Volume 30 Number 4
|
Winter 1992 Volume 30 Number 4 |
|
|
Editor's PageThe New RealityThis year hasn't been an easy one for the Cooperative Extension System. State funding for higher education generally, and in some states for Extension particularly, has been cut. Literally hundreds of years of experience left the organization as veteran Extension educators took early retirements. Changing technology, demographics, politics, and citizen needs in our post -industrial society have forced us to rethink "the Extension way." Coping with change has become the new reality. This issue's To The Point section extends the ongoing dialogue about the role of Extension in today's changing society. In the lead article, Bernard Jones argues that Extension must address broader societal issues to remain viable. He points to needed organizational changes in quality, diversity, planning, partnerships, and funding. Writing in response, C. Wayne Jordan doesn't doubt Extension's willingness to address societal issues. But, he does question the public's willingness to support Extension while it pursues this mission. Walter Walla further maintains that defining our mission is problematic unless both clientele and the Extension organization can first shape a shared vision for its future. Several of the feature articles also reflect how Extension is dealing with changing social and organizational conditions. We learn how California Extension has established a role in public policy education on volatile "mega-issues" affecting both agriculture and urban areas. Two case studies offer insights about strategic planning and competing for external funding, both of which have become necessities in the current environment. The Journal isn't exempt from having to cope with change. In this case, technology is the driving force. The Board of Directors has begun a pilot study to examine electronic delivery of the Journal through Internet, which may ultimately reduce our production costs. This issue is the first to be placed on the system, and should be accessible to any person connected to Internet. We welcome your comments on the electronic version of the Journal. Journal Transitions Doris Smith, of California, has stepped down as chairperson of the Journal's Editorial Committee. We thank her for outstanding service as a reviewer, as well as her leadership on the committee. Emmalou Norland, of Ohio, a current member of the Editorial Committee, will assume the role of chairperson. EMR Extension Journal, Inc.Extension Journal, Inc., is a quasi-official body of the National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges and the Extension Committee on Organization and Policy (ECOP). It is a nonprofit corporation organized for the purpose of publishing a journal for professional Extension staff, adult educators, and community developers. Board of Directors
Kirk Astroth, president, Montana, Member at Large Editorial Committee
Doris Smith, chair, Oakland, California Addressing Mega-Issues of the '90s
Carole Nuckton
Harold O. Carter
David A. Cleaves A primary role of the land grant university and Extension Service has been to create, adapt, and extend new technology to solve problems. The clientele for its teaching, research, and extension was once mostly farmers, ranchers, and other rural citizens. Today, the audience includes all of society. Similarly, issues facing the land grant institutions are no longer strictly agricultural, for even the smallest of controversies has implications reaching far beyond the farm gate. Many issues are larger and more complex than ever before. They're mega-issues because they involve so many different but interrelated factors. Mega-issues call for a new, broad, interdisciplinary approach. This article describes the model for such an approach developed over the past several years at the University of California Agricultural Issues Center. Defining Mega-Issues The controversary surrounding growth and change in California's Central Valley offers a textbook case of a mega- issue. California's Central Valley is taking more than its share of the state's burgeoning population growth and economic boom with resulting adverse impacts on the resource base and the valley's agricultural system. The impacts of growth are being experienced by the valley's farm and nonfarm residents in the form of air pollution, loss of open space, and conflicts over land and water use. The situation in the Central Valley shows two basic components of a mega-issue. First, many diverse interest groups are in conflict. In this case, the conflict is over the use of the valley's resources. The groups involved include long-time valley residents and newcomers. Among the newcomers are commuters from the Bay Area in search of affordable housing and Southeast Asian immigrants in search of a new life for themselves and their families. Traditional valley groups include farm operators and workers who together provide two-thirds of the state's farm output. Developers seek to accommodate the demand for nonfarm uses of the land, while conservationists call for caution and a slowdown in developing these other uses. Some groups work to preserve wild and scenic rivers-and others want to harness them for various uses. Some residents would even like to turn back the clock to when the Central Valley was two-thirds wetlands. Advocates and spokespeople representing a multitude of positions stir the pot. The second characteristic of a mega-issue is that existing institutions seem unable to address the problem. For example, air pollution, land use, or water contamination problems caused by boom times in the Central Valley don't observe county boundaries; yet, few appropriate government bodies regulate across regions. Cities and counties compete for limited financial resources as the pie they're fighting over shrinks. Counties and districts consider declaring bankruptcy, while demand for their services grows. Some argue that inertia in the California state legislature has led to government by initiative. Addressing Mega-Issues In approaching mega-issues, the University of California Agricultural Issues Center uses what can be termed an hourglass model (see Figure 1). Into the top of the hourglass is poured available expertise at the university and elsewhere about an issue and all the diverse values surrounding it. This flows toward a culminating event, at the neck of the hourglass, which brings all the input to focus on the issue and tries to raise the level of the debate. Then, outreach/Extension effort stimulated by the event flows out through the bottom of the hourglass to a broader audience and further work. The center developed the hourglass model in 1986-87 with its first large study/Extension project on worldwide competition and constraints on marketing California specialty crops. The successful format was applied again in 1987-88 to the issue of chemicals in the human food chain. In 1988-90, the center focused on growth and change in California's Central Valley. The center is now using the hourglass model to study and bring together diverse interests in water use in California. 
Figure 1. The hourglass model. Studying Facts and Values Dealing with today's mega-issues requires knowledge and expertise drawn from many specialized subjects, such as plant science, soil science, medicine, animal science, social science, philosophy, law, political science, meteorology, geography, agronomy, economics. A mega-issue calls for interdisciplinary effort, applying what's known to the problem at hand. Even more important than gathering all the "facts" about an issue is understanding the values and feelings surrounding it. Understanding values is essential to knowing how the various players are interpreting facts. The top of the hourglass model represents the center's attempts to serve as a catalyst, bringing university resource people from many disciplines and representatives of diverse interest groups into a forum where they can meet and react. The goal is to get the parties to discuss the way they see an issue from their differing perspectives. Operationally, the UC Agricultural Issues Center separates a mega-issue into meaningful subtopics. For example, the six study group topics for the Central Valley project were: people pressures (urbanization, population growth, and demographic change); the natural resource base including study groups in land, water, air, and biological resources; and institutions. Study group leaders are selected from several UC campuses, so the core of the study is made up of university faculty from a range of disciplines. These leaders must be able to attract others with expertise on their topics and work with them during the study period. Each group leader is provided with a modest budget. With limited funding, the center is able to leverage extensive research through in-kind faculty contributions. Participants from the single-purpose, nonprofit research organizations, such as the American Farmland Trust or Ducks Unlimited, are useful additions to the study groups. Others from state agencies also join the study groups. The center works closely with university county farm advisers, both for their input to the study and their facility for disseminating study results to their clientele. Focus group sessions are held separately with various interest groups to understand the differing valuations of the issue. During the study period, the center coordinates the activities of study groups. The study group leaders are brought together periodically so each knows what the others are doing and can consider the interactions between subject areas. Center staff provide an ongoing liaison among the groups. The center sets a definite cutoff point of usually one to two years for each study. A "solution" isn't expected by this cutoff date, but the center does hope to be able to place all aspects of the issue into a public arena for observation and understanding. The Public Event At the neck of the hourglass model is a large public symposium where the findings of the study groups are presented and discussed. Participants of various interest groups, such as the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Farm Bureau, serve as symposium panelists and react to the study group presentations. They're urged to discuss the way they see an issue from their differing perspectives. Outreach Efforts At the bottom of the hourglass model is the outreach/Extension effort to a broader audience. Appropriate output is prepared that reflects not just the study group findings, but also the input of the diverse interest groups. Findings are disseminating using several media, including a readable proceedings of the symposia, short and longer study group reports, and carefully scripted videotapes. Materials are directed to a general audience-an educated, interested public involved in the decision process. The press is briefed before, during, and after the symposia, as are legislative aides-a direct link to our policy makers. Conclusion The rich diversity of scholars and disciplines represented in our land grant universities has the potential to provide an unparalleled reservoir of expertise to tackle the broadest and most complex of societal problems. The challenge is to use this strength to deal with an expanded set of public issues and, at the same time, continue to serve traditional agricultural interests in a broad new context. The land grant university with its Extension Service needs to achieve a delicate balance between old concerns and new demands in serving its broadened base. The hourglass approach isn't intended to solve mega-issues. The model succeeds, however, in bringing together university expertise to increase public knowledge regarding complex, multidimensional policy issues. By pulling together all perspectives of an issue and providing objective research and reporting, use of the hourglass model can help Extension move important policy debates forward, while fulfilling its role as a public educator. Footnote 1. This article highlights material from Harold O. Carter and Carole Nuckton, "California's Great Central Valley-A Laboratory for Public Policy" (Paper presented at the Western Agricultural Economics Association meeting in Portland, Oregon, July 1991).
