Farmers field school a strategy By Allah Dad Khan

2. FARMERS FIELD SCHOOLFARMERS FIELD SCHOOL
THETHE
MODERN APPROACH TOMODERN APPROACH TO
AGRICULTURE DEVELOPMENTAGRICULTURE DEVELOPMENT
ByBy
Allah Dad KhanAllah Dad Khan
PPD CMP IIPPD CMP II

3. What is a Farmer Field
School?
• Farmer field schools (FFS) is described as a Platform and “School
without walls” for improving decision making capacity of farming
communities and stimulating local innovation for sustainable
agriculture.
• It is a participatory approach to extension, whereby farmers are
given opportunity to make a choice in the methods of production
through discovery based approach.
• A Field School is a Group Extension Method based on adult
education methods. It teaches basic agro-ecology and management
skills that make farmers experts in their own farms.
• It is composed of groups of farmers who meet regularly during the
course of the growing seasons to experiment as a group with new
production options. Typically FFS groups have 25-30 farmers.

4. What is a Farmer Field School?Contd
• FFS aims to increase the capacity of groups of farmers to test new technologies in
their own fields, assess results and their relevance to their particular circumstances,
and interact on a more demand driven basis with the researchers and extensionists
looking to these for help where they are unable to solve a specific problem amongst
themselves.
• (FFS) is a forum where farmers and trainers debate observations, apply their
previous experiences and present new information from outside the community. The
results of the meetings are management decisions on what action to take.
• Thus FFS as an extension methodology is a dynamic
• process that is practiced and controlled by the farmers to transform their
observations to create a more scientific understanding of the crop / livestock agro-
ecosystem.
• A field school therefore is a process and not a goal.

5. Objectives of FFS
• Broad Objectives
• To bring farmers together to carry out collective and collaborative inquiry with the
purpose of initiating community action in solving community problems
• Specific Objectives
• 1. To empower farmers with knowledge and skills to Make them experts in there own
fields.
• 2. To sharpen the farmers ability to make critical and informed decisions that render
their farming profitable and sustainable.
• 3. To sensitize farmers in new ways of thinking and problem solving
• 4. Help farmers learn how to organize themselves and their communities

6. FFS also contribute to the
following objective;
• 1. Shorten the time it takes to get research results from the stations to
adoption in farmers’ field by involving farmers experimentation early in the
technology development process.
• 2. Enhance the capacity of extension staff, working in collaboration with
researchers, to serve as facilitators of farmers’ experiential learning.
Rather than prescribing blanket recommendation that cover a wide
geographic area but may not be relevant to allfarms within it, the methods
train extensionists and researchers to work with farmers in testing,
assessing and adapting a variety of options within their specific local
conditions.
• 3. Increase the expertise of farmers to make informed decisions on what
works best for them, based on their own observations of experimental
plots in their
• 4. Establish coherent farmer groups that facilitate the work of research
and extension workers, providing the demand of a demand driven system.

7. Origin of FFS
• Almost one third of the world’s population are members of farming households in Asia. Most of
these farming families are small holders. Forty years ago, the Green Revolution was launched with
the aim of improving the productivity of small farmers. By improving access to water, improved
varieties, and other inputs, the Green Revolution helped to double average rice yields between the
1960’s and the 1990’s.
• During the 1970s it became increasingly apparent that pest resistance and resurgence caused by
the indiscriminate use of insecticides posed an immediate threat to the gains of the Green
Revolution. At the same time, research was being conducted that demonstrated the viability of
biological control of major rice pests. However, gaps still existed between the science generated in
research insti
• tutions and common farmer practice conditioned by years of aggressive promotion of pesticide use.
Over the ensuing years, a number of approaches were tried to bring integrated pest management
(IPM) to small farmers - particularly rice farmers - in Asia, with mixed results. Some experts
claimed that the principles of IPM were too complex for small farmers to master, and that
centrally-designed messages were still the only way to convince farmers to change their practices.
• By the end of the 1980s, a new approach to farmer training emerged in Indonesia called the
'Farmer Field School' (FFS). The broad problem which these field schools were designed to address
was a lack of knowledge among Asian farmers relating to agroecology, particularly the relationship
between insect pests and beneficial insects [2].

