DEVC 10 Module 5 PDF

COPYRIGHT NOTICE This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of University of the Philippines pursuant to PART IV: The Law on Copyright of Republic Act (RA) 8293 or the “Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines.” The University does not authorize you to reproduce...

COPYRIGHT NOTICE This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of University of the Philippines pursuant to PART IV: The Law on Copyright of Republic Act (RA) 8293 or the “Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines.” The University does not authorize you to reproduce or communicate this material. The material may contain works that are subject to copyright protection under RA 8293. Any reproduction and/or communication of the material by you may be subject to copyright infringement and the copyright owners have the right to take legal action against such infringement. Do not remove this notice.  65 MODULE 5 THE MEANINGS OF DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION1 INTRODUCTION When someone asks you about DevCom, you probably stammer or find it hard to explain. Do not worry; many DevCom students struggle to look for the right words to say when asked, “Ano ‘yung DevCom?” Some try to explain DevCom by quoting one definition: “Ah, ano po, it is the art and science of human communication….” I have a few students saying that DevCom is “parang Mass Comm” or “Mass Comm with a heart.” Those familiar with the other names of DevCom sometimes cite these names when they introduce the field to others: communication for development (C4D); communication for social change (CFSC); empowerment communication; and media, communication, and development (MCD). Articulate ones go further, describing the field as the strategic application of communication in improving human lives and communities. In this module, you will learn about the three definitions of DevCom formulated by the person now recognized as the mother of the field, Dr. Nora Cruz Quebral. Did Quebral mention mass communication in her definition? No. DevCom is definitely not mass communication, but DevCom graduates can land jobs in mass media companies. In fact, many alumni of the College of Development Communication (CDC) have been employed as writers, reporters, editors, producers, and hosts of radio and television programs of big and small media corporations, and news and feature writers of major daily newspapers. Why is this so if DevCom is not Mass Comm? Let us not answer this question at this point, but you will surely know later what makes DevCom unique as a field of communication. If not Mass Comm with a heart, is it communication with a heart, as several students say? Let us say that DevCom has a heart for humankind and Mother Earth. However, it also has the soul, the spirit, and the energy to help make them better. As Quebral herself always says, DevCom is not merely a profession, but a lifetime commitment to service. It is a vocation with social advocacy, aimed at benefitting those who possess less of what it means to live decently as humans and dedicated to the awakening and empowerment of groups and communities that are marginalized in one way or another. Since its humble beginnings in the 1950s mainly as an area practice focused on agricultural communication, DevCom has already evolved to what it is now—a dynamic, strong, and innovative field of study and practice that has served not just the Filipinos but other people in various marginalized areas of the world. It changes over time just as society transforms, but it has never been “debunked” and “archaic.” Its practitioners have been described as “cute” in many ways, but their College of Development Communication Module 5 University of the Philippines Los Baños [The Meanings of Development Communication] © CDC, UPLB 2020 (Revised 1st Semester, AY 2024-2025) DEVC 10  66 ideas, methods, and strategies in applying communication in and for development have never been outdated. DevCom exists in many other parts of the world with different names and contexts, but all the concepts, methods, and principles it embraces have always been directed towards improving the quality of human life in all its aspects. ____________________________ 1 Much of this module's content was based on the drafts of and the published version of Daya’s (2019) article. OBJECTIVES At the end of this module, you should be able to: Cite various milestones in DevCom’s history in the Philippines; Explain the most recent definition of DevCom vis-à-vis the old definitions; Identify the actors, goals, messages, and outcomes of DevCom in a development project; and Use communication as a framework in analyzing a problem or issue associated with underdevelopment in your community. ACTIVITY Watch DevCom: Los Baños Style, a video featuring the “mother of development communication,” Dr. Nora Cruz Quebral, and the field of study and practice that started in Los Baños. Use the following link to access the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3ZhM5kdu7c. DISCUSSION: KEY POINTS The DevCom Story: Roots in Agricultural Communication The first scholar who conceptualized DevCom as an academic field was Dr. Nora Cruz Quebral of University of the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB). She presented and explained the very first definition of DevCom in a symposium on agricultural development in UPLB in 1971, describing DevCom as a distinct field of communication that aims to “promote social equality and the unfolding of human potential” and which has “bias for the poor who make up the majority in any developing country” (Quebral, 1988, p. 28). The practice of DevCom in the Philippines, however, preceded the outset of an academic field on it. While the term DevCom was coined and defined by Quebral in the academe in 1971, DevCom practice started to take shape and grow in the Philippines much earlier—in the 1950s, with Quebral as one of the prime movers (Manyozo, 2006, p. 79). It was in 1954 when the Office of Extension and Publications (OEP) was established under the UP College of Agriculture (UPCA) “to prepare popular articles and extension materials, such as leaflets and College of Development Communication Module 5 University of the Philippines Los Baños [The Meanings of Development Communication] © CDC, UPLB 2020 (Revised 1st Semester, AY 2024-2025) DEVC 10  67 brochures designed to teach farmers modern farming