June 2003
Volume 41 Number 3

Ideas at Work

Money on the Bookshelf: Using Children's Books to Reach Limited Resource Families with Money Management Education

Patricia A. Behal
Area Family Resource Management Specialist
University of Nevada Cooperative Extension
Reno, Nevada
Internet Address: behalp@unce.unr.edu

Kymberley K. Bennett
University of Nevada, Reno
Interdisciplinary Ph.D. Program in Social Psychology
Reno, Nevada
Internet Address: kym@unr.nevada.edu

Alice M. Crites
Extension Educator
University of Nevada Cooperative Extension
Logandale, Nevada
Internet Address: critesa@unce.unr.edu

Dan Weigel
Area Human Development Specialist
University of Nevada Cooperative Extension
Reno, Nevada
Internet Address: weigeld@unce.unr.edu

Introduction

Money often is not an easy topic for families to discuss. How family money is used can be a sensitive topic in communications between parents and their children and may evoke conflict between them. Parents and children who learn to work together to improve their abilities to cope with scarce financial resources and to increase their skills to better manage these resources may avoid or reduce some of the money-oriented problems that cause conflicts (Voydanoff & Donnelly, 1988).

Providing families with money management education to enhance their abilities to cope can be challenging using traditional program delivery methods. A more successful approach may be to teach this topic to parents indirectly by helping them teach it to their children. In fact, it has been demonstrated that when parents teach their children they also learn and practice the concepts taught (Darling, 1992; Mochis, Lawton, & Stampfl, 1980; Myer, Crites, & Haldeman, 1995). Money on the Bookshelf (MOTB), a family financial literacy program, was developed based on this strategy.

Program Design and Delivery

The purpose of MOTB is to provide parents and children with opportunities to discuss the use of financial resources and to enhance the financial skills of both parent and child. It helps parents and their children enhance their knowledge and application of money management concepts, including:

• Allocating resources,
• Making decisions,
• Setting goals,
• Prioritizing,
• Solving problems,
• Recognizing resources,
• Recognizing success, and
• Saving.

Parents and their children learn to engage in positive interactions as they develop the language processing and communications skills related to money and its management. The program was designed particularly with limited resource audiences in mind.

Children's books about money topics are the foundation on which the MOTB curriculum is built. The program uses a series of four family workshops to teach parents with children ages 4 through 10 how to read and discuss these books with their children. Books selected for use in the program include:

• A Bargain for Frances,
• A Chair for My Mother,
• Alexander, Who Used to Be Rich Last Sunday,
• Just Shopping With Mom,
• My First Job,
• Ox-Cart Man,
• Sheep in a Shop,
• Something Good,
• The Berenstain Bears' & Mama's New Job,
• The Berenstain Bears' Trouble With Money,
• The Purse, and
• Tight Times.

Guides for workshop facilitators and guides for parents were developed for each book. The guide content includes:

1. A statement of the program's goal,
2. A list of financial concepts and objectives for each book,
3. A brief summary of the book,
4. Suggestions to parents for things to think about before they read the book with their children,
5. Suggestions to parents for things to talk about as they read the book with their children, and
6. Extender activities that help families practice what they have learned.

The MOTB workshops are built around teaching parents reading techniques such as previewing a book, having children predict, and linking the book to life rather than on teaching money management directly. The modeled reading techniques are the vehicles used to highlight the financial concepts presented within the context of the stories. This indirect approach allows the money management concepts to be taught in a way that makes it easier for both parents and children to grasp. During each workshop, families:

• Receive a parent guide,
• Learn about the financial concepts covered in the day's book,
• Learn several parent/child reading techniques,
• Participate in a group reading session/story time that models the reading techniques,
• Discuss the book's financial concepts,
• Engage in the extender activities, and
• Check out one of the program's books to encourage continued discussion and reading at home.

Accomplishments

To date, 110 families have participated in the program. Forty-four percent of the participants had incomes of $35,000 or less. Almost 37% of the participants were ethnic minorities, and 40% had educational levels of trade school and below. Over 51% of the parents were between the ages of 22 and 35. To reach the target audience, workshop sites included family resource centers, elementary schools and libraries in at-risk neighborhoods, and housing authority sites.

Parents completed a survey prior to beginning the first workshop and an evaluation at the end of the last workshop. Overall, parents showed statistically significant gains in how often they:

1. Talked with their children about things that relate to money,
2. Included their children in talks about how family money is used, and
3. Used everyday events as opportunities to talk with their children about money (paired t-tests, p < .05, n = 44).

