Volume 34 Number 5
|
October 1996 Volume 34 Number 5 |
|
|
Editor's PageDear Readers, I want to call your attention to a special feature in this issue of the Journal of Extension. It is about the Kellogg initiative that seeks nothing less than to change the way land- grant universities do business. Read about it in the article called "Kellogg Foundation Initiative Seeks to Catalyze Change at Land-Grant Institutions." Those attending the national Epsilon Sigma Phi meeting in early December will hear more when John Byrne addresses the delegates/ Byrne is president emeritus of Oregon State University and executive director of the Kellogg Foundation Commission on Future of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges. Your Journal of Extension editorial review committee will need several people to serve as reviewers beginning January 1, 1997. If you are interested in serving as a peer reviewer, please contact Tom Archer, editorial committee chair, at shel@agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu, or the editor. Also in this issue, you'll find article of interest to a cross-section of Extension professionals. Enjoy!
Leonard J. Calvert 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:
Judith Jones, President, Virginia, Southern Directors Ex-officio:
Leonard Calvert, Oregon, Editor Editorial Committee:
Joyce Alves, Arizona
Kellogg Foundation Initiative Seeks to Catalyze Change at Land-Grant Institutions
Sandra Fugate "If you want to build change, you have to start everywhere at once." -Margaret Mead Guided at least in spirit by the words of Margaret Mead, the W. K. Kellogg Foundation's Food Systems Professions Education (FSPE) Initiative is seeking to catalyze positive change in the way land-grant universities operate. The Initiative, which entered Phase II last year after an initial "visioning" process, involves 12 clusters of higher education institutions around the country - literally from coast- to-coast. Early results show that the Initiative not only is prompting change, it's making more headway, and faster, than anyone could have predicted. "It's working. It's breaking down the walls that have existed for so long," said Rick Foster, Vice President for Programs at the Foundation. Among the changes seen in the short time since Phase II began are new educational programs, new working relationships among departments within institutions, and new collaborations among universities and a variety of partners, such as community colleges, agri-businesses, and even neighboring universities that previously had only been competitors. The scope of change has been so promising that Foster says he's optimistic the Initiative will achieve its goal of helping educational institutions prepare for the food system demands of the 21st century. Because that goal requires sweeping change, and because colleges and universities have been traditionally conservative and resistant to change, the Foundation knew before the Initiative began that an infrastructure of support would be necessary if the 12 individual FSPE projects were to make significant and lasting progress, Foster explained. To that end, the Foundation funded supporting grants to help create an environment for change, including a group of college and university presidents to form the Kellogg Presidents' Commission, which will meet regularly for the next four to five years. Also, the Foundation is working with 47 professional societies to address the reward system and single discipline approaches that motivates individual professors, administrators, and agriculturalists. "They (the individual projects and institutions) really need a network of outside support for validation," Foster said. Foundation personnel are keenly aware that the FSPE Initiative is seeking changes that are enormous. Nonetheless, those goals are not out of line with the scope of change that is about to sweep through the world's food systems, Foster said. World population will grow to a projected 10 billion people by the year 2030 and 14 billion by the year 2060; the planet, he added, is believed to be able to comfortably feed about eight billion people. Food will be a volatile global issue in the next century. Higher education, in general, and land-grant universities, in particular, offer one of the best avenues for dealing with future stresses on a fragile food system, Foster stressed. "If we are going to put our future in anyone's hands, it's probably the land-grant universities that have the best structure," he said. Land-grant institutions already have proven their ability to address food systems issues, he said, pointing to the past and current success of the nation's food system and our abundant food supply. However, the nation's and world's food systems have changed and will continue to change drastically in the future, and land- grant institutions haven't kept up, Foster noted. Consequently, land-grant institutions, which were established with the unique mission of public service, have somewhat lost touch with their stakeholders and have lost public support, financially and otherwise, he said. Nonetheless, "We have a sense that the universities know they have a need to change, and are looking for ways to make change." Such was the philosophy that propelled the FSPE Initiative into existence. The project got off the ground in 1994 when the Foundation asked interested institutions to participate in an 18- month-long visioning process that essentially required participants to define where they wanted their educational system to be in the year 2020. The only specific requirements the Kellogg Foundation attached, Foster explained, was that the participants had to involve a diverse group of people, such as minority groups and other stakeholders who have either never been included or who have been relegated to the background, and the vision itself needed to hinge on collaboration and partnerships. Although collaboration isn't necessarily easy, it is viewed as essential, Foster added. The 12 projects that received funding from the Foundation for the visioning process and, ultimately, for the Phase II implementation process are:
Each project received a total of about $100,000 from the Foundation for the visioning process. For Phase II, which runs 1995 through the year 2000, the 12 projects have been granted varying amounts from the Foundation, ranging from $1.5 million to $3 million over five years, depending on the scope of the project. Although all of the projects are somewhat different in terms of the specific issues they're addressing, they're also somewhat the same in terms of the larger issue: stimulating long-term visions, innovative planning, and collaborations in a way that will better prepare food systems professionals to respond to food systems issues in the next century. By way of example, here's a glimpse of five of the 12 FSPE projects. Oregon After going through more than 10 years of budget cuts and numerous strategic planning activities, faculty, staff, and administrators in Oregon's system of higher education were understandably cynical about planning activities, said Gwil Evans, of Oregon State University. To counteract the pessimism, FSPE project leaders there used two key words to generate support: "authenticity" and "sustainability." "Authenticity, so that whatever we engaged in had to come across to people as real to them. It wasn't something artificial. It wasn't something being imposed on them.," Evans explained, adding, "Sustainability, because people seemed to feel that past planning activities came and went like the tides or the moon and didn't leave much trace." For the visioning process, eight small groups were formed, with half of each group consisting of representatives from the colleges and university, and half from customers of those institutions. Each group was charged with the task of creating a vision for the year 2020 that will lead to system change in food systems, post-secondary education in Oregon, or both. The only stipulations were that the vision had to be part of a collaborative, creative process that involved the whole group, so that no one particular person could press an agenda; also, the vision had to be one that the members of the group were willing to work toward themselves, Evans stressed. Last spring, the groups gathered for a "common ground" conference to consolidate their ideas into five areas of goals and action plans. Those areas include such topics as restructuring agricultural education and expanding the curriculum to better educate students about the food system and the challenges it faces. This fall, the groups will begin developing more specific action plans. "How do you integrate a change initiative into the fabric of the institution? We're discovering right now the importance of a steering committee, not just of university representatives, but with the customers. We think it's the body through which these community action teams will work. Because the changes they are talking about making will require policy changes at the various levels of government, so we will, for example, have to make allies in the legislature and governor's office," Evans commented. Iowa Among the goals of the Iowa FSPE project was to develop better working relationships between Iowa State University and the state's 15 community colleges, and ISU's College of Agriculture and the university's other academic colleges. The visioning process involved 40 to 50 "listening sessions" that included up to 900 people across the state, said Gerald Klonglan, associate dean in the College of Agriculture at ISU. Among the stakeholders whose opinions were sought: Native American groups, Hispanic groups, specialized farm organizations, agri-businesses, dietitians, food banks, and representatives from the fast food industry. Many of those same stakeholders also are represented on the project's steering committee, which is broken into smaller committees that focus on specific issues such as academics, partnerships, and projects. The projects committee, Klonglan said, reviews funding requests that are being submitted by those who participated in the listening sessions. The committee is trying hard not to simply accept or reject a request, but instead to work with those who proposed the idea to help refine it and to help locate other possible funding sources. Among the new projects already being funded within the Iowa FSPE project is one that seeks to build ties between higher