Volume 31 Number 2
|
Summer 1993 Volume 31 Number 2 |
|
|
From Practice to Theory and Back AgainExactly 10 years ago, I escaped social constructivism and all those other "isms" of an academic in a liberal arts field, to join the refreshingly pragmatic world of Extension education. If you'd told me then that by 1993 Extension professionals would be talking about "next-age leadership," "continuous process improvement," "new paradigms," and "symbolic frames," my response probably would have been, "You've got to be kidding." But to the extent that the Journal reflects what's going on in Extension nationwide, theory has evidently caught up with (or crept up on) practice. The articles selected for this issue are about both theory and practice. On the one hand, the issue leans heavily toward current applications of organizational theory to Extension. The To the Point section, for example, contains a dialogue about the virtues and concerns related to next-age leadership and new ways of thinking about organizations in a post-modern society. Elsewhere in the Journal are feature articles applying total quality management principles to Extension and new models for program planning and for collaboration. In the Forum section are articles discussing the clash of organizational values in Extension and advocating use of conceptional frames to organize for change. On the other hand, the issue also leads with four case studies of programs developed to address problems and issues. These articles include descriptions of promotional efforts to help Extension communicate with the public on hunger issues, an Extension training program directed toward city government, a test of using public libraries to reach rural audiences, and a district program to train rural day care providers that expanded to meet statewide needs. And, as always, the Journal carries an entire section-Ideas at Work-devoted to innovative Extension programs. Some among us like to dismiss theory as just so much organizational navel-gazing. Others are inclined to think that the practitioner's focus keeps Extension professionals from seeing "the forest from the trees." Each position may be true to a certain extent. But, as we richochet back and forth from practice to theory, we have the opportunity to grow, learn, and move Extension work to new levels of accomplishment. EMR
Editorial Committees and BoardExtension 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.
James Summers, president, Missouri, North Central Directors
Emmalou Norland, Columbus, Ohio, chairperson The $11 Nutrition Challenge
Soneeta Grogan "I knew you all [Extension] did a good job, but I didn't realize to what extent you were actually involved in these kinds of activities for the family." This comment, from the president of a community college, emphasizes Extension's need to continually communicate with its clientele. While many of our clientele know something about the organization, their image of and attitudes toward Extension may be based on experiences with just one program or a contact made years ago. Communicating with our clientele can increase their awareness of contemporary Extension programs and position the organization as a source of education about significant issues. Extension has a history of participating in events, such as fairs or shows, to educate the public. But, we've seldom used promotional events designed primarily to engage the attention of media and communicate with the public about Extension work on an issue. In Marketing for NonProfit Organizations, Kotler states an organization can "increase its newsworthiness by creating events that attract the attention of target publics." He stresses, "Each well-run event not only impresses the immediate participants, but also serves as an opportunity to develop a multitude of stories directed to relevant media vehicles and audiences."1 These were exactly the outcomes Illinois Cooperative Extension staff aimed for in initiating the $11 Nutrition Challenge. Since 1989, the event has been conducted in eight counties with the leadership and involvement of more than 240 staff and volunteers. The Event Participants plan a one-day menu for an imaginary family of four with only $11 to spend for all meals and snacks. On the day of the challenge, they meet in a local grocery store to shop. With menus, coupons, and an assistant, participants search the aisles for the foods they need. After selecting their groceries, shoppers go through the checkout area to learn how much money they've spent. Extension staff use a dietary analysis program to evaluate each day's menu and assign a nutrition score. Then, the staff conduct a press conference. In addition to reporting each participant's nutrition score and cost of the groceries purchased, staff ask participants several questions including: As you went through the store, what changes were you forced to make? What foods or items did you not get to include that you usually take for granted? As a result of today, what have you learned and what do you plan to do? What Participants Learn Challenge shoppers have included a mayor, a U.S. congressman, aides to state and U.S. legislators, county board members, directors of community action agencies, ministers, media personalities, community college and school administrators, an executive director of a hunger coalition, hospital administrators, the wife of a mayor, Extension administrators, EFNEP graduates, and an EFNEP paraprofessional. In 1991, we asked some $11 Nutrition Challenge participants to describe the benefits of the program. Responses revealed participants learned about the difficulties people with limited resources and experience have when trying to feed their families nutritious meals. Participants also learned Extension addresses this problem by providing nutrition education and food shopping education to limited-resource families and other citizens. A school superintendent reported, "After going through it [the challenge], I found an appreciation for shopping and shopping wisely. I think that was the thing I learned the most and looking for the nutritional aspect of things you buy at the store. So it gave me an awareness of all those things I really appreciate." When asked whether his opinion about Extension's value to the community had changed since participating in the $11 Nutrition Challenge, he said, "I wasn't aware of all the things that the University of Illinois is doing in that regard. I had a very enlightening experience in dealing with the Extension Service and since that time I have even learned more about the programs they offer. So, it was a good experience for me." A community college president said, "I think it just raised our consciousness a great deal about what it's like for other people who can't afford to sometimes buy food they want and need." An aide to a legislator commented, "I think this program helped raise the public's awareness of the dilemma faced by people on a limited income. I think they [Cooperative Extension staff] do a good job. I think they need to continue to raise public awareness. And, I think they ought to continue this program as a way to do that." Generating Media Coverage The challenge generated extensive media coverage in every county where it was conducted. Inviting well-known radio, television, and print media personalities to participate was of key importance in gaining media attention. One Extension staff person reported the challenge had stimulated a higher level of media coverage in the county than any other event conducted during the previous 20 years. Two radio announcers broadcast their program from the grocery store during the entire challenge. It featured live interviews with $11 Nutrition Challenge shoppers, volunteers, and organizers. In another county, a radio announcer broadcast his program from a van parked in front of the grocery store for several hours before the event began. Just before the event started, he stopped broadcasting because he was a challenge shopper. Timing is another crucial element in obtaining media coverage. Most often, the challenge was conducted when the community was addressing the issue of hunger or conducting a major food drive. Representatives of the agencies conducting the food drive or working to combat hunger were interviewed during the press conference or given an opportunity to make a statement. Individuals from these organizations support education and recognize citizens need food resources and education to help them use the resources wisely. Communicating with Our Clientele As a result of participating in the challenge event, key opinion leaders in the counties were more aware of nutrition and hunger issues and Extension's role in addressing them through education. The challenge also enhanced cooperation between Extension and community agencies. In every county, the challenge was co- sponsored by Extension and a local grocery store. For all but one challenge, the grocery store management donated the foods shoppers selected to a local food pantry. This allowed involvement of the food pantry directors who accepted the food during the press conference. As a follow-up to one challenge, Extension staff conducted a "Stretching Your Food Dollars Workshop." Staff introduced newly trained Master Food Shoppers during another challenge and explained what they'd do to educate the community. At a third challenge, Extension staff recruited volunteers to be trained as Master Meal Planners. Conducting Promotional Events While the public relations event described in this article addresses the issue of nutrition and health for limited-resource families, Extension staff can design similar events to accomplish the following goals:
Footnote 1. Philip Kotler, Marketing for Nonprofit Organizations (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1982).
