Volume 32 Number 3
|
October 1994 Volume 32 Number 3 |
|
|
Extension Journal, Inc.Extension Journal, Inc. is a quasi-official body of the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges and the Extension Committee on Organization and Policy (ECOP). It is a nonprofit corporation organized for the purpose of publishing a journal for professional Extension staff, adult educators, and community developers. Board of Directors:
James C. Summers, President, Missouri, North Central Directors Editorial Committee:
Emmett Fiske, Washington, Chairperson Extension Education and Unbiased Research
Raymond E. Massey Gary Hansen (1993), in his Forum article "When Grassroots Belief and Research-Based Information Conflict," succinctly presents a real problem in Extension programming. An educator's judgment of the best available research does often come into conflict with grassroots beliefs. However, Hansen's conclusion of putting research-based information as most fundamental is an errant concept of the Extension educator's role in a community. An educator's role is to present knowledge in an environment conducive to learning. Issue based programming meets much of the requirement of an environment conducive to learning because the learners have a stake and an interest in the issue. It is the learners' or community's responsibility to decide how to respond to the information. For the educator to "decline to participate in a program unless it is modified to be consistent with the best available research" (Hansen, 1993) is to leave the realm of educating and enter the realm of prescribing. It is to exit a prime learning environment. The recommendation to value research-based programming over community beliefs fails for the following reasons. First, the recommendation fails to recognize the imperfection of even the best research. Research knowledge is not to be equated with truth. Kuhn (1970), in his classic book "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions," details how various physical science paradigms have fallen and been replaced with others. Social science paradigms are subject to even greater variability than the physical sciences because social scientists are often unable to formulate an experiment under controlled conditions. Experiments in the physical sciences are usually conducted with most of the variables within an experiment controlled, allowing for comparisons against an identical control group. Social science research does not have the luxury of precise control groups though social science researchers do try to minimize variation. Thus, the different levels of statistical significance in social science research may result in variability in application in different contexts. Second, Hansen's recommendation fails to recognize and accommodate diversity. If Extension and the academic community are going to truly value diversity then they must recognize that stark valuations of research over beliefs do not properly take into account the institutional constraints inherent in both education and research. Research which is appropriate in the inner city may be of little value in rural areas. Communities which value traditions over growth may not respond to research findings in the same manner as communities which value growth over traditions. Most research, by design, attempts to minimize diversity and to have a homogenous control group. It is reductionist and must be properly understood when introducing it into a dynamic issue solving context. Educators must be able to recognize the limitations of the research within the context of the institutions (church, community, school, etc.) where they work. Third, the recommendation fails to be unbiased. The use of the term "best available research" indicates that there is published research with different conclusions currently available. The educator's view of what is the "best available" guarantees a bias. As an economist, I happen to think that monetarist theories are superior to Keynesian economic theory. Rather than refuse to participate with a group that does not hold the same bias that I do, I seek to recognize the strengths and limitations of each theory and assist the learners in appropriately addressing their issue. A recommendation which avoids the extremism of declining to participate would be for Extension educators to attempt to serve as true educational resource persons. Such educators avail themselves of as much research as possible and present their programs with the needs and beliefs of the clientele in mind. Such a position allows the educator to be critically involved in community programs without compromise. Extension educators who are properly trained to understand the research published in their respective fields will be able to interpret the experimental design and see where it differs from the goals and objectives of community issue teams. They have the freedom to present the possible strengths and weaknesses of various alternatives being considered by the community. They also have the freedom to mention which alternative they favor. Extension educators do not enter into the realm of deciding what the decision of the community group will be. If the decision of the group results in a success, Extension educators stand to gain by having been a part of a successful program. If the program fails, Extension educators do not have to take the blame because they served as educators rather than as decision makers. Furthermore, Extension educators are now positioned on the inside as resource educators and will be able to help the group make adjustments to the program so that the goal is obtained. If they pull out because their biased opinion of "best available research" was not fully implemented, they are left outside when the time comes to modify a weak program. If Extension is to maintain its reputation for being an objective and unbiased educational resource, we must discard the presumptuousness thinking that we have the answers, learn from history that the best available research is transient, and present all sides of the issue in as fair a manner as possible. To maintain that we or our research is unbiased is arrogant and misleading. Unbiased educational programming is best accomplished when we act as educators providing research-based information regarding the effectiveness of various alternatives and letting the people use that information within the context of their beliefs. This is not controversy-aversive behavior but true education which allows Extension educators to challenge and confront learners with new ideas. To withdraw is to miss the opportunity to truly educate. References Hansen, G. (1993). When grassroots belief and research-based information conflict. Journal of Extension, XXXI(Summer), p. 29. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. In O. Neurath (Ed.), International encyclopedia of unified science (Vol 2, No. 2). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Editor's Note This manuscript was originally accepted for the Forum section of the "Journal of Extension." As such, it was peer reviewed by three members of the Editorial Committee. Manuscripts submitted to the new Commentary section will only be reviewed by the editor.
Effective Public Relations in Extension
Mike Hogan Communicating the impacts and accomplishments of Cooperative Extension programs is vital for the continued support of these programs by legislators, community leaders, and the general public. Simply doing good work and helping people to help themselves will not maintain or expand financial support and positive public opinion in a climate of scarce resources. Several studies have found that legislators and the general public lack a clear understanding of the mission (Adkins, 1981) and funding (Blalock, 1964) of Cooperative Extension. In fact, research in one state has indicated that a majority of state legislators view Cooperative Extension as a public service agency, rather than an educational institution (Miller, 1986). Objectives Beginning in 1988, the Carroll County office of Ohio State University Extension began an organized, proactive public relations program. The overall objective of this program was to increase the effectiveness of the entire county Extension program by increasing the understanding of and support for Extension by county residents and legislators. Specific goals included the following:
To accomplish these goals, Extension staff members sometimes had to confront paradigms regarding how resources were allocated. Spending a few thousand dollars on public relations projects and toll-free telephone lines is not yet routine practice for Extension professionals, but was necessary to communicate our message to users and non-users of Extension programs, legislators, and other community leaders. Innovative Communication Methods One very simple but effective communication tool that was developed was a periodic report to legislators. Currently titled "Priority Press," this two-page (front and back) report is distributed to county commissioners, state legislators, U.S. Senators, Congressional Representatives, and Extension Advisory Committee members three to four times per year. This communication tool has proven to be a highly effective, low-cost method to keep lay leaders and legislators informed of Extension programs and impacts. Recognizing that an effective public relations program should promote two-way communication, attempts were made to make it as easy as possible for the public to communicate with county staff members. To facilitate this communication, a toll-free telephone number was established and marketed with a specially developed refrigerator magnet. These 3" x 3" magnets contain the Ohio State University Extension logo, as well as local and toll- free telephone numbers to call for information. Several thousands of these magnets have been distributed to traditional users of Extension programs and to the general public. These magnets are being used in homes, farms, and places of business throughout the community. Another successful method used to communicate with the public is a high-quality yearly "Report to the People." This professionally prepared yearly report of impacts is distributed to the general public each December. In 1994, a combination calendar/report format was used. This format served two purposes: first, it provided a yearly calendar listing of Extension events, and second, it featured a full 12 pages of Extension program impacts. These pages were also used to highlight the work of Extension volunteers and to thank various legislators for their support. Several thousand copies of this calendar/report were distributed to Extension program users, legislators, and the general public through direct mail and giveaways at libraries, feed mills, grocery stores, etc. This has proven to be an excellent way to educate both users and non-users of Extension programs about the breadth and scope of the total Extension program. Even repeated users of a particular Extension program may not be fully aware of the scope of other Extension programming efforts. Many other approaches to tell Extension's story have been used including:
Results of the Project The effects of this on-going public relations and education project are cumulative and long-term in nature. One of the most tangible positive results has been an increase in county funding for Extension. From 1987 to 1994, funding for Extension increased by 116% or $75,000 in the county. It should also be noted that this increase came during a period when county commissioners had extremely limited funds to allocate, and were forced to "level-fund" or decrease many other county programs and offices. Commissioners apparently believe that Extension programs are more valuable or critical than others which they fund. The size and scope of the Extension program has also increased. Between 1987 and 1992, the size of the county Extension staff has increased from 3.5 FTE's to 5.8 FTE's. Both the quality and quantity of Extension programs offered locally have also increased. Additional funding has also been used to upgrade equipment and improve communications technology, including the purchase of a satellite dish and portable computers. Another benefit of these public relations efforts is the closer working relationship which has been developed with legislators and county commissioners. It is not uncommon for county commissioners to seek assistance from Extension to solve various community problems and issues not typically related to our traditional program areas. People Involvement is Critical The key to the success of this project seems to have been the involvement of lay leaders throughout the process. The entire Extension staff has teamed up with advisory committee members and other lay leaders to promote Extension. It is the responsibility of these citizens, and not Extension staff, to secure funding from county commissioners. Each year, a group of citizens discusses the importance of Extension program impacts as they present Extension's annual budget request to county commissioners. One of the most critical components of involving citizens in this process is to identify the most appropriate and effective community opinion leaders who might help. One year, direct quotations and testimonials from lay leaders and 4-H members were used to document the impact and value of Extension programs in a "Report to the People." These citizens are respected opinion leaders in the community and proved to be very effective advocates for Extension. What Can You Do? There is no limit to the number of creative approaches which Extension professionals and lay leaders can use to make legislators and the general public aware of Extension programs impacts. Why not sit down with fellow staff members or advisory committee members and ask yourselves these questions:
How you answer these questions will likely determine whether or not your Extension program could use a boost from a public relations project. References Adkins, R. (1981). Motherhood, apple pie, state legislators and Extension. Journal of Extension, XIX. Blalock, T. C. (1964). What legislators think of Extension. Journal of Extension, II. Miller, J. (1986). South Carolina legislators' perception of the Clemson University Cooperative Extension Service. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Clemson University, South Carolina. Author Notes Additional staff members contributing to the success of the public relations program include: Cindy Bond-Zielinski, Vicky Piechuta, Jane Carpenter, Michelle Crall, Cookie McGhee.
