October 2004
Volume 42 Number 5

Features

Intelligent Consumption: Addressing Consumer Responsibilities for Natural Resources--and Beyond

Viviane Simon-Brown
Sustainable Living Coordinator
Extension Forestry
Oregon State University
Corvallis Oregon
viviane.simon-brown@oregonstate.edu

Overview

"The American public for many years has been abusing the wasteful lumberman. A public which lives in wooden houses should be careful about throwing stones at lumbermen, even wasteful ones, until it has learned how its own arbitrary demands help cause the waste which it de cries... The long and the short of the matter is that forest conservation depends in part on intelligent consumption, as well as intelligent production of lumber."

~ Aldo Leopold, 1928, "The Home Builder Conserves" (Flader & Caldecott, 1991)

Aldo Leopold was right. At Oregon State University and other land-grant institutions, we focus our educational efforts on teaching students to professionally manage natural resources. However, as population, economic, and consumption pressures increase, addressing the responsibilities of the consumers of natural resources becomes a viable educational tool.

Since 1998, the Sustainable Living Project at OSU has been offering intelligent consumption programming to adults and older youth to create an ethical foundation supporting sustainable management of natural resources. Intelligent consumption is about managing ourselves. It acknowledges the role ethics plays in decision-making. Taking a thoughtful approach to understanding cultural, economic, and environmental values; considering the barriers to living sustainably; examining national trends; and determining personal priorities are all necessary elements in educating the public about their consumer choices.

In this article, I:

• Use forest resources data as an example of natural resource pressures and forestry's response to them;

• Propose that educating consumers about their responsibilities is a new and necessary component of our educational efforts in natural resources;

• Suggest that intelligent consumption is a viable education topic for all Extension professionals, not just those in natural resources;

• Explain why incorporating ethics-based education into intelligent consumption programming is critical;

• Describe The Sustainable Living Project, which helps students determine their own economic, cultural, and environmental values and beliefs; and

• Explain why the time is right for Extension to incorporate such programming.

Pressures

In May 2001, the Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts and Letters and the USDA Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory released the Report of the Intelligent Consumption Project (Strigel & Meine, 2001). The report identified three massive pressures squeezing global forest resources: population, economic growth, and consumption.

First, world population is currently at 6 billion and is projected to rise to 11 billion within 100 years. If projected increases in human population hold true, by the end of this century, the area of forest per capita in the world will drop from the currently inadequate 1.5 acres to between 0.7 and 0.8 acres (Strigel & Meine, 2001). In the United States, it will be more than halved, from 2.7 acres to about 1.3 acres (Strigel & Meine, 2001).

Second, the World Bank predicts that economic growth in the next 10 years could approach 5% annually in developing countries and 2.8% in industrial countries. The combination of population growth and economic growth will create a worldwide demand for new housing units. Over the next 50 years, that demand is likely to exceed one billion (Strigel & Meine, 2001).

The third pressure on forest resources is consumption, with the United States consuming a disproportionate share. U.S. citizens use twice the average for other developed countries and roughly three times that of the world as a whole (Strigel & Meine, 2001). U.S. consumption is higher than that of any other nation on Earth (Strigel & Meine, 2001), leading two researchers to state, "It would require 4 of our Earths for everybody on the planet to live the lifestyle of North Americans" (quoted in Ryan & Durning, 1997).

These pressures are not unique to forestry. Similar pressures affect all Extension program areas. And our responses and solutions are also similar.

Solutions

Forestry's traditional--and crucial--response to the population, economic, and consumption pressures has been to become more efficient. Our educational programs focus on improving silviculture, harvest, utilization, production, management, and delivery methods. But what about the consumers of forest resources? Don't they have responsibilities too? What kind of educational programming can help them make more informed consumer decisions?

Two caveats. First, one could assume that to ease pressures on forest resources, one should encourage people to reduce consumption of wood products. This assumption is misleading. The Report of the Intelligent Consumption Project strongly cautions, "Contrary to expectations, the result could be highly adverse to the environment in the U.S. and globally. Reduction of wood consumption, without accompanying success in reducing consumption in general, would likely lead to a number of undesirable consequences..." (Strigel & Meine, 2001).

The report cites four negative outcomes:

• Substitute materials can be less environmentally benign;

• There would be a resultant increase in metallic and non-metallic mineral extraction globally - with associated social and environmental impacts;

• Energy usage would increase significantly, including use of fossil fuels to transport materials; and

• There would be a considerable increase in U.S. net imports, thereby transferring environmental impacts to other countries.

The second caveat is: to make intelligent consumer decisions, consumers must be cognizant of "the right thing to do," a highly individualistic determination generally arrived at after much thought. In Lawrence Kohlberg's body of work on stages of moral development, intelligent consumption decisions match Stage 6, the highest level: "Follow individual conscience and universal principles even if risk is involved" (Kohlberg, 1984).

Ethics-Based Education

Ethics-based education is all about managing ourselves. It creates a philosophical foundation to support decision-making on all levels. It acknowledges that personal values, ethics, and beliefs powerfully influence decisions and actions. (The take-home message for natural resource managers is "To understand environmental facts you have to understand your own values and the values of others" [Smith & Gilden, 2000]).

Self-aware people consciously align--and articulate--personal, professional, and constitutional values (Figure 1.) These values are intertwined, underpinning everything an individual does. They tell the world who she or he is and how she or he goes about his or her business (Simon-Brown, 1999).

Figure 1.
Personal, Professional, and Constitutional Values Triangle

An ethics-based curriculum helps students determine personal values, ethics and facts. These are defined by Smith and Gilden (2000) as follows.

• Values: What people think is right and wrong, good and bad, desirable and undesirable. They are the lens through which reality is perceived.

• Ethics: A specific combination of values, creating a body of moral principles.

• Facts: Truths which are verifiable and socially agreed upon. Facts can change, based on new knowledge. In the 11th century, the earth was flat, a verifiable and socially agreed upon fact.

An example of an Extension program that evolved into an ethics-based education program is the Sustainable Living Project at OSU.

The Sustainable Living Project at OSU

False Start: Focus on Information Transfer

In 1998, the Sustainable Living Project quietly began at Oregon State University. The project's mission, to reduce environmental degradation and improve quality of life in the Pacific Northwest by fostering new consumption patterns and promoting sustainable lifestyles, targeted mainstream adults and older youth. The project defines sustainable living as "A life that is deeply satisfying, fulfilling and appealing, and at the same time, environmentally responsible" (Simon-Brown, 1998).

Original efforts focused on a "one-stop shopping" approach. I provided research-based information on a variety of traditional Extension topics, such as energy conservation and usage, financial management, consumer products, healthy foods, and gardening. It didn't work. Traditional Extension audiences considered the service to be redundant; new audiences didn't engage. The decision point came when a mall shopper stopped at my booth during a Home Show. "Why should I care about this stuff? What's in it for me?" Clearly, I was offering answers to questions that my audience hadn't yet asked themselves.

At about the same time, I read Yearning for Balance: Views of Americans on Consumption, Materialism, and the Environment (The Harwood Group for Merck Family Fund 1995). The report enumerates four key findings:

1. Americans believe our priorities are out of whack.

2. Americans are alarmed about the future.

3. Americans are ambivalent about what to do.

4. Americans see the environment as connected to these concerns--in general terms.

These non-scientific-sounding findings reflect a society at odds with its values. To move Americans from ambivalence to action, the Sustainable Living Project needed to help people think through their personal values and beliefs.

New Focus: Identify Individual Values and Beliefs

Our approach to the project mission changed to: help mainstream adults and older youth make informed consumer decisions by thoughtfully and consciously examining the cultural, economic and environmental aspects of our American lifestyle. In short, participants identify their own Sustainability Triangle of Values.

Figure 2.
Sustainability Triangle of Values

Now, the Sustainable Living workshops:

• Create a safe intellectual environment for thoughtful dialogue about quality of life issues. This is the foremost requirement.

• Focus on exploring individual values and beliefs in order to make more-informed decisions.

• Address the major barriers to achieving quality of life in the United States: time crunch, natural/spiritual disconnect, and consumption/materialism.

• Act as conduits to other programs, such as Earth Ministry in churches, voluntary simplicity classes and simplicity circles for individuals, and EcoTeams for neighborhood groups.

• Provide access to research-based information on a variety of traditional Extension topics, such as energy usage, financial management, consumer products, healthy foods, and gardening.

Neutrality is the most essential quality for the instructor to exhibit Πand its importance can't be overstated. Each participant arrives with a lifetime of values and beliefs. It is not the instructor's role to change them or to advocate certain philosophies. It is up to the participants to discover what they believe to be their most important cultural, economic and environmental values. The instructor facilitates that process by using time-honored Extension techniques: asking questions, role-playing, large and small group conversations, readings, and individual journaling.

Since refocusing the project in 1999, more than 5,000 people have participated in workshops and presentations, and over 150,000 people have browsed the Web site <http://www.cof.orst.edu/cof/extended/sustain/>. An overdue formal evaluation and assessment of the project is scheduled for this year.