education and the public school system in Des Moines, particularly at the elementary level. Also, in Des Moines, FSPE representatives are working with a group of business and industry representatives who are concerned that the school system hasn't developed a modern food system curriculum, one that focuses on such subjects as technology, economics, environmental concerns. The Des Moines school board, Klonglan noted, has since hired a new staff person to help design a new program. Overall, Klonglan is optimistic that the FSPE will produce significant, lasting institutional change. "Probably there will be changes occurring serendipitously that we in the project are not even going to know about. But we have gotten people working together and thinking, and already some dialogues are happening that weren't happening before." Southern Food Systems Education Consortium (SOFSEC) Every year for the past 50 years, Tuskegee University has hosted the Professional Agricultural Workers Conference, which draws participants from both 1862 and 1890 land-grant universities, as well as different organizations, agencies, and occupations. Over time, Walter Hill said, the conference resulted in a network of people who were discussing the same issues as the Kellogg Foundation: the changing world food systems and the need for educational institutions to change, too. "There was a state of readiness," Hill explained. "When the opportunity came (for the KSPE Initiative), it became clear to me right away that we could identify several southern states and work together as we never had before and use this as a catalyst." After studying statistics pertaining to African-Americans and their social-economic status, Tuskegee located the areas where stakeholders' need appeared greatest. Next, the university approached educational institutions in those states to see if they would be interested in forming an FSPE consortium. They were. For the visioning process, the SOFSEC project brought together representatives from all of the participating institutions, as well as a broad range of stakeholders, such as legislators, community-based leaders, farmers, scientists, K-12 teachers, small business owners, and federal agency representatives. In a sense, the FSPE group worked through the visioning process backwards, Hill said. Participants started by envisioning what type of educational system would be needed in 2020, then backed up in five-year increments to determine what groundwork needed to be done to reach that end. During Phase II, the project is focusing on three strategic areas: the development of one or two new research and outreach programs at each institution; the development of K-12 partnerships; and the development of inter-institutional partnerships to build capacity and change. To achieve that end, the Consortium is funding eight projects that will begin tackling a variety of issues this fall, including community development, food systems curriculum, and the faculty reward system. For one of the projects, the six SOFSEC institutions will work with one local school district per semester to develop curricula that will better prepare secondary students for studies in food and environmental systems. "It cuts across five states, so we'll be able to share what we learn with everyone. What we will be looking for are good examples that work. We just think it's going to generate a lot of excitement in these school systems," Hill emphasized. Ohio Ohio's FSPE project steering committee is a testament to the changing face of the nation's food system. Half of the committee's members are from the university, half are from outside the university and include such traditional and non- traditional agricultural segments as farmers, food processors, agri-business, turf grass companies, rural communities, the Humane Society, the Nature Conservancy, and a Catholic Diocese. "We tried to bring in a real cross-section so we could hear really different view points. We did not want this to be the viewpoint of a really narrow sector," said Marilyn Trefz, director of Project Reinvent, the FSPE project housed at the OSU. Because the steering committee worked so hard to gain genuine and direct input from stakeholders across the board, the visioning process was as challenging as it was rewarding. At one point, when focus groups met to compile their ideas and come up with six areas of emphasis for the college to focus on, one group was about to quit and leave until facilitators intervened. Actually, the discord probably reflects well on the project's strengths. Participants feel strongly about the issues precisely because they are serious about accomplishing something, Trefz said. "People weren't just going through the motions. It meant a lot to them. It was a really great experience." Currently, the project has moved into Phase II, which includes task forces that are working to come up with specific actions in four areas. A "focus" task force is looking for ways to prioritize and focus the university's efforts and resources on issues and subjects that align with the FSPE vision. A "communication and marketing" task force is developing communication plans and is looking for ways to expand and update the technologies used. A "reward system" task force is looking for ways to develop alternative faculty and staff reward systems, possibly on a pilot basis. The "organizational structure" task force is looking for ways to lower barriers and make it easier for people to work across disciplinary lines. The Ohio project also plans to launch six "new direction initiatives" that will focus on building future structures and addressing future needs, while the task forces deal with rebuilding existing structures, Trefz said. Those new directions initiatives will touch on several areas, including student- centered learning, interactive communication technologies, curriculum reform, and international programming. Mid-Atlantic Consortium In the Mid-Atlantic Consortium, all institutions are created equal-that is, consortium members can't earn extra votes by having a larger student population, or bigger budget, or snazzier reputation. "Each institution in this consortium is viewed as an equal partner, and I do think each institution believes this," pointed out Ian L. Maw, dean of academic and student affairs at Rutgers- the State University of New Jersey. The mutual respect in the working relationship between consortium members is largely responsible for the growing number of collaborative agreements that have been worked out so far, Maw believes. Collaborations currently on the table in the consortium involve distance learning, shared coursework, and shared programs. Although the institutions have worked together to some extent in the past, those efforts did not have the true interdependence and more sweeping nature of collaboration, Maw said. Under the consortium, "We are going to be sharing resources, not only human, but capital resources as well. We'll be developing clear articulation agreements. In many cases, we will, I suspect, be talking about joint degrees, joint faculty appointments-all of those kinds of things, it seems to me, are possible." Maw thinks the consortium will help change the current reward system for faculty and staff. "That's the toughest nut to crack, but I think it will happen. There will be within our institutions what I call a modification of the faculty culture that will recognize, reward, and laud faculty for interdisciplinary efforts, on the one hand, and inter-institutional collaborative efforts on the other," he added. During Phase II, the consortium's steering committee is reviewing funding proposals from institutions that want to plan collaborative agreements, and institutions that already have planned and now want to implement collaboration. Already, the consortium has led to trial collaboration agreements in the areas of dairy science and equine science, with various institutions agreeing to take the lead and provide educational programming to the others. Similar discussions also are underway in the area of marine science, Maw said. "It's just every time I turn around somebody has another idea they want to try." Synergy such as that was precisely the hope and goal of the FSPE Initiative right from the start. As Foster pointd out, "The mere fact that you get people together who ordinarily never communicate with each other starts the change process.
Securing Your Future: Housing Education for Low-Income Audiences
Kathleen Parrott
Arun Krishnaswamy
Sarah Burkett A Cooperative Extension education program is, by definition, responsive to local needs and appropriate to the targeted audience. Cooperative Extension professionals must be flexible in responding to the situation and adapting programs in a timely fashion for maximum effectiveness. At the same time, when programs do not succeed as anticipated, the educator needs to re- examine the program plan and learn from the mistakes. This philosophy of public education can be applied to a recent Virginia Cooperative Extension housing counseling program with low-income families. The program planning, development, delivery, and evaluation will be discussed in this article. The mixed success of the program will be analyzed and applied to future educational programming with similar audiences.
"Securing Your Future" was a housing counseling program presented to the residents of Meadowview Apartments, a privately- owned, federally-subsidized (Section 8) garden apartment community in Pulaski, a small city in the Appalachian Mountains of southwest Virginia presented by Virginia Cooperative Extension (VCE) in summer 1994. The program was the result of a sub-grant of a HOPE II planning grant received by the non-profit Virginia Mountain Housing, Inc. (now VMH, Inc.) from the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The planning grant was to prepare for implementation of a HOPE II (Homeownership Opportunities for People Everywhere) program to enable residents in the low-income apartment community to own their homes. The original sub-grant proposed a housing counseling and training program preparing for homeownership. The program design was intended to meet the needs of Meadowview residents and serve as a model for future programs. Program leadership would be given by the state housing specialist with shared responsibility by the local Extension agent. The on-site project manager for the Hope II program would serve as an advisor.