Do Local Realities Clash with Federal Expectations?
Georgia L. Stevens
Kathleen Ann Lodl
S. Kay Rockwell
Cheryl Burkhart-Kriesel The national youth-at-risk initiative responded to the pervasive conditions in America which place children and their families at risk for not meeting their basic needs and not building the basic competencies necessary for successful life participation (Pittman, 1993). With the establishment of this initiative in 1988, the Extension Service-USDA made a commitment to develop and deliver programs for "at-risk" youth as a part of its educational mission within the Land Grant University System. To carry out this mission, a grant program to develop specific youth-at-risk programs at the local level was implemented. A basic assumption was that expectations for these grants would be similar at the federal, state, and local levels. While everyone agreed that the goal of the monies was to improve the lives of young people, especially those at risk, there were different expectations at each of these levels on how to achieve this goal. This article explores the different perceptions that federal, state, and local level participants held about the youth-at-risk grant funds. It highlights similarities and differences, and discusses implications for Cooperative Extension and future youth-at-risk programming. To investigate these federal, state, and local expectations, KIDS' TEAM, a federally funded youth-at-risk project, was used as a case study. Current research shows there are several factors that contribute to youths taking part in behavior that places them at risk (Bogenschneider, Small & Riley, 1991). One method of effectively addressing the needs of youth is to develop local community coalitions that use an ecological approach, focusing on the family in the context of the community (Keith, 1993). With the implementation of KIDS' TEAM, it was hoped that communities would begin to use this ecological approach for addressing youth-at-risk issues. The focus of KIDS' TEAM was to organize groups of children in Nebraska's largely rural Third Congressional District to plan and carry out safe activities when school was not in session. A KIDS' TEAM curriculum box was developed for suggestions on activities that develop lifetime skills. Facilitators were also trained to provide project leadership. The KIDS' TEAM curriculum was designed as a start-up project for local community groups to use in their effort to build an effective community youth coalition. Methods The research question to be addressed was "what are the differences in expectations at the federal, state, and local levels concerning youth-at-risk grant funding?" A qualitative approach using a set of open-ended questions for reviewing printed documents and conducting personal interviews was implemented. At the federal level, data were obtained from the requests for proposals (RFP's) and federal project director memorandums. Data at the state level were obtained through the USDA project applications, progress reports, promotional flyers, preliminary evaluations, and personal interviews with state project directors. At the local level, six telephone interviews were conducted with local project leaders at three sites. The interview protocol focused on background information of the respondent, expectations at the local level, project strengths and weaknesses, project concerns, and suggestions for project improvement. Data from the federal, state, and local levels were analyzed following Strauss and Corbin's (1990) procedures for open coding. Findings Several similarities and differences at each of the three levels emerged for each of the questions studied. The fundamental intent and philosophy at the federal level of youth-at-risk funding are to develop youths' potential and enable at-risk young people to become healthy, productive, and contributing adults. Specific goals focused on: (a) strengthening the ecological environment for youth; (b) increasing the decision-making skills of youth, thereby reducing the long-term costs to society; (c) developing community coalitions of youth and adults that build on partnerships among the public and private sectors; and (d) institutionalizing youth-at-risk programming to ensure local program continuation. Overall, participants at the federal level wanted to carry out this goal by delivering programs across the nation in the most efficient manner for the least amount of money. The overall expectations at the state level mirrored those of the federal level. In addition, participants at the state level wanted to meet their state's goals and local clientele needs. The primary way they expected to accomplish federal expectations and empower communities to address the needs of youth-at-risk was through coalition building--the third goal identified at the federal level. At the state level, mechanisms were put into place to develop local coalitions that would plan, organize, and implement a school-age childcare group that used a curriculum designed for the project, the KIDS' TEAM box. Locally, the highest priority was given to making "real" differences in the lives of individuals and their communities. School-age child care was seen as a major concern, and many initial program expectations were focused on activities surrounding the KIDS' TEAM curriculum box. Retrospectively, one local-level respondent said the program was a "two-prong effort." The first issue was school-age child care. Once this was addressed, the group could then move on to other youth issues. Project participants at the local level saw expectations change as coalitions functioned over a year's time. After strategies were in place to address school-age childcare, the local coalition members began to recognize and address other youth-related concerns. Therefore, they "backed" into the federal and state expectations after they felt success with their initial project focus. Discussion The findings show the basic philosophy and goals for the program at the federal and state levels were similar. While the federal expectations were global, the state level became more specific and focused on state needs. At the local level, more differences in expectations for the project occurred. Primary goals at the federal and state levels focused on developing community coalitions to address youth issues. The primary goal at the local level focused on developing a school-age child care activity. State level program designers wanted the KIDS' TEAM effort to be the "first step" in a coalition building process that would ensure a better local environment for youth. However, many community members saw the situation in reverse. They saw coalition building as the final step in developing a school-age child care program. Although many local groups still are very involved with the school-age child care activities, they began to see the coalition as a means to address other youth needs after experiencing success with one project. The most noteworthy outcome was the willingness of community organizations and traditional Extension clientele to more fully embrace and understand the KIDS' TEAM effort as a part of the role and mission of Cooperative Extension's youth-at-risk effort. The role of Extension was questioned when the Department of Social Services and Head Start in one community reacted with, "I didn't know the Extension Service did that." Likewise, Extension Board members and 4-H Leaders asked, "Do we do that?" and, "Why do we do that?" Coalition members spent a great deal of time explaining why Cooperative Extension is involved in coalition building and why it was reaching out beyond traditional 4-H youth activities to reach at-risk youth. It is often assumed that clientele understand the role and importance of priority initiative programming. As indicated by the interviews, this is not always the case. Though state statistics mirror national figures on several risk-related behaviors, it was difficult for some community leaders to accept the fact that problems existed. While many communities were strongly supportive of the goals of the program, a few did not see themselves as having youth "at risk." In one community, school board members felt that youth do have problems, but this was not indicative of their community because they perceived that youths were home with parents. Recommendations By comparing the expectations of a youth-at-risk project at the federal, state, and local levels, several important elements emerged. The local level Extension educators need to actively redirect Extension's public image by focusing on priority issues that address local needs; raise public awareness as to the severity of youth-at-risk issues by collecting and publicizing local data; and challenge themselves to implement programs that target youth-at-risk and traditional clientele. To support local Extension educators, state project directors need to empower them to create a climate in which this change can occur. Federal administrators must acknowledge the amount of time it takes to nurture the development of youth-at-risk programs and community coalitions. They can also help develop strategies on a short- and long-term basis. Conclusion The purpose of this paper was to examine expectations for youth-at-risk funding. In doing so, it was discovered that while the process at each level might be different, expectations are similar. The clash is the discrepancy that exists between the vision of Cooperative Extension regarding youth-at-risk programming and the understanding of the general public as to this mission. The true challenge for Cooperative Extension is to help the public understand this mission and how it impacts them as clientele. It is only by developing this kind of understanding that our organization can effectively implement programming that will empower communities to successfully address the needs of youth-at-risk. References Bogenschneider, K., Small, S., & Riley, D. (1991). An ecological risk-focused approach for addressing youth-at-risk. Paper presented at the National Extension Youth-at-Risk Summit, Chevy Chase, MD. Keith, J. (1993). Building and maintaining community coalitions on behalf of children, youth and families (Report No. 529). East Lansing: Michigan State University Agricultural Experiment Station. Pittman, K. (1993). Philosophy: Children, youth and families at risk. Extension Plight of Young Children & Youth at Risk National Initiatives. Youth At Risk Site Conference, Washington, DC. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Training Needs of Area Specialized Extension Agents
Jerry D. Gibson
John Hillison Cooperative Extension Service agricultural agents have traditionally been nonspecialists; that is, they have broad knowledge of all aspects of their general program area-- agriculture, natural resources, community development, home economics, or youth development. Today, the problems faced by our society are becoming so specialized and complex that generalist Extension agents have great difficulty keeping abreast of technological developments on all fronts. To address this problem, the North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service has added area specialized Extension agents (ASEA) to their field staff. These agents serve several counties and specialize in a single subject area--for example, swine production, family resource management, or integrated pest management. These specialized agents are highly proficient in their subject area, better serving the needs of Extension clientele and reducing work load and frustration for nonspecialized agents. Currently, North Carolina has 66 ASEAs working in 18 different subject areas. The creation of the ASEA position has presented a new challenge to the North Carolina Extension Service: the planning and development of training programs suitable for these specialized agents. However, virtually all existing training programs are designed for nonspecialist agents. Specialized agents commonly are employed after completing advanced formal training in their area of specialization. To be effective, however, they also need competencies in the Extension education process. In addition, they must understand the human development, learning, and social interaction processes, and they must become knowledgeable about the organization within which they work. Unfortunately, time, personnel, and other resources for inservice training are very limited. Therefore, it is crucial to devote training opportunities to those topics on which training is most important and most needed. As an aid in developing effective inservice training programs for North Carolina ASEAs, their training needs and interests were studied through a survey of North Carolina Extension Service administrators, state-level subject-matter specialists, and the ASEAs themselves. Although the results of the study are unique to North Carolina, the methods and instruments used can be readily adapted to assess training needs for specialized agents in other Extension Systems across the country. Methods The questionnaire used in this study was based on an instrument developed by McCormick (1959) and later adapted by Price (1960) and Hubbard (1971) for assessing the training needs of nonspecialized Extension agents. The questionnaire focused on eight general competency areas identified by the Extension Committee on Policy as necessary for the effectiveness of Extension agents (National Policy Statement, 1968):