Strategic Planning in Extension
Ellen L. Fitzsimmons
Gerald R. Campbell Not too many years ago, the words "issues programming" were new to Extension. The national Extension System conducted training sessions on issues programming to help us learn where we should go, and offered organizational transition training to help us while we were on the way to getting there. State faculty and administrators went home and assessed how their own planning processes measured up. Most found some reasons for change and everybody at least talked about it. In Wisconsin in 1989, the dean of Cooperative Extension appointed a small work group to design and implement a strategic planning process. This group was given a free hand and designed a process different from, yet related to, past planning efforts. In approaching strategic planning, the group examined literature from business and government strategic planning.1 That literature supplemented the issues programming training to emphasize the necessity for an externally focused planning process. Planning Process The strategic planning process was guided by a task force of 20 administrators, county- and campus-based faculty, led by a seven-person steering committee. Each steering committee member chaired a subcommittee that was responsible for the design of a major component of the process. Components of the process are discussed below. Twenty-four county Extension agents attended a three-day training session on strategic planning. They then served as the leadership/training team for county agents in each of the six districts. Each county office received a detailed "how-to-do-it" manual with sample agendas, letters, and recommended procedures to complete the planning process. Each county office identified a lead agent for strategic planning. One strategic planning subcommittee had as its task to describe key forces influencing the environment in which Extension works. The committee's environmental scanning process involved a broad array of Extension and other university-based scanners. The committee also conducted interviews with key leaders in the private and public sectors. Members developed a videotape and print outlook report that were used to help county level committees think beyond their local communities to the broader environment. State specialists gathered trend data and distributed local information to each county office. Counties received visuals and background information about trends related to demographics, income, working, agriculture, business, food, nutrition and health, children, and the elderly. County committees used the materials to bring local and state dimensions to the broader environmental scan and learn more about their own communities. Each county formed a citizen advisory committee for the strategic planning effort-1,849 citizens were involved. Fifty- eight percent of the citizens were nonusers of Extension, and it was the first experience with Extension programs for many. The county planning groups were charged with identifying the 10 priority concerns facing them. An informational meeting was followed by another meeting to identify, prioritize, and clarify concerns. Some form of nominal group process was typically used to facilitate the ranking of priorities. The county concerns were sent to district caucuses to develop district priorities.2 The district and county concerns were advanced to a state caucus involving campus- and field-based staff. The state caucus compiled the county and district concerns into a list of priority issues that were recommended to the dean of Cooperative Extension, who was responsible for selecting the final set of issues. Having identified the issues, the dean nominated issues teams to specify the issues in clear enough detail so county and campus faculty could define related programs in the development of four-year and annual plans of work. At faculty conference, county and campus faculty were given guidelines for program planning, heard presentations on issues and base programs, and participated in discussions of how they'd confront the educational opportunities before them. Planning Outcomes Three statewide issues were identified: managing society's wastes, improving the quality of water, and families and youth at risk. The issues were targeted for special attention and the acquisition of additional resources to supplement existing institutional capacity to respond. No base reallocation of funds has been, or is expected to be, made to the statewide issues. Thus, educational programming around issues must grow out of the individual faculty members' decisions to change and bring their expertise to these issues. Faculty members still work in the four base program areas, and respond to high priority base programs, which include:
Base programs aren't static. In many cases, strategic planning helped to shape the focus of base programs as well as define issues. Some of the issues clearly emerged from base programs and will return to the base later. Lessons from the Process Strategic planing can create fears. Concerns about the planning process included fear of fiscal reallocation away from existing programs, too much staff time and energy would be absorbed, nothing new would be learned, the importance of traditional programs and relationships with their support groups would be threatened, and faculty would lose control of the basic educational decisions. The process in many cases allayed these fears and most faculty and staff now view the process and outcomes as positive. Reallocation fears were eased by a series of strong messages from the dean that the process would be used as a banner under which supplemental resources could be sought, if needed, from a variety of sources. It helped that during the process, Cooperative Extension received a new state allocation for recycling programming and also received federal water quality and youth-at- risk funds. While some traditional support groups were initially concerned about the process, the administration's commitment to strong base programs and continuing relationships with traditional advisers has also helped to limit those concerns. Some people will change and others won't. Many of the skeptics, especially at the county level, were genuinely influenced by what they heard in the local planning meetings. In some counties the program was empowered by the local involvement to a degree it never has been. However, the process and outcome hasn't been accepted by all. Some simply refused to believe results that challenge their expectations. For example, it was difficult for some to accept that in an agricultural county the priority concerns weren't agricultural. It was obvious that citizens see problems beyond their own economic interest areas. The process takes money, time, and energy. Staff at all levels in the organization contributed. The materials development process alone, including development of the environmental scan, the videotape, and the county trends data were costly tasks. County involvement reaps local rewards. Every county-based Extension agent was involved in the local process. This time and commitment enriched the process and was a vital part of university life. In addition, those who were a part of the process learned a new set of skills useful in their professional careers. At the local level, the interest and support for the process has been overwhelming. As a result, Extension has a network of over 1,800 citizens who are better informed about their world, have an image of Extension as a future-oriented institution, feel they have a stake in how we respond, and may become some of our strongest supporters. Issues identification is revealing. The process contained some reaffirmation of current program direction, such as youth at risk. It breathed new fire into some longstanding program directions, such as local community and economic development, and helped to identify a few things that might have been missed. For example, broad-based concern about access to and affordability of health care emerged with enough force that it caused Extension to begin planning how the issue can be addressed in a more comprehensive way. The process didn't identify issues that were truly ahead of the curve, underscoring the need for continued environmental scanning. Throughout the process, we kept referring to a quote from NHL hockey star Wayne Gretzky that he "skated to where the puck was going to be." We aren't confident we know "where the puck is going to be." But, the planning process allowed Extension to see much more clearly that what's of concern to Wisconsin citizens doesn't necessarily match the current "knowledge set" possessed by the faculty. Not everything gets done. Most of the strategic planning literature looks at the process as being simultaneously external and internal. A rigorous internal look at our current capacities wasn't done. Allowing existing faculty and staff to respond to the statewide issues before a judgment is made that new resources are needed may be a major advantage. Wisconsin has a pool of very creative and talented people. It would have been easy to underestimate the talents and interest they bring to the issues. Administration will, however, need to continue to evaluate the additional resources needed to effectively confront statewide issues. The process must be institutionalized. For planning to succeed, it should be incorporated into ongoing activities. A futures committee has been charged with keeping the organization aware of emerging issues. Local planning committees are expected to meet annually to follow up on local progress in confronting issues. The program planning and reporting process has been redesigned to allow opportunity for more team planning and to allow agents to share plans through an electronic database. An annual statewide video conference with all strategic planning committees is planned. Conclusion The key lesson to be learned from strategic planning is the importance of looking outward as we define our future. That idea is under continual threat in an academic world characterized by increasing specialization and the compartmentalization of knowledge. Cooperative Extension and the Wisconsin Idea both grew out of a commitment to educate people where they were so people could solve their own problems. Extension faculty must continually build that external orientation and promote it to campus colleagues. This strategic planning process has helped Wisconsin Cooperative Extension rediscover its heritage in the Wisconsin Idea and see how that heritage is a guide to the future. Footnotes 1. John M. Bryson, "An Effective Strategic Planning Approach for Public and Nonprofit Organizations," in Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations: A Guide to Strengthening and Sustaining Organizational Achievement, John M. Bryson, ed. (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1988), pp. 46-70; James C. Hearn and Richard Heydinger, "Scanning the University's External Environment," Journal of Higher Education, LVI (July/August 1985), 419-45; and Kim Cameron, "Strategic Responses to Conditions of Decline: Higher Education and the Private Sector," Journal of Higher Education, LIV (July/August 1983), 359-80. 2. The county concerns were accumulated in a booklet widely distributed to collaborating agencies and others in Wisconsin. That booklet identified the names of each county's local planning committee along with a general identification of interests they represented.
On the Hunt for "Fiscal Fuel"
Ruth E. Stiehl
Barbara A. Bessey
Vicki L. Schmall ...[Extensionists] must all be fiscal entrepre-neurs....The system is still unduly dependent on appropriations...for the fiscal fuel to drive its programs. The continuing budget cuts the system is now facing at all levels aren't aberrations-they're trends of the future. Each and every Extension staff member...must be trained to acquire and administer private and new public resources. Otherwise, issues programming will end up as so many good ideas on bookshelves....1 At first, this idea is a frightening and potentially debilitating thought. As Extension staff, we not only have to develop and deliver quality educational programs to meet the changing needs of the communities we serve, but now we're sent into the woods to hunt for the "fiscal fuel" we need to keep our fires burning. When we tell ourselves it's just an aberration, our leaders are quick to reaffirm the certainty of the trend in a system that depends greatly on public appropriations. For those of us who have been on the hunt for years, the thought is no less frightening. We know the hunting grounds well, and we know the "sport" is highly competitive. We've met the competition. They're organizations that have traditionally depended on private dollars for their survival and they're experts in bringing home trophies again and again. For the new hunter, much must be learned about getting into the hunting grounds from those who've been there. This article isn't a trail map to the hunting grounds. Neither is it a guide to writing grant proposals. Trail maps and proposals come later. We want to give the new hunter the combination of factors that will open the lock on the gate to the hunting grounds. The combination is based on our experiences as a hunting party and our success in attracting over $250,000 for educational programs from four funding agencies over a period of seven years.2 Get Permission to Hunt Getting permission to hunt means getting permission to let go of other work activities. Just because our Extension leaders are encouraging a new enterpre-neurial spirit among the ranks, doesn't necessarily mean they're willing to have other things left undone. Fundraising is tremendously time-consuming and must be reflected in your job description and plan of work. And once you've been funded, the load doesn't lessen. In addition to developing and implementing the program, the project director is responsible for writing reports, presenting at conferences, evaluating results, and disseminating materials, even after the funding has disappeared. When you ask to be released from other responsibilities to take on the hunt for fiscal fuel, you must be prepared to explain the short- and long-term benefits of outside funding to your unit's mission. Don't assume the benefits are understood. Write them down and be prepared to use them when objections are raised to removing some plan of work item. Take Responsibility for the Hunt Taking responsibility for funding isn't easy when you've never had to do it! What does taking responsibility really mean? Jeffers, in Feel the Fear and Do It Anyway,3 says taking responsibility means doing three things: (1) figuring out what you want, (2) learning what you need to do to make it happened, and (3) never blaming, not even yourself, if you don't receive funding. She says "pushing through fear is less frightening than living with the underlying fear that comes from a feeling of helplessness." Total reliance on vanishing Extension appropriations has the potential of bringing you to a state of helplessness. On the other hand, thousands of educational programs receive private and public grants each year. Why shouldn't yours? Don't Hunt Alone Hunting alone isn't a safety issue, it's a success issue. To compete successfully for educational program funds, your hunting party should include two indispensable members-a primary subject- matter expert and an instructional systems designer.4 The subject expert must be a recognized authority on the issue or content of the educational program. Not just any expert will do. It's best if he or she has strong regional and national connections to organizations and groups associated with the issue and can provide a vita showing long-term and high-level involvement as an expert in the field. Nothing is more important to attracting funds for an educational program than the reputation and experience of the subject-matter expert. The instructional designer is your program architect. This person should be skilled in instructional analysis, creative instructional solutions, materials design, instructional evaluation, and project management.5 A good designer will help you write a proposal and design an educational program that not only looks professional, but gets results. A program that works is your best sales tool for future funding. Don't hunt without an outstanding instructional designer. You may be the subject expert, or the instructional designer, but you probably aren't both. You may be neither. As the project director, your greatest responsibility is to put together a strong hunting party to face the competition. If you're not the quality expert or designer described, hunt for them before you hunt for funds.6 Establish a Support Camp A support camp stays behind, willing and prepared to provide what you need to bring home the goods. This camp isn't established in a day, or even a week. It takes time to put together the diverse groups you'll need to rely on. The primary support groups you'll need include:
Gather the Small Ones First Successful programs that meet a community need through a small grant can sometimes be expanded into projects of regional, national, and even international significance through additional proposals. The key to ending big is to do quality work on the small projects. Our community educational program on aging started with a $13,000 grant and eventually attracted more than $250,000 from four different funding agencies because of the quality of the original model.8 Issue Must Have Political Priority Projects that get funded are the ones matching political agendas. Foundations and agencies dedicate funds for specific causes. Your challenge is to discover how your program fits priorities. Don't expect to find funding for a program that focuses on an issue that's now fading. The trick is to target new issues of importance as they emerge, and establish a linkage between these issues and what you want to do in your program. Hunt with a Sample Here's where a first-rate instructional designer is indispensable. Funding agencies are impressed by the professionalism you bring to an instructional project, because, in all honesty, much of what they see is pretty bad. One sample product illustrating the quality of your work will do more to validate your team's skill than a 20-page vita. If you don't have a sample product, your designer should be able to provide one. Even though the content of the sample may come from another project, it will serve your purpose if it's good. And if the sample is really good, beg to show it. Look in a Lot of Places Once you've been funded by a given agency or foundation, it's tempting to go back again to the same source to fuel another project. You know their system and have established contacts. It seems easier. But, be aware of the changed priorities; even though an agency funded you before and liked what you did, a new project may not fit the next funding round. If it does fit what they're looking for, they may have considered the first grant as seed money and expect you to hunt elsewhere for continued funding. To continue being successful, establish and maintain contacts with many funding sources. A history of funding from a variety of sources is also a good measure of your hunting skill. Don't Expect Results Tomorrow Once you write a proposal and rewrite it several times to match the agenda of different funding agencies, months and sometimes years pass-not always, but sometimes. If you really believe in the value of what you're proposing, you'll also need the patience to keep your party together, continue perfecting your skills, and keep hunting. Footnotes 1. Richard J. Sauer, "Extension Needs Fiscal Entrepreneurs," Journal of Extension, XXIX (Spring 1991), 3. 2. When Dependency Increases is a series of seven multimedia workshops for families on issues of aging, distributed nationally by the Oregon State University Extension Service, Milam Hall, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon. The authors received funding for the series from the Meyer Charitable Trust, Health Association of America, American Council of Life Insurance, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and the Extension Service. 3. Susan Jeffers, Feel the Fear and Do It Anyway (New York: Fawcett Columbine, 1987), p. 52. 4. J. Terpstra, "Developing a Design Team Approach," Performance and Instruction, XXVIII (October 1989), 33-34. 5. Ruth E. Stiehl and others, "Keys to Success in the Non- Profit Arena, Performance Technology '91" (Washington, D.C.: National Society for Performance and Instruction, 1991). 6. To locate an instructional design specialist in your area, contact the Educational Technology or Training and Development program in the College of Education at your university. The National Society for Performance and Instruction publishes a directory to ISD consultants. Contact NSPI, 1300 L Street, N.W., Suite 1250, Washington, D.C. 20005. 7. Stiehl, "Keys to Success." 8. The total cost of When Dependency Increases exceeded $500,000, including contributed funds from the OSU Extension Service.
Developing Life Skills in Youth
Barry L. Boyd
Don R. Herring
Gary E. Briers It's estimated that 25% of our nation's youth engage in "high-risk" activities-heavy alcohol, tobacco, or drug use, delinquency, and poor school performance or non-attendance. An additional 25% are considered to be at moderate risk.1 Almost one -third of our youth fail to graduate from high school. Teen pregnancy is increasing at an alarming rate. Every day in America, 40 teenagers give birth to their third child.2 Because of these high-risk activities, youth become a burden to society instead of contributors. The number of our nation's youth exhibiting at-risk behavior points to a lack of skills necessary for adulthood-skills in working with others, understanding self, communicating, making decisions, and leadership.3 These skills are required by adults for everyday living and are often called leadership life skills. The development of life skills allows youth to cope with their environment by making responsible decisions, having a better understanding of their values, and being better able to communicate and get along with others. The development of such skills though experiential learning is the cornerstone of 4-H youth programming. 4-H programming intervenes in a youth's life before the seeds of irresponsible behavior are planted. As Ladewig and Thomas discovered, skills and attitudes formed during youth carry over into adulthood.4 4-H's affiliation with land grant universities and the opportunities provided for parent-child interaction make it a unique youth development program. As the federal government continues to delegate more responsibilities to states, state budgets will tighten. In such an environment, accountability of state agencies becomes increasingly important. To meet these accountability demands, the strengths and weaknesses of the 4-H program must be documented and these data interpreted to legislators and other key persons. Such a study of the Texas 4-H program was undertaken in 1990. This study compared the leadership life skill development of 4-H Club members and youth who had never participated in 4-H. The relationship between leadership life skill development and the level of 4-H participation was also examined. Inventory Questionnaire In the Spring of 1991, a leadership life skill inventory was mailed to 500 4-H Club members, ages 13 to 19, who were randomly selected from 19 randomly selected Texas counties. Sixty-two percent (309) responded to questions about their perceived leadership life skill development and 4-H participation. During the same period, 558 non-4-H youth from 28 randomly selected schools in Texas were asked similar questions about their leadership life skill development. The non-4-H sample was chosen from grades seven through 12 so youth of similar ages could be compared. Respondents answered questions about their perceived leadership life skill development and their participation in 4-H and non-4-H activities. Most of the 21 leadership life skill statements were adapted from the Leadership and Personal Development Inventory developed at Iowa State University.5 These statements were grouped into five measurement scales: working with groups, understanding self, communicating, making decisions, and leadership.6 Participants indicated their perceived development of leadership life skills using a six-point Likert- type scale (1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=slightly disagree, 4=slightly agree, 5=agree, and 6=strongly agree). Findings Leadership Life Skill Development The mean scores for each of the leadership life skill scales were compared for significant differences between 4-H Club members and non-4-H youth. A t-test analysis revealed that 4-H Club members perceptions of their development of leadership life skills were significantly higher than the perceptions of non-4-H youth for all measurement scales (see Table 1). As a group, 4-H Club members rated their skill development higher on the scales of working with groups, understanding self, communicating, and making decisions, and lower on the leadership scale. In contrast, the non-4-H sample perceived their skill development as higher on the scales understanding self and working with groups, and lower on the remaining scales.
Effect of Level of Participation A second question in this study was the relationship of 4-H participation to the development of leadership life skills. This portion of the study was conducted only with the 4-H sample. 4-H participants were given a list of 18 4-H activities and asked to indicate the highest level at which they'd participated in each of the activities. Levels of participation included: 1=none, 2=club, 3=county, 4=district, 5=state, and 6=national. The scores from these activities were then summed to provide a "4-H participation score." Increased participation could mean participating in several activities or participating at a higher level in a few activities. The Pearson's Product Moment Correlation analysis revealed a low-to-moderate positive and statistically significant relationship between the level of participation in 4-H activities and the perceived development of leadership life skills (see Table 2). The strongest relationships between participation and leadership life skills existed for the scales on leadership, communicating, and working with groups. Participants' level of leadership life skill development increased as their participation in 4-H activities increased.
Specific activities identified during the correlation analysis as having a positive relationship to leadership life skill development included serving as an officer, committee chair/member, serving on 4-H Council, participating in method demonstrations/illustrated talks, public speaking, and judging activities. Again, perceived leadership life skill development increased as participation in these specific activities increased. Implications This research indicates participation in the 4-H program is positively related to perceived leadership life skill development. 4-H youth rated their development of leadership life skills higher than did non-4-H youth in all five measurement scales. The study also indicated that the level of leadership life skill development increased as the level of 4-H participation increased. What are the implications of these findings for further research and 4-H programming? While the relationships between 4-H participation and leadership life skill development measures were low for the scales on communicating, working with groups, making decisions, and understanding self, they were statistically significant. Two possibilities exist for why the relationships were low. One explanation is that the relationships between each of the four scales and the development of leadership life skills actually were low. Another possibility is that the research instrument used lacked the precision to detect stronger relationships. If the goal of youth development programming is to prepare youth for adulthood, then this study indicates that 4-H programming in Texas is accomplishing its mission. These findings also support those from Heinsohn and Cantrell's study of Pennsylvania 4-H members, which found that 4-H members perceived themselves as having developed "good" levels of leadership, communication, and personal development skills.7 Documenting the value of effective youth development programs should be the first step in reducing the negative impact of diminishing budgets. The next step is interpreting the value of these programs to legislators, university administrators, and other key leaders. These groups must be made aware that 4-H activities don't simply teach youth skills in agriculture and home economics, but include nonformal, experiential educational programs that teach youth valuable life skills. Extension leaders must convince decision makers that the potential positive impact on youth justifies significant financial input into the program. Indeed, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and much less expensive. Footnotes 1. The Forgotten Half: Pathways to Success for America's Youth and Young Families (Washington, D.C.: William T. Grant Commission on Work, Family, and Citizenship, 1988). 2. Karen J. Pittman, Promoting Youth Development: Strengthening the Role of Youth Serving and Community Organizations (Washington, D.C.: Center for Youth Development and Policy Research, 1991). 3. L. Hoopfer, "Mission Statement" (Unpublished paper presented at the National Committee on Utilization of 4-H Materials, Washington, D.C., 1981). 4. H. Ladewig and J. Thomas, Does 4-H Make a Difference? (College Station: Texas A&M University System, Texas Agricultural Extension Service, 1987). 5. R. I. Carter, Leadership and Personal Development Inventory (Ames: Iowa State University, 1989). 6. Reliability coefficients for the study itself were: .72, .75, .69, .65, and .83, respectively. 7. A. L. Heinsohn and M. J. Cantrell, Pennsylvania 4-H Impact Study: An Evaluation of Teens' Life Skill Development (University Park: Pennsylvania State University, 1986).