As part of the larger HOPE II grant, the project manager was to be an active leader and organizer within the community. A Resident Council was formed, headquartered in a vacant apartment centrally located in the community. The Resident Council was to be active in planning and supporting the housing counseling program. Planning for the program began with an assessment of the community residents, and their economic status and potential for homeownership. Careful consideration was given to the issues of working with limited-income audiences.
Low-income households live with crises as a common occurrence (Rupered & Payne, 1993; Williams, 1993). Household members may not have had the learning and skill development opportunities to have effective personal resource management for long-term planning and crisis prevention (Williams, 1993). Low- income families may aspire to goals similar to other groups in society, but these are altered by the reality of their situations (Deacon & Firebaugh, 1988). Limited income denies these families the opportunities to enjoy contemporary lifestyles, often resulting in apathy and lack of motivation (Kutner, 1975; Williams, 1993). Many low-income families experience a sense of hopelessness about their ability to make a change in their situation (Rupered & Payne, 1993). Low-income families may tend to perceive their situation, and thus their future, as beyond their control. A picture emerges of low-income audiences with a short-term perspective, lack of an internal sense of control, a crisis-to- crisis lifestyle, and a perception of few life choices. This description was expected to be typical of Meadowview residents and suggested that educational programming targeted to achieving a long term goal, such as home ownership, would not be perceived as useful. In addition, income statistics for Meadowview residents and a consideration of the local economy suggested that homeownership was not an affordable goal in the near future for most residents. Therefore, despite the intended direction of the grant, a re-examination of educational priorities was needed.
A housing education program for Meadowview residents needed to be relevant and useful in their immediate lives. A program focus evolved around securing and planning for the future -- a future that could include homeownership -- but in the context of their lives and present housing situation. Program content was directed to current needs and activities related to housing while laying the foundation to make the choice to achieve home ownership. A balance between the requirements of the grant and the needs of the residents was sought.
An identified education program goal was to assist residents in providing secure, stable, and quality housing for themselves and their families. Achieving self-sufficiency in housing was to be emphasized. A four-part program was proposed:
Program marketing began at the planning stage, with two purposes: "ownership" of the program by residents and maximum participation. Marketing activities included:
Marketing informed the residents about the program and encouraged their participation. At the same time, it was necessary to design the program for easy participation and to make it attractive. Several ideas were incorporated into the program design:
Of the 32 residents who initially agreed to participate in the program, 12 (38%) actually attended the classes, with 9 (30%) completing all sessions. End of the program evaluations were very complimentary, rating the program as very successful, and offered no suggestions for improvement. Participants found the information "very useful," indicating they learned "more than expected." The session on "Easy Care for the Home" was rated as the most useful. Participants identified a variety of concepts and facts learned at each session. The planned changes in behavior were extensive, and included: paying off bills to reduce debt; saving money; selecting effective and economical household cleaners; managing time for home care; negotiating with, instead of confronting, the landlord; and contacting agencies about qualification for a home mortgage.
The program participants were very positive about the educational sessions and felt they benefitted personally. Yet the number of participants was discouraging. Despite community-wide publicity and personal contact, only 32 residents were interested in participating, representing about 36% of the community. Despite personal and written updates, and reminders before each session, only 12 of these 32 residents (38%) actually participated. With the help of the project manager and Resident Council, a survey was conducted of the non-participants. Responses were received from 17 (85%) of the 20 residents who registered but did not participate. The most common reason (44%) for not attending sessions was "something personal came up." Illness in the family was the second most common reason (22%). Other reasons included not wanting to come by themselves, forgetting, and deciding the program was not of interest. Marketing of the program had apparently been successful on one level because almost all respondents were aware there was free child care, refreshments, and door prizes. If the program was offered again, 13 of the 17 respondents (76%) said the would "probably" attend. Reasons given for probable attendance included the value of the information and what they had heard about the quality of the program. Potential barriers included program timing, and family and personal health.
"Securing Your Future" appeared to be very well-received by the program participants, yet there was low attendance from the target audience. The program succeeded in meeting the current needs of those who participated and gave them an enjoyable educational experience. People who did not participate cited primarily personal reasons, suggesting that design and marketing of the program was not the issue. Given the opportunity to develop a similar program in the future, the authors suggest the following improvements:
Deacon, R. E., & Firebaugh, F. M. (1988). Family resource management. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Kutner, N. (1975). An interethnic and place of residence examination of the "culture of poverty". (Departmental Technical Report No. 75-3,) Agricultural Experiment Station, Texas A&M University, College Station. Rupered, M. & Payne, D. (1993). Understanding limited resource audiences: Content or process? In V. S. Fitzsimmons (Ed.), Proceedings of the Association for Financial Counseling and Planning Education: Economic change: Challenges for financial counseling and planning professionals (pp. 253-261). San Antonio, TX: Association for Financial Counseling and Planning Education. Williams, F. L. (1993). Financial counseling: Low-income or limited-income families. In Fitzsimmons, V. S. (Ed.). Proceedings of the Association for Financial Counseling and Planning Education: Economic change: Challenges for financial counseling and planning professionals (pp. 121-145). San Antonio, TX: Association for Financial Counseling and Planning Education.
"Securing Your Future" was a housing counseling program presented to the residents of a privately-owned, federally- subsidized (Section 8) garden apartment community by Virginia Cooperative Extension (VCE) in summer 1994. The program was part of a HOPE II (Homeownership Opportunities for People Everywhere) planning grant, from the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The program planning, development, delivery, and evaluation will be discussed in this article. The mixed success of the program will be analyzed and applied to future educational programming with similar audiences.
