|
February 2006
|
       |
Contents
Editor's PageJOE by the NumbersAs usual this time of year, I report on the previous year's acceptance rate, submission rate, and readership rate. I also call attention to one of the most interesting features of the JOE site--unless you count the issues themselves, of course. Acceptance Rate In 2005, the acceptance rate for JOE articles was 32%. In 2004, it was 48%. This means that JOE is an increasingly rigorous journal in which Extension professionals and other scholars should be proud to be published. Submission Rate In 2005, JOE received 275 submissions. This is only four submissions fewer than our all-time high, reached in 2004. Readership Rate JOE readership rate continues to rise. In 2005, there were 1,546,062 "visitors" to the JOE site who viewed 4,169,310 pages. This compares to 1,055,639 visitors who viewed 2,610,120 pages in 2004. These numbers all say something about the growing popularity of the Web and even more about the success of JOE as the refereed journal for Extension professionals. The Top 50 Most Read Articles In 2002, we started offering reports at 6-month intervals on the most popular articles in JOE. You can find these reports at <http://www.joe.org/stats.html>. These lists are not a reflection on the quality of the JOE articles that "made the lists" as opposed to those that didn't, but they do say a lot about the degree of interest readers from around the world have in some of the topics discussed in JOE articles. February JOEThere are many interesting articles in this issue, and I have space to mention just a few of them.
And these are just six of 29 excellent articles in this issue! Laura Hoelscher, Editor
The Neglected Life SkillAmy Harder IntroductionI pledge my Head to clearer thinking, my Heart to greater loyalty, my Hands to larger service, and my Health to better living, for my club, my community, my country and my world. This is the pledge of the National 4-H program, the single largest out-of-school youth organization in the United States. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (n.d., 4-H Mission), the mission of 4-H is to "[empower] youth to reach their full potential, working and learning in partnership with caring adults." This is accomplished by teaching life skills in experiential, hands-on activities to 4-H members that address each of the four primary areas of living: Head, Heart, Hands, and Health. While 4-H has existed for over one hundred years and has always sought to improve the lives and skills of youth, it was not until the late 20th century that structured models of life skills began to emerge. These models were developed in response to a need for focus and consistency among the many 4-H programs within each state and across the country. Although there is still some disagreement about which life skills should be included, one model has emerged with a great degree of acceptance within the field. This popular design was developed at Iowa State University and is known as the "Targeting Life Skills Model" (Hendricks, 1996). The TLS model places 35 life skills into four major categories—Head, Heart, Hands, and Health—and then subdivides the skills into eight subcategories: giving, working, living, being, thinking, managing, relating, and caring. Problem StatementOf the many TLS model life skills that 4-H seeks to teach youth, 4-H seems to do a particularly good job in the area of communication (Boyd, Herring, & Briers, 1992; Fitzpatrick, Hatch Gagne, Jones, Lobley & Phelps, 2005). This life skill routinely receives high scores on assessments of 4-H members. However, some researchers have recognized the difficulty in getting accurate responses to a life skill as broadly defined as communication, instead differentiating written from oral skills in their evaluation efforts. The result of this differentiation has revealed what seems to be a bias in 4-H—one that emphasizes oral communication and neglects written. This is evident in some notable studies that elected only to measure the oral segment of communication skills (e.g., Boleman, Cummings, & Briers, 2004; Rusk, Martin, Talbert, & Balschweid, 2002). Fox, Schroeder, and Lodl's study of the life skills taught by 4-H gives further verification of this trend, with alumni reporting such statements as "I learned skills for effective communication: presentations and public speaking," and "The most important things I learned were how to speak in front of a group and how to put a presentation together" (2003, Communication Skills). Admittedly, there is a heavier emphasis on oral communication in 4-H, as many programs require their members to give demonstrations and speeches in order to complete their 4-H project. Also, traditionally popular 4-H activities such as livestock and horse judging are designed to teach youth how to give oral reasons in front of a judge. Studies on these activities, such as those previously mentioned (Boleman, et al. 2004; Rusk, et al. 2002), have acknowledged the inherent focus of judging on teaching oral communication skills. Speaking skills are valuable, but in what 4-H activities does a 4-H member have the opportunity to practice his/her writing skills? A typical member may actively participate in an entire year of 4-H and write only once, to complete the project record book. Nearly every 4-H project is accompanied by a record book that members are expected to fill out, although designs of the record book vary. The record book, in some programs, is the only written work required by 4-H. This situation leads to two important questions. How much emphasis should be placed upon written communication skills in 4-H? And, if it is important to emphasize written communication, how can agents convey this message to their members? The Importance of WritingAs a youth development program, 4-H seeks to graduate youth who are prepared to become productive citizens for their community. Increasingly, writing skills are becoming a greater part of taking on a role as a productive citizen. In fact, a report from the College Board's National Commission on Writing for America's Families, Schools and Colleges (2005) found writing skills to be a significant factor in the hiring and promotion processes for state level professional employees. In their survey of 49 state level human resource departments, 75% agreed that writing skills were taken into consideration for hiring and promotion of employees. While good writing skills may help land a position, the commission found that the lack thereof almost certainly bars a candidate from employment, according to 80% of the human resource departments surveyed. The situation is much the same in private industry, as well. In their 2004 report, the National Commission on Writing presented the results from 64 major American companies associated with the Business Roundtable. As with the public sector, employers in private industry noted the importance of good writing skills for job applicants and current employees looking to move up in the company. According to Berman's study, the service industry is expected to provide the most new jobs in the next decade, and 80% or more of salaried employees in these professions have writing responsibilities (as cited in College Entrance Examination Board, 2004). This is a particularly important statistic for today's high school and college students who will be seeking salaried jobs in this time frame. Yet, despite the obvious importance of writing skills in the American workplace, students are shockingly unprepared to meet the necessary challenges ahead. In 2002, the U.S. Department of Education found in their National Assessment of Educational Progress that while 74% of high school seniors were capable of writing at or above a basic level, only 24% performed at the proficiency level, and a scant 2% were considered advanced (U.S. Department of Education, 2003). These figures do not bode well for students seeking future employment or for the state of the educational system today. ImplicationsIt is clear that writing will be a critical part of many 4-H members' professional lives and that 4-H cannot afford to neglect this segment of communication. The importance of writing is paramount in helping youth to "connect the dots in their knowledge" (College Board, 2003, p. 3) and cannot be ignored by a youth development organization such as 4-H. In compliance with the official mission of empowering youth to reach their full potential, 4-H must find a way to incorporate more opportunities to help youth succeed at writing, through such activities as pen pal exchanges, creative writing contests, or writing clinics. Can 4-H rise to the occasion to best prepare its youth to meet the demands of the "real world"? Perhaps more important, can 4-H afford not to? ReferencesBoleman, C. T., Cummings, S. R., & Briers, G. E. (2004). Parents' perceptions of life skills gained by youth participating in the 4-H beef project. Journal of Extension [On-line], 42(5). