August 2002
Volume 40 Number 4

Commentaries

What Is Old Is New Again: Cooperative Extension's Role in Democracy Building Through Civic Engagement

Kathleen Dodge Kelsey
Assistant Professor
Oklahoma State University
Stillwater, Oklahoma
Internet Address: kelseyk@okstate.edu

Introduction

Democracy building was a cornerstone of higher education when its founders created the Morrill Acts of 1862 and 1890. The land-grant university was poised to become the great equalizer of an aristocratic society by educating the commonwealth. The Cold War is credited with fundamentally changing the mission of the university from developing democratic citizens to attaining technological superiority (Checkoway, 2001; Mathews, 1997). Faculty were no longer valued for educating the masses in the virtues of a democratic society. Basic research activities rose in stature to dominate the modern university.

Faculty members were forced to change their role from service to science (Rice, 1991). The noble cause of generating knowledge to solve societal problems was replaced by research agendas that would lead to a peer-reviewed journal article, which became the gold standard of success for faculty regardless of the fact that knowledge disseminated through this route is not accessible to the majority of society.

Critics charge that the university does not prepare adults for a place at the democratic table (Boyte & Hollander, 1999; Checkoway, 2001). Academic disciplines focus on teaching specific content to students in the hope that after a 4-year curriculum the student will graduate a competent member of the profession, not necessarily a civically engaged or democratically minded citizen. Civic lessons are left for others to teach.

The classroom is not the only domain criticized for failing to fully educate America's youth. Research and Extension activities conducted at the university have fallen under attack for not targeting more immediate needs of society. Common problems encountered by county educators are viewed as unpublishable by faculty who must be on the cutting edge of their discipline to earn promotion and tenure (Kelsey, Pense, & Mariger, 2002).

What Is the Role of the Land-Grant University in Teaching Civic Engagement?

The land-grant university has the power to set the tone for higher education worldwide through its prominent status. The land-grant university was established for the commonwealth and embodied the democratic ideals of a Jeffersonian society. The Cooperative Extension System (Extension), founded in 1914 by the Smith-Lever Act, was designed to forge a connection between work, education, and citizenship (Peters, 1997). Extension saw itself as building rural democracy and developing community capacity through organizational activities (Boyte & Hollander, 1999; Peters, 2002).

The mission of the CSREES is "To advance knowledge for agriculture, the environment, human health and well being, and communities" (http://www.reeusda.gov/1700/about/about_csrees.htm). Extension has become the largest rural adult education agency in the world for building excellence in agricultural production and homemaking skills. It has recently expanded its work to include youth at risk and community development programs.

Extension is in an optimal position to help the university reengage with communities through their army of service providers who can act as catalysts for public work. In fact, public work was the dominant driving force of the early Extension county educator. Peters (1997, p. 52-53), citing the work of Smith and Wilson (1930), described the county educator as one who brought "rural people together in groups for social intercourse and study, solving community and neighborhood problems, fostering better relations and common endeavor between town and country." Smith and Wilson presented the idea that farmers and faculty were equal brokers of knowledge, each having something to learn from the other, and that it was the county educators' role to transfer knowledge from both parties for mutual growth and development of a nation.

However, in recent times Extension has come under fire for failing to remember its roots of building active citizenship through the development of human capital that is empowered and socially engaged. Over the past 40 years Extension agents moved away from the role of community organizer toward promoting the research agenda of the university, with little regard for local knowledge (Peters, 2002). Extension agents saw their role as delivering knowledge from the research professor to farmers in a limited array of disciplines, not as facilitators of knowledge exchange between the groups. One of the early scholars of the land-grant system, Liberty Hyde Bailey (1858-1954), stated in 1915:

It is not sufficient to train technically in the trades and crafts and arts to the end of securing greater economic efficiency-this may be accomplished in a despotism and result in no self-action on the part of the people. Every democracy must reach far beyond what is commonly known as economic efficiency, and do everything it can to enable those in the backgrounds to maintain their standing and their pride and to partake in the making of political affairs (cited in Peters, 1997, p. 52).

