Volume 38 Number 6
|
December 2000 Volume 38 Number 6 |
|
|
Contents
Editor's PageDecember's Tools of the TradeTools of the Trade articles are supposed to "report on specific techniques, materials, books, and technologies that can be useful to U.S. Extension professionals." The ones in this issue fill that bill.
And that brings me to my next topic. Feedback WantedOctober's Commentary articles have gotten some good feedback. The electronic discussion forum that's part of "Extension: On the Brink of Extinction or Distinction?" http://www.joe.org/joe/2000october/comm1.html contains a dozen or so thoughtful and enthusiastic responses. And the authors of "Value-Free Extension Education?" http://www.joe.org/joe/2000october/comm2.html report getting responses from Extension staff across the country. That's great. Keep it coming. We want JOE to be a real forum for discussion and force for change. That's why we include authors' e-mail addresses. (And if you really feel strongly, you can always reach more of us in a Commentary.) In 2001, we'll be testing a JOE electronic discussion forum for even more feedback and livelier discussion. We haven't gotten the bugs worked out yet, but, when we do, you'll be the first to know. JOE UpdatesI've got two for you.
Best wishes for the New Year. Laura Hoelscher, Editor Land Use Is the Issue, But Is Land Grant the Answer?Chester L. Arnold, Jr. Land Use and Natural Resource Management: It's Not Just for Aggies AnymoreAmerica has entered a new era of natural resource management, in which local land use decisions will be the key determinant of the health of our resources and communities. The Land Grant University (LGU) network is the only national system with the structure, mission, and track record to deal with local land use issues. We're not doing it. While individual programs and staff are forging ahead on these issues, as a system there is considerable hesitance to embrace any natural resource programming other than production agriculture. This narrow focus has resulted in significant incursion of other agencies into research and outreach that could be done better by LGU/Extension. The head start provided by our experience and the much-touted LGU/Extension model has all but completely eroded away. The LGU/Extension system must move aggressively to reassert our leadership in the broad field of land use and natural resource management, particularly at the community level. The alternative is to cede the field to others--and with it, our relevance to the changing landscape of America. The Focus Shifts to CommunitiesOver the last couple of decades, natural resource management has been moving out of both agency offices and farmers' kitchens into town hall. On the one hand, our critical environmental issues are diffuse and incremental, making them a poor fit for traditional "command and control" regulatory solutions. On the other, as American suburbanizes, the majority of our landscape is no longer primarily controlled by individuals owning large swaths of farm or forest land. As we move to face problems such as nonpoint source water pollution, farmland preservation, and forest/habitat fragmentation, the solutions are to be found partly with individuals owning small parcels of land and primarily with local units of government. Land use is the issue, and land use is overwhelmingly decided at the local level by county- and town-level volunteers serving on land use boards and commissions. Agencies and organizations involved with natural resources have been slow to recognize (or at least embrace) the overwhelming importance of local land use, but it has finally dawned on them. Mounting evidence of the environmental, social, and economic impacts of poorly planned land use, particularly at the rural/urban interface, has attracted the attention of a diverse group of agencies and organizations from The Nature Conservancy to the American Farmland Trust to the Environmental Protection Agency to the National Homebuilder's Association. However, despite the appearance of recent initiatives focused on "sprawl," "livable communities," and "smart growth," relatively little is being done to assist the critical audience of local land use decision makers. The world of local land use--messy, complicated, frustrating, and time-consuming--is foreign and intimidating to many organizations. Few groups have the experience, the tools, the mindset, or the sheer people power to assist local land use decision makers. Extension (including Sea Grant Extension) is the one exception. Extension's strengths are precisely what are needed at the local level: solid, research-based information; facilitation and outreach skills; and ability to work with many different sectors without the "baggage" of being a regulator or advocate. However, despite a number of excellent individual programs in natural resource management/environmental quality throughout system, the LGU system as a whole has steadfastly refused to take up the challenge of addressing land use issues as a topic or focusing on local land use decision makers as an audience. Presented with this apparent abdication, other organizations far less suited for the work are finally moving to fill the gap. Phantom Impediments to a Land Grant Natural Resource FocusWhy is our system so slow to embrace the natural and necessary evolution into land use based natural resource programs? The answer seems to be a combination of misconception, fear, and inertia. Misconception that "environmental" issues are a fundamental topical departure from LGU/Extension's strengths. Fear of moving away from the power base of traditional agricultural audiences. Inertia that is the byproduct of a large, complex system resistant to change. Environmental Doesn't Mean "Tree Hugging" There exists the misconception that natural resource issues are "environmental" and therefore suspect. Let's not forget that agriculture is natural resource management, albeit only one of several major aspects. Presumably, agriculture programs are considered mainstream because they encompass a "production," or economic, emphasis. But all natural resource management is inherently economic in nature, whether it's a timber company attempting to maximize its yield or a town trying to protect the health of its waterways. To be effective, natural resource programs should address both sides of the conservation/development coin. This is far from tree-hugging, and it is a viewpoint that is sorely in need of a champion in our communities. The LGU/Extension system could become this champion by broadening its focus to include "non-commercial" natural resource management by individuals, local governments, and others. It's a logical extension of our historic charge, not a radical break. Breaking Through the Rural-Urban Interface There is also a rarely expressed fear that by overtly addressing issues related to urbanization, LGU/Extension would be making a dangerous move away from our rural public and political power base. However, if we are to effectively address land use issues, LGU/Extension cannot possibly leave traditional rural areas and audiences out of the equation. For example, groups like the American Farmland Trust have been quick to realize that you cannot effectively address farmland preservation without addressing urban issues. Similarly, issues like forest fragmentation, nonpoint source pollution, and sprawl affect both sides of the urban/rural interface. One needn't be an "inside the Beltway" savant to recognize the enormous potential of the political power represented by suburban and urban audiences in general, and local decision makers in particular. Consider the political clout represented by satisfied LGU/Extension "customers" who are mayors, first selectmen, city council members, county commissioners, and League of Women Voter officials, for example. The Myth of Mission Creep What about staying faithful to the "A" in USDA? Doesn't a more explicit focus on land use and natural resource issues constitute "mission creep"? On the contrary, one can make a strong argument that the greatest mission creep evident in the LGU/Extension system is its continued emphasis on production agriculture. By retaining this programmatic focus, we have drifted considerably from the intent of the system's original mission to serve the community. Back in the 19th century when the system was created, the dominance of the family farm in the landscape and culture of America made "community" virtually synonymous with "agriculture." That is obviously no longer the case. Some parts of our system have avoided this blind spot. Both 4-H and Consumer Sciences have turned their attention to suburban/urban areas and issues, and, in those parts of the country where they still exist, Community Development Extension staff have broadened their focus to issues like farmland preservation. The Enemy in the Mirror It has often been pointed out that the large and complex LGU/Extension system cannot adapt with the speed or decisiveness of more "line-oriented" agencies. While true, the real irony is that the complexity and plurality that make administrative hierarchies slow to respond to new situations are the same characteristics that foster creativity at the field level. The result is that individual staff and programs have adapted and moved far ahead of their own administrations on emerging issues. Putting the Brakes on Innovation: Lending a Hand, Versus Having a Hand OutThrough the entrepreneurial work of individual staff members securing external funding, Extension now boasts a handful of excellent research and Extension programs that address critical issues such as urban forestry, habitat fragmentation, land use planning, open space preservation, watershed management, and household environmental management. However, due to their topical focus and their non-USDA funding sources, these programs often exist in isolation from their LGU base, to the detriment of both program and system. Isolated LGU success stories could be dramatically multiplied in both magnitude and number with the addition of one key missing element--administrative will at the state and the federal levels to support, package, and market these programs to the clientele and to other agencies. Moral support is extremely important, but not enough. Money talks, and the language it speaks is leadership: the value is not so much in dollars and cents, but the ability to alter the dynamic between LGU/Extension innovators and our partner agencies. Even modest amounts of "internal" county, university, and USDA funding would allow LGU/Extension natural resource programs to go to the table as "players." This is an entirely different scenario than having our programs continually playing the supplicant, with our hands out and nothing to put on the table but our excellent ideas. Without the basic bargaining chip of internal support, LGU research/Extension model programs will continue to eke out their existence as fringe players in the natural resource management game. A Closing Window of OpportunityAmerica is suburbanizing, and many of the most critical issues facing Americans are at the urban/rural interface. Our communities need help: help to plan and envision their future; help to dovetail economic growth with environmental protection; help to promote tourism without depleting their natural resource base; help to preserve open space and farm land from an onslaught of subdivision. We should be there for them, because a description of the ideal delivery system to meet these needs sounds like a LGU/Extension marketing brochure. But for the most part, we're not. We could be. The solutions are to be found at every rung of the system ladder. On the program end, Extension educators must come to the table willing to fill the need that exists: providing field level information and assistance on natural resource issues directly to land use decision makers. Mere facilitation and research are not enough. Being ready, willing, and able to "get our hands dirty"--in this case at a zoning board meeting rather than in a corn field--will continue to be the greatest asset that our system has to offer. At the individual LGU level, administrators need to take the "choke chain" off of their excellent natural resource programs, and promote and support them the way they do the more traditional programs. Deans and Directors steeped in the agricultural tradition of the system need to look to their entrepreneurial field staff to help them open up new doors and to attain a comfort level with natural resource issues and agencies. At the national level, NASULGC, ESCOP, ECOP, and other system-wide policy bodies should facilitate the creation of a network of existing exemplary research and outreach programs that address natural resource management and the environment. This network should be tapped for their expertise, "marketed" to partner agencies, and, in general, presented as a package that showcases the power and potential of LGU/Extension as a major partner in natural resource management for the 21st century. If our system does not find the will and the resources to assert our role in natural resource management, we will be out of a job. Of greater importance in the big picture, however, is that those recreating our wheel may be too little and too late to provide the type of assistance that our communities desperately need. Walking the Mile BarefootAnne-Michelle Marsden Diversity - A Critical IssueServing a broad array of ethnicities is a high priority at Rutgers Cooperative Extension in New Jersey. It has been an important aspect of my tenure with Rutgers Cooperative Extension to not only conceptualize diversity, but to also develop and implement programs that reach a wide spectrum of clientele. I certainly thought that I was acting from a well-developed knowledge base concerning "reaching and teaching" diverse populations. I also thought that, after 15 years of experience, I understood the core of addressing diversity. That is, I thought that until I had spent just 1 month out of the year I had arranged as a sabbatical in the remote Toledo District of Belize. Are Personal Experiences Valuable?Before positioning fingertips on keyboard to write this piece, I reflected on the potential benefits others could gain from it. Would my experience be valuable to a Family and Consumer Sciences Educator in Connecticut, a 4-H Agent in California, an Agricultural Agent in Ohio? Can the lessons in diversity learned by one professional be applicable to another? The answer, I concluded, was both yes and no. Submersion into another culture provides a perspective that, in some ways, is difficult to transfer. There is an esoteric "knowing" that just arrives when one engages in daily living in a foreign culture on a regular basis. However, as an addendum to all the diversity in-services and training manuals Extension professionals receive, I believe that several key points gained from my experience are transferable. Hands-On Diversity TrainingThe Mopan and K'ekchi' Mayans of Southern Belize in Central America offer a wonderful hands-on diversity training, if one is willing to learn. To establish a relationship with the Mayans, one has to understand their culture. To the industrialized world, their lifestyle could be misunderstood as anything from quaint to primitive. One of the first rules we've all learned through diversity training is to increase our knowledge of a clientele's culture. This part of the diversity equation was relatively easy. I accomplished my academic update by absorbing information from the only two books in existence regarding the contemporary socioeconomic conditions of the Maya of Southern Belize. Rule number two, to "reach clientele where they are" culturally, educationally, and geographically, proved to be quite a challenge. I can speak from experience that it is one thing to work from a position of academic understanding regarding cultural values and practices foreign to one's own. It is another issue to actually move a programmatic initiative forward that truly reaches people. Diversity rule number three, "provide [educational] opportunities that are determined by the target population," was not as much of an issue. Village leaders and the Belizean Minister of Rural Development and Culture, a Mayan himself, had expressed a need for the program to be developed. I was there upon the invitation of the Maya culture's stakeholders. Not surprisingly, however, the establishment of trust on the grass-roots level needed attention. The Long MileEstablishing trust wasn't as easy as "walking a mile in their shoes," where one ostensibly comes to understand a person or a population group. Both in reality and figuratively speaking, I walked the mile. In fact, I walked the mile barefoot, because most of the village women do not wear shoes. Some level of acceptance developed from my willingness to experience their culture, but mostly villagers found my desire to engage in their lifestyle peculiar. I came to realize that I will never totally gain the cultural orientation of a Mayan woman, just as I will never truly understand the cultural orientation of an elderly Hispanic woman who attends my Extension classes in the United States. While I am a female, I am not Mayan, Hispanic, or elderly. I can only make it a point to always engage individuals from diverse populations in the nuts and bolts of planning, implementing, and evaluating initiatives. Of course, I had recruited culturally diverse populations for all aspects of Extension programming in the past. But this experience reinforced my resolve to ask, and ask again, during all stages of programming, "Is this direction of programming suiting your needs?". We may believe we have the research-based answer; however, long-term behavior change will never come about unless we work with the culture instead of trying to change it. I found that coming from a mindset of "I have the answer" is not only pompous, it is pointless. My experiences have given me a deeper and more profound understanding of the term "change agent." My New GlassesOne of my greatest lessons was that it requires hard work and dedication to begin to understand another culture. It requires more than a half dozen in-services and the best of intentions to meet the needs of a diverse population. It requires the willingness to take off the spectacles through which each of us sees the world and risk trying on other pairs. The spectacles we wear (mine ground by the effects of a university education, by being a Caucasian female member of the baby boomer generation, and by living in the North Eastern United States), hinder our sight as we try to connect with those who do not share our outlook. It requires concentration and constant attention to metaphorically take off one's spectacles and see clearly through another's. It is far easier to do the work academically, to increase one's knowledge base about how and why others act different from us through texts and in-services. For academicians, understanding on this sociological level comes easy, too easy. To fight the urge to continue to look through glass ground only by our own personal or cultural experience is a high-maintenance activity. I will give an example. Given my personal beliefs and life experiences, I would have never thought I would choose to try on the spectacles of an older Mayan man from one of the more remote villages. He sees through glasses that I previously could neither understand nor empathize with. For example:
To try on his spectacles means to understand his cultural perspective. Granted, this is an exceptional example. Extension professionals are not challenged on a daily basis to look through the lens of an individual or a group that holds cultural norms so different from their own. But taking the time to engage in the "spectacle trade" activity, to understand another's beliefs system and lifestyle norms, is the point. To move from studying the list of a population group's cultural ways that was handed out at an in-service or is part of a textbook we purchased is the point. To take the responsibility and, as previously noted, the risk to internalize why and how those cultural norm manifest in the behavior of a group or an individual is the point. In the fast-paced world of being an Extension professional, with programs piled high and deadlines for reports even higher, how often did I really take the time to remove my spectacles prior to this experience? How often do you? Understanding Through PicturesThe Mopan and K'ekchi' Mayan culture is outside the paradigm of American life. To emphasize the need to and potential challenge of taking off one's spectacles due to vast cultural differences, I provide some pictures. Infrastructure, Community Living, Farming San Vicente Village (Figure 1) is located on the Belizean/Guatemalan border. As in most villages in the area, there is no electricity or running water. Women wash their clothes and bath their children in the stream. Chickens and pigs roam free throughout the village. Villages are organized in a communal system. Group activities, such as a fajinia (cleaning of the village) are practiced on a regular basis. The alcalde (leader), however, decides where families will live and milpas (farms) will be placed. 