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2004october/rb6.shtml Boyd, B. L., Herring, D. R., & Briers, G. E. (1992). Developing life skills in youth. Journal of Extension [On-line], 30(4). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1992winter/a4.html College Entrance Examination Board (2003). The neglected "R": The need for a writing revolution. Report of The National Commission on Writing in America's schools and colleges. New York, NY: Author. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED475856) College Board (2005, July). Writing: A powerful message from state government. Retrieved January 4, 2006, from http://www.writingcommission.org/prod_downloads/writingcom/powerful-message-from-state.pdf College Board (2004, September). Writing: A ticket to work...or a ticket out. A survey of business leaders. Retrieved January 4, 2006, from http://www.writingcommission.org/prod_downloads/writingcom/writing-ticket-to-work.pdf Fiztpatrick, C., Hatch Gagne, K., Jones, R., Lobley, J. & Phelps, L. (2005). Life skills development in youth: Impact research in action. Journal of Extension [On-line], 43(3), Article 3RIB1. Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2005june/rb1.shtml Fox, J., Schroeder, D. & Lodl, K. (2003). Life skill development through 4-H clubs: The perspective of 4-H alumni. Journal of Extension [On-line], 41(6). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2003december/rb2.shtml Hendricks, P. (1996). Targeting life skills model: Incorporating developmentally appropriate learning opportunities to assess impact of life skills development. Ames, IA: Iowa State University. Rusk, C. P., Martin, C. A., Talbert, B. A., & Balschweid, M. A. (2002). Attributes of Indiana's 4-H livestock judging program. Journal of Extension [On-line], 40(2). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2002april/rb5.html Seevers, B. S. & Dormody, T. J. (1995). Leadership life skills development: Perceptions of senior 4-H youth. Journal of Extension [On-line], 33(4). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1995august/rb1.html U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative State Research , Education, and Extension Service (n.d.). 4-H Lore. Retrieved January 2, 2006 from the 4-H Headquarters Web site: http://www.national4-hheadquarters.gov/about/4h_lore.htm U.S. Department of Education. (2003). The Nation's report card: Writing 2002 (NCES 2003-529). Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics. View reader comments for this Commentary in the JOE Discussion Forum. (This forum is no longer accepting new entries.)
[an error occurred while processing this directive][an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]
Extension's Role in Homeland Security: A Virginia PerspectiveJohn H "Rusty" Miller Robert Grisso Michael Lambur Virginia Tech IntroductionDo you remember what you were doing around 10 a.m. on September 11, 2001? This is a day we will long remember. Given the current environment related to the aftermath of September 11, 2001, Cooperative Extension may be in a unique position to provide educational assistance related to the consequences of terrorism because of its strong presence in local communities. What role should Extension play? What is needed in the way of educational assistance? These were important questions that Virginia Cooperative Extension (VCE) sought to answer in this project. EDEN (Extension Disaster Education Network) developed a USDA project to identify educational needs in the area of homeland security. As part of accomplishing that task, EDEN conducted two national surveys, one from Extension educators working in field offices and one from agricultural producers (EDEN, 2002). The results of the surveys indicated a need for Extension to be involved in this arena by setting up an informational system to provide state and local governments a way to inform and educate the public in homeland security matters. Building upon this, VCE conducted a project that was designed to determine what role it might play in assisting local governments in dealing with emergency preparedness issues in the aftermath of a manmade disaster as a result of terrorist activity. The project was funded as a special project through USDA. Extension can play a critical role in coordination of activities, not just during a disaster, but also before a disaster occurs, and in the period of long-term recovery after consequence management activities. Local governments are actively engaged in safeguarding their counties and cities and most of all protecting their citizens. Many county and city major facilities require upgraded security. Local officials as well as the citizens they represent need additional information for planning emergency preparedness and implementing and managing emergency plans in case of a disaster. Extension could play an important role in providing this type of assistance. PurposeThe purpose of this project was to collect viewpoints and perspectives on the unique role VCE could play in providing Homeland Security educational assistance to local governments and key professionals involved in the protection of residents from a terrorist attack. Using this information, VCE could position itself to play a key role in addressing this important issue. MethodologyCommunity forums were identified as the appropriate data collection method. They were used because they provided a way to bring key individuals together to discuss VCE's potential role in Homeland Security. By identifying local individuals who have a stake in homeland security and facilitating the discussion, VCE could be a catalyst for effective community problem solving. VCE, through its local Extension Leadership Councils (ELC), held five community forums to determine the need for educational assistance in manmade disasters resulting from terrorist attacks. ELC's are composed of a diverse group of salaried and volunteer staff who truly own an ever-changing Cooperative Extension program in their planning area. The ELC assumes responsibility not only for identifying the needs and concerns that exist in their planning area, but shares a commitment to determining solutions, implementing them, and evaluating and reporting results. The diversity of the ELC enhances discussions, deliberations, and actions. In addition, there is a recognition that each person on the ELC brings unique experiences and information that will contribute to the Extension educational programming process. The purpose of the community forums was to collect participants' viewpoints on the kinds of terrorist attacks they considered a threat to their community (both directly and surrounding), the kinds of preparations if any that were already underway to deal with these threats, and the kinds of educational assistance that would be needed by the community (citizens and professionals). Data were collected from community forum participants through the use of eight key questions. Invited participants for this study included:
A total of 122 people participated in the forums. Five community forums were conducted from May through August, 2003, in the following locations in Virginia (Figure 1): the Eastern Shore (Accomack and Northampton Counties), Powhatan County, Prince George County, City of Suffolk, and Abingdon (multi-jurisdictions – southwest Virginia). Figure 1.
