Social and Cultural Transformation Through Participative Learning

Jude Butcher, Valda Dickinson, Phil Glendenning, Peter Hancock, Fay Hickson, and Joanne Trevaglia

Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education Annual Conference, Brisbane, December 3, 1997

_

Social and cultural education is of increasing importance in today’s society, particularly considering the social justice issues which need to be addressed both here and overseas. This area of education is concerned with the social and cultural transformation of participants. The programs involve participants in field or immersion experiences in different cultural contexts, require them to critically analyse social issues and identify ways in which they can be agents of social and cultural change. The programs challenge participants’ personal and social assumptions, develop them personally and culturally and provide them with skills they need for social and organisation analysis and for their roles as change agents and as advocates in the social arena. This paper presents a conceptual framework for social and cultural education and discusses issues related to its implementation. Case studies of this approach are drawn from programs offered by participants both here and overseas.

Global problems require global responses. Our term social and cultural education is an attempt to focus the thinking and tasks of education into this context.

Socialisation has always been a way of describing a society's formal and informal processes for the initiation of its newest generation into how to survive and grow, using the resources and wisdom of its past, its geography and developed mores. To become a child of the globe, then means the same thing. How does the world community learn ways of peace and prosperity for the newly emerging symbolic "global village"? Whether it is an ethical and humane future that is wanted depends on what global values emerge, like what do we want for the survival of the planet? How are the profits to be distributed? What spiritual pathways do we want to merge into our human interactions?

Obviously things have to change. The ethnocentrism of the village, the nation, the class, the judgments of the "best" economic system are all being broken down in what is generally, but not very helpfully, summed up as "change".

Education for global community building then, in this view, is essentially about justice, respect for all people to participate in their own life decision making. To do this, the pioneers of the new education will have to search out the questions facing human kind together, each having to listen, watch, reflect and transform the self as well as try to socialise the new generation. This emphasis on asking questions before making declarations of a judgemental kind will be one of the signs that we educators are allowing ourselves willingly to enter a new state of transformation, in harmony with our growing awareness of the emerging cosmos we are part of. This has always been the point of research in any science, but our presentation tries to grapple with a more urgent and intensely relevant beginning to identifying and addressing the questions facing educators looking at the world today.

This paper examines goals and forms of social and cultural transformation, describes different ways these goals have been pursued in education initiatives both here and overseas, presents case studies of participants or groups involved in these initiatives and offers a set of principles as a possible basis for such education. The programs described are offered by staff from Australian Catholic University and/or the Edmund Rice Centre for Justice and Community Education. An ethnographic and case study methodology was _adopted for the analysis of these programs.

General approaches to social and cultural education in Australia can be said to be informed by a wide range of theorists, but developed within a unique context, and shaped by a range of social, political and ideological tensions which are a result of that context. They represent a movement towards a lifelong, participatory form of education, which requires the individual and/or group to develop personal, social and cultural awareness, as well as the skills to critically analyse what they find through this awareness.

As such, social and cultural education can be said not to be about: increasing knowledge (for the sake of knowledge); individual self-actualisation (since the purpose of this education is the improvement of society as a whole); civics (per se, since all aspects of society are questioned);or institutional or organisational effectiveness (for the same reason). It is explicitly based on commitment to emancipatory social transformation (adapted from Foley 1995:12-13).

Underpinning this commitment are a range of ideological, philosophical and political values. In the programs and movements described in this paper, these values are interpreted through an explicit commitment to social justice, to anti-racism, and to social and cultural transformation. A group of staff found that they possessed a shared commitment to these values especially with respect to the marginalised in society. Their commitment was supported by the university’s vision of its mission in society and by Faculty and Departmental structures which provided forums within which they could explore and critique strategies for realising their vision.

It is even more difficult to provide a single conceptual framework for social and cultural education in Australia because rather than one field, or one framework, there are many, albeit overlapping areas: disability training; anti-racism education; social justice education; immersion experiences. Each of these fields are bounded by a range of discipline specific `understandings’, terminology and techniques.

