![]() |
December 2001 Volume 39 Number 6 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Related Issues |
(f) |
(%) |
|
Increased volunteering when family and friends ask |
16 |
80 |
|
Family responsibilities as a barrier to volunteering |
8 |
40 |
|
Increased volunteering when own children are involved |
18 |
90 |
Theme 2. The Importance of Volunteering to Benefit Youth
No related issues emerged.
Theme 3. The Importance of Church and Religious Beliefs in Volunteering
|
Related Issues |
(f) |
(%) |
|
The role of church as a setting for volunteering |
9 |
45 |
|
Religious beliefs as a positive motivation for volunteering |
12 |
60 |
Theme 4. Volunteering as a Requirement of Employment or Education
|
Related Issues |
(f) |
(%) |
|
Mixed opinions regarding employer-required volunteerism |
||
|
Should not be required |
11 |
55 |
|
Should be required |
8 |
40 |
|
The need for volunteerism as a high school graduation requirement |
18 |
90 |
Theme 5. The Connections Between Volunteering and the Community
|
Related Issues |
(f) |
(%) |
|
Community interdependence through helping others |
20 |
100 |
|
The community becomes stronger and unified through volunteering |
17 |
85 |
|
The role of volunteerism in identifying and addressing community needs |
18 |
90 |
|
Community barriers to volunteering |
20 |
100 |
Theme 6. Personal Satisfaction and Growth Experienced Through Volunteerism
|
Related Issues |
(f) |
(%) |
|
Increased positive attitudes toward self as a result of volunteering |
19 |
95 |
|
Increased positive attitudes toward others as a result of volunteering |
20 |
100 |
|
Volunteered when asked |
7 |
35 |
|
Volunteered without being asked |
15 |
75 |
|
Benefits from volunteering |
20 |
100 |
Based upon the findings, the researchers suggest the following conclusions for Hispanic Americans in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, as supported by the authors identified.
Chambre, S. M. (1982). Recruiting Black and Hispanic volunteers: A qualitative study of organizations' experiences. Journal of Volunteer Administration, Fall, 3-9.
Ellis, S. J., & Noyes, K. H. (1990). By the people: A history of Americans as volunteers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Fisher, J. C., & Cole, K. M. (1993). Leadership and management of volunteer programs: A guide for volunteer administrators. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Gallegos, H., & O'Neil, M. (1991). Hispanics and the nonprofit sector. New York. The Foundation Center.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine/Atherton.
Hobbs, B. B. (2000, March). Recruiting and supporting Latino volunteers(EM 8754). Corvallis: Oregon State University Extension Service.
Kennedy, E. M. (1991). National service and education for citizenship. Phi Delta Kappan, 72(10), 771,773.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Longres, J. (1995). Hispanics overview. In Encyclopedia of social work(19th ed., Vol. 1-3). Washington, DC: National Association of Social Workers.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. B. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Nestor, N. L. (1984). Hispanic Americans: Tapping a new volunteer market. Voluntary Action Leadership, 3, 19-24.
O'Connell, B., & O'Connell, A. B. (1989). Volunteers in action. New York: Foundation Center.
Peterson, G. E., & others. (1992). Confronting the nation's urban crisis: From Watts (1965) to South Central Los Angeles (1992). Washington, DC: Urban Institute. (ERIC No. ED 359310).
Polkinghorne, D. E. (1991). Two conflicting calls for methodology reform. Counseling Psychologist, 19(1), 103-104.
Safrit, R. D., & Merrill, M. (2000). Personal capacities for volunteer administrators: Drawing upon the past as we move into the future. Journal of Volunteer Administration, XVII (4) & XVIII (1), 28-43.
Safrit, R. D., King, J. E., & Burscu, K. (1993). A study of volunteerism in Ohio cities and surrounding communities: Final Report. Columbus, Ohio: The Ohio State University, Department of Agricultural Education.
Swenson, C. A. (1990). How to speak to Hispanics. American Demographics, 22(2), 40-41.
U. S. Bureau of the Census. (2000). Statistical abstract of the United States. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Margaret W. Miltenberger
Extension Agent, Extension Instructor
4-H and Youth, Family and Adult Development
West Virginia University
Keyser, West Virginia
Internet Address: mmiltenb@wvu.edu
The purpose of the Energy Express Qualitative Research Study was to understand the program's impact with the children served from the perspective of their parents and school personnel. The research questions were:
Energy Express is a six-week literacy program designed to promote the school success of children living in low-income communities by maintaining their reading skills over the summer months. It aims to meet the twin challenges - erosion of skills that makes summer time costly for new readers and the nutritional decline faced by students accustomed to school meals (USDE, Every Child a Reader, 1999). College student mentors work with small groups of eight children, who attend five days a week for three and half-hours. A site coordinator, who is a schoolteacher, manages the Energy Express site.