8. Ffs origin
• The implementation of projects using the FFS approach led to a deeper
understanding of the problem and its causes. It was recognized that sustainable
agricultural development required more than just the acquisition of ecological
knowledge by individual farmers. It also required the development of a capability for
generating, adapting and extending this knowledge within farming communities. The
weakness of this capability in most farming communities is itself an important
problem; one which has often been exacerbated by earlier agricultural development
programmes that fostered a dependency on external sources of expertise.
• This deeper understanding of the problem was first recognized by farmers in
Indonesia who graduated from FFS but realised there was more they could do to
improve rural livelihoods. They started to organise new groups, alliances, networks
and associations, and became involved in planning and implementing their own
interventions. These interventions were highly diverse, ranging from research and
training, to marketing and advocacy work. In response to the activities of these
groups, IPM projects started to support the idea of ‘Community IPM’, which gave
considerable attention to organisational issues rather than focussing solely on
technological and educational aspects of IPM. [3]

9. FFS ORIGIN
• The term “Farmer Fields Schools” came from the Indonesian expression
Sekolah Lapangan meaning just field school.
• The first Field Schools were established in 1989 in Central Java during a
pilot season by 50 plant protection officers to test and develop field
training methods as part of their IPM training of trainers course phase of
the FAO-assisted National IPM Programme. This Programme was prompted
by the devastating insecticide-induced outbreaks of brown plant hoppers
(Nilaparvata lugens) that are estimated to have in 1986 destroyed 20,000
hectares of rice in Java alone.
• .
•

10. INDONESIA IS Pioneer
• The Government of Indonesia’s response was to
launch an emergency training project aimed at
providing 120,000 farmers with field training in
IPM, focused mainly on recording on reducing the
application of the pesticides that weredestroying
the natural insect predators of the brown plant
hopper
• The technicalities of rice IPM were refined in
1986 and 1987 and a core curriculum for,training
farmers was developed in 1988 when the National
IPM Programme waslaunched. It was based not on
instructing farmers what to do but on empowering
themthrough education to handle there own on-
farm decisions, using experiential learning
techniques developed for non-formal adult
education purposes

12. Development of FFS
• Two hundred Field Schools were
established that season with 5000
farmers participating. The following
season in 1990, and an additional 45,000
farmers joined Field Schools run by 450
crop protection officers. This work was
undertaken by the FAO assisted
Indonesian National IPM Programme
(project code). The programme now trains
more than 100,000 farmers per year in
season-long Field Schools and assists with
follow-up activities carried out by the
farmer groups.

14. NOW FFS ARE
• After Asia the FFS approach has been extended to several
countries in Africa and Latin
• American. At the same time there has been a shift from a focus
on a single constraint of a single crop (IPM for rice based
systems) to an emphasis on the multiple aspects of crop production
and management, to ropping systems, to non crop/forest (livestock
production etc) to natural resource management (Soil fertility,
water conservation etc) to Socio-cultural dimensions of community
life (food security &nutrition, savings, health,
• HIV/AIDS, literacy training, livelihoods etc).
• African countries implementing the approach are among others
Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi, Ethiopia,
Ghana, Nigeria, Gambia, Egypt, Lesotho, Swaziland and
Mozambique

15. Putting it in Perspective
• The Target Group- Farmers
– Resource deficient, Illiterate, Traditional, inward looking
• Objectives
– Poverty alleviation.
– Enhanced Productivity
– Reduced Costs
– Social Organization
– Group formation (pressure Groups)
– Conflict Resolution (Debate and consensus building)
– Empowerment and removing dependency
– Setting Research Agendas
– To do own research

16. •Natural Resource Management
•Freshwater use
•Soil Conservation
•Environment protection
•Health consciousness
•Livelihood improvement through Technology Use.
Putting it in Perspective