The number of participants by site follows:
At the Suffolk and Prince George sites, questions were posed directly to the participants by a facilitator, with all responses recorded on flipcharts. The number of participants at the Eastern Shore, Abingdon, and Powhatan sites was of a size that participants were divided into small groups. A facilitator posed questions, with each small group responding to the questions within the group and recording their comments on a flipchart. Community Forum ResultsA summary of key results by question is presented below. Question #1: What Kind of Terrorist Attacks, That May Happen Anywhere, Concerns You the Most?Participants at all sites mentioned similar kinds of attacks: Biological and chemical events, disruptions to systems (utilities, communications, and transportation), contamination (water and food), and explosives. In addition, participants at the Abingdon, Prince George, and Suffolk sites were concerned about "something" happening at large public events. The Eastern Shore and Suffolk participants were concerned about an attack on the ports and military bases in the area. Questions #2 & #3: What Types of Attacks Are You Most Concerned About That May Happen Here? From the Created List, What Are the Top Three You Are Most Concerned About?Responses to these questions mirrored responses to the first question. But when participants were asked to choose the three types of attacks they were most concerned could happen in their communities, there were differences among sites:
Question #4: To Your Knowledge, What Preparations Are Already Under Way in Your County/City/Community to Deal with an Attack and Its Aftermath?All sites reported enhanced planning efforts since the September 11, 2001 event, with more serious attention given to potential targets. There are local Emergency Planning Committees in all jurisdictions. Emergency operations plans are in place, and mock drills are being held. Schools have developed crisis plans. Health Departments working with hospitals and other health related organizations have plans. In the eastern part of the state it was mentioned there are transportation plans on how to "move" the people in the event of a disaster. Shelters and distribution centers have been identified. The nonprofit sector and the faith communities (at some sites) have also done planning. Sites also reported the purchase of enhanced equipment/communications systems/weaponry and plans for purchasing additional items when additional funds become available. Several sites reported educational efforts that had been directed to the general public. In the Suffolk area, there is CERT training that provides information on how to help families/neighbors in emergency situations. The Health Department and Red Cross have done training for civic groups. Civic groups have been asked by fire and police departments to assist in passing information on to others. VCE has provided education on farm security and pesticide storage statewide. In general, the public was more open to the receiving of information. Although participants reported enhanced coordination among interested parties, there was also surprise at the amount of planning that was ongoing in sectors not known to them. Multiple plans have been developed for the same geographic area focusing on separate segments of the community, i.e., law enforcement, health, civic involvement, faith communities, nonprofit sector. Participants often commented that there needed to be a coordinated effort where all planning entities would meet at least yearly to compare plans and efforts for better coordination. It was acknowledged that the two segments that appeared to be involved in cross-sector planning were emergency management and law enforcement. Questions #5, #6, & #7: Do You Feel a Need for Information on Preparing for Dealing with Attacks and Their Aftermath? To Whom Should the Information Be Directed? In What Form Do You Think the Information Should Be Made Available?At no site did the participants feel the need for additional information. The sense was that the information is readily available either from their state/federal counterparts or from other sources via the Web. An observer at the Abingdon forum representing a local newspaper stated she could not get the information she thought she needed for distribution to the public. However, participants at all sites felt there was a need to provide information to the general public. As one person stated at the Suffolk site, the information that the public needs is available, but it may not be in a form (written in a technical manner or at a too high educational level or it contains too much information) that is appropriate for the public. A participant in Abingdon stated that some information is only available to key officials/agencies/organizations and the public would not have access to it. It was felt there wasn't a need to create any new information but to get available information in a form appropriate for distribution to the public and coordinate its dissemination. Question #8: What Do You See as Extensions' Role in Supporting the Existing Efforts When Dealing with Preparation for an Attack or Following One?There were differences in responses by site:
In summary, five key points were identified that have implications for Extension's involvement in homeland security.
Extension's Role in Virginia: Next StepsAs a result of these efforts, a Web site <http://www.hlseduc.ext.vt.edu/> has been established with the goal of developing materials that agents and local emergency response groups can use to access and prepare for man-made disasters. A community action plan and implementation strategies will be the primary driver for this site. The site will also contain resources and ideas to study and test as the community acts. The materials will aid in the interaction of sharing the current agency plans for homeland security and how they will impact the total action during an emergency. The Extension agent will be viewed as one of the potential facilitators of these local action and development plans, pulling resources and the expertise from the community and helping to identify potential overlaps of missions and potential gaps in responding and preparing for man-made disasters. Acknowledgments This project would not have been possible without the hard work and dedication of Judy Burtner, who set up and conducted all of the forums. Presented at the EDEN 2004 Annual Meeting, "Building Relationships with Agencies and People," October 12-14, 2004, The Penn State - Conference Center Hotel, Penn State University State College, PA ReferencesEDEN, Extension Disaster Education Network. (2002). 2002 Eden Homeland Security Survey [On-line]. Available at: http://www.eden.lsu.edu/hs_surveys.asp