Access to quality reading material should continue throughout a child's school years (USDE, Raising Readers, 1999). Using an integrated, literature based language arts curriculum focused on reading, the mentors guide the children through enriching experiences to make reading meaningful in their lives. Activities include shared reading, individual reading, writing, drawing, and creative arts projects.
Children stay in their small groups for family-style breakfast and lunch, practicing social skills and learning good nutrition. The meals help to maintain their growth over the summer and ensure that the children are ready to learn. The West Virginia University Extension Service coordinates this statewide program, and local collaborative partners coordinate and implement the program in Mineral County.
Reading is the foundation for all learning. In West Virginia, 4 of every 10 fourth-grade students experience difficulty in reading, and among the remaining 6, only 40% are above a functional reading level (NAEP, 1998). Eighty-eight percent of children who have difficulty reading at the end of first grade display similar difficulties at the end of fourth grade (Juel, 1998). Children's school success is greatly diminished if they cannot read well by the end of third grade. Poor readers at the end of fourth grade comprise an overwhelming percentage of school dropouts, juvenile delinquents, and prison inmates (Kingery, 1999). Energy Express was designed to address these issues and the challenge of children losing ground during the summer.
Energy Express has exceeded its goal of children maintaining reading skills over the summer months. Significant differences in the reading achievement of participating Energy Express children were documented using pre- and post-Woodcock-Johnson Reading Achievement Subtest scores. Seventy percent of the children tested maintained or improved their scores, with the average "hypothetical child" gaining 1 month in word identification and 3 months in comprehension skills, at a time when nonparticipating peers may lose reading skills (Butera & Phillips, 1998).
A reading attitude pre- and post-survey with Energy Express youths found significant positive differences in children's attitudes about reading. Children experienced gains in how they feel about reading a book during free time, how they feel about reading a story with other students, how they feel about writing stories, and how they feel about making art project based on a story in a book (Butera, 1998).
Gains in reading scores justify the program's continuation, but what do the parents and school personnel think about the benefit to the children? Did they observe changes with the children that the quantitative data could not capture? Sustainability of Energy Express is dependent upon acceptance of the program among parents and school personnel within the community. A research study was conducted to learn about Energy Express's impact with the children from the perspective of their parents, teachers and principals.
A qualitative evaluation research design was implemented. Data collection involved conducting interviews with a sample of parents and school personnel from each of the three Mineral County Energy Express sites, Elk Garden, Keyser Primary Middle, and Wiley Ford Schools. The Elk Garden School site serves a small school population of 180 students who are a part of the same school for grades K-8. Both the Keyser and Wiley Ford school sites serve much larger populations, 1100 and 764, respectively, with students coming from different feeder schools. A combined 160 children participated in the Mineral County Energy Express sites.
The sample represented the population of children and was 8% of the persons who could have been interviewed. Eight parents, eleven teachers, and two principals were interviewed, for a total of 21 persons from three sites.
The qualitative analysis method used involved the division of the data into relevant and meaningful groups while maintaining a connection to the whole (Gredler, 1996). A set of codes was developed to help identify initial categories of responses. The frequency of the code's occurrence helped to identify patterns and relationships emerging across the data. A matrix design was used to organize and analyze the information to make general statements about the data.
Errors in the data translation may have occurred. Typed transcripts from hand-written notes could have had simple typing errors, and there may have been gaps in the information when the writer was unable to keep up with the speaker. Typed transcripts from audiotapes could have had errors from poor taping quality, the clarity of a speaker's diction, or unfamiliarity with a speaker's accent or speech patterns.
Parents' Perception of Program Impact
All of the parents interviewed felt Energy Express had positive influences with their children. Some of the parents noticed improvement in their child's reading that they attributed to Energy Express. One parent said it definitely helped my daughter read this year, and another said, "it helped to bring her son's reading up and that he is doing better in school this year than last year." Several parents said that their children were reading more independently, and one parent said that her daughter was reading longer books.
One parent noticed a change in the amount of the son's reading at home, indicating an increased motivation to read. "I noticed my son reading hunting magazines or he will grab the newspaper and go to the sports section and read the sports section. He is a West Virginia fan. He's got to read about West Virginia!... So he is now reading more than he did before."
One parent's goal was met in that her daughter had opportunities to read and maintained her skills. She said, "As far as I could tell her grades, from one year to the next year, they stayed about the same. That's what I was hoping for. Her not getting tired out from having that dry spell during the summer. Just to keep her grades up and her mind going... because in the summer time, if she wouldn't have been in the program, she wouldn't have wanted to read at all."
A parent mentioned her child's need to gain confidence in his ability to read. "Any extra reading that I can get him where he can get confidence (is important) and it has helped. (It is) important that he now realizes he can read. He really picked it up and is doing a lot better."
Several parents mentioned the social benefits for their children learning how to play together, read together, and create together in a positive small group environment. A parent said, "(It) helped her playing with other kids, (provided a) chance to play and have fun."