Yet there is enough underlying commonality in each of these fields to be able to identify a number of key elements which allows them to be grouped together. Foremost amongst these is the goal of reflection and transformation. This goal, unlike other forms of education or training, requires both the educators and the participants to be aware of, and to critically assess, the knowledge, skills and attitudes which they possess as individuals and professionals. They also need to be able to question these attributes, their development, nature and function within themselves, their families and communities, and society at large. It further requires them to put this awareness into operation by effecting change in their personal and professional lives.

The paradigm for developing and implementing these programs emerged from staff reflecting upon and mutually critiquing their practice in these areas. Their own _involvement in the field with marginalised people informed their practice and provided a sound basis for examining the authenticity of their personal and professional approaches in this area. This authenticity pushed the boundaries beyond the teaching about to participating in and reflecting upon this world. The learner, who forms the centre of these fields, can be simultaneously the `educator’ and the `student’ representing the fact that the process of transformation occurs both ways (Brookfield: 1995).

657lbgcb0

Reflective Practice

457lbgcb0Change Management Theories and Practice

Skills Professional of Social Justice

Skills

9lbgcb028cob0lbgcb0

Values Clarification Educators and participants Ethics

Personal Contextual Awareness Knowledge

Critical and Social Interpersonal Skills

Analysis

Principles of Inclusion

These case studies will report upon examples of more formal education programs in the form of cross cultural education, and. an Habilitation course, and less formal programs and movements including immersion experiences and people’s movements.

An examination of cross cultural education, as a form transformative education, raises a number of significant, and at times unanswerable questions - questions about the nature, scope, and purpose of such training, questions about the process by which the education or training is to occur, and most importantly, questions about the ethics surrounding the field as a _whole.

Cross cultural education is part of a field of education and training which carries a myriad of labels, and purposes. It has included intercultural training, cross cultural training, intercultural communications, cultural diversity training, diversity training, EEO training, social justice training, anti-discrimination and anti-racism training. Each of these areas utilise a range of different, albeit overlapping techniques, each is informed by a range of philosophical and ideological stances, and each requires a different level of commitment and discomfort from the participants, and the trainers.

The term training has been used deliberately in the above statement. This is because it is only recently that the term `cross cultural education’ has, or indeed, could, be used. In general, cross cultural programs tended to be provided through a training, rather than education program - meaning that they tended to be short term (at times as short as a ten minute insertion in a longer program!) and, often, presented as an after thought, or perhaps more accurately as an add on (along with disability, indigenous issues, and, to a lesser extent womens’ or girls’ issues).

This resulted in, at best, ineffectual programs, and at worst, programs which actually result in the dissemination of incorrect and damaging information. The staff of the Australian Catholic University have consciously attempted through their programs, to give students the chance to consider what are often highly controversial concepts, at length, and in depth.

The common characteristics of cross cultural education can be seen in relation to one proto-aim, which the authors argue is `to enable individuals, groups, communities or societies, to interact more effectively with individuals, groups, communities or societies other than their own’. Central to this process is the concept of culture, which gives this otherwise disparate group of training a common core. To say, however, that it is only the concept of culture which makes this training what it is , would seem to suggest that it could equally be called `anthropology’ or `cultural studies’.

The difference between cross cultural education, and other forms of education and training which take the notion of culture as their central focus, is that in this context, the study of culture is only a means to an end, rather than the end itself. Culture becomes a key issue in the wider aim of the training, but the aims and outcomes are determined by other factors.

These factors are primarily encapsulated in the types of knowledge, skills or attitudes the training is intended to develop in the participant. This is similar to most forms of training. Unlike other forms of education, however, (such as management skills, or team building) cross cultural education raises significant social and cultural issues, which are constantly under debate.

