|
August 2007
|
       |
Contents
Editor's PageWhat's Wrong with Skimpy References Sections?I have been getting some submissions lately, even of Feature articles, with very skimpy References sections. What's wrong with that? Quite a bit. For one thing, it shows that authors have not done their homework and found out how other scholars have addressed their topic, what light they have had to shed on it, what methodologies they have used. For another, it means that their articles are not as informative as they could be and should be. Readers are helped by knowing what else has been researched and written about on a topic. It deepens their understanding and gives them someplace to go if the topic is particularly relevant to them or has seized their interest. For yet another, articles with no or few citations to other work don't make their points as effectively as they could. Perhaps an article validates work that has been done by others or adds to it. Citing those works is a way of adding credibility. Perhaps an article takes a different tack or comes to a different conclusion. Citing relevant works in those cases demonstrates an article's originality. And finally, authors of articles with scanty literature searches have not participated in the scholarly dialogue that refereed journals like JOE celebrate and perpetuate. I inevitably "return" submissions with inadequate References sections and citations to their authors for improvement before accepting them as suitable for review. If I didn't, JOE reviewers would reject them--as they should. One way to start the kind of literature search that will strengthen an article is to visit and use the JOE Search site, but you know that's not the only way. August JOEDon't let the words "Extension Forestry" in the title of the first Feature lead you to skip that article if you're not a forestry type. The authors' point about absolute frequencies being more effective when seeking to persuade people and relative frequencies when seeking to educate them is relevant for all of us Extension types. And this severely math-impaired editor actually kind of understood it, which is testimony to how well it is written. And, as fair season is winding down, it's interesting to read the last Feature, too. The authors don't mince words: When animal health professionals and the commercial sheep industry as a whole recommend one course of action on this issue and Extension in many states simply ignores it--there is a significant disconnect between industry practice and Extension recommendations. The authors of this article contend that this places Extension in an untenable position and thereby possibly jeopardizes its relevance. That's conviction, and it's persuasive, too. Community development gets a fair amount of attention in other articles in this issue, as do other worthy topics, and that brings me to the Tools of the Trade section and the first article, a review of Negotiating the Complexities of Qualitative Research in Higher Education: Fundamental Elements and Issues. Seems like an interesting and very useful book. The next article answers the question "What Makes a Great Science Experience?" and provides a checklist for educators. And the third Tools of the Trade, "The Growers' Roundtable: Encouraging Conversations About Critical Farmers' Market Management Issues," makes the point that "getting the right people together to focus on important topics with appropriate conversational rules results in an excellent recipe for success" and explains a technique for achieving that. A book, a checklist, a technique--some good tools for our trade. And there are four more. What more can I say? It's another good issue. Laura Hoelscher, Editor
Partnerships Evolve Over Time
Norman K. Bender
Nancy H. Bull IntroductionPartnerships are central to engaging community resources in the development of educational programs. Extension has a successful history working with communities of place and interest to garner support. While relationships vary, common factors influence how partnerships evolve. Relationships with volunteer organizations blend continuity and transition. They require constant attention to build consensus and maintain support for Extension programs and facilities. Communities of place, defined as where people live, work, and play, are traditional locations of Extension programs. Communities of interest differ in that they emanate from shared interests of individuals and are not confined to location (ECOP, 2002, p.3). All Extension Is LocalCommunity involvement is fundamental to identifying educational issues and building political support. Adapting Tip O'Neil's comment regarding politics, Henry Wadsworth (1996, p.3) declared that "all Extension is local." Local referred to the confluence of programs with community-based political support. Fred Harrington (1977, p. 126) described a shared financial support system where Extension obtained financial resources from federal, state, and local funds, and benefited from supporters who ensured that decision-makers continued support. The Virginia State Leadership Councils' Task Force (1997) identified the need for Extension to develop strategies, with local partners, to market accomplishments to the community's public officials. George McDowell (2003, p. 6) proposed four functions for Extension staff: identify problems of individuals and communities, seek information to address those problems, design, conduct or facilitate ways to impart the knowledge resulting in scholarship, and garner support from beneficiaries. How does Extension generate community support for a sufficient resource base to meet community needs? Support from communities of both place and interest play a significant role in acquiring resources. Partners DancePartnerships have been compared to a dance with both a beginning and an end (Anderson, 1994). Anderson observed partnerships are based on common goals to which individuals contribute expertise and skills. Collaboration occurred when the dance partners sought mutually decided solutions based on pooling information, knocking heads, constructing alternatives, and forging an agreement (Gray, 1989). Successful partners recognize that mutual benefits and new possibilities are unachievable alone (Rose, 1994). Loden (2004) identified partnerships as either traditional or strategic. Traditional partnerships focused on a specific goal until the goal was achieved. Strategic partnerships worked toward achieving a shared vision continuing if new goals were identified. The length of each dance and the number of dances are based upon each partner's interest in continuing. Renewing a PartnershipCooperative Extension in New London County, Connecticut has a rich history of varied dance partners. Beginning in 1915 with Connecticut's first county agent, the Farm and Home Bureau evolved into the local partner focusing on Extension staff supervision and programs. In the late 1950s, Connecticut dissolved county government, and the dance changed, creating new opportunities and partners. New opportunities included the University of Connecticut (UConn) assuming the role of staff supervision. The creation of a county Extension council formed a new strategic partner responsible for the local funding role from a state allocation, through the university to the partner. The New London County Agricultural Extension Council actively raised funds to build a new Extension center. Opening in 1963, the building housed Extension and USDA sister agency staff, yet another dance partner. Over 35 years, the Council owned and managed the building, providing programmatic support. Despair, Then RenewalSolutions from the past resulted in challenges and opportunities for the partnership. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA, 1990) required changes in the facility structure. The Council's inability to finance ADA required building improvements prevented USDA from signing a new lease. In 1995, consolidation moved USDA offices to another location, resulting in a loss of income. Facing financial challenges, the Council focused exclusively on building issues, neglecting program support. Transitioning from what had been, to what might be, frustrated volunteers. Yet future building and program possibilities were not apparent, placing the Extension-council partnership at risk. Effective leadership and grassroots energy were needed to explore a renewed partnership. Managing the transition required focus on renovating a community icon, the Extension center building, while reorganizing the Extension council relationship. Partners needed to all dance to the same tune. During the mid 1990s, new leadership in the UConn College of Agriculture and Natural Resources (where Extension is housed administratively) and at the county level renewed Extension's historic commitment to local partners. The Council's board of directors discussed critical issues related to the building, the group's fiscal health, and programmatic needs. Immediate focus addressed the building and impending fiscal demise of the Council, a separate 501(c)(3). Options to upgrade the building appeared limited, and despair was abundant among Council directors. Then in 1995, UCONN 2000 legislation was passed authorizing one billion dollars over 10 years to revitalize long neglected deferred maintenance issues of University facilities. The music for a new dance was written by this legislation. A New Beginning EmergesThe New London County Center belonged to a non-profit council, but was located on land belonging to the State Board of Education. The Council could use the land as long as they sponsored Extension. Upon the council's demise, the land would revert to the state (Deed, 1962). The problem was a backlog of deferred maintenance issues with no funds to resolve. UCONN 2000 opened a