All parents interviewed felt that Energy Express was a good experience for their children. None of the parents described a negative impact of the program. "(I) loved the activities they did," said one person. A number of parents commented that the activities integrated with the reading were very good. One parent said, "They did a lot of projects based on the booksÖ" and another parent said, "(I) liked the interactive learning, (the program) involves so many things - hands on, music, and reading."
School Personnel's Perception of Program Impact
"Students loved the program!" said one teacher. Overall, teachers and principals were very positive about Energy Express and the program benefits. "It's a very different way of schooling. It's so much fun! It's so much hands on along with the literature." Another teacher said, "I've just been impressed with the whole idea of the program when I heard about it. ... I just think this is a wonderful program. What an opportunity for the children whether they are having reading difficulties or not."
Some teachers were aware that Energy Express goes beyond social development to help support a child's reading skills. "They do incorporate some skill lessons...which I thought was more appropriate because we have such low-test scores and it needed to be done." One principal said, "It (Energy Express) is a balance between cognitive, social and cultural (learning)."
A teacher observed increased confidence among children who were familiar with a story used in the classroom. "Whenever I've read When I was Young in the Mountains, or it could be any book, one of the kids will say 'I got that book when I was in Energy Express,' so they've already read it and they have something to talk about and that's good for self confidence and self-esteem."
Each of the teachers was shown a list of the students who attended Energy Express and, with one exception, knew at least one child on the list; most knew approximately three children who participated.
School Personnel's Observations from the Smaller School
School personnel from the smaller school noticed and discussed seeing changes among the children who attended Energy Express. Three of the teachers noted that the children either maintained or gained academic skills. "It seems that those students who attended Energy Express either maintained where they are, or they may even have moved up on the Johnsons (standardized reading test) because they have been reading ... all summer with instruction."
In comparing those students who attended Energy Express to those who did not, one teacher noted an increased interest in reading, and another teacher observed that Energy Express children seemed more eager to learn. "The achievement of academic skills (is one difference). Reading is fun (to them). They do a lot of reading. If they are finished they will find something to do. They don't just stare off into space."
School personnel noted improved social skills among children who participated as compared to those who did not attend Energy Express. "They are very social. I think they enjoy other people more than some others do," said one teacher. Another person said, "I noticed that the children who attended are very social, and cooperate more with others than some that did not participate."
A teacher mentioned that one child had shown great improvement, especially in working in a school environment. "He's improved a lot. More maturity wise. I know last year in first grade he had a lot of trouble with (a) structured environment and just basically getting into the gusto of school and going through the summer, even though it wasn't an instructional, sit down type situation, as opposed to school. It has helped him a lot in that and skill wise I think he is interested in achieving more."
Another person summarized, "Social and general behavior (changes were) shown most. (They) interact and work with their peers better. Reading and academic gains were slight, ...but (the) program (is) good for peer interaction."
Teachers from the smaller school stressed the value of having Energy Express available for children who live in geographically isolated areas. "Students here live so far away from one another, it certainly is good for them to get together and practice those social skills . . . and those kids have access to library books and books all summer long."
School Personnel's Observations from the Larger Schools
Most teachers and principals from the two larger school communities, while they responded to the questions, found it difficult to address whether there were differences among children who participated in Energy Express. There is very little opportunity for teachers to observe the same student from year to year. "I don't think that you ever know the difference ... related to the fact that you don't know them before," said one teacher. Another teacher said, "(It is) hard to tell, (I) don't see children again. (I) would like to think it helps. (One boy's) skills were still very low, now in February he is able to do words ... it could have helped him get ready to learn ... he did come in very low." Another teacher said, "(I) think those who did participate were in a position to benefit both academically and socially."
Some stated that the students who attended needed the program. "Most of the ones who participated here were ones who need an academic boost." Three students, one teacher noted, had severe learning issues, and all three really struggled. "I can't personally say that there was (a difference). But I've seen some of the ones I did have last year, they needed something to help carry them over. I'm sure they benefited from it because they would be the ones that as soon as they walked out the door it would be gone. . . . (I) would tend to believe that it would help them maintain."
A reading support instructor observed improvement in some children, and attributed the change to both programs. "Now some of them I do recognize they are in the first grade now and they are doing fairly well. A few are going to be brought up for learning disabilities. They would have those anyway. A couple of them I do recognize that are excellent readers now and that I have dropped them from my reading program because they have done so well." She also observed a specific benefit to one child. "His mother probably had to fight with him to get him to go. I see now that there's a difference. It has helped with him being positive."
Table 1 summarizes the difference and similarities in perception among the two groups and serves to answer the research questions.
|
Indicator |
Parents |
School Personnel |
|
Reading Skills |
More positive changes in reading skills and improvement in reading among some children |
Fewer changes in reading skills and possible improvement in reading with a few children |
|
Reading Independently |
More reading on their own at home |
More reading on their own between assignments during school |
|
Motivation to Read |
Increased interest in reading |
Increased interest in reading |
|
Socialization |
Some socialization improvement |
Significant socialization improvements |
|
Group Skills |
Did not comment on group skill changes |
Group skills improvements |
|
Confidence |
Increased self-confidence |
Did not comment about change in confidence |
Research Question 1: Did the parents observe a change in children's reading as a result of participating in Energy Express? Parents did observe positive changes in their child's reading skills and more interest in reading.