practices” (Librero, 2008, p. 5). The creation of OEP ushered in the academic institutionalization of DevCom. In 1962, the Department of Agricultural Information and Communications (DAIC) was created out of the OEP as an academic unit under UPCA. It was renamed the Department of Agricultural Communications (DAC) in 1968. With the conceptual foundations of DevCom already laid out by Nora C. Quebral in 1971, DAC was transformed into the Department of Development Communication (DDC) in 1973 under the College of Agriculture (CA) of the now autonomous UPLB. DDC was elevated to an institute in 1987, still under CA, and later became a college separate from CA in 1998. Now the College of Development Communication (CDC), its mission is to “nurture and advance development communication scholarship and praxis among students, educators, and practitioners through participatory and inclusive engagements” (CDC, 2020, para. 2). (Note that UPLB became an autonomous university under the UP System only in 1972.) The brief institutional history of DevCom described above would tell us that as an academic field, DevCom has its roots in agricultural communication, which was from 1962 to 1973 one of the major areas of the Bachelor of Science in Agriculture program of CA in the University of the Philippines (UP) (Librero, 2008). In 1973, the degree program Master of Science (MS) in Agriculture Communication was renamed MS in Development Communication (Quebral, 1988, p. 158). On March 11, 1974, the University Council of UPLB approved the first-ever undergraduate degree program in DevCom—the Bachelor of Science in Development Communication (BSDC), offered under CA (Quebral, 1975a, p. 25). The Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) degree in Development Communication was approved in the same year (Librero, 2008). Since then, DevCom has continued carving a place for itself in the academe, spreading from UP to other higher education institutions (HEI) in the Philippines. Today, CDC has already been recognized thrice as a center of excellence (COE) by the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) of the Philippines. Its BSDC program has also been accredited by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations University Network (AUN) in 2014. Some of its graduates helped establish DevCom degree programs, and many have been teaching DevCom courses in other HEIs in the Philippines. At least one course on DevCom is taken by students of the Bachelor of Arts in Communication program offered by HEIs. As of 2021, 24 state and four private HEIs in the Philippines have undergraduate DevCom programs. In addition to BSDC, UPLB has also been offering master’s and doctoral degree programs in DevCom. Outside the academe, many development-oriented government and nongovernment institutions in the country have communication units that practice DevCom. Devcom graduates work in many of these institutions. Other DevCom professionals also work in nongovernment organizations, mass media companies, and international agencies with development-oriented projects and activities. A scholar of MCD, Linje Manyozo (2012), calls the field of DevCom that grew in the Philippines the “Los Baños school of thought.” Already known in many development agencies worldwide, the school has already produced practitioners and educators who advance the critical role and utmost relevance of communication in facilitating social change for the betterment of human and College of Development Communication Module 5 University of the Philippines Los Baños [The Meanings of Development Communication] © CDC, UPLB 2020 (Revised 1st Semester, AY 2024-2025) DEVC 10  68 community life. Manyozo (2006) contends that “the School’s pioneering reflexive, method-driven, and theory-based nature of devcom practice was very original and defined the shape of global discourse, practice, and training in devcom” (p. 95). In other parts of the world, DevCom is now largely equated to C4D, CFSC, and MCD (Manyozo, 2012, p. xvii). Others also call it empowerment communication, and its more specific variants include ICT for development (ICT4D) and participatory DevCom. Notwithstanding this equivalence, it is now widely acknowledged that the academic intellectualization and institutionalization of DevCom itself began and flourished in the Philippines. Manyozo (2006, 2012) laments how the Western literature on DevCom neglected in the past the theory and praxis of DevCom that emerged in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, especially in the Philippines for various reasons. First, the one who coined the term “development communication” and the first academic to formulate a definition of it as a field of study and practice was Quebral, a Filipina (Bessette, 2006, p. 28; Librero, 2008, p. 9; Manyozo, 2006, p. 80). Second, the first undergraduate and graduate degree programs in DevCom were instituted in the Philippines (Librero 2012; Quebral 1975a), specifically at UPLB. The significance of this institutionalization is underscored by the fact that, as Latin American C4D/CFSC scholar Gumucio-Dagron (2001) notes, “Among thousands of academic institutions that produce journalists, only a very few offer training for people interested in communication for development” (p. 9). Third, the rich history of DevCom in the Philippines attests to how the field has continually grown and matured as a social science with a strong institutional base and a growing number of scholars and practitioners since 1971. It also provides a strong argument for the critical contributions of Filipino scholars led by Quebral to the rise and advancement of DevCom as a field of study and practice. Manyozo laments that “the achievements of Third World development communication scholars” like Quebral were “ignored because of the inability of Western scholars to understand or learn of global developments in the field” (Manyozo, 2006, p. 86). In addition, he argues that it is Quebral, not Everett Rogers, who should have been honored as the “father of development communication” (Manyozo, 2006, p. 85). To scholars who want to understand further how DevCom started as an academic field, Quebral’s seminal paper is a critical document to read. The very first definition of DevCom as a field of study and practice was explained in this paper. (READ Development Communication in the Agricultural Context by Quebral ). Former UPLB-CDC professor and UP Open University chancellor Dr. Felix Librero narrates a very interesting story of DevCom. He presented it during a symposium at CDC in 2008. (READ Development Communication Los Baños Style: A Story Behind the History by Librero & pages 141-144 of Chapter 9 - Definitions of Ongkiko and Flor ). College of Development Communication Module 5 University of the Philippines Los Baños [The Meanings of Development Communication] © CDC, UPLB 2020 (Revised 1st Semester, AY 2024-2025) DEVC 10  69 Three Definitions of Devcom: Changing Definitions in Changing Times Devcom has already been defined thrice by Quebral, as follows: 1971: “...the art and science of human communication applied to the speedy transformation of a country and the mass of its people from poverty to a dynamic state of economic growth that makes possible greater social equality and the larger fulfillment of the human potential.” (1988, p. 147). 