Application of the of four major activities in FFS learning sessions

The process starts with observing plots with and without IPM in small groups. During the observation, participants collect field data such as insect species and populations, and insect and plant samples. These data are collected in several plots. A facilitator is present throughout the observation and assists the participants with their observations. After that, farmers return to the meeting place and draw what they have just observed in the fields on a large piece of poster paper with crayons. The drawings include:

1. the pests and natural enemies observed in the field (pests on one side, natural enemies on the other);
2. the plant (or animal), indicating its size and stage of growth, along with other important growth characteristics such as number of stems, plant colour and visible damage;
3. important environmental characteristics (water level in the field, sunlight, shade trees, weeds and input).

All participants of the small groups work together to produce the drawing and analyse the data. During the drawing process, farmers discuss and analyse the data collected. Based on the analysis, they identify a set of management decisions to be implemented in the field.

A summary of these management decisions is also included in the drawing and agreed by the group. One member of each small group then presents these findings and decisions to the larger group.

After this brief presentation of the results, there is time for open questions and discussion. Large group discussions often involve alternative scenarios, for example questions such as "What would you do if...". This cycle of presentation, question, answer and discussion is repeated until all small groups have presented their results. Keep the agroecosystem drawings from previous weeks handy as reference and discussion material for later in the season.

The role of the facilitator is central to the AESA process. In the field, he or she will guide participants to see what they may not have seen before, such as small predators or changes in the soil. To ensure a balanced and participatory discussion, a good facilitator recognises that the more participants talk, the more they learn, so encourages discussion rather than lecturing. During presentations, the facilitator ensures that all participants in the season have the opportunity to present and that the group addresses all relevant issues. The facilitator needs agricultural and technical skills and must be able to ask good questions, guide the participants in the exercises and ensure that the group makes sound management decisions by presenting new information as necessary.

The four main activities that take place in the learning process:

1. Field studies
2. Agro Ecosystem Analysis (AESA)
3. Special topics
4. Group dynamics, icebreakers and energizers

Field studies

Field studies collect original or unconventional data via face-to-face interviews, surveys, or direct observation. This research technique is usually treated as an initial form of research because the data collected is specific only to the purpose for which it was gathered.

Field studies should be carefully planned and prepared in order to ensure that the data collected is accurate, valid, and collected efficiently. The equipment needed will depend on the type of study being conducted. The process first starts with clearly stating the problem and defining the area of study. From there, a hypothesis, or a theory of explanation, is set forth to explain any occurrences expected for the specified group or phenomena. Therefore, before a field study is conducted, it is important to identify the data/phenomena to observe.

Once the hypothesis has been established, the data can be classified and scaled so that it will be easy to know how to categorize information. Observations are classified because not all field observations will be needed; therefore, the observer can know what to look for and what to disregard. Observations are also scaled to give the observer a way to rank the importance or significance of what has been observed. Once field observations are concluded, this data will be analyzed and processed in order to resolve the problem initially presented or to accept or reject the hypothesis that was presented.

Application of the Field study

It is expected that participants take the initiative in the organization as well as in the three implementation stages of the field study.

Stage 1: Preparation

Preparation involves facilitator action:

• Studies the course books and locates subjects suitable for field study
• Studies the places of the students’ areas of residence and explores all possible places for field study in those areas
• Creates an archive containing the name and place of the area, as well as what this area can offer in terms of learning together with any other useful information
• Makes a preliminary visit to «the field study» in order to familiarize
• Study object should be exploited by the entire group of the students during the sessions
• Prepares activities for the students together with a list of the required materials
• Secures co-operations and selects the best time for implementation

In the sessions facilitator explains the field study technique and sets the rules. More specifically, the facilitator organizes a preliminary discussion for the determination of:

• The subject of the field study
• The aim and the goals of the field study
• The place where the field study is to be carried out
• The activities to be carried out (if group work is involved, every group must be assigned certain activities)
• The duration of the field study
• The sources to be utilized
• The final product

Stage 2: Work on the field

On the field, the participants, either in groups or independently, are assigned certain activities. These activities can vary and their nature depends on their aims and objectives as well as the opportunities offered by each particular field. Activities on the field can include observation and comparison, mapping, sample taking, taking of photographs, etc.

