home / course outline / general information / facilitators / materials / summaries / links
Session 1 / Session 2 / Session 3 / Session 4 / Session 5 / Session 6 / Session 7 / Session 8

Summary of Session 8

Study Circle RSA1 (Martin Jansen)

1. Preparation for the Study-Circle:

In our situation, 3 co-ordinating groups participated ie. Trade Union Library and Education Centre (TULEC), International Labour Resource and Information Group (ILRIG) and Masabelane -a labour history group. We met a few times after the Seville preparatory meeting. We agreed to target those unions which organise TNC's or deal with the operations of TNC's in South Africa. We deliberately proposed more than twelve participants so that if we had at least a 50% recruitment success rate we would have at least Accordingly we proposed participants be elected from the following sectors to participate in the study circle:

• Finance (1)
• Hotel and Retail (2)
• Petroleum (2)
• Pharmaceutical (1)
• International Harbour Services (1)
• Motor (2)
• Municipal (3)
• Food (2)

The main problem with the recruitment process was that the unions and many of the proposed participants were not fully committed to the project. This can be improved by more direct discussion with the union leadership and structures. We also feel that restructuring the course could improve the seriousness with which the project is treated.

2) STRUCTURE OF THE COURSE:

• Course structure too rigid, which restricted possible engagement and debate on issues which might have arisen from exchanges between participating country study-circles.
• The course is too long and spreadout (8 weeks) which makes consistency by union activists difficult.
• Certain sessions are too long (eg. 1 and 2).
• Links between sessions are clear and logical.
• Sessions 6 and 7 could be merged. The sessions on "What could be done" are too spread out.
• Evaluations are too long and detailed.

3) CONTENT:

• Course content and structure tends to develop a feeling of helplessness, in relation to the all powerfull TNC's.
• We felt that the course itself should have focused more on struggles against TNC's and related problems and how to overcome them.
• Insufficient focus on socialist alternatives to TNC's power, like nationalisation .
• The collective approach to the learning was good.
• Need to make links between activities of TNC's and neo-liberal economics eg. Privatisation.
• Too much emphasis on the power of TNC's instead of the working class and their organisations.
• Course lacked a socialist vision.
• Course should have attempted to linked into existing struggles.
• Lack of collective focus on Programme of Action (together and interactively with other groups).
• Global detector was not a suitable start to the course.
• Course did not focus sufficiently on the issue of ownership and control and its historical basis.
• The course orientation was not sufficiently critical.
• Tasks for participants were too ambitious.

4) EDUCATION MATERIALS:

• Materials were interesting and rich, especially the case studies.
• We should have had more audio-visual material and documents of actual struggle.
• The layout of the materials could be improved.
• Amount of work for the course was not manageable for the target audience.
• Facilitators notes could be improved and directly integrated with participants course material.

5) METHODS:

• Innovating the method was difficult to apply due to time constraints.
• We did not have serious problems with participation by study-circle members other than absenteeism.
• Study-circle method was ideal for collective learning but very difficult to sustain on an ongoing basis.

6) THE GROUP:

• The relationship between the members of the study-circle was good. However it was not possible to develop this after sessions through doing tasks collectively.
• Building cohesion in the group was not really an issue for us.
• We were 3 facilitators who alternated the tasks of facilitation and note taking.

7) INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION:

• We were inspired by some of the groups and found some of the information very enlightening.
• We were disappointed with the lack of participation and poor reporting by most countries especially the western Europeans. Many were also inconsistent. Overally we did not learn enough from and about the situation and problems of other countries.
• There was very little exchange and engagement between countries on the issues.
• The internet was very usefull and clearly has immense potential. However the use and consequent enskilling was confined to the facilitators and not the participants. Everyone does at least have a clear idea of its use and potential.
• Project web-site is fine.

8) THE OUTCOMES AND FUTURE:

• All study-circle members , particularly those who attended most sessions were pleased about what they had learnt in the course. They are very confident about conveying ideas on tackling TNC's and the use of the internet to their unions.
• Despite the limitations of our weekly country reports, participants found the learning about experiences, perspectives and TNC operations in other countries most interesting.
• The course helped us focus us on South African based TNC's and what they were doing internationally eg. De Beers.
• The course did not allow for enskilling participants in the use of the internet.
• Participants clearly understood the role and effects of TNC's.
• It would have been more beneficial if parts of the course were focused on actual current struggles against TNC's taking place.
• Participants felt that they understood better the local effects of global developments.
• We need clearer guidelines for reporting to ensure standard requirements from each country.

9) CO-ORDINATION AND PROBLEMS:

• We met during the evenings which caused problems of tiredness and inconsistent attendance.
• The course was too long (8 sesions).
• The layout of the materials can be improved.
• Participants did not have enough time for tasks and do not live close enough to resources in order to do research.
• Course too rigid and not conducive for exploring fully the different perspectives on TNC's. If it was more flexible it could have allowed for dynamic exchanges between the groups facilitated by the international co-ordinator.

10) OUR PROPOSAL FOR THE NEXT PILOT COURSE:

We recommend that in addition to accomodating some of our criticism on the content of the course that it also be restructured to overcome many of the problems which we experienced. We propose that most of the course be completed within a week long workshop/seminar with practical training for participants in the use of the Internet. This week long course should be run simultaneously in all countries and incorporate the study-circle method as per the existing course. The course should also include exchanges

Report compiled by Martin Jansen, based on the collective views of participants and facilitators. (28/11/97)

Links Conserning this summary

Study Circles other summaries

[Session 1]/ [Session 2]/ [Session 3]/ [Session 4]
[Session 5]/ [Session 6]/ [Session 7]/ [Session 8]
[Evaluation]

Other facilitators evaluations

• GBR1 (Les Ford)
• RSA1 (Martin Jansen)

For problems or questions regarding this site contact [Alana Dave].
Technical problems and ideas contact [Technical staff].
This site was developed with financial assistance from the European Commision's Socrates Programme