door to transfer the building to the university for renovation. The partner group relinquished control of a facility they had built in exchange for the university conducting major renovations and maintaining a local presence. Consensus was achieved, on all levels, to proceed. The partners' dance shifted, with one strategic partnership ending and new goals identified. University officials explored alternatives to renovation, including demolishing and replacing the current structure with a modular version. Community concerns focused on a modular's durability and perceived image. A second option moved the center to an abandoned state hospital where a sex offender rehabilitation program was located. This situation raised concerns about the site's appropriateness for 4-H programs. A meeting between university officials and the council's building committee resolved building location issues. The building committee's composition and approach to this meeting were crucial to success. Members consisted of original building committee members, adults (who as youth had raised funds for construction), current council, Farm Bureau, 4-H Foundation members, and Extension faculty and administration. With Extension administration playing an intermediary role, volunteers worked as equals with university officials in the Provost Office and Facilities to address concerns. OutcomesUniversity officials agreed to support comprehensive renovation of the existing building with it continuing as an Extension center. The council agreed to transfer the building to the university, with the Board of Trustees formally accepting the transfer on November 10, 1998. Renovation began in May 2002, when Extension employees moved to a temporary location for 13 months. During renovation, the council agenda shifted from building issues to program support as council members considered ways to provide programmatic financial support, a first in many years. A May 2004 building rededication celebrated the emergence of a renewed partnership and the end of despair. A ribbon cutting celebrated volunteer efforts to renew the building and to honor shepherding of the building's care over time. The ongoing partnership with Extension volunteers was evident as a new milestone was reached. Six years passed from inception to rededication. Council members worked with staff to consider options, monitor construction, and release responsibility and despair. Significant challenges were overcome through collaboration creating new goals for a long-standing partnership. The partners continued dancing, but to new music. Key Elements to SuccessSeveral factors contributed to the achievement of a successful partnership. A process of working through organizational transitions was always present. Factors included managing frustration, anger, uncertainty, and keeping the goal of an updated building in the forefront. Other elements included:
Partnerships built on these elements identified educational issues of communities of place and interest and obtained resources to address these issues. A unique aspect of Extension programs is collaborative partnerships that form and reform over time. While much has changed, the importance of vibrant traditional and strategic community partnerships continues. ReferencesAmericans With Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-336. Anderson, C. (1994, January). Role of Extension in a land grant university. Paper presented at the annual retreat of the University of Connecticut College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Storrs, CT. Deed (1962). Property at 562 New London Turnpike, Norwich, Connecticut conveyed from State of Connecticut, State Board of Education to New London County Agricultural Extension Council, Inc., Volume 318, Page 615, County of New London, Sept. 13, 1962. Authorized under authority of Special Act No. 353 of the Connecticut Special Acts, Regular Session, January 1961. Extension Committee on Organization and Policy (ECOP) (2002, February). The Extension system: A vision for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges. Gray, B. (1989). Collaborating. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Harrington, F. (1977). The future of adult education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Loden, C. (2004). Strategic partnering: Partnering for change. CD Practice, No. 9. Columbus, OH. Community Development Society. McDowell, G. (2003, July). What's the difference between Extension and engagement? Paper presented at the Western Mid-Managers Conference. Newport, Oregon. New London County Agricultural Extension Council. (2000, May). By-laws, revised. Norwich, CT. Rose, A. (1994, July-August). The partnership potential. Adult Learning. Washington, D.C.: American Association of Adult and Continuing Education. Vol. 5, No. 6. Wadsworth, H. (1996, December). All Extension is local. Ruby Lecture presented at the annual meeting of Epsilon Sigma Phi Professional Society. Annapolis, MD. Virginia State Extension Leadership Council Task Force. (1997, October). Indicators of quality for local Extension leadership councils. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Cooperative Extension. View reader comments for this Commentary in the JOE Discussion Forum. (This forum is no longer accepting new entries.)
Education and Persuasion in Extension Forestry: Effects of Different Numerical Information Formats
Gary L. Brase
H. E. "Hank" Stelzer
University of Missouri- Columbia IntroductionExtension work involves a great deal of communication across a number of different parties: Farmers and ranchers, researchers, corporations, government agencies, the general public, and others. Effective communication--being both informative and persuasive--is hard to achieve across so many audiences, especially when trying to communicate complex issues (e.g., issues that often include numerical and statistical information). It is therefore relevant to Extension work to ask how we can best communicate such numerical information. This article uses recent findings from experimental psychology on how people perceive numerical information, and applies those findings to a test case in Extension work: Forestry Extension in Missouri. Missouri is often cited as a microcosm of national demographics and trends (Robertson, 2004; Gardner, 2004). This is certainly true in the case of family-owned forestland, particularly in relation to the eastern United States (Butler & Leatherberry, 2004). According to the 2004 U.S. Forest Service's National Woodland Owner Survey, there are over 350,000 family-owned forests in Missouri. Collectively, these private citizens own approximately 83% of the state's 14 million acres of forestland. While, on an area basis, the number of family forests less than 100 acre equals the number of forested parcels greater than 100 acres, the number of landowners (329,000) disproportionately lies in the former group. Further, less than 10% of these landowners have a management plan or have sought professional help in managing their natural resources. Proper management of these family-owned forests is vital for sustaining the country's natural resources and high quality of life. These forest resources provide for viable ecosystems that support biological diversity and wildlife habitat. Woodland ecosystems contribute significantly to local economies; are fundamental elements of urban and rural communities; and are integral to the quality of life for all the citizens of the country. Everyone expects a safe and healthy environment and an agricultural and forestry industry that serve as stewards of the natural resource base. But how do we increase the number of private landowners practicing good forest stewardship? Forestry Extension has at least two fundamental goals:
These purposes are mutually consistent so long as a better understanding of the state of forestry promotes responsible forest stewardship. The Psychology of Understanding and PersuasionIn this respect, the psychological study of persuasion is of vital interest to those in the Forestry Extension area; how does one persuade people to donate their time and money to forest stewardship issues? While the majority of research in persuasion has focused on behavioral tactics and methods of deploying information in attempts to persuade (e.g., Cialdini, 2001; Petty, Wegener, & Fabrigar, 1997), the persuasive impact of statistical information, as presented in different types of formats has been touched on by only a few studies (Brown & Newman, 1982; Halpern, Blackman, & Salzman, 1989). Statistical information, though, is often at the heart of persuasive messages; for instance, how effective do you think the numerical information was in the first paragraph of this article? Recent research on human judgment and decision-making abilities hold important implications for how different statistical formats are perceived and used in cognitive processes (e.g., Brase, 2002a, 2002b; Brase, Cosmides, & Tooby, 1998; Gigerenzer & Hoffrage, 1995; Hoffrage, Lindsey, Hertwig, & Gigerenzer, 2000). This research has proposed that the human mind was designed by evolutionary history to most effectively acquire and use information in the format of natural frequencies, that is, information about the frequencies of objects, events, and locations as they are encountered and recognized in the world (e.g., Out of 100 trees, 25 have fruit. And of those 25 with fruit, 20 are edible right now). Such information not only is ecologically valid in terms of source, but has advantages over other formats in terms of flexibility and computational ease (Gigerenzer & Hoffrage, 1995). These properties suggest that frequencies can help generate better understanding of messages and thereby more persuasive messages. (See Table 1 for a summary of different numerical formats.)