1997: “…the art and science of human communication linked to a society’s planned transformation from a state of poverty to one of dynamic socio-economic growth that makes for greater equity and the larger unfolding of individual potential.” (2002a, p. 16). 2012: “…the science of human communication linked to the transitioning of communities from poverty in all its forms to a dynamic, overall growth that fosters equity and the unfolding of individual potential.” (Quebral, 2012a, p. 9). The first definition was explained thoroughly by Ongkiko and Flor (2006) in our textbook Introduction to Development Communication. (READ pages 130-139 of Chapter 9 - Definitions of Ongkiko and Flor ) Let us discuss these definitions further in the context of development history, dissecting the two most important words more thoroughly. Development Along with communication, development is the most critical concept in Quebral’s discourse of DevCom, not just because it is one of the key words that constitute the name of the field. Since 1971, there has been a tremendous effort on her part to elucidate what she means by it. To Quebral, development is generally the transformation from poverty to a better state. However, her emphasis on what should be prioritized in this transformation has evolved in her three definitions of DevCom—primarily economic in the first definition, socio-economic in the second, and then self-determined by communities in the third. The shifts in the emphasis reflect the global changes in and dynamics of development discourses through the years. The most pronounced Western influence on Quebral’s Devcom discourse is using the word “development” itself in coining the name of the field. As you learned in Module 3, the meanings of development concerning social change were said to be an invention of the West after World War II. The term became a global buzzword only after the second inaugural speech of US President Harry S. Truman on January 20, 1949 (Ongkiko & Flor 2006, p. 23; Escobar, 1995, p. 3). In his concept of “fair deal,” Truman trumpeted the idea that the United States and other economically affluent nations could help “solve the problems of the ‘underdeveloped areas’ of the globe” to “bring about the conditions necessary to replicating the world over the features that characterized the ‘advanced’ societies of the time” (Escobar, 1995, pp. 3–4). Other strong economies, especially those in Europe, welcomed the Truman doctrine and also became College of Development Communication Module 5 University of the Philippines Los Baños [The Meanings of Development Communication] © CDC, UPLB 2020 (Revised 1st Semester, AY 2024-2025) DEVC 10  70 actively involved in a global play of development projects in nations considered underdeveloped after the Second World War, more often through or with the World Bank, UN agencies, and other international institutions concerned with development (White, 1988/1989; Escobar, 1995). As we already discussed, the UN declared the 1960s as the First Decade of Development, a period of intensified extension of various kinds of aid (e.g., capital, technology, technical advice, planning) from developed nations to underdeveloped ones. During the decade, development was mainly viewed and measured in terms of economic growth. At the onset of the Second Development Decade, not only economic but also social indicators became the preoccupation in the development projects of the West (Ongkiko & Flor, 2006). The paper of British economist Dudley Seers criticizing the economy-centered view of development influenced much of the global development discourse of modernization in the early 1970s. Seers propounded that “the fulfillment of human potential requires much that cannot be specified in purely economic terms” (Seers, 1969, p. 5). It was in the context of the hegemony of the development-as-modernization perspective in the 1960s and 1970s that DevCom was conceived and inaugurated as an academic field at UPLB, with Quebral as the lead scholar. According to Roman (2005), DevCom “was born out of a specific conception of development ingrained in a particular historical conjuncture: the modernization paradigm and the start of the Cold War” (p. 315). The characteristics of a modern society were presumed as evident in nations considered “advanced” that time—“high levels of industrialization and urbanization, technicalization of agriculture, rapid growth of material production and living standards, and the widespread adoption of modern education and cultural values” (Escobar, 1995, p. 4). Quebral’s privileging of economic growth in the first definition of DevCom that was publicized in 1971 echoes the economic rhetoric and preoccupation of modernists in the 1960s and early 1970s. The definition also has some fragments of Seers’ articulation of development in his paper The Meaning of Development, especially on “inequality” and the “fulfillment of human potential” (Seers, 1969, p. 5). Librero (2008) said that Seer’s paper became required reading in and one of the most cited references by students of agricultural communications at Los Baños in the 1970s. During the Third Development Decade (1980s), the focus of development as modernization was expanded to include indigenous people’s rights, women’s welfare, environment conservation, and many others (Ongkiko & Flor, 2006, pp. 29-31). Alternative discourses like those forwarded by the “multiplicity or culturalist paradigm” also emerged from the critique of modernization and dependency paradigms and provided