17. Basic Principles of Farmer Field School
1. Grow a healthy crop
2. Conserve natural
enemies
3. Conduct regular field
observations
4. Farmers understand
ecology and become
experts in their own
fields

18. Basic Aims of Farmer Field School
1. Skill
Development
2. Empowerment
3. Will power
4. Capacity of
Decision Making

19. Technology Transfer
• Products vs Knowledge based Technologies
• Knowledge vs Skill Development
• Learning by doing vs by seeing
• Discovery based learning
• Decision making vs following advice
• Situation based vs Technology based development
• Participatory vs Empty barrel approach

20. Why FFS for Farmers
√ Only farmer can make the “right” Farm Management decision
based on his own perceptions of economics and technologies.
So farmer should be trained in decision-making
√ There are too many farms (5.00 mill) and too few extension
workers to be able to service them all.
A self multiplying training programme for farmers need to
be established.
√ Each farmer field is different in pest, beneficial fauna, soil and
other eco-system elements and cannot be treated on a
generalized technology package message.
√ Technologies requiring decision-making and management need
skill transfer training.
IPM cannot be implemented simply by demonstration, field days, TV
Ads, radio, publications etc.

21. FFS Approach
• The FFS approach was developed by
an FAO project in South East Asia as
a way for small-scale rice farmers to
investigate, and learn, for themselves
the skills required for, and benefits
to be obtained from, adopting on
practices in their paddy fields.

22. Farmer Field School Approach
Farmer Field School is a school without walls.
Farmers and extension workers are students. The
Farmers Field is the class room and the plant is the
teacher. As the plant grows the students gain
knowledge in the light of their observations. The get
together at a fixed time every week once and make
their own decisions based on observations and data
analysis for the health of the plants.

23. TOF
25
Facilitators
10 FFS
3 days TOF per week
2 days FFS per
week
Innovations
•Partial residence
•Single district
participants
Pakistan
Model

24. Non-Formal
education
Specialist/
Facilitators
Researchers/
Subject matter
Specialists
ToF 25
Facilitators
Facilitators are further
divided into 5 groups
each group comprises of 5
facilitators
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5
FFS FFS FFS FFS FFS FFS FFS FFS FFS FFS
Training of Facilitators

25. Basic Aims of Farmer Field School
1. Skill
Development
2. Empowerment
3. Will power
4. Capacity of
Decision Making

26. TOF: Training of Facilitators
Activity guided by a facilitator who has been
trained before hand
CHARACTERISTICS
• One complete growing season
• Learning by doing
• Growing own crop (regular observations on
plant development)
• Carry out FFS
• Group dynamics (serve as preparation for
trainees to conduct FFSs themselves and to
gain facilitation skills)
• Fostering corporate identity (provides joint
spirit which is crucial factor for the success)

27. TOF/FFS Crop Cycle Activity ChartTOF/FFS Crop Cycle Activity Chart
L
Land
Preparation/
Group
formation
AESA
Insect
Zoo
Special
topic
AESA
Insect
Zoo
Group
Dynamics
AESA
Insect
Zoo
Group
Dynamics
S Topic
AESA
Insect Zoo
Group
Dynamics
Data
Analysis