Other research in the field of judgments under uncertainty has documented that when people are asked to make decisions about smaller groups (e.g., family or small-group populations under 100 people), some of the traditionally observed judgment errors significantly lessen or disappear (Tversky & Kahneman, 1981; Wang, 1996a, 1996b; Wang & Johnson, 1995). The explanation for this improvement stems from the rationale that these smaller population sizes are on scales of magnitude with which humans have directly and recurrently dealt over their evolutionary history. What is important for the present purposes is that this view suggests absolute frequency information about very large reference classes (for example, 1,100,000 people visit a national park each day during peak summer months) is not perceived on a normal numerical scale, but rather in a logarithmic manner similar to the changes in difference thresholds in sensory perception (Cohen & Ward, 1989). In other words, as numbers get very large, it takes proportionately bigger differences for people to notice that a difference exists. Brase (2002a) found that very large reference classes (i.e., the U.S. population of 280 million) can indeed lead to systematic distortions in the persuasive impact on both attitudes and potential behaviors (i.e., social influence). Specifically, proportionally small populations expressed as an absolute frequency of a large reference class (e.g., "2.8 million Americans will be exposed to the flu") had more influence on decisions than the same information in different formats (e.g., "1% of Americans will be exposed to the flu") and were seen as representing more significant issues. At the same time, proportionally large populations expressed as a absolute frequency of a large reference class (e.g., "a drug has be estimated to be effective for 272 million Americans"), had less influence on decisions than the same information in different formats (e.g., "a drug has be estimated to be effective for 99% of Americans") and were seen as representing less significant issues. Both this and the previous research by Wang and colleagues have all been based on hypothetical situations that happen to be amenable to laboratory settings. The basic logic of the research by Brase (2002a), however, can be applied to specifically selected topics. The objective of the study reported here was to extend the prior laboratory findings on the effects of numerical formats (absolute frequencies, relative frequencies [percentages], and simplified frequencies) in a specific, more applied, context. This parallels aspects of earlier laboratory research (Brase, 2002a). Two patterns were predicted: 1) Absolute frequencies will generally be perceived as greater quantities than the other format, particularly for small proportions of large reference classes, and 2) Both percentages (relative frequencies) and simplified frequencies will generally be perceived as clearer and easier to understand than absolute frequencies (so long as the reference class is very large). Experiment 1ParticipantsParticipants were 96 undergraduates at a public research university in the Midwestern U.S., who participated as partial fulfillment of a course requirement. The average age of the participants was 18.9 years. Materials and ProcedureEach participant was given a one-sheet survey that consisted of brief instructions followed by the actual study materials. The materials consisted of five pairs of statistical information, each of contrasting numerical formats (simple frequencies versus total frequencies, or relative frequencies [percentages] versus total frequencies); simple frequencies were not contrasted with relative frequencies (e.g., 3 out of 4 versus 75%) because these numbers are fairly easily understood as equivalent). The numerical information was all about forestry-related issues, expressed in terms of statewide resources. (See Appendix for statements.) The reference for all the data was the state of Missouri, with other state names inserted to give the appearance of two separate pieces of information (other states were selected to be as close as possible to Missouri in terms of size, population, or economy, as appropriate for the information statement). Each participant received one of two intermixed combinations of simple frequency/total frequency comparisons and relative frequency/total frequency comparisons. The presentation of the different numerical formats (first or second) was also randomly varied. Each pair of numerical statements was followed by two probe questions that asked participants to evaluate the greater clarity and the greater quantity of the two numerical statements. Specifically, the first question asked, "Which of the above statements gives you the clearest understanding of the situation for that state?," and the second question asked which state had the largest or most of the item quantified in the statements (i.e., privately owned forest land, non-farm non-residence family-owned forests, family forests using management plans or professional advice, proportion of the state's gross product from the forest products industry, and employees in forestry-based industries). There was no time limit for completing the study, and all participants finished within 15 minutes. ResultsThe proportions of participants selecting one numerical statement over another are presented in Figures 1a and 1b (for nominations of greater clarity) and in Figures 2a and 2b (for nominations of greater size). Nonparametric binomial tests were used to identify response patterns that were significantly different from indifference (0.50). Findings of statistically significant differences are indicated in the figures. The ratings of clarity show that, overall, percentages and simple frequencies are consistently perceived as clearer and more understandable than absolute frequencies. The patterns across the different items further suggest some finer distinctions, although these are much more tentative. Percentages appear to be particularly clear at extremes and with very large quantities. Simple frequencies, on the other hand, appear to be particularly clear for intermediate amounts and small absolute quantities. Figure 1a and 1b. The ratings of how large quantities are show that, overall, absolute frequencies are almost always perceived as larger amounts (a particularly remarkable finding, given that the quantities were basically equivalent). The patterns across the different items again suggest some finer distinctions that can be cautiously advanced. Small percentages seem to be perceived as lesser quantities than equivalent absolute frequencies, but large percentages apparently can be perceived as a quantity on par with absolute frequencies. Figures 2a and 2b. Experiment 2A chronic concern in many behavioral research areas, but in particular areas that propose to be studying the general public, is the representativeness of college undergraduates as subjects. To address this concern we collected further data, but using participants who were more representative of general population members who might be expected to encounter and evaluate forestry information. ParticipantsParticipants were 69 adults who participated either during a woodland steward university short course (n=32) or during a conference on tree management (n=37). All participated voluntarily, and the average age of the participants was 57.5 years (range: 27-83). Materials and ProcedureEach participant was given the same sheet survey, following the same procedure, as in Experiment 1. ResultsThe proportions of participants selecting one numerical statement over another are presented in Figures 3a and 3b (for nominations of greater clarity) and in Figures 4a and 4b (for nominations of greater size). Nonparametric binomial tests were again used, and findings of statistically significant differences are indicated in the figures. The results were broadly similar to the results of Experiment 1:
It is also noteworthy that a number of participants, unlike in Experiment 1, refused to judge which quantity of the pairs was greater, arguing (correctly, in fact) that they would need the reference classes for the absolute frequencies in order to make an accurate evaluation. Figures 3a and 3b. Figures 4a and 4b. DiscussionTwo studies, using both university undergraduates and members of the general population, found that:
What does this mean for forestry outreach? Much of the information disseminated in the process of working with communities is quantitative information; how much land, how many dollars, how many trees, etc. The format of that information can be chosen to better accomplish particular forestry outreach goals:
What about situations in which there are mixed goals; when one wants to both educate and persuade? The best strategy would appear to be a dual presentation: present information in both relative (or simple) frequencies and absolute frequencies. This approach requires more time and audience attention, as one might anticipate given the premise that two goals are being pursued. The better Extension professionals understand the various ways individuals perceive statistical information, the more effective they can be in connecting with their clients. ReferencesBrase, G. L. (2002a). Which statistical formats facilitate what decisions? The perception and influence of different statistical information formats. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15(5), 381-401. Brase, G. L. (2002b). Ecological and evolutionary validity: Comments on Johnson-Laird, Legrenzi, Girotto, Legrenzi, & Caverni's (1999) mental model theory of extensional reasoning. Psychological Review, 109(4), 722-728. Brase, G. L., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1998). Individuation, counting, and statistical inference: The roles of frequency and whole object representations in judgments under uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 3-21. Brown R. D., & Newman D. L. (1982). An investigation of the effect of different data presentation formats and order of arguments in a simulated adversary evaluation. Educational Evaluation & Policy Analysis, 4, 197-203. Butler, B. J., & Leatherberry, E. C. (2004). America's family forest owners. Journal of Forestry, 102:7, 4-9. Chaiken, S., & Trope, Y. (Eds.) 1999). Dual-process theories in social psychology. New York: Guilford. Cialdini, R. B. (2001). Influence: Science and practice. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Cohen, S., & Ward, L. M. (1989). Sensation & perception, 3rd edition. San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers. Gardner, J. (2004). Constantly seeking relevancy. Synthesis 3:4, 1-2. Gigerenzer, G., & Hoffrage, U. (1995). How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: Frequency formats. Psychological Review, 102, 684-704. Halpern, D. F., Blackman, S., & Salzman B. (1989). Using statistical risk information to assess oral contraceptive safety. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 3, 251-260. Hoffrage, U., Lindsey, S., Hertwig, R., & Gigerenzer, G. (2000). Medicine--Communicating statistical information. Science, 290, 2261-2262. Levine, R. L., Martinez, T. S., Brase, G., & Sorrensen, K. (1994). Helping behavior in 36 cities across the United States. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 69-82. Petty, R. E., Wegener, D. T., & Fabrigar, L. R. (1997). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 609-647. Robertson, D. B. (2004) Bellweather politics in Missouri. The Forum: 2:3, Article 2. Smith, E. R., & DeCoster, J. (2000). Dual process models in social and cognitive psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 108-131. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458. Wang, X. T. (1996a). Domain-specific rationality in human choices: Violations of utility axioms and social contexts. Cognition, 60, 31-63. Wang, X. T. (1996b). Framing effects: Dynamics and task domains. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 68, 145-157. Wang, X. T., & Johnston, V.S. (1995). Perceived social context and risk preference: A re-examination of framing effects in a life-death decision problem. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 8, 279-293. AppendixInstructions: Answer the questions about each set of statements, using the letters before each statement. There are no requirements that you use all the statements (that is, you may decide that a particular statement is the answer for more than one question). Please answer with your best judgment, even if you are not sure of the correct answer.
[Both forms included the absolute frequency statements, which were compared with the percentages and simple frequencies that are underlined (Form A) or that are italicized (Form B).]
Connecting Communities: Third Generation Community Network Projects
William C. Shuffstall
Theodore R. Alter
Jeffrey C. Bridger
Sheila S. Sager Globalization of economies and production has fundamentally altered the rural landscape. Manufacturing, a mainstay of rural economies, has steadily declined over the past two decades, and many industries have moved overseas, attracted by wage structures and lax environmental standards that dramatically lower production costs. Shrinking economies have forced many rural residents, often the "best and the brightest," to leave rural areas in search of greater opportunity elsewhere. Scholars, policy makers, local leaders, and residents are gradually coming to the realization that what worked in the past is simply not effective in a global economy. Instead, there is growing consensus that rural areas will have to find ways to match local assets with emerging market opportunities (Schafft, Alter, & Bridger, 2005). Many analysts now believe that the best hope for full participation of rural areas in the national and global economies lies in the development of small manufacturing and service firms that produce custom products for local and export niche markets (Drabenstott, 2004; Lyson & Tolbert, 1993; Malecki, 1996, 2003). The potential economic benefits of high-speed Internet service and adoption of information technologies are substantial. Studies conducted for the state of Michigan estimate that accelerated high-speed Internet deployment could potentially increase the gross state product by $440 billion and create 500,000 new jobs over the next decade (Michigan Economic Development Corporation, 2001). Regardless of location, access to high-speed Internet infrastructure is becoming increasingly important for economic development, provision of healthcare and government services, and education and workforce training (McLaren, 2002). Unfortunately, many communities--especially those in rural areas--lack the technological infrastructure required to take full advantage of new developments in information technologies. (Parker, 2000; Strover, 2001). Communities with a poorly developed telecommunication network will have difficulty generating employment opportunities, retaining existing businesses, and participating in the global economy. Although rural high-speed Internet access is improving, many rural communities still lag behind their urban and suburban counterparts (Grubesic & Murry, 2004). In 2006, the National Exchange Carriers Association put the cost of upgrading 5.9 million rural telephone lines to 8Mbps at $11.9 billion. Unfortunately, the low population densities characteristic of rural communities do not provide a sufficient financial return on investment to enable telecommunication providers to extend fiber optic cable lines or other high-speed Internet delivery networks to rural customers. High-speed Internet service is a necessary, but often overlooked, infrastructure for community and economic development; however, the benefits of this infrastructure will on only be realized if individuals and organizations in communities adopt and use high-speed Internet and information technologies to participate in the global economy. Leaders and residents in rural communities need help facing the challenges associated with increasing the availability of high-speed Internet service and the diffusion and adoption of information technologies in rural communities. In this article, we discuss the evolution of the community network movement and provide practical advice about how Extension educators can work with community development professionals, local leaders, and community residents to initiate projects that increase diffusion and adoption of information technologies in their communities. The Evolution of Community NetworksThe community network movement has been at the forefront of recent efforts that use technology to foster community development. The community networking movement has the same goals as the movements that in the past century brought community centers, public libraries, and public broadcasting stations to cities and towns across the United States. It seeks to rebuild the sense of community which many of us believe our neighborhoods have lost within living memory (Stallings, 1996). Community network projects are grounded in community development theory and practices. Community development theory "promotes broad-based, participatory decision making in order to initiate social action processes to improve local economic, social, cultural, or environmental situations" (Christenson & Robinson, 1989, p.14). Cooperative Extension has had little involvement in the community network movement to date. However, the Extension system has the potential to provide leadership for developing the capacity and organizing skills that are needed in many communities to increase the diffusion and adoption of digital technologies. Sustainable community network projects require community-level