Research Question 2: Did the school personnel observe a change in children's reading as a result of participating in Energy Express? School observed some changes in a child's reading and an increased interest in reading.
Research Question 3: Were there differences between the parents' and school personnel's observations? Parents observed more increases in reading skills and increases in self-confidence, whereas most teachers did not observe changes in these areas. Both groups discussed an increased interest in reading and more independent reading. Both noticed improved socialization; however, teachers noticed significant improvement including better group skills.
The major findings were that the parents value Energy Express and that some observed improvements in their children's reading. School personnel value Energy Express more for the program's holistic approach to child development and less for the program's impact on reading scores.
Based on Parent's Perception
Parents attribute a variety of changes to participation in Energy Express: improvement in reading, maintained reading, more reading at home, increased confidence in reading, and better social interaction skills. Some stated that Energy Express contributed to their child's improved school success.
Based on School Personnel's Perception
School personnel from the smaller school felt that Energy Express reached the goal of helping children to maintain their reading scores over the summer months, and they observed gains among some of the children. Because the school is smaller and the community close knit, teachers and students tend to be better connected. School personnel from the larger schools, and the more disconnected communities, had little opportunity to observe changes in children because they do not see them in consecutive years. Connections and relationships between teachers and children are significantly weaker in larger school environments.
Among school personnel, the greatest gains observed were improved socialization and increased interest in reading. Teachers were more apt than the principals or parents to note improvements in social skills and reading interest. Because teachers work with children in a classroom setting, there are more opportunities for them to observe group interaction skills and reading motivation. Some teachers noted a significant difference between children who had been a part of the Energy Express small groups compared to those who were not in the program. Those who had the small group experience could function better in group settings.
The following are implications for the Extension Service and school partners.
Butera, G., & Phillips, R. (1998). Energy Express program indicator report on pre and post Woodcock-Johnson Reading Achievement Subtest scores. West Virginia University Extension Service, Morgantown, WV.
Butera, G. (1998). Garfield reading attitude survey - Keyser Primary Middle School results. West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV.
Gredler, M.E. (1996). Program evaluation: Data analysis and interpretation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 15, 295-307.
Juel, C. (1998). Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of fifty-four children from first through fourth grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 437-447.
Kingery, B. (1999). Reading, English and language arts. Charleston, WV: West Virginia Department of Education.
Miltenberger, M. (1999). Energy Express evaluation research study Mineral County report. West Virginia University Mineral County Extension Service, Keyser, WV.
NAEP. (1998). The NAEP 1998 reading report card for the nation. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Educational Statistics.
National Institute for Literacy. (1998). Fast facts in literacy & fact sheet on correctional education. Washington, D.C.: National Institute for Literacy.
U.S. Department of Education: America Reads Challenge. (July 1999). Every child a reader: How citizens, public leaders, and communities can help [Online]. Available at: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/startearly/ch_4.html.
U.S. Department of Education: America Reads Challenge. (July 1999). Raising readers: The tremendous potential of families [Online]. Available at: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/startearly/ch_1.html.
Jenna Anding
Assistant Professor & Extension Nutrition Specialist
Texas Agricultural Extension Service
Internet Address: j-anding@tamu.edu
Rickie D. Fletcher
Research Associate, Public Policy Research
Institute
Texas A&M University
Internet Address: r-fletcher@tamu.edu.
Peggy Van
Laanen
Professor and Extension Nutrition Specialist
Texas Agricultural Extension Service
Internet Address: p-vanlaanen@tamu.edu
Cheryl
Supak
LaGrange
Independent School District
La
Grange, Texas
(Formerly
Director of Better Living for Texans, Texas Agricultural Extension Service)
College Station, Texas
According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA, 2000), the goal of the Food Stamp Nutrition Education Program (FSNEP) is "to provide educational programs that increase, within a limited budget, the likelihood of all food stamp recipients making healthy food choices consistent with the most recent dietary advice as reflected in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and the Food Guide Pyramid." Educational programs in FSNEP also focus on teaching limited resource individuals and families the skills needed to select, store, prepare, and serve food safely and to adopt economically sound shopping skills to help prevent food insecurity.