28. Agro-Ecosystem Training
Cucumber Cropping Calendar
Ismailia, Winter Season
October November December January February
Preplant Seedling Growth Flower Fruit-Set Harvest
Climate protect young plants
from strong winds
preferred temperature: day 24
o
/night19
o
rH should not sink below 40-50%
preferred temperature: day 20
o
/night16
o
rH should not sink below 40-50%
preferred temperature:
day 27
o
/night27°
keep tunnels closed for
germination only
ventilate tunnels, particularly after sunrise to avoid water on the leaves at anytime
keep tunnels closed at night
Soil • use fine-structured, well
aerated organic soils
• use 20-40m
3
manure to
increase organic matter
• add 50-100 kg sulfur to
lower alkalinity
• plant 2-3 cm deep
• keep soil warm to assist
germination
remove weeds
Water use well drained soils
with high water holding
capacity
irrigate lightly and regularly, preferably in the morning hours
avoid water logging and periods of water stress
Nutrients
N 50 kg Ammon. Sulfate
P 100 kg Super Phosphate
K
Ca 50 kg Calcium Nitrate
Microelements
Protection Favorable Conditions: Control Measures:
Downy Mildew 20-25
o
C
90-95% rH
Protective:Cu-oxichloride
Curative: systemic
Powd. Mildew 20-25
o
C
75-85% rH Micronized Sulfur/water
Spider Mites warm and dry
Micronized Sulfur
Aphids K-soap
Cultural
Practices
do not grow cucumber
repeatedly in the same
field to avoid nematodes
use 1.5 kg seeds/fd
6-8000plants/fd
1-2 plants/m
2
clip tips to encourage
side shoots
cut out old, diseased
leaves
50 kg Potassium Sulfate 50 kg Potassium Sulfate
50-100 kg Super Phosphate
Use TX6 Nozzles for best coverage
Crop Calendar
 
Water
Beneficials
Cultural
Practices
Nutrients
PestsWeather
Soil
Plant
Ecosystem Analysis

29. Agronomic Data
Weekly
Plant Height
# of leaves/plant
# of flowers/plants
# of fruits/plants
Weight of harvested
fruits
Plant Protection
Data
Weekly
Counting insect
pests
Counting natural
enemies
Diseases incidence
General Data
Weekly
Variety
Days after
planting
Weather
conditions
Soil
conditions
Agro-ecosystem Analysis (AESA)Agro-ecosystem Analysis (AESA)

30. FarmerField
Schools Give a man a fish
…...and feed him for a day
Teach him how to fish
…..and feed him for life

31. Updated Crop wise FFS information in Pakistan
Up to Dec-2007
CROP FFS Farmer Trained %
Cotton 3,768 70,603 67.2
Wheat 22 457 0.4
Vegetables 670 16152 15.4
Date Palm 61 1159 1.1
Mango 304 7224 6.9
Citrus 198 4950 4.7
Apple 31 565 0.5
Sugarcane 11 220 0.2
Rice 137 3612 3.4
Live-Stock 9 135 0.1
Grand Total 5,211 105,077 100.0

32. FFS APRROACH WORK AREA
• Rice
• Cotton
• Vegetables
• Sugarcane
• Wheat
• Maize
• Fruits
• Livestock
• Poultry
• Enterprises
• Health
• Teachers
• Others
• FFS
(Men)
• WOS
(Women)
• CEC
(Children)
• FFFS
(Whole
Family)
MODELMODEL AGRI. CROPAGRI. CROP COMODITIESCOMODITIES

33. Characteristics of the Farmer Field
School Approach
• Farmers as Experts.
• Farmers ‘learn-by-doing’ i.e. they carry out for
themselves the various activities related to the
particular farming/forestry practice they want to
study and learn about. This could be related to
annual crops, or livestock/fodder production.
• The key thing is that farmers conduct their own
field studies. Their training is based on
comparison studies (of different treatments) and
field studies that they, not the
extension/research staff conduct. In so doing
they become experts on the particular practice
they are investigating.

34. Characteristics of the Farmer
Field School Approach
• The Field is the Learning Place. All
learning is based in the field. The maize
field,
• banana plantation, or grazing area is where
farmers learn. Working in small subgroups
• they collect data in the field, analyze the
data, make action decisions based on they
• analyses of the data, and present their
decisions to the other farmers in the field
school
• for discussion, questioning and refinement.

