June 2003
Volume 41 Number 3

Research in Brief

Urban and Rural 4-H Adult Volunteer Leaders' Preferred Forms of Recognition and Motivation

Susan Fritz
Associate Professor
Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communication
University of Nebraska
Lincoln, Nebraska
Internet Address: sfritz1@unl.edu

Deanna Karmazin
Extension Associate
University of Nebraska Cooperative Extension in Lancaster County
Internet Address: dkarmazin2@unl.edu

John Barbuto, Jr.
Assistant Professor
Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communication
University of Nebraska
Lincoln, Nebraska

Shawn Burrow
Extension Educator
New Mexico Cooperative Extension

Introduction

In order to serve rural and urban 4-H members, 4-H relies heavily on adult volunteer leaders. Dramatic rural-to-urban shifts in Nebraska's population base have resulted in 4-H becoming more heavily reliant on urban adult 4-H volunteer leaders than ever before. Assumptions about volunteer motivation, recognition, and perception of program quality should be challenged to determine if the old assumptions based on a past experience with predominately rural volunteers fit the new mix of 4-H volunteer leaders in Nebraska. The study reported here compared the motives of urban and rural 4-H volunteers and identified differences in recognition strategies by:

1. Classifying demographics of respondents;
2. Identifying preferred forms of recognition;
3. Assessing perceptions of program quality; and
4. Analyzing primary motivation of volunteers using statements.

Method

Sample

The population for the study consisted of 4-H organizational and project leaders. Addresses for the 737 organizational and 1242 project leaders were secured from the Nebraska State 4-H Office. Using a stratified, random sampling strategy (i.e., percentage of organizational and project leaders and five Extension districts), 264 organizational and 450 project leaders (n=714) were sampled across the urban and rural Cooperative Extension educational programming units (EPUs).

The study divided Nebraska 4-H programs into two categories, urban and rural volunteers. The urban population was classified as the Metro EPU that is an array of four counties: Lancaster, Douglas, Sarpy, and Saunders. The rural population was defined as the remaining 20 EPU's across the state, which comprises 51% of the state's population.

Instrumentation

Preferred forms of recognition were measured using 19 demographic and attitudinal items from an instrument developed by Culp and Schwartz (1999). The 19 items featured a mix of Likert-type scales (5=very important, 1=very unimportant), rank ordering, and frequency counts. Motivation was measured using 27 statements (based on McClelland's trichotomy of needs theory, 1961) which featured Likert-type scales (7=Agree, 4=Neutral, 1=Disagree) developed by Henderson (1981). The 27 statements were later collapsed into the three primary motivation subscales of achievement, affiliation, and power. The instrument was reviewed by a panel of University of Nebraska Extension faculty and graduate students to establish face validity.

Procedures

The coded instrument, cover letter, and return, postage-paid envelope were mailed to 714 organizational and project leaders. Within 2 weeks, 210 respondents had returned instruments. Two weeks after receiving a postcard reminder, 92 additional respondents had returned instruments. Using the recommended procedure for non-respondent follow-up of Miller and Smith (1983), a random sample of 100 non-respondents was sent instruments and return, postage-paid envelopes. This procedure yielded 28 more responses. In total, 330 instruments were received, for a return rate of 46%; four responses were deemed unusable. First, second, and third respondent groups were compared and no significant differences were found among their demographic, rank ordering, or attitudinal responses. The Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient for the motivation data was .89, with motivation subscale (achievement, affiliation, and power) alphas ranging from .82 to .88.

Findings

Demographics

Rural and urban volunteer profiles in this study were more alike than they were different. On the average, volunteers were 43 years of age and generally had children who were eligible for participation in 4-H programs. Rural and urban volunteers also had been 4-H members at a similar rate (70%). More than 92% of the respondents were married. Rural 4-H volunteers in this study were engaged in more volunteer organizations than urban 4-H volunteers were (MN 4.12 rural, MN 3.78, urban, Chi-Square Test, Prob.=.04).

Recognition

Urban volunteers reported that they felt significantly more appreciated by Extension staff (16.5% urban/6.9% rural) and less appreciated by 4-H youth (67% urban/77% rural) than rural volunteers did (Wilcoxon 2-Sample Test, z=.03). Rural and urban volunteers committed a comparable annual amount of time to service (65 hours urban/53 hours rural). While their commitment was far below Banning's (1970) finding of a national average of 200 hours of annual 4-H volunteer service, it parallels findings that volunteer service has been on a steady decline in the United States (Putnam, 2000).

Rural and urban respondents' most appealing form of volunteer recognition was a "letter from a 4-H member" (69 [54%] rural/104 [52%]/urban). Rural and urban volunteers were also appreciative of a "phone call from a 4-H member" (ranked third by 82 [41%] of the rural respondents and second by 46 [36%] of the urban respectively. However, a "letter from Extension Educator" was ranked second by urban respondents (48 [38%]) and sixth by rural respondents (64 [32%]).

Conversely, the least appealing forms of volunteer recognition for both rural and urban respondents were:

• "Visit from Extension Educator" (ranked 16th by 12 [9%] of the rural respondents and 17 [9%] of the urban respondents);
• "Recognition at State Fair or Roundup" (ranked 15th by 13 [10%] of the rural respondents and 22 [11%] of the urban respondents); and
• "Phone call from Extension Educator" (ranked 14th by 20 [16%] of the rural respondents and 30 [15%] of the urban respondents).

Urban respondents ranked a "letter from Extension Educator" higher (second) than rural respondents (sixth). Rural respondents found a "ceremony held at the county fair" significantly less appealing than urban respondents did (Wilcoxon 2-Sample Test, z=.03).

Program Quality

Urban respondents indicated the quality of the 4-H program at the state, county and club levels was excellent to good (see Table 2). Rural respondents identified the quality of their state, local and club levels as good. Significant differences were found between urban and rural perceptions of program quality at the state and county levels. While still positive, urban respondents were slightly more positive about the state and county 4-H programs than rural respondents were.

Motivation

In general, urban and rural volunteers had similar motivation patterns. They were predominately motivated by affiliation needs followed by achievement and power needs. It is important to note that a comparison of volunteer leaders' attitudes yielded a significant difference between urban and rural respondents on the item "I am a 4-H volunteer because I like the challenge of the task." However, the difference in mean values of the two groups was negligible.

Conclusions

4-H volunteers in this study tended to have children who were in 4-H, were in families with married heads of household, and were 4-H alumni. 4-H was one of several community organizations in which volunteers participated, and rural 4-H volunteers were more likely to be engaged in more volunteer organizations than urban 4-H volunteers were.