Respondents were asked to rate the importance of each competency area and specific elements of knowledge and ability within each of those competency areas to the effectiveness of ASEAs. Importance was rated on a four-point scale, with 1 representing little or none; 2, moderately important; 3, important; and 4, very important. In analyzing the results, competencies and elements rated 3.0 or more were considered to be important and included in the study. Respondents were also asked to rate the ASEA's need for training in each competency area and in specific elements of knowledge and ability within each competency area on a four-point scale, with 1 indicating little or none; 2, moderate need; 3, need; and 4, great need. Competencies and elements rated 3.0 or more were considered to be needed and included in the study. The questionnaire was pilot tested with 16 ASEAs in Virginia. Using the split-half method, the reliability was determined to be .93 for importance ratings and .96 for need ratings. The study population was comprised of 66 ASEAs, 49 administrators (district and county directors), and 18 subject- matter specialists employed by the North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service. Response rates were 91% for ASEAs, 96% for administrators, and 100% for subject-matter specialists. Results Selected demographic data were collected for ASEAs responding to the survey. Eighty-two percent of the ASEA respondents were males, with the majority being Caucasian, and only 5% being members of other races or ethnic groups. They had received college training ranging from bachelor's degrees through doctorates, but the majority held master's degrees. They had served from one to 23 years in their present positions, with over 50% having held the position for five years or less, and 33% for three years or less. The substantial proportion of respondent ASEAs with relatively limited experience suggests that inservice training on the principles and practices of Extension education could be especially useful. Importance of Training Ratings of the importance of training by the three respondent groups are summarized in Table 1.
Not surprisingly, Extension administrators considered all eight competency areas important to the effectiveness of an area specialized agent. The specialized agents themselves and the subject-matter specialists were more conservative in their ratings; they agreed that program planning and development, communication, human development, and educational processes were important, but subject-matter specialists also included research. All three respondent groups rated program planning highest among the eight competency areas with a grand mean of 3.37. Other grand means were as follows: educational processes (3.23), communication (3.2), research (3.07), human development (3.03), Extension organization (2.96), social systems (2.96), and effective thinking (2.93). Considering the large number of elements subsumed under the eight competency areas, these data indicate rather solid agreement among the three groups of respondents. The mean ratings for the importance of each general competency area as a whole did not in any case differ among the three groups by as much as 1.0, the level chosen to represent a meaningful difference. The greatest difference (0.4) was observed in the area of Extension organization and administration. Furthermore, mean ratings of the importance of training in specific elements within each competency area did not in any case differ by as much as 1.0. Thus, while there were some minor variations in opinion about the importance of the various competencies and their constituent knowledge and abilities, the data showed general agreement among the groups. Need for Training All three respondent groups also rated the need for training in each of the eight competency areas. Neither the ASEAs nor subject-matter specialist groups highly rated training in any of the eight general competency areas as needed (3.0 or greater). The responses of the administrators, however, indicated training needs in the areas of program planning and development and educational processes (greater than 3.0). As with the ratings of importance, the mean ratings of the need for training within each competency area as a whole did not differ among the three groups by as much as 1.0, the level considered to represent a meaningful difference. The greatest difference observed (0.8) was in the area of program planning and development. Need for training in this competency area was rated much higher by administrators (3.3) and somewhat higher by specialists (2.9) than by ASEAs (2.5). Mean ratings of the importance of training in specific elements of knowledge or ability within the various competency areas did reveal some meaningful differences. In the Extension organization and administration competency area, the three groups exhibited important differences in their ratings of the need for training in understanding the history of Extension (1.0), the philosophy of Extension (1.1), the university-USDA partnership (1.0), and county responsibilities (1.2). Administrators generally gave considerably higher ratings to these elements than did the ASEAs and somewhat higher than the specialists. In the area of program planning and development, the need for training in program planning was rated much higher by administrators (3.3) and subject-matter specialists (2.9) than by ASEAs (2.3). There were no important differences in ratings of the need for training in specific elements within the other general competency areas. The results of this study showed general agreement on the most important competencies and most critical training needs of ASEAs employed by the North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service. Administrators and subject-matter specialists agreed more closely with each other on the training needs of ASEAs than they did with the ASEAs themselves. Administrators rated the importance of and need for training of ASEAs in all competency areas higher than subject-matter specialists and ASEAs. Applications Based on the results of the study, training recommendations were developed for North Carolina ASEAs. Content topics recommended for inclusion in the training program were those for which all three groups of respondents rated training needs at least 2.5. Of the eight competency areas, only program planning and development met this criterion. Within that competency area, six specific elements received ratings of at least 2.5 from all three groups of respondents: understanding the role of area agents, involving lay people, developing a long-term Extension program, building an area Extension program, developing programs, and implementing evaluation procedures. An Area Specialized Agent Development Institute has been proposed to address these ASEA training needs. References Hubbard, R. C. (1971). Training needs of county Extension agents in South Carolina. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University, Raleigh. McCormick, R. W. (1959). An analysis of training needs of county Extension agents in Ohio. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison. National Policy Statement on Staff Training and Development. (1968). Staff training and development subcommittee, national Extension committee on policy. Madison: University of Wisconsin, University Extension. Price, R. K. (1960). An analysis of education needs of Arkansas Extension agents. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Migrant Farmworker Training Needs and
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Table 1. Pesticide training information contained in the EPA's Worker Protection Standards and corresponding interview questions for migrant farmworkers and crew leaders. | |
|---|---|
| Minimum Training Standards for Workers: | **Interview Questions Asked of the Farmworkers and Crew Leaders: |
| 1. Where and in what form pesticides may be encountered during work activities. | 1. Where you might find pesticides at work and what different forms they come in. |
| 2. Hazards of pesticides resulting from toxicity and exposure, including acute and chronic effects delayed effects, and sensitization. | 2. The dangers of pesticide poisoning including effects that happen right away and others that take longer to show. |
| 3. Routes through which pesticides can enter the body. | 3. Ways that pesticides can enter your body. |
| 4. Signs and symptoms of common types of pesticide poisoning. | 4. Signs and things that happen to you if you have pesticide poisoning. |
| 5. Emergency first aid for pesticide injuries or poisonings. | 5. How to help someone who has been poisoned or injured by pesticides. |
| 6. How to obtain emergency medical care. | 6. Where to get emergency medical care. |
| 7. Routine and emergency decontamination procedures, including emergency eye-flushing techniques. | 7. Everyday and emergency steps to decontaminate yourself, including flushing your eyes if pesticides get in them. |
| 8. Hazards from chemigation and drift. | 8. The dangers from pesticides drifting in the wind. |
| 9. Hazards from pesticide residues on clothing. | 9. The dangers of having pesticide residue on your clothes. |
| 10. Warnings about taking pesticides or pesticide containers home. | 10. Problems with taking pesticides or the containers they came in home. |
| 11. Requirements of this subpart designed to reduce the risk of illness or injury resulting from workers' occupational exposure to pesticides including application and entry restrictions, the design of the warning sign, posting of warning signs, oral warnings, the availability of specific information about applications, and the protection against retaliatory acts. | 11. Your right to be told about when pesticides are put on the crops, when you can go back into the fields, what kind of protection you need to wear if you go into the fields that have been treated; and if your boss doesn't do these things, you have a right to tell someone without getting in trouble from your boss. |
| **The respondent was asked "How much do you know about the following:..." to which they responded, nothing, very little, some, or a lot. They were then asked to express what they knew. | |
Six different farms that employ migrant farmworkers were selected based on accessibility and the concentration of migrant farmworkers in North Central Indiana (Cass, Howard, and Tipton counties). Camp location information was obtained through the Indiana Department of Health, and the Consolidated Outreach Program of Kokomo. Permission to enter a camp was granted by the grower or crew leader. A total of 30 interviews were conducted: 20 migrant workers, six crew leaders, and four growers. All migrant farmworker and crew leader interviews were conducted in person, in Spanish or English. Growers were interviewed in person or by phone. The confidential interviews required 20 to 60 minutes.