Creating a Community Sounding Board
Ellen Rilla
James Reedy Gone are the days when Extension educators dealt primarily with agriculture and rural populations. Societal change and pressures have broadened Extension's clientele, research and information base, and educational methodology. Present-day problems of even traditional Extension clientele include more than farm production concerns, and are no longer solved merely by applying some improved technology. In many cases, today's troubles require working with local groups and stakeholders who have vested interests in the "public" policy alternatives and consequences of the problem.1 In some cases, technology transfer may be identified as the trouble. This article chronicles our efforts, operating as a team with other Extension educators, to work with nontraditional clientele. Our goal was to develop a training program focused on an analytical problem-solving model and interactive group processes for a city government eager to deal with the public and ongoing problems in a more proactive manner. Determining Needs In the Spring of 1990, we were asked by the city manager of Fairfield, California, a city with a population of 80,800 to provide educational help to increase the number of community residents involved in the citizen participation process. They were frustrated by the "no-win" attitude at public meetings and the lack of community leadership on pressing issues such as affordable housing, open space preservation, and gang activity. The city manager and other city leaders wanted to create a citizen "sounding board" that would analyze important community issues, report potential solutions and their consequences, and make recommendations. Participation in the sounding board group could enhance the members' abilities as potential members of boards, commissions, and committees, and might interest them in remaining involved in city government affairs. City leaders were clear on their goals and outcomes, they weren't sure how to achieve them. Extension agreed to develop a comprehensive training program, funded by the city, to prepare citizens for participation in Fairfield's "Vision 2020 Sounding Board." Curriculum Development First, we organized a public policy education team of seven Extension educators: six from Solano County and neighboring counties, and the public policy specialist. Team member selection was based on a willingness to participate and expertise in public policy analysis and process training. Next, we split the six county-based members between two subgroups to design a plan for two training components: one that focused on a public policy analytical decision-making process and the other that provided participants with interactive "how-to" skills needed for implementing their public policy information within a group context. Since much of the activity of the sounding board would be in meetings, the group process subteam developed educational materials based on an interactive meeting model.2 Organized around the three roles of facilitator, recorder, and group member, the model focused on a design for successful meetings, including agenda setting, goal identification, ground rules, active listening, full participation, and a written group memory. The materials also covered coalition building, conflict management, group maintenance, and teamwork. The analytical decision-making subteam designed educational materials based on a problem-solving model used, and refined, in California over the past 15 years.3 This model is similar to many developed and used by Extension staff throughout the country. We used a ladder to symbolize the problem-solving model: the rungs represent the steps involved in the analytical process. A ladder is a tool used in the construction of alternatives to the status quo. At the "problem" site, a ladder is used to go from where one is to where one wants to be. You start at the bottom, and proceed, rung by rung, to the top. You can go up and down the ladder to retrieve something, or you can stop at a certain rung for a specific purpose. At the completion of the job, you pick up the ladder and take it to another problem site. The five-part model begins at ground level with a definition of the problem: selecting a problem topic (Step 1), identifying the situation and concerns surrounding that problem (Step 2), refining the problem into one or more specific issues (Step 3), and selecting and analyzing one issue in terms of a goal (Step 4). Part II consists of identification of alternative solutions (Step 5) and their consequences (Step 6). In Part III, making a decision, the model helps establish criteria (Step 7) to choose an alternative solution (Step 8). Part IV helps generate a strategy for implementing the decision (Step 9). Last, the model helps the user to evaluate the process (Step 10). Implementation During the planning phase, we obtained agreement from the city leaders that we would involve both citizens and city staff as students. City staff would participate in the general educational sessions and in some additional "train the trainers" session so that they could act as faculty for future training cycles and as facilitators of various community group meetings. The city recruited through newspaper articles, local cable television, and fliers mailed to community groups. All 75 interested citizens who applied were selected by the city manager to be part of the first class of "Vision 2020 Sounding Board." Our analysis confirmed the city's success with inclusive recruitment. Half of the citizen participants were female, 32 percent were minority, and several were teens. The city manager also picked 12 city department managers to join the class. In Phase I of the project, the group process subteam taught effective meeting skills ("how-to") over several Saturday sessions. Each educational segment consisted of an opening orientation and agenda-setting discussion with the entire class; intensive analytical work in small groups, each facilitated by one of the trainers and recorded by a city staff member; and a closing session to debrief the participants and outline the next session. Two primary group process goals were to increase the participant's group effectiveness and enhance her/his leadership skills through trainer-led small group demonstrations, practice, and feedback. Participants received a binder of handouts that complemented their newly learned skills.4 During the six evening sessions of Phase II, the decision- making subteam provided the class with a working knowledge of public policy, and demonstrated the use of the ladder model in creating viable alternative solutions to real problems. Breaking into small groups during each session, the trainees analyzed selected city issues, rung-by-rung, step-by-step, before debriefing their evening's work in a "what-went-well-and-what- could-have-been-better" evaluation. Individual and/or group analysis of other issues was assigned as homework. Throughout Phase II, the trainers emphasized that knowing "the answer" was less important than learning how to apply an analytical process to any problem. The trainers also modeled how to work within an effective and efficient group meeting process-the techniques taught in Phase I. More materials were added to the students' binders to supplement the training. Program Evaluation Evaluations were done twice: once midway and once at the conclusion of the program. Results indicated that 77% of the participants were pleased with the training results and this percentage remained constant to the end. City officials have since kept the public policy educational team updated on the sounding board's successes. Now in its third year, Fairfield's sounding board continues to function as an independent forum for discussing community issues before citizens and city government start to take sides. City managers credit the sounding board with defusing potentially hot political battles. Earlier in the year, when "teen cruising" became a problem in the downtown shopping area, a city proposal to ban the practice was passed to the sounding board for its input. Members went back to the community and polled neighborhood groups and local businesses. Ultimately, the sounding board recommended enactment of the city's proposal to the City Council. The measure won easy approval by the council and a ban went into effect with few objections from the community. In 1991, a group of five city staff members, graduates of our educational program, became the trainers of 30 community volunteers in Cycle II of the sounding board. During the Fall of 1992, the city began recruitment for Cycle III. Evaluations conducted by the team coordinator with the team members indicated they found the project to be highly useful on several levels. Some expressed enthusiasm for having learned presentation skills through the cross training and modeling done by other team members with more experience. The program was rich in research opportunities-one member gathered evaluation materials for use in her Ph.D. program. The concept and materials that were created for the project have been replicated and used in subsequent training projects in at least six other county, city, or community settings. Implications for Extension Should Extension be involved in community development on this level? Did we make a difference? Part of the original team was invited back in mid-1992 to provide a "refresher" course to the original city staff trainers and an additional 15 city employees, an indication that city officials still find the "Fairfield-Extension connection" relevant and useful. Team members also are involved with helping specific city staff in their ongoing roles as facilitators to city and community groups. As a result of excellent press coverage, the project heightened the public's exposure to Extension educators as being more than "agricultural" advisers. It also helped recruit new members to the Extension public policy educational team. Some of the more traditional program Extension advisers acknowledge they can't ignore the public policy implications of their clients' problems, particularly in the ever-urbanizing state of California. They also concede that having the skills to help their clientele in examining their concerns, defining the issues, and identifying potential solutions is worthwhile and necessary. Demand for, and administrative support of, similar training for Extension staff has increased. The success or failure of Extension programs in public policy isn't necessarily a function of the quality of the decisions made by citizens and their representatives. Quality, like beauty, is in the eye of the stakeholder. However, the program's success in Fairfield depended on whether our training process "improved" the breadth of community participation and the depth of the discussion, and whether, and how well, participants were able to use the process when next faced with a tough issue. More knowledgeable problem solvers make better, more informed decisions-a core Extension mandate and a core tenet of the democratic process. Footnotes 1. Verne W. House and Ardis Young, Working With Our Publics, Module 6: Education for Public Decisions (Raleigh: North Carolina Agricultural Extension Service, 1988). 2. Donna R. Ching, Designing Successful Meetings: A Participant's Guide (Honolulu: University of Hawaii, 1991). 3. James R. Reedy and L. Tim Wallace, The Ladder: An Analytical Decision-Making Process (Berkeley: University of California Cooperative Extension, 1992). 4. Mastering Meetings for Results: The Interactive Method (San Francisco: Interaction Associates, Inc., 1986).