For the most part, the forms of appreciation found most appealing in this study were those that were personal. The desire for personalized recognition was congruent with the respondents' predominant motivation need for affiliation (Henderson, 1981; McClelland, 1961). 4-H member appreciation expressed through letters or phone calls was highly valued overall, and a substantial number of respondents in each group had strong preferences for recognition through a letter from the Extension educator.

Visits or phone calls from the Extension educator held little comparative appeal for urban and rural volunteers in this study, and respondents appeared to be less interested in State Fair or Roundup recognition than almost any form of recognition explored in this study.

Although they still ranked them as above average, rural volunteers were less positive about their state and county 4-H programs than were urban volunteers. Perhaps rural volunteers viewed the 4-H program as a critical component to community viability. Many rural communities in Nebraska are economically distressed, and this may be affecting the priorities of rural volunteers. Rural communities may look to the Extension office as the "front door of the University," and, if they feel that answers are not coming from the Extension office, then their needs are not being met. However, it is possible that Extension educators may be unfairly associated with federal and state government administrators and consultants, who are often viewed as well intentioned but ineffective (Foster & McBeth, 1996).

Extension has established itself as an integral part of rural communities, and there is a higher expectation given past performance. Higher percentages of rural youth are likely to participate in 4-H programs than urban youth are. Extension has acknowledged the need and the challenges in penetrating the urban Extension audience. But urban respondents may still be less informed and, consequently, less critical of the services they receive.

Affiliation, the need to establish a relationship with another, draws urban and rural volunteers to 4-H. Likely the relationship they are interested in is the relationship with their own children, and this may be spilling over into higher parental involvement in 4-H volunteering.

Recommendations

A key component to expanding urban and rural 4-H programs is increasing the volunteer pool. For this expansion to occur, volunteer recruitment strategies must be employed that go beyond recruiting predominately married adults and/or those with a 4-H background.

Encouraging 4-H members to express appreciation for the service volunteer leaders provide could be reinforced through 4-H curricula and regularly emphasized by Extension educators and staff during county-level program delivery. Extension educators taking the time to write genuine, personalized letters expressing appreciation for volunteer service is of similar importance.

4-H is one of many community organizations that compete for volunteer time. It is important that Extension staff develop and implement strategies to retain, recognize, and develop volunteers. This is particularly important for rural volunteers, who tend to volunteer with many organizations and who are also less positive about of county programs than urban volunteers are. With competing service organizations vying for volunteers, retention becomes a paramount challenge in rural settings.

4-H volunteers generally have children who are involved in the 4-H program, and their volunteering coincides with the years of their children's involvement. This involvement would likely span a number of years. If 4-H volunteers receive similar recognition (pins, certificates) at similar events year after year, the sentiment of the recognition is diminished. This is not to say that some traditions should not be established, but that patterns and forums (State Fair) for the recognition can trivialize the gravity and sentiment of the awards. Therefore, Extension staff are strongly encouraged to vary ways and contexts in which they recognize their volunteers.

4-H has become part of the rural social fiber and has the potential to become an integral part of the urban social fiber. However, applying volunteer recruitment and recognition strategies that are timeworn and possibly a mismatch for the urban population will not increase the likelihood that 4-H will make this transition. Further research is needed to profile urban volunteers' and members' reasons for volunteering for and participating in 4-H. A parallel study could be done with rural volunteers, and this information could be used to update and strengthen recruitment and retention of both volunteers and members.

References

Banning, R. (1970). Recruiting 4-H leaders: What studies tell us about recruiting. (U.S. Department of Agriculture Extension Service, PA-954). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.    

Culp III, K., & Schwartz, V. J. (1999). Recognizing tenured 4-H adult volunteers. Journal of Agricultural Education, 40(2), 38-45.

Foster, R. H., & McBeth, M. H. (1996). Urban-rural influences in U.S. environmental and economic development policy. Journal of Rural Studies, 12, 387-397.

Henderson, K. (1981). Motivating the adult 4-H volunteer. Journal of Extension [On-line], 19(1). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1981january/

McClelland, D. (1961). The achieving society. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.

Miller, L. E., & Smith, K. L. (1983). Handling nonresponse issues. Journal of Extension [On-line], 21(5). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1983september/

Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Identifying 4-H Camping Outcomes Using a Standardized Evaluation Process Across Multiple 4-H Educational Centers

Barry A. Garst
Extension Specialist
4-H Staff Development and Camping
Internet Address: bgarst@vt.edu

F. A. Bruce
Extension Specialist, Program Evaluation
Internet Address: fbruce@vt.edu

Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, Virginia

Camping professionals and researchers have long since recognized that camp is more than a location or a program; it includes what happens to youth during and after the camping experience. Camp participation has been found to affect youth in multiple ways, enhancing many forms of growth, including:

• Affective (self-esteem and self-concept),
• Cognitive (knowledge, skills, abilities, and attitudes),
• Behavioral (self-reported behaviors and behavioral intentions),
• Physical,
• Social, and
• Spiritual (Shepard & Speelman, 1986; Gillett, Thomas, Skok, & McLaughlin, 1991; Hopkins & Putnam, 1993; Chenery, 1994; Brannan & Fullerton, 1999; Henderson, 1999).

While many youth service organizations provide residential camping, 4-H is one of the largest providers, with approximately 400,000 youth served annually.

In Virginia, camping is recognized as a primary 4-H delivery mode and as a proven and effective way of reaching boys and girls. The primary purpose of Virginia 4-H camping is to develop youths' life skills through exciting, hands-on programming as the instrument of positive youth development. Virginia has six regionally based 4-H educational centers that provide year-round 4-H camping programs and support local and regional 4-H efforts. While 4-H camping occurs at the local level, a majority of camping programs are conducted at the 4-H Centers.

With increasing emphasis on responsible youth program management, Extension educators and 4-H camp directors are expected to document the benefits of their 4-H youth development programs. Program evaluation is a way to:

• Establish baseline measures,
• Assess goals and objectives,
• Ascertain outcomes and impacts,
• Identify and document benefits,
• Explain success or failure, and
• Rationalize future action (Henderson & Bialeschki, 1995).