Bailey's words remind us that higher education should not be solely about developing economic opportunities for its graduates, but rather about the business of developing graduates who are fully prepared to participate in society in economic, social, and political dimensions.

How Can Extension Educators Build Democracy Through Civic Engagement?

Citizens must have ethical standards, social responsibility, and civic competencies in a democratic society. Citizens must "understand their own social identities, communicate with those who are different from themselves, and build bridges across differences for a common cause" (Checkoway, 2001, p. 129).

Extension educators can teach democratic values through civic engagement as a lifestyle. When we speak of teaching a lifestyle it means incorporating the values of democracy and diversity in daily lessons that are focused on problem-centered rather than discipline-based learning (Checkoway, 2001).

The Wingspread Declaration on Renewing the Civic Mission of the American Research University (Boyte & Hollander, 1999) set forth several challenges for filling Americans with the spirit of democracy. Chief among these recommendations is to get communities involved in projects that are meaningful and that make a positive difference in people's lives.

Participants should be immersed in a climate that is rich in difference--race, culture, ideologies, and experiences. Extension educators should help to create opportunities for the immersion experiences of participants by identifying situations where they can work with community members in solving problems. Prins and Ewert (2002) discuss Extension's role in cooperating with faith-based organizations as a way to build social capital.

Extension educators must also be willing to engage in equal partnerships with the community and respect different ways of knowing. In return, the university must support and reward such activities by making itself more porous to difference, more interactive with non-academic life, and more effective in communicating with lay audiences.

Reengaging the Community

Reconceptualizing scholarship at the university is a required first step in redirecting the university back toward the community. It is common practice to regard community members as human subjects and to view their problems dispassionately through values-free positivist lenses. Researchers must shift their thinking and practice toward post-positivism values and regard members of the community as full "partners and active participants in knowledge development" if they are to be successful in reengaging the community (Checkoway, 2001, p. 134).

Collaborative, post-positivist, community-based projects are reemerging across America. The Wisconsin Cooperative Extension Service founded the Teen Assessment Project in the last 1980s for the purpose of conducting action research in collaboration with university faculty and Extension agents to better understand the needs of adolescents in local communities (Peters, 1997). Community members gathered with faculty to co-create a survey that answered questions that were important to citizens. The data was collected, analyzed, and disseminated by the team. Local knowledge was used to address local problems. This process empowered citizens and gave faculty meaningful work that contributed to their tenure and promotion goals.

The Cornell Cooperative Extension changed its motto in 1996 to reflect a changing paradigm that acknowledges partnerships between university-generated and local knowledge. The motto is "The Cornell Cooperative Extension educational system enables people to improve their lives and communities through partnerships that put experience and research to work" (Warner, Hinrichs, Schneyer, & Joyce, 1998). The Cornell Participatory Action Network (CPARN) based at Cornell University and the Cornell Community and Rural Development Institute (CaRDI) (http://www.cardi.cornell.edu/index.cfm) also focus on community problems and solutions through action research practices. Community members partner with university faculty to collect and analyze information for the purpose of social justice and sustainability.

Conclusion

In order to facilitate greater civic engagement, a space must be created that allows for practical wisdom to flourish, for the valuing of folk knowledge as a legitimate form of knowing, and for conducting research with the people, not just for the people. The Cooperative Extension Service has deep roots in facilitating this endeavor, but was misdirected by the Cold War. With globalization and a world community epistemology at hand, the time has come for Extension to reengage with communities to build partnerships that truly reflect the spirit of solidarity that the land-grant university was founded upon.

References

Boyte, H., & Hollander, E. (1999). Wingspread declaration on renewing the civic mission of the American research university (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 435 370). Campus Compact.

Checkoway, B. (2001). Renewing the civic mission of the American research university. The Journal of Higher Education, 72(2), 125-147.

Kelsey, K. D., Pense, S. L., & Mariger, S. C. (2002). A case study of land-grant university faculty perceptions' toward serving stakeholders. National Association of Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture Journal, 46(1), 50-57.