Figure 1. The agricultural production method of slash-and-burn is used. Basic crop rotation is not always practiced. Figure 2 depicts harvesting rice with a sickle at Silver Creek Village. 
Figure 2. 
Figure 3. Social Constructs Regarding Women, Family Planning What American's refer to as the "children having children epidemic" is a cultural norm for young Mayan women. By age 14 to 16, young women are engaged by their parents to acceptable young men. Elder females in the village did not even meet their husbands-to-be until their wedding day. Females are not provided with family planning information by their elders. Figure 4 shows a K'ekchi' family at home. 
Figure 4. Diet and Meal Preparation Corn is the primary dietary mainstay for Mayans. The Food Guide Pyramid is not part of their understanding, nor is it possible given the lack of vegetables for part of the year. Malnutrition is widespread. Women spend a large part of their day preparing corn tortillas, made fresh up to three times a day. In Figure 5 I am being taught how to take dry corn off the cob. 
Figure 5. The Elderly and Children There is no such thing as "retirement." Elders work until they are too frail to perform their daily duties. Bush doctors provide the main medical interventions for village elders. Figure 6 (Eric Leupold, Leupold Photography) shows a village elder in the Deer Dance festival, a cultural/religious ceremony. 
Figure 6. Children attend school in their village through what is comparable to 6th grade. While there is a high school (comparable to 7 - 10th grades) located in Punta Gorda, the only town of significance in the Toledo District, few attend due to cost and transportation issues. There is no time for personal development and educational programs such as 4-H. Children are given household or farm responsibilities as soon as they are able. Figure 7 shows children rinsing corn in the stream. 
Figure 7. Translating the Experience for the FutureWork with the Mopan and K'ekchi' Mayans was a personal wake-up call. My experience was an extreme example of an opportunity to provide service to a diverse population. But I was fortunate to be engulfed by their culture, where there were no other programming demands or deadlines to steal my attention. In addition to walking the mile barefoot and looking through another's spectacles, I was able to invest the time to contemplate and utilize the material from all of those in-services. I looked for ways to make it work. I did far more listening than talking until I was sure I had an understanding of my clientele. I checked with key representatives within the Mopan and K'ekchi' villages to make sure I was not operating by stereotypes or disturbing cultural norms. Today, the payoff is evident. The Mayan Elder Cultural Project is moving forward with ease, and I will resume my Extension responsibilities in the United States with more resolve to reach underserved populations and a little more confidence in my ability to do so. A Profile of School-Age Care ProgramsBarbara Vandenbergh Eddie Locklear North Carolina State University IntroductionIn the mid 1980's the Cooperative Extension Service developed the School-Age Child Care Consortium to help address the American families' need for quality school-age care for their children while parents worked. The Consortium provided leadership to a national movement to position Cooperative Extension as a leader in helping to improve the quality and availability of school-age care for children ages 5 to 14. In the early 1990's the Cooperative Extension's National Network for Child Care was established to expand the early efforts of the Consortium by including children, birth through five years old. In May 1999, the Cooperative Extension System created the National Child Care Initiative to address the continuing need for child care. Before and after-school care, or school-age care (SAC), as it is commonly called, has become a way of life for most families in America. Current economic conditions have resulted in an increase in families with both parents in the workforce. According to Meyers and Kyle (1996), nearly 75% of mothers with children ages 6 to 17 were in the labor force in 1993. Over 25 million school-age children need care while their parents work (Meyers & Kyle, 1996). In a study of 1,175 public school principals, 84% said children needed before and after-school care (National Association of Elementary School Principals, 1993). The need for school-age care is also growing because of problems associated with leaving children home alone. Children in unsupervised situations face problems of accidents, death, suicide, teen pregnancy, diminished school performance, drug and alcohol abuse, academic failure and negative peer pressure, limited social interaction, lack of social skill development, and limited cognitive development (Locklear, 1992). A 1987 Harris opinion poll found that many teachers felt that students' difficulties in school are associated with their being "left on their own after school" (National Association of Elementary School Principals, 1993). Vandell and Corasanti (1988) found that children in 20 or more hours of school-age care per week are more likely to succeed in school. In addition to providing for the health and welfare of children during non-school hours, educators realize that there are other benefits associated with quality school-age care programs. According to Posner and Vandell (cited in National Association of Elementary School Principals, 1993), after-school programs for children in low-income areas help improve children's self-esteem, social skills, and academic performance. Locklear, et al. (1994), in a national study of 76 school-age care programs in 16 states, found that youth involved with school-age care programs supported by Cooperative Extension showed improvements in social skills and academic performance, and showed a decrease in behavior problems. Similar benefits were found in an inner-city Baltimore program (Allen, Brown, & Finlay, 1994). Although there are many benefits associated with school-age care programs, there is a lack of data that describe the characteristics of these programs. Knowing the characteristics of programs will help identify areas that may need additional attention, such as staff salary, work experience, and educational level and program operations. Because most states, including North Carolina, do not register after-school programs, it is problematic to ascertain the characteristics of many school-age programs in America. This study is a beginning. The study was designed to identify characteristics of school-age care programs in North Carolina. MethodsThe North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service worked with The Department of Health and Human Services, the North Carolina School-Age Care Coalition, the Resource and Referral Network, the Governor's Support Our Students Initiative, and the Department of Public Instruction to secure contact information for school-age care programs in North Carolina. Sample survey questions were distributed to over 20 school-age care professionals for comments. Based on their responses, a survey instrument of 22 questions was prepared. The questions were divided into four categories: information about the sponsoring agency, specifics about the children who attend, a profile of staff, and program operations. Three thousand fifty-two (3,052) surveys were sent to school-age care staff in public schools, churches, and other sponsoring agencies such as YMCA, YWCA, Support Our Students (SOS), and private schools. The Division of Child Development provided a mailing list of 2,225 names of licensed child care providers who offer school-age care services. Anonymity was assured the respondents. The surveys were color-coded in order to ascertain the return rate of each group of respondents. The respondent groups were: child care centers, Department of Public Instruction programs, North Carolina School-Age Care Coalition members, programs registered with the Resource and Referral network, and the Governor's SOS (middle school) initiative. Postage paid return mail was provided to the respondents in order to have as high a return rate as possible. Of the 3,052 surveys mailed, 486 (16%) were returned and formed the basis for this report. Responses were received from 89 of the 100 counties in North Carolina. ResultsSponsoring Agencies The types of sponsoring agencies for school-age care in the study vary widely (Table 1), with churches and schools providing the majority of programs. Types of Sponsoring Agencies
Of the programs, 73% were licensed, and 27% were not licensed. Sixty-five percent (65%) of the licensed programs have an "A" license; 26% an "AA" license; and 7% have certification from the Department of Public Instruction (DPI). Two percent did not indicate a license type. Of those who responded that they were not licensed, 31.0% replied that licensing would require facility upgrades; 14.3% reported no barriers; 14.3% felt it was unnecessary; and 11.9% had never tried. Children Who Attend School-Age Care: The average number of children enrolled in programs was between 10 and 50. The age range of the children varied, with the youngest being five years old and the oldest being 14 years old. Middle school age children were included in 45% of the programs, and 68% indicated that they include special needs children in their programs. Subsides were used to support children in 68.3% of the programs. The source of the subsidy varied; 58.3% of the respondents reported the Department of Social Services as the source of the subsidy and 8.4% as Child Care Resources. Other responses to this question included parent fees and Support Our Students funds. Staff of School-Age Care Programs: An almost equal number of programs reported having 1 to 3 (22.3%) and 4 to 6 (22.1%) staff members. A staff size of more than 15 was reported by 66 centers (16.22%). Staff sizes of 7 to 14 were reported by 39.38% of the respondents. Research has shown that staff training is one of the most important components of high-quality programs (Helburn et al., 1995). Over 94% of respondents reported that they required training for staff, and 85.9% said that they paid for the training. An average of 17.6 hours of training was required annually. The agencies reported as providing most of the training were the Community College System (24.7%), Cooperative Extension Service (19.0%), and the Red Cross (13.6%). When asked what topics were most needed for training, the top two responses were arts and crafts (25.3%) and behavior management (21.7%). Many of the school-age care staff had limited experience in the field (see Table 2). Seventy-four percent (74%) of teachers had less than 5 years of experience in their school-age work. Directors have more work experience than teachers, with 54% reporting more than five years of experience. Work Experience of School-Age Care Staff