35. Characteristics of the Farmer
Field School Approach contd
• Extension Workers as Facilitators Not Teachers.
• The role of the extension worker is very much that of a facilitator rather
than a conventional teacher. Once the farmers know what it is they have to
do, and what it is that they can observe in he field, the
• extension worker takes a back seat role, only offering help and guidance
when asked to do so.
• Presentations during group meetings are the work of the farmers not the
extension worker, with the members of each working group assuming
responsibility for presenting their findings in turn to their fellow farmers.
The extension worker may take part in the subsequent discussion sessions
but as a contributor, rather than leaders, in arriving at an agreed
consensus on what action needs to be taken at that time.

36. Characteristics of the Farmer
Field School Approach contd
• Scientists/Subject Matter Specialists Work With Rather
than Lecture Farmers: The
• role of scientists and subject matter specialists is to
provide backstopping support to the
• members of the FFS and in so doing to learn to work in a
consultative capacity with
• farmers. Instead of lecturing farmers their role is that of
colleagues and advisers who
• can be consulted for advice on solving specific problems,
and who can serve as a
• source of new ideas and/or information on locally unknown
technologies

37. Characteristics of the Farmer
Field School Approach contd
• The Curriculum is integrated.
• The curriculum is integrated. Crop
husbandry, animal husbandry,
horticulture, land husbandry are
considered together with ecology,
economics, sociology and education to
form a holistic approach. Problems
confronted in the field are the
integrating principle.

38. Characteristics of the Farmer
Field School Approach contd
• Training Follows the Seasonal Cycle. Training is
related to the seasonal cycle of the practice
being investigated. For annual crops this would
extend from land preparation to harvesting.
• For fodder production would include the dry
season to evaluate the quantity and quality at a
time of year when livestock feeds are commonly in
short supply. For tree production, and
conservation measures such as hedgerows and
grass strips, training would need to continue over
several years for farmers to see for themselves
the full range of costs and benefits

39. Characteristics of the Farmer
Field School Approach contd
• Regular Group Meetings. Farmers meet at
agreed regular intervals. For annual crops
• such meetings may be every 1 or 2 weeks
during the cropping season. For other
• farm/forestry management practices the
time between each meeting would depend
on
• what specific activities need to be done, or
be related to critical periods of the year
when
• there are key issues to observe and
discuss in the field

40. Characteristics of the Farmer
Field School Approach contd
• Learning Materials are Learner
Generated. Farmers generate their own
learning
• materials, from drawings of what they
observe, to the field trials themselves.
These
• materials are always consistent with local
conditions, are less expensive to develop,
are
• controlled by the learners and can thus be
discussed by the learners with others.

41. Characteristics of the Farmer
Field School Approach contd
• Group Dynamics/Team Building. Training includes
communication skills building, problem solving,
leadership and discussion methods. Farmers
require these skills. Successful activities at the
community level require that farmers can apply
effective leadership skills and have the ability to
communicate their findings to others.
• Farmer Field Schools are conducted for the
purpose of creating a learning environment in
which farmers can master and apply specific land
management skills. The emphasis is on empowering
farmers to implement their own decisions in their
own fields

42. tot
• Training of Trainers (technically sound facilitator training)Farmer Field
Schools
• - basic field course
• - group organisation
• - research methodsCommunity Action
• - clubs, etc.
• - farmer to farmer study
• - farmer forumsActivity flow in IPM programmes
• Test and validate: The Field School method proposes that no technology
will necessarily work in a new location, and therefore must be tested,
validated, and adapted locally. Thus, IPM methods are always tested in
comparison with conventional practices. The end result is that beneficial
aspects of IPM are incorporated into existing practices. There are no “IPM
Farmers”, and “IPM adoption rate” is around zero in good Field Schools.
There are, however, better farming practices and high adaptation rates.

43. Hands-on learning
activities:
• Beside season-long field studies, the Field
School also uses other hands on learning
activities to focus on specific concepts.
“Zoos” in which insect and disease life
cycles can be observed more easily on
potted plants, and controlled testing of
pesticide toxicity with chicks are such
activities. These methods also provide
ways for farmers to continue studying
after the Field School. Farmers are able
to use the same methods to help other
farmers to learn about IPM as well.