At certain levels, education or training programs such as those aimed at developing intercultural communication, or EEO skills can occur solely at a level of knowledge and skills, requiring very little change, or transformation, on the part of the individual or group. The impetus for any change in this context may come from purely _pragmatic stance, ie conforming to legislative requirements, or achieving fewer client complaints, through the use of an interpreter.

Anti racism education, in comparison, requires of participants and educators a more demanding level of interaction. Anti-racism and social justice education are underpinned by an ideological and philosophical stance which goes beyond that which is required by anti-discrimination legislation. It intended to lead participants to not only comply to the letter of the law, but rather to re-consider their own position within society, and the place and circumstances of a number of groups within society. In other words, it requires the participants to undergo, or at least consider undergoing, a process of individual transformation as way of moving towards wider social and cultural transformation.

It requires of individuals an examination not only of what they know, or what they can do (which admittedly can be confronting in itself) but more importantly, of what they believe. It requires that individuals examine both their own values and philosophy, and that of the society in which they live. It also asks them to re-consider what they know, in the light of how that knowledge was constructed, and by whom. It then requires them to re-consider the skills they need in order to operate effectively in a society, and more importantly, to work towards a particular vision of society which is based on a belief that equity and social justice are to be sought after, and are, ultimately achievable.

A commitment to social justice, and to social and cultural transformation, requires a number of key conditions. First amongst these is a commitment to the students, and to ensuring that they are free to express their opinions and concerns.

Students are therefore encouraged to see their classrooms as a safe space which means that they are entitled and encouraged to voice any and all relevant opinions, attitudes and experiences without judgement. Whilst they are encouraged to review these in the light of new information about the experience of indigenous and immigrant Australians, they are never coerced into doing so.

The second condition is that students are given the tools and the time for active reflection to take place. To this end, the use of journals, and other reflective processes are encouraged through their inclusion in the assessment process. This means that whilst the lecturers provide students with up to date factual information, it is the students who begin to process through their reflections, the ways in which their attitudes were and are formed by family, society, and the media.

The third condition requires that most of the information students receive is given first hand, that is, that it comes from the people directly affected. This means that as they begin to question their attitudes, they are given the opportunity to meet people of indigenous and non English speaking backgrounds (sometimes for the first time) who share with them their lives, and in particular the experiences with the education system.

The fourth condition is that in order for transformation to take place, individuals need to experience feelings and situations similar to those of the individuals to whom they have listened. Without this experiential phase, it is argued, students remain at the `head’ level, which is necessary, but not sufficient, for transformation.(Brookfield:1986) _

It is only after this fourth condition is met, that the personal transformation often begins for the course participants just as it did for the authors in their own personal and professional experiences.

The final condition, is that students must be assisted to process their experiences so as to ensure that what they carry with them, into their classroom and into the wider society, is not the distress, anger or guilt that they may have felt through the process, but rather their transformed selves, who through an examination of their knowledge, skills and attitudes towards indigenous and NESB Australians, are able to review their teaching and interpersonal skills in an ongoing manner, and to highlight areas for their further and future development as teachers and as Australian citizens.

This section of the paper describes an undergraduate program in education which has evolved as a direct response to the growth of a people’s movement in the disability area and related social and cultural change. The course involved is a Bachelor of Education (Habilitation). The term ‘habilitation’ refers to the process of enabling people with disabilities to develop skills and participate fully in the community. The process is an ongoing one which enhances the quality of life of people with disabilities and empowers them toward self determination. The course is underpinned by principles of normalisation and social justice. Discourse related to theories of normalisation, which assert that all people have the right to similar opportunities and experiences as any member of the community, (Nirje: 1970), (Wolfensberger: 1972) continues to influence disability related policy and practice in this area on a global level. In practice, these principles translate into the right of full community inclusion and citizenship for all people with disabilities.

