The World Bank participation sourcebooks. Washington D.C:
the International Bank.
World Health Organization. (1999). Community participation in local health and
sustainable development: A working document on approaches and
techniques. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe.
_______. (1999). Planning meeting on Community Learning Centers, Dhaka, 21-26
September 1998. Bangkok: UNESCO.
_______. (1999, April). Literacy watch committee of Nepal, bulletin n.o 9, Special
issue on Role of community learning center for the promotion of literacy
and quality of life. Retrieved on 20 July 2008, from http:www.accu.or.jp/
litdbase/literacy/
_______. (2004). Cambodia country report on Community Learning Center:
Regional workshop on Community Learning Centers (CLCs),
Chiangmai, Thailand, 23-27 March 2004. Phnom Penh: MoEYS.
49
Appendices
Appendix I: In-Depth Interview with CLC committees and
vocational trainers
For CLC committees:
1-Could you describe the processes of CLC establishing and management?
2-What are challenges that you encountered during course implementation?
How did you solve them?
3-What are the strategies that you used to mobilize resources from community
people and other stakeholders?
4-What are the factors that foster community people to participate the CLC
activities?
5-What are the factors that hamper them to participate?
6-In your opinions, what levels should community members participate to
maintain the CLC activities?
For Vocational Trainees:
7- What are challenges that you encountered during class? How did you solve
them?
50
Appendix II: Questionnaire for community people
Respondent’s information and location: 1- Name:..................................... age:..................... sex: male female
2- Occupation:...................................
3- Address: Ksert village Kandal village Pour village
Married Status and Level of Education: 1-a).Married Status: Single Married
Widowed Divorced
b).-Numbers of family member in total:..................... female:...............
-If you are married, please specify the number of children in total:..............,
female:..............
2- Education level:
-Literacy -Uncompleted primary school
-Completed primary school -Uncompleted lower secondary school
-Completed lower secondary school -Uncompleted upper secondary school
-Completed upper secondary school -Other.............................
Understanding of CLC information: (please check “” under the answer you chose)
Clear Unclear Not at all
1- Do you know the community learning center in
your commune?
2- Do you know any CLC committees who worked
there?
3-Do you know the CLC curriculum?
4-Do you know the CLC dissemination?
5-Do you know the CLC schedule?
6-Do you know the CLC benefits?
7-Do you know the CLC supporter are?
The mere use of CLC services: (If yes, please specify a number of your family
member(s) who have participated the programs)
Have you or your family member(s) ever involved in Yes No
How many?
(write in
number)
1-litercy course?
2-tailoring course?
51
3-motorbike repair course?
4-traditional music course?
5-small machinery repair course?
6-electronic device repair course? 7-quality of life improvement program? (Focus on human right,
hygiene, HIV/ Aids awareness, human trafficking ...etc.)
8-library service?
Participation or involvement through various CLC activities:
Have you or your family member(s) ever involved or
participated Yes No
If yes, how many times did
they involve?
1-through contribution of money? -one time -2-3 -4-5 -more than 5
2-through contribution of material? -one time -2-3 -4-5 -more than 5
3-through contribution of labor? -one time -2-3 -4-5 -more than 5
4-through the CLC meeting? -one time -2-3 -4-5 -more than 5
5-through the consultation (give feedback) on a particular issue?
-one time -2-3 -4-5 -more than 5
6-in the delivery as literacy teacher? -one time -2-3 -4-5 -more than 5
7-in the delivery as vocational teacher? -one time -2-3 -4-5 -more than 5
8-in decision making on the course selection such as tailoring course, motorbike repair course......?
-one time -2-3 -4-5 -more than 5
9-in identifying and defining problems? -one time -2-3 -4-5 -more than 5
10-in collecting and analyzing information from survey? -one time -2-3 -4-5 -more than 5
11-in articulating priorities and setting goals of CLC? -one time -2-3 -4-5 -more than 5
12-in deciding on and planning programs? -one time -2-3 -4-5 -more than 5
13-in designing implementation strategies and apportioning responsibilities among participants?
-one time -2-3 -4-5 -more than 5
14-in monitoring and evaluating programs? -one time -2-3 -4-5 -more than 5
52
Open-ended question:
1-Have you ever been disseminated any CLC information? - Yes - No
-If „Yes‟, in what way?........................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................
