5.4 Sharing of Information

This section examines how groups passed on information, their motivation for sharing information, the methods used, the languages used and the kind of people involved in sharing information.

5.4.1 Methods used to pass on information

Few organisations used only one method to pass on information to their target community. The majority used a number of information sharing methods. (Table 2)

Half of the groups and organisations indicated they had been trained, not necessarily through outside workshops or more formal training, but commonly through in-staff training.

The majority (97%) shared information in local languages, some also sharing information in both national and local languages. Small, informal group training was the most commonly used method (72%). Over half used posters, charts and drama or role plays which indicates a willingness to use audiovisual and participatory methods of sharing information. The use of puppets and flannelgraphs by respondents was not widespread, particularly in Africa.

TABLE 2 - Methods employed by postal survey respondents to share information with target community

	FREQUENCY-USING LOCAL LANGUAGE	FREQUENCY-USING NATIONAL LANGUAGE	OVERALL PERCENTAGE USING METHOD
Small group teaching	131	10	72%
Drama and role plays	99	5	53%
Teaching notes	78	23	51%
Posters or charts	78	18	49%
Production of booklets	55	8	32%
Production of literacy materials	45	8	27%
Newsletter production	31	10	21%
Radio programmes	23	6	15%
Use of puppets	18	1	10%
Use of flannelgraphs	17	2	10%

Out of a total of 197 groups

Over half (51%) produced teaching notes of some kind, though sometimes these may be material prepared by a head office, since nearly 12% were not in the local language (comparing with an average of 3% for all other methods). The number of organisations using local radio to pass on information indicated a large potential target audience for information. Nearly a third produced booklets and a fifth produced newsletters. Also of interest was that a quarter either specifically produced literacy materials, or indicated that their materials might be suitable for use with literacy training. Since post-literacy materials are often in very short supply, this indicates that 'real' materials may provide useful sources for literacy work.

Over half (54%) of the postal survey respondents used just one local language to share information. Over a quarter (27%) used two languages, one used 12 tribal languages and another 13 tribal languages. A total of 154 different named languages (not all languages used were named), were being used by 197 groups to pass on information to target communities. The majority of these (57%) were African languages, with 33 groups using KiSwahili. For a full list of the languages see Appendix D.

5.4.2 Identification of information needs

Respondents identified the information needs of their target groups by a number of different means. Recent developments in the use of participatory techniques which encourage communities to prioritise their own needs, may have been incorporated into the work of some respondents. Over 40% of groups mentioned community participation in the identification of information needs. In just over a quarter of situations 'outsiders' appeared to play a major role in determining information priorities and needs for the local community. (Table 3)

TABLE 3 - Identification of information needs of target communities by postal survey respondents

	AGREEING
Community identifies needs together	49	(27%)
We prioritise the needs of the community	31	(17%)
Our experience elsewhere helps us to identify needs	16	(9%)
Community leaders identify needs	15	(8%)
Outside experts help us to identify priorities	6	(3%)
Key individuals in the community identify needs	5	(3%)
Several of the above	61	(33%)
Total	183	(100%)

Missing data 14 cases

5.4.3 Motivation

The difference between simply having access to useful and relevant information, and the desire to pass it on to others who might find it of use, is considerable. An examination of what motivates people to take this step is of great interest. Are people motivated, for example, by a sense of pride in their own knowledge, by the 'ignorance' of those they wish to help, by religious commitment or by a sense of injustice? Or are the needs of the community in requesting information, driving the process? (Table 4)

Motivation of survey respondents in sharing information

	AGREEING
People have so little information	75	(39%)
Community requests this information	67	(35%)
To pass on useful source materials in local language	61	(32%)
Group members want to share their skills	57	(30%)
Our head office directs us to share information	19	(10%)
Various other reasons6	17	(9%)

Missing data 4 cases

⁶ Among the other reasons given were: helping people make informed decisions (6), developing better community health care (3), Christian evangelism, creating environmental awareness (2), sharing skills with refugees in preparation for resettlement, helping develop a positive outlook on life and finding the most appropriate solution to rural poverty.

Few groups (7%) appeared to be motivated by their organisation's policy directing them to pass on information. This indicated a considerable degree of self direction and confidence among survey respondents. The results suggested that sharing information is not strongly driven by demand for useful information by target communities. Rather, the desire to share information was largely driven by altruistic reasons for nearly half the respondents, and by their awareness of the needs of the target community both for more information, and for more accessible information. A fifth stated that group members wanted to pass on and share their own acquired skills, implying their confidence and pride in the knowledge they have gained.

5.4.4 Education and literacy levels of members

Given that a certain amount of confidence in one's own knowledge is required before sharing information with others, a number of questions were asked to determine the educational background of those involved in training of some sort. No differentiation between formal and informal training was made. (Table 5)

TABLE 5 - Cross-tabulation between categories of postal survey respondents and mean percentage levels of education among staff or group members

	GOs and NGOs		GDOs		RPAs
LEVEL OF EDUCATION	MALE	FEMALE	MALE	FEMALE	MALE	FEMALE
Primary schooling	86%	83%	83%	85%	76%	60%
High school - 2 years at least	78%	74%	57%	53%	51%	44%
College	36%	31%	31%	27%	25%	14%
Degree	37%	28%	16%	12%	21%	5%
Literate in English	72%	68%	77%	71%	66%	56%
Literate in local language	80%	78%	87%	83%	73%	66%

Education or literacy levels for women were consistently lower than for men, the one exception being that of primary schooling in GDOs. In nearly all cases education and literacy levels corresponded to income levels of groups, higher for GO and NGOs and lowest for RPAs. However, literacy levels in local language were higher in GDOs and a surprising number of men held degrees in RPAs.