Transformations taking place within the context of the ‘disability culture’ have been influential in the development and re-development of this course. While the disability movement has been variously described as a social movement or a liberation movement (Shakespeare:1993, Oliver: 1996) the strength of this people’s movement is evident in the growing number of students with disabilities enrolling in the program. While this is not notable in itself given the inclusionary philosophies and practices of the program, the impact it has had on the students and staff both within habilitation and across the wider university in terms of growth of awareness and resultant attitudinal change has been significant.

Students enter the course either straight from school or after some years experience working in a related area. School leavers may have little experience of the ‘disability culture’ and are unsure of their future role in this field. Most have a strong commitment to justice and human rights but are uncertain how this can be translated into anything more than ‘caring’ for people with disabilities. In general this group respond quickly to the new knowledge and experiences to which they are exposed. On the other hand, students who are already working in the field often come to the course frustrated by the large bureaucracies in which they work or with a desire to legitimate their past experience and work practices. Meeting the needs of these two disparate groups has been a major, yet not unsurmountable, _challenge for staff working in this program. Usually, by the second semester of the program the students have become ‘one voice’ through a process of reflection, respect for others and a common commitment to justice.

Through listening and responding to students’ needs, structural changes to the course have also been implemented. Each unit in the course is underpinned by the philosophies and practice of normalisation and social justice within a developmental educational framework. There are a balance of foundation units which are matched with those which have a more applied emphasis. Many units include a field based assignment and there is a field based practice component in each year of the program. Students with limited field based experience are given the opportunity to work for one day per week in a service which supports people with disabilities. This is followed by a five week field placement in the middle of their first year. Students who work in the field are required to spend a substantial amount of time in an alternative service as well as meet chosen learning objectives in their place of employment. Formal reflection is built into this program with small groups of students coming together at the end of the session to share their experiences. It is during the period of field experience that students’ transformation is most notable as they begin to listen to, and learn from, one another. Students come to the reflection session enriched by their experiences, with greater understanding of the way the theory they have learnt translates into the real world.

The transformation which takes place across students’ period of study is assisted by their immersion in a culture of learning which challenges the paradigm of the ‘helping profession’. In many ways the students in this program are pioneers of a new profession, one which sees them work in partnership with people with disabilities rather than one which gives them the power and authority to make decisions about others’ lives. This model challenges the previous custodial model of ‘care’ for people with disabilities which gave workers and service agencies the power to define and restrict people’s needs, resulting in a perpetuation of inequality and restriction of self-determination (Rioux:1993). Students speak about their personal growth from wanting to ‘care for’ people with disabilities to becoming advocates who ‘care about’ people in a sense that is neither paternalistic nor patronising. Within the program, learning about self-determination is an interactive process. Students, themselves, become self determined in an environment where advocacy skills are practiced and where adult learning principles apply and, in turn, practice strategies which lead to self-determination for people with disabilities. However, this process of transformation is not always smooth. Tensions between the realities of economic rationalism and a commitment to human rights are real challenges for those working in the human service sector. Further unease can arise when students are faced with social and bureaucratic structures which impede decision making and choice. Students may find themselves in conflict with the philosophy and practice of their workplace. On the positive side they may be in positions where they can influence decision making and change. Either way, as educators we need to be aware of the possible tensions that exist for our students and build in time for listening and reflection so we can best support them in their personal and professional growth.

_

The program described here was designed as an inservice for teaching personnel involved in moving from mainstream schools to work on the margins in small international groups. This report is the fruit of two years involvement in cross-cultural immersion experiences with 17 participants.

Based on principles of social justice, preferential option for the poor and Frierean educational methodologies, the aspect under discussion here is that of the personal and professional development of the educators themselves. As all the learning is to be made in a cross cultural setting, the questions that arise once the educational and social principles are understood, centre around the quality of relationships where outsider and insider are required to interact.

The theoretical model which was adopted for this program of training was that of Anthony Gittins, Professor of Anthropology at the Catholic Theological Union, Chicago (Gittins:1989). Gittins has designed a grid to help discuss the infinitely varied and subtle power relationships and dependencies which arise when a foreigner ("outsider") arrives in a host culture in order to "help" in some way, like education for the poor.

