|
August 2004
|
       |
CommentariesLatino Outreach Programs: Why They Need to Be DifferentBeverly B. Hobbs IntroductionIncreasingly, Extension programs across the country are working to meet the needs and interests of Latino Americans. The rapid growth of the Latino population since 1990 has caused many counties that previously had little or no Latino representation to become home to significant numbers of Latino residents. Often Latinos represent a new audience for county Extension programs and one that is not readily integrated into existing programs. To successfully engage Latino audiences, particularly first- and second-generation Latinos, programs must be culturally responsive; that is, they must reflect the cultural traditions, beliefs, and values of the people (Koss-Chioino & Vargas, 1999). When we do this, Latino participation increases dramatically. But the changes we make often cause concern among our traditional audiences and even some Extension staff. They question the need for these changes and to a certain extent feel threatened by them. Is Extension creating a new identity? What will be the cost to existing programs? For Extension staff, what new skills are needed? As Extension seeks to diversify its audience, it must work to bring traditional audiences along. (Schauber & Castania, 2001). An important step in that process is to help them better understand the cultural characteristics of diverse community participants and how they relate to a nontraditional design and delivery of educational programs. Knowledge of cultural differences will help explain the need for change and will reassure existing audiences that the addition of new approaches does not mean the mission and goals of Extension are changing, only that Extension is becoming more capable of addressing the needs of a diverse population. An Example of ChangeThe experience of the Oregon 4-H program provides a good example of what kinds of program modifications may be made in outreach programs targeted to Latinos. Although outreach 4-H programs share many of the characteristics of the traditional 4-H program (the same goals, delivery modes, member and leader application processes, use of the 4-H symbol and pledge, etc.) there are differences. These differences include the following:
There is sound rationale for each of these practices. Spanish or Bilingual CommunicationAlthough Latinos overwhelmingly believe learning to speak English is key to success in the United States, many Latino adults, and some youth, have limited proficiency in English (Pew Hispanic Center, 2002; Tse, 2001). While youth quickly learn English in school, adults have less opportunity to gain English skills. They often work long hours and have irregular work schedules, and ESL classes either may not be available or only offer basic English instruction (Portes & Rumbaut, 1990). If Latino adults are going to be involved with 4-H as parents and/or as volunteers, it may well be necessary to communicate with them in Spanish, both in oral and written formats. Additionally, it also means that 4-H activities led by monolingual Spanish speakers will be delivered in Spanish. There is another consideration that supports the use of Spanish. Language and culture are closely intertwined (LAB at Brown University, 2002). Even when Latino adults are fluent in English, they appreciate the respect for their culture that is conveyed when Spanish is used. The Spanish language affirms their culture; therefore, programs that support Latino families incorporate the Spanish language as warranted (Family Support America, 2003). Nontraditional Projects and Program DeliveryIn 4-H, youth and their leaders are able to explore any topic that sparks their curiosity and interest. While 4-H project areas found nationwide, such as foods, horticulture, and computer technology, appeal to many Latino youth, Latino members have also expressed an interest in nontraditional projects such as soccer and cultural dance. The latter project areas fall under the 4-H umbrella just as a new project in fishing or softball would. The goal of 4-H is positive youth development through experiential learning, not mastery of particular subject matter. Including projects that affirm the Latino culture help Latino youth develop an understanding and acceptance of their ethnicity and thus contribute to the development of a positive self-concept (Phinney, 1997). It also addresses parentsÁ desires that their children learn about and take pride in their culture. Latino outreach programs may also introduce a family approach to program delivery. More than Euro-Americans, Latinos often participate in activities as a family (National Latino ChildrenÁs Institute, 2003). Thus some 4-H programs may involve youth and adults in the same activities or there may be an adult component that occurs at the same time as the youth program (Bairstow, Berry, & Driscoll, 2002). Predominantly Latino Club MembershipInitially, 4-H clubs that involve Latinos are largely made up of just Latino youth. This may lead some to conclude that there is a separate 4-H program for Latinos. There is not. The emergence of clubs that serve a majority of Latino youth