44. Hands-on learning
activities:
: All Field Schools include field based pre-
and post-tests for the participants.
Farmers with high attendance rates and
who master the field skill tests are
awarded graduation certificates. For many
farmers, the Field School is the first time
that they have graduated from any school
or received a certificate in recognition of
their farming skills, a point of great pride
to many families.

45. A process, not a goal:
• It must be remembered that Field Schools
are a method to provide farmers with a
learning environment so that they can
achieve the goal of reducing inputs, and
increasing yields and profits. In some
programmes the number of Field Schools,
or expansion of programmes becomes the
overwhelming target and success criteria
that quality suffers and the initial goals
are not met

46. “Work self out of a
job”:
• The facilitator in a Field School
attempts to work him/herself out of
a job but building the capacity of the
group. Indeed, many Fields Schools
take over the job of the extension
facilitator by doing Farmer to
Farmer training and other local
activities to strengthen other
members of the community.

47. Follow-up:
• All Field Schools normally have at least one follow-up season, the
intensity of which will be determined by the motivation of the
Field School participants, time constraints of participants and
facilitator, and to some extent - funding. Follow-up has been known
to be a little as monthly support sessions for farmers to discuss
their own problems in implementing IPM, to as much as farmers
running a complete Field School for other farmers. Often farmers
agree to repeat the Field School process for one more season to
verify findings, or to repeat the process of the Field School on a
new crop to learn IPM for the next crop. Some groups begin to
form associations, people’s organisations, and clubs that are
officially or un-officially organised and carry on studying as a
group. The facilitator usually becomes less central in the process
if he/she has done a good job, more often providing some technical
backstopping and stimulation for the group.

48. Integrated Pest Management -
Narrow and Wide Views
• In 1957, “Integrated Pest Management” was first proposed as a
concept which promoted the use of biological control (mostly
free), good agronomic practices (good for crop yields), and other
means before investing in chemical pesticides (costly, destroy
natural enemies, create environmental and health social costs) to
control pests. At that time, as now, many farmers used pesticides
on a calendar basis, governments promoted their use, and they
were considered a essential aspect of “modern” agriculture.
Sometime later, largely due to basic misuse of “economic
thresholds”, IPM also began to be defined as “spray only when the
pest exceeds the threshold”. The original concept was to promote
good practices, the second concept was useful for selling
pesticides.
• A wider view of IPM has been developed in recent years as a result
of farmer focused Farmer Field School programmes. The basis of
this view is derived from the original biologically intensive IPM
concepts. Academic definitions are replaced with understandable
straightforward principles;

49. Comparison between FFS and conventional T&V
Comparison between FFS and conventional T&V Com
PARAMETER FARMER FIELD SCHOOL CONVENTIONAL T & V
1. Learning method By doing, experimenting,
participating, discovering
By listening ( Element of
experimenting and
discovering still absent)
2. Training venue Subject of learning (field, crop,
animal etc)
Training shade or tree
3. Duration Complete study (Season long
cycle)
One or two sessions
4. Extension Agent and
their role
Trained expert. Spends most of
their time assisting farmers
convince themselves about a
given technology
Jack of all trades. Spends
most of their time trying to
convince farmers

50. Comparison between FFS and conventional T&V
Comparison between FFS and conventional T&V Com
PARAMETER FARMER FIELD SCHOOL CONVENTIONAL T & V
5.Farmer and his/her
role
Participator, Contributor,
Decision-maker.
Assumption- farmer is a cup of
tea full of knowledge but needs
steering.
Listener. Management
decisions usually
prescribed.
Assumption- farmer is an
empty cup of tea that needs
to be filled
6. Qualification to
participate
None discriminatory Need to be able to write with
some intensive programmes
(Master farmer training)
7. Programme Planning Done and agreed upon by/with
farmers. Extension agent
commits themselves
Office work. Extension
commitment not quaranteed
8. Evaluation and
adoption
Together with farmers. Adoption
is the choice of the farmer
Office. Usually
persuasion/force