Teens Reaching Youth
Judy M. Groff Where are the teen volunteers in Cooperative Extension? Are adults the only volunteers who can teach, organize activities, offer advice about program priorities, and conduct community service? A national study conducted by Extension on implications of volunteerism indicted that a low percentage of volunteers were below 25 years of age.1 Helping clients become volunteers is a core value of Extension. According to Sanderson, there are at least two major outcomes from involving people as volunteers: (1) it reinforces learning and encourages leadership development and (2) it multiplies the outreach and impact of Extension professionals.2 Teenagers will volunteer when asked. A recent national survey conducted by the Gallup organization reports that youth ages 14 to 17 are volunteering at the same rate as adults or higher.3 In this survey, teenagers indicated they want to contribute in their communities. The two most frequently cited reasons for volunteering were: 47% wanted to do something useful, 38% thought they would enjoy the work. With increasing demands both on professionals and adult volunteers in a time of shrinking financial resources, Extension can't afford to ignore teenagers as a valuable resource pool. Extension can capitalize on the developmental needs of youth to do something useful and to assume adult-life roles. The peer helper model applied to youth leadership development offers teens meaningful volunteer experiences and Extension a way to expand program efforts. Peer Helper Model Peer helper programs offer teenagers an opportunity to contribute while simultaneously helping themselves. According to Resnik and Gibbs, peer helper programs strive to: generate meaningful involvement and responsibilities for youth and encourage participation of youth in real-life decisions, channel peer pressure and normal energies and risk-taking tendencies toward constructive ends, and provide youth with skills through training in a peer-group context. They maintain that since peer programs foster intergroup communication, the attitude and style of the adult leader is a key factor in the success of the peer program.4 Research shows teens need adults to be involved with them in these programs and to value their ideas as well as the labor they contribute. In Pathways to Adulthood, Steppe and Hughes argue for a change in adult attitudes and philosophies toward youth. We simply cannot wait until the later teen years to begin respecting youth as individuals, affording them the dignity to make their own decisions. If we accept this basic premise, then it follows that we must teach our young people the intangible skills of informed decision-making, thereby fostering their self- esteem.5 With this philosophy in mind, the North Carolina State University 4-H and Youth Development Department developed the Teens Reaching Youth (TRY) program in 1986. Teens Reaching Youth Teens Reaching Youth, a peer helper program, is a model that can be useful throughout Extension. Teen volunteers can be trained with adults to conduct educational programs in a variety of subjects. Community development programs where youth issues are the focus is one example. Teens are also interested in environmental and family issues. Imagine the impact of a teen team conducting a lesson on water quality to a group of senior citizens. Teens have received high marks from coaches on both competence and dependability. The broad educational objectives of TRY are for teenagers to increase self-esteem and feelings of belonging in their community and to assume responsibility for self and others. The program objectives are accomplished through different levels of participation:
Level 1. Teens teach younger youth ages six to 11. The program was designed to bridge three life stages from adults to teens to younger youths. Adults are involved with teens as coaches and mentors at all levels. Teenagers work with younger youth as well as their peers, providing them with information and positive role models. Having the younger age group as learners makes teens feel needed, respected, and loved, thus meeting basic developmental needs. The TRY program is experiential. Adult coaches are trained with teens in the same setting. They do the same things and have equal power. Learners are involved in role play, group discussion, simulations, and skits as they examine each of the main concepts. The setting is an informal, low cost, retreat environment. Here trainers (Level 3) experience the curriculum they will use to plan and conduct a TRY retreat within their county or area. TRY teams (Level 1) who participate in the county or area retreat agree to teach six hours of subject matter to younger youth. If teams have special interests in an area where a curriculum guide isn't available, they can write their own lesson plans and test them. The writers' (Level 2) agreement requires additional help from the adult coach and 4-H agent. This help would be in the form of identifying resources, brainstorming, and analyzing how youth would react to different learning experiences. Research Methods and Results Evaluation was designed into the program from the beginning. Of interest were impacts of the program on participants and coaches, perceptions of its value, and effectiveness of the delivery processes. The primary data collection tools were: (1) an adaptation of the Anomie scale, which measures feelings of alientation;6 (2) a skills checklist developed for each level of the program; (3) self-anchoring scales for each of the concepts of marketing, teaching, and planning;7 and (4) a semantic differential to measure adult participants' attitudes toward two concepts-"teenagers" and "coach."8 All instruments were packaged and administered as pre- and post-tests during TRY retreats. The majority (62%) of teen participants were between the ages of 13-15; the majority (63%) were female. In addition, 43% of participants were new to 4-H. The Anomie pre-test mean score of 13.11 increased on the post-test to 13.71. The t-test showed it was a significant difference at the .001 level, indicating the reduction in teen feelings of alienation. The results during the first testing year confirmed the two program objectives were met. In addition, both teens and adults felt they'd improved their leadership skills by participating in TRY. Both the skills checklist and self-anchoring scales showed significant changes for all participants in knowledge of marketing, teaching, and planning a teen leadership retreat. Over the five years since TRY was introduced in North Carolina 4-H, almost 2,000 teens have completed the program and then moved into other areas of leadership at school, in 4-H, or in the community. A TRY and Students Against Drunk Driving adviser from Cary High School said it best: "I was so pleased to see one of my girls run for SADD President. She would never have had enough confidence to do that before." Program participation increased dramatically for the first few years, but recently has leveled off. The model itself has been adopted by other organizations-the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, Alcohol and Drug Defense Unit, and North Carolina Cancer Society initiated collaborative programs with 4-H using the TRY model for program delivery. Another group, Reading Is Fundamental, is currently developing a literacy program with TRY as the core method. Summary and Discussion North Carolina's 4-H Teens Reaching Youth program has effectively involved teens as volunteers through meaningful leadership experiences. As a peer helper program, TRY prepares teens to contribute in their community by teaching younger youth. A progression of leadership roles are available so teens can expand their leadership skills by performing different roles with different audiences. Recognition and respect by adults, peers, and younger youth enhances self-esteem and teens' sense of belonging in their community. Teenagers, who were all first-year 4-Hers, made statements like:
These comments are typical of others expressed by teens in Oregon, Montana, Delaware, and other states where TRY is being adopted. Judy Bracher, a volunteer in Oregon and TRY coach said: "This was a wonderful opportunity for me. I have been able to evaluate my own leadership skills and make improvement when necessary. The TRY program certainly allows room for adults to share knowledge with teens and show them how important they are to our society." Extension has the ability to tap this underused volunteer resource. In the act of volunteering, teens learn leadership and subject-matter skills. Peer helper programs like 4-H Teens Reaching Youth can enable Extension to involve youth to expand the organization's capacity to reach new audiences. The teens learn valuable leadership skills, are respected, have fun, and do interesting work. Footnotes 1. Partners in Action: Summary of Phase II Conclusions and Implications, 4-H (Madison: University of Wisconsin, Department of Continuing and Vocational Education, 1986). 2. D. R. Sanderson, "Module 1: Understanding Cooperative Extension: Our Origins, Our Opportunities, Working with Our Publics," E. J. Boone, ed. (Raleigh, North Carolina: Cooperative Extension Service, 1988), p. 58. 3. V. Hodgkinson and others, Giving and Volunteering Among American Teenagers (Washington, D.C.: Independent Sector, 1991), pp.14-17. 4. H. Resnik and J. Gibbs, Types of Peer Program Approaches in Adolescents Peer Pressure Theory, Correlates and Program Implications for Drug Abuse Prevention (Rockville, Maryland: NIDA, 1986). 5. S. C. Steppe and D. M. Hughes, "Oasis Center: A Continuum of Services for Independent Living," in Pathways to Adulthood: Creating Successful Programs to Prepare Teens for Independence, K. G. Mayne, ed. (Tulsa: University of Oklahoma, The National Resource Center for Youth Services, 1988), p. 69. 6. E. E. White and E. J. Boone, Decision-Making and Communication Patterns of Disadvantaged Farm Families in the North Carolina Plains Area (Raleigh: North Carolina Experiment Station, 1976). 7. F. P. Kilpatrick and H. Cantril, Self Anchoring Scaling: A Measure of Individual's Reality World (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1960). 8. C. Osgood, G. Succi, and P. Tannenbaum, The Measurement of Meaning (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1957).
Who's Responsible for Computer Competence?
Donald Z. Goode, Jr.