Continuity and Change: Themes of Mental Model Development Among Small-Scale FarmersEileen Eckert Alexandra Bell Small-scale farming is an endangered way of life in many parts of the United States. Agricultural land and family farming enterprises are experiencing heavy pressures from real estate development, consolidation, conflicts over water, and other trends that lead more farmers to exit than enter the occupation every year (Golden, 2004; U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1998). At the same time, niches of opportunity exist in farming (Burros, 2002; Ortiz, 2004). Operators of small farms who can produce organic, specialty, or value-added products can often maintain and even improve their economic well-being (Burros, 2002; Greene, 2000). Moskin (2005) noted "the concentration [of these types of enterprises] is especially high in the Northeast, where a small farm near an urban area can now survive solely through farmers' markets, restaurants, farm membership (in which customers pay in advance for a season's worth of produce) and other direct outlets." Ingenuity and innovation are keys to success, and these qualities are integrated in successful small-scale farmers' mental models of farming (Eckert & Bell, 2005). Mental models are defined as "inventions of the mind that represent, organize, and restructure domain-specific knowledge" (Seel, 2001, p. 408). Related research by Eckert and Bell (Eckert & Bell, 2005; Bell & Eckert, 2005) found that prior experience, values and beliefs, and knowledge influenced a farmer's current mental model of farming. In turn, the mental model served as both a filter and guide for his or her actions, decisions, and use of information. This was true regardless of the type of farming operation, marketing practices, or approach to farming (for example, sustainable, organic, or conventional). For many farmers, success requires overcoming assumptions embedded in mental models of farming that keep them tied to their current practices and prevent them from seeing possibilities for success (Berton, 2001; Eckert, 2003). A better understanding of how farmers develop their mental models of farming and the conditions under which their models may change is needed for agricultural educators to maximize the impact of services and enable farmers to improve the viability and profitability of their farms. The qualitative study described here, which focused on a group of small-scale farmers in the Northeast, represents a first step towards this goal. MethodTen operators of small farms in the northeastern United States comprised the sample for this study. The sample was selected through a process of peer and service-provider referral, which resulted in a list of successful small-scale farmers representing different farming approaches, commodities, marketing strategies, and geographic regions. The sample emphasized sustainable and organic practices to reflect growing trends in the Northeast and the USDA Small Farms Commission (1998) policy recommendations emphasizing sustainable agriculture as a profitable, ecological, and socially sound strategy for small farms. A profile of the sample is presented in Table 1. Each participant met the operational definition of "successful new farmer" based on a multifaceted typology of new farmers developed by the Northeast New Farmer Network Project (Sheils, 2004). The typology was designed to enable service providers to better meet the needs of the region's new farmer clientele and accounts for differences in levels of farming experience, responsibility, commitment, resources, and risk. By definition (Sheils, 2004), the farmers in the sample had completed re-strategizing efforts, which typically involves going "through a critical phase of modifying or restructuring their operations" (p. 6) and "they were on their way to becoming established farmers" (p. 6). All of the farms were full-time operations, though many of the farmers had additional sources of income.
The 10 farmers who participated in the study were interviewed on site at their farms. Interviews were completed between February and August of 2002. The semi-structured, tape-recorded interviews lasted 60 to 90 minutes. The interview protocol focused on farmers' perceptions of significant experiences in the course of their learning how to farm and the meanings they attributed to being a "successful" farmer. Consistent with qualitative interview strategies (Strauss & Corbin, 1990), the protocol was revised on an ongoing basis to elicit more focused responses from participants and to accommodate themes that emerged in early data analysis. Data analysis entailed alternating between open coding and thematic coding using themes suggested by the literature on mental models (e.g., Greeno, 1989; Johnson-Laird, 1983; Seel, 2001) and verifying or revising themes based on the data (Miles & Huberman, 1994). Trustworthiness of data collection and analysis were maximized using a variety of strategies, including member checking, peer debriefing, review of transcripts and interpretations by a farmer advisor, and review of current literature. Results are presented in the following section. Relevant information about interview participants is incorporated into the discussion. ResultsBased on the interview data, the researchers developed a definition of a mental model of farming. A mental model of farming is an individual "mental map" or set of propositions that includes the individual's values and beliefs about the ideal and the actual state of farming. It includes the role and relative importance of values, beliefs, knowledge, and skills, as well as ways of processing information, learning, and applying skills to solve problems (Eckert, 2003; Eckert & Bell, 2005). Two themes emerged in the data regarding how small-scale successful farmers developed mental models of farming:
Continuity: Farmers Develop and Reinforce Existing Mental Models Through Discovery Learning and Problem SolvingParticipants in this study developed, reinforced, and refined their existing mental models of farming primarily through discovery learning and problem solving. Farmers spoke of trial-and-error and of learning without necessarily knowing the outcome in advance, in short, of learning through discoveries. According to Tuovinen and Sweller (1999), "Discovery learning requires learners to discover concepts and procedures that might otherwise be communicated by direct instruction" (p. 334). Seel (2001) attributed mental model development to activities such as exploratory learning and problem solving, including both self-guided and other-guided discovery learning. In the interviews, participants described both types of discovery learning experiences. Carla and Jim, who operated a goat dairy and grew vegetable crops, provided an example of how their mental model of insect pest control was refined through self-guided discovery learning. They described their use of chickens to eat the bugs in their greenhouse and their use of praying mantises to control harmful insects:
Organic vegetable growers Cathy and Mike also described several discovery learning activities, both self-guided and other-guided, that contributed to their proficiency in controlling harmful insects. An example of other-guided discovery learning was their participation in an agricultural researcher's project on controlling Mexican bean beetles with a parasitic wasp. An example of self-guided discovery learning was their planting of nicotiana next to their tomatoes, "just because we happened to like the plant," and then discovering that tomato hornworms liked the nicotiana better than the tomato plants. Mike described how they incorporated things that they had "noticed over the years that they've been beneficial to our operation." Mike said, "For me, rotation is so important to control the quality of the ground and what bugs are there, and use of green strips in your fields to isolate. The bugs travel, [so] if you put in grass or something like that it's hard for them to sort of get through so they'll stop." The activities that Cathy and Mike described were in keeping with Mike's summary of his own learning as occurring largely through trial-and-error. All the activities occurred within the farmers' established mental model of being successful in organic farming. The discovery-learning and problem-solving activities described above were undertaken with a conscious awareness on the part of the farmers of how the activities fit their mental model and