Extending Information Resources in Rural Areas
James R. Pinkerton
Jack D. Glazier In many rural areas, the loss of federal revenue-sharing funds, coupled with inflation and the persistent refusal of voters to approve tax increases, are causing cutbacks in county funding for local Extension centers. As a result, a number of rural Extension offices have reduced their operating levels and some are being forced to close. This is occurring even though rural citizens continue to need up-to-date market, scientific, and socioeconomic information to function successfully in our changing society. Extension continues to offer information, but reaching rural audiences today requires innovative multidisciplinary approaches. Working with other organizations that have similar goals can be an effective way to help Extension accomplish its goals with reduced resources. For example, Extension centers can work cooperatively with local library systems to more successfully meet the information and educational needs of community residents. Previous Projects and Research Holmes had success in using the public libraries as outlets for distributing Extension information dealing with a major Gypsy Moth outbreak in Massachusetts.1 The libraries appreciated obtaining this information as their own resources on this topic were often limited or out-of-date. The Intermountain Community Learning and Information Services (ICLIS) project in Wyoming, Utah, Montana, and Colorado developed cooperative links between Extension and local rural libraries as well as other organizations.2 The University of Kentucky Extension had positive results in a major program for disseminating Extension publications from the campus to rural libraries in the state.3 Research Objectives To test the hypothesis that greater cooperation between Extension centers and rural libraries improves their services, a cooperative pilot project by the University Extension Center and the County Library System in Texas County, Missouri, was done. The specific cooperative program activities included using the main library in Houston, Missouri, as an Extension public information outlet with microcomputer access to Extension and other University of Missouri resources. Two important computer information sources were LUMIN (Libraries of the University of Missouri Information Network) and the "Agricultural Electronic Bulletin Board." LUMIN is an online catalog of the holdings of the four University of Missouri campus libraries. The Texas County patrons were able to obtain material from the University of Missouri libraries through the interlibrary loan system. With library staff providing microcomputer access to the Agricultural Electronic Bulletin Board service offered by the University of Missouri-Columbia College of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources, the Texas County Library was able to give farmers and other patrons quick access to current agricultural information on topics such as farm market prices, farm management, pest management, agricultural law updates, gardening and yard work techniques, and daily weather forecasts. Users could also exchange messages on the system via the librarian, such as questions and answers about how to deal with farm or garden problems. Display racks and tables were set up in the main library and three branch libraries for disseminating Extension guide sheets covering agriculture, gardening, home economics, and parks and recreation.4 Library patrons needing additional information on these topics were referred to the county Extension center in Houston. The Texas County Library also made available a video cassette player and a television set for playing Extension videotapes. Additional cooperative program activities included: (1) providing sites in the main and branch libraries for local supervision of examinations for University Extension independent study courses and (2) having the libraries available for Extension programs and Extension specialists' consultations with individual clients. Other cooperative services evolved out of the project, such as dropping off soil samples at a branch library to be delivered to the Extension center for testing. Research Procedures and Findings More than a year after the pilot project began, we measured the patrons' awareness and use of the Extension materials and services introduced into the libraries. The data were obtained by a telephone survey of a random sample of 350 adults living in Texas County. During the previous year, 196 (56%) of these adults made one or more visits to the Texas County library they patronize most often. More than half (55.6%) of the main library visitors were aware of the availability of the Extension guide sheets and almost one out of five (18.9%) used them. The levels of guide-sheet awareness among the two branch libraries' patrons were also sizable (47.9% and 36.1%), and the proportions of guide -sheet users were even higher than in the main library (23.9% and 21.3%).5 A majority of the main library visitors (53.1%) were also aware of the microcomputer service for Missouri University information on agriculture and book titles, and 13.8% used this service. The video cassette player was made available just a few months before our survey began, and it was shared by the main library and one of the branches. More than one-third (37.5%) of the main library patrons and about one-fourth (27.1%) of the branch library patrons were aware of the video player, but fewer than 10% had made use of it. Adding the main and branch libraries as outlets greatly expanded the potential audience for receiving Extension information. Holmes notes that: "Few [people] know about county offices-Extension or otherwise. Often, their best source of current-hence useful-information is Cooperative Extension."6 Our data for 328 respondents revealed that only about one-third (36%) had ever visited the Texas County Extension Center. In contrast, three-fourths (75.6%) of the respondents had visited one or more of the four Texas County public libraries. A larger proportion of library patrons than of nonpatrons had visited the Extension center; still, the majority (60.9%) of library patrons had never done so.7 Conclusions and Recommendations The findings from our pilot project indicated that by working with local libraries, county Extension centers can disseminate useful information to rural clientele in facilities where they're more likely to look for it. Moreover, this innovative way of expanding Extension's informational services can be done with few, if any, additional dollars. We suggest that Extension centers seeking cost savings even explore the possibility of sharing space and personnel with their local libraries. Given that university Extension and county library systems have distinct organizational structures, considerable coordination and arbitration will be needed. Because the pattern of cooperation remained relatively simple in this project, only limited intervention was required. For example, sometimes the bureaucratic procedures of one organization or the other had to be adjusted to implement the project goals and agreements. In more complex organizational environments, however, a greater degree of coordination is likely to be necessary. Footnotes 1. Francis W. Holmes, "Don't Overlook Libraries," Journal of Extension, XXV (Summer 1987), 29-30. 2. Donna Whitson, "ICLIS: A Wyoming Experience," Action for Libraries, XIII (January 1987), 3-4. 3. Joanne Smith, "Partners in Information: Libraries and USDA Extension Services Working Together to Meet Rural Information Needs" (Paper given at American Library Association 106th Annual Conference, San Francisco, June 30, 1987). 4. Extension guide sheets on parks and recreation were provided only in the main library. 5. The findings for Summersville, the smallest of the three branch libraries, weren't reported because only 20 respondents visited this library most often. 6. Holmes, "Don't Overlook Libraries," p. 29. 7. This study was supported in part by a competitive grant from the University Extension Innovative Programming Fund, Missouri Cooperative Extension Service. We're grateful to Simon Geletta for his computational assistance.
Training for Quality Child Care
Linda Boeckner
Patricia A. Hendricks
Patricia E. Steffens The demand for child care arrangements continues to escalate in the United States. Recent national statistics indicate that 51% of all women between the ages of 18-44 years who had given birth in the previous 12 months were back in the labor force. This is an increase of 31% from 1976. The most common child care arrangements for children under age five are: care provided in another home (36%); care provided in family home by a father, relative, or nonrelative (30%); and care at an organized day care or nursery school facility (24%).1 An examination of care situations reveals that child care providers in family day care settings often have little or no training in child care beyond personal parenting experiences.2 These child care providers have educational needs in child development, discipline techniques, nutrition, health and safety, and business management topics that Extension is uniquely qualified to address. In the absence of other opportunities for this training, Nebraska Cooperative Extension and with other states have begun to target child care providers for educational programs.3 Such activities fall well within Extension programming activities for family and economic well-being and under the new National Initiative, Plight of the Young Child. In designing innovative Extension programs, others have outlined critical factors for success.4 They include: focusing on a specific practical problem of an identified client group, using time effectively by prioritizing activities, cooperating and coordinating activities with other agencies, eliminating the potential barriers to the educational activity, and placing emphasis on the rewards or benefits to be received from the activity. This article outlines how Nebraska Cooperative Extension used many of these recommended success factors to design a program that addresses the growing concern for quality child care in the state. It focuses on the development of one Extension district's educational program targeted to child care providers, and its growth into a statewide program. Identifying Needs Before 1987, child care providers in Nebraska's Panhandle typically lacked regular, coordinated opportunities to participate in educational activities dealing with early childhood development. It was especially difficult for care providers to find learning opportunities within reasonable distances and at suitable times. Extension educators began preliminary steps to address the need. They identified 237 licensed child care facilities including 179 day care and group day care homes, 22 day care centers, and 36 preschools in the Panhandle area through the Nebraska Department of Social Services. Child care providers in those facilities were all in need of educational opportunities to meet state licensing requirements for continuing education. Day care center staff were required to have 12 clock hours of continuing education related to early childhood education per year; preschool staff annually needed two hours of continuing education for each full day taught weekly; and day care home providers enrolled in the Child-Adult Care Food Program were required to attend nutrition inservice training each year. Because living in predominantly rural communities meant they had little contact with other caregivers, providers from the Panhandle weren't interested in home study. On-site evaluations by licensing specialists and child care food program consultants indicated care providers preferred to gather at a central site for a day-long activity that would satisfy many of their educational requirements. Providers believed meeting with other caregivers would be beneficial for sharing experiences, problems, and solutions. To avoid conflicts with the typical work schedule of a child care provider, a Saturday conference was selected. District Conference Planning Nebraska Cooperative Extension is recognized as a major educational outreach organization, particularly in rural Nebraska, and thus assumed the coordinating role for providing educational conferences for child care providers. To enhance marketing, Extension faculty involved many of the agencies that were most concerned about the need for child care education. The conference planning group consisted of Extension home economists, director of a regional community action agency that manages the HeadStart program, director of the regional child care food program, a licensing specialist from the Nebraska Department of Social Services, and a preschool educator. The planning group's conference goal was to help parents, preschool, day care home, day care center, and HeadStart staff increase knowledge and skill in child care, share expertise and experience, and develop new resources for children. The conference committee determined that fees shouldn't prohibit the target audience from attending, and the schedule should be flexible enough to meet the needs of all participants- from day care home providers to preschool teachers. The planning group set fees for the initial conference at $12 a person to cover direct operating costs and speaker fees. They designed a conference schedule including general and concurrent sessions to maximize the educational offerings at each conference. To encourage professionalism, the conference committee provided a certificate of attendance and offered a minimum of five hours of continuing education credit for each conference. Child care providers who managed exemplary programs were invited to be presenters for some of the concurrent sessions, thus enhancing the professional image of the target group. The time allowed for sharing among participants was also designed as a practical way to share new standards of professionalism. A total of 176 child care providers, educators, and presenters participated in the first early childhood education conference in Nebraska's Panhandle in October 1988. Since then, two early childhood conferences have been held in the Panhandle each year. By attending two conferences each year, it's possible for child care providers to meet most of their annual educational requirements. The four district conferences held thus far have reached 390 different child care providers, child care educators, and preschool/child care center directors. Nearly one-third of the participants (n=124) have attended more than one conference. Developing the Statewide Program At the time of the initial Panhandle conference in 1988, Nebraska Cooperative Extension was adopting priority initiatives for program emphases. One initiative included a child care provider training component. The state issue team used the district model to stimulate the development of other child care provider conferences throughout the state. Evaluations from the district conference participants were useful in identifying additional workshop topics and supported the need for sharing sessions among the caregivers. Following the Panhandle district pattern, a coalition of interested agencies, including Extension, worked together at each conference location to arrange child care provider training. Community college personnel, state and local social service workers, family services agency personnel, day care center and nursery school directors, food service workers, and others have participated. The value of the local coalition lies not only in bringing together those who have direct responsibilities for child care, but also allows a continuing resource for providers in the community. The site planning committees arranged with the Nebraska Department of Social Services, the state licensing agency, to obtain credits for the majority of the sessions offered. Criteria for granting credits included whether the session directly related to improved child care as opposed to topics that provided benefit only to staff such as stress or business management. Expansion of the program throughout the state indicates that it's meeting an expressed need of care providers in Nebraska. In the statewide program, child care provider training was offered at eight Nebraska sites in 1989, 11 sites in 1990, 13 sites in 1991, and 15 in 1992, for a total of 47 conferences. Groups in some locations are offering repeat conferences, offering a variety of topics, and developing indepth sessions on selected subjects for those who have attended previously. The addition of child care at some conference sites increased attendance and removed another barrier to participation. Participant Feedback In 1990, a random sample telephone survey of 10% of child care conference participants from 10 sites across Nebraska (n=97) was conducted six months after the conference. Survey data were qualitatively analyzed and organized according to emerging themes. An evaluator determined the frequency that each theme was mentioned in response to a question. In response to the question, "What were one or two ideas that have been most useful to you?" respondents indicated suggestions for improvement in curriculum (n=28), food service (n=19), and positive discipline (n=16) as the top three categories. The top three categories for making change as a result of the conferences were curriculum (n=64), positive discipline (n=42), and building children's self-esteem (n=36). As a result of the conference, providers reported recognizing children as individuals rather than treating them as a group. They said they had more realistic expectations of children's abilities and planned more appropriate activities. Providers also reported trying positive discipline rather than punishment. Several of them cited specific instances in which children responded with improved behavior. Preschool teachers and directors reported that some of the sessions didn't address their needs as much as those of day care providers. This suggested the need to provide more accurate descriptions of sessions to help participants choose appropriate sessions. With the majority of parents now in the work force, much of the care and education of young children is being done by child care providers. Extension educators can address the need for quality child care arrangements by forming coalitions of interested agency personnel to work together in presenting educational programs for child care providers. In Nebraska, program success has also been accomplished by carefully considering both the barriers and benefits to participation. Educating child care providers is a valid role for Extension educators in addressing family issues. Footnotes 1. Joan C Courtless, ed., "Who's Minding the Kids?" Family Economic Review, IV (March 1991), 25-27. 2. E. M. Ritter and D. T. Welch, "Reaching and Teaching: A Study in Audience Targeting," Journal of Extension, XXVI (Fall 1988), 5-7. 3. K. K. Chenoweth, "Starting a Child Day Care Business," Journal of Extension, XXIX (Summer 1991), 31. 4. K. A. Astroth and B. S. Robbins, "No Time for Modesty," Journal of Extension, XXIV (Spring 1986), 21-24; M. A. Casey and R. A. Krueger, "Critical Factors for Successful Programs," Journal of Extension, XXIX (Fall 1991), 11; and P. Favero and D. K. Heasley, "Managing Innovative Programs," Journal of Extension, XXIX (Spring 1991), 25-27.