leadership, facilitation, volunteer development, project planning, evaluation, and education. Historically the land-grant university system and Cooperative Extension have participated in other similar community movements, including the development of electric and telephone cooperatives and farmer cooperatives across America. The first electronic community networks were FreeNets, volunteer organizations that used technology to host information about community events, organizations, and people (Clarke, et al, 2000). Many FreeNets focus on geographic communities, while others are built around communities of interest, such as professions, hobbies, and special interests topics. Public access to FreeNets was usually through public computers in libraries or community centers. Most FreeNets were developed through a grass roots approach, which relied on volunteers for operating and maintaining the FreeNet. For this reason, FreeNets are sustainable only as long as volunteers maintain their interest and have the ability to rally local support for public access to computers and the Internet. Second generation community networks represent a more bureaucratic and formal approach to the provision of high-speed Internet and other information technology tools. Most of these projects served a specific geographic community, were developed and managed by an institution in the community (e.g., university or government agency), and were initially supported by federal or foundation grants. These community networks typically have two foci, community centers and training. Community centers were developed using grant funds to provide public access to computers and high-speed Internet. Training and education programs were then developed and offered in the center to teach the public how to use computers, software, and the Internet. Many second generation community networks have struggled to sustain themselves when grant funding ceased. In many fundamental ways, building community is a necessary precursor to building a successful community network (Strover, Chapman, & Waters, 2004). Third generation community networks are designed to overcome the limitations of earlier approaches. Penn State Cooperative Extension has adopted a third generation community network model developed by Ellwood "Woody" Kerkeslager (http://pubs.cas.psu.edu/FreePubs/pdfs/ua384.pdf). The third generation community network model uses community development processes and techniques that engage leaders and organizations in a geographic community in projects that speed up the diffusion and adoption of information technology across all sectors of the community. Engaging community leaders in the process of identifying, planning, and implementing third generation community network projects leverages local resources, reducing the projects dependence on outside funding, and increase the likelihood the project will be sustainable. Like FreeNets, these projects use volunteers to implement specific segments of the project. In the course of these efforts, new linkages between local groups are created and individual and community capacity to address a wide range of issues and problems is enhanced. Third Generation Community Network ComponentsMature third generation community networks build on the attributes of FreeNets and second generation community networks and have four components:
These projects are initiated by an individual or small group of local leaders that recognize the importance of broadband Internet service and the adoption of information technology to their community's economic and social well-being. The local leadership team engages others in the community in a series of projects to assess the availability and use of digital tools in the community, identify projects that will increase the diffusion and adoption of information technology in the community, and implement those projects. The grass-roots process used in the third generation community network process builds shared ownership and buy-in across the community. Third Generation Community Network Project StagesThe third generation community network model incorporates the concepts, principles, and techniques associated with the classic model of diffusion and adoption of innovations (Rogers, 2003). The process engages community leaders and volunteers in reflective discussion about the community, its future, and the development of a community information technology (IT) vision that is an interdependent component of a broader community vision. The IT vision is used by community leaders to develop a plan that provides a framework for implementing a sustainable community network project that capitalizes on a community's assets and history to move the e community (government, education, healthcare, business, families, and individuals) into the information age. The rate of IT adoption is affected by the type of decision involved in choosing to adopt or reject a particular telecommunications tool. (Lamble & Seaman, 1994, p. 49-54). Although these innovation decisions fall along a continuum they may be classified according to four basic types.
While each of these innovation decisions can occur in communities implementing third generation community network projects, the emphasis in these projects is placed on increasing the adoption of information technology tools by individuals (optional decisions) and the community social systems (collective decisions), including businesses, governmental entities, schools, healthcare providers, and non-profits. Developing a mature third generation community network is a process that can take several months to several years. Extension staff in Pennsylvania found it very time consuming and difficult to find communities willing to commit to undertaking full-blown community network projects, usually because community leaders are unwilling, or lack the capacity, to work together. However, projects were initiated in several communities where Extension staff introduced the third generation community network model. Leaders in Potter County, located in Pennsylvania's rural northern tier, initiated a comprehensive project that included developing a community Web-site; initiating an extensive educational component; establishing community centers in partnership with schools and non-profits to provide access to high-speed Internet and computers to residents; and initiating efforts to increase high-speed Internet service throughout the county. Extension staff in Susquehanna County, located in Pennsylvania's northern tier, worked with the county library system to establish a community Web site and partnered with organizations that provided computer training in the county to expand the types of training they offer. In Somerset County, in the rural southern tier, Extension staff partnered with the Chamber of Commerce to undertake an effort to increase the availability of affordable high-speed Internet service across the county. Cooperative Extension provided expertise in a number of areas that were critical to successful development and implementation of these projects, including community visioning, strategic planning, project planning and management, conducting community surveys and assessments, volunteer development and management, program development, and evaluation. This expertise was provided throughout the process of introducing individuals and leaders to the benefits of undertaking projects that would increase the adoption and diffusion of information technologies in their communities. Cooperative Extension staff also delivered educational programs, including eBusiness, eGovernment, PowerPoint, and Excel basics in communities where these needs were identified by the community network leadership teams. Connecting Rural CommunitiesThe work with community networks in Pennsylvania resulted in valuable information and tools that Cooperative Extension educators can use to help community leaders identify and implement projects that increase the diffusion and adoption of information technology. The Southern Rural Development Center funded a project, Connecting Rural Communities (http://www.connectingcommunities.info), to develop an on-line guide to make this information and these resources available to Extension educators across the country. Most community network projects are initiated by an individual or small group of residents that believe the widespread adoption of information technology is crucial to their community's current and future well-being (Connecting Rural Communities). These project champions are not necessarily technology experts, but they must be continuously learning how information technology can benefit their community. They must also develop community organizing skills. Successful champions become evangelists for the community network project, providing leadership in their day-to-day individual and group meetings and constantly