Mathews, D. (1997). The public and the academy. Higher Education Exchange, 71-78.

Peters, S. J. (2002). Rousing the people on the land: The roots of the educational organizing tradition in Extension work. Journal of Extension [On-line], 40(3). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2002june/a1.html

Peters, S. J. (1997). Public scholarship and the land-grant idea. Higher Education Exchange, 50-57.

Prins, E., & Ewert , E. M. (2002). Cooperative Extension and faith-based organizations: Building social capital. Journal of Extension [On-line], 40(3). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2002june/comm2.html

Rice, R. E. (1991). Rethinking what it means to be a scholar (ERIC No. ED333 938).

Warner, M. E., Hinrichs, C., Schneyer, J., & Joyce, L. (1998). From knowledge extended to knowledge created: Challenges for a new Extension paradigm. Journal of Extension [On-line], 36(4). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1998august/rb1.html

Birth to Three: Extension's Role in the Early Years

Harriet Shaklee
Extension Family Development Specialist
University of Idaho
Boise, Idaho
Internet Address: hshaklee@uidaho.edu

If you've been working in the area of early childhood or concerned about young children or just plain alive and listening to the news in recent years, you've probably gathered that there's important new news about the first 3 years of life. Though psychologists have known for some time that brains are important to babies' experiences, recent years of research show that babies' experiences are also important for their brains.

While infants come into the world with plenty of brain cells, those cells need to get connected to each other to function effectively. Cells do this by building synapses between each other, resulting in a rich interconnected neural network. It is the experience of everyday life that prompts this critical developmental process.

And when does this all happen? The most intense period of development for humans is between birth and 3 years of age. By age 2, toddler synaptic networks are as rich as those of adults. At 3 years, they're twice as dense as those of adults and stay that way until 9-10 years of age. Synaptic development in the prefrontal cortex, the site of higher-level cognition, takes place over a longer period, peaking at one year, but continuing strong through much of adolescence. Over the teenage years, unused synapses are "pruned," i.e., eliminated, to result in a leaner organizational structure--cerebral downsizing, if you will. (Shaklee & Fletcher, 2002; Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000).

From Research to Policy

Armed with this new information about how early experiences shape the physical structure of the brain, early childhood professionals joined concerned parents and citizens in calling for public policies and practices to support these developmental trends. Expenditures for children's development are currently focused on children from 5-18 years of age, through the extensive system of public education developed over the past 200 years. However, current brain research suggests that similar concern should be directed to the infant and preschool years.

While there is clear consensus among early childhood professionals about the importance of the early years to children's development, there is less agreement about what to do about it. The body of research on early development is growing at a rapid pace, but the meaning of the findings for programs and policies is less clear. Who, ultimately, is responsible for how we care for infants and toddlers, and how should we move from research to practice in the early childhood years? (Caring for Infants and Toddlers, 2001).

In many cases, policy implications have been sufficiently confusing that communities and states have made no response. The Map and Track project of the National Center for Children in Poverty reports that, by the end of the year 2000, 19 states still had no funded programs that specifically target infants and toddlers. The effect of the early years research is seen in the seven states that took their first step in early childhood funding in 2000 (National Center for Children in Poverty, 2002).

In other cases, policy makers have initiated programs for infants and young children, but not always on sound research grounds. For example, the states of Georgia and Tennessee launched a program to give a classical music CD to every new mother, based on news that listening to classical music could enhance cognitive performance for children. Similarly, a new law in Florida requires that children in state-run child care centers listen to classical music daily. Such programs may be good for the classical music industry, but a look at the research raises doubts about their utility.

These programs and policies were initiated in response to a study in which college students showed increased spatial reasoning skill immediately after listening to Mozart. No long-term effects were measured, and more recent studies show that even the short-term effect is inconsistent. There have been no studies with infants or toddlers showing any cognitive impact of classical music (Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000). Policy makers in these states could have used more direction in using research to inform policy for young children.

These cases point to the difficulty of moving from research to practice in the public arena. Research is clear that the experiences of the early years shape infants' and children's brain development, but what should be done about it?