contributed to their success. Cathy said, "They know at the experiment station that if they have something that is organic that they want to try, that we're very open to trials, we're very open to trying new techniques." Her explanation that she and Mike were open to organic trials indicated her unwillingness to participate in non-organic trials. Non-organic trials would have been outside of her mental model of farming that delimits, or frames, her practices and learning. Cathy described seeking experiences that would contribute to her ability to apply knowledge skillfully and to be successful within her chosen mental model of farming. Most of the learning activities described by farmers in the sample served to maintain the continuity of an existing mental model. Some experiences, however, were activating events, which triggered articulation, questioning, and sometimes transformation of the farmer's mental model. Change: Farmers Sometimes Transform Their Mental Models as a Result of an Activating EventFor some farmers, the process of becoming aware of one's mental model or its components happened over a long period of time. In other cases, the farmer's mental model was challenged by an activating event--an occurrence that caused the mental model to become explicit and open to reflection, refinement, and sometimes transformation. Cranton (2002) used the term activating event to refer to an event that "typically exposes a discrepancy between what a person has always assumed to be true and what has just been experienced, heard, or read" (p. 66). Half of the farmers interviewed described experiences that were indicative of activating events. In his interview, Kevin, a livestock and poultry farmer, explained how he came to understand farming using a different mental model than the "industrial model" that framed most of his learning experiences in college. Upon completing a conventional herdsman program in a vocational college, he believed that he did not have the land, infrastructure, or capital to begin farming for himself, so he worked in a conventional hog farming operation. Kevin described the experience of disease decimating the livestock population, saying, "There was periods of time when we lost every pig in the whole room, and you just, you know, pitching 'em out the door for hours, piles this high outside the . . . it's pretty discouraging." When asked about critical incidents in his development of proficiency, he returned to that experience, saying: Well, I think my "aha" incident would have been working in the hog barns, 'cause, you know, before that time I thought, "Well, this is the way you go, you know, this is the future, this is the way it is," and after that experience that kind of changed my outlook . . . There was a couple of times when things were just, everything was dead! . . . and we were doing everything we could do, in terms of vaccinating and treating and cleaning and all that to prevent it, but it still happened. So I would say that kind of changed my, totally changed my thinking, which also changed whether I could start farming on my own, because if you don't need a confinement barn to start farming, if all you need's a couple of strings of wire and an electric fence and some animals and some grass, that's all you need, then it makes it a whole lot more practical to start. Kevin explained that as a result of the change in his mental model triggered by the activating event, he was able to begin farming in a way that was consistent with his transformed mental model and that was not resource-intensive. Carla described and contrasted two activating events. First was her knowledge of a farmer who died of liver failure after applying pesticides without taking the proper safety precautions. She said, "I had always gardened and had never used chemicals anyway, but that was like the convincing argument for me--OK, this stuff can kill people, we're not gonna use it." Later in the interview, she described the difficulties she and Jim had in learning how to communicate with their customers and asking for their input, saying, "We should have taken the risk of actually communicating the same a couple of years ago rather than waiting so long. And I just, I just didn't think that I was really ready, I didn't know what would happen, I was scared to take that risk, you know, of asking people to come and talk about the future of the farm." Then Carla contrasted the two experiences, saying: We knew other people [who successfully communicated with their CSA members], we knew the model, in our brains. But it didn't get translated to our hearts, to action, to really believe in it until we did it. You know, there's other things that you believe. Okay, I didn't really see anybody die from getting sprayed . . . but I know that. I didn't need to, you know, kill one of my kids before I got that! So there are some things that you learn that you act on and there are other things that you have the knowledge but not the belief. Learning of another farmer's experience with unsafe use of chemicals was an activating event that influenced Carla's strategies in managing pests. The event triggered reflection and articulation of values that filtered her learning and her assessment of pest problem solutions. The experience of being "afraid to take that risk" of discussing the future of the farm with their CSA members, and the experience of finally doing so, were activating events that lead to a major change in Carla's mental model concerning the consumer's role in her and Jim's farming operation. Many of the activating events described by farmers in this study concerned moving from conventional to sustainable agricultural practices and serving special market niches. The changes farmers described included developing a better-articulated and better-integrated understanding of farming and the ability to apply that knowledge more skillfully. While the farmers who were interviewed did not explicitly discuss changes in profitability that resulted from transformation of their mental models, a review of profiles of "innovative" operators of small farms featured in the New American Farmer: Profiles of Agricultural Innovation (Berton, 2001) did address such concerns. In many cases, transformation of the mental model and the resulting changes in practice made the difference between failure and success. Conclusions and Implications for Agriculture EducatorsPrevious researchers (e.g., Eckert, 2003; Raedeke & Rikoon, 1997) have identified the important role that mental models of farming play in farmers' learning, decision-making, and adapting to change. The findings of the study described here provide insight as to how farmers develop their mental models of farming and the conditions under which their models may change. For the small farm operators in the study, the processes of discovery learning and problem-solving served as primary means for mental model development. Farmers approached learning in ways that reflected existing mental models, and the outcomes of learning experiences often served to reinforce their models. Sometimes, an activating event threatened the stability of a mental model, triggering reflection, challenging assumptions, and ultimately transforming the mental model. Because this was a qualitative study, the results cannot be generalized beyond the sample of farmers who participated in the study. The results are consistent, however, with previous research on mental model development indicating that an individual's current mental model can direct the course of learning and problem solving (Seele, 2001) and that an activating event can trigger a significant