Job Satisfaction in Extension
Kathleen Riggs
Karen M. Beus Although much has been written about coping with stress, little is known about what kinds of strategies are most effective in reducing it. Some research has focused on the use of coping strategies in the workplace to help employees deal with the stressors associated with their work.1 Within Cooperative Extension, some attention has been given to the use of coping strategies as a means of reducing or better managing the stresses associated with the profession to reduce low job performance,2 job turnover,3 and job burnout.4 This study of agents in the Western region was designed to examine the relationship between coping strategies Extension agents use in their work to deal with stressful work-related situations and job satisfaction.5 Survey of Agents A systematic random sample of 301 Extension agents with county assignments were surveyed in the Western region. States represented in the sample were Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. Mailed questionnaires were completed and returned by 214 agents (71%). One follow-up request for returning surveys was made. The questionnaire included eight demographic questions. Responses to these questions indicated that 46% of the agents were male. Seventy-two percent of the agents had a master's degree and 24% a bachelor's degree. More than three-fourths of the agents (78%) were married either for the first time or after having been divorced, 10% were single, never-married agents, and 12% were currently divorcing, widowed, or co-habitating. More than 40% of the respondents reported having no children presently living at home, another 38% had 1-2 children living at home, and 19.5% had 3 or more children at home. Of the respondents, 34% had one area of Extension program responsibility. Another 32% had two principal areas of responsibility, and 34% had three or more areas. Areas of responsibility were defined as 4-H/youth at risk, home economics, agriculture, community resource development, EFNEP, and other. Thirty percent of the agents had worked for CES for five to 10 years, 36% 11 to 20 years, and 17% for 21 to 30 years. Just 17% had less than five years' experience. The age of the agents ranged from 26-69 years old, with a mean of 43 years. Measuring Satisfaction and Coping Strategies The instrument used for this study obtained responses from agents about job satisfaction, attitudes toward the organization, and coping strategies. Throughout the questionnaire, agents were asked to mark responses ranging from 1 to 5 based on how strongly they agreed with sets of statements. A score of 1 indicated "strongly disagree" and 5 "strongly agree." A separate section was used to accumulate personal information about the agents. Agents rated their satisfaction with the job itself, present salary, fringe benefits, amount of authority to run programs, administrative supervisors, and level of challenge and opportunity for growth provided by the job. "Overall job satisfaction" was the average score of the means for all six components. They also rated their satisfaction with Extension and their colleagues. Questions relating to five coping strategies identified by McCubbin, Olson, and Larsen were adapted from the F-COPES (Family Crisis Oriented Personal Evaluation Scales) for use in this study.6 The coping strategies were defined as follows:
Reliability and validity tests for each section of the questionnaire were computed using appropriate statistical methods. The reliability scores ranged from alpha=0.70 to alpha=0.86. Findings and Results The questionnaire responses were analyzed statistically to assess job satisfaction, attitudes of agents toward CES colleagues and CES as an organization, and their relationship to demographic factors and coping strategies. Mean scores were calculated for each of the five coping strategies by averaging scores from the corresponding questions on how the individual dealt with difficult situations on the job. Mean scores were similarly computed for overall job satisfaction, agent attitudes toward CES colleagues, and CES as an organization. Findings indicated agents most often used reframing and passive appraisal to cope with stressful situations. Agents' overall satisfaction with their job, colleagues, and CES was moderately high, but more agents were satisfied with their colleagues and with CES as an organization than with the overall job itself. Correlations and probability scores were computed to determine the strength of the relationship between the five coping strategies and three job satisfaction indicators: overall job satisfaction, attitude toward CES, and attitude toward CES colleagues. A low, positive relationship was found between certain coping strategies and job satisfaction measures. Reframing was significantly correlated (p<.03) with how satisfied agents were with all three job satisfaction indicators: overall job satisfaction (r=.24), attitudes toward CES (r=.16), and CES colleagues (r=.15). Other correlations indicated that those agents who use colleagues and other resources aside from family and themselves to cope with job-related problems (mobilizing individual) were more satisfied with CES as an organization (r=.15). Accepting stressful situations as part of the job (passive appraisal) was also correlated with satisfaction with colleagues (r=.16). Agents' overall job satisfaction was moderately correlated with attitudes toward CES as an organization (r=.56) and attitudes toward CES colleagues (r=.47) at the p=.0001 level. A multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) was then used to assess the relationships among demographic factors and coping strategies and their effect on overall job satisfaction, attitudes toward CES, and attitudes toward CES colleagues. Demographic factors were used as independent variables (main effects) in the model, the five coping strategies means as covariates, and the three job satisfaction indicator means as response variables. The multivariate analysis indicated that the interaction between gender and responsibility was a significant factor (p=.0038) in determining job satisfaction. The interaction of responsibility and number of children at home was also significant (p=.0268), as was the covariate reframing (p=.0016). The covariate, mobilizing individual, was marginally significant. When considering overall job satisfaction alone, as the number of areas of responsibility increased, job satisfaction among female agents increased while the satisfaction among male agents decreased. Also, male job satisfaction was influenced by reframing slightly more than was female job satisfaction. A similar relationship was observed when considering attitudes toward CES colleagues alone. In this case, however, the male agents with more areas of responsibility were more satisfied with their colleagues than were the female agents. Considering attitudes toward CES as an organization, a relationship was observed between the number of areas of responsibility and the number of children at home. Agents with fewer areas of responsibility and fewer children living at home were more satisfied with CES, although the margin of increased satisfaction was very slight. Figure 1 includes those factors determined to influence job satisfaction of agents. 