is an expected outcome of outreach. Latino families often have limited understanding of the expectations of the majority culture, including the expectations of the 4-H program, and many have experienced discrimination in largely Euro-American settings (Pew Hispanic Center, 2002). They are uncertain how they will fit in, whether or not they will be accepted. Therefore it is hard to bring families into the existing 4-H framework. They need to be in a supportive, comfortable environment that reflects their culture while they build understanding and skills that will allow them to successfully interact in the greater mainstream program (Cortes, 1999). As confidence and skills develop, youth and families should be encouraged to participate in other parts of the 4-H program that include members from across groups. The ultimate goal is the establishment of a fully inclusive county and state 4-H program. Separate Training for Latino VolunteersThe lack of both fluency in English and a deep understanding of Euro-American culture make it necessary in many cases to provide separate training for Latino volunteers. Other contributing factors may include a lack of understanding of youth development organizations and the role of volunteers and low literacy levels in both English and Spanish. Volunteers may also need more support in completing paperwork. As a result, training for Latino volunteers may need to be conducted in Spanish, may require incorporating more demonstration and oral presentation as teaching methods, needs to be set within the cultural context of participants, and will require more information about the organization and how volunteers contribute. Dedicated Staff SupportGaining the involvement of Latino families in 4-H often takes dedicated staff time. Latino involvement is premised on establishing personal relationships with Latino community members and developing a level of trust, two very time consuming tasks (Hobbs, 2000). Once Latino families are interested in 4-H, it is often necessary for staff to be very involved in program delivery. Before adults will volunteer, they have to see programs in action so they know 4-H is a worthwhile use of their familyÁs time and so they will understand how they can contribute. Staff may deliver programs alone or, as time passes, they may co-teach with volunteers or otherwise provide them with direct support. Staff support is facilitated if staff members are bilingual/bicultural. ConclusionThere are good reasons why Latino outreach programs may look different and be conducted separately. This does not make them less a part of the Extension program. They simply represent an expansion of the ways Extension uses to fulfill its mission. In the case of 4-H, for example, all 4-H members, whether Latino or not, belong to the same county and state 4-H programs and share equally the privilege of participating in 4-H activities or events. As the United States increasingly becomes more multi-cultural, Extension must continue to expand its ability to serve people from culturally diverse groups. Extension staff as well as the audiences they serve must be ready to entertain new perspectives and new ways of doing.
ReferencesBairstow, R., Berry, H., & Driscoll, D. (2002). Tips for teaching non-traditional audiences. Journal of Extension [On-line], 40(2). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2002december/tt1.shtml Cortes, C. (1999, January 1). Building community from communities. NetResults. Retrieved October 10, 2003 from http://www.naspa.org/netresults Family Support America. (n.d.). Principles of family support practice. Retrieved October 10, 2003 from http://www.familysupportamerica.org/content/learning_dir/principles.htm Hobbs, B. (2000). Recruiting and supporting Latino volunteers. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University Extension. Pew Hispanic Center/Kaiser Family Foundation. (December 2002). The 2002 national survey of Latinos. Retrieved October 10, 2003 from http://www.kff.org Koss-Chioino, J., & Vargas, L. (1999). Working with Latino youth: Culture, development, and context. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. LAB at Brown University. (n.d.). The diversity kit: An introductory resource for social change in education. Retrieved October 10, 2003 from http://www.lab.brown.edu/tdl/diversitykit National Latino ChildrenÁs Institute. (n.d.). National Latino childrenÁs agenda: Guiding principles. Retrieved October 10, 2003 from http://www.nlci.org/org/About%20agenda.htm Phinney, J., Cantu, C., & Kurtz, D. (1997). Ethnic and American identity as predictors of self-esteem among African American, Latino, and White adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 26(2), 165-185. Portes, A., & Rumbaut, R. (1990). Immigrant America. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Schauber, A. & Castania, K. (2001). Facing issues of diversity: Rebirthing the Extension Service. Journal of Extension [On-line], 41(5). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2001december/comm2.html Tse, L. (2001). Why don't they learn English?: Separating fact from fallacy in the U. S. language debate. New York: Teachers College Press.