Unfortunately, the majority of evaluations conducted in camp settings have been internal process evaluations aimed at program improvement and identifying levels of participant satisfaction (Dworken, 2001). Based on logic modeling, Barkman and McKee (2001) defined these types of assessments as output evaluation, which focuses on describing activities and participation, including participant characteristics and their reactions and responses to a program. In contrast, outcome evaluation includes identifying the immediate learning, short-term action, and long-term impacts resulting from program participation.

Identifying the outcomes of statewide 4-H camping can be challenging. Many 4-H camping programs are conducted at sites over a wide geographical area and far away from their land-grant university. Barkman (2001) suggests that this

result[s] in miscommunication, leading to the utilization of a variety of methodologies and instruments to evaluate the same program. Because of this lack of consistency in methodologies and instruments, the data gathered from scattered sites are not comparable and cannot be summarized across sites" (p. 5).

One of the most effective ways to address the problems and inconsistencies of 4-H camp evaluation across multiple sites is through collaboration. Collaboration is characterized by the sharing of information and resources by specific agencies to achieve common goals (Meek, 1992). Collaboration allows agencies to achieve more together than they could accomplish individually.

Developing a Standardized Evaluation Process

Purpose

Although the Virginia 4-H program conducted a standardized camping outcome evaluation using the perceptions of parents/guardians of 4-H youth campers in 1995 and 1998, a standardized participant evaluation was not developed. Each 4-H Center used different methods, instruments, and procedures for collecting information from camping participants regarding the programs' outputs and outcomes. Over a period of months in the spring of 2001, State 4-H office faculty collaborated with the six 4-H Center program directors to address the inconsistencies in participant evaluations.

There were two major purposes for the collaboration. The first purpose was to develop a standardized evaluation process by:

• Generating buy-in through an open discussion of the benefits and limitations of a standardized process,
• Identifying the desired life skills targeted by the Virginia 4-H camping program,
• Creating standardized survey instruments that would provide consistency yet also allow program directors to add site-specific questions or items, and
• Clarifying the roles and responsibilities of the State 4-H Office and the 4-H Centers in the evaluation process.

The second purpose was to evaluate camping participants' outcomes using standardized instruments in order to:

• Identify 4-H camping benefits as perceived by youth campers and
• Identify 4-H camping benefits as perceived by youth campers' parents/guardians.

Collaboration

Through the collaboration of 4-H Center and university faculty and staff, two instruments were created, one for youth campers and another for counselors-in-training, teen counselors, adult volunteers, and participating Extension Agents. Both instruments included demographics questions, program ratings, and open-ended questions pertaining to participants' reactions (i.e., outputs).

The youth camper instrument also included a 10-item life-skill measure based on the "Targeting Life Skills Model" (TLS) (Hendricks, 1998). Life skills in five domains of the TLS Model were targeted by the developed instrument:

• Being,
• Relating,
• Caring,
• Thinking,
• Giving, and
• Working.

The measure identified youth camping participants' immediate learning changes (i.e., outcomes).

Finally, to address each 4-H Center's individual site concerns, a portion of the survey instrument was left blank, allowing each 4-H Center to include site-specific questions.

Evaluation Process

In implementing the evaluation process, each 4-H Center agreed to administer the two surveys at the end of each of their 5-day camps to all participating youth 4-H campers, counselors-in-training (CITs), teen counselors, adult leaders, and Extension agents (i.e., population sample). In addition, each 4-H Center agreed to enter data from the surveys on-site into a database. The State 4-H Office agreed to provide training to program directors regarding this evaluation process (i.e., collecting and compiling data; descriptive data analysis; reporting findings to the State 4-H Office), and to provide a summarized report to each 4-H Center at the end of the summer.

Each 4-H Center also agreed to continue a pre-established process of mailing a survey to the parents/guardians of randomly selected 4-H youth campers approximately 2 weeks after the completion of camp. The survey contained 24 questions based on the TLS Model (Hendricks, 1998) that assessed life skill behavior change by comparing behaviors before and after the 4-H camping experience across eight domains of the TLS Model:

• Being,
• Giving,
• Caring,
• Relating,
• Thinking,
• Managing, and
• Working.

The evaluation team assessed the validity of these life skill questions by considering the degree to which they reflected the life skills targeted by the Virginia 4-H camping experience.

Results

Youth Campers' Perceived 4-H Camping Benefits

While output and outcome data were collected, the results presented here focus on the outcome evaluation results of the youth camper and parent/guardian surveys. A total of 9296 surveys were distributed directly to 4-H youth campers at the six 4-H Centers. A total of 8118 surveys were returned and entered into the respective databases, for a response rate of 87%. Youth campers' ages ranged from 9 to 13 years old, with a mean age of 11 years old (S.D. = 1.36). The majority of youth campers were female (61%), with the most prominent ethnic groups represented being White (78.5%) and African-American (15%).

Ten questions on the survey asked campers to identify whether or not participating in 4-H camp had helped them acquire life skills on a scale of 1-4, where 1= "helped me very little" and 4= "helped me very much." The campers indicated that 4-H camp participation helped them most in making new friends (3.34), developing new skills (3.25), and becoming more independent and able to take care of themselves (3.06) (Table 1).

Parent/Guardians' Perceived 4-H Camping Benefits

A total of 791 surveys were mailed to the parents/guardians of the 4-H youth campers. Of these, 363 were returned, for a response rate of 46%. Parents/guardians were asked to rate their child both before and after camp on 24 different life skill items on a scale of 1-5, where 1 = "almost never" and 5 = "almost always." Comparisons were made between each of the "before camp" and "after camp" means using paired t-tests. While significant differences were found (p<.05) between all of the "before camp" and "after camp" means, the most gains were found with the following items:

• "Takes care of his/her own things" (.37),
• "Shares work responsibilities" (.26),
• "Takes initiative and is a self-starter" (.24),
• "Takes responsibility for his/her own actions" (.23),
• "Handles success and failures" (.23),
• "Has a good mental attitude" (.23), and
• "Adapts to change" (Table 2).

Discussion

Benefits of 4-H Camping Participation

These results suggest that Virginia 4-H camping participation positively affects the development of immediate and short-term life skill behavior in youth campers. Specifically, youth campers self-reported that they benefited from 4-H camp participation by making new friends, developing new skills, and becoming more independent and capable of self-care. Parents/guardians thought their children had benefited from 4-H camp in taking care of their own things, sharing work responsibilities, and taking initiative on their own.

The primary benefit of 4-H camping participation supported by both youth and parent/guardian perceptions was related to responsibility. Participation in 4-H camp helped youth to become more responsible for themselves, more independent, and better able to take care of their personal belongings. Considering the nature of the camping experience, these results are not surprising. When youth are placed in a novel environment where they are expected to be responsible for themselves and have the support of caring teen counselors and adult leaders, such behavior change is a natural result.