Figure 1. Most significant factors influencing job satisfaction. Conclusions and Recommendations For the agents surveyed in this study, reframing was the most-used strategy for coping with stress and was also significantly related to both their satisfaction with job opportunities and challenges as well as to overall job satisfaction. Evidently, agents are able to enjoy their work more when they exercise their ability to take a look at a stressful situation and reprogram their initial response to the stress as being less than critical. Agents who are unable to adapt or reframe may find it difficult to work for organizations like CES. This suggests the need to identify agents with low job satisfaction and provide training in reframing and other coping strategies to deal effectively with changes and general stressors associated with their job. This study demonstrated an interdependency among the three segments of job satisfaction identified in the model. Agents who report having high job satisfaction are satisfied with the six components of overall job satisfaction (job itself, salary, fringe benefits, authority to run programs, supervisors, and opportunity for growth), CES as an organization, and CES colleagues. Agents must realize the important role various factors play in determining their job satisfaction and understand that a weak link in any one can increase stress and reduce job satisfaction. Footnotes 1. Leonard I. Pearlin and Carmi Schooler, "The Structure of Coping," Journal of Health and Social Behavior, XIX (No. 19, 1978), 2-21 and Susan Folkman and others, "Dynamics of a Stressful Encounter: Cognitive Appraisal, Coping, and Encounter Outcomes," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, L (No. 5, 1986), 992-1003. 2. Darla Botkin, Patty Rai Smith, and Sam Quick, "Toward Peak Performance," Journal of Extension, XXV (Fall 1987), 6-9. 3. Robert J. Fetsch, Robert Flashman, and David Jeffiers, "Up Tight Ain't Right: Easing the Pressure on County Agents," Journal of Extension, XXII (May/June 1984), 23-28. 4. O. Chris Igodan and L. H. Newcomb, "Are You Experiencing Burnout?" Journal of Extension, XXIV (Spring 1986), 4-7. 5. Kathleen Riggs, "Factors Influencing the Job Satisfaction of Cooperative Extension Agents Utilizing Coping Strategies as a Mediating Variable" (Master's thesis, Department of Family Science, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, 1991). 6. Susan Folkman and Richard S. Lazarus, "An Analysis of Coping in a Middle-Aged Community Sample," Journal of Health and Social Behavior, XXI (December 1980), 219-39 and Hamilton I. McCubbin, David H. Olson, and Andrea S. Larsen, "F-COPES Family Crisis Oriented Personal Evaluation Scales," in Family Assessment Inventories for Research and Practice (Madison: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Family Stress, Coping and Health Project, 1981).
Beyond "Business As Usual"
Lynn Jones
Mark Jost In these times of declining resources and increasing demands, "business as usual" no longer is an option for the Cooperative Extension System. Iowa State University (ISU), like others across the nation, has seen a variety of efficiency studies, stepped-up strategic planning efforts, turnover among administrators, budget revisions, and reallocations caused by a state budget deficit. Iowa State University has felt the impact of increasing budget pressures and changing expectations. State appropriations decreased by $1.25 million in an 18-month period. If recent funding trends continue, ISU Extension could cease to be a viable organization by the year 2007. ISU Extension reduced its state and federally funded professional and scientific staff by 143 positions (24%) during the past six years. The attrition strategy used to deal with the reduction has begun to damage staffing patterns. In addition, a change in the structure and election procedures of Iowa county Extension councils created a shared management relationship between the councils and ISU Extension, which must be strengthened and refined. The Extension System faces significant challenges. A society in flux requires Extension be flexible enough to meet changing needs. Rapid changes in technology also require Extension to invest in and take advantage of modern information and communication tools and resources. Extension can no longer claim to be "the only game in town." We must strengthen ties with other service providers and do a better job of communicating our efforts and services to clients. Extension must meet these challenges or be overcome by them. As a result, ISU Extension has changed the way it does business by adopting the principles of Continuous Process Improvement (CPI) and adapting those principles to meet the needs of the organization and its clients. Continuous Process Improvement Continuous Process Improvement is one component of the total quality management philosophy.1 CPI is a problem-solving and problem-prevention system that empowers natural work teams. It involves using a set of tools to diagram and simplify the elements in any work-flow process. Then, those elements are arranged logically, focusing on and simplifying the critical elements and eliminating those that add no value.2 By providing a means of analyzing and improving hundreds and thousands of elements within a work-flow process, CPI helps work groups achieve revolutionary improvements, one step at a time. The tools used to analyze a work-flow process vary.3 Among those tools ISU Extension faculty have found to be most useful are:
These tools have proven their worth not only in simplifying work processes, but in providing a way to put the process down on paper for all to see and understand. Using CPI in Extension Before the use of CPI, planning for ISU Extension staff development was based each year mostly on "gut-level" reactions to the training and development needs of faculty and staff. The plan generally culminated with an evaluation of the quality of the inservice instruction (see Figure 1). The use of the CPI tools enabled the Extension Human Resources Development faculty to design what it envisioned to be a more responsible and responsive process, based on faculty and staff needs (see Figure 2). The new planning process includes a more thorough analysis of clientele needs, an analysis of Extension's ability to deliver those needs, and a more thorough evaluation of how well those needs are being met. Perhaps most importantly, there's no culmination to the planning. Instead, planning is continual, cycling back through the process to clientele needs assessment. 
Figure 1. Old staff development process (inservice). 
Figure 2. New staff development process (inservice). In addition to creating a new staff development model, the human resources unit used CPI tools to develop and produce CPI training materials in just two weeks. The Extension communications unit has also used CPI to streamline the weekly mailing process. The tools also played an integral role in ISU Extension's reorganization by helping planners redraw administrative boundaries, develop schedules, determine subject- matter mix, and write position descriptions. Interest in CPI has spread to non-Extension units within ISU as the university community begins to consider the potential that CPI's tools have to improve and streamline work procedures. CPI methods have also been used to improve Extension procedures in the field as well as help clientele groups:
By the end of 1992, almost all of ISU Extension's 1,200 faculty, professional staff, and support staff on campus and in the field had been trained to use the CPI tools. To our knowledge, this is the first time that all ISU Extension staff have received exactly the same training. Staff were trained in a "cascade" fashion, which began with a two-day training conference for ISU Extension area directors, campus administrators, and the human resources unit. These "students," in turn, became the "teachers" for their staffs, and so on. Training expenses (aside from staff time) have included reference materials, room rentals, honoraria for consultants, and production of a CPI facilitator's guide. Changing Organizational Culture Continuous process improvement realizes its true potential only when staff move beyond using it as merely a set of tools. The real power of CPI is realized as the organizational culture changes to recognize and, in fact, expect the creative and proactive behavior developed by staff through CPI. Robson, in Continuous Process Improvement, said: I expect you to spend forty or more hours a week on the process because it must become the way you do your job. It can't be something extra to do. It must become the way you think and act every day. It must become such a part of what you do and how you do it that eventually you will be doing it without talking about it.3 Few Extension organizations enjoy a culture that consistently encourages creativity and risk-taking, particularly in these troubled times. Passing along the tools for change is simply a matter of training, but remaking an organization's culture into one of trust and security, while undergoing a massive reorganization, goes far beyond tools and techniques. Part of the CPI process builds a climate of trust through a set of ground rules that include the following: be open, be supportive and noncritical, be positive, be willing to share your thoughts and feelings, and no finger pointing. Without these ground rules, CPI can quickly deteriorate into just one more set of terms that is more fad than foundation, and the organization soon returns to "business as usual." With the combination of analysis and trust incorporated in CPI, Iowa State staff have come to believe we can create a new way of working and that "business as usual" will some day be a compliment rather than a critique. Already the change is taking place, one step at a time. Footnotes 1. Most of the literature agrees that total quality management includes three major components: managerial buy-in, teamwork, and continuous process improvement. For more discussion of this topic, see Joseph R. Jablonski, Implementing Total Quality Management (San Diego: Pfeiffer and Co., 1991). 2. Dan Ciampa, Total Quality: A User's Guide for Implementation (Reading, Massachusetts: Addison Wesley Co., 1992). 3. George D. Robson, Continuous Process Improvement: Simplifying Work Flow Systems (New York: The Free Press, 1991).
Paradigms for Program Planning
Thomas F. Patterson, Jr. The program planning model has dominated the development of Extension programs for more than 20 years. While adherence to this model has given Extension a systematic and logically defensible means of developing programs to meet society's needs, our success has been limited. Have American family problems been solved? Is American agriculture cured of its difficulties? Are youth today less at risk? Of course not. It's time to examine the assumptions of the program planning model and explore new ways of meeting the needs of society through education. This article argues that the reductionistic program planning model is a useful tool, but only in certain situations. New ways of approaching complex social issues, called wicked problems by public administrators, need to be considered. Current Assumptions The traditional Extension program planning model is based on five reductionistic assumptions:
A program planning model based on these assumptions has been used to develop Extension programs regardless of the complexity of the expressed problem. It has been most successfully employed in addressing well-defined issues and where desired outcomes are agreed on, such as eradicating mastitis in dairy cows or ensuring food safety. This planning model has, however, failed to result in programs capable of solving ill-defined, complex human problems where there's disagreement on the desired outcomes. New Paradigm Assumptions By reducing a multifaceted human issue into measurable bits, users of this model ignore critical characteristics of the whole, called emergent properties. In fact, the general failure of reductionistic methods has led to the development of alternative ways of viewing and approaching paradoxical human issues. Rather than divide problems into smaller and smaller chunks to be examined by experts, a new holistic paradigm for examining problems in their entirety has emerged. It's based on a very different set of assumptions:
Implementing a New Paradigm Several conceptual tools and techniques of the new paradigm could be useful in the Extension program planing process. For example, mind mapping is a way of pictorially representing a central idea that shows relationships among key concepts.2 The antithesis of linear note-taking, a mind map organizes information so the brain can process it more efficiently. Using action research, the researcher and client work together in exploring, analyzing, and understanding the client's situation. Collaboratively learning together, they gain insight into the situation, allowing them to make better, more informed decisions.3 Soft systems methodology (SSM) is a systemic (not systematic-that's old paradigm thinking) way of exploring a wicked problem that helps participants learn their way to insight. Holistic or systems thinking is used to analyze the patterns and relationships found within the problem situation. Improvements come from discussion and debate among impacted groups.4 Total systems intervention (TSI), the latest systems methodology to evolve, uses a range of systems metaphors to encourage creative thinking to bring about social change.5 Because current reductionistic program planning methods have failed to solve those intractable societal problems that have been so clearly articulated in national and state Extension plans for years, it would seem that Extension is ready to explore new ways of approaching old problems. Extension prides itself on being an organization that uses research-based information to help others deal with change. The research base in problem- solving and improvement methodologies has grown in sophistication and application over the last 20 years. Extension's switch to issues-based programming was a small step in the right direction. It's time for Extension to take a giant leap and make the paradigm shift to include more holistic ways of approaching today's and tom-orrow's complex problem situations. Footnotes 1. These assumptions are derived from an article by Richard Bawden, "Systems Thinking and Practice in Agriculture," Journal of Dairy Science, LXXIV (No. 7, 1991), 2362-2373. 2. Tony Buzan, Use Both Sides of Your Brain (New York: E. P. Dutton, 1974). 3. Stephen Kemmis and Robin McTaggart, The Action Research Planner (Geelong, Victoria, Australia: Deaking University Press, 1988). 4. For more information on SSM, see, Peter Checkland, Systems Thinking, Systems Practice (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1981) and Peter Checkland and Jim Scholes, Soft Systems Methodology in Action (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1990). 5. Robert L. Flood and Michael C. Jackson, Creative Problem Solving (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1991).