In comparison to the national average of 13.2%, an estimated 16% of Texas families live in poverty (U.S. Census Bureau, 1998). While the Food Stamp program is available to eligible individuals and families in Texas, participation in the program has fallen by approximately 44%. Nationwide, there has been a 30% drop in the participation in the Food Stamp program (Center for Public Policy Priorities, 2000). Reasons behind the overall decline in the number of Food Stamp program participants are numerous and include:
Because participation in the Food Stamp program is low, FSNEP, which is conducted through the Texas Agricultural Extension Service, is offered to both food stamp and food stamp eligible individuals and families. To make the program more marketable to Texas consumers, FSNEP is known as the Better Living for Texans (BLT) program. Individuals in the BLT program participate in a minimum of five lessons that focus on knowledge and behaviors relative to the Food Guide Pyramid, the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, food safety, and food resource management.
In order to evaluate the effectiveness and success of the BLT program, the need to examine selected food and nutrition behaviors of participants was identified. The purpose of the study reported here was to evaluate participant changes in selected food and nutrition behaviors as a result of completing the BLT program.
Subject Recruitment for Participation in the BLT Program
Between September of 1998 and July of 1999, 165 counties in Texas offered the BLT program. County agents and assistants recruited participants through radio and newspaper advertisements, and by distributing informational fliers at specific areas, including public housing authorities, subsidized health clinics, and food banks/pantries. Local DHS (Department of Human Services) offices and health departments also referred individuals to the program.
Subject Recruitment for Participation in the BLT Evaluation Survey
At the request of the BLT program director, county Extension agents were asked to submit names and telephone numbers of individuals who had participated in the BLT program during the 1998 fiscal year. One hundred of the 165 counties submitted a total of 3,027 potential subjects for the study. Because of incorrect phone numbers, duplicate numbers, the inclusion of deaf language calls, and unqualified respondents (under the age of 18 or not a participant in the BLT program), the number of usable names and phone numbers was decreased to 1,307. From this set of usable names and numbers, 481 potential subjects were randomly selected to participate in the survey.
Survey Development and Administration
The major portion of the survey instrument focused on 20 selected food, nutrition, and food resource management behaviors both before and after attending the BLT program. Most of the questions were asked in an "always, most of the time, sometimes, seldom, and never" format (Table 1). In addition, participants were asked to estimate the number of servings consumed daily from each section of the Food Guide Pyramid. The survey was administered by trained, bilingual interviewers to randomly selected BLT participants via the telephone by the Public Policy Research Institute during August and September of 1999.
|
Category |
Examples of Survey Items |
|
Nutrition |
Before the BLT program, how many servings of fruits did you eat per day? |
|
After the BLT program, how many servings of fruits do you eat per day? |
|
|
Food Safety |
Before the BLT program, how long did you leave cooked foods sitting out before eating or refrigerating? |
|
After the BLT program, how long do you leave cooked foods sitting out before eating or refrigerating? |
|
|
Food Resource Management |
Before the BLT program, how often did you compare prices when grocery shopping: always, most of the time, sometimes, seldom, never? |
|
After the BLT program how often do you compare prices when grocery shopping: always, most of the time, sometimes, seldom, never? |
Statistical Analysis
Using the SAS system (version 6.2), paired t-tests were performed on the 20 sets of items to determine if the differences between before and after self-reported behaviors were statistically significant. The level of significance was set at p < .05.
Subject Characteristics
Of the 481 individuals selected, 459 agreed to participate in the survey (95% cooperation rate), representing 76 of the 165 counties that offered the BLT program. As reported in Table 2, a majority of respondents were female, married, and Hispanic. One-third of the interviews were conducted in Spanish. More than one-half of the respondents were under the age of 40. More than 30% of respondents reported household sizes of five or more, while 40% of the participants had three or fewer household members. At least one child under the age of 18 was indicated to be present in 71% of the households. More than one-third (37%) of the respondents had not completed high school. Household incomes of $15,000 or less were reported by nearly one-half (47%) of the respondents.
Only 23% of the subjects reported that they were currently participating in the Food Stamp program. By comparison, 29% of the subjects reported receiving benefits from the Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), and 43% of the households stated participating in the National School Lunch/Breakfast program. Only 7% of households reported receiving benefits from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program. At the time this survey was conducted, 10% of the households reported using food banks and food pantries as means of obtaining food.
|
n |
% |
|
|
Gender |
||
|
Male |
26 |
5.7 |
|
Female |
433 |
94.3 |
|
Ethnicity |
||
|
African American |
40 |
8.7 |
|
Caucasian |
148 |
32.2 |
|
Hispanic |
256 |
55.8 |
|
Other/Multi-racial |
15 |
3.3 |
|
Marital status |
||
|
Married |
292 |
63.6 |
|
Single |
75 |
16.3 |
|
Divorced |
46 |
10 |
|
Widowed |
44 |
9.6 |
|
Refused to answer |
2 |
0.4 |
|
Highest level of education completed |
||
|
Less than high school |
171 |
37.3 |
|
High school graduate |
144 |
31.4 |
|
Some college |
104 |
22.7 |
|
College graduate |
31 |
6.8 |
|
Graduate degree |
8 |
1.7 |
|
Refused to answer |
1 |
0.2 |
|
Annual household income |
||
|
< $5,000 |
66 |
14.4 |
|
$5,000 to $10,000 |
82 |
17.9 |
|
$10,000 to $15,000 |
71 |
15.5 |
|
$15,000 to $25,000 |
106 |
23.1 |
|
> $25,000 |
88 |
19.2 |
|
Refused to answer/don't know |
4610.0 |
Self-Reported Changes in Selected Nutrition, Food Safety, and Food Resource Management Behaviors
In comparison to food consumption habits prior to the BLT program, subjects reported increasing their intakes of foods from four sections of the Food Guide Pyramid after completing the program. (Table 3). The consumption of the number of servings of fruits, vegetables, and dairy products was significantly higher after subjects completed the BLT program in comparison to before entering the program. There was also a trend towards a higher consumption of breads, cereals, rice, and pasta after participating in the program, although the increase was not significant.