Society, in this model can be graphed into four quadrants: "insider participants"; "insider non-participants"; "outsider participants" and "outsider non participants". The educational event takes place amid cultural expectations from the hosts, which the outsider or "stranger" may or may not know or be able to learn about. Unless the outsider ("stranger", "visitor", "guest" ) learns the picture and its rules, all sorts of dangers to the enterprise arise.

The training for this was carried out in the field in a small tourist city. The first task was to gather data from experiences of interaction as stranger. Participants had to visit an alien or unfamiliar setting and engage in conversation as naturally as could be managed in the circumstances in order to get the feel of being in a powerless position at many levels. Examination of the field notes (recorded feelings and descriptions of the sequence of behaviours in the interaction) provided the material in which the Gittins model was critiqued. Similarly, the next exercise required participants to "find a stranger, and give him or her a gift", without further explanation. While this exercise was resisted more strongly by the participants, all completed it and the process of attending to the theory was begun. From this developed their learnings of the potential for good or ill of "the stranger bearing gifts".

What follows are some of the learnings for cross-cultural educational interventions.

Aspects of being an outsider, which are perilous to ignore:

• The visiting educators have to be aware that they walk into a complex net of expectations which are projections for the host culture. Their unaccustomed ambiguity about where they are in the power equations of the society can be unnerving;
• The gifts they bring may be sought by power groups within the host society and the outcomes may defeat the aims of the project._
• Each person has to learn how to develop a strong sense of identity in the interaction required for respectful development and any "inculturation" of the learnings being imparted;
• The educating team has to know how to collaborate and when to leave according to the principles of justice and development;
• Gifts given in return from the hosts need to be accepted, and an understanding of the resulting obligations be attempted.

The Objectives of the program are for participants to:

• develop their potentiality for internationality;
• deepen their understanding of themselves;
• have some experience of personal and social transformation;
• experience living in cross-cultural community;
• prepare themselves for long term journeying with those who are marginalised by society because of poverty or prejudice.

Phase 1: Preparation (2 months)

This involved cultural analysis, personal development and human relations, spirituality and social justice.

The Gitten's model, of outsider / insider - participant / non-participant, was used to describe social patterns of the immersion site. Ethnographic skills and an understanding of ethnocentricity were studied so participants would appreciate the role of "informants" and "gatekeepers" as they tried to learn about different cultures and social systems.

b) Personal Development and Human Relations

Strengths and limitations, healthy and unhealthy behaviours were identified using personal reports, feedback from others and Personality Indicators to highlight areas for growth and personal transformation. There was an emphasis on understanding the role of comfort and restrictive zones, dissonance, defence mechanisms, projections and prejudices, in human relations, cross-cultural adaptations and transitions. The goal was to provide ways for participants to understand and name what was happening within themselves and between others as they became immersed in a new culture.

Tools of social analysis, community development and theological reflection were used as some ways of processing and responding to the multiple dynamics operative in the immersion situation.

Phase 2: Immersion experience (5 months)

Five months were spent in a community located at the margins of the society, usually, but not necessarily, in a developing country. _Each participant was assigned a mentor from the local scene. The key roles of the mentor included coaching, facilitating, networking and counselling the participant. During this time we visited the participant and the community to encourage both, troubleshoot, discuss and assess how the objectives of the program were being realised.

Phase 3: Debriefing and discernment (2 months)

During this time the group shared their stories and critical incidents. They evaluated the immersion in terms of their own personal and social transformation and began a discernment process about their future.

The following learnings have been selected from a multitude which emerged from team and participant evaluations. These evaluations were done through observations during the introductory and closing phases, visitations to the immersion sites, the spoken and written responses from the mentors and immersion communities and the facilitated evaluation by participants conducted during Phase 3.