Results
Population Descriptions
Migrant Farmworker. A migrant farmworker is a seasonal laborer whose principal employment is in agriculture and who establishes a temporary residence for such employment. There are over 7,000 migrant farmworkers employed in the state of Indiana, spanning 44 different counties (Office of Migrant Health, 1990). The farmworkers interviewed were primarily American citizens of Hispanic descent whose home base was Texas (n = 10), Florida (n = 8), Georgia (n = 1), or Mexico (n = 1). As part of the midwest migrant stream, they traveled to Indiana in extended family units to work in cucumber and tomato fields from May through October. The workers had labored seasonally on their present grower's farm for an average of five consecutive years.
Thirteen men and seven women were interviewed. The mean worker age was 31 years (youngest = 16, oldest = 54). On average, workers completed a seventh grade education from American or Mexican schools (low = third grade, high = high school graduate). Spanish was their first language, but about half interviewed in English. Four workers stated they could read and write in English, while 14 could read and write in Spanish. When not working in Indiana, workers were generally employed in agricultural jobs (n = 12).
Migrant Crew Leader. The responsibility of the crew leader was to serve as a liaison between the grower and the workers. Specific duties included showing the workers how to pick, hiring workers, keeping records, and maintaining order in the labor camp. Most crew leaders could speak, read, and write in Spanish and English, speaking to the workers in Spanish and to the grower in English. The crew leaders indicated that the 40 to 100 workers at each of their camps migrated from Florida, Texas, Mexico, El Salvador, and Guatemala.
The crew leaders had worked an average of 12 years with the same grower. When not employed as crew leaders, they worked in Florida (n = 3), Texas (n = 2), and Indiana (n = 1) in agriculture related jobs. All but one of the crew leaders were male.
Grower. Growers either lived next to or nearby their camps. They could not speak Spanish and relied on their crew leader to communicate specific instructions to the migrant workers (e.g., where pesticides have been applied). Growers indicated the necessity of having a good crew leader to manage the daily activities of the workers. Workers were perceived by growers as being highly dependable while doing a job which required long hours of repetitive hard labor.
Pesticide Knowledge
Migrant farmworkers and crew leaders answered a series of pesticide questions, responding that they knew nothing, very little, some, or a lot about the subject of each. They were then given the opportunity to express what they knew.
Migrant Farmworker. Workers generally knew "very little" pesticide information. The information most frequently expressed (25% to 50% of the time) was: pesticides come in powder form; pesticides can enter your body by breathing or smelling and through the skin; pesticides can lead to getting sick; wash your hands before lunch and take a shower in the evening; wash work clothes daily and keep them separate from other clothing; and emergency medical care can be obtained at the health clinic or hospital. All workers indicated they had no responsibilities for mixing, loading, and applying pesticides.
Migrant Crew Leader. Crew leaders were generally more familiar with pesticide terms than workers. Their knowledge was concentrated in the following areas: were and what form pesticides are found at work, where to obtain emergency medical care, everyday steps to remove pesticides from your body and clothing, and dangers of pesticide drift. Their understanding of pesticides was based on personal experience. Crew leaders indicated they were not involved in the pesticide application process.
Grower. Three of the growers hired commercial applicators to apply their pesticides, while one grower utilized his son. Two growers explained they used a "schedule" or "system" in which they sprayed the fields most recently picked by the workers, waited five to seven days, and then reentered the fields to do more picking. The growers' knowledge about the new EPA Worker Protection Standard varied. Each grower indicated that crew leaders and farmworkers had no responsibilities with pesticides.
Training Considerations
Open-ended questions concerning pesticide training were asked of each participant. Thirteen farmworkers would like to know more about pesticide safety, stating, "it never hurts to learn more" or "why not?" Only four indicated a fear of pesticides. One worker commented that pesticides are "...very dangerous, but you need to work, so weigh the odds." Many initially responded ambiguously to the need for pesticide safety training but, by the end of the interview, felt they might need to know more. Five workers felt they didn't need training, commenting, "I've never been sick" and "it's not very important." Two workers reported personal pesticide exposures, while seven workers knew of someone else who had been exposed; none of the exposures referenced occurred in Indiana. Growers and crew leaders stated that pesticide training was not necessary, but it wouldn't hurt. They offered more pressing education for workers: basic hygiene, nutrition, and money management. Many crew leaders and growers believed pesticides pose little risk to workers because they never worked directly with them and were not allowed to work in recently sprayed fields.
Grower, crew leader, and worker responses to the three most important things that workers should know about pesticides were categorized into: (a) preventive measures such as washing hands before you eat, not touching your face, wearing gloves and protective clothing in the fields, and washing tomatoes before eating them; (b) job-related pesticide information such as what pesticides are being used, reentry periods, and recognizing or asking about what might be dangerous; and (c) emergency procedures.
Ten workers suggested that pesticide safety training should be conducted in Spanish. Six workers indicated either Spanish or English, and four indicated they would like training in English. Videos, publications, and oral communication were identified by the workers as the best ways to teach them. One worker commented that the teaching method used needed to "capture their attention." A grower pointed out that any training should be done in coordination with the farmworkers' work schedule (e.g., in the evening and not during harvest time).
According to the workers, they have acquired what they already know about pesticides on the job and through various life experiences (n = 7) such as working in California during the time of Cesar Chavez, seeing a video in Texas, and working with chemical engineers in Mexico. Other individuals said they learned through school, parents, health clinics, handouts, common sense, and the news. The crew leaders' knowledge of pesticides was based on their job experiences.
The dissemination of information on the farm originated with the grower and was passed on to the crew leader, who informed the workers. Crew leaders often communicated information to migrant workers by talking to the head of the family and depended on word of mouth for further dissemination. A majority of the workers indicated a high degree of faith in the crew leader and grower, feeling that when they were told to enter a field, it was safe.
Conclusions
Several important conclusions can be derived from the interview data. First, migrant farmworkers are a population with many unique characteristics. Formal education is limited and elementary school could be the last time workers are taught in a formal setting. Migrant workers' use of Spanish and their inability to read English distinguish them from other adult learners. Experiential learning has made the workers extremely "job-wise," and they do practice some preventive pesticide safety measures.
Second, growers, crew leaders, and migrant farmworkers were ambiguous about the need for pesticide safety training. The potential dangers from pesticides are not immediately apparent because workers and crew leaders have no responsibilities with pesticides and do not enter fields recently treated. Preventive health and safety education, literacy training, and money management overshadowed their perceived need for pesticide training. The desire to learn more was sparked in the farmworkers after the interviews, implying that awareness stimulated interest.
Finally, the growers are mandated by the WPS to educate their workers on basic safety practices; but growers themselves are more typically the recipients of educational programs. Mandating that growers serve as educators may prove difficult. Additionally, growers cannot communicate directly with their workers and have to rely on the crew leader to pass on important information. Growers are concerned about the general welfare of their workers and, with the cooperation of the crew leaders, have developed an informal system of communication built upon each group trusting the decisions of the one above it.
Recommendations
The intent of the EPA's Worker Protection Standard for pesticide safety training for farmworkers is to be commended. It is important to the implementation of the WPS that the transfer of compliance information occur. However, it is crucial that the educational information be incorporated into actual practice.
This study has produced recommendations that are designed to strengthen the effectiveness of the educational component of the WPS. The following insights are intended to aid pesticide educators in providing effective and useful pesticide training to protect the health and well-being of migrant farmworkers:
References
Boyle, P. G. (1981). Adult education association professional development series: Planning better programs. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Frick, M. (1989). Managing agricultural pesticides in ground water protection through prevention: A curriculum for agricultural education in secondary schools. Ames: Iowa State University, Department of Agricultural Education.
Johnson, D. E., Meiller, L. R., Miller, L. C., & Summers, G. F. (1987). Needs assessment: Theory and methods. Ames: Iowa State University Press.
Office of Migrant Health (1990). An atlas of state profiles which estimates number of migrant and seasonal farmworkers and members of their families. Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services.
