Royal University of Phnom Penh

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


Master of Education Program



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:



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


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


Countersigned by the Chief Supervisor

………………………………………....


iv


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


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.

http://www2.unescobkk.org/elib/

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......?


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?


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


Traditional Music 01 01 00 17 02 17 02

2005

Tailoring 01 01 01 20 20 20 20


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.

Royal University of Phnom Penh

Documents

Transcript of Royal University of Phnom Penh