Leading Without Authority: An Examination of the Impact of Transformational Leadership Cooperative Extension Work Groups and Teams
William Brown
Elizabeth A. Birnstihl
Daniel W. Wheeler
University of Nebraska-Lincoln Introduction Willie Loman, the protagonist in Arthur Miller's play, "Death of a Salesman," describes the particular difficulties and challenges of his life by pointing out that "I was out there with nothing but a shoeshine and a smile..." Similar refrains are often heard from Extension professionals appointed to the leadership of critically important work-groups, task forces, and teams, yet not vested with traditional management authority. Driven by the dynamic nature of Extension's operating environment, and encouraged by a management orthodoxy that recommends an increased utilization of teams and work groups with a decreased reliance on traditional authority arrangements (Mantz & Sims, 1993), we are embracing an ever-increasing use of ad hoc organizational forms in Extension (Hutchins, 1992; Boone, 1990). Those appointed to lead these groups occasionally petition for traditional management authority to hire/fire, etc. In general we have resisted these entreaties out of concern for creating additional organizational structure and bureaucracy. However, if we are to deny team leaders any access to or dominion over formal reward structures, just what are they to use to influence others in order to accomplish objectives? In the Nebraska Cooperative Extension Division we are experimenting with the use of Priority Initiative Teams for program planning and execution. These teams, largely self- selected on the basis of disciplinary interests, typically consist of approximately 15 members, a mix of Extension educators and specialists. Co-team leaders are recruited and appointed by Extension administration and charged with responsibility of bringing the team together at inception. Once established, the team self-selects its continuing leadership. Team leaders are definitely not considered administrators. They perform their duties in addition to other responsibilities as an Extension educator or specialist. They have little if any access to the ability to impact performance ratings, pay, or professional status of team members. In terms of the leaders' influence over the group, in the absence of formal authority, the alternative is clearly that the primary source of influence must emanate from the person, not from the organization. We have been examining the emerging concepts of transformational leadership as a means of better understanding, selecting, developing, and gaining access to those unique interpersonal characteristics that generate extra effort and commitment to the accomplishment of objectives. We have been particularly influenced by the work of Bass (1985) who provides formal descriptions of transactional and transformational leadership. He describes transactional leaders as those persons who emphasize the transaction or exchange that takes place between leaders, colleagues, and followers. This exchange is based on the leader specifying what is expected, and helping followers to clearly understand what they will receive, or avoid, if they fulfill those expectations. Bass' description of transactional leadership strikes us as being quite consistent with traditional view as to how to animate and activate a group to action in support of organizational objectives. At the risk of igniting the often tiresome debate of the differences between leadership and management, we consider the impact and methods of the transactional leader as being primarily associated with management Transformational leadership is differentiated from transactional leadership in that transformational leaders do more than set up simple exchanges or agreements. By virtue of the nature of their relationship with followers, they motivate others to do more than they originally intended, more than they thought possible, and to move beyond self-interest and focus on the larger goals of the group or organization. Perhaps the greatest contribution to our understanding of transformational leadership has been the identification of four characteristics, referred to as the four "I's" (Avolio, Waldman, & Yammarino, 1991) which transformational leaders use to stimulate and engage followers. The four I's of transformational leadership are:
Transformational leaders are thought to engage followers by employing one or more of the 4 "I's" to stimulate voluntary and enthusiastic responses to their influence attempts. Having associated transactional characteristics with management, we associate the transformational characteristics with leadership. However, Bass (1985) is quick to point out that the two concepts, transactional (you do this and I'll make sure you receive that) and transformational (intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, inspiration, and idealized influence) are generally not independent of one another. In fact a study of military officers and industrial managers (Waldman, Bass, & Einstein, 1985) showed that although the effects of transformational leadership were generally much stronger than those of transactional leadership, those who had both transactional and transformational characteristics were much more successful than those who had only one. For us then, the intriguing question comes down to how to stimulate the combined ability to both "rally the troops" and "to make the trains run on time." Both of these skills are important, but they are most effective in an appropriate combination with the other. In the past, our efforts at leader development have tended to emphasize the necessity for making logical rational decisions and arraying the reward structures in such a manner so as to make things pay off for people who are helping us to accomplish our goals. In Extension this takes the form of merit pay, tenure, promotions, work assignments, and so forth, and in less formal situations it often takes the form of affection, expressed appreciation, approval, personal assistance, favors, or other interpersonal exchanges. While this capacity is important and needs to be developed, the skills of the transformational leader are often ignored, not because we deem them unimportant, but rather because we have previously been unable to accurately describe, measure, or develop what we often referred to as the elusive "X" factor of leadership. Utilizing factor analytic techniques, Bass and Avolio (1990) have, in addition to identifying the elements of transactional and transformational leadership, provided a validated instrument, the Multi-factorial Leadership Questionnaire to measure this full range of leadership. In an effort to explore the general applicability of the transactional/transformational leadership concepts to Extension in general, and to these new organizational formats in particular, we conducted an exploratory program.
Subjects in this study include a leadership cohort consisting of two Assistant Deans of Cooperative Extension, five Extension specialists appointed as leaders of Priority Initiative Teams, and three Extension educators, also leaders of Priority Initiative Teams. In addition, 47 subordinates of the leader cohort participated in the study for a total of 57 study subjects. The previously noted Multi-factorial Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) was utilized to measure elements of transformational and transactional leadership and to examine their relationship to certain organizational outcomes. The MLQ measures seven characteristics of the behaviors of leaders; the four "I"s ( Individualized Consideration, Intellectual Stimulation, Inspirational Motivation, Idealized Influence) associated with Transformational Leadership; Contingent Reward, associated with transactional leadership; Management by Exception, a method of leadership associated with either solving or preventing problems; and Laissez Faire, an inactive form of leadership characterized by a reluctance to become actively involved and a view that the best leadership is to disassociate from the action. In addition, the MLQ also measures organizational outcomes; the willingness of followers to expend extra effort, effective leader representation of follower needs to higher-level leaders, unit effectiveness, job effectiveness, organizational effectiveness, and job satisfaction. Each member of the leader cohort completed a version of the MLQ measuring their perceptions of themselves on each of the 13 characteristics or outcomes. Each of the 47 subordinate raters completed another version of the MLQ measuring their perceptions of one of the members of the leader cohort (approximately five raters per leader) on each of the 13 measures. Results from the assessments were analyzed comparing the congruence of self- perception and the perception of others, and the relationships between levels of each of the seven leader characteristics and the six organizational outcomes. The importance of combining subordinate evaluations with self evaluations is well established in the relevant literature (Harris & Schaubroeck, 1988; Mabe & West, 1982). In general, congruence between self-ratings and those of subordinates provides an indication of the validity of the underlying measure. In this study both categories of respondents provided ratings on a five point scale for each of the leadership and organizational outcome measures. Table 1 summarizes the mean scores on each measure, and the relatively strong agreement between self and subordinate ratings, thus providing reassurance regarding the validity of the measures in this study.
Pearson's R, commonly referred to as a correlation coefficient, was used to measure the relationship between leadership characteristics and organizational outcomes. The value of R ranges between -1 (a perfect negative correlation) and +1 (a perfect positive correlation). A value of 0 indicates no relationship. These relationships are summarized in Table 2
Guilford (1956) provides assistance in interpreting and comparing correlation coefficients. He describes correlation coefficients of less than .20 as being interpreted as "slight almost negligible relationships", correlations of .20 to.40 as "low correlation;" correlations of .40 to.70 as "moderate correlation;" .70 to.90 as "high correlation, marked relationship;" and correlation greater than .90 as "very high correlation, very dependable relationship." An inspection of Table 2 reveals that transformational leadership characteristics have a consistently positive correlation with organizational outcomes in a range from .62 to .95, indicative of a very strong overall relationship. The correlations between contingent reward/transactional leadership and organizational outcomes is also strong; however, somewhat less so than in the case of the transformational factors. The strength of correlations with organizational outcomes virtually disappears in the case of the problem-oriented Management by Exception leadership and has generally weak negative association with Laissez Fair leadership approaches.