new ways of looking at development (White, 1988/1989, p. 7). Sustainable and participatory development approaches became widely discussed and promoted as well during the decade. Nonetheless, development-as-modernization was still the mainstream and hegemonic discourse in the development programs of UN agencies, the World Bank, and governments throughout the 1980s. College of Development Communication Module 5 University of the Philippines Los Baños [The Meanings of Development Communication] © CDC, UPLB 2020 (Revised 1st Semester, AY 2024-2025) DEVC 10  71 The writings of Quebral in the 1970s and 1980s bore many traces of the dominant modernization paradigm, but she nonetheless integrated into her discourse various notions of development from alternative discourses (i.e., multiplicity or another development, sustainable development, participatory development). On the one hand, many of her articles took a largely modernist stance. On the other hand, some pointed out that development should be community-driven and people-centered, with local values, cultural sensitivity, and people participation as essential components. By the dawn of the new millennium, Quebral completely embraced a view of development as one that unfolds through multiple processes and has different directions in different communities. To her, it should be the people who determine and decide on the process and direction through education, dialogue, and collective action. In 2012a, Quebral also modified the meaning of “developing” in her discourse, forwarding the idea that “all societies are developing societies” (p. 63). Before, she subscribed to the idea of developing communities and nations as those which were yet to build socio-economic structures that would enable them to address social ills and provide their citizens basic needs and social services (Escobar, 1995). Communication In Quebral’s DevCom discourse, in general, communication is the “fundamental human process” that “permeates a society” (Quebral, 1985b, p. 26; 1988, p. 158) and which can facilitate development, while information is the content or message shared and interpreted in any communication situation. Quebral believed that poor people are in dire need of information they can use to improve their lives and acquire relevant information through an effective communication system. Quebral (1988) saw a lopsided information imbalance in developing nations, between the rich and the poor citizens and between technocrats and families in the rural areas. She also criticized the mass media several times for not addressing the local information needs of people in marginalized communities. In her publications, Quebral (1988, 2002a) emphasized that pertinent information transformed into knowledge can help poor people better their lives. She said that it can nurture them to become more politically mature and capable of self-governance; improve their income, health and education; overcome illiteracy; cultivate interaction among rural dwellers and connect them to decision centers; and form and sustain local organizations to broaden their political and economic power. She favored scientific information to fight “economic and social problems” (Quebral, 1988, p. 16). Communication also refers to a discipline to which DevCom belongs. Quebral (1988) stated that DevCom belongs to a “specialized branch in the family tree of the communication discipline” (p. 6). Nonetheless, it is not as hefty as development, which she considered the “cutting edge of the twofold idea of development communication” (p. 5). College of Development Communication Module 5 University of the Philippines Los Baños [The Meanings of Development Communication] © CDC, UPLB 2020 (Revised 1st Semester, AY 2024-2025) DEVC 10  72 DevCom’s Own SMCRE & E/C: Actors, Messages, Channels, Goals, and Environment or Context Let's look at DevCom as a process with different elements. We can say that among the most discussed elements are its actors, messages, channels, goals (i.e., desired effects achieved through projects and activities), and environment or context. Of course, DevCom education and practice face many problems, difficulties, or challenges that could be considered noise or barriers. However, since the field and its practitioners have been known as resourceful, flexible, innovative, and, more importantly, process-oriented, there is almost always a way to take on, minimize, or go around these barriers. For instance, DevCom practitioners who often deal with lack of funds, inadequate infrastructure and equipment, selfish interests by individuals or groups, or ethnolinguistic and cultural differences find ways to achieve a development project's communication goals. Let us now delve into the critical elements of DevCom by drawing heavily from the writings of Quebral. Actors, communicators, or people in Devcom As a field of human communication, DevCom puts people at the center of its messages, channels, and goals. In Quebral’s writings, people are the primary concern of DevCom, as she has advanced a field of communication for human beings. In her three definitions of DevCom, the phrase “human communication” consistently appears. There are at least three categories of people in DevCom. The first category consists of development communicators, especially the scholars and practitioners of the field, who ensure a strong link between theory and practice in DevCom. Scholars like your professors, for instance, train champions and practitioners of DevCom, conduct studies to strengthen the field's theoretical and conceptual grounding, and enrich the DevCom discourse to make it more relevant to society. Quebral (1988) described development communicators as those who consciously and systematically apply or facilitate planned communication in development programs, projects, or activities. They understand concepts, principles, and issues in development and communication, know well the subject matter they communicate about, and have skills in media (Quebral, 1985b, 1988). Quebral (1997) stressed that development communicators are not merely informants or interpreters, but more importantly, they are mediators, facilitators, and consensus builders “whether through media or face-to-face situations” (p. 8). She also disputed the generalization that development communicators are simply “information officers in government development agencies” (Quebral, 1985a, pp. 14–15). The people whose