While these results are encouraging and support the expectation that 4-H camp participation positively affects youth in many ways, the most important finding of this 4-H study is that a standardized evaluation process could be successfully implemented.

Benefits and Limitations of a Collaborative Standardized Evaluation Process

Collaboration was a powerful tool for Virginia Cooperative Extension programming. The value and utility of this cooperative effort involving 4-H Center/4-H camp staff and state-level faculty in developing an on-going evaluation process suggest that other Extension departments can do likewise. Lessons learned include the following.

• Reaching a consensus can take time. Therefore, collaborative planning for 4-H camp evaluation should begin well before the implementation of the program. This supports the Extension programming model whereby purposeful planning for program outcomes occurs prior to start of camp.

• In order for evaluation to be a mutually beneficial process, representatives from both the university and 4-H centers/4-H camps need to have the opportunity to provide shared input into the process and methods of evaluation. Communication and trust are critical at this stage.

• Survey design should allow each 4-H camp facility to add questions based upon individual needs. This flexibility encourages 4-H camp staff to care about the results and makes evaluation both relevant and responsive.

• When possible, other stakeholders, such as teen counselors, adult leaders, summer camp staff members, parents, etc., should be allowed to provide input into the evaluation process. Again, this helps to generate buy-in. Evaluation can be extremely time consuming and energy intensive. Support from these stakeholders is important, and recommended changes should be thoughtfully considered in during the subsequent planning for 4-H camp evaluation.

• Data should be collected from multiple sources (i.e., youth, leaders, and parents) to strengthen results and to explore different aspects of 4-H camping outcomes (i.e., immediate, short-term, and long-term impacts).

• Resources may limit what data collection can occur. Faculty and staff need to recognize these limitations and structure research designs that are practical with given resources.

Acknowledgements

This research would not have been possible without the combined efforts of Program Directors from each of Virginia's 4-H educational centers. The authors thank the following individuals for their contributions: Marvin Heimbach, Airfield 4-H Educational Center; Lance Johnson, Northern Virginia 4-H Educational Conference Center; Bryan Branch, Holiday Lake 4-H Educational Center; Becky Gilles, Smith Mountain Lake 4-H Educational Center; Chrystle Gates, Jamestown 4-H Educational Center; and Ruben Brown, Interim Program Director, Jamestown 4-H Educational Center.

References

Barkman, S. (2001, Fall). Four-fold: A research-based model designing and evaluting the impact of youth development programs. News & Views , 54(4), National Association of Extension 4-H Agents.

Barkman, S., & McKee, R. (2001, October). Measuring the impact of your youth and parent/families programs. Workshop presented at the National Association of Extension 4-H Agents Conference, Bismarck, ND.

Brannan, S., & Fullerton, A. (1999). Case studies reveal camper growth. Camping Magazine, January-February, 22-25.

Chenery, M. F. (1994). Explaining the value of camp. Camping Magazine, May-June, 20-25.

Dworken, B. (2001). Research reveals the assets of camp. Camping Magazine, September/October, 40-43.

Meek, J. (1992). How to build coalitions. Iowa State University Extension.

Gillett, D. P., Thomas, G. P., Skok, R. L., McLaughlin, T. F. (1991). The effects of wilderness camping and hiking on the self-concept and the environmental attitudes of knowledge of twelfth graders. Journal of Environmental Education, 21, 33-44.

Henderson, K., & Bialeschki, M. D. (1995). Evaluating leisure services: Making enlightened decisions. State College, PA: Venture Publishing, Inc.

Hendricks, P. A. (1998). Targeting Life Skills Model. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Extension.

Hopkins, D., & Putnum, R. (1993). Personal growth through adventure. London: David Fulton Publishing.

Meadows, Robert R. (1997) History of Virginia's 4-H Camping Program: A case study on events leading to the development of the 4-H Educational Centers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.

Shepard, C. L., & Speelman, L. R. (1986). Affecting environmental attitudes through outdoor education. Journal of Environmental Education, 17, 20-23.

Leadership Practices of West Virginia University Extension Agents Working with the 4-H Youth Development Program

William Woodrum
Extension Specialist
Department of Community Resource and Economic Development
West Virginia State College
Institute, West Virginia
Internet Address: woodrumw@mail.wvsc.edu

R. Dale Safrit
Associate Professor and Extension Specialist
Department of 4-H Youth Development
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, North Carolina
Internet Address: dale_safrit@ncsu.edu

Introduction

West Virginia University (WVU) is the land-grant institution administering the West Virginia University Extension Service (WVUES). The mission of the Center for 4-H and Youth, Family and Adult Development, a component of WVUES, is to:

[enable] families and youths to improve their lives through educational programs and activities in the areas of nutrition and health, literacy, family life, international awareness, career and post-secondary opportunities, and life skills development (WVUES Annual Report, 2000).

During the past 15 years, there have been major changes to Cooperative Extension (Wheeler, 1992). In an April 9, 1997 speech to a statewide meeting of WVU Extension Service faculty and guests at Jackson's Mill State 4-H Conference Center, Larry S. Cote, Associate Provost for Extension and Public Service, outlined four goals for WVUES. These included:

1. Rebuilding an internal environment of trust, inclusivity, innovation, and continuous quality improvement;
2. Embracing and practicing outreach program development (and implementation) that is focused accurately on the most pressing, changing needs of West Virginians;
3. Evolving a set of relationships and responsibilities (an organizational logic, a structure for WVU Extension and outreach) that better supports the development of an exemplary, national-caliber university extension and outreach program; and
4. Deciding upon the program focus, stabilize the financial future, improve the physical facilities, celebrate the proud heritage and chart an important future for the campus at Jackson's Mill.

With these ambitious goals in mind, it is important for WVUES to attract Extension agents who are leaders and can create and share a vision of community based educational programming into the 21^st century. Scholars have studied leadership theory for many years and have developed vastly differing interpretations. Burns (1978) described transactional leadership as involving the exchange or bartering of wants and needs between leaders and followers, in contrast to transformational leadership that promotes profound change and appeals to followers' higher ideals of liberty, justice, equality, peace, and humanitarianism.