Having embraced an increased use of ad hoc teams and work- groups to accomplish key organizational objectives, and hesitant to enlarge existing organizational structures, we have actively sought to better understand and develop the organizational dynamics necessary to make these new organizational forms effective. Having been impressed by Bass'(1985) full-range leadership formulation, and in particular his description of transformational leadership, we have undertaken an exploratory study seeking to better understand and develop the requisite leadership capacity. Using a relatively small sample of Extension leaders and 47 of their Extension colleagues they are attempting to influence, we have utilized the Multifactorial Leadership Questionnaire, to make an exploratory examination of the relationship between various leadership characteristics and desired organizational outcomes. An examination of the results reveals that transformational leadership characteristics, which emanate exclusively from personal qualities of the leader, have a very strong positive relationship with desired organizational outcomes. Transactional leadership characteristics, which generally require the leader to regulate organizational rewards in return for follower effort, although strongly associated with organization outcomes, were generally less strongly correlated than with transformational characteristics. Problem-solving or dissociation approaches were weakly and negatively correlated respectively. Recalling that these results pertain to a group of only 10 leaders from what is in essence a sample of convenience, our preliminary conclusion is that the concepts of transformational leadership have great promise for Cooperative Extension. We interpret the results as affirming previous decisions to eschew the delegation of formal organizational rewards as a primary means to empower work-group leaders, as it appears that the most effective forms of leadership will be appropriate combinations of both transactional and transformational leadership. We are experimenting with a variety of workshop, personal development, seminar and retreat programs to assist our team leaders and multi-county coordinators to become aware of and to develop transformational leadership skills. Further study on larger representative leader cohorts, and with additional long- term measures of organizational outcomes, will contribute to confidence in the usefulness of transformational leadership to Cooperative Extension
Avolio, B. J., Waldman, D. A., & Yammarino, F. J. (1991). Leading in the 1990s: The four I's of transformational leadership. Journal of European Industrial Training, 15(4), 9-16. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free. Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), 19-36. Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1990). Multifactor leadership questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist. Boone, E. J. (1990). Crossing lines. Journal of Extension, 28(3), Unpaged. Guilford, J. P. (1956). Fundamental statistics in psychology and education. New York: McGraw Hill. Harris, M. M., & Schaubroeck, J. (1988). A meta-analysis of self-supervisor, self-peer, and peer-supervisor ratings. Personnel Psychology, 41, pp. 43-59. Hutchins, G. R. (1992). Evaluating county clustering. Journal of Extension, 30(1), Unpaged. Mabe, P. A., & West, S. G. (1982). Validity of self evaluation of ability: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 280-296. Mantz, C. C., & Sims, H. P., Jr. (1993). Businesses without bosses: How self-managing teams are building high performing companies. New York: Wiley. Waldman, D. A., Bass, B. M., & Einstein, W. O. (1986). Effort, performance, and transformational leadership in industrial and military settings. Unpublished manuscript, School of Management, Binghamton State University of New York. Journal Series No. 11424, Agricultural Reseach Division, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Marketing Fruits and Vegetables in South Central Alabama: The Diffusion Approach
Nii O. Tackie
Ntam Baharanyi
Henry J. Findlay
G.W.C. Agricultural Experiment Station
Over the last few years, the marketing of agricultural produce has taken on increasing importance for Extension. Marketing Extension is a reinforcing phenomenon to production research and Extension as well as other facets of agricultural development such as credit and farmers' organizations (Narayanan, 1991). Giving marketing information to farmers can be viewed from the perspective of innovation diffusion and decision-making theories. Rogers and Shoemaker (1971) described the innovation- decision process as a mental process through which an individual goes from first knowledge of an innovation to a decision of whether or not to adopt that innovation. They emphasized that the innovation-decision process is different from the diffusion process. The major difference, they argued, is diffusion occurs among units in a social system, but innovation decision-making takes place within the mind of an individual. Mahajan and Peterson (1985) stated that of the many forms of innovation and diffusion processes that have been studied, one finding keeps recurring. That is, at the adoption of an innovation only a few people use it. As time goes on, however, more people use. They further noted that diffusion models have been developed to represent the level or spread of an innovation among a set of potential adopters in a social system as a function of time that has elapsed from the introduction of the innovation. The diffusion model of agriculture is based on the hypothesis that appreciable increases in agricultural production may be achieved by allocating considerable resources to (a) increasing the flow of information to farmers about new agricultural technology and institutional arrangements (e.g., marketing and credit), and (b) teaching tradition-bound farmers how to make more economically rational management decisions on how to use the resources they have access to. Diffusion activities in agriculture have not only been carried out by Extension workers, but also by other communication systems such as radio, TV, and newspaper (Stevens & Jabara, 1988). Education, in general, increases the speed with which new skills and techniques can be adopted and implemented (Jamison & Lau, 1982). According to Feder, Just, and Zilberman (1985) the probability of adoption increases as the stock of information pertaining to modern production increases through Extension efforts. The likelihood of adoption is a function of producer skills, level of education, ability to consider the information important, and whether the information is already in use. Also, Wozniak (1984) suggested that an increase in contact with sources of information about the use of new products and procedures increases the probability of adoption. Several studies (e.g., Feder, 1980; Just & Zilberman, 1983; Zilberman & Just, 1984; Feder, et al., 1985) have been conducted on innovation diffusion pertaining to Extension production but none was seen in the literature on Extension marketing. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the marketing of fruits and vegetables in South Central Alabama using the diffusion approach. The objectives included: (a) to encourage farmers to attend workshops on grading and packaging fruits and vegetables, and (b) to determine the impact of these workshops on the operation of the farmers.
Seven workshops were conducted on grading and packaging fruits and vegetables for small and mid-size farmers in selected counties of Alabama over a three-year period. The population for the study included small and mid-size farmers in four counties. These workshops were intended to teach farmers about improved ways of marketing their produce in order to increase their income and knowledge in contemporary ways of marketing. Representatives from surrounding grocery stores, the Alabama Department of Agriculture and Industries, and officials of the U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) were helped in conducting the workshops. Grocery stores provided the necessary fruits and vegetables used for the workshops. Officials of the grocery stores and USDA led the presentation and demonstration on grading and packaging. Issues of size, uniformity, color, weight and packaging were discussed. Samples of fruits and vegetables were used for the demonstration. Fruits and vegetables used included, but were not limited to, tomatoes, onions, sweet potatoes, carrots, watermelon, cantaloupes, corn, peaches, okra, cabbage, strawberries and, blueberries. The final workshop was held at the Montgomery State Farmers' Market wholesale shed, enabling farmers to see first hand workers grading and packaging fruits and vegetables. In addition, information was given to the farmers on food chain store requirements for farm produce, selected marketing strategies, and using cooperatives as a marketing strategy. The innovation in this case was the grading and packaging of produce. In an effort to determine if the information given to these farmers was being used and to what extent, interviews were conducted (several months later) using a questionnaire. The questionnaire was designed to seek information on such things as the county and city of residence of farmer, the rating of workshop by farmer, and impact of workshop on operation. Ninety- eight questionnaires were mailed and 54 were returned.
Table 1 shows the results of assessment of the impact of grading and packaging workshops on operation of farmers. The farmers interviewed resided in Dallas, Sumter, Elmore, and Lowndes counties.
About 22.0% said the workshops were very good. Most farmers (94.4%) thought the general value of the workshop was high (very good and excellent). They said the information was very useful to them. When asked what impact the workshop is having on their marketing activities, 79.3% indicated that the grading and packaging information they received helps them select a uniform and better product, and hence get better produce to sale; 88.9% stated they got higher prices than usual due to using grading and packaging information. This indicated that most of the farmers had adopted and were using the information they received from the workshops in their marketing practices. In response to their future preferences for workshops, 66.7% said they prefer hands-on workshops and 77.8% said they would like to see more involvement of wholesale buyers.
The study was conducted to see if farmers would adopt an innovation regarding grading and packaging fruits and vegetables. In this regard, a series of workshops were held for farmers in selected South Central Alabama Counties. The results of this study indicated that the farmers were using the information they obtained at the workshops in their operations, implying they considered the information important and useful. Because the study was preliminary and limited to farmers in only four of 67 counties in Alabama, it is suggested that more counties be included in future studies. It is also possible to replicate this study in other states. The findings of this study should be beneficial to practitioners and pre-service Extension educators in designing and implementing training programs for marketing farm produce.