Whitford, F. (1993). Pesticide facts and perceptions: Communicating with producers and consumers. Journal of Extension, 31(Spring).
N. L. McCaslin
Associate Professor
Department of Agricultural Education
The Ohio State University
Internet address: nmccasli@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
John Mwangi
Provincial Extension Supervisor
Rift Valley Province
Because employees work harder and perform better if satisfied with their jobs, knowing the factors related to agents' job satisfaction can help prevent staff frustration and low job satisfaction (Beder, 1990; Watanabe, 1991; and Grossnickle & Thiel, 1988). Current information on job satisfaction of Kenya's Rift Valley Extension agents was lacking, and this study was designed to identify agents' personal characteristics (gender, age, marital status, formal education and years of service) and underlying factors of job satisfaction and relative importance.
The questionnaire used in this descriptive, correlational research included 105 job satisfaction and 10 personal characteristic items. Each item had a five point Likert-type response scale as follows: l = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Uncertain, 4 = Agree, and 5 = Strongly Agree. The questionnaire was found to have content validity by 11 professionals, some of them with 10 years experience in Kenya's Extension Service. The reliability coefficient for the questionnaire was .79. The agents were also asked as a group in each district to identify factors that affected their work motivation and job satisfaction.
From an accessible sampling frame of 2,087, a random sample of 325 agents, stratified by rank and gender (i.e., Agricultural Assistants, Assistant Agricultural Officers and Agricultural Officers), completed the questionnaire--about 85% of them as scheduled. A follow-up of the remaining 15% raised the response rate to 100%.
On average, agents were 34.6 years old and had worked for 9.6 years, 85% were married while 14.5% had never been married, .5% were either divorced or widowed, 77% were male, 86.5% had worked from one to 15 years, 41% had not been promoted, 50.9% had been promoted once, 6.5% had been promoted twice, 1% had been promoted three times, and .3% had been promoted four times. Their age ranged from 24 to 55 years, their total years in service from one to 33, and their qualifications ranged from a post-secondary agricultural certificate to a master's degree. Agricultural Assistants had the longest number of years of service (10.5 years) followed by Assistant Agricultural Officers (8.5 years) and Agricultural Officers (5.2 years). All Agricultural Officers had 10 years or less of service. Agricultural Assistants had worked longest in their current positions (5.5 years), while agents in the other two ranks had served for 3.9 years in their current positions.
Factor analysis indicated that eight out of 21 initial factors identified by the researchers from the literature and personal experience were significantly related to the agents' job satisfaction and explained 24% of the variance. Listed in decreasing order of importance, the factor names and percent of variance that each factor explained were: evaluation (7.4%); dependable supervisors (5.3%); work incentives (2.8%); pay (2.2%); praise and work location (1.8%); housing and transportation (1.6%); job security (1.5%); and administration and supervision (1.3%). Because evaluation was the most important factor related to job satisfaction, continuous, accurate, and objective staff evaluation is essential in improving agents' job satisfaction, performance, and productivity. Therefore, as Vroom (1964) recommended, staff performance should be assessed accurately, based on standards that employees perceive to be fair, achievable, and equal for all. The study supported Herzberg's (1972) findings regarding the importance of good relations with one's supervisor, equal treatment for all employees, administrative support, effective supervision, good pay, and job security. Tying pay to individual performance, providing job security, and showing concern for the agents should increase their job satisfaction.
Agents' personal characteristics were not as important for their motivation as were job satisfaction factors. Therefore, Extension managers could do a better job of improving agents' morale and job satisfaction by giving less consideration to personal characteristics and more attention to the job satisfaction factors identified in the study.
The open-ended questions, administered in group interviews, revealed that most agents believed their promotions were more related to years of service than to individual performance. This perception caused them frustration and lowered their job satisfaction. They felt that selecting agents on merit for promotions and further training, paying adequate allowances for travel, hotel accommodation and subsistence, and providing health insurance would greatly improve their job satisfaction. Though generalizable only to Kenya's Rift Valley Extension agents, these findings may be useful to Extension managers whose agents have similar basic training and terms of service.
References
Beder, H. (1990). Reasons for nonparticipation in adult education. Adult Education Quarterly, 40(4), 207-218.
Grossnickle, D.R., & Thiel, W.B. (1988). Promoting effective student motivation in schools and classroom. A practitioners perspective. Columbus: The Ohio State University library microfiche.
Herzberg, F. (1972). Work and the nature of man. New York: New American Library.
Vroom, V.H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Watanabe, S. (1991). The Japanese quality control circle: Why it works. International Labor Review, 130(1), 57-79.
Cheryle Jones Syracuse
County Extension Agent
Ohio State University Extension
Ashtabula County
Jefferson, Ohio
Internet address: asht@agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu
Nineteen ninety-three marked the eighth year that a coalition of agencies in Ashtabula County, Ohio conducted Family- A-Fair. This day-long program: (a) showcases what groups and organizations in the county do to help strengthen families, (b) provides educational programs in the area of strengthening families, and (c) encourages families to do things together. Extension provides the organizational leadership for the Family- A-Fair Coalition. The event draws a large attendance each year and is an anticipated spring activity that local organizations and businesses plan for and include in their promotion budgets.
In 1990, the coalition, concerned about the future of this event and the limited participation at that time, identified two goals for the future. The first goal was to encourage more men and teenagers to participate in a family related event. The second goal was to increase awareness of family strengths and encourage people to think about their family and the importance of family throughout the year and not just on Family-A-Fair day.
To meet both goals, a new activity was added to the annual Family-A-Fair: a Family Fun Run and Walk. Members of the Family-A-Fair Coalition and volunteers from the athletic community formed a planning committee with the goal to make this event appealing and inexpensive. The Family Fun Run and Walk had categories for participants of all ages and families were encouraged to participate together. Registration fees were kept to a minimum and family rates were available. This provided the opportunity for local businesses to contribute and the major sponsor was the local natural gas company. Fast-food restaurants and businesses provided refreshments, and a local radio station agreed to broadcast live from the event. The one-mile route was marked out, permits were obtained, police secured to close the road where the race was to be held, and ambulances and paramedics were asked to be on hand for emergencies. A release of liability form was developed and signed by each participant and/or parent of participants.
The first year of the race, 120 people participated, ranging in age from five to 70. This included 40 family groups, 50 men, and 25 teenagers. Those who couldn't run were encouraged to walk an alternate route. As is customary at races, participants received an official race t-shirt with the logo and theme: "Strength Runs in Families." This provided the awareness vehicle we desired because every time participants wear this t-shirt, they are promoting the importance of families.
In 1993 the race drew over 230 participants, including 50 families. Attendance at Family-A-Fair was estimated at 2,000. In 1994, there were 3,000 people in attendance at the event and more than 250 racers.
The race has achieved many positive outcomes--some anticipated and others inadvertent. The Family-A-Fair event has increased overall attendance, with a notable increase in male and teenage participation. The budget and ability to promote the event have grown with the addition of corporate sponsors, and in 1994 received one of the DeWitt/Wallace Youth-at-Risk Awards. Most importantly, the family message is seen throughout the year on "walking billboards" in the form of t-shirts worn by past participants. An added bonus is that physical activity and healthy family fun are encouraged. Everyone is a winner in this race!
Audrey Liddil
Assistant Professor
Area EFNEP Home Economist
University of Idaho
Internet address: efnepiv@uidaho.edu
An Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program (EFNEP) Program Assistant recruited four blind people from Pocatello, Idaho into EFNEP classes. A variety of problems emerged because of their disability, and the traditional EFNEP curriculum had to be adapted to accommodate their needs. The EFNEP Extension Home Economist and Program Assistant worked with this group to provide useful information and equipment for them. Teaching methods were adjusted so that other senses besides sight could be used to teach nutritional information.
A large braille machine was used at each lesson to record notes and copy recipes. A smaller portable braille instrument could be used for note taking by those who are trained on the device. Hands-on lessons literally involved the participants doing hands-on as the Program Assistant talked them through each experience step by step. Braille markers were made of washable plastic for marking measuring spoons, cups, and canisters. A liquid measuring cup can be purchased that beeps when filled to a certain pre-determined level. Plastic food models were used for every lesson so serving sizes could be more accurately understood.
Kitchen order was found to be extremely important for the participants, so kitchen order was added to the lesson on kitchen cleaning and food safety. A braille machine was used to tag food items in the cupboard and any new groceries purchased at the store. These tags are paper and can be taped on the top of grocery items for easy retrieval when needed at a later time. Plastic tags that attach to elastic bands that fit over cans and other food items and can be purchased and reused indefinitely.
EFNEP 24 hour food recall scores were taken at the beginning of the program and every three months until the participants graduated. There was an average 35 point increase in the 24 hour food recall scores from entry to graduation for the blind program participants.