In 2002, I informally called 25 participants from the 2000 and 2001 workshops to ask 1) if their Sustainability Triangle was displayed and 2) if they used the Sustainability Triangle in decision-making. Twenty-three (92%) said that their Sustainability Triangle was prominently displayed (usually on the refrigerator) and that they consulted it often. Twenty-one (84%) said they had used it in making major family decisions (buying or selling a vehicle or house.) Several ex-participants volunteered that, as a result of the workshops, their families had reduced energy consumption, changed eating and spending habits, and reduced the number of arguments with their teenagers!

Why the Time Is Right: Implications for Extension

Global, national, and regional trends underscore the timeliness of such an ethics-based education effort. According to the World Future Society (Outlook 99, 1998), the following trends affect sustainability of natural resources.

• The likelihood of an energy-related economic/environmental crisis is increasing. The Middle East conflicts and the recent crash of the Asian economy are two examples. A gasoline crisis is predicted.

• Sustainability is becoming a central concept in environmental management, ecology, business, and industry.

• People are increasingly aware of the linkages between personal behavior and environmental health, and industrial behavior and global health.

America is in the midst of a meta-transition. Time and quality of life are becoming relatively more important than money. Sixty-six percent of Americans say they want more balance in their lives. Sixty percent want to simplify their lives (Schor, 1998). The voluntary simplicity movement, which approximately 35 to 40 million Americans espouse, is moving from the early adopter phase to the early majority phase.

Figure 3.
Meta-Transitional Categories

(One sure proof that the concept has become mainstream is the proliferation of commercials by car, banking, and soft drink companies exhorting consumers to simplify their lives--by buying their products.)

Intelligent consumption is applicable to more than just natural resources Extension program areas such as Forestry, Agriculture and Sea Grant. A quick brainstorm list of programs that could be augmented and enhanced include:

• 4-H youth leadership
• Diet and nutrition materials
• Family financial management
• Emergency preparedness
• Welfare reform
• Community revitalization
• Holiday planning
• Family business management
• Housing and energy

Each topic includes aspects of intelligent consumption. Each involves cultural, economic, and environmental values. Incorporating and highlighting the ethical components could be the "grabber" that fully engages the clientele.

Conclusion

Oregon State University--like other land-grant institutions--has a long tradition of educating people to manage natural resources. The Sustainable Living Project focuses on education to manage ourselves, by asking ethics-based questions about intelligent consumption and quality of life. Extension professionals may find it creates an ethical bridge between consumers of natural resources and the sustainable management of natural resources.

References

1998-99 world resources: A guide to the global environment. (1998). A Report by World Resources Institute, UNEP, UNDP, and The World Bank. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Flader, S. L., & Caldecott, J. B. (Eds.) (1991). River of the mother of God and other essays by Aldo Leopold. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Kohlberg, L. (1984). The philosophy of moral development: Moral stages and the idea of justice. HarperCollins.

Oregon benchmarks: Standards for measuring statewide progress and government performance. (1998). Oregon Progress Board. Salem, Oregon.

Oregon values and beliefs. (1998). Oregon Business Council. Salem, Oregon.

Outlook 99. (1998). The Futurist. 32(9).

Ryan, J. C., & Durning, A. T. (1997). Stuff: The secret lives of everyday things. Seattle: Northwest Environment Watch.

Schor, J. (1998). The overspent American: Upscaling, downshifting, and the new consumer. New York: Basic Books.

Simon-Brown, V. (1999). Choosing your group's structure, mission, and goals. Corvallis: Oregon State University. EC 1507. Available at: http://seagrant.oregonstate.edu/sgpubs/onlinepubs/EC1507.html

Simon-Brown, V. (1998). The sustainable living project at OSU. Available at: http://www.cof.orst.edu/cof/extended/sustain/

Smith, C., & Gilden, J. (2000). Values: The lens through which we view reality. Corvallis: Oregon State University.

Strigel, M., & Meine, C., editors. (2001). Report of the intelligent consumption project. Madison, Wisconsin. Available at: http://wisconsinacademy.org/programs/icp/report.html

Yearning for balance: Views of Americans on consumption, materialism, and the environment. (1995). Merck Family Fund. Takoma Park, Maryland.

Strengthening Environmental Policy Education Through Qualitative Research: Experience with Pennsylvania's Nutrient Management Act Regulatory Review

Alyssa Dodd
Extension Associate, Agricultural Environmental Policy
AlyssaDodd@psu.edu

Charles Abdalla
Extension Specialist, Agricultural and Environmental Economics
CAbdalla@psu.edu

Penn State Cooperative Extension
University Park, Pennsylvania

Introduction

Environmental protection is one of the most critical and complex issues our nation faces. Many audiences--farmers, local governmental officials, watershed organizations, and concerned citizens--have questions about rapidly changing environmental policies. Extension has the opportunity to provide timely issues-oriented policy education programs "where people learn about public issues, policy-making processes, and opportunities for involvement and influence" (Hahn, 1990).

While educational opportunities exist, environmental policy education is challenging from both a content and educational process perspective. The issues are dynamic and complex. Educators are challenged with enhancing understanding and providing balanced information to diverse audiences. Additional challenges include transferring time-sensitive information and motivating individuals and groups to participate in decision-making.

Through our experiences in Pennsylvania, we have identified several "ingredients" we believe are essential to a "recipe of success." These include:

• Internal Support--financial commitment and administration support to the educational program area;

• A Presence--within the state-level nutrient and water policy decision-making arena;

• Trust Building--between Extension and other stakeholder groups;

• Timing--a policy decision in the near future; and

• Objectivity--a balanced educational approach.

A recently completed project documenting the views of Pennsylvania nutrient management policy stakeholders illustrates the importance of these "ingredients" in environmental policy education. This article introduces the Pennsylvania Nutrient Management Act and the window of opportunity that presented itself to provide timely and useful public policy information to key influential stakeholders and decision makers. It describes the qualitative research methods used to document stakeholder views, presents key findings, and summarizes the demand for and use of the report. Finally, the article concludes with practical advice for Extension educators working on environmental or related natural resources policy issues.

Background

The Pennsylvania Nutrient Management Act (Act 6) was passed in 1993 and took effect in 1997. The Act requires all "concentrated animal operations" (CAOs) to develop and implement a state-approved nutrient management plan. A CAO is any animal production operation with more than 2,000 pounds of live weight per acre of land available to spread manure.

The State Conservation Commission is responsible for implementing and enforcing Act 6. The Commission relies on the Nutrient Management Advisory Board, a 15-member board established under the Act, to review and comment on regulations (Beegle, Lanyon, & Lingenfelter, 2001). Almost all of the 67 county conservation districts have accepted local program implementation responsibilities.

In 2002, the Commission began its required 5-year review of the density-based criteria for defining CAOs. The review has expanded to include an overall update of the regulations. Currently, policy discussions are underway, and changes to the Nutrient Management Act regulations are likely to occur in 2004.

A decade after passage of the Nutrient Management, the regulatory revision process provides an opportunity to provide timely and useful public policy information to stakeholders and decision makers. The Nutrient Management Act revisions will affect almost 1,000 CAO and over 800 volunteer (non-CAO) livestock and poultry operations with approved Act 6 nutrient management plans. The changes will also provide environmental benefits for Pennsylvania citizens.

Extension's Role

Penn State Cooperative Extension is actively involved in nutrient and water policy education. Historically, Extension has focused on providing technical nutrient management expertise during the policy development process. Extension specialists trained in soil science, agricultural engineering, and animal production continue to contribute in this important role. However, Extension's role has expanded over time to include specialists trained in the social sciences, providing public policy information to stakeholders and decision makers beyond traditional agricultural audiences.

Since late 2000, administrative leadership within Penn State Cooperative Extension has increased its capacity in this program area by hiring one full-time, fixed-term Extension associate (the lead author) for a period of 3 years to explore programming in this area. Additionally, one full-time, permanent Extension specialist (the co-author) devotes time to the agricultural environmental public policy programming area.

Our commitment to maintain a presence within the state-level nutrient and water policy arena led to identifying the opportunity to provide timely public policy education. Extension was aware that the process to update the Pennsylvania Nutrient Management Act regulations was underway and was present during state-level policy discussions where diverse stakeholder perspectives were shared. Once the window of educational opportunity was identified, we organized quickly to document stakeholder perspectives, with the goal of providing a balanced educational resource that would lead to more informed policy discussions.

Methodology

Qualitative research methods were used to document diverse perspectives, issues, and solutions related to nutrient management policy in Pennsylvania. Data were gathered through key informant stakeholder interviews. Several documents were used to create a semi-structured interview survey: the Pennsylvania Nutrient Management Act and its rules, the Pennsylvania Nutrient Management Program manual, and proceedings from legislative hearings held during the spring of 2001. All questions were open-ended.

Extension's presence within the state-level nutrient and water policy arena made it possible to identify key informant interviewees. Key informants were identified on the basis of their involvement in current nutrient and water policy discussions or the stakeholder organization they represent. Additional interviewees were contacted through "snowball sampling," a technique where each key informant was asked to identify other knowledgeable individuals to interview. Snowball sampling is appropriate when a study is primarily explorative, qualitative and descriptive (Atkinson & Flint, 2001).