• Do we need educational programs for parents?
• Better adult-child ratios in childcare settings?
• More effective intervention when young children are abused and neglected?
• Support to help young parents develop positive home environments?
• Flex time at work so parents have more time with their children?

These are all promising options for parents and their young children, but which would best promote a strong start for children? Which are affordable within family, business, community, and state budgets? And which approaches fit with public ideology about appropriate roles for parents, community, and the state? (Gopnik, Meltzoff, & Kuhl, 1999; Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000)

Roles for Extension

The Cooperative Extension System is uniquely positioned to help families and communities sort out these questions as they explore the implications of early childhood research for their children. Problems in research application such as these are ideally suited to the structure and resources of the Extension System. Figure 1 below shows how the core features of the Extension System work together in developing sound research-based policy for young children.

• From research to practice: The function of the Cooperative Extension System is to bring the latest research out of the confines of the library and into communities where people can put it to good use. Research in early childhood and neurodevelopment is moving ahead at a rapid pace and communities will need current updates to make informed decisions about programs and policies.
  
  
• Training: Extension faculty in Family and Consumer Sciences are well trained in issues relevant to family life and child development. Their educational backgrounds prepare them to keep abreast of the latest developments in this lively research area, and to help the public articulate the implications of the research for how they care for children.
  
  
• Links to policy makers: Extension staff have established track records in research-based problem solving with policy makers at the community and state level. Extension faculty can build on this successful history as they work with policy makers on their concerns about their youngest citizens.
  
  
• Community connections: Extension faculty have a long record of success in working with parents, childcare providers, child-relevant organizations, and others concerned about children. They are well positioned to draw together community-based coalitions in the area of early childhood.
  
  
• Campus-based resources: With its strong university ties, Extension is able to draw on campus-based resources and expertise to help communities address their concerns about young children. Campus faculty in Family and Consumer Sciences, Education, Psychology, Physiology, and Neuroscience Departments can keep county-based faculty apprised of the latest developments in early childhood, ensuring that communities work from a sound research base.
  
  
• Grantsmanship: County faculty and state Extension personnel can help community-based and state-level coalitions as they search for resources to expand programming to the early years. Campus-based research offices facilitate this process as well.
  
  
• Evaluation: As communities move forward in the area of early childhood, well-designed evaluations are necessary to assess program impact. Extension professionals, with the support of university resources, can help develop and conduct comprehensive evaluation schemes for programs launched in response to the early brain development research.
  
  
• Best practice: As early childhood programs and policies are initiated in early childhood, program outcome information allows communities to assess the likelihood the programs will meet their needs. Extension personnel can stay up-to-date on "best practice" programs for a strong start for young children and their families.

Recent findings about early brain development challenge parents, citizens, communities, and policy makers at state and local levels to provide their infants and young children with a strong start in life. But the path from research to practice can be unclear as communities search for the best ways to put those findings in practice. Extension can serve a key role in guiding the process toward the sound, research-based programs most likely to meet the needs of young children and their families.

References

Caring for Infants and Toddlers. (2001). The Future of children, 11, Spring/Summer.

Gopnik, A., Meltzoff, A., & Kuhl, P. (1999). The scientist in the crib. New York: Free Press.

National Center for Children in Poverty (2002). Map and track: State Initiatives for Young Children and Families [On-line]. Available at: http://cpmcnet.columbia.edu/dept/nccp/

Shaklee, H., & Fletcher, J. (2002). Key studies that rocked the cradle: How research changed the way we care for infants and toddlers. In B. Stewart, R. Lovingood, & R. Purcell (Eds.), Research Applications in Family and Consumer Sciences. Alexandria, VA: American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences.

Shonkoff, J., & Phillips (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Copyright © by Extension Journal, Inc. ISSN 1077-5315. Articles appearing in the Journal become the property of the Journal. Single copies of articles may be reproduced in electronic or print form for use in educational or training activities. Inclusion of articles in other publications, electronic sources, or systematic large-scale distribution may be done only with prior electronic or written permission of the Journal Editorial Office, joe-ed@joe.org.