Because EFNEP encourages all limited resource people to participate, it should take into consideration the complex problems of some participants. This can guide us to adapt curriculum to fit special needs and help achieve self-reliance and self-esteem for participants and their families in the area of food and nutrition.
Nina Chen, Ph.D.
Human Development Specialist
University of Missouri
University Extension
Jasper County
Carthage, Missouri
Internet address: chenn@ext.missouri.edu
"I Love My Village" is a successful Extension program in Taiwan. The program was started in 1980 and by the end of 1990, 819 villages had conducted this program. The funding resources include federal, county, and town government, farmer associations, and local organizations (Department of Agriculture and Forestry, 1991). About one half of these villages' funding came from local farmer associations (in Taiwan, farmer associations conduct Extension education programs), and local organizations.
The purpose of this program is to empower individuals, families, and villages to be self-reliant and self-improving so they will improve their quality of life and build a healthy environment. This program not only emphasizes community physical development, but also promotes spiritual and psychological well-being. Internal and external collaboration are the keys to implementing this program. Agricultural, youth development, and home economics Extension agents working together are the three main groups to carry out this program in cooperation with other community agencies. The program is delivered through Extension education clubs (farmer clubs, 4-H clubs, and homemaker clubs), activities, workshops, and home visits. Village leaders and volunteers are key people to help implement the program and recruit clientele.
Extension agents help villages to organize a committee. The committee includes Extension advisory council members, leaders, farmer association members, and a village master. Extension agents assist the committee to design their village development plan. They also provide training, support, supervision, resources, collaboration, and evaluation to help villages implement the program.
This program addresses five main issues:
Every village has different programs of various events to promote the ideas of "I Love My Village" and to provide appropriate activities for people to get together and work together. At the end of the year, there is an evaluation to document their efforts and the success of collaboration. This makes these people feel worthy and proud of their contributions and living environment.
These villages usually become independent after several years guidance from the Extension service. They also become a model for other villages. The idea of "I Love My Village" motivates people to be aware of their strengths and realize that building a healthy village is everyone's responsibility, from the young to the old. It also demonstrates the importance of collaboration.
Implications for the U.S.A.
Internal and external collaborative networks are the key to a successful program. Otherwise, competition among agencies and organizations will become a barrier against program development and implementation. Cooperative Extension should use the empowerment approach and act as a catalyst to enlighten people to use their strengths to challenge their environment and take action.
A successful program should focus on family and community as a whole--and not just individuals. Hence, it is important to take a community or neighborhood approach and have local people, businesses, organizations, agencies and representatives from the target population involved in planning, implementation, evaluation, and recognition of the program.
Using Extension clubs as the primary groups to start the program would be helpful. Although some states have eliminated Extension clubs, they may need to consider using these clubs as the main group to expand Extension education programs. Moreover, a well organized committee, community leaders, and volunteers are key people to implement programs. In particular, using volunteers as a bridge to conduct Extension programs has been one important delivery method in Cooperative Extension. It is important to continue to provide on-going leadership training and recruit more volunteers from various backgrounds to be involved in Extension programs.
Finally, a successful program also needs to include recognition. This recognition not only shows appreciation of people's contributions and efforts, but also raises awareness on the value of collaboration.
Reference
Department of Agriculture and Forestry. (1991). Agricultural Extension education plan 1991. Chung-hsien Village: Taiwan Provincial Government.
Patricia Hammerschmidt
Program Leader
4-H Youth Programs
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan
Internet address: hammersc@msuces.canr.msu.edu
Anne Murphy
Nutrition Education Evaluation Consultant
East Lansing, Michigan
June Youatt
Associate Professor
Family and Child Ecology
Michigan State University
Carol Sawyer
Associate Professor
Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition
Michigan State University
Sandra Andrews
Extension Specialist
Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition
Michigan State University
The traditional method for testing the effectiveness of a curriculum involves assessment of knowledge or practices before and after material use. If significant change occurs, it is assumed the curriculum is "effective." However, acceptability of the materials to teachers (leaders) and youth (members) affects use. And if materials are not used, the potential for improving knowledge and practices is not realized. Specifically, 4-H materials should be easy for leaders and fun for members to use.
To evaluate the effectiveness of a food safety curriculum for use with 4-H youth (ages 9-11) and their family members, acceptability was assessed, in addition to change in food handling knowledge and practices. The educational program evaluated (Operation RISK) includes four lessons, a computer game, an audiotape and videotape, and two lessons for use at home with family members. The content of the materials teaches youth the what, whys, and hows of safe food handling. During the pilot testing of this curriculum, opinion surveys about acceptability were completed by nine leaders, 21 parents, and nine 4-H groups (77 members).
The survey for leaders included questions about the ease of use, amount learned by members, and level of members' enjoyment. Regarding ease of use, one lesson received much lower ratings than the other three. This lesson was primarily information given from the leader to members (lecture style). In the leaders' opinions, it also resulted in the lowest "amount learned" and was enjoyed the least of the four lessons. Youth input was collected using a group interview format. They were asked how much they enjoyed each of the materials and how much they thought they learned from them. Their opinions were consistent with those of the leaders. The same lesson received a low rating (regarding amount learned and enjoyed) by students and leaders. Based on these findings, the lesson was modified to include less relating of facts and more "hands on" youth involvement.
Information from parents was collected by enclosing a one-page survey in each of the take-home lessons. Parents were asked about use of the activities, understandability of instructions, amount learned, and whether the activity was fun, interesting, and successful in accomplishing its objective. Input from parents led to changes in the lessons, and in suggestions for their use. For instance, we found that materials need to remain at home several days to maximize their use; time was a barrier, not lack of interest. According to parents, all lessons included "easy to understand" directions and were judged to meet their objectives. However, one lesson was rated much lower than the other two regarding "new information," and how interesting it was. It was considered to be boring to 35% of the parent users. Based on these findings, this take-home lesson was omitted from the final version of the curriculum.
Other interesting results of these surveys included that: food safety is considered by parents to be an important topic for their children to learn about and that most parents (82%) did not have previous knowledge about the recommended temperature for refrigerators. Reported temperatures of their refrigerators (as taken by parents and members) varied from 30 to 57 degrees Fahrenheit. Many (24%) parents had "never thought about" how to keep foods cold in a packed lunch, and only 6% reported using freezer packs when packing a lunch. Some open-ended questions were included on the survey to obtain general information about what parents learned from the take-home activities. Parents were impressed and surprised that their children were so knowledgeable about food safety. Apparently, an unanticipated benefit of the take-home lessons was that it provided members with an opportunity to "show off" and perhaps to update their parents' knowledge about safe food handling. Numerous comments indicated that use of the materials had increased parents' awareness, or provided a reminder, about the importance of proper food handling practices. Parents seemed to learn the most about proper handwashing (takes 20 seconds, proper method) and how to keep cold foods cold when packed in a lunch for school (including freezer packs, pre-freezing sandwiches, or frozen juice boxes).
By asking the users (leaders, parents, members) of educational materials how easy and fun they are to use, what they learned from them, and how they can be improved, a wealth of important information is available that can be used to adapt/improve materials for use in 4-H programs. Although knowledge surveys help to identify what and how much youth learn, assessment of acceptability of materials provides specific information to help plan, develop, and implement educational programs that are used, enjoyed, and effective with the target populations.
Author Notes
Inquiries about this curriculum and surveys can be directed to Ms.
Patricia Hammerschmidt, 4-H Youth Programs, 6H Berkey Hall, Michigan
State University, East Lansing, MI 48824-1111, or e-mail to
This project received support from the USDA (Special Project No. 91-ESFQ-1-4009).
Danny H. Rogers
Extension Agricultural Engineer
G. Morgan Powell
Extension Agricultural Engineer
Kansas State University
Manhattan, Kansas
Internet address: amb@ksuvm.ksu.edu
Standing out-of-doors exposed to the elements and watching fill material being poured into a hole does not sound like an event likely to draw a crowd. Yet in the past two years nearly 6,000 Kansans have attended an abandoned well plugging demonstration. Estimates of the number of abandoned water wells in Kansas range from 250,000 to 500,000. These wells are a conduit for direct contamination of groundwater. Many are also a safety hazard to people, animals, and equipment. Therefore, abandoned wells are a liability to the landowner. Kansas law requires that abandoned wells be plugged. However, enforcement has been limited and in many areas nonexistent.
Environmental quality awareness has been increasing and is having greater influence in the decision-making processes. One piece of evidence of increasing environmental concern was the allocation of state and federal money to county health departments and soil conservation districts to establish Local Environmental Planning Groups (LEPG) and to develop sanitary codes to develop non-point pollution protection plans. When asked to identify environmental problems and corrective actions, many county planning groups identified abandoned wells as a problem and plugging as a control action.
Many Kansans, particularly rural residents, depend on private groundwater wells for their domestic water supply. Recent surveys and studies indicate that water from about half of private wells would not meet public water supply standards. Because of the importance of groundwater to rural Kansas residents and the recognized hazard, the Kansas Cooperative Extension Service in cooperation with the Kansas Farm Bureau developed an educational program on plugging abandoned wells.