Special emphasis was placed on documenting diverse interests in nutrient management policy to support a balanced educational approach. Individuals represented the perspectives of farmers, agribusiness, agricultural consultants, government agencies, environmental interest groups, public interest groups, and educators. Twenty-eight personal interviews (22 in person, 6 phone) were conducted in July and August of 2002. Interviews took no more than 90 minutes. Interviewees were assured that all responses would remain confidential and that no ideas or perspectives would be attributed to specific stakeholders.

Because of the potentially controversial nature of the subject matter, responses were recorded in writing by the interviewer instead of with a tape-recorder. While there may have been some loss of data, we believe the approach created a more comfortable informal interview, allowing greater information exchange. In most cases, the authors interviewed respondents as a team, with one responsible for note-taking.

We believe four major factors increased interviewee participation.

• First, approximately half of the interviewees were interviewed 5 years earlier during a previous Extension effort to document nutrient management policy legislative development and administrative rule-making (Favero & Abdalla, 1997).

• Second, we built and maintained relationships with many of the individuals through state-level nutrient and water policy related workgroups.

• Third, the project was inclusive of diverse stakeholder views and was rooted in a balanced approach.

• Finally, the project was "informal" in the sense that there was no funding source. We identified a need, chose to devote considerable time to the project in a timely manner, and supported travel expenses with our individual Extension budgets. This lack of specific funding also contributed to a perception that the project was balanced and objective.

Stakeholder responses were assembled and analyzed. Steps in the time-intensive analysis included compiling all responses to specific questions; identifying key phrases, words, and concepts; and summarizing emerging themes. As themes emerged, the information or views obtained were not attributed to specific stakeholder groups.

To ensure perspectives and ideas were appropriately documented and to emphasize the importance of each stakeholders view, all interviewees were asked to review the draft research findings. Several interviewees provided written comments on the draft report. Interviewees not responding in writing were contacted via e-mail and/or telephone to ensure the draft report was received and to document additional comments.

Key Findings

Key informant interviewee responses provides insight into nutrient management policy challenges, identifies key indicators of program performance and success, offers broad conclusions about nutrient management policy-making in the state, and identifies future policy directions.

While we strove to include representatives of stakeholders to nutrient management issues, we were not able to be exhaustive in terms of including all possible groups and individuals. However, due to the number and diversity of interviews, we believe the findings are comprehensive and balanced from a statewide perspective.

Key findings include the following.

• Protecting water quality was perceived to be the ultimate goal, but not the only goal of the Pennsylvania Nutrient Management Act. Other goals include providing assurance that agricultural nutrients are properly managed; creating practical and understandable regulations; protecting the environment without putting farmers out of business; balancing nutrients at the farm level with crop needs; and creating uniform state-wide nutrient management standards.

• The majority of interviewees supported preemption of local manure storage, handling, or land application ordinances or regulations that are more stringent than the state requirements. Support was based on perceptions of local officials' limited knowledge of agriculture and the practical need for requirements to be uniform and consistent across municipalities.

• Most interviewees viewed the export of manure off CAOs as a necessary part of the solution to protecting water quality. In principle, exporting and redistributing manure geographically to achieve on-farm nutrient balances was acceptable to them. Most interviewees supported manure export, but believed additional tracking of where the manure is going and assurance that it is being applied properly were needed.

• The majority of interviewees acknowledged the need for phosphorus management, but raised concerns about managerial and financial impacts of implementing a standard that included both nitrogen and phosphorus. Some interviewees believed the P (Phosphorus)-Index, a tool that identifies farm fields with a high nutrient pollution risk, is the appropriate tool to reduce these impacts. They believed this tool may make phosphorus management more acceptable in Pennsylvania.

• Most interviewees agreed that the Nutrient Management Act program has been successful. Inclusiveness, leadership, education, and funding were viewed as key to this success. However, most interviewees identified at least one factor limiting success. Examples of these perceived barriers include a regulatory implementation process viewed by some as non-inclusive; a lack of education to segments of the agricultural community; and county conservation districts perceived by some as too friendly toward agriculture.

• Interviewees envisioned an ideal nutrient management program to be comprehensive, addressing all farms causing water quality problems, adapting to new problems such as phosphorus, using a "systems" or watershed approach, and addressing all nutrient sources.

• The key indicators of program success identified were water quality improvement, farm-level compliance and implementation, economic acceptability, and public acceptance.

Benefits

Hard copies of the report, Nutrient Management Policy: Pennsylvania Stakeholder Views About Progress, Challenges, and Future Directions (Abdalla & Dodd, 2002), were distributed to over 100 stakeholders. The publication was also made available on the Internet at Penn State Cooperative Extension's Nutrient and Water Policy Web site <http://agenvpolicy.aers.psu.edu>. A Web statistics program, WebTrends, provides detailed information on the number of people who access the Web site and download the publication. Between December 2002 and May 2003, the report was downloaded more than 2,000 times.

State-level Extension educators have formally presented the qualitative research findings to the Nutrient Management Advisory Board, the State Conservation Commission, and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection's Chesapeake Bay Advisory Committee. The project highlighted Extension's commitment to agricultural and environmental public policy education and increased visibility and political support. For example, the State Conservation Commission invited Extension to present the Stakeholders Views report at four Nutrient Management Planner meetings held around the state. More than 225 nutrient management planners, county conservation district staff, farmers, and government agency staff attended.

Several key agency members provided unsolicited feedback on Extension's involvement and contribution to the meetings, demonstrating an increase in political support. As a result of impact from this project and other nutrient and water policy programming efforts, the Penn State Cooperative Extension administration has extended the Extension associate position to mid-2004.

Conclusion

Penn State Cooperative Extension's commitment to balanced public policy education approaches that meet the needs of diverse audiences, to maintain a presence within the state-level nutrient and water policy arena and to build trust between Extension and diverse stakeholders has proven useful in identifying and exploiting opportunities for timely public policy education. The use of qualitative research methods to document nutrient management stakeholder views was instrumental in creating a useful educational resource that resulted in more informed policy discussions.

Our educational philosophy is that improvements in policy come about through exchange of facts and perspectives about issues and solutions and effective participation by all interested and affected parties and when public decision makers carefully consider this input. Extension, as demonstrated in Pennsylvania, has an opportunity to facilitate this exchange, participation, and informed decision-making.

For Extension educators in other states looking to become involved in nutrient and water policy education we suggest the following.

• Conduct a needs assessment:
  • Are nutrient and water policies and programs changing in your state?
  • Are new groups affected by the changing policy?
  • Are there opportunities for public participation in the decision-making process?
  • Are other groups, agencies, or organizations providing education?
• Inventory organizational capacity:
  • Do administrators and colleagues value balanced public policy education approaches and broad stakeholder participation in decision-making?
  • Are interdisciplinary efforts valued and encouraged?
  • Do diverse stakeholders value and use Extension's educational resources?
  • Is funding available to support educational efforts?
• Inventory human resources:
  • What are the educator's values and beliefs about human behavior, the democratic process, and the role of education? To be effective in public policy education, the educator must be willing to believe in "enlightened self-interest" and the democratic process and that a well-informed citizenry and the democratic process will produce a choice that is right for society (Barrows, 1993).
  • Is the educator a good listener? Active listening is essential to understand the issues, identify the stakeholder representatives, and identify educational opportunities.
  • Can the educator effectively build and maintain working relationships with diverse stakeholder groups? Does the individual enjoy meeting new people? Is the individual willing to learn and acknowledge diverse values and perspectives? This will likely lead to a better understanding of the educational needs among the diverse audiences Extension serves.
  • Is the educator willing to devote time and resources to serving on state-level advisory committees and workgroups where diverse stakeholders are represented? Individuals who serve on these workgroups are often leaders in the state. We found that "rolling up our sleeves" and working side-by-side with diverse stakeholders strengthened working relationships and demonstrated Extension's commitment to education and the protection of water resources.

References

Abdalla, C., & Dodd, A. (2002). Nutrient management policy: Pennsylvania stakeholder views about progress, challenges, and future directions. Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Penn State University. Available at: http://agenvpolicy.aers.psu.edu/Documents/NMAstakeholderviews.pdf

Atkinson, R., & Flint, J. (2001). Accessing hidden and hard-to-reach populations: Snowball research strategies. Social Research Update [On-line], 33. Available at: http://www.soc.surrey.ac.uk/sru/SRU33.html

Beegle, D., Lanyon L. E., & Lingenfelter, D. D. (2001). Agronomy facts #40: Nutrient management legislation in Pennsylvania: A summary of the regulations, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences. Department of Crops and Soil Sciences, Penn State University. Available at: http://pubs.cas.psu.edu/FreePubs/pdfs/uc111.pdf

Barrows, R. (1993). Public policy education. North Central Regional Extension Publication No. 203.

Favero, P., & Abdalla, C. W. (1997). Creating workable implementation rules to meet the complexities of manure management: Pennsylvania's nutrient management law. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 52(5), 320-322.

Hahn, A. J. (1990). Issues-oriented public policy education. Journal of Extension [On-line], 28(1). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1990spring/a3.html

The Nutrient Management Act, title 3, Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, sections 1701-1717 (2002).