Education: Educational levels varied among staff (see Table 3). The majority of teachers (37%) had a high school diploma, and 12% had four-year college degrees. Directors' educational levels were higher, with 29% of directors indicating they had a four-year degree. Educational Level of School-Age Care Staff*
In addition to educational levels, the respondents were asked which state or national credentials the staff held (CDA, NC Credential I, and NC Credential II). For teachers, the largest number held the NC Credential I (48.1%), followed by NC Credential II (43.0%) and CDA (8.9%). Directors were evenly divided between NC Credential I and NC Credential II, with 15.7% holding a CDA. Salary is an important factor for retaining staff in school-age care programs. The majority of teachers made between $5.00 and $7.00 per hour (53.0%) (see Table 4). The highest percentage of directors received $7.00 to $10.00 per hour (50.0%). Nearly 20% of directors were compensated less than $7.00 per hour for directing a program. Salaries of School-Age Care Staff
Program Operations Other important components of school-age care programs include length of operation, space, snacks, and transportation. The majority of the programs operated year-round (86%), used shared space (66%), and provided snacks (97%). Twelve percent of the programs operated only during the school year, and 2% operated only during the summer. Transportation to the sites was provided by 43% of the programs, and 15% of the programs provided transportation home. The cost for snacks was $1.50 per child per day. To maintain the interest of school-age children, a program must offer a diversity of activities. To organize the responses about what activities were offered on a typical day, questions were classified into physical, intellectual, and social/emotional categories. Art was the one specific activity most frequently offered (24.3%) by school-age care programs followed by games (21.0%), outdoor play (8.1%), and field trips (7.6%). A median of one hour was spent in outdoor play, homework, and free choice activities. Smaller amounts of time (20 to 30 minutes) were spent having snacks and special presentations. Some activities clearly overlap (e.g., basketball was a physical, social, intellectual and emotional activity). The largest number of responses fell into the physical and intellectual categories. Physical may activities include games, sports, and dance. Intellectual activities may include homework, puzzles, computer activities, and reading exercises. These two categories were almost equal in time. Social/emotional activities were a distant third. The ratio of staff to child is an important predictor of quality in school-age care programs (Helburn et al., 1995). In programs of high quality, staff greet children, integrate them into activities, initiate conversations with them, ask questions, encourage social interaction, and, in general, respond to the children in a warm and friendly manner. To achieve this, a staff child ratio of 1 to 15 or better must be maintained. Currently, the allowable ratio in North Carolina is 1 to 25. Respondents were asked how their programs would be affected if child/staff ratios were decreased from 1/25. As indicated in Table 5, the majority of the programs would not be adversely affected if child/staff ratios were reduced because 68% of the programs already have lower ratios. Impact on Programs If Child/Staff Ratios Were Reduced*
Some programs offered additional services to families. When school-age care staff were asked what other services they offered to families, the highest response was that they offered parent services such as: training, counseling, referrals, GED programs, and literacy training. The programs also offered additional child care on teacher workdays, evening care, early drop-off, and summer vacation care. Additional financial aid was also mentioned in the form of scholarships and a sliding fee scale. Some programs offered piano lessons, dance/gymnastics, children's choirs, and library groups. At least one program offered a "drive home" snack. Summary and RecommendationsThe results of this survey provide an overview of school-age care in North Carolina. Although the response rate was 16%, the 486 respondents from 89 of the 100 North Carolina counties provided valuable insight on the characteristics of after-school programs. The data indicate that churches and public schools were providing most of the care and that programs averaged between 10 to 50 children per day. The majority of teachers had less than 5 years of experience, had a high school diploma, and were paid between $5.00 and $7.00 per hour. Directors were paid only slightly more ($7.00 - $10.00 per hour), and 29% had four-year degrees. An average of 17.6 hours per year of training was required of staff. Eighty-six percent of programs operated year-round, and 65% shared the space for their programs with the host facility. Data about the education level, low pay scale, and work environment may help to explain the high turnover rate that exists in school-age care, about 43% for teaching staff in school-age care programs in North Carolina (Lyons and Russell, 1998). High staff turnover, lack of experience, and low salaries continue to plague school-age care programs nationwide. The results of this study indicate a need to focus more attention on staff salaries, educational level of staff, and activities provided to youth in after-school programs. In order to address the issues of educational level, staff salaries, and program quality, NSACA (National School-Age Care Alliance) has developed national standards that describe "best practice" in out-of-school programs for children and youth between the ages of 5 and 14. Many school-age care providers are looking toward the accreditation system to illustrate the standard of quality they have achieved. Other staffs are using the standards to improve the quality of their school-age care programs. The authors recommend that a cooperative effort be made by all individuals responsible for achieving the quality of care children deserve. The Cooperative Extension Service will continue to work with the collaborators who provided contact information for this study to address the needs of after-school staff, with special emphasis on educational level and compensation. Furthermore, parents, communities, governments, and businesses should form a partnership to improve the child care system. Parents can help by becoming knowledgeable about:
Communities can help by:
The federal and state governments can help by:
Employers can help by:
The economy depends upon working mothers and fathers. Parents and children need and deserve high-quality, affordable, accessible care. Although more research is needed to help design ways to support school-age care staff, this survey provides a profile of school-age care in one state and indicates areas that can be addressed to improve the quality of school-age care in America. References
Impact Assessment and Participant Profiles of Extension's Education Programs for Agricultural Chemical/Seed Retailers and Crop AdvisorsMichael A. Schmitt Beverly R. Durgan Sarah M. Iverson University of Minnesota Traditionally, agricultural (ag) education programming by University Extension personnel has been targeted at crop producers. Both Brown (1981) and Hildreth and Armbruster (1981) provide classic representations of Extension programming for the rural agricultural setting. They clearly imply that educational materials, including bulletins, folders, newsletters, and guidebooks, have been developed specifically for farmer-producer audiences. Recent data have shown that crop and livestock producers also look to their agricultural product retailers and service providers for information and recommendations. Alston and Reding (1998) state that grain producers obtain information from ag chemical dealers almost as frequently as from Extension. King and Rollins (1995) conclude that fertilizer dealers are the primary source for locally relevant information. Likewise, a survey by Roseler et al. (1994) reveals that farmers name industry specialists three times more often than Extension personnel as their source for dairy nutrition information. In the past decade, many chemical and/or seed companies and ag products supply cooperatives have increased their emphasis on education/information transfer. Developing and maintaining ag education programs for agricultural products retailers and service providers can be an important niche for university outreach programs, because university research is an important factor in decision-making. Schmitt (1988a) concludes that University education programs and resources rate similarly in terms of quality and demand to in-house, technical education resources among ag retail dealers. Roseler et al. (1994) report equivalent ratings for company specialists and Extension specialists among dairy nutrition professionals. It is critical that education programming for ag professional audiences includes interaction with private industry. Davison (1983) states that involving the private sector leads to wider and more rapid dissemination of information compared to working exclusively with producers, whereas Brown (1981) concludes that partnering with private industry allows for sufficient resources to enhance program impact. Spandl et al. (1998) outline some of the issues related to the development and implementation of joint Extension-industry programs outline. Objectives and MethodsThe University of Minnesota Extension Service (UM Extension) has been conducting crop production education programming for ag professionals, which include retail dealers, crop consultants, sales personnel, and county Extension staff, for the past 12 years. These ag programs are multi-discipline and have been developed, organized, and primarily taught by state Extension faculty. The programs have increased in demand and attendance over the years due to quality programming as well as the widespread popularity of the Certified