Stage 3: Composition and Presentation within the sessions

After the on-the-field work has been completed, processing of the data collected follows leading to composition (analysis and interpretation of the collected data). During this stage, the students could either carry out one or more activities included in their course books or prepare a report containing the basic points of their research, draw up a brochure containing photographs, diagrams, sketches, plans, histograms, or they could merely exhibit the material they have collected by means of written texts, and so on. The electronic or otherwise communication between the students is considered important at this stage. The students can use elements from the field study for their assignments. The presentation of these assignments in the common sessions is considered exceptionally useful.

Agro-Ecosystem Analysis (AESA)

Agro Ecosystem Analysis (AESA) is a decision-making tool used to make weekly field observation throughout the crop life cycle to determine plant health and its compensation abilities, population fluctuations of pests and natural enemies, soil conditions, climatic factors, agronomic practices etc. and analysis of situation taking into consideration the inter-relationship among the factors. The analysis leads to taking a quality decision on appropriate management practices (Table 1.9).

AESA is tool to guide farmers to learn how to develop skills and knowledge about ecosystems and to make better decisions. Working in groups farmers observe field situations and make notes about the ecosystem e.g., crop, insects, diseases, weed, water, weather etc. These observations are then placed on a sheet of paper to be examined before making crop management decisions. AESA may include the following information: Location, Date, Crop age, days after sowing (DAS), Variety, Beneficial insects, Harmful insects, Diseases, Weeds, Plant height, Weather and soil conditions, colour of leaves, flower and fruit initiation.

Application - Main components of the AESA

• a) Field observation

Example: Agro-EcoSystem Analysis in maize with special emphasis on the Fall Armyworm (FAW) Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera; 2021 not yet proven in Europe but likely introduced in the near future)

Objective:
To build the capacity of farmers to understand their agro-ecosystems, and to make informed decisions for the management of the crop based on thorough observation, discussion and analysis.
Procedure:
Recall and record the climate prevailing in the preceding one week. Record the stage of the crop. A total of 20 plants per field must be sampled. The plants within one to two meters from the edge should not be included to avoid border effect on samplings. Randomly select 20 plants.

Of these 20 plants, mark 5 plants with permanent labels for recording the plant growth parameters. Record all findings in a table.

• count the flying insects in and around the plant canopy without disturbing the plant
• examine leaves on both sides and stems for egg masses (count number of egg masses per 20 plants)
• collect egg masses, if any, for rearing and recording the percentage egg parasitism
• next examine leaves for 1-2 instar larvae. Collect 10 to 25 healthy as well as inactive larvae/pupa for rearing and recording the larval parasitism
• examine whorl (funnel) and leaves for three types of damage: windowpane (scratching), pinhole damage (small holes), rugged damage and frass (sawdust-like appearance)
• observe natural enemies
• look for larvae dead from pathogens and count number
• observe growth parameters of plants: stage of growth, age, height, colour, number of leaves, presence of pests and pathogens. To assess the damage to leaves, count the total number of leaves and number of damaged leaves and calculate the percentage defoliation. Leaves with less than 25 percent leaf area damage may be ignored
• observe soil conditions: moisture, weed spectrum (observe around the plant in one square meter area and record the type of weeds, size in relation to maize population density in terms of either number or percentage area affected)
• record weather

• b) Discussion in small groups

Now the group discusses about the field situation by raising many questions. For this purpose, referring the previous weeks’ charts are essential to note the population fluctuation of pests and defenders as well as the trends in plant infestation levels. Discussion points should include the following:

• plant stages, health and compensation ability
• changes in pest population in comparison to previous weeks
• corresponding changes in natural enemies’ population
• diseases – presence of inoculum, favorable climate, availability of susceptible varieties
• climatic factors – temperature, rainfall, humidity, wind velocity and their influence on pest, defenders, crop growth etc.
• weeds – susceptible stage of the crop, alternate host for pests’ shelter for defenders etc.
• agronomic practices – irrigation, fertilizer application and inter cultivation, etc.
• after considering all related factors, the group members arrive at a conclusion and recommendations
• written in the lower part of the chart