2-How does Ksert CLC provide benefits to your family and your community?
..............................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................
3-Why do you involve to any CLC activities?
..............................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................
Why do you not involve? ....................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................
Date:.............................2008
Interviewer‟s Signature
53
Appendix III: CLC Action Plans and Outcomes in 2007
Code
No. Provinces
/Cities
CLC expansion CLC improvement Number of
Students
Total of
CLCs
Number of CLCs
Number of
vocational
trainers
Par
tici
pan
t o
f
trai
nin
g
Number of CLCs
Number of
vocational
trainers
Par
tici
pan
t o
f
trai
nin
g
Total Female
Plan
New
trai
nin
g
cou
rse
Action Plan Action Plan Action Plan Action
1 Bantey Mean
Chey 1 0 0 3 0 0 1 1 3 2 35 35 21 1
2 Battem Bong 1 1 0 3 0 0 2 2 6 4 60 60 48 2
3 Kompong
Cham 1 0 0 3 0 0 4 4 12 8 153 153 80 4
4 Kompong
Chhnang 3 3 3 9 9 136 3 3 9 9 134 270 120 6
5 Kompong
Speu 2 2 0 6 0 0 4 4 12 12 192 192 63 4
6 Kompong
Thom 2 2 0 6 0 0 3 3 9 8 197 197 173 3
7 Kom Pot 2 2 0 6 0 0 3 3 9 6 104 104 60 3
8 Kandal 3 3 3 9 7 107 3 3 9 8 109 216 130 6
9 Koh Kong 2 0 0 6 0 0 3 3 9 4 78 78 60 3
10 Kratie 1 0 0 3 0 0 3 1 9 2 35 35 20 1
11 Mondol Kiri 2 1 0 6 0 0 2 2 6 4 84 84 42 2
12 Phnom Penh 1 1 1 3 3 30 1 1 3 3 35 65 46 2
54
13 Preah vihea 1 1 0 3 0 0 2 2 6 2 18 18 12 2
14 Prey Veng 1 0 0 3 0 0 3 2 9 4 74 74 35 2
15 Pour Sat 2 2 0 6 0 0 3 3 9 7 125 125 65 3
16 Rattanak kiri 1 1 0 3 0 0 2 2 6 4 96 96 40 2
17 Siem Reap 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0
18 Krong Preah
Sihanu 2 2 2 6 4 80 2 2 6 5 100 180 116 4
19 Steng Treng 2 2 0 6 0 0 2 2 6 2 35 35 10 2
20 Svay Rieng 2 1 1 6 3 62 4 4 12 6 140 202 101 5
21 Takeo 1 1 0 3 0 0 4 4 12 9 135 135 43 4
22 Odor
Meanchey 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0
23 Krong Kep 1 0 0 3 0 0 3 3 9 4 40 40 10 3
24 Krong Pai Lin 1 1 0 3 0 0 3 3 9 9 95 95 52 3
Total 35 26 10 105 26 415 62 57 186 122 2,074 2,489 1,347 67
Source: NFE-MIS (2007),Evaluation Report on NFE work.
55
Appendix IV: The list of courses by year in Ksert CLC
Source: Vocational Enrollment Records of Ksert CLC.