Graydon Ed Elliott In 1979, Douce argued that, "We in Extension will lose the support of the public if we don't take an active role in using this new technology [computers] in our educational programs."1 Prawl, Medlin, and Gross noted in Extension in the '80s that "...the system is encouraged to use new electronic technology in providing viable educational opportunities to expanded audiences."2 The need for Extension personnel to have computer expertise has been acknowledged for some time. By 1988, the need to develop, apply, and transfer technology had become part of a National Initiative to improve the "Competitiveness and Profitability of American Agriculture."3 Extension applications of computers have been classified into two general categories: office management uses and educational uses.4 Other categories of computer applications include clientele services and program management. To carry out these computer applications, Extension personnel must develop and maintain their knowledge and skills. Technological obsolescence can result from the deterioration of present skills or failure to acquire new skills as job requirements change.5 A 1982 study of Mississippi Cooperative Extension (MCES) faculty indicated that perceptions vary about who has the responsibility for maintaining the computer skill level of Extension personnel.6 A similar study was conducted in 1990 to determine the involvement of MCES personnel in computer applications and computer technology transfer.7 A part of that study dealt with computer-related training needs and training responsibility perceptions of MCES personnel, which is the focus of this article. Methods This study used a descriptive (correlational) survey design.8 A questionnaire was developed and used to gather data for the study using a modification of Dillman's total design method.9 It included an open-ended question on training responsibility perceptions. An opportunity to make additional comments was also provided. The population consisted of 476 state and area administrators, county personnel, specialists, and secretaries in MCES. Part-time and paraprofessional employees, as well as assistant county agents, were excluded from the study. Questionnaires were mailed to a random sample of 343 personnel stratified by their job position. The response rate was 86%. Findings MCES personnel gave a variety of responses about who they thought was responsible for keeping them current with computer technology. These responsibility responses were categorized as: (1) my own, (2) Computer Service Department, (3) administration, and (4) Staff Development Department. A variable for each of these four categories was coded according to the open-ended comments made to the question. Many respondents' comments were coded into more than one category, while others made no response to the question (see Table 1).
Forty-three percent of the county level personnel and secretaries felt the administration was responsible for keeping them current with computer technology. This included all levels of administration. Respondents held the administration responsible for making training opportunities available and for providing time away from regular duties to attend training sessions. Administration was also charged with providing time for practice back home after the training sessions were over. Secondary responsibility was placed on themselves (21%) and the Computer Services Department (21%) for maintaining the computer- related competence of county level personnel and secretarial staff. Area and state administrators listed themselves (38%) and the Computer Services Department (38%) as being responsible for keeping them current with computer technology. The Staff Development Department was listed by 19% of the administrators as being responsible. Most of the specialists (65%) took the responsibility on themselves for staying current. Specialists placed secondary responsibility on the Computer Services Department (25%) and the administration (23%). In all groups, the Staff Development Department wasn't listed frequently as being responsible for their computer-related competence. In the MCES system, this department has a management role and delegates much of the training to other subject-matter departments. This may explain the low incidence of this department being listed. Conclusions and Recommendations Although the results of this study can be generalized only to Mississippi, they suggest training approaches that may be applicable in many states. Given the differences in perception about responsibility, the impetus for training may need to come from different directions. Data from the study showed MCES personnel spent an average of six hours each week at the computer keyboard. One of those hours was in software experimentation. An additional hour a week was spent in reading computer-related material. More time was requested by many respondents for practice and further learning. In addition, MCES personnel with the most education and computer-related experience rated individualized study higher than those with less experience. Administrators at all levels should look for ways to provide support for developing computer competencies. This support could include providing time on the job for learning experiences and offering additional workshops or training alternatives. For more experienced personnel who develop and maintain their own computer competence, self-study materials should be developed and provided for advanced computer applications. County level personnel and secretarial staff must be encouraged to take more responsibility for their own computer- related competence and to take advantage of training opportunities. Computer resources should be made available to motivated personnel for practice and study during work hours, and after work. Only through cooperative acceptance of responsibility can personnel develop and maintain the technological competence required to keep Extension competitive in the educational marketplace. Footnotes 1. G. K. Douce, "A Blue-Sky Perspective," Journal of Extension, XVII (May/June 1979), 11-16. 2. W. Prawl, R. Medlin, and J. Gross, Adult and Continuing Education Through the Cooperative Extension Service (Columbia: University of Missouri, Extension Division, 1984). 3. USDA, Extension Service, Cooperative Extension System National Initiatives: Focus on Issues (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1988). 4. G. E. Elliott, "Microcomputers in Cooperative Extension," The Agricultural Education Magazine, LVII (No. 10, 1985), 20-22. 5. M. Gist, B. Rosen, and C. Schwoerer, "The Influence of Training Method and Trainee Age on the Acquisition of Computer Skills," Personal Psychology, XLI (No. 2, 1988), 255-65. 6. M. J. Cantrell, "An Assessment of Attitudes, Needs, and Delivery System for Microcomputer Applications by Agricultural and Extension Educators in Mississippi" (Ph.D. dissertation, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, 1982). 7. D. Z. Goode, Jr., "Computer Applications and Computer Technology Transfer by Mississippi Extension Personnel: An Evaluation of Involvement, Competencies, and Training" (Ph.D. dissertation, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, 1990). 8. D. Ary, L. C. Jacobs, and A. Razavieh, Introduction to Research in Education (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1985). 9. D. A. Dillman, Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method (New York: John Wiley, 1978).
Building Community Leadership
Christine A. Langone Extension has been looked on as a source of knowledge and expertise for rural communities. As these communities now face complex issues outside the traditional arenas for agriculture and home economics, however, the role of Extension has been questioned. This study of Georgia's Community Leadership Program shows that county Extension programs can serve as a viable resource in helping communities face social and economic change. The need for leadership in communities, and especially for rural communities in the South, has been well-documented.1 At the national level, Extension has emphasized the importance of leadership development and Extension's role in providing training in this area. In Georgia, the critical need for leadership development was identified through an Extension-sponsored, comprehensive local needs assessment in which communities analyzed local resources and developed plans for the future. A key finding was the need for a broader, better-trained leadership base. This finding was supported by state leaders who publicly stated that unified, committed local leadership is crucial to rural development.2 Community leadership has a particular arena and focus. A workable definition for discussing community leadership and program development has been formulated by the National Extension Task Force on Community Leadership: Community leadership is that which involves influence, power, and input into public decision-making over one or more spheres of activity. The spheres of activity may include an organization, an area of interest, an institution, a town, county or a region. Leadership capacity extends beyond the skills necessary to maintain a social service and/or activities organization. The leadership skills include those necessary for public decision-making, policy development, program implementation, and organizational maintenance.3 This definition suggests the need for application of skills through involvement in local decision-making and action toward community goals. Community Leadership Training In response to the need for leadership development, the Georgia Cooperative Extension Service initiated its Community Leadership Program in 1986. The program was designed to help develop or expand the leadership base in counties and equip local leaders with skills to manage and direct change in their own towns and cities. This county-based program operated with co- sponsors including county Extension, local Chambers of Commerce, boards of commissioners, and other groups interested in community leadership development. The program provided both an educational component and a forum for leaders to discuss current issues. The 12-week leadership program consisted of three units of 30 instructional hours. Class sessions included a combination of lectures, audiovisual media, small group and panel discussions, individual and group assignments, special projects, and informational tours. Instructors were state Extension specialists with expertise in leadership development, group dynamics, conflict management, problem solving, communication, managing change, and community and economic development. In addition to learning theory, the application of skills through case studies, simulations, and community planning was stressed. During many class sessions, participants discussed and prioritized their individual and community concerns. By the last class, participants had formulated an action plan, enabling them to put their skills to work. Successful programs required considerable local input. County Extension agents served as local program coordinators and also as active participants in the classes. The agents built initial support for the program and identified co-sponsors. The co-sponsoring groups then selected a special advisory committee of local leaders to help with the program by seeking donors, selecting participants, and performing managerial tasks. Participants were selected on their potential for developing, continuing, or broadening leadership skills in the county. Each class included members representing various geographical areas and the backgrounds, occupations, group affiliations, races, genders, and age groups of people in the county. Assessing Impacts This study rested on the assumption that the ultimate impact of the Community Leadership Program would be reflected primarily in the ongoing leadership activities of its graduates since the program's inception. The impact assessment included data from 76 counties that had participated in the Community Leadership Program between 1986 and 1991. The counties represented each area of the state and varying types of communities. The population of participating counties ranged from 5,700 to 56,000, with 68% of the counties below 20,000. A total of 2,648 leaders had participated in the program in those counties. To obtain impact data, the state project coordinator developed a questionnaire that was distributed by district agents to the participating counties. One questionnaire per county for 74 of the 76 counties was completed jointly by county directors and agents actively involved in the program. The questions were developed based on interviews, informal conversations, and participant observation with program planners and participants. A total of 23 open- and close-ended questions asked the county directors and agents for information about activities such as the formation of an alumni group, formation of ad hoc or ongoing committees to address specific local concerns, graduates who have run for elected office, sponsorship of repeat leadership classes, and involvement in special activities and other areas of impact. In responding to these questions, the agents and county directors also reported responses and comments they'd received from participants. Due to the open-ended nature of 11 questions, qualitative analysis methods of inductive analysis4 and constant comparison were used to categorize and code statements.5 Totals and percentages were used on questions that asked for quantitative reporting, resulting in descriptions of program impact experienced by the agents involved. Impact Areas Analysis of the responses from agents and those they reported from participants showed that the Community Leadership Program had a positive impact on the counties, residents, and local Extension Service. A positive program impact was found in the areas of networking, the role of Extension, creating a unified spirit, and involvement. While these categories were distinct for purposes of analysis