Most of the participants had the experience of loneliness and were in a constant process of letting go, extending and having their comfort zones challenged and expanded. They saw the importance of presence versus task. They felt non-productive in the Developed World sense. They had a sense of powerlessness with language interaction with the culture and relationships with the indigenous peoples. They began to understand tokenism and the plight of the unemployed and migrants back home. They had the space and time for personal issue to arise.

They experienced some guilt about having many more resources and opportunities to develop their talents than their host communities. There was a sense of conflict between their expectations and that of the people. They were aware of corruption at all levels of society and of a degree of hospitality and generosity that astounded them. They experienced different customs associated with rituals, healings, family and education. There was a touching into real poverty that they had never seen or had contact with before the immersion experience and anger at what they discerned to be the structural causes of this poverty. They realised the possibility of having harmonious relationships and friendships across cultures. A number expressed that they felt that they lacked the practical skills that were needed for the experience. They were highly educated but lacking the basics like language, understandings of the people and social systems, survival and technical skills. They saw networks of people working with and accompanying the people at the margins and questioned their own commitment to be involved at this level. The immersion experience proved indeed to be an experience of personal, social and cultural transformation for each participant

The following case study is presented to give a window into a current immersion placement and to highlight one or two critical transformative incidents.

Participant: Tim Moloney - originally from Melbourne, Australia.

Previous Employment: School Principal

Tim's placement is in Kimberley South Africa. This is an old diamond mining town. The original inhabitants are the Tswana people. There are also a large number of coloured people, Asians, Afrikaners and some English. The majority of the blacks (Tswanas) live in townships on the margins of the city and they form the bulk of the population. As a resultof the poverty and violence there are a large number of young children who live on the streets and sleep under cardboard boxes. They are shabbily dressed and often very hungry. Other youngsters who live in the shanties do not attend regular school for a variety of reasons including the need for uniforms and other resources. Many of the black youngsters who do matriculate cannot afford the fees to go on to further study. They tend to be idle and congregate in gangs. Many of the children and young adults have stab wounds and violent deaths are not uncommon.

Tim has been involved in one-to-one literacy and numeracy teaching and general activities with the poor of Kimberley. His placement is at a "drop-in school" for poor children and young adults (ages 8-22 years). Food is collected each afternoon from the local bakery and some potatoes from the greengrocers. These provide a daily meal at the school for those who attend. The streets are visited each morning and bread and coffee is distributed. In the afternoons the shanty homes and refuges are visited. There are plans to renovate some old buildings to provide emergency accommodation when needed and a hostel for older boys and girls (20+). Tim has the following comments to make concerning his experiences and the effects they have had on him:

Community education contexts across the world are based upon personal transformation at both individual and group levels. What happens when an awareness and a yearning is shared by a community concerned about injustices and their challenges to education?

Social and cultural transformation has made significant progress in the past three decades through the development and actions of peoples movements. The environment, human rights, peace and women’s movements have not won the final battle against poverty, oppression and injustice, but clearly progress has been made. Perhaps most significantly, progress has been made by people’s movements in driving community based welfare and development agencies and organisations away from addressing symptoms only toward an attack on fundamental causes.

_

People’s movements involve more than relief and welfare and seek more than changes in public policy and institutional systems. People’s movements seek and, through participative processes, advocate for change at the personal, community and political levels. Ultimately, people’s movements require a fundamental shift in values, attitudes and action to provide social change.

Over the course of the past three decades, the goal of people’s movement has been broadly described as "seeking to energise a critical mass of independent, decentralised initiative in support of a social vision." (Korton:1990). Accordingly the theory of action underpinning people’s movements is based in a mobilising vision.

The absence of such an enabling vision contributes significantly to the root cause of ongoing injustices in local and global society. This is simply because without such a vision agencies and organisations run the risk of becoming agencies of assistance engaged in relieving symptoms only and use participative learning processes to assist and alleviate rather than transform. Fundamental causes can go unaddressed.