identifying and recruiting volunteers to create a vision and implement a plan for the community network project. Buy-in from key stakeholders is a critical component of any communitywide effort. Extension educators can use Connecting Rural Communities "Leadership Team Identification Worksheet" to identify potential project "champions" and formal and non-formal leaders who are influential with one or more of the following stakeholder groups: education, government, business, non-profits, library, health care, and economic development. The Extension educator works with the community project champions to organize meetings with representatives of these groups to introduce them to the benefits of undertaking a project, explain the Connecting Communities process, and assess their interest in becoming a member of a Community network leadership team. Once the leadership team has been created, Extension staff work with team members to assess how digital technologies are being used and how they might be used in the community and to understand the Internet infrastructure in the community using assessment tools available in the Connecting Communities guide. They also identify volunteers, donors, and corporate partners and develop a community network project plan. This phase of the project may be as short as a few months or as long as a year. The length of time will depend to a large degree on how well the community has cooperated in the past to address community issues or the levels of activeness in the community (Wilkinson, 1991; Claude et al., 2000). If there is a history of cooperation across stakeholder groups, the leadership team can be organized quickly and begin building the project in a few months. If there is little history of cooperation across the community, this stage of community network development could take a year or more. Extension educators can use the "Community Readiness Assessment" in the Connecting Communities guide to determine the likelihood of a community successfully initiating a community network project. Extension educators can play a number of roles in organizing leadership teams. They can provide visioning, strategic planning, and community development process expertise to enable the planning team to effectively organize, develop, and begin to implement their community network project. Extension educators can also provide more mundane but very important functions, including arranging for team meetings, developing agendas, hosting and chairing meetings in local Extension offices, and ensuring that meeting minutes are taken. Extension educators can use the assessment tools in Connecting Rural Communities to help the Leadership Team learn about the IT capacity across the community and identify community organizations that should be involved in the project. Leadership teams use assessment results to engage other individuals and organizations to develop and implement projects. For example, the assessments may identify the existence of a computer lab and a high-speed Internet connection in a community library or senior citizen center. The leadership team would then work with the library or senior center staff to develop and implement a plan to create a community center open to the public. Or the assessment process may identify several organizations that provide computer training. The leadership team would bring those organizations together to discuss the community network project and determine if any of the organizations are willing to participate in the project to expand the range of computer training in the community. ConclusionLocal leaders across the country increasingly recognize the importance of information technologies to their community's future well-being, and they are searching for ways to foster widespread adoption of these tools. Third generation community network projects increase the diffusion and adoption of digital tools by organizations and individuals in the community, improving their ability to participate in the information and knowledge economy. As we detail in this article, trained Extension educators can help local leaders develop a community information technology vision and strategic plan to work toward that vision and provide leadership to mobilize a technology project team, assess local technology needs and develop and implement an action plan. Extension educators can also integrate a number of Extension education activities and programs into community network projects, including news articles or community events to increase awareness about the benefits of high-speed Internet service, small group training on how to use the Internet, and personalized training sessions that will help key individuals better understand the benefits high-speed Internet services can bring to local businesses, government, and organizations. Extension educators can expand their professional networks and affect a wider range of stakeholder groups through participation in community network projects. For example, many educators are using computer labs, global positioning system (GPS) units, and high-speed Internet or other digital tools to deliver farm management, 4-H technology projects, family financial management, and a host of other educational programs. These hands-on programs provide skills in the use of digital tools that participants can easily transfer to other areas of their lives to enhance their economic well-being, access information to improve their quality of life, and participate in virtual education and training opportunities. Integrating these programs into a community network project will likely increase the visibility for these Extension programs in the community in addition to strengthening the educational component of the project. Acknowledgment This article will be published January 2008 as part of a chapter in A. R. Shark & S. Toporkoff (Eds.), Beyond e-Government and e-Democracy: A Global Vision. PTI publications and ITEMS International publications. ReferencesAnalysis Consulting. (2003). The State broadband index. Retrieved from http://technet.org/resources/State_Broadband_Index.pdf CENIC. (2005). One gigabit or bust initiative. [On-line], Available at: http://www.cenic.org/publications/archives/glossies/KillerApps.pdf Clarke, I., et al. (2000). Freenet: A distributed anonymous information storage and retrieval system. Available at: http://www.ecse.rpi.edu/Homepages/shivkuma/teaching/sp2001/readings/freenet.pdf Claude, L. M., Bridger, J. C., & Luloff. A. E. (2000). Community well-being and local activeness pp. 39-45 In P.V. Schaeffer & S. Loveridge (Eds.), Small town and rural economic development: A case studies approach. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. Grubesic, T. H., & Murray, A. T. (2004). Waiting for broadband: Local competition and the spatial distribution of advanced telecommunication services in the United States. Growth and Change. 35(2), 139-165 National Exchange Carrier Association (2006). Trends 2006: Making progress with broadband. Available at: http://www.neca.org/media/trends_brochure_website.pdf Kerkeslager, E. R., & Shuffstall, W. C. Community Network Project. (n.d.). Available at: http://pubs.cas.psu.edu/FreePubs/pdfs/ua384.pdf Michigan Economic Development Corporation
Releases Study Detailing Benefits of Accelerating Statewide Broadband
Deployment. (2001). Available at:
http://www.michigan.org/medc/news/major/archive National Telecommunications and Information Administration. (2000). Falling through the net: Toward digital inclusion : A report on Americans' access to technology tools. Available at: http://search.ntia.doc.gov/pdf/fttn00.pdf Lamble, W. & Seaman, D. (1994). Diffusion and adoption: Basic processes for social change. In Blackburn, D. (ed), Extension handbook: Processes and practices. Toronto: Thomas Educational Publishing. Parker, E. B. (2000). Closing the digital divide. Telecommunications Policy. 24, 281-290. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations, 5th Edition, New York: Free Press. Schafft, K. A., Alter, T. R., & Bridger, J. C. (2006). Bringing the community along: A case study of a school district's information technology rural development initiative. Journal of Research in Rural Education [On-line]. 21(8), Available at: http://www.umaine.edu/jrre/21-8.htm Southern Rural Development Center. (2006). Connecting rural communities. Available at: http://www.connectingcommunities.info Stallings, B. (1996). A critical study of three Free-Net community networks. Available at: http://www.ofcn.org/whois/ben/Free-Nets Strover, S. (2001). Rural Internet connectivity. Telecommunications Policy, 25(5), 331-347. Strover, S., Chapman, G., & Waters, J. (2004). Beyond community networking and CTCs: access, development, and public policy. Telecommunications Policy. 28, 465-485. Wilkinson, K. P. (1991). The community in rural America. New York: Greenwood Press.