A Training Program for Cooperative Extension Agents: Implementation of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in Virginia Public Schools

Dini M. Miller
Assistant Professor and Urban Pest Management Specialist
Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, Virginia
dinim@vt.edu

Program Concept

School administrators face tough questions from parents, students, and staff about pesticide use in and around school buildings. While many school administrators are reluctant to acknowledge that children may be exposed to pests at school, they are often more reluctant to discuss the issue of pesticide use because of the potential liability associated with exposure complaints. However, there is a philosophy of pest control for the school environment that eliminates both the real and perceived hazards of managing pests; it is Integrated Pest Management (IPM) (Greene & Breisch, 2002; Koehler & Scherer, 2002).

Integrated Pest Management is a process for achieving long-term, environmentally sound pest suppression through the use of a variety of least toxic management practices. Control strategies in an IPM program extend beyond chemical remedies to include structural and procedural modifications to reduce pest access and pest resources such as food, water, and harborage (U.S. EPA, 1993). The following four practices are applied simultaneously to manage pest populations within the school environment.

• Prevention of pest populations using monitoring, sanitation, and exclusion.

• Selecting the most effective and least toxic materials available for control of targeted pests.

• Application of pesticides only "as needed" for documented pest problems.

• Precision targeting of pesticides into pest harborages where they are accessible to pests but not to children, faculty, and staff.

There is a national movement to reduce childhood pesticide exposure. For this reason, School IPM as an alternative means of pest control is receiving federal attention (McKenna, 2001). Currently, there is a bill before Congress, the School Environment Protection Act 2003 (SEPA; H.R.121, 2003), which proposes to regulate pesticide use in locations (schools) where children might be exposed (Anonymous, 2003). Several states already have mandatory School IPM programs, e.g., Texas, Louisiana, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia (McKenna, 2001).

However, many states are apprehensive about a mandated program because the school districts will not be provided with additional funds to learn about pesticide alternatives (IPM training). For this reason, many states are trying to avoid mandates by proactively establishing volunteer school IPM programs, e.g., California, Georgia, and North Carolina).

Several volunteer programs have achieved great success by using the infrastructure of the Cooperative Extension Service and state universities to provide IPM education and technical support to the local school districts (Florida, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina). This support facilitates the schools' transition from a monthly pesticide application schedule to a pest management program based on education and prevention (Koehler, Fasulo, & Scherer, 2002; Koehler & Scherer, 2002).

In July 2000, a pilot School IPM training program was launched in Virginia Cooperative Extension Planning District-4 (Montgomery, Giles, Pulaski, and Floyd counties and the City of Radford). The program focused on hands-on IPM training for Extension agents, their local school facilities managers, and contract pest control operators. The pilot program resulted in Montgomery County Public Schools (22 schools and 9,059 students) adopting an IPM program and implementing it with their contract pest control company (Miller, 2003). Montgomery is the largest school district in Planning District 4 and has been influential in leading other districts to adopt IPM.

The success of the pilot program resulted in funds from the Virginia Pesticide Control Board (Virginia Department of Agriculture) to expand the School IPM training to additional public schools throughout the state. However, statewide expansion of the School IPM program required widespread promotion to hundreds of school employees and pest control operators throughout Virginia. Therefore, it was logical that the expansion of the School IPM program be facilitated through the infrastructure of Virginia Cooperative Extension.

Agriculture and Natural Resource (ANR) agents were thought to be ideal for promoting and delivering the School IPM program for a number of reasons. Most ANR agents have established relationships with both the school administrators and the pest control operators in their counties. Many of these agents have been providing regular pesticide applicator training and environmental education as part of their Extension mission. However, most ANR agents in Virginia are only marginally familiar with indoor pest management techniques and have had no training in School IPM. Our goal was to provide this training so that we could use the Virginia Cooperative Extension network to promote the adoption of School IPM in Virginia.

Training Objectives

• Introduce agents to the problems inherent in current school pest control practices, and explain how these problems can be resolved using IPM.

• Familiarize agents with how the pilot IPM training program was initiated.

• Train agents how to demonstrate IPM strategies for specific pests.

• Provide agents with a protocol for introducing the IPM concept to their local schools.

IPM Training Procedures

A 2-day in-service training was presented to ANR agents in a public school facility. During this training, the county agents were taught how to promote and deliver a School IPM training program to their local schools. As part of the training, agents were given an overview of current pest control practices in Virginia schools and supplied with a copy of Integrated Pest Management in Schools 2000 (Long & Kramer, 2000, unpublished), a report funded by the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS) in 2000. This report documented three major areas of concern regarding Virginia school pest control practices:

• Schools keep no records of pest problems or the pesticides applied on school grounds.

• Most school districts contract with a professional pest control company and receive monthly pesticide applications regardless of need.

• Many of the school employees who are responsible for outdoor pesticide applications on school grounds are not state-certified technicians (have not completed the state required pesticide safety training).

Introduction to IPM

As an introduction to the IPM program, we discussed with the agents how poor pest management practices leave school children vulnerable to accidental pesticide exposure and schools vulnerable to litigation. Agents were next familiarized with the methods of pest prevention used in an IPM program and how proper record-keeping coupled with pest prevention could eliminate needless applications of pesticide and potential exposure risk. The agents were provided with all introductory information in a notebook so they could return to their local school administrators and promote the IPM program.

Agents were also provided with PowerPoint training presentations that could be used for teaching IPM techniques. The presentations were explained in detail at the in-service so that the agents had a full understanding of the concepts presented: pest prevention, pest monitoring, reduced toxicity pest control methods, and how to keep records of pesticide applications and pest problems. Agents were encouraged to incorporate their own ideas and experiences into these School IPM presentations.

Part of the introductory training was presented by the Montgomery County Extension agent who took part in the pilot School IPM program. The agent discussed his experience working with the public school system and how he worked with the school facilities engineer to promote the adoption of an IPM program. The agent shared the pesticide safety training program he developed for school grounds maintenance personnel and related how he was able to provide the schools with the pesticide safety training they needed for state certification and compliance with state law.

The Facilities Engineer for Montgomery County schools was also invited to the in-service training to discuss his experience with the implementation of School IPM. The Facilities Engineer was able to address some of the questions that agents would receive from their local schools about developing an IPM pest control contract, selecting a pest control company, and how much an IPM program was going to cost.

Hands-On IPM Training

Agents participated in hands-on exercises to learn IPM techniques for specific school pests (cockroaches, ants, and rodents). The agents practiced monitoring for cockroaches in the school kitchen. They learned where and why sticky traps are placed in locations that are appealing to cockroaches and how to interpret trap catch for precision placement of cockroach baits. They also learned how to place cockroach baits so that they are accessible to the cockroaches but not to children and staff. Agents were also taught how to monitor for ants around school buildings and ant baiting techniques.

Another portion of the technical pest management training involved agents touring the school facility and learning to identify potential rodent entry points and how these locations could be modified to prevent rodent invasion. Finally, the agents returned to the classroom to discuss how to teach these techniques to school personnel and pest management professionals.

Promoting the School IPM Program

This portion of the workshop focused on the sequence of events that lead up to the IPM training session for school personnel. The agents began by identifying administrators and facilities managers who manage or supervise the pest control contract. In the rural school districts the superintendent or assistant superintendent typically oversees the district's pest control. However, in large urban districts pest control is supervised by facilities or grounds personnel. Therefore, we discussed how to best promote IPM to these different individuals.

Agents also engaged in a round table discussion about how to initiate IPM training for their local school district(s). The agents were provided with materials to assess and promote proper pest management practices in schools. Each agent was provided with a sample survey for documenting their local district's current pest control practices. They were also given a sample IPM policy statement, a School IPM pest control contract, and forms for recording pesticide applications on school grounds. These promotional materials, as well as an electronic slide presentation of IPM techniques for controlling cockroaches, ants, and rodents on school grounds, were provided for the agents to take to their local school board so they might generate interest in the IPM program.

It was our intention that after the School IPM training the Extension agents would return to their counties and begin working with the schools, introducing them to the School IPM concepts. Agents would have a complete introduction to the School IPM program and hands-on experience in using IPM techniques to monitor and control urban pests. Each agent would also be armed with a protocol for initiating a School IPM program in his or her school district(s) and a packaged IPM training program, complete with literature and electronic slide presentations.

The intended impact of this training program was to produce Extension agents who were trained to guide their school districts through the IPM implementation process. Our ultimate goal was to have these local schools adopt IPM and replace calendar-based applications of insecticide with an IPM program based on pest prevention and reduced pesticide use.

Measuring Training Impacts

To measure the impact of the agent training we continued to communicate with the agents after they returned to their counties. We kept a record of those agents who scheduled a School IPM program in their district and of course met with them face to face at the actual training sessions. In addition, we recorded the number of school districts that adopted an IPM program. Adoption of an IPM program was defined as rewriting the pest control contract to specify the use of IPM techniques to control pests or, if pest control was done inŒhouse, that the plan of work was rewritten to specify the use of IPM techniques.

Impacts of the Agent Training School IPM Program

Extension Agent Short-Term Knowledge and Attitude Change

Participants in the School Integrated Pest Management program were examined after the IPM training to see how much of the IPM information they had understood and retained. In addition, the agents were surveyed to determine if they had received enough information and training materials to successfully promote an IPM program in their local schools.

The School IPM examination covered specific pest management techniques for cockroaches, rodents, and ants, as well as conceptual ideas such as the basis of IPM (pest prevention) and the use of the term "integrated" (controlling pest by using several techniques at the same time). Sixteen agents took the exam, and the average score on the post IPM training examination was 96%.

