Reflect on the nine assumptions on which the interactive model of program planning is grounded (Chapter 2). In “Local practice, local orientation: Grassroots programme planning”, John Egan (2005) offers a critique of program planning models from a community –based perspective. Elaborate on the similarities and differences between the Grassroots’ Model described by Egan and Caffarella and Daffron’s (2013) Interactive approach to program planning.

            In the article, Local practice, local orientation: Grassroots programme planning, one of John Egan’s (2005) students took exception to a discussion about how program objectives are determined. The student was critical of the presumptions about where, how, and by whom objectives were set in program planning. She felt her experiences as a grassroots activist were absent from the literature discussed. Egan’s student described herself as a grassroots activist and a program planner in social justice work.

            Egan describes a grassroots model as a program planning model based on a posteriori understanding of what grassroots program planners do. It puts equal value on the instrumental, contextual and ethical dimensions of grassroots program planning. Five components of the grassroots model are included: (1) coalescence; (2) strategizing; (3) action for change (internal or external); (4) lessons learned; and (5) continuation or cessation.

            The similarities between the grassroots model described by Egan (2005) and the interactive model of program planning for adults are:

– there are specific components of grassroots and interactive

– there are specific approaches (radical and pragmatic) to program planning

– both models can offer perspectives on program planning models which can embrace the work of activists.

– the grassroots model’s five components (coalescence, strategizing, action for change, lessons learned, and continuation or cessation) fit into one or more of the interactive model components.

            The differences between the grassroots model described by Egan (2005) and the interactive model of program planning for adults are:

– there are five components in grassroots compared to 11 components in interactive

– there are two approaches (radical and pragmatic) to grassroots than three approaches (conventional, practical, and radical) to interactive program planning. Radical focuses on social activism, and it can often be complex, iterative, vague, untidy, intense and a non-linear process.

– the interactive model considers the planning context and ethics in the planning process.

– the grassroots model has an assumption that program planning is an activity occurring or originating exclusively in formalized institutions, organizations or groups.

– Bias in interactive planning includes assumptions about the planner, learners, educators, and definition of a genuine program.

            Egan (2005) identified grassroots program planning as legitimate and necessary, and underrepresented. I was surprised at Egan’s comments identifying hierarchical power dynamics, unwillingness for established programs to migrate to more formalized structures and keeping the work outside of mainstreams purview. However, I was pleased to read Egan (2005) say, “Grassroots activism is rooted in the principle of action; grassroots programmes are oriented towards creating local, substantive change as quickly and straightforwardly as possible.”

            (Caffarella, 2009) embraces the fact that these kinds of community or societal level changes can take many years. Therefore, they must focus on program capacity building and sustainability, developed in partnerships with local leadership.

            It seems clear to me the interactive model of program planning can satisfy both the activists and someone like me who wants nothing more than to use the conventional and traditional approach to program planning.

References

Caffarella, R. S., & Daffron, S. R. (2013). Planning programs for adult learners: A practical guide for educators, trainers, and staff developers (3rd ed.). Jossey Bass.

Egan, J. P. (2005). Local practice, local orientation: Grassroots programme planning. Convergence, 38(1), 41–49. https://search-ebscohost-com.libraryservices.yorkvilleu.ca/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=url,cookie,ip,uid&db=ehh&AN=27761029