Message-ID: <35A5DBE4.16CCC77B@mail.ptl.com.mt> Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 11:16:20 +0200 From: mailto:vdimitroff@MAIL.PTL.COM.MT Subject: Assisting development (was: Bad experiences..) To: mailto:DEVEL-L@AMERICAN.EDU
Uwe's message on Thursday supported my appeal for positive experience and idea sharing.Dr Wandemberg's message points to an interesting article, and I assume our debate is largely about the 'Participation Typology' laid out therein (pasive>>informative>>..etc..up to >>active self-mobilization). The ultimate type (7) does not, however, entirely reject the usefulness of external agents. IMHO it is more viable when a balance is found and such external efforts are harmoniously blended into the internally controlled active brew. Did the SUBIR project result in any real policies reflecting the suggested assumption(s)? What was the actual outcome of this 8-year project? How does the result look when exhibited next to the funds spent?
Can other list members share experiences from other projects, preferably in a less academic/scholarly and more practical light?
V. Dimitroff
- - - - - - - - - Uwe wrote:
> finally this discussion is coolong down and becoming
> more reasonable. Great! How nice would it be, if
> somebody could begin to provide the answers to the
> below questions. Who is the first?
>> OK, 'donors' sending a handful of, ehm.. advisors
>> packaged with their money so that it is better spent
>> ('better' may be in the donors' own eyes) DOESN'T work.
>> So, what DOES? Can anyone suggest from experience?
JC Wandemberg Ph.D. wrote:
> You can visit http://web.nmsu.edu/~juwandem/seminar.html
> for the hypotheses behind my Ph.D. dissertation.
> These (hypotheses) were strongly supported (r2=.73).