Listed below are the quantitative responses to the School IPM Training Evaluation Survey (8 questions total; 16 respondents).

• 81% indicated they received sufficient training to promote IPM in their local schools.

• 100% indicated that the laboratory sections helped them understand the IPM concepts.

• 81% gave the training IPM materials (notebook and CD) the top ranking of "very useful".

• 94% gave the overall IPM training program the top ranking of "very useful."

Respondents were asked to rank their interest in pursuing an IPM program in their local schools based on the IPM training. Rankings were 1-5, with 1 = very willing and 5 = not willing. Fifty percent of responded with a 1; 31% responded with a 2; and 19% responded with a 3.

The qualitative responses were related to what the respondents found the most/least useful about the workshop and what additional topics they thought should be included in future training sessions. Because our program focused on indoor pest control, several agents requested that outdoor weed control be included in the IPM information. There were also several requests for more information on wasp and bee control.

We received only three responses to the "least useful" question. All three mentioned the redundancy of some of the IPM information. Respondents listed the take-home presentations on CD and the hands-on laboratory sessions as the "most useful" portions of the workshop. Note: A CD-ROM covering IPM on Virginia school grounds has been funded by the EPA (2003) and is currently in development. Wasp and bee control information was added to the program in 2003 and is available on the Virginia School IPM Web site <http://schoolipm.ento.vt.edu>.

Long-Term Cultural and Practice Change

At the time of this writing, 12 of the agent participants in the School IPM training have successfully promoted and hosted School IPM workshops (full day) within their local school district(s). These programs have been presented to school administrators, facilities personnel, and pest control contractors. As of 2003, 1 year since the statewide expansion of the school IPM program, eight public school districts and one private school district have adopted School IPM, thus reducing their pesticide use and improving the environmental quality of their facilities. Table 1 indicates the number of structures and people that have benefited from adopting the IPM program.

Additional Impacts of School IPM Agent Training

Due to the efforts of the Montgomery county Extension agent in the pilot School IPM program, Montgomery County Public Schools and the Virginia School IPM program was cited as a model and a "catalyst for change" in Safer Schools: Achieving a Healthy Learning Environment with Integrated Pest Management, a national publication published by the School Pesticide Reform Coalition and Beyond Pesticides organization in 2003. The article included a full-page description of our IPM implementation strategies, with details on the pest-monitoring program and how to keep pesticide application records.

Discussion of Agent Training

In Virginia, pest control issues fall under the purview of the Agriculture and Natural Resource Extension agents. These agents deal predominantly with outdoor or agricultural insect pests. In fact, ANR agents are almost exclusively from a livestock or crop management background, but there are a growing number of ANR agents specializing in horticulture or weed science. However, there are currently no agents who specialize in indoor or urban pest management in Virginia.

Our challenge was to generate enough interest in indoor pest management and provide enough training to make the ANR agents comfortable with promoting the School IPM program. To do this we took a learner-centered approach where the agents were engaged in the educational process and assisted in developing the program content (based on a core curriculum) and activities that were to be presented to their local school districts. Also, each of the agents was expected to take an active role in delivering a portion of School IPM training when they scheduled training for their local schools.

We found that the 2-day in-service training at a school facility was a successful venue for conveying the School IPM program to the ANR agents. School IPM is a complex program with a number of detailed concepts and technical methodologies. Giving inexperienced agents the time to focus on learning a completely new set of concepts and skills required the removal of situational, institutional, and informational barriers.

The overnight in-service training removed agents from their busy schedules and offices so that they were able to be fully engaged in the learning process. Training at an actual school allowed the agents to visualize how the IPM practices would be applied. Finally, the School IPM information was provided in increments with extended periods for discussion and hands-on activities to encourage participation and learning.

The results of the agent training speak for themselves. The impacts of the program have been positive, with at least half of the agent participants promoting and hosting a School IPM program within a year of their own training. The post-training examination and program evaluation indicators also suggested that the agents had learned the material presented and were comfortable enough with it to promote School IPM on their own.

The development and promotion of any large-scale Extension program can be difficult, even when many of the agents are familiar with the subject area. However, we were able to determine from this School IPM program that with an appropriate amount of time and training, county agents can learn, promote, and contribute to complex programs that are outside their area of expertise. This ability to train Extension personnel how to promote and deliver novel programs is particularly important for preparing local stake holders to cope with potential federal mandates like School IPM.

References

Anonymous. (2003). News update: How will the new congress impact PCOs in 2003?. Pest Control Technology. 31: 14, 23-24.

Greene, A., & Breisch, N. L. (2002). Optimizing IPM for public buildings. Pest Control Technology. 30: 32, 34, 36, 38, 40, 42.

Koehler, P. G., & Scherer, C. (2002). University of Florida School IPM training manual. University of Florida. Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. Gainesville, Florida.

Koehler, P.G., Fasulo, T. R., & Scherer, C. (2002). School IPM--Readin, Writin' and Riddin' of Bugs. Available at: http://schoolipm.ifas.ufl.edu/

Long, C., & Kramer, R. D. (2000). Report--Research services to evaluate Integrated Pest Management in Virginia's schools.

McKenna, L. (2001). Don't miss the bus. Pest Control Technology. 29: 23, 26, 28, 30-31, 33-34.

Miller, D. M. (2003). Virginia School IPM (Integrated Pest Management). Available at: http://schoolipm.ento.vt.edu

United States Environmental Protection Agency. (1993). Pest control in the school environment: adopting Integrated Pest Management. EPA Publication No. 735-F-93-012. Office of Pesticide Programs. Washington. D. C. U. S. Government Printing Office. 43 pp.

Entertainment Media Violence: Roles for Extension Professionals

Kimberly Greder
Assistant Professor, Human Development and Family Studies
Family Life Extension State Specialist
kgreder@iastate.edu

Amina Charania
Graduate Student, Curriculum and Instruction
aminik@iastate.edu

Iowa State University
Ames, Iowa

• Every 11 seconds an American child is reported abused or neglected.

• Every 2 hours and 40 minutes an American child or teen is killed by gunfire.

• Every 8 minutes a child is arrested for violent crimes. (The State of Children in America's Union, 2002)

Do the above statistics present cause for alarm? Why are these acts occurring? What can Extension  professionals, parents, and other adults do to lessen this violence?

This article highlights research findings related to entertainment media violence, the process used to develop and evaluate a national satellite series on this topic, and practical applications for Extension educators. The Impact of Entertainment Media Violence on Children and Families, a national satellite series produced in 2001 by Iowa State University Extension, is a form of scholarship that demonstrates land-grant universities' ability to be responsive to societal needs (Norman, 2001).

Violence in America: Whose Responsibility Is It?

Violence has historically played a role in entertainment. However, there's growing consensus that media violence has become more frequent, graphic, sexual, and sadistic <http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/index.cfm>. Parents blame network television, movie, and videogame producers, and they in return blame parents. Media producers say they produce what Americans say that they want, that they are practicing freedom of expression, that it is parents' responsibility to know what their children are viewing, and that the research on entertainment media violence has flaws.

Politicians have become more familiar with the research on this subject, are concerned about the potential negative effects, and are putting more regulations in place (McCain, 2000). However, regulations will only be meaningful if they are enforced--at the store and at home.

Violence in Entertainment Media: What Does the Research Say?

Violence in television programs and movies and its impact on children and families is not a new topic. Thirty years ago, Jesse Steinfeld, then Surgeon General of the United States, warned Americans about the negative effects of television violence on the emotions and behaviors of children, "It is clear to me that the causal relationship between [exposure to] televised violence and antisocial behavior is sufficient to warrant appropriate and immediate remedial act ion... there comes a time when the data are sufficient to justify action. That time has come" (Surgeon General's Scientific Advisory Committee, 1972).

Additionally, six major medical groups warn of harmful effects of media violence on children (Congressional Public Health Summit, 2000). Studies show there is a stronger relationship between viewing violence in television programs and movies and aggressive behavior, than there is between asbestos and cancer, and calcium intake and bone mass (Bushman, 2001).

Over 1,000 research studies in the past 50 years reveal there is a relationship between viewing violence in television programs and movies and aggressive behavior in children, youth, and adults. However, young children are most vulnerable to the effects of media violence because they:

• Are more easily impressionable,

• Have a harder time distinguishing between fantasy and reality,

• Cannot easily discern motives for violence, and

• Learn by observing and imitating. (Bushman, 2001)

Research has shown three major effects of viewing violence on television:

1. Children may become less sensitive to the pain and suffering of others.

2. Children may be more fearful of the world around them.

3. Children may be more likely to behave in aggressive or harmful ways toward others (American Psychological Association, 1985).

Criticisms of Research

Despite numerous studies conducted on this topic, critics claim that the research is flawed and that there are other societal forces (e.g., lack of parental involvement, poverty, teenage alienation, peer group) that have led to the increased violence in America. Criticisms include that many of the studies were lab experiments and cannot be generalized to the real world, the connection between media violence and violent behaviors in viewers has not been empirically established, and most behavior is multi-determined (Fischoff, 1999).