Crop Advisor program, which requires annual continuing education credits. To evaluate the effectiveness of these specialized programs and better identify this audience and its preferences, the authors surveyed Minnesota ag professionals. The survey asked questions that profiled respondents about their educational attainment and perceived knowledge levels and then addressed the impact and comparative evaluation of the university's education programs. A six-page survey was mailed to 1,640 ag professionals on July 20, 1998. Because no comprehensive list of ag professionals exists, the most recent rosters of three programs targeted at Minnesota ag professionals (Ag Professionals' Field School, approximately 250 individuals; Ag Professionals' Winter Update, approximately 500 individuals; and the Minnesota Crop Producers Retailers Association's Annual Conference, approximately 1200 individuals) were used to represent the population. Duplicate entries were identified and excluded. A cover letter was included, along with a self-addressed, postage-paid return envelope. On August 17, a follow-up postcard was sent to everyone. Six hundred and ninety-eight (n=698) usable surveys were completed and returned, for a response rate of 43%. The survey asked factual (job title, educational emphasis and attainment, program attendance, etc.) and perceptual (subject knowledge, program quality and impacts, etc.) questions. Of particular interest was the effect of educational attainment on responses. Two categories were selected to be used, those with bachelor's degrees and those without. Cross tabulation was conducted to delineate and organize the data into cells for each of the reported responses such that chi-square test analysis at the 10% level could be used (Freedman et al., 1978). This test is based on differences between actual cell frequency data to determine the significance of the education categories. A 10% significance level was used. Results and DiscussionRespondents' Education and Knowledge The job titles listed by the respondents were extremely varied and, thus, provided a good mix of perspectives for other questions. Manager was the primary title, listed by 30% of respondents, although many different adjectives (e.g., sales, general, farm, business, branch, area, department, assistant) were added. Agronomist was the second largest category (14%), while 11% listed consultant. Other categories included sales (9%), applicator (9%), owner/president (7%), and specialist (6%). Respondents were also asked to list their formal educational experience. Sixty percent had obtained a bachelor's degree. Thirteen percent listed a high school diploma as their highest level of educational attainment, whereas 27% cited some post high school education (junior college, technical school, college/university). In comparing these results with a similar survey conducted in 1987 (Schmitt, 1988b), there is a strong, positive trend that more ag professionals, especially those working in the ag retail market, have bachelor's degrees (60%) now than a decade ago (29%). Among respondents with a bachelor's degree, the area of specialization, or curriculum major, was diverse. One of the most common categories was agronomy, which included crop science, plant systems, soils, and other similar listings. This category included one third of respondents with bachelor's degrees. Another one-third listed degrees in business/marketing. Education degrees were cited by 9%, while general agriculture majors or derivations thereof accounted for 8%. Numerous other majors were listed, ranging from journalism to animal science to natural resources. All respondents were asked to evaluate their perceived knowledge of several technical areas. Respondents said they had the greatest perceived knowledge about crop production, followed by weed management, fertilizer management, tillage, crop economics, seed selection, insect management, and disease management (Table 1). The subjects that ag professionals deal with almost daily (weed management, fertilizer management, crop production) were those that respondents believed they were most knowledgeable about. In contrast, topics such as disease and insect management--issues that are dealt with less frequently--were those that respondents considered themselves to be less knowledgeable about. Ratings of Perceived Knowledge of Different Subject Matters by Respondents' Education Attainment, from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent)
Delineating respondents' perceived knowledge by formal educational attainment, perceived knowledge was significantly greater among college graduates for the subjects of weed, insect, and disease management and crop production (Table 1). Knowledge of crop economics, fertilizer management, and tillage was not perceived differently based on educational attainment. Only seed selection had lower knowledge ratings from respondents with a bachelor's degree. In our experience with ag professionals, we have observed that information and recommendations about pesticides and their use requires a greater knowledge base about weed, insect, and disease management subjects from the ag professional, with little room for error. However, tillage, crop economics, fertilizer management, and seed selection require important, but less exacting, recommendations and information. Thus the comfort level for making recommendations for these subjects may be less dependent on educational attainment. Programs' Evaluation and Impact Respondents rated several issues pertaining to the UM Extension education programs compared to other education programs. For usefulness of information, UM Extension's programs were rated much better or somewhat better by 49% of the respondents, while 51% rated UM Extension programs as no different or inferior to other programs. On a scale of +2 (UM Extension programs much better) to -2 (other programs much better), with 0 representing no difference, the average score was 0.4. Ratings were also obtained for other program issues (Table 2). For one issue, up-to-date with agricultural technology, only 30% of the respondents rated UM Extension programs as much better or somewhat better and the overall average score for this issue was 0.0. Comparative Evaluation of UM Extension Programming Issues by Respondents' Educational Attainment, from -2 (non-UM Extension programs much better) to +2 (UM Extension programs much better)*
Extension programs rated highest for the issues of professionalism and return for cost investment. The university's resources, faculty, and applied research programs may have contributed to the favorable professionalism rating. The cost investment rating could have referred to the value of the learned information, or, less positively, it could have referred to the relatively low fees charged for UM Extension programs. The cost issue is the only issue that had a significant statistical interaction with education attainment of the respondents. Those respondents with college degrees rated the return for cost significantly higher than did those without degrees. Extension's program issues receiving the lowest rating were up-to-date with ag issues and up-to-date with ag technology. Drawing from comments written on the individual surveys, it appears that some of the respondents may have intertwined these two issues to imply up-to-date with ag technology issues. Numerous comments regarding UM Extension's lack of overall endorsement of current technology issues were listed on surveys. The survey asked respondents to list education programs they had attended recently. The most prevalent sponsors of these education program were regional supply cooperatives (e.g., Cenex/Land O'Lakes, Farmland Industries). Next were programs offered by Land Grant institutions in the neighboring states of Iowa, Wisconsin, and North Dakota. Other frequently mentioned sponsors of ag professional education programs were chemical/seed companies, private research/education organizations, and state commodity organizations. The sponsorship issue for education programs is often overrated, according to our survey. From a list of six factors that ag professionals may consider when deciding whether to attend an education program, sponsor was rated the lowest (Table 3). The most important programming factor was the topics to be presented. In addition, compared to the average, respondents with college degrees rated the factors of topics and speakers as more important and the factors of sponsor and cost as less important, thus creating a stronger disparity among factors. This ranking of factors mirrors the results of Schmitt (1988b), indicating consistency in ag professionals' opinions. Respondents' Perceived Importance of Several Programming Factors by Educational Attainment, from 1 (not important) to 4 (very important)
Assessments of the impact of UM Extension's educational programs were varied. Seventy percent of the respondents said they had provided improved service to their customers as a result of Extension programs. Examples of improved service included enhanced knowledge and credibility as well as improved pest and fertilizer recommendations. There was also a significant interaction with education; respondents with bachelor's degrees more frequently cited a positive impact on service (Table 4). In addition, 71% of respondents reported they had adopted or recommended practices that better protect the environment. There was no significant interaction with this type of service improvement based on education background. Respondents' Indicating a Positive Impact as a Result of UM Extension Contact/Resources