and reporting, the descriptions and quotations show the interrelatedness among categories. Networking As a result of working together in the community leadership classes, networking occurred across many groups. Interaction during classes increased participants' knowledge of local human resources, communication, and appreciation for varying perspectives on issues. Participants told agents that they now had many resource people to call on for committees, community activities, or information. While sharing their ideas, participants learned others had similar concerns and interests. Participants also discovered that differing perspectives could contribute positive solutions. For example, people in recreation became aware of concerns felt by health care professionals. Those in education learned from the business leaders how the whole community is affected by economics. Community leadership classes "helped young leaders understand the values and actions of older leaders and how to work with, not against, each other." Role of Extension Another effect was increased visibility for local Extension staff and an expansion of their role in the community. The leadership classes brought county Extension agents together with the local government, business community, diverse social and civic organizations, church groups, and school personnel. Participants said the program gave them "a broader community perspective as educators and leaders." Groups and individuals became "enlightened" about the resources Extension had to offer through the local office. As one county agent said, "Be it blessing or curse, I am now a community resource person. Within this highly respected group, our office is well-known and called on." The participating Extension agent gained recognition as a knowledgeable resource in community development. Now, county agents are increasingly being called on to provide leadership training, community demographics, rural development planning, and management of community events. Unified Spirit A common theme expressed by most respondents focused on the unified spirit developed among community leaders. Although the classes brought together diverse groups, the result was often a cohesive cadre of leaders with the common goal of community improvement. As one participant stated, the leadership group has developed "A team atmosphere! A support group!" Others described this development as "community pride and togetherness," "a can-do spirit," and a feeling "we have got to work together." One graduate said: "We're a molding together of individuals from different parts of the county with common goals. We put aside selfish interests. We've become a group that's ready to work to make our county the kind of place we want it to be." Involvement This category was expressed two different ways. The first derived from statements expressing the increased level and diversity of involvement; the second related to specific activities and examples of participation. The community leadership classes made people "feel responsible for what goes on," thereby acting as a catalyst for goal-setting and action. A general feeling of "things getting done" was repeatedly expressed. Also, a broader range of community members became involved in leadership activities. One agent stated the classes "brought some hesitant leaders out of the background to assume leadership roles." The application of leadership skills is another sign of involvement. Each county devised a future action plan. These plans typically involved forming alumni groups, sponsoring leadership classes, forming task forces or committees to address local issues, or using skills in existing leadership roles. While the total list of activities is too lengthy to report, the following examples highlight typical local activity. Thirty-six (47%) of the county Community Leadership Programs formed ongoing alumni groups for the purpose of addressing issues in the county. Thirty-seven counties (49%) sponsored second leadership classes for community leaders or targeted audiences, such as youth or agribusiness. These classes have generally been taught using local resource people. Participants in a number of counties have formed task forces or organizations to address specific concerns, such as drug abuse, illiteracy, land use planning, or water quality. Class members in several counties formed a Chamber of Commerce, while programs in two counties resulted in the merger of separate city chambers into one countywide body. In another county, five alumni reactivated the land use planning commission by negotiating with elected officials who initially opposed such a board. Leadership classes motivated participants to become active in local and state affairs. More than 100 program graduates have run for political offices from county school boards to state legislator. Another sign of impact is the appointment of leadership graduates to local and state task forces and boards. Community Leadership Program alumni now serve on the state boards of organizations, such as Young Farmers, Governor's Drug Commission, State Industrial Development Authority, local library boards, land use planning commissions, and countywide needs assessment teams. Several counties now require that appointees to local governing boards be graduates of the Community Leadership Program. Graduates told agents they could make a difference in leadership roles they're already in, using skills learned from class. Many participants were already active in civic and business leadership roles, but now have greater skill and knowledge of effective leadership. Based on these findings, the program has helped build a solid community leadership base in rural Georgia counties. If the leadership actions of program graduates are any indication, they learned the importance of working together toward common goals and acquired or honed the skills needed to achieve those goals. Conclusion Georgia's Community Leadership Program, designed to enhance and develop skills of community leaders, has also highlighted how Extension can be a catalyst for creating stronger linkages and problem-solving capabilities in rural areas. This finding is significant to communities as they search for solutions and resources to solve the complex problems of the future. In a time of dwindling federal and state resources, Extension can help communities discover and develop local resources. Just as Hodgkinson suggested interagency collaboration at the national level to better use resources, reduce duplication of effort, and more effectively attack complex problems,6 so too must local community leaders develop networks to share resources and solutions to local problems. The Community Leadership Program has provided educated leadership and a forum for such cooperation. Footnotes 1. L. J. Beaulieu, "Building Partnerships for People: Addressing the Rural South's Human Capital Needs" (Proceedings of a Regional Conference Revitalizing the Rural South, Birmingham, Alabama, January 16-18, 1990) and R. Soileau, "Social and Economic Impacts of Rural Revitalization" (Proceedings of a Regional Conference Revitalizing the Rural South, Birmingham, Alabama, January 16-18, 1990). 2. G. Berry, "The Secret of Economic Success in Local Leadership, Georgia Trend, I (No. 5, 1986) and A. Niemi, "Rural Georgia Can Save Itself," Georgia Trend, VI (No. 12, 1991). 3. National Extension Task Force on Community Leadership, Community Leadership Development: Implications for Extension (University Park, Pennsylvania: Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development, 1986). 4. M. Q. Patton, Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (Beverly Hills, California: Sage, 1990). 5. C. Sellitiz, L. S. Wrightsman, and S. W. Cook, Research Methods in Social Relations (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1976). 6. H. Hodgkinson, The Same Client: The Demographics of Education and Service Delivery Systems (Washington, D.C.: Institute for Educational Leadership, Center for Demographic Policy, 1989).
Diverse Cultures-CES WelcomeIn the article "Workforce 2000: Is Extension Agriculture Ready?" (Summer 1992), Chesney said, "the organization must make people of diverse cultures feel they're welcome and part of the system." Extension's challenge is enormous. How can Extension make culturally diverse people feel they're welcome and part of the system? It has been said that putting new wine in old wineskins will burst the old wineskins and the new wine will be spilled. New wine must be put into new wineskins. Similarly, putting diverse staff in an old Extension agricultural system won't achieve the outcome Chesney desires. To make culturally diverse people not only feel but be welcome and part of the system requires a new system-a multicultural one. This is one goal of the Cooperative Extension System's emphasis on diversity and pluralism-to create an organization where everyone is empowered to realize their full potential and productivity. When a majority of staff value, embrace, and support differences, people of diverse cultures will be welcome and part of the system. A first step in achieving this goal is for all state and territory Extension Services to commit staff and time to the task of creating a multicultural organization. Leadership for this emphasis is being provided in many states by special diversity committees. But, others, including Extension agricultural staff, can engage in activities to complement and support the efforts of these committees.
Soneeta Grogan
Crop Specialist Questions Tobacco ArticleI have just read the Journal article "Tobacco Risk Awareness" by Robert Duane Plymale (Summer 1992) in which he describes a program conducted by the Ohio Cooperative Extension Service directed at youth at risk. I was amazed and dismayed by this article. The article states as a "fact" that 11 years of age is the average age for starting tobacco and substance abuse. Where is the documentation? The first paragraph also states that, "Tobacco use by adolescents is related to using other chemicals because nicotine addiction may step up their use of other drugs." This statement is referenced, but is extremely subjective in nature. Plymale then states that "a large portion" of the tobacco industries' three billion dollars annual promotional expenditures is directed at youth. Again, documentation is lacking for this statement. He does, however, present data that indicate five percent of the respondents of a survey were influenced to use tobacco based on advertising. Where is the link? In the body of the text, Plymale asserts that a majority of the respondents to the survey who used tobacco products had family members who were aware of this use, but the data presented had less than half of the parents aware of this use. The quoting of figures not presented, while overlooking figures that were less dramatic, would seem more appropriate in a tabloid. With the pronounced anti-tobacco tone of the article, can the project and its results be viewed as anything other than political? Yes, youth should be discouraged from the use of tobacco; but, the underlying issue is what motivates them to start. Tobacco use is probably symptomatic of other problems that face youth and its use should be addressed in that context. Projects that can be implemented that would diminish the "need" for youth to use tobacco as a statement to the world would be more beneficial to all.
Carroll M. Sasscer, Jr.
Extension-Take a Bow!Peter Bloome (Journal of Extension, Spring 1992) is right on target when he points out that as farmers become more proficient in all phases of their operations, Extension should take a lot of the credit. Likewise, I don't believe local county agents have worked themselves out of a job. On the contrary, the need or usefulness of county agricultural agents hasn't diminished, only changed in areas of emphasis. I'm the production agent for the western half of Palm Beach County, Florida, where gross farm income approximates $750,000,000 per year. These are professional growers with staffs of competent individuals managing complex operations. And, located in one of the fastest urbanizing counties in the nation to boot. I'm usually a busy person. I review 200 soil-test results weekly. Variety and fertility trials consume a lot of time seasonally. Production-related pest management is still extremely important and constantly changing. Data collection for recurring publications continues. This is the traditional stuff. The area that has increased the most and overwhelms me is working with the public, whether media, governmental regulatory, university, or concerned citizen. Bloome points out that "society has become much more involved in determining how agriculture will be practiced" and for us in the retirement havens of the South, this is certainly the case. The area of Extension concern that has grown by leaps and bounds, however, is compliance issues. Restricted use pesticide license testing and license renewal through educational programs; mixer-loader and driver safety training; OSHA, SARA Title III, storage tank and solid waste regulations; environmental issues; water use permits; and a whole raft of local ordinances have given farmers more concerns than most production problems ever did. Located with me is an agent with a master's degree in integrated pest management who spends all of his time on compliance issues and is in constant demand. I believe this area will continue to increase in importance. As the farms get bigger, our clientele group doesn't automatically decrease. As acreage increases, so does the number of hired hands, many on a permanent basis. The manager must spend increasing amounts of time in his/her office and thus the employees become man-agement's eyes and ears in the field. The majority of our audience has changed from owner/operators to field or crop managers and their employees. Extension emphasis remains the same: helping ensure a plentiful, safe, and sustainable food supply and a safe, wholesome life for those producing it.