Bass (1985), expanding upon Burns' earlier work, identified four essential transformational leadership actions:

1. Providing a sense of vision and mission while instilling pride in the group (or, charisma);
2. Expressing purposes in simple ways and communicating high expectations to the group (inspirational motivation);
3. Encouraging intelligence and effective problem-solving (intellectual stimulation); and
4. Treating each person as an individual through coaching and advising (or individualized consideration).

Kotter (1988) asserted that leadership is a process that directs and mobilizes people and their ideas to enhance overall group productivity. Bass and Avolio (1990) developed the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) for studying individual leadership approaches, a 45-item standardized instrument. The MLQ focuses upon 12 constructs:

1. Idealized attributes;
2. Idealized behaviors;
3. Inspirational motivation;
4. Intellectual stimulation;
5. Individualized inspiration;
6. Contingent reward;
7. Management-by-exception (active);
8. Management-by-exception (passive);
9. Laissez-faire;
10. Extra effort;
11. Effectiveness; and
12. Satisfaction.

In 1991, Covey asserted that leadership is based on fundamental principles and processes of personal interactions.

Kouzes and Posner (1995) conducted an extensive study of transactional leadership among individual leaders and developed the Leadership Profile Inventory (LPI). The authors concluded that leaders were at their personal best when they focus upon five major leadership constructs:

1. Challenging the process;
2. Inspiring a shared vision;
3. Enabling others to act;
4. Modeling the way; and
5. Encouraging the heart.

Most recently, Northouse (1997) concluded that the common component among the majority of leadership authors is that "leadership is an influence process that assists groups of individuals toward goal attainment" (p. 10).

Purpose and Methodology

The purpose of the study discussed here was to investigate leadership practices of WVU Extension 4-H and Youth agents. The researchers used a census to gather data from the target population of 42 agents. The researchers utilized two standardized instruments to collect data: 1) The Leadership Practices Inventory-Self (LPI-Self, Kouzes & Posner, 1997) and 2) the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ, Bass & Avolio, 1990). The researchers developed a third instrument that collected demographics, including personal and professional characteristics.

According to Bass and Avolio, and Kouzes and Posner, the MLQ and LPI, respectively, have continually produced valid assessments of leadership practice among managerial leaders. Because study participants can be considered administrators of Extension educational programs, the researchers concluded that the instruments were valid for WUVES 4-H and Youth agents. Based upon data collected, the researchers calculated Cronbach's Alpha to measure internal consistency as an indicator of the instruments' reliabilities. The five constructs of the LPI had reliabilities as follows:

1. Challenging the process, .691;
2. Inspiring a shared vision, .545;
3. Enabling others to act, .682;
4. Modeling the way, .522; and
5. Encouraging the heart, .445.

The MLQ transformational constructs resulted in a reliability of .688; the transactional constructs, .543; and the laissez-faire constructs, .433.

The researchers collected data by use of a mailed survey (Dillman, 1978). They mailed the three instruments to study participants on March 30, 2001, with a requested return deadline of April 13, 2001. On April 6, 2001, the researchers e-mailed a reminder to all participants encouraging them to complete and return the instrument. As of April 13, 2001, 24 completed instruments had been returned.

The researchers e-mailed a follow-up message to all non-respondents and discovered that one agent was on leave and would not be returning until May 2001. This made the total accessible population 41 agents. By April 20, 2001, three additional surveys had been returned. On April 23, 2001, the researchers placed telephone calls to remaining non-respondents requesting their participation and established a final response deadline of April 27, 2001. As of that date, 27 completed instrument sets had been returned, resulting in a 66% final response rate. The researchers controlled for non-response error.

All research data was entered and analyzed utilizing the SPSS 10.0.05. The researchers calculated descriptive statistics to meet the research objectives outlined for the study.

Findings

Four of the transactional constructs measured by the LPI (Challenging the Process; Inspiring a Shared Vision; Modeling the Way; and Encouraging the Heart) were practiced "sometimes" (Table 1). Of these, Modeling the Way and Encouraging the Heart were practiced "fairly often." The final construct of Enabling Others to Act was practiced "fairly often."

As for the transactional constructs measured by the MLQ (Table 2), two were used "once in a while," and one was used "sometimes." Management-by-Exception-Active and Management-by Exception-Passive measured nearly equally; both were scored low in the "once in a while" range. Contingent Reward was scored in the high "sometimes." Holistically, the three transactional behaviors scored by the MLQ were practiced "once in a while."

Transformational constructs investigated using the MLQ were used more often by respondents than transactional constructs. Four of the five constructs scored high in the "sometimes" category and almost reached "fairly often." These constructs were Idealized Influence-Attributed; Idealized Influence-Behavior; Inspirational Motivation; and Intellectual Stimulation. Each of these constructs had median scores of 3.00 or "fairly often." The highest score among transformational leadership constructs was Individual Consideration. This median of this construct was also 3.00. The sum of the transformational leadership constructs was "fairly often." Laissez-Faire Leadership was practiced "not at all." The mean score was .88.

Conclusions and Implications

Overall, the Extension agents working with 4-H and Youth exhibited average to slightly above average transactional leadership practices as measured by the LPI. Each construct, however, had a substantial standard deviation that ranged from .62 on Enabling Others to Act to .96 on Inspiring a Shared Vision.

WVUES may want to concentrate their training on these leadership constructs and ensure that agents are exposed to reliable and valid leadership theories in their professional development activities because of the organizational restructuring that is currently in process. Without agents who can empower others to a shared vision of the future and facilitate their constituency's understanding of the change, organizational change cannot succeed.

Management-by-Exception-Active and Management-by-Exception-Passive were practiced "once in a while"; Contingent Reward was practiced "sometimes" and nearly reached the level of "fairly often." Each had a standard deviation above .90, indicating nearly a level difference in agents' responses, once again indicating a wide margin of difference in agent practices.

This may indicate a lack of uniform training and stated expectations from WVUES. To address this issue, WVUES should institute inservice training de-emphasizing both styles of Management-by-Exception. WVUES should instruct agents to focus on positive aspects of program development to inspire the clientele instead of tracking negatives that discourage program growth.

Individual Consideration was scored as "fairly often." Although this is significant, the researchers had hoped for higher results because of organizational change that has occurred within WVUES in the past 5 years. With only one construct being practiced "fairly often," there is obviously not a large emphasis placed on change leadership with respect to Extension agents working 4-H and Youth programs in this system.

As WVUES continues to look at attracting new and diverse audiences, it will be of paramount importance that agents understand and embrace the transformational process and practices associated therein. Although Extension administration may understand and encourage the changes happening, without grass-roots support, the effort cannot succeed in the long term.