transformation in a mental model opening up new possibilities for learning (Cranton, 2002). The mental models of farming held by farmers who were not participants in this study likely reflect a continuum of beliefs, values, assumptions, knowledge, and skill sets. In light of prior research, the possibility exists that regardless of the specific nature of a farmer's mental model, learning and problem solving will be consistent with one's current model. Additionally, the model will be relatively stable, but change may occur following a significant experience that challenges the underlying values and assumptions on which the model is based. Agriculture educators often direct programs and resources to support farmers in adjusting their practices to improve the viability or profitability of their operations. Because learning experiences appear to shape farmers' mental models of farming and mental models serve as guides for decisions and actions (Eckert & Bell, 2005), understanding how farmers develop mental models can help educators design learning programs and services that better enable farmers to succeed. The current model of education through presentation or dissemination of information does not take into account how that information will interact with farmers' existing mental models and practices. When educators consult with farmers on their farms and when they bring together farmers with similar practices to share information and experiences, they provide opportunities for farmers to tailor the information they get to their individual needs and situations. While such outreach activities may be less efficient than those that involve presentation by an expert to a group, they are more likely to be effective, that is, actually used to improve farming practices. In both Extension and academic settings, educators can extend current best practices by:
Sometimes, a component of a farmer's current mental model poses a barrier to change that would lead to improved viability or profitability. When a farmer can benefit from developing further some aspect of his or her mental model, direct instruction or visits to other farms using similar approaches can prime the farmer to consider new possibilities. However, when the viability of a farmer's operation is in danger because of his or her untenable mental model, change may not be possible until it is triggered by an activating event. When working with farmers under these circumstances, a purely cognitive, reason-based approach by agricultural educators is probably not enough to trigger such transformation. In these cases, an educator may best facilitate change by supporting the farmer in sharing experiences with another farmer who has undergone a transformation in assumptions and beliefs that underlie his or her practice. If the farmer becomes open to change after this peer learning experience, the educator can follow up with information and resources--but the first step is the experience. Acknowledgement This study was supported by a USDA grant to the New England Small Farm Institute for the Growing New Farmers project. ReferencesBell, A. A., & Eckert, E. (2005). Effective farmer education research project executive summary and final report (Report for the Growing Northeast New Farmers Project). Storrs CT: University of Connecticut Department of Educational Leadership. Berton, V. (Ed.) (2001). The new American farmer: Profiles of agricultural innovation. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture/Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education. Burros, M. (2002, May 29). Eating well: The greening of the herd. New York Times, pp. F1. Collins, A., & Gentner, D. (1987). How people construct mental models. In D. Holland & N. Quinn (Eds.), Cultural models in language and thought (pp. 243-265). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cranton, P. (2002). Teaching for transformation. In Imel, S. (Series Ed.) & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (Vol. Ed.), Contemporary viewpoints on teaching adults effectively: No. 93. New directions for adult and continuing education (pp. 63-72). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dillon, J. (2003, February 5). New England Milk. All Things Considered [Radio broadcast]. Washington, DC: National Public Radio. Retrieved February 20, 2003, from http://discover.npr.org/features/feature.jhtml?wfId=979162 Eckert, E. (2003). Proficiency-development spirals: Occupational learning among farmers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut. Eckert, E., & Bell, A. A. (2005). Invisible force: Farmers' mental models and how they influence learning and actions. Journal of Extension [On-line], 43(3), Article 3FEA2. Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2005june/ent.shtml#a2 Golden, C. (2004, May 27). Alliance would build up area agriculture. Davis Enterprise. Retrieved June 6, 2004, from http://davisenterprise.com/articles/2004/05/27/ news/219new0.txt Greene, C. (2000, April). U.S. organic agriculture gaining ground. Agricultural Outlook. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture/Economic Research Service. Greeno, J. G. (1989). Situations, mental models, and generative knowledge. In D. Klahr & K. Kotovsky (Eds.), Complex information processing (pp. 285-318). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. Beverly Hills: Sage. Moskin, J. (2005, June 1). Women find their place in the field. New York Times. Retrived June 3, 2005, from http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/01/ Ortiz, J. (2004, January 2). Suddenly, organic beef is a hot item. Sacramento Bee. Retrieved February 29, 2004, from http://www.sacbee.com/content/business/ story/8034904p-8970674c.html Seel, N. M. (2001). Epistemology, situated cognition, and mental models: Like a bridge over troubled water. Instructional Science, 29, 403-427. Sheils, C. (2004). What does the term "new farmer" mean? In C. Shiels & M. Descartes (Eds.), Working with new farmers: Topics in professional development (pp. 4-7). Belchertown, MA: New England Small Farms Institute. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Tuovinen, J. E., & Sweller, J. (1999). A comparison of cognitive load associated with discovery learning and worked examples. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 334-341. U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Commission on Small Farms. (1998). A time to act (Publication No. 1545 MP-1545). Washington, DC: Author.
Community Collaboration: Effective Partnerships with Steering CommitteesMary Banach Sharyn Zunz Nicole LaPointe IntroductionExtension program developers, interested in building a community initiative, often look to some form of citizen association composed of residents who know the local culture and feel a stewardship towards their area's resources (Carlton-LaNey, Edwards, & Reid, 1999). An example of such a mechanism is a community based steering committee. Community-based steering committees have many potential benefits, such as:
The case study described here examines how three similar Extension projects approached the use of community-based steering committees and what their experiences can tell us about their effective use in establishing programs. For the purposes of the study, the effectiveness of a steering committee is defined by whether they cultivated conditions that can lead to program sustainability. This definition was chosen because program sustainability was an initial, articulated goal of the start-up grant period. Figure 1 illustrates a "before" and "after" model of what sustainability might look like for a program in this study. Figure 1.