Youth Involvement in Community Development: Implications and Possibilities for Extension
M. A. Brennan
Rosemary V. Barnett
Eboni Baugh
Department of Family, Youth, and Community Sciences IntroductionThere is a need for Extension agents, program developers, and policy planners to better understand the role of youth in the community development process. Equally important, a need exists to better recognize the benefits and opportunities presented through youth involvement in community development activities. Extension plays a vital role in engaging youth through interactions with the local community, particularly in the implementation of 4-H programs. While often seen only as suited for 4-H, youth can actively contribute to a variety of Extension activities that enhance local life. If youth are included in programs to meet needs and empower communities, they can become lifelong participants and take on a sense of ownership in development efforts. The merging of community building and youth development has been at the core of recent youth engagement literature (Nitzberg, 2005; Kubisch, 2005; Cahn & Gray, 2005; Lynn, 2005; Brennan, Barnett, & Lesmeister, 2006). It has identified that youth must be fully engaged and involved in change efforts at the community level if they are to learn to function as effective members of society (Nitzberg, 2005). Community building, for individuals, focuses on building the capacity and empowerment to identify opportunities for change within or outside of the community. An understanding of youth motivations and efficacy to this kind of engagement are important so that Extension and other development professionals can maximize these valuable resources. As youth are brought into community organizations and civic roles that they have traditionally been excluded from, they can participate in local decision-making at multiple levels. This collaboration leads to skill enhancement, confidence building, and ownership that prepare them as they navigate toward adulthood. To facilitate an understanding of youth involvement, we focus on the primary research question: Can we identify and measure factors associated with youth involvement in their communities? The study reported here examined key independent variables previously found to affect youth involvement, including demographics, influences (Eccles & Barber, 1999; Lamborn, Brown, Mounts & Steinberg, 1992; Youniss & Yates, 1997; Sherrod, Flanagan, & Youniss, 2002; Scales & Leffert, 1999; Flanagan & Van Horn, 2001; Chan & Elder, 1999; Fletcher, Elder, & Mekos, 2000; Parke & Ladd, 1992), motivations (Andolina, Jenkins, Keeter, & Zukin, 2002; Clary Snyder, & Ridge, 1992; Sherrod, Flanagan, & Youniss, 2002; Flanagan & Van Horn, 2001; Wilkinson, 1991) obstacles (Independent Sector, 2001; Felix, 2001; Scales & Leffert, 1999; Israel, Coleman, & Ilvento, 1993), and efficacy (Camino, 2000; Fogel, 2004; Jarret, Sullivan, & Watkins, 2005). All variables were entered into the full model, to assess the partial effects of each conceptual area of youth community involvement. Finally, a reduced stepwise model, including only those variables found to be statistically significant identifies those variables that play a key role in shaping involvement. Specific predictors were identified in order to help youth professionals know what resources to tap as they work to increase youth efforts and more clearly define roles for youth in local development efforts. Related ResearchThe development of community is a dynamic process involving all segments of the locality, including the often-overlooked youth population. The key component to this process is found in the creation and maintenance of channels of interaction and communication among diverse local groups that are otherwise directed toward their more individual interests. By facilitating interaction and developing relationships, these diverse individuals interact and begin to mutually understand common needs. When relationships, consistent interaction, and channels of communication can be established and maintained, increases in local adaptive capacities materialize and community can emerge. During the process of residents and groups interacting, the capacity for local action emerges (Wilkinson, 1991; Luloff & Bridger, 2003). This capacity is often referred to as "community agency." Agency is therefore reflected in the capacity of people to manage, utilize, and enhance those resources available to them in addressing local issues (Wilkinson, 1991; Luloff & Swanson, 1995; Luloff & Bridger, 2003; Brennan, 2005). Community exists in the collective actions of its members. These collective actions allow residents of all ages and backgrounds to participate in the creation, articulation, and implementation of efforts to support local change. Through this process of interaction, the collection of individuals creates an entity whose whole is greater than the sum of its parts. While much of the attention given to building local capacities is often focused toward adults, youth are an increasingly visible and active component in community development efforts. Such involvement contributes to both the development of community and the social and psychological development of the youth involved. To encourage youth involvement in the community, it is vital to understand the influences, motivations, obstacles, and feedback that they receive from the community. Factors Influencing Youth Involvement in the CommunityYouth typically spend a substantial amount of time in activities extracurricular to school, including involvement in community-based organizations, school and local sports teams, and school-based clubs. All of these, and the interaction with individuals within them, directly influence youth involvement in their communities. Previous research supports the premise that participation in community activities is associated with behavioral well-being among adolescents. Influences on youth becoming involved, such as increasing academic performance during high school, increasing the likelihood of college attendance (Eccles & Barber, 1999), greater school engagement (Lamborn, Brown, Mounts, & Steinberg, 1992), and reinforcing positive social values or setting an example (Youniss & Yates, 1997), have been found to affect involvement. Other factors have been reported by youth as influencing their need for and willingness to be a part of a greater good through involvement. These include: feelings of efficacy (Sherrod, Flanagan, & Youniss, 2002), the need to be valued and taken seriously by others in the community (Flanagan & Van Horn, 2001), increasing their own self-esteem, and having a responsibility toward society by performing a public duty (Independent Sector, 2001). Recognition by the community at large is part of feeling valued (Scales & Leffert, 1999). Finally, other factors, such as parental involvement, can facilitate influences on youth involvement. Youth whose parents are actively involved in the community are more likely to become active themselves (Chan & Elder, 1999). Youth whose parents do not participate in civic activities may still become active in their communities; however, a supportive and reinforcing parental relationship may have a greater contribution to civic engagement than parental modeling (Fletcher & Van Horn, 2000). Perhaps as a result of an increased awareness of the advantages for adolescents, parents play an important role in linking their children to the world around them (Parke & Ladd, 1992). Motivations for Youth InvolvementYouth and adults have identified a variety of motivators for volunteering or becoming active in their communities. These have included practical assessments of their activities, such as: to meet school requirements; hopes of getting higher grades in a particular class; improving their chances of getting into college; or as an entry to a desired job (Andolina, Jenkins, Keeter, & Zukin, 2002). Motivations can also be the result of more practical conditions, such as a need to develop job contacts and enhance existing skills. In geographic areas where employment opportunities are limited, voluntary activities can offer a valuable alternative to paid employment (Clary, Snyder, & Ridge, 1992; Independent Sector, 2001). Youth also report becoming active for self-actualization (recognition, raise self-esteem) and social responsibility (setting an example, public duty) (Clary, Snyder, & Ridge, 1992; Independent Sector, 2001). Feelings of efficacy (Clary, Snyder, & Ridge, 1992; Sherrod, Flanagan, & Youniss, 2002), having responsibility/leadership (Kubisch, 2005), and the need to be taken seriously (Flanagan & Van Horn, 2001) have all emerged as important reasons why youth pursue community involvement. Finally, activeness in the community is facilitated by youth participation