Feder, G. (1980). Farm size, risk aversion and adoption of new technology under uncertainty. Oxford Economic Papers, 32, 263 -283. Feder, G., Just, R. E., & Zilberman, D. (1985). Adoption of agricultural innovations in developing countries: A survey. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 33, 255-298. Jamison, D. T., & Lau, L. J. (1982). Farmer education and farm efficiency. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University. Just, R. E., & Zilberman, D. (1983). Stochastic structure, farm size and technology adoption in developing agriculture. Oxford Economic Papers, 35, 307-328. Mahajan, V., & Peterson, R. A. (1985). Models for innovation diffusion. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Narayanan, A. (1991). Enhancing farmers' income through Extension services for agricultural marketing. In W. M. Rivera & D. J. Gustafson (Eds.), Agricultural Extension: Worldwide institutional evolution and forces change (pp. 151-161). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science. Rogers, E. M., & Shoemaker, F. F. (1971). Communication of innovations: A cross-cultural approach (2nd ed.). New York: Free Press. Stevens, R. D., & Jabara, C. L. (1988). Agricultural development principles: Economic theory and empirical evidence. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University. Wozniak, G. D. (1984). The adoption of interrelated innovations: A human capital approach. Review of Economics and Statistics, 66, 70-79. Zilberman, D., & Just, R. E. (1984). Labor supply uncertainty and technology adoption. In R. D. Emerson, (Ed.), Seasonal labor markets in the United States (pp. 200-224). Ames: Iowa State University.
An analysis of Supermarket Pricing
Beverly J. Keil
E. Linda Ferris
Does it matter which supermarket you shop for groceries? Does it make a difference which week of the month you shop? These were questions raised by an Extension County Family and Consumer Science Advisory Committee. Participants expressed the belief that supermarkets raise their prices and feature more junk food the first of the month when food stamps are distributed and have more specials on basic foods at the end of the month, when many low income people are out of money. This study was conducted to test these assumptions and to identify shopping strategies to maximize grocery budgets.
This study evolved into two phases. In the first part, a shopping list of 130 items was compiled. Items on the list were divided into 17 categories. They represented basic items most homes would purchase during a month. Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program (EFNEP) educators made sure the list included items frequently purchased by their low income clientele. The categories were: fresh produce, meats, canned foods, soups, cereals, beverages, starches, staples, chips, cookies, condiments, cake mixes, breads, dairy, frozen foods, paper goods and miscellaneous. Volunteers were recruited to do the shopping. Each volunteer went to a different store and recorded the price for each item on the survey list. The shopping list specified package size and brand. For comparison purposes pre-determined sizes of the product and some name brands were used rather than trying to determine the best buy each time. Volunteers were asked to find the least expensive brand for a few items. The volunteers gathered data twice a month for three months, January through March 1995, during the first and last full week of each month. The eight stores visited for the study represented major supermarkets in Guernsey and Belmont counties of Ohio. Both of these counties are rural, located in the Appalachian area of eastern Ohio. One discount grocery was originally included but discontinued because they did not carry all the items on the shopping list or did not maintain the same brands on a consistent basis. The researchers also looked for foods featured on the front page of the stores' advertising flyers since those are the ones most likely to catch a reader's eye. Food groups represented and the total number of items in each ad were noted. In phase two the stores were surveyed weekly in April to track pricing trends. Six stores were surveyed for the 32 most commonly used items carried in all stores. One of the weeks included a holiday (Easter). The weekly survey was repeated with four stores in July when the holiday fell in a different week.
Evaluating three months of advertisements, volunteers found that the number of foods featured varied weekly within the store and from store-to-store. Items featured were not always offered at reduced prices, that is, deli trays at holidays and lamb at Easter. A soft drink was on special almost every week in nearly every store. This was not always listed in the flyer. Each week Pepsi or Coke was featured somewhere. Coke was the most likely product to be featured, followed by Pepsi, then store brands and 7-Up. Stores offered something from most food groups on the front page of their flyers each week. Milk was the least featured food group. While each store tended to featured a meat item on the front page, the stores varied as to the number of meat items in the ad. One store offered only one meat item while another store always had five or six. Each store featured something classified as a junk food (soft drinks, chips, sweets), but normally this would be just one or two items, a minority of the featured items. In the store price surveys, 60% of the time the highest priced week was one of the middle two weeks of the month. The first week of the month was the least expensive 7 out of 13 weeks, but the most expensive 2 out of 13 weeks. (See Table A.) When comparing the weekly cost variation of the total shopping list within a store, no pattern was identified. None of the stores had one week that was consistently their highest priced or their lowest priced. However, the prices did fluctuate from week-to-week within a store. During April the difference between the highest and lowest week ranged from 83 cents in Store B to $6.03 in Store F. In July prices fluctuated more in three of the four stores, ranging from a difference of $2.27 to $4.28. (See Table 1) At the beginning of the study, committee members and volunteers felt that one store in the area (Store A) always had the lower prices. This caused concern in the one county, because that store was located outside the county and meant a 50 mile round trip to take advantage of its prices. The study showed that during the month of April this store had the lowest total shopping bill 3 out of the 4 weeks and the lowest average price for the month. But in July, they were the highest priced one week and the lowest only one week. In addition, their average price for the total shopping list was slightly higher than the lowest store. In July the average price of three of the four stores only varied 50 cents and the difference in the average prices of the lowest and highest priced store was only 83 cents. (See Table 1) When comparing prices between stores, each store in the survey had a product at the lowest price sometime during the survey period. Although a store may have a higher total cost it may offer the best price on some items. One store consistently had the lowest prices for cereals, another tended to be lowest on starch products. The store with the highest overall market basket price had the lowest prices on frozen foods. Even though overall prices were high during holiday weeks, some of the specials near the holidays were excellent. Consumers may want to watch their other purchases during holiday weeks. If a consumer shopped all four stores during the week of July 3 and bought each product at its least expensive, the list would have cost $37.97. This would be a savings of $4.60 to $7.03 over shopping just one store. But to shop the four stores the shopper would have to travel a thirty-mile circle in Belmont county or 50 miles in Guernsey county. At a mileage rate of .27 cents per mile (IRS mileage rate for 1995), it would cost the consumer $8.10 to $13.00 in transportation costs to shop all four stores. This does not include the value of personal time and the expense of impulse buying in additional stores. Researchers compared the costs of convenience foods versus the basic ingredient. Fresh potatoes were compared to a national brand scalloped potatoes mix. Ten pound bags of potatoes was less expensive at the first of the month while the 7.25 ounce box of scalloped potatoes tended to be less expensive at the end of the month. Of course, the fresh potatoes would make many more servings. Whole chicken and chicken leg quarter prices were also compared. Chicken leg quarters were less expensive more often throughout the month. During the data collection, volunteers began to notice that the price of some foods marked as "special" was the same as the price in weeks when it was not on special. Therefore, 4th of July sale flyers from three of the supermarkets were collected and items featured were added to the shopping list for that store and tracked for the entire month. Most of the featured specials really were specially priced. Five out of 14 special prices were matched again that month. Prices of four of the specials were 50% or more lower than the next lowest price. Nine of the items cost double the sale price sometime during the month. This trend may not hold for all holiday specials. It did not appear that deli trays offered for New Years or the lamb at Easter were featured at any cost savings, but they were not part of the survey. This could be a topic for future study. There were numerous cases where advertised in-store specials were actually at their regular price. So before shopping specials, consumers need to know what the regular price is. (See Table 2)
As Extension educators we often teach consumers to make shopping lists based on sale flyers and to look for the lowest prices. This study has caused the researchers to re-think some of the traditional advice we have been giving. Based on this study our recommendations to consumers are:
No clear patterns of pricing were evident in this study, either between stores or within a store. Therefore, we come back to the recommendation above, in order to realize any saving in the grocery store consumers must know prices and have the flexibility to purchase an item or pass it up.