• c) Synthesis including drawing

• Make the drawing on the manila paper/flipchart paper. Use live specimens as models for drawing
• Top two third portion of the sheet is used for drawing and the remaining one-third portion for writing conclusion and recommendations
• Draw the plant with the correct average number of leaves found
• For weeds write approximate density and size of weed in relation to the size of the plant. Draw the kind of weeds (broad-leaf or grass type)
• For pest population intensity, draw the pest as found in the field on the right side of the plant. Write the average number (per leaf for sucking pests and per plant for others) and local name next to the insect
• For defender population abundance, draw the organisms as found in the field on the left-hand side of the plant. Write the average number per plant and their local names next to the drawing
• Use natural color for all the organisms. For instance, draw green for healthy plant and draw yellow for diseased plant or deficient plant. Draw pests and natural enemies nearer to the plant where usually they are seen
• If fertilizer was applied, place a picture of hand throwing N, P, and K depending on the type used
• If insecticides are used in the field, show sprays with a nozzle and write the type of insecticide coming out of the nozzle
• If the preceding week was mostly sunny, draw a sun, just above the plant. If the week was partially sunny and partially cloudy draw the sun but half covered with dark clouds. If the week was cloudy all day for most of the week, put just dark clouds
• Discuss in the small group what should be the decision for the days to come in the IPM field, and record those, based on AESA. What is the decision in local practice for the days to come?

• d) Presentation to the large group

One representative from each group presents their analysis report before the larger group and invites discussions and interactions. Decisions on management practices are finalized and implemented in the field. Key message: On a daily basis, AESA refers to the major observation done and the decision made (recommendation) and validated by the whole group to guide the management options/practices for the FAW. A comparison should be made also with the previous AESA in order to evaluate the effectiveness or appropriateness of the management options imposed.

Table 1.9 Agro Ecosystem Activity Matrix

Agro Ecosystem Activity

Activity	Critical Steps	Notes	Indicators
AESA A basic activity that develops good habits: observation, analysis, decision-making Farmers become experts	Observation and Drawing of Agro ecosystem	Participants need to understand the process of observation and its purpose and objectives. Participants observe in the field, take notes, collect samples The purpose of the drawing is to summarize the observation, focus on the analysis	1. Before the start of the activity, participants set: a. The aim of the activity b. The procedure to be followed in the activity 2. All participants are in the field 3. The observation procedure involves the whole plant 4. Recorded observation 6. Drawing summarizing the observations
	Presentations and Analyses	The results of the analysis are presented to the large group by at least one member of each group. Problems raised, questions asked. Purpose: to discuss the situation on the ground and to address "what if" scenarios. Objective: to improve decision-making and analytical skills based on ecosystem observation. The facilitator helps the group to achieve the objective by asking questions that help the analytical process.	1. A presentation by a member of each small group 2. Participants ask questions of the representative 3. The facilitator asks questions suitable for analysis 4. The group discusses the situation on the ground and the relationships between agroecosystems 5. Discussion of 'what if' scenarios 6. The agroecosystem drawing from the previous weeks is used for comparison 7. The group critically examines management decisions in the field 8. In addition to economic thresholds, other factors are analyzed, e.g. plant stage, natural enemies 9. The facilitator uses leading questions to help participants analyse what they have learned during the activity

Source: FAO, Fisheries and Aquaculture Management Division, 2008

Special Topics of a day

Technical information to compliment the ‘learning by doing’ and field experimentation is usually brought in as a special topic of the day. This provides an opportunity for the facilitator, researcher or specialist to give technical inputs needed for a general understanding of the subject and to level knowledge among the participants. The topic of the day is normally a farming related topic but could be any subject of concern. Participants may have other problems and feel a need to discuss issues. If the facilitator lacks the specific expertise, external specialists or other community members can be invited to lead the discussion. The role of the facilitator is to target a specific topic at the most relevant time for group participants.

