The majority of indicators of progress described by the learners were found across all five community based organizations. However, once all focus group transcripts were reviewed in detailed and responses were compared from organization to organization, some interesting differences in the findings on learners' perspectives were found:
The majority of indicators of progress described by the learners were found across all five community based organizations. However, once all focus group transcripts were reviewed in detail and responses compared from organization to organization, there was some variation between programs regarding the indicators of progress that were mentioned by learners. Some were mentioned frequently in some programs and not mentioned in other programs.
We wondered what factors might be related these differences. Although we know that the five programs that participated in the project have a lot in common, variation from program to program does exist. For example, program approaches vary. PPR explicitly focuses on and designs its program around normalizing the needs of trauma survivors. AR, RPLC and PPR advocate learning from a whole person perspective (mind, body, emotions and spirit.) LET is a school board managed program with one focus being supporting some learners in moving on to GED programs or credit courses; and WCLC learners do not work in groups as often as learners in the other four programs. (See the program profiles described in Appendix B).
Program settings also vary. Programs and learners come from different neighborhoods, not to mention rural and urban settings. Some programs have close associations with local community health centre or local consumer/survivor membership organization; other programs do not have these links.
Programs also vary with regard to format, staff and organizational culture. We wondered if these program-related differences might have influenced learners' experiences and learning. As well, our findings may have also been influenced by variation in the way focus groups unfold as conversations.
Our project data does not allow us to draw links between program setting and indicators of progress. It does suggest, however, that various factors may affect the kinds of impacts learners identify, factors related to their own awareness, their own context, what is significant to them, the culture of a program and what has been talked about in the program.