From Potluck Suppers to On-line Seminars: The Evolving "Face" of Social InteractionCheryl Burkhart-Kriesel Brenda Caine Social interaction is not new to Extension. One might say that the Cooperative Extension System cut its teeth on its ability to effectively use social interaction as a tool in adult education. As educators, we have historically talked about its importance and often subconsciously integrated it into programming (Torrell, Bruce, & Kvasnicka, 1999; Staats, 1995; Risdon, 1994). As culture evolved, so did the methods used to facilitate social interaction. In Norman Rockwell's day, the potluck supper might have been one of the primary vehicles for social interaction. Although a simple tool, gathering around a meal did provide the opportunity for adult learners to interact, share ideas, and learn from one another. Today, although networking around food is still used, social interaction is now being integrated in many other ways into the learning environment. This article defines briefly social interaction and why it is important to adult learning. Then, it looks at historical educational tools and the latest use of on-line technology to incorporate social interaction into adult education. BackgroundClassically defined, social interaction at the classroom level is "the method by which two or more interdependent individuals influence one another in a group" (Forsythe, 1990). Traditionally, it is thought of in terms of two-way instructor-to-learner and learner-to-learner interaction. It can be successfully woven into a wide variety of learning situations, from the standard face-to-face environment to various multi-media situations in today's distance learning. Moore and Kearsley (1996) have acknowledged that most distance education learners want some kind of interaction with their instructor and fellow learners during an educational event. This may be for purely social reasons or for getting feedback on their ideas and questions. In traditional distance classroom learning environments, email, fax, telephone, and mail all offer methods to connect with the instructor and other learners. Social interaction is important because it can contribute positively to a person's learning. Research indicates that it assists in one's ability to focus towards production (enables accomplishment), innovation (encourages new ideas, explores relationships, and creates change), and maintenance (restores one=s self concept or interpersonal relationships) (Berlo, 1975). In contrast, when social interaction is lacking in a learning environment, it is typically viewed negatively by the learner. Taken to the extreme, it can contribute to the adult's decision to persist or drop out of the learning situation (Kember, 1989). Historical Use in ExtensionIt didn't take long for the first County Extension agents to realize that social interaction was an important component of traditional face-to-face educational programming. Initially, interaction was necessary to counteract the social remoteness of agricultural life, and to some degree it still is important for that same reason. Today as professionals, we casually joke about the use of food as a component to entice people to attend meetings. Perhaps we are doing ourselves a disservice by not looking deeper--what does that social time offer the adult learner? In reality, it provides a venue for social interaction that will enhance the learning process. In 1999, colleagues reminded us of this fact. Never underestimate the need for social interaction. Due to the remoteness of agricultural life and the nature of the business, people look forward to attending Extension meetings for the social aspect as well as the educational materials. Schedule time before or after the program for social interaction. After a few years, this social time becomes tradition and supports attendance at meetings. Many times more Extension work takes place at these social functions than during the program itself (Torrell, Bruce, & Kvasnicka, 1999, 3). Early TeleconferencingAs new program tools became available, new ways to incorporate social interaction were explored. The use of technology opened up a unique set of opportunities and challenges. In the mid-80s, Rogan and Simmons (1984) discussed the generic use of teleconferencing as a method for disseminating information to Extension clientele. They acknowledged the pros and cons of the then new distance delivery systems, discussing three basic types: video-conferencing (television-like communication augmented with sound); computer conferencing (printed communication through keyboard terminals); and audio-conferencing (verbal communication via the telephone with optional capacity for telewriting or telecopying). They clearly recognized that one of the disadvantages of the system was the lack of informal, one-to-one social interaction and the challenge the system had in creating an atmosphere of group rapport. A decade later, teleconferencing via satellite was becoming poplar for selected Extension programs. When carefully crafted, professionals realized the potential positive impact of social interaction, especially for audiences that now could be connected via technology. Teaching via satellite has permitted information transfer to many producers in states and locations previously too distant to reach with traditional programs. Dialogue between audiences of diverse regional and social backgrounds enhances the educational benefit of the program (Staats, 1995, 4). The Use of the InternetToday, as the use of the Internet has