Thomas J. Schueneman
Addressing Societal Issues
Bernard M. Jones Extension has a history of responding to the critical needs of society. The food and labor crises triggered by World War I and farm crises of the 1980s are two examples from a long list going back to the original concept of the land grant colleges and universities. During the last decade of this century, Extension will be challenged much more frequently to respond to broad societal needs. I'm confident Extension has the ability to respond effectively to the challenge. Mission To Address Societal Needs A mission serves as a statement of purpose. Our mission statement has several important parts, but the one I want to focus on first is "people." Contrary to what many believe, the land grant university mission wasn't narrowly focused on agriculture. The basic concept grew out of societal needs-needs of the people and the nation-just as the Cooperative Extension System mission is based on addressing the needs of the people. Extension won't have a great future if its primary objective is to focus only on the needs of about two percent of the population involved in production agriculture. Extension should address those needs of the total population within its base of competence, while continuing its concern for the issues facing the people who produce our food and fiber. The Cooperative Extension System helps people improve their lives through an educational process that uses scientific knowledge focused on issues and needs. This mission is unique, as is the national Extension network that integrates programs and resources of federal, state, and county agencies. That partnership, within the Cooperative Extension System, offers more flexibility than most public-funded educational organizations, with minimum restrictions or mandates. This flexibility will be a tremendous asset for Extension in addressing societal issues. Quality, Diversity, Planning, Partnerships Quality is a common buzzword in higher education in the 1990s. Increased funding for educational programs will go to quality programs. How does Extension score on quality? We have many high quality Extension educational programs across America, but we also have some outdated programs. Most top quality educational programs involve a foundation of outstanding scholars. I believe on-campus and off-campus Extension faculty must be respected as scholars. Extension teachers or educators must be equals with the teachers in the classrooms of our major universities. Scholarly achievements will be a must for faculty developing Extension educational programs. Diversity must improve in Extension. For quality educational programs, the cultural diversity of our faculty must more closely approximate the diversity of our students. Educational diversity of disciplines and of backgrounds must also improve. The Cooperative Extension System strategic plan for diversity is only the first step. The efforts of the National Extension Leadership Development program are providing next age leadership training that addresses diversity for future leaders. Extension must push for a more diverse organization by recruiting, training, and honoring diversity. One of the most positive developments in Extension is a new commitment to planning. The formation of a Strategic Planning Council with a futuristic attitude is a necessity in dealing with the challenges confronting Extension. Most states have started a strategic planning process. Planning forces the organization to make tough decisions and establish priorities. If priorities are set by assessing the most critical needs of the people in each community, as well as state and national needs, and developing educational programs to address these needs, then funds for these programs will be available. Extension in the 1990s must form partnerships outside Extension. In addressing critical concerns such as youth at risk or water quality, we should remember that we're not the only agency concerned with those issues. Extension must form coalitions at the local, state, and federal levels. In fact, we should provide the leadership in forming coalitions or partnerships with other agencies to address critical issues. These coalitions will help prevent duplication and maximize our efforts in meeting societal needs. Funding the Future The opportunity for funding Extension programs in the future is promising. I strongly and sincerely believe the American people are willing and capable of funding education that addresses the societal issues most important to them. Extension's recent success in funding youth programs is an example. Our greatest challenge will be to identify the most critical issues, while our greatest opportunity will be to obtain funding. Extension is the only organization I can think of that has public funding at the local, state, and federal level and also has access to private funds at each of these levels. We haven't been aggressive in seeking funds from the private sector. I'm very optimistic about the future of an Extension System that aggressively addresses the critical issues of society. Futuristic planning with a broader vision of the real issues at the local level will greatly enhance our funding opportunities. Enhanced cultural diversity in people and programs, along with consistently high-quality educational programs, will make an Extension organization with a great history even greater in the 21st century.
Serving Agriculture Is Serving Society
Walter J. Walla Few would disagree that Extension has been and will continue to be challenged by the critical needs of society. History substantiates Jones's assertion that Extension has responded to a wide array of societal needs. Today, the willingness of the Cooperative Extension System to address critical issues is less in question than is the willingness of society to support the system. Extension's three-way funding partnership is described by Jones as providing flexibility. But, sometimes the partners' expectations aren't compatible. Their definition of societal issues isn't the same. Thus, the asset of a partnership becomes a liability when the local Extension unit is caught in the crossfire of partners with different priorities. The fact that two percent of the U.S. population lives on farms today is often cited on both sides of the argument about the need for Extension. If compelled to justify Extension's emphasis, it should be pointed out that agriculture represents more than 15% of our nation's GNP and generates 21 million jobs or 17% of our entire U.S. workforce. And, we all eat and rely on a wide array of agricultural products. In fact, each American farmer provides enough food and fiber for 129 of us. Seems to me serving agriculture and serving society are one in the same. The issue of scholarship and faculty stature for Extension must be addressed by the entire university community. Not only should scholarly achievements be expected from Extension educators, but these should also be recognized and equitably rewarded. Teaching outside the ivy-covered walls of the university must be given equal weight to that from within. In this regard, it appears many land grant universities have lost sight of their historical mission, and relegated Extension and public service to second-class citizenship. It's popular to have a strategic planning exercise, but how many strategic plans languish on the shelf collecting dust? Looking ahead and making adjustments while functioning in the present is a great challenge. No matter the extensiveness of planning, there remains the matter of working the plan. Extension must be careful not to inflict paralysis by excessive analysis. Whatever the sophistication of the planning process, Jones is right on target when he brings into play the role of community needs assessment for setting priorities and developing programs to address those needs. Jones says, "Our greatest challenge will be to identify the most critical issues, while our greatest opportunity will be to obtain funding." It may be more accurate to state the greatest challenge is to get society to agree on the issue Extension should address and to fund the agency's efforts. Clear definition of Extension's competency base and a better understanding of society's interconnectiveness related to critical issues will be crucial to meeting these challenges.
Vision Should Direct Extension's Mission
Walter J. Walla Jones did an excellent job of highlighting some of the issues Cooperative Extension must address to remain a viable organization in the future. About five years ago, Jim Hildreth, now retired executive director of The Farm Foundation, stated that "The Land Grant System including Cooperative Extension is in the process of renewing its social contract with the people and our very survival depends on how well we understand this concept." My fear is that too many of us either didn't understand what Hildreth was talking about or failed to take him seriously. Recent events in many states has made us re-examine not only our mission as Jones does, but also our vision. Before we can discuss, or even define our mission, all of us in the Cooperative Extension System must have a futuristic vision for our organization. We can attain a positive sense of direction only if we have an idealistic vision for the future. This vision must be shared and shaped by those who will be living it- Extension faculty and clientele. Only then can we define our mission and the goals necessary to achieve our objectives. In his comments on quality programs, Jones is accurate in reinforcing the view that Extension professionals must be recognized as equals by their peers in academia. Quality Extension programs aren't, however, defined by scholarly achievements. If we subscribe to the concept of Total Quality Management, which many organizations do, then the quality of our programs must be judged by the consumer. Our clientele will ultimately decide whether we're delivering high-quality educational programs that meet societal needs, not a classroom teacher. As we discuss diversity, we need to recognize this is only a first step toward building a system that takes advantage of societal differences. The next step is to recognize pluralism defines an organizational culture that expects and encourages differences and recognizes the value of broadening our clientele base. Jones reinforces the need for planning to start at the grassroots. However, when clientele are involved and have ownership in the process, they also expect, as a result of their efforts, something will happen. Do we have accountability back to all of our stakeholders? I believe that as an organization our greatest weakness is communicating our accomplishments at the grassroots. We falsely assume these are the people we're closest to and they should know what we're doing. In the future, Extension will be addressing issues that make us uncomfortable, go beyond our areas of expertise, and are controversial. Issues are complex by their very nature, but can be divided into a series of problems. We can address problems we can solve, farm out those we can't, and as Jones states, build bridges and share ownership with other organizations. I'm not as optimistic as Jones about our future. Too many in our organization resist change or bury their heads in the sand, hoping that this too will go away. They've forgotten that Cooperative Extension isn't my organization or theirs-it belongs to our clientele. Only if the people at the grassroots have a pride of ownership will we successfully achieve our vision for this organization.