The three studied initiatives were part of a statewide effort to expand rural communities' capacity to support vulnerable and low-income families by providing educational resources and opportunities. These initiatives were to be developed through partnerships between Extension and community-based entities, utilizing community assets to ensure program sustainability, including the formation of a local steering committee. Program DescriptionThree rural communities in a Northern New England state that had a high percentage of identified at-risk families were selected to receive start-up grant funding. Data indicated that all three selected communities were above the state averages in: children living in poverty, percent of low wage earners, number of adults with less than a 9th grade education, and the number of students scoring lower on standardized reading tests (Bensen, 1998, Children's Alliance, 2000):
The study looked at data gathered during program evaluations conducted at Sites A, B, & C. Each site received an equal amount of funding over a period of 5 years. While the programs implemented by each community varied somewhat, each site formed a community steering group as part of their implementation strategy. A branch of Extension managed the grant funding and provided senior level administrative support to the three site managers who were all Extension Educators. Site managers, in turn, provided guidance and oversight to the program staff and steering committee members who interacted directly with the program recipients (Figure 1). Every Extension site manager had other job responsibilities and was expected to devote less than 25% of their time to these projects. Similarly, these projects were neither the sole job responsibility of senior Extension administrators nor of the local program staffs. Literature ReviewA scarcity of literature speaks to successful use of steering committees in development of community initiatives. Therefore, information was gleaned from related topics, such as: work team management, non-profit board management, consumer advisory boards, coalition building, and community development. The literature suggests three interconnected attributes as vital to the effectiveness of community working groups:
A review of the literature on these three attributes is summarized below. ResourcesIt is important to analyze what resources the supporting organization is able to commit to establishing a steering committee. Resources might include: 1) leaders' experience with group facilitation, 2) availability of leaders' and members' time, 3) concrete resources, such as space and funds, and 4) commitment of leaders to genuine power sharing (Cohen, 1994). Such organizational supports are common themes in the literature for predicting group effectiveness (Hirokawa, 1990; Hersey & Blanchard, 1993; Hirokawa & Keyton, 1995). The community's "readiness" is another important resource. Community readiness includes economic and social resources a community is willing to make available to the program. Predicting a community's readiness requires an understanding of the culture, values, history, and politics of the community, as well as the relevance the community sees in the issues addressed by any new initiative (Bergstrom, A., et al., 1995; Mizrahi & Rosenthal, 2001). Member CompositionBroad representation across the constituent base of a community program is needed to develop feasible and sustainable solutions to complex social problems (Kretzmann & McKnight, 1996). The nature of these problems cannot be fully understood by only a handful of stakeholders. In order to capture a diversity of representation across traditional boundaries of public, private, and non-profit sectors, relationship building is a critical element in steering committee development (Crocker, 2000; Mulroy, 2000). Efforts aimed at engaging hard-to-reach or excluded groups (including consumers) are important to achieve organizational integrity. Efforts to recruit broad participation should be sensitive to the culture of the supporting organization, including the location and structure of meetings (Pargament, Habib, & Antebi, 1978). In addition, consumers, who are affected by a lack of needed services can become frustrated by a long-term process where their participation does not seem to bring about meaningful and timely change. Maintaining a diverse membership requires the activity of a nominating committee, or some other standardized process by which citizens can be recruited to participate in the group (Rabinowitz, n.d.; Kolzow, 1995; Herman, Renz, & Heimovics, 1997). However, volunteering on a steering committee can be strenuous and time consuming, leading to member resignations or periods of inactivity (McFarlen, 1999). Therefore, ongoing maintenance of members' interest, (re-)motivation, and engagement are at least as important as recruitment of new members. Leadership and OwnershipOne of the leader's major responsibilities during the development phase of a steering committee is to guide the group in creating a vision, mission, goals, and objectives (Eadie, 1991; Kolzow, 1999; McFarlen, 1999). Leaders must both ensure that new members have an understanding of the vision and values of the committee and that ongoing members undertake a regular review of the organization's direction (Kolzow, 1995; Herman, Renz, & Heimovics, 1997). Another major role of any leader is the development of clear, efficient information pathways (Hirokawa, 1990; Hersey & Blanchard, 1993; Hirokawa & Keyton, 1995). It is especially important that there be clear and candid internal communication regarding member roles and leader expectations. Additionally, strong external channels of communication between the steering committee and other community organizations can increase the potential for program effectiveness and sustainability (Kolzow, 1999). Reliable communication channels can: identify community assets, prevent duplication of efforts, find ways to share existing resources, and create a sense of working within the community-as-a-whole. There is a relationship between high expectations from the leadership and effective performance by the steering committee (Hirokawa & Keyton, 1995). Leaders who encourage members to function independently help the committee develop the competency to take on larger and more complex tasks (Hersey & Blanchard, 1993; Axelrod, 1997). By delegating tasks and being open to dissenting opinions, leaders illustrate trust in, and respect for, the steering committee. In summary, a review of the literature points to three interrelated areas that affect program effectiveness and sustainability. These areas are: 1) resources, 2) steering committee composition, and 3) leadership and community ownership. The case study described here examines how these areas manifested themselves in the development of the three selected programs. MethodologyThe study analyzed data gathered from interviews with Extension managers and steering committee members in three sites during a first- and second-year program evaluation. Faculty and graduate student research assistants from the social work department of a local university conducted the semi-structured, telephone interviews. Interviewers asked managers to comment on several content areas, including: steering committee functioning, sustainability, grant administration, progress towards program goals, suggestions for future planning, and the way their individual skills had been used. First-year evaluation interviews analyzed from the three sites included eight managers and 19 steering committee members. Responses from eight managers and 22 steering committee members represent the second-year evaluation data analyzed. Responses were grouped by site and by the year the interview was conducted. Respondents' interviews were recorded and then transcribed. Transcript excerpts were examined for data that pertained to committee, site managers, and leadership functions as well as the project's interface with the overall community. Qualitative analysis of the data utilized standard activities of data reduction, data display and conclusion drawing, and verification for a grounded theory approach identifying key concepts. All transcript excerpts were coded using theories, concepts, and categories that emerged through the data. Particular attention was paid to themes relating to the use and development of the steering committees and variances among the three sites in moving toward sustainability. Verification was achieved through a process of triangulation involving each of the three authors examining transcripts and analyzing data for theories and concepts, which were then compiled into data tables under the most robust themes. FindingsThe analysis of the case study's data allowed a comparison of steering committee development in the three programs. The discussion below delineates the study's findings using the broad categories supported by the review of the literature and which emerged as themes in the data analysis: resources, steering committee composition, and leadership skills and ownership issues. Table 1 presents a summary of the findings.