Violent Television Programs

A typical American child spends an average of 28 hours a week (nearly 3 to 4 hours a day) exposed to television outside of school. When looking at total use of media, children between the ages of 8-18 spend more than 40 hours a week using some form of media (e.g., television, music, video games) (Roberts, Foehr, Rideout, & Brodie, 1999) outside the classroom and often as an individual effort. Time spent watching television programs and playing video games is time that children could use to read for pleasure, take a nature hike, play an instrument, or interact with family members.

The National Television Violence Study (1996-98), through analyzing 8,000 hours of television and cable broadcasting, found that 60% of the programs on television were violent. Of this 60%, 4% did not show any anti-violent themes, and 40% of violent acts were perpetrated by the "good characters". When the violent acts were conducted by "bad characters," over 40% of the bad characters went unpunished. Seventy-three percent of the violence perpetrators did not show any remorse for their violent actions, and 55% of the victims did not show any pain or suffering due to violence inflicted on them. In addition, 40% of the violent acts were portrayed as humorous (Houston et al., 1992).

Children may be exposed to as many as 5 violent acts per hour during prime time and an average of 26 violent acts per hour during Saturday morning children's programs. Thus, an average American child will have seen about 8,000 murders and more than 100,000 other assorted acts of violence, by the time they graduate from elementary school (Huston et al., 1992).

Violent Video Games

Although television serves as the main source of media consumption for children, children are increasing their video game use. Approximately 10% of children ages 2-18 play video games over 1 hour each day (Roberts et al., 1999), and boys aged 8-13, on average, play video games over 7.5 hours each week (Roberts et al., 1999). In 2000, the revenues of video and computer games were as great as those of the retail software industry and significantly greater than that of the domestic film industry.

According to 4th grade girls, their favorite video games are violent ones (Buchman & Funk, 1996). Andersen and Dill (2000) found that use of violent video games was related to aggression and delinquency, and the time spent playing video games was negatively related to academic achievement. Sixty to 90% of the most popular video games portray violence. Andersen (2001) also found that playing a violent video game for as little as 20 minutes causes a decrease in prosocial, helping behaviors and an increase in the following:

• aggressive thinking
• aggressive feelings such as anger
• physiological arousal (e.g., heart rate) and
• aggressive behavior

How Do Children Learn to Become Aggressive?

Observational Learning

Observation, imitation, and trial and error are key strategies used by children to learn to speak language--and to learn violence. Adults have always been models for observation; however, the extent of role modeling provided by adults has changed with industrialization and technological advances. With the advent of television, movies, and video games, parents are only one source of role modeling.

Children spend many hours learning from television, movie, and video game characters. Combined, these media characters tap the audio, visual, and tactile modes of learning, thus making them very stimulating and appealing to young audiences. As a result, if caution is not taken, these media can minimize the presence of parents, teachers, and other adults in the community as role models. However, it is important to note that family attitudes and social class are stronger determinants of attitudes toward aggression than is the amount of exposure to TV. Therefore, parents have the opportunity to mitigate the potential negative effects of media violence (Huesmann, 2001).

Observational learning is stronger when the identification with the character is based more on wishful thinking than on similarity with the character (Huesmann, 2001). Examples of identification with non-similar characters are popular animated violent video games and television programs. There are a number of instances where children have imitated the violent acts they see in video games and television programs in real life in terms of shooting and other violent acts in school, neighborhood, and at home.

Repeated exposure over time strengthens the learning of observed violent acts. Besides observational learning, operant conditioning, a very important type for long-term learning, can play its part, especially in video games. In video games the child is an active learner as he or she makes things happen by choosing the response, targeting towards it, and finally making it happen. Moreover, this habituation becomes stronger as his or her violent response, such as shooting the target, fighting, and hitting, is reinforced by earning additional points.

An Extension Response: "The Impact of Entertainment Media Violence on Children and Families," a National Satellite Series

Based on the growing research and societal concern regarding violence portrayed via entertainment media, Iowa State University Extension produced and broadcasted a four-part national satellite series (October 8, 22 and November 5, 19, 2001): "The Impact of Entertainment Media Violence on Children and Families," to 175 sites across the nation. The use of satellite technology allowed the program to be offered in several sites (rural and urban) across the nation simultaneously. As a result, a greater number of people participated in the program than if the program had been offered in only one site. In addition, travel costs were minimized for participants if the satellite program was offered in their community.

This satellite series brought together nationally recognized experts in the field of entertainment media violence to provide reliable information and practical suggestions to Extension and other family professionals. Approximately 1,800 professionals and parents were reached through this series.

The Logic Model--A Framework for Measuring Program Outcomes

To help describe what was done, how it was done, and the short-term outcomes that are associated with the satellite series, the logic model framework was implemented. The logic model describes the sequence of events that links program investments to results (University of Wisconsin Extension, 2002) and is the foundation of outcome-based evaluation. The purpose of the logic model is to clarify and make precise each element of the program and help identify the process and outcomes of the program. Graphically, the logic model illustrates the relationship of the parts to its whole and helps to summarize the program processes (inputs, activities, outputs) and program outcomes (Table 1).

Results

Outputs

• 175 Cooperative Extension county offices, hospitals, and schools downlinked the satellite series.

• Over 1,800 parents and professionals participated in one or more of the four programs in the series.

• 96 videotaped copies of the satellite series were distributed to individuals to share the information with parents and other professionals.

• Over 500 additional individuals (e.g., day care providers, teachers, foster parents, school counselors, parent educators, child abuse prevention council members, church groups, teen parents) participated in follow-up workshops conducted by county Extension  staff using videotaped copies of the satellite series.

• Information from the series was used with elementary and middle school youth through after school computer labs using non-violent, educational videogames.

• 4H members produced their own media messages.

• Research findings and practical suggestions from the series have been shared with over 15,000 families via school, 4-H, and faith organization newsletters.

• Extension staff posted information from the series on Web sites (one Web site averaged over 30,000 hits a month).

• Over 5,100 visits and 2,200 downloads from the Web site were recorded in Feb 2004, more than two years after the broadcast of the satellite series.

Outcomes

The satellite series was evaluated to assess the extent of change in participants' and site facilitators' knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors related to potential negative effects of entertainment media violence for children and families.

Short-Term Outcomes

The percentages reported below are rounded up to the nearest percent and reflect individuals who completed the evaluation forms immediately following the satellite series.

Given that the response rate is low (25% for participants; 17% for facilitators), care needs to be taken in interpreting the findings so they are not generalized to the total number of individuals who participated in the satellite series. The low response rate could be due to the extensive length of the series (four programs over a 1-month period) and that there was no requirement for participants to complete the evaluation forms or for local site facilitators to return the evaluation forms to the originating institution.

• Estimates indicate that over 1,800 individuals participated in the series.

• The majority of the participants (n=438; 25% response rate) were educators and family/youth professionals (75%), parents (17%), health professionals (10%), administrators (7%), volunteers (4%), students (3%) and clergy (4%). (Note: participants reported more than one category.)

• The majority of participants who completed the evaluation form at the end of the series (n=438) indicated that entertainment media violence can lead to negative consequences in children (95% to a very large or large extent, 4% to some extent, 1% not at all).

• 96% of the participants reported that, if given the opportunity to decide, they would either eliminate all the violent media programs or eliminate only the extreme violent ones.

• When asked what steps they would take in the 1-2 weeks following the satellite series, participants indicated that they planned to limit the exposure of entertainment media violence to families (their own and those they work with) by providing information they learned in the series to adults and children, by showing videotaped copies of the series to parent and professional groups, and by writing letters to television stations informing them about the importance of this issue.

• Facilitators (n=29; 17% response rate) stated that the program content was relevant to the audience 79% (31% agreed, 48% strongly agreed); the styles of the presenters were conducive to learning 83% (55% agreed, 28% strongly agreed); and there was a balance between research reported and time given for questions and answers 83%(52% agreed, 31% strongly agreed).

• Aspects of the series the facilitators liked best were the clarity of the research, the practical examples shared about media literacy and the informational handouts they could use to further disseminate the information shared in the program.

Long-Term Outcomes

A follow-up evaluation was conducted in March 2002, 4 months following the last satellite broadcast (November 19, 2001) to assess the extent to which the information shared during the satellite programs was retained and/or resulted in action steps taken by participants. Participants and facilitators who shared their e-mail addresses on the attendance sheet at the end of the series were sent an e-mail message asking them to complete a follow-up survey located at the Web site created for the series. When participants submitted their responses their e-mail addresses and names were not identified with their responses. The follow-up survey reported:

1. Attitudinal change regarding the effects of entertainment media violence in children before, immediately after and four months after the program;

2. Change in knowledge about the effects of entertainment media violence before, immediately after and four months after the program;

3. Action steps that participants actually took related to what they learned during the satellite series.

One hundred one participants responded to the electronic survey. A paired t-test was run to assess any significant change in attitude and knowledge before, immediately after, and 4 months after the program. The results indicated that the extent to which entertainment media violence affected children negatively was rated significantly higher (p=<.001) by participants immediately after the program (M=2.881, SD=.355) than before the program (M=2.535, SD = .558). The extent to which entertainment media violence affected children negatively was rated significantly higher (p<.001) by participants in the 4-month follow-up survey (M=2.861, SD=.375) than before the program (M=2.335, SD=.558).