WVUES needs to address leadership as an issue in need of serious attention within the 4-H and Youth program area. As 4-H and Youth administrators attempt to strengthen and expand targeted community-based educational programs, they will need committed staff who demonstrate above-average levels of transformational leadership. An Extension Service system cannot be changed and renewed in this inspirational manner by professionals with only marginal use of leadership practices. Without professionals who utilize the leadership constructs outlined by Bass (1990) and Kouzes and Posner (1995, 1997), such changes will be viewed as fleeting administrative bureaucracy and never internalized by clientele groups,

The current WVUES plan of work (including the organization's vision statement) emphasizes ambitious goals and visionary leadership in Extension administration at WVU. However, these practices do not seem to be embraced at the local level, as exhibited by average leadership scores on the two leadership instruments used in this study. WVUES needs to make a firm effort to help county-based faculty and staff working with 4-H and Youth programs to espouse the values inherent the plan of work and vision statement. These practices cannot be adopted overnight and will take role models to encourage their future success.

Extension administrators must nurture leadership practices of 4-H and Youth agents as they see them being exhibited. This practice is at the core of Bass's (1990) work on transformational leadership. Extension administrators must ensure that they have a framework in place that recognizes and rewards agents for expanded use of leadership practices in their community. Only then will agents begin to understand and embrace these practices and internalize their use of them. After Extension agents have internalized these leadership practices and expanded their use of them, WVUES will be better positioned to achieve the visionary goals to which it aspires.

References

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Harper & Row.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1990). Multifactor leadership questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press.

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Covey, S. R. (1991). Principle-centered leadership. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster-Fireside.

Dillman, D. A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. Pullman: Washington State University.

Kotter, J. P. (1988). The leadership factor. New York, NY: Free Press.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1995). The leadership challenge. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1997). Leadership practices inventory [LPI]: Participant's workbook. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Northouse, P. G. (1997). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

West Virginia University Extension Service. (2000). Annual report. Morgantown: Author.

Wheeler, D. L. (1992, April 22). Land-grant universities urged to broaden research beyond traditional agricultural mission. The Chronicle of Higher Education, p. 8.

Agricultural Science Fairs: Are Students Truly Learning from This Activity?

C. T. Boleman
Extension Program Specialist
Department of Agricultural Education
Internet Address: ct-boleman@tamu.edu

F. Burrell Jr.
County Extension Agent, Natural Resources - Dallas County
Internet Address: f-burrell@tamu.edu

Texas Cooperative Extension
Texas A & M University

Background/Justification

In today's society, most families reside in urban and suburban cities and communities. With this change in demographics, most children have become removed from farms and agriculture in general. These same youth are our future leaders, governmental decision maker, and business people. Therefore, there are new educational program innovations that have been implemented to educate our next generation about agricultural commodities.

In addition, youth tend to have a narrow perception of career opportunities associated in agriculture. Thus, expanding their knowledge in this field could also enhance their opportunities for future success. Finally, Terry, Herring, and Larke (1992) note that elementary teachers need an agricultural literacy curriculum to assist them in educating youth.

Agricultural Science Fairs have been a successful vehicle for emphasizing the importance of agriculture to children and teachers in Texas. Blackburn, Skaggs, and Vestal (1995) and Blackburn (1999) have documented that there is knowledge gained from youth participating in Agriculture Science Fairs. However, the instrument used did not measure perceptions of youth concerning agriculture or ask them about specific agricultural commodities that affect their daily lives. The study described here sought to address these concerns.

Agricultural Science Fairs are 1-day field trips for elementary school students to a local fairground or similar facility. At the facility, 15-20 minute sessions that focus on the importance of agricultural commodities are presented. Some of the commodities represented are beef, swine, sheep, cotton, small grains, and dairy products. The educational stations engage groups of 25-40 students in the learning process to provide experiences that require hands-on activity and critical thinking. Because of these sessions, the hypothesis is that knowledge of production agriculture will increase with students. Last year, 350,000 youth participated in agricultural literacy programs in Texas (Texas 4-H, 2000); however, educational impact of these activities was very limited.

Dallas County has had a long history of developing, coordinating, and implementing agricultural awareness activities for young people. Most notable is their rich tradition of their agriculture science fair, called "Farm Day." Farm Day brings in 4th grade students from the Dallas Metroplex, depicting agriculture and illustrating how it influences and touches these young people's daily lives. In May of 2001, over 4000 4th grade students representing 200 classes and 49 different schools participated in Farm Day during a 3-day time period. In addition to the students, 203 teachers and 167 chaperones accompanied these students through Farm Day. This audience was led and instructed by 110 volunteers from Dallas County.

Purpose and Objectives

The purpose of the study was to determine the impact Dallas Farm Day has on its participants. As these types of educational activities continue to grow, evaluations must be implemented to determine the knowledge being gained from participants. The objectives of the study were to:

• Determine gained knowledge of participants on simple agriculture entities that influence their everyday lives.
• Determine the educational effectiveness of "Dallas Farm Day" through teacher input.

Methodology

There were two populations for the study. The first population was a youth population that included 480 4th-grade students. A tiered cluster sampling technique was used to select the participants. This cluster sample initiated with a sampling of school districts followed by individual 4^th-grade classes within those school districts. These students represented elementary schools from Dallas, Duncanville, Mesquite, and Richardson.

The questionnaire used for the study was a pre- and post-test designed following a similar format used by Blackburn, Skaggs, & Vestal (1995). However, modifications were made by Dallas County Extension Agents with input from a panel of experts that consisted of three 4-H & youth development specialists and two agricultural commodity specialists within Texas Cooperative Extension. These individuals reviewed the instrument for both face and content validity. The participants were administered a pre- and post-test that asked 10 questions relating to agriculture and two questions on their perception of how agriculture affects their daily lives.

Ten of the 12 questions used a multiple-choice approach in which the students were asked to circle the correct answer. The 10 multiple-choice questions were coded and analyzed using the descriptive and frequency statistical measures for the pre- and post-tests from SPSS (1999). As a result of missing data, percentage correct were noted from the frequency data. Pre- and post-test percentages were compared to determine the knowledge gained between these two tests.

The other two statements used a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = no opinion, 4 = disagree, 5 = strongly disagree) to measure the participants' perceptual thoughts regarding agriculture in general. The two scaled statements utilized a t-test to determine if the means from pre- and post-test results revealed a change in the participants' perception of agriculture. An alpha level of 0.05 was predetermined to reveal significance.