Interdependence Models
Claude F. Bennett In 1991, Astroth cited Extension's need to bolster genuine collaboration with other agencies, concluding this requires not only effort and commitment, but also conceptual models to guide Extension toward building collaboration.1 New models are essential, as is the need to abandon existing conceptual models that keep Extension from achieving closer working relationships with other public sector agencies and private sector organizations. Collaboration between Extension and other entities requires common understandings and expectations regarding the processes by which Extension develops programs and the roles it performs in resolving public issues and clientele problems. Yet, Extension often sees its program development processes and roles differently than do other agencies and organizations that are potential collaborators. This article describes how "research- transfer" and "adult education" program models are barriers to closer working relationships among Extension and other agencies and organizations, and suggests the use of an interdependence model. Characterizing Extension Potential collaborators outside Extension, such as research faculty, public policymakers, public/private sector coordinating councils, and industry, generally use research-transfer models to characterize Extension roles and relationships in the generation and adoption of technologies and practices. Research-transfer models first consider research agency/industry actions and outputs and then consider Extension actions and outputs. Examples of research-transfer models can be found in Feller,2 Holt,3 Joint Council on Food and Agricultural Sciences,4 and Office of Technology Assessment.5 Faculty and administrators within Extension generally characterize Extension roles through the use of adult education models. These models first cite Extension actions, then note research agency/industry contributions to the subject-matter content of Extension programs, and follow with further consideration of Extension actions and outputs aimed at user adoption of technologies and practices as well as education of users. Adult education models are reflected in works by Boone,6 Committee on the Future of Extension, USDA-NASULGC,7 McKenna,8 and Warner and Christenson.9 Extension "issues programming," as advanced by Dalgaard,10 for example, also fits an adult education model. Although issues programming promotes interagency cooperation and collaboration, it identifies only Extension roles rather than also citing the related roles of other types of public agencies and private organizations. Interdependence models have been used to describe farming systems research and Extension and are advocated as a means of improving relationships among Extension and related entities. Interdependence models consider: (1) the concurrent actions and outputs of Extension, research agencies, industry, and intermediate users as well as end users of practices and technologies and (2) these five elements' continuous mutual dependencies in the generation and adoption of technologies and practices, plus the education of users. Interdependence models have been used in publications by Beal,11 Bennett,12 Lipman- Blumen and Schram,13 Marshall and Summers,14 and Meyers.15 Comparisons of Models Table 1 summarizes the roles of Extension as characterized by the three categories of models. The categories are broad so not every model placed in a category shares all its general characteristics. By comparison, Table 1 shows that interdependence models, as a family of models, include a broader scope of program development processes and roles of Extension than research-transfer models or adult education models.
If Extension is to effectively collaborate with other agencies and organizations, then their respective leaders, policymakers, public/private sector coordinating councils, and legislators need to fully understand Extension program development processes and roles relative to those of other agencies, organizations, and the public. Research-transfer models and adult education models both limit understanding of the processes and roles of Extension in an interorganizational context. Interdependence models are more helpful because they include all of the following characteristics of Extension:
Conclusion Interdependence models combine the perspectives of Extension held by research-transfer and adult education models. In combining these, interdependence models provide a more comprehensive perspective of Extension processes and roles than provided by either research-transfer or adult education models. Thus, interdependence models help to resolve conflicting understandings and expectations about Extension processes and roles by articulating a new, overarching view of them. Use of interdependence models can build common understandings and expectations concerning Extension processes and roles. Extension is advised to invite other agencies and organizations, public policy-makers, and legislators to use interdependence models. This not only should improve cooperation and collaboration among Extension and other public agencies and the private sector, but also should help build broader support for Extension. Footnotes 1. K. A. Astroth, "Getting Serious About Strategic Alliances," Journal of Extension, XXIX (Fall 1991), 8-10. 2. I. Feller and others, The Agricultural Technology Delivery System (State College: The Pennsylvania State University, Institute for Policy Research and Evaluation, 1984), pp. 223-24. 3. D. Holt, A Conceptual Model of Information Flow in Agricultural Research and Development (Champaign-Urbana: University of Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station, 1986). 4. Joint Council on Food and Agricultural Sciences, Five-Year Plan for the Food and Agricultural Sciences: A Report to the Secretary of Agriculture (Washington, D.C.: USDA, 1986), p. 5. 5. Office of Technology Assessment, Technology, Public Policy, and the Changing Structure of American Agriculture (Washington, D.C.: Congress of the United States, 1986), pp. 69-74., 6. E. J. Boone, Developing Programs in Adult Education (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1985), pp. 130-32, 216-17. 7. Committee on the Future of Extension, Extension in the '80s (Madison: University of Wisconsin-Extension, 1983). 8. C. McKenna, "Cooperative Extension System: A Case in Point," in Planning Adult Learning: Issues, Practices and Directions, W. M. Rivera, ed. (London, England: Croom Helm Ltd., 1987), pp. 85- 105. 9. P. W. Warner and J. A. Christenson, The Cooperative Extension Service: A National Assessment (Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1984), pp. 32-40. 10. K. A. Dalgaard and others, Issues Programming in Extension (St. Paul: Minnesota Extension Service and ES-USDA, 1988). 11. G. M. Beal, Farming Systems Research and Development (Honolulu: University of Hawaii, East-West Center, 1982), pp. 17- 45. 12. C. F. Bennett, Cooperative Extension Roles and Relationships for a New Era (Washington, D.C.: National Technical Information Service, 1990), pp. xv, 6-10, 21-59, 75-83, 149-54. 13. J. Lipman-Blumen and S. Schram, The Paradox of Success: The Impact of Priority Setting in Agricultural Research and Extension (Washington, D.C.: Science and Education Administration, USDA, 1984), pp. iii-6, vi-10, 11, 17-22. 14. H. P. Marshall and J. C. Summers, Strengthening the Research Base for Extension (Morgantown, West Virginia: Extension Service, USDA, cooperating with West Virginia Cooperative Extension Service and Missouri Cooperative Extension Service, 1985), pp. 2- 4. 15. J. M. Meyers, "Technology Development, Technology Transfer: Rethinking the Agricultural Extension Model," in Technology Transfer Society International Symposium Proceedings, Wayne Seden and Scott Taper, eds. (Los Angeles, California: Technology Transfer Society, 1985), pp. 189-99. 16. P. G. Boyle, Planning Better Programs (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1981), pp. 28-29 and Office of Technology Assessment, Technology and the American Economic Transition: Choices for the Future-Summary (Washington, D.C.: Congress of the United States, 1988), p. 34.