lives development communicators want to help improve belong to the second category. They are individuals, groups, and communities experiencing any form of poverty. The third category includes other stakeholders who, in one way or another, provide support or assistance in DevCom initiatives. They are not the direct targets of DevCom goals, but their roles are crucial in College of Development Communication Module 5 University of the Philippines Los Baños [The Meanings of Development Communication] © CDC, UPLB 2020 (Revised 1st Semester, AY 2024-2025) DEVC 10  73 achieving these goals. Examples include funding agencies, nongovernment organizations, people’s organizations, and local government units. Let us delve into the second category further vis-à-vis Quebral’s discourse of DevCom. Quebral (1988) had always thought that DevCom must benefit individuals and groups experiencing poverty and whose voices are weak or muted, especially in rural villages, which constitutes this nodal point's primary meanings. In one particular chapter of her book Development Communication, Quebral (1988) categorically explained that the people in DevCom are the “majority for whom the right to speak is empty because poverty, ignorance, illiteracy, and isolation have muted their voices” (p. 22). Despite their situation, they are the main decision makers and actors in the development process. Hence, Quebral thought that development should focus on developing and enriching people's capabilities to become in charge of their lives. Messages of DevCom As you may have noticed in Modules 1-3, DevCom deals with, talks about, or is concerned with almost all issues of underdevelopment and development in society that makes human life hard. However, it looks at all these issues through the lens of communication, believing in the power of communication in transforming the lives of individuals and communities. Quebral said that the topics and issues that DevCom focuses on are those close to or directly affecting the poor and disadvantaged. These include, but are not limited to the following: agriculture, food production, and food security; health, nutrition, and family planning; agrarian reform; relevant education; gender equality; cooperatives and other farm organizations; and the environment, including natural resources management, conservation, and global warming (Quebral, 1975b; 1982; 2002a; 2006; Quebral & Gomez, 1976). Channels of DevCom DevCom uses both mediated and non-mediated (i.e., interpersonal, face-to-face) channels of communication. It is pragmatic in the sense that it optimizes any available and appropriate means of communication in a particular context. While various media and media platforms have become pervasive in our lives in recent decades, the potentials of non-mediated communication have never diminished. Even Quebral strongly believed that DevCom practice must not be dependent on media. Unlike mass communication, DevCom uses all appropriate means of communication, mediated or not, to help raise people's quality of life. This alone already answers the question raised by some scholars on the difference between mass communication and DevCom. Quebral (1988) elaborated that interpersonal communication is often more relevant and powerful than media in areas where the “need for development is greatest” (p. 140). For instance, in agricultural communities, interpersonal channels and group methods must be prioritized over mass media, which may take a supporting role in teaching complex concepts to farmers (Quebral, 2002b, p. 51). College of Development Communication Module 5 University of the Philippines Los Baños [The Meanings of Development Communication] © CDC, UPLB 2020 (Revised 1st Semester, AY 2024-2025) DEVC 10  74 Quebral’s three definitions of DevCom make no mention of media. However, it is an important concept in her discourse because of her attempts to decenter it from the communication discourse and contest the commonplace perspective that communication is chiefly about media. The discursive contestation has probably become very challenging that she commented in 2006, “The conceptual difference between communication as process and communication as media or channels seems to bear repeating every so often” (Quebral, 2006, p. 38). In another article, she lamented that communication is still seen as essentially the same as media (Quebral, 2012b, p. 59). Quebral thought that the communication-as-media mindset has adverse consequences on the whole discipline of communication; that is, communication is seen merely as a tool for or secondary to another discipline like agriculture and development, and communication professionals are treated only as producers of media. Though Quebral tried to decenter media—especially mass media—in DevCom, she extensively discussed its roles and importance in development. Her critique of media was focused only on what she regards as its misuse or misapplication in developing nations (e.g., concentration in urban areas, low priority given to rural people and their problems). She lamented the lack of funding priority given to the use of media in rural development, especially for nonformal education, and the commercial media’s preoccupation with "entertainment and profit” (Quebral, 1988, p. 38). To Quebral (1988), if media is to be used in development, its programs must target specific groups or communities to be relevant; its orientation should be non-commercial; its content and strategies for nonformal educational goals, not just for entertainment and general information; and its location is preferably in areas where they are really needed. Since the beginning of the 21st century, however, Quebral had been rethinking her thoughts on media. She observed that the enormous transformation in the media environment has goaded governments of developing nations into embracing ICTs as catalysts of change, as “old and new media have become part of the warp and weft of the communication structures of all societies and communities” (Quebral, 2008; 2012b, p. 64). Quebral saw the potentials of new digital technologies like ICTs to increase people’s opportunities for dialogue, participation, and organization (2011, 2012a). In the new century, therefore, the need for “independent, knowledgeable, and responsible media is greater than ever” (Quebral, 2008, p. 183) in developing nations. Nonetheless, she was still convinced that community or small media are