51. STEPS IN CONDUCTING FFS (CLASSICALL APPROACH)
There are 8 key classical steps in conducting FFS
• 1. Ground working activities
• 2. Training of Facilitators
• 3. Establishment and running of FFS
• 4. Evaluating PTDs
• 5. Field days
• 6. Graduations
• 7. Graduations
• 8. Follow up by facilitators

52. 1. Groundworking
activities
• Identify focus enterprises
• · Identify priority problems
• · Identify solutions to identified
problems
• · Establish farmers’ practices
• · Identify field school participants
• · Identify field school sites

53. 2. Training of
Facilitators
• Crop/livestock production and protection technologies
• · Field guides on how to effectively deliver crop/livestock
production and
• protection topics using non-formal education methods (NFE)
• · Participatory technology development (PTD) with emphasis
on the
• approaches and developing guidelines on conducting PTD
• · Non-formal education methods with emphasis on what,
when and how to
• use NFE in FFS
• · Group dynamics
• · Special topics to be addressed at every stage of training.

54. 3.Establishment and
running of FFS
• With the guidance of facilitators, the group
meets regularly throughout the
• season, and
• · Carries out experiments and field trials related
to the selected enterprise.
• · Implement PTDs (Test and Validate)
• · Conduct AESA and Morphology and collect data
• · Process and present the data
• · Group dynamics
• · Special topics

55. 4. Evaluating PTDs
• Analyse collected data
• · Interpret
• · Economic analysis
• · Presentation

56. 5. Field days
• During the period of running the FFS,
field days are Organized where the
• rest of the farming community is
invited to share what the group has
• learned in the FFS.
• · 1or 2 per season
• · Farmers themselves facilitate
during this day

57. 6. Graduations
• This activity marks the end of the
season long FFS. The farmers,
• facilitators and the coordinating
office usually organize it.
• · Farmers are awarded certificates

58. 7. Farmer run FFS
• FFS farmer graduates now have the
knowledge and confidence to run
their
• own FFS.

59. 8. Follow up by
facilitators
• Occasionally the core facilitators will
follow-up on schools that have
• graduated preferably on monthly
basis. The core facilitators also
backstop
• on-going farmer run FFS.

60. Local funding goal:
• Some of the Field School activities focus
on future planning and funding raising.
There is an explicit goal for groups to
become independent and seek local support
separate from national funding. In some
cases this has meant that farmers each
bring a bowl of uncooked rice to a meeting
to but together for snack money, or as
much as writing a proposal and receiving a
funding grant from government or NGO
sources. In national programmes, it is
desirable to have funds available directly
to farmer groups that request support for
their local activities.

61. Training and Visitation
comparison with Field
Schools
Point Classical Training and Visit Farmer Field School evolution
Field-level extension
officer’s job
Deliver pre-packaged “messages” from a
research-extension linkage. Primary job is
information transfer, not technical
expertise, which is reserved for Specialists
not at the field level.
Technical Facilitator: Every FFS trainer should have
basic technical skills (at least able to grow the
crop, or rear animals, etc.). Secondly, every FFS
trainer should have group oriented training and
management skills. These skills are typically
learned in a season-long Training of Trainers
where they learn what they will teach.

62. Experience of
trainers
Variable, but most often lacking basic farming
skills and experience. Field level staff
given communication skills.
Master trainer with farming experience gained during
Training of Trainer programmes in which each
person is required to grow crops and carry out
field studies so that they test what they will use
in Field Schools later.
Information Primarily top-down messages from distant
research stations about situations
presumed to be representative of farms.
Recommendations are tested against conventional
practices and new information about to the site
emerges. Promotes local creativity.
Contact point Contact farmers that are supposed to train other
farmers by passing on external
information.
Groups of interested farmers that farm on a daily basis
through generating local study circles.
Time frame Continuously, forever, on a two-week regular
cycle not based on any natural phenology.
A pre-defined period. Usually on a weekly basis over
a season. FFS may be longer than a season, but
never less than one season integrated with the
crop phenology.