grown, so has this technology's ability to function as an adult learning tool for educators. The Internet is reaching out into the realm of social interaction as only computers and the Internet can do. One illustration of this was the rapid development and universal use of a wide variety of graphic emoticons, the best known being : ) for happiness and : ( for sadness, as a way to transmit emotional responses via the written computer word. As Extension professionals, we have not let the role of social interaction via the Internet go unnoticed. The morale benefits that accrue from the collegial interaction via e-mail discussion groups and the close relationship between morale and productivity were acknowledged over 10 years ago in (Trotter & Risdon, 1990). Currently, Nebraska Cooperative Extension is piloting the use of the Internet as a program delivery mode using a relatively new tool--an on-screen platform for real-time sight and sound. A closer look at this tool may provide others with new ideas for future ways to integrate social interaction in adult education opportunities. On-line Seminars as an Outreach ToolTo reach more rural businesses, the University of Nebraska Panhandle Learning Center - Scottsbluff, in partnership with the University of Nebraska Rural Initiative and corporate sponsors, launched an Internet-based business seminar program on September 17, 2003. Called NU Skills®, the highly interactive service allows presenters to share presentations, documents, applications, and Web sites. Attendees log into a virtual seminar room for the visual presentation and dial into a phone conference for the audio portion. NU Skills makes it convenient for rural business people to attend training without traveling and taking time away from the office. Seminars last 1 hour and cover a range of business topics. The premier series, "Running a David Business in a Goliath Economy," covers eight essential keys to help small businesses succeed in a competitive environment. Because it is Internet-based, interested individuals can view upcoming seminars and enroll online at http://nuskills.unl.edu. Costs are kept low, $29 per seminar, to make it affordable for small businesses and individuals. The technology has been available since late 1999. Online meeting services have been used successfully for in-house training, professional association educational programs, technical support, sales demonstrations, and collaborative meetings. Extensive Internet searches show that NU Skills is the first use of this application for public business development seminars. NU Skills also extends the reach of the University of Nebraska Panhandle Learning Center beyond Western Nebraska to anyone anywhere with Internet access. This service allows participants to interact with each other and a presenter from their desks. Interaction is live and can take a number of forms.
Once individuals become familiar with and feel comfortable with this technology, they can maximize the social interaction features that encourage learning. It should also encourage idea sharing and experience-sharing that would benefit the participants in their businesses. The major drawback to this technology is that because attendees participate from their desks, distractions are a danger. Someone entering their offices may distract them, or, should they find the material uninteresting or irrelevant, participants may also opt to check e-mail, browse the Internet, or do other work. Therefore, the presenter must work diligently to keep interaction levels high and adapt content to make presentations compelling. ConclusionSocial interaction is an important part of the learning process. As adult educators, we have consciously and unconsciously incorporated it into our program delivery process. Historically, as new program delivery opportunities have developed, Extension has found ways to incorporate social interaction into the learning situation. Today it may be the use of an on-line seminar. Tomorrow, who knows? Regardless, we can be sure that the "face" of social interaction may change, but the role it will play will remain important in Extension programming.
ReferencesBerlo, D. K. (1975). Information and communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Forsythe, D. R. (1990). Group dynamics. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole. Kember, D. (1989). A longitudinal-process model of drop-out from distance education. Journal of Higher Education, 60(3), 278-301. Moore, M., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance education: A systems view. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Risdon, P. (1994). Transferring technology through the Internet channel. Journal of Extension [On-line], 32(1). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1994june/a1.html Rogan, R., & Simmons, G. (1984). Teleconferencing. Journal of Extension [On-line], 22(5). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1984september/a4.html Staats, L. (1995). Using satellite technology in traditional programs. Journal of Extension [On-line], 33(4). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1995august/iw4.html Torrell, R., Bruce, B., & Kvasnicka, B. (1999). Promoting and organizing agricultural extension meetings. Journal of Extension [On-line], 37(1). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1999february/tt1.html Trotter, P., & Risdon, P.L. (1990). Performance counseling. College and University Personnel Association, 41, 21-24.
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. |