The second population consisted of 202 schoolteachers. Eighty-nine were randomly selected to participate in the study. All 89 of the teachers responded to the survey. Using an ex-post facto approach, a three-point Likert-type scale survey (1 = excellent, 2 = good, and 3 = poor) was administered to 4^th-grade teachers. Its purpose was to help measure the effectiveness of Farm Day by asking questions pertaining to the educational program as a whole and how it supplements learning with the objectives set forth by the individual school districts.

Their responses were coded and analyzed by SPSS (1999) to determine means and standard deviations. Once means and standard deviations were determined, these statements were ranked. Also, one question was an open-ended statement that asked how Farm Day could be improved to establish a more educational program for 4^th-grade students. These statements were coded for similarities and frequencies were reported.

Results

Participants

None of the 480 pretests revealed a 100% correct response rate. However, the post-test yielded 72 (out of 445) 4th-grade students who answered all questions correctly. (Twenty-one students did not take the post-test or had missing data for at least one question.)

The students revealed an increase in knowledge for nine of the 10 multiple-choice questions when comparing percent correct from the pre and post-test results (Table 1). The only question that revealed a lower percent was the statement that asked what type of animal produced wool (93.2% pre-test vs. 91.4% post-test). This decrease could possibly be explained by the fact that this session was not available for all participants. The presenter was forced to leave early because of another obligation. Four of the 10 questions revealed an increase of 20% for correct responses from the pre- to the post-test.

The t-test for the statements that utilized a five-point Likert-type scale revealed significant changes in perceptions pertaining to agriculture (p < 0.05) (Table 2). The first statement, "Agriculture will become less important as the population of the earth increases and more people live and work in the city" displayed a mean of 2.87 Å 1.26 on the pretest compared to a 3.24 Å 1.54 on the post-test. This increase in the mean indicates that the participants did notice the impact of agriculture as a result of Farm Day. However, the larger numerical value for the standard deviation for the post-test responses had a wider range of responses.

The second statement "Agricultural touches my life everyday" had a pre mean of 2.87 Å 1.21 compared to a post-test mean of 2.20 Å 1.32. Statement two also had a wider range for the standard deviation, but was more narrow than the post-test for statement one. Moreover, the post-test mean of 2.20 indicated that students' perceptions of agriculture affected their everyday lives.

Teachers

The responses from the teachers concerning Farm Day appear to be very favorable (Table 3). The scale for responses was defined as 1 = excellent, 2 = good, 3= poor. All Likert- type responses yielded mean averages ranging from 1.29 - 1.60 (standard deviation ranged from .50 - .73). The statement revealing the most concern (mean of 1.60 Å .73) was "Does Farm Day supplement your curriculum through hands-on experience?" These results indicate that a more focused effort should be coordinated to work with school districts to develop a curriculum that would be of benefit to the students as they pertain to agriculture.

The open-ended responses also indicate enjoyment and appreciation for Farm Day (Table 4). Over 40% of the teachers documented that there should be no change or simple positive remarks as they relate to the educational aspect of the activity. Eighteen of 101 responses requested more hands-on activities, and 16 would appreciate smaller groups.

Extension's Response

Farm Day is continuing to grow, and verbal testimonials indicate that youth and teachers appreciate this educational activity. It is, however, imperative that Texas Cooperative Extension in Dallas County strongly consider including the following recommendations to make this activity thoroughly educational while still being enjoyable for the participants. These recommendations include:

1. An evaluation effort should be implemented for this activity. In order to more effectively report the impact this program is having on the target audience, the evaluation should closely follow the measurable objectives set forth before the program. The Dallas County Farm Day is an example that can be followed by other county and state programs.

2. Teachers should be incorporated in the planning process to ensure that the educational program adheres to the schools' initiatives. Working closely with the County Extension Agent or program coordinator, these individuals together can effectively prepare a complete program that the participants can enjoy and learn from even more.

3. New curricula should be developed for the classroom. The results from the study indicate that teachers have a strong desire to incorporate general agriculture definitions and terms into their teaching plans. This could significantly enhance the learning environment during the actual activity. Furthermore, this could lead to long-term learning and interest well after Farm Day is over.

References

Blackburn, D. A. (1999). Ag science fairs: The next wave in agricultural literacy. Journal of Extension [On-line], 37(4). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1999august/tt1.html

Blackburn, D. A., Skaggs B. R., & Vestal, T. A. (1995). Where agriculture comes alive. Brochure Publication, Texas Agricultural Extension Service. College Station, TX

SPSS. (1999). Applications Guide (Base 10.0). SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL.

Terry Jr., R., Herring, D. R., & Larke Jr., A. (1992). Assistance needed for elementary teachers in Texas to implement programs of agricultural literacy. Journal of Agricultural Education, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 51-60.

Texas 4-H. (2000). College Station, TX. Retrieved September 14, 2000, from the World Wide Web: http://resources.tamu.edu/

Dietary Changes by Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program (EFNEP) Graduates Are Independent of Program Delivery Method

Barbara H. D. Luccia
Program Coordinator
Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition
Clemson University
Internet Address: bluccia@clemson.edu

Mary E. Kunkel
Professor
Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition
Clemson University
Internet Address: bkunkel@clemson.edu

Katherine L. Cason
Associate Professor
Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition
The Pennsylvania State University
Internet Address: klc13@psu.edu

Introduction

The Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program (EFNEP) was established in 1969 to provide education to limited resource audiences with the goal of reducing levels of food insecurity and improving their nutritional health. EFNEP, administered by the Cooperative Extension Service in all 50 U.S. states, employs paraprofessionals to help families improve dietary practices and to more effectively manage their available resources. The paraprofessionals provide intensive nutrition education in a variety of non-formal educational settings, including homes, community centers, housing complexes, WIC offices, and churches.

Innovative program delivery methods and program curriculum, such as videos and interactive CDs, have been incorporated into EFNEP. When the program was initiated, instruction was conducted primarily in the home through one-on-one education. In the 1980s, program emphasis shifted from individual instruction to instruction provided in groups (United States Department of Agriculture, 1983).

The primary objective of the study discussed here was to determine whether differences in group or individual instruction affect the level of change in dietary practices. The study addressed the need for investigation into effective techniques for nutrition education (Shafer, Gillespie, Wilkins, & Borra, 1996) as well as the evaluation of the immediate effects of EFNEP on a diverse audience with a large sample (Arnold & Sobal, 2000). Information obtained from the study may provide direction to EFNEP and other nutrition education programs for cost-effective educational programming.

