Gender-responsive Researchers Equipped for Agricultural Transformation, Level 2.: Trainer’s Manual for the Gender-Responsive Plant Breeding Course

1 The Gender-Responsive Plant Breeding Course (Level 2)

This section describes the delivery of the first GREAT Level 2 cours e that led to the development of this manual. We give this overview to orient potential implementers of this material to the process we followed, in order to give context and grounding.

Target Course Participants

The course targeted participants with previous exposure to introductory courses on gender and plant breeding. Minimum qualifications were a masters degree in a biophysical science discipline such as plant breeding, crop science, soil science, or plant pathology, along with social science-related disciplines such as economics, social anthropology, gender studies, and agricultural extension – among others. In this case, the course targeted GREAT fellows (participants who had taken the Level 1 GREAT course). We recruited interdisciplinary teams of fellows (both biophysical and social scientists) that demonstrated application of Level 1 learning through publications and other related knowledge products. The teams were working on ongoing plant breeding and seed systems research programs in their organizations. The ideal number of participants for such training is between 25 and 40 individuals, and the recommended participant-to-trainer ratio is 1:8.

Trainer Team

The trainer team was multidisciplinary. Prerequisite cross-cutting competencies required for all trainers include: 1) technical knowledge and skills in gender, diversity, sociocultural, and economic contexts in SSA, agriculture, ICT, and computer software for networking, training, and research; 2) adult learning methods and the ability to apply principles of feminist pedagogy to the training design and delivery. In addition to these, core subject-matter competencies required for particular sessions are described in the plans for the respective sessions.

Details of the GREAT course trainer competency framework can be found in Mangheni et al. (2021), pages 46–47.

Reference

Mangheni, M.N., Boonabaana, B., Asiimwe, E., Tufan, H.A., Jenkins, D. and Garner, E. (2021) Developing a competency framework for trainers of gender-responsive agricultural research training programs. Journal of Gender, Agriculture and Food Security 6(2), 41–57.

Course Delivery Approach

All the sessions were delivered virtually through the Zoom platform, due to travel restrictions imposed by COVID-19. To suit the online delivery, the trainer team adjusted the content and delivery mode to promote virtual interaction. In this case, the approach involved the use of less dense material and increased participant engagement opportunities, such as using innovative interactive methods like experience sharing in plenary and break-out groups, live quizzes, polls, and question-and-answer approaches. Providing handouts for self-paced independent/asynchronous learning through relevant platforms (e.g., Google Classroom) was helpful before live, shortened, sessions.

Course Structure

The Level 2 course was divided into two parts. Part 1, comprising sessions 1–10 (9 days), targeted both biophysical and social scientists, while Part 2, comprising sessions 11–12 (4 days) targeted only social scientists (and was optional for biophysical scientists). Please note that sessions lasted 3 hours per day. Fig. 1 presents the sessions and corresponding learning objectives. Users may note that Level 1 training covered research design and research methods, while the Level 2 course focused more on conceptual deepening in key topics and targeted methods. This was intentional and based on needs assessment and gaps identified following Level 1 training delivery for several cycles.

Fig. 1. Linkage between course sessions and objectives

Editable version here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_1LmyoJQbBMQhxLkboQuIhdYmhbLTF_otSJtz-aJH5A/edit.

Level 2 aimed at deepening participants’ knowledge and skill in GRAR through testing two separate strands of the training model – i.e., theory only and theory plus practice. The first group of participants attended only the Level 2 training, while the second received both the training and further coaching through participation in research clusters to enable the practical application of the learning. The research clusters focused on resilience and G+ breeding tools for teams of biophysical and social scientists, and women’s empowerment and social norms for social scientists. The year-long research clusters focused on strengthening foundational research skills, ensuring coherent and logical research outcomes with clear connections between literature, concepts, methodologies, data collection, analysis, and presentation of findings. The fellows were teamed with senior researchers from Makerere University, Cornell University, the CGIAR, and the NARES who provided field-level coaching and mentorship to achieve in-depth capacity development from research conceptualization to field data collection, analysis to publication. The clusters were confined to a specific geographic location within the same country. Sample publications produced by research cluster teams include Frimpong et al. (2023) and Olaosebikan et al. (2023). For practitioners aiming to use this manual, the additional mentored research component may or may not be possible to implement, but our experience showed the addition of applied research to Level 1, followed by Level 2 training to be more effective.

References

Frimpong, B.N., Asante, B.O., Asante, M.D., Ayeh, S.J., Sakyiamah, B., Nchanji, E., Mujawamariya, G., Zenna, N. and Tufan, H. (2023) Identification of gendered trait preferences among rice producers using the G+ breeding tools: implications for rice improvement in Ghana. Sustainability 15(11), 8462. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15118462

Olaosebikan, O., Bello, A., Utoblo, O., Okoye, B., Olutegbe, N., Garner, E., Teeken, B., Bryan, E., Forsythe, L., Cole, S., Kulakow, P., Egesi, C., Tufan, H. and Madu, T. (2023) Stressors and resilience within the cassava value chain in Nigeria: preferred cassava variety traits and response strategies of men and women to inform breeding. Sustainability 15(10), 7837. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15107837

Course Sequencing (Road Map)

Fig. 2 outlines the Level 2 course sequencing. This road map is intended to give trainers delivering the course, as well as trainees on Day 1, a broad overview of the course structure. The road map also color codes in different sections the different intended outcomes from each module, giving trainers and trainees a sense of the pedagogical flow of the course. The session numbering is important as sessions sequentially build on one another and this should be followed on delivery without removing any sections, to ensure flow.

Fig. 2. Course sequencing (road map).

Editable version here: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1xP6lXQ3TJXKPcawaa0nJq8aAC1OAR3fT/edit#slide=id.g25ad440a1db_0_192

Readers should note that Part 2 is targeted only at social scientists, so the participation of biophysical scientists is optional.

Format of the Sessions

Each session is presented as a section authored by the respective trainers who designed and implemented it. The manual presents information for each session in a standardized format.

Session plan and description

This section presents a descriptive table of what participants should expect to learn from the session and outlines the learning outcomes. Sharing learning outcomes with participants also helps in wrapping up at the end of each day and tracking learning progress.

Effective utilization of the manual requires thorough preparation by both trainers and participants. The table contains pre-session preparation by the trainer and participants, topic content outline, total duration, allocation of time to each content area, and key references. For some sessions that require a unique room set-up, we share some suggestions. The suggested duration of the session is based on past experience. However, the time for an activity may vary depending on the number of participants and other factors. It is recommended that the session duration be adapted to the learning pace of the