Academic
year Types of Skill
Number of
Classes
Number of teachers Student enrollment Student Achievement Program
Sponsor Total Female Total Female Total Female
2003 Tailoring 01 01 01 20 20 20 20
MoEYS Electronic 01 01 00 20 00 20 00
2004
Tailoring 01 01 01 19 18 19 18
MoEYS Electronic 01 01 00 17 00 15 00
Traditional Music 01 01 00 17 02 17 02
2005
Tailoring 01 01 01 20 20 20 20
MoEYS Electronic 01 01 00 15 00 15 00
Machinery Repair 01 01 00 25 00 25 00
2006 Tailoring by using motor-
running- machine 10 01 01 234 197 234 197
MWA &
IOM
2007
Tailoring by using motor-
running- machine 12 01 01 149 125 149 125
MWA &
IOM
Tailoring 01 01 01 17 17 17 17 MoEYS
2008
Tailoring by using motor-
running- machine 05 01 01 60 60 60 60
MWA &
IOM
Motor Bike Repairing 01 01 00 12 00 ongoing MWA &
IOM
Total 37 13 7 625 459 611 459
56
Appendix V: The participation of community people in various activities spited by kinds of participants
The participation of community people Total in
row in doing survey in identification
of problems in planning
in implementing
the plan
in evaluation
plan
No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes
Kin
ds
of
par
tici
pan
ts
Farmer
Count 84 5 80 9 83 6 80 9 84 5 89
% within in row 94.4% 5.6% 89.9% 10.1% 93.3% 6.7% 89.9% 10.1% 94.4% 5.6% 100%
% within in
column 91.3% 50.0% 90.9% 64.3% 91.2% 54.5% 90.9% 64.3% 91.3% 50.0% 87.3%
% of Total 82.4% 4.9% 78.4% 8.8% 81.4% 5.9% 78.4% 8.8% 82.4% 4.9% 87.3%
Local
authority
Count 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 8
% within in row 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100%
% within in
column 4.3% 40.0% 4.5% 28.6% 4.4% 36.4% 4.5% 28.6% 4.3% 40.0% 7.8%
% of Total 3.9% 3.9% 3.9% 3.9% 3.9% 3.9% 3.9% 3.9% 3.9% 3.9% 7.8%
Influential
person
Count 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 5
% within in row 80.0% 20.0% 80.0% 20.0% 80.0% 20.0% 80.0% 20.0% 80.0% 20.0% 100%
% within in
column 4.3% 10.0% 4.5% 7.1% 4.4% 9.1% 4.5% 7.1% 4.3% 10.0% 4.9%
% of Total 3.9% 1.0% 3.9% 1.0% 3.9% 1.0% 3.9% 1.0% 3.9% 1.0% 4.9%
Total
Count 92 10 88 14 91 11 88 14 92 10 102
% within in
column
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
% 100.0%
% of Total 90.2% 9.8% 86.3% 13.7% 89.2% 10.8% 86.3% 13.7% 90.2% 9.8% 100.0%
Source: Field data.
57
Appendix VI: Map of Ksert, Pour, and Kandal village
Note:
, : Village road , : Household
: Village border : Pagoda
: School : Health Center
: Canal : Bridge
Ksert CLC
Ksert Health
Center
Hun Sen Ksert
Primary School
Ksert village
Pour village
Kandal village
Ksert CLC
7 Makara
Pagoda
Ksert
Pagoda
58
Notes
1 NFUAJ=National Federation of UNESCO Association in Japan.
2 There are seven factors which keep CLC sustainability: (1) having the policy supported by the
government, (2) actively participating and supporting from community people, (3) having enough
human, material and financial resources, (4) regularly improving and building CLC committees‟
capacity, (5) having good relationship with other development partner, (6) monitoring and evaluating
CLC effectively and (7) providing the CLC personnel with enough supports.
5 PAP8: Priority Action Program 8, which is one of 12 Priority Action Programs which focus on Non-
Formal Education Expansion. (MoEYS, Education Strategic Plan 2006-2010, p.30)
3 There are: ATLP-CE Volume I: Continuing Education: New Policies and Directions, Volume II:
Post-Literacy Programs, Volume III: Equivalency Programs, Volume IV: Quality of Life
Improvement Programs, Volume V: Income-Generation Programs, Volume VI: Individual Interest
Promotion Programs, Volume VII: Future-Oriented Programs, and Volume VIII: Development of
Community Learning Centers.
4 There are seven project partners which directly run in the local level: (1) Punleu Komar Kampuchea
Organization (PKKO), (2) Non-Formal Education (NFE) Department in Phnom Penh, (3) Street
Children Assistance & Development Program (SCADP), (4) Mith Samlanh/Friends, (5) Operations
Enfants de Battembong (OEB), (6) Provincial Non-Formal Education Office in Battembong, and (7)
Provincial Non-Formal Education Office in Siem Reap.
6 For other CLCs, they commonly need 3-4 months to run on a tailoring course. However, Ksert CLC
needs only a month; the candidates can not produce or design the cloth themselves as their
counterparts who study in 3-4 months.