The program, officially titled "Safe Water for Kansas" featured information on water testing, well construction, well site selection, and disposal of abandoned wells. The plugging of the abandoned well, however, was the high-interest feature of the program. Participants learned about the hazards and liabilities associated with abandoned wells and the correct procedures for plugging abandoned wells.
Events were generally co-sponsored by county personnel from the Kansas Farm Bureau and the Kansas State Cooperative Extension Service, although other local sponsors such as conservation districts, the county health office, LEPG, groundwater management districts, civic and service clubs, FFA chapters, and agribusinesses participated. Local planners selected the site and handled the labor, equipment, and materials arrangements with guidance from university Extension specialists. Refreshments and meals were often incorporated into the event. Initially sites were visited by the Extension specialist and the state representative from the Farm Bureau during the selection and planning process. As experience was gained, questions about well conditions could be answered and prior visitation became unnecessary.
The equipment and fill material expenses were generally borne by the landowner. Expenses for local fill materials were generally minimal. However, the more expensive sodium bentonite clay, an approved grout material, was donated by industry through contacts made by the Farm Bureau. Approximately 250,000 pounds of bentonite was used during the demonstrations.
Over 175 well plugging demonstrations were conducted with almost 100% participation by the 105 Kansas counties. Nearly 200 wells were plugged. Many were attended by FFA, civic groups, and farmer organization representatives for education on proper procedures. These groups then planned multiple well pluggings as a service project for their neighbors and community. The program focused initially on farms, but expanded to include rural residents and small communities. The impact of the demonstration was also magnified with coverage by the local newspapers, radio stations, and to a lesser extent, by television.
Well plugging demonstrations are still being conducted, however, without direct specialist involvement. County Extension agents and other agency personnel have continued to schedule events and promote plugging at farm shows, county fairs and other events. State support continues through the supply of the bulletins and the production of a video entitled "Plugging Abandoned Wells." Training workshops have been held during the annual Extension conference.
The program's success was probably due to the combination of a number of factors including: (a) the increasing concern and awareness of the public regarding the environment, (b) the establishment of local environmental planning groups in Kansas that corresponded with the initiation of the program, (c) the multiple organization sponsorship of the events, and (d) the hands-on or active nature of the event. In almost every instance, some degree of participation by those in attendance occurred. Every event accomplished a positive action--the proper plugging of at least one abandoned well--forever removing this groundwater contamination conduit and safety hazard. The paperwork documenting the proper plugging was completed for filing with the state as also required by law.
Stephen R. Koontz
Associate Professor
Derrell S. Peel
Associate Professor
Extension Economist
James N. Trapp
Regents Professor
Clement E. Ward
Professor
Extension Economist
Internet address: ceward@okway.okstate.edu
Department of Agricultural Economics
Oklahoma State University
Extension programs result from responding to adult and youth learners' needs, promoting programs which educators or others consider important, or the two combined. This article discusses the use of an experiential teaching/learning tool used in an Extension marketing program.
The Fed Cattle Market Simulator, labeled the "Packer-Feeder Game" by participants, is an experiential teaching/learning tool in which participants role play as cattle feedlot managers and meat packing plant managers (Koontz, Peel, Trapp & Ward, 1992). Since 1991, it has been used effectively with high school students, high school/vocational-technical school teachers, county/district Extension staff, agribusiness managers, and livestock producers. This Extension program has effectively sold itself. Demand for it has been generated by word of mouth from previous participants, and not by advertising through the program developers.
The following is a brief description of the market simulator, its relationship to experiential learning, and a summary of its extensive evaluation by participants.
The Fed Cattle Market Simulator
Several types of simulators have been developed and used in teaching (Gentry, 1990). Development of the Fed Cattle Market Simulator began in 1990 and was enhanced by a U.S. Department of Agriculture Higher Education Challenge Grant in October 1991. Since then, the simulator has been used with Extension audiences in two-hour to two-day workshops on an "as requested" basis.
The Fed Cattle Market Simulator consists of 12, two-to-four person teams role playing in eight feedlots and four meat packing plants. Feedlot managers sell cattle from their feedlot when they reach acceptable finish weights, and meat packing plant managers purchase cattle for eventual sale as meat in a boxed- beef market. A live cattle futures market is also included. Thus, the focus is on negotiation and trading of fed cattle, either by cash transactions or by forward contracts, and trading of live cattle futures contracts. More important, however, is understanding the economics which translate into effective business strategies and successful negotiating.
The Packer-Feeder Game moves rapidly. The time reference in the simulated market is one week, and one week of game-time is simulated in an eight-minute cycle. During the first five minutes, cattle are traded among feedlots and meat packing plants. Each feedlot has several scanner forms, each representing cattle in five weight groups which are available for sale. Prices are negotiated among buyers and sellers. When trades are completed, specific transaction information is recorded on the form and scanned into the computer with software written for the simulator. Current market information (cash and futures market volume along with high and low cash prices and futures market prices for each live cattle contract traded) is updated every five seconds during the trading session and scrolled across a light bar on the screen.
After five minutes of trading, the trading period ends and financial reports are printed for each team. The software generates information to update weekly market information summaries (market volume, feeder and fed cattle prices, boxed beef prices, and feedlot cost of gain). Teams are able to track financial performance associated with their marketing or purchasing strategies. Thus, during the three-minute information processing phase (or weekend), each team updates its show list, estimates break-even bids or offer prices, evaluates the team's past performance, assesses market conditions, and adjusts its marketing strategies.
Instructors determine the market-level or macro supply scenario, allowing periods of large and small numbers of cattle. Thus, realistic market dynamics are integrated into the simulation. However, firm-level or micro decisions by participants determine the direction and performance of marketings, prices, and profits.
The Experiential Learning Process
Kolb (1984) describes John Dewey's model of experiential learning as one emphasizing the learning that takes place following each completion of a circular set of stages: impulse, observation, knowledge, and judgment. Each completion of the loop provides feedback for the next loop, with all loop sequences ultimately targeted toward a specific purpose. Thus, Dewey's model stresses feedback in the learning process and indicates that learning occurs during the completion of each loop.
Dewey's model parallels participants' experiences with the market simulator. Each loop equates to a trading period. Each trading period has a unique impulse, consisting of a combination of past experiences and resulting information, plus new information. During the trading session, participants experience a period of observation, assimilating previous and current information into knowledge, and making strategy decisions or judgments. The result contributes to the next impulse or next trading period.
The experiential learning exercise with the Fed Cattle Market Simulator can be summarized as a process of continuous learning derived from each participant's individual and collective attitudes and behaviors. The ultimate result is the attainment of increased knowledge and skills. Compressing real time into shorter periods of game time allows participants to accelerate the experience from different market scenarios for the participant time invested. One strength of the simulator is that each participant operates at his/her own level and learns at his/her own pace. Participants with less academic or industry background function on a more basic level than more advanced participants who use sophisticated marketing and managerial plans. This robustness makes the simulator suitable for a wide variety of audiences and is especially appropriate for Extension audiences in which participants frequently have a diverse set of educational and industry backgrounds.
Evaluation Feedback
Each group of participants completes an evaluation of the experiential session. Two questions have been asked consistently. On a seven-point scale (one being best), 82.7% of participants rated the simulator's realism a three or better and 92% rated its effectiveness in teaching about markets, marketing, and pricing a three or better.
Below are several observations about the experiential learning process based on feedback from participants.
In summary, experiential teaching/learning methods have not been used extensively in Extension agricultural economics. Success of the Fed Cattle Market Simulator provides concrete evidence that it is one experiential tool with considerable potential as an alternative method for teaching/learning agricultural marketing and pricing.
References
Gentry, J. W. (Ed.). (1990). Association for Business Simulation and Experiential Learning (ABSEL): Guide to business gaming and experiential learning. London: Nichols/GP.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Koontz, S. R., Peel, D. S., Trapp, J. N., & Ward, C. E. (1992, December). Experiential learning using a fed cattle market simulator: The "Packer-Feeder" game. Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report, p. 929.
Charles R. Blinn
Associate Professor
Extension Specialist and Research Associate
Department of Forest Resources
University of Minnesota
St. Paul, Minnesota
Internet address: cblinn@mercury.forestry.umn.edu
Elizabeth E. Templin
County Extension Educator
Community Resources
Minnesota Extension Service
Stillwater, Minnesota
Internet address: etemplin@mes.umn.edu
Jane H. Stevenson
Former Program Director
Public Policy
Minnesota Extension Service
St. Paul, Minnesota
Rapid growth and decline in communities cause a variety of stresses on local governments as well as the social structure of the community. The challenge to local governments is to manage growth so that local services and infrastructure can be provided at reasonable costs. Local elected officials must ensure that the means employed to manage the growth are compatible with the values and attitudes of the citizens within the community. However, those local elected officials (a) may not serve full-time in that capacity, (b) may vary in their occupation, educational backgrounds, and understanding of the issue, (c) may not have technical assistance available through paid professional planning staff, and (d) may not have time to compile and review or have access to available materials.