more apt for dialogue and relevant to rural development as far as mediated communication is concerned (Quebral, 2012a). Goals of DevCom The overall mission of DevCom is vividly evident in Quebral’s definitions of the field. DevCom aims to help people experiencing poverty improve their living conditions. The first two definitions of DevCom by Quebral clearly articulate the supposed “transformation” from less to more desirable social and economic conditions (Quebral, 1988, p. 147; 2002a, p. 16). The third definition uses “transitioning” instead of “transformation” to refer to the progress “from poverty in all its forms to an overall growth,” including both material and nonmaterial growth (Quebral, 2002a; 2012, p. 9). As regards the people in poverty, Quebral College of Development Communication Module 5 University of the Philippines Los Baños [The Meanings of Development Communication] © CDC, UPLB 2020 (Revised 1st Semester, AY 2024-2025) DEVC 10  75 (1988, p. 28; 2012a, p. 7) did not change her position since 1971 that one of the attributes of DevCom that makes it different from other communication fields is its “bias” or “allegiance” to the “poor, the powerless, and the disadvantaged in any developing society.” Quebral emphasized DevCom’s role in rural development. She noted that “poverty in the cities is only a manifestation of poverty in the villages” (Quebral, 1988, p. 30); “the income gap between the urban and rural areas is ‘dangerously wide’” (Quebral, 2008, p. 180); and poverty “persists” in the rural areas (Quebral, 2011). Second, the urban bias in development is a common mindset among leaders and citizens, as anything rural and agricultural is often associated with backwardness and remoteness. Hence, DevCom programs should prioritize these areas. DevCom has a crucial role in ensuring that appropriate and relevant information reaches those who need it, especially the poor who would benefit much from it. Quebral was firm in her assertion that the poor majority in developing nations lack the information they need to transform their lives. DevCom should thus “circulate the information to those who can use it” (Quebral, 1988, p. 68). In many of her publications, Quebral emphasized that pertinent information transformed into knowledge can help poor people better their lives. She said that it can nurture them to become more politically mature and capable of self- governance; improve their income, health, and education; overcome illiteracy; cultivate interaction among rural dwellers and connect them to decision centers; and form and sustain local organizations to broaden their political and economic power (p. 11, 40). She favored scientific information produced by experts, researchers, or scientists to fight “economic and social problems” (p. 16). To connect the users of information to the producers or sources of it, she said that DevCom should serve as the link or provide opportunities for information sharing. It is important to note that Quebral believed that development and the DevCom process should be participatory, with the active involvement of community members at all stages. This is a belief that Quebral held and enriched since the late 1970s, perhaps even before Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed became available to the scholars of the Los Baños school of thought of DevCom (Manyozo, 2006, p. 85). She subscribed to the idea that people are neither passive receivers of information nor unsuspecting players in development programs, so she had always criticized the “linear and top-down modes of communication” (Quebral, 1988, p. 8). She maintained that the absence of active participation from people does not result in meaningful change. Environment or context of DevCom The main context of DevCom is development. According to Quebral (2012), development is the “weightier” between the two words that comprise the name of the field (p. 10). It is viewed as the context where meaningful and relevant communication happens among community members and informs how communication must happen. This context sets DevCom apart from other fields of communication. Quebral explained that the basic concepts and principles of College of Development Communication Module 5 University of the Philippines Los Baños [The Meanings of Development Communication] © CDC, UPLB 2020 (Revised 1st Semester, AY 2024-2025) DEVC 10  76 DevCom come from both “development theory and communication theory” (Quebral, 1988, p. 68), but development “sets the goal, provides the message, … and colorizes the communication process” (2002a, p. 18). As the context of DevCom, development is regarded by Quebral as a major concern or issue among developing nations, most of which are former colonies located in the Global South. The role of DevCom is critical in helping these nations reduce or overcome widespread poverty. To address problems associated with underdevelopment in more participatory, appropriate, and meaningful ways, DevCom prioritizes specific communities. In her discourse, Quebral underscored the idea that DevCom should operate more at the community level to be relevant to people’s lives. The community and communication tandem was necessary because “it is through communication that a community begins and persists, just as it is in a community, defined geographically or in some other way, where close communication becomes possible” (Quebral, 1988, p. 41). The community and development tandem clarifies her argument that community is the level at which development should be planned and practiced. She also believed that “every self-respecting community” wants “to manage its own destiny” (Quebral, 1988, p. 43). As of this point, it is important to argue that if DevCom is inherently participatory, as Quebral claimed, then its context must not be development in general, but the development situation or environment in specific communities and nations. In one of my papers, I argued that DevCom must be grounded in a community or nation’s context. What does this mean? Groundedness necessitates that people shape the processes and outcomes of DevCom projects in their own ways and according to their own cultural, socio-economic, and political conditions and struggles. Diversity is expected, as Quebral (1988, p. 11) herself said that “ideas about how human development is best achieved are nothing if not diverse.” Gumucio-Dagron (2001, p. 8) agreed, pointing out that “the experiences