63. Pedagogy Training: Use of static pre-determined
demonstrations and in field examples to
show and tell.
Education: A focus on underlying principles that
allow farmers to derive and adopt
recommendations within their own dynamic
their ecological, social, and economic realities.
Evaluation At best indirect: based on measuring delivery
and funds spent.
Pre- and post-testing. Community self-surveying.
Identifiable indicators defined in terms of
system-critical factors. Internal rates of return.
Training site Demonstration field, training centers, home of
Contact Farmer, static not revisited in time
or observed in terms of any on going
process.
A shared field in which the FFS uses to dynamically
validate and test new management methods over
the entire season (e.g. decisions during one part
of the season can be verified by yield cuts)
Long term objectives Increase food production, etc. “Farmer’s
attitudes, lack of knowledge, and practices
are an object/constraint of a development
process”
Nurture groups that will continue to address
agricultural and community problems on their
own and with technical backstopping.
“Farmers as the subject of development”
Research Primary source of information is research
stations assumed to develop representative
models that are widely applicable.
A process and consequence of local testing and
within-community/ecosystem learning.

64. Description of a typical Farmer
Field School
• The Farmer Field School (FFS) is a group-based
learning process. During the FFS, farmers carried
out experiential learning activities that helped
them understand the ecology of their rice fields.
These activities involve simple experiments,
regular field observations and group analysis. The
knowledge gained from these activities enables
participants to make their own locally-specific
decisions about crop management practices. This
approach represents a radical departure from
earlier agricultural extension programmes, in
which farmers were expected to adopt
generalized recommendations that had been
formulated by specialists from outside the
community.
.

65. Description of a typical Farmer
Field School
• The basic features of a typical rice IPM Farmer Field School are as follows[4] [5]:
• The IPM Field School is field based and lasts for a full cropping season.
• A rice FFS meets once a week with a total number of meetings that might range from
at least 10 up to 16 meetings.
• The primary learning material at a Farmers Field School is the rice field.
• The Field School meeting place is close to the learning plots often in a farmer’s home
and sometimes beneath a convenient tree.
• FFS educational methods are experiential, participatory, and learner centred.
• Each FFS meeting includes at least three activities: the agro-ecosystem analysis, a
“special topic”, and a group dynamics activity.
• In every FFS, participants conduct a study comparing IPM with non-IPM treated
plots.
• An FFS often includes several additional field studies depending on local field
problems.
• Between 25 and 30 farmers participate in a FFS. Participants learn together in small
groups of five to maximise participation.
• All FFSs include a Field Day in which farmers make presentations about IPM and the
results of their studies

66. Description of a typical Farmer
Field School
• A pre- and post-test is conducted as part of every Field School for
diagnostic purposes and for determining follow-up activities.
• The facilitators of FFS’s undergo intensive season-long residential training
to prepare them for organising and conducting Field Schools.
• Preparation meetings precede an FFS to determine needs, recruit
participants, and develop a learning contract.
• Final meetings of the FFS often include planning for follow-up activities.
• Although Farmer Field Schools were designed to promote IPM,
empowerment has an essential feature from the beginning. The curriculum
of the FFS was built on the assumption that farmers could only implement
IPM once they had acquired the ability to carry out their own analysis,
make their own decisions and organise their own activities. The
empowerment process, rather than the adoption of specific IPM
techniques, is what produces many of the developmental benefi

68. 01/08/2007 69
Citrus FFS OrchardsCitrus FFS Orchards

69. 01/08/2007 70
Visit of Secretary Agriculture NWFP to Citrus FFS
at Swabi

70. 01/08/2007 71

72. 04/25/15 73
Visit of Secretary AgricultureVisit of Secretary Agriculture
NWFP to Citrus FFS at NowsheraNWFP to Citrus FFS at Nowshera

73. 01/08/2007 74
Tomato ToF Dargai, M. Agency 2006-07Tomato ToF Dargai, M. Agency 2006-07

76. THANKTHANK
YOUYOU