The term "growth management" has been defined as being "a conscious government program intended to influence the rate, amount, type, location, and/or quality of future development within a local jurisdiction" (Godschalk, Brower, McBennett & Vestal, 1979). Growth management is neither pro-growth nor anti-growth. Instead, it seeks a responsible "fit" between development and infrastructure needed to support the impacts of development, including such things as roads, schools, water, sewer, drainage, solid waste, and parks and recreation (DeGrove, 1992). Extension's role in growth management is to "...encourage creative thought and provide information vital to maturing of the community planning process" (Fowler, 1991).
There is a great deal of published information on the topic of growth management. However, much of the information is not easy to retrieve and is in scholarly journals that are not easy to understand. In 1991, the US Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration, funded a project to compile information to assist state and local authorities in planning and managing growth and development while preserving community character. It resulted in production of the four-volume report "Managing Community Growth and Change," which is available through the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and the National Technical Information Service, US Department of Commerce. The volumes are:
Volume I. Managing Growth and Change (Einsweiler & Miness, 1992);
Volume II. Academic and Professional Literature on Growth and Growth Management: A Bibliography (Miness, Einsweiler & Jacobs, 1992);
Volume III. Educational Materials on Growth Management: A Bibliography (Templin, 1992); and
Volume IV. Federal Data Sources and State Activities in Growth Management (Stevenson, 1992).
These four volumes, as overviewed in this paper, will be useful to local elected officials, professional planners, and Extension educators addressing this issue.
Volume I
This volume presents aids to understanding growth and growth management in urban, suburban, and rural settings through conceptual frameworks and case studies that link pressing issues to appropriate techniques. Some of the issues discussed include: (a) urban uses moving into agriculture and forest areas, (b) traffic, (c) fiscal stress on local government, (d) shortage of affordable housing, and (e) water pollution. For each issue, there is a discussion of the purposes of intervention, tools or techniques for accomplishing the desired task, and an evaluation of the impact and effectiveness of those tools.
Volume II
This bibliography organizes and presents the most useful or classic economic, political, and social science writings from the academic and professional literature. The scope of the review is limited primarily to books, articles, and bibliographies published since the mid-1980s. This date limit was set, in part, because the literature of the 1970s and early 1980s is covered by existing bibliographies that are referenced in the piece. It includes more than 500 books and articles and 30 bibliographies. Summaries or annotations are provided for many of the sources. Two indices are provided to access sources relevant to a particular subject or interest: the first is a keyword index that is keyed to titles, publication information, summaries, and subject headings; the second is a subject index which is based on Library of Congress headings.
Volume III
This bibliography provides a list of educational materials available to help local officials understand growth issues and the implications of growth. It also helps them interpret data available for formulating policies to manage growth and change. It is organized under the following headings:
Items which are mostly from the mid-1980s and early 1990s are listed by topic under each heading. Annotations summarizing the content of the material are provided for the more than 200 citations. Because materials cited in this bibliography are generally not available in most community libraries, information about how to obtain each piece is provided.
Volume IV
This directory identifies the types of information and data that are available from nine federal agencies--the Department of Agriculture, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Department of Interior, the Department of Labor, and the Department of Transportation. This information and data might be useful to help local officials and planners make informed decisions about local development. For each source, information that is provided includes the types of data maintained, specialists' names and telephone numbers, and means and costs of accessing the data. While the directory is not meant to be comprehensive, it can serve as a useful starting point for the local data user. It also contains information on state data needs and activities in growth management.
The information summarized in the four volumes provides Extension educators with a comprehensive, current review of growth management issues and information. Individuals can use the information directly in their programming to facilitate decision-making by elected officials within their jurisdiction.
References
DeGrove, J. M. (1992). Planning and growth management in the United States. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
Einsweiler, R. C., & Miness, D. A. (1992). Managing growth and change in urban, suburban, and rural settings, Volume I of managing community growth and change. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
Fowler, R. E. (1991). Challenges to Cooperative Extension in urbanized settings. Proceedings of the National Rural Studies Committee Fourth Annual Meeting, 75-78.
Godschalk, D. R., Brower, D. J., McBennett, L. D., & Vestal, B. A. (1979). Constitutional issues of growth management. Washington, DC: Planners Press.
Miness, D. A., Einsweiler, R. C., & Jacobs, H. M. (1992). Bibliography of academic and professional literature on growth and growth management, Volume II of managing community growth and change. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
Stevenson, J. H. (1992). Directory of federal data sources and overview of state data needs and activities in growth management, Volume IV of managing community growth and change. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
Templin, E. E. (1992). Bibliography of educational materials for local officials on growth management, Volume III of managing community growth and change. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
Author Notes
This contribution was supported by the College of Natural Resources and the University of Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station under Project MN 42-40, the Minnesota Extension Service, and the US Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration. Contributed as Paper No. 20,673 of the Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station.
Jan Scholl
Associate Professor
Agricultural and Extension Education
Internet address: familyliv@psupen.psu.edu
Dan Lago
Senior Research Associate
Adult Development and Aging
Internet address: familyliv@psupen.psu.edu
The Pennsylvania State University
University Park, Pennsylvania
Are you tired of handing out evaluations at every meeting, but still want data to use to plan and legitimize programs? Why not try non-reactive methods?
Non-reactive or unobtrusive methods, as they are sometimes called, are used to collect data without asking for it and overcome response problems, such as selective participation. Using existing census data is an example of a non-reactive method.
The research literature describes non-reactive approaches as those methods that do not require a response from a participant. This can certainly be observation, but using existing data is also a possibility. In fact, these methods are most everything except questionnaires, tests, and surveys (Webb, Campbell, Schwartz, Sechrest & Grove, 1981).
Generally, Extension 4-H programs have rich sources of non-reactive data. This paper will identify several of these existing data sources.
Artis Koester (1989) used non-reactive methods when she studied fair exhibits to improve 4-H clothing and textiles exhibits and subsequent programs. Inspired by this study, Pennsylvania State University faculty members tried this and other non-reactive measures to evaluate state 4-H programs. They found that fairs are an excellent way of obtaining data about programs. Exhibits can be counted and compared to previous years' entries; a team of people can view exhibits and list new ideas that may be used in curriculum development and marketing; and judge's comments can be gathered and summarized and winning entries studied to help other members improve their efforts. In addition, the difficulty and workmanship of the exhibits may be noted and observations made to discover what exhibits are of greatest interest to the public.
Sometimes record books are exhibited at fairs, but more often they are reviewed as part of a record book judging event or contest. Record books can be a source of project and program ideas and are generally good indicators of how the members "connect" with the purpose of the project. For example, you might want to note the sections of the record that show a lot of activity and those that are scarcely filled out. Try to get an idea of how well the answers correspond to the questions asked. Do youth of a specific age seem to take this project more often? Information of this kind is highly valued by curriculum specialists and curriculum committees, particularly ones rewriting curricula.
In some cases, it may be useful to follow-up with phone calls to find out more about a completed activity or project. Having most of the study completed before making the calls will help you extract the few questions that will assist you the most. Also, don't try to do a record book analysis mid-year. Most record books are tucked away or have been thrown away, so accessing them at this time may be difficult. (We found this out the hard way!)
Because registration forms for events are so much a part of county and state 4-H programs, they are much less reactive than questionnaires. A few well chosen questions not only lead to a smooth running activity, but provide information that will legitimize program efforts and enhance curriculum development. For example, information about the cost of fashion revue garments is not only helpful in providing insurance for an event, but winning entries can be compared to determine if they resulted from monetary inputs or from learning.
Registration forms can also provide input to help prepare future curriculum materials. For example, when 4-H fashion revue participants were asked what they sewed outside of their textile and clothing projects, the response was largely "making gifts and mending for other people." This information was also used to add interest to the members' narrations at the time of the contest.
Judging events are good, informal indicators of how well your 4-H members are doing. Set up score cards or judging sheets so that they not only can be used to score members and establish winners, but also to analyze the data for areas where youth seem to have the most difficulty. (This analysis can also identify problems with cheating and improve the quality of contest classes the following year.) The information you find may be given as part of training meetings, used within the curriculum, or as a single "tips" fact sheet sent out shortly after the event to improve learning. One year, a potential catastrophe was averted when large numbers of youth were notified after a contest that eating rhubarb leaves wasn't more healthful than eating lettuce.
Many types of non-reactive methods may be used. In this article, we have included ones that we have tried and found successful in our 4-H program. Note that non-reactive measures do not require pages and pages of additional information gathered on forms or at events. Usually one or two questions that can be tracked periodically are sufficient. Think carefully about what you need to know and what measures would be the best way to collect the data. Be very concerned about asking personal and unethical questions, and be sure to disclose da