People’s movements emerge when public consciousness is raised with an alternative vision adequate to mobilise voluntary action on a national or even global scale. The focus is not on relieving symptoms only, or on seeking changes to government policy, but on the communication of ideas, information and values through community education. The use of mass media, school curricula, newsletters, study and discussion groups and a wide range of other experimental and participative learning processes is essential. It also requires the utilisation of social networks that already exist. These community and grassroots based networks are essential to energising voluntary action because they connect with people within and outside their formal organisations in support of social transformation. In short, the networks are relevant to the lives of ordinary people who must be mobilised if people’s movements are to be effective.

People’s movements have not happened by accident. Their emergence can be traced historically over the past three decades as a result of learned experience, particularly in the human development field. Traditionally development agencies and non government organisations focussed on welfare and relief through the provisions of locally-based, village level, projects. Feeding the Poor because they are hungry. In time agencies determined to teach the poor skills to help feed themselves and even organise to address political structures that create local inequities. In time, such micro-level activities were joined by macro level action by agencies in seeking structural changes in public policy and institutions. This was based on the notion that poverty and injustice were caused not only by shortage, natural disasters and poor skill development. Organisations and individuals reflecting on their experience realised that more was needed than an "either/or" micro or macro approach to social transformation. It was through an increased awareness of the interconnectedness of values and social needs that led to the emergence of people’s movements as the stage beyond the relief, skills, training and policy change models.

_

The progress made by the women’s, environment, human rights and peace movements have shown that much remains to be done. In particular it is becoming clear that there remains a need to mobilise a people’s movement around a people-centred development vision. The mobilisation of the Australians for Native Title and Reconciliation (ANTaR) network in 1997 is evidence that such a movement is emerging. What is clear is that the people’s movement approach to community development is a strategic orientation that is the culmination of the learned experience of community based development and welfare agencies over the past three decades.

As ANTaR’s experience in 1997 has illustrated, the dynamic of people’s movements has unique implications for the maintenance, management and sustainability of the movement. The job of community based education and development groups involved in the promotion of the peoples movement strategy is "to coalesce and energise self-managing networks over which it has no control whatever" (Morris:1996). This must be achieved primarily through the power of ideas, values and communication links. Much of the resultant action will be beyond its range of vision, since people’s movement go beyond the project mentality of measurable, containable outcomes.

The special quality of people’s movements is that they are not driven by money or elaborate strategic plans or corporatist, cost-effective organisational structures. Rather peoples’ movements emerge in response to ideas and values and a vision effectively communicated, that inspires action to make the world a better place. By definition, people’s movements demand participative and experiential learning in order to bring about social and cultural transformation. Whether it is in human rights, environment, women’s and peace issues - people’s movements are yet to "win the war". However, it is clear that the historical experience of these movements over the past three decades, indicates that rapid progress has been, and continues to be made. These experiences of countless people and organisations and their independent voluntary action in response to a mobilising vision across national borders, all supporting a shared ideal has been a profound phenomenon of the late 20th Century. Successful movements have managed to unify purpose and direction through collaboration in "continuously shifting networks and coalitions." What they have delivered is social change, providing opportunities for participative action and reflective learning and hopes for long-term social and cultural transformation.

Several key principles emerge from the analysis of responses of participants and educators involved in these programs. These principles are related to:

• the time involved in people’s social and cultural transformation;
• the need to address areas of interpersonal and intrapersonal dissonance;
• the organisational aspects _of social and cultural transformation;
• ethical nature of programs.

The cultural education programs with the inherent tension of adopting a training model because of limitations of time and resources highlights the issue of resourcing such programs so that participants are able to be involved in such experiences over an extended period of time. An extended period of time was found to be integral part of all programs whether they be formal courses, such as the Habilitation program, or the more intensive and extensive immersion programs. The time needed for people to identify with and be transformed by a people’s movement such as the current movement in Australia regarding Native Title is further evidence of educators and leaders needing to be realistic in understanding what is involved in such personal and community transformation.