Application of Special Topic of a day

Example: Insect Zoo - the role of natural enemies (farmer friends)

Insect zoos are an important special topic in FFS. Participants can set up insect zoo experiments which allow them to follow and observe behavior of insects that are alive (discovery learning). The insect zoo also helps find out more about functions of an insect in the field, which is very important information when managing insects through IPM. It can help farmers get a better understanding of insects even if they have limited access to information from outside. Insect zoos also motivate farmers to continue observing and exploring their agro-ecosystem, as they realize that they can make important and useful discoveries by themselves to improve their farm management. Overall, learning in the insect zoo generates knowledge and information that help to take informed management decisions for the IPM of FAW and other pests.

Purpose of insect zoos:

• Study the function of an insect – is it eating plants? Other insects?
• Understand more about natural enemies – including rate of predation (for example by putting together a natural enemy with pests and finding out how many pests a natural enemy can consume during a day) and rearing egg masses, larvae or pupae to observe parasitation.
• Explore life cycles of insects – setting up experiments to observe the life cycle of an insect, where different stages can be found (on or in the plant, in the surroundings), and how long different stages of the life cycle will last.

Rationale:

Natural enemies provide a natural pest regulation mechanism. There is a wide range of natural enemies (insects–predators, parasitoids, birds, frogs, and micro-organisms – fungi, viruses, bacteria, nematodes) in our fields. Many of them can help manage FAW. Farmers usually are not aware of the presence and the benefit of friends of the farmer (natural enemies) to control pest populations in their field.

Objectives:

To build the capacity of farmers to recognize natural enemies in the maize field and their impact, by:

• getting to know the function of an insect in the field (e.g. what does it eat or do)
• understanding/observing predation and parasitation and pathogen infection
• observing rates of predation and parasitation
• understanding its life cycle through life cycle studies

Time required:
Season-long

Materials needed:
Field plots; hand lenses/magnifiers; vials or plastic bottles for field collection; mosquito nets; small knife; cutlass; sticks.

Procedures and parameters for observation:

• Collect various insects and arachnids (i.e. “spiders”) you can find and make direct field observations on what they are doing
• Set up a simple experiment using empty bottles or jars (make sure the bottle has small aeration holes or cover the lid with veil/net)
• Predation: put a caterpillar and/or egg masses in a bottle with the suspected predator and make observations (approx. 5 min). Observations can be repeated daily, as homework for interested FFS participants to observer predation. Note how many FAW a day are eaten. However, note that the predator might not be able to exhibit his natural behaviour under these circumstances. This may lead to a substantial underestimation of the efficacy. You can also just observe - for example count digger wasps visiting their holes and count the number carrying larvae
• Egg parasitism: Parasitized eggs are likely to have a darker colour (which can sometimes be confused with eggs close to hatching) – if parasitism is suspected, collect eggs masses with the leaf, put it in a clear, aerated plastic bottle and observe daily and discuss the results. What happens? What are the differences with hatching of non-parasitized egg masses?
• Larvae parasitism and diseases: Look for larvae with abnormal behaviour; collect each such larva into individual transparent bottle or jar with some leaves and make observations
• Field study monitoring for observation, data collection and analysis for learning and informed decision-making will be done using the AESA process regularly
• It is possible to do a systematic comparison between IPM and local practice (LP) as part of the AESA – by collecting a fixed number of egg masses in each field and observing if there is a difference between the treatments

Results–discussion:

• diversity and numbers of natural enemies
• function and behavior of natural enemies; predators’ vs parasitoids
• diversity of insect pests
• crop growth and vigor
• yield

Table 1.10 Special Topics Activity Matrix

Special Topics Activity

Activity	Critical Steps	Notes	Indicators
Special Topics focus on topics such as ecology, biology, other fields etc.	Statement of Goal	Participants need to know the purpose of the activity and what they will learn.	1. Before the activity starts, tell participants what the aim of the activity is.
	Small group	It is clear to participants what they need to do and why. All the material is at hand.	1. All participants are active and involved in the activity 2. No small group dominated by one person to the total exclusion of others.
	Presentation	Activity analyzed by participants. Facilitator asks leading questions so that participant know what happened during activity and why. Special topics provide opportunity to learn of topics important to the subject	1. Participants present the results of their work during the activity and summarize what happened and why. 2. The facilitator asks leading questions to help participants reflect on the steps in the activity process and apply the learning to 'real life'.