b NS = not significantly different |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
On average, participants made self-reported changes in a number of behaviors that are in agreement with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (Table 4). The percentage of respondents who reported that they never used lard for cooking rose from 58% before the BLT program to 74% after the BLT program. Nearly 21% of the subjects reported that before the BLT program they seldom or never added salt to foods; after the BLT program, the percentage rose to 41%. Prior to the BLT program, 31% of respondents reported that they read food labels for nutrition information always or most of the time. After completing the BLT program, the percentage of respondents reading food labels always or most of the time rose to 71%. In addition, 68% of the subjects reported that after participating in the BLT program, they were reading food labels to help them choose foods with less fat always or most of the time, up from 26%.
b possible responses were as follows: 1=always, 2=most of the time, 3=sometimes, 4=seldom, and 5=never |
Participants also reported engaging in behaviors that reflect improvements in safe food handling practices. Before participating in the BLT program, subjects reported that they let cooked foods sit out for an average of 1 hour and 10 minutes. After the program, cooked foods were left out for an average of 68 minutes, a reduction by only 2 minutes. However, the percentage of subjects who allowed cooked foods to sit out for longer than 2 hours decreased from 9.4% to 2%. The percentage of subjects who reported washing their hands for 20 seconds always or most of the time increased from 89.3% to 95.9%.
Self-reports of practicing proper food resource management skills also improved among participants (Table 5). The percentage of respondents planning meals always or most of the time increased from 27% before BLT to 57% after BLT. More than 70% of the subjects shopped with a list always or most of the time, up from 47% before completing the BLT program. Two-thirds (66%) of the subjects reported that they compared prices when shopping before participating in the program, while 87% reported doing so after the program. For the households of respondents receiving food stamp benefits, 70% reported that their food stamps were lasting longer since completing the BLT program. In addition, the percentage of subjects who reported running out of money, food stamps, or food before the end of the month always or most of the time decreased from 17% to 7%.
Table 5
Mean a Self-Reported Food Resource Management Behaviors, Before
and After the BLT Program
b possible responses were as follows: 1=always, 2=most of the time, 3=sometimes, 4=seldom, and 5=never |
For educators who work with limited resource audiences, this study demonstrates that Extension programs and educators are effective in reaching this audience and making a difference in selected food and nutrition behaviors. Subjects who participated in the BLT program reported significant changes in selected nutrition, food safety, and food resource management behaviors. Because increased consumption of fruits and vegetables and decreased consumption of dietary fat are thought to promote good health and prevent disease (USDA, 1992; USDA, 2000), the reported changes in these food consumption behaviors, along with the reported increase in calcium-rich dairy products, are encouraging.
Breads, cereals, grains, and pasta are also important for a healthful diet, but the upward trend in the consumption of these foods was not significant. It is possible that participants in this survey did not have a clear understanding of the suggested portion sizes for foods within this section of the Food Guide Pyramid. Due to the fact that more than 52% of participants identified at least one overweight person in the household, it is also possible that some individuals in this study were attempting to follow one or more variations of low-carbohydrate diets as a means of managing their weight. Unfortunately, this survey did not measure the subject's knowledge of portion sizes or weight management practices; therefore, only conjectures about the low consumption of breads, grains, cereals, and pasta can be made. Perhaps assessing participant knowledge about specific food and nutrition behaviors would be helpful in explaining future survey findings.
The self-reported improvements in selected food safety behaviors are also encouraging given the current national attention to this issue. An estimated 19% of foodborne illnesses originate in the home (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1996); therefore, adopting safe food handling practices is critical for all people, including limited resource individuals who cannot afford to lose food due to spoilage or improper handling or who often lack health insurance or employee benefits to accommodate time loss from work due to a personal or family illness.
A major objective of the BLT program is to provide education and guidance in the area of food resource management to prevent food insecurity. According to the Life Sciences Research Office (1990), "food insecurity exists whenever the availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods or the ability to acquire acceptable foods in socially acceptable ways is limited or uncertain." In a recent survey published by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA, 1999), the percentage of food-insecure households was nationally estimated at 9.7%. In Texas, however, approximately 12.9% of families were food insecure. Furthermore, 5% of the food-insecure households in Texas demonstrated signs of hunger (USDA, 1999).