While the survey ratings immediately after the program were slightly higher than the 4-month follow-up responses, there was no significant difference between the ratings of these two surveys, indicating that in the 4 months between the end of the series and the follow-up survey the participants did not perceive any additional shift in attitude regarding the negative effects of entertainment media violence.

A majority of participants who responded to the e-mail survey indicated that they planned to continue the activities they identified they would do immediately following the series (listed above), as well as form local committees to address issues related to entertainment media violence and include information in agency and community newsletters.

Participants also stated that they need additional support to find funds to help develop educational programs about entertainment media violence (e.g., funds for staff time, resources, etc.) and brief fact sheets/handouts to disseminate to parents, volunteers, and professionals. A large number of participants expressed the seriousness they felt towards the issue of entertainment media violence after participating in the series. A majority of other responses indicated appreciation for the research shared, the media literacy content, the suggestions shared for parents and professionals working with children, and the information regarding various implications of entertainment media violence for different age groups of children.

Lessons Learned for Producing a National Satellites Series

Qualitative responses to the surveys (at end of the series and 4-months later) helped to inform the suggestions below for future satellite programs.

• Reduce the number of program sessions in a series from four sessions to two sessions and develop programs 1 ½ to 2 hours in length.

• Develop and post suggested local site activities on a Web site for site facilitators to conduct immediately before, during and after the program.

• Use few PowerPoint slides during presentations and increase the time devoted to presenters sharing their research and ideas in a conversational manner.

• Ask presenters how they best want to use the medium (satellite broadcast) and capitalize on presenters' presentation strengths.

• Recruit a broader audience to participate in the satellite series and serve as site facilitators through identifying state and national level agencies and organizations who have a vested interest in the program topic.

• Continue to partner with national organizations (e.g., Parent Teacher Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, AAFCS, NEAFCS, NCFR, etc.) to promote the satellite series on their Web sites and directly to audiences they serve.

• Continue to develop a Web site to promote the satellite series, to serve as a resource for local site facilitators (e.g., promotional materials, local site activities, technical information) and to link to additional research and educational tools related to the program topic.

• Develop a state-level registration fee that allows states to downlink the series in as many sites as they desire.

Recommendations for Extension Action

Role of Extension Professionals in Educating About Entertainment Media Violence

Extension has a history of assisting parents and other adult caregivers in understanding influences on child development, of speaking up for the needs of children and families, and of helping families and communities critically think about public issues affecting their lives. Mass media (e.g., newspaper articles, radio talk shows, cable television, Web sites) have long been major vehicles for Extension  to share research and practical implications for families and professionals. Satellite broadcasts continue to serve as a cost-effective way to share this information, as well. This satellite series was one strategy to increase professionals' and parents' awareness and understanding of the issue, critically think about the issue, and begin to take action steps to address the impact of entertainment media violence on children and families.

Suggestions for Extension Professionals

• Increase personal awareness and understanding of this issue.

• Share information with parents, other adults and youth to help them develop critical thinking skills.

• Advocate. Share your viewpoints with movie, television, and game producers; help parents and youth learn how, when, and with whom to share their viewpoints; decide what products you are going to patronize.

Messages Extension Should Share with Families

• When it comes to entertainment media and young children, grown-ups are the gatekeepers.

• Make a list of the values you most want to pass along to your child and use that list to evaluate the media your child sees.

• Know what your child is watching and playing.

• If your child already has violent video games or movies, explain to him why they are harmful, get rid of them, offer to buy new, nonviolent movies and games, and give your child some choice in selecting nonviolent movies and games.

• Look at how your child uses media, and plan screen time to fit into a balanced routine of activities that include quiet and noise time; chances to have conversations, draw, and dance; and time to play alone and with others.

• If, after viewing TV or playing a video game, your child is aggressive, cranky, or scared, make different media choices.

• To see what your child might be most likely to remember, watch television programs or play videogames with the sound off. Images are more powerful than words--especially for young children.

• Look for developmentally appropriate production techniques (e.g., moderate pacing, showing instead of telling, highlighting key elements, age-appropriate language).

• Limit the number of media-related toys in your home and provide lots of generic toys. Children who only play with media-related toys may not be getting enough chances to use their imagination, especially if they use the toys only to repeat what they've seen rather than inventing their own stories.

• If you learn that a retailer is selling violent movies and games to children, complain to the manager.

• If you learn that a retailer is doing a good job of screening sales of violent material, thank the manager, and support the business, perhaps by purchasing nonviolent movies or educational video games.

• Help educate others in your community (parents, youth, public officials). (Anderson, 2001; Rogow, 2001)

Additional Resources

Additional resources on entertainment media violence can be retrieved from <http://www.extension.iastate.edu/families/media/resources.html>.

References

American Psychological Association. (1985). Violence on television: What do children Learn? what can parents do? Iowa State University. Retrieved July, 7, 2003, from: http://www.apa.org/pi/pii/vio&tv.html

Anderson, C. A. (2001). The impact of violent video games. Iowa State University. Retrieved June 10, 2003 from http://www.extension.iastate.edu/families/media/program.anderson.html

Anderson, C., & Dill, K. (2000). Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behavior in the laboratory and in life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(4), 772-790.

Buchman, D. D., & Funk, J. B. (1996). Video and computer games in the 90's: Children's time commitment and game preference. Children Today, 24, 12-16.

Bushman, B. (2002). The impact of violent television programs and movies. Iowa State University. Retrieved June 10, 2003 from: http://www.extension.iastate.edu/families/media/presenters.html

Congressional Public Health Summit (2000). Joint statement on the impact of entertainment violence on children. Retrieved June 10, 2003 from: http://www.aap.org/advocacy/releases/jstmtevc.htm

Fischoff, S. (1999). Psychology's quixotic quest for the media-violence connection. Journal of Media Psychology, 4(4). Retrieved September 20, 2000, from: http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/sfischo/violence.html

Huesmann, R. (2001). The psychology of media violence: Why it has a lasting impact on children. Iowa State University. Retrieved June 10, 2003, from: http://www.extension.iastate.edu/families/media/program.huesmann.html

Huston, A. C., Donnerstein, E., Fairchild, H., Feshbach, N. D., Katz, P.A., Murray, J.P. et al. (1992). Big world, small screen: The role of television in American society. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

The Impact of Entertainment Media Violence on Children and Families. (2001). Retrieved June 10, 2003, from: http://www.extension.iastate.edu/families/media

McCain, J. (2000). John McCain on families and children. June 10, 2003, from: http://www.issues2000.org/Social/John_McCain_Families_&_Children.htm

Media Awareness Network. (2003). Retrieved June 10, 2003, from: http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/issues/violence/violence_entertainment.cfm

Norman, C. L. (2001). The challenge of Extension scholarship. Journal of Extension [On-line], 39(1). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2001february/comm1.html

Oliver, M. B. (1994). Portrayals of crime, race and aggression in "reality based" policy shows: A content analysis. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 38, 179-192.

Roberts, D.F., Foehr, U.G., Rideout, V.G., & Brodie, M. (1999). Kids & media @ the new millennium. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation.

Rogow, F. (2001). Media literacy: A potent antidote to media violence. Retrieved May 19, 2003, from: http://www.extension.iastate.edu/families/media/presenters.html

The State of Children in America's Union: A 2002 Action Guide to Leave No Child Behind. Children's Defense Fund. Retrieved July 7, 2003, from: http://www.cdfactioncouncil.org/actionguide/

Surgeon General's Scientific Advisory Committee on Television and Social Behavior, Television and Growing Up. (1972). The impact of televised violence. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

University of Wisconsin Extension. (2002). Program development and evaluation: The logic model. Retrieved June 10, 2003, from: http://www.uwex.edu/ces/pdande/evaluation/evallogicmodel.html

Perceptions of the Cooperative Extension Service: A Community Resource for Youth and Family Programs

Claudia Mincemoyer
Assistant Professor
The Pennsylvania State University
University Park, Pennsylvania
cxm324@psu.edu

Daniel Perkins
Associate Professor
The Pennsylvania State University
University Park, Pennsylvania
dfp101@psu.edu

Catherine Lillehoj
Prevention Coordinator
Institute for Social and Behavioral Research
Iowa State University
Ames, Iowa
catheri@iastate.edu

Introduction

The study discussed here examined the perception of Cooperative Extension personnel, human service providers, and members involved in local PROSPER teams, regarding the role in the community that the Cooperative Extension Service played in providing prevention services to youth and families. PROSPER (PROmoting School-Community-University Partnerships to Enhance Resilience) is a research initiative designed to test a partnership model that builds capacity to deliver research-based family and youth interventions--interventions that are designed to bolster youth competencies, learning, and positive development (Spoth, Greenberg, Bierman & Redmond, 2004).

The PROSPER partnership model builds upon an extensive body of literature and existing conceptual frameworks for community-based partnerships addressing risk reduction, competence-building, and positive youth development. Namely, PROSPER creates a collaboration between two well-established educational delivery systems with a broad reach to American communities--public schools and the Cooperative Extension Service. These collaborations receive guidance and technical assistance based on science-guided practice from their state land-grant universities. (For more information on PROSPER, see Spoth, Greenberg, Bierman, & Redmond, 2004.)