In contrast, only one-third of the respondents stated that their business was more profitable as a result of UM Extension programs (Table 4). One interpretation might be that the improved services/recommendations and practices protecting the environment could have been reducing the sales of products. Summary and ConclusionAccording to ag professionals, the UM Extension education programming offered to them is not necessarily better than other education programs, especially as it relates to current technology issues. However, participants clearly stated that Extension's programs are positively affecting their service and recommendations to customers, both agronomically and environmentally, although not necessarily improving their business profitability. In most instances, ag professionals with college degrees responded more positively to university education programming issues. Future programming will need to focus on relevant topics as well as offer excellent speakers. The specific sponsor and, in general, cost of the program are the least important factors to those attending educational program. The implications of this survey research to the broad picture of Extension are critical. Extension will have greater impact on agriculture when it directly reaches key information disseminators. Roseler et al. (1994) conclude that, for dairy production, the university's impact and value are in developing and maintaining programs/relationships with the industry. Our survey results reinforce that conclusion for crop production. Extension education programs should recognize that a very critical target audience for crop production information has shifted from farmers to ag professionals. Agricultural professionals then transfer and/or repackage this information, often in association with product sales to crop producers on a local basis. This information delivery system could potentially exclude county Extension personnel. Extension programming, especially by state Extension faculty, can have its greatest educational impact when its creators partner with companies, associations, and agencies that also sponsor education programs for their employees. These partnerships will enable Extension to target information to those who will be able to best use or transfer the information. References
Planning Educational Volunteer Forums: Steps to SuccessKen Culp, III IntroductionA considerable amount of time and resources, on the part of both volunteer and paid staff in, are dedicated annually to the planning, coordination, and execution of educational volunteer events. These may include workshops, in-services, conferences, or forums that may range in duration from a few hours to several days. Regional 4-H Volunteer Forums are held annually in the four national Extension Regions. Each Regional Forum is somewhat different, displays its own personality, and reflects its host state's unique culture. Many similarities exist, however, including the recurring issues that must be addressed by each group when planning such an event. The purpose of Regional Volunteer Forums is to increase the capacity of volunteer and salaried staff to contribute to the achievement of the mission of 4-H Youth Development Education and the Cooperative Extension System as a whole (Curtis, Hampton, Hougen, Howard, Johnston, McCoy, Peterson, Rutledge, Grieb, & Mullen; 1991). Similarly, the purpose of a state, area, or district Volunteer Conference or workshop is to provide the educational and technical resources that volunteers need in order to deliver the 4-H Youth Development program as well as to meet 4-H members' needs. Although the following suggestions are offered as steps to consider when undertaking the planning of a Regional Volunteer Forum, they have been proven to be equally effective when planning a state, area or district Volunteer Conference or workshop. MethodologyThis article is one of the results of a qualitative, longitudinal study. Since 1992, the researcher has participated in eight Forums in the North Central and Southern Regions, has worked with regional steering committees in four states, and has participated in state 4-H Volunteer Conferences in four states. In addition, the researcher collaborated in researching, developing, and implementing the Ohio 4-H Volunteer Recognition Model (Culp, Schwartz, & Campbell, 1997) and the Kentucky 4-H Volunteer Recognition Model (Culp, in press). The Ohio 4-H Volunteer Recognition Model was implemented and resulted in a single-day, combined volunteer education and recognition event that was attended by 1700 individuals in 1998, 1900 in 1999, and 1400 in 2000. The Kentucky 4-H Volunteer Recognition Model resulted in a two-day, combined volunteer education and recognition event that was attended by 752 individuals in 2000. The "Steps to Success" for any Regional Volunteer Forum and most, if not all, State Conferences, may be divided into five categories. These categories include: Constructing the Steering/Planning Committee; Contracting Facilities; Planning the Program; Arranging for Food, Meals and Catering; and Developing the Budget. By focusing on these five categories, planning committees can coordinate a successful forum or conference without getting completely bogged down managing endless details. Discussion and RecommendationsThe steps are introduced and discussed in the order in which they should be executed. For example, the planning committee should be constructed before contracting the facilities, developing the budget, planning the program, or arranging for meals. This is important, because the planning committee needs to be a player in the decision-making processes that are involved in the other four steps. Constructing the Planning/Steering CommitteeHave enough people to do the job. Committees are composed of volunteers. Most volunteers also have jobs and professional and personal lives, and aren't able to devote their full attention to a volunteer role. "Many hands make light work" is a good motto to remember. Providing secretarial support and technological resources (duplicating, mailing, faxing, printing, etc.) from the State 4-H Office in support of the Steering Committee and its chairpersons will support the volunteers, facilitate goal achievement, and help avoid burnout. Sometimes, however, more is less. Large groups can be unwieldy and unproductive. Having too many people can cripple some committees. The important thing is to know your volunteers, especially the committee chairs, and to respect their wishes and leadership styles. Construct committees with a cross-section of personality types and leadership styles. Each committee needs an assortment of Thinkers, Doers, Dreamers, and Watchers. The Thinkers will envision the details. The Dreamers l be creative, spontaneous, and dynamic. The Watchers will keep lend balance and stability to the group. And the Doers will make sure that the job gets done. Structure each committee to have more volunteers than paid staff. Remember that this is a volunteer conference and the volunteers should have both wide-spread responsibility and authority in planning and undertaking it. The volunteers are likely to have the best concept of what will appeal to other volunteers, what frills are unnecessary, and where to place budgetary and educational priorities. Make sure all Extension staff on the Steering Committee are Forum literate. The quickest way to cause a "them against us" rivalry is to place a group of well-meaning Extension staff in leadership roles who have no concept of, or history with, the Regional Forum. Regional Forums are not NAE4-HA conferences. The purposes, objectives, and audiences of the two are quite different and have no bearing on each other. Don't expect a lifetime commitment. With the exception of booking facilities (which needs to be done at least three years prior to the event), most Forum details can be accomplished in 18 months or less. In no case should a committee be meeting on a regular basis more than 2 years prior to the regional event. Contracting FacilitiesKnowing your audience is crucial. Many volunteers attend Regional Forums and State Conferences without reimbursement. Others take vacation to attend on their own. Planners should consider these factors when contracting the conference center and hotel. Negotiate hotel costs. Hotels costing $100 per room per night are likely to be too expensive for volunteers. Remember that, of the "big three" costs (meals, facilities, and sleeping rooms), the sleeping room cost is likely to be the most negotiable. One option is to get the hotel to guarantee a room price, regardless of the number of guests in the room. Be aware that many conference hotels in large cities also charge a bed or conference tax, ranging from 10 to 20%, that is not tax-exempt. Recognize that big convention centers are intimidating. People don't want to pull out a map to determine the location of their next workshop. Nor do they want to leave the hotel every time they attend a workshop. Meeting rooms should be in close proximity to lodging rooms; there should be ample elevators to transport guests to different floors; and meeting rooms should be easily located. Be the only conference scheduled at that facility. It is more advantageous to be "a big fish in a small pond," or, even better, the only "fish" in the pond. Being the only conference scheduled at a facility ensures that you will have all available staff and resources funneled toward your event, rather than have to share them with other groups. House all conference delegates at a single facility. Most 4-H volunteers have been found to be motivated by affiliation (Byrne & Caskey, 1985; Culp, 1997; Henderson, 1983; Rouse & Clawson, 1992). Forum and conference delegates attend largely due to three motivational influences: the quality of the educational workshops (achievement motives), the opportunity to share information (achievement through affiliation), and building or renewing relationships (Culp & Schwartz, 1999). Housing delegates at multiple hotels complicates schedules, requires additional transportation, and reduces opportunities to meet and share. Volunteers staying at an "over-flow" hotel are likely to feel disconnected and left out, and will have a less positive experience. Know the preferences and limitations of your audience. If your audience is accustomed to a hotel/conference center, planning a Forum at a state 4-H camp may be out of the question. While historic hotels can be wonderful places to spend a weekend, consider whether their turn-of-the century elevator(s) will be able to transport your guests from the main floor to their rooms and back between workshops. Can the facility accommodate the special needs of all of your delegates? Make sure that the facilities are convenient, accessible, and easy to locate and navigate. Understand the constraints that "tradition" places on your event. If the Forum in your region has traditionally been successfully scheduled during a particular month or time frame, moving it to another time could be disastrous. A difference of 3 weeks may not seem to be a problem on an agent's calendar, but a move from mid-October to late September may seem "undoable" to a volunteer. Developing the Budget and Financial ResourcesPlan your budget based on a 3- to 5-year attendance average. A 3- to 5-year average