in community-based groups. Interaction between social groups promotes awareness of needs and helps identify volunteer opportunities (Wilkinson, 1991; Luloff & Swanson, 1995). Overall, a variety of motivations are present that shape civic behavior. Included are traditional factors (motivations and sociodemographics), but also the extent to which people interact with each other. Obstacles to Successful Youth InvolvementDespite the influences and motivations, significant obstacles exist that inhibit, and often discourage, community activeness among youth. Among the leading obstacles prevalent in the research, not being taken seriously, not being asked, and not being assigned or having an identifiable role are consistently noted in the research literature (Independent Sector, 2001). Felix (2003) identified other challenges to youth involvement in communities, including a lack of communication and awareness of opportunities, turf issues among organizations competing for youth participants, youth fears of speaking out, lack of diversity, and adultism or the systematic mistreatment of young people simply because of their age. Other factors such as lack of transportation (Scales & Leffert, 1999), lack of time (Sherrod, Flanagan, & Youniss, 2002), and not being sure of the benefits of their contributions (Israel, Coleman, & Ilvento, 1993) can limit the active involvement of youth. Scales & Leffert (1999) identified four key barriers that keep youth from participating in activities: lack of interesting programs, transportation problems, lack of knowledge about programs, and cost. Similarly, community organizations may be uncertain of the role or impact that youth may have in their efforts (Israel, Coleman, & Ilvento, 1993). Viewing young people as transient, participating in too many other activities, and having less predictable schedules, community organizations may exclude youth. Last, the extent to which youth can contribute to the decision making process of organizations and play an active role in program/policy development is important in shaping youth involvement. Efficacy and Youth InvolvementThe views and opinions of others, namely authority figures, can greatly influence youth community involvement. Youth report a greater likelihood of becoming involved if their participation is valued by parents, teachers, community leaders, etc. (Camino, 2000; Fogel, 2004; Jarrett, Sullivan, & Watkins, 2005). The receptivity of authority figures can play a central role in youth efficacy, their engagement, and their continued involvement in the community. Historically, previously held negative beliefs by both youth and adults (Jarrett, Sullivan, & Watkins, 2005; Zeldin, 2004) have created a disconnection between youth involvement and youth-adult partnerships in the community. Often, youth have not been viewed as essential contributors to society, mainly due to stereotypical images and misconceptions of their age and developmental capacity. The period of intense emotional changes during adolescence helps contribute to the lower expectations of youth from adults and subsequent decreased opportunity for youth to participate in community activities (Camino & Zeldin, 2002). Such conditions have led to a lack of recognition and receptivity by adults, and often, the wider community. The increasing presence of youth in the development process and the establishment of youth-adult partnerships have created an environment where communities are more receptive. The active involvement of youth highlights their value and provides an opportunity to erase negative stereotypes. Recent research has focused on such positively held adult notions of youth and their relationship to encouraging youth involvement. Zeldin (2002) reported that many adults perceive adolescents as being capable of contributing to their communities, performing well in community positions, and taking proactive approaches to their life development. This receptiveness opens the door to long-term youth involvement, while also facilitating greater appreciation for the youth contribution to the community by adults (Camino, 2000). These factors all result in influences, motivations, obstacles, and feedback that directly or indirectly influence youth toward or away from local involvement. These variables are examined further in the study reported here to determine whether any predict involvement, so that Extension professionals may consider and recognize key factors in order to engage youth in local interactions, particularly in the implementation of 4-H programs. MethodsThe research was designed to measure the factors contributing to youth involvement in their communities. To accomplish these goals, multiple research sites (surveying numerous community development focused 4-H groups throughout the state) and multiple research methods (quantitative survey data, secondary data, and key informant interviews) were used. Each protocol was designed to help determine specific motivations for youth involvement and to identify methods for better including youth in the community development process. Initial data collection took the form of key informant interviews with youth, 4-H program development agents, and adults actively involved with youth/adult partnerships. Key informants are individuals who, as a result of their knowledge, experience, or social status, can provide insights and access to information valuable in understanding issues, impacts, and needs (Krannich & Humphrey, 1986; Schwartz, Bridger & Hyman, 2001). In June 2005, 12 key informant interviews were conducted. These included 4-H administrators, educators, youth participants, and program administrators that include youth in their efforts. A wide range of expertise and program interests was included to help enhance reliability and validity. This research stage was designed to aid in the identification of specific issues and motivations for youth community involvement. Interviews facilitated our understanding of the context of attitudes and actions, as well provided information that would not have been evident from survey or secondary data. They were particularly helpful in the development of questions for use in the survey. Subsequent to the key informant interviews, quantitative data was obtained from Florida teen 4-H participants through a self-administered questionnaire. A modified Total Design Method (TDM) was used in these surveys (Dillman, 2000). This method stressed a precise methodology, including specialized design and personalization. Questionnaires were distributed in group settings to all participants to help ensure a high completion rate. Based on previous research and literature, a series of concepts and variables were identified. The researchers then developed a questionnaire including these items. Reliability and validity were assessed through pilot testing and through review by an expert panel of reviewers. Indices and other data points were tested statistically to assess their reliability. Data collection took place at four different 4-H events between June and September 2005. Included were the Florida 4-H Legislature, State 4-H Congress, and two "Learning and Leading" workshops. A total 679 youth ages 12-18 took part in these events. Sample validation showed that participants in these events, while not representative of all youth in Florida, were statistically representative of the overall 4-H teen population in Florida (Isaac & Michael, 1997). Completed and usable questionnaires were obtained from 418 respondents, representing a response rate of 62%. This response rate and the number of usable questionnaires returned were more than sufficient to statistically represent 4-H Youth in Florida (Isaac & Michael, 1997). AnalysisA series of multiple regression models were estimated to assess the partial effects of each conceptual area on youth community involvement (Table 1). These models focus on each area individually. A final model considered all independent variables together, and was ultimately reduced, in order to obtain the most parsimonious model. Youth involvement in their communities was measured with a series of questions that asked respondents about their frequency and level of involvement (see Appendix for a listing of items included in this index). According to the community development literature, a variety of factors influence community agency and shape the context in which it emerges. Among those included in this analysis are sociodemographic characteristics, influences for involvement, motivations for activeness in their communities, obstacles to community involvement, and youth efficacy. A full description and measurement of the summative scale variables (activeness, motivations, and efficacy) are provided in the Appendix.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