More important, when parents were compared by income levels, ethnicity, and education, it was those with the lower annual incomes ($35,000 or less), those who were ethnic minorities, and those with less education (trade school or below) who showed statistically significant gains (p < .05). Parents with higher incomes and more education and who were white showed improvements, but not at statistically significant levels.

It is often challenging to reach families with basic money management education. MOTB is a backdoor method for helping families gain basic financial management skills and improve their communications about money. Approaching the subject by appealing to parents through their children appears to be an effective means of educating parents and children on the topic. Although the program's evaluation is at an early stage, results suggest that MOTB is helpful to limited resource audiences--an audience in particular need of money management skills.

References

Darling, S. (1992). Family literacy: Parents and children learning together. Principal, 72, 10-12.

Mochis, G. P., Lawton, J. T., & Stampfl, R. W. (1980). Preschool children's consumer learning. Home Economics Research Journal, 9, 64-71.

Myer, P. A., Crites, A. M., & Haldeman, V. A. (1995). Annual report of Extension program impact (Unpublished Report). University of Nevada Cooperative Extension.

Voydanoff, P., & Donnelly, B. W. (1988). Economic distress, family coping, and quality of family life. In P. Voydanoff & L. C. Majka (Eds.), Families and economic distress: Coping strategies and social policy. New perspectives on family (pp. 97-115). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Coordinating and Conducting a Multi-State 4-H Horse and Pony Judges' School

C. M. Brady
Extension Specialist
Department of 4-H Youth Development
Purdue University
West Lafayette, Indiana
Internet Address: cbrady@four-h.purdue.edu

A. S. Griffin
Extension Specialist
University of Kentucky
Lexington, Kentucky
Internet Address: agriffin@uky.edu

R. C. Kline
Extension Specialist
The Ohio State University
Columbus, Ohio
Internet Address: Kline.1@osu.edu

Introduction

Indiana, Ohio, and Kentucky 4-H Horse and Pony programs have a history of providing annual training for the judges involved in their state's youth horse programs. These annual sessions consist of a combination of lectures on rules and regulations, the process of judging specific disciplines, and how to better work with youth and provide a positive learning experience for contestants.

In 1999, the Youth Horse Extension Specialists in these states decided to pool their resources and provide one seminar to meet the needs of all three states. The primary goals of this newly formed "Multi-State Judges' School" include:

• Provide high-quality training for judges working with 4-H youth,
• Facilitate judges' efforts to hold several judges cards,
• Provide a wider pool of judges within each state, and
• More efficiently utilize the time of Extension Staff and volunteers.

Since the Multi-State Judges' school was first conducted in 1999, it has gained support from several other surrounding states. In more recent years, this educational opportunity has expanded to six collaborative states and one breed organization. In 2002 these states included:

• Indiana,
• Illinois,
• Kentucky,
• Michigan,
• Ohio, and
• Pennsylvania.

In addition, the Pony of Americas Club (POAC) breed association requested to be present at the school, enabling their carded judges to renew their licenses by attending our educational opportunity.

Methods

The current format of the judges' school is as follows:

Friday Evening

• Registration and welcoming refreshments
• General session: Introduction of Extension staff and explanation of each state's approval process
• Panel discussion/keynote speaker, etc.
• Break out into special state sessions

Saturday

• Continental Breakfast
• Morning sessions on judging topics determined by planning committee
• Lunch
• Afternoon sessions on judging topics determined by planning committee

Sunday

• Live judging of 8-10 classes in judging contest format

Selection of the host location is vital to the success of the Multi-State Judges' School. The location has rotated among Indiana, Ohio, and Kentucky to date. Special consideration has been given to location accessibility and facility quality.

In 1999, management of the school was divided among the three states participating in the project. However, we quickly learned that it was much more effective for the host state to coordinate the on-site activities and facility. Each state continues to maintain its own judges lists, conduct testing, handle state applications, and provide registration materials to the judges on their list. Currently, all registrations collected for the judges' school are handled by The Ohio State University, maintaining our self-sustaining treasury.

Survey and impact data has been collected to determine the effectiveness and future direction of this collaborative educational effort. The participants have been asked if the program meets their needs both in terms of content-based information and availability and accessibility of the seminars.