provides a good benchmark from which to base your budget. Other issues, including registration, lodging and transportation costs, location within the region, and local attractions may have a bearing on attendance. Basing break-even costs on a conservative attendance estimate will help ensure that your event operates in the black. Have a contingency plan that is reflected in your budget. When Nebraska hosted the 1997 North Central Forum, three budgets were developed, based upon different registration numbers. These registration numbers were 400, 500, and 600 delegates. While 600 was the 5-year average, the previous Forum held in Ohio (scheduled a month earlier than traditional dates, in an expensive luxury hotel) had registered barely 400 delegates. By comparison, South Dakota (which adjoins Nebraska) hosted 775 delegates at the 1993 NCRVF. Nebraska's 600-delegate budget (which was ultimately the budget that was utilized) featured two nights out, two off-site dinners, and heavy-duty speakers. The smaller budgets reduced the number of off-site visits and meals, as well as Forum "extras." Understand what the threshold is for Forum registration fees. Volunteers understand inflation. However, increasing registration more than 10% in a year is likely to significantly reduce attendance figures, particularly if a good reason for the increase is not perceived or understood. Establish up-front who will be responsible for resource development and financial contributions. What role will your state 4-H Foundation play in resource development? If the Foundation is involved, coordinating fund raising activities will be important. A development officer may be more effective in securing a $5,000 gift than a volunteer. Additionally, a development officer is more likely to ask a potential donor for $5,000, while a volunteer may ask only for $500. Realize that in-kind contributions may be even more important than long-term financial support. For example, a printer is more likely to be willing to donate printing the registration booklet, dinner menus, programs, or evaluations, than cash. In the budget, however, in-kind donations are as important as cash. Budget and spend money where it makes a difference. You should spend most of the budget in two key areas: education (speakers, workshop locations, and offerings that are conducive to learning, and high-quality educational tours) and meals. Money spent on professional decorators, elaborate lights and sound, and exotic meals will neither increase the educational value of the Forum, nor attract potential delegates to attend. Find out early what recognition each donor desires in return for contributions. Each Regional Forum has a JC Penney banquet. Yet many Forums have donors who have made larger contributions but who receive less recognition than JC Penney does. For most donors, seeing their name listed in the program is not enough. Some alternatives include: displaying their logo or signage prominently throughout the Forum, including a catalogue or products in goodie bags or on tables at meals, inviting a company representative to give remarks at a meal, and including self-addressed thank-you notes in goodie bags or on tables at a meal for participants to complete and mail. It's also important to provide donors with impact information within 2 months of the Forum. Planning the ProgramRemember that the success of the Forum rests on the educational workshops. Forum delegates attend to gain new ideas, become re-energized, develop or renew friendships, and take information back home. Workshops should be hands-on, ready to use, and easily understood. Offering workshops that appeal to both newer and more experienced volunteers will have greater appeal and educational value. Because Saturday will be part-timers' day of choice, fill it with high-quality workshops. A common temptation of many Steering Committees is to load the Saturday schedule with tours. However, if a Forum goal is to appeal to part-timers, remember that part-time attendees are likely to be employed and will therefore be weekend participants. Part-timers will not be as interested in going on a tour as they will be in attending a meaningful workshop. Recognize that one "heavy-duty" speaker per day is more meaningful (and more cost-effective) than one speaker per meal. An effective speaker can greatly enhance any Forum. Everyone will hear the speakers, so make sure that your money for speakers is well-spent. It is also important to remember that informal sharing is an important aspect of the Forum. Providing time during one or two meals each day for sharing and developing relationships will meet the volunteers' motivational needs, help keep the program uncluttered, and also keep the budget in check. When budgeting for speakers, the minimum for a "reputation" speaker, contracted through a speaker's bureau or conference planner, will start at $2,500 plus expenses. Vary speaker types. Different speakers appeal to different people. In order to please everyone, include a cross-section of motivational, inspirational, educational, and humorous speakers. Engaging the services of a meeting planner will provide access to a larger speaker's pool. Remember it is possible that an effective speaker maybe someone local, who may be willing to speak for free. However, any speaker should be reputable and experienced. One lackluster speaker can do a lot of damage. Respect tradition. Some aspects of the Forum are considered sacred! The volunteers will recognize those and won't want to compromise them. Planners are well advised not to alter or compromise such sacred traditions. Try at least one new idea. Start a new tradition. Each Forum has its own personality. Each Forum brings an opportunity to try something innovative and new. Be creative, make an impression, and try something a little bit different. Schedule at least one evening meal "off-site." Having one meal off-site livens up the program and breaks the routine. Off-site meals also present an opportunity for a state to showcase some of its own unique culture. A bar-be-que, luau, crawfish boil, hog roast, or fish fry; dinner at a museum, mall, farm, or zoo; or one with an ethnic theme will add to the Forum experience without drastically increasing costs. In addition, eating off-site provides commodity groups an opportunity to make in-kind donations, whereas most convention centers or caterers will not accept foods from other suppliers. Schedule time for mingling, meeting new people, and exchanging information. Forum delegates are "people-persons." They want to share and receive information, as well as develop and rekindle relationships. Scheduling 90-minute meals, 30-minute refreshment breaks, and some "down time" between workshops will facilitate these exchanges. Arranging for Food, Meals, and CateringHave plenty of wholesome, hearty food, in ample servings. Eating is a celebration, a tradition, and a way of life in most cultures. Meals should be wholesome, nutritious, hot, on-time, and abundant. The wait staff should be punctual, courteous, and responsive to individual requests. Most people perceive that their registration fees are spent largely on meals and therefore want good value for their money. Remember that "grazing" buffets can be awkward for large groups. Many people prefer to be waited upon, rather than to serve themselves. Additionally, buffets are not conducive to exchanging information and developing or renewing relationships. While lingering over a meal may be desirable, standing in a long line with 400 other delegates may be perceived to be a waste of time. Finally, buffets are awkward for older people or those with disabilities. Have alternative entrees available. Many people are on restricted diets. Restricted diets may require eliminated or reduced amounts of sugar, salt, fat, cholesterol, and meat. Check with your caterer and have an alternative entree available. Provide a space on the registration form for special or restricted diets. Have ample seating available. The "fallout rate" is generally lower for State or Regional Forums than for most other volunteer programs. This is likely due, in part, to the sizable investment volunteers make to attend. It is embarrassing and hard on a schedule to be caught short of seating and to ha o set-up additional tables, chairs, and place settings. ConclusionThere are many effective means of planning and orchestrating Regional Volunteer Forums and State Volunteer Conferences. All of them, however, are time and resource intensive. This article is not exhaustive and has not covered all details, but conference planners who pay attention to the five "Steps to Success" described here will gain the necessary structure to keep focused on the "big picture" without getting completely bogged down managing endless details. References
The Educational Needs of Small Business Owners: Look into the FutureGlenn Muske Nancy Stanforth IntroductionSmall businesses represented a significant driving force behind the economic boom of the 90s. These businesses employed more than 56% of all workers. Between 1990 and 1994, small businesses generated 38% of the gross national product (Berns, 1991; Chun & Griffin, 1996; Nelton, 1989). Small businesses accounted for virtually all of the net new jobs created between 1987 and 1992(Ashmore, 1996). Women and minority small businesses made an important contribution to the economy, generating over $3 trillion in sales and receipts (Chun, 1998). Future economic expansion will depend on the continued success of small business owners. One factor found to predict business success has been education and training of the small business owner. Much of that training has come from continuing education programs, such as that offered by the Cooperative Extension Service. Seventy-four percent of home-based business owners in one southern state depended on continuing education to fulfill their educational needs (Burns, 1994). Similar studies by Burns in 1989 and Berns in 1991 support that finding. Berns studied 9,000 entrepreneurs and found that continuing education in financial management, personnel, marketing, and business planning was regularly requested. The purpose of the study described here was to examine the anticipated continuing educational needs of current college students. Today, entrepreneurship courses have seen tremendous growth at the college level. With such an explosion it might be anticipated that today's college student will already have acquired the