These statistics, which show a need for food resource management education, along with the finding that subjects in this study stretched their food dollars and reduced the need for assistance from emergency programs like food banks and food pantries, reinforce the importance of teaching food resource management skills through programs like BLT.
The findings of the telephone survey and the reported changes in the selected behaviors compare favorably with previous studies (Romero, Medeiros, & Melcher, 1988; Amstutz & Dixon, 1986). However, there are three limitations to this study that should be addressed.
First, the manner by which this survey was administered may have excluded participants who did not have easy access to a telephone. Participants who moved and changed phone numbers after completing the program might also have been excluded. Unfortunately, the geographical area (165 counties throughout Texas) from which our subjects were recruited, the need to use trained, bilingual interviewers, and financial limitations prohibited face-to-face interviews.
Second, it is possible that the reported changes in behavior were not due solely to the BLT program but instead to other educational programs, including those offered by Extension. Although we do not know the extent to which participants engaged in other educational activities, more than 46% of the subjects reported that the BLT program was their first experience with Extension.
Third, the study relied on retrospective self-reported data. Again, the extensive geographical area in which this program was offered plus the desire to use trained interviewers prevented the collection of pre and post behaviors. Furthermore, because of the possibility that some of our participants had limited literacy skills, we administered our survey via an interview. Having Extension agents interviewing the participants individually would have been extremely difficult to do at the county level because of the time involved to interview each participants and would also have introduced more variability in the data.
Results of this survey indicate that the Food Stamp Nutrition Education Program (BLT in Texas) is effective in teaching limited resource individuals and families food and nutrition skills that mirror the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and the Food Guide Pyramid. Additionally, the skills learned in the area of food resource management are helping individuals and families stretch their limited food resources and are reducing the need for emergency food. Further investigation is needed to determine the level of understanding that program participants have with respect to portion sizes--especially breads, grains, cereals, rice, and pasta--that are recommended by the Food Guide Pyramid.
Amstutz, M. K., & Dixon, D. L. (1986). Dietary changes resulting from the Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program. Journal of Nutrition Education, 18, 55-60.
Bean, N. H., Goulding, J. S., Lao, C., & Angulo, F. J. (1996). Surveillance for foodborne-disease outbreaks - United States, 1988-1992. CDC Surveillance Summaries, October 25, 1996. MMWR 1996; 45 (No. SS-5): 1-30.
Center for Public Policy Priorities. (2000, January). Hunger in a time of plenty: Food stamp declines in Texas since welfare reform. Austin, Texas.
Dodds, J. M., Ahluwalia, W., & Baligh, M. (1996). Experiences of families using food assistance and welfare programs in North Carolina: Perceived barriers and recommendations for improvement. Journal of Nutrition Education, 28, 101-108.
Life Sciences Research Office, Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology. (1990). Core indicators of nutritional state for difficult-to-sample populations. Journal of Nutrition, 122 (suppl): 1559-1600.
Nord, M., Jemison, K., & Bickel, G. (1999). Measuring food security in the United States: Prevalence of food insecurity and hunger, by state, 1996-1998 (Food Assistance and Nutrition Research Report Number 2) Food and Rural Economics Division, Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
Romero, V. A., Medeiros, D. M., & Melcher, L. (1988). Use and effectiveness of Wyoming EFNEP's lesson series. Journal of Nutrition Education, 20, 15-19.
United States Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration. (1999). Poverty in the United States, 1998 (U.S. Census Bureau publication P60-207).
United States Department of Agriculture. (2000). Nutrition education planning guidance, fiscal year 2001, Food and Nutrition Service, Food Stamp Program, Program Accountability Division.
United States Department of Agriculture, Human Nutrition Information Service. (1992). The Food Guide Pyramid(Home and Garden Bulletin No. 252). Hyattsville, MD.
Unites States Department of Agriculture, United States Department of Health and Human Services (2000). Nutrition and your health: Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 5th edition (USDA, USDHHS Home and Garden Bulletin No. 232). Hyattsville, MD.
United States General Accounting Office. (1999). Food stamp program: Various factors have led to declining participation(GAO/RCED Publication No. 99-185). Washington, D.C: U.S. General Accounting Office.
Don Breazeale
Extension Educator, University of Nevada Cooperative Extension
Lovelock, Nevada
Internet Address: breazealed@unce.unr.edu
Gordon Myer
Farm Management Specialist (retired)
Internet Address: gmyer@email.uophx.edu
George Hill
Associate Professor of Educational Leadership
Internet Address: gchill@unr.edu
University of Nevada
Reno, Nevada
Financial management and record keeping are sought-after topics by farm and ranch owners, particularly beginning farmers (Trede & Whitaker, 1998). Education in the use and application of computers is a related topic of importance to these same people. In the early 1980's, many people felt that computers would be used by more than 80% of the farm and ranch owners by the 1990's. While this predication may not have been completely accurate, computer usage has certainly increased (Schmidt, Rockwell, Bitney, & Sarno, 1994).