Leadership for the Next Age
Jerold W. Apps Depending on who you listen to, we're either entering a post-industrial era, a post-modern era, an information age, or the new age. Rather than try to defend any of these labels, I simply call the emerging era, "the next age." The next age is reflected in IBM cutbacks, General Motors reorganization, layoffs at Boeing and McDonald Douglas, and the passing of the Sears catalog. It will continue to profoundly challenge our society and its institutions, including higher education and the Cooperative Extension Service. Organizations Adrift Many organizations are adrift, not able to adjust to change and challenge, and in a state of shock as yet another set of problems comes into view. Some leaders, including those in Extension, feel like they're on a railroad track, trying to move along, with a freight train bearing down on them. They don't know if they should jump off the track, try to run faster, or hope that the train will run out of fuel, slow down, or maybe, through some act of the Almighty, simply vanish into thin air. This next age isn't several hundred miles down the track and over the mountain. For most of us, it's right around the bend, if not already overtaking us. The next age is more than the restructuring of institutions. It also includes a bundle of paradoxes. For instance, the attitudes of hope and despair are often found together. The next age offers us hope in new technologies to improve communities, combat disease, increase access to information, and assure an adequate world food supply. It also fills us with growing despair about environmental problems, crime, substance abuse, urban decay, the underclass of people who can't afford life's essentials, and political turmoil in the world. Mitroff writes, "On every front of our existence, the problems the United States faces today cannot even be properly defined, let alone solved in terms of the old prevailing solutions. In short, the old solutions just don't work anymore."1 Many of today's leaders, including our Extension leaders, still try to solve the present and emerging problems and meet the challenges of the time with old solutions. The next age will require new solutions, based on new ways of thinking. And, the new ways of thinking will also serve as a foundation for new approaches to leadership. New Ways of Thinking An old way of thinking is to assume all thought and activity is linear-that one starts at a defined beginning and then proceeds step-by-step to some, usually predefined, conclusion. Most, if not all, Extension program planning is linear. An emerging way of thinking includes both linear and non-linear approaches. Extension programmers will need to jump into a project not knowing whether they have found the beginning or not. They'll respond to a problem and not spend a lot of time worrying about doing needs analysis and other linear work. At other times, the linear approach will be most appropriate. The old way of thinking values growth. If the organization isn't expanding, employing more people, and increasing the budget, it's not succeeding. We assume that "bigger is better," when, in reality, more sometimes means less. For example, more money spent on controlling crime may result in less money for preventing it. In Extension, more money spent on new faculty may mean less money to support people already in place. New thinking values sustainability over growth and is concerned with qualitative issues such as human development, quality of life, protection of the environment, and diversity. Emerging ways of thinking will cause us to take a new view of competition, examine the differences between efficient and effective, question specialization, broadly define knowledge to include multiple perspectives, and realize that change isn't constant. Change itself is changing. It's increasingly unpredictable and, as a result, next to impossible to prepare for.2 Leadership for the Next Age What kinds of leaders does the Extension System need as the next age comes upon us? We need leaders who:
The Challenge Can the Extension System meet the challenge of next-age leadership? Can our administrators and faculty find within themselves flexibility to change? From county offices to national leadership, we must nurture new ways of thinking that result in new approaches to doing. Otherwise, Extension will find its place in history as a "last" organization. Footnotes 1. Ian Mitroff, Break-Away Thinking (New York: John Wiley, 1988). 2. C. Handy, The Age of Unreason (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1989) and P. B. Vaill, Managing as a Performing Art (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1989). 3. W. T. Anderson, Reality Isn't What It Used To Be (New York: Harper & Row, 1990).
I'm Supposed to Dance with the One That Brought Me
Howard Ladewig Since attending a Juran seminar in 1990 on total quality management, I've been overwhelmed with opportunities to purchase books, attend seminars, rent videotapes, and subscribe to newsletters on Total Quality Management, Continuous Improvement, empowerment, work teams, quality circles, diversity, organizational development, preparing mission statements, and coaching. In addition, such traditional terms as leadership, management skills, performance appraisal, planning, and delegation now have modifiers connecting them to an additional list of books, seminars, videotapes, and newsletters. Because leadership and organizational development is a field in which I have some interest, I'm able to sort the many topics into some semblance of order. I can only imagine the feelings of Extension administrators and others not as closely associated with this topic. Perhaps, their feelings are similar to that of Darryl Royal, the very successful former football coach of the University of Texas Longhorns. When asked what new strategies he'd use for an upcoming football game for the national championship, Royal responded, "We intend to dance with who brought us." I believe Apps has done a commendable job of summarizing some of the problems facing current leadership and in describing leadership characteristics required in the "next age." This article, however, raises three concerns for me. My first concern is that the mode of operation that brought many of our leaders into their current leadership positions included growth of the organization, flexible goals, employees looking to administration for key decisions, and working behind the scenes to gain support for budgets. To ask our leadership to change strategies in a time of budget battles is like asking a run-oriented football coach to pass on first down. The coach knows full well the team isn't skilled at passing. And, what about an Extension culture that has long valued the traditional view of leaders as special people who set the direction, make the key decisions, and motivate the faculty?1 Until recently, Extension had the reputation for providing a lifetime job. Employees, in turn, were loyal "running the football." It's time to clearly demonstrate to both groups whether next-age leadership is "nice or necessary." A second concern relates to new ways of thinking. Rather than talk about new ways of thinking, let's talk about the value of its antithesis. Some old ways of thinking have been the basis for our existence. Reading the 1926 Extension Service Handbook reminds one of the long-time emphasis by Extension on the importance of problem solving. The agent is told to clearly document the present practices being followed and the circumstances dictating those practices. The agent then should provide practical solutions for problems, including sources of supplies. In building a local program, the agent is instructed to work with community leaders to consider local problems and to arouse community interest in approving the program and to discuss ways and means of carrying it out.2 In today's jargon, develop a vision, clearly document present reality, and work with local people in adapting the vision to their situation. In sum, Extension has been conducting next-age leadership with clientele since it inception. I believe Extension must now apply the process to itself. My third concern is "the vision thing." Lee reminds us that most organizations have a mission and vision statement.3 Most also have printed a list of organizational values. But how many are making real structural changes based on the organization's vision? The process involved in building a shared vision is a very powerful tool. Handled improperly, it can cause serious, if not fatal, injury to all who come in contact with it. In conclusion, I believe that next-age leadership has taken the first step. It has provided a vision. The next step is to clearly describe the difference between that vision and reality. Then, perhaps we'll be prepared to answer: "What do I tell the one who brought me to the dance?" Footnotes 1. Peter M. Senge, "The Leader's New Work: Building Learning Organizations," Sloan Management Review, XXXII (Fall 1990), 7-23. 2. U.S., Department of Agriculture, 1926 Extension Service Handbook (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1926). 3. Chris Lee, "The Vision Thing," Training, XXX (February 1993), 25-34.
Assisting Poland in Transition
Earl H. Teeter, Jr.
John L. Ragland
Michael J. McGirr For the last three years, U.S. Extension personnel have been involved in a collaborative project with Poland's Ministry of Agriculture to restructure and revitalize Poland's Agricultural Advisory Service. Beyond helping Poland, this project has provided a unique opportunity to extend the federal/state/county partnership that has made our domestic Extension programs so successful to the international arena. Background In late 1989, President Bush asked then Secretary of Agriculture, Clayton Yeutter, to head a team to determine how the United States could help Poland in making the difficult transition to a political democracy and a market economy. An Extension Service-USDA team, led by ES Administrator Myron Johnsrud, met in 1990 with key officials in Poland's Ministry of Agriculture, agricultural leaders from Rural Solidarity, the Sejm (Poland's Parliament), and the Church Agricultural Committee, as well as regional and local agriculturalists and private farmers. The team and the leaders they interviewed agreed that Poland had a sound agricultural research base and well-trained agricultural specialists at all levels. However, neither the agriculturalists, agricultural economists, nor farmers had the basic economic knowledge and skills needed to successfully manage farms or agribusinesses in a market economy. Poland's Extension system was held in low esteem because it had served the Party and government, favoring state farms over private farms in the provision of new technology and physical inputs. But most Poles favored restructuring the current organization rather than abandoning it only to face building a new Agricultural Advisory Service from scratch. Polish officials were also unhappy with international "assistance," which they described as experts coming in with little knowledge of local circumstances, staying in posh hotels for one or two weeks, telling Poles what they should be doing, and then disappearing with nothing accomplished. The Project Based on these findings, the ES-USDA, in collaboration with Poland's Ministry of Agriculture, developed and implemented a project to help restructure and reorient Poland's Agricultural Advisory Service to work closely with private farmers, agribusinesses, and rural communities to teach the skills necessary to operate successfully in a market economy. The focus of help would be on how to plan and carry out client-oriented educational programs and on understanding economic issues and developing skills in management, marketing, and agribusiness development, rather than in agricultural production. The program would be carried out by a few, long-term American staff assigned to the Ministry of Agriculture and with six-month, two-person field teams working at provincial level advisory centers. These teams would have time enough to gain an understanding of local conditions and design programs with their Polish counterparts that would address specific local concerns and needs. This basic approach, worked out in collaboration with many Poles, has worked effectively and received the continued endorsement of three new Ministers of Agriculture. To date, ES- USDA has placed field teams in 14 of Poland's 49 provinces and five additional field teams began six-month assignments in January of 1993. As a result of the program, many changes have been made in the Polish Agricultural Advisory Service. For example, 49 provincial Agricultural Advisory Centers have been separated from state farms, the center directors fired, and new directors recruited using a competitive process. The Agricultural Advisory staffs, which were bloated by the make-work policies of the old regime, were reduced by about 50%. The Polish advisers and specialists were found to be well-educated and professionally active, but they underestimated the quan-tity and quality of work they could do. By example and quiet persuasion, these limitations are being eliminated. Citizen advisory councils have also been organized in all provinces and, in some cases, in each township. Increasingly, these councils determine priorities and needs and Extension professionals organize and deliver the educational programs to address these needs. A national council has been established and is making recommendations on a regular basis to the provincial governors, Ministry of Agriculture, and the Parliament. In terms of direct Extension programming, farm visits and consultations have greatly increased and local agribusinesses are becoming regular clients of the Agricultural Advisory Service. A larger number of on-farm trials and demonstrations are being conducted by Extension staff throughout the country to reduce production costs and improve marketing. The Extension centers are regularly printing and distributing market news based on price information collected by local Extension workers. The Agriculture Marketing Service of USDA is building on this base to develop a uniform national system of price discovery and reporting. Once it becomes more highly developed, the market news function will "spin off" as a private industry. More than 1,200 Extension advisers in 26 provinces have received intensive training in business planning and development workshops. Extension centers have become the primary source of such assistance in rural Poland. A variety of small- and medium- sized agribusinesses have been created in rural communities as a result of these workshops and follow-up assistance. Polish specialists are now so expert in conducting the business planning workshops, which are in ever-increasing demand, that American advisers are giving more of their attention to helping business startups, joint ventures, and international trade. Success Factors Two major factors contributed to the success of this project. First, no attempt was made to impose the U.S. or any another Extension model on Poland. Instead, Poles at all levels collaborated with U.S. Extension personnel in developing a unique approach consistent with Polish traditions, institutions, and needs. The U.S. field teams weren't given blueprints to implement, but were expected to develop their plans of work, in collaboration with provincial and local Extension staff and farmers, to address local conditions, needs, and priorities. Second, U.S. Extension marshalled a group of highly qualified, diverse, committed faculty for the effort. State directors and staff responded positively to opportunities to participate. Staff from 20 land grant universities have included:
As word of the project's accomplishments has spread, USDA has received requests for Extension help from Hungary, Bulgaria, Albania, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Russia, and Ukraine. At a critical time in history, U.S. Extension has been able to demonstrate the power and effectiveness of adopting to and meeting the needs of the people.