of participatory communication for social change are as diverse as the cultural and geographic settings in which they have been developing.” Quebral (2014, p. 48) also said that the cultural dimension of DevCom as a participatory process makes it “that much more diverse and rich as a field.” Allied Fields of DevCom DevCom is a branch or field of communication. Quebral (1988) claimed that it “may well be the branch of communication education in Asia that has broken more new ground than any other” (p. 66). To her, communication is integral to the process and materialization of development. Its facilitative power can help people, particularly those in developing nations who are experiencing poverty, realize their potentials and improve their lives; hence, the need for communication that can hone and unleash this power. As DevCom embraces the principle that the development process must be holistic, its practitioners must work with various individuals or groups from other fields. In terms of theories, concepts, and principles, DevCom shares a lot with other fields of communication (e.g., mass communication, communication arts, College of Development Communication Module 5 University of the Philippines Los Baños [The Meanings of Development Communication] © CDC, UPLB 2020 (Revised 1st Semester, AY 2024-2025) DEVC 10  77 advertising, public relations). However, it uses any communication means that can help achieve its goals, mediated or interpersonal. And while Quebral said community media have more meaningful impact to specific groups, barangays, or municipalities, she did not discount the importance of mass media. In terms of development content and methods, it is interdependent with many fields from various disciplines like the applied sciences (e.g., agriculture, forestry, health, nutrition, environment) and social sciences (e.g., community development, education, anthropology, economics, social psychology, sociology). This is why DevCom students take technical and social science electives—they must also understand what, not just how, to communicate. Ongkiko and Flor discuss some of the allied fields of DevCom in their book Introduction to Development Communication. (READ pages 141-144 of Chapter 9 - Definitions of Ongkiko and Flor ) Can you now explain to your relatives and neighbors what DevCom is and how different it is from other fields of communication like advertising, public relations, extension communication, speech communication, and mass communication? QUIZ 4A & 4B Note: This will be given during class hours. Your professor will give you specific instructions on what to do. EXERCISE 3A: “DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION: VIEWING UNDERDEVELOPMENT THROUGH COMMUNICATION AS A LENS” Directions: This exercise will be accomplished by group (i.e., 2-3 students per group). Identify a glaring underdevelopment issue in your community (i.e., purok or barangay) in Los Baños. Collect data about this issue. You may also gather information on other underdevelopment issues related to it. For instance, improper waste management is a perennial problem in Barangay ABC, municipality of DEF, province of Laguna. The barangay has 8,326 individuals who often leave or throw garbage everywhere, including the creek that leads to Laguna Lake. During the rainy season, debris and other wastes clog some portions of the creek and exacerbate flooding in two puroks of the barangay. Some parents also complain about foul-smelling pile of wastes near their residence and say that it poses health risks to their children. Most barangay leaders attribute this problem to College of Development Communication Module 5 University of the Philippines Los Baños [The Meanings of Development Communication] © CDC, UPLB 2020 (Revised 1st Semester, AY 2024-2025) DEVC 10  78 a lack of discipline among the residents. Many residents agree but add that there is no systematic garbage collection system being implemented in the barangay. The barangay council claims ordinances have already been passed to address the problem. Two council members admit that the barangay leaders are not strictly enforcing the ordinances on waste management. Of course, you can gather and provide more specific data regarding the issue. You may ask your parents, relatives, neighbors, friends, barangay leaders, and/or other community members for data that will help you understand the issue. When you already have a good grasp of the issue, think about what communication can do to address it, e.g., how communication can help the residents, including the leaders, understand the gravity of the issue, change their attitudes and behavior toward waste management, become motivated to face the issue and act on it, and/or take a proactive stance in dealing with the issue. In summary, write a brief report by answering the following questions: 1. What is the underdevelopment issue? 2. Why is it a problem or difficulty? How does it affect the people in your community and the community as a whole? 3. What causes it? 4. What do people in the barangay think about it? (You may ask your neighbors, relatives, or friends from the barangay via FB Messenger.) 5. What are the ordinances or laws that supposedly address it or are related to it (if any)? 6. How can communication help address the issue? What communication projects or activities can be implemented? Your report consists of three main parts, as follows: 1. Brief community profile (2–3 paragraphs); 2. Underdevelopment issue in the community (3-4 paragraphs); and 3. Role/s of communication in addressing the issue (2–3 paragraphs). College of Development Communication Module 5 University of the Philippines Los Baños [The Meanings of Development Communication] © CDC, UPLB 2020 (Revised 1st Semester, AY 2024-2025) DEVC 10  79 Rubric for Assessment of Report Your report will be graded based on the rubric below. (36 points) Performance Level Criteria 4 points 3 points 2 points 1 point Content and All the pertinent Most of the Some pertinent Hardly any pertinent depth of information and pertinent information and information and ideas discussion ideas were information and ideas were were covered and (Multiplier: 6) covered and ideas were covered and discussed. adequately covered and discussed. discussed. adequately discussed. Organization Information and Structure of the Organization was Information and ideas of ideas ideas were report was poor; some were presented (Multiplier: 2) presented relatively information and haphazardly with no logically, organized. ideas were particular attention to observing a Information and presented organization or logic. smooth flow from ideas were illogically. one idea to the generally next. presented logically. Grammar and Observed proper The report had Grammar was Report was format sentence few/minimal poor; report did incomprehensible (Multiplier: 1) construction and errors in not follow because of grammar syntax; followed grammar and prescribed errors; the prescribed the prescribed syntax; followed format. format/instructions format (i.e., the prescribed were not followed. number of format. paragraphs). MODULE SUMMARY After understanding key concepts on development and communication in Modules 1–4, you were finally introduced in this module to the field of study and practice that combines those two important words: development communication. By now, you can already explain what DevCom is to your family and friends. Module 5 also required you to watch a video that explains the Los Baños school of DevCom and read one more chapter each of our main textbooks (Ongkiko & Flor, 2006; Quebral, 1988) and a paper on DevCom’s story which was written by another DevCom pioneer (Librero, 2008b). As an assessment of your learning from Module 5, you were given a quiz and were asked to write a report on an underdevelopment issue in your community and the role of communication in addressing it. College of Development Communication Module 5 University of the Philippines Los Baños [The Meanings of Development Communication] © CDC, UPLB 2020 (Revised 1st Semester, AY 2024-2025) DEVC 10  80 REFERENCES Required Readings Flor, A.G., & Ongkiko, I.V.C. (2006). Introduction to development communication. UP Open University. Librero, F. (2008). Development Communication Los Baños Style: A story behind the history. Paper presented at the Development Communication: Looking Back, Moving Forward Symposium, December 8, 2008, Los Baños, Laguna. Quebral, N. C. (1988). Development communication. University of the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB). Materials for Activity and Assessment Rappler. (Producer). (2020, October 16). Senator Imee Marcos schooled about DevCom after 'cute,' 'archaic' remark. UPLB Interactive Learning Center & UPLB-CDC. (2020). Devcom: Los Baños style. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3ZhM5kdu7c Literature Cited Bessette, G. (2006). Participatory development communication for natural resource management. Earthscan and the International Development Research Centre (IDRC). CDC (College of Development Communication). (2020). Vision, mission, goals. https://devcom.edu.ph/cdc-story/ Daya, R. A. (2019). The Filipinos and the Philippines in Nora Cruz Quebral’s development communication discourse: Strengthening communication’s groundedness in a nation’s context. International Journal of Asia Pacific Studies, 15 (2), 143–173. https://doi.org/10.21315/ijaps2019.15.2.6 Escobar, A. (1995). Encountering development: The making and unmaking of the Third World. Princeton University Press. Gumucio-Dagron, A. (2001). Making waves: Stories of participatory communication for social change. The Rockefeller Foundation. Librero, F. (2012). Development communication education in Los Baños: Contributions from graduate research. In S. R. Melkote (Ed.), Development communication in directed social change: A re- appraisal of theory and practice (pp. 231–243). AMIC. Manyozo, L. (2006). Manifesto for development communication: Nora Quebral and the Los Baños school of development communication. Asian Journal of Communication, 16 (1), 79–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01292980500467632 Manyozo, L. (2012). Media, communication, and development: Three approaches. Sage. Quebral, N. C. 1975a. The making of a development communicator. In J. F. Jamias (Ed.) Readings in Development Communication (pp. 25–36). UPLB. Quebral, N. C. 1975b. Development communication: Where does it stand today. Media Asia 2 (4), 197–202. Quebral, N. C. (1982). The CTRE study: Piloting a distance learning system for small farmers. UPLB and Philippine Ministry of Education and Culture. Quebral, N. C. (1985a). Is development communication the same as communication for development? Paper delivered at the AMIC-BERNAMA-WACC Seminar on Communication Challenges in Asia, November 21–22, 1985, Kuala Lumpur. College of Development Communication Module 5 University of the Philippines Los Baños [The Meanings of Development Communication] © CDC, UPLB 2020 (Revised 1st Semester, AY 2024-2025) DEVC 10  81 Quebral, N. C. (1985b). People, not media, communicate: An Asian update. Media Asia 4, 25–27. Quebral, N. C. (1988). Development communication. UPLB. Quebral, N. C. (1997). Development communication in Southeast Asia. The Journal of Development Communication, 8 (2), 1–8. Quebral, N. C. (2002a). Reflections on development communication (25 years later). UPLB. Quebral, N. C. (2002b). IPM farmer field schools: A work in progress. UPLB. Quebral, N. C. (2006). Participatory development communication: An Asian perspective. In G. Bessette (Ed.), Participatory development communication for natural resource management (pp. 35- 40). Earthscan and the International Development Research Centre. Quebral, N. C. (2008). M4D in a wireless Asia. The Philippine Journal of Development Communication, 1 (1), 175–185. Quebral, N. C. (2011). Devcom Los Baños style. Lecture read at the Honorary Doctorate Celebration Seminar, December 2011, London. Quebral, N. C. (2012a). Development communication primer. Southbound. Quebral, N. C. (2012b). The underside of communication in development. Nordicom Review, 33 (Special Issue), 59–64. Quebral, N. C. & Gomez E. D. 1976. Development communication primer. UPLB. Roman, R. (2005). The place of theory in development communication: Retrospect and prospects. Annals of the International Communication Association, 29(1), 311–332. Seers, D. (1969). The meaning of development. IDS Communication 44. Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex. White, R. E. (Ed.). (1988/1989). Communication and development. Communication Research Trends, 9 (3). Centre for the Study of Communication and Culture. College of Development Communication Module 5 University of the Philippines Los Baños [The Meanings of Development Communication] © CDC, UPLB 2020 (Revised 1st Semester, AY 2024-2025) DEVC 10