While Bowen, Miller, and Escolme (1989) found that few farmers named Extension personnel as the primary source for microcomputer instruction, it was apparent that Extension was still playing an important role. In the case of Nevada, financial management and computer training is often combined (Nevada Cooperative Extension, in-progress). As with other Extension Services, Nevada Cooperative Extension strives to bring relevant educational programs to its clientele.
Seevers, Grahm, Gamon, and Conklin (1995) reported that client satisfaction with Extension programs was of significant importance. According to Warnock (1992), Cooperative Extension should follow the example set by private businesses and ask their customers, "How are we doing?" Information relative to the beliefs, needs, and behavior of clients can provide valuable input concerning the effectiveness of the programs they attended (Martin and Rewerts, 1988). If possible, input should also be sought from those not participating in current programs. Are they getting their information from others? Would they be willing to participate in future Extension programs?
Both groups can also provide insight concerning topics for future programming as well as the format for receiving this information. Answers to these types of questions can improve current instructional efforts and provide insight into developing new learning situations (Parrett, Faulkner, & Varner, 1988).
Given the emphasis being placed on farm financial management and computer training by Nevada Cooperative Extension (NCE), it was necessary to determine producer perceptions related to this training. The study reported here was designed to determine the financial management and computer educational needs of two groups of agricultural producers in Nevada and to determine if there were differences between the two groups. This information would allow NCE to adjust and adapt current topics, teaching methods, and delivery formats to more closely meet producer needs.
Data were collected from a total of 69 producers. "Participants" included 33 respondents who previously participated in an Extension tax management program conducted by correspondence. The 33 respondents represented 44% of the tax course participants. The second group, "non-participants," consisted of 36 respondents who were randomly selected for telephone interviews. These 36 had originally been notified about the tax program but chose not participate.
A closed-form questionnaire consisting of 20 questions was used. The format of the questionnaire included five - point Likert-type scales, multiple choice selection, and two open-ended questions. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to describe the two groups and to determine if there were any differences between them.
The participant group received the questionnaire through the mail, and the non-participant group responded by telephone interview. Topics covered included:
Many of the questions contained multiple sections. Cronbach's alpha was calculated for both groups. The coefficient for the "participants" was .78 and .82 for the "non-participants." Considering the small N of both groups, the coefficients indicated that the instrument's scales were internally consistent.
Demographics
Respondents represented 13 of Nevada's 17 counties. Multiple choice selection type questions were used to gather the data for this section. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups when comparing six demographic characteristics.
Combined, the two groups reported that 40% had graduated from college, 34% had attended college, 21% had graduated from high school. and 5% had attended high school. Sixty-four percent of the respondents reported that farming and/or ranching was their principal occupation. Sixty percent listed their major agricultural activity as livestock, 38% crop production, and 2% some type of agribusiness enterprise. Thirty-two percent reported working 200 days or more off-farm, while 68% worked less than 200 days off-farm. Gross income from farming and/or ranching activities was also reported. Forty-four percent of the respondents reported gross earnings of less than $50,000, 22% between $50,000 and $100,000, and one-third had gross earnings in excess of $100,000. Forty-four percent of the respondents had owned their farm or ranch for 4 years or less, 28% between 5 and 9 years, and 62% for 10 years or more.
Knowledge and Use of Economic and Financial Management Techniques
This section (Table 1) revealed the respondents' perceptions concerning their level of expertise in economics and financial management and whether their level of expertise was a limiting factor when analyzing the financial performance of their operation. Also measured were the respondents' knowledge and skill level with several financial management procedures. The data were gathered using five-point Likert-type scales (1=not at all and poor, and 5=definitely, excellent, and almost always).
The respondents reported that they had come to rely on financial management techniques and that they had a moderate level of expertise with these techniques. They did not report having many problems in analyzing the business performance of their operations because they did not feel that their level of expertise was a limiting factor. They did report relying on others for help. The only statistically significant differences between the groups in this section was the fact that the participant group tended to rely more heavily on others for help than did the non-participant group.
Table 1
Respondents' Perceptions Regarding Their Knowledge and Use of Economic and
Financial Management Techniques
** statistically different at the .05 level of significance |
Respondents were also asked to indicate their familiarity with certain financial statements. To measure this variable, respondents were asked to indicate their level of use of the financial statements shown in Table 2 (1=don't use, 2=use, but not with computer, 3=use with computer). While there were several individuals using computers with these procedures, the majority were using the statements without a computer. There were statistically significant differences between the groups concerning their level of knowledge and skill associated with enterprise budgets and farm/ranch accounting.
Table 2
Respondents' Perceptions Regarding Their Knowledge and Level of Skill in
Utilizing Business Management Tools
|
|