Overcoming Barriers to a Global Outlook in 4-H
Arlen Etling
Kimberly K. Reaman
Gwen El Sawi Cooperative Extension faces many problems in adopting a more global outlook. This is evident in many Extension programs and especially in 4-H. Numerous programs offer 4-Hers opportunities for global citizenship. International 4-H youth exchanges (IFYE) and the Japan exchange program continue to grow and evolve. The Central American Peace Scholarship (CAPS) pro-gram that brings Costa Rican youth to live with 4-H fam-ilies shows promise for expansion to other countries. The National 4-H Council's new Mexico project promises "collaboration for youth development," and a pilot exchange between Minnesota and Russia is in progress. Another new National 4-H Council initiative, development education, has provided 12 states with U.S. Agency for International Development funds, so 4 -H families may explore global connections in their own communities. The new leaders' guides, "...And My World," provide the basis for a unique project in global understanding that can unite all of the fragmented activities we used to know as international 4-H. Simply having these exchanges and projects available, however, doesn't mean 4-H has created an organization- wide global outlook. Barriers to Participation We need to examine the impact of emerging international opportunities at the county level. We need to look at those activities, often fragmented and isolated from the rest of 4-H, to take a balanced look at the barriers as well as the benefits of such programs. In a recent study of international programming delivered by county 4-H professionals, Reaman identified several problems for effective youth programming in global citizenship. The greatest barriers are: expense, especially for trips out of the country; lack of a clearly defined project; agents' resistance to international activities; problems with state program leadership, such as inadequate communication and impossible deadlines; limited opportunities for adults who might otherwise provide support; and program management, including scheduling, evaluation, and complicated procedures.1 In working with 4-H international programming at the local, county, state, national, and international levels, we identified two more perceptual barriers: (1) war and recession greatly affects clients' attitudes about global citizenship and (2) the "image" of international 4-H in the past is an impediment to participation in global citizenship programs. Recommendations Extension professionals must understand these barriers and respond by adjusting their programs. Inexpensive alternatives to international travel are necessary. One option is travel that involves little or no cost to deserving youth, such as the Mexico Project. Another option is to promote activities that don't require international travel, including camps, workshops, global recognition nights, pen pals, sister clubs, country studies, speakers, movies, and board simulation games. Agents, specialists, and administrators need to be aware of county agents' negative perceptions about international programming. They should also know that familiarity breeds respect. Agents who support a global perspective in 4-H should encourage their colleagues to take advantage of these opportunities. State coordinators should use advisory committees to help implement clear and consistent communications and to give leadership and direction at all levels for the programs. Inservice opportunities for professionals and volunteers should be expanded. In Pennsylvania, Extension professionals have traveled to Puerto Rico through a class in international development. University assistance projects in other countries also enable Extension agents to share their expertise while gaining international experience. The keys to improving the management of international programs are stability and communications. Procedures must be simplified, clarified, and unified. A risk management system, such as the one in Oregon, should be implemented. We can best respond to war and recession by diversifying our global educational curriculum. If travel to one part of the world is questionable, we can shift emphasis to programs in other parts of the world, to interstate exchanges involving cross-cultural experience, or to activities not requiring travel. The term "international" should be replaced with "global citizenship" when speaking about 4-H and youth programming. When we speak about "global education," we should be speaking of a curriculum that helps youth gain life skills. Youth exchanges are just one activity that may comprise that curriculum. These recommendations can serve as guidelines in reducing barriers and improving global citizenship programming. Some Extension professionals will, however, remain unconvinced. We still hear people say, "Let's take care of our own backyard before we start running around the world." But let's also consider the facts about today's global society. One in six U.S. production workers depends directly on international trade. Furthermore, 20% of U.S. industrial output is for export, 40% of the U.S. farmland produces for export, and about one-third of U.S. corporate profits come from international activities.2 Preparing people to live in a global society has become a necessary component of citizenship education. Extension has the capacity to play a vital role in developing competent citizens. It can help youth become self-directed, productive, and contributing members of their communities whether local, national, or global. Footnotes 1. Kimberly K. Reaman, International Programming Delivered by County 4-H Professionals (Master's thesis, Department of Agricultural and Extension Education, Penn State University, University Park, 1990). 2. Commission on International Education, What We Don't Know Can Hurt Us: The Shortfall in International Competence (Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1984).
Attitudes Toward Internationalizing
Barbara G. Ludwig Extension has been challenged by ES-USDA to integrate international perspectives into all programs and help staff and clientele in developing global competence. Yet, how do our clientele feel about internationalizing Extension? When the Ohio Cooperative Extension Service began to internationalize its program, a study of faculty and staff was conducted by the Extension International Committee. Extension staff were positive about adding an international dimension to programming, but some identified lack of clientele support as a barrier. Research to determine the accuracy of this perception was needed. During the Summer of 1991, a survey was mailed to 385 Ohio leaders. The target population consisted of three groups: county agricultural leaders, metropolitan leaders, and state level agricultural leaders. A proportionate stratified random sample was identified from names provided by faculty in the College of Agriculture. Included were 96 (25%) county agricultural leaders, 185 (48%) metropolitan leaders, and 104 (27%) Ohio agricultural opinion leaders. Demographicl information was collected about those studied and a five-point, Likert-type scale was used to measure attitudes. Questionnaires were returned by 316 (82%) leaders. Overall, the groups targeted for study were positive in their attitude toward internationalizing Extension, but not strongly so. County agricultural leaders, agricultural opinion leaders, and metropolitan leaders indicated Extension should develop programs to educate U.S. farmers, agribusinesses, and rural leaders about competing in global markets and encouraged Extension staff to receive training to become more knowledgeable about global marketing. This reinforces ES-USDA recommendations.1 Respondents also indicated strong support for the concept that Extension staff in Ohio have a role to play in helping clientele understand global issues. Leaders indicated we can learn from the culture and technologies of other countries and indicated citizen exchanges between countries improve the ability of participants to understand and care about how other people live. Ohio's traditional agricultural constituency were more reluctant than their metropolitan neighbors to support internationalizing Extension. Analysis of variance and the Scheffe post hoc test showed metropolitan leaders to be significantly (p<.05) more positive in attitudes than county agricultural or state agricultural opinion leaders. County agricultural leaders had the most negative atti-tudes toward Extension involvement in global education. Analysis of variance showed neither age, educational level, nor out-of-country experience significantly (p<.05) affected reactions to adding a global dimension to Extension programming. In all instances, attitudes toward Extension involvement were positive. The groups surveyed were well-educated and traveled, with 98.7% completing high school and 91.4% attending college or going on to earn an advanced degree. Twenty-five percent had obtained post-graduate degrees. Seventy-seven percent had traveled outside the United States and 71% read a daily newspaper. The final question on the survey offered respondents the chance to make written comments about Extension staff incorporating global concepts in their educational programs. A total of 114 leaders responded. Fifty-six percent were supportive, 20% were negative, and 24% offered mixed reactions. Metropolitan leaders were the most positive in their comments. In addition to developing curriculum for clientele and inservice training for staff, marketing the concept of internationalizing Extension to clientele groups is advisable. Traditional county agricultural constituency should be targeted for marketing and educational programming. Footnote 1. Global Perspectives for Extension (Washington, D.C.: Extension Service-USDA, 1989). < | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