educational programs needed to operate his or her own business. Confirming this will help Cooperative Extension plan its future entrepreneurial support role. BackgroundThe number of small businesses in the U.S. economy quickly grew during the 1990s. Today, more than 99% of the 23 million U.S. businesses are classified as small, using the standards of the U.S. Small Business Administration. Over 70% of U.S businesses have 20 employees or fewer (Buck, 1997; Frauenfelder, 1997; U.S. Census, 1998). The growth in the number of small businesses is expected to continue into the new millennium. According to futurist Watts Wacker of SRI Consulting, the number of small businesses is expected to increase by 50% over the next 10 years (Chun, 1998). Nearly 900,000 new companies started each year, with over 90% classified as small businesses, and it is estimated that 50% are home-based (Case, 1996; Frauenfelder, 1997). One primary reason for the growth in the number of small businesses is that "being your own boss" continues to be a part of the American dream (Batory & Batory, 1997). In a N.Y Times survey, over 75% of people indicated that having one's own business was one measure of success. Muske and Stanforth (1998) note that nearly 60% of non-business college students thought they would be owning their own business at some time. Other studies of college students, including both business and non-business majors, note similar results (Brenner, Pringle, & Greenhaus, 1991; Crant, 1996; Duke, 1996; Kay, 1996; Scott & Twomeny, 1988). A second reason for starting a business is disillusionment with corporate America, causing many to look for alternative employment choices (Kay, 1996). Corporations are no longer viewed as lifetime employers, even if the individual would like that to be the case. Global competition, corporate hiring freezes, downsizing, and changing skill needs have altered the business/employee relationship. Nor can workers expect that corporate jobs will fulfill their psychological and sociological needs. Quality of life represents a third reason for starting a business. Many employees view quality of life as important as money or status (Buck, 1997; Kay, 1996). Owning a business provides income and time flexibility that is not easily available when working in a large corporation (Brackey, 1998). Entrepreneurship represents an alternative means for many to achieve their desired lifestyle (Buck, 1997; Duffy & Stevenson, 1984; Kay, 1996). Entrepreneurship also provides an income potential greater than what the corporate world might offer and sufficient to keep up with one's peers (Bryant, 1999). The technological revolution has made working at home or in a small business more viable. Technology has allowed workers to produce quality output from their desktop computers without regard to firm size or location, and has enabled rapid communication worldwide (Kay, 1996). Another issue that has sparked people's interest in starting a business is the "glass ceiling," often regarded as a gender issue. Often women are not able to rise beyond a certain level within the corporate environment. To fully realize their potential, they choose to start their own businesses (Chun, 1998). These reasons for growth are predicted to continue and to drive the increasing numbers of individuals starting a business. At the same time, however, many businesses fail or do not achieve the success needed to continue a growing economy. Success, measured simply by staying in business, is an elusive goal for many entrepreneurs. Research indicates that as many as 60% of all small businesses fail within 5 years of start up (Case, 1996; Kirchoff, 1993). One way to increase business success rates has been through education and training (Danco, 1994; Ede, Calcich, & Panigrahi, 1998; Jenkins & Jenkins, 1997; Luisser, 1995; Robinson & Sexton, 1994; Sage, 1993). Education can reduce mistakes that are costly in terms of both time and money (Hatten, 1997). One obvious source for such education is higher education. Entrepreneurial courses and programs have experienced a huge growth in numbers (Block & Stumpf, 1992; Gartner & Vesper, 1993, Vesper & Gartner, 1997). Today, as many as 1,000 two- and four-year colleges and universities offer formal entrepreneurship programs, up from only 50 in 1975 (Vesper, 1993; White & Shank, 1999). For a variety of reasons, though, many students do not have an opportunity to take entrepreneurship courses while in college. Business colleges report that classes are filled to capacity with their own students and many have substantial prerequisites for enrollment. Thus a non-business student has limited opportunities to get this training while in college (Stanforth and Muske, 1999). Cooperative Extension has long assisted the home and micro business owner as well as rural and community development through educational programs. These programs have responded to the needs of the business owner (Burns, 1994). The Extension programs in each of 40 states have a designated person to oversee micro business development. For future planning, it is important that the Cooperative Extension Service look at prospective demand for entrepreneurship education. This paper discusses the entrepreneurial intentions and continuing business education needs of the non-business student. Do these students see themselves as future entrepreneurs? Do they anticipate that they will need educational support beyond college courses, such as those offered by Cooperative Extension's non-formal education programs? If so, what programs does this group anticipate needing? Such information will be useful in the development and planning of Extension programs and outreach efforts as we enter the new millennium. MethodStudents in non-business classes in two Land Grant universities completed a self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire included questions regarding the students' continuing education plans for business management classes. Students were asked what subject content they would be interested in taking through some form of continuing education. The choice of subject matters was derived from Duke's (1996) study. Demographic information included the respondent's major, year in school, family experience with entrepreneurship, age, and gender. The study discussed here has two limitations that affect its applicability. The most important is that the survey measured intended behaviors, that is, what students were planning to do. Many factors may cause their actual behavior to differ. For example, students who now are planning to become entrepreneurs may never achieve that goal, and others who did not consider entrepreneurship may indeed end up owning a business. Entrepreneurial ventures are often unplanned (Jenkins & Jenkins, 1997). A ond limitation is that students were from two universities and primarily from two colleges within those universities. Thus the results may not be applicable to all areas of the country and across other colleges even within the same university. Having noted these limitations, the authors nonetheless believe that their findings have implications for future Extension programming. ResultsThree hundred eighty-three students completed the questionnaire. The majority were female (68.1%). A variety of majors were represented, with 43.9% from Human Environmental Sciences and 38.9% Agriculture, for a total of 82.8% from these two areas. The majority (76.2%) were 20 years of age or younger (Table 1). Descriptive Statistics
Nearly half of the respondents (46.6%) indicated that their families owned a business, which included ownership of farms and ranches. Forty percent indicated that their fathers owned a business, while 16.4% indicated that their mothers owned a business. The other businesses were jointly owned or held in some other form of business structure. Twenty four percent of the respondents said they are definitely going to open their own business some time during their lifetime. An additional 60% indicated they might start a business. These two groups were considered the prospective entrepreneurs in this study. As might be expected, the needs of the potential entrepreneurs differed significantly from those who did not see themselves becoming business owners. Among the prospective entrepreneurs, students anticipated most needing education in small business financing, basic accounting, and business growth. However, there was not a great deal of difference with each course being listed by 32% to 40% of the respondents. Students were least interested in personnel management and retailing (both at 32%) (Table 2). Ten percent of the students overall said they would be taking all of the listed courses. Women and men did not differ significantly in seeing themselves as becoming entrepreneurs. In examining the responses according to college major, only in the agriculture college did men and women differ significantly (c2=12.8588, p=.00161). This finding might be expected because male students majoring in agriculture are more likely to return to a family farm than are female students. Men and women potential entrepreneurs did not differ, however, in their perceived future educational needs. Students' Perceived Post-College Continuing Education Needs
DiscussionContinued economic expansion depends on successful small business owners. One important factor to that success has been education and training. In a 1999 survey of its members, the Oklahoma Home-Based Business Association found that the primary need of the membership was for information. The top four topics included marketing, taxes, financial resources, and record keeping (Muske, 1999). The students in this study expressed similar needs to current business owners. Today's college student represents a future audience for small business courses already offered by state Extension Services. Support of small business owners, both potential and existing, will remain an important focus for the Cooperative Extension Service. The potential audience includes today's owners and tomorrow's potential owners. The programs will include business development efforts as well as programs that allow the owner to keep up with today's rapidly changing environment. Education is a life-long requirement, becoming a necessity in the development and maintenance of a successful business enterprise (Roth, 1996). Cooperative Extension small business programs can build on three advantages.
References
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