Staffing Extension for the 21st Century
Lynda C. Harriman
Renee A. Daugherty Rebirth, renewal, and rightsizing describe organizational changes occurring in the Cooperative Extension System. No state is exempt from restructuring.1 Cooperative Extension, like other organizations, faces an era of "discontinuous futures." Life in the future will be very different from the past-more difficult to predict yet requiring greater and faster adaptation. Organizations will face an end to the business they've perceived themselves to be in and a need to redirect human and financial resources.2 The challenge is to chart a course compatible with the changing environment and drop programs and activities that deal with obsolete situations. State Extension Systems have always had some differences in structure and staffing patterns. Some have moved toward more specialized roles for county staff. In others, counties share staff through clustering.3 Several are experimenting with area centers of excellence. Some of the small Northeastern states share state specialists. Those in Extension who try to preserve the past miss the big picture. Success will depend on dedicated Extension faculty and staff empowered to be innovative and take risks. It will also require a clear vision, with careful attention to a market niche within a defined mission. Unwillingness to continue evaluating structure and staffing roles could lead to "paradigm paralysis," an inability to see the organization any differently than it is today. Impact on Structure and Staffing The information explosion and accompanying communications technology have hit head-on with the way Extension has traditionally done business. The computer has transformed education as radically as the printing process once did. Extension publications may become an archaic method of delivering information. Satellite communications make it possible to bring national experts into local communities at little cost. Telecommunications networks have barely been tapped by Extension as tools for information dissemination. What impact do delivery systems have on our structure and staffing decisions? Envision Extension information centers that provide immediate access to national subject-matter databases to answer both common and uncommon questions. Retrieval and information services will automatically gather and send new information to users whose profiles were stored in their systems.4 The professional expertise needed to run these Extension information centers will be different from the skills required of county workers in the past. Extension may find its information dissemination and teaching functions can no longer be handled by the same staff. The critical problems of clientele will still require specialized knowledge and collaboration among experts in various disciplines. The information explosion suggests more specialization will be required of field staff to provide the latest education. Content specialists may become scarce, but distance learning via audio, video, or computer conference will make them increasingly available. State and field staff must be adept at using communication technology both to access and disseminate current information. The global economy will also affect the way Extension does business. We're in an era of tremendous opportunity for farmers, home-based businessowners, and rural businesses to produce, process, and export-particularly value-added products. Clientele need to know and understand how to participate in the world economy, including help in identifying and evaluating markets and connecting with appropriate distribution channels. International marketing requires knowledge of other cultures, compliance with laws and regulations, and skill in handling currency exchange. Extension can position itself and staff the system to provide the needed technical help, education, and training programs the global economy requires. A shifting population and workforce will also have an impact on the 21st century Extension System. The U.S. population has already shifted from rural to urban, family farms to commercial farms, and young to older. Minority populations are growing rapidly. These changes in the population point to the need for a culturally diverse Extension staff and suggest a move away from a staffing pattern dominated by those with expertise and skill mainly in production agriculture, although meeting the needs of agriculture will continue to be important. Based on population centers and changing workforce patterns, where the system will need expertise and who can best provide that expertise must be carefully assessed. With less than two percent of the nation's population engaged in production agriculture, Extension must be seen as an organization staffed to meet the needs of a broader, more diverse population. Even largely rural states will find with the 1990 Census that their urban centers contain the majority of the population and gain more legislative representation. Extension's rural legislative support base-legislators with rural backgrounds -is quickly disappearing. Maintaining Traditional Strengths Extension must also identify and preserve what has made it strong and viable for 75 years. It has always practiced a grassroots approach to programming based on the clients' needs. People know, trust, and rely on Extension professionals. These relationships have produced a strong support base and need to be retained as new ones are fostered. Staff with excellent communication, personal relations, and public relations skills will continue to be critical. Extension is also known for its ability to identify an issue, develop a program to address it, and evaluate the program's success. No doubt the demand for accountability will increase, requiring the system to document program impact on critical local issues. The ability of staff to develop issues- based programs and conduct impact evaluation studies will be vital. Respect for the integrity of the Extension employee and volunteer is another Extension strength. It's exemplified by the system's emphasis on staff and volunteer development and the autonomy granted to staff and volunteers as they work on local issues. Finally, Exten-sion's research base brings credibility to the system as a source of unbiased information that clients can trust to be impartial. Staff with skills to conduct applied research will become increasingly important. Today's Extension staff need to continue to develop and hone these skills that have strengthened the organization. Strategies for Change As the system struggles to redesign itself, innovation and clearer direction with issues-based programs is evident. For Extension professionals, however, restructuring has often meant chaos, stress, resistance, and conflict. In some states, restructuring has focused on state positions versus county positions. In others, people in 4-H, home economics, and agriculture have been pitted against one another resulting in despair, fragmentation, scapegoating, and a weakened system. In trying to rightsize, states may use a staffing formula based on county indexing. States using indexing are Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Kansas, Nebraska, and Wisconsin. Common indexing factors include the number of households per $1,000 of agricultural production, family or commercial farms, 4- H age youth, rural residents, urban residents, adults 18-64 years of age, and low-income families with children under age 16. State Extension organizations appear to use a mix of two basic approaches, with variations to deal with structure and staffing changes. We have labeled these approaches historical/reactive and futuristic/visionary. Although each approach has unique elements, the two aren't mutually exclusive. Most states use elements of both to redesign their Extension Systems. Historical/Reactive. Maintaining current structure and staffing patterns in the face of reduced budgets is the driving force behind the historical/reactive approach. This often means cutting budgets and positions across the board. Critical positions may be lost. Support services, maintenance budgets, and staff development are also reduced.5 Staff reductions come from attrition and/or freezing vacant positions. Counties are combined, with the hope of a return to full staff when funding is regained. The historical/reactive approach is often a stopgap based on the fervent hope that conditions will improve. Some state organizations may be so trapped in history and steeped in tradition, so committed to the way things are done, that the leadership is unable to respond to the needs of a new age.6 Downsizing usually leads to low staff morale and increased stress. Staff may feel insecure. Mobile staff leave the system. Roles and responsibilities are in a constant state of flux, as a smaller staff tries to maintain the same level and types of programming a fully staffed system provided. Staff may feel powerless and victimized. Some go outside the organization to power brokers to try to force change in organizational decisions. Futuristic/Visionary. The futuristic/visionary approach assumes that in the face of a reduced resource base, Extension professionals can design a different yet viable 2lst century organization. The strengths and weaknesses of the current organization are analyzed. Oklahoma Extension, for example, used surveys for input from all staff, then had a representative task force analyze results and move the planning process forward. In a planning task force, the process of deciding what to retain and what to leave behind begins. By developing a clear, challenging vision, the organization determines where it wants to go. Staff are empowered to develop strategies to move ahead within the mission and toward the targeted vision. Staff in states such as Minnesota recognize that moving from the current structure to a targeted goal takes time.7 The futuristic/visionary approach involves all stakeholders in the planning process, and keeps communications continuous, two -way, and free-flowing. In using this approach, the leadership of Illinois CES worked closely with county boards to reconcile the strengths of Extension with the needs of a changing world. Considerable effort by planning groups involving staff at all levels is required to clearly establish where Extension is and where it should be and to identify specific strategies to get there over time. It involves risk and will lead to some resistance both within and outside the organization. The futuristic/visionary approach is cumbersome and time- consuming. It requires careful planning to involve all stakeholders. Oklahoma and Illinois have used hearings in different locations to give local citizens and leaders an opportunity to be involved in planning. This approach can also be undermined by people who believe today's structure is sacred. The approach requires that leaders build on positive forces and carefully analyze barriers to change so new staffing plans aren't defeated before they can be tested. Toward the 21st Century Future Extension staffing patterns should reflect the difference between clients' needs for information versus education, and provide for a staff with skills, facilities, and strategies to meet those needs effectively. Extension professionals must have or acquire expertise in communication and computer technologies. Along with high-tech skills, "high-touch" skills, interpersonal communication, and public relations will continue to be critical. As Extension's viability increasingly depends on program accountability and research-based programming, staff must also further their skills in scientific investigation and program evaluation. Extension programs will be enhanced by hiring more people with cross-cultural experiences and foreign language skills, and those who represent populations to be served. Dealing effectively with changing Extension staffing patterns means making wise decisions about how to deal with external forces having an impact on the system and its clients. It also involves analyzing the internal environment, to retain that which is valuable and will continue to serve Extension well into the next century. Equally important is a willingness to leave behind that which will cause Extension to become an antiquated system. As Rosabeth Moss Kanter so aptly said, "The change master is partly a historian who knows which pieces of the past to honor and preserve while moving toward a different future, but that is not the same as letting the past define the future."8 Footnotes 1. Strategic Planning Council, Patterns of Change: A Report of the Cooperative Extension System Strategic Planning Council (Washington, D.C.: ES/USDA, March 1991). 2. J. W. Pfeiffer, L. D. Goldstein, and T. M. Nolan, Shaping Strategic Planning (Chicago: Scott Foresman & Co., 1989), p. 10. 3. G. K. Hutchins, "Agent Specialization and the 4-H PRK Model," Journal of Extension, XXVIII (Winter 1990), 12-14. 4. M. P. Ezell, "Communication-Age Trends Affecting Extension," Journal of Extension, XXVII (Fall 1989), 11-13. 5. G. J. Applebee and M. W. Duttweiler, "Positive Leadership for Dealing with Limited Resources," Cornell Extension, (August 1991), pp. 1-10. 6. B. Nanus, "Resources for Future Creation," The Futurist, XXIV (May-June 1990), 16-17. 7. G. K. Hutchins, "Evaluating County Clustering," Journal of Extension, XXX (Spring 1992), 17-19. 8. R. M. Kanter, The Change Masters: Innovation for Productivity in the American Corporation (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1983).
Begrudging Ag Resources Won't Solve Funding Problems
Henry M. Bahn Over the past several years, a disturbing trend has emerged in the Journal of Extension and elsewhere. Increasingly, writers are apt to blame agriculture for Extension's problems, be they financial or institutional. Writers suggest the simplistic solution to Extension's problems is reducing the resources available for agricultural Extension work. Increasingly, they're polarizing the Cooperative Extension System. Sauer makes the implausible generalization that no state should devote more than 10% to 20% of its Extension staff resources to the problems of production agriculture. He argues that youth at risk is a higher cause, more worthy of Extension resources.1 Dillman expands Sauer's complaint that agriculture gets too big a slice of the USDA and Extension resource pie. Rural development, he says, is constrained by the "gatekeeper" role of agriculture. He notes that just 17% of rural U.S. counties are dependent on agriculture. It's easy to trivialize such small potatoes (pardon the pun), but don't forget that oxygen is "only" about 20% of the air we breathe.2 My good friend George McDowell, at a CES program leaders' meeting and more recently in Cooperative Farmer, claims CES is "held hostage" by agricultural interests. The fact that "everybody eats," he says, is a weak basis for agricultural Extension. He also hints (rather strongly) that community resource development has need for agriculture's resources.3 In Conone's recent Forum article, she declares that we're "trapped in our agrarian past." A viable Extension, she says, must shift toward more critical needs. Many are more congruous with home economics, including day care, teenage pregnancy, health care, child abuse/neglect.4 I've never been much of a believer in conspiracy theory, but there seems to be a trend developing here. These critics all share a common characteristic. They all covet a bigger slice of the agricultural Extension pie. Their verbiage ("gatekeeper," "hostage," "trapped") is negative and polarizing. Dillman even wants rural development (along with its appropriated funds) out of the USDA. Maybe I'm naive, but shouldn't the U.S. Department of Agriculture be committed to agriculture? Generalizations critical of agriculture are myopic. In 40 years, the world's population will grow to over 10 billion people; agriculture will become more important, not less, to ensure that "everybody eats." The resources earmarked for agriculture clearly reach far beyond the farm family. Did you know that more than 40% of USDA's 111,000 employees work for the U.S. Forest Service? That USDA transfer payments such as food stamps, WIC, and school lunch programs for nonfarm recipients were budgeted at $31 billion in 1992 (over half the USDA budget), while payments to farmers were $10 billion? That 62 million people received direct USDA benefits in 1990? That only 20% of USDA workforce administers programs that deal with farme | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