Source: FAO, Fisheries and Aquaculture Management Division, 2008

Group dynamic

Dynamic of the group or implementation of the learning process and activities are undertaken collectively by group members with participatory methods during joint planning, management, implementation, monitoring and evaluation.

Participation calls for collective analysis and good rapport. Facilitator must work closely with local people. Ideally, though, teams of participants work together in interdisciplinary and intersectoral teams. By working as a group, the participants can approach a situation from different perspectives, carefully monitor one another's work, and carry out a variety of tasks simultaneously. Groups can be powerful when they function well, because performance and output are likely to be greater than the sum of the individual participants. But shared perceptions, essential for group or community action, must be carefully negotiated. Various workshop and field methods are used to facilitate this process of group formation.

The creative ingenuity of practitioners worldwide has greatly increased the range of participatory methods in use. Many have been drawn from a wide range of nonagricultural contexts and were adapted to new needs.

Application of participatory methods

Some group dynamics exercises are physical and active, while others are more as ‘brain teasers’. The facilitator's role is to help participants analyze their own experiences to better understand how people behave in different situations.

Many didactical exercises and games can be used to enhance learning process in the group. The principal emphasis is on creating an environment in which individuals and groups feel free to experience, reflect and change. Additional reading about each exercise is available on online at:

• www.researchgate.net/publication/288832171_Trainers'_Guide_for_Participatory_Learning_and_Action


• http://danadeclaration.org/pdf/ChattyBaasFleig.pdf

There are eleven main categories of group process exercises and games which are effective in participatory learning (Table 1.11).

Table 1.11 The description of the main categories of group process and examples of games