Results

Judges attending the 2001 Multi State Judges' School hosted in Kentucky were surveyed to determine event effectiveness. All attendees received a survey in their program materials and were asked to complete the survey and return it to the event coordinators.

Objective 1: Provide High-Quality Training for Judges Working with 4-H Youth

Judges were asked if the seminars presented were useful. Table 1 shows the percentage of responses indicating the sessions were either useful or very useful.

When asked if the seminar met their expectations, 100% of judges responding indicated that the seminar met or exceeded their expectations.

Objective 2: Facilitate Judges' Efforts to Hold Several Judges Cards and Objective 3: Provide a Wider Pool of Judges Within Each State

When asked if registration was easy, 71.6% of judges responding (n=81) indicated that registration was very easy, and 28.4 indicated registration was easy.

Judges were also asked to indicate how many states they applied to for judging cards. There were a total of 72 respondents for this question.

• 40% applied to one state
• 59% applied to more than one state
  • 25% applied to two states
  • 15% applied to three states
  • 11 % applied to four states
  • 8% applied to five states

Objective 4-More Efficiently Utilize Time of Extension Staff and Volunteers

Prior to the creation of the Multi-State Judges' School, each Extension staff and volunteer corps organized a state judges' school on an annual basis. Since the inception of the Multi-State Judges' School, each State staff and volunteer corps now has to organize the judges' school only once every 3 to 4 years. In addition, this effort has created a self-sustaining Extension program that reduces duplication of effort within each state.

Conclusion

The Multi-State Judges' School is meeting the educational and programmatic objectives identified at inception. In addition, the regional format has provided opportunities to seek outside funding that may not have been available with the single state format.

In 2001, the University of Kentucky Barnhart Grant awarded $1,000, the Tennessee Walking Horse Breeders' and Exhibitors' Association sponsored our English speaker, and the Indiana Horse Council continued its $500 sponsorship of the Multi-State Judges School. These increased sponsorship resources and increases in individual registrations, yielding more revenue, have created opportunities for the planning committee to seek speakers with stronger national reputations and exceptional qualifications in specific areas of interest.

Community Health as Community Partnerships

Linnette Mizer Goard
Assistant Professor/Extension Agent, Family and Consumer Sciences
Elyria, Ohio
Internet Address: goard.1@osu.edu

Sereana Howard Dresbach
Former Assistant Professor/Extension Health Specialist
Columbus, Ohio
Internet Address: dresbach.7@osu.edu

Ohio State University Extension

Introduction

Health is a complex concept that incorporates the individual health of citizens, the multiplying effect of family health, and the cumulative effect of community health (Dresbach, 2001). This article describes a project whose purpose was to empower the community through a collaborative effort in order to bring about improved community health.

The health of a community is directly related to relationships among organizations, neighborhoods, families, friends, and individuals (Eng, Salmon, & Mullan, 1992). Thus, understanding the concerns and issues perceived by individuals in the community was important in understanding of health on a societal level. The project was conducted in a rural Ohio farming community with a population of about 30,000.

Process

Taking advantage of the presence of Ohio State University Extension was a key step in building the framework for collaboration in Fayette County, Ohio. Like Extension systems in other states, Ohio State University Extension is administered through the land-grant institution, Ohio State University, a comprehensive system of research, education, and experiment stations. By virtue of the complimentary missions, three participating agencies, Scioto Valley Health System Agency, Fayette County Health Department, and Ohio State University Extension were able to initiate a community decision-making process to identify, prioritize, and act on health concerns.

With a successful history of other community decision-making and action efforts, citizen participation in countywide efforts was very strong. Understanding the prior social situation, historical context of relationships, concerns, and issues was essential to create a foundation of continued public participation from traditional and non-traditional health partners (Beal, Blout, Powers, & Johnson, 1966).

Asset Mapping

Each of the public and private health care entities in the county had completed their own assessment, but no compilation of results or recommendations had been made to date. OSU Extension was able to bring in an out-of-county facilitator for a series of participatory meetings. Participants were asked to identify all the contributing components that impact health:

• Social,
• Emotional,
• Political,
• Environmental, and
• Behavioral.

The facilitator used techniques to guide the discussion to reveal biases, experiences, beliefs, attitudes, and values. This process established the environment for decisions, programs, and evaluations to occur. The participants were able to identify three major foci:

• Health education,
• Access and availability issues, and
• Financial concerns.

Participants then initiated an "asset map" that took each focus and identified all the potential contributions already established in the county.

