S
tr
engthening C
ommunit
y L
ear
ning C
en
tr
es thr
ough Link
ages and Net
w
or
ks: A S
yn
thesis of Six C
oun
tr
y R
epor
ts
be NFE teachers or volunteers; there is no lack of goodwill and commitment, but often
the specific skills of handling adult groups in an appropriate pedagogical fashion are
not fully transmitted or grasped. The way to overcome this obstacle is through more
systematic training, even short term, of these CLC workers.
There is also the concern about what one country report calls the "successor generation."
The worry is that once the original founder of the CLC moves on, the successor may
not have the same passion for the CLC, the same high standing in the community, or
the same breadth of contacts. In the older CLCs, it may well be that successor leaders
who have not been able to match their predecessors have already caused a lowering
of the visibility and, hence, the service potential of the CLCs. This is also true for staff, in
general, especially when a significant core is working on a voluntary basis or for very
low pay. It requires a constant effort to replace these workers with more volunteers
and people willing to sacrifice financially for CLCs. In some cases, the recruitment for
successor generations becomes harder and harder.
Organization and Communication
There was a common concern over the need to improve the efficiency of the CLC's
operations. Reports called for better control mechanisms and greater vigilance. The
conduct of meetings is not always efficient; often the same louder voices dominate
and prevent the rest of the membership from expressing their views. The proper
legal and policy frameworks for their operations are not always clear, and sometimes
there are even inconsistencies between existing policies. Communication is a major
concern; not just within CLCs or with partners in their network, but particularly with
other CLCs.
An interesting dilemma arose in this area of intra-CLC relations. Those responsible for
clusters of CLCs bemoan the great diversity of these relations and called for some sort
of standardization to make cooperation, communication, and materials development
and sharing a bit easier. On the other hand, they ceaselessly advocate that each CLC
must be driven by the needs of each particular local community and their specific
needs, which naturally evolves CLCs quite different from each other. So there is a
simultaneous desire for uniformity and diversity. Of course, the balance can and should
be set between the two.
Community Acceptance and Relevance
It turns out that community acceptance in not an automatic thing. In the beginning,
there is naturally a lack of understanding or appreciation of the role of the CLC at
various levels in and outside the community. Conservative or traditional elements
in the community may have a difficult time accepting a new institution that may
challenge their culture or beliefs. A newly established CLC needs to earn, sometimes
slowly, the respect and trust of the community. Even after the general community is
won over, there is the matter of winning over the trust and confidence of the political