ResourcesThe resources discussed in this section include: those already available in the communities at program start-up; those developed at each site during the first two years of the project; and those in process of being, or that have yet to be, developed by manager. Year OneFew resources were found in any of the small, rural communities for the three programs. Sites A and C both had initial difficulties with recruitment and retention of staff and steering committee members. Such personnel shortages left little opportunity for any discussion of sustainability. Site B managers found that local residents were very responsive to their after-school program aims and more easily recruited committee members with pre-existing skills. The resources of staff time and energy were at a premium in all three sites. All site managers expressed difficulty balancing this project with their other, concurrent Extension responsibilities. Some managers felt overwhelmed by the enormity of the project and perceived little support. In all three sites, managers thought more training and better preparation were required to meet their responsibilities. For example, managers expressed the need for additional training on:
Year TwoSite B was the only site to accomplish the goal of sustainability as the local Board of Education took ownership of the program late in the second year. This was especially noteworthy given the political and legal battles over state and local school financing that had gained prominence in this particular district. The Site B managers and steering committee demonstrated a high degree of political sophistication as they deliberately remained politically neutral in the battle over school funding and thus were able to maintain a positive working relationship with the school board. By contrast, the other two sites were hindered by continuing confusion about the use of grand funds and communication problems with school administrations. Site C managers faced additional challenges as relationships with school officials had deteriorated to the point that rebuilding relationships became a pre-requisite step to finding any sustainability solutions. Coordinating multiple tasks and roles remained a challenge for managers in all three sites. Extension staff expressed mixed feelings about the project because of its time demands and the limited funding allocated to support it. Training needs also continued to be an issue. Although improvements were noted, all site managers requested additional training on: facilitated group processes, community development, public relations, and financial management. Member CompositionYear OneDue to small rural community settings, identifying steering committee members who were interested and able to engage actively was a challenge in all three sites. Both Sites A and C experienced challenges with poor attendance and steering committee dropouts. Reasons for these problems may be attributed to: a loss of interest, confusion regarding the mission and goals of the program, or over-commitment by steering committee members to other activities. On the other hand, attendance was very high at Site B, and the perceived "unwieldy" size of the group was managed by creating smaller work groups and clustering sub-committees of members with similar interests. However, despite the large size of Site B's steering committee, it was felt that actual consumers of program services were still not adequately represented and thus a shifting of member composition was required. Year TwoAll site managers and committee members recognized that there seemed to be a few, very active volunteers in their rural communities. Numerous things vied for the time of the existing committee members, and many members had become "inactive supporters." Even at Site B, where the steering committee remained large, diverse, and fairly representative, there was a debate about whether to put energy into retaining members or into recruiting interested individuals with fresh ideas. Some members were beginning to appear "stretched thin," and there was concern that talented members might burn out. Leadership and Committee OwnershipYear OneAll sites struggled to clarify their relationship with upper level grant administration. For example, some managers felt the leadership from upper level Extension staff provided unclear communication and expectations were unrealistic and confusing. Many site managers wanted assistance resolving their ambivalence about this new project that reduced their available time for other long-standing endeavors. Other managers thought that administrators could have fostered more communication among the project sites, allowing for mutual support. In terms of relationships between site managers and steering committee members, results were variable. Although Site A managers saw themselves as working well as a team, some steering committee members perceived these managers to dominate meetings with a top-down leadership style. At Site C, managers were confronted by changes in personnel with associated time pressures, which in turn hindered their ability to effectively develop and communicate with the steering committee. In comparison, managers in Site B responded to the increased time demands by encouraging cooperation, delegating leadership responsibilities, and reaching out to those members who had skills that could benefit the program. Year TwoAll sites reported progress. Managers felt clearer about their role and about the program goals. They understood the need for the steering committee to take a more active role in decision-making, and site managers became more adept at:
Positive communication and working relationships among the Site B managers continued in year two. Therefore, Site B managers began to engage in a more sophisticated dialogue about accountability as well as the benefits and shortcomings of a grass-roots leadership model. The steering committee in Site C felt that gains had been made in the structure of the meetings, use of members' time, and appreciation shown for member contributions. Members perceived the level of collaboration between managers and the steering committee to have increased. The committee was taking ownership of the program, and indigenous leadership was emerging from within the group. The committee members felt unified in their understanding of the program's goals, and failures in meeting goals were mainly due to their continuing struggle to adequately staff the program. Summary of FindingsIn examining the data, several observations can be made regarding resources, steering committee composition and leadership/ownership issues. It should be noted that as of this writing, only Site B had gained financial sustainability for its program. Both Site A and Site C were still trying to explore alternate funding sources. What contributed to Site B's success? In looking at resources, Site B began with a considerably larger population and therefore a larger pool from which to draw participation. Individuals already existed who were previously active in other community initiatives, interested in at-risk families, and had previous experience in resource development. Thus, Site B demonstrated the benefit of having a large enough recruitment pool to ensure that committee members had sufficient expertise and committee tasks were widely shared. They were better able to encourage and advance collaboration, and, as a result, Site B steering committee members articulated an ownership of their committee early into its development. Clear communication, group decision-making, and engaging members in task involvement appeared to assist in this process. The Site A and C communities, although similarly identified as needing programs for their at-risk families, had not previously been mobilized as a community the way Site B had been by a longstanding, acrimonious debate about public school funding. Therefore, site managers in Site A and C faced greater start-up challenges in identifying and attracting diverse steering committee members, and in readying them for task acceptance. Implications for PracticeSeveral implications for Extension program developers can be drawn from the study. These implications are particularly important given the emphasis on collaboration with community stakeholders, which is the foundation of Extension-sponsored endeavors. Recommendations can be identified in three areas: the need for adequate preparation, leadership tasks and skills, and maintenance of a focus on sustainability. Preparation ProcessAll participants often underestimate the time and effort needed to develop a new program with a steering committee. Unfortunately, there is usually a demand, either by consumers or funding sources, for immediate start-up services and demonstrable results. Such demands can shortchange the time needed to develop clear task assignments, draft initial program goals, and consider a steering committee's composition. Therefore, suggestions include:
Leadership Tasks and SkillsLeadership issues are a second concern for Extension personnel attempting effective steering committee development. Leadership of a community-based initiative may not be a well-developed skill, particularly if concentration has previously been on education or direct services to clients. Effective leadership seemed to require the following:
Maintaining a Focus on SustainabilityA final implication is to remain focused on the goal of sustainability. Although this is particularly important for programs funded with time-limited start-up grants, all programs can benefit from constantly monitoring viability. A focus on sustainability requires:
In conclusion, the study illustrates several elements important to effective steering committee development by Extension Educators. However, the small sample size and geographically specific, rural setting may mitigate its generalizability. Additional research is needed to determine the degree to which the finding would be replicated in other settings and with different types of programs. Further testing of how various aspects of preparation effect steering committee development would be valuable to expand upon this study's findings. ReferencesAxelrod, N. (1997). Beyond good intentions: Qualities of successful non-profit board leaders. Directorship, 23(5), 12 - 13. Bensen, C. H. (1998). Demographic guide to New Hampshire towns, cities and places: 1990 census edition. Lake Ridge, VA: Polidataë Political Data Analysis. Bergs | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
