June 2002 // Volume 40 // Number 3
"Bringing the Message Home" discusses the kinds of international articles JOE is looking for. "Engagement, History, Community" highlights several issues engaging authors in the June JOE. They have a lot in common.
In "Going International in Extension: A Done Deal?" Tom Gallagher comments that "when you write an article for JOE you are engaging in a worldwide discussion of best theory and practice." He's right, as was Barbara Ludwig in her April Commentary, when she pointed out that JOE is now read by people from around the world.
Given this ongoing discussion about the internationalization of Extension and of JOE, I thought it was time to talk about the kinds of "international articles" that belong in JOE--and the kinds that belong elsewhere.
As we say in the Submission Guidelines, "JOE expands and updates the research and knowledge base for U.S. Extension professionals . . . to improve their effectiveness" and "serves as a forum for emerging and contemporary issues affecting U.S. Cooperative Extension." JOE authors share "successful educational applications, original and applied research findings, scholarly opinions, educational resources, and challenges on issues of critical importance to U.S. Cooperative Extension."
In other words, the kinds of international articles suitable for (and sought after by) JOE are those that "bring the message home," that discuss international Extension work or the international Extension experience in the context of the implications for U.S. Extension.
One (more than) suitable home for articles dealing exclusively with international Extension work or experience is The Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education. Ludwig mentioned it in her Commentary for good reason. It's a good journal, another forum for engaging in that "worldwide discussion" to which Gallagher refers.
Engagement, History, Community
All of the articles in the June JOE model the concept of engagement in one way or another, but two take it head on, both discussing the report by the Kellogg Commission on the Future of State and Land-Grant Universities, Returning to Our Roots: The Engaged Institution.
In "Rousing the People on the Land: The Roots of the Educational Organizing Tradition in Extension Work," the author maintains and convincingly demonstrates that "the path of engagement requires reclaiming and strengthening a tradition that is deeply rooted in Extension's history." And then there's "Leading Organizational Change: A Comparison of County and Campus Views of Extension Engagement," whose title speaks for itself.
The second June Commentary, "Cooperative Extension and Faith-Based Organizations: Building Social Capital," shares the deeply historical approach of "Rousing the People on the Land," but its authors, Esther Prins and D. Merrill Ewert, make a different case.
"Shaping Communities Through Extension Programs" is another article whose title speaks for itself. It makes a persuasive case for Appreciative Inquiry as an "action research process" that Extension educators can use to "extend and accelerate the community-shaping process."
Community shaping. Community organizing. Community building. Community development. Whatever one calls it, it's an issue that engages many of the authors in the June issue of JOE.
Laura Hoelscher, Editor