Extension's Involvement in Youth and Family Programs

The Cooperative Extension Service has a long history of providing educational programming for youth and families. The goal of Extension programming is to encourage self-reliance and improve the quality of life for youth and families. Cooperative Extension Service personnel implement research-based programs that address a broad range of issues and needs, including youth character development, youth science and technology skill development, youth and family resiliency skills, child care and parenting skills, as well as prevention programs addressing teen pregnancy, child abuse, community crime and violence, drug and alcohol abuse, and academic underachievement (Hobbs, 1994).

The Cooperative Extension Service supports base programs and national initiatives that provide direction for educational programming in each state. Base programs define the major program foci, are central to the mission of Cooperative Extension, and are common to most Cooperative Extension units. Two of the seven base programs support the Cooperative Extension Service's role in youth and family programming: 4-H and Youth Development and Family Development and Resource Management.

All states provide some programming in these base program areas. National initiatives are also created to meet specific emerging needs of communities and to respond to societal concerns. For example, Extension Cares is a national initiative developed to improve childcare and youth programs, as well as supporting prevention programming (CSREES, 2003).

Another national initiative, Children, Youth and Families at Risk (CYFAR), was developed to provide resources and strategies to foster and support prevention programming for at-risk children, youth, and families. Since 1991, CYFAR has supported programs in more than 600 communities in all states and territories.

As part of the CYFAR Initiative, an organizational change study was conducted in 42 states to assess the ability of the Cooperative Extension Service to work with at-risk children, youth, and families (Betts, Marczak, Peterson, Sewell, & Lipinski, 1998). The respondents, CES personnel, reported strong organizational support for expansion and strengthening programs for at-risk children, youth, and families. Moreover, in 34 states, one-half or more respondents reported that they are called upon at least monthly for their expertise related to children, youth, family, and community issues, suggesting that Cooperative Extension professionals are recognized for expertise related to youth and families.

Collaboration in Youth and Family Programs

The Cooperative Extension Service is committed to fostering community-based partnerships and collaborations to solve local problems. A central value of the Cooperative Extension Service is to optimize resources and enhance program outcomes through partnerships with external organizations (White & Burnham, 1995). Warner, Hinrich, Schneyer, and Joyce (1998) suggest that the role of Cooperative Extension Service personnel is transitioning from educational programmer and facilitator to builder of community partnerships that engage in research focused on the community problem-solving process. The CYFAR Organizational Change Survey (Betts et al., 1998) found that collaboration with other community, state, and federal organizations was perceived to enhance the Cooperative Extension Service's experience and credibility in work with at-risk groups and that collaboration was worth the effort.

Lerner (1995) indicates that it is imperative for prevention research to include collaborations between researchers and community groups, agencies, and institutions. The Cooperative Extension Service can provide a valuable link between community groups and institutions (e.g., schools) to enable collaborative prevention efforts. The Cooperative Extension Service increasingly collaborates with schools and community agencies to develop, deliver, and evaluate prevention programs (Miltenberger, 2001; Molgard, 1997; Smith, Hill, Matranga, & Good, 1995; Smith, Hill & Bandera, 1997). Smith et al. (1995) conducted a qualitative study of school principals who had collaborated on youth at-risk programs with the Cooperative Extension Service. One of six major elements identified as making a difference in the collaboration was the local support provided by the Cooperative Extension Service.

Perception and Role of the Cooperative Extension Service in Providing Services to Youth and Families

Warner, Christenson, Dillman, and Salant (1996) examined the public's perception of the Cooperative Extension Service and how it had changed from 1982 to 1995. Using a telephone survey, a random national sample of adults (N =1,048) was asked their perception of the Cooperative Extension Service, use of their programs, and priorities for funding. The same questions were asked of a national random sample of adults in 1995 (N = 1,124); 45% indicated that they had heard of the Cooperative Extension Service, a 5% increase from 1982. Of the four program areas, 4-H had the greatest visibility (i.e., 69% of respondents had knowledge of 4-H programs); however, this was an 8% decline in the awareness level of the 4-H Youth Development program over the 13-year period. When asked if they or an immediate family member had ever used Cooperative Extension services, 26% indicated a positive response.

Across the U.S., the greatest rate of use was found in the Midwest and Southern regions, among those living on farms, among Caucasians, by middle-aged persons, and by those with higher educational and income levels. Even though the Cooperative Extension Service has made a concerted programming effort to reach under-served audiences (e.g., urban residents, youth and young families, and persons with lower levels of income and education), those groups remain the least likely to be aware of the Cooperative Extension Service (Warner et al., 1996).

Johns, Moncloa, and Gong (2000) examined the Cooperative Extension Service's role in strengthening community-based programs focused on pregnant and parenting teens. They identified 10 best practices for teen pregnancy prevention. In particular, they noted that the Cooperative Extension Service could provide extensive knowledge and support in three of the 10 best practices: youth development, family involvement, and cultural relevance. The authors identified those three issues because of the Cooperative Extension Service's historic experience and expertise in those areas.

Through the 4-H Youth Development program, the Cooperative Extension Service has played a key role for over 100 years with programs focused on academic enrichment, life skill development, community service, and leadership development. Supporting and developing family involvement programs is another role identified for the Cooperative Extension Service. In the majority of states, the extensive experience and knowledge of Cooperative Extension personnel was identified as a major asset in working with multicultural populations through the Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program and the 4-H Youth Development program.

In sum, the Cooperative Extension Service is the only community-based organization with a direct connection to the research expertise of the land-grant university and has a history of effective and extensive collaborative networking among community agencies and institutions who serve youth and families (Coward, VanHorn, & Jackson, 1986). From the literature reviewed previously, there is strong descriptive and anecdotal evidence that the Cooperative Extension Service is a community leader in providing services to children, youth, and families.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the study discussed here was to examine the perception of the Cooperative Extension Service as an organization addressing issues facing children, youth, and families. Data were drawn from the PROSPER project. Cooperative Extension Service agents and directors, as well as members of community PROPSER teams, were interviewed to assess: the Cooperative Extension Service's reputation for providing services to youth and families, the perceived level of commitment that the Cooperative Extension Service has for fostering school and community-based prevention programs, and perceptions of the Cooperative Extension Service as a leading force in improving the lives of youth and families. Specifically, the research questions were:

1. Is there a difference between Cooperative Extension Service agents' and directors' perceptions of the Cooperative Extension Service in terms of:
   1. reputation in providing services to youth and families;
   2. commitment to fostering school and community-based prevention programs; and
   3. as a leading force in improving the lives of youth and families?
2. Is there a difference between Cooperative Extension Service personnel and community PROSPER team member perceptions of the Cooperative Extension Service in terms of:
   1. reputation in providing services to youth and families;
   2. commitment to fostering school and community-based prevention programs; and
   3. as a leading force in improving the lives of youth and families?

Methods

In the spring of 2002, paid survey researchers conducted face-to-face interviews with Cooperative Extension Service agents (N=22) on PROSPER teams, county Cooperative Extension Service directors from PROSPER communities (N=19), and other PROSPER team members (N =238) in 28 communities (i.e., 14 in Pennsylvania and 14 in Iowa). Those interviews included both comparison (N=7) and intervention communities (N=7) in each state and were completed at the beginning of the PROSPER project. No PROSPER activities had occurred in the intervention communities prior to the interviews. PROSPER team members were identified and interviewed in the comparison communities although they never formed or met as a team following the interviews.

Communities involved in the PROSPER study included rural areas and small towns with school districts varying between 1,236 and 5,192 students; the average school district size was slightly less than 3,000 students. PROSPER team members included parents, Safe and Drug Free School coordinators, community mental health and substance abuse agency representatives, principals, and other school personnel (e.g., teachers and guidance counselors). Participants were asked questions about their perception of the Cooperative Extension Service regarding:

1. Reputation in the community;
2. Commitment to fostering school and community-based prevention programs; and
3. Leading force in improving the lives of youth and families.

Measures

Reputation

This single-item variable was measured with responses to the statement, "The Cooperative Extension Service has a good reputation in this community for providing services to youth and families." Participants were asked to respond using a Likert scale ranging from "Strongly agree" (1) to "Strongly disagree" (4).

Commitment

Participant responses to this single-item variable were measured with the statement, "The Cooperative Extension Service is committed to fostering school- and community-based prevention programs." The same four-point Likert scale was used as with the reputation variable.

Leading force

This single-item variable measured the level of agreement with the statement, "The Cooperative Extension Service is seen as a leading force in the community in improving the lives of youth and families." The Likert response scale ranged from "Strongly agree" (1) to "Strongly disagree" (4).

Results

The analyses involved a two-step process. First, descriptive statistics were conducted on all the variables. Second, the Fisher's Exact Test was used to investigate significant differences for both the first and second research questions.

CES Agents' and Directors' Perceptions

In terms of the reputation of the Cooperative Extension Service in providing community youth and family programs, no significant difference was found between the perceptions of agents and directors (Fisher's Exact Test = 0.1.69; N = 39; p = 0.58) (Table 1). Given the small cell sizes for the "Strongly disagree" and "Disagree" categories, these two categories were collapsed into one category. A subsequent Fisher's Exact Test found no significant difference between perceptions of Cooperative Extension Service agents and directors (Fisher's Exact Test = .52; N = 39; p = 0.54).