Participants in these programs need time, personal space and a supportive but challenging learning environment in which they can reflect upon, discuss and address areas of interpersonal and intrapersonal dissonance. Dissonances can occur at both the cognitive and personal levels. The goals of these programs require that such dissonances be addressed holistically so that participants are more able to feel confident that they can contribute to the whole agenda of social and cultural transformation not only within themselves but also at a community level.

Social and cultural transformation is concerned with addressing justice issues at personal, community and organisational levels. The structural nature of justice issues requires participants in these programs to develop the knowledge, attitudes and skills to analyse organisations and institutions and critique their policies and practices to ensure that they are based upon ethical and humane principles. Dissonances between organisations’ practices and their justice principles or codes of ethics are to be part of the agenda of participants involved in social and cultural transformation programs.

Participants are challenged to address justice issues at personal, community and organisational levels. In this process educators and participants in the program need to critique the ethical principles and practices of the program at each of these levels. These principles need to ensure respect for participants, provision of supportive environment for reflection and critique, the fostering of a nurturant community which addresses justice issues both locally and globally.

There is a traditional saying that one cannot discover new lands unless one is prepared to leave the homeland and to lose sight of the shore for a time. Any transformation - be it personal, social, moral, spiritual, environmental - means that the person has accepted the challenge to change.

Change implies a letting go, a transition period, new beginnings and a period of consolidation. It requires that one be a stranger and accept the hospitality and guardedness of hosts and hostesses; informants and gatekeppers.

Programs designed to contribute to social and cultural transformation need to be holistic in their view of people, communities and _organisations. Such a view is based upon an appreciation of the interrelationships between the different elements of the planet and global communities. All members of the planet are to be considered in the development and implementation of policies and procedures with all decisions being based upon a new sense of the spiritual which has been highlighted by the different forms of indigenous spirituality.

Ambrose, Y. (1996). Empowering the Poor: Animation for Social Change. Caritas: India, New Delhi.

Ayers, R.L. (1983). Banking on the Poor. MIT Press:Boston.

Boud, D. (1996). Working with Experience. London: Routledge.

Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. San Fancisco: Jossey Bass.

Brookfield, S. (1986). Understanding and Facilitating Adult Learning. San Fancisco: Jossey Bass.

Foley, G. (ed). (1995). Understanding Adult Education and Training. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

Gittins, A. (1989). Gifts and Strangers. New York: Orbis Books

Giroux, H. (1992). Border Crossings: Cultural Workers and the Politics of Education. New York: Routledge.

Korten, D. (1990). Getting to the 21st Century, Voluntary Action and the Global Agenda. Kumanian Press: Connecticut, U.S.A.

McLaren, P & Leonard P. (1996) Paolo Friere: A Critical Encounter. London: Routledge.

Mezirow, J. & Associates (1990). Fostering Critical Reflection in Adulthood. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Morris, A. (1996). People’s Movements in Modhya Pradesh. Unpublished Manuscript. UTS Sydney.

Nirje, B. (1970). ‘The normalisation principle’. British Journal of Subnormality,16, 62-70.

November, P. (1997). ‘Learning to Teach Experientially: A Pilgrim’s Progress’. Studies in Higher Education,22, 3, 289-299.

Oliver, M. (1996). Understanding Disability. London: Macmillian.

Pettman, J. (1992). Living in the Margins. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.

Rahnema, M. & Bawtree, V. (1997). The Post Development Reader. Zed Books: London

Rioux, M. (1993). Social well-being - a paradigm for reform. Ontario: The Roeher Institute.

Shakespeare, T. (1993). ‘Disabled people’s self-organisation: a new social movement?’ Disability, Handicap and Society, 8, 3, 249 - 64._

Smillie, J. (1995). The Alms Bazaar: Altruism Under Fire - Non-profit Organisations and International Development. IT Publications: London.

Wolfensberger, W. (1972). The normalisation principle in human service systems. Toronto: National Institute of Mental Retardation