Methodology

Participants

The population for the study was 1141 graduated EFNEP participants in South Carolina during the reporting period October 1, 1996 to September 30, 1997. The participants were 63% rural; 53% had incomes of less than 50% of poverty level; and 54% received Food Stamps and Thirty-two percent were Caucasian; 66%, African American; 1%, Asian; and 1%, Hispanic. Of the participants, 76.2% were taught in a group setting; 21.3% received individual instruction; and 2.5% received a combination of both. A minimum of 12 education sessions was required for a participant to be considered a "graduate."

Instrumentation

The Adult Enrollment Form (Family Record) and Homemaker's 24-Hour Recall developed for the national EFNEP Reporting System (ERS Version 4.02, CSREES, Washington, DC) were used in the study. The Adult Enrollment Form is used to collect demographic information such as age of participant, race, and place of residence. The 24-hour recall is a standard 24-hour dietary recall form used to record everything participants have eaten and drunk in the previous 24 hours and has been used by USDA since 1965 in nationwide food consumption surveys (Pao, Sykes, & Cypel, 1989). The 24-hour recall method is widely used due to its ease of administration and has been shown to be an acceptable method of assessment for the purpose of surveying group trends (Karvetti & Knuts, 1985; Murphy, Kaiser, Townsend, & Allen, 2001; Resnicow et al., 2000).

The questionnaires were administered to homemakers upon enrollment, after six education sessions, and at graduation.

Statistical Analyses

Program effectiveness was defined as statistically significant positive behavioral change in food intake as reported by program participants on the Adult Enrollment Form. Data collected in the project were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS Inc., 1998). Paired-samples t-tests were used to analyze differences in pre- and post-program levels of intake. Independent-samples t-tests were used to compare differences in intake among participants educated with group methods and participants educated through individual methods. Levels of statistical significance were determined at the p<0.001 level unless otherwise noted.

Results

Servings from the Food Guide Pyramid

Based on the Food Guide Pyramid, a balanced diet includes 6-11 servings from the grains group, 2-4 servings from the fruits group, 3-5 servings from the vegetables group, 2-3 servings from the dairy group, and 2-3 servings from the meats and meat alternates group (United States Department of Agriculture, 1996). Prior to graduating from the program, participants were not consuming the recommended number of servings in the grains, fruits, vegetables, and dairy food groups (Table 1). Graduates increased their number of servings from the vegetables group to within the recommended range. However, the number of servings reported in the grains, fruits, and dairy groups remained less than the recommendations. The number of servings from the meat and meat alternates group was within the recommended range before and after program participation.

Even though graduates did not achieve the recommended number of servings from some food groups, there were significant improvements in the number of servings consumed from the grains (p<0.01), vegetables (p<0.001), dairy (p<0.001), and meat and meat alternates (p<0.001) food groups. However, there was not a significant improvement in the number of servings of fruit consumed. Whether participants received nutrition education in a group or individual setting did not have a significant effect on pre- and post-program results.

Caloric Intake

The mean number of calories consumed by graduates increased significantly, by nearly 150 calories. At program completion, graduates consumed significantly more (p<0.001) grams of carbohydrates, protein, and fat than at program initiation. There was no effect of teaching method on these improvements.

Fiber Intake

The recommended intake of dietary fiber for adults is 25 - 30 grams per day (Van Horn, 1997). Fiber consumption improved significantly (p<0.05) from program initiation to program completion. There was no difference in this improvement between those who participated in group education sessions and those who participated in individual education sessions.

Vitamin and Mineral Intake

Intake of selected vitamins and minerals improved significantly (p<0.001) during EFNEP participation. Iron intake increased 13%; calcium intake increased 16%; vitamin A intake increased 32%; vitamin C intake increased 20%; and vitamin B6 intake increased 21%. These improvements, too, were independent of method of nutrition education.

Discussion

Data from the Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII) reveals that the average American diet contained almost 2000 kcal per day (United States Department of Agriculture, 1997). The average diet of EFNEP graduates contained 13% fewer kcal than the average American diet. The average American diet contained 52% of kcal from carbohydrates, 33% of kcal from fat, and 15% of kcal from protein; similarly, EFNEP graduates consumed 49% of kcal from carbohydrates, 34% of kcal from fat, and 17% of kcal from protein.

Despite improvements in number of servings consumed from the grains and dairy groups, EFNEP graduates still were not consuming the recommended number of servings from these food groups. Participation in EFNEP did not improve intake of fruit group foods. Graduates were meeting the lower range recommendations for the vegetables and meat and meat alternates groups. The greatest gain by EFNEP graduates was made in the vegetables group, with the mean number of servings increasing by 0.9.

The results of the study indicate that EFNEP is effective in implementing significant positive dietary changes in its graduates and that improvements are independent of the type of education setting. There were no significant differences in dietary changes among graduates of EFNEP who received nutrition education in group settings and those who received nutrition education on an individual basis.

Other reports indicate similar results with a variety of audiences. Ashley et al. (2001) report that weight loss interventions incorporating meal replacements are effective for weight control in both the physician's office setting and the dietitian-led group setting. Group nutrition education classes are just as effective in modifying behavior as an individual self-paced nutrition education program among employees at different worksites (Anderson & Dusenbury, 1999). 

According to Randall, Brink, & Joy (1989), the success of EFNEP has been attributed to several factors. First is the use of paraprofessionals in education program delivery. The use of former EFNEP participants as program volunteers is another key factor in the program's success. EFNEP also tailors educational efforts to the needs, interests, financial resources, age, ethnic backgrounds, and learning capabilities of the participants. This tailored approach and the flexibility of duration and content have also been identified as factors contributing to the program's success (Randall, Brink, & Joy, 1989).

Recommendations

EFNEP continues to be an effective model for providing participants with the nutrition knowledge needed to make positive dietary changes. However, studies should be conducted beyond the scope of this research to provide additional information. Studies that include EFNEP populations in other states and low-income populations who are in the workforce would add to the literature.

Hebert et al. (2001) conclude that group nutrition interventions do result in positive behavior changes, although the effectiveness and maintenance of adherence may require additional support, including periodic individual meetings or group booster sessions. It is therefore likely that EFNEP graduates may benefit from follow-up instructions to maintain nutrition knowledge and behavior changes.

Based on the results of this study, several principles should be stressed in future EFNEP educational interventions.

• Low-fat food choices and employment of