4-H Peer Theater: Taking Center Stage in Overcoming Obstacles
Joyce Shriner
Susan Hodson Rinehart
Deanna Tribe
Barbara Starkey Youth involved in the juvenile court system commonly reflect problematic family histories and inadequate problem solving skills. Faced with overwhelmingly negative situations and few coping mechanisms, these youth often resort to undesirable behaviors. It is generally understood that teens who have low cultural self-esteem are more likely to get in trouble than those who don't. Ohio State University Extension and the Hocking County, Ohio, Juvenile Court joined efforts to provide these young people with positive experiences designed to improve their self-esteem, help them acquire responsibility, discover and develop leadership potential, and practice civic life. The project was named Peer Theater because of the link between self-esteem and cultural awareness, and the opportunity to showcase the project for members' peers and the public as a means of community participation. Program objectives included: recruiting and educating high- risk, court-involved youth, raising awareness of local cultural heritage and crucial youth issues, increasing participation in the local 4-H program, providing educational opportunities for high-risk teens, and expanding agency collaborative efforts. The Peer Theater Team consisted of nine high-risk youth between the ages of 12 and 17, all referred by the county juvenile court. The group met weekly to learn about local culture, to discuss current youth concerns and to develop a theatrical piece. Sociologists tell us that where we spend our early years, especially up to about age 16, helps to frame our heritage and culture that influence our attitudes, behaviors, and values in life. Hocking County is located in Ohio's Appalachian region. Federally-defined Appalachia stretches from a few counties in northern Mississippi to southern New York state, parts of twelve states, including 29 counties in Ohio, and all of West Virginia. Negative, unfavorable stereotypes focusing on deficiencies, backward, demeaning, and making fun of people who are often labeled hillbillies have resulted in Appalachian people frequently displaying feelings of shame as well as poor self- image, esteem, and confidence rather than acceptance and pride in who they are. In working with Appalachian people in the context of cultural diversity, it is important to help them feel better about themselves--who they are and where they live. This requires recognition, understanding, appreciation, and celebration of Appalachian identity. During the early months of this year-long program, the Peer Theater Team learned about Appalachian culture based upon the concept that knowing who we are -- culture, heritage, traditions and values -- helps us feel better about ourselves and where we live. Team members explored the geographic, economic and social aspects of the Appalachian culture as well as the history of Hocking County and its prominent citizens. As a part of this study, the group compared and contrasted the past and current challenges faced by teens. To further enhance their cultural awareness the teens learned about local food customs and prepared a typical Appalachian meal. A variety of teaching methods and educational experiences were used to accomplish the program's objectives. These included inviting local historians to guest lecture; taking field trips to historical landmarks; observing a presentation by another peer theater group; participating in bonding and team building activities; studying critical youth issues; and working with a thespian to learn about acting and stage productions. This resulted in: the teens developing a play based on prominent local citizens that they presented in historical costumes; the creation of a puppet play which illustrated the value of telling the truth and the importance of family support; and the presentation of a prepared puppet play that emphasized self-worth, inner strength, and being able to overcome the less desirable things in life. The 4-H Peer Theater experience culminated with performances given for the Hocking County Youth Advisory Board, the County Historical Society's Christmas Open House and for the Special Friends (a group similar to Big Brothers and Big Sisters). Nearly 200 adults and children attended the performances. This project proved to be a positive experience for team members and the adults involved with it. An audience member commented, "The youth were very well prepared and poised. Youth seemed to enjoy what they were doing. Excellent." Other positive outcomes noted by the Hocking County Juvenile Court include: five of the nine members are no longer involved with the court system; none have been removed from their homes; and none have dropped out of school. Throughout the experience the teens learned the importance of taking responsibility, working together as a team, and contributing to the community in which they live.
Campus Encounters of the Clothing Kind
Rose Marie Tondl Young teens often experience a lack of self-confidence and may even experience a decline in self-esteem as they enter their adolescent years (Bower, 1991). Clothing is a significant force in the enhancement of the self, and when used positively, contributes to one's feelings of self-acceptance, self-respect, and self-esteem (Horn, 1968). There are a wide variety of career opportunities in textiles, clothing and design. Given the opportunity, young people can explore how their talents and interests fit in a variety of fields. Sometimes the process of finding out about jobs and careers matching one's skills and interest can be a bit overwhelming. (Weber, 1990).
During the past two years, a three-day campus encounter event was held for 4-H youth on the University of Nebraska campus planned by a team of county Extension educators and the Extension clothing specialist. The goals were to create an awareness and encourage an interest in clothing and textiles by nurturing ways to develop self-esteem, providing an overview of the field of clothing and textiles, and improving clothing construction and design skills. The three-day program gave 4-H members an opportunity to interact with college faculty who taught a variety of sessions. Youth explored chemical and physical properties of fibers through textile experiments, gained computer experience by creating a design for a T-shirt, expanded their sewing skills using a serger sewing machine, and increased their insight into historical clothing. The group toured places in the community involved with textiles, clothing and design, and heard from graduates now employed in the field. Youth reported that they made and gained new friends who had similar interests. On the last day, the youth presented a public showing of their accomplishments. Insight into personal improvement allowed youth to gain a better understanding of themselves, expand their responsibilities by staying in a college dormitory on campus, and eating in the campus union. Program participants included 34 young women, no younger than 14 nor older than 18. A prerequsite, completion of the 4-H Clothing Level 2 project, insured they would come with some basic sewing skills.
To determine the impact of this program, a survey was mailed to the thirty-four participants in January of 1996. They responded to this survey after one year or after seven months since attending this event. A total of 26, or 76%, was returned. To assess how helpful the different experiences were in developing their interests and awareness in clothing and textiles, the participants indicated the following were most helpful: between 65 and 88% said sewing on a serger, sewing stirrup pants, and making a glitz bag; between 72 and 82% said designing on the computer, and screening their computer design on T-shirts; going on field trips and listening to a career panel; 92% said their interaction with faculty and 84 percent said making new friends. Considering the time and money spent for this event, the majority of participants rated their experience as very positive. Approximately 90% felt the experience was very worthwhile, that it was a good investment, and they learned a lot. To assess the youths' increased knowledge about textiles, clothing and design and the influence of the department to continue on to higher education, they indicated the following: 100% increased their awareness about clothing, textiles and design; between 84 and 92% learned about the field of textiles, clothing and design; a desire was created to enter a career in this area; clothing construction skills were improved; and between 69 and 81% felt it strengthened their self-esteem and self-confidence. Attending Campus Encounters of the Clothing Kind was really liked by 80% of the participants; while the remainder said it was ok. After participating in Campus Encounters, one-third of the participants changed their impression about the department; 60% noted there was some change. Selecting a college and choosing a major in textiles, clothing and design are big decisions for youth. How likely would the choice of enrolling at the University in the Department of Textiles, Clothing and Design be influenced by their campus experience? Forty-eight percent said they were to likely enroll, while 51% said they were unlikely to enroll. The participants were also asked to reflect and indicate before they came to campus whether they would consider enrolling at the University in the Department of Textiles, Clothing and Design. Twenty-three percent said likely, while 72% said unlikely. This change reflects a significant difference that their campus experience would encourage them to enroll at the University. (t = p.<.05) This successful campus event was offered again this year. Youth summed up their experiences by making these comments: "I enjoyed my experiences at the camp. I was enlightened greatly about your clothing, textiles and design department. I would recommend this camp to anyone who is interested in clothing, textiles and design." "...After the camp I made the decision to major in clothing design. ...We were able to meet with professors from the University and see first hand of what their job entails." "Campus Encounters was the best camp I've been at! I believe it was a very good use of my money and would recommend Campus Encounters to ANYONE. I am now considering going into the field of clothing!" A parent summed it up by saying that the days her daughter spent on campus was a hugh boost to her self confidence, the special attention she got from quality people, and the time spent in getting to know girls her age made her feel very special.