Category of the group process	Description	Examples of the exercises
Introduction and icebreaking	It is important to make everyone feel welcome and part of a group. It is critical to get everyone, especially the shy people, involved and talking to one another by breaking the tensions and nervousness at the beginning.	Paired interviewing, Expectations and ground rules in writing, first name introduction, Hopes and fears, Self-portraits, Something from home, Stepping stones, Symbolic introductions, Drawing concepts, The seed mixer, Name game, Who are we?
Energizers	Energizers are games that energize the group. This can be vital in maintaining the momentum of training. A quick, amusing game that gets everyone moving reactivate their minds.	Fruit Salad, ‘A’s and ‘B’s, Numbers game, Move to the spot, Move if, Streets and avenues, Robots, Family members, Breakthrough, Statue stop, Countdown, Group self-select, Group sculpture
Group formation	Group formation is necessary on participatory methods as they should involve a lot of intensive group work. Games can be used for random mixing or for purposive formation of groups. There are times when it is good to allow and encourage people to form subject group with participants with the same interest.	Fruit salad, Numbers game, Move if, Count down, Group self-select, Postcard or Jigsaw puzzle
Group dynamics exercise	These exercises can be valuable in helping participants through the various stages of group development. The general aim of these exercises is to demonstrate the power of working in groups, to encourage individuals to respond openly to others. Such exercises can bring difficult issue of conflict and dominance out into the open in a non-threatening way.	Nominal group technique, Group profiles, Kmotty problem, Trust walk, Group problem solving and team contrast, Chairs, Group strategies: prisoner’s dilemma, Cooperative squares, Postcard or Jigsaw puzzle, Look who’s talking, Rope square, My corner, Group roles, Excluding numbers
Listening and observing exercises	Adopting a listening and learning attitude is central to training for participatory learning, particularly when it comes to field work and direct work with local people. These exercises can help to shift people’s views, allowing participants the chance to reflect on how they behaved in the exercise debriefing discussions following listening and observing games are crucial.	Paper game, Drawing bricks, Empathetic listening, Noodders and shakers, Wayward whispers and story sequences
Analytical exercises	Participatory training should permit and encourage reflection on how we learn and observe, including realization of how our personal experiences and our personality influence what we see. These exercises focus on how we observe and remember, what we ignore, how we assimilate new information, and how difficult it is to be objective.	Learning by association, Seeing the Ks or Hs, Fact, opinion, rumor, Swap over, Playing detective, The coat of rucksack, Which watch? Whose shoe? Margolis weal, Johari’s window, Beans in a jar, Map reversals, Handclasp
Evaluation exercise	As a facilitator, it is important continually to evaluate how the training is developing and how to adjust your programme to meet changing conditions. The exercises are helpful for quick updates on the group’s mood and for more thorough evaluations at the end of training.	Margolis wheel, Scoring individuals and groups, Resents and appreciates, Mood meter, Graffiti feedback boards, Monitoring representatives, Evaluation of session, Evaluation wheel, Hopes and fears scoring, Role play for creative evaluation, Problem hat, Mental gifts
Semi structured Interviewing	It is a guided questioning/ interviewing and listening process, where only some questions and topics are pre-defined, and other questions arise during the interview. Interviews appear informal and conversational but are in fact carefully controlled and structured. The multidisciplinary team, using a guide or checklist, asks open-ended questions and tests themes as they emerge. During the interview, new possibilities for asking questions are explored.	Many types of interviews can be combined in sequences and chains. These include key informant interviews, where we ask who the experts are and then construct a series of interviews and group interviews, which can be groups convened to discuss a particular topic.
Diagraming and visualization	Diagramming is a way of clearly structuring information, visualizing the links between certain objects or factors and providing a basis for further analysis. Diagrams can be tables, "trees", pie charts or any other format suitable to support a discussion on a particular topic. The flow diagram and the relationship diagram or Venn diagram the most common. Try to include both in any training on participatory tools, as they are essential for analyzing problems and identifying patterns of social interaction/conflict. Venn diagrams involve the use of circles of paper or card to represent people, groups, and institutions. These are arranged to represent real linkages and distance between individuals and institutions. Flow diagram is a collective term for a diagram representing a flow or set of dynamic relationships in a system. Overlap indicates flows of information, and distance on the diagram represents lack of contact. The element is the emphasis on diagramming and visual construction. In formal surveys, information is taken by interviewers, who transform what people say into their own language. By contrast, diagramming by local people gives them a share in the creation and analysis of knowledge, providing a focus for dialogue which can be sequentially modified and extended. Local categories, criteria, and symbols are used during diagramming. Rather than answering questions which are directed by the values of the outside professional, local people can explore creatively their own versions of their worlds. Visualizations therefore help to balance dialogue and increase the depth and intensity of discussion.
Ranking and scoring	These methods are for learning about local people's categories, criteria, choices, and priorities. For pairwise ranking, items of interest are compared pair by pair; informants are asked which of the two they prefer, and why. Scoring takes criteria for the rows in a matrix and items for columns, and people complete the boxes row by row. The items may be ordered for each of the criteria (e.g., for six trees, indicate from best to worst for fuelwood, fodder, erosion control, and fruit supply).
Mapping and modeling	This involves constructing, on the ground or on paper. It provides a good starting point for discussions with local people about their problems, potential and needs. It is recommended that facilitators provide an overview on the different kinds of mapping and their objectives. Maps or models are made on paper using materials such as sticks, stones, grass, wood, boxes, tree leaves, sand and soil, colored chalk and pens. As the maps are created, more people are involved and want to contribute and make changes in turn. There are many types of maps: resource maps showing catchment areas, villages, forests, fields, farms, home gardens; social maps of residential areas; topical maps, such as aquifer maps drawn by a well-digger or soil maps drawn by soil experts; impact monitoring maps, where villagers record or map the incidence of pests, the use of raw materials, the prevalence of weeds, the quality of the soil and so on. Some of the most informative maps combine historical views with views from the present.

Table 1.12 Group Dynamics Activity Matrix

Group Dynamics Activity

Activity	Critical Steps	Notes	Indicators
Group Dynamics (Enhance teamwork and problemsolving skills)	Process	Participants informed about objectives and process before activities begin. Materials for activities, if needed, are on hand before activity begins. Time allowed for activity is sufficient to achieve objective	1. Before activity begins participants tell goal and activity 2. All participants involved/active, no single individual dominates activity
	Synthesis	Leaders take time to: review objective of activity; lead discussion concerning what happened during the activity; help participant to make conclusions based on their experiences during activity.	Leader: 1. Reviews goal and process of activity 2. Helps participants identify key learning points based on activity 3. Ask questions which help participants learn from their experience

Source: FAO, Fisheries and Aquaculture Management Division, 2008