From the compiled data, participant input, and the development of the asset map, a "Community Health Assessment" was developed as a means to do a broad-based survey of county residents. The assessment was intended to gather consumer input on the various health focus areas. The assessment focused on three identified areas that were further refined into:

1. Health Education - Lifestyle/Behavior Concerns;
2. Health Education - Environmental, Geographical and Occupational Concerns;
3. Health Care Access & Availability;
4. Health Care Providers; and
5. Financial Concerns (Escovitz, Birdwell, & Dresbach, 1992).

Community Health Assessment

While all health issues are important in communities, at some point, prioritization must happen to effectively allocate resources. Using previous needs assessments to gather the breadth of issues, this community health assessment asked specifically to rank the issues in an effort to focus resources. By focusing efforts in each of the identified areas, the limited resources available in the initiating agencies could effectively be allocated.

The assessment was distributed at an annual Community Health Fair in Fayette County. Respondents were asked to rank their top three health issue/concerns in each section of the assessment. Each category had 20 to 25 issues listed. The top three in each category are reported. Age and sex demographics were obtained but not racial/ethnic identity because 96.6 percent of Fayette County's population is Caucasian. After eliminating unusable surveys, the n was 126.

Results

Table 1 shows the top three concerns in each category.

The results of the survey show that many of the concerns of rural residents in this county were directly related to the infrastructure of health in the community. Individual concerns affect community health priorities, and, subsequently, agencies can direct resources appropriately by understanding people's concerns. Current perceptions of concerns, such as drinking water, must be recognized so that appropriate resources are used. Is the quality of drinking water threatened, or is this a concern because people have been told they should be concerned? Depending on the answer, different agencies and resources would be used to address this issue.

The difficulty in addressing health at a community level is that the "process" takes time and is not easily defined as "finished." In working with individuals who want change to occur, this process is sometimes burdensome because it does not produce instantaneous results. This may lead to attrition of community participation and a perception that participants need to speed up the process by making hasty decisions. Another stumbling block to this process is the perceived risk that agencies and organizations could lose their identity in becoming part of the process.

Implications

Further study is needed to assess the interrelationship of health to the community. As other health issues are studied, health of the community is segmented into smaller subjects and extrapolated to the bigger picture based on a small sub-set. The interrelationship of health itself needs in-depth study to better understand the whole rather than focus solely on components. This interaction and relationship are very critical to understanding the dynamics of health, particularly in times of dwindling resources.

Extension personnel at the local level have skills to assist health agencies to combine their resources to encourage improved community health. Extension, acting as the facilitator, can focus attention on assets and break down barriers in health systems, thus enabling agencies to effectively use their scarce resources.

References

Beal, G. M., Blout, R. C., Powers, R. C., & Johnson, W. J. (1966). Social action and interaction in program planning. Iowa State University Press: Ames, Iowa.

Dresbach, S. H. (2001). Understanding cancer risk among Extension professionals: A program development perspective. Journal of Extension [On-line], 39(2). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2001april/rb2.html

Eng, E., Salmon, M., & Mullan, F. (1992). Community empowerment: The critical base for primary health care. Family Community Health 15(1):1-12.

Escovitz, A., Birdwell, F., & Dresbach, S. (1992). Ohio rural health concerns: A four county survey. The Ohio State University: Columbus, Ohio.

Thompson, B., & Kinne, S. (1990). Social change theory: Application to community health. In N. Bracht (ed.) Health promotion at the community level. Sage Publications: Newbury Park, California.

Livestock Ethics--A Lesson for High School Students

Clinton P. Rusk
Assistant Professor
Department of 4-H Youth Development
Purdue University
West Lafayette, Indiana
Internet Address: cr@four-h.purdue.edu

Krisanna Machtmes
Assistant Professor
School of Human Resources Education and Workforce Development
Louisiana State University
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Internet Address: machtme@lsu.edu

Introduction

"One purpose of the 4-H animal projects is to teach young people how to feed, fit and show their animals. The more important purpose is to provide an opportunity for personal growth and development of the young person" (Hammatt, 1995). People develop and strengthen character by making ethical decisions, just as they build muscles through exercise. According to Goodwin (1996), "Young lives and minds that are moldable can be taught ethics."

According to Kohlberg (1984), moral reasoning develops through a sequence of stages. Moral education consists of promoting change or development through these stages as an individual interacts with his or her environment and makes sense of those experiences. Even at low stages, people are able to make claims about what is right and wrong, but Kohlberg contends that people at higher stages of moral development are more likely to act in accordance with their moral judgments.