Bower, B. (1991). Teenage turning point. Science News, 139 (12), pp. 184-186. Horn, M.J. (1968). The second skin. New York: Houghton Mifflin. Weber, J. (1990). Clothing fashion-fabrics-construction. Lake Forest, IL: Glencoe. A Weekend Together: Single Parent Family Camp
Nancy K. Recker
Sharon L. Mader One of society's greatest challenges today is the increasing number of children in single parent families. "It is projected that nearly one-half of all babies born today will spend some time in a one parent family that occurred as a result of single parenthood or divorce." (Hernandez, 1993) Today 7.3% (4.7 million) of American children live with an unmarried parent, 9.1% (5.9 million) live with a divorced parent, and 7.4% (4.8 million) live with a separated or widowed parent. (Norton & Miller, 1992) Despite their prevalence, single parents often feel like they are "going it alone." These families are often targeted as families in disruption or distress with children being targeted as youth-at-risk. Reaching these families is one reason why Extension agents with Ohio State University Extension initiated a single parent family camp and why its organizers see a repeat business each year. Originating in 1989, the innovative camp provides an opportunity for single parents to spend quality time with their children in a non-threatening, less stressful atmosphere than might be perceived at home. The camp demonstrates a team approach utilizing Extension professionals in 4-H youth development and family and consumer sciences. According to Teachman & Paasch (1994), single parent families are more likely to be economically disadvantaged than two parent families. To help offset financial obstacles, numerous civic and service organizations contribute money annually to assist with camp costs, registration fees, scholarships, group camp activities and guest speaker honoraria. To keep costs to a minimum, the weekend camp is held at an established 4-H camp with a permanent staff. The goal of Single Parent Family Camp is to provide age- appropriate educational opportunities for parents, children, and families. Parent sessions focus on increasing management skills, coping with stress, raising self-esteem, strengthening interpersonal communications, empowering parenting roles, enhancing parent-child relationships, and developing decision making and goal setting skills. Children participate in nature walks, board games, crafts, story telling, and clowning. Special programs are designed for family interaction--cabin skits, family tent camping, low initiative and high rope courses, wagon rides, farm visits and team sports. Extension personnel, volunteers and former campers coordinate the weekend activities and interact with participants. Both parents and children complete a questionnaire following camp. Evaluations indicate that both groups had excellent opportunities to share and develop quality time, increase self- esteem and develop better communication skills in their families. Perhaps the most important impact was revealed through qualitative data collected via informal interview. "You just don't see a lot of things offered for single parents," a single father said. "I feel like we're a big, silent majority that no one really pays attention to. At the camp, we're definitely not a minority." Having completed its eighth year, the Northwest Ohio camping program continues to serve single parent families throughout Ohio and neighboring states. The camp allows single parent families, often called the "silent majority," to feel like they are an integral part of society.
Hernandez, D.J. (1993). America's children: Resources for family, government, and the economy. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Norton, A.J. & Miller, L.F. (1992). U.S. Bureau of Census: Marriage, divorce and remarriage in the 1990's (Current Population Reports, Series P-23, No. 180). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Teachman, J.D. & Paasch, K.M. (Spring 1994). Financial impact of divorce on children and their families. In R.E. Behrman, M.D. (Ed.). The future of children (pp.63-83). Los Angeles: The Center for the Future of Children, The David and Lucille Packard Foundation.
A Weekend Together: Single Parent Family Camp Nearly one-half of all babies born today will spend time in a one parent family that occurred as a result of single parenthood or divorce. To reach this audience, a weekend camp has been conducted since 1989 reaching over 75 families every year. 4 -H youth development and family and consumer science Extension professionals work together to provide educational opportunities for parents, children, and families. Evaluations indicate an increase in self-esteem, better communication skills, and more quality time spent together. The low-cost camping experience has helped families feel like they are a more integral part of society.
Developing Skills and Expertise to Program in Latino Communities Using Satellite Technology
Rebecca Escott
Claudia Mincemoyer
Debra Nauman
Michelle Rodgers
Madeleine Sigman-Grant
The Pennsylvania State University In September 1995, approximately 200 Extension faculty and staff participated in a training progam to increase their skills and confidence in programming in Latino communities. The program was funded by college administration and a Strengthen Our Capacity to Care Staff Development Grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Participants attending included county Extension staff, University Extension faculty and staff, Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program (EFNEP) staff, and Extension volunteers and board members. The objectives of the in-service were to: identify aspects of the Latino culture that influence programming; obtain programming resources; share programming ideas; and experience the culture. The agenda combined regional site activities and satellite programming. At local sites, participants experienced the culture through food, music, discussions with local Latino/Hispanic community members, and hands-on exploration of resources. During the satellite portion of the program, demographic issues and concerns relevant to programming were discussed and a panel of experts shared their perspectives on the Latino culture. In addition, increasing involvement of Latino/Hispanic volunteers was addressed and programming resources were identified. County Extension staff shared, both locally and on the satellite portion, successful programs already being conducted in Latino communities. In Pennsylvania, the Latino population doubled between 1980 and 1990. The three-member panel shared information about the culture and skills needed to work in Latino communities. The key points the panel presented about the culture were:
The panelists stressed, "Never base your understanding on what you see in the media." Finally, they emphasized that having bi-lingual, bi-cultural people employed in an organization provides opportunities for on-going, informal training and communicates a greater level of commitment to the local Latino communities' needs. At the end of the conference, carbonless paper was used to obtain program evaluation information in the form of an action plan. This technique allowed the participants to provide feedback to the planning committee, yet retain a copy of their plan for future consultation and direct input for modifying personal job objectives. Participants were asked to indicate two aspects of the Latino culture that they had learned about and what program changes they planned to make to address these cultural aspects. Additionally, participants identified next steps necessary to enhance Cooperative Extension's relationship with local Latino -serving agencies and community leaders. Also, participants identified new ideas that they would include in their personal job objectives. Finally, participants rated their ability to provide educational programs in Latino communities before and after the conference. A 50% response rate was obtained. Distance education technologies and on-site activities helped participants examine attitudes as well as programs. A synopsis of the findings follow: Aspects of Latino culture
Program changes and changes in Plan of Work
Confidence in programming in Latino communities
This article is online at http://www.joe.org/joe/1996october/ent.html.
Copyright © by Extension Journal, Inc. ISSN 1077-5315. Articles appearing in the Journal become the property of the Journal. Single copies of articles may be reproduced in electronic or print form for use in educational or training activities. Inclusion of articles in other publications, electronic sources, or systematic large-scale distribution may be done only with prior electronic or written permission of the Journal Editorial Office, joe-ed@joe.org. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