For Kohlberg, psychological development of the individual is the primary aim of education and is promoted by engaging in discussions of moral dilemmas--both hypothetical and real. Participating in these discussions helps students to recognize and understand the perspective of others and to have their own reasoning supported at times and challenged at others (Benninga, 1991).

Halbach (2002) maintains that youth who show animals and their parents are constantly confronted with the question of what is and what isn't appropriate in the raising, training, and grooming of their show animals. And Goodwin (2002) explains:

The major reason I have worked on the issue of livestock show ethics since 1993 is for what we are teaching young people. If we teach young people to make good ethical choices in the show ring, there is more of a chance that they will make good ethical choices in everyday life as an adult.

Because of the need for livestock ethics education at the high school level, the authors developed a lesson for Agriculture Education Instructors to use in their high school classrooms. They also wrote a pretest/posttest to determine the effectiveness of the lesson.

Lesson Description

The livestock ethics lesson is a PowerPoint presentation that defines livestock ethics and describes four questions written by Goodwin (1996) that can be used to determine whether practices related to raising, training, and grooming youth livestock projects are ethical or unethical. The lesson describes several hypothetical situations and helps youth to apply Goodwin's test questions:

1. Does the practice violate Food and Drug Administration Law?
2. Is the practice fraudulent misrepresentation of the animal?
3. Does the practice compromise the welfare of the animal?
4. Does the practice relate to real world agriculture?

The primary author taught the lesson to college seniors majoring in Agricultural Education at the beginning of the semester they were going out to student teach in high school classrooms across the state. The author provided each of the student teachers with the same PowerPoint presentation on livestock ethics so that each group of high school students received the same information and results from the various schools could be combined for analysis. The author also equipped the student teachers with the Goodwin video A Line in the Sand (1996). This educational video on livestock ethics reiterates the material presented in the PowerPoint presentation and describes additional livestock practices for students to determine whether they are ethical or unethical.

Pretest/Posttest Description

The pretest/posttest includes five demographic questions related to gender, grade in school, 4-H enrollment, enrollment in 4-H animal project(s), and experience raising animals. In addition, 20 multiple-choice ethics questions related to practices associated with raising, training, and showing beef cattle, dairy cattle, horses, sheep, and swine are included. Each multiple-choice question had five possible answers. To ensure anonymity and to facilitate the matching of pretests and posttests, the students who take the test are asked to list their first, middle, and last initials, along with their date of birth. The pretest/posttest was pilot tested to ensure face and content validity.

Results

Data were analyzed using a matched pairs comparative design to assess the change in knowledge related to animal ethics. A knowledge-based pretest was administered to the students prior to the instructional lesson on Animal Ethics. After completing the program, the students were given the same knowledge based test as a posttest. The n for this study was 68. The data was analyzed using a t test.

The results indicate that the improvement in scores from the pretest to the posttest was significant (t = 3.438, df = 67, p<0.001), with high school students posting an average knowledge increase of 9.9%. The questions resulting in the greatest knowledge gain were related to the following issues:

1. Characteristics of a trustworthy livestock exhibitor,
2. Links in the food safety chain,
3. Percentage of U.S. food animals that come from youth livestock shows, and
4. The most important reason to address the issue of livestock show ethics.

Some of the questions asking students to differentiate between ethical and unethical grooming practices resulted in low scores on both the pretest and posttest. The lesson included both a PowerPoint presentation and the Line in the Sand video. The authors made no attempt to evaluate the educational value of the PowerPoint presentation separate from Goodwin's videotape. The authors plan to expand the lesson in future years to improve student competency and confidence in distinguishing between ethical and unethical grooming practices.

References

Benninga, J. S. (1991). Moral, character and civil education in the elementary school. Teachers' College Press, New York.

Goodwin, J. L. (1996). Ethics in livestock shows: Ethics in our lives. Presented at: National 4-H Congress, Memphis, TN. November 30, 1996.

Goodwin, J. L. (2002). The rules are black and white. Facilitator Guide

Halbach, T. (2002). The rules are black and white and they apply to all breeds. News Release, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI.

Hammatt, D. R. (1995). What is the real purpose of the 4-H livestock projects? (2611). Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA. 2pp.

Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development. pp. 172-177. New York: Harper & Row.

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.

If you have difficulties viewing or printing this page, please contact JOE Technical Support.